WPCA 2HBVX@Z3|P (TT)7PC2XCXP\  P6QXP"5@^2CRdd$CCdq2C28dddddddddd88qqqYzoCNzoozzC8C^dCYdYdYCdd88d8ddddCN8ddddY`(`l2CC!CCPRCddYYYYYYzYzYzYzYC8C8C8C8ddddddddddYdddddoddYYYYYzYzYzYddddddPdCdCCCdNdz8zRdddCRoNoNNF2[dCYddddd7>d<d<CCYYdCCddCYCdYzzzzCCCCqodYYYYYYYYYYY8888dddddddndddddddXPPS - PS1; Rm. 907_1XPPSPS.WRSSXj\  P6G;{ SeXP2Ez Zv) X-#Xj\  P6G;CXP#3|PXPPS - PS1; Rm. 907_1XPPSPS.WRSSXj\  P6G;{ SeXPTimes New Roman (TT)RomanTimes New Roman (Bold) (TT)Times New Roman (Italic) (TT)WP MultinationalA Roman (TT)2vqpkW X- I. A. 1. a.(1)(a) i) a) 1. 1. 1. a.(1)(a) i) a)#X\  P6G;pP#X01Í ÍX01Í Í#Xj\  P6G; XP#a8DocumentgDocument Style StyleXX` `  ` a4DocumentgDocument Style Style . a6DocumentgDocument Style Style GX  2 k_ v tz a5DocumentgDocument Style Style }X(# a2DocumentgDocument Style Style<o   ?  A.  a7DocumentgDocument Style StyleyXX` ` (#` BibliogrphyBibliography:X (# 2   ]  a1Right ParRight-Aligned Paragraph Numbers:`S@ I.  X(# a2Right ParRight-Aligned Paragraph Numbers C @` A. ` ` (#` a3DocumentgDocument Style Style B b  ?  1.  a3Right ParRight-Aligned Paragraph Numbers L! ` ` @P 1. ` `  (# 2  Va4Right ParRight-Aligned Paragraph Numbers Uj` `  @ a. ` (# a5Right ParRight-Aligned Paragraph Numbers _o` `  @h(1)  hh#(#h a6Right ParRight-Aligned Paragraph Numbersh` `  hh#@$(a) hh#((# a7Right ParRight-Aligned Paragraph NumberspfJ` `  hh#(@*i) (h-(# 2P a8Right ParRight-Aligned Paragraph NumbersyW"3!` `  hh#(-@p/a) -pp2(#p Tech InitInitialize Technical Style. k I. A. 1. a.(1)(a) i) a) 1 .1 .1 .1 .1 .1 .1 .1 Technicala1DocumentgDocument Style Style\s0  zN8F I. ׃  a5TechnicalTechnical Document Style)WD (1) . 2 ^a6TechnicalTechnical Document Style)D (a) . a2TechnicalTechnical Document Style<6  ?  A.   a3TechnicalTechnical Document Style9Wg  2  1.   a4TechnicalTechnical Document Style8bv{ 2  a.   276~3a1TechnicalTechnical Document StyleF!<  ?  I.   a7TechnicalTechnical Document Style(@D i) . a8TechnicalTechnical Document Style(D a) . Doc InitInitialize Document Stylez   0*0*0*  I. A. 1. a.(1)(a) i) a) I. 1. A. a.(1)(a) i) a)Documentg2iemRPleadingHeader for Numbered Pleading PaperE!n    X X` hp x (#%'0*,.8135@8:d<d<CCYYdCCddCYCdYzzzzCCCCqodYYYYYYYYYYY8888dddddddnddddddd"5@^?(?SO_c(88?g(g(WOOOOOOOOOO((_g_GkOWSWSO[_,;WGc[WWWWOK_O_OSO888WO(OSKSK3KW,,S,WOSOCC;WG_OKG8 8_((((W,E(OWOOOOOOOOOOOwSKSKSKSKSK,,,,,,,,[WWOWOWOWO_W_W_W_W(KOOWSWOWOSKWOSSOOWWOOSKSKSKSKWWSK[K[O[[K[K_W_W,WWW,,,W;WSG,GE[W[WWW((WCWEOC((N((;S(GOOOS(OOOOKOOOOOO(((((((((((((((OOtOg\\GO\d*,KO.wROOn\CfxKxWlRx\]\cdIfIs`Wx\rriwgd((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((?(?SO_c(88?g(g(WOOOOOOOOOO((_g_GkOWSWSO[_,;WGc[WWWWOK_O_OSO888WO(OSKSK3KW,,S,WOSOCC;WG_OKG8 8_(((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((KOOS,SWOOOOOOO,gOO(K;((OOOOOOGOOOOOOOSSSSS,,,,W[WWWWWOW____SSWOOOOOOwKKKKK,,,,OWOOOOOGOWWWWKS"5@^2Coddȧ8CCdr2C28ddddddddddCCrrrdzNdzoȐC8CtdCdoYoYCdo8Co8odooYNCodddYO,Oh2CC!CCPRCdodddddȐYYYYYN8N8N8N8oddddooooddoddddzodddYYYYYYddddooPoNoNCNodo8RoodȐYYoNoNNF2ldCddddddd<d<CCoodCCddCoCddzzzzzzzzzzCCCCozdddddddYYYYY8888dddddddndddddYd2?:@?-@0@3@6"5@^(1<>400000000009>9+@04242079$4+<744440-909020!!!4002-2--42O4020(($4+90-+!!94)0400000000000G2-2-2-2-2-744040404094949494-004240402-40220044002-2-2-2-442-7-7077-7-94944444$42++)7474444(4)0(N$2+00020000-00000000t0>77+0c7<&&209<!!