FCC Web Documents citing 76.7

as compiled by hallikainen.com/FccRules on 2012 07 01

• http://fjallfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-275666A1.pdf
  • to the FM signal. The difference in the power level below is because of the difference in the occupied bandwidth. Table 7-6. Co-channel Undesired Interference Power Level (dBm) Microphone WM1 WM1-2 WM2 WM3 WM3-2 System 1 2 3 FM -87.0 -87.0 -88.0 -87.5 -87.0 Noise -75.4 -75.3 -88.0 -74.3 -74.3 OFDM -76.1 -76.0 -88.9 -74.2 -74.2 Prototype A -76.5 -89.0 -76.7 69 Table 7-7 shows the undesired signal power level above which the SINAD was less than 30 dB for first adjacent channel interference from the simulated WSD signals. In some cases the desired signal was lost before the SINAD indication decreased to 30 dB as the undesired signal level was increased. The undesired FM signal was located 50 kHz from
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-00-1202A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-00-1202A1.txt
  • be served by the indirect foreign ownership of PacAmTel LLC, a holder of common carrier point-to-point microwave licenses, in excess of the 25% statutory limit. Applicant requests Commission approval for the indirect foreign ownership specified below. Applicant seeks approval for an aggregate level of indirect foreign ownership by citizens from WTO Members (or overseas territories of WTO Members) up to 76.7 %. The proposed indirect foreign ownership of PacAmTel is as follows: 31.2% Bermudian, 32.1% British Virgin Islands, 3.4% Indonesian and 10% will be issued through a stock option plan to employees, all of whom are citizens of WTO Members. Indirect foreign ownership from citizens of non-WTO Members does not exceed 25%. Grant of Authority Page 1 of 7 ISP-PDR-20000428-00009 Mountain
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-00-1347A1.doc
  • the authority does not meet the statutory certification requirements. In Implementation of Cable Act Reform Provisions of the Telecommunications Act of 1996 ("Cable Act Reform Order"), the Commission instructed cable operators believing themselves subject to local exchange carrier ("LEC") effective competition under Section 623(l)(1)(D) of the Communications Act to file a petition for determination of effective competition pursuant to Section 76.7 of the Commission's rules. Section 623(l)(1)(D) of the Communications Act provides that a cable operator is subject to effective competition where: a local exchange carrier or its affiliate (or any multichannel video programming distributor using the facilities of such carrier or its affiliate) offers video programming services directly to subscribers by any means (other than direct-to-home satellite services) in the
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-00-1361A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-00-1361A1.pdf
  • the Federal Communications Commission Washington, D.C. 20554 In the Matter of GCI Cable, Inc. Petition for Special Relief ) ) ) ) ) CSR-5442-Z Adopted: June 19, 2000 Released: June 21, 2000 By the Chief, Cable Services Bureau: I. INTRODUCTION 1. GCI Cable, Inc. and its affiliate GCI/Fairbanks, Inc. ("GCI") have filed a petition for special relief, pursuant to Section 76.7 of the Commission's rules, seeking a waiver of Section 76.605(a)(6)(ii) of the rules. The rule, which went into effect on December 30, l999, requires measurement of a cable television system's amplitude characteristic at the subscriber terminal, thereby including the converter box in the measurement. GCI contends that application of the rule will require it to prematurely replace a significant number
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-00-1385A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-00-1385A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-00-1385A1.txt
  • Content-Type: text/plain Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit PUBLIC NOTICE FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION 445 12TH STREET, S.W. WASHINGTON, D.C. 20554 DA 00-1385 News media information 202/418-0500 Fax-On-Demand 202/418-2830 Internet: http://www.fcc.gov ftp.fcc.gov CABLE SERVICES BUREAU ACTION June 22, 2000 PETITION FOR WAIVER FROM REQUIREMENT TO PROVIDE POINT OF DEPLOYMENT MODULES CSR 5560-Z Pursuant to Section 76.7 of the Commission's rules, 47 C.F.R. § 76.7, MediaOne Group, Inc. (``MediaOne'') filed a petition for special relief requesting a waiver of 47 C.F.R. § 76.1204. MediaOne seeks a waiver from the requirement to offer point of deployment modules (``PODs'') for some of its cable systems. Pursuant to Section 1.1208, of the Commission's rules, 47 C.F.R. § 1.1208, this proceeding
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-00-1386A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-00-1386A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-00-1386A1.txt
  • Content-Type: text/plain Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit PUBLIC NOTICE FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION 445 12TH STREET, S.W. WASHINGTON, D.C. 20554 DA 00-1386 News media information 202/418-0500 Fax-On-Demand 202/418-2830 Internet: http://www.fcc.gov ftp.fcc.gov CABLE SERVICES BUREAU ACTION June 22, 2000 PETITION FOR WAIVER FROM REQUIREMENT TO PROVIDE POINT OF DEPLOYMENT MODULES CSR 5561-Z Pursuant to Section 76.7 of the Commission's rules, 47 C.F.R. § 76.7, Cox Communications, Inc. (``Cox'') filed a petition for special relief requesting a waiver of 47 C.F.R. § 76.1204. Cox seeks a waiver from the requirement to offer point of deployment modules (``PODs'') for some of its cable systems. Pursuant to Section 1.1208, of the Commission's rules, 47 C.F.R. § 1.1208, this proceeding
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-00-1477A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-00-1477A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-00-1477A1.txt
  • Content-Type: text/plain Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit PUBLIC NOTICE FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION 445 12TH STREET, S.W. WASHINGTON, D.C. 20554 DA 00-1477 News media information 202/418-0500 Fax-On-Demand 202/418-2830 Internet: http://www.fcc.gov ftp.fcc.gov CABLE SERVICES BUREAU ACTION June 30, 2000 CABLEVISION PETITION FOR WAIVER FROM REQUIREMENT TO PROVIDE POINT OF DEPLOYMENT MODULES CSR 5566-Z Pursuant to Section 76.7 of the Commission's rules, 47 C.F.R. § 76.7, Cablevision Systems Corp. (``Cablevision'') filed a petition for special relief requesting a waiver of 47 C.F.R. § 76.1204. Cablevision seeks a waiver from the requirement to offer point of deployment modules (``PODs'') for some of its cable systems. Pursuant to Section 1.1208, of the Commission's rules, 47 C.F.R. § 1.1208, this proceeding
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-00-1478A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-00-1478A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-00-1478A1.txt
  • Content-Type: text/plain Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit PUBLIC NOTICE FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION 445 12TH STREET, S.W. WASHINGTON, D.C. 20554 DA 00-1478 News media information 202/418-0500 Fax-On-Demand 202/418-2830 Internet: http://www.fcc.gov ftp.fcc.gov CABLE SERVICES BUREAU ACTION June 30, 2000 ADELPHIA PETITION FOR WAIVER FROM REQUIREMENT TO PROVIDE POINT OF DEPLOYMENT MODULES CSR 5567-Z Pursuant to Section 76.7 of the Commission's rules, 47 C.F.R. § 76.7, Adelphia Communications Corporation, Inc. (``Adelphia'') filed a petition for special relief requesting a waiver of 47 C.F.R. § 76.1204. Adelphia seeks a waiver from the requirement to offer point of deployment modules (``PODs'') for some of its cable systems. Pursuant to Section 1.1208, of the Commission's rules, 47 C.F.R. § 1.1208, this
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-00-1479A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-00-1479A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-00-1479A1.txt
  • Content-Type: text/plain Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit PUBLIC NOTICE FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION 445 12TH STREET, S.W. WASHINGTON, D.C. 20554 DA 00-1479 News media information 202/418-0500 Fax-On-Demand 202/418-2830 Internet: http://www.fcc.gov ftp.fcc.gov CABLE SERVICES BUREAU ACTION June 30, 2000 GCI PETITION FOR WAIVER FROM REQUIREMENT TO PROVIDE POINT OF DEPLOYMENT MODULES CSR 5564-Z Pursuant to Section 76.7 of the Commission's rules, 47 C.F.R. § 76.7, GCI Cable, Inc. (``GCI'') filed a petition for special relief requesting a waiver of 47 C.F.R. § 76.1204. GCI seeks a waiver from the requirement to offer point of deployment modules (``PODs'') for some of its cable systems. Pursuant to Section 1.1208, of the Commission's rules, 47 C.F.R. § 1.1208, this proceeding
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-00-1483A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-00-1483A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-00-1483A1.txt
  • Report and Order, 13 FCC Rcd at 14793. 47 C.F.R. § 76.1204. Implementation of Section 304 of the Telecommunications Act of 1996, Commercial Availability of Navigation Devices, Order on Reconsideration, 14 FCC Rcd 7596 (1999). Id. at 7602. 47 C.F.R. § 1.3 WAIT Radio, 418 F.2d 1153, 1157 (D.C. Cir. 1969), cert denied, 409 U.S. 1027 (1972). 47 C.F.R. § 76.7(b)(1) & (c)(3). 47 C.F.R. § 0.321 (...continued from previous page) (continued...) Federal Communications Commission DA 00-1483 Federal Communications Commission DA 00-1483 × â × â â @& „0ý „0ý „0ý „0ý „0ý „0ý „ðñ â
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-00-2413A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-00-2413A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-00-2413A1.txt
  • and Certain Communities therein ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) CSR 5455-E Adopted: October 25, 2000 Released: October 27, 2000 By the Deputy Chief, Cable Services Bureau: introduction Time Warner Entertainment Co., L.P. and Time Warner Entertainment -Advance/Newhouse Partnership, collectively d/b/a Time Warner Communications (``Time Warner'') have filed with the Commission a petition pursuant to Sections 76.7 and 76.907 of the Commission's rules for a determination of effective competition in Seminole County, Florida and certain communities within Seminole County (collectively, the ``Communities''). Time Warner alleges that its cable systems serving the Communities are subject to effective competition pursuant to Section 623(a)(2) of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended ("Communications Act"), and the Commission's implementing rules, and
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-00-2467A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-00-2467A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-00-2467A1.txt
  • ) CSR 5577-M Adopted: October 31, 2000 Released: November 2, 2000 By the Chief, Consumer Protection and Competition Division, Cable Services Bureau: introduction The Board of Education of the City of New York (``Board''), licensee of non-commercial television station WNYE-TV, New York, New York (``WNYE''), filed a complaint pursuant to Section 614 of the Communications Act, as amended, and Sections 76.7 and 76.61(b) of the Commission's rules, claiming entitlement to mandatory carriage of WNYE in certain communities in New Jersey served by Service Electric Cable TV of New Jersey, Inc. (``Service Electric''). Service Electric filed an opposition to the complaint, and the Board filed a reply. background Section 614(h)(1)(C) of the Communications Act, as amended by the Telecommunications Act of 1996,
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-00-2471A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-00-2471A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-00-2471A1.txt
  • Subpart K, of the Commission's Rules and Regulations Relative to Community Antenna Television Systems; and Inquiry Into the Development of Communications Technology and Services To Formulate Regulatory Policy and Rulemaking and/or Legislative Proposals (`` Second Report and Order''), 23 FCC 2d 816, 820-821 (1970), recon. denied, 39 FCC 2d 377 (1973). 47 C.F.R. § 1.3; see also 47 C.F.R. § 76.7(a)(1) (On petition by a cable television system operator ... or by any other interested person, the Commission may waive any provision of the rules relating to cable television systems...''). University of Arizona, 12 FCC Rcd at 11460 (quoting All Clear Cable TV (``All Clear''), 50 FCC 2d 693, 694 (1975)). 47 C.F.R. § 0.321. (...continued from previous page) (continued...) Federal
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-00-2860A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-00-2860A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-00-2860A1.txt
  • Royalton, Shaker Heights, and Strongsville, Ohio (CUID Nos. OH1606; OH0823; OH1193; OH0971: OH0175; OH0841) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) CSR 5582-E; CSR 5583-E; CSR 5584-E; CSR 5585-E; CSR 5586-E; CSR 5587-E Adopted: December 19, 2000 Released: December 20, 2000 By the Deputy Chief, Cable Services Bureau: introduction Six petitions have been filed pursuant to Sections 76.7 and 76.907 of the Commission's rules for a determination of effective competition in Brooklyn, Brook Park, Garfield Heights, North Royalton, Shaker Heights, and Strongsville, Ohio (the ``Communities''). The petitioners (herein ``Cablevision'') allege that their cable systems serving the Communities are subject to effective competition pursuant to Section 623(a)(2) of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended ("Communications Act"), and the
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-00-2861A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-00-2861A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-00-2861A1.txt
  • and Hernando County (CUID No. FL 1055), Florida ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) Adopted: December 19, 2000 Released: December 20, 2000 By the Deputy Chief, Cable Services Bureau: introduction 1. Constel Communications, L.P. (``Constel'') has filed with the Commission a petition pursuant to Section 623(a)(1) of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended ("Communications Act") and Sections 76.7(a)(1) and 76.905(b)(1) of the Commission's rules for a determination of effective competition in unincorporated portions of Orange County and Hernando County, Florida (the ``Communities''). Constel alleges that its cable systems serving the Communities are subject to effective competition and are therefore exempt from cable rate regulation. Constel claims the presence of effective competition in the Communities because fewer than thirty
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-01-100A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-01-100A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-01-100A1.txt
  • Subpart K, of the Commission's Rules and Regulations Relative to Community Antenna Television Systems; and Inquiry Into the Development of Communications Technology and Services To Formulate Regulatory Policy and Rulemaking and/or Legislative Proposals (`` Second Report and Order''), 23 FCC 2d 816, 820-821 (1970), recon. denied, 39 FCC 2d 377 (1973). 47 C.F.R. § 1.3; see also 47 C.F.R. § 76.7(a)(1) (On petition by a cable television system operator ... or by any other interested person, the Commission may waive any provision of the rules relating to cable television systems...''). University of Arizona, 12 FCC Rcd at 11460 (quoting All Clear Cable TV (``All Clear''), 50 FCC 2d 693, 694 (1975)). 47 C.F.R. § 0.321. (...continued from previous page) (continued...) Federal
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-01-1024A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-01-1024A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-01-1024A1.txt
  • and Two Other Puerto Rico Franchise Areas ) ) ) ) ) ) ) CSR 5644-E Adopted: April 18, 2001 Released: April 23, 2000 By the Deputy Chief, Cable Services Bureau: introduction Teleponce Cable TV, Inc, (``Teleponce'') has filed with the Commission a petition pursuant to Section 623(a)(1) of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended ("Communications Act") and Sections 76.7(a)(1) and 76.905(b)(1) of the Commission's rules for a determination of effective competition in Ponce, Puerto Rico and two other franchise areas in Puerto Rico (the ``Franchise Areas''). Teleponce alleges that its cable systems serving the Franchise Areas are subject to effective competition and are therefore exempt from cable rate regulation. Teleponce claims the presence of effective competition in the Franchise
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-01-1267A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-01-1267A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-01-1267A1.txt
  • of WWDP immediately, particularly since, as a station providing Spanish-language programming, WWDP's carriage would serve the public interest by increasing diversity. In opposition, Adelphia argues that WWDP's complaint should be dismissed or denied for the following reasons. First, Adelphia points out that the certificate of service accompanying WWDP's complaint fails to include the affected franchising authorities as required by Section 76.7((a)(3) of the Commission's rules. Adelphia notes that in Pentecostal Revival Association, Inc. v. Cablevision Industries of Middle Florida, Inc., the Commission ruled that because a petitioning station failed to served its complaint on the local franchising authority, its complaint was moot. Adelphia maintains that even if WWDP attempts to correct this omission after the fact it would be immaterial because
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-01-1355A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-01-1355A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-01-1355A1.txt
  • Services Bureau Attachment A Percentage of Households in the Communities Subscribing to MVPDs Other than the Largest MVPD Community NDNC % of Households DTH % of Households 1. Berthold 28% 70% 2. Carpio 30% 81%1 3. Donnybrook 20% 79% 4. Granville 19% 64% 5. Lake Metigoshe 25%1 37% 6. Sherwood 35% 57% 7. Westhope 50% 50% See 47 C.F.R. § 76.7; Application of Phillip C Merrill to Transfer Control of MMDS Station Licenses to North Dakota Network Company. NDNC filed an addendum to its Application on May 22, 2001. The Communities are: Berthold, Carpio, Donnybrook, Granville, Lake Metigoshe, Sherwood, and Westhope, North Dakota. 47 C.F.R. § 21.912. Petitioners must file for special relief pursuant to Section 76.7 when demonstrating compliance with
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-01-142A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-01-142A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-01-142A1.txt
  • is reluctant to expand if Armstrong can respond competitively through selective rate adjustments. Discussion We will exercise our discretion to accept the Citizens Cable presentation. As a competitor of Armstrong's, Citizens Cable is an interested person in the proceeding. Although its presentation was filed outside the time frame for responding to the Township's petition for special relief established by section 76.7 of the Commission's rules, the presentation has provided information relevant to the issues raised by the Township's petition and has not caused delay. We disagree with the Township's and Citizens Cable's assertions that Armstrong was required to seek an advance determination of effective competition from the Commission, and that its failure to do so precludes consideration of effective competition in
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-01-1436A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-01-1436A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-01-1436A1.txt
  • the New York Area of Dominant Influnece, 12 FCC Rcd 12262 (1997); and WLNY-TV, Inc. v. FCC, 163 F. 3d 137 (2d Cir. 1998). See WLNY-TV v. FCC, 163 F. 2d at 145. Id. See WRNN-TV Associates, 14 FCC Rcd at 13456. We note that WRNN-TV raised the issue of Cablevision's failure to comply with the service requirements of Section 76.7(a)(3) of the Commission's rules. 47 C.F.R. §76.57(a)(3). However, since Cablevision filed an amended certificate of service, this matter is now moot. 47 C.F.R. §76.59(b)(1). Opposition at Exhibit 1. Id. WRNN-TV notes that in June 1995 TKR, the previous owner of the Elizabeth, New Jersey cable system had agreed to carry its signal prior to the system's sale to Cablevision. See
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-01-1657A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-01-1657A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-01-1657A1.txt
  • Commission's rules ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) CSR 5669 Adopted: July 11, 2001 Released: July 13, 2001 By the Chief, Cable Services Bureau: introduction Black Rock Cable, Inc. (``Black Rock''), certified to operate an open video system in the counties of Snohomish, Skagit, and Whatcom, Washington, has filed a petition for special relief pursuant to Section 76.7 of the Commission's rules seeking a waiver of the Commission's rules that require open video system operators to allocate available capacity every three years. The Cities of Snohomish and Marysville, Washington filed oppositions to Black Rock's petition. For the reasons discussed herein, we deny the petition. background The Telecommunications Act of 1996 added Section 653 to the Communications Act of
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-01-1749A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-01-1749A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-01-1749A1.txt
  • that, at $0.63, the Greenwood system's average monthly regulated revenue per channel, per subscriber, falls between that of small systems ($0.86) and that of systems with more than 15,000 subscribers ($0.44). However, given the totality of the circumstances, we find that Northland has demonstrated that it resembles a small system according to most of the applicable criteria. 15. Under Section 76.7(c)(1) of the Commission's rules, a petition for special relief "shall state fully and precisely all pertinent facts and considerations relied on to demonstrate the need for the relief requested and to support a determination that a grant of such relief would serve the public interest." Northland has adequately established its "need for the relief requested" as required by Section 76.7(c)(1).
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-01-1778A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-01-1778A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-01-1778A1.txt
  • Relief from the Requirement to File an Annual FCC Form 320 for All Individual Community Units Served by a Cable System ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) CSR-5703 Adopted: July 24, 2001 Released: July 26, 2001 By the Chief, Cable Services Bureau: Introduction We have before us a Petition for Special Relief (``Petition'') filed pursuant to Section 76.7(a)(1) of the Commission's Rules by Insight Communications Company, L.P. (``Insight'') requesting that it be allowed to file a single Form 320 for each of its physical systems, identifying the community units served by the system. In so doing Insight would be relieved of the requirement to file a Basic Signal Leakage Report, Form 320, for each and every community unit
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-01-1779A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-01-1779A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-01-1779A1.txt
  • Relief from the Requirement to File an Annual FCC Form 320 for All Individual Community Units Served by a Cable System ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) CSR-5696 Adopted: July 24, 2001 Released: July 26, 2001 By the Chief, Cable Services Bureau: Introduction We have before us a Petition for Special Relief (``Petition'') filed pursuant to Section 76.7(a)(1) of the Commission's Rules by Mediacom Communications Corporation (``Mediacom'') requesting that it be allowed to file a single Form 320 for each of its physical systems, identifying the community units served by the system. In so doing Mediacom would be relieved of the requirement to file a Basic Signal Leakage Report, Form 320, for each and every community unit served
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-01-1780A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-01-1780A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-01-1780A1.txt
  • from the Requirement to File an Annual FCC Form 320 for All Individual Community Units Served by a Common Cable System ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) CSR-5608 Adopted: July 24, 2001 Released: July 26, 2001 By the Chief, Cable Services Bureau: Introduction We have before us a Petition for Special Relief (``Petition'') filed pursuant to Section 76.7(a)(1) of the Commission's Rules by Charter Communications, Inc. (``Charter'') requesting that it be allowed to file a single Form 320 for each of its physical systems, identifying the community units served by the system. In so doing Charter would be relieved of the requirement to file a Basic Signal Leakage Report, Form 320, for each and every community unit served
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-01-1781A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-01-1781A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-01-1781A1.txt
  • Relief from the Requirement to File an Annual FCC Form 320 for All Individual Community Units Served by a Cable System ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) CSR-5643 Adopted: July 24, 2001 Released: July 26, 2001 By the Chief, Cable Services Bureau: Introduction We have before us a Petition for Special Relief (``Petition'') filed pursuant to Section 76.7(a)(1) of the Commission's Rules by Cox Communications, Inc. (``Cox'') requesting that it be allowed to file a single Form 320 for each of its physical systems, identifying the community units served by the system. In so doing Cox would be relieved of the requirement to file a Basic Signal Leakage Report, Form 320, for each and every community unit served
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-01-1782A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-01-1782A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-01-1782A1.txt
  • Relief from the Requirement to File an Annual FCC Form 320 for All Individual Community Units Served by a Cable System ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) CSR-5693 Adopted: July 24, 2001 Released: July 26, 2001 By the Chief, Cable Services Bureau: Introduction We have before us a Petition for Special Relief (``Petition'') filed pursuant to Section 76.7(a)(1) of the Commission's Rules by Adelphia Communications Corporation (``Adelphia'') requesting that it be allowed to file a single Form 320 for each of its physical systems, identifying the community units served by the system. In so doing Adelphia would be relieved of the requirement to file a Basic Signal Leakage Report, Form 320, for each and every community unit served
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-01-1865A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-01-1865A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-01-1865A1.txt
  • of Los Angeles, Inc. And KCAL-TV ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) File No. CSR-5655-C Adopted: August 2, 2001 Released: August 6, 2001 By the Chief, Cable Services Bureau: INTRODUCTION EchoStar Satellite Corporation (``EchoStar'') has filed a retransmission consent complaint against the above-captioned parties (collectively, ``Young''), pursuant to Sections 76.7 and 76.65 of the Commission's rules. EchoStar alleges that Young has breached its obligation to negotiate in good faith terms for EchoStar's local retransmission of Young's ABC affiliate, WKRN, in Nashville, Tennessee and its NBC affiliate, KRON, in San Francisco, California. EchoStar's complaint arises out of the Satellite Home Viewer Improvement Act of 1999 (``SHVIA''). The SHVIA authorizes satellite carriers
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-01-1942A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-01-1942A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-01-1942A1.txt
  • Petition for Determination of Effective Competition ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) File No. CSR-5650-E Kearney, Missouri CUID No. MO0442 Adopted: August 14, 2001 Released: August 16, 2001 By the Deputy Chief, Cable Services Bureau: INTRODUCTION Kansas City Cable Partners (``KCCP'') has filed a Petition for Special Relief seeking a determination of effective competition pursuant to Sections 76.7, 76.905(b)(4) and 76.907 of the Commission's rules. KCCP asserts that its cable television system serving the City of Kearney, Missouri is subject to local exchange carrier (``LEC'') effective competition because of the presence of ExOp Missouri, Inc.'s (``ExOp'') cable services in Kearney. The petition is unopposed. For the reasons discussed below, the petition is granted. BACKGROUND Section 623(a)(4) of the
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-01-1947A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-01-1947A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-01-1947A1.txt
  • COMMISSION William H. Johnson Deputy Chief, Cable Services Bureau Attachment A Percentage of Households in the Communities Subscribing to MVPDs Other than the Largest MVPD Community % of Households 1. Alda 20.28% 2. Gibbon 38.43% 3. Grand Island 15.27% 4. Hastings 15.82% 5. Lexington 18.33% 6. Shelton 27.22% 7. St. Paul 27.88% 8. Wood River 33.04% See 47 C.F.R. § 76.7; Application of Cable USA, Inc. to Transfer Control of MMDS Station Licenses to CC VIII Operating, LLC. The Communities are: Alda, Gibbon, Grand Island (including Hall County), Hastings, Lexington, Shelton, St. Paul, and Wood River, Nebraska. 47 C.F.R. § 21.912. Petitioners must file for special relief pursuant to Section 76.7 when demonstrating compliance with Section 21.912 based on the effective
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-01-2008A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-01-2008A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-01-2008A1.txt
  • states that it recently informed KRPA that if it delivered an adequate signal to its headends, it would qualify for carriage. However, Mediacom states that, rather than confront the challenge of meeting its must carry obligations through cooperation and better engineering, KRPA instead seeks administrative relief from the Commission. KRPA states in a motion to strike Mediacom's surreply that Section 76.7(c)(1) of the Commission's rules entitled KRPA, in its reply, to aver additional facts or considerations in support of its arguments to answer Mediacom's allegations. KRPA maintains that its arguments did not extend beyond responses to Mediacom's earlier claims. Therefore, because Section 76.7 of the Commission's rules do not contemplate the filing of an additional reply in a must carry proceeding
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-01-2439A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-01-2439A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-01-2439A1.txt
  • Kansas City Cable Partners Petition For Determination of Effective Competition ) ) ) ) ) ) ) CSR-5711-E Lenexa, Kansas CUID No. KS0087 Adopted: October 17, 2001 Released: October 19, 2001 By the Deputy Chief, Cable Services Bureau: INTRODUCTION Kansas City Cable Partners (``KCCP'') has filed a Petition for Special Relief seeking a determination of effective competition pursuant to Sections 76.7, 76.905(b)(4) and 76.907 of the Commission's rules. KCCP asserts that it is subject to local exchange carrier (``LEC'') effective competition in Lenexa, Kansas because of the presence of Everest Connections Corporation (``ECC'') cable services in that community. Everest submitted a late-filed pleading opposing Time Warner's request. Time Warner filed a reply. For the reasons discussed below, the petition is granted.
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-01-2539A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-01-2539A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-01-2539A1.txt
  • from the Requirement to File an Annual FCC Form 320 for All Individual Community Units Served by a Common Cable System ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) CSR-5725 Adopted: October 29, 2001 Released: October 31, 2001 By the Chief, Cable Services Bureau: Introduction We have before us a Petition for Special Relief (``Petition'') filed pursuant to Section 76.7(a)(1) of the Commission's Rules by AT&T Broadband, LLC, (``AT&T'') requesting that it be allowed to file a single Form 320 for each of its physical systems, identifying the community units served by the system. In so doing AT&T would be relieved of the requirement to file a Basic Signal Leakage Report, Form 320, for each and every community unit served
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-01-2744A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-01-2744A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-01-2744A1.txt
  • Hours will be extended after December 3, 2001. What Multichannel Video and Cable Television Service filings require an FRN? for contact information. Aeronautical Frequency Notifications (47 C.F.R. § 76.1804) Cable Community Registrations (47 C.F.R. § 76.1801) Change Of Operational Information (47 C.F.R. § 76.1610) CARS Special Temporary Authority (STA) (47 C.F.R. § 78.33) Petitions for Special Relief (47 C.F.R. § 76.7) CARS Microwave Applications (47 C.F.R. §§ 78.11-78.40) CARS Microwave Change/ Modifications (47 C.F.R. §§ 78.11-78.40) CARS Microwave Renewals (47 C.F.R. § 78.29) CARS Microwave Transfers And Assignments (47 C.F.R. § 78.35) Cumulative Leakage Index Filing Waivers (47 C.F.R. § 76.611) Pole Attachment Complaints (47 C.F.R. § 1.1404) Adoption of a Mandatory FCC Registration Number, 16 FCC Rcd 16138 (2001). Multichannel
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-01-2758A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-01-2758A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-01-2758A1.txt
  • full power stations to be unsupported. Consequently, we find that W49BV is not a qualified LPTV station as contemplated by Section 614(h)(2) of the Act and is not entitled to mandatory carriage on the subject cable systems. ordering clauses Accordingly, IT IS ORDERED, pursuant to Section 614 of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended (47 U.S.C. §534(d)(3)) and Sections 76.7 and 76.61(a) of the Commission's rules (47 C.F.R. §§76.7 and 76.61(a)), the petition for reconsideration filed by Larry L. Schrecongost against TCI of Pennsylvania, Inc., Adelphia Cable Communications, Hollis Corporation d/b/a Bethel Cable TV, Summerville Cablevision, Inc., and Commuter Cable Television IS DENIED. This action is taken pursuant to authority delegated by Sections 0.321 and 1.106 of the Commission's rules.
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-01-2822A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-01-2822A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-01-2822A1.txt
  • KNWS argues that DIRECTV should be barred from making its jurisdictional argument because the Commission resolved that issue in the DBS Must Carry Report & Order. KNWS also reiterates its earlier interpretation of Section 1.4. Based on the record, we deny KNWS' request for mandatory carriage. As an initial matter, we note that DIRECTV's Opposition was timely filed. Under Section 76.7(b)(1), DIRECTV's Opposition was due October 18, 2001, twenty days following the public notice of KNWS' Complaint on September 28, 2001. Due to increased security concerns at the Commission's headquarters location in Washington, DC, the Commission temporarily suspended the acceptance of hand-delivered or messenger-delivered paper filings on October 18, 2001. The due date for all filings due at the Commission on
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-01-2857A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-01-2857A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-01-2857A1.txt
  • that television station for reception by subscribers. 47 C.F.R. § 76.66(a)(6). Under Section 76.66(m)(3) of the Commission's rules, a local television broadcast station that disputes a response by a satellite carrier that it is in compliance with its must carry obligations may obtain review of such denial or response by filing a ``complaint'' with the Commission in accordance with Section 76.7. 47 C.F.R. § 76.66(m)(3). Although styled a ``complaint,'' a carriage complaint filed against a satellite carrier is treated by the Commission as a petition for special relief for purposes of the Commission's pleading requirements. See 1998 Biennial Regulatory Review: Part 76 - Cable Television Service Pleading and Complaint Rules, 14 FCC Rcd 418 (1999). Responsive pleadings filed in this context,
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-01-2881A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-01-2881A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-01-2881A1.txt
  • VIII. See Omnipoint Corp. v. FCC, 78 F. 3d 620, 633-634 (D.C. Cir. 1996)(noting that when Congress directs an agency to consider certain factors, the agency simply ``must reach an express and considered conclusion about the bearing of a factor, but is not required to give any specific weight to it.''). Petition at Exhibit IX. Id. at 9. 47 C.F.R. §76.7(a)(3). See 1998 Biennial Regultory Review - Part 76 - Cable Television Service Pleading and Complaint Rules, Report and Order, 14 FCC Rcd 418 (1999). Opposition at 2. Id. Id. Id. Cox notes that although WWDP only requested the inclusion of one-third of the communities served by Cox, because the cable system is technically integrated, a grant of WWDP's request would
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-01-2886A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-01-2886A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-01-2886A1.txt
  • that television station for reception by subscribers. 47 C.F.R. § 76.66(a)(6). Under Section 76.66(m)(3) of the Commission's rules, a local television broadcast station that disputes a response by a satellite carrier that it is in compliance with its must carry obligations may obtain review of such denial or response by filing a ``complaint'' with the Commission in accordance with Section 76.7. 47 C.F.R. § 76.66(m)(3). Although styled a ``complaint,'' a carriage complaint filed against a satellite carrier is treated by the Commission as a petition for special relief for purposes of the Commission's pleading requirements. See 1998 Biennial Regulatory Review: Part 76 - Cable Television Service Pleading and Complaint Rules, 14 FCC Rcd 418 (1999). Responsive pleadings filed in this context,
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-01-2887A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-01-2887A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-01-2887A1.txt
  • that television station for reception by subscribers. 47 C.F.R. § 76.66(a)(6). Under Section 76.66(m)(3) of the Commission's rules, a local television broadcast station that disputes a response by a satellite carrier that it is in compliance with its must carry obligations may obtain review of such denial or response by filing a ``complaint'' with the Commission in accordance with Section 76.7. 47 C.F.R. § 76.66(m)(3). Although styled a ``complaint,'' a carriage complaint filed against a satellite carrier is treated by the Commission as a petition for special relief for purposes of the Commission's pleading requirements. See 1998 Biennial Regulatory Review: Part 76 - Cable Television Service Pleading and Complaint Rules, 14 FCC Rcd 418 (1999). Responsive pleadings filed in this context,
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-01-2888A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-01-2888A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-01-2888A1.txt
  • that television station for reception by subscribers. 47 C.F.R. § 76.66(a)(6). Under Section 76.66(m)(3) of the Commission's rules, a local television broadcast station that disputes a response by a satellite carrier that it is in compliance with its must carry obligations may obtain review of such denial or response by filing a ``complaint'' with the Commission in accordance with Section 76.7. 47 C.F.R. § 76.66(m)(3). Although styled a ``complaint,'' a carriage complaint filed against a satellite carrier is treated by the Commission as a petition for special relief for purposes of the Commission's pleading requirements. See 1998 Biennial Regulatory Review: Part 76 - Cable Television Service Pleading and Complaint Rules, 14 FCC Rcd 418 (1999). Responsive pleadings filed in this context,
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-01-289A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-01-289A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-01-289A1.txt
  • the authority does not meet the statutory certification requirements. In Implementation of Cable Act Reform Provisions of the Telecommunications Act of 1996 ("Cable Act Reform Order"), the Commission instructed cable operators believing themselves subject to local exchange carrier ("LEC") effective competition under Section 623(l)(1)(D) of the Communications Act to file a petition for determination of effective competition pursuant to Section 76.7 of the Commission's rules. Section 623(l)(1)(D) of the Communications Act provides that a cable operator is subject to effective competition where: a local exchange carrier or its affiliate (or any multichannel video programming distributor using the facilities of such carrier or its affiliate) offers video programming services directly to subscribers by any means (other than direct-to-home satellite services) in the
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-01-308A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-01-308A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-01-308A1.txt
  • Effective Competition in Pasco County, Florida (CUID Nos. FL1175, FL1243) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) CSR-5592-E Adopted: February 2, 2001 Released: February 8, 2001 By the Deputy Chief, Cable Services Bureau: INTRODUCTION Constel Communications, L.P. (``Constel'') has filed a petition, pursuant to Section 623(a)(1) of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended, (``Communications Act'') and Sections 76.7(a)(1) and 76.905(b)(1) of the Commission's rules, seeking a determination of effective competition regarding unincorporated areas of Pasco County, Florida (the ``Community Units''). Constel argues that its cable systems are subject to effective competition for all purposes, including but not limited to, exemption from the cable/SMATV cross-ownership prohibition as set forth in Section 613(a)(3) of the Communications Act and Section 76.501(f)
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-01-345A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-01-345A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-01-345A1.txt
  • 15. This action is taken pursuant to delegated authority under Section 0.321, 47 C.F.R. § 0.321, of the Commission's rules. FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION William H. Johnson Deputy Chief Cable Services Bureau Section 76.915(f) is no longer part of the Commission's rules. We will, however, treat Time Warner's petition as a request for a determination of effective competition pursuant to Section 76.7 of our rules. See 47 C.F.R § 76.7. Three of the communities at issue, Cocoa Beach, Melbourne Beach, and Patrick AFB, are not certified to regulate basic cable rates. The City of Cocoa is certified to regulate rates. Consequently, we will resolve this aspect of Time Warner's petition pursuant to Section 76.914 of the Commission's rules which permits a cable
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-01-423A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-01-423A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-01-423A1.txt
  • Washington, D.C. 20554 In the Matter of: Norwell Television, LLC Complaint for Carriage of WWDP(TV) Norwell, Massachusetts ) ) ) ) ) ) ) Adopted: February 14, 2001 Released: February 16, 2001 By the Chief, Consumer Protection and Competition Division, Cable Services Bureau: Introduction Norwell Television, LLC (``Norwell Television''), licensee of WWDP(TV), Norwell, Massachusetts, filed a complaint, pursuant to Section 76.7 of the Commission's rules, alleging that Harron Cablevision of New Hampshire, Inc. d/b/a Adelphia Communications Corporation (``Adelphia'') improperly refused to carry the signal of WWDP(TV) on Adelphia's cable systems in Kingston, Londonderry, and New London, New Hampshire (the ``Adelphia cable communities''). An opposition to the complaint was filed by Adelphia and WWDP(TV) filed a reply. BACKGROUND Pursuant to Section 614
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-01-536A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-01-536A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-01-536A1.txt
  • Warner Cable Petitions for Determination of Effective Competition in Waco, Texas (CUID No. TX0230) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) CSR 5637-E Adopted: February 27, 2001 Released: March 2, 2001 By the Deputy Chief, Cable Services Bureau: introduction Time Warner Entertainment-Advance/Newhouse Partnership, d/b/a Time Warner Cable (``Time Warner'') has filed with the Commission a petition pursuant to Sections 76.7, 76 905(b)(4) and 76.907 of the Commission's rules for revocation of the certification of the City of Waco, Texas to regulate basic cable service rates due to the presence of effective competition in Waco, Texas. Time Warner alleges that its cable system serving Waco is subject to effective competition pursuant to Section 623(a)(2) of the Communications Act of 1934, as
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-01-553A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-01-553A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-01-553A1.txt
  • 20554 In the Matter of: Texas Cable Partners, L.P. Petition for Determination of Effective Competition in Certain Communities in Texas ) ) ) ) ) ) CSR 5634-E Adopted: February 27, 2001 Released: March 2, 2001 By the Deputy Chief, Cable Services Bureau: introduction Texas Cable Partners, L.P. (``Texas Cable'') has filed with the Commission a petition pursuant to Sections 76.7 and 76.907 of the Commission's rules for a determination of effective competition in the twenty eight Texas communities listed on Attachment A (the ``Communities''). Texas Cable alleges that its cable systems serving these communities are subject to effective competition pursuant to Section 623(1) of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended ("Communications Act"), and the Commission's implementing rules, and are
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-01-571A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-01-571A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-01-571A1.txt
  • in Certain Communities in Vermont ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) CSR 5622-E Adopted: March 1, 2001 Released: March 5, 2001 By the Deputy Chief, Cable Services Bureau: introductions FrontierVision Operating Partners, L.P., Harron Communications Corporation and Richmond Cable Television Corporation, each d/b/a Adelphia Cable Communications (``Adelphia'') have filed with the Commission a petition pursuant to Sections 76.7 of the Commission's rules for a determination of effective competition in the Vermont communities listed in Attachment A (the ``Communities''). Adelphia alleges that its cable systems serving the Communities are subject to effective competition pursuant to Section 623(a)(2) of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended ("Communications Act"), and the Commission's implementing rules, and are therefore exempt from cable rate
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-01-808A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-01-808A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-01-808A1.txt
  • Gahanna, Ohio CUID No. OH0522 Westerville, Ohio CUID No. OH0517 Bexley, Ohio CUID No. OH0512 Obetz, Ohio Adopted: March 29, 2001 Released: April 2, 2001 By the Deputy Chief, Cable Services Bureau: INTRODUCTION Time Warner Entertainment Company, L.P., d/b/a Time Warner Communications (``Time Warner'') has filed a Petition for Special Relief seeking a determination of effective competition pursuant to Sections 76.7, 76.905(b)(4) and 76.907 of the Commission's rules. Time Warner asserts that it is subject to local exchange carrier (``LEC'') effective competition in the above-noted community units (the ``Communities'') because of the presence of Ameritech New Media, Inc.'s (``Ameritech'') cable services in those Communities. Time Warner also requests that the Commission revoke the certification of the City of Westerville, Ohio to
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-01-831A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-01-831A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-01-831A1.txt
  • Carry Complaint ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) CSR-5632-M Adopted: April 2, 2001 Released: April 3, 2001 By the Chief, Consumer Protection and Competition Division, Cable Services Bureau: introduction Paxson Oklahoma License, Inc. (``Paxson''), licensee of commercial television station KOPX-TV (Channel 62), Oklahoma City, Oklahoma, (``KOPX-TV'') filed a must carry complaint with the Commission, pursuant to Sections 76.7 and 76.61 of the Commission's rules, against Cox Communications (``Cox''). Paxson alleges that Cox has failed to carry the signal of KOPX-TV without material degradation on a basic service tier channel uniformly available to all Cox subscribers on its systems serving Edmond, Oklahoma and communities in Logan, Canadian, and Cleveland Counties, Oklahoma (the ``cable communities''), as required under the Commission's
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-01-882A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-01-882A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-01-882A1.txt
  • 3. Bertrand 21.54% 4. Boelus 46.03% 5. Cairo 30.83% 6. Cozad 23.50% 7. Dannebrog 48.16% 8. Elm Creek 16.83% 9. Hildreth 27.87% 10. Juniata 34.86% 11. Kenesaw 26.36% 12. Litchfield 36.61% 13. Loomis 22.14% 14. Minden 22.76% 15. Overton 23.80% 16. Ravenna 24.92% 17. Riverdale 22.22% 18. St. Libory 45.30% 19. Sumner 37.22% 20. Wilcox 29.89% See 47 C.F.R. § 76.7; Application of Antilles Wireless, L.L.C. to Transfer Control of MMDS Station Licenses to Cable USA, Inc.; Application of Russell G. Hilliard II to Transfer Control of MMDS Station Licenses to Cable USA, Inc. The Communities are: Amhearst, Axtell, Bertrand, Boelus, Cairo, Cozad, Dannebrog, Elm Creek, Hildreth, Juniata, Kenesaw, Litchfield, Loomis, Minden, Overton, Ravenna, Riverdale, Saint Libory, Sumner, and Wilcox, Nebraska.
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-01-906A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-01-906A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-01-906A1.txt
  • to rebut any aspect of KRPV's showing but instead merely asserts that the instant complaint is untimely and that KRPV intends to file a market modification petition. With regard to timeliness, KRPV points out that Commission precedent distinguishes between must carry ``election'' letters and carriage ``requests'' or ``demands.'' It also encourages negotiations between the parties. Indeed, KRPV states that Section 76.7(a)(4)(ii) of the Commission's rules requires a complaint to ``set forth [negotiation] steps taken by the parties to resolve the problem.'' In that light, KRPV points to three documents to demonstrate an ongoing course of negotiations between TCI and itself: 1) the first is its September 30, 1999 must carry election letter; 2) the second is TCI's November 12, 1999 letter
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-01-938A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-01-938A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-01-938A1.txt
  • that the four readings which were submitted, all of which fell below the minimum signal strength criteria, were sufficient evidence of WOCB-LP's failure to provide a good quality signal. Time Warner maintains that the additional required readings confirm the original result. In addition to its engineering showing, Time Warner points to WOCB-LP's procedural error in failing to comply with Section 76.7(c)(1) of the Commission's rules which requires that it serve Time Warner with a copy of its reply to Time Warner's opposition to the must carry complaint. Time Warner states that it learned of the reply's existence only at the time the Bureau Order was released. We grant Time Warner's petition for reconsideration. The amended engineering showing provided by Time Warner
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-02-102A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-02-102A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-02-102A1.txt
  • that television station for reception by subscribers. 47 C.F.R. § 76.66(a)(6). Under Section 76.66(m)(3) of the Commission's rules, a local television broadcast station that disputes a response by a satellite carrier that it is in compliance with its must carry obligations may obtain review of such denial or response by filing a ``complaint'' with the Commission in accordance with Section 76.7. 47 C.F.R. § 76.66(m)(3). Although styled as a ``complaint,'' a carriage complaint filed against a satellite carrier is treated by the Commission as a petition for special relief for purposes of the Commission's pleading requirements. See 1998 Biennial Regulatory Review: Part 76 - Cable Television Service Pleading and Complaint Rules, 14 FCC Rcd 418 (1999). Responsive pleadings filed in this
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-02-113A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-02-113A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-02-113A1.txt
  • consented to the extension of time request. KHCV's request is hereby granted. Under Section 76.66(m)(3) of the Commission's rules, a local television broadcast station that disputes a response by a satellite carrier that it is compliance with its must carry obligations may obtain review of such denial or response by filing a ``complaint'' with the Commission in accordance with Section 76.7. See 47 C.F.R. § 76.66(m)(3). Although styled a ``complaint,'' a carriage complaint filed against a satellite carrier is treated by the Commission as a petition for special relief for purposes of the Commission's pleading requirements. See 1998 Biennial Regulatory Review: Part 76 - Cable Television Service Pleading and Complaint Rules, 14 FCC Rcd 418 (1999). Responsive pleadings filed in this
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-02-114A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-02-114A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-02-114A1.txt
  • KLDT argues that DIRECTV should be barred from making its jurisdictional argument because the Commission resolved that issue in the DBS Must Carry Report & Order. KLDT also reiterates its earlier interpretation of Section 1.4. Based on the record, we deny KLDT's request for mandatory carriage. As an initial matter, we note that DIRECTV's opposition was timely filed. Under Section 76.7(b)(1), DIRECTV's opposition was due October 18, 2001, twenty days following the public notice of KLDT's complaint on September 28, 2001. Due to increased security concerns at the Commission's headquarters location in Washington, DC, the Commission temporarily suspended the acceptance of hand-delivered or messenger-delivered paper filings on October 18, 2001. The due date for all filings due at the Commission on
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-02-129A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-02-129A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-02-129A1.txt
  • that television station for reception by subscribers. 47 C.F.R. § 76.66(a)(6). Under Section 76.66(m)(3) of the Commission's rules, a local television broadcast station that disputes a response by a satellite carrier that it is in compliance with its must carry obligations may obtain review of such denial or response by filing a ``complaint'' with the Commission, in accordance with Section 76.7. See 47 C.F.R. § 76.66(m)(3). Although generally styled by parties as a ``complaint,'' we note that a carriage complaint filed against a satellite carrier is treated by the Commission as a petition for special relief for purposes of complying with the Commission's pleading requirements. See In the Matter of 1998 Biennial Regulatory Review: Part 76 - Cable Television Service Pleading
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-02-130A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-02-130A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-02-130A1.txt
  • Petition for Determination of Effective Competition in Northport, Alabama ) ) ) ) ) ) CSR 5777-E Adopted: January 16, 2002 Released: January 17, 2002 By the Deputy Chief, Cable Services Bureau: introduction Charter Communications, L.L.C. (``Charter'') has filed with the Commission a petition pursuant to Section 623(a)(1) of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended ("Communications Act") and Sections 76.7(a)(1) and 76.905(b)(1) of the Commission's rules for a determination of effective competition in Northport, Alabama (the ``Franchise Area''). Charter alleges that its cable system serving the Franchise Area is subject to effective competition and is therefore exempt from cable rate regulation. Charter claims the presence of effective competition in the Franchise Area because fewer than thirty percent of the households
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-02-1312A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-02-1312A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-02-1312A1.txt
  • Inc. ) ) ) ) ) ) ) CSR 5841-M MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER Adopted: May 31, 2002 Released: June 5, 2002 By the Deputy Chief, Policy Division, Media Bureau: introduction Sage Broadcasting Corporation ("Sage"), licensee of low power television ("LPTV") station KIDU-LP, Brownwood, Texas, filed a complaint pursuant to Section 614 of the Communications Act, as amended, and Sections 76.7 and 76.61(a) of the Commission's Rules, claiming entitlement to mandatory carriage of KIDU-LP in the communities of Brownwood, Santa Anna, Cross Plains, Rising Star, Clyde, and Baird, Texas (the ``Communities''), on the cable systems of Brownwood Cable Television Services, Inc. ("Brownwood"). Brownwood filed an opposition to the complaint and Sage filed a reply. discussion Both the Communications Act of 1934,
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-02-1315A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-02-1315A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-02-1315A1.txt
  • that television station for reception by subscribers. 47 C.F.R. § 76.66(a)(6). Under Section 76.66(m)(3) of the Commission's rules, a local television broadcast station that disputes a response by a satellite carrier that it is in compliance with its must carry obligations may obtain review of such denial or response by filing a ``complaint'' with the Commission in accordance with Section 76.7. See 47 C.F.R. § 76.66(m)(3). Although styled a ``complaint,'' a carriage complaint filed against a satellite carrier is treated by the Commission as a petition for special relief for purposes of the Commission's pleading requirements. See 1998 Biennial Regulatory Review: Part 76 - Cable Television Service Pleading and Complaint Rules, 14 FCC Rcd 418 (1999). Responsive pleadings filed in this
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-02-152A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-02-152A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-02-152A1.txt
  • that television station for reception by subscribers. 47 C.F.R. § 76.66(a)(6). Under Section 76.66(m)(3) of the Commission's rules, a local television broadcast station that disputes a response by a satellite carrier that it is in compliance with its must carry obligations may obtain review of such denial or response by filing a ``complaint'' with the Commission, in accordance with Section 76.7. See 47 C.F.R. § 76.66(m)(3). Although generally styled by parties as a ``complaint,'' we note that a carriage complaint filed against a satellite carrier is treated by the Commission as a petition for special relief for purposes of complying with the Commission's pleading requirements. See In the Matter of 1998 Biennial Regulatory Review: Part 76 - Cable Television Service Pleading
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-02-154A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-02-154A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-02-154A1.txt
  • that television station for reception by subscribers. 47 C.F.R. § 76.66(a)(6). Under Section 76.66(m)(3) of the Commission's rules, a local television broadcast station that disputes a response by a satellite carrier that it is in compliance with its must carry obligations may obtain review of such denial or response by filing a ``complaint'' with the Commission, in accordance with Section 76.7. See 47 C.F.R. § 76.66(m)(3). Although generally styled by parties as a ``complaint,'' we note that a carriage complaint filed against a satellite carrier is treated by the Commission as a petition for special relief for purposes of complying with the Commission's pleading requirements. See In the Matter of 1998 Biennial Regulatory Review: Part 76 - Cable Television Service Pleading
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-02-1568A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-02-1568A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-02-1568A1.txt
  • that television station for reception by subscribers. 47 C.F.R. § 76.66(a)(6). Under Section 76.66(m)(3) of the Commission's rules, a local television broadcast station that disputes a response by a satellite carrier that it is in compliance with its must carry obligations may obtain review of such denial or response by filing a ``complaint'' with the Commission in accordance with Section 76.7. See 47 C.F.R. § 76.66(m)(3). Although styled a ``complaint,'' a carriage complaint filed against a satellite carrier is treated by the Commission as a petition for special relief for purposes of the Commission's pleading requirements. See 1998 Biennial Regulatory Review: Part 76 - Cable Television Service Pleading and Complaint Rules, 14 FCC Rcd 418 (1999). Responsive pleadings filed in this
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-02-1599A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-02-1599A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-02-1599A1.txt
  • $0.63, the Aiken system's average monthly regulated revenue per channel per subscriber falls between that of small systems ($0.86) and that of systems with more than 15,000 subscribers ($0.44). However, given the totality of the circumstances, we find that Northland has demonstrated that its Aiken system resembles a small system according to most of the applicable criteria. 16. Under Section 76.7(c)(1) of the Commission's rules, a petition for special relief "shall state fully and precisely all pertinent facts and considerations relied on to demonstrate the need for the relief requested and to support a determination that a grant of such relief would serve the public interest." Northland has adequately established the Aiken system's "need for the relief requested" as required by
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-02-1619A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-02-1619A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-02-1619A1.txt
  • Communications Commission Washington, D.C. 20554 In the Matter of: Hometown Online, Inc. Petition for Determination of Effective Competition in Vernon Township, New Jersey ) ) ) ) ) ) CSR 5872-E Adopted: June 25, 2002 Released: July 10, 2002 By the Deputy Chief, Media Bureau: introduction Hometown Online, Inc. (``Hometown'') has filed with the Commission a petition pursuant to Section 76.7 of the Commission's rules for a determination of effective competition in Vernon Township, New Jersey pursuant to Section 623(a) of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended ("Communications Act"), and the Commission's implementing rules. More particularly, Hometown claims that it is subject to effective competition and is therefore exempt from cable rate regulation in Vernon Township because fewer than 30
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-02-1656A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-02-1656A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-02-1656A1.txt
  • that television station for reception by subscribers. 47 C.F.R. § 76.66(a)(6). Under Section 76.66(m)(3) of the Commission's rules, a local television broadcast station that disputes a response by a satellite carrier that it is in compliance with its must carry obligations may obtain review of such denial or response by filing a ``complaint'' with the Commission in accordance with Section 76.7. 47 C.F.R. § 76.66(m)(3). Although styled a ``complaint,'' a carriage complaint filed against a satellite carrier is treated by the Commission as a petition for special relief for purposes of the Commission's pleading requirements. See 1998 Biennial Regulatory Review: Part 76 - Cable Television Service Pleading and Complaint Rules, 14 FCC Rcd 418 (1999). Responsive pleadings filed in this context,
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-02-1720A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-02-1720A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-02-1720A1.txt
  • IS GRANTED to the extent indicated herein and in all other respects DENIED. This action is taken pursuant to authority delegated under § 0.283 of the Commission's rules, as amended. FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION W. Kenneth Ferree Chief, Media Bureau CTC filed its complaint pursuant to the open video system complaint procedures of Section 76.1513 and, in the alternative, the Section 76.7 general complaint procedures. See 47 C.F.R. §§ 76.1513; 76.7. Because Section 76.1513 appears to contemplate only complaints against open video system operators, we will treat CTC's complaint as filed pursuant to Section 76.7. An open video system is defined as ``[a] facility consisting of a set of transmission paths and associated signal generation, reception, and control equipment that is designed
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-02-175A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-02-175A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-02-175A1.txt
  • Effective Competition in Monroe, Michigan ) ) ) ) ) ) ) CSR 5811-E Adopted: January 22, 2002 Released: January 24, 2002 By the Deputy Chief, Cable Services Bureau: introduction CC Michigan, L.L.C. d/b/a Charter Communications (``Charter'') has filed with the Commission a petition pursuant to Section 623(a)(1) of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended ("Communications Act") and Sections 76.7(a)(1) and 76.905(b)(1) of the Commission's rules for a determination of effective competition in Monroe, Michigan (the ``Franchise Area''). Charter alleges that its cable system serving the Franchise Area is subject to effective competition and is therefore exempt from cable rate regulation. Charter claims the presence of effective competition in the Franchise Area because fewer than thirty percent of the households
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-02-176A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-02-176A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-02-176A1.txt
  • of Effective Competition in Petersburg, Michigan ) ) ) ) ) ) CSR 5806-E Adopted: January 22, 2002 Released: January 24, 2002 By the Deputy Chief, Cable Services Bureau: introduction CC: Michigan L.L.C., d/b/a Charter Communications (``Charter'') has filed with the Commission a petition pursuant to Section 623(a)(1) of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended ("Communications Act") and Sections 76.7(a)(1) and 76.905(b)(1) of the Commission's rules for a determination of effective competition in Petersburg, Michigan (the ``Franchise Area''). Charter alleges that its cable system serving the Franchise Area is subject to effective competition and is therefore exempt from cable rate regulation. Charter claims the presence of effective competition in the Franchise Area because fewer than thirty percent of the households
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-02-177A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-02-177A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-02-177A1.txt
  • Various Vermont Communities ) ) ) ) ) ) ) CSR 5800-E Adopted: January 22, 2002 Released: January 24, 2002 By the Deputy Chief, Cable Services Bureau: introduction 1. The Helicon Group, L.P. d/b/a Charter Communications (``Charter'') has filed with the Commission a petition pursuant to Section 623(a)(1) of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended ("Communications Act") and Sections 76.7(a)(1) and 76.905(b)(1) of the Commission's rules for a determination of effective competition in the cities of Cabot, Calais, East Montpelier, Marshfield, Plainfield, Woodbury, and Worchester, Vermont (the ``Franchise Area''). Charter alleges that its cable systems serving the Franchise Area are subject to effective competition and therefore exempt from cable rate regulation. Charter claims the presence of effective competition in the
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-02-1919A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-02-1919A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-02-1919A1.txt
  • the Commission a petition alleging that Charter is subject to effective competition from competing service providers in the fourteen franchise areas in Texas listed in Attachment A (collectively, the ``Communities''). Charter alleges that its' cable systems serving the Communities are subject to effective competition, pursuant to Section 623(a)(1) of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended ("Communications Act"), and Sections 76.7(a)(1) and 76.905(b)(2) of the Commission's rules, and seeks revocation of the certifications of the local franchising authorities in the Communities to regulate basic service rates. Charter bases its allegation of effective competition on the competing services provided by two direct broadcast satellite ("DBS") providers, DirecTV, Inc. (``DirecTV'') and EchoStar Communications Corporation (``EchoStar''), and a SMATV operator, TVMAX, Inc. No opposition
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-02-1940A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-02-1940A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-02-1940A1.txt
  • 0.283 of the Commission's rules. FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION Mary Beth Murphy Chief, Policy Division Media Bureau PTCB filed a Rebuttal to Comcast's Reply to Opposition. Comcast filed a Motion to Strike PTCB's Rebuttal to Reply to Opposition. We grant Comcast's Motion to Strike because PTCB failed to articulate the extraordinary circumstances required to support its consideration under 47 C.F.R. § 76.7(d). In any event, PTCB's Rebuttal did not raise any new arguments. 8 FCC Rcd 2965, 2976-2977 (1993). Section 614(h)(1)(C) of the Communications Act, as amended by the Telecommunications Act of 1996, provides that a station's market shall be determined by the Commission by regulation or order using, where available, commercial publications which delineate television markets based on viewing patterns. See
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-02-2093A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-02-2093A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-02-2093A1.txt
  • Fibervision, Inc. (``Fibervision'') has filed with the Commission a petition alleging that Fibervision is subject to effective competition from competing service providers in Laurel and Park City, Montana (the ``Communities''). Fibervision alleges that its cable system serving the Communities is subject to effective competition, pursuant to Section 623(a)(1) of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended ("Communications Act"), and Sections 76.7(a)(1) and 76.905(b)(2) of the Commission's rules. Fibervision bases its allegation of effective competition on the competing services provided by two direct broadcast satellite ("DBS") providers, DirecTV, Inc. (``DirecTV'') and EchoStar Communications Corporation (``EchoStar''). No opposition to the petition was filed. discussion In the absence of a demonstration to the contrary, cable systems are presumed not to be subject to effective
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-02-2152A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-02-2152A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-02-2152A1.txt
  • for carriage of television broadcast signals, program exclusivity, cablecasting, access channels, and related matters. Need: Theses rules prescribe definitions of cable television terms and requirements for waivers for special relief, enforcement, complaints, as well as declaratory ruling procedures. Legal basis: 47 U.S.C. § 154, 303, 339 Section Number and Title: 76.5 (jj) Definitions: Rural area. 76.5 (kk) Definitions: Technically integrated. 76.7 (e) General special relief, waiver, enforcement, complaint, show cause, forfeiture, and declaratory ruling procedures. Additional procedures and written submissions. SUBPART D - CARRIAGE OF TELEVISION BROADCAST SIGNALS Brief Description: These rules provide for the carriage of television broadcast signals on cable television systems. Subject to the Commission's network nonduplication, syndicated exclusivity and sports broadcasting rules, cable systems must carry the
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-02-2166A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-02-2166A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-02-2166A1.txt
  • 20554 In the Matter of: Falcon First, Inc., d/b/a Charter Communications Petition for Determination of Effective Competition in Athens, Alabama (AL0016) ) ) ) ) ) ) CSR-5797-E Adopted: September 5, 2002 Released: September 6, 2002 By the Deputy Chief, Media Bureau: introduction Falcon First, Inc., d/b/a Charter Communications (``Charter''), has filed with the Commission a petition pursuant to Section 76.7 of the Commission's rules for a determination of effective competition in Athens, Alabama. Charter alleges that its cable system serving Athens is subject to effective competition pursuant to Section 623(a) of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended ("Communications Act"), and Section 76.905(b)(2) of the Commission's rules, and seeks revocation of the certification of the local franchising authority in Athens
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-02-2167A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-02-2167A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-02-2167A1.txt
  • for Determination of Effective Competition in Bradford (VT0155), Chelsea (VT0132), Royalton (VT0029), and Turnbridge (VT0228), Vermont ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) CSR-5799-E Adopted: September 5, 2002 Released: September 6, 2002 By the Deputy Chief, Media Bureau: introduction The Helicon Group, L.P. d/b/a Charter Communications (``Charter'') has filed with the Commission a petition pursuant to Section 76.7 of the Commission's rules for a determination of effective competition with respect to certain communities in Vermont (collectively, the ``CPG''). Charter alleges that its cable system serving the CPG is subject to effective competition pursuant to Section 623(a) of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended ("Communications Act"), and Section 76.905(b)(2) of the Commission's rules, and seeks revocation of the
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-02-2168A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-02-2168A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-02-2168A1.txt
  • Helicon Group, L.P. d/b/a Charter Communications Petition for Determination of Effective Competition in Barnet, Vermont (VT0212), et al. ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) CSR-5801-E Adopted: September 5, 2002 Released: September 6, 2002 By the Deputy Chief, Media Bureau: introduction The Helicon Group, L.P. d/b/a Charter Communications (``Charter'') has filed with the Commission a petition pursuant to Section 76.7 of the Commission's rules for a determination of effective competition with respect to certain communities in Vermont (collectively, the ``CPG''). Charter alleges that its cable system serving the CPG is subject to effective competition pursuant to Section 623(a) of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended ("Communications Act"), and Section 76.905(b)(2) of the Commission's rules, and seeks revocation of the
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-02-2169A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-02-2169A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-02-2169A1.txt
  • Ð Before the Federal Communications Commission Washington, D.C. 20554 In the Matter of: Charter Communications Petition for Determination of Effective Competition in Rockwall, Texas (TX1181) ) ) ) ) ) ) CSR-5852-E Adopted: September 5, 2002 Released: September 6, 2002 By the Deputy Chief, Media Bureau: introduction Charter Communications (``Charter'') has filed with the Commission a petition pursuant to Section 76.7 of the Commission's rules for a determination of effective competition in Rockwall, Texas. Charter alleges that its cable system serving Rockwall is subject to effective competition pursuant to Section 623(a) of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended ("Communications Act"), and Section 76.905(b)(2) of the Commission's rules, and seeks revocation of the certification of the local franchising authority in Rockwall
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-02-2170A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-02-2170A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-02-2170A1.txt
  • the Matter of: Charter Communications, LLC d/b/a Charter Communications Petition for Determination of Effective Competition in Decaturville, Tennessee (TN0017) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) CSR-5890-E Adopted: September 5, 2002 Released: September 6, 2002 By the Deputy Chief, Media Bureau: introduction Charter Communications, LLC d/b/a Charter Communications (``Charter'') has filed with the Commission a petition pursuant to Section 76.7 of the Commission's rules for a determination of effective competition in Decaturville, Tennessee. Charter alleges that its cable system serving Decaturville is subject to effective competition pursuant to Section 623(a) of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended ("Communications Act"), and Section 76.905(b)(2) of the Commission's rules, and seeks revocation of the certification of the local franchising authority in Decaturville
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-02-2171A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-02-2171A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-02-2171A1.txt
  • the Matter of: Charter Communications, LLC d/b/a Charter Communications Petition for Determination of Effective Competition in Murray, Kentucky (KY0005) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) CSR-5892-E Adopted: September 5, 2002 Released: September 6, 2002 By the Deputy Chief, Media Bureau: introduction Charter Communications, LLC d/b/a Charter Communications (``Charter'') has filed with the Commission a petition pursuant to Section 76.7 of the Commission's rules for a determination of effective competition in Murray, Kentucky. Charter alleges that its cable system serving Murray is subject to effective competition pursuant to Section 623(a) of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended ("Communications Act"), and Section 76.905(b)(2) of the Commission's rules, and seeks revocation of the certification of the local franchising authority in Murray
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-02-2172A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-02-2172A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-02-2172A1.txt
  • LLC d/b/a Charter Communications (``Charter'') has filed with the Commission a petition alleging that Charter is subject to effective competition from competing service providers in the City of Marshall, Minnesota (``Marshall''). Charter alleges that its cable system serving Marshall is subject to effective competition, pursuant to Section 623(a)(1) of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended ("Communications Act"), and Sections 76.7(a)(1) and 76.905(b)(2) of the Commission's rules, and seeks revocation of the certification of the local franchising authority in Marshall to regulate basic service rates. Charter bases its allegation of effective competition on the competing services provided by two direct broadcast satellite ("DBS") providers, DirecTV, Inc. (``DirecTV'') and EchoStar Communications Corporation (``EchoStar''), and an overbuilder, McLeod USA. No opposition to the
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-02-2174A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-02-2174A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-02-2174A1.txt
  • Cable Associates, LLC d/b/a Charter Communications, Inc. (``Charter'') has filed with the Commission a petition alleging that Charter is subject to effective competition from competing service providers in Denton, Texas (``Denton''). Charter alleges that its cable system serving Denton is subject to effective competition, pursuant to Section 623(a)(1) of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended ("Communications Act"), and Sections 76.7(a)(1) and 76.905(b)(2) of the Commission's rules, and seeks revocation of the certification of the local franchising authority in Denton to regulate basic service rates. Charter bases its allegation of effective competition on the competing services provided by two direct broadcast satellite ("DBS") providers, DirecTV, Inc. (``DirecTV'') and EchoStar Communications Corporation (``EchoStar''), and a SMATV operator, TVMAX, Inc. Denton filed an
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-02-2175A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-02-2175A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-02-2175A1.txt
  • Television Company, Inc. d/b/a WEHCO Video, Inc. (``WEHCO'') has filed with the Commission a petition alleging that WEHCO is subject to effective competition from competing service providers in Longview, Texas (``Longview''). WEHCO alleges that its cable system serving Longview is subject to effective competition, pursuant to Section 623(a)(1) of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended ("Communications Act"), and Sections 76.7(a)(1) and 76.905(b)(2) of the Commission's rules, and seeks revocation of the certification of the local franchising authority in Longview to regulate basic service rates. WEHCO bases its allegation of effective competition on the competing services provided by two direct broadcast satellite ("DBS") providers, DirecTV, Inc. (``DirecTV'') and EchoStar Communications Corporation (``EchoStar''). No opposition to the petition was filed. discussion In
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-02-2176A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-02-2176A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-02-2176A1.txt
  • Vicksburg Video, Inc. d/b/a WEHCO Video, Inc. (``WEHCO'') has filed with the Commission a petition alleging that WEHCO is subject to effective competition from competing service providers in Vicksburg, Mississippi (``Vicksburg''). WEHCO alleges that its cable system serving Vicksburg is subject to effective competition, pursuant to Section 623(a)(1) of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended ("Communications Act"), and Sections 76.7(a)(1) and 76.905(b)(2) of the Commission's rules. WEHCO bases its allegation of effective competition on the competing services provided by two direct broadcast satellite ("DBS") providers, DirecTV, Inc. (``DirecTV'') and EchoStar Communications Corporation (``EchoStar''). No opposition to the petition was filed. discussion In the absence of a demonstration to the contrary, cable systems are presumed not to be subject to effective
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-02-2177A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-02-2177A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-02-2177A1.txt
  • Kilgore Video, Inc. d/b/a WEHCO Video, Inc. (``WEHCO'') has filed with the Commission a petition alleging that WEHCO is subject to effective competition from competing service providers in Kilgore, Texas (``Kilgore''). WEHCO alleges that its cable system serving Kilgore is subject to effective competition, pursuant to Section 623(a)(1) of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended ("Communications Act"), and Sections 76.7(a)(1) and 76.905(b)(2) of the Commission's rules, and seeks revocation of the certification of the local franchising authority in Kilgore to regulate basic service rates. WEHCO bases its allegation of effective competition on the competing services provided by two direct broadcast satellite ("DBS") providers, DirecTV, Inc. (``DirecTV'') and EchoStar Communications Corporation (``EchoStar''). No opposition to the petition was filed. discussion In
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-02-221A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-02-221A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-02-221A1.txt
  • that television station for reception by subscribers. 47 C.F.R. § 76.66(a)(6). Under Section 76.66(m)(3) of the Commission's rules, a local television broadcast station that disputes a response by a satellite carrier that it is in compliance with its must carry obligations may obtain review of such denial or response by filing a ``complaint'' with the Commission in accordance with Section 76.7. 47 C.F.R. § 76.66(m)(3). Although styled a ``complaint,'' a carriage complaint filed against a satellite carrier is treated by the Commission as a petition for special relief for purposes of the Commission's pleading requirements. See 1998 Biennial Regulatory Review: Part 76 - Cable Television Service Pleading and Complaint Rules, 14 FCC Rcd 418 (1999). Responsive pleadings filed in this context,
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-02-2293A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-02-2293A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-02-2293A1.txt
  • of: Charter Video Electronics, Inc. d/b/a Charter Communications Petition for Determination of Effective Competition in Hayward, Wisconsin (WI0665) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) CSR-5893-E Adopted: September 12, 2002 Released: September 18, 2002 By the Deputy Chief, Media Bureau: introduction Charter Video Electronics, Inc. d/b/a Charter Communications (``Charter'') has filed with the Commission a petition pursuant to Section 76.7 of the Commission's rules for a determination of effective competition in Hayward, Wisconsin. Charter alleges that its cable system serving Hayward is subject to effective competition pursuant to Section 623(a) of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended ("Communications Act"), and Section 76.905(b)(2) of the Commission's rules, and seeks revocation of the certification of the local franchising authority in Hayward
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-02-2294A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-02-2294A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-02-2294A1.txt
  • of: CoxCom, Inc. d/b/a Cox Communications Phoenix Petition for Determination of Effective Competition in Phoenix, AZ, et al. ) ) ) ) ) ) ) CSR-5897-E Adopted: September 12, 2002 Released: September 18, 2002 By the Deputy Chief, Media Bureau: introduction CoxCom, Inc. d/b/a Cox Communications Phoenix (``Cox'') has filed with the Commission a petition (the ``Petition'') pursuant to Sections 76.7 and 76.907 of the Commission's rules seeking a finding of effective competition in eight communities in Arizona (collectively, the ``Communities''). Cox alleges that its cable system serving the Communities is subject to effective competition pursuant to Section 623(a)(2) of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended ("Communications Act"), and the Commission's implementing rules, and is therefore exempt from cable rate
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-02-2296A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-02-2296A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-02-2296A1.txt
  • Petitions for Determination of Effective Competition in Hewitt and Woodway, Texas (CUID Nos. TX0460 & TX0258) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) CSR 5828-E Adopted: September 12, 2002 Released: September 18, 2002 By the Deputy Chief, Media Bureau: introduction Time Warner Entertainment-Advance/Newhouse Partnership, d/b/a Time Warner Cable (``Time Warner''), filed with the Commission a petition pursuant to Sections 76.7 of the Commission's rules for a determination of effective competition in Hewitt and Woodway, Texas (the ``Cities''). Time Warner also requests the revocation of the certification of the City of Woodway to regulate basic cable service rates due to the presence of effective competition. Time Warner alleges that its cable systems serving the Cities are subject to effective competition pursuant
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-02-229A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-02-229A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-02-229A1.txt
  • that television station for reception by subscribers. 47 C.F.R. § 76.66(a)(6). Under Section 76.66(m)(3) of the Commission's rules, a local television broadcast station that disputes a response by a satellite carrier that it is in compliance with its must carry obligations may obtain review of such denial or response by filing a ``complaint'' with the Commission in accordance with Section 76.7. 47 C.F.R. § 76.66(m)(3). Although styled a ``complaint,'' a carriage complaint filed against a satellite carrier is treated by the Commission as a petition for special relief for purposes of the Commission's pleading requirements. See 1998 Biennial Regulatory Review: Part 76 - Cable Television Service Pleading and Complaint Rules, 14 FCC Rcd 418 (1999). Responsive pleadings filed in this context,
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-02-2316A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-02-2316A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-02-2316A1.txt
  • that Cablevision is subject to effective competition from competing service providers in Allamuchy Township, Montague Township and the Layton and Branchville portions of Sandyston Township, New Jersey (collectively, the ``Communities''). Cablevision alleges that its cable system serving the Communities is subject to effective competition, pursuant to Section 623(a)(1) of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended ("Communications Act"), and Sections 76.7(a)(1) and 76.905(b)(2) of the Commission's rules, and seeks revocation of the certification of the New Jersey Board of Public Utilities' Office of Cable Television (``OCTV'') to regulate basic service rates. Cablevision bases its allegation of effective competition on the competing services provided by two direct broadcast satellite ("DBS") providers, DirecTV, Inc. (``DirecTV'') and EchoStar Communications Corporation (``EchoStar''). The New Jersey
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-02-231A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-02-231A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-02-231A1.txt
  • that television station for reception by subscribers. 47 C.F.R. § 76.66(a)(6). Under Section 76.66(m)(3) of the Commission's rules, a local television broadcast station that disputes a response by a satellite carrier that it is in compliance with its must carry obligations may obtain review of such denial or response by filing a ``complaint'' with the Commission in accordance with Section 76.7. 47 C.F.R. § 76.66(m)(3). Although styled a ``complaint,'' a carriage complaint filed against a satellite carrier is treated by the Commission as a petition for special relief for purposes of the Commission's pleading requirements. See 1998 Biennial Regulatory Review: Part 76 - Cable Television Service Pleading and Complaint Rules, 14 FCC Rcd 418 (1999). Responsive pleadings filed in this context,
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-02-2324A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-02-2324A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-02-2324A1.txt
  • (``Charter'') has filed with the Commission a petition alleging that Charter is subject to effective competition from competing service providers in Coldwater Township and Coldwater City, Michigan (collectively, the ``Communities''). Charter alleges that its' cable system serving the Communities is subject to effective competition, pursuant to Section 623(a)(1) of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended ("Communications Act"), and Sections 76.7(a)(1) and 76.905(b)(2) of the Commission's rules, and seeks revocation of the certifications of the local franchising authorities in the Communities to regulate basic service rates. Charter bases its allegation of effective competition on the competing services provided by two direct broadcast satellite ("DBS") providers, DirecTV, Inc. (``DirecTV'') and EchoStar Communications Corporation (``EchoStar''), and a public utility overbuilder, the Coldwater Board
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-02-2325A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-02-2325A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-02-2325A1.txt
  • filed with the Commission a petition alleging that its cable systems are subject to effective competition from competing service providers in its Altavista, Hurt, and unincorporated Pittsylvania County, Virginia franchise areas (the ``communities''). Adelphia alleges that its cable systems are subject to effective competition, pursuant to Section 623(a)(1) of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended ("Communications Act"), and Sections 76.7(a)(1) and 76.905(b)(2) of the Commission's rules. Adelphia bases its allegation of effective competition on the competing services provided by two direct broadcast satellite ("DBS") providers, DirecTV, Inc. (``DirecTV'') and DISH Network (``DISH''). No opposition to the petition was filed. Discussion In the absence of a demonstration to the contrary, cable systems are presumed not to be subject to effective competition,
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-02-2326A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-02-2326A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-02-2326A1.txt
  • Competition ) ) ) ) ) ) ) CSR 5870-E Adopted: September 18, 2002 Released: September 20, 2002 By the Deputy Chief, Policy Division, Media Bureau: introduction 1. Horry Telephone Cooperative, Inc. d/b/a Horry Telephone Cablevision (``Horry'') has filed with the Commission a petition pursuant to Section 623(a)(1) of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended ("Communications Act") and Sections 76.7(a)(1) and 76.905(b)(1) of the Commission's rules for a determination of effective competition in its Horry County, South Carolina franchise area (the ``county''). Horry alleges that its cable system serving the county is subject to effective competition and therefore exempt from cable rate regulation. Horry claims the presence of effective competition because of the competing services offered by Time Warner Entertainment-Advance/Newhouse
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-02-2380A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-02-2380A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-02-2380A1.txt
  • the Commission's rules, 47 C.F.R. §§ 76.66, that the must carry complaint filed by Christian Television Corporation IS DISMISSED. This action is taken pursuant to authority delegated by Section 0.283 of the Commission's rules, 47 C.F.R. § 0.283. FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION William H. Johnson Deputy Chief, Media Bureau Must carry complaints are treated as Petitions for Special Relief under Section 76.7 of our rules. See 1998 Biennial Regulatory Review: Part 76 - Cable Television Service Pleading and Complaint Rules, 14 FCC Rcd 418 (1999). 47 C.F.R. § 76.66. See 17 U.S.C. § 122(a); 47 U.S.C. § 339. A satellite carrier provides ``local-into-local'' satellite service when it retransmits a local television signal back into the local market of that television station for
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-02-2391A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-02-2391A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-02-2391A1.txt
  • alleging that Adelphia's cable system is subject to effective competition from competing service providers in the City of Arcadia, California (``Arcadia'') and requests revocation of Arcadia's certification to regulate basic cable service rates. Adelphia alleges that its' cable system is subject to effective competition, pursuant to Section 623(a)(1) of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended ("Communications Act"), and Sections 76.7(a)(1) and 76.905(b)(2) of the Commission's rules. Adelphia bases its allegation of effective competition on the competing services provided by two direct broadcast satellite ("DBS") providers, DirecTV, Inc. (``DirecTV'') and DISH Network (``DISH''). No opposition to the petition was filed. DISCUSSION In the absence of a demonstration to the contrary, cable systems are presumed not to be subject to effective competition,
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-02-2424A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-02-2424A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-02-2424A1.txt
  • Charter Communications (``Charter'') has filed with the Commission a petition alleging that Charter is subject to effective competition from competing service providers in ten communities in Wisconsin (collectively, the ``Communities''). Charter alleges that its' cable systems serving the Communities are subject to effective competition, pursuant to Section 623(a)(1) of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended ("Communications Act"), and Sections 76.7(a)(1) and 76.905(b)(2) of the Commission's rules, and seeks revocation of the certifications to regulate basic cable service rates of the local franchising authorities in the Communities. Charter bases its allegation of effective competition on the competing services provided by two direct broadcast satellite ("DBS") providers, DirecTV, Inc. (``DirecTV'') and EchoStar Communications Corporation (``EchoStar''). No opposition to the petition was filed.
