******************************************************** 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: ) ) Paxson Atlanta License, Inc. ) CSR-5129-M ) vs. ) ) Brenmor Cable Partners, L.P. ) ) Request for Mandatory Carriage ) of Television Station WTLK-TV, ) Rome, Georgia ) ) Brenmor Cable Partners, L.P. ) CSR-5131-A ) For Modification of the ADI of ) Station WTLK-TV ) MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER Adopted: February 17, 1998 Released: February 24, 1998 By the Deputy Chief, Cable Services Bureau: INTRODUCTION 1. Paxson Atlanta License, Inc. ("Paxson"), licensee of Station WTLK-TV (Ind., Channel 14), Rome Georgia, filed the above-captioned signal carriage complaint (CSR-5129-M) against Brenmor Cable Partners, L.P., a California Limited Partnership d/b/a InterMedia ("InterMedia"), operator of a cable television system serving Athens, Georgia and surrounding communities. Rome, WTLK-TV's city of license, and the subject communities served by InterMedia's cable systems are located within the Atlanta, Georgia "area of dominant influence" ("ADI"). InterMedia opposed Paxson's complaint and Paxson filed a reply. In addition, InterMedia also filed the above-captioned petition (CSR-5131-A) to modify the television market of WTLK-TV in order to exclude Athens and surrounding communities from the station's market. Paxson opposed the petition and InterMedia filed a reply. We are consolidating these cases for processing in order to determine the signal carriage rights of WTLK-TV in the communities served by InterMedia. 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 No. 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)(l)(C) 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 in 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 No. 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 demon- strated 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. 6. As for deletions of communities from a station's market, the legislative history of this provision indicates that: The provisions of [this subsection] 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. It is not the Committee's intention that these provisions be used by cable systems to manipulate their carriage obligations to avoid compliance with the objectives of this section. Further, this section is not intended to permit a cable system to discriminate among several stations licensed to the same community. Unless a cable system can point to particularized evidence that its community is not part of one station's market, it should not be permitted to single out individual stations serving the same area and request that the cable system's community be deleted from the station's television market. 7. In adopting rules to implement this provision, the Commission indicated that requested changes 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. The rules further provide, in accordance with the requirements of the 1992 Cable Act, that a station not be deleted from carriage during the pendency of an ADI change request. ARGUMENTS OF THE PARTIES Signal Carriage Complaint (CSR-5129-M) 8. Paxson states that WTLK-TV's city of license and the communities that InterMedia serves are all located within the Atlanta ADI, and therefore WTLK-TV is entitled to carriage on InterMedia's cable systems. Paxson further states that pursuant to a "Mandatory Carriage Entry and Testing Agreement" entered into with InterMedia, Paxson conducted signal testing and installed the requisite amplification and antenna array in order to commence delivery of a good quality signal. Paxson states that it was later informed by InterMedia that WTLK-TV was not eligible for carriage on its cable systems because of the Commission's decision in MediaOne, Inc. in which the Commission determined that WTLK-TV and WNGM-TV, another station carried by InterMedia, were both affiliates of the "inTV" network, and carriage of both stations was not required because of signal duplication. Paxson notes that it later informed InterMedia that WNGM-TV was no longer airing programming from the "inTV" network, and thus WTLK-TV was eligible for carriage on its cable systems. InterMedia then filed a Petition for Special Relief to request that WTLK-TV's television market be modified to exclude the subject cable communities. Paxson then filed the instant signal carriage complaint. 9. In response, InterMedia states that WTLK-TV is geographically remote from InterMedia's cable systems because the cable communities involved are located approximately 93 miles from Rome, WTLK-TV's city of license. In addition, InterMedia also notes that Rome is more than 107 miles from InterMedia's headend sites in Athens and Oconee County. InterMedia also states that WTLK-TV does not provide a Grade B coverage signal to any of the communities served by InterMedia's cable systems. InterMedia also points out that the Commission has previously issued orders modifying WTLK-TV's television market in order to exclude communities that are located even closer to Rome than those at issue in the matter. InterMedia also argues that even though Paxson states that WNGM-TV is no longer affiliated with "inTV," a reading of WNGM-TV's programming schedule reveals that both stations air more than 15 hours per week of overlapping programming emanating for the same "entity" -- Paxson. Thus, according to InterMedia, the Commission's signal duplication rule still applies and WTLK-TV's petition should be dismissed. 