&>>400000000009>9+@04242079$4+<744440-909020!!!4002-2--42O4020(($4+90-+!!9-002240000000>00-$000000+0000000222224744444049999224000000G-----0400000+04444-2"5@^dC2CCdECCCCCCC 10.xWith regard to historic carriage, Comcast states that its systems have never offered WHAI  x<to its subscribers. In addition, Comcast states that it has not carried other stations from the same  xarea of the New York ADI on its New Jersey cable systems. As for statutory factor two, local  x-coverage, Comcast states that Bridgeport, Connecticut, WHAI's city of license, is geographically  x.distant from the communities which Comcast seeks to exclude from WHAI's market. Since the  xstation's transmitter is located 60 to 90 miles from the systems in question, petitioner states that  x-the station provides no coverage of local news or public affairs that would be of any significance  xor interest to subscribers of the systems. Comcast argues that 95% of WHAI's broadcast schedule  xconsists of home shopping programming called Value Vision, which is not of any particular local  xinterest, and which duplicates two home shopping channels already carried on Comcast's systems.  xkPetitioner states that WHAI offers a few hours of locally produced programming each week  xwhich focuses on issues of interest to local viewers in the Bridgeport area, and that the only  xprogram of conceivable interest to New Jersey viewers is a college produced program which  xKincludes segments produced by various New Jersey colleges. In addition, Comcast states that all  xthe communities it seeks to exclude are well outside of the station's Grade B contour. Petitioner  xemphasizes the fact that the station's Grade B coverage does not even reach the boundries of New  xYork City, let alone the areas of northern and central New Jersey served by the cable systems  xin quesstion. Turning to the third statutory factor, Cablevision argues that each of the  xLcommunities it seeks to exclude from WHAI's television market receives extensive coverage of  xlocal issues from the systems' carriage of a number of local television stations. According to  xComcast, each of its systems carries the New Jersey Network, a channel devoted to the coverage  xjof New Jersey public affairs, news and sports. In addition, the systems also carry WWORTV,"j$ 0*%%ZZ(#"  xSecaucus, New Jersey, which devotes half of its news coverage to New Jersey news, and that six  xother local New Jersey stations are carried to some degree on the systems in question.  xAdditionally, each of Comcast's systems carry at least six New York City stations which provide  xnews and public affairs programming of interest to the New Jersey communities in question.  xFinally, with regard to local viewing, Comcast claims that WHAI's audience ratings and local  xytelevision listings do not reflect a significant audience share in the New York ADI, and that the  xstation does not have a sufficient audience share to qualify as a "reportable station" in Nielsen  xMedia Research's ratings book for the New York City Designated Market Area. Comcast provides the Commission with documentation to support the above contentions.  X -   11.xIn opposition, WHAI argues that Comcast has repeatedly responded in an uncooperative  xmanner to the station's inquiries regarding carriage on the systems, and that the prior owners of  xComcast's New Jersey and Jersey City systems had agreed to carry the station once copyright and  x-signal quality issues were resolved. WHAI contends that Comcast's actions are motivated by its  xNreluctance to carry a competitor to QVC, Inc. (QVC), a satellite delivered home shopping channel, which is jointly owned by Comcast and TeleCommunications, Inc.  Xy-   12.xWHAI also argues that Comcast has failed to make a case for deleting the communities  xunder the four statutory market modification factors. In regard to historical carriage and local  xviewing patterns, WHAI argues that since the station was off the air from March l99l until  xSeptember l993, these factors provide little insight into the structure of the station's market, and  xshould not be considered by the Commission. In addition, WHAI argues that it provides many  xprograms which are of substantial interest to the subscribers in Comcast's service area and that  x>it devotes at least one hour per day of its weekday prime time schedule to locally produced  xpublic affairs, educational and informational programming of interest to communities throughout  xthe New York ADI generally, and to the specific New Jersey communities in question. WHAI  xxfocuses on the program "College and University Showcase," which it contends provides a unique  xbroadcast outlet for public affairs programming produced at local New Jersey colleges and  xjuniversities. WHAI does not provide documentation for this claim in the form of program logs or any other station document.  