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-02-2425A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-02-2425A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-02-2425A1.txt
  • Time Warner Cable (``Time Warner'') has filed with the Commission a petition alleging that Time Warner is subject to effective competition from competing service providers in its Cape Coral, Florida franchise area. Time Warner alleges that its' cable system is subject to effective competition pursuant to Section 623(a)(1) of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended ("Communications Act"), and Sections 76.7(a)(1) and 76.905(b)(2) of the Commission's rules. Time Warner bases its allegation of effective competition on the competing services provided by two direct broadcast satellite ("DBS") providers, DirecTV, Inc. (``DirecTV'') and DISH Network (``DISH''). No opposition to the petition was filed. discussion In the absence of a demonstration to the contrary, cable systems are presumed not to be subject to effective
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-02-2441A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-02-2441A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-02-2441A1.txt
  • alleging that Charter is subject to effective competition from competing service providers in its Morgan Hill, King City, Hollister, Gilroy, San Juan Bautista, and Norco, California franchise areas (the ``Communities''). Charter alleges that its cable systems serving the Communities are subject to effective competition pursuant to Section 623(a)(1) of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended ("Communications Act"), and Sections 76.7(a)(1) and 76.905(b)(2) of the Commission's rules. Charter bases its allegation of effective competition on the competing services provided by two direct broadcast satellite ("DBS") providers, DirecTV, Inc. (``DirecTV'') and EchoStar Communications Corporation (``EchoStar''). No opposition to the petition was filed. discussion In the absence of a demonstration to the contrary, cable systems are presumed not to be subject to effective
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-02-2480A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-02-2480A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-02-2480A1.txt
  • with the Commission a petition alleging that Charter is subject to effective competition from competing service providers in its Jefferson, Marshall, Hallsville, Atlanta, and Rockwall, Texas franchise areas (the ``Communities''). Charter alleges that its cable systems serving the Communities are subject to effective competition pursuant to Section 623(a)(1) of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended ("Communications Act"), and Sections 76.7(a)(1) and 76.905(b)(2) of the Commission's rules. Charter bases its allegation of effective competition on the competing services provided by two direct broadcast satellite ("DBS") providers, DirecTV, Inc. (``DirecTV'') and EchoStar Communications Corporation (``EchoStar''). No opposition to the petition was filed. discussion In the absence of a demonstration to the contrary, cable systems are presumed not to be subject to effective
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-02-2488A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-02-2488A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-02-2488A1.txt
  • Time Warner Cable (``Time Warner'') has filed with the Commission a petition alleging that Time Warner is subject to effective competition from competing service providers in its Live Oak, Florida franchise area. Time Warner alleges that its' cable system is subject to effective competition pursuant to Section 623(a)(1) of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended ("Communications Act"), and Sections 76.7(a)(1) and 76.905(b)(2) of the Commission's rules. Time Warner bases its allegation of effective competition on the competing services provided by two direct broadcast satellite ("DBS") providers, DirecTV, Inc. (``DirecTV'') and DISH Network (``DISH''). The City of Live Oak filed an opposition to which Time Warner replied. DISCUSSION In the absence of a demonstration to the contrary, cable systems are presumed
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-02-2634A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-02-2634A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-02-2634A1.txt
  • Hot Springs, AR (CUID Nos. AR0005 & AR0030) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) CSR-5926-E Adopted: October 11, 2002 Released: October 15, 2002 By the Deputy Chief, Policy Division, Media Bureau: introduction Cam-Tel Company and Resort Television Cable Company, Inc., d/b/a WEHCO Video, Inc. (``WEHCO''), have filed with the Federal Communications Commission (``Commission'') a petition pursuant to Section 76.7 of the Commission's rules for a determination of effective competition in the two above-captioned communities in Arkansas (the ``Communities''). WEHCO alleges that its cable systems serving the Communities are subject to effective competition pursuant to Section 623(a) of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended ("Communications Act"), and Section 76.905(b)(2) of the Commission's rules. WEHCO claims the presence of effective
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-02-2716A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-02-2716A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-02-2716A1.txt
  • ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) CSR-5918-M MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER Adopted: October 16, 2002 Released: October 18, 2002 By the Deputy Chief, Policy Division, Media Bureau: introduction TCT of Michigan, Inc. (``TCT''), licensee of television broadcast station WTLJ(TV), Muskegon, Michigan (``WTLJ'' or the ``Station''), has filed a must carry complaint with the Commission pursuant to Sections 76.7 and 76.61(a) of the Commission's rules, claiming that Charter Communications (``Charter'') has failed to commence carriage of WTLJ on Charter's cable system serving Coldwater, Michigan. TCT requests that the Commission order Charter to commence carriage of WTLJ on channel 54, its over-the-air broadcast channel. Charter filed an opposition to which TCT replied. For the reasons discussed below, we grant TCT's
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-02-2842A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-02-2842A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-02-2842A1.txt
  • Charter Communications Petition for Determination of Effective Competition in Wisconsin Rapids, WI (CUID No. WA0062) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) CSR-5895-E Adopted: October 24, 2002 Released: October 25, 2002 By the Deputy Chief, Policy Division, Media Bureau: introduction Charter Cable Partners, LLC, d/b/a Charter Communications (``Charter'') has filed with the Commission a petition pursuant to Sections 76.7 and 76.907 of the Commission's rules seeking a finding of effective competition in Wisconsin Rapids, Wisconsin. Charter alleges that its cable system serving the City of Wisconsin Rapids is subject to effective competition pursuant to Section 623(a)(2) of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended ("Communications Act"), and the Commission's implementing rules, and is therefore exempt from cable rate regulation.
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-02-2847A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-02-2847A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-02-2847A1.txt
  • WDYR-LP Dyersburg, Tennessee ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) CSR-5920-M MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER Adopted: October 24, 2002 Released: October 28, 2002 By the Deputy Chief, Policy Division, Media Bureau: introduction Tri-State Christian TV, Inc., licensee of low power television station (``LPTV'') WDYR-LP (``WDYR''), Dyersburg, Tennessee, filed a complaint pursuant to Sections 76.56(b)(3), 76.61(a) and 76.7 of the Commission's rules, asserting mandatory carriage rights for WDYR on Blytheville TV Cable Company's (``Blytheville'') Blytheville, Arkansas cable system. Blytheville filed an opposition to which WDYR replied. For the reasons discussed below we deny the complaint. background Both the Communications Act of 1934, as amended, and the Commission's rules require the carriage of ``qualified'' LPTV stations in certain limited
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-02-2875A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-02-2875A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-02-2875A1.txt
  • ) ) ) ) ) ) CSR 5937 MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER Adopted: October 28, 2002 Released: October 30, 2002 By the Deputy Chief, Policy Division, Media Bureau: introduction Millenium Communications & Productions ("Millenium"), licensee of low power television ("LPTV") station KLNM-LP (``KLNM-LP''), Lufkin, Texas, filed a complaint pursuant to Section 614 of the Communications Act, as amended, and Sections 76.7 and 76.61(a) of the Commission's Rules, claiming entitlement to mandatory carriage of KLNM-LP on the cable system of Cox Communications (``Cox'') serving the community of Lufkin, Texas. Cox filed an opposition to the complaint. background Both the Communications Act of 1934, as amended, and the Commission's rules require the carriage of "qualified" LPTV stations in certain limited circumstances. An LPTV
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-02-2944A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-02-2944A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-02-2944A1.txt
  • to show cause filed by The School Board of Miami-Dade County, Florida IS GRANTED to the extent indicated herein. This action is taken pursuant to authority delegated by Section 0.283 of the Commission's rules, 47 C.F.R. § 0.283. FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION William H. Johnson Deputy Chief, Media Bureau Must carry complaints are treated as Petitions for Special Relief under Section 76.7 of our rules. See 1998 Biennial Regulatory Review: Part 76 - Cable Television Service Pleading and Complaint Rules, 14 FCC Rcd 418 (1999). 47 C.F.R. § 76.66. See National Association of Broadcasters and Association of Local Television Stations, Request for Modification or Clarification of Broadcast Carriage Rules for Satellite Carriers, 17 FCC Rcd 6065 (2002) (``Declaratory Ruling''), petitions for reconsideration
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-02-2945A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-02-2945A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-02-2945A1.txt
  • Falcon First, Inc. d/b/a Charter Communications Petition for Determination of Effective Competition in Eleven New York Communities ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) CSR-5963-E Adopted: October 30, 2002 Released: November 1, 2002 By the Deputy Chief, Policy Division, Media Bureau: introduction Falcon First, Inc. d/b/a Charter Communications (``Charter'') has filed with the Commission a petition pursuant to Section 76.7 of the Commission's rules for a determination of effective competition in eleven communities in New York (the ``Communities''). Charter alleges that its cable system serving the Communities is subject to effective competition pursuant to Section 623(a) of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended ("Communications Act"), and Section 76.905(b)(1)-(2) of the Commission's rules, and seeks revocation of the certification of
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-02-2946A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-02-2946A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-02-2946A1.txt
  • I, LLC d/b/a Charter Communications Petition for Determination of Effective Competition in Sixteen Missouri Communities ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) CSR-5983-E Adopted: October 30, 2002 Released: November 1, 2002 By the Deputy Chief, Policy Division, Media Bureau: introduction Charter Communications Entertainment I, LLC d/b/a Charter Communications (``Charter'') has filed with the Commission a petition pursuant to Section 76.7 of the Commission's rules for a determination of effective competition in sixteen communities in Missouri (the ``Communities''). Charter alleges that its cable systems serving the Communities are subject to effective competition pursuant to Section 623(a) of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended ("Communications Act"), and Section 76.905(b)(1)-(2) of the Commission's rules, and seeks revocation of the certifications of the
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-02-2947A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-02-2947A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-02-2947A1.txt
  • Effective Competition in Brownfield (TX0069), Coleman (TX0042), Littlefield (TX0221), Morton (TX0275) and Slaton (TX0480), Texas ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) CSR-5985-E Adopted: October 30, 2002 Released: November 1, 2002 By the Deputy Chief, Policy Division, Media Bureau: introduction Charter Communications VI, LLC d/b/a Charter Communications (``Charter'') has filed with the Commission a petition pursuant to Section 76.7 of the Commission's rules for a determination of effective competition in the five above-captioned communities in Texas (the ``Communities''). Charter alleges that its cable systems serving the Communities are subject to effective competition pursuant to Section 623(a) of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended ("Communications Act"), and Section 76.905(b)(2) of the Commission's rules, and seeks revocation of the certification
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-02-2953A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-02-2953A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-02-2953A1.txt
  • in Cities of Archer, Holiday and Wichita Falls, TX (CUID Nos. TX0763, TX1300 & TX0483) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) CSR-5932-E Adopted: October 31, 2002 Released: November 1, 2002 By the Deputy Chief, Policy Division, Media Bureau: introduction Time Warner/Advance-Newhouse Partnership d/b/a Time Warner Cable (``Time Warner'') has filed with the Commission a petition pursuant to Section 76.7 of the Commission's rules for a determination of effective competition in the three above-captioned communities in Texas (the ``Communities''). Time Warner alleges that its cable systems serving the Communities are subject to effective competition pursuant to Section 623(a) of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended ("Communications Act"), and Section 76.905(b)(2) of the Commission's rules, and seeks revocation of the
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-02-2977A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-02-2977A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-02-2977A1.txt
  • Community Cable, L.P. d/b/a Charter Communications Petition for Determination of Effective Competition in Seven Kentucky Communities ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) CSR-5964-E Adopted: October 31, 2002 Released: November 4, 2002 By the Deputy Chief, Policy Division, Media Bureau: introduction Falcon Community Cable, L.P. d/b/a Charter Communications (``Charter'') has filed with the Commission a petition pursuant to Section 76.7 of the Commission's rules for a determination of effective competition in seven communities in Kentucky (the ``Communities''). Charter alleges that its cable systems serving the Communities are subject to effective competition pursuant to Section 623(a) of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended ("Communications Act"), and Section 76.905(b)(1)-(2) of the Commission's rules, and seeks revocation of the certifications of the
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-02-2982A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-02-2982A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-02-2982A1.txt
  • of: Coxcom, Inc. d/b/a Cox Communications Phoenix Petition for Determination of Effective Competition in Eleven Arizona Communities ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) CSR-5981-E Adopted: November 1, 2002 Released: November 4, 2002 By the Deputy Chief, Policy Division, Media Bureau: introduction Coxcom, Inc. d/b/a Cox Communications Phoenix (``Cox'') has filed with the Commission a petition pursuant to Section 76.7 of the Commission's rules for a determination of effective competition in the eleven above-captioned communities in Arizona (the ``Communities''). Cox alleges that its cable systems serving the Communities are subject to effective competition pursuant to Section 623(a) of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended ("Communications Act"), and Section 76.905(b)(2) of the Commission's rules, and seeks revocation of the certification
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-02-2986A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-02-2986A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-02-2986A1.txt
  • for Revocation of Certification and Determination of Effective Competition in Colorado Springs, Colorado (CO0030) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) CSR 5884-E Adopted: November 1, 2002 Released: November 5, 2002 By the Deputy Chief, Policy Division, Media Bureau: introduction Century Colorado Springs Partnership d/b/a Adelphia Cable Communications (``Adelphia'') has filed with the Commission a petition pursuant to Sections 76.7, 76.905(b)(2) and 76.907 of the Commission's rules for revocation of the certification of the City of Colorado Springs, Colorado to regulate basic cable service rates due to the presence of effective competition. Adelphia alleges that its cable system serving Colorado Springs is subject to effective competition pursuant to Section 623(a)(2) of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended ("Communications Act"),
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-02-3012A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-02-3012A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-02-3012A1.txt
  • of: Charter Communications, LLC d/b/a Charter Communications Petition for Determination of Effective Competition in Hopkinsville, Kentucky (KY0087) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) CSR-5962-E Adopted: November 1, 2002 Released: November 5, 2002 By the Deputy Chief, Policy Division, Media Bureau: introduction Charter Communications, LLC d/b/a Charter Communications (``Charter'') has filed with the Commission a petition pursuant to Section 76.7 of the Commission's rules for a determination of effective competition in Hopkinsville, Kentucky (``Hopkinsville''). Charter alleges that its cable system serving Hopkinsville is subject to effective competition pursuant to Section 623(a) of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended ("Communications Act"), and Section 76.905(b)(2) of the Commission's rules, and seeks revocation of the certification of the local franchising authority in
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-02-3079A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-02-3079A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-02-3079A1.txt
  • Cable Associates, LLC d/b/a Charter Communications Petition for Determination of Effective Competition in Duncanville, Texas (TX0548) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) CSR-5984-E Adopted: November 7, 2002 Released: November 8, 2002 By the Deputy Chief, Policy Division, Media Bureau: introduction Marcus Cable Associates, LLC d/b/a Charter Communications (``Charter'') has filed with the Commission a petition pursuant to Section 76.7 of the Commission's rules for a determination of effective competition in Duncanville, Texas (``Duncanville''). Charter alleges that its cable system serving Duncanville is subject to effective competition pursuant to Section 623(a) of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended ("Communications Act"), and Section 76.905(b)(2) of the Commission's rules, and seeks revocation of the certification of the local franchising authority in
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-02-3084A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-02-3084A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-02-3084A1.txt
  • Grade B contour analysis. In situations involving mountainous terrain or other unusual geographical features, Longley-Rice propagation studies can aid in determining whether or not a television station actually provides local service to a community under factor two of the market modification test. See Modification Final Report and Order, 14 FCC Rcd at 8388. 47 C.F.R. § 76.59(b). 47 C.F.R. §§ 76.7, 76.59(c). See 47 C.F.R. § 76.59(b)(1)-(2). The map KFTL identifies as its terrain map appears to be simply a larger version of its signal contour map. See KFTL Petition at Exhibit V. 47 U.S.C. § 534(h); 47 C.F.R. § 76.59(c). 47 C.F.R. § 0.283. (...continued from previous page) (continued....) Federal Communications Commission DA 02-3084 Federal Communications Commission DA 02-3084 #
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-02-3093A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-02-3093A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-02-3093A1.txt
  • of Effective Competition in Mount Orab, Ohio ) ) ) ) ) ) CSR 5863-E Adopted: November 7, 2002 Released: November 12, 2002 By the Deputy Chief, Policy Division, Media Bureau: introduction Thompson Cable Vision Company (``Thompson'') has filed with the Commission a petition pursuant to Section 623(a)(1) of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended ("Communications Act") and Sections 76.7(a)(1) and 76.905(b)(1) of the Commission's rules for a determination of effective competition in Mount Orab, Ohio (the ``Franchise Area''). Thompson alleges that its cable system serving the Franchise Area is subject to effective competition and is therefore exempt from cable rate regulation. Thompson claims the presence of effective competition in the Franchise Area because fewer than thirty percent of the
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-02-3098A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-02-3098A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-02-3098A1.txt
  • the Commission's rules, 47 C.F.R. §§ 76.66, that the must carry complaint filed by Telemundo Group, Inc. IS DISMISSED. This action is taken pursuant to authority delegated by Section 0.283 of the Commission's rules, 47 C.F.R. § 0.283. FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION William H. Johnson Deputy Chief, Media Bureau Must carry complaints are treated as Petitions for Special Relief under Section 76.7 of our rules. See 1998 Biennial Regulatory Review: Part 76 - Cable Television Service Pleading and Complaint Rules, 14 FCC Rcd 418 (1999). 47 C.F.R. § 76.66. See 17 U.S.C. § 122(a); 47 U.S.C. § 339. A satellite carrier provides ``local-into-local'' satellite service when it retransmits a local television signal back into the local market of that television station for
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-02-3140A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-02-3140A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-02-3140A1.txt
  • Competition in Hondo (TX0605), Port Aransas (TX0669), Shiner (TX0349) and Sinton (TX0741), Texas ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) CSR-5986-E Adopted: November 8, 2002 Released: November 14, 2002 By the Deputy Chief, Policy Division, Media Bureau: introduction Falcon Telecable, a California Limited Partnership d/b/a Charter Communications (``Charter'') has filed with the Commission a petition pursuant to Section 76.7 of the Commission's rules for a determination of effective competition in the four above-captioned communities in Texas (the ``Communities''). Charter alleges that its cable systems serving the Communities are subject to effective competition pursuant to Section 623(a) of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended ("Communications Act"), and Section 76.905(b)(2) of the Commission's rules, and seeks revocation of the certification
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-02-3192A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-02-3192A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-02-3192A1.txt
  • CSR 5796-E Adopted: November 15, 2002 Released: November 19, 2002 By the Deputy Chief, Policy Division, Media Bureau: introduction 1. Time Warner Entertainment-Advance/Newhouse Partnership, Time Warner Entertainment Company, L.P., and Cablevision Industries of Central Florida (``Time Warner'') has filed with the Commission a petition pursuant to Section 623(a)(1) of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended ("Communications Act") and Sections 76.7(a)(1) and 76.905(b)(1) of the Commission's rules for a determination of effective competition in thirteen communities in Florida (the ``Communities''). Time Warner alleges that its cable systems serving the Communities are subject to effective competition and therefore exempt from cable rate regulation. Time Warner alleges that its cable systems serving twelve Communities are subject to effective competition and therefore exempt from
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-02-3199A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-02-3199A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-02-3199A1.txt
  • the Matter of Requirement to File an Annual FCC Form 320 for All Individual Community Units Served by a Common Cable System ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) CSR 5743 CSR 5805 CSR 5874 Adopted: November 18, 2002 Released: November 22, 2002 By the Chief, Media Bureau: Introduction We have before us petitions filed pursuant to Section 76.7(a)(1) of the Commission's Rules by Armstrong Utilities, Inc. (``Armstrong''); CSC Holdings, Inc. (``CSC''); and Comcast Cable Communications, Inc. (``Comcast''). Each petition requests that the Commission allow the cable system operator to file a single Form 320 for each physical system, identifying the communities served by the system, rather than a separate Form 320 for each community. This would greatly reduce
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-02-3224A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-02-3224A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-02-3224A1.txt
  • the Matter of: Time Warner Entertainment Company, L.P. Petition for Determination of Effective Competition in Wadsworth, Ohio (OH1003) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) CSR-5954-E Adopted: November 20, 2002 Released: November 25, 2002 By the Deputy Chief, Policy Division, Media Bureau: introduction Time Warner Entertainment Company, L.P. (``Time Warner'') filed with the Commission a petition pursuant to Section 76.7 of the Commission's rules for a determination of effective competition in Wadsworth, Ohio (``Wadsworth'' or the ``City''). Time Warner alleges that its cable system serving Wadsworth is subject to effective competition pursuant to Section 623(a) of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended ("Communications Act"), and Section 76.905(b)(3) of the Commission's rules and seeks revocation of the certification of the
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-02-3237A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-02-3237A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-02-3237A1.txt
  • in West Milford Township, New Jersey (NJ0632), Warwick Village, New York (NY1721) and Florida Village, New York (NY1722) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) CSR 5960-E Adopted: November 22, 2002 Released: November 25, 2002 By the Deputy Chief, Policy Division, Media Bureau: introduction Hometown Online, Inc. (``Hometown'') has filed with the Commission a petition pursuant to Section 76.7 of the Commission's rules for a determination of effective competition in West Milford Township, New Jersey and the Villages of Warwick and Florida, New York (the ``Communities''). Hometown claims that it is subject to effective competition and is therefore exempt from cable rate regulation in the Communities because fewer than 30 percent of the households in each franchise area subscribe
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-02-325A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-02-325A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-02-325A1.txt
  • that television station for reception by subscribers. 47 C.F.R. § 76.66(a)(6). Under Section 76.66(m)(3) of the Commission's rules, a local television broadcast station that disputes a response by a satellite carrier that it is in compliance with its must carry obligations may obtain review of such denial or response by filing a ``complaint'' with the Commission in accordance with Section 76.7. 47 C.F.R. § 76.66(m)(3). Although styled a ``complaint,'' a carriage complaint filed against a satellite carrier is treated by the Commission as a petition for special relief for purposes of the Commission's pleading requirements. See 1998 Biennial Regulatory Review: Part 76 - Cable Television Service Pleading and Complaint Rules, 14 FCC Rcd 418 (1999). Responsive pleadings filed in this context,
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-02-326A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-02-326A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-02-326A1.txt
  • market of that television station for reception by subscribers. 47 C.F.R. § 76.66(a)(6). Under Section76.66(m)(3) of the Commission's rules, a local television broadcast station that disputes a response by a satellite carrier that is in compliance with its must carry obligations may obtain review of such denial or response by filing a ``complaint'' with the Commission in accordance with Section 76.7. See 47 C.F.R. § 76.66(m)(3). Although styled a ``complaint,'' a carriage complaint filed against a satellite carrier is treated by the Commission as a petition for special relief for purposes of the Commission's pleading requirements. See 1998 Biennial Regulatory Review: Part 76 - Cable Television Service Pleading and Complaint Rules, 14 FCC Rcd 418 (1999). Responsive pleadings filed in this
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-02-327A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-02-327A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-02-327A1.txt
  • that television station for reception by subscribers. 47 C.F.R. § 76.66(a)(6). Under Section 76.66(m)(3) of the Commission's rules, a local television broadcast station that disputes a response by a satellite carrier that it is in compliance with its must carry obligations may obtain review of such denial or response by filing a ``complaint'' with the Commission in accordance with Section 76.7. See 47 C.F.R. § 76.66(m)(3). Although styled a ``complaint,'' a carriage complaint filed against a satellite carrier is treated by the Commission as a petition for special relief for purposes of the Commission's pleading requirements. See 1998 Biennial Regulatory Review: Part 76 - Cable Television Service Pleading and Complaint Rules, 14 FCC Rcd 418 (1999). Responsive pleadings filed in this
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-02-3335A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-02-3335A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-02-3335A1.txt
  • Enstar XI d/b/a Charter Communications Petition for Determination of Effective Competition in Ashdown (AR0109) and Foreman (AR0145), Arkansas ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) CSR-6018-E Adopted: December 2, 2002 Released: December 6, 2002 By the Deputy Chief, Policy Division, Media Bureau: introduction Enstar XI d/b/a Charter Communications (``Charter'') has filed with the Commission a petition pursuant to Section 76.7 of the Commission's rules for a determination of effective competition in the two above-captioned communities in Arkansas (the ``Communities''). Charter alleges that its cable system serving the Communities is subject to effective competition pursuant to Section 623(a) of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended ("Communications Act"), and Section 76.905(b)(1)-(2) of the Commission's rules, and seeks revocation of the certification
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-02-3336A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-02-3336A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-02-3336A1.txt
  • Charter Communications Petition for Determination of Effective Competition in Maumelle, Arkansas (AR0327, AR0376) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) CSR-6017-E Adopted: December 2, 2002 Released: December 6, 2002 By the Deputy Chief, Policy Division, Media Bureau: introduction Falcon Cable Media, a California Limited Partnership d/b/a Charter Communications (``Charter'') has filed with the Commission a petition pursuant to Section 76.7 of the Commission's rules for a determination of effective competition in Maumelle, Arkansas (``Maumelle''). Charter alleges that its cable system serving Maumelle is subject to effective competition pursuant to Section 623(a) of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended ("Communications Act"), and Section 76.905(b)(2) of the Commission's rules, and seeks revocation of the certification of the local franchising authority in
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-02-3337A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-02-3337A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-02-3337A1.txt
  • the Commission a petition alleging that Charter is subject to effective competition from competing service providers in the twelve franchise areas in Michigan listed in Attachment A (collectively, the ``Communities''). Charter alleges that its' cable systems serving the Communities are subject to effective competition pursuant to Section 623(a)(1) of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended ("Communications Act"), and Sections 76.7 and 76.905(b)(2) of the Commission's rules, and seeks revocation of the certifications of the local franchising authorities in the Communities to regulate basic cable service rates. Charter bases its allegation of effective competition on the competing services provided by two direct broadcast satellite ("DBS") providers, DirecTV, Inc. (``DirecTV'') and EchoStar Communications Corporation (``EchoStar''). Oppositions to the petition were filed by
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-02-3338A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-02-3338A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-02-3338A1.txt
  • Washington, D.C. 20554 In the Matter of: MCC Iowa LLC Petition for Determination of Effective Competition in Maquoketa, Iowa (IA0100) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) CSR-5971-E Adopted: November 29, 2002 Released: December 6, 2002 By the Deputy Chief, Policy Division, Media Bureau: introduction MCC Iowa LLC (``Mediacom'') has filed with the Commission a petition pursuant to Section 76.7 of the Commission's rules for a determination of effective competition in Maquoketa, Iowa (``Maquoketa''). Mediacom alleges that its cable system serving Maquoketa is subject to effective competition pursuant to Section 623(a) of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended ("Communications Act"), and Section 76.905(b)(2) of the Commission's rules, and seeks revocation of the certification of the local franchising authority in
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-02-3339A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-02-3339A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-02-3339A1.txt
  • ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) CSR-5941-M MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER Adopted: December 3, 2002 Released: December 6, 2002 By the Deputy Chief, Policy Division, Media Bureau: introduction Pappas Southern California License, LLC (``Pappas''), licensee of television broadcast station KAZA-TV (UHF Channel 54), Avalon, California (``KAZA''), has filed a must carry complaint with the Commission pursuant to Sections 76.7 and 76.61(a)(3) of the Commission's rules, claiming that Adelphia Communications (``Adelphia'') has failed to commence carriage of KAZA on Adelphia's cable systems serving Anaheim, Hacienda Heights, and Ventura, California (the ``Communities''). The complaint is unopposed and will be granted in part and dismissed in part. background Under Section 614 of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended, and implementing rules
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-02-3376A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-02-3376A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-02-3376A1.txt
  • Commission Washington, D.C. 20554 In the Matter of: AT&T CSC, Inc. Petition for Determination of Effective Competition in Lexington, Massachusetts (MA0140) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) CSR-6015-E Adopted: December 4, 2002 Released: December 9, 2002 By the Deputy Chief, Media Bureau: introduction AT&T CSC, Inc. (``AT&T'') has filed with the Commission a petition (the ``Petition'') pursuant to Sections 76.7 and 76.907 of the Commission's rules seeking a finding of effective competition in Lexington, Massachusetts (``Lexington''). AT&T alleges that its cable system serving Lexington is subject to effective competition pursuant to Section 623(a)(2) of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended ("Communications Act"), and the Commission's implementing rules, and seeks revocation of the certification of the local franchising authority in
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-02-33A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-02-33A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-02-33A1.txt
  • 45% 32% 3. Adams 33% 38% 4. Fordville 39% 29% 5. Park River 74% 18% 6. Crystal 47% 30% 7. Edinburg 42% 26% 8. Hensel 16% 49% 9. Cavalier 68% 17% 10. Mountain 67% 33% 11. Neche 34% 29% 12. St. Thomas 50% 35% 13. Osnabrock 33% 41% 14. Pisek 36% 34% 15. Hoople 39% 32% See 47 C.F.R. § 76.7; Application of Grand Forks Wireless, L.L.C. to Transfer Control of MMDS Station Licenses to Polar Communications. The Communities are: Michigan, Petersburg, Adams, Fordville, Park River, Crystal, Edinburg, Hensel, Cavalier, Mountain, Neche, St. Thomas, Osnabrock, Pisek, and Hoople, North Dakota. 47 C.F.R. § 21.912. Petitioners must file for special relief pursuant to Section 76.7 when demonstrating compliance with Section 21.912 based
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-02-3465A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-02-3465A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-02-3465A1.txt
  • Sauk Centre, MN ) ) ) ) ) ) ) CSR 5812-E Adopted: December 12, 2002 Released: December 16, 2002 By the Deputy Chief, Policy Division, Media Bureau: introduction CC VIII Operating, LLC d/b/a Charter Communications (``Charter'') has filed with the Commission a petition pursuant to Section 623(a)(1) of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended ("Communications Act"), and Sections 76.7(a)(1) and 76.905(b)(2) of the Commission's rules for a determination of effective competition in Sauk Centre, Minnesota (the ``Franchise Area''). Charter alleges that its cable system serving the Franchise Area is subject to effective competition and is therefore exempt from cable rate regulation because of the competing services provided by two direct broadcast satellite ("DBS") providers, DirecTV, Inc. (``DirecTV'') and EchoStar
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-02-3466A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-02-3466A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-02-3466A1.txt
  • AL ) ) ) ) ) ) ) CSR 5798-E Adopted: December 12, 2002 Released: December 16, 2002 By the Deputy Chief, Policy Division, Media Bureau: introduction Falcon Cablevision, a California Limited Partnership d/b/a Charter Communications (``Charter'') has filed with the Commission a petition pursuant to Section 623(a)(1) of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended ("Communications Act"), and Sections 76.7(a)(1) and 76.905(b)(2) of the Commission's rules for a determination of effective competition in Decatur, Alabama, (the ``Franchise Area''). Charter alleges that its' cable system serving the Franchise Area is subject to effective competition and is therefore exempt from cable rate regulation because of the competing services provided by two direct broadcast satellite ("DBS") providers, DirecTV, Inc. (``DirecTV'') and EchoStar Communications
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-02-3507A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-02-3507A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-02-3507A1.txt
  • d/b/a Mediacom Petition for Determination of Effective Competition in unincorporated Tift County, GA (CUID Nos. GA0647 & GA0199) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) CSR-5995-E Adopted: December 18, 2002 Released: December 24, 2002 By the Deputy Chief, Policy Division, Media Bureau: introduction MCC Georgia LLC d/b/a Mediacom (``Mediacom''), has filed with the Commission a petition pursuant to Section 76.7 of the Commission's rules for a determination of effective competition in the unincorporated portion of Tift County, Georgia (the ``Community''). Mediacom alleges that its cable system serving the Community are subject to effective competition pursuant to Section 623(a) of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended ("Communications Act"), and Section 76.905(b)(2) of the Commission's rules. Mediacom seeks revocation of the
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-02-3599A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-02-3599A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-02-3599A1.txt
  • Communications, Inc. d/b/a Time Warner Cable Petition for Determination of Effective Competition in Gardena, California (CA0934) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) CSR-5901-E Adopted: December 13, 2002 Released: December 27, 2002 By the Deputy Chief, Media Bureau: introduction Paragon Communications, Inc. d/b/a Time Warner Cable (``Time Warner'') has filed with the Commission a petition (the ``Petition'') pursuant to Sections 76.7, 76.905(b)(4) and 76.907 of the Commission's rules seeking a finding of effective competition in Gardena, California (``Gardena''). Time Warner alleges that its cable system serving Gardena is subject to effective competition pursuant to Section 623(a)(2) of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended ("Communications Act"), and the Commission's implementing rules, and seeks revocation of the certification of the local franchising
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-02-544A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-02-544A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-02-544A1.txt
  • D.C. 20554 In the Matter of: Texas Cable Partners, L.P. Petition for Determination of Effective Competition in Corpus Christi, Texas (TX0205) ) ) ) ) ) ) CSR 5676-E Adopted: March 5, 2002 Released: March 7, 2002 By the Deputy Chief, Cable Services Bureau: introduction Texas Cable Partners, L.P. (``TCP'') has filed with the Commission a petition pursuant to Sections 76.7, 76.905(b)(4) and 76.907 of the Commission's rules for revocation of the certification of the City of Corpus Christi, Texas to regulate basic cable service rates due to the presence of effective competition. Time Warner alleges that its cable system serving Corpus Christi is subject to effective competition pursuant to Section 623(a)(2) of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended ("Communications
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-02-577A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-02-577A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-02-577A1.txt
  • MULTICHANNEL VIDEO AND CABLE TELEVISION SERVICE The authority citation for Part 76 continues to read as follows: AUTHORITY: 47 U.S.C. 151, 152, 153, 154, 301, 302, 303, 303a, 307, 308, 309, 312, 315, 217, 325, 503, 521, 522, 531, 532, 534, 535, 536, 537, 543, 544, 544a, 545, 548, 549, 552, 554, 556, 558, 560, 561, 571, 572, 573. Section 76.7 is amended by revising paragraph (g)(3) to read as follows: § 76.7 General special relief, waiver, enforcement, complaint, show cause, forfeiture, and declaratory ruling procedures. ***** (g)(3) Unless otherwise directed by the Commission, or upon motion by the Media Bureau Chief, the Media Bureau Chief shall not be deemed to be a party to a proceeding designated for a hearing
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-02-605A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-02-605A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-02-605A1.txt
  • with the Commission a petition alleging that Charter is subject to effective competition from competing service providers in two separate San Luis Obispo County, California Franchise Areas (the ``County''). Charter alleges that its' cable systems serving the County are subject to effective competition, pursuant to Section 623 (a)(1) of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended ("Communications Act"), and Sections 76.7(a)(1) and 76.905(b)(2) of the Commission's rules. Charter bases its allegation of effective competition on the competing services provided by two direct broadcast satellite ("DBS") providers, DirecTV, Inc. (``DirecTV'') and EchoStar Communications Corporation (``EchoStar''). No opposition to the petition was filed. background Section 623(l)(1)(B) of the Communications Act provides that a cable operator is subject to effective competition if the franchise
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-02-611A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-02-611A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-02-611A1.txt
  • Effective Competition in Twelve Oregon Cities ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) File Nos. CSR 5678-E Thru CSR 5689-E Adopted: March 12, 2002 Released: March 15, 2002 By the Deputy Chief, Cable Services Bureau: introduction Falcon Cable Systems Company II, a California Limited Partnership, d/b/a Charter Communications (``Charter''), has filed with the Commission twelve petitions pursuant to Sections 76.7 and 76.907 of the Commission's rules for determinations of effective competition in each of the twelve Oregon communities listed on Attachment A (the ``Communities''). Charter alleges that its cable systems serving these communities are subject to effective competition pursuant to Section 623(1) of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended ("Communications Act"), and the Commission's implementing rules, and are therefore
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-02-792A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-02-792A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-02-792A1.txt
  • Warner Entertainment-Advance/Newhouse Partnership Petitions for Determination of Effective Competition in St. John the Baptist, Parish, Louisiana (CUID No. LA0151) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) CSR 5728-E Adopted: March 29, 2002 Released: April 11, 2002 By the Deputy Chief, Media Bureau: introduction Time Warner Entertainment-Advance/Newhouse Partnership (``Time Warner'') has filed with the Commission a petition pursuant to Sections 76.7, 76.905(b)(4) and 76.907 of the Commission's rules for a determination of effective competition in St. John the Baptist Parish, Louisiana (``The Parish''). Time Warner alleges that its cable system serving The Parish is subject to effective competition pursuant to Section 623(a)(2) of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended ("Communications Act"), and the Commission's implementing rules, and is therefore exempt
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-02-793A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-02-793A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-02-793A1.txt
  • Petitions for Determination of Effective Competition in Dunedin (FL0482), Oldsmar (FL0716), Safety Harbor (FL0233), and Tarpon Springs (FL0488), Florida ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) CSR 5729-E Adopted: April 1, 2002 Released: April 11, 2002 By the Deputy Chief, Media Bureau: introduction Time Warner Entertainment-Advance/Newhouse Partnership (``Time Warner'') has filed with the Commission a petition pursuant to Sections 76.7, 76.905(b)(2) and (4) and 76.907 of the Commission's rules for revocation of the certification of the Cities of Dunedin, Oldsmar, Safety Harbor, and Tarpon Springs, Florida (``The Cities'') to regulate basic cable service rates due to the presence of effective competition in The Cities. Time Warner alleges that its cable systems serving The Cities is subject to effective competition pursuant
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-02-794A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-02-794A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-02-794A1.txt
  • Cable Partners, L.P. Petitions for Determination of Effective Competition in Harlingen, Alice, and Certain Other Texas Communities ) ) ) ) ) ) CSR 5788 -E & CSR 5790-E Adopted: March 29, 2002 Released: April 11, 2002 By the Deputy Chief, Media Bureau: introduction Texas Cable Partners, L.P. (``Texas Cable'') has filed with the Commission two petitions pursuant to Sections 76.7 of the Commission's rules for revocation of the certifications of the Texas communities listed on Attachment A (the ``Communities'') to regulate basic cable service rates due to the presence of effective competition in those Communities. Texas Cable alleges that its cable systems serving those Communities are subject to effective competition pursuant to Section 623(a) of the Communications Act of 1934,
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-02-871A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-02-871A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-02-871A1.txt
  • WADL, Mt. Clemens, MI; WHMB, Indianapolis, IN; KWHD, Castle Rock, CO; WGGS, Greenville, SC; WHTN, Murfreesboro, TN; and WTGL, Orlando, FL. Entravision Holdings, LLC (``Entravision'') and Costa de Oro Television, Inc. (``Costa'') filed Petitions to Show Cause on behalf of WUNI and KJLA. The remaining Petitioners filed must carry complaints that are treated as Petitions for Special Relief under Section 76.7 of our rules. See 1998 Biennial Regulatory Review: Part 76 - Cable Television Service Pleading and Complaint Rules, 14 FCC Rcd 418 (1999). 47 C.F.R. § 76.66. On December 7, 2001, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit unanimously upheld the constitutionality of Section 338 of the Act, and Section 76.66 of the Commission's rules. See SBCA v.
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-02-889A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-02-889A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-02-889A1.txt
  • the Caribbean system's average monthly regulated revenue per channel, per subscriber, falls between that of small systems ($0.86) and that of systems with more than 15,000 subscribers ($0.44). However, given the totality of the circumstances, we find that Caribbean Corp. has demonstrated that the Caribbean system resembles a small system according to most of the applicable criteria. 15. Under Section 76.7(c)(1) of the Commission's rules, a petition for special relief "shall state fully and precisely all pertinent facts and considerations relied on to demonstrate the need for the relief requested and to support a determination that a grant of such relief would serve the public interest." Caribbean has adequately established its "need for the relief requested" as required by Section 76.7(c)(1).
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-03-1014A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-03-1014A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-03-1014A1.txt
  • that television station for reception by subscribers. 47 C.F.R. § 76.66(a)(6). Under Section 76.66(m)(3) of the Commission's rules, a local television broadcast station that disputes a response by a satellite carrier that it is in compliance with its must carry obligations may obtain review of such denial or response by filing a ``complaint'' with the Commission in accordance with Section 76.7. See 47 C.F.R. § 76.66(m)(3). Although styled a ``complaint'', a carriage complaint filed against a satellite carrier is treated by the Commission as a petition for special relief for purposes of the Commission's pleading requirements. See 1998 Biennial Regulatory Review: Part 76 - Cable Television Service Pleading and Complaint Rules, 14 FCC Rcd 418 (1999). Responsive pleadings filed in this
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-03-1107A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-03-1107A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-03-1107A1.txt
  • complaint should be denied because the station's September 16, 2002 election letter did not constitute a demand for carriage. As such, Cox states that KDCG-LP's complaint is premature and should be dismissed. Further, Cox argues that KDCG-LP's complaint is also deficient in that it failed to serve the local television stations carried on the Cox systems in violation of Section 76.7 of the Commission's rules. Although KDCG-LP filed its complaint within 60 days of Cox's denial of its election of carriage, it should be noted that the Commission's rules contain a two-part must carry process. Section 76.64(f)(2) of the Commission's rules requires that television broadcast stations make an election between must carry and retransmission consent status every three years. This KDCG-LP
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-03-1149A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-03-1149A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-03-1149A1.txt
  • ) ) CSR 5888-E Adopted: April 14, 2003 Released: April 16, 2003 By the Deputy Chief, Policy Division, Media Bureau: introduction 1. Century-TCI California, L.P. and Adelphia Cablevision of San Bernardino, LLC d/b/a Adelphia Cable Communications (``Adelphia'') has filed with the Commission a petition pursuant to Section 623(a)(1) of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended ("Communications Act") and Sections 76.7(a)(1) and 76.905(b)(2) of the Commission's rules for a determination of effective competition in ten California communities (the ``Communities''). Adelphia alleges that its cable systems serving the Communities are subject to effective competition and therefore exempt from cable rate regulation because of competing services provided by two direct broadcast satellite (``DBS'') providers, DirecTV, Inc. (``DirecTV'') and DISH Network (``DISH''). The Cities
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-03-1150A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-03-1150A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-03-1150A1.txt
  • 5904-E Adopted: April 11, 2003 Released: April 16, 2003 By the Deputy Chief, Policy Division, Media Bureau: introduction Century-TCI California, L.P., Adelphia California Cablevision L.L.C. and Adelphia Cablevision of Simi Valley L.L.C., d/b/a Adelphia Cable Communications (``Adelphia'') has filed with the Commission a petition pursuant to Section 623(a)(1) of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended ("Communications Act"), and Sections 76.7(a)(1) and 76.905(b)(2) of the Commission's rules for a determination of effective competition in five California communities (the ``Communities''). Adelphia alleges that its cable systems serving the Communities are subject to effective competition and therefore exempt from cable rate because of competing service provided by two direct broadcast satellite ("DBS") providers, DirecTV, Inc. (``DirecTV'') and DISH Network (``DISH''). No opposition to
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-03-1161A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-03-1161A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-03-1161A1.txt
  • ) ) ) ) ) ) CSR 6050-M CSR 6073-M MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER Adopted: April 15, 2003 Released: April 16, 2003 By the Deputy Chief, Policy Division, Media Bureau: introduction Costa de Oro Television, Inc. (``Costa''), licensee of television broadcast station KJLA-TV (Ind. Ch. 57), Ventura, California (``KJLA''), has filed must carry complaints with the Commission pursuant to Sections 76.7 and 76.61(a)(3) of the Commission's rules, claiming that Cox Communications (``Cox'') and Comcast Corporation [formerly MediaOne] (``Comcast'') have failed to commence carriage of KJLA on their cable systems serving several southern California communities (the ``Communities''). Both Cox and Comcast have filed Oppositions and Costa has filed replies. For the reasons stated below, we deny the relief Costa seeks. background Under
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-03-1162A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-03-1162A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-03-1162A1.txt
  • ) ) ) ) ) ) CSR 6071-M CSR 6055-M MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER Adopted: April 15, 2003 Released: April 16, 2003 By the Deputy Chief, Policy Division, Media Bureau: introduction Costa de Oro Television, Inc. (``Costa''), licensee of television broadcast station KJLA-TV (Ind. Ch. 57), Ventura, California (``KJLA''), has filed must carry complaints with the Commission pursuant to Sections 76.7 and 76.61(a)(3) of the Commission's rules, claiming that Catalina Cable TV Company (``Catalina'') and Sierra Dawn Cablevision (``Sierra'') have failed to commence carriage of KJLA on their cable systems serving Avalon and Hemet, California, respectively (the ``Communities''). The complaints are unopposed. For the reasons stated below, we grant the relief Costa seeks. DISCUSSION Under Section 614 of the Communications Act
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-03-1164A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-03-1164A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-03-1164A1.txt
  • NC (NC0746), and Town of Tabor City, NC (NC1015) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) CSR-5911-E MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER Adopted: April 15, 2003 Released: April 17, 2003 By the Deputy Chief, Policy Division, Media Bureau: INTRODUCTION ACC Cable Communications FL-VA, LLC, d/b/a Adelphia Cable Communications (``Adelphia'') has filed with the Commission a petition, pursuant to Sections 76.7 and 76.905 of the Commission's rules, alleging that Adelphia is subject to effective competition from competing service providers in unincorporated Columbus County, the Town of Lake Waccamaw, and the Town of Tabor City, North Carolina (the ``Communities''). Adelphia asserts that its cable systems serving the Communities are subject to effective competition pursuant to Section 623(l)(1)(B) of the Communications Act of
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-03-1192A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-03-1192A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-03-1192A1.txt
  • the Matter of: Mediacom Southeast LLC Petition for Determination of Effective Competition in Unincorporated Santa Rosa County, Florida (FL0728, FL0519) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) CSR-5994-E Adopted: April 21, 2003 Released: April 24, 2003 By the Deputy Chief, Policy Division, Media Bureau: introduction Mediacom Southeast LLC (``Mediacom'') has filed with the Commission a petition pursuant to Section 76.7 of the Commission's rules for a determination of effective competition in unincorporated Santa Rosa County, Florida (``Santa Rosa''). Mediacom alleges that its cable system serving Santa Rosa is subject to effective competition pursuant to Section 623(a) of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended ("Communications Act"), and Section 76.905(b)(2) of the Commission's rules, and seeks revocation of the certification of
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-03-1193A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-03-1193A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-03-1193A1.txt
  • D.C. 20554 In the Matter of: MCC Iowa LLC Petition for Determination of Effective Competition in Le Mars, IA IA0102 ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) CSR-5987-E Adopted: April 21, 2003 Released: April 23, 2003 By the Deputy Chief, Policy Division, Media Bureau: introduction MCC Iowa LLC (``Mediacom'') has filed with the Commission a petition pursuant to Section 76.7 of the Commission's rules for a determination of effective competition in Le Mars, Iowa (``Le Mars''). Mediacom alleges that its cable system serving Le Mars is subject to effective competition pursuant to Section 623(a) of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended ("Communications Act"), and Section 76.905(b)(2) of the Commission's rules, and seeks revocation of the certification of the local
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-03-1194A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-03-1194A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-03-1194A1.txt
  • Washington, D.C. 20554 In the Matter of: MCC Iowa LLC Petition for Determination of Effective Competition in Waukee, IA IA0507 ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) CSR-5997-E Adopted: April 21, 2003 Released: April 23, 2003 By the Deputy Chief, Policy Division, Media Bureau: introduction MCC Iowa LLC (``Mediacom'') has filed with the Commission a petition pursuant to Section 76.7 of the Commission's rules for a determination of effective competition in Waukee, Iowa (``Waukee''). Mediacom alleges that its cable system serving Waukee is subject to effective competition pursuant to Section 623(a) of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended ("Communications Act"), and Section 76.905(b)(2) of the Commission's rules, and seeks revocation of the certification of the local franchising authority in
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-03-1195A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-03-1195A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-03-1195A1.txt
  • D.C. 20554 In the Matter of: MCC Iowa LLC Petition for Determination of Effective Competition in Charles City, IA IA0133 ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) CSR-6000-E Adopted: April 21, 2003 Released: April 23, 2003 By the Deputy Chief, Policy Division, Media Bureau: introduction MCC Iowa LLC (``Mediacom'') has filed with the Commission a petition pursuant to Section 76.7 of the Commission's rules for a determination of effective competition in Charles City, Iowa (``Charles City''). Mediacom alleges that its cable system serving Charles City is subject to effective competition pursuant to Section 623(a) of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended ("Communications Act"), and Section 76.905(b)(2) of the Commission's rules, and seeks revocation of the certification of the local
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-03-1201A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-03-1201A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-03-1201A1.txt
  • the Matter of: Cable One, Inc. Petition for Determination of Effective Competition in Sioux City, IA (CUID No. IA0084) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) CSR-5968-E Adopted: April 21, 2003 Released: April 24, 2003 By the Deputy Chief, Policy Division, Media Bureau: introduction Cable One, Inc., (``Cable One''), has filed with the Commission a petition pursuant to Section 76.7 of the Commission's rules for a determination of effective competition in the above-captioned community in Iowa (the ``Community''). Cable One alleges that its cable system serving the Community is subject to effective competition pursuant to Section 623(a) of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended ("Communications Act"), and Section 76.905(b)(2) of the Commission's rules. Cable One claims the presence of
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-03-1286A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-03-1286A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-03-1286A1.txt
  • ) ) ) ) ) ) ) CSR 6116-M MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER Adopted: April 25, 2003 Released: April 28, 2003 By the Deputy Chief, Policy Division, Media Bureau: introduction Jovon Broadcasting Corporation (``Jovon''), licensee of television broadcast station WJYS-TV (Ind. Ch. 62), Hammond, Indiana (``WJYS-TV''), has filed a must carry complaint and request for declaratory ruling pursuant to Sections 76.7 and 76.61(a)(3) of the Commission's rules, claiming that RCN Communications Corporation (``RCN'') has failed to commence carriage of WJYS-TV on its cable systems serving Chicago and Skokie, Illinois (the ``Communities''), as required by the Commission's rules. RCN filed an Opposition to the Complaint and Jovon filed a Reply. For the reasons stated below, we grant the relief Jovon seeks. background
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-03-139A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-03-139A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-03-139A1.txt
  • that television station for reception by subscribers. 47 C.F.R. § 76.66(a)(6). Under Section 76.66(m)(3) of the Commission's rules, a local television broadcast station that disputes a response by a satellite carrier that it is in compliance with its must carry obligations may obtain review of such denial or response by filing a ``complaint'' with the Commission in accordance with Section 76.7. See 47 C.F.R. § 76.66(m)(3). See also 1998 Biennial Regulatory Review: Part 76 - Cable Television Service Pleading and Complaint Rules, 14 FCC Rcd 418 (1999). See Pub. L. No. 106-113, 113 Stat. 1501, 1501A-526 to 1501A-545 (Nov. 29, 1999). See 47 U.S.C. § 338. A DMA is a geographic area that describes each television market exclusive of others, based
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-03-1515A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-03-1515A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-03-1515A1.txt
  • Carriage of KBLN(TV) (Channel 30), Grants Pass, Oregon ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) CSR-6062-M Adopted: May 5, 2003 Released: May 8, 2003 By the Deputy Chief, Policy Division, Media Bureau: introduction Better Life Television, Inc. (``BLT''), licensee of television broadcast station KBLN(TV), Grants Pass, Oregon (``KBLN''), filed the above-captioned must carry complaint pursuant to Sections 76.7 and 76.61 of the Commission's rules, asserting mandatory rights for KBLN on Charter Communications' (``Charter'') cable system serving Klamath Falls, Oregon. BLT requests that the Commission order Charter to commence carriage of KBLN on channel 30, its over-the-air broadcast channel. Charter Communications filed an opposition to which KBLN replied. background Under Section 614 of the Communications Act of 1934, as
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-03-1516A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-03-1516A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-03-1516A1.txt
  • Carriage of KBLN(TV) (Channel 30), Grants Pass, Oregon ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) CSR-6065-M Adopted: May 5, 2003 Released: May 8, 2003 By the Deputy Chief, Policy Division, Media Bureau: introduction Better Life Television, Inc. (``BLT''), licensee of television broadcast station KBLN(TV), Grants Pass, Oregon (``KBLN''), filed the above-captioned must carry complaint pursuant to Sections 76.7 and 76.61 of the Commission's rules, asserting mandatory rights for KBLN on Falcon Cable's (``Falcon'') cable system serving Alturas, California. BLT requests that the Commission order Falcon to commence carriage of KBLN on channel 30, its over-the-air broadcast channel. Falcon Cable Systems Company II, L.P., d/b/a Charter Communications filed an opposition to which KBLN replied. background Under Section 614 of
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-03-1517A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-03-1517A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-03-1517A1.txt
  • Carriage of KBLN(TV) (Channel 30), Grants Pass, Oregon ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) CSR-6066-M Adopted: May 5, 2003 Released: May 8, 2003 By the Deputy Chief, Policy Division, Media Bureau: introduction Better Life Television, Inc. (``BLT''), licensee of television broadcast station KBLN(TV), Grants Pass, Oregon (``KBLN''), filed the above-captioned must carry complaint pursuant to Sections 76.7 and 76.61 of the Commission's rules, asserting mandatory rights for KBLN on Charter Communications' (``Charter'') cable system serving Port Orford, Oregon. BLT requests that the Commission order Charter to commence carriage of KBLN on channel 30, its over-the-air broadcast channel. Charter filed an opposition to which KBLN replied. background Under Section 614 of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-03-1530A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-03-1530A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-03-1530A1.txt
  • 30), Grants Pass, Oregon ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) CSR-6061-M Adopted: May 7, 2003 Released: May 8, 2003 By the Deputy Chief, Policy Division, Media Bureau: introduction Better Life Television, Inc. (``BLT''), licensee of television broadcast station KBLN(TV), Grants Pass, Oregon (``KBLN''), filed the above-captioned must carry complaint against Charter Communications (``Charter'') pursuant to Sections 76.7 and 76.61 of the Commission's rules, asserting mandatory rights for KBLN on Charter's cable systems serving Brookings, Gold Beach and Port Orford, Oregon (``cable communities) served by Charter's Crescent City, Oregon headend. BLT requests that the Commission order Charter to commence carriage of KBLN on channel 30, its over-the-air broadcast channel. Charter Communications filed an opposition to which KBLN replied.
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-03-1548A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-03-1548A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-03-1548A1.txt
  • Carriage of KBLN(TV) (Channel 30), Grants Pass, Oregon ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) CSR-6064-M Adopted: May 9, 2003 Released: May 12, 2003 By the Deputy Chief, Policy Division, Media Bureau: introduction Better Life Television, Inc. (``BLT''), licensee of television broadcast station KBLN(TV), Grants Pass, Oregon (``KBLN''), filed the above-captioned must carry complaint pursuant to Sections 76.7 and 76.61 of the Commission's rules, asserting mandatory rights for KBLN on Northland Cable, Inc.'s (``Northland'') cable system serving Mount Shasta, California. BLT requests that the Commission order Northland to commence carriage of KBLN on channel 30, its over-the-air broadcast channel. Northland filed an opposition to which KBLN replied. background Under Section 614 of the Communications Act of 1934, as
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-03-1865A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-03-1865A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-03-1865A1.txt
  • Commission's rules. FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION Steven A. Broeckaert Deputy Chief, Policy Division, Media Bureau Attachment A Percentage of Households in the Communities Subscribing to MVPDs Other than the Largest MVPD Community Black Hills % of Households 1. Rapid City 41% 2. Piedmont 34% 3. Lead 49% 4. Black Hawk 44% 5. Sturgis 41% 6. Deadwood 49% See 47 C.F.R. § 76.7; Application of Antilles Wireless, L.L.C. to Transfer Control of MMDS Station Licenses to Black Hills Fiber Systems, Inc. The Communities are: Rapid City, Piedmont, Lead, Black Hawk, Sturgis and Deadwood, South Dakota. 47 C.F.R. § 21.912. Petitioners must file for special relief pursuant to Section 76.7 when demonstrating compliance with Section 21.912 based on the effective competition exception to Section
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-03-188A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-03-188A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-03-188A1.txt
  • Operating, LLC d/b/a Charter Communications Petition for Determination of Effective Competition in Winona, Minnesota (MN0010) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) CSR-5889-E Adopted: January 22, 2003 Released: January 23, 2003 By the Deputy Chief, Policy Division, Media Bureau: introduction Charter Communications VIII Operating, LLC d/b/a Charter Communications (``Charter'') has filed with the Commission a petition pursuant to Section 76.7 of the Commission's rules for a determination of effective competition in Winona, Minnesota. Charter alleges that its cable system serving Winona is subject to effective competition pursuant to Section 623(a) of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended ("Communications Act"), and Section 76.905(b)(2) of the Commission's rules, and seeks revocation of the certification of the local franchising authority in Winona
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-03-2082A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-03-2082A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-03-2082A1.txt
  • the Matter of: MCC Iowa LLC Petition for Determination of Effective Competition in the City of Iowa Falls, IA IA0129 ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) CSR-5998-E Adopted: June 24, 2003 Released: June 26, 2003 By the Deputy Chief, Policy Division, Media Bureau: introduction MCC Iowa LLC (``Mediacom'') has filed with the Commission a petition pursuant to Section 76.7 of the Commission's rules for a determination of effective competition in the City of Iowa Falls, Iowa (``Iowa Falls''). Mediacom alleges that its cable system serving Iowa Falls is subject to effective competition pursuant to Section 623(a) of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended ("Communications Act"), and Section 76.905(b)(2) of the Commission's rules, and seeks revocation of the certification
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-03-2083A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-03-2083A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-03-2083A1.txt
  • the Matter of: MCC Iowa LLC Petition for Determination of Effective Competition in the City of Fort Madison, IA IA0001 ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) CSR-5999-E Adopted: June 24, 2003 Released: June 26, 2003 By the Deputy Chief, Policy Division, Media Bureau: introduction MCC Iowa LLC (``Mediacom'') has filed with the Commission a petition pursuant to Section 76.7 of the Commission's rules for a determination of effective competition in the City of Fort Madison, Iowa (``Fort Madison''). Mediacom alleges that its cable system serving Fort Madison is subject to effective competition pursuant to Section 623(a) of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended ("Communications Act"), and Section 76.905(b)(2) of the Commission's rules, and seeks revocation of the certification
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-03-2097A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-03-2097A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-03-2097A1.txt
  • Effective Competition in Chanhassen, Minnesota (CUID MN0577) ) ) ) ) ) ) CSR 6006-E Adopted: June 25, 2003 Released: June 27, 2003 By the Deputy Chief, Policy Division, Media Bureau: introduction 1. Mediacom Minnesota LLC (``Mediacom'') has filed with the Commission a petition pursuant to Section 623(a)(1) of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended ("Communications Act") and Sections 76.7(a)(1) and 76.905(b)(2) of the Commission's rules for a determination of effective competition in the City of Chanhassen, Minnesota. Mediacom alleges that its cable system serving the City is subject to effective competition and therefore exempt from cable rate regulation because of competing services provided by two direct broadcast satellite (``DBS'') providers, DirecTV, Inc. (``DirecTV'') and DISH Network (``DISH''). The City
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-03-2102A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-03-2102A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-03-2102A1.txt
  • Competition in Pocatello, Idaho (CUID ID0009) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) CSR 5958-E Adopted: June 26, 2003 Released: July 7, 2003 By the Deputy Chief, Policy Division, Media Bureau: introduction 1. Cable One, Inc. (``Cable One'') filed with the Commission a petition pursuant to Section 623(a)(1) of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended ("Communications Act") and Sections 76.7(a)(1) and 76.905(b)(2) of the Commission's rules for a determination of effective competition in the City of Pocatello, Idaho. Cable One alleges that its cable system serving the City is subject to effective competition and therefore exempt from cable rate regulation because of competing services provided by two direct broadcast satellite (``DBS'') providers, DirecTV, Inc. (``DirecTV'') and DISH Network (``DISH'') and
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-03-2114A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-03-2114A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-03-2114A1.txt
  • Time Warner Cable (``Time Warner'') has filed with the Commission a petition alleging that Time Warner is subject to effective competition from competing service providers in its Cary, North Carolina franchise area. Time Warner alleges that its cable system is subject to effective competition pursuant to Section 623(a)(1) of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended ("Communications Act"), and Sections 76.7(a)(1) and 76.905(b)(2) of the Commission's rules. Time Warner bases its allegation of effective competition on the competing services provided by two direct broadcast satellite ("DBS") providers, DirecTV, Inc. (``DirecTV'') and DISH Network (``DISH''). The Town of Cary filed an opposition to which Time Warner replied. In addition, Time Warner filed a supplement to it petition in response to a Media
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-03-2115A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-03-2115A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-03-2115A1.txt
  • filed with the Commission a petition alleging that Time Warner's cable system serving the unincorporated portions of Harrison County, West Virginia (``franchise area'') is subject to effective competition from competing service providers. Time Warner alleges that its cable system is subject to effective competition pursuant to Section 623(a)(1) of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended ("Communications Act"), and Sections 76.7(a)(1) and 76.905(b)(2) of the Commission's rules. Time Warner bases its allegation of effective competition on the competing services provided by two direct broadcast satellite ("DBS") providers, DirecTV, Inc. (``DirecTV'') and DISH Network (``DISH''), and other cable providers. The Public Services Commission (``PSC'') of West Virginia filed a response to the petition. In the response, the PSC complained it was not
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-03-2172A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-03-2172A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-03-2172A1.txt
  • ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) CSR-5924-E Adopted: June 27, 2003 Released: July 2, 2003 By the Deputy Chief, Policy Division, Media Bureau: introduction Time Warner Entertainment Company, L.P., Time Warner Cable of Southeast Wisconsin, L.P., and Century Venture Corporation d/b/a/ Time Warner Cable (collectively ``Time Warner'') have filed with the Commission a petition pursuant to Section 76.7 of the Commission's rules for a determination of effective competition in eight Wisconsin communities (the ``Communities''). Time Warner alleges that its cable systems serving the Communities are subject to effective competition pursuant to Section 623(a) of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended ("Communications Act"), and Section 76.905(b)(2) of the Commission's rules, and seeks revocation of the City of Brookfield
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-03-2198A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-03-2198A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-03-2198A1.txt
  • Washington, D.C. 20554 In the Matter of: Kansas City Cable Partners Petition for Determination of Effective Competition in Shawnee, Kansas (KS0431) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) CSR-5956-E Adopted: June 30, 2003 Released: July 9, 2003 By the Deputy Chief, Media Bureau: introduction Kansas City Cable Partners (``KCCP'') has filed with the Commission a petition (``Petition'') pursuant to Sections 76.7, 76.905(b)(4) and 76.907 of the Commission's rules seeking a finding of effective competition in Shawnee, Kansas (``Shawnee''). KCCP alleges that its cable system serving Shawnee is subject to effective competition pursuant to Section 623(a)(2) of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended ("Communications Act"), and the Commission's implementing rules, and seeks revocation of the certification of the local franchising authority
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-03-2199A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-03-2199A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-03-2199A1.txt
  • Competition ) ) ) ) ) ) ) CSR-5714-E New Ulm, Minnesota CUID No. NM0033 MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER Adopted: June 30, 2003 Released: July 9, 2003 By the Deputy Chief, Media Bureau: INTRODUCTION Amzak Cable Midwest, Inc., d/b/a Time Warner Cable (``Time Warner'') has filed a Petition for Special Relief seeking a determination of effective competition pursuant to Sections 76.7, 76.905(b)(4) and 76.907 of the Commission's rules, and an order to revoke the basic rate certification authority of the City of New Ulm, Minnesota. Time Warner asserts that it is subject to local exchange carrier (``LEC'') effective competition in the above-captioned community because of the presence of New Ulm Telecom, Inc.'s (``NT'') cable services in that community. The petition is
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-03-2276A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-03-2276A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-03-2276A1.txt
  • In the Matter of: MCC Iowa LLC Petition for Determination of Effective Competition in the City of Chariton, IA (IA0021) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) CSR-5996-E Adopted: July 9, 2003 Released: July 11, 2003 By the Deputy Chief, Policy Division, Media Bureau: introduction MCC Iowa LLC (``Mediacom'') has filed with the Commission a petition pursuant to Section 76.7 of the Commission's rules for a determination of effective competition in the City of Chariton, Iowa (``Chariton''). Mediacom alleges that its cable system serving Chariton is subject to effective competition pursuant to Section 623(a) of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended ("Communications Act"), and Section 76.905(b)(2) of the Commission's rules, and seeks revocation of the certification of the local
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-03-2338A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-03-2338A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-03-2338A1.txt
  • In the Matter of: MCC Georgia LLC Petition for Determination of Effective Competition in the City of Americus, Georgia, (GA0069) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) CSR-6005-E Adopted: July 11, 2003 Released: July 16, 2003 By the Deputy Chief, Policy Division, Media Bureau: introduction MCC Georgia LLC (``Mediacom'') has filed with the Commission a petition pursuant to Section 76.7 of the Commission's rules for a determination of effective competition in the City of Americus, Georgia (``Americus''). Mediacom alleges that its cable system serving Americus is subject to effective competition pursuant to Section 623(a) of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended ("Communications Act"), and Section 76.905(b)(2) of the Commission's rules, and seeks revocation of the certification of the local
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-03-2383A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-03-2383A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-03-2383A1.txt
  • ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) CSR 6164-M CSR 6166-M MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER Adopted: July 21, 2003 Released: July 23, 2003 By the Deputy Chief, Policy Division, Media Bureau: introduction Family Stations, Inc. (``FSI''), licensee of television broadcast station WFME-TV (Ch. 66), West Milford, NJ (``WFME''), has filed must carry complaints with the Commission pursuant to Sections 76.7 and 76.61 of the Commission's rules, claiming that Time Warner Cable (``Time Warner'') and RCN of New York (``RCN'') have failed to commence carriage of WFME-TV on their respective cable systems. Time Warner and RCN filed Oppositions. WFME-TV filed a reply to each Opposition. For the reasons stated below, we dismiss the Station's carriage complaints. BACKGROUND Section 76.55(a) of the
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-03-2647A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-03-2647A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-03-2647A1.txt
  • averments, and hereby withdraws its Complaint as to the Santa Anna cable system only.''7 Star also points out that Brownwood did not oppose carriage of KXVA on the other two cable systems, namely, the Rising Star and Clyde systems. Therefore, Star claims ``that it is entitled to summary decision'' in favor or carriage of KXVA on these systems under ``Section 76.7(b)(2)(v) of the [Commission's] Rules (`Averments in a complaint are deemed to be admitted when not denied in the answer').''8 We grant Star's request to withdraw its complaint regarding that Santa Anna cable system, and grant its complaint regarding the Rising Star and Clyde cable systems. Brownwood's Rising Star and Clyde cable systems are located in the same DMA as KXVA.
