In Re: ) ) Good Companion Broadcasting, Inc

Federal Communications Commission DA 96-568

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

In re: ) ) Good Companion Broadcasting, Inc. ) CSR-3973-A d/b/a Channel 68 Broadcasting, Inc. ) Hagerstown, Mary land ) ) For Modification of Station ) WJAL-TV's ADI )

MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER

Adopted: April 9, 1996 Released: April 18, 1996

By the Deputy Chief, Cable Services Bureau:

INTRODUCTION

1.Good Companion Broadcasting, Inc., licensee of television station WJAL-TV, Channel 68, Hagerstown, Maryland ("WJAL") has filed the captioned petition requesting modification of its "area of dominant influence" ("ADI") for purposes of the cable television mandatory broadcast signal carriage rules. WJAL's ADI of Hagerstown, Maryland currently consists of a single county, Washington County, Maryland. WJAL seeks to include communities located in the following twelve counties within the Hagerstown, Maryland ADI: Frederick and Allegany Counties in Maryland; Adams, Cumberland, Franklin, and Fulton Counties in Pennsylvania; Berkeley, Jefferson, Morgan, and Hampshire Counties in West Virginia; and Clarke and Frederick Counties in Virginia.1 The communities that WJAL seeks to have added to its ADI are served by a number of different cable systems and are part of the following three ADis: Washington, D.C.; Harrisburg-York-Lancaster-Lebanon, Pennsylvania; and Johnstown-Altoona, Pennsylvania.2 Initially, WJAL sought to add communities from twenty-three counties to its Hagerstown ADI.3

See Appendix A for a list of the communities at issue in this proceeding (the "Communities").

2 See Appendices A and B.

See Petition for Special Relief filed by WJAL, dated May 10, 1993. The Commission received oppositions to this petition from five cable operators with respect to various counties that WJAL included in its request See Oppositions to Petition for Special Relief filed by Prestige Cable TV of Maryland, Inc. (dated August 19, 1993), Montgomery Cablevision, L.P. (dated August 19, 1993), TV Cable of Carlisle (dated September l, 1993), York Cable Television, Inc. (dated August 24, 1993), and Central Virginia Cable TV, Inc. d/b/a Adelphia Cable Communications ("Adelphia") (dated August 19, 1993). 4826 Federal Communications Commission DA 96-568

WJAL, however, subsequently modified its request to include communities from twelve counties.4 Adelphia opposes the grant of WJAL's request with respect to the communities located in Frederick and Clarke Counties, Virginia.5

BACKGROUND

2. Pursuant to §614 of the Communications Act and implementing rules adopted by the Commission in its Report and Order in MM Docket 92-259,6 commercial television broadcast stations are entitled to assert mandatory carriage rights on cable systems located within the station's market. A station's market for this purpose is its "area of dominant influence" or ADI as defined by the Arbitron audience research organization.7 An ADI is a geographic market designation that defines each television market exclusive of others, based on measured viewing patterns. Essentially, each county in the United States is allocated to a market based on which home-market stations receive a preponderance of total viewing hours in the county. For purposes of this calculation, both over-the-air and cable television viewing are included.8

3. Under the Act, however, the Commission is also directed to consider changes in ADI areas. Section 614(h)(l)(C) provides that the Commission may:

with respect to a particular television broadcast station, include additional communities within its television market or exclude communities from such station's television market to better effectuate the purposes of this section.

In considering such requests, the Act provides that:

4 See Modification and Clarification of Petition for Special Relief filed by WJAL on August 8, 1995 and Supplement to Petition for Special Relief filed by WJAL on March 13, 1996. We note that, with the exception of Frederick and Clarke Counties, Virginia, WJAL has eliminated from its petition those counties that had aroused oppositions from cable operators.

See Opposition to Petition for Special Relief filed by Adelphia on August 19, 1993; Reply to Modification and Clarification of Petition for Special Relief filed by Adelphia on September 8, 1995; and Letter dated March 26, 1996 to Leora Hochstein, Esq., FCC, from Rhona S. Alter, Assistant General Counsel, Adelphia. Adelphia's opposition to the inclusion of Frederick and Clarke Counties, Virginia is the only opposition that remains relevant to WJAL's petition, as modified.

6 8 FCC Red 2965, 2976-2977 (1993).

