*Pages 1--8 from  Microsoft Word - 33798*
 Federal  Communications  Commission  DA  03-  3798 
 Before  the  Federal  Communications  Commission 
 Washington,  D.  C.  20554 


 In  the  Matter  of: 
 Young  Broadcasting  of  Lansing,  Inc. 
 Petition  For  Modification  of  the  Television  Market  of  Television  Station  WLNS-  TV,  Lansing, 
 Michigan 


 )  ) 
 )  ) 
 )  ) 
 CSR-  6220-  A 


 MEMORANDUM  OPINION  AND  ORDER 
 Adopted:  November  24,  2003  Released:  November  26,  2003 
 By  the  Deputy  Chief,  Policy  Division,  Media  Bureau: 
 I.  INTRODUCTION 
 1.  Young  Broadcasting  of  Lansing,  Inc.  (  Young),  licensee  of  television  broadcast  station  WLNS-  TV,  Lansing,  Michigan  (  WLNS),  filed  the  above-  captioned  petition  for  special  relief  seeking  to 


 modify  WLNSs  designated  market  area  (  DMA)  to  include  the  communities  of  Howell,  Brighton,  Genoa,  Brighton  Township,  Oceola,  and  Green  Oak,  Michigan  (the  cable  communities)  served  by  a 
 cable  system  operated  by  Comcast  Cablevision  of  the  South,  Inc.  (  Comcast).  1  Comcast  filed  an  opposition,  to  which  Young  replied.  For  the  following  reasons,  we  grant  the  petition. 


 II.  BACKGROUND 
 2.  Pursuant  to  Section  614  of  the  Communications  Act  and  implementing  rules  adopted  by  the  Commission  in  Implementation  of  the  Cable  Television  Consumer  Protection  and  Competition  Act  of 


 1992,  Broadcast  Signal  Carriage  Issues  (  Must  Carry  Order),  commercial  television  broadcast  stations  are  entitled  to  assert  mandatory  carriage  rights  on  cable  systems  located  within  the  stations  market.  2  A 
 stations  market  for  this  purpose  is  its  designated  market  area,  or  DMA,  as  defined  by  Nielsen  Media  Research  (  Nielsen).  3  A  DMA  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 
 1  The  cable  communities  are  located  in  Livingston  County,  Michigan. 
 2  8  FCC  Rcd  2965,  2976-  77  (1993). 
 3  Section  614(  h)(  1)(  C)  of  the  Communications  Act,  as  amended  by  the  Telecommunications  Act  of  1996,  provides 
 that  a  stations  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).  Section  76.55(  e)  requires  that  a  commercial  broadcast  television  stations  market  be  defined  by  Nielsen  Media  Researchs  DMAs.  47  C.  F.  R.  76.55(  e);  see  Definition  of  Markets  for  Purposes  of  the  Cable 
 Television  Broadcast  Signal  Carriage  Rules,  14  FCC  Rcd  8366  (1999)(  Modification  Final  Report  and  Order). 
1
 Federal  Communications  Commission  DA  03-  3798 
 2 
 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.  4 
 3.  Under  the  Act,  however,  the  Commission  is  also  directed  to  consider  changes  in  market  areas.  Section  614(  h)(  1)(  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 
 stations  television  market  to  better  effectuate  the  purposes  of  this  section.  5 
 In  considering  such  requests,  the  1992  Cable  Act  provides  that: 
 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; 
 (IV)  evidence  of  viewing  patterns  in  cable  and  noncable  households  within  the  areas  served  by  the  cable  system  or  systems  in  such  community.  6 


 The  legislative  history  of  the  provision  states  that: 
 where  the  presumption  in  favor  of  [DMA]  carriage  would  result  in  cable  subscribers  losing  access  to  local  stations  because  they  are  outside  the 
 [DMA]  in  which  a  local  cable  system  operates,  the  FCC  may  make  an  adjustment  to  include  or  exclude  particular  communities  from  a  television 
 stations  market  consistent  with  Congress  objective  to  ensure  that  television  stations  be  carried  in  the  area  in  which  they  serve  and  which 
 form  their  economic  market. 
 *  *  *  * 


