Click here for Adobe Acrobat version
Click here for Microsoft Word version

******************************************************** 
                      NOTICE
********************************************************

This document was converted from Microsoft Word.

Content from the original version of the document such as
headers, footers, footnotes, endnotes, graphics, and page numbers
will not show up in this text version.

All text attributes such as bold, italic, underlining, etc. from the
original document will not show up in this text version.

Features of the original document layout such as
columns, tables, line and letter spacing, pagination, and margins
will not be preserved in the text version.

If you need the complete document, download the
Microsoft Word or Adobe Acrobat version.

*****************************************************************



                           Before the
                Federal Communications Commission
                     Washington, D.C. 20554


In the matter of                 )
                                )
Telecommunications Management,   )
LLC                              )
d/b/a NewWave Communications     )
                                )
Operator of Cable Systems in:    )
                                )    File No. EB-04-HS-008
Ashdown, Arkansas                )
Fulton, Kentucky                 )
Wheatland, Missouri              )
Chesterfield, South Carolina     )
Pageland, South Carolina         )
Bolivar, Tennessee               )
Bradford, Tennessee              )
Brownsville, Tennessee           )
Covington, Tennessee             )
Dyer, Tennessee                  )
Ripley, Tennessee                )
                                )
Request for Waivers of  Section  )
11.11(a) of the
Commission's Rules

                              ORDER

   Adopted:  March 22, 2004             Released:  March 23, 2004


By the:  Director, Office of Homeland Security, Enforcement 
Bureau:

