Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout20061274.tiff Hardy, Carey, Chautin & Balkin, LLP ATTORNEYS AT LAW 110 Veterans Memorial Boulevard,Suite 300 Metairie,Louisiana 70005 Telephone 504.830.4646 Facsimile 504.830.4659 www.hardycarey.com May 3, 2006 Joseph Chautin, III jchautin(rihardycarev_com Direct Dial: 504.830.4643 2317.107 Via Hand Delivery Ms. Marlene Dortch, Secretary Federal Communications Commission 445 12' Street, SW Washington, DC 20554 Re: CSR-7004-M LeSEA Broadcasting of Denver,Inc. v. Comcast of Colorado I, LLC, et al Petitioner's Reply to Respondent's Opposition Dear Ms. Dortch: Please find enclosed an original and four (4) copies of the above referenced pleading that we are filing on behalf of LeSEA Broadcasting of Denver, Inc., the Petitioner in this proceeding. If you have any questions, please do not hesitate to contact me. Kindest Regards, —s-- �se. C. Chautin, III JCC,III:ems Encl. cc: Service List Peter Sumrall Stephen Broeckaert (via hand delivery) (10141,A 0S k G 0O 0290 Before the FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION Washington, DC 20554 In re: ) ) LeSEA Broadcasting of Denver, Inc. ) CSR-7004-M ) v. ) ) Comcast of Colorado I, LLC and, ) Comcast of Colorado II, LLC and, ) Comcast of Colorado III, LLC and, ) Comcast of Colorado IV, LLC and, ) Comcast of California/Colorado, LLC and, ) Comcast of California/Colorado/Texas/Washington, Inc. ) ) Request for Mandatory Carriage ) for KWHD(TV) ) in All Communities Served by Comcast in ) Larimer and Weld Counties, Colorado' ) ) To: Chief, Media Bureau Reply to Opposition to Must Carry Complaint Pursuant to Section 76.7(c) of the Commission's rules, LeSEA Broadcasting of Denver, Inc. ("LeSEA")hereby files this reply to the opposition filed by Comcast of Colorado I, LLC et al ("Comcast"). Comcast has alleged that KWHD is not eligible for carriage on its systems serving Weld and Larimer Counties because KWHD does not deliver a good quality signal to Comcast's headends at Fort Collins and Greeley, Colorado. LeSEA disputes the accuracy and technical sufficiency of these tests and requests that the Bureau grant carriage of KWHD on these systems. ' See Exhibit A in original complaint for complete listing of communities. I. Comcast's tests of KWHD's signal are technically insufficient and inaccurate and cannot be relied upon to determine KWHD's must-carry rights on these systems. The Commission places the initial burden on Comcast to show, through signal strength tests,that KWHD's signal is inadequate for purposes of must-carry. Hope Television, Inc. v. Friendship Cable of Arkansas, Inc., 13 FCC Rcd 13454 (1998); Corridor Television, LLP v. Bluebonnet Electric Coop, Inc. d/b/a BRDC Cablevision, 16 FCC Red 13825, 13827 at¶ 7 (2001). Comcast must use sound engineering practices when conducting the tests to meet its initial burden and to be able to rely on the tests to determine KWHD's must-carry eligibility. At a minimum, for the tests to be considered to have been conducted using sound engineering practices, the reported results must include, "1) specific make and model numbers of the equipment used, as well as its age and most recent date(s) of calibration; 2) description(s) of the characteristics of the equipment used, such as antenna ranges and radiation patterns; 3) height of the antenna above ground level and whether the antenna was properly oriented; and 4) weather conditions and time of day when tests were done." Complaint of Larry L. Schrecongost, 12 FCC Rcd 13194 at¶ 16;Must Carry Order, 8 FCC Rcd 2965, 2990 at¶ 103 (1993), and Clarification Order, 8 FCC Rcd 4142 at¶ 5 (1993). Moreover,with respect to the antenna used, Comcast must "take measurements with `generally accepted equipment that is currently used to receive signals of similar frequency range, type or distance from the principal headend.""Hope Television, 13 FCC Rcd at¶ 6 (citing Clarification Order, 8 FCC Red at 4143); Citrus County Association for Retarded Citizens v. Mickelson Media, Inc. d/b/a Century Cable, 16 FCC Rcd 20713 (FCC 2001). Comcast must also test KWHD's signal at the same height that it receives the signals of other broadcasters that it currently carries. Suburban Cable TV Co., Inc., 16 FCC Rcd 10790, 10800-01 at¶32 (2001) -2- (citing Clarification