 4  For  a  more  complete  description  of  how  counties  are  allocated,  see  Nielsen  Media  Researchs  Nielsen  Station 
 Index:  Methodology  Techniques  and  Data  Interpretation.  5 
 47  U.  S.  C.  534(  h)(  1)(  C).  6 
 Id. 
2
 Federal  Communications  Commission  DA  03-  3798 
 3 
 [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  stations  market.  7 
 The  Commission  indicated  that  requested  changes  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.  8 
 4.  In  the  Modification  Final  Report  and  Order,  the  Commission,  in  an  effort  to  promote  administrative  efficiency,  adopted  a  standardized  evidence  approach  for  modification  petitions  that 


 requires  the  following  evidence  be  submitted: 
 (1)  A  map  or  maps  illustrating  the  relevant  community  locations  and  geographic  features,  station  transmitter  sites,  cable  system  headend  locations, 


 terrain  features  that  would  affect  station  reception,  mileage  between  the  community  and  the  television  station  transmitter  site,  transportation  routes 
 and  any  other  evidence  contributing  to  the  scope  of  the  market. 
 (2)  Grade  B  contour  maps  delineating  the  stations  technical  service  area  and  showing  the  location  of  the  cable  system  headends  and  communities 
 in  relation  to  the  service  areas. 
 Note  to  Paragraph  (b)(  2):  Service  area  maps  using  Longley-  Rice  (version  1.2.2)  propagation  curves  may  also  be  included  to  support 
 a  technical  service  exhibit.  9 
 (3)  Available  data  on  shopping  and  labor  patterns  in  the  local  market. 
 (4)  Television  station  programming  information  derived  from  station  logs  or  the  local  edition  of  the  television  guide. 


 (5)  Cable  system  channel  line-  up  cards  or  other  exhibits  establishing  historic  carriage,  such  as  television  guide  listings. 
 (6)  Published  audience  data  for  the  relevant  station  showing  its  average  all  day  audience  (i.  e.,  the  reported  audience  averaged  over 
 Sunday-  Saturday,  7  a.  m.-  1  a.  m.,  or  an  equivalent  time  period)  for  both  cable  and  noncable  households  or  other  specific  audience  indicia,  such 


 7  H.  R.  Rep.  102-  628,  102d  Cong.,  2d  Sess.  97  (1992). 
 8  Must  Carry  Order,  8  FCC  Rcd  2965,  2977  n.  139. 
 9  The  Longley-  Rice  model  provides  a  more  accurate  representation  of  a  stations  technical  coverage  area  because  it 
 takes  into  account  such  factors  as  mountains  and  valleys  that  are  not  specifically  reflected  in  a  traditional  Grade  B  contour  analysis.  In  situations  involving  mountainous  terrain  or  other  unusual  geographical  features,  Longley-  Rice 


 propagation  studies  can  aid  in  determining  whether  or  not  a  television  station  actually  provides  local  service  to  a  community  under  factor  two  of  the  market  modification  test. 
3
 Federal  Communications  Commission  DA  03-  3798 
 4 
 as  station  advertising  and  sales  data  or  viewer  contribution  records.  10 
 Petitions  for  special  relief  to  modify  television  markets  that  do  not  include  the  above  evidence  shall  be  dismissed  without  prejudice  and  may  be  re-  filed  with  a  filing  fee.  The  Modification  Final  Report  and 
 Order  provides  that  parties  may  continue  to  submit  additional  evidence  that  they  deem  appropriate. 
 III.  DISCUSSION 
 5.  The  issue  before  us  is  whether  to  grant  WLNSs  request  to  include  the  communities  of  Howell,  Brighton,  Genoa,  Brighton  Township,  Oceola,  and  Green  Oak,  Michigan  within  its  television 


 market.  WLNS  is  an  affiliate  of  the  CBS  television  network,  and  is  in  the  Lansing,  Michigan  DMA,  while  the  cable  communities  are  located  in  the  Detroit,  Michigan  DMA. 


