******************************************************** 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 Jones Intercable, Inc.) ) CSR-4976-A ) For modification of the ) Los Angeles ADI ) MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER Adopted: August 14, 1997 Released: September 12, 1997 By the Deputy Chief, Cable Services Bureau: INTRODUCTION 1. Jones Intercable, Inc., operator of a cable system serving northern Los Angeles County, California ("Intercable") and assigned to the Los Angeles ADI has filed with the Commission a petition requesting modification of the television markets of KRCA(TV), Channel 62, Riverside, California ("KRCA"), KZKI(TV), Channel 30, San Bernardino, California ("KZKI"), and KSCI(TV), Channel 18, San Bernardino, California ("KSCI"), (collectively the "Stations"). Specifically, Intercable requests that the communities of Edwards Air Force Base, Elizabeth Lakes, Green Valley, Lancaster, Los Angeles County, Palmdale, Quartz Hill, Littlerock, Lake Los Angeles, Leonna Valley, and Pearblossom, California (the "Communities") be deleted from the Stations' television markets. Paxson Los Angeles License, Inc., licensee of KZKI filed an opposition, KSLS, Inc., licensee of KSCI filed an opposition, and Fouce Amusement Enterprises Inc., licensee of television station KRCA, filed an opposition. Intercable filed a consolidated reply. BACKGROUND 2. Pursuant to Section 614 of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended by the Television Consumer Protection and Competition Act of 1992 ("1992 Cable 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. 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. The Commission is also directed to consider changes in market areas. Section 614(h)(1)(C) further 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, Section 614(h)(1)(C)(ii) 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; 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 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 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 demonstrated 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. In adopting rules to implement this provision, the Commission indicated that changes requested 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. SUMMARY OF PLEADINGS Intercable Petition 6. In support of its petition, Intercable argues that the Stations should be excluded from carriage on Intercable's cable systems because the Stations fail to satisfy any of the four statutory market modification factors. First, with regard to historic carriage, Intercable asserts that KZKI has never been carried and that KSCI and KRCA have been carried since September, 1993 and June, 1994, respectively, pursuant to the must-carry requirements of the 1992 Cable Act. Intercable further asserts that its carriage of KSCI and KRCA does not outweigh each of those stations' inability to meet the other three statutory factors. 7. Second, with regard to coverage or local service, Intercable asserts that while some of the cable communities at issue are covered by the Stations' predicted Grade B contours, predicted Grade B contour coverage does not definitively evidence a television station's economic market. Intercable states that the signal level of each of the three television stations show that the Stations do not provide a good quality signal to Intercable's principal headend. Intercable states that the Stations should be considered geographically distant from the Communities as Intercable's headend is located 73.5 miles from KRCA's community of license and 56.7 miles from the communities of license of KZKI and KSCI, respectively. Intercable 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. Intercable further argues that the San Gabriel Mountains form a significant natural obstruction that not only impugns the quality of the Stations' signals but also defines Intercable's market as one that is separate and distinct from the rest of the Los Angeles market. Intercable asserts that, in analogous cases, the Commission has recognized natural barriers as a factor which helps delineate a television station's market. Intercable states that, in market modification proceedings, the Commission also considers the nature of the programming provided by the television station at issue. Intercable asserts that the Stations do not provide programming that is focused on the needs and concerns of the cable communities at issue which are located on the opposite side of the San Gabriel Mountains. Intercable asserts that the programming format of each of the Stations does not lend itself to focusing on local concerns because KRCA and KSCI are Asian-language programmers and KZKI is a home shopping network. 8. Third, Intercable asserts that, with regard to the service to the Communities offered by other local television stations and eligible for carriage on Intercable's cable system, local coverage is provided by numerous television stations all of which transmit from a site which is 22 miles closer to Intercable than the transmitter site from which the Stations operate. 