Order, 8 FCC Rcd at 4143). Finally, conducting a test when a station is operating at reduced power will yield invalid results that do not give a(literally) clear picture of the station's signal strength. See KM Television of El Dorado, LLC v. Friendship Cable of Arkansas, 19 FCC Rcd 8534 (2004); Folse Communications, LLC v. Allen's TV Cable Service, Inc., 18 FCC Rcd 11304 (2003); R y F Broadcasting v. Cable TV of Greater San Juan, 14 FCC Rcd 6821 (1999). Here, Comcast inadequately and improperly tested KWHD's signal at the Fort Collins and Greeley headends. The lack of use of sound engineering practices when performing the tests vitiated the results as well as Comcast's subsequent denial of carriage.2 Comcast committed four fatal errors in testing KWHD signal, any of which alone would invalidate the results,but when taken together make it impossible to rely on the results to determine KWHD's must carry status. First, Comcast conducted the tests when KWHD was operating at reduced power, a fact which Comcast knew at the time it conducted the tests. Second, Comcast used an antenna that was inferior to the types that it uses to receive other broadcasters' signals off-air. Third, Comcast tested the signal at a height of only 31 feet,which is not the height that it receives the signals of other broadcast signals that it carries. And, finally, Comcast improperly oriented the antenna in 2 Part of the problem with the tests was that they were conducted in a hurry, even though Comcast had more than six months to test KWHD's signal from the time LeSEA made its first election for carriage of KWHD. Indeed, Comcast's own engineer, Bob McQuitty, admitted to KWHD's chief engineer that he had only two days to conduct the tests. Exhibit A (Affidavit of Ron Vincent). Placing the completion of the testing under such a deadline - especially when the tests could have been properly done at any point in the last six months - increased the chances that the test would be performed in a sloppy manner and without attention to detail and procedure. The consequence of this hurried and poor testing is that the test results are so flawed they cannot be relied upon to give an accurate picture of KWHD's signal strength at either headend and thus, cannot form the basis for a denial of carriage on these systems. -3- both tests such that it could not properly measure KWHD's signal. These four critical mistakes establish that Comcast failed to use sound engineering practices in the KWHD tests. Consequently, the tests cannot form the basis for Comcast's denial of carriage of KWHD.3 A. Comcast improperly tested KWHD's signal when the station was operating at reduced power. On April 11, 2006, LeSEA began having problems with the air conditioning unit in KWHD's transmitter building. The unit failed and as the temperature rose in the building, the power to the transmitter was reduced, resulting in a decrease of KWHD's signal strength by 26%. KWHD operated with only 74%power from April 11, 2006 until April 12, 2006. At approximately 3 pm on April 12, 2006, the technicians were able to fix the air conditioner and normal power operation was restored. However, LeSEA's Chief Engineer,Ron Vincent, discovered on April 16, 2006, that the air conditioner developed a second leak and failed again. At that point, the power was again reduced and KWHD operated at 71% of its normal power. See Exhibit A (Affidavit of Ron Vincent). The station is still operating at this power level. LeSEA notified the Commission of the reduced power operation on April 26, 2006. See Exhibit B (Reduced Power Notification)4. 3 These gross errors in Comcast's tests make it impossible for LeSEA to reach an informed decision as to whether LeSEA must commit to provide additional equipment at its own cost in order to qualify for carriage. As the Bureau will readily recognize, making such a commitment under these circumstances would be premature and unnecessary, given that Comcast has not carried its burden. In the event the Bureau directs Comcast to re-test the signal using sound engineering practices, LeSEA respectfully requests that such order direct Comcast to coordinate with LeSEA on the timing of the test so that LeSEA personnel can be present. Only if such properly conducted tests confirmed a lack of signal