 6.  WLNS  explains  in  its  petition  that  it  had  been  carried  on  the  cable  system  (the  Brighton  system)  since  at  least  1983  to  December  15,  2000,  when  then-  owner  MediaOne  ceased  carriage  of  the 
 station.  11  In  addition,  WLNS  states  that  the  station  is  currently  carried  on  all  of  the  cable  systems  serving  communities  adjacent  to  the  cable  communities  in  Livingston  County.  12  WLNS  states  that  the  station 
 places  a  predicted  Grade  A  contour  over  all  of  the  cable  communities,  located  within  32  miles  of  the  stations  transmitter  and  42  miles  from  Lansing,  with  the  exception  of  Green  Oak,  which  is  well  within 
 the  stations  Grade  B  contour  and  40  miles  from  the  transmitter  and  50  miles  from  Lansing.  13  Petitioner  contends  that  the  station  provides  5  daily  half-  hour  newscasts,  and  two  each  weekend  day,  which  cover 
 topics  of  interest  to  residents  of  the  cable  communities.  14  Petitioner  states  that  the  station  is  listed  in  major  television  guides  circulated  in  the  cable  communities.  15  In  addition,  WLNS  states  that  its  coverage 
 of  weather  conditions  in  the  cable  communities  is  unique  because  of  its  superior  weather  radar.  16  WLNS  argues  that  it  offers  better  coverage  of  local  community  events  than  do  the  majority  of  the  stations  carried 
 by  the  cable  system.  Petitioner  states  that  although  the  Detroit  stations  carried  on  the  system  may  occasionally  cover  significant  events  occurring  in  the  cable  communities,  these  stations  do  not  provide  the 
 type  of  routine  news  coverage  that  WLNS  offers,  which  includes  regular  weather  reports  and  coverage  of  local  high  school  sports  and  community  events.  17  WLNS  states  that  WWJ-  TV  (  WWJ),  the  CBS 
 affiliate  assigned  to  the  Detroit  DMA  provides  no  local  news,  sports,  weather,  or  community  programming  for  residents  of  the  cable  communities.  18  In  support,  WLNS  provides  examples  of 
 newspaper  articles  and  letters  from  viewers  expressing  their  disappointment  regarding  MediaOnes  decision  to  cease  carrying  the  station.  19  WLNS  also  contends  that  the  station  has  a  substantial  viewing 


 10  47  C.  F.  R.  76.59(  b). 
 11  Petition  at  5. 
 12  Id.  at  6. 
 13  Id.  at  7,  11. 
 14  Id.  at  8,  Exhibit  8. 
 15  Id. 
 16  Id.  at  9,  Exhibit  10  (Examples  of  viewers  praise  for  coverage  of  a  local  tornado). 
 17  Id.  at  14. 
 18  Id.  at  13. 
 19  Id.  at  14,  Exhibits  5,  17,  18,  19  and  20  (including  letters  of  protest  from  the  City  Managers  Office  of  Howell  and 
 Brighton). 
4
 Federal  Communications  Commission  DA  03-  3798 
 5 
 audience  in  the  cable  communities,  and  supplies  Nielsen  data  in  support.  20  In  addition,  WLNS  states  that  of  the  six  cable  systems  serving  Livingston  County,  the  station  is  currently  carried  on  all  the  systems 
 except  for  Comcasts  Brighton  System.  21 
 7.  In  its  opposition,  Comcast  argues  that  WLNSs  programming  would  duplicate  the  programming  of  WWJ,  the  Detroit  market  CBS  affiliate,  and  since  WLNS  may  be  slightly  closer  to  the 


 systems  headend,  WWJs  must  carry  rights  in  the  cable  communities  would  be  at  risk  since  the  cable  operator  would  be  required  by  the  Commissions  rules  to  carry  only  the  closest  of  the  affiliates.  22 
 Comcast  cites  the  Portland  Cases  for  the  proposition  that  even  where  the  station  seeking  modification  presents  favorable  statutory  factors,  the  Commission  is  loathe  to  jeopardize  the  existing  in-  market 
 affiliates  must  carry  rights.  23  Comcast  contends  that  WLNS  claim  of  Grade  A  coverage  to  the  cable  communities  is  spotty  at  best,  while  WWJ  provides  a  Grade  A  signal  to  the  cable  communities 
 according  to  Longley-  Rice  studies.  24  Comcast  contends  that  WWJs  overall  viewership  exceeds  that  of  WLNS  in  the  cable  communities,  25  and  argues  that  even  though  both  stations  are  significantly  viewed  in 
 the  cable  communities,  WWJs  higher  overall  viewership  ratings  demonstrate  a  preference  for  WWJ.  26  Comcast  argues  that  voluntary  carriage  of  an  out-  of-  market  station  is  hardly  proof  that  the  station 
 should  be  entitled  to  mandatory  carriage  rights.  In  addition,  Comcast  contends  that  WLNS  programming  does  not  focus  on  the  cable  communities,  and  that  the  cable  system  carries  numerous  Detroit  stations  that 
 provide  local  programming  to  the  communities.  27 
 8.  In  reply,  WLNS  contends  that  it  broadcasts  an  abundance  of  local  programming  specifically  targeted  to  the  cable  communities,  in  addition  to  its  highly  localized  weather  reports  which 


