******************************************************** NOTICE ******************************************************** This document was converted from WordPerfect to ASCII Text format. Content from the original version of the document such as headers, footers, footnotes, endnotes, graphics, and page numbers will not show up in this text version. All text attributes such as bold, italic, underlining, etc. from the original document will not show up in this text version. Features of the original document layout such as columns, tables, line and letter spacing, pagination, and margins will not be preserved in the text version. If you need the complete document, download the WordPerfect version or Adobe Acrobat version, if available. ***************************************************************** Before the Federal Communications Commission Washington, D.C. 20554 In re: ) Complaint of Maranatha Broadcasting, Inc.) CSR-4893-M Against TKR Cable Company ) Hamilton Township, NJ ) ) ) Request for Carriage ) ) TKR Cable Company ) CSR-4933-A ) For Modification of the Philadelphia,) Pennsylvania ADI ) MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER Adopted: May 30, 1997 Released: June 4, 1997 By the Deputy Chief, Cable Services Bureau: INTRODUCTION 1. Maranatha Broadcasting Company, Inc., licensee of independent television broadcast station WFMZ-TV, Channel 69, Allentown, Pennsylvania ("Maranatha") has filed with the Commission a petition requesting mandatory carriage of its signal on cable systems operated by TKR Cable Co. ("TKR") in the communities of Allentown, Brooklawn, Gloucester, Hamilton Township, Maple Shade, Mount Ephraim, and Washington Township, New Jersey (collectively, "the Communities"). TKR filed an opposition to which Maranatha replied. In a separate but related pleading, TKR also filed a request to modify the television market of WFMZ-TV. Specifically, TKR requests that WFMZ-TV be excluded from the Philadelphia, Pennsylvania ADI relative to TKR's cable systems serving the Communities. Maranatha filed an opposition to which TKR replied. We will jointly consider these cases to resolve the signal carriage rights of WFMZ-TV on TKR's cable systems. BACKGROUND 2. Pursuant to 614 of the Communications Act and implementing rules adopted by the Commission in its Report and Order in MM Docket No. 92-259, 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. 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. 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 station's television market to better effectuate the purposes of this section. In considering such requests, the 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 new 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. 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 in 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. 5. The Commission provided guidance in its Report and Order in MM Docket No. 92- 259, supra, to aid decision making in these matters, as follows: 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 demon- strated 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. 6. As for deletions of communities from a station's ADI, the legislative history of this provision indicates that: The provisions of [this subsection] reflect a recognition that the Commission may conclude that a community within a station's ADI may be so far removed from the station that it cannot be deemed part of the station's market. It is not the Committee's intention that these provisions be used by cable systems to manipulate their carriage obligations to avoid compliance with the objectives of this section. Further, this section is not intended to permit a cable system to discriminate among several stations licensed to the same community. Unless a cable system can point to particularized evidence that its community is not part of one station's market, it should not be permitted to single out individual stations serving the same area and request that the cable system's community be deleted from the station's television market. 7. In adopting rules to implement this provision, 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. The rules further provide, in accordance with the requirements of the 1992 Cable Act, that a station not be deleted from carriage during the pendency of an ADI change request. MUST CARRY ARGUMENTS 8 . Maranatha states that, on September 30, 1996, it informed TKR of its election of mandatory carriage on TKR's system serving the Communities. Maranatha asserts that TKR failed to respond to Maranatha's request for carriage within thirty days, i.e. by October 30, 1996, as required by 76.61(a)(2) of the Commission's rules. Maranatha further asserts that its complaint is timely filed; that TKR's cable system provides more than 12 usable activated channels of which fewer than one-third are utilized for carriage of local television signals; that WFMZ-TV is a full- power local television station within the meaning of the Commission's rules; that WFMZ-TV's signal would not be deemed distant and its carriage would not increase copyright liability; that WFMZ-TV delivers a good quality signal to TKR's principal headend; and that WFMZ-TV's signal is not substantially duplicated by the signal of any local commercial television station carried on TKR's cable system serving the communities at issue. Maranatha notes that WFMZ-TV is assigned to the Philadelphia ADI which is the same television market which TKR serves. Maranatha asserts that to the extent the station does not provide, by direct, off-air reception, a signal of -45 dBm or better, Maranatha has agreed to cover any costs and to supply any equipment necessary to deliver a good quality signal or baseband video signal. Maranatha argues therefore that it is entitled to mandatory carriage because it meets all of the Commission's criteria for carriage. 