strength would LeSEA be in a position to make any commitment to provide equipment at its own cost. In the footnote of the Notification, LeSEA indicated that normal power was restored on April 13, 2006. LeSEA's Chief Engineer later clarified that normal power was restored at -4- • Given KWHD's situation, any tests that Comcast conducted of KWHD's signal on April 11 and April 12 are invalid since they were conducted when KWHD was not operating at full- power. See KM Television of El Dorado, LLC v. Friendship Cable of Arkansas, 19 FCC Rcd 8534, 8536 at¶ 8 (2004). What is more disturbing, however, is that Comcast's engineer, Bob McQuitty, who performed the test of KWHD's signal at Greeley,knew of KWHD's power troubles when he was testing the signal. On April 11, 2006, Mr. McQuitty called Ron Vincent, LeSEA's chief engineer at KWHD, and, when they spoke, Mr. McQuitty informed Mr. Vincent that he was conducting tests of KWHD's signal for Comcast. Mr. McQuitty inquired whether the station was having power problems because he noticed a drop in the signal strength from early morning to approximately noon. Mr. Vincent confirmed for Mr. McQuitty that KWHD was operating at reduced power and informed him of the reason. See Exhibit A(Affidavit of Ron Vincent). Despite having this information when he was testing the signal, however, Mr. McQuitty did not stop the test or reschedule it, or even note the reduced power in the test results; nor did he stop the April 12, 2006 test of KWHD's signal at Fort Collins. Comcast's submission of these test results despite its knowledge of the station's reduced power is not only disingenuous,but irresponsible. The Bureau should completely reject the test results on this basis alone. B. Comcast's test results are also invalid because it used an amateur, low gain antenna with a 35-mile range to pick up KWHD's signal. According to Comcast's test specifications, the engineers used two separate RCA 3036X antennas to test KWHD's signal. This $59.95 rooftop antenna is typically used by residential approximately 3 pm on April 12, 2006. -5- consumers to enhance their analog off-air reception at their homes; it is not a professional antenna used to receive a signal for purposes of must-carry. Comcast's own documentation shows that this antenna,unlike professional antennas which are channel-specific, is designed to receive a wide range of both UHF and VHF channels. Moreover, the stated range of the antenna, an underwhelming 35 miles for UHF, leaves no doubt as to its amateur use and complete inadequacy for determining must-carry eligibility. Since KWHD's tower is located more than 35 miles from both the Fort Collins and Greeley testing sites, this low gain antenna had no chance of adequately testing KWHD's signal. Moreover, the antenna cannot be the same as what Comcast currently uses "to receive signals of similar frequency range, type or distance from the principal headend." Clarification Order, 8 FCC Rcd at 4143. On both its Fort Collins and Greeley systems, Comcast carries several full power UHF stations that are licensed to Denver, some fifty-five miles away from Fort Collins.' The use of this low-gain, short range antenna appears to have been calculated to trigger a poor signal test, and violates LeSEA's right to have the signal tested using equipment that Comcast uses"to receive signals of a similar ... type and distance from the principal headend." Id. Indeed, at the Greeley headend, Comcast uses high-gain professional antennas to receive broadcast signals. KWHD's Chief Engineer, Ron Vincent, observed a communications tower at the Greeley headend with multiple high-gain antennas hanging on it. See Exhibit A (Affidavit of ' These stations include KTVD (Channel 20), KDVR(Channel 31), KCEC (Channel 50), and KPXC-TV (Channel 59). Comcast carries another UHF station, KMAS-TV (Channel 24), licensed to Steamboat Springs, which is also more than 35 miles away from Fort Collins. This station is only carried on the Fort Collins system. -6- Ron Vincent, Exhibits 1-6). This alone supports the conclusion that Comcast cannot receive signals from Denver using the short-range antenna employed for the KWHD signal test. Further, it strongly suggests, if not confirms, that Comcast intentionally chose to use an inadequate antenna for