Before the

Federal Communications Commission

Washington, D.C. 20554

+----------------------------------+---+------------------------------+
| In the Matter of :               | * | CSR-5562-Z                   |
|                                  | * |                              |
| WHDT-DT, Channel 59, Stuart,     | ) |                              |
| Florida                          | * |                              |
|                                  | * |                              |
| Petition for Declaratory Ruling  |   |                              |
| that Digital Broadcast Stations  | * |                              |
| Have Mandatory Carriage          | * |                              |
|                                  | ) |                              |
| Rights                           | * |                              |
|                                  | * |                              |
|                                  |   |                              |
|                                  | * |                              |
|                                  | * |                              |
|                                  | ) |                              |
|                                  | * |                              |
|                                  | * |                              |
|                                  |   |                              |
|                                  | * |                              |
|                                  | * |                              |
|                                  | ) |                              |
|                                  | * |                              |
|                                  | * |                              |
|                                  |   |                              |
|                                  | * |                              |
|                                  | * |                              |
|                                  | ) |                              |
|                                  | * |                              |
|                                  | * |                              |
|                                  |   |                              |
|                                  | * |                              |
|                                  | * |                              |
|                                  | ) |                              |
|                                  | * |                              |
|                                  | * |                              |
|                                  |   |                              |
|                                  | * |                              |
|                                  | * |                              |
|                                  | ) |                              |
|                                  | * |                              |
|                                  | * |                              |
|                                  |   |                              |
|                                  | * |                              |
|                                  | * |                              |
|                                  | ) |                              |
|                                  | * |                              |
|                                  | * |                              |
|                                  |   |                              |
|                                  | * |                              |
|                                  | * |                              |
|                                  | ) |                              |
|                                  | * |                              |
|                                  | * |                              |
+----------------------------------+---+------------------------------+

MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER

**Adopted: January 18, 2001** **Released: January 23, 2001**

By the Commission:

# INTRODUCTION

1\. Guenter Marksteiner, Permittee of Station WHDT-DT, Channel 59,
Stuart, Florida ("WHDT") has filed a Petition for Declaratory Ruling
(\"Petition\") pursuant to Section 1.2 of the Commission\'s rules.[^1]
WHDT asks the Commission to issue a ruling that a new digital-only
("DTV") television station, which seeks carriage of a single channel of
video programming, is entitled to mandatory carriage under Section 614
of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended (\"Act\").[^2] The
Petition was placed on public notice and a time frame was established
for filing comments and reply comments.[^3]

**II. BACKGROUND**

II. 

2\. Pursuant to Section 614 of the Act, and the implementing rules
adopted by the Commission in *Implementation of the Cable Television
Consumer Protection and Competition Act of 1992, Broadcast Signal
Carriage Issues,* Report and Order *("Must Carry Order"),* a commercial
television broadcast station is entitled to request carriage on cable
systems located within the station\'s market. [^4] A station\'s market
for this purpose is its \"designated market area," or DMA, as defined by
Nielsen Media Research.[^5] A DMA is a geographic market designation
that defines each television market exclusive of others, based on
measured viewing patterns.[^6] Congress intended the mandatory carriage
provisions to ensure the continued availability to the public of
television broadcast service.