9. In its opposition, TKR states that it has filed with the Commission a petition requesting that the communities at issue be deleted from the television market of WFMZ-TV. TKR asserts that, during the pendency of its ADI petition, it has the right to maintain the status quo with regard to signal carriage. TKR argues therefore that it is not required to commence carriage of WFMZ-TV until the Commission has completed its review of TKR's market modification request. TKR does not dispute that it and WFMZ-TV are currently assigned to the same ADI. 10. In its reply, Maranatha argues that TKR's arguments are evasionary and irrelevant to the station's request for mandatory carriage. Maranatha notes that TKR does not contest WFMZ- TV's qualifications as a local commercial television station within the meaning of the Commission's rules. Maranatha further notes that TKR did not show any reason, in the absence of favorable action on its market modification request, that WFMZ-TV should not be carried on TKR's cable system serving the Communities. Maranatha argues that the Commission should order TKR to promptly commence carriage of WFMZ-TV's signal. MODIFICATION ARGUMENTS 11. TKR's Hamilton cable system is located in Mercer and Monmouth Counties, New Jersey and its Maple Shade/Gloucester cable system is located in Camden and Burlington Counties, New Jersey. The communities of Allentown, Washington and Hamilton are served by TKR's Hamilton system and the communities of Brooklawn, Gloucester, Maple Shade and Mount Ephraim are served by TKR's Maple Shade/Gloucester system. All of the Communities, with one exception, are part of the Philadelphia ADI. The exception is Allentown, New Jersey which is located in Monmouth County but is assigned to the New York ADI. 12. In support of its petition, TKR argues that WFMZ-TV should be excluded from carriage on TKR's systems because the station does not satisfy any of the four statutory market modification factors. First, with regard to historic carriage, TKR asserts that WFMZ-TV has never been carried on TKR's Hamilton and Maple Shade/Gloucester systems since TKR obtained those systems in 1984 and 1989, respectively. Second, with regard to local coverage, TKR asserts that WFMZ-TV does not provide Grade B coverage to any of the communities at issue. TKR's assertion that WFMZ-TV fails to provide Grade B coverage is based upon WFMZ-TV's engineering records which are on file with the Commission. TKR further asserts that WFMZ-TV, in addition to failing to provide Grade B contour coverage, is geographically distant from the Communities. TKR notes that WFMZ-TV and the Communities are separated by significant natural barriers, i.e., the Delaware River and the communities of Philadelphia, Pennsylvania and Trenton, New Jersey. TKR argues that the Commission has recognized that both rivers and dense urban areas can form natural boundaries between television station markets and cable communities. TKR further argues that its cable systems serving the Communities are geographically distant from WFMZ-TV's city of license and its transmitter site, both of which are located in Allentown, Pennsylvania. TKR states that its Maple Shade/Gloucester system is 52.4 miles from Allentown and 50.4 miles from WFMZ- TV's transmitter site and that its Hamilton system is 47.8 miles from Allentown and 49.4 miles from WFMZ-TV's transmitter site. TKR argues that these distances are all within the range of distances that the Commission has previously found to attenuate the ties between cable communities and broadcast stations. 13. Third, TKR asserts that, with regard to the service to the Communities offered by other local televisions and eligible for carriage on TKR's systems, local coverage of its Hamilton system is provided by 22 local broadcast stations and by 13 local broadcast stations to its Maple Shade/Gloucester system. TKR notes that, in addition to those broadcast stations, included in its channel line-ups are several channels dedicated solely to local affairs, e.g., Channel 23 to Mercer County College; Channel 27 to the Hamilton school system; Channel 5 to a community bulletin board; and Channel 16 to the Cable Television Network which airs community affairs programming. TKR argues that the communities are well-served by the channels which it already carries on its systems, other local broadcast stations which it carries are licensed to communities in New Jersey or to communities in Philadelphia. TKR asserts that these local stations provide local news coverage for all of its service areas and have a closer nexus to the communities than WFMZ- TV. 14. Finally, TKR asserts that, with regard to viewership levels, WFMZ-TV is not listed in the television listings of two newspapers local to TKR's service areas, the Trentonian and the Philadelphia Daily News. TKR argues that WFMZ-TV's failure to provide Grade B contour coverage over the Communities coupled with the fact that the television station is not carried by other area cable systems make it highly unlikely that WFMZ-TV has any measurable viewership in the Communities. 