the KWHD signal tests. C. Comcast's test results are also unreliable because it tested KWHD's signal at the paltry height of 31 feet when it receives other broadcast signals at double that height. Much like it violated the Commission's edict requiring testing of signals employing comparable antennas used to receive other signals, Comcast also failed to follow the FCC's requirement that it test KWITD's signal at the same height which it receives other broadcast signals that it is currently carrying. Since the beginning of must-carry in 1993, the Commission has strictly enforced the cable operator's mandated obligation to test signals at the same height that it receives other broadcast signals. For example, in Suburban Cable TV Co., Inc., 16 FCC Rcd 10790, 10800-01 at¶32 (2001), the Commission held that a test of the station's signal at 30 feet was blatantly invalid because Suburban was receiving other broadcast signals at a height of approximately 350 feet. Similarly, Comcast violated the FCC's mandate by not testing KWHD at the height which it receives other broadcast signals. In both tests of KWHD's signal, Comcast mounted the inadequate antenna on a pole on the roofs of its headend buildings at the equally inadequate heights of 31 feet (Fort Collins) and 31 feet 2 inches (Greeley). At the Greeley headend, it is clear that Comcast is receiving other broadcast signals at heights of at least 60 feet on its communications tower. Yet, Comcast only tested KWHD on a makeshift pole at a height of 31 feet two inches, affixed to the top of the headend building- directly adjacent to the -7- communications tower- in violation of the Commission's requirements. See Exhibit A (Affidavit of Ron Vincent and Exhibits 1-6). Comcast must test KWHD's signal at the same height that it receives other broadcast signals for purposes of determining the station's must-carry eligibility or else the results will be an invalid picture of KWHD's true signal strength and cannot be used to determine its must-carry status. D. Comcast ensured that the tests would fail by improperly orienting the antenna. In addition to using an inadequate antenna mounted at only 31 feet, Comcast improperly oriented the antenna on both tests. This improper orientation added to the almost certainty that Comcast would not receive an adequate signal from KWHD. According to Comcast's diagrams, it oriented the antenna at 130° for the Fort Collins test and at 265° for the Greeley test. Both orientations were incorrect. For the test at Fort Collins, Comcast should have oriented the antenna at the 153° mark. See Exhibit A(Affidavit of Ron Vincent). The orientation mistake was even worse on the Greeley test. On that test, Comcast oriented the antenna at the 265° mark, over 100° from where KWHD's tower is located, which is at the 167°mark.6 Once Comcast improperly oriented the antenna, the legitimacy of the tests was permanently compromised and the validity of the tests was negated. See e.g. KM Television of El Dorado, LLC v. Classic Cable 6 Comcast has no excuse for this error since LeSEA's chief engineer, Ron Vincent, called Bob McQuitty, Comcast's engineer on April 12, 2006, to make sure that Comcast was properly orienting the antenna for the test. Mr. Vincent told Mr. McQuitty that many times, an antenna is improperly oriented toward Golden, Colorado while KWHD's tower is located halfway between Parker and Elizabeth, Colorado. Mr. McQuitty assured him that Comcast had the correct orientation. See Exhibit A(Affidavit of Ron Vincent). Mr. Vincent's information also did not make it to Michael Agnew, the Comcast engineer who tested KWHD's signal at Greeley. Both engineers could have easily determined the location of KWHD's tower by simply searching in the Commission's CDBS database. -8- of Louisiana, LLC, 19 FCC Rcd 12845 (2004). Thus, neither Comcast nor the Bureau can rely upon Comcast's tests to determine KWHD's must-carry eligibility. Conclusion Comcast has failed to carry its burden of showing that its tests of KWHD's signal at the headends at Fort Collins and Greeley meet the Commission's requirements of sound engineering practices. The tests were irrevocably flawed because Comcast conducted them when KWHD was operating at low power,which Comcast knew at the time, and used a woefully