7 Section 76.55(e) of the Commission's Rules provides that the ADls to be used for purposes of the initial implementation of the mandatory carriage rules are those published in Arbitron's 1991-1992 Television Market Guide.

8 Because of the topography involved, certain counties are divided into more than one sampling unit. Also, in certain circumstances, a station may have its home county assigned to an ADI even though it receives less than a preponderance of the audience in that county. For a more complete description of how counties are allocated, see Arbitron's Description of Methodology.

4827 Federal Communications Commission DA 96-568

the Commission shall afford particular attention to the value of localism by taking into account such factors as --

(I) whether the station, or other stations located in the same area, have been historically carried on the cable system or systems within such community;

(II) whether the television station provides coverage or other local service to such community;

(III) whether any other television station that is eligible to be carried by a cable system in such community in fulfillment of the requirements of this section provides news coverage of issues of concern to such community or provides carriage or coverage of sporting and other events of interest to the community; and

(IV) evidence of viewing patterns in cable and noncable households within the areas served by the cable system or systems in such community.9

4. The legislative history of this provision indicates that:

where the presumption in favor of ADI carriage would result in cable subscribers losing access to local stations because they are outside the ADI in which a local cable system operates, the FCC may make an adjustment to include or exclude particular communities from a television station's market consistent with Congress' objective to ensure that television stations be carried in the areas which they serve and which form their economic market

* * * * * [This subsection] establishes certain criteria which the Commission shall consider in acting on requests to modify the geographic area in which stations have signal carriage rights. These factors are not intended to be exclusive, but may be used to demonstrate that a community is part of a particular station's market. 10

5. The Commission provided guidance in its Report and Order in MM Docket 92- 259, supra, to aid decision making in these matters, as follows:

9 Communicati~ns Act of 1934, as amended, §614(h)(l)(C)(ii), 47 U.S.C. §534(h)(l)(C)(ii).

10 H.R. Rep. No. 628, 102d Cong., 2d Sess. 97 (1992).

4828 Federal Communications Commission DA 96-568

For example, the historical carriage of the station could be illustrated by the submission of documents listing the cable system's channel line-up (e.g., rate cards) for a period of years. To show that the station provides coverage or other local service to the cable community (factor 2), parties may demonstrate that the station places at least a Grade B coverage contour over the cable community or is located close to the community in terms of mileage. Coverage of news or other programming of interest to the community could be demonstrated by program logs or other descriptions of local program offerings. The final factor concerns viewing patterns in the cable community in cable and noncable homes. Audience data clearly provide appropriate evidence about this factor. In this regard, we note that surveys such as those used to demonstrate significantly viewed status could be useful. However, since this factor requires us to evaluate viewing on a community basis for cable and noncable homes, and significantly viewed surveys typically measure viewing only in noncable households, such surveys may need to be supplemented with additional data concerning viewing in cable homes. 11

6. In adopting rules to implement this provision, the Commission indicated that changes requested should be considered on a community-by-community basis rather than on a county-by-county basis and that they should be treated as specific to particular stations rather than applicable in common to all stations in the market. 12 The rules further provide, in accordance with the requirements of the Act, that a station not be deleted from carriage during the pendency of an market area change request. 13

7. Adding communities to a station's market area generally entitles that station to insist on cable carriage in those communities. However, this right is subject to several conditions: 1) a cable system operator is generally required to devote no more than one-third of its activated channel capacity to compliance with the mandatory signal carriage obligations, 2) the station is responsible for delivering a good quality signal to the principal headend of the system, 3) indemnification may be required for any increase in copyright liability resulting from carriage, and 4) the system operator is not required to carry the signal of any station whose signal substantially duplicates the signal of any other local signal carried or the signals of more than one local station affiliated with a particular broadcast network. If, pursuant to these requirements, a system operator elects to carry the signal of only a single affiliate of a broadcast network, it is obliged to carry the affiliate from within the market whose city of license is closest to the

11 8 FCC Red at 2977 (emphasis in original).

12 8 FCC Red at 2977 n.139. Viewership data cited herein is county data, rather than community-specific data. However, absent evidence that such data is not fairly reflective of viewing in the actual communities in question, we accept such data as probative in cases of this type.

13 47 C.F.R. §76.59.

