WPC- 2MBERKZ3|j X-#XP\  P6Q9XP#"i~'^5>I\\>>>\g0>03\\\\\\\\\\33gggQyyrg>Frgygrr>3>T\>Q\Q\Q>\\33\3\\\\>F3\\\\QX%Xc>0cT>>>0>>>>>>>>\3QQQQQwyQrQrQrQrQ>3>3>3>3\\\\\\\\\\Q\Z\\\g\QQQyQyQycyQtrQrQrQrQ\\\c\c\>3>\>>>\gcc\r3rIr>r>r3\l\\\\y>y>y>gFgFgFgcrMr3rT\\\\\\crQrQrQ\r>\gFr>\t0\\=!=WxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxNBnnBT\>Q\\\\\3;\7;\7>>QQ\??n\\pBnnBmgg>Q\7"yyyy\njc\gnn\HP4M (PCL) (Additional); Local PrintHL4MPCAD.PRS&a\  P6G;\"\&P2gEKX X-#XP\  P6Q9XP#"i~'^:DPddDDDdp4D48dddddddddd88pppX|pDL|pp||D8D\dDXdXdXDdd88d8ddddDL8ddddX`(`lD4l\DDD4DDDDDDDDd8XXXXXX|X|X|X|XD8D8D8D8ddddddddddXdbdddpdXXXXXlX~|X|X|X|XdddldldD8DdDDDdplld|8|P|D|D|8dvddddDDDpLpLpLpl|T|8|\ddddddl|X|X|Xd|DdpL|Dd~4ddC$CWxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxNHxxH\dDXddddd8@d<@d<DDXXdDDxddzHxxHvppDXd<"dxtldpxxdD2a=5,0&a\  P6G;&P7jC:,9Xj\  P6G;XPgygrr>3>T\>Q\Q\Q>\\33\3\\\\>F3\\\\QX%Xc>0cT>>>0>>>>>>>>\3QQQwyQrQrQrQrQ>3>3>3>3\\\\\\\\\\Q\Z\\\g\QQQyQyQycyQtrQrQrQrQ2 K< Z0 3|j"i~'^:DPddDDDdp4D48dddddddddd88pppX|pDL|pp||D8D\dDXdXdXDdd88d8ddddDL8ddddX`(`lD4l\DDD4DDDDDDDDd8XXXXXX|X|X|X|XD8D8D8D8ddddddddddXdbdddpdXXXXXlX~|X|X|X|XdddldldD8DdDDDdplld|8|P|D|D|8dvddddDDDpLpLpLpl|T|8|\ddddddl|X|X|Xd|DdpL|Dd~4ddC$CWxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxNHxxH\dDXddddd8@d<@d<DDXXdDDxddzHxxHvppDXd<"dxtldpxxdTimes New RomanTimes New Roman BoldTimes New Roman ItalicHP4M (PCL) (Additional); Local PrintHL4MPCAD.PRSXj\  P6G;\"\XP2 KV n  I. A. 1. a.(1)(a) i) a) 1. 1. 1. a.(1)(a) i) a)"i~'^5>I\\>>>\g0>03\\\\\\\\\\33gggQyyrg>Frgygrr>3>T\>Q\Q\Q>\\33\3\\\\>F3\\\\QX%Xc>0cT>>>0>>>>>>>>\3QQQQQwyQrQrQrQrQ>3>3>3>3\\\\\\\\\\Q\Z\\\g\QQQyQyQycyQtrQrQrQrQ\\\c\c\>3>\>>>\gcc\r3rIr>r>r3\l\\\\y>y>y>gFgFgFgcrMr3rT\\\\\\crQrQrQ\r>\gFr>\t0\\=!=WxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxNBnnBT\>Q\\\\\3;\7;\7>>QQ\??n\\pBnnBmgg>Q\7"yyyy\njc\gnn\Bibliogrphy(PȗBibliography(6+.K+,ȗ&+Bȗ+> Tech InitT(PȗInitialize Technical Style.K+,ȗ&+Bȗ+> 1 .1 .1 .1 .1 .1 .1 .1 Technical2)w a1Technical+>ȗ&Technical Document Style&ȏ(6+.K+,4"     a2Technical+>ȗ&Technical Document Style&ȏ(6+.K+,*    a3Technical+>ȗ&Technical Document Style&ȏ(6+.K+,'     a4Technical+>ȗ&Technical Document Style&ȏ(6+.K+,&     2Y  ca5Technical+>ȗ&Technical Document Style&ȏ(6+.K+,&   . a6Technical+>ȗ&Technical Document Style&ȏ(6+.K+,&  . a7Technical+>ȗ&Technical Document Style&ȏ(6+.K+, &  . a8Technical+>ȗ&Technical Document Style&ȏ(6+.K+, &  . 2   aDoc InitT(PȗInitialize Document Style.K+,ȗ&+Bȗ+>     I. 1. A. a.(1)(a) i) a)DocumentҲa1Document+>ȗ&Document Style7&ȏ(6+#.K+, F *  ׃  a2Document+>ȗ&Document Style7&ȏ(6+#.K+, *    a3Document+>ȗ&Document Style7&ȏ(6+#.K+,0     2q)ffqfa4Document+>ȗ&Document Style7&ȏ(6+#.K+, . a5Document+>ȗ&Document Style7&ȏ(6+#.K+,   a6Document+>ȗ&Document Style7&ȏ(6+#.K+, !" a7Document+>ȗ&Document Style7&ȏ(6+#.K+,#$` ` ` 2yq *zep a8Document+>ȗ&Document Style7&ȏ(6+#.K+,%&` ` ` PleadingT(PȗHeader for Numbered Pleading Paper,ȗ&+Bȗ+>'(   ,#6X@@# X  y*dddyy*dddy HJ1 HJ2 HJ3 HJ4 HJ5 HJ6 HJ7 HJ8 HJ9 H10 H11 H12 H13 H14 H15 H16 H17 H18 H19 H20 H21 H22 H23 H24 H25 H26 H27 H28   ӲHeading 2T(PȗUnderlined Heading Flush Left.K+,ȗ&+Bȗ+>)* Heading 1T(PȗCentered Heading6+).K+,ȗ&+Bȗ+>+,* Ã  2 sM Bullet List(PȗIndented Bullet List+*.K+,ȗ&+Bȗ+>-.