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-03-2862A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-03-2862A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-03-2862A1.txt
  • issue may not meet the tolerances prescribed in the rules for separation between the audio and visual carriers at subscriber terminals. Petitioners assert that the deviation beyond tolerance is small, not perceivable by television viewers, and will not have an adverse impact on the quality of signal received by consumers. Petitioner seeks both permanent relief pursuant to Sections 1.3 and 76.7 of the Commission's rules, 47 C.F.R. §§ 1.3 & 76.7, and interim relief pursuant to Section 1.45(d) and (e) of the Commission's rule, 47 C.F.R. §§ 1.45(d) - (e). Comments and oppositions to the request for permanent relief are due within 30 days from the date of this Public Notice. Petitioner's reply is due 20 days thereafter. Comments and oppositions
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-03-28A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-03-28A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-03-28A1.txt
  • Massachusetts, Inc. Petition for Determination of Effective Competition in Dedham (MA0238) and Needham (MA0199), Massachusetts ) ) ) ) ) ) ) CSR-6021-E Adopted: January 3, 2003 Released: January 9, 2003 By the Deputy Chief, Media Bureau: introduction MediaOne of Massachusetts, Inc. (``MediaOne'') (providing service as ``AT&T Broadband'') has filed with the Commission a petition (the ``Petition'') pursuant to Sections 76.7 and 76.907 of the Commission's rules seeking a finding of effective competition in Dedham and Needham, Massachusetts (``the Communities''). MediaOne alleges that its cable systems serving the Communities are subject to effective competition pursuant to Section 623(a)(2) of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended ("Communications Act"), and the Commission's implementing rules, and seeks revocation of the certification of the
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-03-2935A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-03-2935A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-03-2935A1.txt
  • that television station for reception by subscribers. 47 C.F.R. § 76.66(a)(6). Under Section 76.66(m)(3) of the Commission's rules, a local television broadcast station that disputes a response by a satellite carrier that it is in compliance with its must carry obligations may obtain review of such denial or response by filing a ``complaint'' with the Commission in accordance with Section 76.7. See 47 C.F.R. § 76.66(m)(3). Although styled a ``complaint'', a carriage complaint filed against a satellite carrier is treated by the Commission as a petition for special relief for purposes of the Commission's pleading requirements. See 1998 Biennial Regulatory Review: Part 76 - Cable Television Service Pleading and Complaint Rules, 14 FCC Rcd 418 (1999). Responsive pleadings filed in this
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-03-3110A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-03-3110A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-03-3110A1.txt
  • that television station for reception by subscribers. 47 C.F.R. § 76.66(a)(6). Under Section 76.66(m)(3) of the Commission's rules, a local television broadcast station that disputes a response by a satellite carrier that it is in compliance with its must carry obligations may obtain review of such denial or response by filing a ``complaint'' with the Commission in accordance with Section 76.7. 47 C.F.R. § 76.66(m)(3). Although styled a ``complaint,'' a carriage complaint filed against a satellite carrier is treated by the Commission as a petition for special relief for purposes of the Commission's pleading requirements. See 1998 Biennial Regulatory Review: Part 76 - Cable Television Service Pleading and Complaint Rules, 14 FCC Rcd 418 (1999). See Pub. L. No. 106-113, 113
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-03-3279A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-03-3279A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-03-3279A1.txt
  • (``KVMD'' or ``Station''), permittee of Station KVMD-DT, Twentynine Palms, California (Ch. 23-Ind.), has filed a Complaint against Time Warner Cable (``Time Warner'') because of the cable operator's refusal to carry the station's digital television signal on its cable systems. Time Warner filed an Opposition to the Complaint and KVMD filed a Reply. Time Warner filed a Petition, pursuant to Section 76.7 of the Commission's Rules and Section 614(h) of the Communications Act (``Act''), seeking to exclude certain cable communities from KVMD's market so that it would be under no obligation to carry the Station's signal on its cable systems. KVMD filed an Opposition to the Petition and Time Warner filed a Reply. We jointly consider the Complaint and the Petition because
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-03-3280A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-03-3280A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-03-3280A1.txt
  • ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) CSR 6201-M MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER Adopted: October 17, 2003 Released: October 20, 2003 By the Deputy Chief, Policy Division, Media Bureau: introduction KVMD Licensee Co., LLC, licensee of television broadcast station KVMD-DT (Ind. Ch. 23), Twentynine Palms, California (``KVMD''), has filed a must carry complaint with the Commission pursuant to Sections 76.7 and 76.61(a)(3) of the Commission's rules, claiming that Sierra Dawn Cablevision (``Sierra'') has failed to commence carriage of KVMD on its cable system serving Hemet, California. The complaint is unopposed. For the reasons stated below, we grant the relief KVMD seeks. DISCUSSION The Commission has held that a broadcaster initiating DTV-only service is entitled to mandatory carriage for its digital
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-03-353A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-03-353A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-03-353A1.txt
  • D.C. 20554 In the Matter of: Kansas City Cable Partners Petition for Determination of Effective Competition in Overland Park, Kansas (KS0064) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) CSR-5993-E Adopted: February 3, 2003 Released: February 5, 2003 By the Deputy Chief, Media Bureau: introduction Kansas City Cable Partners (``KCCP'') has filed with the Commission a petition (``Petition'') pursuant to Sections 76.7, 76.905(b)(4) and 76.907 of the Commission's rules seeking a finding of effective competition in Overland Park, Kansas (``Overland Park''). KCCP alleges that its cable system serving Overland Park is subject to effective competition pursuant to Section 623(a)(2) of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended ("Communications Act"), and the Commission's implementing rules, and seeks revocation of the certification of the
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-03-3571A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-03-3571A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-03-3571A1.txt
  • ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) CSR 6177-M CSR 6178-M MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER Adopted: November 6, 2003 Released: November 7, 2003 By the Deputy Chief, Policy Division, Media Bureau: introduction Price Broadcasting, Inc. (``Price''), permittee of television broadcast station KUFT(TV) Price, Utah (``KUTF''), filed the captioned must carry complaints with the Commission pursuant to Sections 76.7 and 76.61(a)(3) of the Commission's rules, claiming that Precis Communications, LLC and Myvocom, Inc. (``Cable Operators'') have failed to commence carriage of KUFT on their cable systems serving certain communities in the Salt Lake City, Utah Designated Market Area (the ``Communities''). The complaints are unopposed and will be granted. background Under Section 614 of the Communications Act of 1934, as
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-03-3610A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-03-3610A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-03-3610A1.txt
  • LLC (``KVMD'' or ``Station''), permittee of Station KVMD-DT, Twentynine Palms, California (Ch. 23-Ind.), has filed a Complaint against Frontier, A Citizens Communications Company (``Frontier''), because of the cable operator's refusal to carry the station's digital television signal on its cable system. Frontier filed an Opposition to the Complaint and KVMD filed a Reply. Frontier filed a Petition, pursuant to Section 76.7 of the Commission's rules and Section 614(h) of the Communications Act (``Act''), seeking to exclude a certain cable community from KVMD's market so that it would be under no obligation to carry the Station's signal on its cable system. KVMD filed an Opposition to the Petition and Frontier filed a Reply. We jointly consider the Complaint and the Petition because
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-03-3611A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-03-3611A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-03-3611A1.txt
  • LLC (``KVMD'' or ``Station''), permittee of Station KVMD-DT, Twentynine Palms, California (Ch. 23-Ind.), has filed a Complaint against Avenue TV Cable Service, Inc. (``Avenue'') because of the cable operator's refusal to carry the station's digital television signal on its cable systems. Avenue filed an Opposition to the Complaint and KVMD filed a Reply. Avenue filed a Petition, pursuant to Section 76.7 of the Commission's rules and Section 614(h) of the Communications Act (``Act''), seeking to exclude certain cable communities from KVMD's market so that it would be under no obligation to carry the Station's signal on its cable systems. KVMD filed an Opposition to the Petition and Avenue filed a Reply. We jointly consider the Complaint and the Petition because they
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-03-3612A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-03-3612A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-03-3612A1.txt
  • INTRODUCTION KVMD Licensee Co., LLC (``KVMD'' or ``Station''), permittee of Station KVMD-DT, Twentynine Palms, California (Ch. 23-Ind.), has filed a Complaint against Altrio Communications (``Altrio'') because of the cable operator's refusal to carry the station's digital television signal on its system. Altrio filed an Opposition to the Complaint and KVMD filed a Reply. Altrio filed a Petition, pursuant to Section 76.7 of the Commission's rules and Section 614(h) of the Communications Act (``Act''), seeking to exclude certain communities from KVMD's market so that it would be under no obligation to carry the Station's signal on its system. KVMD filed an Opposition to the Petition and Altrio filed a Reply. We jointly consider the Complaint and the Petition because they are interrelated.
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-03-4030A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-03-4030A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-03-4030A1.txt
  • Carriage of KAZH-TV (Channel 57), Baytown, Texas ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) CSR-6226-M Adopted: December 18, 2003 Released: December 22, 2003 By the Deputy Chief, Policy Division, Media Bureau: introduction KAZH License, LLC (``KAZH License''), licensee of television broadcast station KAZH-TV, (Channel 57) Baytown, Texas (``KAZH''), filed the above-captioned must carry complaint pursuant to Sections 76.7 and 76.61(a)(3) of the Commission's rules, asserting mandatory rights for KAZH on Cable One, Inc.'s (``Cable One'') cable system serving Port Lavaca, Texas. KAZH License requests that the Commission order Cable One to commence carriage of KAZH on the cable system in question. Cable One filed an opposition to which KAZH replied. background Under Section 614 of the Communications Act
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-03-4044A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-03-4044A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-03-4044A1.txt
  • that television station for reception by subscribers. 47 C.F.R. § 76.66(a)(6). Under Section 76.66(m)(3) of the Commission's rules, a local television broadcast station that disputes a response by a satellite carrier that it is in compliance with its must carry obligations may obtain review of such denial or response by filing a ``complaint'' with the Commission in accordance with Section 76.7. 47 C.F.R. § 76.66(m)(3). Although styled a ``complaint,'' a carriage complaint filed against a satellite carrier is treated by the Commission as a petition for special relief for purposes of the Commission's pleading requirements. See 1998 Biennial Regulatory Review: Part 76 - Cable Television Service Pleading and Complaint Rules, 14 FCC Rcd 418 (1999). See Pub. L. No. 106-113, 113
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-03-4080A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-03-4080A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-03-4080A1.txt
  • Communications (``Cox'') for its failure to carry K07XL on Cox's cable system serving Mountain Home, Arkansas. Cox filed a motion to dismiss the complaint and an opposition to which Reynolds replied. Cox also filed a motion to file a supplemental pleading to which Reynolds replied. Cox contends in its first motion that the complaint should be dismissed, pursuant to Section 76.7 of the Commission's rules, because Reynolds has failed to satisfy governing statutory and regulatory prerequisites and therefore has failed to invoke the Commission's jurisdiction. As discussed below, we disagree with Cox's arguments regarding Reynolds' procedural compliance, and accordingly deny Cox's motion to dismiss. Cox also filed a motion to file a supplemental opposition, pursuant to Sections 76.7(c)(1) and 76.7(d) of
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-03-4094A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-03-4094A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-03-4094A1.txt
  • Request for Carriage of KAZH-TV (Channel 57), Baytown, Texas ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) CSR-6225-M Adopted: December 23, 2003 Released: December 24, 2003 By the Deputy Chief, Policy Division, Media Bureau: introduction KAZH License, LLC (``KAZH License''), licensee of television broadcast station KAZH-TV, Baytown, Texas (``KAZH''), filed the above-captioned must carry complaint pursuant to Sections 76.7 and 76.61(3) of the Commission's rules, asserting mandatory rights for KAZH on Cox Communications' (``Cox'') cable systems serving Huntsville, Corrigan and Livingston, Texas (``Cable Communities). KAZH License requests that the Commission order Cox to commence carriage of KAZH on the three cable systems in question. Cox filed an opposition to which KAZH replied. background Under Section 614 of the Communications
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-03-4108A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-03-4108A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-03-4108A1.txt
  • Comcast's actual rate was related to the 2003 Form 1240. Petition, Exhibit 5. Petition, Exh. 4 at 2-3. Township's first Motion to Strike, Exh. 5 at 1. Id. at 1 (quotations from and citations to Commission decisions omitted). June 2003 Order, supra note15, at ¶¶ 6, 9. Id. at ¶¶ 4, 7. Id. at ¶ 9. 47 C.F.R. §§ 1.2, 76.7; 5 U.S.C. § 554(e). See also 47 USC § 154(i), (j). Yale Broadcasting Co. v. FCC, 478 F.2d 594, 602 (D.C.Cir.), cert denied, 414 U.S. 914 (1973). Frontiervision Operating Partners, Order DA 03-3127, rel. Oct. 10, 2003, available at 2003 WL 22318718. Township's first Motion to Strike at 3-4, 6. See supra note 34. Township's first Motion to Strike at
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-03-413A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-03-413A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-03-413A1.txt
  • the Commission's rules requires that a commercial television station's market be defined by Nielsen Media Research's DMAs. See Definition of Markets for Purposes of the Cable Television Broadcast Signal Carriage Rules, 14 FCC Rcd 8366 (1999) (``Modification Final Report and Order''). See Norwell Television, LLC, 17 FCC Rcd 16085 (2002). Complaint at Exhibit II. Id. at 3. 47 C.F.R. § 76.7(c)(5). Complaint at 5. Id. See 47 C.F.R. § 76.56(b)(2). Complaint at 6. See Must Carry Order, 8 FCC Rcd at 2990. 47 U.S.C. § 534. 47 C.F.R. §§ 76.57 and 76.64(f). 47 C.F.R. § 0.283. (...continued from previous page) (continued....) Federal Communications Commission DA 03-413 Federal Communications Commission DA 03-413 Ï Ð F ‡
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-03-414A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-03-414A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-03-414A1.txt
  • Comcast pointed out that KTNC-TV's petition was procedurally defective because it failed to serve copies of its petition on the franchising authorities of the communities at issue and the television stations licensed to the Sacramento DMA. Our review of KTNC-TV's petition confirmed this deficiency. KTNC-TV failed to respond to this allegation in its reply or to correct the omission. Section 76.7(a)(3) of the Commission's rules requires that petitions or complaints filed with the Commission be accompanied by a certificate of service indicating that the petitioner served a copy of its petition on any cable system operator, franchising authority, station licensee, permittee, or applicant, or other interested person who is likely to be directly affected if the relief requested is granted. The
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-03-415A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-03-415A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-03-415A1.txt
  • ) ) CSR 5879-E Adopted: February 10, 2003 Released: February 12, 2003 By the Deputy Chief, Policy Division, Media Bureau: introduction Adelphia Cable Partners, L.P. and Key Biscayne Cablevision, each doing business as Adelphia Cable Communications (``Adelphia''), has filed with the Commission a petition pursuant to Section 623(a)(1) of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended ("Communications Act") and Sections 76.7(a)(1) and 76.905(b)(2) of the Commission's rules for a determination of effective competition in three Florida communities (the ``Communities''). Adelphia alleges that its cable systems serving the Communities are subject to effective competition and therefore exempt from cable rate regulation because of competing services provided by two direct broadcast satellite ("DBS") providers, DirecTV, Inc. (``DirecTV'') and DISH Network (``DISH''). No opposition
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-03-416A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-03-416A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-03-416A1.txt
  • Company, L.P. Petition for Determination of Effective Competition in Doylestown (OH0787) and Chippewa (OH1590), Ohio ) ) ) ) ) ) ) CSR-5955-E Adopted: February 5, 2003 Released: February 12, 2003 By the Deputy Chief, Media Bureau: introduction Time Warner Entertainment Company, L.P. and TW Fanch-Two Co. (collectively, ``Time Warner'') have filed with the Commission a petition pursuant to Sections 76.7, 76.905(b)(4) and 76.907 of the Commission's rules seeking a finding of effective competition in Doylestown and Chippewa, Ohio (``the Communities''). Time Warner alleges that its cable systems serving the Communities are subject to effective competition pursuant to Section 623(a)(2) of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended ("Communications Act"), and the Commission's implementing rules. Time Warner claims the presence of
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-03-419A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-03-419A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-03-419A1.txt
  • Various California Communities ) ) ) ) ) ) CSR 5903-E Adopted: February 11, 2003 Released: February 13, 2003 By the Deputy Chief, Policy Division, Media Bureau: ` introduction Century-TCI California, L.P., d/b/a Adelphia Cable Communications (``Adelphia''), has filed with the Commission a petition pursuant to Section 623(a)(1) of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended ("Communications Act") and Sections 76.7(a)(1) and 76.905(b)(2) of the Commission's rules for a determination of effective competition in five communities in California (the ``Communities''). Adelphia alleges that its cable systems are subject to effective competition and therefore exempt from cable rate regulation because of competing services provided by two direct broadcast satellite ("DBS") providers, DirecTV, Inc. (``DirecTV'') and DISH Network (``DISH''). No opposition to the
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-03-425A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-03-425A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-03-425A1.txt
  • ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) CSR-6004-M MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER Adopted: February 11, 2003 Released: February 13, 2003 By the Deputy Chief, Policy Division, Media Bureau: introduction Senda Broadcasting Network (``Senda''), licensee of low power television station W15BB, Channel 15, San Juan, Puerto Rico (``W15BB''), has filed a complaint pursuant to Sections 76.61(a) and 76.7 of the Commission's rules, asserting mandatory carriage rights on Adelphia Communications' (``Adelphia'') cable system serving San Juan and Levittown, Puerto Rico (the ``cable communities''). Adelphia filed an opposition to which Senda did not reply. For the reasons discussed below we deny the complaint. background The Communications Act of 1934, as amended, and the Commission's rules require the carriage of ``qualified''
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-03-448A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-03-448A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-03-448A1.txt
  • Adopted: February 13, 2003 Released: February 21, 2003 By the Deputy Chief, Policy Division, Media Bureau: introduction Century-TCI California, L.P., Adelphia Cablevision of Fontana LLC, and Adelphia Cablevision of Inland Empire LLC d/b/a Adelphia Cable Communications (``Adelphia'') has filed with the Commission a petition pursuant to Section 623(a)(1) of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended ("Communications Act"), and Sections 76.7(a)(1) and 76.905(b)(2) of the Commission's rules for a determination of effective competition in seven California communities (the ``Communities''). Adelphia alleges that its' cable systems serving the Communities are subject to effective competition and therefore exempt from cable rate regulation because of competing services provided by two direct broadcast satellite ("DBS") providers, DirecTV, Inc. (``DirecTV'') and DISH Network (``DISH''). In addition
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-03-450A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-03-450A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-03-450A1.txt
  • Communities ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) CSR 5885-E Adopted: February 13, 2003 Released: February 21, 2003 By the Deputy Chief, Policy Division, Media Bureau: introduction Century-TCI California, L. P., d/b/a Adelphia Cable Communications (``Adelphia''), has filed with the Commission a petition pursuant to Section 623(a)(1) of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended ("Communications Act") and Sections 76.7(a)(1) and 76.905(b)(1) of the Commission's rules for a determination of effective competition in three California communities (the ``Communities''). Adelphia alleges that its cable systems serving the Communities are subject to effective competition and therefore exempt from cable rate regulation because of competing services provided by two direct broadcast satellite ("DBS") providers, DirecTV, Inc. (``DirecTV'') and DISH Network (``DISH''). No opposition
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-03-471A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-03-471A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-03-471A1.txt
  • for the Stations, as outlined in the Declaratory Ruling and Order, DA 02-765, and this Memorandum Opinion and Order. This action is taken pursuant to authority delegated by Section 0.283 of the Commission's rules, 47 C.F.R. § 0.283. FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION William H. Johnson Deputy Chief, Media Bureau Must carry complaints are treated as Petitions for Special Relief under Section 76.7 of our rules. See 1998 Biennial Regulatory Review: Part 76 - Cable Television Service Pleading and Complaint Rules, 14 FCC Rcd 418 (1999). See 47 U.S.C. § 338; 47 C.F.R. § 76.66. See EchoStar Opposition to LeSEA Complaint at i. The Satellite Home Viewer Improvement Act of 1999 grants satellite carriers a royalty-free copyright license that enables satellite carriers to
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-03-472A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-03-472A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-03-472A1.txt
  • that television station for reception by subscribers. 47 C.F.R. § 76.66(a)(6). Under Section 76.66(m)(3) of the Commission's rules, a local television broadcast station that disputes a response by a satellite carrier that it is in compliance with its must carry obligations may obtain review of such denial or response by filing a ``complaint'' with the Commission in accordance with Section 76.7. See 47 C.F.R. § 76.66(m)(3). Although styled a ``complaint,'' a carriage complaint filed against a satellite carrier is treated by the Commission as a petition for special relief for purposes of the Commission's pleading requirements. See 1998 Biennial Regulatory Review: Part 76 - Cable Television Service Pleading and Complaint Rules, 14 FCC Rcd 418 (1999). Responsive pleadings filed in this
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-03-473A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-03-473A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-03-473A1.txt
  • the Commission's rules, 47 C.F.R. §§ 76.66, that the must carry complaint filed by Entravision Holdings, LLC IS DISMISSED. This action is taken pursuant to authority delegated by Section 0.283 of the Commission's rules, 47 C.F.R. § 0.283. FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION William H. Johnson Deputy Chief, Media Bureau Must carry complaints are treated as Petitions for Special Relief under Section 76.7 of our rules. See 1998 Biennial Regulatory Review: Part 76 - Cable Television Service Pleading and Complaint Rules, 14 FCC Rcd 418 (1999). 47 C.F.R. § 76.66. See 17 U.S.C. § 122(a); 47 U.S.C. § 339. A satellite carrier provides ``local-into-local'' satellite service when it retransmits a local television signal back into the local market of that television station for
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-03-474A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-03-474A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-03-474A1.txt
  • 21, 2003 By the Deputy Chief, Policy Division, Media Bureau: introduction Century-TCI California, L.P., Adelphia Cablevision of Orange County II L.L.C., Adelphia California Cablevision L.L.C., and Adelphia Cablevision of Santa Ana L.L.C. d/b/a Adelphia Cable Communications (``Adelphia'') has filed with the Commission a petition pursuant to Section 623(a)(1) of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended ("Communications Act") and Sections 76.7(a)(1) and 76.905(b)(1) of the Commission's rules for a determination of effective competition in thirteen California communities (the ``Communities''). Adelphia alleges that its cable systems serving the Communities are subject to effective competition and therefore exempt from cable rate regulation because of competing services provided by two direct broadcast satellite ("DBS") providers, DirecTV, Inc. (``DirecTV'') and DISH Network (``DISH''). No opposition
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-03-620A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-03-620A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-03-620A1.txt
  • Competition in Various Virginia Communities ) ) ) ) ) ) CSR 5894-E Adopted: March 4, 2003 Released: March 6, 2003 By the Deputy Chief, Policy Division, Media Bureau: introduction UCA, LLC d/b/a Adelphia Cable Communications (``Adelphia'') has filed with the Commission a petition pursuant to Section 623(a)(1) of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended ("Communications Act"), and Sections 76.7(a)(1) and 76.905(b)(2) of the Commission's rules for a determination of effective competition in six Virginia communities (the ``Communities''). Adelphia alleges that its cable systems serving the Communities are subject to effective competition and therefore exempt from cable rate regulation because of competing service provided by two direct broadcast satellite ("DBS") providers, DirecTV, Inc. (``DirecTV'') and DISH Network (``DISH''). Loudoun County
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-03-742A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-03-742A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-03-742A1.txt
  • Arkansas ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) CSR 6025-M MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER Adopted: March 10, 2003 Released: March 12, 2003 By the Deputy Chief, Policy Division, Media Bureau: introduction Agape Church, Inc. ("Agape"), licensee of television station KVTH-TV (``KVTH-TV''), Hot Springs, Arkansas, filed a complaint pursuant to Section 614 of the Communications Act, as amended, and Sections 76.7 and 76.61(a) of the Commission's Rules, claiming entitlement to mandatory carriage of KVTH-TV on the cable systems of Community Communications, Inc. (``Community'') serving the communities of Magic Springs, East Camden, Friendship, Donaldson, Jones Mill, Norman, Pearcy, Royal, and unincorporated portions of Clark and Garland Counties, Arkansas (the ``Communities''). Community filed an opposition to the complaint and Agape filed a reply.
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-03-743A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-03-743A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-03-743A1.txt
  • Arkansas ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) CSR 6026-M MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER Adopted: March 10, 2003 Released: March 12, 2003 By the Deputy Chief, Policy Division, Media Bureau: introduction Agape Church, Inc. ("Agape"), licensee of television station KVTN-TV (``KVTN-TV''), Pine Bluff, Arkansas, filed a complaint pursuant to Section 614 of the Communications Act, as amended, and Sections 76.7 and 76.61(a) of the Commission's Rules, claiming entitlement to mandatory carriage of KVTN-TV on the cable systems of Community Communications, Inc. (``Community'') serving the communities of Arkansas City, Kingsland, Tillar/Reed and Gillett, Arkansas (the ``Communities''). Community filed an opposition to the complaint and Agape filed a reply. discussion Under Section 614 of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended, and
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-03-80A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-03-80A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-03-80A1.txt
  • Station WDYR-LP Dyersburg, Tennessee ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) CSR-5961-M MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER Adopted: January 10, 2003 Released: January 14, 2003 By the Deputy Chief, Policy Division, Media Bureau: introduction Tri-State Christian TV, Inc., licensee of low power television station (``LPTV'') WDYR-LP (``WDYR''), Dyersburg, Tennessee, filed a complaint pursuant to Sections 76.61(a) and 76.7 of the Commission's rules, asserting mandatory carriage rights for WDYR on Charter Communication's (``Charter'') cable system serving Newbern, Troy, Trimble, Obion and Union City, Tennessee ( the ``cable communities''). Charter filed an opposition to which WDYR replied. For the reasons discussed below we deny the complaint. background Both the Communications Act of 1934, as amended, and the Commission's rules require
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-03-824A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-03-824A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-03-824A1.txt
  • Time Warner states that it does not carry five other Los Angeles stations with transmitter sites on Mount Wilson on the basis of distance and lack of market connection, and that it has not singled out KXLA for ``special treatment.'' In regard to Rancho's supplemental pleading, we do not believe that the supplement is timely filed in accordance with Section 76.7 of the Commission's rules. Further, we agree with Time Warner that the basis for acceptance of a late-filed supplement cannot be predicated on reminding the Bureau to pay attention to a recently issued Bureau decision. Even if we were to accept the supplement, it would not alter our decision in the instant proceeding. In its supplement, Rancho argues that the
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-04-1015A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-04-1015A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-04-1015A1.txt
  • the Federal Communications Commission Washington, D.C. 20554 In the Matter of: CSC Holdings, Inc. Petition for Determination of Effective Competition ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) CSR-6163-E Adopted: April 14, 2004 Released: April 15, 2004 By the Deputy Chief, Policy Division, Media Bureau: introduction CSC Holdings, Inc. (``Cablevision'') has filed with the Commission a petition pursuant to Section 76.7 of the Commission's rules for a determination of effective competition in nine New York cable communities (``Communities''). Cablevision alleges that its cable system serving the Communities is subject to effective competition pursuant to Section 623(a) of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended ("Communications Act"), and Section 76.905(b)(2) of the Commission's rules, and seeks revocation of the certification of the
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-04-1029A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-04-1029A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-04-1029A1.txt
  • New Jersey Cablevision of Monmouth Petitions for Determination of Effective Competition ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) CSR 6108-E CSR 6169-E CSR 6176-E Adopted: April 15, 2004 Released: April 15, 2004 By the Deputy Chief, Policy Division, Media Bureau: introduction Cablevision Systems Corporation, through its various subsidiaries, has filed with the Commission three separate petitions pursuant to Section 76.7 of the Commission's rules for determinations of effective competition in several New Jersey communities (``Communities''). Cablevision alleges that its cable systems serving the Communities are subject to effective competition pursuant to Section 623(a) of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended ("Communications Act"), and Section 76.905(b)(2) of the Commission's rules, and seeks revocation of the certifications of the local franchising
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-04-1040A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-04-1040A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-04-1040A1.txt
  • filed motions to withdraw the petitions with respect to Granite Falls, Lenoir, and Weaverville, North Carolina, which the LFAs opposed. A request for Commission action may be withdrawn as a matter of right unless restricted by regulation. See for example 47 C.F.R. 1.420(j). No such regulation applies to petitions for determination of effective competition filed pursuant to 47 C.F.R. §§ 76.7 & 76.907. Additionally, the unopposed Motions for Extension of Time filed by Charter are granted. 47 C.F.R. § 76.906. See 47 U.S.C. § 543(1) and 47 C.F.R. § 76.905. See 47 C.F.R. §§ 76.906 & 907. See 47 U.S.C. § 543(l)(1)(A)-(D). See 47 C.F.R. §76.905. 47 U.S.C. § 543(1)(1)(B); see also 47 C.F.R. § 76.905(b)(2). See MediaOne of Georgia, 12
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-04-1072A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-04-1072A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-04-1072A1.txt
  • Comcast Cablevision of Maryland, Inc. (MD0178) (MD0351) (MD0263) (MD0033) (MD0196) (MD0278) (MD0267) Petitions for Determination of Effective Competition ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) CSR-6040-E Adopted: April 22, 2004 Released: April 23, 2004 By the Deputy Chief, Policy Division, Media Bureau: introduction Comcast Cablevision of Maryland, Inc. (``Comcast'') has filed with the Commission a petition pursuant to Section 76.7 of the Commission's rules for a determination of effective competition in Charles County, MD (``County''). Comcast alleges that its cable system serving the County is subject to effective competition pursuant to Section 623(a) of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended ("Communications Act"), and Section 76.905(b)(2) of the Commission's rules, and seeks revocation of the certification of the local franchising
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-04-1598A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-04-1598A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-04-1598A1.txt
  • 534(d)(1) of the Communications Act and Section 76.61(a) of the Commission's rules. Cox maintains that the Station's election notices cannot be deemed demands for mandatory carriage. Second, Cox contends that the Commission lacks jurisdiction to consider KEJB's procedurally defective complaint because the Station failed to serve other interested parties such as franchising authorities or cable operators as required by Section 76.7(a)(3) of the Commission's rules. Cox asserts that on January 9, 2004, it informed KEJB that, with the exception of Winnfield, Louisiana, Cox would commence carrying KEJB in Mer Rouge, Vienna, Grambling, Simsboro, Hodge, Jackson and Quitman, Louisiana, on February 19, 2004. Cox requests that the Bureau award Cox fees and expenses, including attorney's fees, it incurred in responding to a
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-04-1944A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-04-1944A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-04-1944A1.txt
  • of that television station for reception by subscribers. 47 C.F.R. § 76.66(a)(6). Under Section 76.66(m)(3) of the Commission's rules, a local television broadcast station that disputes a response by a satellite carrier that it is in compliance with its carriage obligations may obtain review of such denial or response by filing a ``complaint'' with the Commission in accordance with Section 76.7. See 47 C.F.R. § 76.66(m)(3). Although styled a ``complaint'', a carriage complaint filed against a satellite carrier is treated by the Commission as a petition for special relief for purposes of the Commission's pleading requirements. See 1998 Biennial Regulatory Review: Part 76 - Cable Television Service Pleading and Complaint Rules, 14 FCC Rcd 418 (1999). Responsive pleadings filed in this
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-04-1945A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-04-1945A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-04-1945A1.txt
  • of that television station for reception by subscribers. 47 C.F.R. § 76.66(a)(6). Under Section 76.66(m)(3) of the Commission's rules, a local television broadcast station that disputes a response by a satellite carrier that it is in compliance with its carriage obligations may obtain review of such denial or response by filing a ``complaint'' with the Commission in accordance with Section 76.7. See 47 C.F.R. § 76.66(m)(3). Although styled a ``complaint'', a carriage complaint filed against a satellite carrier is treated by the Commission as a petition for special relief for purposes of the Commission's pleading requirements. See 1998 Biennial Regulatory Review: Part 76 - Cable Television Service Pleading and Complaint Rules, 14 FCC Rcd 418 (1999). Responsive pleadings filed in this
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-04-1956A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-04-1956A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-04-1956A1.txt
  • referenced publications as comprising a given DMA, or it may configure its system based on the Nielsen Zip Code Index because both are referenced in the ``Nielsen Station Index Directory and Nielsen Station Index United States Television Household Estimates''. ORDERING CLAUSES Accordingly, IT IS ORDERED, pursuant to Section 325(b) of the Communications Act, as amended, 47 U.S.C. § 325(b), and 76.7 of the Commission's rules, 47 C.F.R. §76.7, that the complaint of New York Times Management Services, licensee of television station WNEP-TV, Scranton, PA against DIRECTV, Inc. IS DENIED. This action is taken pursuant to authority delegated by Section 0.283 of the Commission's rules, 47 C.F.R § 0.283. FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION William H. Johnson Deputy Chief, Media Bureau 47 U.S.C. §
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-04-1994A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-04-1994A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-04-1994A1.txt
  • ) CSR 6075-E CSR 6111-E CSR 6126-E & 6182-E CSR 6148-E, 6159-E & 6212-E CSR 6184-E CSR 6211-E, 6224-E & 6239-E Adopted: June 29, 2004 Released: June 30, 2004 By the Deputy Chief, Policy Division, Media Bureau: I. INtroduction 1. This Order considers eleven unopposed petitions which cable operators (the ``Cable Operators'') have filed with the Commission pursuant to Sections 76.7, 76.905(b)(2) and 76.907 of the Commission's rules for a determination that such operators are subject to effective competition pursuant to Section 623(a)(1) of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended ("Communications Act") and the Commission's implementing rules and are therefore exempt from cable rate regulation in the communities listed in Attachment A (the ``Communities''). No opposition to the petitions was
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-04-2014A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-04-2014A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-04-2014A1.txt
  • St. Peter (MN0060), Sleepy Eye (MN0068), Redwood Falls (MN0225) and Springfield (MN0134), Minnesota ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) CSR 6320-E; CSR 6321-E & CSR 6322-E Adopted: June 30, 2004 Released: July 2, 2004 By the Deputy Chief, Media Bureau: introduction Mediacom Minnesota LLC (``Mediacom'') has filed with the Commission three petitions pursuant to Section 76.7 of the Commission's rules for a determination of effective competition in St. Peter, Sleepy Eye, Redwood Falls, and Springfield, Minnesota (``the Cities'') Mediacom alleges that its cable systems serving the Cities are subject to effective competition pursuant to Sections 623(a)(2) and 623(1)(1)(4) of the Communications Act and the Commission's implementing rules, and therefore are exempt from cable rate regulation. Mediacom
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-04-2037A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-04-2037A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-04-2037A1.txt
  • of that television station for reception by subscribers. 47 C.F.R. § 76.66(a)(6). Under Section 76.66(m)(3) of the Commission's rules, a local television broadcast station that disputes a response by a satellite carrier that it is in compliance with its carriage obligations may obtain review of such denial or response by filing a ``complaint'' with the Commission in accordance with Section 76.7. 47 C.F.R. § 76.66(m)(3). Although styled a ``complaint,'' a carriage complaint filed against a satellite carrier is treated by the Commission as a petition for special relief for purposes of the Commission's pleading requirements. See 1998 Biennial Regulatory Review: Part 76 - Cable Television Service Pleading and Complaint Rules, 14 FCC Rcd 418 (1999). See Pub. L. No. 106-113, 113
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-04-213A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-04-213A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-04-213A1.txt
  • 20554 In the Matter of: Kansas City Cable Partners Petition for Determination of Effective Competition in Kansas City, MO (MO0199) (MO200) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) CSR-6104-E Adopted: January 28, 2004 Released: January 29, 2004 By the Deputy Chief, Media Bureau: introduction Kansas City Cable Partners (``KCCP'') has filed with the Commission a petition (``Petition'') pursuant to Sections 76.7, 76.905(b)(4) and 76.907 of the Commission's rules seeking a finding of effective competition in Kansas City, Missouri (``Kansas City''). KCCP alleges that its cable system serving Kansas City is subject to effective competition pursuant to Section 623(a)(2) of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended ("Communications Act"), and the Commission's implementing rules, and seeks revocation of the certification of the
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-04-2297A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-04-2297A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-04-2297A1.txt
  • Channel 41, Macon, Georgia v. Monroe, Georgia Water Light and Gas Commission d/b/a Monroe Utilities Network ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) CSR No. 6237-C CSR No. 6254-C Adopted: July 23, 2004 Released: July 27, 2004 By the Deputy Chief, Media Bureau: INTRODUCTION Pursuant to Sections 76.7 and 76.65 of the Commission's rules, the Monroe, Georgia Water Light and Gas Commission, d/b/a Monroe Utilities Network (``Monroe Utilities''), a municipally-owned cable operator serving incorporated and unincorporated portions of Walton and Morgan Counties, Georgia, has filed a retransmission consent complaint and petition for declaratory ruling (``Monroe Utilities Complaint'') against Morris Network, Inc. (``Morris''), owner of television station WMGT (NBC
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-04-2544A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-04-2544A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-04-2544A1.txt
  • Commission's rules provides that ``[c]able television systems distributing signals by using methods such as nonconventional coaxial cable techniques . . . and which, because of their basic design, cannot comply with one or more of the technical standards set forth in . . . this section, may be permitted to operate, provided that an adequate showing is made pursuant to 76.7 which establishes that the public interest is benefited.'' 47 C.F.R. § 76.505(b). BellSouth asserts that its deployment has been rendered nonconventional because it pioneered a unique digital cable design that has proven to be inconsistent with the development of subsequent digital cable standards. Id. at 12-14 (citing Pace Micro Technology PLC Petition for Special Relief and Interim Relief, 19 FCC
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-04-262A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-04-262A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-04-262A1.txt
  • that television station for reception by subscribers. 47 C.F.R. § 76.66(a)(6). Under Section 76.66(m)(3) of the Commission's rules, a local television broadcast station that disputes a response by a satellite carrier that it is in compliance with its must carry obligations may obtain review of such denial or response by filing a ``complaint'' with the Commission in accordance with Section 76.7. 47 C.F.R. § 76.66(m)(3). Although styled a ``complaint,'' a carriage complaint filed against a satellite carrier is treated by the Commission as a petition for special relief for purposes of the Commission's pleading requirements. See 1998 Biennial Regulatory Review: Part 76 - Cable Television Service Pleading and Complaint Rules, 14 FCC Rcd 418 (1999). EchoStar Opposition at 11. 47 U.S.C.
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-04-263A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-04-263A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-04-263A1.txt
  • KFTR(TV) on Channel 46 throughout its South Pasadena and Gardena, California systems within sixty (60) days of the release of this Memorandum Opinion and Order. This action is taken pursuant to authority delegated under Section 0.283 of the Commission's rules. FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION Steven A. Broeckaert Deputy Chief, Policy Division Media Bureau 47 U.S.C. § 534(a); see 47 C.F.R. §§ 76.7 and 76.61. 8 FCC Rcd 2965, 2976-2977 (1993). 47 U.S.C. § 534(b)(6); 47 C.F.R. § 76.57. 47 U.S.C. § 534(b)(6); 47 C.F.R. § 76.57(a). 47 U.S.C. § 534(b)(6); 47 C.F.R. § 76.57(c). Complaint at 2. Id. Id. and Exhibit 1. Id. Id. Id. Id. Id. Id. at 5. Must Carry Order, 8 FCC Rcd at 2988. Id. Id. 47 C.F.R.
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-04-3049A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-04-3049A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-04-3049A1.txt
  • ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) CSR 6307-E, 6318-E & 6319-E CSR 6302-E CSR 6312-E & 6327-E Adopted: September 22, 2004 Released: September 24, 2004 By the Deputy Chief, Policy Division, Media Bureau: I. INtroduction 1. This Order considers six unopposed petitions which cable operators (the ``Cable Operators'') have filed with the Commission pursuant to Sections 76.7, 76.905(b)(1) & (2) and 76.907 of the Commission's rules for a determination that such operators are subject to effective competition pursuant to Section 623(a)(1) of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended ("Communications Act") and the Commission's implementing rules and are therefore exempt from cable rate regulation in the communities listed in Attachment A (the ``Communities''). No opposition to any
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-04-3088A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-04-3088A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-04-3088A1.txt
  • LLC Petitions for Determination of Effective Competition in Forest City (IA0151), Clear Lake (IA0076) and Ventura (IA0393), IA ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) CSR-6323-E CSR-6328-E Adopted: September 24, 2004 Released: September 28, 2004 By the Deputy Chief, Media Bureau: introduction MCC Iowa LLC (``Mediacom'') has filed with the Commission two petitions pursuant to Section 76.7, 76.905(b)(4) and 76.907 of the Commission's rules seeking a finding of effective competition in Forest City, Clear Lake and Ventura, Iowa (``the Communities''). Mediacom alleges that its cable systems serving the Communities are subject to effective competition pursuant to Sections 623(a)(2) and 623(1)(1)(D) of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended, (``Communications Act''), and the Commission's implementing rules, and are
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-04-3195A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-04-3195A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-04-3195A1.txt
  • are allocated, see Nielsen Media Research's Nielsen Station Index: Methodology Techniques and Data Interpretation. 47 U.S.C. §534(h)(1)(C). 47 C.F.R. § 76.59. 47 C.F.R. § 76.92. 47 U.S.C. § 534. 47 C.F.R. § 76.92. Petition at Exhibits A and B. Id. at Exhibit C. Id. at 2-3; see also 47 C.F.R. § 76.92. Petition at 3-4; see also 47 C.F.R. §§ 76.7 and 76.59. Petition at 3-4. Id. at 8-9. Dalton Utilities states that the vast majority of Whitfield County residents commute to a work location in Georgia, rather than Tennessee. See www.census.gov/population/www/cen2000/commuting.html. Petition at 9. Id. at 10. Id. at 10-11. Dalton Utilities also notes that a sizable portion of the sports-minded population in Dalton and Whitfield County follow Georgia and
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-04-349A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-04-349A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-04-349A1.txt
  • further provide, in accordance with the requirements of the 1992 Cable Act, that a station not be deleted from carriage during the pendency of a modification request. DISCUSSION Dismissal of the Petition with Respect to WUVP(TV) Service filed a motion seeking dismissal of that portion of the requesting modification of the market of WUVP(TV). A petition filed pursuant to Section 76.7 of the Commissions rules may be dismissed without prejudice as a matter of right prior to any final action by the Commission. Accordingly, Service's motion for partial dismissal of the petition with respect to WUVP(TV) will be dismissed without prejudice. Modification of The Market of WWSI Station WWSI is located in the Philadelphia DMA as are the Communities served by
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-04-394A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-04-394A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-04-394A1.txt
  • deadline is technical and unfair because the Town filed close to the proper filing date. However, the Town does not proffer any good cause to support its failure to file the complaint on time, when it had 180 days to do so. Therefore, we deny the petition for special relief. 3. Accordingly, IT IS ORDERED, pursuant to Sections 0.283 and 76.7 of the Commission's rules, 47 C.F.R. § 0.283 and § 76.7, that the referenced petition for special relief IS DENIED. FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION John B. Norton, Deputy Chief Policy Division Media Bureau See letter, dated July 8, 1997, to Ms. Carol Pennington, Town Clerk, Town of Henrietta, from Gary Remondino, Cable Services Bureau. See 47 C.F.R. § 76.7. See 47
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-04-398A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-04-398A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-04-398A1.txt
  • at $0.67, the Greenwood system's average monthly regulated revenue per channel per subscriber falls between that of small systems ($0.86) and that of systems with more than 15,000 subscribers ($0.44). Given the totality of the circumstances, we find that Northland has demonstrated that its Greenwood system resembles a small system according to most of the applicable criteria. 12. Under Section 76.7(c)(1) of the Commission's rules, a petition for special relief must state fully and precisely all pertinent facts and considerations relied on to demonstrate the need for the requested relief and to support a decision that such relief would serve the public interest. Northland has adequately established the Greenwood system's need for the relief as required by Section 76.7(c)(1). In making
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-04-615A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-04-615A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-04-615A1.txt
  • of Effective Competition in Le Sueur, Minnesota (MN0535) ) ) ) ) ) ) CSR-6009-E Adopted: March 2, 2004 Released: March 4, 2004 By the Deputy Chief, Policy Division, Media Bureau: I. introduction Mediacom Minnesota LLC (``Mediacom'') has filed with the Commission a petition pursuant to Section 623(a)(1) of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended ("Communications Act"), and Sections 76.7(a)(1) and 76.905(b)(2) of the Commission's rules for a determination of effective competition in the City of Le Sueur, Minnesota (``Le Sueur''). Mediacom alleges that its cable system serving the City is subject to effective competition and therefore exempt from cable rate regulation because of competing services provided by two direct broadcast satellite ("DBS") providers, DirecTV, Inc. (``DirecTV'') and DISH Network
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-04-632A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-04-632A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-04-632A1.txt
  • as such. Lenfest's pleading will be treated as a carriage complaint. Under Section 76.66(m)(3) of the Commission's rules, a local television broadcast station that disputes a response by a satellite carrier that it is in compliance with its must carry obligations may obtain review of such denial or response by filing a ``complaint'' with the Commission in accordance with Section 76.7. See 47 C.F.R. § 76.66(m)(3). See also 1998 Biennial Regulatory Review: Part 76 - Cable Television Service Pleading and Complaint Rules, 14 FCC Rcd 418 (1999). See Pub. L. No. 106-113, 113 Stat. 1501, 1501A-526 to 1501A-545 (Nov. 29, 1999). See 47 U.S.C. § 338. See also 47 C.F.R. § 76.66. The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-04-690A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-04-690A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-04-690A1.txt
  • television station for reception by subscribers. See 47 C.F.R. § 76.66(a)(6). Under Section 76.66(m)(3) of the Commission's rules, a local television broadcast station that disputes a response by a satellite carrier that it is in compliance with its must carry obligations may obtain review of such denial or response by filing a ``complaint'' with the Commission in accordance with Section 76.7 of our rules. See 47 C.F.R. § 76.66(m)(3). Although styled a ``complaint,'' a carriage complaint filed against a satellite carrier is treated by the Commission as a petition for special relief for purposes of the Commission's pleading requirements. See 1998 Biennial Regulatory Review: Part 76 - Cable Television Service Pleading and Complaint Rules, 14 FCC Rcd 418 (1999). In response
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-04-699A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-04-699A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-04-699A1.txt
  • on its cable systems serving Belle Mead, Flemington and Passaic, New Jersey within sixty (60) days of the release of this Memorandum Opinion and Order. This action is taken pursuant to authority delegated under Section 0.283 of the Commission's rules. FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION Steven A. Broeckaert Deputy Chief, Policy Division Media Bureau 47 U.S.C. § 534(a); see 47 C.F.R. §§ 76.7 and 76.61. Patriot is the successor in interest of C-Tec Cable Systems. C-Tec Cable Systems began carriage of WXTV on Channel 21 beginning on November 26, 1993. Patriot's Opposition to Complaint at Exhibit 1. 8 FCC Rcd 2965, 2976-2977 (1993). 47 U.S.C. § 534(b)(6); 47 C.F.R. § 76.57. 47 U.S.C. § 534(b)(6); 47 C.F.R. § 76.57(a). 47 U.S.C. § 534(b)(6);
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-04-939A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-04-939A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-04-939A1.txt
  • Petition for Determination of Effective Competition in Eleven Minnesota Communities ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) CSR 6106-E Adopted: March 31, 2004 Released: April 5, 2004 By the Deputy Chief, Policy Division, Media Bureau: introduction Amzak Cable Midwest, Inc. and Minnesota Cable Properties, Inc. (``Cable Operators'') have filed with the Commission a petition pursuant to Sections 76.7 and 76.907 of the Commission's rules for a determination of effective competition in the eleven Minnesota communities listed below (the ``Communities''). The Cable Operators alleges that their cable systems serving these communities are subject to effective competition and are therefore exempt from cable rate regulation. More particularly, the Cable Operators claim the presence of effective competition in the eleven Communities
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-04-940A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-04-940A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-04-940A1.txt
  • of: Texas Cable Partners, L.P. Petition for Determination of Effective Competition in Eleven Texas Communities ) ) ) ) ) ) CSR 6091-E Adopted: March 30, 2004 Released: April 7, 2004 By the Deputy Chief, Policy Division, Media Bureau: introduction Texas Cable Partners, L.P. d/b/a Time Warner Cable (``Texas Cable'') has filed with the Commission a petition pursuant to Sections 76.7 and 76.907 of the Commission's rules for a determination of effective competition in the eleven communities listed on Attachment A (the ``Communities''). Texas Cable alleges that its cable systems serving these communities are subject to effective competition pursuant to Section 623(1) of the Communications Act, and the Commission's implementing rules, and are therefore exempt from cable rate regulation. More particularly,
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-04-948A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-04-948A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-04-948A1.txt
  • 6218-E & 6221-E File No. CSR 6171-E File No. CSR 6102-E File No. CSR 6137-E File No. CSR 6099-E MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER Adopted: April 2, 2004 Released: April 6, 2004 By the Deputy Chief, Policy Division, Media Bureau: introduction This Order considers nineteen unopposed petitions which cable operators (the ``Cable Operators'') have filed with the Commission pursuant to Sections 76.7, 76.905(b)(2) and 76.907 of the Commission's rules for a determination that such cable operators are subject to effective competition pursuant to Section 623(a)(2) of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended ("Communications Act"), and the Commission's implementing rules, and are therefore exempt from cable rate regulation in the communities listed in Attachment A (the ``Communities''). No oppositions to the petitions
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-05-1136A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-05-1136A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-05-1136A1.txt
  • ) ) ) CSR-6414-P ORDER Adopted: April 26, 2005 Released: April 27, 2005 By the Deputy Chief, Policy Division, Media Bureau: On October 8, 2004, a program access complaint was filed on behalf of Rainbow DBS Company LLC (``VOOM'') against iN DEMAND, L.L.C. (``ID'') pursuant to Sections 628(b) and (c) of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended, and Sections 76.7(a) and 76.1003(a) of the Commission's rules. VOOM alleged that ID violated Section 628(b) of the Act because it refused to negotiate a non-discriminatory, commercially reasonable agreement with VOOM for carriage of ID's INHD1 and INHD2 high definition television programming channels. VOOM also alleged that ID violated Section 628(c) of the Act and Section 76.1002(c)(2) of the Commission's rules because ID
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-05-1281A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-05-1281A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-05-1281A1.txt
  • that television station for reception by subscribers. 47 C.F.R. § 76.66(a)(6). Under Section 76.66(m)(3) of the Commission's rules, a local television broadcast station that disputes a response by a satellite carrier that it is in compliance with its must carry obligations may obtain review of such denial or response by filing a ``complaint'' with the Commission in accordance with Section 76.7. 47 C.F.R. § 76.66(m)(3). Although styled a ``complaint,'' a carriage complaint filed against a satellite carrier is treated by the Commission as a petition for special relief for purposes of the Commission's pleading requirements. See 1998 Biennial Regulatory Review: Part 76 - Cable Television Service Pleading and Complaint Rules, 14 FCC Rcd 418 (1999). See Letter dated April 13, 2004,
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-05-136A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-05-136A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-05-136A1.txt
  • requested withdrawal of the Complaint. Accordingly, IT IS ORDERED that the Emergency Complaint filed by Horry Telephone Cooperative, Inc. is dismissed. This action is taken pursuant to delegated authority under Section 0.283 of the Commission's rules. FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION Steven A. Broeckaert Deputy Chief, Policy Division, Media Bureau 47 U.S.C. § 325; 47 C.F.R. §§ 76.64-65. See 47 C.F.R. § 76.7(a) (4)(iii). 47 C.F.R. § 0.283. Federal Communications Commission FCC 03-XXX Federal Communications Commission DA 05-136 ] ^ � ` a a Ô Õ Ö × ødd a ­
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-05-1393A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-05-1393A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-05-1393A1.txt
  • 6556-E, 6565-E, 6587-E, 6588-E, 6589-E, 6624-E CSR CSR 6558-E CSR 6566-E CSR 6591-E CSR 6468-E, 6469-E, 6470-E, 6471-E, 6472-E, 6473-E, 6474-E, 6475-E, 6476-E Adopted: May 18, 2005 Released: May 19, 2005 By the Deputy Chief, Policy Division, Media Bureau: introduction This Order considers twenty-two unopposed petitions which cable operators (the ``Cable Operators'') have filed with the Commission pursuant to Sections 76.7, 76.905(b)(2) and 76.907 of the Commission's rules for a determination that such operators are subject to effective competition pursuant to Section 623(1) of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended ("Communications Act"), and the Commission's implementing rules, and are therefore exempt from cable rate regulation in the communities listed in Attachment A (the ``Communities''). No opposition to any petition was
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-05-1394A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-05-1394A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-05-1394A1.txt
  • 6437-E, 6450-E, 6479-E, 6483-E, 6638-E, 6641-E, 6644-E, 6645-E, 6646-E, 6655-E, 6659-E CSR CSR 6436-E, 6642-E, 6643-E, 6649-E CSR 6590-E, 6647-E, 6648-E CSR 6601-E Adopted: May 18, 2005 Released: May 19, 2005 By the Deputy Chief, Policy Division, Media Bureau: introduction This Order considers twenty-four unopposed petitions which cable operators (the ``Cable Operators'') have filed with the Commission pursuant to Sections 76.7, 76.905(b)(2) and 76.907 of the Commission's rules for a determination that such operators are subject to effective competition pursuant to Section 623(1) of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended ("Communications Act"), and the Commission's implementing rules, and are therefore exempt from cable rate regulation in the communities listed in Attachment A (the ``Communities''). No opposition to any petition was
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-05-1562A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-05-1562A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-05-1562A1.txt
  • ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) CSR-6612-E CSR-6613-E CSR-6614-E CSR-6615-E CSR-6616-E CSR-6617-E CSR-6618-E CSR-6619-E CSR-6620-E CSR-6621-E CSR-6622-E CSR-6623-E MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER Adopted: May 27, 2005 Released: June 2, 2005 By the Deputy Chief, Policy Division, Media Bureau: Introduction This Order considers twelve petitions filed with the Commission by TCA Cable Partners (``Cox'') pursuant to Sections 76.7, 76.905(b)(1) & (2) and 76.907 of the Commission's rules for a determination that Cox's cable systems serving eighteen Arkansas communities and one Oklahoma and one Texas community (the ``Communities'') are subject to effective competition pursuant to Section 623(a)(1) of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended (``Communications Act'') and are therefore exempt from cable rate regulation. The Communities are listed
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-05-1603A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-05-1603A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-05-1603A1.txt
  • Ohio, 11 FCC Rcd 18034 (1996) (41 miles). Id. at Exhibit 9. Id. at 5-6. Id. at Exhibit 10. Id. at 6. 47 U.S.C. §534(h)(1)(C). Modification at Exhibit 4. 47 U.S.C. §534(h)(1)(C). Modification at Exhibit 13. Opposition at 2, citing 19 FCC Rcd 24086 (2004). Id. at 2. Id. Id. Id. Id. Reply at 2. Id., citing 47 C.F.R. §§ 76.7, 76.59. Id. Id., citing Brownwood Cable Television Service, Inc., 16 FCC Rcd 3108 (2001); Implementation of the Cable Television Consumer Protection and Competition Act of 1992, Broadcast Signal Carriage Issues, 8 FCC Rcd 2965, 2977 (1993) (``During the pendency of a [market modification] petition before the Commission, cable operators will be required to maintain the status quo with regard to
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-05-1649A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-05-1649A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-05-1649A1.txt
  • ) ) ) ) ) ) CSR-6456-E CSR-6457-E CSR-6458-E CSR-6459-E CSR-6460-E CSR-6461-E CSR-6462-E CSR-6463-E CSR-6464-E CSR-6465-E CSR-6466-E CSR-6467-E MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER Adopted: June 9, 2005 Released: June 13, 2005 By the Deputy Chief, Policy Division, Media Bureau: Introduction This Order considers twelve petitions filed with the Commission by Charter Communications, on behalf of its affiliates, (``Charter'') pursuant to Sections 76.7, 76.905(b)(1) & (2) and 76.907 of the Commission's rules for a determination that Charter's cable systems serving twenty-three Oregon communities (``the Communities'') are subject to effective competition pursuant to Section 623(a)(1) of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended (``Communications Act'') and are therefore exempt from cable rate regulation. The Communities are listed in Attachment A. No opposition to any
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-05-1911A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-05-1911A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-05-1911A1.txt
  • however, the Commission has determined that carriage complaints filed against satellite carriers should be treated as petitions for special relief for purposes of pleading requirements. Id.; 1998 Biennial Regulatory Review: Part 76-Cable Television Service Pleading and Complaint Rules, 14 FCC Rcd 418 (1999); 47 C.F.R. § 76.66(m)(3). Accordingly, we apply the rule for pleadings responsive to petitions, 47 C.F.R. § 76.7(b)(1), which provides that ``interested persons may submit comments or oppositions within twenty (20) days after the date of public notice of the filing of such petition.'' Thus, the deadline for filing oppositions is calculated as 20 days from the date of the public notice, which was released on March 18, 2005. See supra note 1. Accordingly, the Opposition was timely
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-05-1924A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-05-1924A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-05-1924A1.txt
  • Areas in Louisiana ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) CSR-6603-E CSR-6604-E CSR-6605-E CSR-6606-E CSR-6607-E CSR-6608-E CSR-6609-E CSR-6610-E CSR-6611-E MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER Adopted: June 30, 2005 Released: July 1, 2005 By the Deputy Chief, Policy Division, Media Bureau: Introduction This Order considers nine petitions filed with the Commission by Cox Communications Louisiana, LLC (``Cox'') pursuant to Sections 76.7, 76.905(b)(1) & (2) and 76.907 of the Commission's rules for a determination that Cox's cable systems serving seventeen communities in Louisiana (the ``Communities'') are subject to effective competition pursuant to Section 623(a)(1) of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended (``Communications Act'') and are therefore exempt from cable rate regulation. The Communities are listed in Attachment A. No opposition to
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-05-1925A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-05-1925A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-05-1925A1.txt
  • ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) CSR-6713-E CSR-6714-E CSR-6715-E CSR-6716-E CSR-6717-E CSR-6718-E CSR-6719-E CSR-6720-E MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER Adopted: June 30, 2005 Released: July 1, 2005 By the Deputy Chief, Policy Division, Media Bureau: Introduction This Order considers eight petitions filed with the Commission by Charter Communications, on behalf of its affiliates, (``Charter'') pursuant to Sections 76.7, 76.905(b)(1) & (2) and 76.907 of the Commission's rules for a determination that Charter's cable systems serving twenty-three Michigan communities (the ``Communities'') are subject to effective competition pursuant to Section 623(a)(1) of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended (``Communications Act'') and are therefore exempt from cable rate regulation. The Communities are listed in Attachment A. No opposition to any
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-05-1926A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-05-1926A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-05-1926A1.txt
  • Local Franchise Areas in Michigan ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) CSR-6672-E CSR-6673-E CSR-6674-E CSR-6675-E MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER Adopted: June 30, 2005 Released: July 1, 2005 By the Deputy Chief, Policy Division, Media Bureau: Introduction This Order considers four petitions filed with the Commission by Charter Communications, on behalf of its affiliates, (``Charter'') pursuant to Sections 76.7, 76.905(b)(1) & (2) and 76.907 of the Commission's rules for a determination that Charter's cable systems serving twenty-seven Michigan communities (the ``Communities'') are subject to effective competition pursuant to Section 623(a)(1) of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended (``Communications Act'') and are therefore exempt from cable rate regulation. The Communities are listed in Attachment A. No opposition to any
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-05-1927A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-05-1927A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-05-1927A1.txt
  • ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) CSR-6688-E CSR-6689-E CSR-6690-E CSR-6691-E CSR-6692-E CSR-6693-E CSR-6694-E CSR-6695-E CSR-6696-E MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER Adopted: June 30, 2005 Released: July 1, 2005 By the Deputy Chief, Policy Division, Media Bureau: Introduction This Order considers nine petitions filed with the Commission by Charter Communications, on behalf of its affiliates, (``Charter'') pursuant to Sections 76.7, 76.905(b)(1) & (2) and 76.907 of the Commission's rules for a determination that Charter's cable systems serving twenty-five Michigan communities (the ``Communities'') are subject to effective competition pursuant to Section 623(a)(1) of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended (``Communications Act'') and are therefore exempt from cable rate regulation. The Communities are listed in Attachment A. No opposition to any
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-05-1932A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-05-1932A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-05-1932A1.txt
  • 6549-E, 6557-E, 6662-E, 6665-E, 6669-E & 6680-E CSR 6663-E CSR 6640-E, 6656-E, 6682-E, 6683-E & 6685-E CSR 6533-E & 6534-E MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER Adopted: June 30, 2005 Released: July 6, 2005 By the Deputy Chief, Policy Division, Media Bureau: Introduction This Order considers seventeen petitions which cable operators (``the ``Cable Operators'') have filed with the Commission pursuant to Sections 76.7, 76.905(b)(1) & (2) and 76.907 of the Commission's rules for a determination that such operators are subject to effective competition pursuant to Section 623(a)(1) of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended (``Communications Act'') and are therefore exempt from cable rate regulation in the communities listed in Attachment A (the ``Communities''). No opposition to any petition was filed. Finding that
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-05-2511A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-05-2511A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-05-2511A1.txt
  • 6628-E, 6629-E & 6630-E CSR 6740-E, 6784-E, 6861-E & 6892-E CSR 6780-E CSR 6433-E & 6434-E CSR 6439-E & 6444-E MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER Adopted: September 23, 2005 Released: September 27, 2005 By the Deputy Chief, Policy Division, Media Bureau: Introduction This Order considers twenty petitions which cable operators (the ``Cable Operators'') have filed with the Commission pursuant to Sections 76.7, 76.905(b)(1) & (2) and 76.907 of the Commission's rules for a determination that such operators are subject to effective competition pursuant to Section 623(a)(1) of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended (``Communications Act'') and are therefore exempt from cable rate regulation in the communities listed in Attachment A (the ``Communities''). No opposition to any petition was filed. Finding that
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-05-2512A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-05-2512A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-05-2512A1.txt
  • Washington, D.C. 20554 In the Matter of: MCC Iowa, LLC Petition for Determination of Effective Competition in Alta, Iowa (IA0121) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) CSR 6436-E Adopted: September 23, 2005 Released: September 26, 2005 By the Deputy Chief, Policy Division, Media Bureau: introduction MCC Iowa LLC (``Mediacom'') filed with the Commission a petition pursuant to Sections 76.7 and 76.907 of the Commission's rules for a determination of effective competition in the City of Alta, Iowa (``Alta'' or the ``City''). Mediacom alleges that its cable system serving Alta is subject to effective competition pursuant to Section 623(l)(1) of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended ("Communications Act"), and Section 76.905(b)(3) of the Commission's rules and seeks revocation of
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-05-2527A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-05-2527A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-05-2527A1.txt
  • In the Matter of: MCC Iowa LLC Petition for Determination of Effective Competition for Six Local Franchise Areas ) ) ) ) ) ) ) CSR 6482-E Adopted: September 28, 2005 Released: September 30, 2005 By the Deputy Chief, Policy Division, Media Bureau: introduction MCC Iowa, LLC and Mediacom Iowa LLC (``Mediacom'') has filed with the Commission pursuant to Sections 76.7, 76.905(b)(2) and 76.907 of the Commission's rules for a determination of effective competition in the Communities listed in Attachment A. Mediacom alleges that its cable system serving these Communities is subject to effective competition pursuant to Section 623(1) of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended ("Communications Act"), and the Commission's implementing rules, and is therefore exempt from cable rate
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-05-2528A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-05-2528A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-05-2528A1.txt
  • Commission Washington, D.C. 20554 In the Matter of: MCC Iowa LLC Petition for Determination of Effective Competition in Cedar Rapids, Iowa (IA0079) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) CSR 6389-E Adopted: September 28, 2005 Released: September 30, 2005 By the Deputy Chief, Media Bureau: introduction MCC Iowa LLC (``Mediacom'') has filed with the Commission a petition pursuant to Section 76.7, 76.905(b)(4) and 76.907 of the Commission's rules for a determination of effective competition in the City of Cedar Rapids, Iowa (the ``Franchise Area''). Mediacom alleges that its cable system serving the Franchise Area is subject to effective competition pursuant to Sections 623(a)(2) and 623(1)(1)(4) of the Communications Act and the Commission's implementing rules, and therefore is exempt from cable rate
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-05-2531A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-05-2531A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-05-2531A1.txt
  • ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) CSR-6639-E, 6661-E CSR-6664-E, 6684-E CSR-6668-E MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER Adopted: September 23, 2005 Released: September 28, 2005 By the Deputy Chief, Policy Division, Media Bureau: Introduction This Order considers five petitions filed with the Commission by MCC Illinois LLC, Mediacom Illinois LLC and Mediacom Indiana LLC (``Mediacom'') pursuant to Sections 76.7, 76.905(b)(2) and 76.907 of the Commission's rules for a determination that Mediacom's cable systems serving twenty-one Illinois and Michigan communities (the ``Communities'') are subject to effective competition pursuant to Section 623(a)(1) of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended (``Communications Act'') and are therefore exempt from cable rate regulation. The Communities are listed in Attachment A. No opposition to any
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-05-2532A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-05-2532A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-05-2532A1.txt
  • in Illinois ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) CSR-6705-E CSR-6731-E, 6732-E, 6733-E, 6735-E & 6746-E MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER Adopted: September 23, 2005 Released: September 28, 2005 By the Deputy Chief, Policy Division, Media Bureau: Introduction This Order considers six petitions filed with the Commission by Mediacom Southeast LLC and Mediacom Illinois LLC (``Mediacom'') pursuant to Sections 76.7, 76.905(b)(2) and 76.907 of the Commission's rules for a determination that Mediacom's cable systems serving twenty-seven Illinois communities (the ``Communities'') are subject to effective competition pursuant to Section 623(a)(1) of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended (``Communications Act'') and are therefore exempt from cable rate regulation. The Communities are listed in Attachment A. No opposition to any petition was
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-05-2535A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-05-2535A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-05-2535A1.txt
  • ) ) ) ) CSR 6729-E, 6840-E, 6841-E, 6847-E, 6851-E, 6852-E, 6862-E, 6867-E CSR 6710-E, 6756-E, 6768-E, 6770-E, 6773-E, 6775-E, 6788-E, 6797-E, 6798-E, 6799-E Adopted: September 27, 2005 Released: September 28, 2005 By the Deputy Chief, Policy Division, Media Bureau: introduction This Order considers eighteen petitions which cable operators (the ``Cable Operators'') have filed with the Commission pursuant to Sections 76.7, 76.905(b)(2) and 76.907 of the Commission's rules for a determination that such operators are subject to effective competition pursuant to Section 623(1) of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended ("Communications Act"), and the Commission's implementing rules, and are therefore exempt from cable rate regulation in the communities listed in Attachment A (the ``Communities''). No opposition to any petition was
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-05-2544A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-05-2544A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-05-2544A1.txt
  • 6633-E, 6634-E, 6635-E & 6636-E CSR 6781-E, 6782-E & 6783-E, CSR 6598-E, 6734-E, 6743-E, 6796-E, 6802-E, 6807-E, 6825-E & 6889-E MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER Adopted: September 28, 2005 Released: September 30, 2005 By the Deputy Chief, Policy Division, Media Bureau: Introduction This Order considers eighteen petitions which cable operators (``the ``Cable Operators'') have filed with the Commission pursuant to Sections 76.7, 76.905(b)(1) & (2) and 76.907 of the Commission's rules for a determination that such operators are subject to effective competition pursuant to Section 623(a)(1) of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended (``Communications Act'') and are therefore exempt from cable rate regulation in the communities listed in Attachment A (the ``Communities''). No opposition to any petition was filed. Finding that
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-05-2850A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-05-2850A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-05-2850A1.txt
  • Matter of: Bright House Networks, LLC Petition for Determination of Effective Competition in Unincorporated Hillsborough County, Florida ) ) ) ) ) ) ) CSR 6133-E Adopted: October 27, 2005 Released: October 28, 2005 By the Deputy Chief, Policy Division, Media Bureau: I. introduction Bright House Networks, LLC (``Bright House'') has filed with the Commission a petition pursuant to Sections 76.7 and 76.905(b)(1) & (2) and 76.907 of the Commission's rules seeking a finding of effective competition in unincorporated Hillsborough County, Florida (the ``Community''). Bright House alleges that its cable system serving the Community is subject to effective competition pursuant to Section 623(a)(1) of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended ("Communications Act") and therefore exempt from cable rate regulation because
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-05-2854A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-05-2854A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-05-2854A1.txt
  • ) ) ) ) ) CSR 6722-E CSR 6828-E, 6830-E MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER Adopted: October 28, 2005 Released: October 31, 2005 By the Deputy Chief, Policy Division, Media Bureau: Introduction This Order considers three petitions that cable operators, MCC Missouri LLC (``MCC'') and Mediacom Southeast LLC (``Mediacom; collectively, the ``Cable Operators''), have filed with the Commission pursuant to Sections 76.7, 76.905(b)(1) & (2) and 76.907 of the Commission's rules for a determination that such operators are subject to effective competition pursuant to Section 623(a)(2) of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended (``Communications Act''), and are therefore exempt from cable rate regulation in the communities listed in Attachment A (the ``Communities''). No opposition to any petition was filed. Finding that
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-05-2855A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-05-2855A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-05-2855A1.txt
  • ) CSR 6651-E, 6654-E CSR 6652-E, 6653-E, 6657-E, 6658-E, 6707-E, 6708-E, 6791-E, 6806-E, 6819-E, 6822-E, 6835-E, 6836-E, 6837-E, 6838-E, 6844-E MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER Adopted: October 28, 2005 Released: October 31, 2005 By the Deputy Chief, Policy Division, Media Bureau: Introduction This Order considers seventeen petitions which cable operators (the ``Cable Operators'') have filed with the Commission pursuant to Sections 76.7, 76.905(b)(1) & (2) and 76.907 of the Commission's rules for a determination that such operators are subject to effective competition pursuant to Section 623(a)(2) of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended (``Communications Act''), and are therefore exempt from cable rate regulation in the communities listed in Attachment A (the ``Communities''). No opposition to any petition was filed. Finding that
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-05-2912A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-05-2912A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-05-2912A1.txt
  • Matter of: Adelphia Cable Communications Petition for Determination of Effective Competition in Five Local Franchise Areas ) ) ) ) ) ) ) CSR 6364-E Adopted: November 3, 2005 Released: November 4, 2005 By the Deputy Chief, Policy Division, Media Bureau: introduction This Order considers a petition that Adelphia Cable Communications (``Adelphia'') has filed with the Commission pursuant to Sections 76.7, 76.905(b)(2), and 76.907 of the Commission's rules for a determination that it is subject to effective competition pursuant to Section 623(1) of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended ("Communications Act"), and the Commission's implementing rules, and is therefore exempt from cable rate regulation in the local franchise areas listed in Attachments A and B (the ``Franchise Areas''). The petition
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-05-2931A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-05-2931A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-05-2931A1.txt
  • for Determination of Effective Competition in Springfield, Missouri ) ) ) ) ) ) CSR 6771-E MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER Adopted: November 3, 2005 Released: November 7, 2005 By the Deputy Chief, Policy Division, Media Bureau: Introduction This Order considers a Petition for Special Relief (``Petition'') that cable operator MCC Missouri LLC (``MCC'') filed with the Commission pursuant to Sections 76.7, 76.905(b)(1) & (2) and 76.907 of the Commission's rules for a determination that it is subject to effective competition pursuant to Section 623(a)(2) of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended (``Communications Act''), and is therefore exempt from cable rate regulation in the Springfield, Missouri, franchise area (``Springfield''). Responding to the Petition, the City of Springfield, Missouri (the ``City''), filed
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-05-2950A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-05-2950A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-05-2950A1.txt
  • D.C. 20554 In the Matter of: Comcast of Dallas, L.P. Petition for Determination of Effective Competition in Dallas, Texas ) ) ) ) ) ) CSR 6445-E Adopted: November 7, 2005 Released: November 14, 2005 By the Deputy Chief, Policy Division, Media Bureau: I. introduction Comcast of Dallas, L.P. (``Comcast'') has filed with the Commission a petition pursuant to Sections 76.7 and 76.905(b)(1) & (2) and 76.907 of the Commission's rules seeking a finding of effective competition in Dallas, Texas (the ``Community''). Comcast alleges that its cable system serving the Community is subject to effective competition pursuant to Section 623(a)(1) of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended ("Communications Act") and therefore exempt from cable rate regulation because of competing service
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-05-2996A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-05-2996A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-05-2996A1.txt
  • November 21, 2005 By the Deputy Chief, Policy Division, Media Bureau: On January 20, 2005, CoxCom, Inc., Cox Southwest Holdings, L.P., Cox Communications Louisiana, LLC and TCA Cable Partners (collectively ``Cox'') filed a Complaint for Enforcement against Nexstar Broadcasting, Inc. (``Nexstar'') and Mission Broadcasting, Inc. (``Mission'') pursuant to Section 325(b)(3)(C) of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended, and Sections 76.7 and 76.65 of the Commission's rules. Cox alleged that Nexstar and Mission violated Section 325(b)(3)(C) of the Communications Act and Section 76.65 of the Commission's rules by failing to negotiate in good faith for the renewal of retransmission consent agreements relating to a number of their local broadcast television stations carried on Cox cable systems. On November 3, 2005, citing
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-05-3238A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-05-3238A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-05-3238A1.txt
  • CSR-6790-E CSR-6793-E CSR-6794-E CSR-6795-E CSR-6805-E CSR-6811-E CSR-6813-E CSR-6814-E CSR-6817-E CSR-6821-E CSR-6823-E CSR-6824-E MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER Adopted: December 27, 2005 Released: December 28, 2005 By the Deputy Chief, Policy Division, Media Bureau: Introduction This Order considers twelve petitions filed with the Commission by MCC Iowa LLC, MCC Illinois LLC, Mediacom Illinois LLC and Mediacom Indiana LLC (``Mediacom'') pursuant to Sections 76.7, 76.905(b)(1)&(2) and 76.907 of the Commission's rules for a determination that Mediacom's cable systems serving twenty-three Illinois and Michigan communities (the ``Communities'') are subject to effective competition pursuant to Section 623(a)(1) of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended (``Communications Act'') and are therefore exempt from cable rate regulation. The Communities are listed in Attachment A. No opposition to any
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-05-3251A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-05-3251A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-05-3251A1.txt
  • In the Matter of: Mediacom Minnesota LLC Petition for Determination of Effective Competition in St. James, Minnesota (CUID MN0312) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) CSR 6010-E Adopted: December 20, 2005 Released: December 22, 2005 By the Deputy Chief, Policy Division, Media Bureau: introduction 1. Mediacom Minnesota LLC (``Mediacom'') has filed with the Commission a petition pursuant to Sections 76.7 and 76.905(b)(1) & (2) and 76.907 of the Commission's rules seeking a finding of effective competition in the City of St. James, Minnesota. Mediacom alleges that its cable system serving the City is subject to effective competition pursuant to Section 623(a)(1) of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended ("Communications Act") and therefore exempt from cable rate regulation because of
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-05-3328A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-05-3328A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-05-3328A1.txt
  • Areas in Texas ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) CSR 6396-E, 6397-E, 6398-E, 6399-E, 6400-E, 6401-E MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER Adopted: December 27, 2005 Released: December 28, 2005 By the Deputy Chief, Policy Division, Media Bureau: Introduction This Order considers six petitions which the cable operator Comcast Cable Communications, LLC (``Comcast''), filed with the Commission pursuant to Sections 76.7 and 76.905 of the Commission's rules for a determination that, in 42 communities in Texas (the ``Communities''), it is subject to effective competition pursuant to Section 623(a)(2) of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended (``Communications Act''), and is therefore exempt from cable rate regulation. Franchise authorities have filed objections to Comcast's petitions concerning two of the Communities. We find
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-05-3329A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-05-3329A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-05-3329A1.txt
  • ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) CSR 6422-E, 6423-E, 6454-E, 6496-E, 6497-E, 6498-E, 6559-E, 6560-E, 6561-E, 6562-E, 6563-E, 6564-E CSR 6405-E Adopted: December 27, 2005 Released: December 28, 2005 By the Deputy Chief, Policy Division, Media Bureau: introduction This Order considers thirteen petitions which cable operators (the ``Cable Operators'') have filed with the Commission pursuant to Sections 76.7, 76.905(b)(2) and 76.907 of the Commission's rules for a determination that such operators are subject to effective competition pursuant to Section 623(1) of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended ("Communications Act"), and the Commission's implementing rules, and are therefore exempt from cable rate regulation in the communities listed in Attachment A (the ``Communities''). No opposition to any petition was
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-05-3330A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-05-3330A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-05-3330A1.txt
  • Washington, D.C. 20554 In the Matter of: MCC Iowa, LLC Petition for Determination of Effective Competition in Algona, Iowa (IA0014) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) CSR 6745-E Adopted: December 27, 2005 Released: December 28, 2005 By the Deputy Chief, Policy Division, Media Bureau: introduction MCC Iowa LLC (``Mediacom'') filed with the Commission a petition pursuant to Sections 76.7 and 76.907 of the Commission's rules for a determination of effective competition in the City of Algona, Iowa (``Algona'' or the ``City''). Mediacom alleges that its cable system serving Algona is subject to effective competition pursuant to Section 623(l)(1) of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended ("Communications Act"), and Section 76.905(b)(3) of the Commission's rules and seeks revocation of
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-05-3331A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-05-3331A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-05-3331A1.txt
  • ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) CSR 6721-E, 6724-E, 6737-E, 6739-E, 6758-E CSR 6887-E CSR 6709-E, 6728-E, 6748-E, 6800-E, 6803-E, 6888-E Adopted: December 27, 2005 Released: December 28, 2005 By the Deputy Chief, Policy Division, Media Bureau: introduction This Order considers twelve petitions which cable operators (the ``Cable Operators'') have filed with the Commission pursuant to Sections 76.7, 76.905(b)(2) and 76.907 of the Commission's rules for a determination that such operators are subject to effective competition pursuant to Section 623(1) of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended ("Communications Act"), and the Commission's implementing rules, and are therefore exempt from cable rate regulation in the communities listed in Attachment A (the ``Communities''). No opposition to any petition was
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-05-3332A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-05-3332A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-05-3332A1.txt
  • ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) CSR 6702-E, 6706-E, 6736-E, 6741-E, 6742-E, 6744-E, 6754-E, 6839-E, 6869-E CSR 6808-E, 6809-E, 6810-E Adopted: December 27, 2005 Released: December 28, 2005 By the Deputy Chief, Policy Division, Media Bureau: introduction This Order considers twelve petitions which cable operators (the ``Cable Operators'') have filed with the Commission pursuant to Sections 76.7, 76.905(b)(2) and 76.907 of the Commission's rules for a determination that such operators are subject to effective competition pursuant to Section 623(1) of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended ("Communications Act"), and the Commission's implementing rules, and are therefore exempt from cable rate regulation in the communities listed in Attachment A (the ``Communities''). No opposition to any petition was
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-05-3335A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-05-3335A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-05-3335A1.txt
  • Federal Communications Commission Washington, D.C. 20554 In the Matter of: MCC Iowa, LLC Petition for Determination of Effective Competition in Carroll, IA ) ) ) ) ) ) ) CSR 6438-E Adopted: December 28, 2005 Released: December 29, 2005 By the Deputy Chief, Policy Division, Media Bureau: introduction MCC Iowa, LLC (``Mediacom'') has filed with the Commission pursuant to Sections 76.7, 76.905(b)(2) and 76.907 of the Commission's rules for a determination of effective competition in Carroll, Iowa. Mediacom alleges that its cable system serving this community is subject to effective competition pursuant to Section 623(1) of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended ("Communications Act"), and the Commission's implementing rules, and are therefore exempt from cable rate regulation. More particularly, Mediacom
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-05-3336A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-05-3336A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-05-3336A1.txt
  • ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) CSR-6747-E CSR-6752-E CSR-6753-E CSR-6757-E CSR-6776-E CSR-6777-E CSR-6778-E CSR-6787-E CSR-6789-E MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER Adopted: December 28, 2005 Released: December 29, 2005 By the Deputy Chief, Policy Division, Media Bureau: Introduction This Order considers nine petitions filed with the Commission by Mediacom Illinois LLC and MCC Illinois LLC (``Mediacom'') pursuant to Sections 76.7, 76.905(b)(1)&(2) and 76.907 of the Commission's rules for a determination that Mediacom's cable systems serving thirty Illinois communities (the ``Communities'') are subject to effective competition pursuant to Section 623(a)(1) of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended (``Communications Act'') and are therefore exempt from cable rate regulation. The Communities are listed in Attachment A. No opposition to any petition was
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-05-3337A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-05-3337A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-05-3337A1.txt
  • Local Franchise Areas ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) CSR 6514-E, 6515-E, 6516-E, 6517-E, 6518-E, 6519-E, 6520-E, 6521-E Adopted: December 28, 2005 Released: December 29, 2005 By the Deputy Chief, Policy Division, Media Bureau: introduction This Order considers a petition that Adelphia Cable Communications (``Adelphia'') filed with the Commission on behalf of its affiliates pursuant to Sections 76.7, 76.905(b)(2) and 76.907 of the Commission's rules for a determination that it is subject to effective competition pursuant to Section 623(1) of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended ("Communications Act"), and the Commission's implementing rules, and is therefore exempt from cable rate regulation in twenty-three franchise areas (the ``Franchise Areas''). The Cities of Winchester, Morehead, and Cynthiana (``the Cities'')
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-05-3349A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-05-3349A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-05-3349A1.txt
  • of Section 76.66(e)(3) of the Commission's Rules. ) ) ) ) ) ) ) CSR-6919-M MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER Adopted: December 29, 2005 Released: December 30, 2005 By the Chief, Media Bureau: INTRODUCTION TV 34, Inc., licensee of commercial television station KWFT-TV Eureka Springs, Arkansas (``KWFT''), formerly KWBS TV, filed the above-captioned petition for special relief (``Petition''), pursuant to Section 76.7 of the Commission's rules. The Petition asks the Commission to waive Section 76.66(e)(3) of the Commission's rules, which prescribes that the 2003-2004 Nielsen Station Index Directory and Nielsen Station Index United States Television Household Estimates (collectively, ``Nielsen publications'') shall be used for the retransmission consent-mandatory carriage cycle commencing January 1, 2006 and ending December 31, 2008. KWFT seeks to base
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-05-3350A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-05-3350A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-05-3350A1.txt
  • Petition for Determination of Effective Competition in Twenty-six Local Franchise Areas ) ) ) ) ) ) ) CSR 6404-E Adopted: December 28, 2005 Released: December 30, 2005 By the Deputy Chief, Policy Division, Media Bureau: introduction This Order considers a petition that Service Electric Cable TV of New Jersey, Inc. (``Service Electric'') filed with the Commission pursuant to Sections 76.7, 76.905(b)(2) and 76.907 of the Commission's rules for a determination that it is subject to effective competition pursuant to Section 623(1) of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended ("Communications Act"), and the Commission's implementing rules, and is therefore exempt from cable rate regulation in twenty-six franchise areas (``Franchise Areas''). The New Jersey Board of Public Utilities (``BPU'') has filed
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-05-524A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-05-524A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-05-524A1.txt
  • for Determination of Effective Competition in Buffalo Center (IA0083), Huxley (IA0370), and Slater (IA0373), Iowa ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) CSR 6330-E & CSR 6331-E Adopted: February 28, 2005 Released: March 7, 2005 By the Deputy Chief, Media Bureau: introduction Mediacom Iowa LLC (``Mediacom'') has filed with the Commission two petitions pursuant to Section 76.7 of the Commission's rules for a determination of effective competition in Buffalo Center, Huxley, and Slater, Iowa (``the Franchise Areas'') Mediacom alleges that its cable systems serving the Franchise Areas are subject to effective competition pursuant to Sections 623(a)(2) and 623(1)(1)(4) of the Communications Act and the Commission's implementing rules, and therefore are exempt from cable rate regulation. Mediacom claims
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-05-530A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-05-530A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-05-530A1.txt
  • Matter of: Adelphia Cable Communications Petition for Determination of Effective Competition in Cullman, Garden City, Hanceyville, and Holly Pond, Alabama ) ) ) ) ) ) ) CSR 6340-E Adopted: February 28, 2005 Released: March 7, 2005 By the Deputy Chief, Policy Division, Media Bureau: introduction Adelphia Cable Communications (``Adelphia'') has filed with the Commission a petition pursuant to Sections 76.7 and 76.907 of the Commission's rules for a determination of effective competition in Cullman, Garden City, Hanceville, and Holly Pond, Alabama (the ``Communities''). Adelphia alleges that its cable systems serving these communities are subject to effective competition pursuant to Section 623(1) of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended ("Communications Act"), and the Commission's implementing rules, and are therefore exempt
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-05-542A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-05-542A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-05-542A1.txt
  • Certifications ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) CSR 6357-E CSR 6353-E; CSR 6372-E & CSR 6385-E Adopted: March 1, 2005 Released: March 7, 2005 By the Deputy Chief, Policy Division, Media Bureau: introduction MCC Iowa LLC and MCC Georgia LLC (collectively ``MCC'') have filed with the Commission four petitions pursuant to Sections 76.7 and 76.907 of the Commission's rules for a determination of effective competition in Spencer, Iowa, and in Cairo, Moultrie, Thomasville, and Tifton, Georgia (the ``Communities''). MCC alleges that their cable systems serving the Communities are subject to effective competition pursuant to Section 623(1)(1)(C) of the Communications Act and the Commission's implementing rules, and therefore are exempt from cable rate regulation.
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-05-544A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-05-544A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-05-544A1.txt
  • Commission Washington, D.C. 20554 In the Matter of: Cable One, Inc. Petition for Determination of Effective Competition in Rio Rancho, New Mexico ) ) ) ) ) ) CSR 6337-E Adopted: February 28, 2005 Released: March 7, 2005 By the Deputy Chief, Policy Division, Media Bureau: introduction Cable One, Inc. has filed with the Commission a petition pursuant to Sections 76.7 and 76.907 of the Commission's rules for a determination of effective competition in Rio Rancho, New Mexico. Cable One alleges that its cable systems serving this community is subject to effective competition pursuant to Section 623(1) of the Communications Act of 1934 ("Communications Act"), and the Commission's implementing rules, and is therefore exempt from cable rate regulation. More particularly, Cable
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-05-545A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-05-545A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-05-545A1.txt
  • Effective Competition in Greenacres, Hypoluxo, Lake Charles Shores, Lantana, Palm Springs, Royal Palm Beach, and West Palm Beach, Florida ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) CSR 6329-E Adopted: February 28, 2005 Released: March 7, 2005 By the Deputy Chief, Policy Division, Media Bureau: introduction Adelphia Cable Communications (``Adelphia'') has filed with the Commission a petition pursuant to Sections 76.7 and 76.907 of the Commission's rules for a determination of effective competition in Greenacres, Hypoluxo, Lake Charles Shores, Lantana, Palm Springs, Royal Palm Beach, and West Palm Beach, Florida (the ``Communities''). Adelphia alleges that its cable systems serving these communities are subject to effective competition pursuant to Section 623(1) of the Communications Act of 1934, and the Commission's implementing rules,
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-05-546A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-05-546A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-05-546A1.txt
  • the Matter of: Mediacom Minnesota LLC Petition for Determination of Effective Competition and Revocation of Certification in Sixteen Minnesota Communities ) ) ) ) ) ) ) CSR 6241-E Adopted: February 28, 2005 Released: March 7, 2005 By the Deputy Chief, Policy Division, Media Bureau: introductions Mediacom Minnesota LLC (``Mediacom'') has filed with the Commission a petition pursuant to Sections 76.7, 76.905(b)(2) and 76.907 of the Commission's rules for revocation of the certification of the Lake Minnesota Cable Commission (``LMCC'') to regulate basic cable rates due to the presence of effective competition in the sixteen communities (``the Franchise Area'') listed on Attachment A. Mediacom alleges that its cable system serving the Franchise Area is subject to effective competition and is therefore
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-05-640A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-05-640A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-05-640A1.txt
  • Grade B contour analysis. In situations involving mountainous terrain or other unusual geographical features, Longley-Rice propagation studies can aid in determining whether or not a television station actually provides local service to a community under factor two of the market modification test. See Modification Final Report and Order, 14 FCC Rcd at 8388. 47 C.F.R. § 76.59(b). 47 C.F.R. §§ 76.7, 76.59(c). See 47 C.F.R. § 76.59(b)(1)-(2). 47 U.S.C. § 534(h); 47 C.F.R. § 76.59(c). 47 C.F.R. § 0.283. (...continued from previous page) (continued....) Federal Communications Commission DA 05-640 Federal Communications Commission FCC 00-XXX Ñ Ò � Ò � @& 0 x Ÿ ¥ Rf ­
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-05-665A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-05-665A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-05-665A1.txt
  • and South Dakota franchise areas ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) CSR-6375-E CSR-6376-E CSR-6377-E CSR-6378-E CSR-6379-E Adopted: March 9, 2005 Released: March 14, 2005 By the Deputy Chief, Media Bureau: introduction MCC Iowa LLC, Mediacom Minnesota LLC, and Zylstra Communications Corporation (collectively ``Mediacom'') have filed with the Commission a petition pursuant to Section 76.7, 76.905(b)(4) and 76.907 of the Commission's rules seeking a finding of effective competition in the Cities of Storm Lake and Lakeside, Iowa; the Cities of Luverne, Pipestone, Slayton and Worthington, Minnesota; the Cities of Colman, Flandreau, and Yankton, South Dakota and the Town of Gayville, South Dakota (collectively ``the Communities''). Mediacom alleges that its cable systems serving the Communities are
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-05-685A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-05-685A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-05-685A1.txt
  • 20554 In the Matter of: Cable One, Inc. Petitions for Determination of Effective Competition in Odessa, Texas (CUID TX 0045; CUID TX 1253) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) CSR 6362-E Adopted: March 9, 2005 Released: March 30, 2005 By the Deputy Chief, Media Bureau: introduction Cable One, Inc. has filed with the Commission a petition pursuant to Section 76.7 of the Commission's rules for a determination of effective competition in Odessa, Texas. Cable One alleges that its cable system serving Odessa is subject to effective competition pursuant to Sections 623(a)(2) and 623(1)(1)(4) of the Communications Act and the Commission's implementing rules, and therefore is exempt from cable rate regulation. Cable One claims the presence of effective competition stems from
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-05-921A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-05-921A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-05-921A1.txt
  • Content-Type: text/plain Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit DA 05-921 Released: April 1, 2005 MEDIA BUREAU ACTION REMINDER AS TO PROCEDURES FOR Filing CABLE TELEVISION effective competition PETITIONS Cable television system operators seeking a determination of effective competition must file a petition under the procedures set forth in Section 76.7 of the Commission's rules and pay a filing fee of $1,160 pursuant to Section 1.104(8)(g) of the rules. Although for the convenience of the filing parties multiple communities and multiple cable physical systems (``PSIDs'') may be combined in a single filing, each PSID must be separately identified and a separate fee must be paid for each PSID. In addition, each
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-05-996A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-05-996A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-05-996A1.txt
  • 6415-E, 6416-E, 6480-E, 6485-E, 6486-E, 6487-E, 6489-E, 6499-E, 6500-E , 6501-E, 6527-E, 6528-E & 6529-E CSR 6478-E CSR 6481-E MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER Adopted: March 31, 2005 Released: April 1, 2005 By the Deputy Chief, Policy Division, Media Bureau: Introduction This Order considers nineteen unopposed petitions which cable operators (``the ``Cable Operators'') have filed with the Commission pursuant to Sections 76.7, 76.905(b)(1) & (2) and 76.907 of the Commission's rules for a determination that such operators are subject to effective competition pursuant to Section 623(a)(1) of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended (``Communications Act'') and are therefore exempt from cable rate regulation in the communities listed in Attachment A (the ``Communities''). No opposition to any petition was filed. Finding that
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-06-1019A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-06-1019A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-06-1019A1.txt
  • that television station for reception by subscribers. 47 C.F.R. § 76.66(a)(6). Under Section 76.66(m)(3) of the Commission's rules, a local television broadcast station that disputes a response by a satellite carrier that it is in compliance with its must carry obligations may obtain review of such denial or response by filing a complaint with the Commission in accordance with Section 76.7. 47 C.F.R. § 76.66(m)(3). Although styled a ``complaint,'' a carriage complaint filed against a satellite carrier is treated by the Commission as a petition for special relief for purposes of the Commission's pleading requirements. See TV 34, Inc. v. EchoStar Communications Corp., 20 FCC Rcd 8747 & n.3 (MB 2005). See Pub. L. No. 106-113, 113 Stat. 1501, 1501A-526 to
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-06-1024A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-06-1024A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-06-1024A1.txt
  • Television Household Estimates shall be used for the second retransmission consent-mandatory carriage election cycle commencing January 1, 2006 and ending December 31, 2008.'' Because it is Section 76.66(e)(3) of the Commission's rules, rather than a statutory provision, that determines which edition of the Nielsen publications is to be used for each carriage cycle, that determination is subject to waiver. Section 76.7 of the Commission's rules allows an interested party to petition the Commission to ``waive any provision of this part 76.'' When analyzing a request for a waiver of Commission rules or policies, agency rules are presumed valid, and ``an applicant for waiver faces a high hurdle even at the starting gate.'' A rule or policy may be waived where the
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-06-1098A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-06-1098A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-06-1098A1.txt
  • dBm; 2:15 p.m. -82.95 dBm; 2:45 p.m. -83.15 dBm; and 3:15 p.m. -83.45 dBm. A second test conducted on February 21, 2006 resulted in the following readings: 6:00 p.m. -83.75 dBm; 6:30 p.m. -83.85 dBm; 7:00 p.m. -83.35 dBm; and 7:30 p.m. -83.45 dBm. Mediacom asserts that W62DE failed to comply with the Section 76.61(a) notification requirements and the Section 76.7(a)(3) service procedures. It points out that W62DE mailed its October 17, 2005 letter, as well as a copy of its must carry complaint, to a mystery address in New York City, New York, to an entity called ``Mediacom USA,'' which is not affiliated with Mediacom Communications Corp., whose headquarters is located in Middletown, New York. Mediacom also points out that
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-06-1137A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-06-1137A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-06-1137A1.txt
  • Antonio, TX ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) Adopted: June 2, 2006 Released: June 5, 2006 By the Deputy Chief, Policy Division, Media Bureau: Guadalupe Valley Communications Systems, L.P. (``GVCS'') filed a retransmission consent complaint against Post-Newsweek Stations, Inc. and its subsidiary Post-Newsweek Stations, San Antonio, LP, licensee of KSAT-TV, San Antonio, TX (collectively ``KSAT''), pursuant to Sections 76.7 and 76.65 of the Commission's rules. GVCS alleged that KSAT refused to negotiate in good faith with GVCS for consent to retransmit KSAT's digital signal. On May 16, 2006, KSAT informed the Commission that the parties entered into a retransmission consent agreement on December 19, 2005 that resolved the pending matter. KSAT requested that the retransmission consent complaint be dismissed.
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-06-1454A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-06-1454A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-06-1454A1.txt
  • ACTION ``PERMIT-BUT-DISCLOSE'' EX PARTE PROCEDURES ESTABLISHED FOR CEBRIDGE ACQUISITION, LLC d/b/a SUDDENLINK COMMUNICATIONS' EMERGENCY RETRANSMISSION CONSENT COMPLAINT (CSR 7038-C) AS WELL AS FOR SINCLAIR BROADCAST GROUP, INC.'S EMERGENCY PETITION FOR DECLARATORY RULING AND FOR IMMEDIATE INJUNCTIVE RELIEF (CSR 7039-C) On July 5, 2006, Cebridge Acquisition, LLC d/b/a Suddenlink Communications (``Suddenlink'') filed an Emergency Retransmission Consent Complaint (``Complaint'') pursuant to Sections 76.7 and 76.65 of the Commission's rules. Suddenlink's Complaint alleges that Sinclair Broadcast Group, Inc. (``Sinclair'') violated its duty to negotiate retransmission consent in good faith for two Charleston, West Virginia television broadcast stations, WCHS-TV (ABC) and WVAH-TV (Fox) (the ``Stations''). In addition, Suddenlink alleges that Sinclair has demanded that Suddenlink terminate retransmission of the Stations during a ``sweeps'' period in
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-06-1565A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-06-1565A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-06-1565A1.txt
  • ) ) ) CSR-7004-M Adopted: July 28, 2006 Released: August 2, 2006 By the Deputy Chief, Policy Division, Media Bureau: introduction LeSEA Broadcasting of Denver, Inc. (``LeSEA''), licensee of television broadcast station KWHD, Castle Rock, Colorado (``KWHD'' or the ``Station'') filed the above-captioned must carry complaint pursuant to Section 614(d) of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended, and Section 76.7 of the Commission's rules, against Comcast of Colorado I, LLC, Comcast of Colorado II, LLC, Comcast of Colorado III, LLC, Comcast of Colorado IV, LLC, Comcast of California/Colorado, LLC, Comcast of California/Colorado/Texas/Washington, Inc. (collectively, ``Comcast''), for failing to carry KWHD on its cable systems serving Greeley (CO0047), Weld (unincorporated) (CO0048), (CO0302) and (CO0492), Frederick (CO0168), Dacono (CO0169), Firestone (CO0170), Lasalle
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-06-1569A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-06-1569A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-06-1569A1.txt
  • Television Station W24DC Hamilton, Alabama ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) CSR-7003-M MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER Adopted: July 26, 2006 Released: August 2, 2006 By the Deputy Chief, Policy Division, Media Bureau: introduction WMTY, Inc., licensee of low power television station (``LPTV'') W24DC (``W24DC'' or the ``Station''), Hamilton, Alabama, filed a complaint pursuant to Section 76.7 of the Commission's rules, asserting mandatory carriage rights for W24DC on James Cable Partners d/b/a CommuniComm Services' cable systems (``JCP'') serving Guin, Sulligent and Hackleburg, Alabama, and surrounding environs (the ``cable communities''). JCP filed an opposition to which W24DC replied. background Both the Communications Act of 1934, as amended, and the Commission's rules require the carriage of ``qualified'' LPTV stations
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-06-1587A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-06-1587A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-06-1587A1.txt
  • conclude, that in light of the balance of the equities here, NFL has established a sufficient prospect of success on the merits to justify this relief. V. ordering clauseS Accordingly, IT IS ORDERED, that pursuant to Sections 4(i) and 623 of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended, 47 U.S.C. §§ 154(i) and 543, and 47 C.F.R. §§ 0.283, 0.61, 76.7 and 76.1603, Time Warner Cable reinstate carriage of the NFL Network on all systems newly acquired from Adelphia Communications and Comcast Corporation on the same terms under which the NFL Network was carried prior to August 1, 2006. This order shall be effective immediately and shall remain in effect until the NFL's petition is resolved on the merits. IT IS
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-06-1594A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-06-1594A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-06-1594A1.txt
  • their cable systems. The interim relief we have granted provides a remedy for these subscribers until we are able to resolve the NFL's Petition. V. ORDERING CLAUSES Accordingly, IT IS ORDERED, that pursuant to sections 4(i), 623, and 632 of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended, 47 U.S.C. §§ 154(i), 543, and 552, and 47 C.F.R. §§ 0.283, 0.61, 76.7, and 76.1603, Time Warner Cable shall continue to carry the NFL Network on all systems newly acquired from Adelphia Communications and Comcast Corporation on the same terms under which the NFL Network was carried on those systems prior to August 1, 2006 until the NFL's Petition is resolved on the merits or until 30 days after Time Warner has provided
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-06-1645A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-06-1645A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-06-1645A1.txt
  • 54.400(e) of the Commission's rules, enhanced Lifeline support. 47 C.F.R. § 54.403(a)(4). The Link-Up program assists qualifying low-income consumers in initiating telephone service by paying a portion of the service connection charge. See 47 C.F.R. § 54.411. See Twelfth Report and Order, 15 FCC Rcd at 12220, para. 20. In the Twelfth Report and Order, the Commission noted that only 76.7 percent of rural households earning less than $5,000 have a telephone, and only 47 percent of Indian tribal households on reservations and other tribal lands have a telephone, in comparison to 94 percent of all households in the United States. Id. at 12224, paras. 26-27. On the basis of these observations, the Commission concluded that the extent to which telephone
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-06-1733A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-06-1733A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-06-1733A1.txt
  • August 29, 2006 MEDIA BUREAU ACTION REQUEST FOR WAIVER OF 47 C.F.R. § 76.1204(a)(1) FILED WITH THE COMMISSION CSR-7049-Z/CS Docket No. 97-80 Comment Date: September 18, 2006 Reply Comment Date: September 28, 2006 Charter Communications Inc. (``Charter'' or ``Petitioner'') has filed a request pursuant to Section 629(c) of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended (the ``Communications Act''), and Sections 76.7 and 76.1207 of the Commission's rules for waiver of the prohibition set forth in Section 76.1204(a)(1) of the Commission's rules, which prohibits multichannel video programming distributors from offering navigation devices that perform both conditional access and other functions, for seven specific set-top box models. Charter asserts that its Waiver Request is limited in scope to the types of devices the
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-06-1751A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-06-1751A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-06-1751A1.txt
  • ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) CSR-6958-N CSR-6963-N Adopted: August 31, 2006 Released: September 1, 2006 By the Deputy Chief, Policy Division, Media Bureau: introduction Storefront Television, licensee of low power television stations WPRU-LP and WSJP-LP, Aquadilla, Puerto Rico (collectively, the ``Stations''), has filed two complaints for network non-duplication protection with the Commission pursuant to Section 76.7 of the Commission's rules. Storefront Television claims that Last Mile Communications, LLC (``Last Mile'') and Liberty Cablevision of Puerto Rico, Ltd. (``Liberty'') have not afforded WPRU-LP and WSJP-LP such protection. Storefront Television requests that the Commission order Last Mile and Liberty to provide network non-duplication protection to the Stations. Liberty submitted an answer to the complaint, and Storefront Television submitted
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-06-1784A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-06-1784A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-06-1784A1.txt
  • also alleged that ID's fee structure constituted an unfair practice in violation of Section 628(b) of the Act and Section 76.1001 of the rules. EchoStar further alleged that ID's conduct amounted to a de facto exclusive reservation of the INHD programming to cable systems and violated the Commission's prohibition on exclusive cable contracts. On September 6, 2006, pursuant to Section 76.7(a)(4)(iii) of the Commission's rules, EchoStar withdrew its program access complaint against ID and asked the Commission to dismiss the complaint without prejudice. Accordingly, EchoStar's request is GRANTED and its program access complaint against iN DEMAND IS DISMISSED WITHOUT PREDUDICE. This action is taken pursuant to authority delegated by Section 0.283 of the Commission's rules. FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION Steven A. Broeckaert
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-06-1788A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-06-1788A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-06-1788A1.txt
  • ) ) ) ) ) ) CSR-7027-M Adopted: September 19, 2006 Released: September 22, 2006 By the Deputy Chief, Policy Division, Media Bureau: introduction 1. Long Communications, LLC (``Long''), licensee of commercial television station WHKY(TV), Hickory, North Carolina, (``WHKY''), filed a must-carry complaint with the Commission, pursuant to Section 614(d) of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended, and Section 76.7 of the Commission's rules, asking that the Commission require HPI Acquisitions Co., LLC (``HPI'') to carry WHKY on Channel 14 on HPI's cable system in the Charlotte DMA serving Boone and Blowing Rock, North Carolina (the ``communities''). Charter Communications, LLC (``Charter'') filed an opposition on behalf of its wholly-owned subsidiary HPI, to which Long replied. For the following reasons, we
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-06-193A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-06-193A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-06-193A1.txt
  • Determination of Effective Competition in Argyle, Wisconsin (WI0550) and Blanchardville, WI (WI0465) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) CSR 6599-E, 6831-E MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER Adopted: January 25, 2006 Released: January 30, 2006 By the Deputy Chief, Policy Division, Media Bureau: Introduction Mediacom Wisconsin LLC (``Mediacom'') has filed two petitions with the Commission pursuant to Sections 76.7, 76.905(b)(2) and 76.907 of the Commission's rules for a determination that Mediacom is subject to effective competition pursuant to Section 623(a) of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended (``Communications Act'') and is therefore exempt from cable rate regulation in the Villages of Argyle and Blanchardville, Wisconsin (the ``Communities''). No opposition to either petition was filed. Finding that Mediacom is
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-06-1946A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-06-1946A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-06-1946A1.txt
  • Determination of Effective Competition in two Local Franchise Areas ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) CSR-7045-E CSR-7047-E Memorandum Opinion AND ORDER Adopted: September 27, 2006 Released: September 29, 2006 By the Deputy Chief, Policy Division, Media Bureau: I. introduction This Order considers two petitions which MCC Iowa LLC (``Mediacom'') has filed with the Commission pursuant to Sections 76.7, 76.905(b)(2) and 76.907 of the Commission's rules for a determination that such operators are subject to effective competition pursuant to Section 623(1) of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended ("Communications Act"), and the Commission's implementing rules, and are therefore exempt from cable rate regulation in the communities listed in Attachment A (the ``Communities''). No opposition to any petition was
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-06-1947A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-06-1947A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-06-1947A1.txt
  • Matter of: Charter Communications Petition for Determination of Effective Competition in Kearney, Nebraska ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) CSR-7030-E MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER Adopted: September 27, 2006 Released: September 29, 2006 By the Deputy Chief, Policy Division, Media Bureau: introduction Charter Communications (``Charter'') has filed with the Commission, on behalf of its affiliates, pursuant to Section 76.7 and 76.905 of the Commission's rules, for a determination of the effective competition in Kearney, Nebraska (``Franchise Area''). Charter claims that its cable system serving Kearney, Nebraska is subject to effective competition pursuant to Section 623(l) of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended (``Communications Act''), and the Commission's implementing rules, and is therefore exempt from cable rate regulation. Charter
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-06-1975A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-06-1975A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-06-1975A1.txt
  • of: MCC Iowa LLC Petitions for Determination of Effective Competition in two Iowa Communities ) ) ) ) ) ) ) CSR 7044-E & 7046-E Adopted: October 2, 2006 Released: October 5, 2006 By the Deputy Chief, Policy Division, Media Bureau: introduction This Order considers two petitions which MCC Iowa LLC (``Mediacom'') has filed with the Commission pursuant to Sections 76.7, 76.905(b)(2) and 76.907 of the Commission's rules for a determination that such operator is subject to effective competition pursuant to Section 623(1) of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended ("Communications Act"), and the Commission's implementing rules, and is therefore exempt from cable rate regulation in the communities listed in Attachment A (the ``Communities''). No opposition to any petition was
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-06-1985A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-06-1985A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-06-1985A1.txt
  • 20554 In the Matter of: Charter Communications Petition for Determination of Effective Competition in various Nevada Communities ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) CSR 6417-E, 6418-E, 6419-E Adopted: October 2, 2006 Released: October 5, 2006 By the Deputy Chief, Policy Division, Media Bureau: introduction Charter Communications (``Charter'') has filed with the Commission a petition pursuant to Sections 76.7, 76.905(b)(2) and 76.907 of the Commission's rules for determinations of effective competition in several Nevada communities pursuant to Section 623(1) of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended ("Communications Act"), and the Commission's implementing rules, and is therefore exempt from cable rate regulation in the communities listed in Attachment A. The cities of Carson City, Reno, Sparks, Nevada and Washoe
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-06-2038A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-06-2038A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-06-2038A1.txt
  • Matter of: MEDIACOM MINNESOTA LLC Petition for Determination of Effective Competition in various Minnesota Franchise Areas ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) CSR 6895-E Adopted: October 12, 2006 Released: October 17, 2006 By the Deputy Chief, Policy Division, Media Bureau: introduction Mediacom Minnesota LLC (``Mediacom'') has filed a petition with the Commission pursuant to Section 76.7, 76.905(b)(2) and 76.907 of the Commission's rules for a determination that its cable systems serving various Minnesota franchise areas listed in Attachment A (the ``Communities'') are subject to effective competition pursuant to Section 623(l) of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended (``Communications Act''), and the Commission's implementing rules, and are therefore exempt from cable rate regulation in those communities.
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-06-2119A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-06-2119A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-06-2119A1.txt
  • ) ) ) CSR-7015-E, 7016-E, 7017-E, 7018-E, 7019-E, 7020-E, 7021-E, 7022-E, 7023-E MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER Adopted: October 26, 2006 Released: October 27, 2006 By the Deputy Chief, Policy Division, Media Bureau: Introduction This Order considers a Petition for Special Relief (``Petition'') that the cable operator Liberty Cablevision of Puerto Rico, Ltd. (``Liberty''), filed with the Commission pursuant to Sections 76.7, 76.905, and 76.907 of the Commission's rules. The Petition seeks a determination that, in seven franchise areas in the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico, Liberty is subject to effective competition pursuant to Section 623(a)(2) of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended (``Communications Act''), and is therefore exempt from cable rate regulation. No opposition to the Petition was filed. Finding that
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-06-2257A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-06-2257A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-06-2257A1.txt
  • ACTION REQUEST FOR WAIVER OF 47 C.F.R. § 76.1204(a)(1) FILED WITH THE COMMISSION CSR-7056-Z/CS Docket No. 97-80 Comment Date: November 30, 2006 Reply Comment Date: December 11, 2006 The National Cable and Telecommunications Association (``NCTA'' or ``Petitioner'') has filed a request pursuant to Section 629(c) of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended (the ``Communications Act''), and Sections 1.3 and 76.7 of the Commission's rules, for temporary waiver of the prohibition set forth in Section 76.1204(a)(1) of the Commission's rules on offering navigation devices that perform both conditional access and other functions. Specifically, NCTA requests that the Commission waive the prohibition for all cable operators until those cable operators deploy downloadable security or until December 31, 2009, whichever is earlier. NCTA
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-06-2258A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-06-2258A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-06-2258A1.txt
  • OF 47 C.F.R. § 76.1204(a)(1) FILED WITH THE COMMISSION CSR-7057-Z/CS Docket No. 97-80 Comment Date: November 30, 2006 Reply Comment Date: December 11, 2006 Bend Cable Communications, LLC d/b/a BendBroadband (``BendBroadband'' or ``Petitioner'') has filed a request pursuant to Section 629(c) of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended, Section 706 of the Telecommunications Act of 1996, and Sections 1.3, 76.7, and 76.1207 of the Commission's rules, for waiver of the prohibition set forth in Section 76.1204(a)(1) of the Commission's rules on offering navigation devices that perform both conditional access and other functions with respect to the Motorola DCT-700 set-top box (the ``DCT-700''). BendBroadband asserts that its Waiver Request is limited in scope to the type of device the Commission identified
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-06-2274A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-06-2274A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-06-2274A1.txt
  • December 1, lasting for at least three months and having the effect of a temporary restraining order, to preserve the status quo cable retransmission of the Sinclair stations pending resolution of Mediacom's complaint. By this Public Notice, we assign the file number CSR-7058-C to Mediacom's Complaint and Request for Interim Carriage and seek comment on these matters. Pursuant to Section 76.7, answers to Mediacom's Complaint are due within 20 days after the date of issuance of this public notice and replies to answers must be filed within 10 days after submission of the responsive pleading. On November 2, 2006, Mediacom filed an Emergency Request for Designation as ``Permit-But-Disclose'' Proceeding and for Ex Parte Contacts in connection with its Complaint. On November
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-06-2327A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-06-2327A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-06-2327A1.txt
  • and 76.123(k) (significantly viewed exception to satellite network nonduplication and syndicated exclusivity) would also appertain based on the same showing that a station is no longer significantly viewed in the relevant community. See 47 U.S.C. § 340(a)(2) and 340(c); 47 C.F.R. §§ 76.92(f), 76.106(a), 76.122(j) and 76.123(k). We also take this opportunity to remind petitioners that, in accordance with Section 76.7(c)(3), petitions should be accompanied by a certificate of service showing that affected cable operators, stations, and interested persons, including satellite carriers, have been served. 47 C.F.R. § 76.7(c)(3). Petition at 1. Id. at 3. We note that, initially, WGME-TV submitted county-wide survey data so that it could assert its network nonduplication rights against WBZ-TV throughout York County. When it was
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-06-2543A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-06-2543A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-06-2543A1.txt
  • 06-2543 Released: December 18, 2006 MEDIA BUREAU ACTION REQUEST FOR WAIVER OF 47 C.F.R. § 76.1204(a)(1) FILED WITH THE COMMISSION CSR-7078-Z Docket No. 97-80 Comment Date: January 8, 2007 Reply Comment Date: January 18, 2007 Cablevision Systems Corporation (``Cablevision'' or ``Petitioner'') has filed a request pursuant to Section 629(c) of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended, and Sections 1.3, 76.7, and 76.1207 of the Commission's rules, for limited waiver of the prohibition set forth in Section 76.1204(a)(1) of the Commission's rules on offering navigation devices that perform both conditional access and other functions. Cablevision seeks either (1) a clarification that navigation devices that rely upon separate security other than CableCARDs - specifically, SmartCards, a separable-security conditional access system developed by
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-06-254A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-06-254A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-06-254A1.txt
  • the Matter of: Charter Communications Petitions for Determination of Effective Competition in Beatrice, Louisville and Plattsmouth, Nebraska ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) CSR 6420-E CSR 6421-E Adopted: February 1, 2006 Released: February 2, 2006 By the Deputy Chief, Policy Division, Media Bureau: introduction Charter Communications (``Charter'') has filed two petitions with the Commission pursuant to Sections 76.7, 76.905(b)(2) and 76.907 of the Commission's rules for a determination that its cable systems serving the three Nebraska communities listed in Attachment A (the ``Communities'') are subject to effective competition pursuant to Section 623(1) of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended ("Communications Act"), and the Commission's implementing rules, and are therefore exempt from cable rate regulation in those communities.
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-06-278A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-06-278A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-06-278A1.txt
  • Adopted: February 3, 2006 Released: February 6, 2006 By the Deputy Chief, Policy Division, Media Bureau: Introduction This Order considers eleven petitions filed with the Commission by Mediacom Illinois LLC, MCC Illinois, LLC, Mediacom Indiana LLC, Mediacom Southeast LLC, Bright House Networks and Charter Communications (collectively ``the Petitioners,'' unless otherwise specifically referred to by individual company name) pursuant to Sections 76.7, 76.905(b)(1)&(2) and 76.907 of the Commission's rules for a determination that Petitioners' cable systems serving twenty-two Illinois and Michigan communities (the ``Communities'') are subject to effective competition pursuant to Section 623(a)(1) of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended (``Communications Act'') and are therefore exempt from cable rate regulation. The Communities are listed in Attachment A. No opposition to any
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-06-284A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-06-284A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-06-284A1.txt
  • ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) CSR 6761-E CSR 6762-E CSR 6763-E CSR 6764-E CSR 6765-E MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER Adopted: February 3, 2006 Released: February 7, 2006 By the Deputy Chief, Policy Division, Media Bureau: Introduction This Order considers five petitions filed with the Commission by Charter Communications, on behalf of its affiliates, (``Charter'') pursuant to Sections 76.7, 76.905(b)(1) & (2) and 76.907 of the Commission's rules for a determination that Charter's cable systems serving seven Missouri communities (the ``Communities'') are subject to effective competition pursuant to Section 623(a)(1) of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended (``Communications Act'') and are therefore exempt from cable rate regulation. The Communities are listed in Attachment A. An opposition was filed
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-06-285A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-06-285A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-06-285A1.txt
  • ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) CSR 6902-E CSR 6903-E CSR 6904-E CSR 6907-E CSR 6908-E MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER Adopted: February 3, 2006 Released: February 7, 2006 By the Deputy Chief, Policy Division, Media Bureau: Introduction This Order considers five petitions filed with the Commission by Charter Communications, on behalf of its affiliates, (``Charter'') pursuant to Sections 76.7, 76.905(b)(1) & (2) and 76.907 of the Commission's rules for a determination that Charter's cable systems serving twenty nine Missouri communities (the ``Communities'') are subject to effective competition pursuant to Section 623(a)(1) of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended (``Communications Act'') and are therefore exempt from cable rate regulation. The Communities are listed in Attachment A. An opposition was
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-06-333A2.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-06-333A2.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-06-333A2.txt
  • for Purposes of the Satellite Home Viewer Act (SHVA) Pending OMB Approval 3060-0865 Wireless Telecommunications Bureau Universal Licensing System Recordkeeping and Third-Party Disclosure Requirements 03/31/07 3060-0874 FCC 475, FCC 475B 11/30/08 3060-0876 USAC Board of Directors Nomination Process, Sec. 54.703 and Review of Administrator's Decision, Secs. 54.719 - 54.725 06/30/06 3060-0881 Sec. 95.861 09/30/08 3060-0882 Sec. 95.833 01/31/09 3060-0888 Secs. 76.7, 76.9, 76.61, 76.914, 76.1003, 76.1302, and 76.1513 05/31/08 3060-0893 Universal Licensing Service (ULS) Pre-Auction Database Corrections 02/28/07 3060-0894 Certification Letter Accounting for Receipt of Federal Support, CC Docket Nos. 96-45 and 96-262 06/30/07 3060-0895 FCC 502 03/31/07 3060-0896 Broadcast Auction Form Exhibits 12/31/08 3060-0897 MDS and ITFS Two-Way Transmissions 07/31/07 3060-0900 Compatibility of Wireless Services with Enhanced 911 - CC
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-06-398A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-06-398A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-06-398A1.txt
  • Waiver of Section 76.66(e)(3) of the Commission's Rules. ) ) ) ) ) ) CSR-6918-M MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER Adopted: February 27, 2006 Released: March 1, 2006 By the Deputy Chief, Media Bureau: INTRODUCTION Nevada Channel 3, Inc., licensee of commercial television station KEGS-TV Goldfield, Nevada (``KEGS''), formerly KTVY-TV, filed the above-captioned petition for special relief (``Petition''), pursuant to Section 76.7 of the Commission's rules. The Petition asks the Commission to waive Section 76.66(e)(3) of the Commission's rules, which prescribes that the 2003-2004 Nielsen Station Index Directory and Nielsen Station Index United States Television Household Estimates (collectively, ``Nielsen publications'') shall be used for the retransmission consent-mandatory carriage cycle commencing January 1, 2006 and ending December 31, 2008. KEGS seeks to base
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-06-59A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-06-59A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-06-59A1.txt
  • in Louisville, Illinois (IL0284), Morris, Minnesota (MN0012) and Chokio, Minnesota (MN0179) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) CSR 6352-E CSR 6354-E Adopted: January 12, 2006 Released: January 13, 2006 By the Deputy Chief, Media Bureau: introduction Mediacom Minnesota LLC (``Mediacom'') and MCC Illinois LLC (collectively ``Mediacom'') have filed with the Commission petitions pursuant to Section 76.7, 76.905(b)(4) and 76.907 of the Commission's rules for a determination of effective competition in the Village of Louisville, Illinois and the Cities of Morris and Chokio, Minnesota (collectively ``the Franchise Areas''). Mediacom alleges that its cable systems serving the Franchise Areas are subject to effective competition pursuant to Sections 623(a)(2) and 623(1)(1)(4) of the Communications Act and the Commission's implementing
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-06-623A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-06-623A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-06-623A1.txt
  • Reconsideration of the Certification of the City Fort Stockton, Texas to Regulate Basic Cable Service Rates ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) CSR 6510-E Adopted: March 30, 2006 Released: March 31, 2006 By the Deputy Chief, Policy Division, Media Bureau: introduction U.S. Cable of Coastal-Texas, L.P. (``U.S. Cable'') has filed with the Commission pursuant to Sections 76.7, 76.905(b)(2) and 76.907 of the Commission's rules for a determination of effective competition in Fort Stockton, Texas. U.S. Cable alleges that its cable system serving the City of Fort Stockton, Texas (the ``City'') is subject to effective competition pursuant to Section 623(1) of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended ("Communications Act"), and the Commission's implementing rules, and is therefore
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-06-63A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-06-63A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-06-63A1.txt
  • Determination of Effective Competition in Seventeen Local Franchise Areas ) ) ) ) ) ) ) CSR 6700-E, 6701-E, 6703-E, 6704-E, 6730-E, 6853-E, 6602-E, 6625-E Adopted: January 12, 2006 Released: January 13, 2006 By the Deputy Chief, Policy Division, Media Bureau: introduction This Order considers eight petitions which Mediacom Southeast LLC (``Mediacom'') has filed with the Commission pursuant to Sections 76.7, 76.905(b)(2) and 76.907 of the Commission's rules for a determination that it is subject to effective competition pursuant to Section 623(1) of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended ("Communications Act"), and the Commission's implementing rules, and is therefore exempt from cable rate regulation in the franchise areas listed in Attachments A and B (the ``Franchise Areas''). No opposition to
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-06-744A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-06-744A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-06-744A1.txt
  • Two Petitions for Determination of Effective Competition in Seven Local Franchise Areas ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) CSR 6660-E, 6667-E MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER Adopted: March 30, 2006 Released: March 31, 2006 By the Deputy Chief, Policy Division, Media Bureau: Introduction Mediacom Wisconsin LLC (``Mediacom'') has filed two petitions with the Commission pursuant to Sections 76.7, 76.905(b)(2) and 76.907 of the Commission's rules for a determination that Mediacom is subject to effective competition pursuant to Section 623(a) of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended (``Communications Act'') and is therefore exempt from cable rate regulation in the franchise areas listed in Attachment A (the ``Communities''). No opposition to either petition was filed. Finding that Mediacom is
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-06-745A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-06-745A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-06-745A1.txt
  • ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) CSR 6855-E CSR 6894-E CSR 6567-E, 6833-E CSR 6832-E CSR 6856-E CSR 6940-E Adopted: March 30, 2006 Released: March 31, 2006 By the Deputy Chief, Policy Division, Media Bureau: introduction This Order considers eight petitions which cable operators (the ``Cable Operators'') have filed with the Commission pursuant to Sections 76.7, 76.905(b)(2) and 76.907 of the Commission's rules for a determination that such operators are subject to effective competition pursuant to Section 623(1) of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended ("Communications Act"), and the Commission's implementing rules, and are therefore exempt from cable rate regulation in the communities listed in Attachment A (the ``Communities''). No opposition to any petition was
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-06-746A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-06-746A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-06-746A1.txt
  • ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) CSR 6568-E, 6569-E CSR 6522-E, 6523-E, 6538-E, 6539-E, 6540-E, 6541-E CSR 6530, 6531-E Adopted: March 30, 2006 Released: March 31, 2006 By the Deputy Chief, Policy Division, Media Bureau: introduction This Order considers ten petitions which cable operators (the ``Cable Operators'') have filed with the Commission pursuant to Sections 76.7, 76.905(b)(2) and 76.907 of the Commission's rules for a determination that such operators are subject to effective competition pursuant to Section 623(1) of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended ("Communications Act"), and the Commission's implementing rules, and are therefore exempt from cable rate regulation in the communities listed in Attachment A (the ``Communities''). No opposition to any petition was
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-06-747A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-06-747A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-06-747A1.txt
  • of: Comcast Cable Communications, LLC Two Petitions for Determination of Effective Competition in various Local Franchise Areas ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) CSR 6596-E, 6597-E Adopted: March 30, 2006 Released: March 31, 2006 By the Deputy Chief, Policy Division, Media Bureau: introduction Comcast Cable Communications, LLC, (``Comcast'') has filed a petition with the Commission pursuant to Sections 76.7, 76.905(b)(2) and 76.907 of the Commission's rules for a determination that its cable systems serving various Colorado franchise areas listed in Attachment A (the ``Communities'') are subject to effective competition pursuant to Section 623(l) of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended (``Communications Act''), and the Commission's implementing rules, and are therefore exempt from cable rate regulation. In addition, pursuant
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-06-750A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-06-750A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-06-750A1.txt
  • Matter of: Charter Communications Petitions for Determination of Effective Competition in Mount Vernon, Okawville, Salem and Richmond, Illinois ) ) ) ) ) ) ) CSR-6759-E CSR-6760-E MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER Adopted: March 30, 2006 Released: March 31, 2006 By the Deputy Chief, Policy Division, Media Bureau: Introduction Charter Communications has filed with the Commission two petitions pursuant to Sections 76.7, 76.905(b)(2) and 76.907 of the Commission's rules for a determination that Charter's cable systems serving four Illinois communities (the ``Communities'') are subject to effective competition pursuant to Section 623(a)(1) of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended (``Communications Act'') and are therefore exempt from cable rate regulation. The City of Salem, Illinois (``Salem'') filed an opposition against one of the
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-06-760A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-06-760A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-06-760A1.txt
  • & Mediacom Iowa, LLC Petition for Determination of Effective Competition in various Local Franchise Areas ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) CSR 6896-E Adopted: March 30, 2006 Released: April 3, 2006 By the Deputy Chief, Policy Division, Media Bureau: introduction Mediacom Iowa LLC and MCC Iowa LLC (``Mediacom'') have filed a petition with the Commission pursuant to Sections 76.7, 76.905(b)(2) and 76.907 of the Commission's rules for a determination that its cable systems serving various Iowa communities are subject to effective competition pursuant to Section 623(1) of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended ("Communications Act"), and the Commission's implementing rules, and are therefore exempt from cable rate regulation in those communities. No opposition to the petition was filed.
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-06-761A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-06-761A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-06-761A1.txt
  • 76.123(k) (significantly viewed exception to satellite network nonduplication and syndicated exclusivity) would also appertain based on the same showing that a station is no longer significantly viewed in the relevant community; see 47 C.F.R. §§ 76.92(f), 76.106(a), 76.122(j) and 76.123(k). See 47 U.S.C. §§ 340(a)(2) and 340(c). We also take this opportunity to remind petitioners that, in accordance with Section 76.7(c)(3), petitions should be accompanied by certificate of service showing that affected cable operators, stations and interested persons, including satellite carriers, have been served; 47 C.F.R. § 76.7(c)(3). We note that initially Jefferson-Pilot Communications Company of Virginia, licensee of television broadcast station WWBT (Ch. 12), Richmond, Virginia, filed a motion for extension of time to file a response to WVIR-TV's petition.
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-06-776A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-06-776A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-06-776A1.txt
  • Petitions for Determination of Effective Competition in Twenty-One Local Franchise Areas ) ) ) ) ) ) ) CSR 6723-E, 6725-E, 6727-E, 6755-E Adopted: March 31, 2006 Released: April 4, 2006 By the Deputy Chief, Policy Division, Media Bureau: I. INtroduction 1. This Order considers four petitions which Mediacom Southeast, LLC (``Mediacom'') has filed with the Commission pursuant to Sections 76.7, 76.905(b)(2) and 76.907 of the Commission's rules for a determination that Mediacom is subject to effective competition pursuant to Section 623(a)(1) of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended ("Communications Act") and the Commission's implementing rules and is therefore exempt from cable rate regulation in the communities listed in Attachment A and in the communities listed in Attachment B (the
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-06-78A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-06-78A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-06-78A1.txt
  • ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) CSR 6047-E Adopted: January 25, 2006 Released: January 26, 2006 By the Deputy Chief, Policy Division, Media Bureau: I. INTRODUCTION 1. Alert Cable TV of South Carolina, Inc. and Time Warner Entertainment-Advance/Newhouse Partnership, d/b/a Time Warner Cable (``Time Warner'') has filed with the Commission a petition pursuant to Sections 76.7 and 76.905(b)(1) & (2) and 76.907 of the Commission's rules seeking a finding of effective competition in thirty-eight communities in South Carolina (the ``Communities''). Time Warner alleges that its cable systems serving the Communities are subject to effective competition pursuant to Section 623(a)(1) of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended ("Communications Act") and therefore exempt from cable rate regulation.
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-06-799A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-06-799A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-06-799A1.txt
  • sale of its INHD programming violated Section 628(c)(2)(B) of the Act and Section 76.1002(b) of the Commission's rules because it discriminated in its price, terms and conditions. DIRECTV also alleged that ID's fee structure constituted an unfair practice in violation of Section 628(b) of the Act and Section 76.1001 of the Commission's rules. On April 7, 2006, pursuant to Section 76.7(a)(4)(iii) of the Commission's rules, DIRECTV withdrew its program access complaint against ID and asked the Commission to dismiss the complaint without prejudice. Accordingly, DIRECTV's request is GRANTED and its program access complaint against iN DEMAND, LLC IS DISMISSED WITHOUT PREJUDICE. FEDERAL COMUNICATIONS COMMISSON Steven A. Broeckaert Deputy Chief, Policy Division Media Bureau 47 U.S.C. § 548. 47 C.F.R. §§ 76.1000-1003.