10. Paxson contends in reply that under the must carry rules, WTLK-TV is entitled to carriage because it satisfies the statutory definition of a "qualified local commercial television station." Paxson argues that InterMedia's claims that it need not carry WTLK-TV based on the station's signal contour and its distance from InterMedia's systems are irrelevant to Paxson's must carry complaint. Similarly, Paxson contends that InterMedia's arguments regarding the signal duplication rule do not provide a basis for InterMedia to deny carriage to WTLK-TV. Paxson argues that while it makes certain programming decisions for both WTLK-TV and WNGM-TV, this does not, in and of itself, implicate the signal duplication rule. According to Paxson, while WTLK-TV obtains its programming from Paxson-owned "inTV" and WNGM-TV obtains its programming from "The Infomall," also owned by Paxson, each programming source provides different programming and each utilizes distinct distribution methods. Thus, Paxson argues that its relationship with each of the programming sources does not qualify Paxson as a network under the must carry rules. Moreover, Paxson argues, although both programming sources provide infomercial-based programming, similarity in format likewise does not implicate the signal duplication rule. Market Modification Petition (CSR-5131-A) 11. InterMedia states that although WTLK-TV's city of license, Rome, Georgia, is technically in the same ADI market as InterMedia's cable systems located in and around Athens, Georgia, WTLK-TV does not serve these communities, which are on the opposite side of the Atlanta urban area, on the easternmost edge of the market. InterMedia also notes that WTLK-TV, which began operation in 1988, has never been carried by InterMedia's cable systems. InterMedia also adds that it has been unable to identify carriage of WTLK-TV on any of the cable systems serving communities immediately surrounding the communities here at issue. InterMedia also notes that its cable systems do not carry any other stations from the Rome area. 12. InterMedia also argues that WTLK-TV fails to place a Grade B contour over the communities, which are located approximately 93 miles from Rome. In addition, InterMedia states that Rome is more than 107 miles from InterMedia's headend sites in Athens and Oconee County. InterMedia also argues that WTLK-TV does not provide any discernable local programming to the communities served by its cable systems. InterMedia contends that Paxson stations utilize an infomercial format nationwide and this format has no specific nexus to the communities at issue. InterMedia also argues that WTLK-TV's lack of nexus to the communities is further emphasized by the fact that the television listings in the Athens daily newspaper, the Athens Daily News/Athens Banner-Herald, do not include WTLK-TV. 13. InterMedia also notes that its cable systems carry a host of stations licensed in and around Atlanta, which provide extensive coverage of local news and sporting events. InterMedia also states that its systems carry channels such as the "Athens/Government Programming" channel, the "Clarke County School Channel," a University of Georgia (UGA Programming) channel and the "Community Channel" which all focus on various community-oriented programming. Finally, InterMedia states that WTLK-TV has no significant viewership in the communities at issue. According to a marketing and research consulting study cited by InterMedia, WTLK-TV has no ratings whatsoever in either cable or noncable households in either Clarke or Oconee County where the communities are located. 14. In opposition, Paxson argues that deletion of the communities from its television market would place WTLK-TV at a distinct disadvantage relative to the other stations in the Atlanta ADI. According to Paxson, Congress designed the must carry regime in order to ensure that smaller, less- established stations, such as WTLK-TV, would receive the cable carriage necessary to remain economically viable, thereby promoting localism, diversity and competition in the video marketplace. WTLK-TV notes that the statutory rules were recently upheld by the Supreme Court in TBS, Inc. v. FCC, in which the Court stated that Congress properly designed the rules to "prevent any significant reduction in the multiplicity of broadcast programming sources available to noncable households." WTLK-TV contends that its entitlement to carriage throughout its ADI is underscored by the Commission's determination in the Report and Order in MM Docket 92-259, supra, that Rome, Georgia -- WTLK-TV's city of license -- is an integral part of the Atlanta, Georgia market. In reaching this determination, WTLK-TV notes that the Commission found that all television stations licensed to Atlanta and Rome compete with each other, and that recognition of a hyphenated Atlanta-Rome, Georgia market was warranted. WTLK-TV notes as well that Congress rejected a definition of a station's market based upon a mileage-based standard, and opted instead for an ADI-based test. 15. Paxson further argues that InterMedia has failed to demonstrate that deletion of the communities from WTLK-TV's ADI would better effectuate the purposes of the must carry rules or promote the value of localism. Paxson maintains that InterMedia fails to support its arguments with particularized evidence that the communities in question are not part of the station's ADI. Paxson contends that the WTLK-TV's lack of historic carriage should not be given great weight because the must carry provisions were adopted, in large part, to cure past discriminatory signal carriage practices by cable operators against broadcast stations. Paxson also argues