WPCb 2MB%RK Z3|aTimes New RomanTimes New Roman Bold P6G;P"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 K<3|a "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$CWxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxNHxxH\dDXddddd8@d<@d<DDXXdDDxddzHxxHvppDXd<"dxtldpxxdTimes New RomanTimes New Roman BoldTimes New Roman Italic P6G;\k;vP2> <pXKB Times New RomanTimes New Roman BoldTimes New Roman Italicry.X80,IX\  P6G;Ps7jC:,+Xj\  P6G;XPt2a=5,0&a\  P6G;&P2e=5,D&e4  pG;&d|DdpL|Dd~4ddC$CWxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxNHxxH\dDXddddd8@d<@d<DDXXdDDxddzHxxHvppDXd<"dxtldpxxd"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\ S' I. A. 1. a.(1)(a) i) a) 1. 1. 1. a.(1)(a) i) a)#Xj\  P6G;+XP##&a\  P6G;0&P#2 Kp vp1k"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\a8DocumentgDocument Style StyleXX` `  ` a4DocumentgDocument Style Style . a6DocumentgDocument Style Style GX  28k>vNta5DocumentgDocument Style Style }X(# a2DocumentgDocument Style Style<o   ?  A.  a7DocumentgDocument Style StyleyXX` ` (#` BibliogrphyBibliography:X (# 2j   Na1Right ParRight-Aligned Paragraph Numbers:`S@ I.  X(# a2Right ParRight-Aligned Paragraph Numbers C @` A. ` ` (#` a3DocumentgDocument Style Style B b  ?  1.  a3Right ParRight-Aligned Paragraph Numbers L! ` ` @P 1. ` `  (# 28 , ha4Right ParRight-Aligned Paragraph Numbers Uj` `  @ a. ` (# a5Right ParRight-Aligned Paragraph Numbers _o` `  @h(1)  hh#(#h a6Right ParRight-Aligned Paragraph Numbersh` `  hh#@$(a) hh#((# a7Right ParRight-Aligned Paragraph NumberspfJ` `  hh#(@*i) (h-(# 2jCCa8Right ParRight-Aligned Paragraph NumbersyW"3!` `  hh#(-@p/a) -pp2(#p Tech InitInitialize Technical Style. k I. A. 1. a.(1)(a) i) a) 1 .1 .1 .1 .1 .1 .1 .1 Technicala1DocumentgDocument Style Style\s0  zN8F I. ׃  a5TechnicalTechnical Document Style)WD (1) . 2NSa6TechnicalTechnical Document Style)D (a) . a2TechnicalTechnical Document Style<6  ?  A.   a3TechnicalTechnical Document Style9Wg  2  1.   a4TechnicalTechnical Document Style8bv{ 2  a.   2!B3N a1TechnicalTechnical Document StyleF!<  ?  I.   a7TechnicalTechnical Document Style(@D i) . a8TechnicalTechnical Document Style(D a) . Doc InitInitialize Document Stylez   0*0*0*  I. A. 1. a.(1)(a) i) a) I. 1. A. a.(1)(a) i) a)Documentg2%'!e%&&PleadingHeader for Numbered Pleading PaperE!n    X X` hp x (#%'0*,.8135@8:(5)7*9+;toc 8toc 8(` hp x (#44` hp x (#toc 9toc 9)` hp x (#44` hp x (#index 1index 1*` hp x (#4 4 ` hp x (#index 2index 2+` hp x (#4 4 ` hp x (#2B,I>-g@.+A/Atoatoa,` hp x (#` hp x (#captioncaption-;1#XP\  P6QXP##C\  P6QP#_Equation Caption_Equation Caption.11#XP\  P6QXP##C\  P6QP#endnote referenceendnote reference/44#XP\  P6QXP##C\  P6QP#2D0B1cC2}C3_Dfootnote referencefootnote reference04#XP\  P6QXP#head1 #1'd#2p}wC@ #a1Paragraph R!1. a. i. (1) (a) (i) 1) a)D )DDDFrf2$ a2Paragraph R!1. a. i. (1) (a) (i) 1) a)D )DDDFrf3/` ` ` 2G4E5E6JF7Fa3Paragraph R!1. a. i. (1) (a) (i) 1) a)D )DDDFrf4:` ` `  a4Paragraph R!1. a. i. (1) (a) (i) 1) a)D )DDDFrf5E` ` `  a5Paragraph R!1. a. i. (1) (a) (i) 1) a)D )DDDFrf6P  ` ` ` hhh a6Paragraph R!1. a. i. (1) (a) (i) 1) a)D )DDDFrf7[   2M8G9HKbIKKa7Paragraph R!1. a. i. (1) (a) (i) 1) a)D )DDDFrf8f  a8Paragraph R!1. a. i. (1) (a) (i) 1) a)D )DDDFrf9q "i~'^#)0<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""/>/>/>/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+SS8-8WuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxNM\\>>>\}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\\y{,W80,%W*f9 xr G;Xzy.\80, {\4  pG;7nC:,Xn4  pG;X"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>lBBn7ry.X80,IX\  P6G;Ps7jC:,+Xj\  P6G;XP t2a=5,0&a\  P6G;&P u2e=5,D&e4  pG;&vW!@(#,9h@\  P6G;hPwH5!,,5\  P6G;,P\x5hC:,%Xh*f9 xr G;XX\y{,W80,%W*f9 xr G;Xzy.\80, {\4  pG;{7nC:,Xn4  pG;XP:% ,1J:\  P6G;JP\0_=5,% &_*f9 xr G;&X2b S- X   0 S-  Federal Communications Commission`}(#DA 972279 ă  yxdddy  ]#.