` ` ` a1Right Par+>ȗ&Right-Aligned Paragraph Numbers6+6.K+,8/0@   a2Right Par+>ȗ&Right-Aligned Paragraph Numbers6+6.K+,A12@` `  ` ` ` a3Right Par+>ȗ&Right-Aligned Paragraph Numbers6+6.K+,J34` ` @  ` `  2$$!!"I#a4Right Par+>ȗ&Right-Aligned Paragraph Numbers6+6.K+,S56` `  @  a5Right Par+>ȗ&Right-Aligned Paragraph Numbers6+6.K+,\78` `  @hh# hhh a6Right Par+>ȗ&Right-Aligned Paragraph Numbers6+6.K+,e9:` `  hh#@( hh# a7Right Par+>ȗ&Right-Aligned Paragraph Numbers6+6.K+,n;<` `  hh#(@- ( 2+D$K%Ka'K)a8Right Par+>ȗ&Right-Aligned Paragraph Numbers6+6.K+,w=>` `  hh#(-@pp2 -ppp "i~'^5>g\\>>>\g0>03\\\\\\\\\\>>ggg\yyrF\yrgyy>3>j\>\gQgQ>\g3>g3g\ggQF>g\\\QI(I_>0_j>>>0>>>>>>\>g3\\\\\QyQyQyQyQD3D3D3D3g\\\\gggg\\g\\\\pg\\\QQ_QyQyQyQyQ\\\_\gjF3FgF>Fgg__gy3ySy>yIy3ggg\\QQQgFgFgFg_y^y>yjgggggg_yQyQyQgy>ggFy>\0\\=2=WxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxNBnnBa\>\\\\\\7>\7>\7>>\\\??n\\pBnnBsgg>\\7"yyyy\nlc\gnn\"i~'^09CSS999S]+9+/SSSSSSSSSS//]]]Ixnnxg]xx9?xgxx]xn]gxxxxg9/9MS9ISISI9SS//S/SSSS9?/SSxSSIP!PZ9+ZM999+99999999S/xIxIxIxIxIlnIgIgIgIgI9/9/9/9/xSxSxSxSxSxSxSxSxSxSxIxSxRxSxSxS]SxIxIxInInInZnIxigIgIgIgIxSxSxSxZxSxZxS9/9S999Su]ZZxSg/gCg9g9g/xSbxSxSxSxSxn9n9n9]?]?]?]ZgFg/gMxSxSxSxSxSxSxxZgIgIgIxSg9xS]?g9xSi+SS88WuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxN/>/>/>/x]SSSSx]x]x]x]xSxSx]SSxSxSf]xSxSxSxIxIxWxIx{nInInInISSSWS]a?/?]?9?]]WW]n/nKn9nCn/x]xx]x]SSxxIxIxI]?]?]?]WnUn9nax]x]x]x]x]x]xxWnInInIx]n9x]]?n9xSz+SS8-8WuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxN+[toc 2toc 2;` hp x (#` !(#B` !(#B` hp x (#toc 3toc 3<` hp x (#` !(# ` !(# ` hp x (#toc 4toc 4=` hp x (# !(#  !(# ` hp x (#toc 5toc 5>` hp x (#h!(# h!(# ` hp x (#2Kd?{]@v_A`B-btoc 6toc 6?` hp x (#!(#!(#` hp x (#toc 7toc 7@ toc 8toc 8A` hp x (#!(#!(#` hp x (#toc 9toc 9B` hp x (#!(#B!(#B` hp x (#2MkC}dDfEhFvjindex 1index 1C` hp x (#` !(# ` !(# ` hp x (#index 2index 2D` hp x (#` !(#B` !(#B` hp x (#toatoaE` hp x (#!(# !(# ` hp x (#captioncaptionF 2YmGlkHrkI]lJ}l_Equation Caption_Equation CaptionG endnote referenceendnote referenceH head1 #I'd#2p}wC@ #a1Paragraph R!1. a. i. (1) (a) (i) 1) a)D )DDDFrfJ$ 2oKmLnMnNDoa2Paragraph R!1. a. i. (1) (a) (i) 1) a)D )DDDFrfK/` ` ` a3Paragraph R!1. a. i. (1) (a) (i) 1) a)D )DDDFrfL:` ` `  a4Paragraph R!1. a. i. (1) (a) (i) 1) a)D )DDDFrfME` ` `  a5Paragraph R!1. a. i. (1) (a) (i) 1) a)D )DDDFrfNP  ` ` ` hhh 2tOpPpQqK\ra6Paragraph R!1. a. i. (1) (a) (i) 1) a)D )DDDFrfO[   a7Paragraph R!1. a. i. (1) (a) (i) 1) a)D )DDDFrfPf  a8Paragraph R!1. a. i. (1) (a) (i) 1) a)D )DDDFrfQq "i~'^5>M\\>>>\}0>03\\\\\\\\\\>>}}}\rryrr>Qygyrr\grrggF3FM\>\\Q\Q3\\33Q3\\\\FF3\QyQQFI3Ic>0cM>>>0>>>>>>\>\3r\r\r\r\r\yyQrQrQrQrQ>3>3>3>3y\\\\\\\\\gQr\\\\gQ\r\r\r\r\yQyQycyQnrQrQrQrQ\\\c\c\>3>\>>>\\ccyQg3gBg>g;g3y\jy\y\\\yrFrFrF\F\F\FccgBg3gM\\\\\\ygcgFgFgF\g>y\\Fg>g\n0\\=(=WddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddNBnnB_\F\\\\\\3;\7;\7>>gg\??n\\pBnnBb\\>g\7"yyyy\njc\}nn\2~KtK$w