that InterMedia's conclusion that WTLK-TV does not provide local service to the cable communities is incorrect. According to Paxson, since it acquired WTLK-TV in July, 1994, the station has been airing a unique program format, developed by Paxson, that combines program-length presentations by local and national businesses and community organizations with religious and local public affairs programming. WTLK-TV states that its public affairs program "Daybreak" highlights topics of importance to residents of the cable communities and features locally-based organizations which operate throughout the ADI. In addition, Paxson cites its airing of a Japanese-language news program as well as locally produced cultural and information programs focusing on issues of concern to the Muslim community and to Americans of Asian and Pacific Islander, East Indian, and Iranian descent. WTLK-TV states that it is committed to both maintaining and expanding its local programming, and contends that a station's planned local programming is also to be weighed in evaluating market modification petitions. 16. Paxson also argues that in support of abrogating WTLK-TV's must carry rights, InterMedia claims that it carries other stations that offer programming of interest to the communities; yet, according to Paxson, InterMedia's rationale conflicts with one of the primary purposes of the must carry rules -- to enhance the diversity of programming and programming sources accessible to the public. Paxson also argues that if WTLK-TV's carriage rights are eliminated, WTLK-TV's ability to compete with other Atlanta ADI stations will be undermined. 17. Finally, with respect to viewing patterns in the cable communities, Paxson contends that the Commission has previously found that specialty stations such as WTLK-TV offer desirable programming diversity yet frequently attract limited audiences. Moreover, Paxson argues that evidence regarding viewership "must be considered in light of the existing lack of carriage and the heavily cabled nature" of the communities at issue. According to Paxson, Clarke County, the county in which Athens and some of the cable communities are located, has a cable penetration rate of 89 percent, while Oconee County has a cable penetration rate of 80 percent. Paxson argues that the Commission has previously determined that if over 75 percent of potential viewers in the cable communities are cable subscribers, over-the-air ratings are considered to be of little relevance and should be discounted in the market modification process. Thus, Paxson argues that WTLK-TV's over-the-air ratings in this case should be discounted. 18. In reply, InterMedia argues that Paxson fails to rebut InterMedia's showing that the communities in question are not truly part of WTLK-TV's market. According to InterMedia, while Paxson offers its own general interpretation of the Commission's must carry rules, Paxson fails to demonstrate how the statutory four-part test for market modification does not support InterMedia's request. InterMedia contends that while Paxson attempts to obfuscate the issue of historic carriage, the fact remains that WTLK-TV has never been carried on InterMedia's cable systems. InterMedia argues that while lack of carriage by itself may not be a controlling factor, it should weigh heavily in favor of deleting the communities at issue in this case, especially in light of the fact that Paxson fails to adequately rebut the other market modification criteria. Regarding local coverage, InterMedia argues that Paxson offers little to show that WTLK-TV's programming is "specifically tailored" to he communities at issue. In addition, InterMedia argues that while Paxson claims that its programming is different from that aired on WNGM-TV, both stations appear to air an overlapping lineup of infomercials emanating from the same "entity" --Paxson. 19. With regard to carriage of other local stations, InterMedia argues that Paxson discounts the fact that other stations licensed in the Atlanta area and carried by InterMedia's cable systems provide extensive local coverage. InterMedia also argues that, unlike WTLK-TV, all of the commercial stations that it carries that are licensed to Atlanta place at least a Grade B contour over the communities. InterMedia also reiterates its arguments regarding the lack of viewership of WTLK-TV. InterMedia argues that the suggestion that a station which offers primarily infomercials and some religious and foreign language programming should get automatic carriage, even where it has no off-air viewership, is unfounded. ANALYSIS AND DECISION 20. We turn first to InterMedia's market modification petition, to determine whether Athens, Georgia and the surrounding communities served by InterMedia's cable systems should be removed from WTLK-TV's ADI. A resolution of this matter will determine whether WTLK-TV is eligible to claim carriage rights in these communities. Based on our analysis of the evidence relating to the four statutory and other relevant factors, InterMedia's petition will be granted. 