inadequate and improperly oriented antenna mounted at a bare 31 feet. These flaws doomed the tests from the outset and invalidated any use of the tests to deny KWHD carriage on Comcast's systems serving Weld and Larimer Counties. LeSEA respectfully requests that the Bureau find the tests unreliable and order Comcast to carry KWHD's signal. Respectfully submitted: Jose C Chautin, III Eli Stubbe Hari Carey, Chautin &Balkin, LLP 110 Veterans Blvd., Suite 300 Metairie, LA 70005 Tel: (504) 830-4646 Fax: (504) 830-4659 Attorneys for LeSEA Broadcasting of Denver, Inc. Dated: May 3, 2006 -9- CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I, Joseph C. Chautin, III do hereby certify that a copy of the foregoing must-carry complaint was mailed on this 3r°day of May, 2006 via first-class mail, postage pre-paid to the following: Scott Binder The Hon. Doug Hutchinson Senior VP - Comcast Cable Mayor, Fort Collins, CO 8000 E. Iliff Avenue 1315 Whedbee Street Denver, CO 80231 Fort Collins, CO 80524 Doug Gaston, Esq. Frank Lancaster Senior VP & General Counsel Larimer County Manager Comcast Cable 200 W. Oak Street 1500 Market Street P.O. Box 1190 Philadelphia, PA 19102 Fort Collins, CO 80522-1190 Weld County Commissioners Roy Otto, City Manager Weld County, Colorado City of Greeley, CO 915 Tenth Street 1000 10th Street P.O. Box 758 Greeley, CO 80631 Greeley, CO 80632 Frederick W. Giroux, Esq. Cole, Raywid &Braverman, LLP 1919 Pennsylvania Avenue,NW Suite 200 Washington, DC 20006 �6 Josep . autin, III -10- County of Douglas ) State of Colorado ) AFFIDAVIT OF RON VINCENT BEFORE ME,the undesigned Notary, personally came and appeared: RON VINCENT who after being duly sworn did depose and state as follows: I.Ron Vincent, am a citizen of the United States of America and resident of the County of Douglas, State of Colorado. 1) I am employed by LeSEA Broadcasting of Denver,Inc.,the licensee of TV station KWHD, as the chief engineer. I have been in this position for 8 years and have worked for LeSEA Broadcasting Corporation since 1979. I have been a broadcast engineer for 26 years and am certified by the Society of Broadcast Engineers. 2) On April 11, 2006, I went out to KWHD's transmitter building on a routine visit and discovered that the air conditioning unit had failed. Due to the heat in the building the detuning was altered and the power was reduced. At that point, KWHD was operating at 74% of its normal power. Air conditioner technicians were able to fix the unit on April 12,2006 and the normal power was restored at approximately 3 pm that afternoon. On April 16, 2006, I discovered that the air conditioning unit had developed a second leak and the power was again reduced. From that point on,the station was operating at 71%. 3) On April 11, 2006, after I determined that KWHD was operating at reduced power, I received a call from Bob McQuitty of Comcast. He left a message and I returned his call. During our call, Mr. McQuitty stated that he was testing KWHD's signal for Comcast. He told me that he had two days to test the signal. 4) He asked me if KWHD was having problems because he noticed a drop in the signal from early morning until approximately noon. I informed him that KWHD was having problems and was operating at 74% of its normal power due to the failure of the air conditioner in the transmitter building. I told him that in approximately another day the signal should be back up to full power. In speaking with him,I had the impression that he had to finish the tests and could not wait. 5) On April 12, 2006,I called Bob McQuitty to make sure that Comcast was properly orienting the antenna toward KWHD's tower since many people assume that the tower is near Golden, Colorado. I informed him that the tower was actually located half way between Parker and Elizabeth, Colorado. Mr. McQuitty assured me that he oriented the antenna correctly. 6) After reviewing Comcast's test results filed in response to LeSEA's carnage complaint, I EXHIBIT A observed that the antenna orientation specified on both the Greeley and Ft. Collins tests conducted by Comcast was inaccurate. Based upon the location of the test sites specified by Comcast and the location of the KWHD tower at 39°25' 57" N, 104°39' 18" W, the proper antenna orientation for the Greeley test would have been 167° degrees, and the proper antenna orientation for the Ft. Collins test would have been 153° degrees. 