=7 Ԋ ]#.=7 v3 #X\  P6G;IP#Before the Federal Communications Commission  yO} Washington, D.C. 20554 #&a\  P6G;0&P#у In re:R) R)  S-North Texas CableVision, Ltd.,R)hppCSR5033A Post CableVision of Texas, L.P., andR) TWFanch One Co.R) R) R) For Modification of the ADIR) of KINZ (TV), Arlington, TexasR) R)  S` -  MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER TP  S-X` hp x (#%'0*,.8135@8:-v. North Texas CableComm, Ltd., DA 971523 (Cab. Serv. Bur. rel. July 21, 1997). Thus KINZ argues  xthat its status as a new market entrant requires that its lack of historical carriage be given little weight in  Sp-this proceeding.}pp m {O-ԍOpposition at 20 citing Time Warner Cable Avenal, 11 FCC Rcd 8047, 8054 (1996).}  S - ` x13.` ` KINZ argues that, with regard to local service and coverage, Congress did not intend  xGrade B contour coverage to be the sole measure of a station's local coverage, particularly where a station  xopts to upgrade its signal quality. KINZ states that its Grade B contour covers at least one of the  xycommunities at issue and that the remaining communities are on the fringe of its Grade B contour. KINZ  xnotes that CableVision carries another station, KTXA, whose Grade B contour is virtually identical to that  SX- xof KINZ.X m {O-ԍOpposition at Attachment A (contour map of KINZ) cf. Exhibit 2 (contour map of KTXA). KINZ argues that geographic distance is a factor that Congress rejected in favor of ADIwide  xcarriage of a television station. KINZ further argues that its transmitter site is located within 2 miles of  S- xthe transmitters of other television stations carried by CableVision.A m yO<-ԍOpposition at Exhibit 1. A KINZ's Chief Engineer affirms that  xKINZ transmits from Cedar Hill, Texas, the transmitter site for nine other television stations carried by  S- xCableVision.$m {O|!- xԍId. CableVision carries commercial television stations KDAF, KDFITV, KDFWTV, KDTXTV, KTVT, KTXA, KXASTV, WFAATV, and KXTXTV which transmit from Cedar Hill, Texas. With regard to local programming, KINZ asserts that it airs threeandonehalf hours of  xzchildren's programming and oneandonehalf hours of local news and public affairs programming on a  xjweekly basis, and that it also broadcasts program length local presentations from 8:00 a.m. to 10:00 p.m.  S@- xdaily.r@~m yO^&-ԍAffidavit of Kent Matthew, Chief Engineer, KINZ. Opposition at Exhibit 1.r KINZ further asserts that through programs such as "Metroplex Views" which airs from 7:30 a.m.  xMto 8:00 a.m. twice a week and "Texas Financial News" which airs 8:30 a.m. to 9:00 a.m. once a week,",`(`(88b"  S- xthe station provides a valuable outlet for local advertisers, businesses, and community organizations.1m {Oh-ԍId.1  xzKINZ further asserts that it is committed to providing an expanded menu of local programming in the future.  S`- ` x14.` ` With regard to carriage by other local stations, KINZ argues that a cable system's carriage  x[of other stations provides no basis for deleting communities from a particular station's television market.  xLKINZ states that this statutory factor was intended to be used as an enhancement criterion and does not  S-act as a bar to a station's mustcarry rights.Zm {O -ԍOpposition at 2627 citing, inter alia, Kansas City Cable Partners, 10 FCC Rcd 3809, n. 14.ĕ  S- ` x15.` ` Finally, KINZ asserts that, with regard to viewing patterns, it has not had the opportunity  xto develop a substantial viewership base. KINZ states that the Commission has recognized that it can take  SH - xas long as three years for a new television station to establish viewing patterns.xH m {O-ԍOpposition at 27 citing DeSoto Broadcasting, 10 FCC Rcd 4491, 4494 (1995).x KINZ further states that  xits lack of viewership also can be attributed to the difficulties the station has experienced obtaining  xcarriage. KINZ asserts that it is a specialty station that offers a desirable diversity of programming but attracts a limited audience.  