Agency Tracking ID:PGC2243890 Authorization Number:284894 Successful Authorization -- Date Paid: 12/5/12 FILE COPY ONLY!!

FCC:Success:Fonn 159- PRINTABLE VERSION https://pay.fcc.gov/ElectronicForml 59/success_! 59 _html/printed\59 ... Agency Tracking ID:PGC2243890 Authorization Number:284894 Successful Authorization -- Date Paid: 12/5/12 FILE COPY ONLY!! !READ INSTRUCTIONS FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION APPROVED BY OMB r AREFULL Y BEFORE 3060-05~ !PROCEEDING REMITTANCE ADVICE SPECIAL USE FORM 159 I) LOCKBOX11979089 PAGE NO I OF I FCC USE ONLY SECTION A - Payer lnfonnatlon 2) PAYER NAME (if paying by credit card. enter name exactly as it appears on your card) ~)TOTAL AMOUNT PAID (dollars and cents) ~estern Pacific Broadcast, LLC 1355.00 4) STREET ADDRESS LINE NO. I ~00 N. Ashley Drive 5) STREET ADDRESS LINE NO. 2 ~uite 3010 6)CITY r;LSTATE _!!)ZIP CODE [Tampa 3602 9) DAYTIME TELEPHONE NUMBER (INCLUDING AREA CODE) r.IO) COUNTRY CODE (IF NOT IN U.S.A.) ~13-5794240 us FCC REGISTRATION NUMBER (FRN) AND TAX IDENTIFICATION NUMBER (TIN) REQUIRED II) PAYER (FRN) 12) FCC USE ONLY lo020401378 IF PAYER NAME AND THE ,\PPLICANT NAME ARE DIFFERENT, COMPLETE SECTION B IF MORE THAN ONE APPLICANT, USE CONTINUATION SHEETS (FORM 159-C) 13) APPLICANT NAME !western Pacific Broadcast, LLC 14) STREET ADDRESS LINE NO. I ~00 N. Ashley Drive 15) STREET ADDRESS LINE NO.2 ~uite 3010 16)CITY l.:iSTATE K8)ZIPCODE [Tampa 3602 19) DAYTIME TELEPHONE NUMBER (INCLUDING AREA CODE) r:O) COUNTRY CODE (IF NOT IN U.S.A.) ~13-5794240 us FCC REGISTRATION NUMBER (FRN) AND TAX IDENTIFICATION NUMBER (TIN) REQUIRED 21) APPLICANT (FRN) 22) FCC USE ONLY ~020401378 COMPLETE SECTION C FOR EACH SERVJCE,IF MORE BOXES ARE NEEDED, USE CONTINUATION SHEET 23A) FCC CaB SigniOther ID 24A) Payment Type Code(PTC) 25A) Quantity WACP TQC 1 26A) Fee Due for (PTC) 27A) Total Fee FCC Use Only $1,355.00 $1355.00 28A) FCC CODE I r29A) FCC CODE 2 VZPenn PA,NJDE 23B) FCC CaD SigiV'Other ID 248) Payment Type Code(PTC) 258) Quantity 268) Fee Due for (PTC) 278) Total Fee FCC Use Only 288) FCC CODE I ~298) FCC CODE 2 I of2 12/5/2012 9:57AM Before the FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION Washington, DC 20554 In the Matter of: ) ) Carriage Complaint Against ) ) Verizon Pennsylvania, Inc. ) ) File No. _______ by ) ) Western Pacific Broadcast, LLC ) ) With Respect to Carriage Within the ) Philadelphia, PA Designated Market Area, ) of Local Commercial Television Station WACP, ) Licensed to Atlantic City, New Jersey ) Directed to: The Chief, Media Bureau PETITION FOR SPECIAL RELIEF BY ORDER OF CARRIAGE Western Pacific Broadcast, LLC ("Western Pacific"), pursuant to FCC Rules 76.7 and 76.61, hereby respectfully requests that the Bureau order Verizon Pennsylvania, Inc. ("Verizon") to carry local commercial television station WACP, licensed to serve Atlantic City, NJ ("WACP"), in accordance with the Commission's must carry rules and policies on Verizon's cable system(s) within the Philadelphia, PA designated market area (the "DMA") for the remaining duration of the current must carry election cycle, expiring December 31, 2014. This petition is one of three petitions for special relief filed on this date against the three Verizon cable operators who operate within the DMA. The other two operators are Verizon Delaware LLC and Verizon New Jersey, Inc. While Verizon serves the DMA with three separate companies, Verizon interacted with Western Pacific through a single set of employees on behalf of all three Verizon cable operators and the facts and issues pertinent to this dispute are identical for all three cable operators. In support of this petition, the following is respectfully submitted: I. Factual Background This Petition is the unfortunate culmination of over 4 months of frustrated attempts by Western Pacific to obtain carriage ofWACP by Verizon, in accordance with WACP's must carry rights. Western Pacific's efforts have involved, among other things, sending two letters (an election then a demand) to Verizon, sending numerous emails to Verizon, visiting Verizon's headend, and attending telephone conferences with Verizon employees. Throughout Western Pacific's interactions with Verizon, not once has Verizon raised any defense to Western Pacific's demand for statutory mandatory carriage of WACP. Indeed, Verizon has admitted that it has no defense to carriage, but continues to drag its feet, thus necessitating this petition. W ACP is a new commercial television station, which commenced operation this summer. As a result of its status as a new station, Rule 76.64(f)(4) required it to notify local cable operators ofWACP's initial election of carriage status within a window 60 days prior to commencing broadcasting and 30 days after commencing broadcasting. In accordance with that requirement, Western Pacific notified Verizon by letter dated June 6, 2012 that WACP was commencing operation and elected mandatory carriage on Verizon's cable systems operating in the DMA. 1 That letter was sent by certified mail and was received by Verizon on June 11, A copy of that letter appears in Exhibit 1. The attachment to the letter is a list of all Verizon CUIDs within the DMA as of the date of the letter. 