4829 Federal Communications Commission DA 96-568 principal headend of the cable system. 14 Accordingly, based on the specific circumstances involved, the addition of communities to a station's market area may guarantee it cable carriage and specific channel position rights; simply provide the system operator with an expanded list of must-carry signals frorri which to choose, i.e., when it has used up its channel capacity mandated for broadcast signals carriage, or determined which of duplicating network affiliated stations are entitled to carriage priority.

MARKET FACTS AND ARGUMENTS OF THE PARTIES

8. WJAL is an independent television station, licensed in Hagerstown, Maryland. WJAL's ADI of Hagerstown, Maryland consists solely of Washington County. In its petition, WJAL asks the Commission to modify its ADI so that the communities referenced in Appendix A may also be included in the Hagerstown, Maryland ADI for purposes of the cable television mandatory broadcast signal carriage rules. WJAL argues that its defined television market is unrealistically limited to a single county and excludes contiguous counties which form the core of the station's viewing audience. The communities at issue in this proceeding are located in twelve counties which span four states and three ADis. 15 The counties containing the communities in question are contiguous to the Hagerstown, Maryland ADI with the exception of Frederick and Clarke Counties, Virginia; Hampshire County, West Virginia; and Cumberland County, Pennsylvania.

9. WJAL asserts that it satisfies each of the four market modification criteria set forth in the 1992 Cable Act and the Commission's rules. With respect to the historical carriage factor, WJAL provides a chart summarizing the extent of the station's carriage on local cable systems. WJAL contends that it has achieved a significant level of carriage in light of the fact that the station only began broadcasting in 1987. According to WJAL, the station has been carried on cable systems serving Cumberland County, Pennsylvania and most of the communities at issue in Franklin County, Pennsylvania and Berkeley County, West Virginia since 1988.16 WJAL has been carried to communities in Frederick and Clarke Counties, Virginia and Jefferson County, West Virginia for the majority of its nine years in operation.17 The station was also carried to the communities in question in Frederick County, Maryland between 1990 and 1992.18 WJAL indicates that it will be carried to a number of other communities at issue beginning in May of

14 8 FCC Red at 2981.

IS See Appendices A and B.

16 See Appendix A.

17 Id.

18 Id.

4830 Federal Communications Commission DA 96-568

1996. 19 The station has not been carried on cable systems serving Allegany County, Maryland; Morgan and Hampshire Counties, West Virginia; or Adams County, Pennsylvania.20

10. The petitioner argues that the historical carriage factor is less significant in determining the "true extent" of WJAL's market than it would be in other cases, both because the station is relatively new and because of the unusual characteristics of its market. The petitioner maintains that most of the established stations that are carried to the Communities on local cable systems are imports from much larger urban markets. WJAL claims that such stations have historically been carried in the Hagerstown area due to the lack of truly local stations. The petitioner contends that most of the counties that WJAL is seeking to add to its market have been included within distant ADis because the counties have received cable carriage of network affiliated stations from the major markets in the past and not because the counties can be legitimately identified as part of the Washington, D.C. or Johnstown-Altoona, Pennsylvania markets. WJAL argues that, in the "unique context" of the greater Hagerstown marketplace, a station's historic carriage has little to do with the degree to which the station is actually "local". According to the petitioner, those stations with the longest record of carriage on local cable systems are, in fact, the least "local" and offer the least to the community in terms of locally oriented programming and advertising opportunities for local businesses. WJAL also contends that application of the must carry requirements in 1992 had an adverse effect on the station, prompting several cable systems to drop WJAL because they were not required to cany the station but would potentially be required to cany stations from the distant major markets.

11. WJAL maintains that it provides contour coverage to the communities at issue. WJAL submits a contour map and chart showing that it places a Grade B contour over virtually all of the Communities and a Grade A contour over many of the Communities. Specifically, the petitioner indicates that its Grade B contour covers all of the communities in question with the exception of Frostburg, Midland, Lonaconing, and Woodland in Allegany, Maryland and Romney in Hampshire, West Virginia WJAL demonstrates that it provides Grade A contour coverage to all of the communities at issue in Cumberland, Franklin, and Fulton Counties, Pennsylvania as well as Berkeley, Jefferson, and Morgan Counties, West Virginia. The petitioner also indicates that it places a Grade A contour over the majority of communities in question in Frederick County, Maryland and Adams County, Pennsylvania.