Koy K{"i~'^ %,77\V%%%7>%7777777777>>>0eOIIOD>OO%*ODaOO>OI>DOOgOOD%%37%07070%777V7777%*77O77055;%;3%%%%%%%%%%%7O0O0O0O0O0aHI0D0D0D0D0%%%%O7O7O7O7O7O7O7O7O7O7O0O7O6O7O7O7>7O0O0O0I0I0I;I0OED0D0D0D0O7O7O7O;O7O;O7%%7%%%7M>;;O7DD,D%D%DO7AO7O7O7O7aOI%I%I%>*>*>*>;D.DD3O7O7O7O7O7O7gOO;D0D0D0O7D%O7>*D%O7E77%%WMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxN(BB(37%07777j7#TT7!#TT7T!%%007n&&Bn77lCTn(nBB(A\\>>n%07\n!"IIIITTenn7TnB@;7>lBBn7"i~'^"(22TN"""28"2222222222888,\HBBH>8HH"&H>XHH8HB8>HH^HH>"".2",2,2,"222N2222"&22H22,006"6."""""""""""2H,H,H,H,H,XAB,>,>,>,>,""""H2H2H2H2H2H2H2H2H2H2H,H2H1H2H2H282H,H,H,B,B,B6B,H?>,>,>,>,H2H2H2H6H2H6H2""2"""2F866H2>>(>">">H2;H2H2H2H2XHB"B"B"8&8&8&86>*>>.H2H2H2H2H2H2^HH6>,>,>,H2>"H28&>"H2?22!!WFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxN$<<$.2",2222`2 LL2 LL2L"",,2d""(-((((((((((---#J:55:2-:::2F::-:5-2::K::2%(#(#(#(((>((((((:((#&&++%(:#:#:#:#:#F45#2#2#2#2#:(:(:(:(:(:(:(:(:(:(:#:(:':(:(:(-(:#:#:#5#5#5+5#:22#2#2#2#:(:(:(:+:(:+:(((8-++:(22 222:(/:(:(:(:(F:555----+2"22%:(:(:(:(:(:(K::+2#2#2#:(2:(-2:(2((W888888888888888888888888888888888888888888888888xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxN00%(#((((M(==(==(=##(P0P((N1=PP00/CC--P#(CP"5555==JPP(=P0.+(-N00P(J7jC:,9Xj\  P6G;XP K2a=5,&a\  P6G;&PL2e=5,&e4  pG;&My.X80,X\  P6G;P Ny.\80,T\4  pG;\O0_=5,%&_*f9 xr G;&XPP:% ,J:\  P6G;JPQH5!,i,5\  P6G;,P\R{,W80,%0W*f9 xr G;XSW!@(#,h@\  P6G;hP\U5hC:,%2Xh*f9 xr G;XXVa$G,',G\  P6G;P :*,*\  P6G;P X- X   PN S-#&a\  P6G;&P#  Federal Communications Commission`}(#DA 971378 #Xj\  P6G;9XP#у  yxdddy Pv3#X\  P6G;P# Before the Federal Communications Commission  yO} Washington, D.C. 20554 X01Í ÍX01Í Í#&a\  P6G;&P#у T  SQ-In the Matter ofThpp)  S)-Petition for Relief of hh@hpp) x` `  hh@hpp)  S-DENVER AREA EDUCATIONALhh@hpp)  S- TELECOMMUNICATIONS CONSORTIUM, INC.,hpp)  S-X` hp x (#%'0*,.8135@8:(>(II."Ԍ S- ` Rx4.` ` In the Rate Order, the Commission developed a highest implicit net fee formula for  S- xdetermining the maximum monthly rate that the operator may charge a programmer for leased access.A@ yOB-ԍ47 C.F.R.  76.970(d).A  S- xSubsequently, in the Second Report, released after our decision in Denver Consortium, the Commission  xzidentified problems with the highest implicit fee formula based on comments of interested parties and  Sd-replaced that formula with an average implicit fee formula.NdX@ {O\-ԍSee Second Report,  13 58.N  S-  THE PETITION FOR RECONSIDERATION ă  S- ` #x5.` ` DAETC requests reconsideration of our decision in Denver Consortium, which denied its  xemergency petition for waiver, on the grounds that this case is indistinguishable from two prior cases in  Sv- xwhich waivers of 47 C.F.R.  76.975(h) were issued.v@ {O- xzԍSee United Broadcasting Corp. v. TCI TKR of South Dade, Inc 9 FCC Rcd 3034 (CSB 1995) and Rifkin/  {O-Narragansett South Florida CATV Limited Partnership, 9 FCC Rcd 3651 (CSB 1995) ("Telemiami cases"). DAETC also argued that in denying its petition  xwe unfairly relied on information to which it was denied access and had no opportunity to rebut. We will  S& -dismiss DAETC's petition for reconsideration of our decision in Denver Consortium.  