21. Atlanta is the nation's tenth largest market in terms of population. It is approximately 170 miles long and 150 miles wide, encompassing 52 counties in three states. Rome is 56 miles to the northwest of Atlanta. WTLK-TV, licensed to Rome, Georgia, began operation in 1988 and broadcasts on channel 14 from a transmitter close to Waleska, Georgia. Athens and the other cable communities involved are located approximately 93 miles southeast of Rome and approximately 80 miles from the WTLK-TV transmitter site. Rome is also more than 107 miles from InterMedia's headend sites in Athens and Oconee County. In addition to the Rome and Atlanta stations, the market is also served by WNGM- TV, channel 34, Athens, Georgia, which InterMedia alleges duplicates the signal of WTLK-TV. A. Historic Signal Carriage 22. Statutory factor one is "whether the station, or other stations located in the same area, have been historically carried on the cable system or systems within such community." WTLK-TV has no history of carriage in the communities in question. WTLK-TV began operation 10 years ago, so this carriage pattern is not a reflection of the recent origin of the station. Also, it appears that WTLK-TV is not carried on any of the cable systems serving communities located near the communities at issue here. InterMedia's cable systems also do not carry any other stations licensed to the Rome area. 23. Carriage on nearby cable systems is not a factor specified in the statute, but it does seem likely, depending on the specific circumstances involved, that carriage on nearby systems could serve as evidence to define the logical scope of a station's market. Such carriage serves to demonstrate the belief of both the stations and systems involved that there is a market nexus between the broadcast station and the communities where the station is carried and thus provides evidence as to the scope of a station's market. B. Station Coverage of Communities 24. Statutory factor two is "whether the television station provides coverage or other local service to such community." With respect to coverage, the Commission stated in its Report and Order in MM Docket 92-259, supra, 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 to the community in terms of mileage." InterMedia provides evidence that WTLK-TV's Grade B contour falls short of the communities in question. In two previous Commission cases, Monroe and Covington, the Commission issued orders modifying the television market of WTLK-TV in order to exclude communities that were located somewhat closer to Rome, and were also located outside of WTLK-TV's Grade B contour. 25. With respect to programming service, InterMedia alleges that there is no significant amount of programming from WTLK-TV that is specifically targeted to the cable communities involved. Although Paxson contends that it has been airing a unique program format since 1994 that combines infomercials with religious and local public affairs programming, that material does not appear to be the kind that suggests that these communities are a particular focus of the station or are in any sense served in a manner that establishes a specific market connection. C. Coverage of News, Sporting Events, or Other Events of Interest by Other Stations Entitled to Carriage. 26. Statutory factor three is "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." In this instance, InterMedia alleges that its cable systems carry numerous stations licensed in and around Atlanta that provide local service to its subscribers. 27. Carriage of other local stations may be used as an enhancement factor to support a cable operator's deletion request when there is other evidence in the record that the communities at issue are outside of the station's market. While InterMedia suggests that WTLK-TV's programming is not specific to the cable communities, it cites to equally non-specific programming, such as local newscasts broadcast by local network affiliates, as evidence of the other stations' local service. InterMedia also notes that it carries several cable channels that it says feature community focused programming, yet InterMedia does not cite to any specific kind of programming carried by those channels. D. Station Audience in Communities Served by Cable System 28. 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." InterMedia states that WTLK-TV has no ratings at all in either cable or noncable households in either Clarke or Oconee County where the communities are located. This is confirmed by the most recent Nielsen viewership data, which records no viewing of WTLK-TV in those counties. E. Other Considerations 29. The factors specified in Section 614(h)(1)(C)(ii) of the Communications Act do not purport to be exclusive and thus other evidence may be considered that is helpful in defining the scope of the markets of the stations involved. Another consideration argued to be relevant to this proceeding is the Commission's consideration of the scope of the Atlanta-Rome, Georgia market in the context of a market hyphenation rulemaking proceeding. Market hyphenation proceedings, undertaken pursuant to Section 614(f) of the Communications Act, and ADI market modification proceedings, undertaken pursuant to Section 614(h)(1)(C)(ii) of the Act, although not identical in purpose nevertheless involve some overlap of objectives and decisional criteria and the Commission's decision to join markets takes into consideration the economic ties between the communities to be hyphenated and the subject stations. The hyphenation of Atlanta and Rome reflects a judgment that stations in Rome and Atlanta are competitive. The hyphenation decision is thus suggestive evidence of the belief, notwithstanding the distances between Atlanta and Rome, that stations from both communities are local to significant overlapping portions of the same market area. However, the hyphenation is not controlling in every circumstance. The "[r]edesignation of the market reflects in the rules the general competitive situation that in fact exists in the local area, allowing the application of the more specific