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-06-833A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-06-833A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-06-833A1.txt
  • failed to comply with the mandatory carriage notification process established by Section 534(d)(1) of the Communications Act and Section 76.61 of the Commission's rules; 2) the station failed to provide a good quality signal to some of the communities involved; and 3) the complaint had not been properly served on franchise authorities in accordance with the service requirements of Section 76.7(a)(3) of the Commission's rules. In the underlying decision, the petition was dismissed for KEJB's failure to comply with the Commission's service requirements. In its reconsideration petition, KEJB does not seek reconsideration of this dismissal, but seeks only a declaration from the Commission that the service provisions of Section 76.7(a)(3) of the rules do not require service of petitions of this
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-07-1041A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-07-1041A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-07-1041A1.txt
  • Adelphia Cable Communications Petition for Determination of Effective Competition in Various North Carolina Communities ) ) ) ) ) ) ) CSR 6524-E, CSR 6525-E & CSR 6526-E Adopted: March 6, 2007 Released: March 7, 2007 By the Deputy Chief, Policy Division, Media Bureau: I. introduction Adelphia Cable Communications (``Adelphia'') has filed with the Commission a petition pursuant to Sections 76.7 and 76.905(b)(1) & (2) and 76.907 of the Commission's rules seeking a finding of effective competition in Caswell County, Lenoir County, Pink Hill, and Pitt County, North Carolina (collectively the ``Communities''). Adelphia alleges that its cable system serving the communities are subject to effective competition pursuant to Section 623(a)(1) of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended ("Communications Act") and
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-07-1065A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-07-1065A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-07-1065A1.txt
  • withdraw Biltmore Forest, Weaverville, and Woodfin from its Petition. See Charter Communications, Motion to Withdraw Biltmore Forest, Weaverville, and Woodfin, North Carolina From Petition For Special Relief, CSR No. 6891-E (``Motion to Withdraw''). We grant Charter's Motion to Withdraw. Accordingly, we address the Petition only as it relates to Buncombe County, North Carolina. 47 U.S.C. § 543(a). 47 C.F.R. § 76.7; 47 C.F.R. § 76.905(b). See 47 U.S.C. § 543(1) and 47 C.F.R. § 76.905. 47 C.F.R. § 76.906. See 47 C.F.R. §§ 76.906 & 76.907. 47 U.S.C. § 543(1)(1)(B); see also 47 C.F.R. § 76.905(b)(2). See MediaOne of Georgia, 12 FCC Rcd 19406 (1997). See Twelfth Annual Assessment of the Status of Competition in the Market for the Delivery of
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-07-1066A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-07-1066A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-07-1066A1.txt
  • Carolina ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) CSR 6942-E, 6943-E, 6944-E, 6945-E, 6946-E MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER Adopted: March 6, 2007 Released: March 7, 2007 By the Deputy Chief, Policy Division, Media Bureau: Introduction This Order considers five petitions which the cable operator CoxCom, Inc., d/b/a/ Cox Communications North Carolina (``Cox''), filed with the Commission pursuant to Sections 76.7 and 76.907 of the Commission's rules for a determination that, in 13 franchise areas in North Carolina (the ``Communities''), it is subject to effective competition pursuant to Section 623(a)(2) of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended (``Communications Act''), and is therefore exempt from cable rate regulation. Cox filed its Petition for Determination of Effective Competition and subsequently filed a
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-07-1088A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-07-1088A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-07-1088A1.txt
  • Advanced Cable Communications Petition for Determination of Effective Competition in Weston, Florida ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) CSR-6548-E Adopted: March 7, 2007 Released: March 8, 2007 By the Deputy Chief, Policy Division, Media Bureau: Introduction This Order considers a petition filed with the Commission by Advocate Communications, Inc. d/b/a Advanced Cable Communications, Inc (``Advanced'') pursuant to Sections 76.7, 76.905(b)(1) & (2) and 76.907 of the Commission's rules for a determination that Advanced's cable system serving Weston, Florida is subject to effective competition pursuant to Section 623(a)(1) of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended (``Communications Act'') and is therefore exempt from cable rate regulation. The City of Weston (``Weston'') opposed the petition and Advanced filed a reply. We
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-07-1116A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-07-1116A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-07-1116A1.txt
  • the City of Salamanca (NY0021) New York to Regulate Basic Cable Service Rates ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) CSR 6339-E Adopted: March 8, 2007 Released: March 9, 2007 By the Deputy Chief Media Bureau: I. Introduction 1. Atlantic Broadband (Penn) LLC (``Atlantic'') has filed with the Commission a petition pursuant to Sections 76.7, 76.905(b)(1) & (2) and 76.907 of the Commission's rules seeking a finding of effective competition in the following New York communities: (1) the Town of Great Valley; (2) the Town of Little Valley; (3) the Village of Little Valley; (4) the City of Salamanca; (5) and the Town of Salamanca. Atlantic alleges that its cable systems serving the captioned areas
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-07-1250A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-07-1250A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-07-1250A1.txt
  • Cable Petition for Determination of Effective Competition in San Antonio, Texas (CUID No. TX0029) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) CSR 5721-E Adopted: March 12, 2007 Released: March 13, 2007 By the Deputy Chief, Policy Division, Media Bureau: introduction Paragon Communications, Inc. d/b/a Time Warner Cable (``Time Warner'') has filed with the Commission a petition pursuant to Sections 76.7, 76.905(b)(4) and 76.907 of the Commission's rules seeking a finding of effective competition in San Antonio, Texas (``San Antonio'' or the ``City''). Time Warner alleges that its cable system serving San Antonio is subject to effective competition pursuant to Section 623(a)(2) of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended ("Communications Act"), and the Commission's implementing rules, and seeks revocation of
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-07-1251A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-07-1251A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-07-1251A1.txt
  • Warner Cable Petition for Determination of Effective Competition in Austin, Texas (CUID No. TX0029) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) CSR 5701-E Adopted: March 12, 2007 Released: March 13, 2007 By the Deputy Chief, Policy Division, Media Bureau: introduction Time Warner Entertainment-Advance/Newhouse Partnership, d/b/a Time Warner Cable (``Time Warner'') has filed with the Commission a petition pursuant to Sections 76.7, 76.905(b)(4) and 76.907 of the Commission's rules seeking a finding of effective competition in Austin, Texas (``Austin'' or the ``City''). Time Warner alleges that its cable system serving Austin is subject to effective competition pursuant to Section 623(a)(2) of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended ("Communications Act"), and the Commission's implementing rules, and seeks revocation of the certification of
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-07-1257A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-07-1257A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-07-1257A1.txt
  • In the Matter of Time Warner Entertainment-Advance/Newhouse Partnership Petition for Determination of Effective Competition in San Marcos, Texas ) ) ) ) ) ) ) CSR 5712-E Adopted: March 12, 2007 Released: March 13, 2007 By the Deputy Chief, Policy Division, Media Bureau: introduction Time Warner Entertainment-Advance/Newhouse Partnership (``Time Warner'') has filed with the Commission a petition pursuant to Sections 76.7, 76.905(b)(4) and 76.907 of the Commission's rules seeking a finding of effective competition in San Marcos, Texas (``San Marcos'' or the ``City''). Time Warner alleges that its cable system serving San Marcos is subject to effective competition pursuant to Section 623(a)(2) of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended ("Communications Act"), and the Commission's implementing rules, and seeks revocation of
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-07-159A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-07-159A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-07-159A1.txt
  • LLC Petition for Determination of Effective Competition in the Farmington Hills, Livonia, and Novi, Michigan Franchise Areas ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) CSR 6941-E Adopted: January 22, 2007 Released: January 24, 2007 By the Deputy Chief, Policy Division, Media Bureau: introduction Bright House Networks, LLC (``Bright House'') has filed a petition with the Commission pursuant to Sections 76.7, 76.905(b)(2) and 76.907 of the Commission's rules for a determination that its cable systems serving various Michigan communities are subject to effective competition pursuant to Section 623(1) of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended ("Communications Act"), and the Commission's implementing rules, and are therefore exempt from cable rate regulation in those communities. Southwestern Oakland Cable Commission (``SWOCC'') filed a
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-07-162A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-07-162A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-07-162A1.txt
  • Osceola County (FL0900) and Inverness (FL09905), FL ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) CSR 6534-E & 6535-E MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER Adopted: January 22, 2007 Released: January 24, 2007 By the Deputy Chief, Policy Division, Media Bureau: Introduction Telesat Acquisition LLC d/b/a Adelphia Cable Communications (``Adelphia'') has filed with the Commission two petitions pursuant to Sections 76.7, 76.905(b)(1) & (2) and 76.907 of the Commission's rules seeking a finding of effective competition in Osceola County and the City of Inverness, Florida (the ``Communities''). Adelphia alleges that its cable systems serving the Communities are subject to effective competition pursuant to Section 623(a)(1) of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended (``Communications Act'') and therefore exempt from cable rate
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-07-183A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-07-183A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-07-183A1.txt
  • Long Island Corporation Petition for Determination of Effective Competition in the Town of Hempstead, New York (NY0454) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) CSR 7040-E Adopted: January 22, 2007 Released: January 24, 2007 By the Deputy Chief, Policy Division, Media Bureau: introduction Cablevision Systems Long Island Corporation (``Cablevision'') has filed with the Commission a petition pursuant to Section 76.7, 76.905(b)(4) and 76.907 of the Commission's rules for a determination of effective competition in the Town of Hempstead, New York (the ``Franchise Area''). Cablevision alleges that its cable system serving the Franchise Area is subject to effective competition pursuant to Sections 623(a)(2) and 623(1)(1)(4) of the Communications Act and the Commission's implementing rules, and therefore is exempt from cable rate
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-07-184A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-07-184A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-07-184A1.txt
  • Competition in the Villages of Nyack, New York (NY0870) and South Nyack, New York (NY0872) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) CSR 7031-E Adopted: January 22, 2007 Released: January 24, 2007 By the Deputy Chief, Policy Division, Media Bureau: introduction Cablevision of Rockland/Ramapo, LLC (``Cablevision'') has filed with the Commission a petition pursuant to Section 76.7, 76.905(b)(4) and 76.907 of the Commission's rules for a determination of effective competition in the Villages of Nyack, New York and South Nyack, New York (collectively, the ``Franchise Areas''). Cablevision alleges that its cable system serving the Franchise Areas are subject to effective competition pursuant to Sections 623(a)(2) and 623(1)(1)(4) of the Communications Act and the Commission's implementing rules, and
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-07-185A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-07-185A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-07-185A1.txt
  • Effective Competition in Three Local Franchise Areas in Kentucky and Tennessee ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) CSR-6865-E CSR-6874-E Adopted: January 22, 2007 Released: January 24, 2007 By the Deputy Chief, Policy Division, Media Bureau: Introduction This Order considers two petitions filed with the Commission by Mediacom Southeast LLC (Mediacom) pursuant to Sections 76.7, 76.905(b)(1) and 76.907 of the Commission's rules for a determination that Mediacom's cable systems serving certain communities in Kentucky (the ``communities'') are subject to effective competition pursuant to Section 623(a)(1) of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended (``Communications Act'') and are therefore exempt from cable rate regulation. The communities include Clinton, Gamaliel, and Henderson, Kentucky. No opposition to any
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-07-194A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-07-194A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-07-194A1.txt
  • two-year period demonstrates that WSMV-TV no longer meets the significantly viewed criteria in the communities served by the subject cable systems. Mediacom opposes WNKY's petition on procedural grounds and also challenges the methodology that WNKY used in its survey. First, Mediacom states that WNKY failed to serve a copy of its petition on all interested parties, as required by Section 76.7(a)(3). Specifically, WNKY failed to serve Kentucky Partners II LP, the cable system serving Bowling Green, Kentucky and the largest community affected by WNKY's proposed waiver, and the local franchising authorities of the individually affected communities. Second, Mediacom states that WNKY failed to provide prior notice that it intended to conduct a significantly viewed audience survey, as required by Section 76.54(c).
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-07-195A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-07-195A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-07-195A1.txt
  • the Federal Communications Commission Washington, D.C. 20554 In the Matter of Charter Communications Petition for Determination of Effective Competition ) ) ) ) ) ) CSR 6453-E Adopted: January 24, 2007 Released: January 25, 2007 By the Deputy Chief, Policy Division, Media Bureau: introduction This Order considers a petition which Charter Communications (``Charter'') filed with the Commission pursuant to Sections 76.7, 76.905(b)(2) and 76.907 of the Commission's rules for a determination that such operator is subject to effective competition pursuant to Section 623(1) of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended ("Communications Act"), and the Commission's implementing rules, and is therefore exempt from cable rate regulation in Owatonna, Minnesota. No opposition to the petition was filed. Finding that Charter is subject
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-07-196A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-07-196A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-07-196A1.txt
  • Warner Cable Petition for Determination of Effective Competition in Germantown, Ohio ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) CSR 6551-E Adopted: January 24, 2007 Released: January 25, 2007 By the Deputy Chief, Policy Division, Media Bureau: introduction Time Warner Entertainment Company LP d/b/a Time Warner Cable (``Time Warner'') has filed with the Commission a petition pursuant to Sections 76.7, 76.905(b)(2) and 76.907 of the Commission's rules for a determination that its cable system serving Germantown, Ohio (``Germantown'') is subject to effective competition pursuant to Section 623(1) of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended ("Communications Act"), and the Commission's implementing rules, and is therefore exempt from cable rate regulation in the community listed in Attachment A. The Miami Valley
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-07-2008A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-07-2008A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-07-2008A1.txt
  • six headends, pass an average of 55 homes per mile. Charter asserts that the relief it seeks is consistent with the Commission's policy goal of increased broadband deployment in rural areas because the relief would offset the higher infrastructure costs associated with low-density systems. discussion Charter makes its request for waiver pursuant to Section 629(c) of the Act and Sections 76.7 and 76.1207 of the Commission's rules. Accordingly, we analyze its request pursuant to the waiver standards set forth in Section 629(c) as well as under the general waiver provisions found in Sections 1.3 and 76.7 of the Commission's rules. In addition, because Charter characterizes its request as one for ``low-cost, limited capability'' devices as described in the Commission's 2005 Deferral
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-07-2009A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-07-2009A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-07-2009A1.txt
  • seeks a waiver of the integration ban until December 31, 2007, for the Motorola DCT-700 and DCT-3416 integrated digital cable set-top boxes (``DCT-700'' and ``DCT-3416,'' respectively), which OneSource argues are critical to its plans to migrate to an all-digital network by December 31, 2007. For the reasons stated below, we conditionally grant OneSource's Waiver Request pursuant to Sections 1.3 and 76.7 of the Commission's rules with respect to deployment of the DCT-700, but deny its request to continue deployment of the DCT-3416. BACKGROUND A. Section 629 of the Act Section 629(a) of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended (the ``Act''), requires the Commission to: adopt regulations to assure the commercial availability, to consumers of multichannel video programming and other services
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-07-2010A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-07-2010A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-07-2010A1.txt
  • Bureau the above-captioned request for waiver (the ``Waiver Request'') of the ban on integrated set-top boxes set forth in Section 76.1204(a)(1) of the Commission's rules. Specifically, GCI seeks a waiver of the integration ban for all new set-top boxes issued after July 1, 2007. For the reasons stated below, we partially grant GCI's Waiver Request pursuant to Sections 1.3 and 76.7 of the Commission's rules, subject to the conditions set forth herein. BACKGROUND Section 629(a) of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended (the ``Act''), requires the Commission to: adopt regulations to assure the commercial availability, to consumers of multichannel video programming and other services offered over multichannel video programming systems, of converter boxes, interactive communications equipment, and other equipment used
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-07-2282A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-07-2282A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-07-2282A1.txt
  • ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) CSR 6924-E, 6991-E CSR 7071-E, 7072-E, 7123-E Adopted: May 31, 2007 Released: June 1, 2007 By the Deputy Chief, Policy Division, Media Bureau: introduction This Order considers several petitions which Coxcom, Inc. (``Coxcom'') and Comcast Cable Communications, LLC (``Comcast'') (collectively the ``Petitioners'' or ``operators'') filed with the Commission pursuant to Sections 76.7, 76.905(b)(2) and 76.907 of the Commission's rules for a determination that Petitioners are subject to effective competition pursuant to Section 623(1) of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended ("Communications Act"), and the Commission's implementing rules, and are therefore exempt from cable rate regulation in the communities listed in Attachment A (the ``Communities''). No opposition to any petition was filed.
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-07-2283A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-07-2283A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-07-2283A1.txt
  • the Matter of: Charter Communications Petition for Determination of Effective Competition in Two Local Franchise Areas in Wisconsin ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) CSR-7106-E Adopted: May 31, 2007 Released: June 1, 2007 By the Deputy Chief, Policy Division, Media Bureau: Introduction This Order considers a petition filed with the Commission by Charter Communications (``Charter'') pursuant to Sections 76.7, 76.905(b)(1) & (2) and 76.907 of the Commission's rules for a determination that Charter's cable systems serving Beloit and Janesville, Wisconsin are subject to effective competition pursuant to Section 623(a)(1) of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended (``Communications Act'') and are therefore exempt from cable rate regulation. The City of Janesville (``Janesville'') opposes the petition with respect to that
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-07-2284A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-07-2284A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-07-2284A1.txt
  • Communities ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) CSR 7060-E CSR 7062-E, 7068-E, 7125-E Adopted: May 31, 2007 Released: June 1, 2007 By the Deputy Chief, Policy Division, Media Bureau: introduction This Order considers several petitions which Comcast Cable Communications, LLC and Bright House Networks, LLC (collectively ``the Petitioners'' or ``operators'') filed with the Commission pursuant to Sections 76.7, 76.905(b)(2) and 76.907 of the Commission's rules for a determination that Petitioners are subject to effective competition pursuant to Section 623(1) of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended ("Communications Act"), and the Commission's implementing rules, and are therefore exempt from cable rate regulation in the communities listed in Attachment A (the ``Communities''). No opposition to any petition was filed.
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-07-275A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-07-275A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-07-275A1.txt
  • of York Cable Television, Inc. Petitions for Determination of Effective Competition in Pearl and Flowood, MS ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) CSR-7005-E CSR-7013-E Adopted: January 26, 2007 Released: January 30, 2007 By the Deputy Chief, Policy Division, Media Bureau: INTRODUCTION York Cable Television, Inc. d/b/a SusCom (``SusCom'') has filed two petitions with the Commission pursuant to 76.7, 76.905(b)(2) and 76.907 of the Commission's rules for a determination that its cable television systems serving Pearl and Flowood, Mississippi (the ``Communities'') are subject to effective competition pursuant to Section 623(a)(1) of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended (``Communications Act''), and are therefore exempt from rate regulation. No oppositions to the petitions were filed. We grant the petitions finding
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-07-2796A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-07-2796A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-07-2796A1.txt
  • Marcus Cable Associates LLC d/b/a Charter Communications Petition for Determination of Effective Competition in Burbank, CA ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) CSR-6949-E Adopted: June 22, 2007 Released: June 26, 2007 By the Deputy Chief, Policy Division, Media Bureau: INTRODUCTION Marcus Cable Associates LLC d/b/a Charter Communications (``Charter'') has filed a petition with the Commission pursuant to 76.7, 76.905(b)(2) and 76.907 of the Commission's rules for a determination that its cable television system serving Burbank, California is subject to effective competition pursuant to Section 623(a)(1) of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended (``Communications Act''), and is therefore exempt from rate regulation. No oppositions to the petition were filed. We grant the petition finding that Charter is subject
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-07-2797A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-07-2797A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-07-2797A1.txt
  • ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) CSR-6537-E CSR-6670-E CSR-6671-E MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER Adopted: June 22, 2007 Released: June 26, 2007 By the Deputy Chief, Policy Division, Media Bureau: Introduction Cablevision of Rockland/Ramapo Inc., CSC TKR, Inc. d/b/a Cablevision of Elizabeth, and Cablevision of Warwick LLC (collectively ``Cablevision'') have filed with the Commission petitions pursuant to Sections 76.7, 76.905 and 76.907 of the Commission's rules for a determination that Cablevision's cable systems serving Montvale, Elizabeth and West Milford, New Jersey (the ``Communities'') are subject to effective competition pursuant to Section 623(a)(1) of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended (``Communications Act'') and are therefore exempt from cable rate regulation. Specifically, Cablevision asserts that the competing provider test is
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-07-2807A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-07-2807A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-07-2807A1.txt
  • 6767-E, 6849-E, 6870-E & 6875-E Adopted: June 22, 2007 Released: June 26, 2007 By the Deputy Chief, Policy Division, Media Bureau: I. introduction This Order considers several petitions that Adelphia Cable Communications (``Adelphia''), MCC Georgia LLC (``MCC''), Mediacom Arizona LLC (``Mediacom Arizona''), and Mediacom Southeast LLC (``Mediacom Southeast'') (collectively the ``Petitioners'' or ``operators'') filed with the Commission pursuant to Sections 76.7, 76.905(b)(2) and 76.907 of the Commission's rules for a determination that Petitioners are subject to effective competition pursuant to Section 623(1) of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended ("Communications Act") and the Commission's implementing rules, and are therefore exempt from cable rate regulation in the communities listed in Attachment A (the ``Communities''). No opposition to any petition was filed.
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-07-2916A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-07-2916A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-07-2916A1.txt
  • established by the Commission in the 2005 Deferral Order for low-cost, limited-capability set-top boxes. The Bureau found good cause, however, to conditionally grant Bend Cable Communications d/b/a BendBroadband (``BendBroadband'') a waiver of Section 76.1204(a)(1) of the Commission's rules. The Waiver Requests and Comments Armstrong Utilities, Inc. Pursuant to Section 629(c) of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended, and Sections 76.7 and 76.1207 of the Commission's rules, Armstrong Utilities, Inc. (``Armstrong'') seeks waiver of the integration ban to allow it to continue to place into service new integrated digital cable set-top boxes after July 1, 2007. Armstrong seeks relief very similar to what the National Cable and Telecommunications Association seeks in its waiver request: Armstrong seeks waiver of the integration ban
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-07-2917A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-07-2917A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-07-2917A1.txt
  • implementing the ban in Guam. According to GCL, the small market Guam represents, the island's immature consumer electronic retail environment and its location halfway around the world from the contiguous 48 states mean that no competitive set-top boxes will be available to consumers, even if waiver is denied, meaning higher costs for customers. GCL also requests waiver pursuant to Section 76.7 of the Commission's rules, arguing that compliant equipment will not be available from Scientific Atlanta in time for the onset of the integration ban. Finally, GCL cites congressionally recognized ``vast social and economical differences . . . between the contiguous 48 States on the one hand, and the noncontiguous Pacific region on the other,'' arguing that the policy objective pursued
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-07-2918A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-07-2918A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-07-2918A1.txt
  • 76.1204(a)(1) of the Commission's rules on which Crosslake may no longer place in service integrated set-top boxes. Crosslake seeks to defer enforcement of the July 1, 2007 deadline until it receives delivery of set-top boxes it previously ordered which will comply with the integration ban. For the reasons stated below, we grant Crosslake's deferral request pursuant to Sections 1.3 and 76.7 of the Commission's rules. BACKGROUND Section 629(a) of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended (the ``Act''), requires the Commission to: adopt regulations to assure the commercial availability, to consumers of multichannel video programming and other services offered over multichannel video programming systems, of converter boxes, interactive communications equipment, and other equipment used by consumers to access multichannel video programming
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-07-2919A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-07-2919A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-07-2919A1.txt
  • small operators could request deferral of the July 1, 2007 deadline if they could demonstrate that they have placed orders for compliant set-top boxes that will not be fulfilled in time for them to comply with the deadline. The Waiver Request Pursuant to Section 629(c) of the Communications Act, Section 706 of the Telecommunications Act of 1996, and Sections 1.3, 76.7, and 76.1207 of the Commission's rules, Massillon seeks a waiver of the integration ban to allow it to place into service integrated set-top boxes it will have in inventory after the July 1, 2007 deadline. Massillon states that it is a ``small, locally-run, family-owned'' cable operator with approximately 46,000 customers. Massillon explains that it invested approximately $1 million in the
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-07-2920A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-07-2920A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-07-2920A1.txt
  • be especially appropriate for the increasing number of small MVPDs that provide Internet Protocol television (``IPTV'') utilizing fiber or copper-based digital subscriber line (``DSL'') technology. discussion NCTA argues that its request ``satisfies the special waiver provision in Section 629(c) of the Communications Act and Section 76.1207 of the Commission's rules, as well as the general standards of Sections 1.3 and 76.7 of the Commission's rules.'' Accordingly, we analyze its request pursuant to the waiver standards set forth in Section 629(c) as well as under the general waiver provisions found in Sections 1.3 and 76.7 of the Commission's rules. As discussed below, we find that the request does not justify the grant of a waiver under either of these standards. We therefore
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-07-2921A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-07-2921A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-07-2921A1.txt
  • will transition to all-digital systems by February 17, 2009. All seek a waiver of the integration ban, which they argue is necessary in order to make the transition or to continue to provide the high-quality video and related digital services over their all-digital distribution networks. For the reasons stated below, we grant the Waiver Requests pursuant to Sections 1.3 and 76.7 of the Commission's rules. BACKGROUND A. Section 629 of the Act Section 629(a) of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended (the ``Act''), requires the Commission to: adopt regulations to assure the commercial availability, to consumers of multichannel video programming and other services offered over multichannel video programming systems, of converter boxes, interactive communications equipment, and other equipment used by
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-07-3136A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-07-3136A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-07-3136A1.txt
  • communities: Asbury (CUID IA0055), Dubuque (CUID IA0011), Epworth (CUID IA0115), Farley (CUID IA0114), Sageville (CUID IA0689) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) CSR 6600-E Adopted: July 9, 2007 Released: July 11, 2007 By the Deputy Chief, Policy Division, Media Bureau: I. introduction MCC Iowa LLC (``Mediacom'') has filed with the Commission a petition pursuant to Sections 76.7 and 76.905(b)(2) and 76.907 of the Commission's rules seeking a finding of effective competition in the franchise areas listed in the above caption. Mediacom alleges that its cable systems serving the franchise areas are subject to effective competition pursuant to Section 623(l)(1)(b) of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended ("Communications Act") and therefore exempt from cable rate regulation because
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-07-3137A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-07-3137A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-07-3137A1.txt
  • Areas: Credit River (CUID MN0443); Prior Lake (CUID MN0441); Spring Lake (CUID MN0442); Webster (CUID MN0734) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) CSR-6774-E MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER Adopted: July 9, 2007 Released: July 11, 2007 By the Deputy Chief, Policy Division, Media Bureau: introduction Mediacom Minnesota (``Mediacom'') has filed with the Commission, pursuant to Section 76.7 and 76.905 of the Commission's rules, petitions for a determination of effective competition in the following Minnesota communities: Credit River, Prior Lake, Spring Lake, and Webster. Mediacom claims that its cable systems serving those communities are subject to effective competition pursuant to Section 623(l) of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended (``Communications Act''), and the Commission's implementing rules, and
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-07-3146A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-07-3146A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-07-3146A1.txt
  • ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) CSR 6726-E, 6738-E, 6750-E, 6751-E, 6816-E CSR 6769-E Adopted: July 9, 2007 Released: July 12, 2007 By the Deputy Chief, Policy Division, Media Bureau: introduction This Order considers several petitions which Mediacom Southeast LLC ``Mediacom'' and Mediacom Minnesota LLC ``Mediacom'' (collectively the ``Petitioners'' or ``operators'') filed with the Commission pursuant to Sections 76.7, 76.905(b)(2) and 76.907 of the Commission's rules for a determination that Petitioners are subject to effective competition pursuant to Section 623(1) of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended ("Communications Act"), and the Commission's implementing rules, and are therefore exempt from cable rate regulation in the communities listed in Attachment A and B (the ``Communities''). No opposition to any petition
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-07-3192A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-07-3192A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-07-3192A1.txt
  • In the Matter of Bright House Networks, LLC Petition for Determination of Effective Competition in Temple Terrace, FL (FL0490) ) ) ) ) ) ) CSR 7034-E Adopted: July 12, 2007 Released: July 13, 2007 By the Deputy Chief, Policy Division, Media Bureau: introduction Bright House Networks, LLC (``Bright House'') has filed with the Commission a petition pursuant to Sections 76.7, 76.905(b)(4) and 76.907 of the Commission's rules for a determination of effective competition in Temple Terrace, Florida. Bright House Networks alleges that its cable system serving Temple Terrace is subject to effective competition pursuant to Section 623(1)(1)(D) of the Communications Act and the Commission's implementing rules, and is therefore exempt from cable rate regulation. Bright House claims the presence of
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-07-3193A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-07-3193A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-07-3193A1.txt
  • Cook (CUID MN0917); Tyler (CUID MN0150); Stewart (CUID MN0663); Winsted (CUID MN0536) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) CSR-6801-E, CSR-6772-E, CSR-6786-E, CSR-6779-E MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER Adopted: July 12, 2007 Released: July 13, 2007 By the Deputy Chief, Policy Division, Media Bureau: introduction Mediacom Minnesota LLC (``Mediacom'') has filed with the Commission, pursuant to Section 76.7 and 76.905 of the Commission's rules, petitions for a determination of effective competition in the following areas in Minnesota: Grove City, Paynesville, Cook, Tyler, Stewart, and Winsted (the ``Franchise Areas''). Mediacom claims that its cable systems serving those communities are subject to effective competition pursuant to Section 623(l) of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended (``Communications Act''), and the
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-07-319A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-07-319A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-07-319A1.txt
  • 76.123(k) (significantly viewed exception to satellite network nonduplication and syndicated exclusivity) would also appertain based on the same showing that a station is no longer significantly viewed in the relevant community. See 47 C.F.R. §§ 76.92(f), 76.106(a), 76.122(j), and 76.123(k). See 47 U.S.C. §§ 340(a)(2) and 340(c). We also take this opportunity to remind petitioners that, in accordance with Section 76.7(c)(3), petitions should be accompanied by a certificate of service showing that affected cable operators, stations and interested persons, including satellite carriers, have been served. 47 C.F.R. § 76.7(c)(3). Petition at 1. Id. at 1-2. See 47 C.F.R. §§76.92 and 76.101. 47 C.F.R. §§ 76.92(f) and 76.106(a); see 47 C.F.R. §§ 76.5(i) and 76.54. The 35-mile geographic zone of all major
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-07-3205A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-07-3205A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-07-3205A1.txt
  • Grade B contour analysis. In situations involving mountainous terrain or other unusual geographical features, Longley-Rice propagation studies can aid in determining whether or not a television station actually provides local service to a community under factor two of the market modification test. See Modification Final Report and Order, 14 FCC Rcd at 8388. 47 C.F.R. § 76.59(b). 47 C.F.R. §§ 76.7, 76.59(c). See 47 C.F.R. § 76.59(b)(1)-(2). See 47 C.F.R. § 76.59(b)(6). See Implementation of the Cable Television Consumer Protection and Competition Act of 1992, Broadcast Signal Carriage Issues, 8 FCC Rcd 2965, 2977 (1993) (``Must Carry Order''). See 47 C.F.R. § 76.59(b)(3). 47 U.S.C. § 534(h); 47 C.F.R. § 76.59(c). 47 C.F.R. § 0.283. (...continued from previous page) (continued....) Federal
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-07-3253A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-07-3253A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-07-3253A1.txt
  • KCCP Trust d/b/a Time Warner Cable Petition for Determination of Effective Competition in Platte City, Missouri (MO0075) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) CSR 6391-E Adopted: July 16, 2007 Released: July 18, 2007 By the Deputy Chief, Policy Division, Media Bureau: introduction KCCP Trust d/b/a Time Warner Cable (``KCCP'') has filed with the Commission a petition pursuant to Section 76.7, 76.905(b)(4) and 76.907 of the Commission's rules for a determination of effective competition in Platte City, Missouri (the ``Franchise Area''). KCCP alleges that its cable system serving the Franchise Area is subject to effective competition pursuant to Sections 623(a)(2) and 623(1)(1)(4) of the Communications Act and the Commission's implementing rules, and therefore is exempt from cable rate regulation. KCCP claims
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-07-3254A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-07-3254A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-07-3254A1.txt
  • of Effective Competition in Ten Local Franchise Areas in Illinois and in Ridgecrest, California ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) CSR-6818-E CSR-6452-E Adopted: July 16, 2007 Released: July 19, 2007 By the Deputy Chief, Policy Division, Media Bureau: INTRODUCTION Mediacom Illinois LLC and Mediacom California LLC (``Mediacom'') have filed two petitions with the Commission pursuant to 76.7, 76.905(b)(2) and 76.907 of the Commission's rules for a determination that its cable television systems serving ten Illinois communities and Ridgecrest, California (the ``Communities'') are subject to effective competition pursuant to Section 623(a)(1) of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended (``Communications Act''), and are therefore exempt from rate regulation. No oppositions to the petitions were filed. We grant the
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-07-3295A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-07-3295A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-07-3295A1.txt
  • Competition in various California and Illinois Communities ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) CSR-6505-E CSR-6678-E CSR-6792-E CSR-6826-E CSR-6829-E Adopted: July 17, 2007 Released: July 19, 2007 By the Deputy Chief, Policy Division, Media Bureau: INTRODUCTION WaveDivision VI, LLC (``WaveDivision''), Mediacom California LLC, and Mediacom Illinois LLC (``Mediacom'') have filed petitions with the Commission pursuant to 76.7, 76.905(b)(2) and 76.907 of the Commission's rules for a determination that its cable television systems serving various communities in California and Illinois (the ``Communities'') are subject to effective competition pursuant to Section 623(a)(1) of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended (``Communications Act''), and are therefore exempt from rate regulation. No oppositions to the petitions were filed. We grant the
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-07-3297A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-07-3297A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-07-3297A1.txt
  • Systems Long Island Corporation Petition for Determination of Effective Competition in The Village of Massapequa Park, New York ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) CSR-7011-E Adopted: July 18, 2007 Released: July 19, 2007 By the Deputy Chief, Policy Division, Media Bureau: introduction Cablevision Systems Long Island Corporation (``Cablevision'') has filed with the Commission a petition pursuant to Section 76.7, 76.905(b)(4) and 76.907 of the Commission's rules seeking a finding of local exchange carrier (``LEC'') effective competition in the Village of Massapequa Park, New York (``Massapequa Park'' or ``Village''). Cablevision alleges that its cable system serving Massapequa Park is subject to effective competition pursuant to Sections 623(a)(2) and 623(1)(1)(D) of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended, (``Communications Act''), and
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-07-3310A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-07-3310A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-07-3310A1.txt
  • 20554 In the Matter of MEDIACOM SOUTHEAST LLC Petition for Determination of Effective Competition in various Kentucky Franchise Areas ) ) ) ) ) ) ) CSR 6909-E, 6910-E Adopted: July 17, 2007 Released: July 20, 2007 By the Deputy Chief, Policy Division, Media Bureau: introduction Mediacom Southeast LLC (``Mediacom'') has filed a petition with the Commission pursuant to Section 76.7, 76.905(b)(2) and 76.907 of the Commission's rules for a determination that its cable systems serving various Kentucky franchise areas are subject to effective competition pursuant to Section 623(l) of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended (``Communications Act''), and the Commission's implementing rules, and are therefore exempt from cable rate regulation in those communities. No opposition to the petition was
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-07-3311A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-07-3311A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-07-3311A1.txt
  • the Matter of Mediacom Southeast LLC Petition for Determination of Effective Competition in various Kentucky Communities ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) CSR 6699-E Adopted: July 17, 2007 Released: July 20, 2007 By the Deputy Chief, Policy Division, Media Bureau: introduction Mediacom Minnesota LLC (``Mediacom'') has filed a petition with the Commission pursuant to Sections 76.7, 76.905(b)(2) and 76.907 of the Commission's rules for a determination that its cable systems serving the City of Sonora, the City of Upton, and the unincorporated areas of Larue County which are adjacent or connected to Upton, Kentucky (the ``Communities''), are subject to effective competition pursuant to Section 623(1) of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended ("Communications Act"), and
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-07-3312A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-07-3312A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-07-3312A1.txt
  • the Matter of Mediacom Minnesota LLC Petition for Determination of Effective Competition in various Minnesota Local Franchise Areas ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) CSR 6876-E Adopted: July 16, 2007 Released: July 20, 2007 By the Deputy Chief, Policy Division, Media Bureau: introduction Mediacom Minnesota, LLC (``Mediacom'') has filed with the Commission a petition pursuant to Sections 76.7, 76.905(b)(2) and 76.907 of the Commission's rules for a determination that its cable systems serving various Minnesota communities are subject to effective competition pursuant to Section 623(1) of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended ("Communications Act"), and the Commission's implementing rules, and are therefore exempt from cable rate regulation in the communities listed in Attachment A (the ``Communities''). Southern
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-07-3314A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-07-3314A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-07-3314A1.txt
  • In the Matter of Bright House Networks, LLC Petitions for Determination of Effective Competition in Bradenton, FL (CUID FL0183) ) ) ) ) ) ) CSR 7054-E Adopted: July 19, 2007 Released: July 20, 2007 By the Deputy Chief, Policy Division, Media Bureau: introduction Bright House Networks, LLC (``Bright House'') has filed with the Commission a petition pursuant to Sections 76.7, 76.905(b)(4) and 76.907 of the Commission's rules for a determination of effective competition in Brandenton, Florida. Bright House alleges that its cable system serving Brandenton is subject to effective competition pursuant to Section 623(1)(1)(D) of the Communications Act and the Commission's implementing rules, and therefore is exempt from cable rate regulation. Bright House claims the presence of effective competition in
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-07-3316A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-07-3316A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-07-3316A1.txt
  • requests for set-top boxes that it concluded were not the ``low-cost, limited-capability'' set-top boxes that the Commission committed to exempt from the integration ban in the 2005 Deferral Order. The Waiver Requests and Comments Great Plains On May 9, 2007, Great Plains filed a request pursuant to Section 629(c) of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended, and Sections 1.3, 76.7, and 76.1207 of the Commission's rules, for waiver of the prohibition set forth in Section 76.1204(a)(1) of the Commission's rules on offering integrated digital cable set-top boxes after July 1, 2007. Great Plains limits its request to boxes that it deploys to its subscribers who receive one-way service, and seeks waiver until the earlier of: (i) the commercial availability of
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-07-3317A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-07-3317A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-07-3317A1.txt
  • February 17, 2009. All seek a waiver of the integration ban, which they argue is necessary in order to make the transition or to continue to provide the high-quality video and related digital services over their all-digital distribution networks. For the reasons stated below, we grant the Waiver Requests subject to the conditions specified below pursuant to Sections 1.3 and 76.7 of the Commission's rules. BACKGROUND A. Section 629 of the Act Section 629(a) of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended (the ``Act''), requires the Commission to: adopt regulations to assure the commercial availability, to consumers of multichannel video programming and other services offered over multichannel video programming systems, of converter boxes, interactive communications equipment, and other equipment used by
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-07-3318A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-07-3318A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-07-3318A1.txt
  • sufficient justification for grant. The Consumer Electronics Association (``CEA'') states that the Bureau should not grant waiver requests that fall outside of the narrowly defined criteria that have been established to show good cause for waiver, and asserts that Comsouth has not met any of those criteria. DISCUSSION Comsouth makes its request pursuant to the general waiver provision of Section 76.7 of the Commission's rules, Section 76.1207 of the Commission's rules, and Section 629(c) of the Telecommunications Act of 1996. As discussed below, and consistent with the reasons previously set forth in the January 10 Orders and the Armstrong Order, we find that the Waiver Request does not justify the grant of waiver under any of these standards. We therefore deny
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-07-3319A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-07-3319A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-07-3319A1.txt
  • ten waiver requests for set-top boxes that it concluded were not the ``low-cost, limited-capability'' set-top boxes that the Commission committed to exempt from the integration ban in the 2005 Deferral Order. The Waiver Request Pursuant to Section 629(c) of the Communications Act and Section 76.1207 of the Commission's rules, Section 706 of the Telecommunications Act of 1996, Sections 1.3 and 76.7 of the Commission's rules, and the 2005 Deferral Order, Innovative seeks a waiver of Section 76.1204(a)(1) to allow it to continue to deploy the integrated Motorola DCT-1000 (``DCT-1000'') and the Motorola DCT-2000 (``DCT-2000'') set-top boxes until December 31, 2009. Innovative states that it is a small cable operator serving approximately 15,251 subscribers on the island of St. Thomas-St. John and
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-07-3334A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-07-3334A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-07-3334A1.txt
  • Effective Competition in Eight Kentucky Communities ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) CSR-6866-E Memorandum Opinion AND ORDER Adopted: July 20, 2007 Released: July 23, 2007 By the Deputy Chief, Policy Division, Media Bureau: I. introduction 1. This Order considers a petition for special relief that Mediacom Southeast, LLC (``Mediacom'') has filed with the Commission pursuant to Sections 76.7, 76.905(b)(2), and 76.907 of the Commission's rules for a determination that Mediacom is subject to effective competition pursuant to Section 623(1) of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended ("Communications Act"), and the Commission's implementing rules, and are therefore exempt from cable rate regulation in seven Kentucky communities (``Franchise Areas'') as listed in Attachment A and B. No opposition was
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-07-3336A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-07-3336A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-07-3336A1.txt
  • Lincoln, KY (KY1155) Rockcastle, KY (KY1157) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) CSR-6868-E Memorandum Opinion AND ORDER Adopted: July 20, 2007 Released: July 23, 2007 By the Deputy Chief, Policy Division, Media Bureau: I. introduction 1. This Order considers a petition for special relief that Mediacom Southeast, LLC (``Mediacom'') has filed with the Commission pursuant to Sections 76.7, 76.905(b)(2), and 76.907 of the Commission's rules for a determination that Mediacom is subject to effective competition pursuant to Section 623(1) of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended ("Communications Act"), and the Commission's implementing rules, and are therefore exempt from cable rate regulation in two Kentucky communities (``Franchise Areas'') as listed in Attachment A. Rockcastle filed an opposition. II.
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-07-3337A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-07-3337A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-07-3337A1.txt
  • KY (KY1122) Whitesville, KY (KY0735) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) CSR-6871-E Memorandum Opinion AND ORDER Adopted: July 20, 2007 Released: July 23, 2007 By the Deputy Chief, Policy Division, Media Bureau: I. introduction 1. This Order considers a petition for special relief that Mediacom Southeast, LLC (``Mediacom'') has filed with the Commission pursuant to Sections 76.7, 76.905(b)(2), and 76.907 of the Commission's rules for a determination that Medicom is subject to effective competition pursuant to Section 623(1) of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended ("Communications Act"), and the Commission's implementing rules, and are therefore exempt from cable rate regulation in four Kentucky communities (``Franchise Areas'') as listed in Attachments A and B. No oppositions were
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-07-3338A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-07-3338A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-07-3338A1.txt
  • Casey, KY (KY1116) Russell, KY (KY1117) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) CSR-6872-E Memorandum Opinion AND ORDER Adopted: July 20, 2007 Released: July 23, 2007 By the Deputy Chief, Policy Division, Media Bureau: I. introduction 1. This Order considers a petition for special relief that Mediacom Southeast, LLC (``Mediacom'') has filed with the Commission pursuant to Sections 76.7, 76.905(b)(2), and 76.907 of the Commission's rules for a determination that Mediacom is subject to effective competition pursuant to Section 623(1) of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended ("Communications Act"), and the Commission's implementing rules, and are therefore exempt from cable rate regulation in two Kentucky communities (``Franchise Areas'') as listed in Attachment A. No oppositions were filed. II.
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-07-3339A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-07-3339A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-07-3339A1.txt
  • Hopkins (KY0895) Hopkins (KY1205) Nebo (KY0721) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) CSR-6848-E Memorandum Opinion AND ORDER Adopted: July 20, 2007 Released: July 23, 2007 By the Deputy Chief, Policy Division, Media Bureau: I. introduction 1. This Order considers a petition for special relief that Mediacom Southeast, LLC (``Mediacom'') has filed with the Commission pursuant to Sections 76.7, 76.905(b)(2), and 76.907 of the Commission's rules for a determination that Medicom is subject to effective competition pursuant to Section 623(1) of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended ("Communications Act"), and the Commission's implementing rules, and are therefore exempt from cable rate regulation in three Kentucky communities (``Franchise Areas''), as listed in Attachments A and B. No oppositions were
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-07-3343A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-07-3343A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-07-3343A1.txt
  • Petition for Determination of Effective Competition in Hutchinson (MN0078), Litchfield (MN0050) and Hassen Valley, Minnesota (MN0985) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) CSR 6338-E Adopted: July 20, 2007 Released: July 23, 2007 By the Deputy Chief, Policy Division, Media Bureau: introduction Mediacom Minnesota LLC (``Mediacom'') has filed with the Commission a petition pursuant to Section 76.7, 76.905(b)(4) and 76.907 of the Commission's rules for a determination of effective competition in the Cities of Hutchinson, Litchfield, and Hassen Valley, Minnesota (collectively the ``Franchise Areas''). Mediacom alleges that its cable system serving the Franchise Areas are subject to effective competition pursuant to Sections 623(a)(2) and 623(1)(1)(4) of the Communications Act and the Commission's implementing rules, and therefore is
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-07-3355A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-07-3355A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-07-3355A1.txt
  • LLC Petition for Determination of Effective Competition in 12 Local Franchise Areas in Illinois and Indiana ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) CSR-6749-E Adopted: July 23, 2007 Released: July 25, 2007 By the Deputy Chief, Policy Division, Media Bureau: INTRODUCTION Mediacom Illinois LLC and Mediacom Indiana LLC (``Mediacom'') have filed a petition with the Commission pursuant to 76.7, 76.905(b)(2) and 76.907 of the Commission's rules for a determination that its cable television systems serving 12 Illinois and Indiana communities (the ``Communities'') are subject to effective competition pursuant to Section 623(a)(1) of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended (``Communications Act''), and are therefore exempt from rate regulation. No oppositions to the petition were filed. We grant the petitions
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-07-3356A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-07-3356A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-07-3356A1.txt
  • LLC Petition for Determination of Effective Competition in 14 Local Franchise Areas in Illinois ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) CSR 6812-E Adopted: July 23, 2007 Released: July 25, 2007 By the Deputy Chief, Policy Division, Media Bureau: INTRODUCTION MCC Iowa LLC and Mediacom Illinois LLC (``Mediacom'') have filed a petition with the Commission pursuant to 76.7, 76.905(b)(2) and 76.907 of the Commission's rules for a determination that their cable television systems serving 14 Illinois communities (the ``Communities'') are subject to effective competition pursuant to Section 623(a)(1) of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended (``Communications Act''), and are therefore exempt from rate regulation. No oppositions to the petition were filed. We grant the petition finding that
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-07-3956A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-07-3956A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-07-3956A1.txt
  • ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) CSR-7207-M CSR-7208-M CSR-7209-M CSR-7210-M CSR-7230-A CSR-7211-M CSR-7350-A MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER Adopted: September 17, 2007 Released: September 17, 2007 By the Senior Deputy Chief, Policy Division, Media Bureau: Introduction Christian Faith Broadcast, Inc. (CFB), licensee of WGGN-TV, Channel 52, Sandusky, Ohio, filed the captioned complaints pursuant to Sections 76.7 and 76.61 of the Commission's rules requesting an order requiring carriage of the signal of WGGN-TV in the communities served by five Ohio cable systems in the Cleveland-Akron (Canton) Ohio Designated Market Area. No opposition was received regarding the complaints concerning Orwell Cable Television (Orwell), Rapid Cable (Rapid), and GLW Broadband (GLW). Cox Communications Cleveland Area (Cox) filed an opposition
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-07-3A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-07-3A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-07-3A1.txt
  • ) ) ) ) ) ) ) CSR-7058-C Adopted: January 4, 2007 Released: January 4, 2007 By the Chief, Media Bureau: INTRODUCTION On October 31, 2006, Mediacom Communications Corporation (``Mediacom'') filed an Emergency Retransmission Consent Complaint and Complaint for Enforcement for Failure to Negotiate Retransmission Consent Rights in Good Faith (``Complaint'') against Sinclair Broadcast Group, Inc. (``Sinclair''), pursuant to Sections 76.7 and 76.65 of the Commission's rules. Mediacom alleges that Sinclair violated its duty to negotiate retransmission consent in good faith for carriage of certain Sinclair owned and/or operated local broadcast television stations (the ``Stations''). Mediacom requests that the Commission find Sinclair in violation of its obligation to negotiate in good faith for retransmission consent, direct Sinclair to immediately commence negotiations
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-07-4079A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-07-4079A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-07-4079A1.txt
  • deadline set forth in Section 76.1204(a)(1) of the Commission's rules on which date Baja Broadband may no longer place in service integrated set-top boxes. Baja Broadband seeks to defer enforcement of the July 1, 2007 deadline until it receives delivery of set-top boxes that will comply with the integration ban. For the reasons stated below, pursuant to Sections 1.3 and 76.7 of the Commission's rules, we grant Baja Broadband's Deferral Request with respect to the Motorola DCT-6200 and Motorola DCT-6416 set-top boxes but deny its Deferral Request with respect to the Motorola DCT-700 and Motorola DCT-2500 set-top boxes. BACKGROUND Section 629(a) of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended (the ``Act''), requires the Commission to: adopt regulations to assure the commercial
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-07-4259A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-07-4259A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-07-4259A1.txt
  • Cable Inc. Petition for Determination of Effective Competition in Five Local Franchise Areas in Arizona and California ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) CSR 7226-E Adopted: October 12, 2007 Released: October 16, 2007 By the Deputy Chief, Policy Division, Media Bureau: introduction Time Warner Cable Inc. (``Time Warner'') has filed with the Commission a petition pursuant to Sections 76.7, 76.905(b)(2) and 76.907 of the Commission's rules for a determination that its cable systems serving the communities listed in Attachment A (the ``Communities'') are subject to effective competition pursuant to Section 623(1) of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended ("Communications Act"), and the Commission's implementing rules, and are therefore exempt from cable rate regulation in the Communities. No opposition
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-07-4260A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-07-4260A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-07-4260A1.txt
  • 20554 In the Matter of MCC Georgia LLC Petition for Determination of Effective Competition in Fitzgerald, Georgia (CUID GA0501) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) CSR 6679-E Adopted: October 12, 2007 Released: October 16, 2007 By the Deputy Chief, Policy Division, Media Bureau: I. introduction MCC Georgia LLC (``MCC'') has filed with the Commission a petition pursuant to Sections 76.7 and 76.905(b)(1) & (2) and 76.907 of the Commission's rules seeking a finding of effective competition in the unincorporated areas within the County of Ben Hill, Georgia, which is commonly known as Fitzgerald and is adjacent to the incorporated area of the City of Fitzgerald (``Fitzgerald''). MCC alleges that its cable system serving Fitzgerald is subject to effective competition pursuant
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-07-4261A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-07-4261A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-07-4261A1.txt
  • subsidiaries and affiliates Petition for Determination of Effective Competition in various Mississippi Franchise Areas ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) CSR 7196-E Adopted: October 12, 2007 Released: October 16, 2007 By the Deputy Chief, Policy Division, Media Bureau: introduction This Order considers a petition which Comcast Cable Communications, LLC (``Comcast'') filed with the Commission pursuant to Sections 76.7, 76.905(b)(2) and 76.907 of the Commission's rules for a determination that Comcast is subject to effective competition pursuant to Section 623(1) of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended ("Communications Act"), and the Commission's implementing rules, and is therefore exempt from cable rate regulation in the communities listed in Attachment A (the ``Communities''). No opposition to the petition was filed.
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-07-4354A2.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-07-4354A2.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-07-4354A2.txt
  • of Network Signals to Unserved Households for Purposes of the Satellite Home Viewer Act (SHVA) 04/30/09 3060-0865 Wireless Telecommunications Bureau Universal Licensing System Recordkeeping and Third-Party Disclosure Requirements 07/31/10 3060-0874 FCC 475B, FCC 2000 Series 09/30/10 3060-0876 Sec. 54.703 and Secs. 54.719, 54.720, 54.721, 54.722, 54.723, 54.724 and 54.725 09/30/09 3060-0881 Sec. 95.861 09/30/08 3060-0882 Sec. 95.833 01/31/09 3060-0888 Secs. 76.7, 76.9, 76.61, 76.914, 76.1003, 76.1302, and 76.1513 05/31/08 3060-0894 Secs. 54.313 and 54.316 and Certification Letter Accounting for Receipt of Federal Support and Rate Comparability Review and Certification 09/30/10 3060-0895 FCC 502 05/31/10 3060-0896 Broadcast Auction Form Exhibits 12/31/08 3060-0900 Compatibility of Wireless Services with Enhanced 911 - CC Docket No. 94-102 02/28/09 3060-0901 Reports of Common Carriers and Affiliates
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-07-47A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-07-47A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-07-47A1.txt
  • of the ban on integrated set-top boxes set forth in Section 76.1204(a)(1) of the Commission's rules for the Motorola DCT-700 integrated digital cable set-top box, a sub-$100 device that BendBroadband argues is critical to its plans to migrate to an all-digital network by 2008. For the reasons stated below, we conditionally grant BendBroadband a waiver pursuant to Sections 1.3 and 76.7 of the Commission's rules. BACKGROUND Section 629 of the Act Section 629(a) of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended (the ``Act''), requires the Commission to: adopt regulations to assure the commercial availability, to consumers of multichannel video programming and other services offered over multichannel video programming systems, of converter boxes, interactive communications equipment, and other equipment used by consumers
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-07-48A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-07-48A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-07-48A1.txt
  • the Commission's rules. Finally, in response to CEA's contention that it has improperly requested a ``perpetual'' waiver under Section 629(c), Cablevision responds that ``it would be sufficient for the Commission to grant it until the cable industry's deployment of downloadable conditional access.'' discussion Cablevision makes its request for waiver ``[p]ursuant to [Section 629 of the Communications Act] and Sections 1.3, 76.7 and 76.1207 of the Commission's rules.'' Accordingly, we analyze its request pursuant to the waiver standards set forth in Section 629(c) as well as under the general waiver provisions found in Sections 1.3 and 76.7 of the Commission's rules. As described in detail below, we do not believe that Cablevision meets the standard for waiver found in Section 629(c) of
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-07-49A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-07-49A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-07-49A1.txt
  • request only extends to the natural evolution of the specific boxes for which it seeks waiver and does not include any boxes that will have ``DVR, HD, multiple tuning, or broadband Internet access,'' and claims that it is not seeking a waiver for any box that has advanced capabilities. discussion Comcast makes its request for waiver ``[p]ursuant to Sections 1.3, 76.7 and 76.1207 of the Commission's rules and Section 629(c) of the Communications Act.'' Accordingly, we analyze its request pursuant to the waiver standards set forth in Section 629(c) and the Commission's 2005 Deferral Order, as well as under the general waiver provisions found in Sections 1.3 and 76.7 of the Commission's rules. As discussed below, we find that the request
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-07-638A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-07-638A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-07-638A1.txt
  • In the Matter of Bright House Networks, LLC Petition for Determination of Effective Competition in Four Florida Communities ) ) ) ) ) ) CSR 6484-E Adopted: February 27, 2007 Released: March 1, 2007 By the Deputy Chief, Policy Division, Media Bureau: I. introduction Bright House Networks, LLC (``Bright House'') has filed with the Commission a petition pursuant to Sections 76.7 and 76.905(b)(1) & (2) and 76.907 of the Commission's rules seeking a finding of effective competition in four Florida communities. Bright House alleges that its cable system serving the communities are subject to effective competition pursuant to Section 623(a)(1) of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended ("Communications Act") and therefore exempt from cable rate regulation because of competing service
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-07-639A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-07-639A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-07-639A1.txt
  • Competition in Various Michigan Communities ) ) ) ) ) ) CSR 6037-E Adopted: February 27, 2007 Released: March 1, 2007 By the Deputy Chief, Policy Division, Media Bureau: introduction 1. Millennium Digital Media Systems, LLC (``Millennium'') has filed with the Commission a petition pursuant to Section 623(a)(1) of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended ("Communications Act") and Sections 76.7(a)(1) and 76.905(b)(1) of the Commission's rules for a determination of effective competition in various communities in Michigan (the ``Communities''). Millennium alleges that its cable systems serving the Communities are subject to effective competition and therefore exempt from cable rate regulation. Millennium alleges that its cable systems serving thirty-five Communities are subject to effective competition and therefore exempt from cable rate
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-07-66A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-07-66A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-07-66A1.txt
  • ) ) ) ) ) ) CSR-7058-C ORDER Adopted: January 12, 2007 Released: January 12, 2007 By the Chief, Media Bureau: 1. On October 31, 2006, Mediacom Communications Corporation (``Mediacom'') filed an Emergency Retransmission Consent Complaint and Complaint for Enforcement for Failure to Negotiate Retransmission Consent Rights in Good Faith (``Complaint'') against Sinclair Broadcast Group, Inc. (``Sinclair''), pursuant to Sections 76.7 and 76.65 of the Commission's rules. On January 4, 2007, the Media Bureau issued a Memorandum Opinion and Order finding no violation of the Commission's rules and denying Mediacom's Complaint. Prior to the ruling by the Media Bureau, Mediacom filed a Supplement to ``Request for Order Permitting Interim Carriage of Sinclair Stations and Request for Expedited Treatment'' (``Supplement''). In its
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-07-872A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-07-872A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-07-872A1.txt
  • February 27, 2007 MEDIA BUREAU ACTION LIBERTY CABLEVISION FILES REQUEST FOR WAIVER OF 47 C.F.R. § 76.1204(a)(1) WITH THE COMMISSION CSR-7124-Z/CS Docket No. 97-80 Comment Date: March 19, 2007 Reply Comment Date: March 29, 2007 Liberty Cablevision of Puerto Rico, Ltd. (``Liberty'' or ``Petitioner'') has filed a request pursuant to Section 706 of the Telecommunications Act of 1996, and Sections 76.7 and 76.1207 of the Commission's rules for waiver of the prohibition set forth in Section 76.1204(a)(1) of the Commission's rules on offering navigation devices that perform both conditional access and other functions with respect to the Motorola DCT-700 set-top box (the ``DCT-700''). Liberty asserts that its Waiver Request is limited to the relief previously granted to BendBroadband. Liberty explains that
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-07-876A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-07-876A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-07-876A1.txt
  • Washington, D.C. 20554 In the Matter of MCC Iowa LLC Petition for Determination of Effective Competition Jo Daviess, IL ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) CSR-6858-E Adopted: February 27, 2007 Released: February 28, 2007 By the Deputy Chief, Policy Division, Media Bureau: INTRODUCTION MCC Iowa LLC (``Mediacom'') has filed a petition with the Commission pursuant to Sections 76.7, 76.905(b)(1) and 76.907 of the Commission's rules for a determination that Mediacom's cable system serving the unincorporated, unnamed area of Jo Daviess County, Illinois is subject to effective competition pursuant to Section 623(a)(1) of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended (``Communications Act'') and is therefore exempt from cable rate regulation. No opposition to the petition was filed. We grant
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-07-909A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-07-909A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-07-909A1.txt
  • of Effective Competition in Five Local Franchise Areas in Florida ) ) ) ) ) ) ) CSR 6626-E, 6627-E MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER Adopted: February 28, 2007 Released: March 1, 2007 By the Deputy Chief, Policy Division, Media Bureau: Introduction This Order considers a petition that the cable operator CoxCom, Inc. (``Cox''), filed with the Commission, pursuant to Sections 76.7 and 76.907 of the Commission's rules, for a determination that, in five local franchise areas in Florida, it is subject to effective competition pursuant to Section 623(a)(2) of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended (``Communications Act''), and is therefore exempt from cable rate regulation. The five areas in question are in two neighboring counties in north inland Florida, Alachua
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-07-911A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-07-911A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-07-911A1.txt
  • Networks, LLC Petition for Determination of Effective Competition in Plant City, Florida (FL0199) and Tampa, Florida (FL0706) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) CSR 6925-E Adopted: February 27, 2007 Released: March 1, 2007 By the Deputy Chief, Policy Division, Media Bureau: I. introduction Bright House Networks, LLC (``Bright House'') has filed with the Commission a petition pursuant to Sections 76.7 and 76.905(b)(2) and 76.907 of the Commission's rules seeking a finding of effective competition in Plant City, Florida and Tampa, Florida. Bright House alleges that its cable systems serving the franchise areas are subject to effective competition pursuant to Section 623(l)(1)(b) of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended ("Communications Act") and therefore exempt from cable rate regulation because of
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-07-912A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-07-912A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-07-912A1.txt
  • 20554 In the Matter of SBC Cable Co. Petition for Determination of Effective Competition in Shelbyville, IN ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) CSR-7014-E Adopted: February 27, 2007 Released: March 1, 2007 By the Deputy Chief, Policy Division, Media Bureau: INTRODUCTION SBC Cable Co. d/b/a SusCom (``SusCom'') has filed a petition with the Commission pursuant to Sections 76.7, 76.905(b)(2) and 76.907 of the Commission's rules for a determination that its cable television system serving Shelbyville, Indiana (the ``Community'') is subject to effective competition pursuant to Section 623(a)(1) of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended (``Communications Act''), and is therefore exempt from rate regulation. No opposition to the petition was filed. We grant the petition finding that SusCom
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-07-913A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-07-913A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-07-913A1.txt
  • Competition in unincorporated Manatee County, FL (CUIDs FL0067, FL0863, FL0483) and Palmetto, FL (CUID FL0357) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) CSR 6926-E Adopted: February 27, 2007 Released: March 2, 2007 By the Deputy Chief, Policy Division, Media Bureau: introduction 1. Bright House Networks LLC (``Bright House Networks'') has filed with the Commission a petition pursuant to Sections 76.7 and 76.905(b)(2) and 76.907 of the Commission's rules seeking a finding of effective competition in unincorporated Manatee County, Florida and Palmetto, Florida. Bright House Networks alleges that its cable system serving the captioned areas are subject to effective competition pursuant to Section 623(l)(1)(b) of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended ("Communications Act") and therefore exempt from cable rate regulation
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-07-933A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-07-933A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-07-933A1.txt
  • ) ) ) ) ) ) ) CSR 6877-E CSR 6878-E CSR 6879-E CSR 6880-E CSR 6881-E CSR 6882-E CSR 6883-E CSR 6884-E CSR 6885-E CSR 6886-E Adopted: February 28, 2007 Released: March 2, 2007 By the Deputy Chief, Policy Division, Media Bureau: introduction Cox Southwest Holdings, LP (``Cox'') has filed ten unopposed petitions with the Commission pursuant to Sections 76.7, 76.905(b)(2) and 76.907 of the Commission's rules for a determination that Cox is subject to effective competition pursuant to Section 623(1) of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended ("Communications Act"), and the Commission's implementing rules, and is therefore exempt from cable rate regulation in the communities listed in Attachment A (the ``Communities''). No opposition to any petition was filed.