12. In addition,· WJAL avers that it provides locally oriented programming to the Communities. For example, WJAL states that it broadcasts the announcement of school closings due to inclement weather and covers community events and sporting events featuring local high school teams. The petitioner also asserts that it covers professional and college sporting events that are of interest to residents in the Communities such as the Frederick (Maryland) Keys and Hagerstown Suns minor league baseball games, Shippensburg University athletic events, and

19 Id.

20 Id.

4831 Federal Communications Commission DA 96-568 races at the Hagerstown Speedway. WJAL states that it broadcasts other special local events such as a documentary on the dedication of a Civil War monument in Adams County, Pennsylvania and a festival in Frederick County, Virginia. WJAL contends that it produces or airs a number of regularly scheduled programs that originate locally and feature area citizens and topics of local interest. WJAL claims, for instance, that its office in Chambersburg, Pennsylvania is the location for the production of a half dozen programs that air on the station on a daily or weekly basis. The petitioner also states that it broadcasts a half-hour weekly program called "About the Law" which is hosted and produced by a local attorney from Allegany County, Maryland. WJAL asserts that it airs another weekly program that features a Reverend delivering sermons from his church in Adams County, Pennsylvania. The petitioner further states that it carries "Keystone on the Line", a live call-in show that originates locally and answers questions about faith and life from viewers in the four-state area.

13. As to the issue of whether other stations entitled to mandatory carriage provide local coverage to the communities in question, WJAL contends that its signal coverage is equal to or more extensive than the coverage provided by stations with carriage rights. WJAL attributes its signal strength to its high antenna (2,277 feet). WJAL claims that a number of the counties at issue receive only minimal Grade B coverage from stations in distant cities such as Washington, D.C. and Harrisonburg, Virginia. With respect to Frederick County, Virginia, which is part of the Washington, D.C. ADI, WJAL contends that two .Hagerstown stations and one Harrisonburg station provide the only Grade B commercial service to Winchester, Frederick's principal community. According to WJAL, two Washington, D.C. stations, WRC and WTTG, provide Grade B service that extends only to the easternmost portion of Frederick County. WJAL argues that Winchester and Frederick County are, therefore, more closely identified with the Hagerstown area than with Washington, D.C. As to Clarke County, Virginia, which is also included within the Washington, D.C. ADI, the petitioner maintains that WJAL and WHAG-TV provide signal coverage equal to that provided by the Washington, D.C. stations, indicating that Clarke County is properly identified as part of both the Washington and Hagerstown markets. The petitioner also claims that it generally provides more extensive Grade A contour coverage to Frederick County, Maryland and Adams County, Pennsylvania than do stations entitled to mandatory carriage.

14. The petitioner asserts that with respect to many of the counties included in its petition, there are no stations, other than WJAL, that provide "truly local" coverage except for WHAG-TV, which only recently was added to the area by petition.21 The petitioner insists that were it not for WJAL and WHAG-TV, the Hagerstown area would be almost entirely devoid of a local television presence, dependent wholly on signals from distant markets for network programming. WJAL argues that the Washington, D.C. and Johnstown-Altoona stations do not cover news of local importance or local events because of the "geographic distance and the multiplicity of other areas serviced by these highly urban stations." WJAL further contends that it offers a unique service to viewers-- a "family-program format of no-sex, no-violence, no bad

21 See Great Trails Broadcasting, Corp., 10 FCC Red 8629 (released August 11, 1995).

4832 Federal Communications Commission DA 96-568 language programming that includes locally-produced, inspirational and Christian programs." WJAL explains that the demographic make-up of the station's consumer marketplace is primarily rural in nature. WJAL argues that while major network programs are supplied to this market, primarily by large stations in urban and metropolitan Baltimore, Maryland and Washington, D.C., with some additional coverage by stations in other ADls, none of these competitors provide either local community television or programs of inspirational or Christian content. WJAL asserts that it is the only Christian and the only independent station in the area providing programming which is not available from other sources.