7) On the afternoon of April 28,2006, I traveled to the address at 3737 W. 10th Street, Greeley, Colorado, which is listed as the address of Comcast's Greeley headend provided in Comcast's test results. I took a GPS reading of the coordinates at the site which were: 40° 25.412'N, 104°44.447'. While present, I noted a communications tower located on the property directly adjacent to the headend building. The tower was substantially higher than the headend building and had multiple antennas appended to it, many of which appeared to be high gain television reception antennas or cut-to-channel antennas. I estimate the height of the tower to be approximately 60 feet with the high gain professional antennas mounted at a height of between 45 and 60 feet. I did not observe the RCA antenna that was used in the Greeley test either on the tower or on the roof of the headend building. 1 took several pictures of the site, including the communications tower and the antennas. They are attached to this affidavit as Exhibits 1-6. 6 CCt1 k.A14\6. C Ron Vincent, Chief Engineer for KWHD(TV) LeSEA Broadcasting of Denver, Inc. County of Arapahoe,State of Colorado The foregoing instrument was subscribed and aired before me this.../day of Ana c�OG Sworn to and Subscribed before me by >�o n 1l n 0€. Ala Witness my hand and official seal. This 1 `day of May,2006 C)O at,B . Notary Public HEttN�t •• Not Public • TA• •% i ffln9J41 A• CB1.�G'iztip r COO ` ..1 MY Connissioranes01252010 MO EA:main Road ghimod 8O112 B Page 2 of 2 Affidavit of Ron Vincent May 1, 2006 Exhibits 1-6 • 3 1 1.E :, 1 �y. • �'S Y.,1 l Al t. # ♦�• .01 ; Olt.i , w,. '4 w . . k -S,' '. 4! .y ri! i . - •• i r r .r ..� F.: 1 ;. Mk Pi . • A, ,,5` ::..: 1 i iL ti • 11 L;i i t . p r i . 1 : i 1 4 A 6, r 34 :• • M1 , a r p s 6 e � r t. 11 , t M aY _ ' r - ' rf.• •'.i .N II �' r;1i. •- ' k • i NI ft 4:, • a ll , y si Mme•' ' r i r g s v 2 ,i •• T y . P. _ ., ` 1 t I • • 1 '. .., V all ` t ,t. 'rt s S k:. i55S' < Ky �� fir }F$ I �V t�a iQr ff r I hx j" S r�+i3 3ert 4m a 'sew ter,.. Y ifi� �����A���"��II�fa iii,®.& .. •.++ 'T�/w��®w�._ � S r r 3 • • II I L Nor i 3 P 4 S. SY F 1. et �a..� b , K•':5" s . , _ ., . Y a 1 '. +yry,. 4 ..... abt „ , le T J.kt .. , � „ #A y E r _p n rT A A � 1 1 V't5 ' . t X1111 .,'S,. _ h 4.1 . y Y F11 M1 > to ,1 . rat 4A 're a: 4541 - ,' t '+ §fry"1 � ` ° ,i;#.4 L',41 ',b t' r x ^5 nt 1 ' .at L„.? e ✓xT .5f5. , vkA. Y y w ,It gY i, 'lid, k" TJi i Atl t. * 4 . ..i. x s,� . ... .3„1,,±v7.•,4,7, 1EF�. ,-,,,,i,541/4.7..-,1/44:- I J T ax . eF6 �x. ?; tr 4} r t. far ... 4 S�4 31*x>e• j a .221. jp h A�At d °t t ,': f., � .Air �r`Aauh m < _ -rm. , , : te \\IV hidt ,Jr a Is tztri 0 �� li'al' I0. A \ �� C Sr dR! xr� i. `? Y �T_ � ry�t'. A % s1 t�4x f �w y} 1 41,:. Y 3 i d l I q f;liy yy • Ar Mg Hardy, Carey, Chautin. & Balkin, LE p A T T O R N E Y S AT LAW 110 veterans Memorial Boulevard,Suite 300 Metairie,Louisiana 70005 Telephone 504.830.4646 Facsimile 504.830.4659 �w✓whardycarey.com April 26, 2006 Elise M. Stubbe; Esq. estubbe(dihardvcarev.corn Direct Dial: 504.830.4641 fi L 2317.107 Via Hand Delivery Y,? ct t a t: Ms.Marlene Dortch, Secrreta1 w 0 k e �° " I= v Federal Conunulucatipf iiEsiou . ? ii x 445 12th Street, SW # i .gt'- l"..e"cirr e& `^ iir Washington, DC 205541a �" E F° ' r= do Re: KWHD(TV) � � " F $ Fat. Id. 37101 �ECEIvED Castle Rock, CO FRN: 0011-6662-60 APR 2 6 2006 Notice of Operation at Reduced Power Fa�AmimmunicatonsCommisslor, Mice of Secrty Dear Ms. Dortch: We are filing this letter on behalf of LeSEA Broadcasting of Denver, Inc., the licensee of KWHD(TV) and pursuant to Section 73.1560(d)to notify the Commission that KWEID(TV) has been operating at reduced power since April 16, 2006.1 If you have any questions,please do not hesitate to contact me. Sincerely, Elise M. Stubbe EMS:dbg cc: Pete Sim-mall (public file) Tony Hale Wes Hylton 'The station started operating at reduced power on April 11, 2006, but resumed normal power operations on April 13, 2006. On April 16, 2006, the station was again forced to begin operating at reduced power and has been doing so since that date. EXHIBIT T:12317.1071 FCC 060425 ems(KWHD low power notice).wpd Hello