### 3. The Commission has adopted rules to provide for the transition from analog television service to digital television service.[^7] In brief, the Commission has stated that each existing analog television licensee or permittee is eligible to construct and operate a new digital station with a roughly comparable service area using 6 MHz of spectrum.[^8] A digital television licensee may offer high definition digital television ("HDTV") or standard definition digital television ("SDTV").[^9] The rules governing the transition also provide for a staggered implementation schedule contingent upon the size of the television market.[^10] At the end of the transition, a broadcast licensee is required to cease broadcasting its analog signal and return to the government the 6 MHz of spectrum used to broadcast analog television service.[^11] The target date for the end of the digital transition is December 31, 2006.[^12]  {#the-commission-has-adopted-rules-to-provide-for-the-transition-from-analog-television-service-to-digital-television-service.-in-brief-the-commission-has-stated-that-each-existing-analog-television-licensee-or-permittee-is-eligible-to-construct-and-operate-a-new-digital-station-with-a-roughly-comparable-service-area-using-6-mhz-of-spectrum.-a-digital-television-licensee-may-offer-high-definition-digital-television-hdtv-or-standard-definition-digital-television-sdtv.-the-rules-governing-the-transition-also-provide-for-a-staggered-implementation-schedule-contingent-upon-the-size-of-the-television-market.-at-the-end-of-the-transition-a-broadcast-licensee-is-required-to-cease-broadcasting-its-analog-signal-and-return-to-the-government-the-6-mhz-of-spectrum-used-to-broadcast-analog-television-service.-the-target-date-for-the-end-of-the-digital-transition-is-december-31-2006. .unnumbered}

4\. As required by the Act,[^13] the Commission commenced a proceeding
to determine a cable operator's digital broadcast signal carriage
obligations.[^14] In light of the significant changes to the broadcast
and cable industries resulting from the conversion to digital
technology, the Commission sought comment in that proceeding on how to
accomplish the goals reflected in Section 614 and the other statutory
broadcast signal carriage provisions.

5\. In a recent Memorandum Opinion and Order regarding band clearing of
the 700 MHz spectrum, the Commission clarified two limited issues
related to cable carriage of digital signals as part of voluntary band
clearing agreements:

> First, we wish to clarify that cable systems are ultimately obligated
> to accord "must carry" rights to local broadcasters' digital signals.
> Existing analog stations that return their analog spectrum allocation
> and convert to digital are entitled to mandatory carriage for their
> digital signals consistent with applicable statutory and regulatory
> provisions. Second, to facilitate the continuing availability during
> the transition of the analog signal of a broadcaster who is party to a
> voluntary band clearing agreement with new 700 MHz licensees, such a
> broadcaster could, in this context and at its own expense, provide its
> broadcast digital signal in an analog format for carriage on cable
> systems. In these circumstances, nothing prohibits the cable system
> from providing such signals in analog format to subscribers, in
> addition to or in place of the broadcast digital signal, pursuant to
> an agreement with the broadcaster. [^15]

**III. DISCUSSION**

## WHDT's Petition

6\. WHDT is licensed to serve Stuart, Florida, which is located in the
West Palm Beach-Ft. Pierce television market.[^16] According to Nielsen
Media Research, there is an 84% cable penetration rate in this DMA.[^17]
This market is served by several cable operators, including Comcast and
Adelphia.[^18] There are six other full power commercial television
stations licensed to communities in the West Palm Beach-Ft. Pierce
DMA.[^19]

7.  WHDT states that the Commission granted on April 25, 2000 its
    initial construction permit.[^20] According to WHDT, its programming
    will "uniquely serve the public interest" with locally produced news
    and informational programming; international news, arts and
    informational programming from the German network Deutsche
    Welle,[^21] and American syndicated programming and movies.[^22]
    WHDT states that currently there are no other DTV-only stations
    authorized by the Commission.[^23] WHDT adds that because only a
    very small portion of the public have DTV television receivers, it
    is initially dependent on cable carriage to reach viewers and obtain
    the advertising revenue necessary to survive.[^24] WHDT states that
    its narrow request should be granted because it does not involve
    complex constitutional and definitional issues related to the
    carriage of multiplexed digital signals or concurrent carriage of
    analog and digital signals from the same broadcaster.[^25] Rather,
    WHDT states that it is asking for carriage of a single channel of
    television programming, equivalent in bandwidth and function to the
    transmission of an analog television station. WHDT will request that
    its signal be carried in digital format provided all cable
    subscribers with digital television sets could watch it.[^26] WHDT
    states that it would not object to a cable operator converting its
    signal to analog format at the cable operator's principal headend,
    and will provide the necessary conversion equipment to the cable
    system.[^27] WHDT states that if its signal is carried in an analog
    format, it should be done in a manner consistent with the channel
    positioning requirements in Section 76.57 of the Commission's
    rules.[^28] WHDT also states that the signal strength requirements
    for analog television signals, under Section 76.55(c)(3), should be
    applied in this case.[^29]