 focus  on  individual  neighborhoods  within  the  cable  communities.  28  WLNS  states  that  during  a  representative  four  month  period,  the  station  produced  33  stories  specifically  targeted  toward  the  six  cable 
 communities  and  aired  these  stories,  with  updates,  a  total  of  124  times.  29  WLNS  contends  that  Comcasts  argument  that  the  systems  carriage  history  should  be  discounted  because  it  was  voluntary  rather  than 
 mandatory  is  faulty.  WLNS  argues  that  such  voluntary  carriage  affirms  that  the  station  provides  programming  and  information  of  interest  to  the  residents  of  the  cable  communities.  30  In  response  to 
 Comcasts  contention  that  WLNS  provides  spotty  Grade  A  coverage,  petitioner  submitted  a  Longley- 
 20  According  to  Nielsen  reports  for  the  years  2000-  2001,  WLNS  had  a  6  share  of  total  households  in  Livingston 
 County  at  5:  00  P.  M.,  and  a  7  share  at  5:  30  P.  M.,  6:  00  P.  M.  and  6:  30  P.  M.  In  2001,  the  station  achieved  a  3  share  at  6:  00  P.  M.  and  a  4  share  at  6:  30  P.  M.  Id.  at  10,  Exhibit  12. 


 21  Id.  at  5. 
 22  Opposition  at  4-  5,  citing  Broad  Street  Television,  L.  P.,  10  FCC  Rcd  5576  (1995);  Guy  Gannet  Communications, 
 Inc.  13  FCC  Rcd  23470  (1998),  recon.  denied,  15  FCC  Rcd  10762,  Pacific  and  Southern  Company,  Inc.  14  FCC  Rcd  4558  (1999)  (the  Portland  Cases).  See  also  47  C.  F.  R.    76.55(  b)(  5). 


 23  Opposition  at  4-  5. 
 24  Id.  at  7,  Exhibit  3. 
 25  Id.  at  7,  Exhibit  7. 
 26  Id.  at  8.  Comcast  supplies  letters  from  Media  Strategies,  based  on  Nielsen  research  for  2002. 
 27  Id.  at  13-  14. 
 28  Reply  at  3,  Exhibits  1,  2. 
 29  Id.  at  3. 
 30  Id.  at  9. 
5
 Federal  Communications  Commission  DA  03-  3798 
 6 
 Rice  study  which  demonstrates  that  the  station  provides  Grade  A  coverage  to  all  six  cable  communities.  31  In  addition,  in  response  to  Comcasts  pleading,  WLNS  recalculated  the  distances  from  its  transmitter  to 
 the  cable  headend  and  cable  communities.  32  According  to  its  new  calculations,  WLNS  states  that  its  transmitter  is  less  than  29  miles  from  the  cable  systems  headend  and  that  the  distances  to  the  cable 
 communities  range  from  23  to  36  miles.  33  WLNS  disputes  Comcasts  claim  that  WWJ  is  significantly  viewed  in  the  cable  communities.  34  WLNS  argues  that  Comcast  overstates  the  respective  viewing 
 audiences  in  favor  of  WWJ,  and  that,  in  fact,  viewership  data  shows  that  viewers  in  the  cable  communities  prefer  WLNS  to  WWJ.  35  WLNS  also  contends  that  Comcasts  concerns  regarding  carriage 
 of  two  CBS  affiliates  ring  hollow  given  that  the  system  carries  two  ABC  affiliates  and  two  NBC  affiliates,  including  the  Lansing  market  NBC  affiliate  and  WKAR,  the  Lansing  market  PBS  affiliate.  In 
 addition,  WLNS  contends  that  Comcast  carries  both  WLNS  and  WWJ  on  its  Harland  system,  also  serving  viewers  in  Livingston  County.  WLNS  argues  that  this  carriage  implicitly  acknowledges  that  WLNS 
 provides  programming  valuable  to  residents  of  the  county  who  already  receive  WWJ.  36  Moreover,  WLNS  contends  that  WWJs  lack  of  participation  in  the  instant  proceeding  is  evidence  that  it  will  not  be 
 harmed  by  Comcasts  carriage  of  WLNS  in  the  cable  communities.  37 
 9.  In  granting  WLNS  petition  to  modify  its  DMA  to  include  the  cable  communities,  we  find  that  WLNS  meets  the  mandatory  statutory  criteria  for  market  modification.  With  regard  to  the  first 