rules, including those relating to `area of dominant influence' changes, to be addressed from the perspective of a properly defined market area." Here, the issue is not whether stations in Rome and Atlanta are competitive, but whether the Rome station's market properly includes communities on the opposite side of Atlanta. Thus, for present purposes, the hyphenation decision appears to add little to the Section 614(h)(1)(C)(ii) decision making process. Indeed the fact that Athens is not hyphenated with Rome (nor with Atlanta) would suggest that the market hyphenation argument weighs in favor rather than against the requested relief. F. Summary 30. The cable television mandatory broadcast signal carriage rules were adopted as part of the 1992 Cable Act. According to the legislative history of that Act, the use of ADI market areas is intended "to ensure that television stations be carried in the areas which they serve 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 Section 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." Based on the evidence presented, we conclude that the requested exclusion of the subject cable communities from the market of WTLK-TV will better effectuate the purposes of the must carry statutory provisions. 31. In reaching this conclusion, we have considered the statutory factors as well as other relevant information. WTLK-TV has never been carried in any of the communities in question (factor I), provides no over-the-air television broadcast service for the communities (factor II), and has no measured audience in the communities. Given the statutory directive, weight must be given to these factors, but that must be done bearing in mind that the objective of the Section 614(h) process is to "better effectuate the purposes" of the broadcast signal carriage scheme. Thus, with respect to the question of historical carriage patterns, attention must be paid to the circumstances from which such patterns developed. Some stations have not had the opportunity to build a record of historical carriage for specific reasons that do not necessarily reflect a judgment as to the geography of the market involved. Given the age of WTLK-TV, however, that does not appear to be the circumstance here. 32. Given the difficulties of relying exclusively and explicitly on the statutory factors of historical carriage and viewing patterns, which in certain circumstances could severely narrow the carriage rights of stations even within what is undeniably their local market area, we have found it helpful to focus also on factors that are less influenced by the type of station involved or historical carriage. The scope of a local station's market may be measured through geographic means by examining the distance between the station and the cable community subject to the deletion request and by taking into account natural phenomena such as waterways, mountains, and valleys that may tend to separate communities and define natural markets -- basic geographic, demographic, and political features that provide the best available evidence of the market boundaries of the stations involved. In this regard, the Commission has explicitly noted the relevance of Grade B contours. In the absence of other information, station service contours provide at least one objective measure of the scope of a station's local market. Here we note that WTLK-TV does not provide Grade B service to any of the communities at issue. In addition, the communities are on the opposite side of the Atlanta urban area from WTLK-TV and geographically separated from its city of license by 93 miles. 33. We have carefully considered each statutory and other relevant factor in the context of the circumstances presented here and, on balance, we find that InterMedia has demonstrated that the communities it serves lack a sufficient nexus with WTLK-TV so as to warrant deletion of these communities from the station's ADI. 34. Turning to Paxson's signal carriage complaint, having found that grant of InterMedia's petition for market modification is warranted, that complaint is now moot. Section 614 of the Communications Act and the Commission's rules permit stations to assert mandatory carriage rights on cable systems located within their market. The prerequisite for asserting must carry rights with respect to a particular cable system, however, is that the operator serve communities in the station's ADI. These communities have been deleted from WTLK-TV's market by this Memorandum Opinion and Order. Because we have granted the petition to delete these communities from WTLK-TV's market, the associated complaint filed for mandatory carriage of its signal in these communities is rendered moot. ORDERING CLAUSES 35. Accordingly, IT IS ORDERED, that the petition for special relief (CSR-5131-A) filed by Brenmor Cable Partners, L.P., d/b/a InterMedia IS GRANTED. Athens, Clarke County, Oconee County, Winterville, Bogart, and Watkinsville, Georgia served by InterMedia's cable systems are no longer part of WTLK-TV's market area for purposes of Section 614. 36. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED, that the Request for Mandatory Carriage Complaint (CSR-5129-M) filed by Paxson Atlanta License, Inc. IS DISMISSED in accordance with Section 614(d)(3) of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended (47 U.S.C. 534) and 47 C.F.R. 76.56(b) ). 37. This action is taken pursuant to authority delegated by Section 0.321 of the Commission's Rules. FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION William H. Johnson Deputy Chief, Cable Services Bureau