## Ripeness for Review

# 8. Several cable programmers argue that WHDT's petition is not ripe for review by the Commission. They assert that WHDT's petition is premature for three reasons: (1) the station is not currently on-the-air; (2) WHDT has not made requests for carriage on local cable systems; and (3) the Commission has not yet issued digital broadcast signal carriage requirements for cable operators.[^30] In response, WHDT argues that its request for carriage is not premature, noting its \$13 million investment and the fact that the station's studio is fully constructed.[^31] While it could have requested carriage of its station on local cable systems in the standard manner pursuant to the Commission's rules, WHDT states that it purposefully asked for a declaratory ruling prior to engaging in a formal cable request because it acknowledged that cable operators might question their carriage obligations with regard to a DTV-only station.[^32] Moreover, WHDT argues that the complex legal issues discussed in the *DTV Must Carry Notice* are different from the narrow issue presented by WHDT's petition, and, as such, should be addressed independently. {#several-cable-programmers-argue-that-whdts-petition-is-not-ripe-for-review-by-the-commission.-they-assert-that-whdts-petition-is-premature-for-three-reasons-1-the-station-is-not-currently-on-the-air-2-whdt-has-not-made-requests-for-carriage-on-local-cable-systems-and-3-the-commission-has-not-yet-issued-digital-broadcast-signal-carriage-requirements-for-cable-operators.-in-response-whdt-argues-that-its-request-for-carriage-is-not-premature-noting-its-13-million-investment-and-the-fact-that-the-stations-studio-is-fully-constructed.-while-it-could-have-requested-carriage-of-its-station-on-local-cable-systems-in-the-standard-manner-pursuant-to-the-commissions-rules-whdt-states-that-it-purposefully-asked-for-a-declaratory-ruling-prior-to-engaging-in-a-formal-cable-request-because-it-acknowledged-that-cable-operators-might-question-their-carriage-obligations-with-regard-to-a-dtv-only-station.-moreover-whdt-argues-that-the-complex-legal-issues-discussed-in-the-dtv-must-carry-notice-are-different-from-the-narrow-issue-presented-by-whdts-petition-and-as-such-should-be-addressed-independently. .unnumbered}

9\. We find no support for the contention that WHDT's petition is
premature. First, over-the-air broadcasting is not a prerequisite to a
Commission determination of the must carry rights of a broadcaster. The
record indicates that WHDT is committed to commence broadcast service
and provide programming service to its local community once it has
completed construction of its station facilities. Waiting for WHDT to
commence over-the-air broadcasting before providing guidance on this
issue would serve no discernable purpose. Second, while WHDT could have
filed requests for carriage with cable operators in its DMA, we agree
with WHDT that such requests would have resulted in confusion and
unnecessary delay because local cable operators would undoubtedly have
raised the same objections to any must carry requests that they have
raised herein.

##  {#section .unnumbered}

## C. Carriage Rights {#c.-carriage-rights .unnumbered}

### 10. WHDT asserts that commercial television stations, including DTV-only stations such as WHDT, have broad carriage rights under the Act.[^33] According to WHDT, the 1992 Cable Act was premised on the principles of preserving the existence of local broadcasters and promoting competition in the provision of video programming. WHDT argues that the carriage of DTV-only stations is mandated by the Act.[^34] To support this contention, WHDT refers to the language of Section 614(b)(1)(B) of the Act, which provides that:  {#whdt-asserts-that-commercial-television-stations-including-dtv-only-stations-such-as-whdt-have-broad-carriage-rights-under-the-act.-according-to-whdt-the-1992-cable-act-was-premised-on-the-principles-of-preserving-the-existence-of-local-broadcasters-and-promoting-competition-in-the-provision-of-video-programming.-whdt-argues-that-the-carriage-of-dtv-only-stations-is-mandated-by-the-act.-to-support-this-contention-whdt-refers-to-the-language-of-section-614b1b-of-the-act-which-provides-that .unnumbered}