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-07-940A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-07-940A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-07-940A1.txt
  • Competition in Fort Bragg City, Twentynine Palms City and Yucca Valley Town, CA ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) CSR 6386-E Adopted: March 1, 2007 Released: March 2, 2007 By the Deputy Chief, Policy Division, Media Bureau: InTRODUCTION Adelphia Cable Communications, on behalf of its affiliates (``Adelphia''), has filed a petition with the Commission pursuant to Sections 76.7, 76.905(b)(2) and 76.907 for a determination that its cable systems serving three Southern California franchise areas (the ``Franchise Areas'') are subject to effective competition pursuant to Section 623(a)(1) of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended, (``Communications Act''), and are therefore exempt from rate regulation. No oppositions to the petition were filed. We grant the petition finding that Adelphia is
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-07-941A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-07-941A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-07-941A1.txt
  • Matter of Bright House Networks, LLC Petition for Determination of Effective Competition in Winter Haven, Florida (CUID FL0154) ) ) ) ) ) ) CSR 6546-E Adopted: February 28, 2007 Released: March 5, 2007 By the Deputy Chief, Policy Division, Media Bureau: I. introduction Bright House Networks, LLC (``Bright House'') has filed with the Commission a petition pursuant to Sections 76.7 and 76.905(b)(1) & (2) and 76.907 of the Commission's rules seeking a finding of effective competition in Winter Haven, Florida (the ``City''). Bright House alleges that its cable system serving the City is subject to effective competition pursuant to Section 623(a)(1) of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended ("Communications Act") and therefore exempt from cable rate regulation because of
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-07-942A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-07-942A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-07-942A1.txt
  • Networks, LLC Petition for Determination of Effective Competition in Two Local Franchise Areas in Florida ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) CSR-6839-E Adopted: March 1, 2007 Released: March 2, 2007 By the Deputy Chief, Policy Division, Media Bureau: Introduction This Order considers a petition filed with the Commission by Bright House Networks LLC (``Bright House'') pursuant to Sections 76.7, 76.905(b)(1) & (2) and 76.907 of the Commission's rules for a determination that Bright House's cable systems serving Pasco County (``Pasco'') and Port Richey, Florida are subject to effective competition pursuant to Section 623(a)(1) of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended (``Communications Act'') and are therefore exempt from cable rate regulation. Pasco County opposed the petition with respect to
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-07-943A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-07-943A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-07-943A1.txt
  • In the Matter of Bright House Networks, LLC Petition for Determination of Effective Competition in Various Florida Communities ) ) ) ) ) ) CSR 6132-E Adopted: February 28, 2007 Released: March 2, 2007 By the Deputy Chief, Policy Division, Media Bureau: I. introduction Bright House Networks, LLC (``Bright House'') has filed with the Commission a petition pursuant to Sections 76.7 and 76.905(b)(1) & (2) and 76.907 of the Commission's rules seeking a finding of effective competition in five franchise areas in Florida (the ``Communities''). Bright House alleges that its cable system serving four of the Communities is subject to effective competition pursuant to Section 623(a)(1) of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended ("Communications Act") and therefore exempt from cable
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-07-944A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-07-944A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-07-944A1.txt
  • Effective Competition in Fairfax County, Virginia ) ) ) ) ) ) ) CSR 6957-E MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER Adopted: March 1, 2007 Released: March 5, 2007 By the Deputy Chief, Policy Division, Media Bureau: Introduction This Order considers a petition that the cable operator CoxCom, Inc., d/b/a/ Cox Communications Northern Virginia (``Cox''), filed with the Commission pursuant to Sections 76.7 and 76.907 of the Commission's rules. The Petition seeks a determination that, in its several local franchise areas in Fairfax County, Virginia, it is subject to effective competition pursuant to Section 623(a)(2) of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended (``Communications Act''), and is therefore exempt from cable rate regulation. In Fairfax County, a Virginia suburb of Washington, D.C., Cox
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-07-945A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-07-945A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-07-945A1.txt
  • of Effective Competition ) ) ) ) ) ) CSR-6938-E MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER Adopted: March 1, 2007 Released: March 5, 2007 By the Deputy Chief, Policy Division, Media Bureau: Introduction This Memorandum Opinion and Order considers a Petition for Special Relief (``Petition'') that the cable operator, Bright House Networks, LLC (``Bright House''), filed with the Commission pursuant to Sections 76.7, 76.905(b)(2), and 76.907 of the Commission's rules. The Petition seeks a determination that, in two franchise areas in Florida, Bright House is subject to effective competition pursuant to Section 623(a)(2) of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended (the ``Act''), and is therefore exempt from cable rate regulation. The City of Lake Alfred, Florida (``Lake Alfred'') and the Town of
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-07-947A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-07-947A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-07-947A1.txt
  • the Matter of: Bright House Networks, LLC Petition for Determination of Effective Competition in Various Florida Communities ) ) ) ) ) ) ) CSR 6937-E Adopted: March 1, 2007 Released: March 2, 2007 By the Deputy Chief, Policy Division, Media Bureau: I. introduction Bright House Networks, LLC (``Bright House'') has filed with the Commission a petition pursuant to Sections 76.7 and 76.905(b)(1) & (2) and 76.907 of the Commission's rules seeking a finding of effective competition in Crystal River (the ``City'') and unincorporated Hernando County, Florida (the ``County'') (collectively, the ``Communities''). Bright House alleges that its cable system serving the communities are subject to effective competition pursuant to Section 623(a)(1) of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended ("Communications Act")
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-07-966A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-07-966A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-07-966A1.txt
  • for Determination of Effective Competition in Fullerton and Santa Monica, California ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) CSR 6390-E CSR 6394-E Adopted: March 2, 2007 Released: March 5, 2007 By the Deputy Chief, Policy Division, Media Bureau: introduction Adelphia Cable Communications, on behalf of its affiliates (``Adelphia''), has filed two petitions with the Commission pursuant to Sections 76.7, 76.905(b)(2) and 76.907 of the rules for a determination that its cable systems serving Fullerton and Santa Monica, California (the ``Franchise Areas'') are subject to effective competition pursuant to Section 623(a)(1) the Communications Act of 1934, as amended, (``Communications Act''), and are therefore exempt from rate regulation. Both the City of Fullerton and the City of Santa Monica (the ``Cities'')
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-07-967A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-07-967A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-07-967A1.txt
  • ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) CSR-6927-E Memorandum Opinion AND ORDER Adopted: March 2, 2007 Released: March 5, 2007 By the Deputy Chief, Policy Division, Media Bureau: I. introduction This Order considers a petition for special relief that Time Warner Entertainment - Advance/Newhouse Partnership d/b/a Time Warner Cable (``Time Warner) has filed with the Commission pursuant to Sections 76.7, 76.905(b)(2) and 76.907 of the Commission's rules for a determination that such operators are subject to effective competition pursuant to Section 623(1) of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended ("Communications Act"), and the Commission's implementing rules, and are therefore exempt from cable rate regulation in the community, as listed in Attachment A. The City of Wilson, North Carolina (``Wilson'')
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-07-968A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-07-968A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-07-968A1.txt
  • for Determination of Effective Competition in Beverly Hills, Calabasas, Ojai and Palmdale, CA ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) CSR 6387-E Adopted: March 2, 2007 Released: March 5, 2007 By the Deputy Chief, Policy Division, Media Bureau: introduction Adelphia Cable Communications, on behalf of its affiliates (``Adelphia''), has filed a petition with the Commission pursuant to Sections 76.7, 76.905(b)(2) and 76.907 of the Commission's rules for a determination that its cable systems serving four Southern California franchise areas (the ``Franchise Areas'') are subject to effective competition pursuant to Section 623(a)(1) of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended, (``Communications Act''), and are therefore exempt from rate regulation. The City of Beverly Hills (the ``City'') has filed an opposition
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-07-969A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-07-969A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-07-969A1.txt
  • Orchard cable system's average monthly regulated revenue per channel per subscriber is much closer to that of small systems than to that of systems with more than 15,000 subscribers. Given the totality of the circumstances, we find that WaveDivision has demonstrated that its Port Orchard system resembles a small system according to most of the applicable criteria. 11. Under Section 76.7(a)(4)(i) of the Commission's rules, a petition for special relief must state fully and precisely all pertinent facts and considerations relied on to demonstrate the need for the requested relief and to support a decision that such relief would serve the public interest. WaveDivision has adequately established the Port Orchard system's need for the relief as required by Section 76.7(a)(4)(i). In
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-08-1028A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-08-1028A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-08-1028A1.txt
  • of Effective Competition in Moorpark, California ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) CSR 7710-E Adopted: May 1, 2008 Released: May 2, 2008 By the Senior Deputy Chief, Policy Division, Media Bureau: I. introduction and Background Time Warner NY Cable LLC (``Time Warner''), hereinafter referred to as ``Petitioner,'' has filed with the Commission a petition pursuant to Sections 76.7, 76.905(b)(2) and 76.907 of the Commission's rules for a determination that Petitioner is subject to effective competition in the community listed on Attachment A and hereinafter referred to as ``Community.'' Petitioner alleges that its cable system serving the Community is subject to effective competition pursuant to Section 623(1)(1)(B) of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended (``Communications Act'') and the
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-08-1032A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-08-1032A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-08-1032A1.txt
  • ) ) ) ) ) ) ) CSR 7772-E 7774-E 7807-E 7808-E 7810-E 7811-E Adopted: April 30, 2008 Released: May 1, 2008 By the Senior Deputy Chief, Policy Division, Media Bureau: I. introduction and Background Comcast Cable Communications, LLC, on behalf of its subsidiaries and affiliates, hereinafter referred to as ``Petitioner,'' has filed with the Commission petitions pursuant to Sections 76.7, 76.905(b)(2) and 76.907 of the Commission's rules for determinations that Petitioner is subject to effective competition in those communities listed on Attachment A and hereinafter referred to as ``Communities.'' Petitioner alleges that its cable systems serving the Communities are subject to effective competition pursuant to Section 623(1)(1)(B) of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended (``Communications Act'') and the Commission's
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-08-1033A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-08-1033A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-08-1033A1.txt
  • Competition in 27 Communities in California ) ) ) ) ) ) ) CSR 7768-E 7769-E 7770-E Adopted: April 30, 2008 Released: May 1, 2008 By the Senior Deputy Chief, Policy Division, Media Bureau: I. introduction and background COXCOM, INC., d/b/a/ Cox Communications San Diego, hereinafter referred to as ``Petitioner,'' has filed with the Commission three petitions pursuant to Sections 76.7, 76.905(b)(2), 76.905(b)(4) and 76.907 of the Commission's rules for determinations that Petitioner is subject to effective competition in those communities listed on Attachment A and hereinafter referred to as ``Communities.'' Petitioner alleges that its cable systems serving the Communities are subject to effective competition pursuant to Section 623(1) of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended (``Communications Act'') and the
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-08-1036A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-08-1036A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-08-1036A1.txt
  • 7748-E, CSR 7749-E, CSR 7750-E, CSR 7751-E, CSR 7752-E & CSR 7754-E Adopted: May 1, 2008 Released: May 2, 2008 By the Senior Deputy Chief, Policy Division, Media Bureau: I. introduction and Background Comcast Cable Communications, LLC, on behalf of its subsidiaries and affiliates (``Comcast''), hereinafter referred to as ``Petitioner,'' has filed with the Commission a petition pursuant to Sections 76.7, 76.905(b)(2), 76.905(b)(1) and 76.907 of the Commission's rules for a determination that Petitioner is subject to effective competition in those communities listed on Attachment A and hereinafter referred to as ``Communities.'' Petitioner alleges that its cable system serving the Communities is subject to effective competition pursuant to Section 623(1) of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended (``Communications Act'') and
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-08-1037A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-08-1037A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-08-1037A1.txt
  • ) ) ) ) CSR7522-E CSR 7524-E CSR 7526-E CSR 7527-E CSR 7529-E CSR 7530-E CSR 7531-E CSR 7532-E CSR 7533-E Adopted: May 1, 2008 Released: May 2, 2008 By the Senior Deputy Chief, Policy Division, Media Bureau: I. introduction and Background Time Warner Cable Inc., hereinafter referred to as ``Petitioner,'' has filed with the Commission petitions pursuant to Sections 76.7, 76.905(b)(2), 76.905(b)(1) and 76.907 of the Commission's rules for a determination that Petitioner is subject to effective competition in those communities listed on Attachment A and hereinafter referred to as ``Communities.'' Petitioner alleges that its cable systems serving the communities listed on Attachment B and hereinafter referred to as Group B Communities are subject to effective competition pursuant to Section
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-08-1038A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-08-1038A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-08-1038A1.txt
  • ) ) ) ) ) CSR 7458-E CSR 7481-E CSR 7482-E CSR 7484-E CSR 7544-E Adopted: May 1, 2008 Released: May 2, 2008 By the Senior Deputy Chief, Policy Division, Media Bureau: I. introduction and Background Comcast Cable Communications, LLC and Time Warner Entertainment-Advance/Newhouse Partnership , hereinafter referred to as ``Petitioners,'' have filed with the Commission petitions pursuant to Sections 76.7, 76.905(b)(2), 76.905(b)(1) and 76.907 of the Commission's rules for a determination that Petitioners are subject to effective competition in those communities listed on Attachment A and hereinafter referred to as ``Communities.'' Petitioners allege that their cable systems serving the communities listed on Attachment B and hereinafter referred to as Group B Communities are subject to effective competition pursuant to Section
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-08-1039A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-08-1039A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-08-1039A1.txt
  • for Determination of Effective Competition in various Michigan Communities ) ) ) ) ) ) CSR 7420-E, 7488-E, 7498-E, 7545-E Adopted: May 1, 2008 Released: May 2, 2008 By the Senior Deputy Chief, Policy Division, Media Bureau: I. introduction and Background Comcast Cable Communications, LLC, hereinafter referred to as ``Petitioner,'' has filed with the Commission a petition pursuant to Sections 76.7, 76.905(b)(2), 76.905(b)(1) and 76.907 of the Commission's rules for a determination that Petitioner is subject to effective competition in those communities listed on Attachment A and hereinafter referred to as ``Communities.'' Petitioner alleges that its cable system serving the communities listed on Attachment B and hereinafter referred to as Group B Communities is subject to effective competition pursuant to Section
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-08-1045A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-08-1045A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-08-1045A1.txt
  • of Effective Competition in Various Texas Communities ) ) ) ) ) ) ) CSR 7728-E Adopted: May 7, 2008 Released: May 8, 2008 By the Senior Deputy Chief, Policy Division, Media Bureau: I. introduction and Background Time Warner Entertainment - Advance/Newhouse Partnership (``Time Warner''), hereinafter referred to as ``Petitioner,'' has filed with the Commission a petition pursuant to Sections 76.7, 76.905(b)(2) and 76.907 of the Commission's rules for a determination that Petitioner is subject to effective competition in the communities listed on Attachment A and hereinafter referred to as ``Communities.'' Petitioner alleges that its cable system serving the Communities is subject to effective competition pursuant to Section 623(1)(1)(B) of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended (``Communications Act'') and the
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-08-1075A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-08-1075A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-08-1075A1.txt
  • for Determination of Effective Competition in various Indiana Communities ) ) ) ) ) ) CSR 7679-E, 7680-E, 7681-E, 7682-E Adopted: May 5, 2008 Released: May 6, 2008 By the Senior Deputy Chief, Policy Division, Media Bureau: I. introduction and Background Comcast Cable Communications, LLC, hereinafter referred to as ``Petitioner,'' has filed with the Commission a petition pursuant to Sections 76.7, 76.905(b)(2), 76.905(b)(1) and 76.907 of the Commission's rules for a determination that Petitioner is subject to effective competition in those communities listed on Attachment A and hereinafter referred to as ``Communities.'' Petitioner alleges that its cable system serving the communities listed on Attachment B and hereinafter referred to as Group B Communities is subject to effective competition pursuant to Section
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-08-1076A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-08-1076A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-08-1076A1.txt
  • of Effective Competition in Various Pennsylvania Communities ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) CSR 7726-E CSR 7722-E Adopted: May 7, 2008 Released: May 8, 2008 By the Senior Deputy Chief, Policy Division, Media Bureau: I. introduction and Background Time Warner Cable Inc. (``Time Warner''), hereinafter referred to as ``Petitioner,'' has filed with the Commission petitions pursuant to Sections 76.7, 76.905(b)(2), 76.905(b)(1) and 76.907 of the Commission's rules for a determination that Petitioner is subject to effective competition in those communities listed on Attachment A and hereinafter referred to as ``Communities.'' Petitioner alleges that its cable systems serving the communities listed on Attachment B and hereinafter referred to as ``Group B Communities'' are subject to effective competition pursuant to Section
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-08-1089A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-08-1089A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-08-1089A1.txt
  • ) ) ) ) ) CSR 7711-E CSR 7708-E CSR 7712-E Adopted: May 7, 2008 Released: May 8, 2008 By the Senior Deputy Chief, Policy Division, Media Bureau: I. introduction and Background Time Warner Cable LLC, Time Warner NY Cable LLC, and CAC Exchange I, LLC hereinafter referred to as ``Petitioners,'' have filed with the Commission petitions pursuant to Sections 76.7, 76.905(b)(2), 76.905(b)(1) and 76.907 of the Commission's rules for determinations that Petitioners are subject to effective competition in those communities listed on Attachment A and hereinafter referred to as ``Communities.'' Petitioners allege that their cable systems serving the communities listed on Attachment B and hereinafter referred to as ``Group B Communities'' are subject to effective competition pursuant to Section 623(1)
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-08-1099A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-08-1099A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-08-1099A1.txt
  • ) ) ) ) ) CSR 7460-E CSR 7461-E CSR 7469-E CSR 7472-E CSR 7473-E CSR 7474-E CSR 7476-E CSR 7513-E Adopted: May 8, 2008 Released: May 9, 2008 By the Senior Deputy Chief, Policy Division, Media Bureau: I. introduction and Background Comcast Cable Communications, LLC, hereinafter referred to as ``Petitioner,'' has filed with the Commission petitions pursuant to Sections 76.7, 76.905(b)(2), 76.905(b)(1) and 76.907 of the Commission's rules for a determination that Petitioner is subject to effective competition in those communities listed on Attachment A and hereinafter referred to as ``Communities.'' Petitioner alleges that its cable systems serving the communities listed on Attachment B and hereinafter referred to as Group B Communities are subject to effective competition pursuant to Section
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-08-1100A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-08-1100A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-08-1100A1.txt
  • for Determination of Effective Competition in various Indiana Communities ) ) ) ) ) ) CSR 7595-E, 7602-E, 7683-E, 7684-E Adopted: May 8, 2008 Released: May 9, 2008 By the Senior Deputy Chief, Policy Division, Media Bureau: I. introduction and Background Comcast Cable Communications, LLC, hereinafter referred to as ``Petitioner,'' has filed with the Commission a petition pursuant to Sections 76.7, 76.905(b)(2), 76.905(b)(1) and 76.907 of the Commission's rules for a determination that Petitioner is subject to effective competition in those communities listed on Attachment A and hereinafter referred to as ``Communities.'' Petitioner alleges that its cable system serving the communities listed on Attachment B and hereinafter referred to as Group B Communities is subject to effective competition pursuant to Section
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-08-1111A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-08-1111A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-08-1111A1.txt
  • Effective Competition in Various Communities in North and South Carolina ) ) ) ) ) ) CSR 7393-E, 7397-E, 7398-E Adopted: May 12, 2008 Released: May 13, 2008 By the Senior Deputy Chief, Policy Division, Media Bureau: I. introduction and Background Time Warner Cable Inc., hereinafter referred to as ``Petitioner,'' has filed with the Commission several petitions pursuant to Sections 76.7, 76.905(b)(2), 76.905(b)(1) and 76.907 of the Commission's rules for a determination that Petitioner is subject to effective competition in those communities listed on Attachment A and hereinafter referred to as ``Communities.'' Petitioner alleges that its cable systems serving the communities listed on Attachment B and hereinafter referred to as Group B Communities are subject to effective competition pursuant to Section
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-08-1152A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-08-1152A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-08-1152A1.txt
  • Effective Competition in various Franchise Areas in Pennsylvania ) ) ) ) ) ) CSR 7566-E CSR 7569-E CSR 7667-E Adopted: May 14, 2008 Released: May 15, 2008 By the Senior Deputy Chief, Policy Division, Media Bureau: I. introduction and Background Comcast Cable Communications, LLC, hereinafter referred to as ``Petitioner,'' has filed with the Commission a petition pursuant to Sections 76.7, 76.905(b)(2), 76.905(b)(1) and 76.907 of the Commission's rules for a determination that Petitioner is subject to effective competition in those communities listed on Attachment A and hereinafter referred to as ``Communities.'' Petitioner alleges that its cable systems serving the communities listed on Attachment B and hereinafter referred to as Group B Communities are subject to effective competition pursuant to Section
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-08-1160A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-08-1160A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-08-1160A1.txt
  • LLC Petition for Determination of Effective Competition in Jenkins, Kentucky (CUID KY0051) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) CSR 7567-E Adopted: May 15, 2008 Released: May 16, 2008 By the Senior Deputy Chief, Policy Division, Media Bureau: I. introduction and Background Mikrotec CATV, LLC, hereinafter referred to as ``Petitioner,'' has filed with the Commission a petition pursuant to Sections 76.7, 76.905(b)(2) and 76.907 of the Commission's rules for a determination that Petitioner is subject to effective competition in those communities listed on Attachment A and hereinafter referred to as ``Communities.'' Petitioner alleges that its cable system serving the Communities is subject to effective competition pursuant to Section 623(1)(1)(B) of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended (``Communications Act'') and the
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-08-1161A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-08-1161A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-08-1161A1.txt
  • Competition in the Town of Oyster Bay, New York (CUID NY0489) ) ) ) ) ) ) CSR 7048-E Adopted: May 15, 2008 Released: May 16, 2008 By the Senior Deputy Chief, Policy Division, Media Bureau: I. introduction and Background Cablevision Systems Long Island Corporation, hereinafter referred to as ``Petitioner,'' has filed with the Commission a petition pursuant to Sections 76.7 and 76.905(b)(4) and 76.907 of the Commission's rules for a determination that Petitioner is subject to effective competition in the community listed on Attachment A and hereinafter referred to as the ``Community.'' Petitioner alleges that its cable system serving the Community is subject to effective competition pursuant to Section 623(1)(1)(D) of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended (``Communications Act'')
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-08-1162A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-08-1162A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-08-1162A1.txt
  • ) ) ) ) ) ) ) CSR 7479-E & CSR 7480-E Adopted: May 15, 2008 Released: May 16, 2008 By the Senior Deputy Chief, Policy Division, Media Bureau: I. introduction and Background Comcast Cable Communications, LLC, on behalf of its subsidiaries and affiliates (``Comcast''), hereinafter referred to as ``Petitioner,'' has filed with the Commission a petition pursuant to Sections 76.7, 76.905(b)(2), 76.905(b)(1) and 76.907 of the Commission's rules for a determination that Petitioner is subject to effective competition in those communities listed on Attachment A and hereinafter referred to as ``Communities.'' Petitioner alleges that its cable system serving the Communities is subject to effective competition pursuant to Section 623(1) of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended (``Communications Act'') and
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-08-1163A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-08-1163A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-08-1163A1.txt
  • Petition for Determination of Effective Competition in various Colorado Communities ) ) ) ) ) ) CSR 7575-E, 7600-E, 7693-E Adopted: May 15, 2008 Released: May 16, 2008 By the Senior Deputy Chief, Policy Division, Media Bureau: I. introduction and Background Comcast Cable Communications, LLC, hereinafter referred to as ``Petitioner,'' has filed with the Commission a petition pursuant to Sections 76.7, 76.905(b)(2), 76.905(b)(1) and 76.907 of the Commission's rules for a determination that Petitioner is subject to effective competition in those communities listed on Attachment A and hereinafter referred to as ``Communities.'' Petitioner alleges that its cable system serving the communities listed on Attachment B and hereinafter referred to as Group B Communities is subject to effective competition pursuant to Section
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-08-1212A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-08-1212A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-08-1212A1.txt
  • cable systems serving the West Palm Beach-Ft. Pierce, Florida Designated Market Area (``DMA''). WHDT asks that the Commission order Comcast to reinstate WHDT's carriage and impose a forfeiture on Comcast for violations of the mandatory carriage (``must-carry'') rules, signal deletion notice rules, and customer service provisions found in Section 614 of the Communications Act, as amended (the ``Act''), and Sections 76.7, 76.61(a), 76.56(b), 76.1601, and 76.1603 of the Commission's rules. To clarify certain matters concerning WHDT's operating history, the Commission sent WHDT a Letter of Inquiry (``LOI'') on March 18, 2008. After considering WHDT's response to the LOI, we order Comcast to reinstate carriage of WHDT conditioned upon WHDT's proof of its authorized operations. We decline to impose the requested forfeiture
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-08-1215A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-08-1215A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-08-1215A1.txt
  • CSR 6156-E Adopted: May 28, 2008 Released: May 28, 2008 By the Senior Deputy Chief, Policy Division, Media Bureau: I. introduction and Background Comcast of Massachusetts I, Inc., Comcast of Massachusetts III, Inc., Comcast of Massachusetts/New Hampshire/Ohio, Inc., and Comcast of California/Massachusetts/Michigan/Utah, Inc. (collectively ``Comcast''), hereinafter referred to as ``Petitioner,'' has filed with the Commission a petition pursuant to Sections 76.7 and 76.905(b)(4) and 76.907 of the Commission's rules for a determination that Petitioner is subject to effective competition in those communities listed on Attachment A and hereinafter referred to as ``Communities.'' Petitioner alleges that its cable system serving the Communities is subject to effective competition pursuant to Section 623(1)(1)(D) of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended (``Communications Act'') and
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-08-1216A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-08-1216A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-08-1216A1.txt
  • 7503-E & CSR 7505-E CSR 7502-E, CSR 7504-E, CSR 7506-E & CSR 7507-E Adopted: May 28, 2008 Released: May 28, 2008 By the Senior Deputy Chief, Policy Division, Media Bureau: I. introduction and Background Comcast Cable Communications, LLC, on behalf of its subsidiaries and affiliates, hereinafter referred to as ``Petitioner,'' has filed with the Commission a petition pursuant to Sections 76.7, 76.905(b)(2), 76.905(b)(1) and 76.907 of the Commission's rules for a determination that Petitioner is subject to effective competition in those communities listed on Attachment A and hereinafter referred to as ``Communities.'' Petitioner alleges that its cable system serving the Communities is subject to effective competition pursuant to Section 623(1) of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended (``Communications Act'') and
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-08-1218A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-08-1218A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-08-1218A1.txt
  • LLC Petition for Determination of Effective Competition in various Illinois Communities ) ) ) ) ) ) CSR 7158-E, 7666-E Adopted: May 28, 2008 Released: May 29, 2008 By the Senior Deputy Chief, Policy Division, Media Bureau: I. introduction and Background Comcast Cable Communications, LLC, hereinafter referred to as ``Petitioner,'' has filed with the Commission a petition pursuant to Sections 76.7, 76.905(b)(2), 76.905(b)(1) and 76.907 of the Commission's rules for a determination that Petitioner is subject to effective competition in those communities listed on Attachment A and hereinafter referred to as ``Communities.'' Petitioner alleges that its cable system serving the communities listed on Attachment B and hereinafter referred to as Group B Communities is subject to effective competition pursuant to Section
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-08-1219A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-08-1219A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-08-1219A1.txt
  • for Determination of Effective Competition in various Michigan Communities ) ) ) ) ) ) CSR 7375-E, 7423-E, 7434-E, 7436-E Adopted: May 28, 2008 Released: May 29, 2008 By the Senior Deputy Chief, Policy Division, Media Bureau: I. introduction and Background Comcast Cable Communications, LLC, hereinafter referred to as ``Petitioner,'' has filed with the Commission a petition pursuant to Sections 76.7, 76.905(b)(2), 76.905(b)(1) and 76.907 of the Commission's rules for a determination that Petitioner is subject to effective competition in those communities listed on Attachment A and hereinafter referred to as ``Communities.'' Petitioner alleges that its cable system serving the communities listed on Attachment B and hereinafter referred to as Group B Communities is subject to effective competition pursuant to Section
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-08-1224A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-08-1224A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-08-1224A1.txt
  • Petition for Determination of Effective Competition in Jackson, Alabama (CUID AL0097) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) CSR 6666-E Adopted: May 28, 2008 Released: May 29, 2008 By the Senior Deputy Chief, Policy Division, Media Bureau: I. introduction and Background Mediacom Southeast LLC (``Mediacom''), hereinafter referred to as ``Petitioner,'' has filed with the Commission a petition pursuant to Sections 76.7, 76.905(b)(2) and 76.907 of the Commission's rules for a determination that Petitioner is subject to effective competition in the community listed on Attachment A and hereinafter referred to as ``Community.'' Petitioner alleges that its cable system serving the Community is subject to effective competition pursuant to Section 623(1)(1)(B) of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended (``Communications Act'') and the
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-08-1255A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-08-1255A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-08-1255A1.txt
  • Inc. Petition for Determination of Effective Competition in Various Franchise Areas in Ohio ) ) ) ) ) ) CSR-7806-E Adopted: May 29, 2008 Released: May 29, 2008 By the Senior Deputy Chief, Policy Division, Media Bureau: I. introduction and Background Time Warner Cable Inc., hereinafter referred to as ``Petitioner,'' has filed with the Commission a petition pursuant to Sections 76.7, 76.905(b)(2), 76.905(b)(1) and 76.907 of the Commission's rules for a determination that Petitioner is subject to effective competition in those communities listed on Attachment A and hereinafter referred to as ``Communities.'' Petitioner alleges that its cable system serving the communities listed on Attachment B and hereinafter referred to as Group B Communities is subject to effective competition pursuant to Section
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-08-1262A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-08-1262A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-08-1262A1.txt
  • ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) CSR 7617-E, 7618-E Adopted: May 29, 2008 Released: May 29, 2008 By the Senior Deputy Chief, Policy Division, Media Bureau: I. introduction and Background Cablevision of Connecticut, L.P. and Cablevision Systems of Southern Connecticut, L.P. (collectively, ``Cablevision''), hereinafter referred to as ``Petitioner,'' has filed with the Commission a petition pursuant to Sections 76.7 and 76.905(b)(4) and 76.907 of the Commission's rules for a determination that Petitioner is subject to effective competition in those communities listed on Attachment A and hereinafter referred to as ``Communities.'' Petitioner alleges that its cable system serving the Communities is subject to effective competition pursuant to Section 623(1)(1)(D) of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended (``Communications Act'') and
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-08-1263A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-08-1263A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-08-1263A1.txt
  • for Determination of Effective Competition in various Ohio Communities ) ) ) ) ) ) CSR 7715-E, 7716-E, 7760-E, 7791-E Adopted: May 29, 2008 Released: May 29, 2008 By the Senior Deputy Chief, Policy Division, Media Bureau: I. introduction and Background Time Warner Cable Inc., hereinafter referred to as ``Petitioner,'' has filed with the Commission a petition pursuant to Sections 76.7, 76.905(b)(2) and 76.907 of the Commission's rules for a determination that Petitioner is subject to effective competition in those communities listed on Attachment A and hereinafter referred to as ``Communities.'' Petitioner alleges that its cable system serving the Communities is subject to effective competition pursuant to Section 623(1)(1)(B) of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended (``Communications Act'') and the
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-08-1264A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-08-1264A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-08-1264A1.txt
  • ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) CSR-7163-E MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER Adopted: May 29, 2008 Released: May 29, 2008 By the Senior Deputy Chief, Policy Division, Media Bureau: Introduction and background Comcast Cable Communications, LLC (``Comcast''), on behalf of its subsidiaries and affiliates, hereinafter referred to as ``Petitioner,'' has filed with the Commission a petition pursuant to Sections 76.7, 76.905(b)(2) and 76.907 of the Commission's rules for a determination that Petitioner is subject to effective competition in those communities listed on Attachment A and hereinafter referred to as ``Communities.'' Petitioner alleges that its cable systems serving the Communities are subject to effective competition pursuant to Section 623(1)(1)(B) of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended (``Communications Act'') and the
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-08-1270A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-08-1270A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-08-1270A1.txt
  • Communities in California ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) CSR-7186-E CSR-7187-E CSR-7195-E Adopted: May 29, 2008 Released: May 30, 2008 By the Senior Deputy Chief, Policy Division, Media Bureau: I. introduction and Background Comcast Cable Communications, LLC, on behalf of its subsidiaries and affiliates, hereinafter referred to as ``Petitioner,'' has filed with the Commission petitions pursuant to Sections 76.7, 76.905(b)(2) and 76.907 of the Commission's rules for a determination that Petitioner is subject to effective competition in those communities listed on Attachment A and hereinafter referred to as ``Communities.'' Petitioner alleges that its cable systems serving the Communities are subject to effective competition pursuant to Section 623(1)(1)(B) of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended (``Communications Act'') and the
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-08-1285A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-08-1285A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-08-1285A1.txt
  • Inc. Petition for Determination of Effective Competition in Various Franchise Areas in Ohio ) ) ) ) ) ) CSR-7725-E Adopted: June 12, 2008 Released: June 13, 2008 By the Senior Deputy Chief, Policy Division, Media Bureau: I. introduction and Background Time Warner Cable Inc., hereinafter referred to as ``Petitioner,'' has filed with the Commission a petition pursuant to Sections 76.7, 76.905(b)(2), 76.905(b)(1) and 76.907 of the Commission's rules for a determination that Petitioner is subject to effective competition in those communities listed on Attachment A and hereinafter referred to as ``Communities.'' Petitioner alleges that its cable system serving the communities listed on Attachment B and hereinafter referred to as Group B Communities is subject to effective competition pursuant to Section
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-08-1286A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-08-1286A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-08-1286A1.txt
  • Inc. Petition for Determination of Effective Competition in Various Franchise Areas in Ohio ) ) ) ) ) ) CSR-7724-E Adopted: June 12, 2008 Released: June 13, 2008 By the Senior Deputy Chief, Policy Division, Media Bureau: I. introduction and Background Time Warner Cable Inc., hereinafter referred to as ``Petitioner,'' has filed with the Commission a petition pursuant to Sections 76.7, 76.905(b)(2), 76.905(b)(1) and 76.907 of the Commission's rules for a determination that Petitioner is subject to effective competition in those communities listed on Attachment A and hereinafter referred to as ``Communities.'' Petitioner alleges that its cable system serving the communities listed on Attachment B and hereinafter referred to as Group B Communities is subject to effective competition pursuant to Section
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-08-1304A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-08-1304A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-08-1304A1.txt
  • Petitions for Determination of Effective Competition in 25 Pennsylvania Franchise Areas ) ) ) ) ) ) CSR 7570-E CSR 7571-E Adopted: June 2, 2008 Released: June 3, 2008 By the Senior Deputy Chief, Policy Division, Media Bureau: I. introduction and Background Comcast Cable Communications, LLC, hereinafter referred to as ``Petitioner,'' has filed with the Commission petitions pursuant to Sections 76.7, 76.905(b)(2), 76.905(b)(1) and 76.907 of the Commission's rules for a determination that Petitioner is subject to effective competition in those communities listed on Attachment A and hereinafter referred to as ``Communities.'' Petitioner alleges that its cable systems serving the communities listed on Attachment B and hereinafter referred to as Group B Communities are subject to effective competition pursuant to Section
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-08-1333A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-08-1333A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-08-1333A1.txt
  • Communities ) ) ) ) ) ) ) CSR 7762-E & CSR 7763-E Adopted: June 5, 2008 Released: June 6, 2008 By the Senior Deputy Chief, Policy Division, Media Bureau: I. introduction and Background Comcast Cable Communications, LLC, on behalf of its subsidiaries and affiliates, hereinafter referred to as ``Petitioner,'' has filed with the Commission a petition pursuant to Sections 76.7, 76.905(b)(2), 76.905(b)(1) and 76.907 of the Commission's rules for a determination that Petitioner is subject to effective competition in those communities listed on Attachment A and hereinafter referred to as ``Communities.'' Petitioner alleges that its cable system serving the Communities is subject to effective competition pursuant to Section 623(1) of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended (``Communications Act'') and
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-08-1334A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-08-1334A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-08-1334A1.txt
  • Communities ) ) ) ) ) ) ) CSR 7437-E & CSR 7439-E Adopted: June 5, 2008 Released: June 6, 2008 By the Senior Deputy Chief, Policy Division, Media Bureau: I. introduction and Background Comcast Cable Communications, LLC, on behalf of its subsidiaries and affiliates, hereinafter referred to as ``Petitioner,'' has filed with the Commission a petition pursuant to Sections 76.7, 76.905(b)(2) and 76.907 of the Commission's rules for a determination that Petitioner is subject to effective competition in those communities listed on Attachment A and hereinafter referred to as ``Communities.'' Petitioner alleges that its cable system serving the Communities is subject to effective competition pursuant to Section 623(1)(1)(B) of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended (``Communications Act'') and the
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-08-1335A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-08-1335A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-08-1335A1.txt
  • of Effective Competition in various Idaho and Washington Communities ) ) ) ) ) ) CSR 7593-E, 7594-E, 7603-E Adopted: June 5, 2008 Released: June 6, 2008 By the Senior Deputy Chief, Policy Division, Media Bureau: I. introduction and Background Time Warner NY Cable LLC, hereinafter referred to as ``Petitioner,'' has filed with the Commission a petition pursuant to Sections 76.7, 76.905(b)(2) and 76.907 of the Commission's rules for a determination that Petitioner is subject to effective competition in those communities listed on Attachment A and hereinafter referred to as ``Communities.'' Petitioner alleges that its cable system serving the Communities is subject to effective competition pursuant to Section 623(1)(1)(B) of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended (``Communications Act'') and the
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-08-1396A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-08-1396A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-08-1396A1.txt
  • ) ) ) ) ) ) CSR 7730-E, CSR 7775-E & CSR 7777-E Adopted: June 11, 2008 Released: June 12, 2008 By the Senior Deputy Chief, Policy Division, Media Bureau: I. introduction and Background Comcast Cable Communications, LLC, on behalf of its subsidiaries and affiliates, hereinafter referred to as ``Petitioner,'' has filed with the Commission three petitions pursuant to Sections 76.7 and 76.905(b)(4) and 76.907 of the Commission's rules for a determination that Petitioner is subject to effective competition in those communities listed on Attachment A and hereinafter referred to as ``Communities.'' Petitioner alleges that its cable system serving the Communities is subject to effective competition pursuant to Section 623(1)(1)(D) of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended (``Communications Act'') and
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-08-1397A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-08-1397A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-08-1397A1.txt
  • Effective Competition in various Iowa Communities ) ) ) ) ) ) CSR 7685-E, 7688-E, 7689-E, 7690-E Adopted: June 11, 2008 Released: June 12, 2008 By the Senior Deputy Chief, Policy Division, Media Bureau: I. introduction and Background MCC Iowa LLC and Mediacom Iowa LLC, hereinafter referred to as ``Petitioner,'' has filed with the Commission a petition pursuant to Sections 76.7, 76.905(b)(2) and 76.907 of the Commission's rules for a determination that Petitioner is subject to effective competition in those communities listed on Attachment A and hereinafter referred to as ``Communities.'' Petitioner alleges that its cable system serving the Communities is subject to effective competition pursuant to Section 623(1)(1)(B) of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended (``Communications Act'') and the
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-08-1412A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-08-1412A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-08-1412A1.txt
  • Communications, LLC Petition for Determination of Effective Competition in various Wisconsin Communities ) ) ) ) ) ) CSR 7456-E Adopted: June 12, 2008 Released: June 13, 2008 By the Senior Deputy Chief, Policy Division, Media Bureau: I. introduction and Background Comcast Cable Communications, LLC, hereinafter referred to as ``Petitioner,'' has filed with the Commission a petition pursuant to Sections 76.7, 76.905(b)(2), 76.905(b)(1) and 76.907 of the Commission's rules for a determination that Petitioner is subject to effective competition in those communities listed on Attachment A and hereinafter referred to as ``Communities.'' Petitioner alleges that its cable system serving the communities listed on Attachment B and hereinafter referred to as Group B Communities is subject to effective competition pursuant to Section
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-08-1413A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-08-1413A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-08-1413A1.txt
  • Areas ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) CSR Nos. 7626-E, 7627-E, 7628-E, 7629-E, 7630-E, 7631-E, 7632-E, 7633-E, 7634-E Adopted: June 12, 2008 Released: June 13, 2008 By the Senior Deputy Chief, Policy Division, Media Bureau: I. introduction and Background Comcast Cable Communications, LLC, hereinafter referred to as ``Petitioner,'' has filed with the Commission nine petitions pursuant to Sections 76.7 and 76.905(b)(4) and 76.907 of the Commission's rules for a determination that Petitioner is subject to effective competition in those communities listed on Attachment A and hereinafter referred to as ``Communities.'' Petitioner alleges that its cable systems serving the Communities are subject to effective competition pursuant to Section 623(1)(1)(D) of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended (``Communications Act'') and
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-08-1414A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-08-1414A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-08-1414A1.txt
  • Determination of Effective Competition in various Ohio Communities ) ) ) ) ) ) CSR 7704-E, 7705-E, 7713-E, 7714-E, 7718-E Adopted: June 12, 2008 Released: June 13, 2008 By the Senior Deputy Chief, Policy Division, Media Bureau: I. introduction and Background Time Warner Cable Inc., hereinafter referred to as ``Petitioner,'' has filed with the Commission a petition pursuant to Sections 76.7, 76.905(b)(2), 76.905(b)(1) and 76.907 of the Commission's rules for a determination that Petitioner is subject to effective competition in those communities listed on Attachment A and hereinafter referred to as ``Communities.'' Petitioner alleges that its cable system serving the communities listed on Attachment B and hereinafter referred to as Group B Communities is subject to effective competition pursuant to Section
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-08-1446A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-08-1446A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-08-1446A1.txt
  • Competition in various Ohio Communities ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) CSR 7717-E, 7719-E, 7720-E, 7721-E, 7723-E Adopted: June 19, 2008 Released: June 20, 2008 By the Senior Deputy Chief, Policy Division, Media Bureau: I. introduction and Background Time Warner Cable Inc. , hereinafter referred to as ``Petitioner,'' has filed with the Commission a petition pursuant to Sections 76.7, 76.905(b)(2), 76.905(b)(1) and 76.907 of the Commission's rules for a determination that Petitioner is subject to effective competition in those communities listed on Attachment A and hereinafter referred to as ``Communities.'' Petitioner alleges that its cable system serving the communities listed on Attachment B and hereinafter referred to as Group B Communities is subject to effective competition pursuant to Section
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-08-1453A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-08-1453A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-08-1453A1.txt
  • the extraordinary flood damage that the Cedar Rapids area has endured, and the importance of restoring cable service to its customers as quickly as possible so that they may be able to obtain important local news and information relative to the recovery efforts in their community, we conclude that the grant of a waiver to ImOn under Sections 1.3 and 76.7 of the Commission's rules is justified. Given the emergency nature of this request and the enormous capital costs that ImOn faces in light of the damage to its systems, and specifically, the significant physical damage to ImOn's network facilities and damage to its customers' set top boxes, we also find good cause to grant waiver of the application fee required
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-08-1456A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-08-1456A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-08-1456A1.txt
  • Communications, LLC Petition for Determination of Effective Competition in various Michigan Communities ) ) ) ) ) ) CSR 7424-E Adopted: June 19, 2008 Released: June 20, 2008 By the Senior Deputy Chief, Policy Division, Media Bureau: I. introduction and Background Comcast Cable Communications, LLC, hereinafter referred to as ``Petitioner,'' has filed with the Commission a petition pursuant to Sections 76.7, 76.905(b)(2), 76.905(b)(1) and 76.907 of the Commission's rules for a determination that Petitioner is subject to effective competition in those communities listed on Attachment A and hereinafter referred to as ``Communities.'' Petitioner alleges that its cable system serving the Communities is subject to effective competition pursuant to Section 623(1) of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended (``Communications Act'') and
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-08-1473A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-08-1473A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-08-1473A1.txt
  • Petition for Determination of Effective Competition in Various North Carolina Communities ) ) ) ) ) ) ) CSR 6834-E Adopted: June 24, 2008 Released: June 25, 2008 By the Senior Deputy Chief, Policy Division, Media Bureau: I. introduction and Background Mediacom Southeast LLC , hereinafter referred to as ``Petitioner,'' has filed with the Commission a petition pursuant to Sections 76.7, 76.905(b)(1) and 76.907 of the Commission's rules for a determination that Petitioner is subject to effective competition in those communities listed on Attachment A and hereinafter referred to as ``Communities.'' Petitioner alleges that its cable system serving the Communities is subject to effective competition pursuant to Section 623(1)(1)(A) of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended (``Communications Act'') and the
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-08-1507A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-08-1507A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-08-1507A1.txt
  • ) ) ) ) CSR Nos. 7654-E, 7655-E, 7656-E, 7657-E, 7658-E, 7659-E, 7660-E, 7661-E, 7662-E, 7663-E, 7664-E, 7665-E Adopted: June 25, 2008 Released: June 26, 2008 By the Senior Deputy Chief, Policy Division, Media Bureau: I. introduction and Background Comcast Cable Communications, LLC, hereinafter referred to as ``Petitioner'' or ``Comcast,'' has filed with the Commission twelve petitions pursuant to Sections 76.7 and 76.905(b)(4) and 76.907 of the Commission's rules for a determination that Comcast is subject to effective competition in those communities listed on Attachment A and hereinafter referred to as ``Communities.'' Comcast alleges that its cable systems serving the Communities are subject to effective competition pursuant to Section 623(1)(1)(D) of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended (``Communications Act'') and
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-08-1509A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-08-1509A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-08-1509A1.txt
  • for Determination of Effective Competition in Groton, CT - Area Franchise ) ) ) ) ) ) CSR 7121-E Adopted: June 26, 2008 Released: June 27, 2008 By the Senior Deputy Chief, Policy Division, Media Bureau: I. introduction and Background Comcast Cable Communications, LLC , hereinafter referred to as ``Petitioner,'' has filed with the Commission a petition pursuant to Sections 76.7, 76.905(b)(2) and 76.907 of the Commission's rules for a determination that Petitioner is subject to effective competition in those communities listed on Attachment A and hereinafter referred to as ``Communities.'' Petitioner alleges that its cable system serving the Communities is subject to effective competition pursuant to Section 623(1)(1)(B) of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended (``Communications Act'') and the
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-08-1515A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-08-1515A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-08-1515A1.txt
  • Petition for Determination of Effective Competition in various Ohio and Indiana Communities ) ) ) ) ) ) CSR 7706-E, 7779-E, 7780-E, 7781-E Adopted: June 26, 2008 Released: June 26, 2008 By the Associate Chief, Media Bureau: I. introduction and Background Time Warner Cable Inc. hereinafter referred to as ``Petitioner,'' has filed with the Commission a petition pursuant to Sections 76.7, 76.905(b)(2), 76.905(b)(1) and 76.907 of the Commission's rules for a determination that Petitioner is subject to effective competition in those communities listed on Attachment A and hereinafter referred to as ``Communities.'' Petitioner alleges that its cable system serving the communities listed on Attachment B and hereinafter referred to as Group B Communities is subject to effective competition pursuant to Section
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-08-1563A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-08-1563A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-08-1563A1.txt
  • Charleston County (CUID SC0633) and McClellanville (CUID SC0384), South Carolina ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) CSR 7394-E Adopted: June 30, 2008 Released: June 30, 2008 By the Senior Deputy Chief, Policy Division, Media Bureau: I. introduction and Background Time Warner Cable Inc., hereinafter referred to as ``Petitioner,'' has filed with the Commission a petition pursuant to Sections 76.7, 76.905(b)(1) and 76.907 of the Commission's rules for a determination that Petitioner is subject to effective competition in those communities listed on Attachment A and hereinafter referred to as ``Communities.'' Petitioner alleges that its cable system serving the Communities is subject to effective competition pursuant to Section 623(1)(1)(A) of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended (``Communications Act'') and the
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-08-1573A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-08-1573A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-08-1573A1.txt
  • Section 76.1204(a)(1) of the Commission's rules so that it may place into service certain integrated digital cable set-top boxes. The Bureau has already granted GCL a limited waiver of the ban on integrated set-top boxes for the Scientific Atlanta Explorer 1850, finding that the extraordinary typhoon damage that GCL has endured demonstrated good cause for waiver under Sections 1.3 and 76.7 of the Commission's rules. As set forth below, we modify Guam's request for waiver to include the Scientific Atlanta Explorer 2200 and the Scientific Atlanta Explorer 8300. BACKGROUND Congress directed the Commission to adopt regulations to assure the commercial availability of navigation devices more than ten years ago as part of the Telecommunications Act of 1996. The Commission implemented this
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-08-1575A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-08-1575A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-08-1575A1.txt
  • 76.1204(a)(1) of the Commission's rules to allow it to place into service integrated digital cable set-top boxes. The Bureau has already granted Choice a limited waiver of the ban on integrated set-top boxes for certain set-top box models, finding that the fact that Choice transitioned to an all-digital system demonstrated good cause for such a waiver under Sections 1.3 and 76.7 of the Commission's rules. As set forth below, we grant Choice's request for a waiver of Section 76.1204(a)(1) of the Commission's rules. BACKGROUND Congress directed the Commission to adopt regulations to assure the commercial availability of navigation devices more than ten years ago as part of the Telecommunications Act of 1996. The Commission implemented this directive in 1998 through the
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-08-1582A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-08-1582A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-08-1582A1.txt
  • Determination of Effective Competition in various Ohio Communities ) ) ) ) ) ) CSR 7782-E, 7786-E, 7787-E, 7789-E, 7790-E Adopted: July 2, 2008 Released: July 3, 2008 By the Senior Deputy Chief, Policy Division, Media Bureau: I. introduction and Background Time Warner Cable Inc, hereinafter referred to as ``Petitioner,'' has filed with the Commission a petition pursuant to Sections 76.7, 76.905(b)(2), 76.905(b)(1) and 76.907 of the Commission's rules for a determination that Petitioner is subject to effective competition in those communities listed on Attachment A and hereinafter referred to as ``Communities.'' Petitioner alleges that its cable system serving the communities listed on Attachment B and hereinafter referred to as Group B Communities is subject to effective competition pursuant to Section
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-08-1593A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-08-1593A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-08-1593A1.txt
  • Pennsylvania (PA0026) Woodward, Pennsylvania (PA0917) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) CSR 7860-E Adopted: July 3, 2008 Released: July 3, 2008 By the Senior Deputy Chief, Policy Division, Media Bureau: I. introduction and Background Comcast Cable Communications, LLC, hereinafter referred to as ``Petitioner,'' has filed with the Commission a petition pursuant to Sections 76.7, 76.905(b)(2), 76.905(b)(1) and 76.907 of the Commission's rules for a determination that Petitioner is subject to effective competition in those communities listed on Attachment A and hereinafter referred to as ``Communities.'' Petitioner alleges that its cable system serving the communities listed on Attachment B and hereinafter referred to as Group B Communities is subject to effective competition pursuant to Section
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-08-1594A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-08-1594A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-08-1594A1.txt
  • Competition in 18 Massachusetts Communities ) ) ) ) ) ) CSR 7852-E Adopted: July 3, 2008 Released: July 3, 2008 By the Senior Deputy Chief, Policy Division, Media Bureau: I. introduction and Background Comcast Cable Communications, LLC, on behalf of its subsidiaries and affiliates, hereinafter referred to as ``Petitioner,'' has filed with the Commission a petition pursuant to Sections 76.7, 76.905(b)(2) and 76.907 of the Commission's rules for a determination that Petitioner is subject to effective competition in those communities listed on Attachment A and hereinafter referred to as ``Communities.'' Petitioner alleges that its cable system serving the Communities is subject to effective competition pursuant to Section 623(1)(1)(B) of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended (``Communications Act'') and the
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-08-1595A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-08-1595A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-08-1595A1.txt
  • and affiliates Petition for Determination of Effective Competition in Oakland, California (CA0589) ) ) ) ) ) ) CSR 7824-E Adopted: July 3, 2008 Released: July 3, 2008 By the Senior Deputy Chief, Policy Division, Media Bureau: I. introduction and Background Comcast Cable Communications, LLC, hereinafter referred to as ``Petitioner,'' has filed with the Commission a petition pursuant to Sections 76.7, 76.905(b)(2) and 76.907 of the Commission's rules for a determination that Petitioner is subject to effective competition in those communities listed on Attachment A and hereinafter referred to as ``Communities.'' Petitioner alleges that its cable system serving the Communities is subject to effective competition pursuant to Section 623(1)(1)(B) of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended (``Communications Act'') and the
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-08-1603A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-08-1603A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-08-1603A1.txt
  • Adopted: July 7, 2008 Released: July 7, 2008 By the Senior Deputy Chief, Policy Division, Media Bureau: INTRODUCTION Richard C. and Lisa A. Goetz (``Petitioners''), licensees of low power television (``LPTV'') station WKRP-LP (``WKRP'' or the ``station''), Alexandria, Tennessee, filed the above-captioned complaint seeking mandatory carriage rights for WKRP on Charter Communications' (``Charter'') cable system serving Alexandria, pursuant to Section 76.7 of the Commission's rules. Charter filed an opposition, to which Petitioners replied. Charter filed a response to Petitioners' Reply. For the reasons discussed below, we grant Petitioners' complaint. BACKGROUND The Communications Act of 1934, as amended, and the Commission's rules require that cable operators carry on their cable systems ``qualified'' LPTV stations in certain limited circumstances. An LPTV station that
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-08-1627A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-08-1627A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-08-1627A1.txt
  • after the transition and submit a sworn declaration to the Commission confirming that this is the case, and (4) the operator must publicly commit to this plan by sworn declaration. As we explained in the BendBroadband Order, such a declaration will ``demonstrate [a] commitment to move to an all-digital network.'' Accordingly, IT IS ORDERED that, pursuant to Sections 1.3 and 76.7 of the Commission's rules, 47 C.F.R. §§ 1.3, 76.7, a conditional waiver of Section 76.1204(a)(1) of the Commission's rules, 47 C.F.R. § 76.1204(a)(1), IS GRANTED to Waitsfield-Fayston Telephone Co, Inc and Tri-County Communications, Inc. for the Motorola DCT-700 and DCT-2214, conditioned as set forth in this Order. This action is taken pursuant to authority delegated by Section 0.283 of the
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-08-1632A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-08-1632A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-08-1632A1.txt
  • their MVPD. Although the cable industry has challenged the lawfulness of the integration ban on three separate occasions, in each of those cases the D.C. Circuit denied those petitions. In limited circumstances, however, operators may be eligible for waiver of the integration ban. discussion Petitioners make their requests for waiver pursuant to the Financial Hardship Order and Sections 1.3 and 76.7 of the Commission's rules. In light of Petitioners' demonstrated financial hardships and consistent with the Financial Hardship Order, we conclude that a limited grant of their Extension Requests until January 31, 2009 is justified under Sections 1.3 and 76.7 of the Commission's rules. We therefore grant Petitioners limited waivers of the integration ban for the Subject Boxes. On April 25,
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-08-1638A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-08-1638A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-08-1638A1.txt
  • Inc. Petition for Determination of Effective Competition in various Michigan and Wisconsin Communities ) ) ) ) ) ) CSR 7816-E and 7817-E Adopted: July 10, 2008 Released: July 11, 2008 By the Associate Chief, Media Bureau: I. introduction and Background Time Warner Cable Inc., hereinafter referred to as ``Petitioner,'' has filed with the Commission a petition pursuant to Sections 76.7, 76.905(b)(2), 76.905(b)(1) and 76.907 of the Commission's rules for a determination that Petitioner is subject to effective competition in those communities listed on Attachment A and hereinafter referred to as ``Communities.'' Petitioner alleges that its cable system serving the communities listed on Attachment B and hereinafter referred to as Group B Communities is subject to effective competition pursuant to Section
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-08-1639A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-08-1639A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-08-1639A1.txt
  • Inc. Petition for Determination of Effective Competition in various Ohio Communities ) ) ) ) ) ) CSR 7776-E, 7783-E, 7784-E, 7785-E, 7788-E Adopted: July 10, 2008 Released: July 11, 2008 By the Associate Chief, Media Bureau: I. introduction and Background Time Warner Cable Inc., hereinafter referred to as ``Petitioner,'' has filed with the Commission a petition pursuant to Sections 76.7, 76.905(b)(2), 76.905(b)(1) and 76.907 of the Commission's rules for a determination that Petitioner is subject to effective competition in those communities listed on Attachment A and hereinafter referred to as ``Communities.'' Petitioner alleges that its cable system serving the communities listed on Attachment B and hereinafter referred to as Group B Communities is subject to effective competition pursuant to Section
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-08-1658A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-08-1658A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-08-1658A1.txt
  • 7389-E CSR 7403-E CSR 7417-E CSR 7433-E CSR 7435-E CSR 7441-E CSR 7463-E Adopted: July 14, 2008 Released: July 15, 2008 By the Senior Deputy Chief, Policy Division, Media Bureau: I. introduction and Background Comcast Cable Communications, LLC, on behalf of its subsidiaries and affiliates, hereinafter referred to as ``Petitioner,'' has filed with the Commission a petition pursuant to Sections 76.7, 76.905(b)(2), 76.905(b)(1) and 76.907 of the Commission's rules for a determination that Petitioner is subject to effective competition in those communities listed on Attachment A and hereinafter referred to as ``Communities.'' Petitioner alleges that its cable systems serving the Communities are subject to effective competition pursuant to Section 623(1) of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended (``Communications Act'') and
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-08-1783A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-08-1783A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-08-1783A1.txt
  • NY 1473) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) CSR 7900-E CSR 7901-E Adopted: July 29, 2008 Released: July 30, 2008 By the Senior Deputy Chief, Policy Division, Media Bureau: I. introduction and Background Cablevision of Wappingers Falls, Inc., and Cablevision Systems Long Island Corp., hereinafter referred to as ``Petitioner,'' has filed with the Commission petitions pursuant to Sections 76.7 and 76.905(b)(4) and 76.907 of the Commission's rules for determinations that Petitioner is subject to effective competition in those communities listed on Attachment A and hereinafter referred to as ``Communities.'' Petitioner alleges that its cable systems serving the Communities are subject to effective competition pursuant to Section 623(1)(1)(D) of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended (``Communications Act'') and the
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-08-1786A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-08-1786A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-08-1786A1.txt
  • St. James Parish, LA (CUID 0274) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) CSR 7830-E Adopted: July 30, 2008 Released: July 30, 2008 By the Senior Deputy Chief, Policy Division, Media Bureau: I. introduction and Background Charter Communications, on behalf of its subsidiaries and affiliates, hereinafter referred to as ``Petitioner,'' has filed with the Commission a petition pursuant to Sections 76.7, 76.905(b)(2) and 76.907 of the Commission's rules for a determination that Petitioner is subject to effective competition in those communities listed on Attachment A and hereinafter referred to as ``Communities.'' Petitioner alleges that its cable system serving the Communities is subject to effective competition pursuant to Section 623(1)(1)(B) of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended (``Communications Act'') and the
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-08-1787A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-08-1787A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-08-1787A1.txt
  • (CUID VA0205) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) CSR 7855-E Adopted: July 30, 2008 Released: July 30, 2008 By the Senior Deputy Chief, Policy Division, Media Bureau: I. introduction and Background Comcast Cable Communications, LLC, on behalf of its subsidiaries and affiliates , hereinafter referred to as ``Petitioner,'' has filed with the Commission a petition pursuant to Sections 76.7 and 76.905(b)(4) and 76.907 of the Commission's rules for a determination that Petitioner is subject to effective competition in those communities listed on Attachment A and hereinafter referred to as ``Communities.'' Petitioner alleges that its cable system serving the Communities is subject to effective competition pursuant to Section 623(1)(1)(D) of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended (``Communications Act'') and
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-08-1817A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-08-1817A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-08-1817A1.txt
  • Petition for Determination of Effective Competition in various Wisconsin Communities ) ) ) ) ) ) CSR 7820-E and 7821-E Adopted: July 30, 2008 Released: July 31, 2008 By the Senior Deputy Chief, Policy Division, Media Bureau: I. introduction and Background Time Warner Cable Inc., hereinafter referred to as ``Petitioner,'' has filed with the Commission a petition pursuant to Sections 76.7, 76.905(b)(2), 76.905(b)(1) and 76.907 of the Commission's rules for a determination that Petitioner is subject to effective competition in those communities listed on Attachment A and hereinafter referred to as ``Communities.'' Petitioner alleges that its cable system serving the communities listed on Attachment B and hereinafter referred to as Group B Communities is subject to effective competition pursuant to Section
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-08-1818A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-08-1818A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-08-1818A1.txt
  • Petition for Determination of Effective Competition in various Ohio Communities ) ) ) ) ) ) CSR 7105-E, 7778-E, 7792-E Adopted: July 30, 2008 Released: July 31, 2008 By the Senior Deputy Chief, Policy Division, Media Bureau: I. introduction and Background Time Warner Cable Inc., hereinafter referred to as ``Petitioner,'' has filed with the Commission a petition pursuant to Sections 76.7, 76.905(b)(2), 76.905(b)(1) and 76.907 of the Commission's rules for a determination that Petitioner is subject to effective competition in those communities listed on Attachment A and hereinafter referred to as ``Communities.'' Petitioner alleges that its cable system serving the communities listed on Attachment B and hereinafter referred to as Group B Communities is subject to effective competition pursuant to Section
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-08-1883A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-08-1883A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-08-1883A1.txt
  • Petition for Determination of Effective Competition in various Washington Communities ) ) ) ) ) ) CSR 7731-E, 7734-E, 7759-E Adopted: August 8, 2008 Released: August 8, 2008 By the Senior Deputy Chief, Policy Division, Media Bureau: I. introduction and Background Comcast Cable Communications, LLC, hereinafter referred to as ``Petitioner,'' has filed with the Commission a petition pursuant to Sections 76.7, 76.905(b)(2), 76.905(b)(1) and 76.907 of the Commission's rules for a determination that Petitioner is subject to effective competition in those communities listed on Attachment A and hereinafter referred to as ``Communities.'' Petitioner alleges that its cable system serving the communities listed on Attachment B and hereinafter referred to as Group B Communities is subject to effective competition pursuant to Section
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-08-1884A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-08-1884A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-08-1884A1.txt
  • for Determination of Effective Competition in various Colorado Communities ) ) ) ) ) ) CSR 7732-E, 7739-E, 7740-E, 7746-E Adopted: August 8, 2008 Released: August 8, 2008 By the Senior Deputy Chief, Policy Division, Media Bureau: I. introduction and Background Comcast Cable Communications, LLC, hereinafter referred to as ``Petitioner,'' has filed with the Commission a petition pursuant to Sections 76.7, 76.905(b)(2) and 76.907 of the Commission's rules for a determination that Petitioner is subject to effective competition in those communities listed on Attachment A and hereinafter referred to as ``Communities.'' Petitioner alleges that its cable system serving the Communities is subject to effective competition pursuant to Section 623(1)(1)(B) of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended (``Communications Act'') and the
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-08-1893A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-08-1893A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-08-1893A1.txt
  • 7494-E CSR 7497-E CSR 7499-E CSR 7501-E CSR 7536-E CSR 7555-E CSR 7556-E CSR 7557-E CSR 7559-E CSR 7560-E Adopted: August 12, 2008 Released: August 13, 2008 By the Associate Chief, Media Bureau: I. introduction and Background Time Warner Cable Inc., and Time Warner Entertainment-Advance/Newhouse Partnership, hereinafter referred to as ``Petitioner,'' has filed with the Commission petitions pursuant to Sections 76.7, 76.905(b)(2), 76.905(b)(1) and 76.907 of the Commission's rules for a determination that Petitioner is subject to effective competition in the 754 communities listed on Attachment A and hereinafter referred to as ``Communities.'' Petitioner alleges that its cable systems serving the communities listed on Attachment B and hereinafter referred to as Attachment B Communities, as well as the communities listed in
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-08-1899A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-08-1899A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-08-1899A1.txt
  • Virginia Petition for Determination of Effective Competition in Various Virginia Communities ) ) ) ) ) ) ) CSR 7537-E Adopted: August 12, 2008 Released: August 13, 2008 By the Associate Chief, Media Bureau: I. introduction and Background Coxcom, Inc. d/b/a Cox Communications Northern Virginia, hereinafter referred to as ``Petitioner,'' has filed with the Commission a petition pursuant to Sections 76.7, 76.905(b)(1), 76.905(b)(2), 76.905(b)(4) and 76.907 of the Commission's rules for a determination that Petitioner is subject to effective competition in the community listed on Attachment A and hereinafter referred to as ``Community.'' Petitioner alleges that its cable system serving the Community is subject to effective competition pursuant to Section 623(1) of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended (``Communications Act'')
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-08-1902A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-08-1902A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-08-1902A1.txt
  • Communications, LLC Petition for Determination of Effective Competition in 17 Illinois Communities ) ) ) ) ) ) CSR 7064-E Adopted: August 13, 2008 Released: August 14, 2008 By the Senior Deputy Chief, Policy Division, Media Bureau: I. introduction and Background Comcast Cable Communications, LLC,, hereinafter referred to as ``Petitioner,'' has filed with the Commission a petition pursuant to Sections 76.7, 76.905(b)(2) and 76.907 of the Commission's rules for a determination that Petitioner is subject to effective competition in those communities listed on Attachment A and hereinafter referred to as ``Communities.'' Petitioner alleges that its cable system serving the Communities is subject to effective competition pursuant to Section 623(1)(1)(B) of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended (``Communications Act'') and the
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-08-1903A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-08-1903A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-08-1903A1.txt
  • Communications, LLC Petition for Determination of Effective Competition in 12 Illinois Communities ) ) ) ) ) ) CSR 7134-E Adopted: August 13, 2008 Released: August 14, 2008 By the Senior Deputy Chief, Policy Division, Media Bureau: I. introduction and Background Comcast Cable Communications, LLC, hereinafter referred to as ``Petitioner,'' has filed with the Commission a petition pursuant to Sections 76.7, 76.905(b)(2) and 76.907 of the Commission's rules for a determination that Petitioner is subject to effective competition in those communities listed on Attachment A and hereinafter referred to as ``Communities.'' Petitioner alleges that its cable system serving the Communities is subject to effective competition pursuant to Section 623(1)(1)(B) of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended (``Communications Act'') and the
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-08-1908A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-08-1908A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-08-1908A1.txt
  • ) ) ) ) ) CSR 7905-E CSR 7906-E CSR 7908-E CSR 7909-E CSR 7910-E CSR 7911-E CSR 7913-E CSR 7914-E CSR 7916-E Adopted: August 13, 2008 Released: August 14, 2008 By the Associate Chief, Media Bureau: I. introduction and Background Comcast Cable Communications, LLC , hereinafter referred to as ``Petitioner,'' has filed with the Commission petitions pursuant to Sections 76.7, 76.905(b)(2), 76.905(b)(1) and 76.907 of the Commission's rules for a determination that Petitioner is subject to effective competition in those communities listed on Attachment A and hereinafter referred to as ``Communities.'' Petitioner alleges that its cable systems serving the communities listed on Attachment B and hereinafter referred to as Group B Communities are subject to effective competition pursuant to Section
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-08-1916A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-08-1916A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-08-1916A1.txt
  • Warner Cable Inc. Petition for Determination of Effective Competition in Various South Carolina Communities ) ) ) ) ) ) ) CSR 7396-E Adopted: August 14, 2008 Released: August 15, 2008 By the Associate Chief, Media Bureau: I. introduction and Background Time Warner Cable Inc., hereinafter referred to as ``Petitioner,'' has filed with the Commission a petition pursuant to Sections 76.7, 76.905(b)(2), 76.905(b)(1) and 76.907 of the Commission's rules for a determination that Petitioner is subject to effective competition in those communities listed on Attachment A and hereinafter referred to as ``Communities.'' Petitioner alleges that its cable systems serving the communities listed on Attachment B and hereinafter referred to as Group B Communities, as well as the communities listed in Attachment
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-08-1917A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-08-1917A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-08-1917A1.txt
  • Warner Cable Inc. Petition for Determination of Effective Competition in 8 Communities in New Jersey ) ) ) ) ) ) CSR 7547-E Adopted: August 14, 2008 Released: August 15, 2008 By the Associate Chief, Media Bureau: I. introduction and Background Time Warner Cable Inc., hereinafter referred to as ``Petitioner,'' has filed with the Commission a petition pursuant to Sections 76.7, 76.905(b)(2) and 76.907 of the Commission's rules for a determination that Petitioner is subject to effective competition in those communities listed on Attachment A and hereinafter referred to as ``Communities.'' Petitioner alleges that its cable systems serving the Communities are subject to effective competition pursuant to Section 623(1)(1)(B) of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended (``Communications Act'') and the
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-08-2135A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-08-2135A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-08-2135A1.txt
  • York State ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) CSR 7958-E CSR 7959-E Adopted: September 23, 2008 Released: September 24, 2008 By the Senior Deputy Chief, Policy Division, Media Bureau: I. introduction and Background Time Warner Cable Inc. and Time Warner Cable LLC , hereinafter referred to as ``Petitioner,'' have filed with the Commission two petitions pursuant to Sections 76.7, 76.905(b)(2) and 76.907 of the Commission's rules for a determination that Petitioner is subject to effective competition in those communities listed on Attachment A and hereinafter referred to as ``Communities.'' Petitioner alleges that its cable systems serving the Communities are subject to effective competition pursuant to Section 623(1)(1)(B) of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended (``Communications Act'') and the
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-08-2217A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-08-2217A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-08-2217A1.txt
  • 7598-E CSR 7599-E CSR 7604-E CSR 7605-E CSR 7606-E CSR 7607-E CSR 7608-E CSR 7609-E CSR 7979-E CSR 7980-E CSR 7981-E Adopted: October 1, 2008 Released: October 2, 2008 By the Senior Deputy Chief, Policy Division, Media Bureau: introduction and background Subsidiaries of Cablevision Systems Corporation, hereinafter referred to as ``Petitioner,'' have filed with the Commission petitions pursuant to Sections 76.7, 76.905(b)(2 and 4) and 76.907 of the Commission's rules for a determination that Petitioner is subject to effective competition in those communities listed on Attachment A and hereinafter referred to as the ``Attachment A Communities.'' Petitioner alleges that its cable systems serving the Attachment A Communities are subject to effective competition pursuant to Section 623(1) of the Communications Act of
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-08-2243A3.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-08-2243A3.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-08-2243A3.txt
  • ATSC N N - - A - 45 NTSC Y Y NTSC -61.7 O O 46 ATSC Y Y ATSC -54.3 O - 47 NTSC N N NTSC -96.3 A A 48 ATSC Y Y ATSC -68.5 O - 49 NTSC N Y NTSC -89.1 A A 50 NTSC Y Y NTSC -70.0 A A 51 ATSC Y Y ATSC -76.7 O - 1 Second scan for NTSC signals only. TABLE 5-36. I2R WSD Prototype Results at Test Site 6. CH NTSC/ ATSC Within Service Contour? (Y/N) Viewable? (Y/N) Measured Signal Type Measured Power Level (dBm) Occupied (O) & Available (A) Channels Reported by WSD L1/ S1 L1/ S2 L2/ S1 L2/ S2 21 ATSC N Y ATSC -79.1 O O
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-08-2243A6.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-08-2243A6.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-08-2243A6.txt
  • 7.1 40 D 626.3095 -53.7 Y 54.1 41 D 632.3095 -75.5 Y 24.1 42 D 638.3095 -44.8 Y 22.1 43 N 645.25 -98 N 44 45 N 657.25 -61.7 2 46 D 662.3321 -54.3 Y 45.1 47 N 669.24 -96.3 N 48 D 674.3094 -68.5 Y 4.1 49 N 681.25 -89.1 5 50 N 687.25 -70 3 51 D 692.3321 -76.7 Y 50.1 Table C-11. Measurement Results - Doub's Meadow Park Site Channel Signal Type (N or D) Frequency (MHz) Measured Power (dBm) Viewable (Picture/TASO) Reported PSIP 21 D 512.3095 -92.9 N 22 N 519.28 -69 4 23 N 525.24 -89.2 5 24 N 531.26 -88.5 4 25 N 537.24 -80.1 4 26 N 543.24 -81.1 4 27 D 548.3224 -81.5
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-08-2269A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-08-2269A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-08-2269A1.txt
  • below within 60 days after release of this Order. Referral to Administrative Law Judge or Alternative Dispute Resolution We direct that an Administrative Law Judge resolve the factual disputes with respect to the claims and return a recommended decision and a recommended remedy, if necessary, to the Commission within 60 days of the date of this Order. Pursuant to Section 76.7(g)(2) of the Commission's rules, the parties will have ten days following release of this Order to elect to resolve this dispute through ADR. Each party will notify the Commission, in writing, of its election within 10 days of release of this Order and, in the event that ADR is chosen, will update the Commission monthly on the status of the
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-08-2504A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-08-2504A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-08-2504A1.txt
  • Litchfield, Inc. Petition for Determination of Effective Competition in Eight Connecticut Communities ) ) ) ) ) ) CSR 8021-E Adopted: November 13, 2008 Released: November 13, 2008 By the Senior Deputy Chief, Policy Division, Media Bureau: I. introduction and background Cablevision of Litchfield, Inc., hereinafter referred to as ``Petitioner,'' has filed with the Commission a petition pursuant to Sections 76.7, 76.905(b)(2), 76.905(b)(4) and 76.907 of the Commission's rules for a determination that Petitioner is subject to effective competition in the eight Connecticut communities of Litchfield, Watertown, Cornwall, Goshen, Torrington, Thomaston, Warren, and Morris (listed on Attachment A) and hereinafter referred to as ``Communities.'' Petitioner alleges that its cable system serving the Communities is subject to effective competition pursuant to Section
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-08-2505A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-08-2505A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-08-2505A1.txt
  • in Five Indiana Communities (CUIDS: IN0027, IN0366, IN0577, IN0377, IN0113) ) ) ) ) ) ) CSR 8053-E CSR 8007-E Adopted: November 13, 2008 Released: November 13, 2008 By the Senior Deputy Chief, Policy Division, Media Bureau: I. introduction and Background Time Warner Cable Inc., hereinafter referred to as ``Petitioner,'' has filed with the Commission two petitions pursuant to Sections 76.7, 76.905(b)(2) and 76.907 of the Commission's rules for a determination that Petitioner is subject to effective competition in those communities listed on Attachment A and hereinafter referred to as ``Communities.'' Petitioner alleges that its cable system serving the Communities is subject to effective competition pursuant to Section 623(1)(1)(B) of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended (``Communications Act'') and the
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-08-2512A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-08-2512A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-08-2512A1.txt
  • their MVPD. Although the cable industry has challenged the lawfulness of the integration ban on three separate occasions, in each of those cases the D.C. Circuit denied those petitions. In limited circumstances, however, operators may be eligible for waiver of the integration ban. discussion Petitioners make their requests for waiver pursuant to the Financial Hardship Order and Sections 1.3 and 76.7 of the Commission's rules. In light of Petitioners' demonstrated financial hardships and consistent with the Financial Hardship Order, we conclude that a limited grant of their Waiver Requests until January 31, 2009 is justified under Sections 1.3 and 76.7 of the Commission's rules. We therefore grant Petitioners limited waivers of the integration ban for the Subject Boxes. On October 10,
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-08-2513A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-08-2513A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-08-2513A1.txt
  • Section 76.1204(a)(1) of the Commission's rules to allow it to place into service integrated digital cable set-top boxes. The Bureau has already granted Liberty a limited waiver of the ban on integrated set-top boxes for certain set-top box models, finding the fact that Liberty transitioned to an all-digital system demonstrated good cause for such a waiver under Sections 1.3 and 76.7 of the Commission's rules. As set forth below, we grant Liberty's request for a waiver of Section 76.1204(a)(1) of the Commission's rules. BACKGROUND Congress directed the Commission to adopt regulations to assure the commercial availability of navigation devices more than ten years ago as part of the Telecommunications Act of 1996. The Commission implemented this directive in 1998 through the
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-08-2541A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-08-2541A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-08-2541A1.txt
  • Networks Petition for Determination of Effective Competition in Six Communities in California ) ) ) ) ) ) CSR 8048-E Adopted: November 19, 2008 Released: November 19, 2008 By the Senior Deputy Chief, Policy Division, Media Bureau: I. introduction and Background Bright House Networks, LLC, hereinafter referred to as ``Petitioner,'' has filed with the Commission a petition pursuant to Sections 76.7, 76.905(b)(2) and 76.907 of the Commission's rules for a determination that Petitioner is subject to effective competition in those communities listed on Attachment A and hereinafter referred to as ``Communities.'' Petitioner alleges that its cable system serving the Communities is subject to effective competition pursuant to Section 623(1)(1)(B) of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended (``Communications Act''), and the
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-08-2542A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-08-2542A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-08-2542A1.txt
  • of Effective Competition in Four Communities in California ) ) ) ) ) ) ) CSR 8056-E Adopted: November 19, 2008 Released: November 19, 2008 By the Senior Deputy Chief, Policy Division, Media Bureau: I. introduction and Background CoxCom, Inc., d/b/a Cox Communications Orange County, hereinafter referred to as ``Petitioner,'' has filed with the Commission a petition pursuant to Sections 76.7, 76.905(b)(2) and 76.907 of the Commission's rules for a determination that Petitioner is subject to effective competition in those communities listed on Attachment A and hereinafter referred to as ``Communities.'' Petitioner alleges that its cable system serving the Communities is subject to effective competition pursuant to Section 623(1)(1)(B) of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended (``Communications Act''), and the
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-08-2554A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-08-2554A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-08-2554A1.txt