S - ` x6.` ` DAETC's petition for reconsideration fails to present any information which was not  S - xalready considered in our decision to deny its emergency waiver request. More importantly, in Denver  S - x.Consortium we declined to grant a waiver of Section 76.975(h) of the rules, which if granted would have  x[permitted DAETC to obtain leased access channel without full payment of rates that no longer have any  xapplication and which must now be recalculated under the new average implicit fee formula adopted in  S- xthe Second Report. In this regard, DAETC has acknowledged that a different formula for calculating  xmaximum leased access rates is now applicable and requests that the TCI Companies be required to submit  S- xnew rates under the current rules.F@ {O-ԍSee letter, dated April, 1997, from the president of DAETC to the Commission's acting secretary. The TCI Companies are obligated by the recent revisions of Section  xL76.970 to provide DAETC a schedule of leased access rates that do not exceed rates calculated under the  xnew average implicit fee formula set forth in Section 76.970 of the rules, within fifteen days of any  xrequest from DAETC for such rates. For these reasons, we see no need to revisit the matters decided in  S&-Denver Consortium.aZ&@ yO- xhԍFor those same reasons, it would serve no useful purpose to discuss the substantially different factual circumstances  {Of- xwhich distinguish this case from the circumstances obtaining in the Telemiami cases, in which waivers of 47 C.F.R.  76.975(h) were granted. a  S- ` x7.` ` In Denver Consortium, we based our finding that the TCI Companies had made a prima  S- xfacie showing that their rates were developed in compliance with our rules then in effect on calculations  xisubmitted by the TCI Companies. TCI submitted its calculations with a request that they be withheld from  xpublic inspection pursuant 47 C.F.R.  0.459. The TCI Companies requested such confidential treatment  xMon the grounds that those calculations contain confidential and proprietary material, the disclosure of"< ,>(>(II"  S- xwhich would cause substantial competitive harm to TCI. \@ {Oh- xԍSee Denver Consortium, 10 FCC Rcd, at 13749. The Commission in the Rate Order anticipated a possible need  x;to follow the procedures for treatment of proprietary information where cable operators find it necessary to submit  {O-such information to justify schedules of rates. See Rate Order, 8 FCC Rcd at 5951, n.1314. Since DAETC never made any request pursuant  xto 47 C.F.R.  0.461 to inspect those documents, we reject the notion that our reliance on those documents  xwas unfair to DAETC. In any event, those calculations no longer have any application because of the recent changes to the formula for calculating leased access rates.  