X7-   13.xIn reply, Comcast argues that WHAI fails to refute the compelling facts underlying  x!Comcast's petition, and that its opposition appears to "be grounded on an allegation of  xLanticompetitive conduct; an allegation for which no factual support of any kind is offered." In  xLregard to this contention, Comcast argues that its systems currently carry the Home Shopping  x/Network, which is QVC's primary competitor. Petitioner contends that WHAI has failed to  X - x-substantiate that it provides any more than a de minimus amount of local programming. Comcast  x[argues that of the 5% of its program schedule which is not home shopping, WHAI may have a  xytopic of possible interest to New Jersey viewers "on occasion." Comcast argues that this level  xkof programming cannot be construed to constitute local service to the cable communities in  xquestion, and that this is the only factor of the four statutory factors that the station has attempted"j$ 0*%%ZZ(#"  xLto satisfy. Comcast also stresses that nothing in the "geography or geopolitical nature of the  xConnecticut region to suggest that the residents of the affected communities associate themselves with the Bridgeport area or viceversa."  X- ANALYSIS AND DECISION ă  Xv-   14.xBased on the four statutory and other relevant factors, Comcast's petition will be granted.  xyAs an initial matter, we note that, according to the legislative history of the 1992 Cable Act, the  xuse of ADI market areas is intended "to ensure that television stations be carried in the areas  X1- xwhich they service and which form their economic market."\ 1KW yO -ԍ H.R. Rep. 102628, 102d Cong., 2d Sess. 97 (1992).\ Changes may be sought and  xgranted by the Commission "to better effectuate the purposes" of the mandatory carriage  X - xrequirements.?  XKW yO -ԍ 47 U.S.C. 534(h).? The ADI market change process incorporated into the Communications Act,  xhowever, is not intended to be a process whereby cable operators may seek relief from the  xmandatory signal carriage obligations apart from the question of whether a change in the market  x>area involved is warranted.   When viewed against this backdrop, and considering all of the  xMrelevant factual circumstances in the record, we believe that the operator's deletion petition  x appears to be a legitimate request to redraw ADI boundaries to make them congruous with  x=market realities. Comcast's actions do not clearly reflect an intention to skirt its signal carriage  xresponsibilities under the 1992 Cable Act and the Commission's rules nor do they evidence a  xpattern of discriminatory conduct against the station subject to deletion. Based on the geography  xKand the statutory factors, we believe that the New Jersey communities in question are sufficiently  x\removed from WHAI that it ought not be deemed part of the station's market for mandatory  xcarriage purposes. The evidence before us, which we believe has not been sufficiently disputed  xby WHAI, distinguishes the various New Jersey communities from Bridgeport, Connecticut and  xpersuades us that the action requested would "better effectuate purposes" of Section 614 of the  x=l992 Cable Act. We believe Congress enacted Section 614(h) with a deletion provision so that market anomalies such as this one could be properly review and rectified.  