  • in Two Communities in the State of New York ) ) ) ) ) ) ) CSR 8068-E CSR 8069-E Adopted: November 24, 2008 Released: November 24, 2008 By the Senior Deputy Chief, Policy Division, Media Bureau: I. introduction and Background Time Warner Cable, Inc., hereinafter referred to as ``Petitioner,'' has filed with the Commission two petitions pursuant to Sections 76.7 and 76.905(b)(4) and 76.907 of the Commission's rules for a determination that Petitioner is subject to effective competition in those communities listed on Attachment A and hereinafter referred to as ``Communities.'' Petitioner alleges that its cable systems serving the Communities are subject to effective competition pursuant to Section 623(1)(1)(D) of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended (``Communications Act'') and
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-08-2555A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-08-2555A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-08-2555A1.txt
  • licensee of a television station in the same DMA, WGCB-TV, Red Lion, Pennsylvania (``WGCB''), demanded on June 12, 2008 that Comcast of Southeast Pennsylvania, Inc. (``Comcast'') carry its signal on Comcast's cable systems located in Franklin County. Comcast refused this carriage demand, and on July 2, 2008, WGCB filed a mandatory carriage complaint against Comcast pursuant to Section 76.61 and 76.7 of the Commission's rules. WGCB requests that the Commission order Comcast to carry WGCB on Comcast's Franklin County cable systems, beginning immediately. Comcast filed an opposition to this pleading, and WGCB filed a reply. For the reasons discussed below, we deny WGCB's complaint. Background Under Section 614 of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended (hereinafter the ``Act''), and implementing
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-08-2617A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-08-2617A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-08-2617A1.txt
  • Pennsylvania ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) CSR 7377-E CSR 7493-E CSR 7496-E Adopted: December 16, 2008 Released: December 17, 2008 By the Senior Deputy Chief, Policy Division, Media Bureau: I. introduction and Background Time Warner Cable Inc., and Time Warner Entertainment-Advance/Newhouse Partnership, hereinafter referred to as ``Petitioner,'' has filed with the Commission petitions pursuant to Sections 76.7, 76.905(b)(2), 76.905(b)(1) and 76.907 of the Commission's rules for a determination that Petitioner is subject to effective competition in the 52 communities listed on Attachment A and hereinafter referred to as ``Communities.'' Petitioner alleges that its cable systems serving the communities listed on Attachment B and hereinafter referred to as the Attachment B Communities, as well as the communities listed
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-08-2632A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-08-2632A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-08-2632A1.txt
  • affiliates Petition for Determination of Effective Competition in Salisbury, Massachusetts (CUID 0162) ) ) ) ) ) ) CSR 7985-E Adopted: December 2, 2008 Released: December 3, 2008 By the Senior Deputy Chief, Policy Division, Media Bureau: I. introduction and Background Comcast Cable Communications, LLC, hereinafter referred to as ``Petitioner,'' has filed with the Commission a petition pursuant to Sections 76.7, 76.905(b)(2) and 76.907 of the Commission's rules for a determination that Petitioner is subject to effective competition in those communities listed on Attachment A and hereinafter referred to as ``Communities.'' Petitioner alleges that its cable system serving the Communities is subject to effective competition pursuant to Section 623(1)(1)(B) of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended (``Communications Act'') and the
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-08-2633A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-08-2633A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-08-2633A1.txt
  • Petition for Determination of Effective Competition in two Massachusetts Communities. ) ) ) ) ) ) CSR 7999-E & 8000-E Adopted: December 2, 2008 Released: December 3, 2008 By the Senior Deputy Chief, Policy Division, Media Bureau: I. introduction and Background Comcast Cable Communications, LLC, hereinafter referred to as ``Petitioner,'' has filed with the Commission a petition pursuant to Sections 76.7 and 76.905(b)(4) and 76.907 of the Commission's rules for a determination that Petitioner is subject to effective competition in those communities listed on Attachment A and hereinafter referred to as ``Communities.'' Petitioner alleges that its cable system serving the Communities is subject to effective competition pursuant to Section 623(1)(1)(D) of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended (``Communications Act'') and
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-08-2634A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-08-2634A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-08-2634A1.txt
  • and affiliates Petition for Determination of Effective Competition in Tulpehocken, Pennsylvania (3193) ) ) ) ) ) ) CSR 8014-E Adopted: December 2, 2008 Released: December 3, 2008 By the Senior Deputy Chief, Policy Division, Media Bureau: I. introduction and Background Comcast Cable Communications, LLC, hereinafter referred to as ``Petitioner,'' has filed with the Commission a petition pursuant to Sections 76.7, 76.905(b)(2) and 76.907 of the Commission's rules for a determination that Petitioner is subject to effective competition in those communities listed on Attachment A and hereinafter referred to as ``Communities.'' Petitioner alleges that its cable system serving the Communities is subject to effective competition pursuant to Section 623(1)(1)(B) of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended (``Communications Act'') and the
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-08-2635A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-08-2635A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-08-2635A1.txt
  • North Carolina Communities ) ) ) ) ) ) CSR 8035-E, 8043-E, 8049-E, 8042-E, 8038-E, 8046-E, 8034-E, 8031-E, 8054-E, 8032-E Adopted: December 2, 2008 Released: December 3, 2008 By the Senior Deputy Chief, Policy Division, Media Bureau: I. introduction and Background Time Warner Cable, Inc., hereinafter referred to as ``Petitioner,'' has filed with the Commission a petition pursuant to Sections 76.7, 76.905(b)(2), 76.905(b)(1) and 76.907 of the Commission's rules for a determination that Petitioner is subject to effective competition in those communities listed on Attachment A and hereinafter referred to as ``Communities.'' Petitioner alleges that its cable system serving the Communities is subject to effective competition pursuant to Section 623(1) of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended (``Communications Act'') and
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-08-2636A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-08-2636A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-08-2636A1.txt
  • Effective Competition in Several Texas Communities ) ) ) ) ) ) CSR 8033-E, 8052-E, 8030-E, 8047-E, 8044-E, 8050-E, 8039-E, 8027-E Adopted: December 2, 2008 Released: December 3, 2008 By the Senior Deputy Chief, Policy Division, Media Bureau: I. introduction and Background Time Warner Cable Inc., hereinafter referred to as ``Petitioner,'' has filed with the Commission petitions pursuant to Sections 76.7, 76.905(b)(2), 76.905(b)(1) and 76.907 of the Commission's rules for a determination that Petitioner is subject to effective competition in those communities listed on Attachment A and hereinafter referred to as ``Communities.'' Petitioner alleges that its cable system serving the Communities is subject to effective competition pursuant to Section 623(1) of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended (``Communications Act'') and
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-08-268A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-08-268A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-08-268A1.txt
  • the public interest. Absent a waiver in this case, the affected communities would experience an interruption of popular network programming as the result of Time Warner's inability to comply fully with Section 76.1603(b). We, therefore, conclude that the public interest would be served by granting Time Warner's request. ordering clauses Accordingly, IT IS ORDERED that, pursuant to Section 1.3 and 76.7 of the Commission's rules, 47 C.F.R. §§ 1.3, 76.7, the request for waiver filed by Time Warner Cable of Section 76.1603(b) of the Commission's rules, 47 C.F.R. § 76.1603(b), IS GRANTED as discussed herein. This action is taken pursuant to authority delegated by Section 0.283 of the Commission's rules, 47 C.F.R. § 0.283. FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION Monica Shah Desai Chief,
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-08-2709A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-08-2709A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-08-2709A1.txt
  • in New York State ) ) ) ) ) ) ) CSR 8015-E CSR 8016-E CSR 8017-E CSR 8018-E Adopted: December 15, 2008 Released: December 16, 2008 By the Senior Deputy Chief, Policy Division, Media Bureau: I. introduction and Background Subsidiaries of Cablevision Systems Corporation, hereinafter referred to as ``Petitioner,'' has filed with the Commission a petition pursuant to Sections 76.7 and 76.905(b)(4) and 76.907 of the Commission's rules for a determination that Petitioner is subject to effective competition in those communities listed on Attachment A and hereinafter referred to as the ``Communities.'' Petitioner alleges that its cable system serving the Communities is subject to effective competition pursuant to Section 623(1)(1)(D) of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended (``Communications Act'')
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-08-2805A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-08-2805A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-08-2805A1.txt
  • be made, evidenced, and enforced in the same manner as actions of the Commission.'' The Media Bureau is granted authority to administer and enforce rules and policies regarding program carriage. The procedural rules for program carriage provide that disputes are to be resolved on the basis of a complaint, answer and reply. The general procedural rules set forth under Section 76.7 apply to program carriage proceedings unless specified otherwise under the program carriage rules. Section 76.7(g)(1) authorizes the Media Bureau to refer matters to an administrative law judge (``ALJ''): (1) After reviewing the pleadings, and at any stage of the proceeding thereafter, the Commission staff may, in its discretion, designate any proceeding or discrete issues arising out of any proceeding for
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-08-2812A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-08-2812A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-08-2812A1.txt
  • State of New York and the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) CSR 7490-E Adopted: December 29, 2008 Released: December 29, 2008 By the Senior Deputy Chief, Policy Division, Media Bureau: I. introduction and Background Time Warner Entertainment-Advance/Newhouse Partnership, hereinafter referred to as ``Petitioner,'' has filed with the Commission a petition pursuant to Sections 76.7, 76.905(b)(2), 76.905(b)(1) and 76.907 of the Commission's rules for a determination that Petitioner is subject to effective competition in the 24 communities listed on Attachment A and hereinafter referred to as the ``Communities.'' Petitioner alleges that its cable systems serving the communities listed on Attachment B and hereinafter referred to as the Attachment B Communities, as well as the communities
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-08-437A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-08-437A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-08-437A1.txt
  • their television sets after the transition and submit a sworn declaration to the Commission confirming that this is the case, and (4) publicly commit to this plan by sworn declaration. As we explained in the BendBroadband Order, such a declaration will ``demonstrate [a] commitment to move to an all-digital network.'' Accordingly, IT IS ORDERED that, pursuant to Sections 1.3 and 76.7 of the Commission's rules, 47 C.F.R. §§ 1.3, 76.7, a conditional waiver of Section 76.1204(a)(1) of the Commission's rules, 47 C.F.R. § 76.1204(a)(1), IS GRANTED to the Petitioners listed in the Appendix conditioned as set forth in this Order. This action is taken pursuant to authority delegated by Section 0.283 of the Commission's rules, 47 C.F.R. § 0.283. FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-08-438A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-08-438A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-08-438A1.txt
  • after the transition and submit a sworn declaration to the Commission confirming that this is the case, and (4) the operator must publicly commit to this plan by sworn declaration. As we explained in the BendBroadband Order, such a declaration will ``demonstrate [a] commitment to move to an all-digital network.'' Accordingly, IT IS ORDERED that, pursuant to Sections 1.3 and 76.7 of the Commission's rules, 47 C.F.R. §§ 1.3, 76.7, a conditional waiver of Section 76.1204(a)(1) of the Commission's rules, 47 C.F.R. § 76.1204(a)(1), IS GRANTED to Innovative Cable TV, St. Thomas-St. John & St. Croix and Massillon Cable TV, conditioned as set forth in this Order. This action is taken pursuant to authority delegated by Section 0.283 of the Commission's
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-08-569A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-08-569A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-08-569A1.txt
  • Cable Communications, LLC Petition for Determination of Effective Competition in various Connecticut Communities ) ) ) ) ) ) ) CSR 7066-E Adopted: March 13, 2008 Released: March 14, 2008 By the Associate Bureau Chief, Media Bureau: I. introduction and background Comcast Cable Communications, LLC, hereinafter referred to as ``Petitioner,'' has filed with the Commission a petition pursuant to Sections 76.7, 76.905(b)(2) and 76.907 of the Commission's rules for a determination that Petitioner is subject to effective competition in those communities listed on Attachment A and hereinafter referred to as ``Communities.'' Petitioner alleges that its cable system serving the Communities is subject to effective competition pursuant to Section 623(1)(1)(B) of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended (``Communications Act'') and the
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-08-572A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-08-572A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-08-572A1.txt
  • Cook County, Illinois Communities ) ) ) ) ) ) ) CSR 7578-E, 7579-E, 7580-E, 7581-E, 7582-E, 7583-E, 7584-E, 7585-E, 7586-E, 7587-E Adopted: March 13, 2008 Released: March 14, 2008 By the Associate Bureau Chief, Media Bureau: I. introduction and Background Comcast Cable Communications, LLC, hereinafter referred to as ``Petitioner,'' has filed with the Commission a petition pursuant to Sections 76.7, 76.905(b)(2) and 76.907 of the Commission's rules for a determination that Petitioner is subject to effective competition in those communities listed on Attachment A and hereinafter referred to as ``Communities.'' Petitioner alleges that its cable system serving the Communities is subject to effective competition pursuant to Section 623(1)(1)(B) of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended (``Communications Act'') and the
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-08-632A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-08-632A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-08-632A1.txt
  • Petition for Determination of Effective Competition in two Minnesota Communities (CUID MN0057 and MN0082) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) CSR 7076-E and 7077-E Adopted: March 20, 2008 Released: March 21, 2008 By the Associate Chief, Media Bureau: I. introduction and Background Charter Communications, hereinafter referred to as ``Petitioner,'' has filed with the Commission a petition pursuant to Sections 76.7, 76.905(b)(2) and 76.907 of the Commission's rules for a determination that Petitioner is subject to effective competition in those communities listed on Attachment A and hereinafter referred to as ``Communities.'' Petitioner alleges that its cable system serving the Communities is subject to effective competition pursuant to Section 623(1)(1)(B) of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended (``Communications Act'') and the
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-08-683A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-08-683A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-08-683A1.txt
  • Inc. Petition for Determination of Effective Competition in various Ohio Communities ) ) ) ) ) ) ) CSR 7099-E, 7100-E, 7101-E, 7180-E Adopted: March 25, 2008 Released: March 25, 2008 By the Associate Chief, Media Bureau: I. introduction and Background Time Warner Cable Inc., hereinafter referred to as ``Petitioner,'' has filed with the Commission a petition pursuant to Sections 76.7, 76.905(b)(2) and 76.907 of the Commission's rules for a determination that Petitioner is subject to effective competition in those communities listed on Attachment A and hereinafter referred to as ``Communities.'' Petitioner alleges that its cable system serving the Communities is subject to effective competition pursuant to Section 623(1)(1)(B) of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended (``Communications Act'') and the
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-08-701A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-08-701A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-08-701A1.txt
  • Comcast Cable Communications, LLC Petition for Determination of Effective Competition in various Florida Communities ) ) ) ) ) ) CSR 7086-E Adopted: March 25, 2008 Released: March 26, 2008 By the Associate Bureau Chief, Media Bureau: I. introduction and Background Comcast Cable Communications, LLC, hereinafter referred to as ``Petitioner,'' has filed with the Commission a petition pursuant to Sections 76.7, 76.905(b)(2), 76.905(b)(1) and 76.907 of the Commission's rules for a determination that Petitioner is subject to effective competition in those communities listed on Attachment A and hereinafter referred to as ``Communities.'' Petitioner alleges that its cable system serving the communities listed on Attachment B and hereinafter referred to as Group B Communities is subject to effective competition pursuant to Section
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-08-702A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-08-702A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-08-702A1.txt
  • of Effective Competition in Pasco County, Florida (CUIDs FL0238, FL1296, FL1297) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) CSR 7043-E Adopted: March 25, 2008 Released: March 26, 2008 By the Associate Bureau Chief, Media Bureau: I. introduction and Background Bright House Networks, LLC (``Bright House''), hereinafter referred to as ``Petitioner,'' has filed with the Commission a petition pursuant to Sections 76.7 and 76.905(b)(4) and 76.907 of the Commission's rules for a determination that Petitioner is subject to effective competition in those communities listed on Attachment A and hereinafter referred to as ``Communities.'' Petitioner alleges that its cable system serving the Communities is subject to effective competition pursuant to Section 623(1)(1)(D) of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended (``Communications Act'') and
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-08-703A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-08-703A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-08-703A1.txt
  • Determination of Effective Competition in Various Georgia Communities ) ) ) ) ) ) ) CSR 7087-E Adopted: March 25, 2008 Released: March 26, 2008 By the Associate Bureau Chief, Media Bureau: I. introduction and Background Cox Communications, Inc. d/b/a Cox Communications Middle Georgia (``Cox''), hereinafter referred to as ``Petitioner,'' has filed with the Commission a petition pursuant to Sections 76.7, 76.905(b)(2), 76.905(b)(1) and 76.907 of the Commission's rules for a determination that Petitioner is subject to effective competition in those communities listed on Attachment A and hereinafter referred to as ``Communities.'' Petitioner alleges that its cable system serving the communities listed on Attachment B and hereinafter referred to as Group B Communities is subject to effective competition pursuant to Section
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-08-704A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-08-704A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-08-704A1.txt
  • in Twenty-Three Missouri and Kansas Communities ) ) ) ) ) ) ) CSR 7150-E, CSR-7151-E & CSR 7535-E Adopted: March 25, 2008 Released: March 26, 2008 By the Associate Bureau Chief, Media Bureau: I. introduction and Background Time Warner Cable Inc. (``Time Warner'') , hereinafter referred to as ``Petitioner,'' has filed with the Commission three petitions pursuant to Sections 76.7, 76.905(b)(2), 76.905(b)(1) and 76.907 of the Commission's rules for a determination that Petitioner is subject to effective competition in those communities listed on Attachment A and hereinafter referred to as ``Communities.'' Petitioner alleges that its cable system serving the communities listed on Attachment B and hereinafter referred to as Group B Communities is subject to effective competition pursuant to Section
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-08-705A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-08-705A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-08-705A1.txt
  • Southeast LLC Petition for Determination of Effective Competition in Hopkinsville, Kentucky (CUID KY0896) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) CSR 7194-E Adopted: March 25, 2008 Released: March 26, 2008 By the Associate Bureau Chief, Media Bureau: I. introduction and Background Mediacom Southeast LLC (``Mediacom''), hereinafter referred to as ``Petitioner,'' has filed with the Commission a petition pursuant to Sections 76.7, 76.905(b)(1) and 76.907 of the Commission's rules for a determination that Petitioner is subject to effective competition in the community listed on Attachment A and hereinafter referred to as ``Community.'' Petitioner alleges that its cable system serving the Community is subject to effective competition pursuant to Section 623(1)(1)(A) of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended (``Communications Act'') and the
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-08-706A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-08-706A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-08-706A1.txt
  • LLC Petition for Determination of Effective Competition in various Illinois Communities ) ) ) ) ) ) CSR 7371-E, 7400-E, 7427-E, 7438-E Adopted: March 25, 2008 Released: March 26, 2008 By the Associate Bureau Chief, Media Bureau: I. introduction and Background Comcast Cable Communications, LLC, hereinafter referred to as ``Petitioner,'' has filed with the Commission a petition pursuant to Sections 76.7, 76.905(b)(2) and 76.907 of the Commission's rules for a determination that Petitioner is subject to effective competition in those communities listed on Attachment A and hereinafter referred to as ``Communities.'' Petitioner alleges that its cable system serving the Communities is subject to effective competition pursuant to Section 623(1)(1)(B) of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended (``Communications Act'') and the
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-08-707A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-08-707A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-08-707A1.txt
  • Comcast Cable Communications, LLC Petition for Determination of Effective Competition in two Michigan Communities ) ) ) ) ) ) CSR 7402-E Adopted: March 25, 2008 Released: March 26, 2008 By the Associate Bureau Chief, Media Bureau: I. introduction and Background Comcast Cable Communications, LLC, hereinafter referred to as ``Petitioner,'' has filed with the Commission a petition pursuant to Sections 76.7, 76.905(b)(2) and 76.907 of the Commission's rules for a determination that Petitioner is subject to effective competition in those communities listed on Attachment A and hereinafter referred to as ``Communities.'' Petitioner alleges that its cable system serving the Communities is subject to effective competition pursuant to Section 623(1)(1)(B) of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended (``Communications Act'') and the
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-08-708A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-08-708A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-08-708A1.txt
  • Tennessee Communities (CUIDs TN0012, TN0049, TN0023) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) CSR 7668-E Adopted: March 25, 2008 Released: March 26, 2008 By the Associate Bureau Chief, Media Bureau: I. introduction and Background Charter Communications, on behalf of its subsidiaries and affiliates (``Charter''), hereinafter referred to as ``Petitioner,'' has filed with the Commission a petition pursuant to Sections 76.7, 76.905(b)(2) and 76.907 of the Commission's rules for a determination that Petitioner is subject to effective competition in those communities listed on Attachment A and hereinafter referred to as ``Communities.'' Petitioner alleges that its cable system serving the Communities is subject to effective competition pursuant to Section 623(1)(1)(B) of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended (``Communications Act'') and the
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-08-709A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-08-709A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-08-709A1.txt
  • Communications, LLC Petition for Determination of Effective Competition in Detroit, Michigan CUID (MI1039) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) CSR 7374-E Adopted: March 25, 2008 Released: March 26, 2008 By the Associate Bureau Chief, Media Bureau: I. introduction and Background Comcast Cable Communications, LLC, hereinafter referred to as ``Petitioner,'' has filed with the Commission a petition pursuant to Sections 76.7, 76.905(b)(2), 76.905(b)(1) and 76.907 of the Commission's rules for a determination that Petitioner is subject to effective competition in the community listed on Attachment A and hereinafter referred to as ``Community.'' Petitioner alleges that its cable system serving the Community is subject to effective competition pursuant to Section 623(1) of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended (``Communications Act'') and
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-08-724A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-08-724A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-08-724A1.txt
  • 7615-E & CSR 7616-E Adopted: March 26, 2008 Released: March 28, 2008 By the Senior Deputy Chief, Policy Division, Media Bureau: I. introduction and Background C-Native Exchange IIA, L.P. d/b/a Time Warner Cable and C-Native Exchange III, L.P. d/b/a Time Warner Cable (collectively ``Time Warner''), hereinafter referred to as ``Petitioner,'' has filed with the Commission three petitions pursuant to Sections 76.7, 76.905(b)(2), 76.905(b)(1) and 76.907 of the Commission's rules for a determination that Petitioner is subject to effective competition in those communities listed on Attachment A and hereinafter referred to as ``Communities.'' Petitioner alleges that its cable system serving the communities listed on Attachment B and hereinafter referred to as Group B Communities is subject to effective competition pursuant to Section
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-08-739A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-08-739A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-08-739A1.txt
  • ) ) CSR 7152-E, CSR 7153-E, CSR 7161-E, CSR 7171-E & CSR 7172-E Adopted: March 26, 2008 Released: March 28, 2008 By the Senior Deputy Chief, Policy Division, Media Bureau: I. introduction and Background Comcast Cable Communications, LLC, on behalf of its subsidiaries and affiliates, hereinafter referred to as ``Petitioner,'' has filed with the Commission five petitions pursuant to Sections 76.7, 76.905(b)(2), 76.905(b)(1) and 76.907 of the Commission's rules for a determination that Petitioner is subject to effective competition in those communities listed on Attachment A and hereinafter referred to as ``Communities.'' Petitioner alleges that its cable system serving the communities listed on Attachment B and hereinafter referred to as Group B Communities is subject to effective competition pursuant to Section
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-08-749A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-08-749A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-08-749A1.txt
  • Determination of Effective Competition in Lake County, Illinois ) ) ) ) ) ) ) CSR 7380-E, 7381-E, 7382-E, 7383-E Adopted: March 27, 2008 Released: March 28, 2008 By the Senior Deputy Chief, Policy Division, Media Bureau: I. introduction and Background Comcast Cable Communications, LLC, hereinafter referred to as ``Petitioner,'' has filed with the Commission a petition pursuant to Sections 76.7, 76.905(b)(2) and 76.907 of the Commission's rules for a determination that Petitioner is subject to effective competition in those communities listed on Attachment A and hereinafter referred to as ``Communities.'' Petitioner alleges that its cable system serving the Communities is subject to effective competition pursuant to Section 623(1)(1)(B) of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended (``Communications Act'') and the
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-08-750A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-08-750A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-08-750A1.txt
  • for Determination of Effective Competition in DuPage County, Illinois ) ) ) ) ) ) ) CSR 7453-E, 7454-E, 7455-E Adopted: March 27, 2008 Released: March 28, 2008 By the Senior Deputy Chief, Policy Division, Media Bureau: I. introduction and Background Comcast Cable Communications, LLC, hereinafter referred to as ``Petitioner,'' has filed with the Commission a petition pursuant to Sections 76.7, 76.905(b)(2) and 76.907 of the Commission's rules for a determination that Petitioner is subject to effective competition in those communities listed on Attachment A and hereinafter referred to as ``Communities.'' Petitioner alleges that its cable system serving the Communities is subject to effective competition pursuant to Section 623(1)(1)(B) of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended (``Communications Act'') and the
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-08-771A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-08-771A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-08-771A1.txt
  • for Determination of Effective Competition in various Illinois Communities ) ) ) ) ) ) ) CSR 7191-E and 7392-E Adopted: March 31, 2008 Released: April 1, 2008 By the Senior Deputy Chief, Policy Division, Media Bureau: I. introduction and Background Comcast Cable Communications, LLC, hereinafter referred to as ``Petitioner,'' has filed with the Commission a petition pursuant to Sections 76.7, 76.905(b)(2) and 76.907 of the Commission's rules for a determination that Petitioner is subject to effective competition in those communities listed on Attachment A and hereinafter referred to as ``Communities.'' Petitioner alleges that its cable system serving the Communities is subject to effective competition pursuant to Section 623(1)(1)(B) of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended (``Communications Act'') and the
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-08-772A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-08-772A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-08-772A1.txt
  • for Determination of Effective Competition in McHenry County, Illinois ) ) ) ) ) ) ) CSR 7378-E and 7379-E Adopted: March 31, 2008 Released: April 1, 2008 By the Senior Deputy Chief, Policy Division, Media Bureau: I. introduction and Background Comcast Cable Communication, LLC, hereinafter referred to as ``Petitioner,'' has filed with the Commission a petition pursuant to Sections 76.7, 76.905(b)(2), 76.905(b)(1) and 76.907 of the Commission's rules for a determination that Petitioner is subject to effective competition in those communities listed on Attachment A and hereinafter referred to as ``Communities.'' Petitioner alleges that its cable system serving the Communities is subject to effective competition pursuant to Section 623(1) of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended (``Communications Act'') and
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-08-773A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-08-773A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-08-773A1.txt
  • CSR 7418-E, CSR 7419-E, CSR 7421-E, CSR 7428-E, CSR 7459-E & CSR 7462-E Adopted: March 31, 2008 Released: April 1, 2008 By the Senior Deputy Chief, Policy Division, Media Bureau: I. introduction and Background Comcast Cable Communications, LLC, on behalf of its subsidiaries and affiliates, hereinafter referred to as ``Petitioner,'' has filed with the Commission six petitions pursuant to Sections 76.7, 76.905(b)(2) and 76.907 of the Commission's rules for a determination that Petitioner is subject to effective competition in those communities listed on Attachment A and hereinafter referred to as ``Communities.'' Petitioner alleges that its cable system serving the Communities is subject to effective competition pursuant to Section 623(1)(1)(B) of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended (``Communications Act'') and the
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-08-782A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-08-782A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-08-782A1.txt
  • ) ) ) ) ) CSR 7063-E 7067-E 7073-E 7102-E 7103-E 7122-E 7678-E Adopted: April 1, 2008 Released: April 2, 2008 By the Senior Deputy Chief, Policy Division, Media Bureau: I. introduction and Background Comcast Cable Communications, LLC, on behalf of its Subsidiaries and Affiliates, hereinafter referred to as ``Petitioner,'' has filed with the Commission seven petitions pursuant to Sections 76.7, 76.905(b)(1), 76.905(b)(2), 76.905(b)(4) and 76.907 of the Commission's rules for a determination that Petitioner is subject to effective competition in those communities listed on Attachment A and hereinafter referred to as ``Communities.'' Petitioner alleges that its cable systems serving those Communities are subject to effective competition pursuant to Section 623(1) of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended (``Communications Act'')
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-08-806A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-08-806A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-08-806A1.txt
  • LLC Petition for Determination of Effective Competition in Fairhope, Alabama (CUID AL0160) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) CSR 6683-E Adopted: April 3, 2008 Released: April 4, 2008 By the Senior Deputy Chief, Policy Division, Media Bureau: I. introduction and Background Mediacom Southeast LLC, hereinafter referred to as ``Petitioner,'' has filed with the Commission a petition pursuant to Sections 76.7, 76.905(b)(2) and 76.907 of the Commission's rules for a determination that Petitioner is subject to effective competition in those communities listed on Attachment A and hereinafter referred to as ``Communities.'' Petitioner alleges that its cable system serving the Communities is subject to effective competition pursuant to Section 623(1)(1)(B) of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended (``Communications Act'') and the
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-08-807A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-08-807A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-08-807A1.txt
  • 7647-E CSR 7650-E, CSR 7651-E, CSR 7652-E & CSR 7653-E Adopted: April 3, 2008 Released: April 4, 2008 By the Senior Deputy Chief, Policy Division, Media Bureau: I. introduction and Background Time Warner Cable San Antonio LP and Time Warner Entertainment-Advance/Newhouse Partnership (collectively ``Time Warner''), hereinafter referred to as ``Petitioner,'' has filed with the Commission seven petitions pursuant to Sections 76.7, 76.905(b)(2) and 76.907 of the Commission's rules for a determination that Petitioner is subject to effective competition in those communities listed on Attachment A and hereinafter referred to as ``Communities.'' Petitioner alleges that its cable system serving the Communities is subject to effective competition pursuant to Section 623(1)(1)(B) of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended (``Communications Act'') and the
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-08-808A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-08-808A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-08-808A1.txt
  • Virginia (CUID VA0240) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) CSR 7601-E Adopted: April 3, 2008 Released: April 4, 2008 By the Senior Deputy Chief, Policy Division, Media Bureau: I. introduction and Background Comcast Cable Communications, LLC, on behalf of its subsidiaries and affiliates, hereinafter referred to as ``Petitioner,'' has filed with the Commission a petition pursuant to Sections 76.7, 76.905(b)(2) and 76.907 of the Commission's rules for a determination that Petitioner is subject to effective competition in those communities listed on Attachment A and hereinafter referred to as ``Communities.'' Petitioner alleges that its cable system serving the Communities is subject to effective competition pursuant to Section 623(1)(1)(B) of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended (``Communications Act'') and the
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-08-809A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-08-809A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-08-809A1.txt
  • in Six Georgia Communities ) ) ) ) ) ) ) CSR 7065-E Adopted: April 3, 2008 Released: April 4, 2008 By the Senior Deputy Chief, Policy Division, Media Bureau: I. introduction and Background Comcast Cable Communications, LLC, on behalf of its subsidiaries and affiliates, hereinafter referred to as ``Petitioner,'' has filed with the Commission a petition pursuant to Sections 76.7, 76.905(b)(2) and 76.907 of the Commission's rules for a determination that Petitioner is subject to effective competition in those communities listed on Attachment A and hereinafter referred to as ``Communities.'' Petitioner alleges that its cable system serving the Communities is subject to effective competition pursuant to Section 623(1)(1)(B) of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended (``Communications Act'') and the
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-08-810A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-08-810A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-08-810A1.txt
  • in Various Louisiana Communities ) ) ) ) ) ) ) CSR 7426-E Adopted: April 3, 2008 Released: April 4, 2008 By the Senior Deputy Chief, Policy Division, Media Bureau: I. introduction and Background Comcast Cable Communications, LLC, on behalf of its subsidiaries and affiliates, hereinafter referred to as ``Petitioner,'' has filed with the Commission a petition pursuant to Sections 76.7, 76.905(b)(2) and 76.907 of the Commission's rules for a determination that Petitioner is subject to effective competition in those communities listed on Attachment A and hereinafter referred to as ``Communities.'' Petitioner alleges that its cable system serving the Communities is subject to effective competition pursuant to Section 623(1)(1)(B) of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended (``Communications Act'') and the
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-08-813A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-08-813A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-08-813A1.txt
  • Competition in Various Alabama Communities ) ) ) ) ) ) CSR 7431-E Adopted: April 3, 2008 Released: April 4, 2008 By the Senior Deputy Chief, Policy Division, Media Bureau: I. introduction and Background Comcast Cable Communications, LLC, on behalf of its subsidiaries and affiliates, hereinafter referred to as ``Petitioner,'' has filed with the Commission a petition pursuant to Sections 76.7, 76.905(b)(2), 76.905(b)(1) and 76.907 of the Commission's rules for a determination that Petitioner is subject to effective competition in those communities listed on Attachment A and hereinafter referred to as ``Communities.'' Petitioner alleges that its cable system serving the communities listed on Attachment B and hereinafter referred to as Group B Communities is subject to effective competition pursuant to Section
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-08-820A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-08-820A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-08-820A1.txt
  • for Determination of Effective Competition in various Michigan Communities ) ) ) ) ) ) ) CSR 7384-E and 7401-E Adopted: April 3, 2008 Released: April 4, 2008 By the Senior Deputy Chief, Policy Division, Media Bureau: I. introduction and Background Comcast Cable Communications, LLC, hereinafter referred to as ``Petitioner,'' has filed with the Commission a petition pursuant to Sections 76.7, 76.905(b)(2), 76.905(b)(1) and 76.907 of the Commission's rules for a determination that Petitioner is subject to effective competition in those communities listed on Attachment A and hereinafter referred to as ``Communities.'' Petitioner alleges that its cable system serving the Communities is subject to effective competition pursuant to Section 623(1) of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended (``Communications Act'') and
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-08-826A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-08-826A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-08-826A1.txt
  • 7620-E CSR 7621-E CSR 7622-E CSR 7623-E CSR 7624-E CSR 7686-E CSR 7687-E CSR 7691-E CSR 7694-E CSR 7695-E Adopted: April 7, 2008 Released: April 8, 2008 By the Senior Deputy Chief, Policy Division, Media Bureau: I. introduction and Background Cablevision Systems Corporation, through several subsidiaries, hereinafter referred to as ``Petitioner,'' has filed with the Commission petitions pursuant to Sections 76.7 and 76.905(b)(4) and 76.907 of the Commission's rules for determinations that Petitioner is subject to effective competition in those communities listed on Attachment A and hereinafter referred to as ``Communities.'' Petitioner alleges that its cable systems serving the Communities are subject to effective competition pursuant to Section 623(1)(1)(D) of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended (``Communications Act'') and the
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-08-827A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-08-827A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-08-827A1.txt
  • Determination of Effective Competition in Fourteen Oklahoma Communities ) ) ) ) ) ) ) CSR 7561-E Adopted: April 7, 2008 Released: April 8, 2008 By the Senior Deputy Chief, Policy Division, Media Bureau: I. introduction and Background CoxCom, Inc. d/b/a Cox Communications Oklahoma City, hereinafter referred to as ``Petitioner,'' has filed with the Commission a petition pursuant to Sections 76.7, 76.905(b)(2) and 76.907 of the Commission's rules for a determination that Petitioner is subject to effective competition in those communities listed on Attachment A and hereinafter referred to as ``Communities.'' Petitioner alleges that its cable system serving the Communities is subject to effective competition pursuant to Section 623(1)(1)(B) of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended (``Communications Act'') and the
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-08-828A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-08-828A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-08-828A1.txt
  • for Determination of Effective Competition in Five California Communities ) ) ) ) ) ) CSR 6225-E Adopted: April 7, 2008 Released: April 8, 2008 By the Senior Deputy Chief, Policy Division, Media Bureau: I. introduction and Background Time Warner Cable Inc. (``Time Warner'') , hereinafter referred to as ``Petitioner,'' has filed with the Commission a petition pursuant to Sections 76.7, 76.905(b)(2), 76.905(b)(1) and 76.907 of the Commission's rules for a determination that Petitioner is subject to effective competition in those communities listed on Attachment A and hereinafter referred to as ``Communities.'' Petitioner alleges that its cable system serving the Communities is subject to effective competition pursuant to Section 623(1) of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended (``Communications Act'') and
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-08-833A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-08-833A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-08-833A1.txt
  • Determination of Effective Competition in Franchise Area Seven in Connecticut ) ) ) ) ) ) ) CSR 7357-E Adopted: April 9, 2008 Released: April 10, 2008 By the Senior Deputy Chief, Policy Division, Media Bureau: I. introduction and Background MetroCast Communications of Connecticut, LLC, hereinafter referred to as ``Petitioner,'' has filed with the Commission a petition pursuant to Sections 76.7, 76.905(b)(2) and 76.907 of the Commission's rules for a determination that Petitioner is subject to effective competition in those communities listed on Attachment A and hereinafter referred to as ``Communities.'' Petitioner alleges that its cable system serving the Communities is subject to effective competition pursuant to Section 623(1)(1)(B) of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended (``Communications Act'') and the
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-08-839A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-08-839A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-08-839A1.txt
  • 7645-E, CSR 7649-E, CSR 7673-E Adopted: April 9, 2008 Released: April 10, 2008 By the Senior Deputy Chief, Policy Division, Media Bureau: I. introduction and Background Time Warner Cable LLC, Time Warner NY Cable LLC, Time Warner Entertainment Advance/Newhouse Partnership, and CAC Exchange I, LLC,, hereinafter referred to as ``Petitioners,'' have filed with the Commission thirteen petitions pursuant to Sections 76.7, 76.905(b)(2) and 76.907 of the Commission's rules for a determination that Petitioners are subject to effective competition in those communities listed on Attachment A and hereinafter referred to as ``Communities.'' Petitioners allege that their cable systems serving the Communities are subject to effective competition pursuant to Section 623(1)(1)(B) of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended (``Communications Act'') and the
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-08-852A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-08-852A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-08-852A1.txt
  • in Seven Franchise Areas in Rhode Island ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) CSR 7495-E Adopted: April 10, 2008 Released: April 10, 2008 By the Senior Deputy Chief, Policy Division, Media Bureau: I. introduction and Background CoxCom, Inc., d/b/a/ Cox Communications New England, hereinafter referred to as ``Petitioner,'' has filed with the Commission a petition pursuant to Sections 76.7 and 76.905(b)(4) and 76.907 of the Commission's rules for a determination that Petitioner is subject to effective competition in those communities listed on Attachment A and hereinafter referred to as ``Communities.'' Petitioner alleges that its cable systems serving the Communities are subject to effective competition pursuant to Section 623(1)(1)(D) of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended (``Communications Act'') and
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-08-856A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-08-856A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-08-856A1.txt
  • IL1105) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) CSR 7136-E 7137-E 7138-E Adopted: April 10, 2008 Released: April 11, 2008 By the Senior Deputy Chief, Policy Division, Media Bureau: I. introduction and Background Comcast Cable Communications, LLC, on behalf of its Subsidiaries and Affiliates , hereinafter referred to as ``Petitioner,'' has filed with the Commission petitions pursuant to Sections 76.7, 76.905(b)(2) and 76.907 of the Commission's rules for a determination that Petitioner is subject to effective competition in those communities listed on Attachment A and hereinafter referred to as ``Communities.'' Petitioner alleges that its cable system serving the Communities is subject to effective competition pursuant to Section 623(1)(1)(B) of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended (``Communications Act'') and the
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-08-861A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-08-861A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-08-861A1.txt
  • Vegas, New Mexico (CUID NM0008) ) ) ) ) ) ) CSR 7466-E Adopted: April 11, 2008 Released: April 11, 2008 By the Senior Deputy Chief, Policy Division, Media Bureau: I. introduction and Background Comcast Cable Communications, LLC, on behalf of its subsidiaries and affiliates, hereinafter referred to as ``Petitioner,'' has filed with the Commission a petition pursuant to Sections 76.7, 76.905(b)(2) and 76.907 of the Commission's rules for a determination that Petitioner is subject to effective competition in the community listed on Attachment A and hereinafter referred to as ``Community.'' Petitioner alleges that its cable system serving the Community is subject to effective competition pursuant to Section 623(1)(1)(B) of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended (``Communications Act'') and the
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-08-862A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-08-862A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-08-862A1.txt
  • Utah (CUID UT0006) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) CSR 7471-E Adopted: April 11, 2008 Released: April 11, 2008 By the Senior Deputy Chief, Policy Division, Media Bureau: I. introduction and Background Comcast Cable Communications, LLC, on behalf of its subsidiaries and affiliates, hereinafter referred to as ``Petitioner,'' has filed with the Commission a petition pursuant to Sections 76.7, 76.905(b)(2) and 76.907 of the Commission's rules for a determination that Petitioner is subject to effective competition in the community listed on Attachment A and hereinafter referred to as ``Community.'' Petitioner alleges that its cable system serving the Community is subject to effective competition pursuant to Section 623(1)(1)(B) of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended (``Communications Act'') and the
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-08-863A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-08-863A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-08-863A1.txt
  • in Five Colorado Communities ) ) ) ) ) ) ) CSR 7509-E Adopted: April 11, 2008 Released: April 11, 2008 By the Senior Deputy Chief, Policy Division, Media Bureau: I. introduction and Background Comcast Cable Communications, LLC, on behalf of its subsidiaries and affiliates, hereinafter referred to as ``Petitioner,'' has filed with the Commission a petition pursuant to Sections 76.7, 76.905(b)(2) and 76.907 of the Commission's rules for a determination that Petitioner is subject to effective competition in those communities listed on Attachment A and hereinafter referred to as ``Communities.'' Petitioner alleges that its cable system serving the Communities is subject to effective competition pursuant to Section 623(1)(1)(B) of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended (``Communications Act'') and the
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-08-864A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-08-864A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-08-864A1.txt
  • Petition for Determination of Effective Competition in various Illinois Communities ) ) ) ) ) ) CSR 7061-E, 7213-E, 7541-E Adopted: April 11, 2008 Released: April 11, 2008 By the Senior Deputy Chief, Policy Division, Media Bureau: I. introduction and Background Comcast Cable Communications, LLC, hereinafter referred to as ``Petitioner,'' has filed with the Commission a petition pursuant to Sections 76.7, 76.905(b)(2), 76.905(b)(1) and 76.907 of the Commission's rules for a determination that Petitioner is subject to effective competition in those communities listed on Attachment A and hereinafter referred to as ``Communities.'' Petitioner alleges that its cable system serving the communities listed on Attachment B and hereinafter referred to as Group B Communities is subject to effective competition pursuant to Section
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-08-865A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-08-865A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-08-865A1.txt
  • Petition for Determination of Effective Competition in various Michigan Communities ) ) ) ) ) ) CSR 7373-E, 7376-E, 7425-E Adopted: April 11, 2008 Released: April 11, 2008 By the Senior Deputy Chief, Policy Division, Media Bureau: I. introduction and Background Comcast Cable Communications, LLC, hereinafter referred to as ``Petitioner,'' has filed with the Commission a petition pursuant to Sections 76.7, 76.905(b)(2) and 76.907 of the Commission's rules for a determination that Petitioner is subject to effective competition in those communities listed on Attachment A and hereinafter referred to as ``Communities.'' Petitioner alleges that its cable system serving the Communities is subject to effective competition pursuant to Section 623(1)(1)(B) of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended (``Communications Act'') and the
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-08-870A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-08-870A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-08-870A1.txt
  • for Determination of Effective Competition in various Michigan Communities ) ) ) ) ) ) ) CSR 7676-E and 7677-E Adopted: April 14, 2008 Released: April 14, 2008 By the Senior Deputy Chief, Policy Division, Media Bureau: I. introduction and Background Comcast Cable Communications, LLC, hereinafter referred to as ``Petitioner,'' has filed with the Commission a petition pursuant to Sections 76.7, 76.905(b)(2), 76.905(b)(1) and 76.907 of the Commission's rules for a determination that Petitioner is subject to effective competition in those communities listed on Attachment A and hereinafter referred to as ``Communities.'' Petitioner alleges that its cable system serving the communities listed on Attachment B and hereinafter referred to as Group B Communities is subject to effective competition pursuant to Section
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-08-875A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-08-875A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-08-875A1.txt
  • Massachusetts Communities ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) CSR 7231-E CSR 7232-E Adopted: April 14, 2008 Released: April 15, 2008 By the Senior Deputy Chief, Policy Division, Media Bureau: I. introduction and Background Time Warner Entertainment-Advance/Newhouse Partnership and Time Warner Cable Inc., hereinafter referred to as ``Petitioner,'' has filed with the Commission two petitions pursuant to Sections 76.7, 76.905(b)(2) and 76.907 of the Commission's rules for a determination that Petitioner is subject to effective competition in those communities listed on Attachment A and hereinafter referred to as ``Communities.'' Petitioner alleges that its cable system serving the Communities is subject to effective competition pursuant to Section 623(1)(1)(B) of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended (``Communications Act'') and the
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-08-886A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-08-886A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-08-886A1.txt
  • in Three West Virginia Communities ) ) ) ) ) ) ) CSR 7553-E & CSR 7554-E Adopted: April 16, 2008 Released: April 16, 2008 By the Senior Deputy Chief, Policy Division, Media Bureau: I. introduction and Background Cebridge Acquisition, L.P. d/b/a Suddenlink Communications (``Cebridge''), hereinafter referred to as ``Petitioner,'' has filed with the Commission a petition pursuant to Sections 76.7, 76.905(b)(2), 76.905(b)(1) and 76.907 of the Commission's rules for a determination that Petitioner is subject to effective competition in those communities listed on Attachment A and hereinafter referred to as ``Communities.'' Petitioner alleges that its cable system serving the Communities is subject to effective competition pursuant to Section 623(1) of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended (``Communications Act'') and
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-08-887A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-08-887A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-08-887A1.txt
  • Village of Valley Stream, NY (CUID 0741) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) CSR 7173-E Adopted: April 16, 2008 Released: April 16, 2008 By the Senior Deputy Chief, Policy Division, Media Bureau: I. introduction and Background Cablevision Systems Long Island Corporation, hereinafter referred to as ``Petitioner,'' has filed with the Commission a petition pursuant to Sections 76.7 and 76.905(b)(4) and 76.907 of the Commission's rules for a determination that Petitioner is subject to effective competition in those communities listed on Attachment A and hereinafter referred to as ``Communities.'' Petitioner alleges that its cable system serving the Communities is subject to effective competition pursuant to Section 623(1)(1)(D) of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended (``Communications Act'') and
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-08-888A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-08-888A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-08-888A1.txt
  • 0815); Village of Irvington, NY (CUID NY 0851) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) CSR 7174-E Adopted: April 16, 2008 Released: April 16, 2008 By the Senior Deputy Chief, Policy Division, Media Bureau: I. introduction and Background Cablevision of Southern Westchester, Inc., hereinafter referred to as ``Petitioner,'' has filed with the Commission a petition pursuant to Sections 76.7 and 76.905(b)(4) and 76.907 of the Commission's rules for a determination that Petitioner is subject to effective competition in those communities listed on Attachment A and hereinafter referred to as ``Communities.'' Petitioner alleges that its cable system serving the Communities is subject to effective competition pursuant to Section 623(1)(1)(D) of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended (``Communications Act'') and
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-08-889A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-08-889A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-08-889A1.txt
  • submit sworn declarations to the Commission confirming that this is the case, and (4) within 10 days of the release of this order, publicly commit to this plan by sworn declarations. As we explained in the BendBroadband Order, such declarations will ``demonstrate [a] commitment to move to an all-digital network.'' Accordingly, IT IS ORDERED that, pursuant to Sections 1.3 and 76.7 of the Commission's rules, 47 C.F.R. §§ 1.3, 76.7, a limited, conditional waiver of Section 76.1204(a)(1) of the Commission's rules, 47 C.F.R. § 76.1204(a)(1), IS GRANTED to Bresnan Communications, LLC for its system in Gillette, Wyoming, and to Mediacom Communications Corporation for the communities listed in the Appendix, conditioned as set forth in this Order. This action is taken pursuant
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-08-890A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-08-890A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-08-890A1.txt
  • ) ) CSR 7164-E 7165-E 7166-E 7167-E 7168-E 7169-E 7170-E 7188-E 7189-E 7190-E Adopted: April 16, 2008 Released: April 16, 2008 By the Senior Deputy Chief, Policy Division, Media Bureau: I. introduction and Background Comcast Cable Communications, LLC, on behalf of its Subsidiaries and Affiliates, hereinafter referred to as ``Petitioner,'' has filed with the Commission ten petitions pursuant to Sections 76.7, 76.905(b)(2), 76.905(b)(1) and 76.907 of the Commission's rules for a determination that Petitioner is subject to effective competition in those communities listed on Attachment A and hereinafter referred to as ``Communities.'' Petitioner alleges that its cable systems serving the Communities are subject to effective competition pursuant to Section 623(1) of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended (``Communications Act'') and
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-08-891A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-08-891A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-08-891A1.txt
  • ) CSR 7079-E CSR 7080-E CSR 7735-E CSR 7741-E CSR 7742-E CSR 7793-E CSR 7794-E CSR 7795-E CSR 7796-E Adopted: April 16, 2008 Released: April 16, 2008 By the Senior Deputy Chief, Policy Division, Media Bureau: I. introduction and Background Cablevision Systems Corporation, through several subsidiaries, hereinafter referred to as ``Petitioner,'' has filed with the Commission petitions pursuant to Sections 76.7 and 76.905(b)(4) and 76.907 of the Commission's rules for determinations that Petitioner is subject to effective competition in those communities listed on Attachment A and hereinafter referred to as ``Communities.'' Petitioner alleges that its cable systems serving the Communities are subject to effective competition pursuant to Section 623(1)(1)(D) of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended (``Communications Act'') and the
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-08-894A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-08-894A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-08-894A1.txt
  • LLC Petitions for Determination of Effective Competition in various Pennsylvania Communities ) ) ) ) ) ) CSR 7549-E CSR 7550-E Adopted: April 16, 2008 Released: April 17, 2008 By the Senior Deputy Chief, Policy Division, Media Bureau: I. introduction and Background Comcast Cable Communications, LLC, hereinafter referred to as ``Petitioner,'' has filed with the Commission petitions pursuant to Sections 76.7, 76.905(b)(2), 76.905(b)(1) and 76.907 of the Commission's rules for a determination that Petitioner is subject to effective competition in those communities listed on Attachment A and hereinafter referred to as ``Communities.'' Petitioner alleges that its cable system serving the communities listed on Attachment B and hereinafter referred to as Group B Communities is subject to effective competition pursuant to Section
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-08-895A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-08-895A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-08-895A1.txt
  • Communications, LLC Petition for Determination of Effective Competition in various Pennsylvania Communities ) ) ) ) ) ) ) CSR-7489-E Adopted: April 16, 2008 Released: April 17, 2008 By the Senior Deputy Chief, Policy Division, Media Bureau: I. introduction and Background Comcast Cable Communications, LLC, hereinafter referred to as ``Petitioner,'' has filed with the Commission a petition pursuant to Sections 76.7, 76.905(b)(2), 76.905(b)(1) and 76.907 of the Commission's rules for a determination that Petitioner is subject to effective competition in those communities listed on Attachment A and hereinafter referred to as ``Communities.'' Petitioner alleges that its cable system serving the communities listed on Attachment B and hereinafter referred to as Group B Communities is subject to effective competition pursuant to Section
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-08-896A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-08-896A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-08-896A1.txt
  • LLC Petition for Determination of Effective Competition in various Pennsylvania Communities ) ) ) ) ) ) ) CSR- 7486-E Adopted: April 16, 2008 Released: April 17, 2008 By the Senior Deputy Chief, Policy Division, Media Bureau: I. introduction and Background Comcast Cable Communications, LLC, hereinafter referred to as ``Petitioner,'' has filed with the Commission a petition pursuant to Sections 76.7, 76.905(b)(2), 76.905(b)(1) and 76.907 of the Commission's rules for a determination that Petitioner is subject to effective competition in those communities listed on Attachment A and hereinafter referred to as ``Communities.'' Petitioner alleges that its cable system serving the communities listed on Attachment B and hereinafter referred to as Group B Communities is subject to effective competition pursuant to Section
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-08-897A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-08-897A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-08-897A1.txt
  • ) ) ) ) CSR 7515-E CSR 7516-E CSR 7517-E CSR 7518-E CSR 7519-E CSR 7521-E Adopted: April 16, 2008 Released: April 17, 2008 By the Senior Deputy Chief, Policy Division, Media Bureau: I. introduction and Background Time Warner Cable Inc. and Time Warner Entertainment-Advance/Newhouse Partnership, hereinafter referred to as ``Petitioners,'' have filed with the Commission petitions pursuant to Sections 76.7, 76.905(b)(2) and 76.907 of the Commission's rules for a determination that Petitioners are subject to effective competition in those communities listed on Attachment A and hereinafter referred to as ``Communities.'' Petitioners allege that their cable systems serving the Communities are subject to effective competition pursuant to Section 623(1)(1)(B) of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended (``Communications Act'') and the
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-08-898A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-08-898A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-08-898A1.txt
  • for Determination of Effective Competition in various Michigan Communities ) ) ) ) ) ) ) CSR 7572-E, 7573-E, 7574-E Adopted: April 17, 2008 Released: April 17, 2008 By the Senior Deputy Chief, Policy Division, Media Bureau: I. introduction and Background Comcast Cable Communications, LLC, hereinafter referred to as ``Petitioner,'' has filed with the Commission a petition pursuant to Sections 76.7, 76.905(b)(2), 76.905(b)(1) and 76.907 of the Commission's rules for a determination that Petitioner is subject to effective competition in those communities listed on Attachment A and hereinafter referred to as ``Communities.'' Petitioner alleges that its cable system serving the communities listed on Attachment B and hereinafter referred to as Group B Communities is subject to effective competition pursuant to Section
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-08-899A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-08-899A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-08-899A1.txt
  • for Determination of Effective Competition in various Michigan Communities ) ) ) ) ) ) ) CSR 7562-E, 7563-E, 7564-E Adopted: April 17, 2008 Released: April 17, 2008 By the Senior Deputy Chief, Policy Division, Media Bureau: I. introduction and Background Comcast Cable Communications, LLC, hereinafter referred to as ``Petitioner,'' has filed with the Commission a petition pursuant to Sections 76.7, 76.905(b)(2), 76.905(b)(1) and 76.907 of the Commission's rules for a determination that Petitioner is subject to effective competition in those communities listed on Attachment A and hereinafter referred to as ``Communities.'' Petitioner alleges that its cable system serving the communities listed on Attachment B and hereinafter referred to as Group B Communities is subject to effective competition pursuant to Section
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-08-921A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-08-921A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-08-921A1.txt
  • LLC Petition for Determination of Effective Competition in 9 Washington Franchise Areas ) ) ) ) ) ) CSR 7156-E Adopted: April 18, 2008 Released: April 21, 2008 By the Senior Deputy Chief, Policy Division, Media Bureau: I. introduction and Background Comcast Cable Communications, LLC, hereinafter referred to as ``Petitioner,'' has filed with the Commission a petition pursuant to Sections 76.7, 76.905(b)(2), 76.905(b)(1) and 76.907 of the Commission's rules for a determination that Petitioner is subject to effective competition in those communities listed on Attachment A and hereinafter referred to as ``Communities.'' Petitioner alleges that its cable system serving the Communities listed on Attachment B is subject to effective competition pursuant to Section 623(1) of the Communications Act of 1934, as
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-08-922A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-08-922A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-08-922A1.txt
  • LLC Petition for Determination of Effective Competition in 9 Washington Franchise Areas ) ) ) ) ) ) CSR 7160-E Adopted: April 18, 2008 Released: April 21, 2008 By the Senior Deputy Chief, Policy Division, Media Bureau: I. introduction and Background Comcast Cable Communications, LLC, hereinafter referred to as ``Petitioner,'' has filed with the Commission a petition pursuant to Sections 76.7, 76.905(b)(2), 76.905(b)(1) and 76.907 of the Commission's rules for a determination that Petitioner is subject to effective competition in those communities listed on Attachment A and hereinafter referred to as ``Communities.'' Petitioner alleges that its cable system serving the Communities listed on Attachment B is subject to effective competition pursuant to Section 623(1) of the Communications Act of 1934, as
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-08-923A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-08-923A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-08-923A1.txt
  • (CUIDs WA0198, WA0382, WA0537); Poulsbo, WA (CUID WA0009) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) CSR 7155-E Adopted: April 18, 2008 Released: April 21, 2008 By the Senior Deputy Chief, Policy Division, Media Bureau: I. introduction and Background Comcast Cable Communications, LLC, hereinafter referred to as ``Petitioner,'' has filed with the Commission a petition pursuant to Sections 76.7, 76.905(b)(2), 76.905(b)(1) and 76.907 of the Commission's rules for a determination that Petitioner is subject to effective competition in those communities listed on Attachment A and hereinafter referred to as ``Communities.'' Petitioner alleges that its cable system serving the Communities listed on Attachment B is subject to effective competition pursuant to Section 623(1) of the Communications Act of 1934, as
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-08-924A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-08-924A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-08-924A1.txt
  • Petition for Determination of Effective Competition in 6 Washington Franchise Areas ) ) ) ) ) ) ) CSR 7154-E Adopted: April 18, 2008 Released: April 21, 2008 By the Senior Deputy Chief, Policy Division, Media Bureau: I. introduction and Background Comcast Cable Communications, LLC, hereinafter referred to as ``Petitioner,'' has filed with the Commission a petition pursuant to Sections 76.7, 76.905(b)(2) and 76.907 of the Commission's rules for a determination that Petitioner is subject to effective competition in those communities listed on Attachment A and hereinafter referred to as ``Communities.'' Petitioner alleges that its cable system serving the Communities is subject to effective competition pursuant to Section 623(1)(1)(B) of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended (``Communications Act'') and the
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-08-938A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-08-938A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-08-938A1.txt
  • ) ) ) CSR 7520-E CSR 7523-E CSR 7525-E CSR 7528-E CSR 7542-E CSR 7543-E Adopted: April 22, 2008 Released: April 22, 2008 By the Senior Deputy Chief, Policy Division, Media Bureau: I. introduction and Background Time Warner Cable Inc., and Time Warner Entertainment-Advance/Newhouse Partnership, hereinafter referred to as ``Petitioner,'' has filed with the Commission a petition pursuant to Sections 76.7, 76.905(b)(2), 76.905(b)(1) and 76.907 of the Commission's rules for a determination that Petitioner is subject to effective competition in those communities listed on Attachment A and hereinafter referred to as ``Communities.'' Petitioner alleges that its cable systems serving the communities listed on Attachment B and hereinafter referred to as Group B Communities are subject to effective competition pursuant to Section
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-08-939A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-08-939A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-08-939A1.txt
  • ) ) ) ) ) CSR 7510-E, CSR 7511-E & CSR 7512-E Adopted: April 22, 2008 Released: April 22, 2008 By the Senior Deputy Chief, Policy Division, Media Bureau: I. introduction and Background Comcast Cable Communications, LLC, on behalf of its subsidiaries and affiliates (``Comcast''), hereinafter referred to as ``Petitioner,'' has filed with the Commission a petition pursuant to Sections 76.7, 76.905(b)(2), 76.905(b)(1) and 76.907 of the Commission's rules for a determination that Petitioner is subject to effective competition in those communities listed on Attachment A and hereinafter referred to as ``Communities.'' Petitioner alleges that its cable system serving the communities listed on Attachment B and hereinafter referred to as Group B Communities is subject to effective competition pursuant to Section
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-08-951A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-08-951A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-08-951A1.txt
  • for Determination of Effective Competition in various Michigan Communities ) ) ) ) ) ) CSR 7457-E, 7464-E, 7467-E, 7635-E Adopted: April 23, 2008 Released: April 24, 2008 By the Senior Deputy Chief, Policy Division, Media Bureau: I. introduction and Background Comcast Cable Communications, LLC, hereinafter referred to as ``Petitioner,'' has filed with the Commission a petition pursuant to Sections 76.7, 76.905(b)(2), 76.905(b)(1) and 76.907 of the Commission's rules for a determination that Petitioner is subject to effective competition in those communities listed on Attachment A and hereinafter referred to as ``Communities.'' Petitioner alleges that its cable system serving the communities listed on Attachment B and hereinafter referred to as Group B Communities is subject to effective competition pursuant to Section
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-08-959A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-08-959A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-08-959A1.txt
  • Petition for Determination of Effective Competition in various Michigan Communities ) ) ) ) ) ) CSR 7465-E, 7485-E, 7487-E Adopted: April 24, 2008 Released: April 25, 2008 By the Senior Deputy Chief, Policy Division, Media Bureau: I. introduction and Background Comcast Cable Communications, LLC, hereinafter referred to as ``Petitioner,'' has filed with the Commission a petition pursuant to Sections 76.7, 76.905(b)(2), 76.905(b)(1) and 76.907 of the Commission's rules for a determination that Petitioner is subject to effective competition in those communities listed on Attachment A and hereinafter referred to as ``Communities.'' Petitioner alleges that its cable system serving the communities listed on Attachment B and hereinafter referred to as Group B Communities is subject to effective competition pursuant to Section
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-08-960A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-08-960A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-08-960A1.txt
  • in Maine ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) CSR 7440-E CSR 7558-E CSR 7565-E Adopted: April 24, 2008 Released: April 25, 2008 By the Senior Deputy Chief, Policy Division, Media Bureau: I. introduction and Background Comcast Cable Communications, LLC and Time Warner Cable, Inc., hereinafter referred to as ``Petitioners,'' have filed with the Commission petitions pursuant to Sections 76.7, 76.905(b)(2), 76.905(b)(1) and 76.907 of the Commission's rules for a determination that Petitioners are subject to effective competition in those communities listed on Attachment A and hereinafter referred to as ``Communities.'' Petitioners allege that their cable systems serving the communities listed on Attachment B and hereinafter referred to as Group B Communities are subject to effective competition pursuant to Section
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-09-1349A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-09-1349A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-09-1349A1.txt
  • ) ) ) ) ) CSR 8154-E CSR 8155-E CSR 8156-E Adopted: June 17, 2009 Released: June 17, 2009 By the Senior Deputy Chief, Policy Division, Media Bureau: I. introduction and Background CSC Holdings, Inc., Cablevision of Rockland/Ramapo Inc., and Cablevision of Wappingers Falls Inc., hereinafter referred to as ``Petitioner,'' has filed with the Commission a petition pursuant to Sections 76.7 and 76.905(b)(4) and 76.907 of the Commission's rules for a determination that Petitioner is subject to effective competition in those communities listed on Attachment A and hereinafter referred to as ``Communities.'' Petitioner alleges that its cable system serving the Communities is subject to effective competition pursuant to Section 623(1)(1)(D) of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended (``Communications Act'') and
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-09-1374A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-09-1374A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-09-1374A1.txt
  • Amalie, Virgin Islands ) ) ) ) ) ) CSR-8133-A MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER Adopted: June 19, 2009 Released: June 19, 2009 By the Senior Deputy Chief, Policy Division, Media Bureau: Introduction Storefront Television (Storefront), licensee of CBS affiliate WVXF-TV, Channel 17, Charlotte Amalie, Virgin Islands (WVXF or the Station), filed the above-captioned petition for special relief. Pursuant to Sections 76.7 and 76.59 of the Commission's rules, WVXF seeks to modify its broadcast television market, for purposes of the cable television mandatory broadcast signal carriage rules, to include the communities served by two cable systems in the Puerto Rico television market. The cable systems, San Juan Cable, LLC d/b/a OneLink Communications (OneLink) and Liberty Cablevision of Puerto Rico Inc. (Liberty), did
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-09-1387A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-09-1387A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-09-1387A1.txt
  • a further extension of the waiver would be warranted based on its financial situation. WOW has demonstrated that its financial condition has weakened in the months since the release of the July 2008 Financial Hardship Order. In light of the further deterioration of Petitioner's financial condition, we conclude that a limited extension of waiver is justified under Sections 1.3 and 76.7 of the Commission's rules. While we continue to believe that ``[i]ncreased demand due to common reliance should reduce the cost of compliant set-top boxes, and the financial burdens Petitioners face should dissipate,'' WOW has demonstrated sufficiently that the cost of compliance would impose an undue hardship on WOW in light of the fact that its financial situation has deteriorated in
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-09-1388A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-09-1388A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-09-1388A1.txt
  • a further extension of the waiver would be warranted based on RCN's financial situation. RCN has demonstrated that its financial condition has weakened in the months since the release of the July 2008 Financial Hardship Order. In light of the further deterioration of Petitioner's financial condition, we conclude that a limited extension of waiver is justified under Sections 1.3 and 76.7 of the Commission's rules. While we continue to believe that ``[i]ncreased demand due to common reliance should reduce the cost of compliant set-top boxes, and the financial burdens Petitioners face should dissipate,'' RCN has demonstrated sufficiently that the cost of compliance would impose an undue hardship on RCN in light of the fact that its financial situation has deteriorated in
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-09-1489A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-09-1489A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-09-1489A1.txt
  • LLC Petition for Determination of Effective Competition in Franchise Areas in Montgomery County, Maryland ) ) ) ) ) ) ) CSR-7179-E MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER Adopted: June 29, 2009 Released: June 30, 2009 By the Senior Deputy Chief, Policy Division, Media Bureau: Introduction Comcast of Potomac, LLC, hereinafter referred to as ``Petitioner,'' has filed a petition pursuant to Sections 76.7, 76.905(b)(2), 76.905(b)(4), and 76.907 of the Commission's rules for a determination that Petitioner is subject to effective competition in the franchise areas of Montgomery County, Maryland (the ``County''). Petitioner alleges that its cable systems serving the County are subject to ``competing provider'' effective competition pursuant to Section 623(1) of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended (``Communications Act'') and the
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-09-1571A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-09-1571A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-09-1571A1.txt
  • James Cable filed a plan for compliance with the integration ban, but has subsequently filed information that indicates its financial condition has weakened in the months since the release of the July 2008 Financial Hardship Order. In light of the further deterioration of Petitioner's financial condition, we conclude that a limited extension of waiver is justified under Sections 1.3 and 76.7 of the Commission's rules. On April 20, 2009, James Cable submitted updated financial information to demonstrate that it still remains in poor financial condition. In order to demonstrate its financial condition, James Cable submitted a Cash Flow Statement to demonstrate its negative cash flows for 2008, indicating that the company is spending more cash than it is earning. James Cable's
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-09-1572A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-09-1572A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-09-1572A1.txt
  • their MVPD. Although the cable industry has challenged the lawfulness of the integration ban on three separate occasions, in each of those cases the D.C. Circuit denied those petitions. In limited circumstances, however, operators may be eligible for waiver of the integration ban. discussion Petitioner makes its request for waiver pursuant to the Financial Hardship Order and Sections 1.3 and 76.7 of the Commission's rules. In light of Petitioner's demonstrated financial hardship and consistent with the Financial Hardship Order, we conclude that a limited grant of its Waiver Request until July 1, 2010 is justified under Sections 1.3 and 76.7 of the Commission's rules. We therefore grant Petitioner a limited waiver of the integration ban for the Subject Boxes. On June
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-09-1629A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-09-1629A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-09-1629A1.txt
  • IV. ORDERING CLAUSES Accordingly, IT IS ORDERED, that the complaint filed by Channel 38 IS DENIED. This action is taken pursuant to authority delegated by Section 0.283 of the Commission's rules, 47 C.F.R. § 0.283. FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION Steven A. Broeckaert Senior Deputy Chief, Policy Division Media Bureau Mandatory carriage complaints are treated as Petitions for Special Relief under Section 76.7 of our rules. See 1998 Biennial Regulatory Review: Part 76 - Cable Television Service Pleading and Complaint Rules, 14 FCC Rcd 418 (1999). See Pub. L. No. 106-113, 113 Stat. 1501, 1501A-526 to 1501A-545 (Nov. 29, 1999). See 47 U.S.C. § 338. See 47 C.F.R. § 76.66(c)(3); see also 76.66(c)(4). See generally DBS Must Carry Report & Order, 16 FCC
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-09-1728A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-09-1728A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-09-1728A1.txt
  • Content-Type: text/plain Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit DA 09-1728 Released: July 31, 2009 MEDIA BUREAU ACTION MEDIA BUREAU SEEKS COMMENT ON BAJA BROADBAND'S INTEGRATION BAN WAIVER REQUEST CSR-7111-Z Comment Date: August 20, 2009 Reply Comment Date: August 31, 2009 Baja Broadband Operating Company, LLC (``Baja Broadband'' or ``Petitioner'') has filed a request pursuant to Sections 1.3 and 76.7 of the Commission's rules, for limited waiver of the prohibition set forth in Section 76.1204(a)(1) of the Commission's rules on offering navigation devices that perform both conditional access and other functions. Baja Broadband seeks a waiver that will allow Baja Broadband to place in service refurbished integrated navigation devices, including high-definition (``HD'') and digital video recorder (``DVR'') devices. Baja Broadband
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-09-1735A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-09-1735A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-09-1735A1.txt
  • granting Time Warner's request. Additionally, Time Warner and Media General have reached an agreement settling Media General's three Emergency Enforcement Complaints regarding the discontinuance of carriage of WBTW, WNCT-TV, and WCBD-TV. Accordingly, we grant Media General's requests to withdraw the complaints, and dismiss the subject complaints with prejudice. ordering clauses Accordingly, IT IS ORDERED that, pursuant to Section 1.3 and 76.7 of the Commission's rules, 47 C.F.R. §§ 1.3, 76.7, the request for waiver filed by Time Warner Cable Inc. of Sections 76.1601, 76.1603(b) and 76.1603(c) of the Commission's rules, 47 C.F.R. §§ 76.1601, 76.1603(b), and 76.1603(c), IS GRANTED as discussed herein. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the Emergency Enforcement Complaints of Media General Communications Holdings, LLC, regarding stations WBTW(TV), WNCT-TV,
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-09-1759A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-09-1759A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-09-1759A1.txt
  • (CUID MD0052) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) CSR 8163-E Adopted: August 6, 2009 Released: August 6, 2009 By the Senior Deputy Chief, Policy Division, Media Bureau: I. introduction and Background Comcast Cable Communications, LLC, on behalf of its subsidiaries and affiliates and hereinafter referred to as ``Petitioner,'' has filed with the Commission a petition pursuant to Sections 76.7, 76.905(b)(2) and 76.907 of the Commission's rules for a determination that Petitioner is subject to effective competition in the community listed on Attachment A and hereinafter referred to as ``Community.'' Petitioner alleges that its cable system serving the Community is subject to effective competition pursuant to Section 623(1)(1)(B) of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended (``Communications Act''), and the
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-09-1826A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-09-1826A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-09-1826A1.txt
  • Petition for Determination of Effective Competition in Eight Communities in the State of New York ) ) ) ) ) ) ) CSR 8170-E Adopted: August 17, 2009 Released: August 18, 2009 By the Associate Chief, Media Bureau: introduction and Background Cablevision Systems East Hampton Corp. (``Cablevision'' or ``the Company''), has filed with the Commission a petition pursuant to Sections 76.7, 76.905(b)(2) and 76.907 of the Commission's rules for a determination that it is subject to effective competition in eight franchise areas in New York's Long Island. They are listed on Attachment A and hereinafter referred to as ``the Communities.'' Cablevision alleges that its cable system serving the Communities is subject to effective competition pursuant to Section 623(1)(1)(B) of the Communications
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-09-1854A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-09-1854A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-09-1854A1.txt
  • because the Subject Boxes are only capable of doing what is necessary to make digital cable programming viewable on analog television sets. For this reason we conclude that, with respect to the Subject Boxes, Petitioners have justified three-year waivers of the integration ban under the standard set forth in the 2005 Deferral Order, the Evolution Order, and Sections 1.3 or 76.7 of the Commission's rules. Accordingly, we grant the Waiver Requests, and, until three years from the release of this order, any cable operator may choose to deploy the Subject Boxes without requesting a waiver of Section 76.1204(a)(1)'s prohibition on the deployment of navigation devices ``that perform both conditional access and other functions in a single integrated device.'' ordering clauses Accordingly,
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-09-203A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-09-203A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-09-203A1.txt
  • REGARDING PUBLIC, EDUCATIONAL, AND GOVERNMENTAL PROGRAMMING CSR-8126, CSR-8127, CSR-8128 MB Docket No. 09-13 Comment Date: March 9, 2009 Reply Comment Date: March 24, 2009 The Alliance for Community Media (``ACM'') et al.; the City of Lansing, Michigan, and the City of Dearborn , Michigan et al. (collectively, ``Petitioners''), have separately filed petitions for declaratory ruling pursuant to Sections 1.2 and 76.7 of the Commission's rules seeking Commission guidance regarding the carriage of public, educational and governmental (``PEG'') channels. We seek comment on each of these petitions. This proceeding will be treated as ``permit but disclose'' for purposes of the Commission's ex parte rules. See generally 47 C.F.R. §§ 1.1200-1.1216. As a result of the permit-but-disclose status of this proceeding, ex parte
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-09-2094A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-09-2094A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-09-2094A1.txt
  • Content-Type: text/plain Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit DA 09-2094 Released: September 23, 2009 MEDIA BUREAU ACTION MEDIA BUREAU SEEKS COMMENT ON CABLEVISION'S REQUEST FOR WAIVER OF THE PROHIBITION ON ENCRYPTION OF THE BASIC SERVICE TIER MB Docket No. 09-168 Comment Date: October 22, 2009 Reply Comment Date: November 6, 2009 Cablevision Systems Corporation (``Cablevision'') has filed a request pursuant to Section 76.7 of the Commission's rules for waiver of Section 76.630(a) of the Commission's rules with respect to its New York City franchise areas. Section 76.630(a) of the Commission's rules prohibits a cable operator from encrypting the Basic service tier. The Basic service tier contains local broadcast stations and Public, Educational, and Government access channels, and may contain other cable programming. Cablevision's
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-09-2164A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-09-2164A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-09-2164A1.txt
  • the Subject Boxes are only capable of doing what is necessary to make digital cable programming viewable on analog television sets. For this reason we conclude that, with respect to the Subject Boxes, Petitioner has justified a three-year waiver of the integration ban under the standard set forth in the 2005 Deferral Order, the Evolution Order, and Sections 1.3 and 76.7 of the Commission's rules. Accordingly, we grant the Waiver Request, and, until three years from the release of this order, any cable operator may choose to deploy the Subject Boxes without requesting a waiver of Section 76.1204(a)(1)'s prohibition on the deployment of navigation devices ``that perform both conditional access and other functions in a single integrated device.'' ordering clauses Accordingly,
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-09-217A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-09-217A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-09-217A1.txt
  • for Determination of Effective Competition in Twenty Three North Carolina Communities ) ) ) ) ) ) ) CSR 8029-E Adopted: February 10, 2009 Released: February 10, 2009 By the Senior Deputy Chief, Policy Division, Media Bureau: I. introduction and Background Time Warner Cable, Inc., hereinafter referred to as ``Petitioner,'' has filed with the Commission a petition pursuant to Sections 76.7, 76.905(b)(2), 76.905(b)(1) and 76.907 of the Commission's rules for a determination that Petitioner is subject to effective competition in those communities listed on Attachment A and hereinafter referred to as ``Communities.'' Petitioner alleges that its cable system serving the communities listed on Attachment B and hereinafter referred to as Group B Communities is subject to effective competition pursuant to Section
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-09-2192A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-09-2192A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-09-2192A1.txt
  • of Potomac, LLC Petition for Determination of Effective Competition in 13 Franchise Areas in Montgomery County, Maryland ) ) ) ) ) ) CSR 8188-E Adopted: October 6, 2009 Released: October 8, 2009 By the Senior Deputy Chief, Policy Division, Media Bureau: INTRODUCTION AND BACKGROUND Comcast of Potomac, LLC (``Comcast''), has filed with the Commission a petition pursuant to Sections 76.7 and 76.905(b)(4) and 76.907 of the Commission's rules for a determination that it is subject to effective competition in those communities listed on Attachment A and hereinafter referred to as ``Communities.'' The Communities are franchise authorities in some, but not all, of Montgomery County, Maryland (the ``County''). Comcast alleges that its cable system serving the Communities is subject to effective
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-09-220A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-09-220A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-09-220A1.txt
  • In the Matter of KJLA, LLC v. CoxCom, Inc. ) ) ) ) ) ) ) CSR-8065-M Adopted: February 11, 2009 Released: February 11, 2009 By the Senior Deputy Chief, Policy Division, Media Bureau: Introduction KJLA, LLC (``KJLA''), licensee of digital-only television broadcast station KJLA-DT, Ventura, California (``KJLA''), has filed two must carry complaints with the Commission pursuant to Sections 76.7, 76.56 and 76.61(a)(1) of the Commission's rules, against CoxCom, Inc. d/b/a Cox Communications Palos Verdes and Cox Communications Orange County (``Cox''). Cox opposed both complaints, and KJLA has filed replies. For administrative convenience, the Bureau is consolidating the petitions into one proceeding. For the reasons discussed below, we dismiss both of KJLA's mandatory carriage complaints. Background Under Section 614 of
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-09-2386A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-09-2386A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-09-2386A1.txt
  • of Section 76.630(a) of the Commission's Rules ) ) ) ) ) ) MB Docket No. 09-168 MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER Adopted: November 5, 2009 Released: November 5, 2009 Reply Comment Date: November 16, 2009 By the Chief, Media Bureau: In this Order, we waive in part, sua sponte, our September 23, 2009 Public Notice in this proceeding and Section 76.7(b)(1) and 76.7(c)(1) of the Commission's rules, which require service on all parties to the proceeding and an indication that all comments have been served on the Petitioner. We also extend the reply comment date for the Petitioner. Section 76.7(b)(1) states that comments and oppositions ``shall be served on the petitioner and on all persons listed in petitioner's certificate of service.''