S - ` x16.` ` In reply, CableVision maintains that KINZ misstates the rules governing market  x{modification proceedings and that it has failed to rebut CableVision's evidentiary showing that the  xCommunities should be deleted from KINZ's television market. CableVision asserts that it has  x[demonstrated that KINZ lacks a history of carriage, is geographically distant, fails to provide meaningful  xservice or Grade B contour coverage to all but one of the Communities, and is not viewed offtheair by  xresidents of the cable communities. CableVision further asserts that KINZ's comparison of its status with  xthat of KTXA, a station which CableVision currently carries, is inappropriate because KTXA provides an offair signal of good quality.  S- ` Cx17.` ` CableVision argues that KINZ's lack of a local nexus with the communities at issue  xmakes the Communities "so far removed from the station that it cannot be deemed part of the station's  S- xmarket."r~m {O-ԍReply at 4 citing H.R. Rep. No. 268, 102d Cong., 2d Sess. 97 (1992).r Thus, CableVision asserts that the Commission's market modification process "allows stations  S- x\to add or delete communities from their ADI to reflect their true marketplace."m {OP -ԍId. at 45 citing DeSoto Broadcasting, Inc., 10 FCC Rcd 2291 at  13 (1995). CableVision further  xasserts that KINZ's suggestion that smaller, independent stations are guaranteed the right to carriage throughout its ADI is without legal basis.  S-( DISCUSSION ă  S- ` x18.` ` Based on our analysis of the evidence relating to the four statutory and other relevant  xfactors, we will deny CableVision's petition to delete the Communities from KINZ's television market.  xWe have given greater weight to KINZ's Grade B contour and Cablevision's carriage of other stations in"`,`(`(88"  xthe same area while KINZ's lack of historical carriage and viewership have been given less weight. We  xtake special note of CableVision's carriage of nine other television stations which transmit from virtual the same site as KINZ in Cedar Hill, Texas.  S`- ` #x19.` ` The cable television mandatory broadcast signal carriage rules were adopted as part of the  x1992 Cable Act. The legislative history of the 1992 Cable Act indicates that the use of ADI market areas  xis intended "to ensure that television stations be carried in the areas which they service and which form  S- xtheir economic market."^m yOP-ԍH.R. Rep. No. 102628, 102d Cong., 2d Sess. 97 (1992).^ The Act specifically provided that the Commission was to consider adding  xadditional communities or excluding communities from the markets of television stations to "better  S- xeffectuate the purposes" of the mandatory carriage requirements.=Xm yO -ԍ47 U.S.C. 534(h).= In acting on such requests, the  xCommission was instructed to "afford particular attention to the value of localism, taking into account four  SH - xLspecified statutory factors." These factors, however, were "not intended to be exclusive."^H m yO-ԍH.R. Rep. No. 102628, 102d Cong., 2d Sess. 97 (1992).^ The market  xkmodification provisions of 614(h) are said, in the legislative history, to "reflect a recognition that the  xMCommission may conclude that a community within a station's ADI may be so far removed from the  S - xstation that it cannot be deemed part of the station's market."1 xm {O-ԍId.1 When viewed against this framework, and  xconsidering all of the relevant factual circumstances in the record, we believe that CableVision's deletion  xpetition does not appear to be a legitimate request to redraw ADI boundaries to make them congruous with  xOmarket realities. We do not believe that the requested exclusion of the communities served by  xCableVision's cable system from the market of KINZ will better effectuate the purposes of the mustcarry statutory provisions.  