15. With regard to viewing patterns in the twelve counties, WJAL maintains that it receives significant ratings in those areas where it currently achieves cable carriage. The petitioner concedes, however, that in jurisdictions· where WJAL is not currently carried by the cable system, or has been carried inconsistently, it has been difficult to achieve ratings. WJAL states that low viewership levels may also be attributed to "the unique nature" of WJAL's programming, which "traditionally has not attracted the viewership of more raw and violent programming of network stations." According to the 1995 Nielsen reports, WJAL's viewership levels in the twelve counties are very low or not reported.22

16. In addition to the evidence presented with respect to the four market modification factors, WJAL also raises other considerations in support of its petition. First, WJAL states that it looks to the twelve counties for local advertising revenues. The petitioner identifies business retailers in each of the counties that advertise on the station. The petitioner explains that advertisers in the counties rely on WJAL to carry their local business messages because of WJAL's extensive signal coverage and low advertising rates. WJAL claims that it provides an economically feasible means for local businesses to reach their customer base. The petitioner asserts that by advertising on WJAL, local businesses are able to avoid the added payment for the larger audiences of the big network stations, whose viewers, for the most part, are unlikely to patronize Hagerstown area businesses. Second, the petitioner argues that topographical barriers play a role in delineating WJAL's viewing area. WJAL asserts, for instance, that mountain ranges in Frederick County, Maryland and Blair County, Pennsylvania restrict the reception of signals from major markets such as Johnstown-Altoona, Harrisburg, Baltimore, and Washington, D.C. In addition, WJAL points out that there is a high level of cable penetration in the Hagerstown area. The petitioner claims that even without the mountain ranges, most stations are sufficiently distant that television viewers in the vicinity of Hagerstown have become dependent on cable television to receive a full complement of network programming. WJAL argues that in this heavily cabled market, it is especially vital that a local station achieve cable carriage in order to gamer an audience and attract local advertisers. WJAL notes that WHAG-TV, which has a similar antenna coverage pattern, was granted its reque'st for ADI modification.23

22 Nielsen Station Index, 1995 County/Coverage Study, County Summary.

23 See Great Trails Broadcasting, Corp., IO FCC Red 8629 (released August 11, 1995). 4833 Federal Communications Commission DA 96-568

17. Adelphia opposes WJAL's petition with respect to the communities at issue in Frederick and Clarke Counties, Virginia. Adelphia points out that WJAL was not carried on its cable systems serving Frederick or Clarke Counties in 1993. Adelphia also contends that WJAL's assertions of its contour coverage area in its May 1993 petition are inaccurate. Adelphia claims that WJAL's predicted Grade B signal does not cover the entirety of either Frederick or Clarke Couaties. The opponent notes as well that WJAL's Grade A contour does not reach Winchester in Frederick County or any portion of Clarke County. Adelphia contends that Hagerstown, Maryland is not physically proximate to the communities served by its cable systems. The opponent argues that Frederick and Clarke Counties, Virginia are at least as distant as other jurisdictions that WJAL withdrew from its original request and should, therefore, be eliminated from possible inclusion in WJAL's ADI as well. For example, Adelphia notes that Carroll and Montgomery Counties, Macy land and Loudon County, Virginia were among the more distant jurisdictions eliminated from WJAL's original petition. Adelphia contends that as much, if not more, of Carroll County is within WJAL's predicted Grade A and Grade B contours as is Frederick County, Virginia. The opponent also asserts that as much, if not more, of Loudon and Montgomery Counties are within WJAL's predicted Grade B as is Clarke County, Virginia. Adelphia maintains that if Carroll, Montgomery, and Loudon Counties are to be eliminated from WJAL's request because they are too distant, Frederick and Clarke Counties should be eliminated from consideration on the same basis.

18. Adelphia claims that WJAL does not provide any probative evidence of viewing levels in Frederick and Clarke Counties. The opponent notes that WJAL submitted two letters and two pledge forms from Frederick and Clarke County residents as its only support for the proposition that WJAL is viewed in the two counties. Adelphia contends that the petitioner has failed to demonstrate that Frederick or Clarke County residents have any interest in WJAL's programming. The opponent argues that WJAL's programming does not address local concerns and consists primarily of nationally syndicated religious shows and re-runs. Finally, Adelphia asserts that several Washington, D.C. stations entitled to mandatory carriage provide coverage of major events that occur in Frederick and Clarke Counties. Adelphia points out, as well, that the Grade B contours of Washington D.C. stations WUSA, WTTG, WRC-TV, and WJLA-TV entirely cover Clarke County.