2 2012.2 Under Rule 76.64(t)(4), that initial election took effect 90 days after it was made, which in the case ofVerizon was September 9, 2012. Verizon definitely knew of the carriage obligation during the 90-day notice period for carriage. Marcello Correa ofVerizon's Content Acquisition and Programming Division communicated with undersigned counsel about the carriage and arranging for that carriage on June 14,2012, by telephone message left on the undersigned's telephone at 1:16 p.m. which date is 87 days before the end of the 90-day notice period. Mr. Correa also discussed carriage with 1 undersigned counsel by telephone on June 18 h and sent an email to counsel on July 3rd to relay the name of a Verizon engineer, Mr. Anthony Van Lierop, Verizon's Sr. Network Engineer, for contact by WACP's engineer. Yet, even though Rule 76.64(t)(4) gave Verizon 90 days to take the steps required for carriage, when the 90-day notice period ended on September 9, 2012, Verizon was not carrying WACP. Apparently, Verizon did nothing material during that 90-day notice period to prepare for carriage ofWACP. During this time, WACP actively pursued contact with Verizon to determine when the carriage of W ACP by Verizon would begin and to determine as early as possible if Verizon had any defenses to carriage that WACP might successfully address. Kevin Busselman, a senior engineer with Western Pacific, made several calls to Verizon's Sr. Network Engineer, Anthony Van Lierop, to determine whether the carriage of WACP presented any technical issues. He was not told there were any insurmountable issues. Despite WACP's proactive efforts, Verizon was not responsive. At the end of the 90-day notice period, it became apparent to Western Pacific that a more formal approach would be 2 Copies of the US Post Office delivery receipts appear in Exhibit 2. Letters were sent to Verizon at three (3) addresses. Two were received on June 11,2012, and one received on June 7. For purposes of calculations here, the date of June 11,2012 is used. 3 required to get Verizon's attention. To preserve its rights to carriage, by letter dated September 14,2012, Western Pacific demanded carriage ofWACP pursuant to FCC Rule 76.61(a)(l), which states: ( 1) Whenever a local commercial television station or a qualified low power television station believes that a cable operator has failed to meet its carriage or channel positioning obligations, pursuant to§§ 76.56 and 76.57, such station shall notify the operator, in writing, of the alleged failure and identify its reasons for believing that the cable operator is obligated to carry the signal of such station or position such signal on a particular channel. 3 Verizon responded to Western Pacific's carriage demand by a letter dated October 15, 2012, which says no more than "Verizon's and WACP's engineers have been working together ... ", that WACP's engineers will conduct on-site testing on October 17, 2012, and that "[w]e will continue to discuss carriage ofWACP with the station based upon the results of Wednesday's testing."4 Of course, WACP had no obligation to make tests and did not do so, as under Rule 76.61(a)(2), Verizon has that obligation. Verizon's October 15 letter completely ignores the requirements of Rule 76.61(a)(2), which sets forth in specific detail the response a cable operator must make to a carriage demand letter: (2) The cable operator shall, within 30 days of receipt of such written notification, respond in writing to such notification and either commence to carry the signal of such station in accordance with the terms requested or state its reasons for believing that it is not obligated to carry such signal or is in compliance with the channel positioning and repositioning and other requirements of the must-carry rules. If a refusal for carriage is based on the station's distance from the cable system's principal headend, the operator's response shall include the location of such headend. If a cable operator denies carriage on the basis of the failure of the station to deliver a good quality signal at the cable system's 3 The demand letter, which appears in Exhibit 3, was sent to each of the three Verizon cable operators in the DMA, at three separate addresses. As shown in post office return receipt notices appearing in Exhibit 4, those letters were received by Verizon on September 15 or September 18.

Load more