15. In its opposition, Maranatha asserts that TKR misapplies the four statutory factors relevant to market modification analysis in order to justify its request to exclude the communities at issue from WFMZ-TV's television market. Maranatha argues that the legislative history underlying the ADI statute strongly suggests that the market modification process was intended to be used to demonstrate that a community is part of a particular television station's market. Maranatha further argues that Congress did not intend to preserve the status quo which would be the result of denying carriage of the signals of stations that did not have a history of cable carriage in the relevant community or that had not established a record of viewership in cable households. Maranatha contends that it can not be excluded from the relevant market on the solely on the basis of TKR's existing channel line-up, distance or the absence of Grade B contour coverage. Maranatha notes that TKR currently carries WLVT, an educational station that has the same city of license and broadcasts from the same mountain as does WFMZ-TV. Maranatha contends that were the Delaware River, which is contiguous with the entire Pennsylvania-New Jersey border, to be treated as a market boundary, TKR would not be obligated to carry anything other than New Jersey stations. 16. Maranatha asserts that TKR's argument regarding WFMZ-TV's lack of historical carriage overlooks the fact that, until recently, WFMZ-TV had no statutory right to carriage. With regard to carriage on other cable systems, Maranatha states that the station is carried on Comcast's systems serving Trenton and Philadelphia; on the Lower Bucks system, Wade and Greater Media systems in Philadelphia. Maranatha states that, with regard to local coverage, it provides significant local programming to the Communities which includes five live daily newscasts pertaining to local news and public affairs. Maranatha further states that it broadcasts a regular rotation of prime time public affairs programs including Law Journal, Dollar Dynamics and Talk to Your Doctor. Maranatha notes that its affiliated company, Maranatha Broadcasting Company ("MBC"), has an application pending with the Commission to improve the facilities of WFMZ-TV which would, when constructed, extend WFMZ-TV's Grade B contour to within approximately one kilometer of Hamilton Square and within less than five kilometers from the communities of Gloucester and Mt. Ephraim. Finally, Maranatha states that cable penetration rates in Burlington, Camden and Mercer Counties are 82, 79 and 82 percent, respectively, which makes the factor of over-the-air viewership levels as neutral to the ADI analysis as that of historic carriage. 17. Maranatha argues that, with regard to coverage by other television stations, TKR cited the number of broadcast stations currently carried on its system serving the Communities but did not demonstrate that those stations provide coverage of local news and sporting events as required by the statute. Maranatha further argues that it is unlikely that any of the stations that TKR currently carries provides the extensive coverage of New Jersey news offered by WFMZ-TV. Maranatha next asserts that as of January 1997, according to a Nielsen study of 1300 households throughout the ADI, WFMZ-TV reached 120,000 households noon-midnight, Monday through Friday. Maranatha notes that that figure compares favorably with those of other stations carried by TKR, including WYBE with 178,000 households; WGTW with 51,000 households; and WTGI with 12,000 households. 18. In reply, TKR states that Maranatha mischaracterizes Congressional intent with its argument that the market modification process was not intended to be used to exclude communities from a television station's market. TKR asserts that Congress clearly contemplated that, in some cases, ADIs may not accurately reflect the stations which are local to a particular community. TKR summarizes its position that WFMZ-TV is not part of TKR's service area because: (i) the distance between WFMZ-TV and TKR's service area is great; (ii) the Delaware River and the congested Philadelphia and Trenton areas separate WFMZ-TV from TKR; (iii) WFMZ-TV lacks any appreciable measure of local programming; (iv) WFMZ-TV lacks historical carriage in TKR's service area; and (v) WFMZ-TV lacks viewership in TKR's service area. 19. Specifically, TKR argues that, with regard to historical carriage and viewership levels, WFMZ-TV has never been carried on TKR's cable systems even though the television station has been broadcasting for more than 20 years. TKR contends that WFMZ-TV has failed to garner an audience in the Communities because it is not considered a local station by viewers. TKR further contends that WFMZ-TV's assertion that TKR currently carries WLVT,a station that is as distant from TKR's service area as WFMZ, failed to include the fact that WLVT provides Grade B contour coverage to TKR's cable communities. 20. TKR states that Maranatha's opposition cites 31 cable systems on which WFMZ-TV is carried but failed to mention that, of the 31 cable systems, only five serve any communities in New Jersey, and three of those five systems are located in Warren and Sussex Counties in northern New Jersey, which are not near TKR's systems. The remaining two New Jersey systems on which WFMZ-TV is carried are the Bridge cable system, serving Hopewell, New Hope and Solebury Township, and the Comcast system serving Trenton. TKR points out that a significant number of cable systems in the area do not carry WFMZ-TV, which shows that TKR is accurate to assert that WFMZ-TV is not carried by other area cable systems. TKR further states that Maranatha's claim that WFMZ-TV has been added to cable systems serving 500,000 households fails to note that none of the cable systems carrying the station is located in southern New Jersey or that none are outside of WFMZ-TV's Grade B contour as is TKR. 21. TKR reiterates