     1.   In this Order, we grant Telecommunications Management, 
LLC d/b/a/ NewWave Communications (``NewWave'') temporary waivers 
of section 11.11(a) of the Commission's Rules (``Rules'')1 for 
the eleven above-captioned cable television systems.  Section 
11.11(a) of the Rules requires cable systems serving fewer than 
5,000 subscribers from a headend to either provide national level 
Emergency Alert System (``EAS'') messages on all programmed 
channels or install EAS equipment and provide a video interrupt 
and audio alert on all programmed channels and EAS audio and 
video messages on at least one programmed channel by October 1, 
2002.2
     2.   The Cable Act of 1992 added new Section 624(g) to the 
Communications Act of 1934, which requires that cable systems be 
capable of providing EAS alerts to their subscribers.3  In 1994, 
the Commission adopted rules requiring cable systems to 
participate in EAS.4  In 1997, the Commission amended the EAS 
rules to provide financial relief for small cable systems.5  The 
Commission declined to exempt small cable systems from the EAS 
requirements entirely, however, concluding that such an exemption 
would be inconsistent with the statutory mandate of Section 
624(g).6  The amended rules extended the deadline for cable 
systems serving fewer than 10,000 subscribers to begin complying 
with the EAS rules to October 1, 2002, and provided cable systems 
serving fewer than 5,000 subscribers the option of either 
providing national level EAS messages on all programmed channels 
or installing EAS equipment and providing a video interrupt and 
audio alert on all programmed channels and EAS audio and video 
messages on at least one programmed channel.7  In addition, the 
Commission stated that it would grant waivers of the EAS rules to 
small cable systems on a case-by-case basis upon a showing of 
financial hardship.8  
          3.   On January 14, 2004, NewWave filed a request for 
temporary waivers of the EAS requirements for the above-captioned 
cable systems, asserting that the cost of immediate installation 
of EAS equipment in the 11 systems would cause financial 
hardship.  NewWave states that the 11 systems lacked EAS 
equipment when it acquired the systems in September 2003.  In 
support of its waiver requests, NewWave reports that these are 
small cable systems, with the six systems in Ashdown, Bradford, 
Chesterfield, Covington, Pageland, and Wheatland serving between 
253 and 919 subscribers and the five systems in Bolivar, 
Brownsville, Dyer, Fulton, and Ripley serving between 1,043 and 
1,938 subscribers.  NewWave reports that it plans to:  (1) 
upgrade the subject cable systems; (2) interconnect the Ripley 
and Brownsville systems and the Bradford and Dyer systems; and 
(3) perform this upgrade and interconnection in stages throughout 
2004, with completion of the final phases by early 2005.  Based 
on price quotes provided by EAS equipment manufacturers, NewWave 
estimates that it will cost approximately $110,000 to purchase 
and install EAS equipment at the 11 headends.  NewWave asserts 
that the estimated cost of $20,000 to install EAS equipment at 
the Brownsville and Bradford systems will impose an unnecessary 
financial expenditure because the two headends will be eliminated 
once the interconnection is completed.  NewWave provides 
financial data in support of its contention that the cost of 
immediate installation of EAS equipment in the 11 cable systems 
would cause substantial financial hardship.  Finally, NewWave 
contends that subscribers will continue to have ready access to 
national EAS information from other sources, including its cable 
system and over-the-air reception of broadcast television and 
radio stations.  
     4.   Based on our review of the financial data and other 
information submitted by NewWave, we conclude that temporary 
waivers of section 11.11(a) of the Rules for the above-captioned 
cable systems is warranted.  We also find that the schedule 
proposed by NewWave for bringing these 11 newly acquired cable 
systems into compliance with section 11.11(a) of the Rules is 
reasonable.9  Additionally, we find that the estimated $20,000 
cost of installing EAS equipment for the Brownsville and Bradford 
systems, which will soon be interconnected with other NewWave 
systems, could impose an unnecessary financial expenditure for 
NewWave.10
     5.   NewWave also requests that any waivers that are granted 
for the subject cable systems continue to apply if the systems 
are sold.11  NewWave contends that the Commission has recognized 
the importance of small cable system relief following a system 
after its sale to a larger operator.12  In support of this 
contention, NewWave cites a 1995 Commission Order which 
determined that small cable systems eligible for relief from 
cable rate regulation should remain eligible for such relief even 
if the system is subsequently acquired by a larger cable 
operator.13  
     6.   We deny this request; the temporary waivers of section 
11.11(a) of the Rules granted in this Order will not continue to 
apply if the captioned cable systems are sold.  We have 
previously stated that waivers of section 11.11(a) of the Rules 
do not continue to apply when cable systems are sold and have 
specifically rejected arguments similar to those made by 
NewWave.14  Our decision to grant these temporary waivers is 
based on our review of the financial data and other information 
submitted by NewWave.  That information demonstrates that the 
estimated cost of EAS equipment for the captioned cable systems 
could impose a substantial financial hardship on NewWave and 
could impose an unnecessary financial expenditure for two of 
NewWave's systems.  We have no basis for determining whether 
compliance with the EAS requirements would impose a similar 
financial hardship on any buyer or buyers if any of NewWave's 
cable systems are sold.  As stated in Galaxy Cable, the policy of 
allowing small cable systems to remain eligible for relief from 
rate regulation when they are subsequently acquired by a larger 
operator should not be automatically extended to the EAS 
context.15  There is a significant distinction between the 
ongoing regulatory burdens and costs associated with rate 
regulation and the one?time expense of installing EAS 
equipment.16  In view of the serious public safety objectives 
underlying the EAS rules, it would not be appropriate to 
automatically extend the temporary waivers granted for NewWave's 
systems to any subsequent buyer regardless of its size or 
financial status.  However, we will afford any such buyer 30 days 
from the date of consummation of the sale of a cable system to 
request a waiver of section 11.11(a) of the Rules and to submit 
the information necessary to support a financial hardship 
showing.17  Any buyer that does not file a waiver request will be 
required to come into compliance with the EAS rules by the end of 
the 30-day period.18  
     7.   Accordingly, IT IS ORDERED that, pursuant to sections 
0.111, 0.204(b) and 0.311 of the rules,19 Telecommunications 
Management, LLC d/b/a NewWave Communications' request for 
temporary waivers of section 11.11(a) of the Rules is GRANTED for 
the following systems, Fulton, Kentucky until June 1, 2004; 
Bolivar, Brownsville, and Ripley, Tennessee until January 1, 
2005; Dyer and Bradford, Tennessee until March 1, 2005; Ashdown, 
Arkansas; Wheatland, Missouri; Chesterfield and Pageland, South 
Carolina; and Covington, Tennessee until October 1, 2005.20 
     8.   IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Telecommunications 
Management, LLC d/b/a NewWave Communications' request that the 
temporary waivers of section 11.11(a) continue to apply if the 
systems are sold is DENIED.  
     9.   IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Telecommunications 
Management, LLC d/b/a NewWave Communications place a copy of this 
waiver in its system files.
     10.  IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that a copy of this Order shall 
be sent by Certified Mail Return Receipt Requested to counsel for 
Telecommunications Management, LLC d/b/a NewWave Communications, 
Christopher C. Cinnamon, Cinnamon Mueller, 307 North Michigan 
Avenue, Suite 1020, Chicago, Illinois 60601. 