### A cable operator of a cable system with more than 12 usable activated channels shall carry the signals of local commercial television stations, up to one-third of the aggregate number of usable activated channels of such system.[^35]  {#a-cable-operator-of-a-cable-system-with-more-than-12-usable-activated-channels-shall-carry-the-signals-of-local-commercial-television-stations-up-to-one-third-of-the-aggregate-number-of-usable-activated-channels-of-such-system. .unnumbered}

In this regard, Section 614(h)(1)(A) of the Act defines:

> \[T\]he term "local commercial television station" \[as\] any full
> power television broadcast station, other than a qualified
> noncommercial educational television station \... licensed and
> operating on a channel regularly assigned to its community by the
> Commission\....[^36]

WHDT states that it meets the requirements for carriage under Section
614(b)(1)(B). WHDT asserts that it is a "local commercial television
station," in that it is a full power commercial television broadcast
station, "licensed to and soon to be operating on a Channel 59 regularly
assigned to its community (Stuart, Florida) by the Commission."[^37]
WHDT argues that if Congress had intended to exclude from Section 614
the carriage of DTV stations, which were explicitly anticipated by
Congress at the time of the passage of the 1992 Cable Act, it would have
done so through express language in Section 614.[^38] The Association
for Maximum Service Television ("MSTV") contends that as soon a station
transmits a DTV signal, it is entitled to carriage.[^39]

11\. Several cable commenters argue that Section 614(b)(4)(B) of the Act
supports the view that carriage of WHDT's signal is not required.
Section 614(b)(4)(B), in pertinent part, reads:

> the Commission shall initiate a proceeding to establish any changes in
> the signal carriage requirements of cable television systems necessary
> to ensure cable carriage of \[advanced television\] broadcast signals
> of local commercial television stations which have been changed to
> conform to such modified standards.[^40]

NCTA argues that Section 614(b)(4)(B) requires only the carriage of
signals that have been changed into a digital format and that there
should be no single digital carriage obligation until the closeout of
analog television.[^41] The International Channel similarly asserts that
carriage is only required at the end of the transition period when the
signals of all broadcast stations in a market are digitally transmitted
to a substantial portion of over-the-air viewers.[^42] Adelphia asserts
that while digital broadcast signals would certainly be subject to must
carry in a post-transition environment, the analog carriage of a brand
new DTV-only facility during the transition period presents a different
issue.[^43]

12\. We agree with WHDT and MSTV that, pursuant to Section 614 of the
Communications Act and the Commission's rules, WHDT is entitled to cable
carriage of its digital broadcast signal within the West Palm Beach-Ft.
Pierce television market and disagree with the cable commenters that
Section 614(b)(4)(B) requires a different result. Section 614(a)
provides that "\[e\]ach cable operator shall carry, on the cable system
of that operator, the signals of local commercial television stations
... as provided by this section."[^44] The statutory definition of
"local commercial television station" includes any full power commercial
television station, other than a qualified noncommercial education
television station, licensed by the Commission. The Commission is
charged with issuing regulations and establishing standards ensuring the
transition to advanced television technology, pursuant to Section
614(b)(4)(B). Insofar as WHDT is concerned, this transition will have
taken place when it commences broadcasting. Indeed, as we indicated in
the First Report and Order and Further Notice of Proposed Rulemaking
("*DTV Order and FNPRM*"), when a television station seeks carriage of
only one signal, whether digital or analog, the cable system is
obligated to carry the signal, and may not require the television
station to wait until the end of the transition period.[^45] In the *700
MHz Order*, which also addressed the relevant comments from the *DTV
Must Carry Notice*, the Commission clearly stated that digital
television signals have carriage rights under the Act and that these
rights exist now in situations where the transition is complete.
Although this decision focused on the immediate carriage rights of
stations that have returned their analog spectrum allocation and
commenced digital broadcasting, we see no relevant distinction in terms
of cable carriage rights between a station that has surrendered its
analog allocation and one that commences digital broadcasting without an
analog frequency pair to surrender. In this respect, WHDT's petition is
squarely within the language of the *700 MHz Order*. WHDT is a
digital-only station, operating on Channel 59, seeking carriage only for
its high definition digital signal. As in the *700 MHz Order*, we
conclude that broadcasters initiating DTV-only service "are entitled to
mandatory carriage for their digital signals consistent with applicable
statutory and regulatory provisions."[^46] WHDT is entitled to make its
cable carriage election in accordance with the provisions of Section
76.64(f)(4).