that WFMZ-TV fails to place Grade B contour coverage over the Communities and fails to offer news and public affairs programming which is truly local to the relevant communities. TKR notes that the Communities can not be considered "fringe communities" relative to WFMZ-TV's Grade B contour. TKR contends that, even if MBC's application for construction is approved, WFMZ-TV's Grade B contour will extend only two miles closer to TKR's service area. TKR argues that, with regard to programming, only a small fraction of WFMZ-TV's total news programming pertains to issues affecting communities in TKR's service areas. TKR argues that WFMZ-TV's programming is geared primarily towards viewers located in the Lehigh River Valley, rather than viewers located in southern New Jersey, TKR's service area. 22. TKR restates that the Communities are well-served by numerous other local broadcast stations on its cable systems. TKR further states that the Cable Services Bureau ("Bureau") has already found that other stations provide a closer economic nexus than WFMZ-TV to TKR. TKR notes that the Bureau held that "[w]here an operator is seeking to delete a station's mandatory carriage rights in certain communities within its ADI, and it is clear that the station is not providing local service to those communities, the issue of local coverage by other stations becomes a factor which we will give greater weight than in cases where a party is seeking to add communities." 23. TKR asserts that the Commission should give appropriate weight to WFMZ-TV's lack of audience ratings in the Communities because this a statutory factor which indicates the scope of a station's television market. In the instant case, TKR argues that WFMZ-TV's lack of viewership is significant because WFMZ-TV has been broadcasting for more than 20 years. Finally, TKR states that WFMZ-TV's use of a Nielsen study to show that it reaches 120,000 households in the Philadelphia ADI does not demonstrate that WFMZ-TV has established a presence in the particular communities at issue. DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS 24. We turn first to TKR's market modification petition, to determine whether the communities served by TKR should be removed from WFMZ-TV's ADI. A resolution of this matter will determine whether WFMZ-TV is eligible to claim carriage rights in these communities. 25. Based on our analysis of the evidence relating to the four statutory and other relevant factors, TKR's petition will be denied. Philadelphia is the fourth nation's largest populous television market in terms of population. It is a large market in terms of geographic area, stretching from Northamption County in the north to Atlantic City and into Delaware in the south. Allentown is some 45 miles to the north of Philadelphia, the core city of the market. The cable communities involved are in the New Jersey counties of Burlington, Camden, and Mercer. The communities associated with the Maple Shade/Gloucester system are located immediately across the Delaware River from the City of Philadelphia. The communities associated with the Hamilton system are adjacent to Trenton, New Jersey. WFMZ-TV, licensed to Allentown, Pennsylvania began operation in 1976 and broadcasts on channel 69 from a transmitter located in Allentown. The cable communities are approximately 49 miles (Maple Shade/Gloucester) and 47 miles (Hamilton) from the station. A. Historic Signal Carriage 26. Statutory factor one is "whether the station, or other stations located in the same area, have been historically carried on the cable system or systems within such community." WFMZ-TV has no history of carriage in the cable communities in question. WFMZ-TV is not a station of recent origin, having commenced operations more than 20 years ago. The systems do carry the signal of another Allentown station, noncommercial educational station WLVT-TV, which broadcasts from the same tower as WFMZ-TV. 27. Carriage on nearby cable systems is not a factor specified in the statute, but it does seem likely, depending on the specific circumstances involved, that carriage on nearby systems could serve as evidence to define the logical scope of a station's market. Such carriage could serve to demonstrate the belief of both the stations and systems involved that there is a market nexus between the broadcast station and the communities where the station is carried and thus provide evidence as to the scope of a station's market. The signal of WFMZ-TV is carried in the City of Philadelphia and in Trenton. The Maple Shade/Gloucester system communities are immediately adjacent to Philadelphia. The Hamilton system communities are adjacent to Trenton. B. Station Coverage of Communities 28. Statutory factor two is "whether the television station provides coverage or other local service to such community." This factor incorporates both technical service and programming service. With respect to technical service coverage, the Commission has stated in its Report and Order in MM Docket No. 92-259 that "to show that the station provides coverage or other local service to the cable communities, 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." WFMZ-TV does not provide Grade B service to the cable communities. An application is pending, however, that will extend the station's Grade B service area so that portions of Mercer and Burlington Counties in which the systems operate will be within or on the fringe of the station's contour. 