                                   FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS 
COMMISSION


                              James A. Dailey
                              Director, Office of Homeland 
Security
                              Enforcement Bureau
_________________________

1 47 C.F.R.  11.11(a).
2 Id.
3 Cable  Television Consumer  Protection and  Competition Act  of 
1992, Pub. L. No. 102-385,  16(b), 106 Stat. 1460, 1490  (1992).  
Section 624(g) provides that  ``each cable operator shall  comply 
with such standards as the  Commission shall prescribe to  ensure 
that viewers of video programming  on cable systems are  afforded 
the same emergency  information as is  afforded by the  emergency 
broadcasting system pursuant to Commission regulations ....''  47 
U.S.C.  544(g).  
4 Amendment  of Part  73, Subpart  G, of  the Commission's  Rules 
Regarding the Emergency  Broadcast System, Report  and Order  and 
Further Notice of Proposed Rule  Making, 10 FCC Rcd 1786  (1994), 
reconsideration granted in part, denied in part, 10 FCC Rcd 11494 
(1995).
5 Amendment  of Part  73, Subpart  G, of  the Commission's  Rules 
Regarding the  Emergency  Broadcast  System,  Second  Report  and 
Order, 12 FCC Rcd 15503 (1997).
6 Id. at 15512-13.
7 Id. at 15516-15518.
8 Id. at 15513.
9 NewWave seeks waiver  of section 11(a) of  the Rules for:   (1) 
Fulton, Kentucky until June  1, 2004;  (2) Bolivar,  Brownsville, 
and Ripley,  Tennessee  until  January  1,  2005;  (3)  Dyer  and 
Bradford,  Tennessee  until  March  1,  2005;  and  (4)  Ashdown, 
Arkansas; Wheatland, Missouri;  Chesterfield and Pageland,  South 
Carolina; and Covington, Tennessee until October 1, 2005.
10 See also, Cable One Inc, 19 FCC Rcd 2381 (Director, Office  of 
Homeland Security, Enforcement Bureau 2004); Cable One, Inc.,  18 
FCC Rcd  7646  (Chief,  Technical  and  Public  Safety  Division, 
Enforcement  Bureau  2003)  (granting  similar  temporary  waiver 
requests).
11  To   partially   finance   EAS   equipment,   upgrades,   and 
interconnections, NewWave  plans to  sell  the cable  systems  in 
Ashdown, Chesterfield,  Pageland,  Covington,  and  Wheatland  by 
October 2005.
12 NewWave's January 14, 2004,  Request for Temporary Waivers  at 
7.
13  See  Implementation  of  Sections  of  the  Cable  Television 
Consumer Protection and Competition Act of 1992: Rate Regulation, 
Sixth Report and Order and Eleventh Order on Reconsideration,  10 
FCC Rcd 7393, 7413 (1995).
14 See  Galaxy  Cable, Inc.,  18  FCC Rcd  14522,  14524  (Chief, 
Spectrum Enforcement Division, Enforcement Bureau 2003) (``Galaxy 
Cable'').
15 Id.
16 Id.  
17 See Galaxy Cable, 18 FCC Rcd at 14524.
18 We  note  that NewWave  acquired  these 11  cable  systems  in 
September 2003 and  should have filed  its waiver request  before 
January 14, 2004.  Nevertheless, for the reasons stated supra  at 
4, we find that the compliance schedule proposed by NewWave  for 
the 11 captioned cable systems is reasonable.  
19 47 C.F.R.  0.111, 0.204(b) and 0.311.
20 We clarify that these  waivers also encompass the EAS  testing 
and monitoring requirements.