S8- THE PETITION FOR RELIEF ă  S- ` Rx8.` ` At the time of the filing of the underlying petition for relief which we now address,  x.DAETC, a nonprofit corporation, provided public affairs programming on leased access channels on the  xbasic tier of seven TCI cable systems in six locations: Baltimore; Boulder and parts of the Denver suburbs;  xportions of suburban Detroit; parts of Los Angeles; Santa Cruz County, California, and some of the  xsuburbs of Hartford, Connecticut. Because DAETC's carriage contracts with the TCI Companies were  xabout to expire, the TCI Companies proposed new leased access rates. DAETC alleges that under new  xrates proposed by the TCI Companies it would be required to commence paying the TCI Companies over  x$240,000 each month in order to continue carriage of its programming. DAETC asserted that it could not  x-afford to pay anything close to the proposed rates and that, absent special relief, it would suffer irreparable injury by being forced to go off the air upon expiration of the contracts.  S0- ` x9.` ` DAETC requested an order from the Commission requiring the TCI Companies to produce  xfor Commission review all documentation purporting to support the proposed leased access rates in order  xto verify whether those rates were calculated correctly under Section 76.970 of the Commission's rules.  S- xDAETC also requested a ruling (a) requiring that it be charged a negative amount (i.e., receive payments  x.from the TCI Companies), equal to the lowest per subscriber fee that the TCI Companies pay to a non xaffiliated programmer on the same tier as its programming, and (b) finding that the contracts then in  xeffect, which were about to expire between DAETC and the TCI Companies, established a market rate  xyin DAETC's services areas. DAETC requested an alternative ruling, in the event it is determined that the  x TCI Companies' rates are consistent with Section 76.970, suspending application of Section 76.970,  xenjoining the TCI Companies from charging rates calculated in accordance with Section 76.970, revising  xthe fee formula to provide that leased access operators are entitled to payments equal to the lowest per  xsubscriber fee paid by the operator to a nonaffiliated programmer on the corresponding tier, barring cable  x/operators from charging rates in excess of prevailing market rates, and finding that DAETC's existing agreements establish a market rate in its service area.  S- ` x10.` ` The TCI Companies filed an opposition to the petition for special relief. @ yOf!