29. With respect to programming service, TKR alleges that there is no significant amount of programming from the station that is specifically targeted to the cable communities involved. There is evidence from the station, however, that its broadcasts material directed toward New Jersey viewers, including stories specific to Burlington, Camden and Mercer Counties. The station's programming also is said to include regular coverage of games involving the minor league baseball and hockey teams in Trenton. C. Coverage of News, Sporting Events, or Other Events of Interest by Other Stations Entitled to Carriage 30. Statutory factor three is "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." In this instance TKR alleges that it provides carriage to numerous Pennsylvania and New Jersey stations that provide local service to its subscribers. TKR includes on this list as well, the major network and independent stations from New York City. Maranatha argues that some of these stations carry no news at all and disputes the significance of the coverage by the other stations. D. Station Audience in Communities Served by Cable System 31. Statutory factor four is "evidence of viewing patterns in cable and noncable households within the areas served by the cable system or systems in such community." TKR has presented no direct evidence as viewing of WFMZ-TV in the cable communities, suggesting that the other indirect information that is available establishes that the station is unlikely to be viewed in these communities. E. Other Considerations 32. The factors specified in 614(h) do not purport to be exclusive and thus other evidence may be considered that is helpful in defining the scope of the markets of the stations involved. One such additional factor involves whether local newspaper or other listings of station programming that have circulation in the cable communities include the programming of the stations in question. WFMZ-TV is said to be now listed in the channel reference pages of the Philadelphia metropolitan edition of TV Guide with a full program listing scheduled to commence in June of 1997. F. Summary 33. The cable television mandatory broadcast signal carriage rules were adopted as part of the 1992 Cable Act. According to the legislative history of that Act, the use of ADI market areas is intended "to ensure that television stations be carried in the areas which they serve and which form their economic market." The Act specifically provided that the Commission was to consider adding additional communities or excluding communities from the markets of television stations "to better effectuate the purposes" of the mandatory carriage requirements. In acting on such requests the Commission was instructed to "afford particular attention to the value of localism, taking into account four specified statutory factors." These factors, however, were "not intended to be exclusive." The market modification provisions of 614(h) are said, in the legislative history, to "reflect a recognition that the Commission may conclude that a community within a station's ADI may be so far removed from the station that it cannot be deemed part of the station's market." We do not believe that the requested exclusion of the communities served by TKR's cable systems from the markets of WFMZ-TV will better effectuate the purposes of the must-carry statutory provisions. 34. In reaching this conclusion, we have considered the statutory factors as well as other relevant information. WFMZ-TV has never been carried in the communities in question (factor I) and provides no over-the-air television broadcast service to the communities (factor II). Other stations that are entitled to carriage do provide news and other information regarding issues of concern to the communities (factor III). Given the statutory directive, weight must be given to these factors, but that must be done bearing in mind that the objective of the 614(h) process is to "better effectuate the purposes" of the broadcast signal carriage scheme. Thus, with respect to the question of historical carriage patterns, attention must be paid to the circumstances from which such patterns developed. Some stations have not had the opportunity to build a record of historical carriage for specific reasons that do not necessarily reflect a judgment as to the geography of the market involved. Thus, these factors -- to the extent they are reflective of circumstances outside of the shape of the market -- are not by themselves controlling in circumstances where such an implementation of the 1992 Cable Act would, in effect, prevent weaker stations like WFMZ-TV, that cable systems had previously declined to carry, from ever obtaining carriage rights. 35. Another factor to consider is the availability of other broadcasters in the market that are eligible for carriage and provide coverage of news, sporting events, or other events of interest to the communities at issue. We have stated, however, that where a cable operator is seeking to delete a station's mandatory carriage rights in certain communities within its ADI and it is clear that the station is not providing local service to those communities, the issue of local coverage by other stations becomes a factor to which we will give greater weight than in cases where a party is seeking to add communities. Carriage of other local stations may be used as an enhancement factor to support a cable operator's deletion request when there is other evidence in the record that the communities at issue are outside of the station's market. In the present case, TKR carries numerous other stations licensed to communities in the Philadelphia ADI that are closer to the cable communicates and provide coverage of local news and events. There is, however, also evidence of WFMZ-TV's service to the cable communities. 