#  D. Manner of Carriage {#d.-manner-of-carriage .unnumbered}

13. According to C-Span, there is no support in either the Act or the
    Commission's rules for imposing a requirement that a cable operator
    convert a digital-only signal into an analog format at the
    headend.[^47] WHDT states that it is offering to convert its digital
    signal to analog at local cable headends in order to accommodate
    carriage of its DTV signal. By converting its signal to an analog
    format, WHDT states that concerns regarding compatibility with
    digital set-top boxes, signal strength standards, and channel
    positioning will be eliminated.[^48] WHDT points out that the signal
    of many analog stations go through a similar process after signals
    are delivered to cable TV headends via microwave or fiber-optic
    links.[^49] Several broadcast commenters assert that once conversion
    of WHDT's signal from digital to analog is complete, the signal
    would be indistinguishable from any station broadcasting in an
    analog format.[^50] As such, carriage of one channel of a
    digital-only station in this manner will not subject cable operators
    to additional burdens.[^51]

14. Having concluded that WHDT's signal is entitled to carriage, it is
    appropriate that we provide some guidance regarding the manner of
    carriage required. To facilitate the availability of service to
    consumers during the start of the transition period, as we indicated
    in the *700 MHz* proceeding, carriage in a converted analog format
    would be acceptable. Concurrent with our decision herein, the
    Commission has adopted the *DTV Order and FNPRM* with regard to the
    carriage of digital television broadcast signals.[^52] The *DTV
    Order and FNPRM* concludes that for purposes of supporting the
    ultimate conversion to digital signals and facilitating the return
    of the analog spectrum, a television station may demand that one of
    its HDTV or SDTV television signals be carried on the cable system
    for delivery to subscribers in an analog format.[^53] Consistent
    with this conclusion, WHDT may elect cable carriage of its digital
    signal in a converted analog format. If WHDT elects analog carriage,
    it must supply to cable operators at its own expense conversion
    equipment to translate the signal to analog.[^54] Cable operators
    carrying WHDT's signal in analog format must do so in accordance
    with the analog carriage requirements set forth in the Commission's
    rules.[^55] As indicated in the *700 MHz* proceeding, the status and
    duration of any such converted analog carriage arrangements would be
    subject to review after 2003 as the progress of the transition is
    considered. Notwithstanding our statements in that 700 MHz
    reconsideration decision that assumed that the cable operator could
    elect to provide a digital-only broadcaster's signal in analog
    format with the agreement of the broadcaster, we clarify herein that
    the election as to whether the cable operator provides the signal to
    consumers in analog or digital format is solely that of the
    broadcaster. As the transition moves forward, WHDT and other
    television broadcast stations will be required to deliver their
    signals in digital format and cable operators will be required to
    carry them in digital format.[^56]

15. If a cable system carries WHDT's signal in digital format, we
    recognize that a number of questions were previously unresolved
    regarding the specific mechanics of carriage. The *DTV Order and
    FNPRM* should resolve the issues related to the mechanics of
    carriage raised by WHDT's petition. To the extent that the rules and
    policies adopted in the *DTV Order and FNPRM* may not sufficiently
    address a particular issue, we expect parties to cooperate in
    resolving such issues.

**E. Other Matters**

C.  

```{=html}
<!-- -->
```
16. WHDT states that the Supreme Court upheld the constitutionality of
    the mandatory carriage provisions of the Act, and the principles
    underlying them.[^57] WHDT argues that all of the reasons underlying
    the Supreme Court's decision to uphold the mandatory carriage
    provisions of the 1992 Cable Act apply to this case.[^58]
    Conversely, cable commenters argue that none of the interests
    identified by the Supreme Court are realized in the proposal
    presented by WHDT.[^59] NAB and MSTV assert that without carriage,
    the benefits of diverse programming and competitive operation in the
    market, elements the Supreme Court in the *Turner* cases sought to
    preserve*,* would be lost.[^60] We need not address the
    constitutional arguments raised by the cable operators in this
    proceeding other than to recognize that the Court found the Act's
    cable carriage provisions constitutional against the challenges
    presented. Commenters opposing WHDT's petition have not presented
    evidence persuading us that the Court's holding, and the
    Congressional basis for mandatory carriage, are in any way
    inconsistent with application of Section 614 to the carriage of a
    DTV-only signal.

17. WHDT argues that the Commission's support and promotion of free,
    over-the-air digital broadcast service further support its
    Petition.[^61] WHDT states that the Commission cannot expect
    broadcasters to provide DTV service without some certainty that they
    will be able to reach cable subscribers.[^62] Comcast, on the other
    hand, argues that the grant of WHDT's carriage request would not
    spur the purchase of digital television equipment or hasten the
    digital transition.[^63] Adelphia states that the success or failure
    of a digital-only business strategy undertaken at this time should
    be determined by the marketplace and not regulatory
    intercession.[^64] While not essential to our decision herein, which
    involves a straightforward application of the must carry provisions,
    we find that the licensing and impending operation of WHDT certainly
    advances the digital transition. As evidenced by our decision in the
    *700 MHz Order*, we support the rapid conversion of analog
    television stations to the digital broadcast format.

In this regard, we believe that clarifying cable carriage rights for
DTV-only stations will foster this process.

**IV. ORDERING CLAUSES**

18. Accordingly, **IT IS ORDERED**, pursuant to Section 614 of the
    Communications Act of 1934, as amended, 47 U.S.C. § 534, and Section
    1.2 of the Commission's rules, 47 C.F.R. § 1.2, that the Petition
    for Declaratory Ruling filed by Guenter Marksteiner, Permittee of
    Station WHDT-DT, **IS GRANTED** to the extent indicated herein.

FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION

Magalie Roman Salas

Secretary

#   {#section-1 .unnumbered}

# APPENDIX A {#appendix-a .unnumbered}

**Petitioner**

Guenter Marksteiner ("WHDT")

**Commenters**

Arts & Entertainment Network ("A&E")/Black Entertainment Television
("BET")/Courtroom Television Network/Ovation, Inc.

Association for Maximum Service Television ("MSTV")

C-Span Networks ("C-Span")

International Cable Channels Partnership, ltd. ("International Cable")

KB Prime Media, LLC

KM Communications, Inc.

Maranatha Broadcasting Co.

National Association of Broadcasters ("NAB")

National Cable Television Association ("NTCA")

Pappas Telecasting

Paxson Communications Corporation ("Paxson")

Sonshine Family Television

**Reply Commenters**

Adelphia

American Cable Association ("ACA")

Comcast

Guenter Marksteiner

MSTV

National Association of Broadcasters

National Cable Television Association

[^1]: 47 C.F.R. §1.2.

[^2]: 47 U.S.C. §534.

[^3]: *See Petition for Declaratory Ruling that Digital Television
    Stations Have Must Carry Rights*, Public Notice, DA 00-1406 (rel.
    July 3, 2000). A list of commenters and reply commenters is set
    forth in Appendix A and includes the acronyms and abbreviations by
    which they are referred in this item.

[^4]: 8 FCC Rcd 2965, 2976-2977 (1993).

[^5]: ^ ?^Section 614(h)(1)(C) of the Communications Act, as amended by
    the Telecommunications Act of 1996, provides that a station\'s
    market shall be determined by the Commission by regulation or order
    using, where available, commercial publications which delineate
    television markets based on viewing patterns. *See* 47 U.S.C.
    §534(h)(1)(C).

[^6]: *Market Modification Final Report and Order,* 14 FCC Rcd at 8369.

[^7]: 47 C.F.R. §§73.622-624.

[^8]: *See Advanced Television Systems and Their Impact Upon the
    Existing Television Broadcast Service,* Fifth Report and Order, 12
    FCC Rcd 12809 (1997)("*Fifth Report and Order*").

[^9]: A broadcast station may also use its allotted digital spectrum for
    datacasting opportunities.

[^10]: *Fifth Report and Order,* 12 FCC Rcd at 12840-41.

[^11]: *Id.*; *Sixth Report and Order*, 12 FCC Rcd 14588 (1997).

[^12]: Balanced Budget Act of 1997, Pub. L. No. 105-33, 11 Stat. 251
    (1997).

[^13]: 47 U.S.C. §534(b)(4)(B).

[^14]: *Carriage of the Transmissions of Digital Television Broadcast
    Stations*, Notice of Proposed Rulemaking, 13 FCC Rcd 15092
    (1998)("*DTV Must Carry Notice*"). The Commission first sought and
    received comments addressing digital broadcast television carriage
    issues in 1995. *See Advanced Television Systems and Their Impact
    Upon the Existing Television Broadcast Service*, Fourth Further
    Notice of Proposed Rulemaking and Third Notice of Inquiry, 10 FCC
    Rcd 10540 (1995)("*Fourth Further Notice of Proposed Rulemaking and
    Third Notice of Inquiry"*).

[^15]: *See Service Rules for the 746-764 and 776-794 MHz Bands, and
    Revisions to Part 27 of the Commission's Rules*, Memorandum Opinion
    and Order and Further Notice of Proposed Rulemaking, FCC 00-224
    (released June 30, 2000) at ¶ 65 (footnotes omitted) ("*700 MHz
    Order*").

[^16]: West Palm Beach-Ft. Pierce is the 43^rd^ largest television
    market in the United States. *See* January 1, 2001-Nielsen Media
    Research Estimates. Existing commercial television stations in this
    market have until May, 2002 to initiate digital television service.
    *See* *Fifth Report and Order*, 12 FCC Rcd at 12841.

[^17]: *See* Nielsen Cable Penetration by DMA, July 2000.

[^18]: AT&T Broadband also has cable systems in this market, as do
    several smaller cable operators. We note that DirecTV is providing
    local-into-local television service in this market as well.

[^19]: The local commercial television stations include: (1) WFGC (Ch.
    61-Ind.); (2) WFLX (Ch. 29-Fox); (3) WPBF (Ch. 25-ABC); (4) WPEC
    (Ch. 12-CBS); (5) WPTV (Ch. 5-NBC); and WTVX (Ch. 34-UPN). The
    market is also served by two noncommercial educational television
    stations: (1) WTCE (Ch. 21-Ft. Pierce) and (2) WXEL (Ch. 42-West
    Palm Beach).

[^20]: WHDT explains that it originally filed an application for an
    analog station on Channel 59, Stuart, Florida. *See* 47 C.F.R. §
    73.606. After the settlement of competing applications for that
    allotted channel was filed, WHDT amended its application to specify
    DTV-only operation, pursuant to the Commission's *Memorandum Opinion
    and Order on Reconsideration of the Sixth Report and Order*, 13 FCC
    Rcd 7418 (1998).

[^21]: According to WHDT, Deutsche Welle is the largest international
    news network in the world, other than CNN. It states that the
    programming presented on Channel 59 will be predominantly in the
    English language. WHDT Petition at 2.

[^22]: *Id.*

[^23]: *Id.*

[^24]: *Id.*

[^25]: WHDT Petition at 1. We note that the carriage of both the analog
    and digital television station signals, as well as the carriage of
    multiple programming streams carried on a digital television signal,
    are the core issues in the *Digital Broadcast Signal Carriage*
    proceeding.

[^26]: *See* WHDT *Ex Parte* Letter to the Commission, dated September
    21, 2000; WHDT *Ex Parte* Letter to the Commission, dated October
    27, 2000.

[^27]: If the Commission allows a cable operator to carry the station's
    signal in an analog format, WHDT explains that it would provide at
    its own expense to each cable operator, a standard antenna "cut" to
    receive channel 59, as well as a DTV receiver. WHDT Petition at 2-3.
    WHDT explains that this receiver is a slightly modified version of
    an off-the-shelf set-top device, approximately the size of a
    standard videotape, and acts to convert the station's signal from
    digital to analog format. *Id.*

[^28]: *Id.* at 2; *see* 47 C.F.R. §76.57.

[^29]: *Id; see* 47 C.F.R. §76.55(c)(3)*.*

[^30]: Joint Comments of A&E Television Network, Black Entertainment
    Television, Inc., Courtroom Television Network, and Ovation at 6.

[^31]: WHDT Reply Comments at 12.

[^32]: *Id.* at 13.

[^33]: WHDT Petition at 4.

[^34]: *Id.*

[^35]: 47 U.S.C. §534(b)(1)(B).

[^36]: 47 U.S.C. §534 (h)(1)(A).

[^37]: WHDT Petition at 4, citing 47 U.S.C. §534(h)(1)(A).

[^38]: *Id.*

[^39]: MSTV Comments at 3 and 5.

[^40]: 47 U.S.C. §534(b)(1)(B).

[^41]: NCTA Comments at 2-3.

[^42]: International Cable Comments at 4.

[^43]: Adelphia Reply Comments at 2.

[^44]: 47 U.S.C. §534(a).

[^45]: *See Carriage of Digital Television Signals*, First Report and
    Order and Further Notice of Proposed Rulemaking, FCC 01-22, ¶ 15
    (rel. January 23, 2001).

[^46]: *See 700 MHz Order* at ¶ 65.

[^47]: C-Span Comments at 5.

[^48]: WHDT Reply Comments at 6, footnote 6.

[^49]: WHDT Petition at 3.

[^50]: NAB Comments at 6; KM Communications Comments at 6.

[^51]: KM Communications Comments at 6.

[^52]: *See Carriage of Digital Television Signals,* FCC 01-22 (rel.
    January 23, 2001).

[^53]: *Id.* at ¶ 74.

[^54]: Any conversion equipment supplied by WHDT must be of comparable
    quality to that of other signal processing equipment at the cable
    operator's principle headend. *See Implementation of the Cable
    Television Consumer Protection and Competition Act of 1992,
    Broadcast Signal Carriage Issues*, Clarification Order, 8 FCC Rcd
    4142, 4143 (1993).

[^55]: *See* 47 C.F.R. §§ 76.55-64; *see also 700 MHz Order*, at ¶ 65.

[^56]: *See* *Carriage of Digital Television Signals*, FCC 01-22 (rel.
    January 23, 2001).

[^57]: WHDT Comments at 3 *citing Turner Broadcasting System v. FCC,*
    512 U.S. 622 (1994) ("*Turner I"*); *Turner Broadcasting System v.
    FCC,* 520 U.S. 180 (1997) ("*Turner II"*).

[^58]: WHDT Petition at 4. WHDT asserts that the Supreme Court noted
    that the provisions advanced three interrelated important
    governmental interests:

    > \(1\) preserving the benefits of free, over-the-air local
    > broadcasting television; (2) promoting the widespread
    > dissemination of information from a multiplicity of sources; and
    > (3) promoting fair competition in the market for television
    > programming.

    *Turner I,* 512 U.S. at 662; *see also Turner II,* 520 U.S. 189-90.

[^59]: A&E Comments at 10; C-Span Comments at 3; NCTA Comments at 4-5.

[^60]: NAB Comments at 5; MSTV Reply Comments at 6.

[^61]: *Id.* at 6.

[^62]: *Id.*; *see* Pappas Comments at 4; MSTV Comments at 4; KB Prime
    Media Comments at 2-3; KM Communications Comments at 7.

[^63]: Comcast Reply Comments at 9.

[^64]: Adelphia Reply Comments at 5.