- xhԍThe Commission released a Public Notice inviting persons wishing to do so to file comments and reply comments  x<regarding the emergency petition as well as the underlying petition. The opposition of the TCI Companies also  xaddressed the emergency petition. DAETC filed a reply addressing only the TCI Companies' opposition to the emergency petition. The TCI  xCompanies provided information for the record regarding their proposed rates and the methodology of  xtheir calculation, and asserted that their rates complied with the highest implicit fee formula then required  xyby Section 76.970 of the rules. The TCI Companies also described DAETC's programming as consisting  xof two to four hours of taped programming run continuously, twentyfour hours a day, seven days a week,": ,>(>(II "  xexcept that on weekends the programming may include several hours of infomercials. The TCI  x=Companies stated that DAETC's programming was being carried in the seven cable systems pursuant to  xtwo litigation settlement arrangement contracts that were due to expire, thus creating the need for leased access rates developed pursuant to Section 76.970 of the rules.  S8- DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS ă  S- ` x11.` ` We will also dismiss DAETC's petition for relief. In Denver Consortium, we found that  xthe information submitted by the TCI Companies made a prima facie showing that the TCI Companies  xLdeveloped their leased access rates in compliance with the requirements of Section 76.970. In particular,  xwe found that the TCI Companies followed the highest implicit formula methodology initially established  SJ - xin the Rate Order and applicable at the time those rates were developed and the petition was filed.Z J @ {O -ԍSee Denver Consortium, 10 FCC Rcd, at 13749.Z  xjDAETC has submitted nothing in its petition for reconsideration that suggests that our preliminary view  xof the TCI Companies' rates was in error. Futhermore, in view of the fact that the Commission in the  S - x/Second Report adopted an average implicit fee formula for calculating leased access rates, any further  xjreview of the TCI Companies' rates developed under the discontinued highest implicit fee formula would  S - xzserve no useful purpose. \ Z@ {O- xԍSee Second Report, Appendix D, Revised Rules. Furthermore, the issues DAETC attempts to raise in its request  x-for alternative rulings are more appropriately raised in a rulemaking proceeding. In any event, the Commission  {O-rejected DAETC position on those issues in the Rate Order and the Second Report.Ĝ Lastly, we note that the Second Order requires cable operators to provide  xprospective leased access programmers with information pertaining to leased access rates, among other  S8- xthings, within 15 calendar days of the date on which a request for such information is received.@ 8~@ yOV-ԍ47 C.F.R. 76.970(h).@ Now  S- xthat the Second Report has been released, we expect cable operators to follow the outlined procedures therein for responding to requests for leased access rates.  S-1 ORDERING CLAUSES ă  SJ- ` x12.` ` For the foregoing reasons, IT IS ORDERED , pursuant to authority delegated by 0.321  xof the Commission's rules, 47 C.F.R.  0.321, that the petition for reconsideration and the petition for  xrelief filed by Denver Area Educational Telecommunications Consortium, Inc. in File No. CSR 4595L  S- ARE HEREBY DISMISSED.  S- X` hp x (#%'0*,.8135@8: