********************************************************    
                         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 United Broadcast Group)CSR-4946-M
II, Inc. against Time Warner Cable)
                                )
Request for Carriage            )

                  MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER

      Adopted:  June 25, 1997  Released:  July 1, 1997  

By the Chief, Consumer Protection & Competition Division, Cable Services Bureau:

                           INTRODUCTION

      1. United Broadcast Group II, Inc., licensee of Television Broadcast Station KINZ, Arlington,
Texas, has filed a must carry complaint requesting that the Commission order Time Warner Cable, operator
of a cable television system serving Greenville, Texas and surrounding Hunt County, Texas, to commence
carriage of KINZ.  Time Warner has opposed KINZ's petition and KINZ has replied.

                            BACKGROUND

      2. Pursuant to Section 614 of the Communications Act and implementing rules adopted by the
Commission in its Report and Order in MM Docket 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.

                     ARGUMENTS OF THE PARTIES

      3. In support of its request, KINZ states that, pursuant to 76.64(f)(4) of the Commission's
Rules, it notified Time Warner by letter dated December 11, 1996, that it was conducting on-air program
tests and would be commencing regular broadcasting shortly.  In the same letter, KINZ indicates that it
informed Time Warner that it was electing must carry status in lieu of retransmission consent and requested
carriage on Time Warner's Greenville, Texas system.   In a December 27, 1996 response, KINZ states that
Time Warner alleged that the station did not deliver an adequate signal to its system's headend and therefore
was not entitled to carriage.  KINZ argues that, despite its stated willingness to work with Time Warner to
resolve any signal quality problems, and its offer to provide any specialized equipment necessary to ensure
a good signal, the cable system remains unwilling to carry its signal.  KINZ maintains that even if the signal
quality tests performed by Time Warner indicate that its signal does not meet the Commission's criteria for
a good quality signal, its willingness to provide equipment to improve its signal should overcome this
deficiency.  KINZ therefore requests that the Commission should grant its request.

      4. In opposition, Time Warner argues that in joint tests conducted by KINZ and cable system
engineers on February 27, 1997, KINZ's signal was found to be unacceptable by both Time Warner and
KINZ's Chief Engineer.  Indeed, Time Warner states that Mr. Kent Mathew, KINZ's Chief Engineer, attested
to this fact in a signed declaration where he stated that he "[w]ould not recommend using signal for this
system."  Moreover, Time Warner points out that this joint test was conducted using the exact equipment
which KINZ specified would produce favorable results.  In light of this fact, Time Warner argues that
KINZ's complaint should be dismissed.

      5. KINZ argues in reply to although the joint test conducted by the parties did not yield the
expected good quality signal, this does not relieve Time Warner of the obligation to carry its signal.  KINZ
states that it immediately offered several alternative measures after the joint test to ensure that its signal
would be adequate:  a) replace Time Warner's 80-foot tower with a brand new 100-foot free-standing tower; 
b) pay a reasonable sum to install fiber optic cable from Time Warner's nearby 300-foot tower to the 80-foot
Greenville headend located less than two miles away; and c) install at its own expense a microwave relay
from an antenna it would install on the 300-foot tower to the headend.  KINZ indicates that Time Warner
has failed to permit any of these alternatives. 

                            DISCUSSION

      6.  We will grant KINZ's petition.  According to 76.55(e) of the Commission's Rules,
commercial television broadcast stations, such as KINZ, are entitled to carriage on cable systems located in
the same Area of Dominant Influence (or "ADI").  KINZ is located in the Dallas-Ft. Worth, Texas ADI,
which is also where the system served by Time Warner is located.  A review of the joint engineering test
conducted by Time Warner and KINZ establishes that KINZ fails to provide a good quality signal to Time
Warner's principal headend.  However, we note that KINZ has offered to provided specialized equipment
to Time Warner and suggested headend tower adjustments to improve its station's signal.  KINZ maintains
that with the use of specialized equipment and the suggested adjustments, it can provide a signal to Time
Warner's headend that is consistent with Commission criteria.  Moreover, KINZ has stated that it will bear
the costs of installing such equipment to assure a good quality signal.  The Commission has stated that
specialized equipment may be employed to deliver a good quality signal to a cable system headend.  The
Commission in the Must Carry Clarification Order, after re-emphasizing that it was the television station's
obligation to bear the costs associated with delivering a good quality signal to the system's principal headend,
stated:

     This may include improved antennas, increased tower height, microwave relay
     equipment, amplification equipment and tests that may be needed to determine
     whether the station's signal complies with the signal strength requirements. . .

KINZ, by committing to provide specialized equipment, satisfies its obligation to bear the costs associated
with delivering a good signal to Time Warner's headend.  We encourage Time Warner and KINZ to work
together in this regard.  Consequently, we shall order Time Warner to carry KINZ's signal in the event that
KINZ provides a good quality signal. 

                         ORDERING CLAUSES

      7. Accordingly, IT IS ORDERED that the petition filed February 25, 1997, by United
Broadcast Group II, Inc. IS GRANTED pursuant to 614 of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended
(4 U.S.C. 534).  Time Warner Cable IS ORDERED to commence carriage of Station KINZ on its
Greenville, Texas cable system sixty (60) days from the date that KINZ provides a good quality signal at
Time Warner's principal headend.  KINZ shall notify Time Warner in writing of its carriage and channel
position elections (76.56, 76.57, and 76.64(f) of the Commission's Rules) within thirty (30) days of
providing a good quality signal.

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

     FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION



     Gary M. Laden, Chief 
     Consumer Protection and Competition Division
     Cable Services Bureau