9. Finally, Intercable asserts that with regard to viewership levels, the Stations have virtually no audience viewing within the zip codes served by Intercable's cable system. Intercable based its assertion on a survey conducted by Media Strategies which used ratings provided by the Nielsen Ratings Company for the November, 1996 survey period. Opposition of KZKI 10. In opposition, KZKI asserts that it is a local television station which provides a good quality signal to Intercable's headend and that it is entitled to carriage throughout the Los Angeles ADI pursuant to the must-carry provisions of the 1992 Cable Act. While Intercable characterizes KZKI as a home shopping network, KZKI states that its programming combines home shopping services with religious and local affairs programming. With regard to historic carriage, KZKI further asserts that the Commission has stated that a station's failure to establish a history of carriage should not be given great weight in market modification proceedings. KZKI maintains that historic carriage is even less persuasive in this case because prior to 1994 KZKI had been off-the-air for over two years. KZKI asserts that the 1992 Cable Act also provides protection to smaller stations like KZKI from discriminatory signal carriage practices. 11. KZKI argues that, with regard to local service and coverage, Intercable asserts, but does not demonstrate, that KZKI fails to satisfy the local service prong of the statutory test. KZKI asserts that it provides Grade B contour coverage to nine of the 11 cable communities which Intercable seeks to delete from KZKI's television market including the communities of Elizabeth Lake, Green Valley, Lake Los Angeles, Lancaster, Leonna Valley, Littlerock, Los Angeles County, Palmdale, and Pearblossom. KZKI does not provide Garde B contour coverage to the communities of Edwards Air Force Base and Quartz Hill. KZKI argues that Intercable has misrepresented the extent of KZKI's local programming. KZKI asserts that it is providing programming targeted to the needs and interests of a significant segment of subscribers in the cable communities at issue. KZKI states that its programming includes two hours of children's programming each week, two hours of locally originated news programming that provides traffic and weather reports and other topics of interest to residents, and 19 hours of non-entertainment religious programming. KZKI further states that its programming includes broadcasts focusing on the impact of immigration in the area, entertainment features, restaurant reviews of local establishments, a public affairs program "Southern Exposures" providing information of the latest educational, political, and social issues, and a weekly talk show "Talk Town" featuring local cultural and media personalities. KZKI further states that it broadcasts advertisements from local automobile dealers, hair salons, medical doctors and other businesses and offers Chinese language programming to satisfy the interests of the area's Chinese population. KZKI maintains that it is committed to serving the Communities and continuing its local programming efforts. 12. With regard to Intercable's carriage of other local stations, KZKI argues that this criterion does not act as a bar to a station's ADI claim but is a factor which can enhance a station's claim where it can be shown that other local stations do not serve the relevant communities. KZKI asserts that, to do otherwise, would be contrary to the promotion of diversity in programming which is an underlying goal of the 1992 Cable Act. 13. Finally, KZKI asserts that, with regard to viewing patterns, the Commission has found that ratings are of no probative value where a cable operator seeks to delete a new station such as KZKI which is also a "struggling independent station." KZKI further asserts that it is a specialty station that, while it provides a valuable source of diverse programming to cable communities, typically attracts a limited audience. KZKI maintains that Intercable has not demonstrated that exclusion of the Communities from its television market would better effectuate the purposes of the must-carry provisions of the 1992 Cable Act and that Intercable has failed to show that the cable communities are not part of KZKI's television market. Opposition of KSCI 14. In opposition, KSCI argues that Intercable has failed to justify deletion of the cable communities from KSCI's television market. With respect to historical carriage, KSCI asserts that it is carried on Intercable's cable system as well as a number of years on Los Angeles cable systems located further from KSCI than Intercable's system. Specifically, KSCI shows that it has been carried on 23 other Los Angeles cable systems whose headends are located at least 56 miles from KSCI's city of license, San Bernardino, California. 15. KSCI argues that, with regard to local service and coverage, its Grade B contour covers all of the cable communities served by Intercable's principal headend. In fact, KSCI points out that the cable communities of Littlerock and Pearblossom are located within the fringe of KSCI's predicted Grade A contour. KSCI argues that Intercable's emphasis on geographic distance is misleading because Intercable currently carries a slate of Los Angeles stations of comparable or greater distance from Intercable's principal headend as is KSCI. For example, KSCI states that Intercable carries television station KHIZ, an independent station, which is located 68 miles from Intercable's principal headend as compared to KSCI's 56.7 miles. KSCI argues that Intercable's allegation that KSCI's Asian language programming is not geared towards subscribers in the cable communities is without merit. KSCI asserts that it offers award-winning programming to the ethnic communities located in the Los Angeles ADI which includes Korean, Chinese, Asian/Indian/Middle Eastern, and Farsi subscribers and which clearly provides diversity and unique value to the cable communities. 