 of  the  four  statutory  factors,  KCBA  has  a  long  history  of  carriage  on  Comcasts  Brighton  system  serving  the  cable  communities.  We  also  note  that  Comcast  carries  both  WLNS  and  WWJ  on  its  other  cable 
 system  serving  Livingston  County,  and  that  of  the  six  cable  systems  serving  the  county,  only  Comcasts  Brighton  system  does  not  carry  WLNS.  Secondly,  WLNS  has  demonstrated  that  it  provides  coverage  and 
 local  service  because  its  Longley-  Rice  Grade  A  contour  encompasses  the  cable  communities.  We  have  stated  previously  that  such  coverage  alone  may  be  sufficient  to  satisfy  the  second  statutory  requirement.  38 
 In  addition,  WLNS  presented  evidence  that  it  provides  local  programming  to  the  cable  communities,  and  letters  from  the  Brighton  and  Howell  City  Managers  Offices  stating  that  WLNS  provides  valuable 
 programming  to  their  communities.  With  regard  to  the  third  statutory  factor,  namely,  whether  other 


 31  Id.  at  10,  Exhibit  7.  WLNS  contends  that  its  Longley-  Rice  analysis  uses  standard  parameters  and  methodology, 
 as  opposed  to  Comcasts  Longley-  Rice  analysis  which  contains  no  indication  of  the  parameters  or  methodology  used. 


 32  WLNS  calculated  its  revised  distances  using  a  program  from  the  U.  S.  Department  of  Agriculture,  and  contends 
 that  its  figures  are  more  accurate  than  Comcasts  distance  calculations.  Id.  at  13,  Exhibit  10.  33 
 Id.  at  14.  34 
 Id.  at  11-  12.  WLNS  argues  that  Comcasts  Exhibit  8  references  the  Cable  &  Station  Coverage  Atlas  (2000  edition)  which  lists  WDIV,  channel  4,  whose  call  sign  letters  were  WWJ-  TV  until  1978.  The  WWJ-  TV  referenced 


 in  the  instant  matter  broadcasts  on  channel  62  and  is  not  listed  in  the  2003  edition  of  the  Cable  &  Station  Coverage  Atlas  as  significantly  viewed  in  Livingston  County. 
 35  Id.  at  12.  WLNS  argues  that  Comcasts  Exhibit  7,  supra,  shows  that  during,  e.  g.,  late-  afternoon  and  evening  news, 
 primetime  Monday  through  Sunday,  and  late-  night  Monday  through  Friday,  WLNS  has  significantly  more  viewers  in  non-  cable  households  than  WWJ.  Even  in  total  viewership,  where  WLNS  is  severely  hampered  by  its  lack  cable 


 carriage  in  the  cable  communities,  WLNS  has  greater  viewership  than  WWJ  in  the  late-  afternoon  and  evening  news  periods. 
 36  Id.  at  18. 
 37  Id.  at  ii. 
 38  KSBW  License,  Inc.,  11  FCC  Rcd  2368,  2371  (1996). 
6
 Federal  Communications  Commission  DA  03-  3798 
 7 
 television  stations  provide  local  programming,  we  believe  that  Congress  did  not  intend  this  criterion  to  bar  a  stations  DMA  modification  claim,  but  instead  was  intended  to  enhance  its  claim  where  it  could  be 
 shown  that  other  stations  do  not  serve  the  communities  at  issue.  39  Concerning  the  fourth  factor,  viewing  patterns,  WLNSs  petition  indicates  it  has  a  moderate  level  of  viewership  in  the  cable  communities,  and 
 that  many  viewers  prefer  WLNSs  local  programming.  40 
 10.  With  regard  to  Comcasts  argument  that  grant  of  WLNS  petition  could  lead  to  the  dropping  of  the  in-  market  CBS  affiliate,  we  acknowledge  that  the  Commission  is  reluctant  to  grant  a 


 market  modification  where  an  in-  market  affiliates  status  on  a  cable  system  may  be  jeopardized.  41  However,  this  does  not  mean  that  the  Commission  will  not  grant  market  modifications  merely  because 
 there  is  an  in-  market  affiliate.  In  the  Portland  Cases,  network  stations  in  Portland,  Maine,  in  the  Portland-  Poland  Spring  ADI  (now  DMA)  sought  to  include  in  their  market  cable  communities  in  the 
 Boston,  Massachusetts  ADI.  The  Commission  noted,  in  denying  the  requests,  that  this  would  jeopardize  the  continued  carriage  on  the  cable  system  of  stations  licensed  to  Boston  that  were  affiliated  with  the 
 same  network.  In  the  Portland  Cases,  the  Portland  television  stations  and  the  Boston  stations  were  generally  an  equal  distance  from  the  cable  communities  at  issue,  as  is  the  case  here.  In  that  instance,  the 
 Commission  concluded  that  if  the  market  modifications  were  granted,  the  in-  market  Boston  affiliates  must  carry  status  within  their  own  ADI  market  would  be  jeopardized.  42  In  the  Portland  Cases,  however, 
 it  was  clear  that  the  in-  market  affiliate  had  substantial  viewership  levels  and  was  significantly  viewed  in  the  communities,  whereas  the  out-  of-  market  affiliate  had  significantly  less  viewership  and  was  not 
 significantly  viewed  in  the  communites.  The  facts  are  different  in  the  present  situation.  In  this  matter,  WLNS  has  demonstrated  that  it  is  significantly  viewed  in  the  cable  communities,  whereas  WWJ  is  not. 
 WLNS  has  also  shown  that  viewership  levels  show  a  preference  for  its  local  programming.  An  additional  important  distinction  between  the  Portland  Cases  and  WLNSs  situation  is  that,  in  the  Portland  Cases, 
 the  television  stations  provided  only  predicted  Grade  B  coverage  to  the  cable  communities,  whereas  WLNS  provides  Grade  A  coverage.  For  the  reasons  discussed  above,  we  believe  WLNS  petition 
 presents  a  legitimate  request  to  redraw  DMA  boundries  to  make  them  congruous  with  market  realities,  and  hereby  grant  WLNSs  request. 


 39  See  Great  Trails  Broadcasting  Corp.,  10  FCC  Rcd  8629  (1995);  Paxson  San  Jose  License,  Inc.,  12  FCC  Rcd 
 17520  (1997).  40 
 See  KSBW  License,  Inc.,  11  FCC  Rcd  at  2371.  41 
 See,  e.  g.,  Duhamel  Broadcasting  Enterprises,  15  FCC  Rcd  4965,  4972  (2000).  42 
 Guy  Gannett  Communications,  Inc.,  13  FCC  Rcd  at  23478;  see  Portland  Cases,  supra  n.  23. 
7
 Federal  Communications  Commission  DA  03-  3798 
 8 
 IV.  ORDERING  CLAUSES 
 11.  Accordingly,  IT  IS  ORDERED,  pursuant  to  Section  614(  h)  of  the  Communications  Act  of  1934,  as  amended,  47  U.  S.  C.  534,  and  Section  76.59  of  the  Commissions  rules,  47  C.  F.  R.  76.59, 


 that  the  captioned  petition  for  special  relief  (CSR-  6220-  A),  filed  by  Young  Broadcasting  of  Lansing,  Inc.,  licensee  of  television  station  WLNS-  TV,  IS  GRANTED. 


 12.  These  actions  are  taken  pursuant  to  authority  delegated  by  Section  0.283  of  the  Commissions  rules.  43 
 FEDERAL  COMMUNICATIONS  COMMISSION 


 Steven  A.  Broeckaert  Deputy  Chief,  Policy  Division 
 Media  Bureau 


 43  47  C.  F.  R.    0.  283. 
8