4834 Federal Communications Commission DA 96-568

ANALYSIS AND DECISION

19. We shall grant WJAL's market modification request. The petitioner has made a persuasive case that the communities at issue are logically part of WJAL's market for purposes of the cable television mandatory broadcast signal carriage rules under the standards set forth in §614(h) of the Communications Act. We find that the Commission's Order in Great Trails Broadcasting, Corp., 10 FCC Red 8629 (released August 11, 1995), which granted WHAG-TV's request for modification of the Hagerstown, Maryland ADI, is strong precedent. In that case, the Commission determined that many of the same communities at issue here, together- with Hagerstown, Maryland, form an economic market.24

20. In addition, WJAL has achieved some level of carriage on most of the cable systems serving the Communities.25 WJAL has not been carried on cable systems serving Allegany County, Maryland; Morgan and Hampshire Counties, West Virginia; or Adams County, Pennsylvania. With respect to these counties, however, other factors weigh in favor of granting the station's market modification request. For one, communities located in Allegany County, Maryland and Morgan and Hampshire Counties, West Virginia were determined to be part of the Hagerstown market in the Great Trails Broadcasting, Corp. case. In addition, the Allegany, Morgan, and Hampshire County communities at issue are geographically closer to Hagerstown than they are to Washington, D.C. which is the center of the AJ?I to which they are currently assigned. Furthermore, a number of the Allegany County communities in question are located along or near a commercial artery, 1-70/Maryland-40, which runs East-West and connects Allegany County to the Hagerstown area. The Morgan County communities at issue are covered by WJAL's Grade A contour and the Hampshire County communities in question are within WJAL's Grade B contour with the exception of Romney, which lies on the fringe of the Grade B contour. Regarding Adams County, Pennsylvania, five of the six communities in question here are covered by WJAL's Grade A contour. WJAL also provides Grade B contour coverage to virtually all of the Communities and Grade A contour coverage to many of the Communities.26 WJAL has demonstrated that it covers sporting and other events of interest to the Communities. In addition, many businesses located in the greater Hagerstown area advertise on WJAL. As to the issue of coverage provided by other stations, we do not believe that Congress intended for the third criterion to operate as a bar to a station's ADI claim whenever other stations could also be shown to serve the communities at issue. Rather, we believe that this criterion was intended to enhance a station's claim where it could be shown that other stations do not serve the communities at issue. Regarding viewership levels, we recognize that specialty stations, such as

24 Id.

25 See Appendix A.

26 All of the Communities lie within WJAL's Grade B or Grade A contours with the exception of Frostburg, Midland, Lonaconing, and Woodland in Allegany County, Maryland and Romney in Hampshire County, West Virginia. See also paragraph 11, supra.

4835 Federal Communications Commission DA 96-568

religious stations, typically attract limited audiences. In such circumstances, we assign less weight to the station's viewership levels than we would in cases involving, for example, network affiliates.

21. We note that WJAL's petition was unopposed except with respect to the communities located in Frederick and Clarke Counties, Virginia. We find that the Frederick and Clarke County communities at issue are logically part of WJAL's ADI. The station has been carried on Adelphia's Winchester system serving Frederick and Clarke Counties, Virginia for the majority of WJAL's nine years in operation. WJAL's Grade B contour covers Winchester in Frederick County, Virginia and Berryville in Clarke County, Virginia. The community of Boyce in Clarke County, Virginia lies on the fringe of WJAL's Grade B contour. In addition, the communities of Berryville and Boyce in Clarke County, Virginia and Winchester in Frederick County, Virginia are geographically closer to Hagerstown, Maryland than they are to Washington D.C., the ADI to which they are currently assigned.27 Finally, the community of Winchester in Frederick County was added to the Hagerstown ADI in Great Trails Broadcasting, Corp.

ORDER .

22. In view of the foregoing, we find that grant of WJAL's Petition for Special Relief is in the public interest. 28

23. Accordingly, IT IS ORDERED, pursuant to §614 of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended (47 U.S.C. §534), and §76.59 of the Commissfon's Rules (47 C.F.R. §76.59), that the Petition for Special Relief filed by Good Companion Broadcasting, Inc., d/b/a Channel 68 Broadcasting Inc., dated May 10, 1993 and modified on August 8, 1995 and March 13, 1996, is GRANTED. WJAL shall notify the relevant cable systems in writing of its carriage and channel position elections (§§76.56, 76.57, 76.64(f) of the Commission's Rules) within thirty (30) days of the release date of this Memorandum Opinion and Order. The affected cable systems shall come into compliance with the applicable rules within sixty (60) days of such notification.