16. KSCI further argues that Intercable's reliance on the statutory factor relating to coverage by other local television stations is misplaced. KSCI asserts that that factor is irrelevant where a station provides Grade B contour coverage to the cable communities at issue. KSCI asserts that, in any event, Intercable has failed to show why the Communities should be removed from KSCI's television market and not from the other Los Angeles stations which are virtually the same distance or more distant from Intercable's headend. 17. Finally, with regard to viewership levels, KSCI argues that the Commission has found that little weight will be given to a station's ratings where a station offers a specialized programming format. KSCI asserts that Nielsen ratings are not as useful in measuring its audience because Nielsen's meters and diaries are distributed to English-speaking households only and therefore do not reflect the true level of KSCI's viewership among its target audience. For example, KSCI points out a 1996 Gallup Korean Viewership Survey found that KSCI's "SportsRap" was the most popular program among Korean households on Saturdays from 5:30 p.m. to 6:00 p.m., a fact which is not reflected in the Nielsen ratings for that time slot. Opposition of KRCA 18. In opposition, KRCA argues that it is an important part of the Los Angeles ADI and that Intercable has failed to prove otherwise. With regard to historical carriage, KRCA asserts that it has been carried on Intercable's cable system since 1994. 19. KRCA asserts that, with regard to coverage or local service, KRCA provides Grade B contour coverage to all but one of the cable communities at issue, namely, Edwards Air Force Base. KRCA argues that Intercable's allegation regarding KRCA's signal strength is irrelevant in a market modification proceeding and that, in any event, KRCA provides a good quality signal to Intercable's principal headend by using a microwave feed. KRCA further argues that Intercable's allegation that the San Gabriel Mountains form a natural barrier is disingenuous at best because Intercable failed to state that all the Los Angeles stations which it carries are separated from the Communities by the same mountain range. KRCA further argues that Intercable incorrectly calculated the geographic distance between KRCA's city of license and Intercable's headend as being 73.5 miles distant when, in fact, KRCA's city of license is 59 miles distant, and only 34.7 miles distant using geographical coordinates. KRCA points out that Intercable carries or has carried other Los Angeles stations that are licensed to the cities of Corona and Santa Ana, respectively, that are as distant as KRCA. KRCA argues that its Asian-language programming has been found by the Commission to be of interest to Asian subscribers in the Los Angeles market. KRCA asserts that the Asian population is a growing segment of the communities served by Intercable's cable system and that, according to the 1990 Census, the community in which Intercable's system is located is at least 4% Asian. KRCA states that there are only two Asian-language stations carried by Intercable both of which are the subject of Intercable's market modification request which, if granted, would eliminate all sources of Asian-language programming. 20. KRCA argues that, with regard to the service to the Communities offered by other local television stations and eligible for carriage on Intercable's systems, Intercable provides no evidence that other Los Angeles stations broadcast programming that specifically focuses on the needs and interests of the cable communities at issue. KRCA further argues that this statutory factor should not be given great weight where a cable operator seeks to delete communities from a station's television market. 21. Finally, KRCA argues that, with respect to viewership levels, Intercable's reliance on an audience viewing study conducted by Media Strategies is misplaced because the study appears to be based on the average viewing of all subscribers residing in the Communities and not community-community viewing patterns, as is required by the Commission. KRCA further argues that the methodology utilized to conduct the study is particularly unrepresentative of KRCA's viewers among the ethnic segments of the Los Angeles ADI. Moreover, KRCA further argues that it is a specialty station that, while it provides a valuable source of diverse programming to cable communities, typically attracts a limited audience. Intercable's Consolidated Reply 22. In its consolidated reply, Intercable asserts that the Stations, contrary to their claims, have failed to show a nexus between the respective broadcast station and the cable communities at issue. Intercable asserts that the ADI process allows the Commission to consider factors other than the presence of a station within a particular ADI in order to more accurately determine that station's market. Intercable argues that the Stations fail to provide a usable off-air signal or local service to the Communities, fail to attract a reportable audience, and that Intercable carries other local television stations which provide local news and sporting events. Intercable further argues that the Stations fail to show that they each place an actual Grade B contour over the cable communities at issue. Intercable argues that KZKI proffers an unduly narrow view of the Commission's authority in market modification proceedings which, if followed, would prevent a television station from ever being deleted from the ADI to which it is assigned. Intercable further argues that KZKI has never been carried on Intercable's cable system. With regard to KRCA and KSCI, Intercable argues that those stations failed to state that their transmitter site is 22 miles more distant from Intercable than the transmitter site of the other Los Angeles stations which Intercable carries. 23. Intercable argues that the Stations do not provide programming specifically tailored to the Communities. Intercable asserts that the Stations provide no evidence that the subscribers to which their programming is targeted reside in the cable communities at issue. With regard to viewing patterns, Intercable asserts that the Stations did not demonstrate that each has a reportable viewing audience, a factor which should be given evidentiary weight by the Commission in this proceeding as an indicator of the scope of the Stations' markets. DISCUSSION 24. Based on our analysis of the evidence relating to the four statutory and other relevant factors, we will grant, in part, and deny, in part, Intercable's market modification request. With regard to KZKI, we grant Intercable's petition with respect to the cable communities of Edwards Air Force Base and Quartz Hill and deny Intercable's petition with respect to the remaining nine communities. With regard to KSCI and to KRCA, we wholly deny Intercable's petition. 25. The cable television mandatory broadcast signal carriage rules were adopted as part of the 1992 Cable Act. The legislative history of the 1992 Cable Act indicates that the use of ADI market areas is intended "to ensure that television stations be carried in the areas which they service 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." ADI Statutory Factors 26. Statutory factor one is "whether the station, or other stations located in the same area, has been historically carried on the cable system or systems within such community." (factor I). Statutory factor two is "whether the television station provides coverage or other local service to such community." (factor II) This factor incorporates both technical service and programming service as well as geography (mileage and topographical features). With respect to technical service, the Commission has stated in its Report and Order in MM Docket 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 in terms of mileage." Statutory factor three is "whether any other television station that is eligible to be carried by a cable system in such a community in fulfillment of the requirements of this section provides news coverage of issues of concern to such community." (factor III). 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." (factor IV) We now turn to the four part market modification analysis with respect to each television station at issue. KZKI 27. KZKI has no history of carriage in the relevant cable communities. While the lack of historic carriage favors excluding the Communities from the market of KZKI, it is not outcome determinative, particularly in the instant case where the station recently resumed broadcasting after a two year absence. We find that factor I will be given little weight in our determination of Intercable's market modification request with respect to KZKI. We further find that KZKI provides Grade B contour coverage to all of the cable communities except for the communities of Edwards Air Force Base and Quartz Hill. The evidence with respect to KZKI's service to the nine cable communities to which it provides Grade B contour coverage weighs against granting Intercable's petition with respect to those communities. The evidence with respect to the two communities of Edwards Air Force Base and Quartz Hill weighs in favor of the requested action. With regard to geographic distance, KZKI does not dispute Intercable's allegation concerning distance but argues that distance is irrelevant in this proceeding because KZKI is committed to providing a good quality signal to Intercable's headend. We conclude that the geographic distance should not be accorded significant evidentiary weight where KZKI provides a Grade B contour and should be considered in favor of deletion where KZKI does not provide Grade B contour coverage. 28. With regard to factor III, Intercable asserts, but does not demonstrate, that other local television stations which it carries provide news and local event programming targeted to the cable communities. We have stated that where a cable operator seeks to delete a stations' 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. In this case, KZKI provides coverage to nine of the cable communities at issue so we will give less weight to factor III in considering Intercable's request to delete those communities. With respect to factor IV, we find that KZKI has no reportable audience share in the cable communities in question but we have considered other relevant factors. We first note that KZKI, a home shopping network and Asian-language programmer, is a specialty station. The Commission has found that specialty stations typically attract limited audiences. We note that KZKI provided examples of its foreign-language programming, advertisements from local businesses, and public affairs programming to show that it focused on the needs and interests of the Asian community located in Los Angeles. It is unclear how much of the KZKI's public affairs programming is focused on the cable communities at issue. For instance, KZKI introduced evidence that its public affairs program "Southern Exposures" focuses on issues of interest to the San Bernardino area. 29. We have carefully considered the statutory factors as well as other relevant information. We find that KZKI has no history of carriage on Intercable's cable system (factor I) but provides coverage and local service to nine of the 11 cable communities at issue (factor II) and that it is a specialized station which attracts a limited audience but which the Commission has found can "offer a desirable diversity of programming." (factor IV) Intercable's channel line-up shows that it carries other local television stations on its cable system serving the Communities but does not include program listings. Factors II and IV weigh against the requested action while Factors I and III weigh in favor of deletion with respect to the cable communities for which KZKI does not provide coverage. The evidence, on balance, persuades us to deny Intercable's petition with respect to the cable communities of Elizabeth Lake, Green Valley, Lake Los Angeles, Lancaster, Leonna Valley, Littlerock, Los Angeles County, Palmdale, and Pearblossom. However, the lack of coverage and other relevant factors persuade us that the evidence with regard to the communities of Edwards Air Force Base and Quartz Hill weighs in favor of Intercable's request with respect to those communities. KSCI 30. KSCI has shown that it has a history of carriage on Intercable's cable system and has been carried by Intercable since 1993. (factor I) KSCI has also shown that it provides Grade B contour coverage to the cable communities at issue. (factor II) With respect to geographic distance, we find that Intercable carries a television station, KHIZ, an independent station, that is 11 miles more distant from Intercable's headend than KSCI. We further find that, with respect to factor III, Intercable's channel line-up shows that it carries other local stations but Intercable did not demonstrate that those stations offer programming focused on the needs and interests of the cable communities at issue. With regard to viewership ratings, we find that KSCI's assertion with respect to the methodology employed to survey the Los Angeles market raises the issue of whether viewing by ethnic groups has been underrepresented in the survey. The evidence shows that KSCI has a history of carriage, places a predicted Grade B contour over the Communities, and is a specialty station. We are persuaded by the evidentiary weight of these factors to deny Intercable's request with respect to KSCI. KRCA 31. We find that KRCA has a history of carriage on Intercable's cable system and has been carried by Intercable since 1994. (factor I) We take note of KRCA's showing that Intercable carries a Los Angeles station, KVEA, whose city of license is in the same area as KRCA's city of license. We further find that KRCA has shown that it provides Grade B contour coverage to all of the cable communities at issue with the exception of Edwards Air Force Base (factor II). With regard to Intercable's allegation that the San Gabriel Mountains form a natural barrier between itself and KRCA, we find that Intercable has not shown a distinction between KRCA, or the other television stations at issue, and other Los Angeles stations which Intercable carries and which are also separated by the same mountain range. With regard to geographic distance, we find that the actual distance between KRCA and Intercable's principal headend is in dispute. With regard to factor III, we find that Intercable has failed to show that the local stations which it carries provide news and information focused on the needs and interests of the cable communities at issue. 32. We further find that KRCA is a specialty station which broadcasts programs in Korean, Mandarin, Vietnamese, and Tagalog, as well as English, and serves a limited audience within the Los Angeles ADI. KRCA introduces evidence to show that the Asian or Pacific Islander population of Palmdale, the community in which Intercable's headend is located, was found to be 6% in 1996 and projected to be 7% by the year 2000. KRCA shows that the Asian population is a growing segment of the communities served by Intercable's cable system and that, according to the 1990 Census, the community in which Intercable's system is located is at least 4% Asian. 33. With regard to KRCA, we find that the evidence with respect to its historic carriage on Intercable's cable system serving the Communities, Grade B contour coverage and local programming, and the specialized nature of its programming persuades us to deny Intercable's market modification request with regard to all of the cable communities at issue. ORDERING CLAUSES 34. Accordingly, IT IS ORDERED that, pursuant to 614 of the Communications Act, as amended, 47 U.S.C. 534, and Section 76.59 of the Commission's rules, 47 C.F.R. 76.59, the Petition for Special Relief (CSR-4976-A) filed by Jones Intercable, Inc. against television broadcast station KZKI(TV) IS DENIED with respect to the cable communities of Elizabeth Lakes, Green Valley, Lancaster, Los Angeles County, Palmdale, Littlerock, Lake Los Angeles, Leonna Valley, and Pearblossom, California and IS GRANTED with respect to the cable communities of Edwards Air Force Base and Quartz Hill. 35. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Intercable's petition against television broadcast station KSCI(TV) IS DENIED with respect to the cable communities of Edwards Air Force Base, Elizabeth Lakes, Green Valley, Lancaster, Los Angeles County, Palmdale, Quartz Hill, Littlerock, Lake Los Angeles, Leonna Valley, and Pearblossom, California. 36. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Intercable's petition against television broadcast station KRCA(TV) IS DENIED with respect to the cable communities of Edwards Air Force Base, Elizabeth Lakes, Green Valley, Lancaster, Los Angeles County, Palmdale, Quartz Hill, Littlerock, Lake Los Angeles, Leonna Valley, and Pearblossom, California. 37. This action is taken pursuant to authority delegated by Section 0.321 of the Commission's rules, 47 C.F.R. 0.321. FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION William H. Johnson Deputy Chief, Cable Services Bureau