36. Given the difficulties of relying exclusively and explicitly on the statutory factors of historical carriage and viewing patterns, which could severely narrow the carriage rights of stations even within what is undeniably their local market area, we have found it necessary to focus more heavily on factors that are not influenced by the type or age of the stations involved or historical carriage. The scope of a local station's market may be measured through geographic means by examining the distance between the station and the cable community subject to the deletion request and by taking into account natural phenomena such as waterways, mountains, and valleys that may tend to separate communities and define natural markets -- basic geographic, demographic, and political features that provide the best available alternative evidence of the market boundaries of the stations involved. In this regard the Commission has explicitly noted the relevance of Grade B contours. In the absence of other information, station service contours provide at least one objective measure of the scope of a stations local market. Here we note that WFMZ-TV does not presently provide Grade B service to the cable communities but is in the process of improving its facilities so that they will be on the edge of its service area. The station is also geographically separated from the cable communities in terms of mileage by approximately 47 to 49 miles, it is on the far side of the Delaware River from Allentown, and is in a different state. 37. Weighing against the grant of the petition is evidence relating to cable carriage in other adjoining communities and the fact that station has demonstrated some efforts to provide programming targeted to New Jersey, including Burlington, Camden, and Mercer Counties. These two factors are of significant importance in our analysis of this petition and persuade us, along with the other facts as to the station's broadcast service area and the distances and geography involved that exclusion of these communities from the market of WFMZ-TV is not warranted. We recognize that a number of the other factors weigh in TKR's favor, including in particular the absence of any historical carriage in the areas in question after many years of operation. The station's facilities were improved in 1993 and a further improvement has been applied for, so that the lack of historical carriage is based circumstances that no longer exist. Significantly, WFMZ-TV is carried on the Trenton, New Jersey cable system which is located in Mercer County, where TKR's cable communities of Hamilton and Washington are also located. Of further significance is the fact that WFMZ is carried on all three Philadelphia cable systems which are closely proximate to TKR's cable communities of Gloucester City, Brooklawn, Mount Ephraim, all of which are located in Camden County, and also to Maple Shade in western Burlinton County. The listing of the station and its schedule in TV listings relevant at least to the Maple Shade/Gloucester communities also provides some evidence that the market regards this area to be within the economic market and service area of the station. The distances and geography involved are not so extreme as to suggest no market nexus with the communities exists. In addition to WFMZ-TV's carriage on nearby cable systems, is the fact that TKR carries WLVT-TV, a station which operates from the same transmitter site as WFMZ-TV and is likewise separated from TKR's cable communities by Philadelphia and by the Delaware River. TKR's argument that WFMZ-TV is separated from the cable communities at issue by natural barriers does not prevent it from finding WLVT-TV of sufficient local interest to warrant carriage. 38. We have carefully considered each statutory and other relevant factors in the context of the circumstances presented here and, on balance, we find that TKR has not demonstrated that the communities it serves lack a sufficient nexus with WFMZ-TV to warrant deletion of these communities from the station's ADI. 39. Having found that grant of TKR's petition for market modification is not warranted, we now turn to Maranatha's signal carriage complaint. We note that, although TKR failed to provide any response to Maranatha's request for carriage, Maranatha has committed to providing, at its own expense, the equipment necessary for WFMZ-TV to deliver a good quality signal to TKR's principal headends. We find that WFMZ-TV is a qualified commercial television station entitled to carriage on TKR's systems serving the communities at issue. ORDERING CLAUSES 40. Accordingly, IT IS ORDERED, pursuant to 614(h) of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended, 47 U.S.C. 534, and 76.59 of the Commission's rules, 47 C.F.R. 76.59, that the petition for special relief (CSR-4933-A) filed by TKR Cable Company IS DENIED. 41. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the complaint filed on behalf of WFMZ-TV by Maranatha Broadcasting Company, Inc., (CSR-4893-M) against TKR's cable systems IS GRANTED, in accordance with 614(d)(3) of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended, 47 U.S.C. 534 and Section 76.56(b) of the Commission's rules, 47 C.F.R. 76.56(b). 42. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the affected cable systems shall commence carriage of WFMZ-TV sixty (60) days from the effective date of this Order. 43. This action is taken pursuant to authority delegated under 0.321, 47 C.F.R. 0.321 of the Commission's rules. FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION William H. Johnson, Deputy Chief, Cable Services Bureau