S- ` ax20.` ` We now turn to the fourpart market modification analysis. Statutory factor one is  x."whether the station, or other stations located in the same area, has been historically carried on the cable  xsystem or systems within such community." KINZ, operating as Channel 68 assigned to the DallasFort  xWorth ADI, has no history of carriage on CableVision's cable system serving the Communities. KINZ  x=however has been operating for only eight months and has not had an opportunity to establish a history  xof carriage in the ADI. While in general the lack of historic carriage favors excluding the cable  xNcommunities from KINZ's television market, that factor is not outcome determinative in a market  xmodification proceeding, particularly in the instant case where the station has recently begun broadcast  xMoperations. In further consideration of this factor, CableVision's carriage of nine other stations on its  xsystem serving the Communities which transmit from the same transmitter site as KINZ has significant weight in this proceeding.  S- ` Qx21.` ` Statutory factor two is "whether the television station provides coverage or other local  xLservice to such community." This factor incorporates both technical service and programming service as  xwell as geography (mileage and topographical features). With regard to technical service, the Commission  S`- xhas stated in its Report and Order in MM Docket 92259 that "to show that the station provides coverage  xLor other local service to the cable communities, parties may demonstrate that the station places at least a": ,`(`(88 "  S- xGrade B coverage contour over the cable communities, or is located close in terms of mileage."?m yOh-ԍ8 FCC Rcd at 29762977.? In the  xyabsence of other determinative market facts (i.e., where the other aspects of the four statutory factors by  xthemselves define the market, where there is no clear proof that the contour fails to reflect actual coverage,  xor where there are no terrain obstacles), Grade B contours have been found to be an efficient tool to adjust  S`- xmarket boundaries.`Xm {OX-ԍSee, e.g., CableVision Systems Corp. (NY ADI Market), FCC 97285 (rel. August 13, 1997). We find that KINZ places a Grade B contour over one community at issue, namely,  S8-Glen Rose.8m yO -ԍBoth CableVision and KINZ state that the community of Glen Rose is covered by KINZ's Grade B contour.  S- ` `x22.` ` With regard to the remaining communities for which KINZ does not evidence Grade B  xjcontour coverage, ordinarily we might have concluded that they were too distant to be considered part of  xlKINZ's television market. In the instant case, however, we have taken special notice of and given  xsignificant weight to CableVision's carriage of nine other television stations which transmit from the same  xtransmitter site as KINZ. One of the nine stations, KTXA, is licensed to the same city as KINZ, i.e.,  S - x=Arlington, Texas. zm yO:-ԍOf the remaining eight stations, six are licensed to Dallas, Texas and two are licensed to Fort Worth. We further note that KTXA has a Grade B contour which is substantially similar to  S - x.that of KINZ with regard to the cable communities at issue.J! m {O-ԍSee Opposition at Exhibit 2.J We find that CableVision's carriage of the  xnine television stations, in general, and its carriage of KTXA, in particular, undermines its claim that the  S -Communities are not part of the same economic market for broadcast television purposes.  0  SX- ` x23.