27 Berryville is approximately 36 miles from Hagerstown and 53. miles from Washington, D.C. Boyce is roughly 42 miles from Hagerstown and 56 miles from Washington, D.C. And Winchester is approximately 39 miles from Hagerstown and 64 miles from Washington, D.C.

28 The communities at issue in Frederick and Allegany Counties, Maryland; Franklin County, Pennsylvania; Berkeley, Jefferson, Morgan, and Hampshire Counties, West Virginia; and Frederick and Clarke Counties, Virginia also remain within the Washington, D.C. ADI. The communities at issue in Adams and Cumberland Counties, Pennsylvania also remain within the Harrisburg-York-Lancaster-Lebanon, Pennsylvania ADI. And Fulton County, Pennsylvania also remains within the Johnstown-Altoona, Pennsylvania ADI. 4836 Federal Communications Commission DA 96-568

24. This action is taken pursuant to authority delegated by §0.321 of the Commission's Rules.

FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION

William H. Johnson Deputy Chief, Cable Services Bureau

4837 Federal Communications Commission DA 96-568

Appendix A Historic County Communities Cable System Carriaee

Macy land:

Allegany Frostburg, Midland, Lonaconing, CMA Cablevision and Woodland Associates VII of Frostburg

Oldtown and Flintstone Oldtown Community Systems

Cumberland TCI Cablevision of Maryland

Frederick Adamstown, Braddock Heights, Frederick 1990- Brunswick, Burkittsville, Cablevision, Inc. 1992 Emmittsburg, Fort Detrick, Frederick, Jefferson, Libertytown, Middletown, Mt. Airy, Mt. Pleasant, Myersville, Point of Rocks, Rosemont, Thurmont, Urbana, Walkersville, and Woodsboro

Pennsylvania:

Adams Arendtsville, Bendersville, Pennsylvania Bonneauville, East Berlin, and Classic Cable Fairfield

Gettysburg TCI of Pennsylvania

Cumberland Walnut Bottom Kuhn 1988- Communications Present

Shippensburg TV Cable of 1988- Chambersburg Present

Franklin Greencastle Cumberland 1988- Valley Cable TV Present

Spring Run Spring Run 1988- Cable TV Present

4838 Federal Communications Commission DA 96-568

Historic County Communities Ca hie System Carriaee

Chambersburg TV Cable of 1988- Chambersburg Present

Mercers berg Tri-State Beginning Cablevision 5196

Ft. Loudon, St. Thomas TV Cable of Beginning Ft. Loudon/ 5196 St. Thomas

Mt. Alto, Rouzerville, TV Cable of 1988- Waynesboro Waynesboro Present

Fulton McConnellsburg Tri-State Carried by Cablevision several small systems

West Virginia:

Berkeley Falling Waters, Marlowe Berkeley Cable 1988- Communications Present

Hedgesville, Inwood TV Cable of 1995- Berkeley County Present

Martinsburg Time Warner Cable 1988- of Martinsburg Present

Hampshire Augusta CMA Cablevision Associates of Augusta/Keyser

Capon Bridge Valley Cable Beginning 5196

Romney TCI Cable of Maryland

4839 Federal Communications Commission DA 96-568

Historic County Communities Cable System Carriaa=e

Jefferson Bolivar, Charles Town, CIR TV Cable, 1988- Harper's Ferry, Ranson, Inc. 1994(?) and Shepherdstown

Morgan Berkeley Springs and Tri-State Beginning Great Cacapon Cablevision 5196 Associates XI

Virginia:

Clarke Berryville and Boyce Central Virginia 1987-1993 Cable TV d/b/a 1995-Present Adelphia Cable Communications

Frederick Winchester Central Virginia 1987-1993 Cable TV d/b/a 1995-Present Adelphia Cable Communications

4840 Federal Communications Commission DA 96-568

Appendix B

Washington, D.C. ADI:

Frederick County, MD Allegany County, MD Franklin County, PA Berkeley County, WV Jefferson County, WV Morgan County, WV Hampshire County, WV Clarke County, VA Frederick County,VA

Harrisburg-York-Lancaster-Lebanon, PA ADI:

Adams County, PA Cumberland County, PA

Johnstown-Altoona, PA ADI:

Fulton County, PA

4841