X|- xM15. At the outset, the evidence suggests the WHAI does not provide local service to the  xcommunities in question. WHAI does not place either a Grade A or Grade B contour over the  XN- x-cable communities. NKW yO - xԍ We have held that the local service requirement is satisfied if the station's Grade B contour covers the  yO!-community. See 8 FCC Rcd at 2981. In fact, the coverage map supplied by petitioner demonstrates that WHAI's  x[Grade B contour does not reach any communities in New Jersey, and certainly is not proximate  xto any of the cable communities at issue in this matter. In addition, we do not believe that  xWHAI carries enough programming of specific local interest or import for cable viewers in the" @ 0*%%ZZ["  x-relevant New Jersey communities to fulfill the statutory factor. It appears from the pleadings that  xythe amount of programming broadcast by WHAI which has any specific relevance to residents  X- xof the New Jersey communities is of a de minimus nature. We have arrived at this conclusion  xbased on the description of the programming provided by WHAI, which indicates generic  xprogramming produced by New Jersey colleges and universities, with few specific ties to any of  xLthe New Jersey communities at issue in this matter. The station also has no reported audience  xin the counties where the cable communities are located and it has no history of carriage.  xMoreover, Bridgeport, Connecticut, WHAI's city of license, is 60 to 90 miles across Long Island  xSound and the congested New York City metropolitan area from the relevant cable communities.  xThe distance and geographic situation involved attenuates the local ties the station might have  xZto the cable communities and helps explain why the station's viewership is too low to be reported.  X - x16. We also believe that Comcast's carriage of other local television stations provides support  x>for the action requested. Where a cable operator is seeking to delete a station's mandatory  x{carriage rights in certain communities within its ADI, and it is clear that the station is not  xproviding local programming to those communities, the issue of local coverage by other stations  xbecomes a factor which we will give greater weight than in cases where a party is seeking to add  x>communities. We believe this case is exemplary in that there are several television stations  xycarried by Comcast's systems, such as WWORTV, the six New York City stations, the six New  x/Jersey stations, and the New Jersey Network, which have a closer nexus to the New Jersey communities and provide more focused local programming than WHAI.  X- xj17. Comcast also demonstrates the WHAI has no historical carriage on the cable systems in  xyquestion and has no audience in the counties in which the cable systems are located. Because  xWHAI is a specialized format station, these facts are not determinative, in and of themselves, of  xzthe relationship between the cable communities and the market of the television station, nor  x should their absence permit a cable operator to undermine the objectives of the mandatory  xcarriage requirement. Here, however, we conclude that the lack of historical carriage, noting that  x?the station was not broadcasting between l99l and l993, and the dearth of audience is of  xevidential significance when linked with other information regarding the market, lack of Grade  xB coverage, and the particular distances involved. In these circumstances, we cannot discount WHAI's carriage and audience as indicators of the scope of its market area.  X- x18. This is not a situation where the carriage pattern suggests that a station is logically part  xof the market for carriage purposes but has not been carried for competitive or content reasons.  xxWHAI's contentions regarding anticompetitive practices are entirely speculative and are rebutted,  xat least in part, by Comcast's carriage of the Home Shopping Network. Nor do we believe that  x[the operator has impermissibly singled out WHAI from among other similarly situated stations as the sole station it has declined to carry. "j$ 0*%%ZZ(#"Ԍ X- xz19. Given these facts, the operator's deletion petition appears to be a legitimate request to redraw ADI boundaries to make them congruous with market realities.  X- x20. Since we are granting Comcast's petition to delete the relevant New Jersey communities  xfrom the ADI of WHAI for mandatory carriage purposes, the associated petitions filed by WHAI  xfor mandatory carriage on Comcast's New Jersey and Jersey City systems are rendered moot by this decision.  XH-x   ORDERING CLAUSES ă  X -   21.xAccordingly, IT IS ORDERED , pursuant to 614(h) of the Communications Act of 1934,  xas amended, 47 U.S.C. 534, and 76.59 of the Commission's Rules, 47 C.F.R. 76.59, that the  x!"Petition for Special Relief" (CSR4549A) filed June 30, l995 by Comcast Cablevision of  X - x<Monmouth County, et al. IS GRANTED, and that the "Complaints" (CSR4590M and 4591M),  X -filed September l9, l995 by VVI Bridgeport, Inc., ARE DISMISSED , without prejudice.  X-  22.xThis action is taken pursuant to authority delegated by 0.321 of the Commission's Rules, 47 C.F.R. 0.321. x` `  hhFEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION x` `  hhWilliam H. Johnson x` `  hhDeputy Chief, Cable Services Bureau " 0*%%ZZ"  X-0 APPENDIX ă  X- Comcast Cablevision of Monmouth County Shrewsbury Borough Shrewsbury Township Fair Haven Tinton Falls Red Bank Long Branch Hazlet Atlantic Highlands Loch Arbour Deal Fort Monmouth Monmouth Beach Highlands West Long Branch Sea Bright Oceanport Middletown Freehold Borough Allenhurst Holmdell Eatontown Little Silver Rumson  X- Comcast Cablevision of Northwest New Jersey Mansfield Township Independence Township Califon Liberty Township Hackettstown Belvidere Oxford Washington Township (Warren County) Washington Borough Hampton Glen Gardner High Bridge Mt. Olive"h$ 0*%%ZZ(#"ԌFranklin Township Lebanon Township Washington Township (Morris County) White Township  X- Comcast Cablevision of Ocean County Brick Point Pleasant Borough Point Pleasant Beach Mantoloking Bay Head  X - Comcast Cablevision of the Plainfields Plainfield South Plainfield North Plainfield  Xy- Comcast Cablevision of the Meadowlands Wallington Kearny East Newark North Arlington Lyndhurst Rutherford East Rutherford Carlstadt  X-  X- Comcast Cablevision of Central New Jersey Cranbury Township East Brunswick Township East Windsor Township Helmetta Borough Hightstown Borough Jamesburg Borough Monroe Township (Middlesex County) Plainsboro Township Roosevelt Borough South Brunswick Township Spotswood Borough West Windsor Township "h$ 0*%%ZZ(#"Ԍ X- Comcast Cablevision of Jersey City Jersey City  X- Comcast Cablevision of New Jersey Belleville Township Berkely Heights Township Bloomfield Township Caldwell Township Carteret Borough Clark Township East Orange City Essex Fells Township Fairfield Borough Fanwood Borough Garwood Borough Glen Ridge Borough Township Harrison Township Hillside Township Irvington Township Kenilworth Borough Linden City Livingston Township Maplewood Township Millburn Township Montclair Township Mountainside Borough New Providence Borough Orange Township City Perth Amboy City Rahway City Roseland Borough Roselle Borough Roselle Park Borough Scotch Plains Township Secaucus Township South River Borough Springfield Township Summit City Union Township Verona Township West Caldwell Township"h$ 0*%%ZZ(#"ԌWestfield Township Winfield Township Woodbridge Township