` ` With regard to geographic distance, we find that the distances ranging from 50 to 73 miles  xserve to attenuate the KINZ's connection to the cable communities. CableVision argues that the  S- xgeographic distances should be given significant weight in this proceeding. We further find that the  xsignificance of geographic distance can be mitigated by other factors such as the carriage of similarly  S- xsituated television stations. Wi th regard to programming service, KINZ has not demonstrated that its  xprogramming is focused on the interests of the residents of the communities at issue. For example, KINZ  xcites its program "Texas Financial News" which may be of general interest to subscribers but fails to show  xthat this program is of local interest. KINZ states that it is dedicated to providing local programming in  xthe future although it does not elaborate upon its plans or cite examples of programming commitments  xwhich are tailored to the interests of the Communities. We find that KINZ's programming is currently insufficient to establish a specific programming nexus to the relevant cable communities.  Sx- ` x24.` ` Statutory factor three is "whether any other television station that is eligible to be carried  xby a cable system in such a community in fulfillment of the requirements of this section provides news  xLcoverage of issues of concern to such community." Carriage of other local stations, in particular, may be  xLused as an enhancement factor to support a cable operator's deletion request when other evidence shows  x>the communities at issue to be outside of the station's market. In the instant case, however, the local  xstations that CableVision claims provide local programming are from the same area as KINZ. Thus, if  xanything, CableVision's carriage of these other local stations provides support for the proposition that the"!,`(`(88"  xareas in question are part of KINZ's market rather than evidence that local service is provided by stations from other communities.  S- ` ox25.` ` Statutory factor four is "evidence of viewing patterns in cable and noncable households  xwithin the areas served by the cable system or systems in such community." KINZ has no significant  x\reported audience share in the cable communities in question. We note that KINZ is a relatively new  x/station, classifies itself as a specialty station and asserts that ratings are of no probative value in this  S- xMproceeding. The Commission has stated that it may take as long as 3 years for a television station to  S- xestablish viewing patterns.\"m {O( -ԍDeSoto Broadcasting, Inc., 10 FCC Rcd at 4494.\ KINZ's lack of audience share is not outcome determinative and, because it is a new station, will be given little weight in this proceeding.  SH - ` x26.` ` We have carefully considered the statutory factors as well as other relevant information.  x.KINZ's status as a new market entrant and a specialty programmer persuade us that factors I (historical  xcarriage) and IV (viewership) provide little support for the requested deletion of the communities from  xKINZ's television market. We further find that the evidence with respect to factor II (coverage or local  x[service) weighs against granting CableVision's deletion request. Finally, CableVision's carriage of KTXA  xand of the other stations transmitting from virtually the same site as KINZ provides support under factor I (historical carriage) for denying Cablevision's petition with respect to the cable communities at issue.  S-1 ORDERING CLAUSES  S- ` Qx 27.` ` Accordingly, IT IS ORDERED that, pursuant to  614 of the Communications Act, as  xamended, 47 U.S.C.  534, and Section 76.59 of the Commission's rules, 47 C.F.R.  76.59, the Petition  xfor Special Relief (CSR5033A) filed by North Texas CableVision, Ltd., Post CableVision of Texas, L.P., and TWFanch One, Co. IS DENIED.  S- ` _x28.` ` This action is taken pursuant to authority delegated by Section 0.321 of the Commission's rules, 47 C.F.R.  0.321. x` `  hh@FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION  S-x` `  hh@William H. Johnson  xx 0(#(#X x` `  hh@Deputy Chief, Cable Services Bureau