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-09-2399A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-09-2399A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-09-2399A1.txt
  • 8bit DA 09-2399 Released: November 9, 2009 MEDIA BUREAU ACTION MEDIA BUREAU SEEKS COMMENT ON INTEL'S REQUEST FOR WAIVER OF THE IEEE-1394 OUTPUT REQUIREMENT CS Docket No. 97-80 / CSR-8229-Z Comment Date: November 30, 2009 Reply Comment Date: December 10, 2009 Intel Corporation (``Intel'') has filed a request pursuant to Sections 629(a) and 629(c) of the Communications Act and 1.3, 76.7, and 76.1207 of the Commission's rules for waiver of part of Section 76.640(b)(4)(ii) of the Commission's rules. Section 76.640(b)(4)(ii) requires cable operators to include a DVI or HDMI interface and an IEEE 1394 interface on all high definition set-top boxes (``STBs'') that they acquire for distribution to customers. Intel seeks waiver of this rule section with respect to the IEEE
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-09-246A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-09-246A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-09-246A1.txt
  • ) Adopted: February 18, 2009 Released: February 18, 2009 By the Senior Deputy Chief, Policy Division, Media Bureau: Introduction On August 15, 2008, ATC Broadband LLC and Dixie Cable TV, Inc. (collectively ``ATC Broadband'') filed a retransmission consent complaint and petition for declaratory ruling against Gray Television Licensee, Inc., licensee of television station WSWG-DT, Valdosta, Georgia (``WSWG'') pursuant to Sections 76.7 and 76.65 of the Commission's Rules. WSWG is a CBS affiliate serving the Albany, Georgia Designated Market Area (``DMA''). ATC Broadband sought to retransmit WSWG outside the station's DMA on ATC Broadband's cable systems serving communities in the Savannah, Georgia and Jacksonville, Florida DMAs. ATC Broadband alleges WSWG failed to negotiate with it in good faith for retransmission consent by
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-09-2557A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-09-2557A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-09-2557A1.txt
  • Commission's rules. FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION Steven A. Broeckaert Senior Deputy Chief, Policy Division Media Bureau The specific communities at issue are Corolla, Duck, Kill Devil Hills, Kitty Hawk, Manns Harbor, Manteo, Nags Head, Southern Shores, Stumpy Point, and Wanchese (the cable communities). Request for Section 403 Investigation, CSR-8189-M (Petition). 47 U.S.C. § 535. 47 C.F.R. § 76.56. 47 C.F.R. § 76.7. Opposition to Must Carry Request of Charter Communications, Inc. (Opposition). Reply of Hampton Roads Educational Telecommunications Association, Inc. (Reply). 47 U.S.C. § 535. 8 FCC Rcd 2965 (1993) (Must Carry Order). 47 U.S.C. § 535(b)(1), (l)(2). 47 C.F.R. § 76.5(pp)(2). Must Carry Order, 8 FCC Rcd at 2967-2968, ¶ 9. 47 C.F.R. § 76.5(pp)(2). Id.; see also, e.g., Minority Television
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-09-2636A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-09-2636A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-09-2636A1.txt
  • ) ) ) ) ) CSR 8236-E CSR 8237-E Adopted: December 28, 2009 Released: December 29, 2009 By the Senior Deputy Chief, Policy Division, Media Bureau: I. introduction and Background Cablevision Systems Long Island Corporation, Cablevision Systems Huntington Corporation, and Cablevision Systems Westchester Corporation, hereinafter referred to collectively as ``Petitioner,'' have filed with the Commission a petition pursuant to Sections 76.7 and 76.905(b)(4) and 76.907 of the Commission's rules for a determination that Petitioner is subject to effective competition in those communities listed on Attachment A and hereinafter referred to as the ``Communities.'' Petitioner alleges that its cable systems serving the Communities are subject to effective competition pursuant to Section 623(1)(1)(D) of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended (``Communications Act'')
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-09-284A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-09-284A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-09-284A1.txt
  • Cable Inc. Petition for Determination of Effective Competition in San Diego, California ) ) ) ) ) ) CSR 8097-E Adopted: February 18, 2009 Released: February 18, 2009 By the Senior Deputy Chief, Policy Division, Media Bureau: I. introduction and Background Time Warmer Cable Inc., hereinafter referred to as ``Petitioner,'' has filed with the Commission a petition pursuant to Sections 76.7 and 76.905(b)(4) and 76.907 of the Commission's rules for a determination that Petitioner is subject to effective competition in those communities listed on Attachment A and hereinafter referred to as the ``Communities.'' Petitioner alleges that its cable system serving the Communities is subject to effective competition pursuant to Section 623(1)(1)(D) of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended (``Communications Act'')
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-09-285A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-09-285A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-09-285A1.txt
  • 7866-E CSR 7867-E CSR 7868-E CSR 7869-E CSR 7870-E CSR 7872-E CSR 7877-E CSR 7885-E Adopted: February 18, 2009 Released: February 19, 2009 By the Senior Deputy Chief, Policy Division, Media Bureau: introduction and Background Comcast Cable Communications, LLC, on behalf of subsidiaries and affiliates, hereinafter referred to as ``Petitioner,'' has filed with the Commission a petition pursuant to Sections 76.7, 76.905(b)(1), 76.905(b)(2), 76.905(b)(4) and 76.907 of the Commission's rules for determinations that Petitioner is subject to effective competition in those franchise areas listed on the Attachments hereto. Petitioner alleges that its cable systems serving those franchise areas listed in Attachment A hereto and hereinafter referred to as the ``Attachment A Communities'' are subject to effective competition pursuant to Section 623(1)(1)(B)
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-09-286A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-09-286A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-09-286A1.txt
  • Bronx, New York (CUIDs NY1413 and 1414) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) CSR 8099-E CSR 8100-E Adopted: February 18, 2009 Released: February 19, 2009 By the Senior Deputy Chief, Policy Division, Media Bureau: I. introduction and Background Cablevision Systems New York City Corp., hereinafter referred to as ``Petitioner,'' has filed with the Commission a petition pursuant to Sections 76.7 and 76.905(b)(4) and 76.907 of the Commission's rules for a determination that Petitioner is subject to effective competition in those communities listed on Attachment A and hereinafter referred to as the ``Communities.'' Petitioner alleges that its cable system serving the Communities is subject to effective competition pursuant to Section 623(1)(1)(D) of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended (``Communications Act'')
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-09-287A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-09-287A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-09-287A1.txt
  • Competition in Four Communities in New Jersey ) ) ) ) ) ) CSR 8089-E CSR 8090-E Adopted: February 19, 2009 Released: February 20, 2009 By the Senior Deputy Chief, Policy Division, Media Bureau: introduction and Background Cablevision of Oakland Inc., and CSC TKR Inc., hereinafter referred to as ``Petitioner,'' has filed with the Commission a petition pursuant to Sections 76.7 and 76.905(b)(4) and 76.907 of the Commission's rules for a determination that Petitioner is subject to effective competition in those communities listed on Attachment A and hereinafter referred to as the ``Communities.'' Petitioner alleges that its cable system serving the Communities is subject to effective competition pursuant to Section 623(1)(1)(D) of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended (``Communications Act'')
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-09-416A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-09-416A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-09-416A1.txt
  • various Franchise Areas in Rhode Island ) ) ) ) ) ) ) CSR 7871-E CSR 8088-E Adopted: February 19, 2009 Released: February 20, 2009 By the Senior Deputy Chief, Policy Division, Media Bureau: I. introduction and Background CoxCom, Inc. d/b/a Cox Communications New England , hereinafter referred to as ``Petitioner,'' has filed with the Commission petitions pursuant to Sections 76.7 and 76.905(b)(4) and 76.907 of the Commission's rules for a determination that Petitioner is subject to effective competition in those communities listed on Attachment A and hereinafter referred to as ``Communities.'' Petitioner alleges that its cable system serving the Communities is subject to effective competition pursuant to Section 623(1)(1)(D) of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended (``Communications Act'') and
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-09-417A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-09-417A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-09-417A1.txt
  • Petitions for Determination of Effective Competition in 28 Delaware Communities ) ) ) ) ) ) CSR 7701-E CSR 7702-E Adopted: February 19, 2009 Released: February 23, 2009 By the Senior Deputy Chief, Policy Division, Media Bureau: I. introduction and Background Comcast Cable Communications, LLC, hereinafter referred to as ``Petitioner,'' has filed with the Commission a petition pursuant to Sections 76.7, 76.905(b)(2) and 76.907 of the Commission's rules for a determination that Petitioner is subject to effective competition in those communities listed on Attachment A and hereinafter referred to as ``Communities.'' Petitioner alleges that its cable systems serving the Communities are subject to effective competition pursuant to Section 623(1)(1)(B) of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended (``Communications Act'') and the
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-09-418A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-09-418A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-09-418A1.txt
  • Determination of Effective Competition in the Franchise Area of Norwich, CT ) ) ) ) ) ) CSR 7703-E Adopted: February 19, 2009 Released: February 23, 2009 By the Senior Deputy Chief, Policy Division, Media Bureau: I. introduction and Background Comcast Cable Communications, LLC , hereinafter referred to as ``Petitioner,'' has filed with the Commission a petition pursuant to Sections 76.7, 76.905(b)(2) and 76.907 of the Commission's rules for a determination that Petitioner is subject to effective competition in those communities listed on Attachment A and hereinafter referred to as ``Communities.'' Petitioner alleges that its cable system serving the Communities is subject to effective competition pursuant to Section 623(1)(1)(B) of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended (``Communications Act'') and the
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-09-419A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-09-419A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-09-419A1.txt
  • LLC Petition for Determination of Effective Competition in 48 Pennsylvania Franchise Areas ) ) ) ) ) ) CSR 7577-E Adopted: February 19, 2009 Released: February 23, 2009 By the Senior Deputy Chief, Policy Division, Media Bureau: I. introduction and Background Comcast Cable Communications, LLC, hereinafter referred to as ``Petitioner,'' has filed with the Commission a petition pursuant to Sections 76.7, 76.905(b)(2), 76.905(b)(1) and 76.907 of the Commission's rules for a determination that Petitioner is subject to effective competition in those communities listed on Attachment A and hereinafter referred to as ``Communities.'' Petitioner alleges that its cable system serving the communities listed on Attachment B and hereinafter referred to as Group B Communities is subject to effective competition pursuant to Section
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-09-436A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-09-436A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-09-436A1.txt
  • LLC Petition for Determination of Effective Competition in Various Alabama Communities ) ) ) ) ) ) CSR 6893-E Adopted: February 24, 2009 Released: February 25, 2009 By the Senior Deputy Chief, Policy Division, Media Bureau: I. introduction and Background Mediacom Southeast LLC (``Mediacom'') , hereinafter referred to as ``Petitioner,'' has filed with the Commission a petition pursuant to Sections 76.7, 76.905(b)(2), 76.905(b)(1) and 76.907 of the Commission's rules for a determination that Petitioner is subject to effective competition in those communities listed on Attachment A and hereinafter referred to as ``Communities.'' Petitioner alleges that its cable system serving the Communities is subject to effective competition pursuant to Section 623(1) of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended (``Communications Act'') and
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-09-469A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-09-469A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-09-469A1.txt
  • the July 2008 Financial Hardship Order were based on erroneous factual assumptions. The Bureau also understands that Petitioner's financial condition has weakened in the months since the release of the July 2008 Financial Hardship Order. In light of the further deterioration of Petitioner's financial condition, we conclude that a limited extension of waiver is justified under Sections 1.3, 1.106, and 76.7 of the Commission's rules. James Cable argues that the Bureau's decisions (1) failed to take into account the harmful effects of the waiver ending within weeks of the transition to digital broadcast television, (2) failed to take into account that the continued waiver will provide compelling public interest benefits, and (3) were based on a material error of fact regarding
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-09-470A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-09-470A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-09-470A1.txt
  • the November 2008 Financial Hardship Order were based on erroneous factual assumptions. The Bureau also understands that Petitioner's financial condition has weakened in the months since the release of the November 2008 Financial Hardship Order. In light of the further deterioration of Petitioner's financial condition, we conclude that a limited extension of waiver is justified under Sections 1.3, 1.106, and 76.7 of the Commission's rules. Broadstripe argues that the Bureau's decisions (1) failed to take into account the harmful effects of the waiver ending within weeks of the transition to digital broadcast television, (2) failed to take into account that the continued waiver will provide compelling public interest benefits, and (3) were based on a material error of fact regarding the
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-09-475A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-09-475A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-09-475A1.txt
  • carried on a single, uniform channel was filed more than a year and a half later, the Commission again rejected the cable operator's argument that it was filed too late. KPXN Replies at 5 & n.14, citing United Broadcast, 14 FCC Rcd 6766 (1999). KPXN Reply at 6-7 nn.20-24, WPXV Reply at 5-6 nn.20-24, citing 47 C.F.R. §§ 76.61(a)(2), 76.62(a)(5), 76.7(b)(1) and (c)(3), and 76.61(a)(4). Replies at 7. Replies at 7 & n.26 (citing Carriage of Digital Television Broadcast Signals: Amendment to Part 76 of the Commission's Rules, FCC 08-224, ¶¶ 14-16 (rel. Sept. 26, 2008) (``2008 Viewability Clarification Order'')). See 2008 Viewability Clarification Order, FCC 08-224, at ¶ 15. Id. (citing Program and System Information Protocol for Terrestrial Broadcast and
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-09-530A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-09-530A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-09-530A1.txt
  • 2009 Released: March 9, 2009 By the Senior Deputy Chief, Policy Division, Media Bureau: introduction On October 6, 2008, Complainant Pacific Bell Telephone Company d/b/a SBC California d/b/a AT&T California and AT&T Services, Inc. (``AT&T'') filed a program access complaint against CoxCom, Inc. (``Cox'') pursuant to Sections 628(b) of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended (the ``Act''), and Sections 76.7(a), 76.1001 and 76.1003(a) of the Commission's rules. AT&T alleges Cox's withholding of channel Cox-4 from carriage by AT&T on its U-verse TV system in San Diego, California constitutes an unfair practice under Section 628(b) because the purpose or effect of Cox's actions has been to significantly hinder AT&T's ability to provide satellite-delivered programming to consumers. In addition, AT&T seeks an
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-09-531A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-09-531A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-09-531A1.txt
  • WAIVER OF REPLY AND SERVICE RULES concerning PetitionS for DECLARATORY RULING REGARDING PUBLIC, EDUCATIONAL, AND GOVERNMENTAL PROGRAMMING CSR-8126, CSR-8127, CSR-8128 MB Docket No. 09-13 Reply Comment Date: April 1, 2009 On February 6, 2009, the Bureau issued a Public Notice seeking comment on petitions for declaratory ruling regarding public, educational, and governmental programming. These petitions were filed pursuant to Section 76.7 of the Commission's rules. The Public Notice set a deadline of March 9, 2009 for filing comments and oppositions and stated that ``Petitioners' replies are due March 24, 2009.'' In addition, Section 76.7(c)(1) provides that petitioners may file a reply to oppositions or comments received regarding the petitions, and must serve such reply on all parties who have filed pleadings.
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-09-55A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-09-55A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-09-55A1.txt
  • CSR-8001-P - February 20, 2009 NFL Enterprises v. Comcast, File No. CSR-7876-P - February 27, 2009 This Order is issued pursuant to Sections 4(i), 4(j) and 616 of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended, 47 U.S.C. §§ 154(i), (j) and 536, and Section 4 of the Freedom of Information Act, 5 U.S.C. § 552(b)(4), and 47 C.F.R. §§ 0.457(d), 76.7, and 76.1300-1302, and authority delegated under Section 0.283 of the Commission's rules, 47 C.F.R. § 0.283. FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION Monica Shah Desai Chief, Media Bureau APPENDIX A Before the Federal Communications Commission Washington, D.C. 20554 In the Matter of Herring Broadcasting, Inc. d/b/a WealthTV, Complainant v. Time Warner Cable Inc. Defendant Herring Broadcasting, Inc. d/b/a WealthTV, Complainant v. Bright House
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-09-67A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-09-67A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-09-67A1.txt
  • than their MVPD. Although the cable industry has challenged the lawfulness of the integration ban on three separate occasions, in each of those cases the D.C. Circuit denied those petitions. In limited circumstances, however, operators may be eligible for waiver of the integration ban. The Waiver Request On November 26, 2008, Cablevision filed a request pursuant to Sections 1.3 and 76.7 of the Commission's rules, for a limited 18-month extension of its waiver of the prohibition on integrated set-top boxes set forth in Section 76.1204(a)(1) of the Commission's rules. Cablevision's current limited waiver is set to expire on July 1, 2009. Securing an 18-month extension of the waiver of the integration ban would allow Cablevision to use its Smartcard until it
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-09-70A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-09-70A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-09-70A1.txt
  • of Effective Competition in Mount Vernon, New York (CUID NY 0398) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) CSR 8087-E Adopted: January 27, 2009 Released: January 28, 2009 By the Senior Deputy Chief, Policy Division, Media Bureau: I. introduction and Background Time Warner Cable Inc., hereinafter referred to as ``Petitioner,'' has filed with the Commission a petition pursuant to Sections 76.7 and 76.905(b)(4) and 76.907 of the Commission's rules for a determination that Petitioner is subject to effective competition in the community listed on Attachment A and hereinafter referred to as the ``Community.'' Petitioner alleges that its cable system serving the Community is subject to effective competition pursuant to Section 623(1)(1)(D) of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended (``Communications Act'')
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-09-71A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-09-71A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-09-71A1.txt
  • ) ) ) ) ) CSR 8091-E CSR 8092-E CSR 8093-E Adopted: January 27, 2009 Released: January 28, 2009 By the Senior Deputy Chief, Policy Division, Media Bureau: I. introduction and Background Cablevision Systems Huntington Corporation, Cablevision Systems Long Island Corp., and CSC Acquisition-MA Inc., hereinafter referred to as ``Petitioner,'' has filed with the Commission a petition pursuant to Sections 76.7 and 76.905(b)(4) and 76.907 of the Commission's rules for a determination that Petitioner is subject to effective competition in those communities listed on Attachment A and hereinafter referred to as the ``Communities.'' Petitioner alleges that its cable system serving the Communities is subject to effective competition pursuant to Section 623(1)(1)(D) of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended (``Communications Act'')
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-09-72A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-09-72A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-09-72A1.txt
  • Systems Westchester Corp. Petition for Determination of Effective Competition in Putnam Valley, New York (CUID NY1083) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) CSR 8095-E Adopted: February 2, 2009 Released: February 3, 2009 By the Senior Deputy Chief, Policy Division, Media Bureau: introduction and Background Cablevision Systems Westchester Corp. (``Petitioner'') has filed with the Commission a petition pursuant to Sections 76.7, 76.905(b)(2) and 76.907 of the Commission's rules for a determination that Petitioner is subject to effective competition in the community listed on Attachment A and hereinafter referred to as the ``Community.'' Petitioner alleges that its cable system serving the Community is subject to effective competition pursuant to Section 623(1)(1)(B) of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended (``Communications Act''), and
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-09-903A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-09-903A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-09-903A1.txt
  • ) CSR 8139-E CSR 8140-E CSR 8141-E Adopted: April 23, 2009 Released: April 24, 2009 By the Senior Deputy Chief, Policy Division, Media Bureau: I. introduction and Background Cablevision Systems Long Island Corp., Cablevision Systems Suffolk Corp., CSC Holdings, Inc., and Cablevision of Brookhaven, Inc., hereinafter referred to as ``Petitioner,'' has filed with the Commission a petition pursuant to Sections 76.7 and 76.905(b)(4) and 76.907 of the Commission's rules for a determination that Petitioner is subject to effective competition in those communities listed on Attachment A and hereinafter referred to as ``Communities.'' Petitioner alleges that its cable system serving the Communities is subject to effective competition pursuant to Section 623(1)(1)(D) of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended (``Communications Act'') and
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-10-1020A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-10-1020A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-10-1020A1.txt
  • Effective Competition in various Pennsylvania Franchise Areas ) ) ) ) ) ) ) CSR 8072-E CSR 8075-E CSR 8078-E Adopted: June 3, 2010 Released: June 4, 2010 By the Senior Deputy Chief, Policy Division, Media Bureau: I. introduction and Background Comcast Cable Communications, LLC , hereinafter referred to as ``Petitioner,'' has filed with the Commission petitions pursuant to Sections 76.7, 76.905(b)(2), 76.905(b)(1) and 76.907 of the Commission's rules for a determination that Petitioner is subject to effective competition in those communities listed on Attachment A and hereinafter referred to as ``Communities.'' Petitioner alleges that its cable systems serving the communities listed on Attachment B and hereinafter referred to as Group B Communities are subject to effective competition pursuant to Section
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-10-1021A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-10-1021A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-10-1021A1.txt
  • Pennsylvania Franchise Areas ) ) ) ) ) ) ) CSR 8179-E CSR 8180-E CSR 8181-E CSR 8182-E CSR 8183-E Adopted: June 3, 2010 Released: June 4, 2010 By the Senior Deputy Chief, Policy Division, Media Bureau: I. introduction and Background Comcast Cable Communications, LLC , hereinafter referred to as ``Petitioner,'' has filed with the Commission petitions pursuant to Sections 76.7, 76.905(b)(2), 76.905(b)(1) and 76.907 of the Commission's rules for a determination that Petitioner is subject to effective competition in those communities listed on Attachment A and hereinafter referred to as ``Communities.'' Petitioner alleges that its cable systems serving the communities listed on Attachment B and hereinafter referred to as Group B Communities are subject to effective competition pursuant to Section
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-10-1023A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-10-1023A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-10-1023A1.txt
  • Determination of Effective Competition in 33 Scranton, Pennsylvania-area Franchise Areas ) ) ) ) ) ) ) CSR 8191-E Adopted: June 3, 2010 Released: June 4, 2010 By the Senior Deputy Chief, Policy Division, Media Bureau: I. introduction and Background Comcast Cable Communications, LLC , hereinafter referred to as ``Petitioner,'' has filed with the Commission a petition pursuant to Sections 76.7, 76.905(b)(2), 76.905(b)(1) and 76.907 of the Commission's rules for a determination that Petitioner is subject to effective competition in those communities listed on Attachment A and hereinafter referred to as ``Communities.'' Petitioner alleges that its cable system serving the communities listed on Attachment B and hereinafter referred to as Group B Communities is subject to effective competition pursuant to Section
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-10-1024A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-10-1024A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-10-1024A1.txt
  • Competition in various Indiana Communities ) ) ) ) ) ) ) CSR 7948-E, 7949-E, 7950-E, 7951-E, 7952-E, 7953-E, 7954-E, 7955-E Adopted: June 3, 2010 Released: June 4, 2010 By the Senior Deputy Chief, Policy Division, Media Bureau: I. introduction and Background Comcast Cable Communications, LLC, hereinafter referred to as ``Petitioner,'' has filed with the Commission petitions pursuant to Sections 76.7, 76.905(b)(2), 76.905(b)(1) and 76.907 of the Commission's rules for a determination that Petitioner is subject to effective competition in those communities listed on Attachment A and hereinafter referred to as ``Communities.'' Petitioner alleges that its cable system serving the communities listed on Attachment B and hereinafter referred to as Group B Communities is subject to effective competition pursuant to Section
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-10-1028A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-10-1028A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-10-1028A1.txt
  • Communities in Louisiana ) ) ) ) ) ) ) CSR 7857-E CSR 7858-E CSR 7859-E Adopted: June 4, 2010 Released: June 4, 2010 By the Senior Deputy Chief, Policy Division, Media Bureau: introduction and Background Charter Communications, on behalf of its subsidiaries and affiliates, hereinafter referred to as ``Petitioner,'' has filed with the Commission a petition pursuant to Sections 76.7, 76.905(b)(2) and 76.907 of the Commission's rules for a determination that Petitioner is subject to effective competition in those communities listed on Attachment A and hereinafter referred to as ``Communities.'' Petitioner alleges that its cable system serving the Communities is subject to effective competition pursuant to Section 623(1)(1)(B) of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended (``Communications Act''), and the
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-10-105A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-10-105A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-10-105A1.txt
  • Alabama v. Cablestar, Inc. ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) CSR-8213-M Adopted: January 20, 2010 Released: January 20, 2010 By the Senior Deputy Chief, Policy Division, Media Bureau: Introduction The Board of Trustees of the University of Alabama, licensee of local commercial television station WUOA-DT, Tuscaloosa, Alabama (``WUOA'') has filed a must carry complaint pursuant to Sections 76.7 and 76.61 of the Commission's rules, against cable operator, Cablestar, Inc. (``Cablestar''), seeking carriage on the latter's system serving the community of Ragland in the Birmingham, Alabama DMA. Cablestar's response sought dismissal of WUOA's complaint on the ground that Cablestar was carrying WUOA. Accordingly, the Media Bureau dismissed WUOA's complaint as moot. However, WUOA subsequently filed a request to reinstate
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-10-106A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-10-106A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-10-106A1.txt
  • and Envision Media must commence carriage of WUOA-DT on each cable system they operate that serves communities within the Birmingham, Alabama DMA. This action is taken under authority delegated by Section 0.283 of the Commission's rules, 47 C.F.R § 0.283. FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION Steven A. Broeckaert Senior Deputy Chief, Policy Division Media Bureau These complaints are brought pursuant to Sections 76.7 and 76.61 of our rules. 47 C.F.R. §§ 76.7 and 76.61. Petition for Special Relief of Trustees against Trust Cable (CSR-8205-M), filed Sept. 15, 2009 (``Trust Complaint''), James Cable (CSR-8207-M), filed Sept. 17, 2009 (``James Cable Complaint''), SCS (CSR-8209-M), filed Sept. 11, 2009 (``SCS Complaint''), KFWC (CSR-8210-M), filed Sept. 11, 2009 (``KFWC Complaint''), and Envision (CSR-8249-M), filed Nov. 30, 2009
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-10-1094A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-10-1094A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-10-1094A1.txt
  • petitioners' requests for waiver of the IEEE 1394 interface requirement with respect to devices that include IP-based interfaces that output video in a format that third-party devices can receive. This waiver is effective until the Commission adopts an order that addresses interface requirements on cable set-top boxes. ordering clauses Accordingly, IT IS ORDERED that, pursuant to Sections 0.61(h), 1.3, and 76.7 of the Commission's rules, 47 C.F.R. §§ 0.61(h), 1.3, and 76.7, the requests for waiver of Section 76.640(b)(4)(ii) of the Commission's rules, 47 C.F.R. § 76.640(b)(4)(ii), filed by Intel Corporation, Motorola, Inc., and TiVo, Inc. ARE GRANTED ON AN INTERIM BASIS as set forth in this order. FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION William T. Lake Chief, Media Bureau See Intel Waiver Request
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-10-1291A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-10-1291A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-10-1291A1.txt
  • that the Commission has never argued that ``common reliance'' requires that all of an operator's devices use CableCARDS. Finally, James Cable argues that there is no evidence in the record that James Cable's use of integrated devices has or would cause it to provide inferior support for retail devices. discussion James Cable filed its request pursuant to sections 1.3 and 76.7 of the Commission's Rules. In the 2007 Financial Hardship Order, the Bureau found that extraordinary financial hardships present good cause for limited waiver of the integration ban. On four separate occasions, the Bureau has granted James Cable waiver of Section 76.1204(a)(1) of the Commission's rules based on the 2007 Financial Hardship Order precedent, most recently extending the waiver until July
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-10-1557A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-10-1557A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-10-1557A1.txt
  • failed to comply with the Commission's procedures when it sought waivers of the requirement to honor the exclusivity requests of the Toledo stations. WTVG Opposition at note 29. Specifically, Buckeye did not file a Special Relief Petition, did not serve notice of its request on the required parties, and did not pay the required filing fee. 47 C.F.R. §§ 1.1104, 76.7. Section III.A.3, supra. WUPW Request at 24-28, WTVG Request at 25-29. Buckeye does not intend to reconfigure its system, but instead plans to drop the Detroit stations, temporarily if necessary, to comply with Commission rules pending resolution of the Applications for Review. WUPW Request at 24, WTVG Request at 25. See generally, WUPW Opposition at 17-18, WTVG Opposition at 16.
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-10-1713A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-10-1713A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-10-1713A1.txt
  • in Four Communities in Maryland ) ) ) ) ) ) ) CSR 8026-E Adopted: September 9, 2010 Released: September 9, 2010 By Senior Deputy Chief, Policy Division, Media Bureau: I. introduction and Background Comcast Cable Communications, LLC, on behalf of its subsidiaries and affiliates, hereinafter referred to as ``Petitioner,'' has filed with the Commission a petition pursuant to Sections 76.7, 76.905(b)(2) and 76.907 of the Commission's rules for a determination that Petitioner is subject to effective competition in the four communities listed on Attachment A and hereinafter referred to as ``Communities.'' Petitioner alleges that its cable systems serving the Communities are subject to effective competition pursuant to Section 623(1)(1)(B) of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended (``Communications Act'') and
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-10-1714A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-10-1714A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-10-1714A1.txt
  • Louisiana ) ) ) ) ) ) ) CSR 8077-E CSR 8239-E CSR 8240-E CSR 8241-E Adopted: September 9, 2010 Released: September 9, 2010 By the Senior Deputy Chief, Policy Division, Media Bureau: I. introduction and Background Cox Communications Louisiana, LLC, d/b/a/ Cox Communications Greater Louisiana, hereinafter referred to as ``Petitioner,'' has filed with the Commission petitions pursuant to Sections 76.7, 76.905(b)(1, 2, 4) and 76.907 of the Commission's rules for a determination that Petitioner is subject to effective competition in those communities listed on Attachment A and hereinafter referred to as ``Communities.'' Petitioner alleges that its cable systems serving the Communities are subject to effective competition pursuant to Section 623(1)(1)(B) of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended (``Communications Act'')
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-10-1723A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-10-1723A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-10-1723A1.txt
  • New Mexico Communities ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) CSR 7773-E Adopted: September 10, 2010 Released: September 10, 2010 By the Senior Deputy Chief, Policy Division, Media Bureau: introduction and Background Comcast Cable Communications, LLC, on behalf of its subsidiaries and affiliates (``Comcast''), hereinafter referred to as ``Petitioner,'' has filed with the Commission a petition pursuant to Sections 76.7, 76.905(b)(1), 76.905(b)(2) and 76.907 of the Commission's rules for a determination that Petitioner is subject to effective competition in those communities listed on Attachment A and hereinafter referred to as ``Communities.'' Petitioner alleges that its cable system serving the Communities is subject to effective competition pursuant to Section 623(1) of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended (``Communications Act'') and
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-10-1787A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-10-1787A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-10-1787A1.txt
  • in Maryland ) ) ) ) ) ) ) CSR 8161-E Adopted: September 21, 2010 Released: September 21, 2010 By the Senior Deputy Chief, Policy Division, Media Bureau: introduction and Background Comcast Cable Communications, LLC (``Comcast'' or ``the Company''), on behalf of its subsidiaries and affiliates, has filed with the Commission a Petition for Special Relief (``Petition'') pursuant to Sections 76.7, 76.905(b)(2) and 76.907 of the Commission's rules for a determination that the Company is subject to effective competition in two franchise areas (``the Communities'') in the Maryland part of the Delmarva Peninsula. The Communities are listed in Attachment A hereto. Comcast alleges that its cable system serving the Communities is subject to effective competition pursuant to Section 623(1)(1)(B) of the
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-10-1838A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-10-1838A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-10-1838A1.txt
  • for Determination of Effective Competition in Eight Arlington, Washington-Area Franchises ) ) ) ) ) ) ) CSR No. 7854-E Adopted: September 27, 2010 Released: September 27, 2010 By the Senior Deputy Chief, Policy Division, Media Bureau: I. introduction and Background Comcast Cable Communications, LLC, hereinafter referred to as ``Petitioner,'' has filed with the Commission a petition pursuant to Sections 76.7, 76.905(b)(2) and 76.907 of the Commission's rules for a determination that Petitioner is subject to effective competition in those communities listed on Attachment A and hereinafter referred to as ``Communities.'' Petitioner alleges that its cable system serving the Communities is subject to effective competition pursuant to Section 623(l)(1)(B) of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended (``Communications Act'') and the
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-10-1840A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-10-1840A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-10-1840A1.txt
  • Communities in Kentucky ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) CSR 8248-E CSR 8270-E CSR 8282-E Adopted: September 28, 2010 Released: September 28, 2010 By the Senior Deputy Chief, Policy Division, Media Bureau: introduction and Background Inter Mountain Cable, Inc. and Mediacom Southeast LLC, hereinafter referred to as ``Petitioners,'' have filed with the Commission petitions pursuant to Sections 76.7, 76.905(b)(1-2), and 76.907 of the Commission's rules for a determination that the Petitioners are subject to effective competition in those communities listed on Attachment A and hereinafter referred to as ``Communities.'' Petitioners allege that their cable systems serving the Communities are subject to effective competition pursuant to Section 623(1) of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended (``Communications Act'') and
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-10-1860A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-10-1860A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-10-1860A1.txt
  • ( NM0117, NM0212 ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) CSR 7956-E Adopted: September 27, 2010 Released: September 28, 2010 By the Senior Deputy Chief, Policy Division, Media Bureau: I. introduction and Background Comcast Cable Communications, LLC, on behalf of its subsidiaries and affiliates, hereinafter referred to as ``Petitioner,'' has filed with the Commission a petition pursuant to Sections 76.7, 76.905(b)(2) and 76.907 of the Commission's rules for a determination that Petitioner is subject to effective competition in Angel Fire, New Mexico, hereinafter referred to as ``Community.'' Petitioner alleges that its cable system serving the Community is subject to effective competition pursuant to Section 623(1)(1)(B) of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended (``Communications Act''), and the Commission's implementing rules,
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-10-1883A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-10-1883A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-10-1883A1.txt
  • Petitions for Determination of Effective Competition in various Colorado Communities ) ) ) ) ) ) CSR 7733-E, 7745-E, 7809, 7823-E Adopted: September 28, 2010 Released: September 29, 2010 By the Senior Deputy Chief, Policy Division, Media Bureau: I. introduction and Background Comcast Cable Communications, LLC, hereinafter referred to as ``Petitioner,'' has filed with the Commission petitions pursuant to Sections 76.7, 76.905(b)(2), 76.905(b)(1) and 76.907 of the Commission's rules for a determination that Petitioner is subject to effective competition in those communities listed on Attachment A and hereinafter referred to as ``Communities.'' Petitioner alleges that its cable system serving the communities listed on Attachment B and hereinafter referred to as Group B Communities is subject to effective competition pursuant to Section
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-10-1918A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-10-1918A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-10-1918A1.txt
  • The Tennis Channel asserts that it has been forced to limit marketing, production, and programming expenses, and was unable to renew agreements for certain smaller tournaments in 2010. Referral to ALJ or ADR Based on the foregoing, we find it appropriate to designate the captioned complaint on the issues specified below for a hearing before an ALJ. Pursuant to Section 76.7(g)(2) of the Commission's Rules, each party will have ten days following release of this Order to notify the Chief, Enforcement Bureau and Chief ALJ, in writing, of its election to resolve this dispute through ADR. The hearing proceeding will be suspended during this ten-day period. In the event that both parties elect ADR, the hearing proceeding will remain suspended, and
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-10-1931A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-10-1931A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-10-1931A1.txt
  • ) CSR 8295-E, CSR 8300-E, CSR 8309-E, CSR 8310-E, CSR 8313-E, CSR 8321-E & CSR 8312-E CSR 8339-E Adopted: October 6, 2010 Released: October 6, 2010 By the Senior Deputy Chief, Policy Division, Media Bureau: introduction and Background Mediacom Southeast LLC and Time Warner Cable Inc., hereinafter referred to as ``Petitioners,'' have filed with the Commission petitions pursuant to Sections 76.7, 76.905(b)(2) and 76.907 of the Commission's rules for a determination that Petitioners are subject to effective competition in those communities listed on Attachment A and hereinafter referred to as ``Communities.'' Petitioners allege that their cable systems serving the Communities are subject to effective competition pursuant to Section 623(l)(1)(B) of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended (``Communications Act''), and the
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-10-1932A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-10-1932A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-10-1932A1.txt
  • Cable Inc. Petition for Determination of Effective Competition in various Ohio Communities ) ) ) ) ) ) CSR 7969-E Adopted: October 6, 2010 Released: October 6, 2010 By the Senior Deputy Chief, Policy Division, Media Bureau: I. introduction and Background Time Warner Cable Inc., hereinafter referred to as ``Petitioner,'' has filed with the Commission a petition pursuant to Sections 76.7, 76.905(b)(2), 76.905(b)(1) and 76.907 of the Commission's rules for a determination that Petitioner is subject to effective competition in those communities listed on Attachment A and hereinafter referred to as ``Communities.'' Petitioner alleges that its cable system serving the communities listed on Attachment B and hereinafter referred to as Group B Communities is subject to effective competition pursuant to Section
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-10-1949A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-10-1949A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-10-1949A1.txt
  • Determination of Effective Competition in various Illinois, Indiana, and Kentucky Communities ) ) ) ) ) ) ) CSR 8006-E Adopted: October 8, 2010 Released: October 8, 2010 By the Senior Deputy Chief, Policy Division, Media Bureau: I. introduction and Background Time Warner Cable Inc., hereinafter referred to as ``Petitioner,'' has filed with the Commission a petition pursuant to Sections 76.7, 76.905(b)(2), 76.905(b)(1) and 76.907 of the Commission's rules for a determination that Petitioner is subject to effective competition in those communities listed on Attachment A and hereinafter referred to as ``Attachment A Communities.'' Petitioner alleges that its cable system serving the Attachment A Communities is subject to effective competition pursuant to Section 623(1) of the Communications Act of 1934, as
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-10-1950A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-10-1950A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-10-1950A1.txt
  • Petitions for Determination of Effective Competition in various Ohio Franchise Areas ) ) ) ) ) ) CSR 8337-E CSR 8338-E Adopted: October 8, 2010 Released: October 13, 2010 By the Senior Deputy Chief, Policy Division, Media Bureau: introduction and Background Time Warner Cable Inc. , hereinafter referred to as ``Petitioner,'' has filed with the Commission petitions pursuant to Sections 76.7, 76.905(b)(2) and 76.907 of the Commission's rules for a determination that Petitioner is subject to effective competition in those communities listed on Attachment A and hereinafter referred to as ``Communities.'' Petitioner alleges that its cable systems serving the Communities are subject to effective competition pursuant to Section 623(1)(1)(B) of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended (``Communications Act''), and the
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-10-1976A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-10-1976A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-10-1976A1.txt
  • Petition for Determination of Effective Competition in 105 Franchise Areas in Ohio ) ) ) ) ) ) CSR 7799-E Adopted: October 14, 2010 Released: October 14, 2010 By the Senior Deputy Chief, Policy Division, Media Bureau: I. introduction and Background Time Warner Cable Inc., hereinafter referred to as ``Petitioner,'' has filed with the Commission a petition pursuant to Sections 76.7, 76.905(b)(1-2), and 76.907 of the Commission's rules for a determination that Petitioner is subject to effective competition in those communities listed on the Attachments hereto and hereinafter referred to as ``Communities.'' Petitioner alleges that its cable system serving the Communities listed on Attachments A hereto (the ``Attachment A Communities'') is subject to effective competition pursuant to Section 623(1)(1)(B) of the
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-10-2113A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-10-2113A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-10-2113A1.txt
  • Inc. Petition for Determination of Effective Competition in Five Communities in New York ) ) ) ) ) ) CSR 7500-E Adopted: November 3, 2010 Released: November 3, 2010 By the Senior Deputy Chief, Policy Division, Media Bureau: introduction and Background Time Warner Cable Inc., hereinafter referred to as ``Petitioner,'' has filed with the Commission a petition pursuant to Sections 76.7, 76.905(b)(2) and 76.907 of the Commission's rules for a determination that Petitioner is subject to effective competition in the five communities listed on Attachment A and hereinafter referred to as ``Communities.'' Petitioner alleges that its cable system serving the Communities is subject to effective competition pursuant to Section 623(l)(1)(B) of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended (``Communications Act''), and
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-10-2114A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-10-2114A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-10-2114A1.txt
  • NM (0016) Pecos, NM (0113) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) CSR-7957-E CSR-7960-E CSR-7961-E CSR-7962-E CSR-7963-E Adopted: November 3, 2010 Released: November 3, 2010 By the Senior Deputy Chief, Policy Division, Media Bureau: I. introduction and Background Comcast Cable Communications, LLC, hereinafter referred to as ``Petitioner,'' has filed with the Commission petitions pursuant to Sections 76.7, 76.905(b)(2), 76.905(b)(1) and 76.907 of the Commission's rules for a determination that Petitioner is subject to effective competition in those communities listed on Attachment A and hereinafter referred to as ``Communities.'' Petitioner alleges that its cable system serving the Communities is subject to effective competition pursuant to Section 623(1) of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended (``Communications Act'') and
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-10-2115A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-10-2115A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-10-2115A1.txt
  • NM0058 Hatch, NM NM0093 NM0211 ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) CSR7964-E CSR7965-E Adopted: November 3, 2010 Released: November 3, 2010 By the Senior Deputy Chief, Policy Division, Media Bureau: I. introduction and Background Comcast Cable Communications, LLC hereinafter referred to as ``Petitioner,'' has filed with the Commission a petition pursuant to Sections 76.7, 76.905(b)(2), 76.905(b)(1) and 76.907 of the Commission's rules for a determination that Petitioner is subject to effective competition in those communities listed on Attachment A and hereinafter referred to as ``Communities.'' Petitioner alleges that its cable system serving the Communities is subject to effective competition pursuant to Section 623(1) of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended (``Communications Act'') and
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-10-2116A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-10-2116A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-10-2116A1.txt
  • (NM 0029) Silver City, NM (NM 0003) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) CSR 8020-E Adopted: November 3, 2010 Released: November 3, 2010 By the Senior Deputy Chief, Policy Division, Media Bureau: I. introduction and Background Comcast Cable Communications LLC, hereinafter referred to as ``Petitioner,'' has filed with the Commission a petition pursuant to Sections 76.7, 76.905(b)(2), 76.905(b)(1) and 76.907 of the Commission's rules for a determination that Petitioner is subject to effective competition in those communities listed on Attachment A and hereinafter referred to as ``Communities.'' Petitioner alleges that its cable system serving the Communities is subject to effective competition pursuant to Section 623(1) of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended (``Communications Act'') and
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-10-2183A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-10-2183A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-10-2183A1.txt
  • for Determination of Effective Competition in Six Communities in New York State ) ) ) ) ) ) ) CSR 8363-E Adopted: November 15, 2010 Released: November 15, 2010 By the Senior Deputy Chief, Policy Division, Media Bureau: introduction and Background Time Warner Cable Inc., hereinafter referred to as ``Petitioner,'' has filed with the Commission a petition pursuant to Sections 76.7, 76.905(b)(2), and 76.907 of the Commission's rules for a determination that Petitioner is subject to effective competition in those communities listed on Attachment A and hereinafter referred to as the ``Communities.'' Petitioner alleges that its cable system serving the Communities is subject to effective competition pursuant to Section 623(l)(1)(B) of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended (``Communications Act''), and
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-10-2197A1.doc
  • in 15 Communities in Arkansas ) ) ) ) ) ) CSR 8243-E CSR 8244-E CSR 8245-E CSR 8246-E Adopted: November 17, 2010 Released: November 17, 2010 By the Senior Deputy Chief, Policy Division, Media Bureau: I. introduction and Background CoxCom, Inc., d/b/a/ Cox Communications Arkansas, hereinafter referred to as ``Petitioner,'' has filed with the Commission petitions pursuant to Sections 76.7 and 76.907 of the Commission's rules for a determination that Petitioner is subject to effective competition in 15 franchise areas in Arkansas (the ``Communities''). Petitioner alleges that its cable system is subject to effective competition pursuant to Section 623(1) of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended (``Communications Act'') and the Commission's implementing rules, and is therefore exempt from cable
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-10-2204A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-10-2204A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-10-2204A1.txt
  • LLC Petition for Determination of Effective Competition in four Pennsylvania Franchise Areas ) ) ) ) ) ) CSR 8362-E Adopted: November 18, 2010 Released: November 19, 2010 By the Senior Deputy Chief, Policy Division, Media Bureau: introduction and Background Comcast Cable Communications, LLC , hereinafter referred to as ``Petitioner,'' has filed with the Commission a petition pursuant to Sections 76.7, 76.905(b)(2) and 76.907 of the Commission's rules for a determination that Petitioner is subject to effective competition in those communities listed on Attachment A and hereinafter referred to as ``Communities.'' Petitioner alleges that its cable system serving the Communities is subject to effective competition pursuant to Section 623(l)(1)(B) of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended (``Communications Act''), and the
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-10-2246A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-10-2246A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-10-2246A1.txt
  • Effective Competition in York County and West Point, Virginia ) ) ) ) ) ) ) CSR 8187 -E Adopted: November 29, 2010 Released: November 29, 2010 By the Senior Deputy Chief, Policy Division, Media Bureau: I. introduction and background Cox Communications Hampton Roads, LLC, hereinafter referred to as ``Petitioner,'' has filed with the Commission a petition pursuant to Sections 76.7, 76.905(b)(2), 76.905(b)(4) and 76.907 of the Commission's rules for a determination that Petitioner is subject to effective competition in the community listed on Attachment A and hereinafter referred to as the ``Community.'' Petitioner alleges that its cable system serving the Community is subject to effective competition pursuant to Section 623(1) of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended (``Communications Act'')
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-10-2247A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-10-2247A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-10-2247A1.txt
  • Various Arizona Communities ) ) ) ) ) ) ) CSR 7812-E, CSR 7813-E & CSR 7814-E Adopted: November 29, 2010 Released: November 29, 2010 By the Senior Deputy Chief, Policy Division, Media Bureau: I. introduction and Background CoxCom, Inc., d/b/a Cox Communications Phoenix , hereinafter referred to as ``Petitioner,'' has filed with the Commission a petition pursuant to Sections 76.7, 76.905(b)(2), 76.905(b)(1) and 76.907 of the Commission's rules for a determination that Petitioner is subject to effective competition in those communities listed on Attachment A and hereinafter referred to as the ``Communities.'' Petitioner alleges that its cable system serving the Communities is subject to effective competition pursuant to Section 623(1) of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended (``Communications Act'')
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-10-227A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-10-227A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-10-227A1.txt
  • because the Subject Boxes are only capable of doing what is necessary to make digital cable programming viewable on analog television sets. For this reason we conclude that, with respect to the Subject Boxes, Petitioners have justified three-year waivers of the integration ban under the standard set forth in the 2005 Deferral Order, the Evolution Order, and Sections 1.3 or 76.7 of the Commission's rules. Accordingly, we grant the Waiver Requests, and, until three years from the release of this order, any cable operator may choose to deploy the Subject Boxes without requesting a waiver of Section 76.1204(a)(1)'s prohibition on the deployment of navigation devices ``that perform both conditional access and other functions in a single integrated device.'' ordering clauses Accordingly,
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-10-230A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-10-230A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-10-230A1.txt
  • Pennsylvania v. DirecTV, Inc. ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) CSR-8110-M MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER Adopted: February 3, 2010 Released: February 3, 2010 By the Senior Deputy Chief, Policy Division, Media Bureau: INTRODUCTION Red Lion Broadcasting Company, Inc., licensee of WGCB-TV, Red Lion, Pennsylvania (``WGCB'') filed the above captioned carriage complaint against DirecTV, Inc. (``DirecTV''), pursuant to Sections 76.7 and 76.66(m)(3) of the Commission's rules. WGCB alleged that due to the death of its General Manager, it failed to send a timely carriage election by the October 1, 2008 deadline for the 2009-2011 carriage election cycle. As a consequence of WGCB's failure to meet this deadline, DirecTV refused to afford the station mandatory carriage on DirecTV's direct broadcast satellite
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-10-2405A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-10-2405A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-10-2405A1.txt
  • Competition in Various Virginia Communities ) ) ) ) ) ) ) CSR 8370-E Adopted: December 22, 2010 Released: December 22, 2010 By the Senior Deputy Chief, Policy Division, Media Bureau: introduction and Background Comcast Cable Communications, LLC, on behalf of its subsidiaries and affiliates, hereinafter referred to as ``Petitioner,'' has filed with the Commission a petition pursuant to Sections 76.7, 76.905(b)(2) and 76.907 of the Commission's rules for a determination that Petitioner is subject to effective competition in those communities listed on Attachment A and hereinafter referred to as ``Communities.'' Petitioner alleges that its cable system serving the Communities is subject to effective competition pursuant to Section 623(l)(1)(B) of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended (``Communications Act''), and the
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-10-2409A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-10-2409A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-10-2409A1.txt
  • Communications, LLC Petition for Determination of Effective Competition in various Oregon Communities ) ) ) ) ) ) CSR 8137-E Adopted: December 22, 2010 Released: December 22, 2010 By the Senior Deputy Chief, Policy Division, Media Bureau: I. introduction and Background Comcast Cable Communications, LLC, hereinafter referred to as ``Petitioner,'' has filed with the Commission a petition pursuant to Sections 76.7, 76.905(b)(2), 76.905(b)(1) and 76.907 of the Commission's rules for a determination that Petitioner is subject to effective competition in those communities listed on Attachment A and hereinafter referred to as ``Communities.'' Petitioner alleges that its cable system serving the Communities is subject to effective competition pursuant to Section 623(1)(1)(B) of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended (``Communications Act'') and
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-10-2420A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-10-2420A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-10-2420A1.txt
  • LLC Petition for Determination of Effective Competition in Five Pennsylvania Franchise Areas ) ) ) ) ) ) CSR 8372-E Adopted: December 22, 2010 Released: December 29, 2010 By the Senior Deputy Chief, Policy Division, Media Bureau: introduction and Background Comcast Cable Communications, LLC , hereinafter referred to as ``Petitioner,'' has filed with the Commission a petition pursuant to Sections 76.7, 76.905(b)(2) and 76.907 of the Commission's rules for a determination that Petitioner is subject to effective competition in those communities listed on Attachment A and hereinafter referred to as ``Communities.'' Petitioner alleges that its cable system serving the Communities is subject to effective competition pursuant to Section 623(l)(1)(B) of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended (``Communications Act''), and the
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-10-284A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-10-284A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-10-284A1.txt
  • of Effective Competition in Nineteen Franchise Areas in Connecticut ) ) ) ) ) ) CSR 7864-E Adopted: February 18, 2010 Released: February 19, 2010 By the Senior Deputy Chief, Policy Division, Media Bureau: I. introduction and Background CoxCom, Inc. d/b/a Cox Communications New England, hereinafter referred to as ``Petitioner,'' has filed with the Commission a petition pursuant to Sections 76.7 and 76.905(b)(4) and 76.907 of the Commission's rules for a determination that Petitioner is subject to effective competition in those communities listed on Attachment A and hereinafter referred to as ``Communities.'' Petitioner alleges that its cable system serving the Communities is subject to effective competition pursuant to Section 623(1)(1)(D) of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended (``Communications Act'') and
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-10-286A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-10-286A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-10-286A1.txt
  • Communities ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) CSR 8057-E and 8058-E Adopted: February 19, 2010 Released: February 19, 2010 By the Senior Deputy Chief, Policy Division, Media Bureau: I. introduction and Background Coxcom, Inc, d/b/a Cox Communications Omaha and Cox Communications Sun Valley, hereinafter referred to as ``Petitioner,'' has filed with the Commission a petition pursuant to Sections 76.7, 76.905(b)(2) and 76.907 of the Commission's rules for a determination that Petitioner is subject to effective competition in those communities listed on Attachment A and hereinafter referred to as ``Communities.'' Petitioner alleges that its cable system serving the Communities is subject to effective competition pursuant to Section 623(1)(1)(B) of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended (``Communications Act'') and the
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-10-34A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-10-34A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-10-34A1.txt
  • has demonstrated a strong need to encrypt the basic service tier, has committed to take steps necessary to mitigate harm to its subscribers, and through the reporting requirement will provide valuable data to the Commission relative to the impact of this waiver in its New York City franchise areas. ordering clauses Accordingly, IT IS ORDERED that, pursuant to Sections 1.3, 76.7, and 76.630(a) of the Commission's rules, 47 C.F.R. §§ 1.3, 76.7, 76.630(a), the request for waiver filed by Cablevision Systems Corporation of Section 76.630(a) of the Commission's rules, 47 C.F.R. § 76.630(a), IS GRANTED to allow Cablevision to encrypt the basic service tier in Cablevision's New York City franchise areas pursuant to the terms and conditions discussed herein. The Bureau
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-10-359A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-10-359A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-10-359A1.txt
  • for Determination of Effective Competition in two Iowa Communities ) ) ) ) ) ) ) CSR 7045-E and 7047-E Adopted: March 3, 2010 Released: March 3, 2010 By the Senior Deputy Chief, Policy Division, Media Bureau: I. introduction and Background MCC Iowa LLC (``Mediacom''), hereinafter referred to as ``Petitioner,'' has filed with the Commission a petition pursuant to Sections 76.7, 76.905(b)(2) and 76.907 of the Commission's rules for a determination that Petitioner is subject to effective competition in those communities listed on Attachment A and hereinafter referred to as ``Communities.'' Petitioner alleges that its cable system serving the Communities is subject to effective competition pursuant to Section 623(1)(1)(B) of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended (``Communications Act'') and the
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-10-360A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-10-360A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-10-360A1.txt
  • of Coxcom, Inc. Petition for Determination of Effective Competition in various Ohio Communities ) ) ) ) ) ) ) CSR 8012-E Adopted: March 3, 2010 Released: March 3, 2010 By the Senior Deputy Chief, Policy Division, Media Bureau: I. introduction and Background Coxcom, Inc., hereinafter referred to as ``Petitioner,'' has filed with the Commission a petition pursuant to Sections 76.7 and 76.905(b)(4) and 76.907 of the Commission's rules for a determination that Petitioner is subject to effective competition in those communities listed on Attachment A and hereinafter referred to as ``Communities.'' Petitioner alleges that its cable system serving the Communities is subject to effective competition pursuant to Section 623(1)(1)(D) of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended (``Communications Act'') and
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-10-373A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-10-373A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-10-373A1.txt
  • to also purchase low-cost set-top boxes from third parties,'' and has approached set-top box refurbishing companies about the prospects of selling refurbished set-top boxes directly to Baja's subscribers. At least one company indicated that it would be willing to sell devices directly to consumers if Baja's waiver request were granted. discussion Baja filed its request pursuant to Sections 1.3 and 76.7 of the Commission's rules. The Bureau has granted waiver of the integration ban pursuant to those rule sections in cases of non-speculative, extraordinary financial hardship. In light of Baja's demonstrated financial hardship, and consistent with Bureau precedent, we conclude that a limited grant of Baja's request for waiver of the integration ban for non-HD, non-DVR set-top boxes is justified under
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-10-398A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-10-398A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-10-398A1.txt
  • Maryland (CUID MD0035) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) CSR 8005-E Adopted: March 9, 2010 Released: March 9, 2010 By the Senior Deputy Chief, Policy Division, Media Bureau: I. introduction and Background Comcast Cable Communications, LLC, on behalf of its subsidiaries and affiliates, hereinafter referred to as ``Petitioner,'' has filed with the Commission a petition pursuant to Sections 76.7, 76.905(b)(2) and 76.907 of the Commission's rules for a determination that Petitioner is subject to effective competition in the community listed on Attachment A and hereinafter referred to as the ``Community.'' Petitioner alleges that its cable system serving the Community is subject to effective competition pursuant to Section 623(1)(1)(B) of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended (``Communications Act'') and
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-10-399A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-10-399A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-10-399A1.txt
  • Maryland (CUID MD0336) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) CSR 8022-E Adopted: March 8, 2010 Released: March 9, 2010 By the Senior Deputy Chief, Policy Division, Media Bureau: I. introduction and Background Comcast Cable Communications, LLC, on behalf of its subsidiaries and affiliates, hereinafter referred to as ``Petitioner,'' has filed with the Commission a petition pursuant to Sections 76.7, 76.905(b)(1) and 76.907 of the Commission's rules for a determination that Petitioner is subject to effective competition in the community listed on Attachment A and hereinafter referred to as ``Community.'' Petitioner alleges that its cable system serving the Community is subject to effective competition pursuant to Section 623(1)(1)(A) of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended (``Communications Act''), and the
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-10-400A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-10-400A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-10-400A1.txt
  • New Hanover, North Carolina, 24 FCC Rcd 10130 (2009) (``Charter III''). Cable systems are presumed not to be subject to effective competition, and a cable operator bears the burden of rebutting that with evidence that effective competition is present within the relevant franchise area. See 47 C.F.R. §§ 76.906 & 907. 47 U.S.C. § 543(l)(1)(B); see also 47 C.F.R. §§ 76.7, 76.905(b)(2), 76.907. Opposition to Petition for Reconsideration & Petition for Special Relief, dated Dec. 20, 2009. Reply to Opposition to Petition for Reconsideration, dated Jan. 4, 2009. The County's Supplement and Motion are dated January 25, 2010. Charter's Opposition to Motion is dated February 1, 2010. 47 C.F.R. § 76.7(d); see also Charter Commun., Memorandum Opinion & Order DA 09-2515
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-10-408A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-10-408A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-10-408A1.txt
  • Inc. Petition for Determination of Effective Competition in various Nevada Communities ) ) ) ) ) ) CSR 8098-E Adopted: March 10, 2010 Released: March 10, 2010 By the Senior Deputy Chief, Policy Division, Media Bureau: I. introduction and Background Cox Communications Las Vegas, Inc., hereinafter referred to as ``Petitioner,'' has filed with the Commission a petition pursuant to Sections 76.7, 76.905(b)(2) and 76.907 of the Commission's rules for a determination that Petitioner is subject to effective competition in those communities listed on Attachment A and hereinafter referred to as ``Communities.'' Petitioner alleges that its cable system serving the Communities is subject to effective competition pursuant to Section 623(1)(1)(B) of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended (``Communications Act''), and the
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-10-417A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-10-417A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-10-417A1.txt
  • Buckeye Cablevision, Inc. Petition for Determination of Effective Competition in various Ohio Communities ) ) ) ) ) ) CSR 8150-E Adopted: March 11, 2010 Released: March 11, 2010 By the Senior Deputy Chief, Policy Division, Media Bureau: I. introduction and Background Buckeye Cablevision, Inc., hereinafter referred to as ``Petitioner,'' has filed with the Commission a petition pursuant to Sections 76.7 and 76.905(b)(4) and 76.907 of the Commission's rules for a determination that Petitioner is subject to effective competition in those communities listed on Attachment A and hereinafter referred to as ``Communities.'' Petitioner alleges that its cable system serving the Communities is subject to effective competition pursuant to Section 623(1)(1)(D) of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended (``Communications Act'') and
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-10-459A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-10-459A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-10-459A1.txt
  • allow a petitioner to correct any errors or clarify issues related to the methodology before a petition is actually filed and, perhaps, avoid the filing of oppositions. However, we do not find that failure to comply with this requirement would automatically result in a denial of the petition. WTVG properly served its petition on the requested parties, pursuant to Section 76.7(a)(3) of the rules and this, combined with the Commission's public notice, ensured that the appropriate parties were notified. Moreover, while both WXYZ-TV and Buckeye maintain that WTVG did not meet the waiver standards of Section 76.92(f) because it failed to demonstrate that it will suffer any economic harm absent the requested waiver, it should be noted that in Report and
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-10-464A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-10-464A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-10-464A1.txt
  • the Subject Boxes are only capable of doing what is necessary to make digital cable programming viewable on analog television sets. For this reason we conclude that, with respect to the Subject Boxes, COSHIP has justified a three-year waiver of the integration ban under the standard set forth in the 2005 Deferral Order, the Evolution Order, and Sections 1.3 or 76.7 of the Commission's rules. Accordingly, we grant the Waiver Request, and, until three years from the release of this order, any cable operator may choose to deploy the Subject Boxes without requesting a waiver of Section 76.1204(a)(1)'s prohibition on the deployment of navigation devices ``that perform both conditional access and other functions in a single integrated device.'' ordering clauses Accordingly,
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-10-570A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-10-570A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-10-570A1.txt
  • Determination of Effective Competition in Eight Communities in California ) ) ) ) ) ) ) CSR 8255-E Adopted: March 30, 2010 Released: March 31, 2010 By the Senior Deputy Chief, Policy Division, Media Bureau: I. introduction and background CoxCom, Inc., doing business as Cox Communications Orange County (``Cox''), has filed with the Commission a petition (``Petition'') pursuant to Sections 76.7, 76.905(b)(2), 76.905(b)(4) and 76.907 of the Commission's rules for a determination that Cox is subject to effective competition in eight communities in southern California between Los Angeles and San Diego. Cox alleges that, in the three communities listed on Attachment A and hereinafter referred to as the ``Attachment A Communities,'' its system is subject to ``competing provider'' effective competition pursuant
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-10-679A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-10-679A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-10-679A1.txt
  • 47 C.F.R. § 76.1003(a) (``Any multichannel video programming distributor aggrieved by conduct that it believes constitute a violation of the regulations set forth in this subpart may commence an adjudicatory proceeding at the Commission to obtain enforcement of the rules through the filing of a complaint. . . .''); 47 C.F.R. § 76.1003(c)(1) (``In addition to the requirements of § 76.7 of this part, a program access complaint shall contain: (1) The type of multichannel video programming distributor that describes complainant . . . .''). See Sky Angel Complaint at 1, 8; Sky Angel Emergency Request at 5. See 47 U.S.C. § 522(13); see also 47 C.F.R. § 76.1000(e). See 47 U.S.C. § 522(4) (defining ``channel''). See Sky Angel Complaint at
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-10-76A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-10-76A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-10-76A1.txt
  • in Glendale, California (CUID CA0180) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) CSR 8247-E Adopted: January 14, 2010 Released: January 14, 2010 By the Senior Deputy Chief, Policy Division, Media Bureau: I. introduction and Background Charter Communications, on behalf of its subsidiaries and affiliates, hereinafter referred to as ``Petitioner,'' has filed with the Commission a petition pursuant to Sections 76.7, 76.905(b)(2) and 76.907 of the Commission's rules for a determination that Petitioner is subject to effective competition in the community listed on Attachment A and hereinafter referred to as the ``Community.'' Petitioner alleges that its cable system serving the Community is subject to effective competition pursuant to Section 623(1)(1)(B) of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended (``Communications Act''), and
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-10-788A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-10-788A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-10-788A1.txt
  • Petitions for Determination of Effective Competition in various Illinois and Wisconsin Communities ) ) ) ) ) ) ) CSR 8215-E, 8218-E, 8220-E Adopted: May 6, 2010 Released: May 7, 2010 By the Senior Deputy Chief, Policy Division, Media Bureau: I. introduction and Background Charter Communications, hereinafter referred to as ``Petitioner,'' has filed with the Commission petitions pursuant to Sections 76.7, 76.905(b)(2) and 76.907 of the Commission's rules for a determination that Petitioner is subject to effective competition in those communities listed on Attachment A and hereinafter referred to as ``Communities.'' Petitioner alleges that its cable system serving the Communities is subject to effective competition pursuant to Section 623(1)(1)(B) of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended (``Communications Act''), and the
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-10-789A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-10-789A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-10-789A1.txt
  • Effective Competition in various Kansas Communities ) ) ) ) ) ) ) CSR 8222-E, 8223-E, 8224-E, 8225-E, 8226-E, 8227-E, 8228-E Adopted: May 6, 2010 Released: May 7, 2010 By the Senior Deputy Chief, Policy Division, Media Bureau: I. introduction and Background Cox Communications Kansas, LLC, hereinafter referred to as ``Petitioner,'' has filed with the Commission petitions pursuant to Sections 76.7, 76.905(b)(1), 76.905(b)(2), 76.905(b)(4) and 76.907 of the Commission's rules for a determination that Petitioner is subject to effective competition in those communities listed on Attachment A and hereinafter referred to as ``Communities.'' Petitioner alleges that its cable system serving the Communities is subject to effective competition pursuant to Section 623(1) of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended (``Communications Act'')
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-10-790A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-10-790A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-10-790A1.txt
  • in Baltimore County, Maryland ) ) ) ) ) ) ) CSR 8013-E Adopted: May 7, 2010 Released: May 7, 2010 By the Senior Deputy Chief, Policy Division, Media Bureau: I. introduction and Background Comcast Cable Communications, LLC, on behalf of its subsidiaries and affiliates, hereinafter referred to as ``Petitioner,'' has filed with the Commission a petition pursuant to Sections 76.7, 76.905(b)(2) and 76.907 of the Commission's rules for a determination that Petitioner is subject to effective competition in the community listed on Attachment A and hereinafter referred to as the ``Community.'' Petitioner alleges that its cable system serving the Community is subject to effective competition pursuant to Section 623(1)(1)(B) of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended (``Communications Act'') and
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-10-791A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-10-791A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-10-791A1.txt
  • Competition in Communities in New York State ) ) ) ) ) ) CSR 7826-E CSR 7827-E CSR 7828-E Adopted: May 7, 2010 Released: May 7, 2010 By the Senior Deputy Chief, Policy Division, Media Bureau: I. introduction and Background Cablevision Systems Corporation, through several subsidiaries, hereinafter referred to as ``Petitioner,'' has filed with the Commission petitions pursuant to Sections 76.7 and 76.905(b)(4) and 76.907 of the Commission's rules for a determination that Petitioner is subject to effective competition in those communities listed on Attachment A and hereinafter referred to as ``Communities.'' Petitioner alleges that its cable systems serving the Communities are subject to effective competition pursuant to Section 623(1)(1)(D) of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended (``Communications Act'') and
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-10-795A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-10-795A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-10-795A1.txt
  • serves the public interest, we deny MPAA's waiver request in part and grant a waiver subject to certain limitations. On balance, this limited waiver will provide public interest benefits- making movies widely available for home viewing far earlier than ever before - without imposing harm on any consumers. Public Interest Determination MPAA makes its request pursuant to Sections 1.3 and 76.7 of the Commission's rules, which state, respectively, that the Commission will waive its rules ``if good cause therefore is shown,'' or if ``the public interest would be served by the grant'' of a waiver request. MPAA's waiver request raises two issues: (i) whether MPAA's proposed service offering would serve the public interest, and (ii) if so, whether waiver is necessary
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-10-818A1.pdf
  • See47 C.F.R. § 76.1001(b)(2)(iii). 4 oA defendant has 45 days ­rather than the usual 20 days ­from the date of service ofthe complaint to file an answer. See47 C.F.R. § 76.1001(b)(2)(i). oWith the exceptions noted above, a program access complaint proceeding regarding an unfair act involving terrestriallydelivered, cable-affiliated programming will be subject to the same procedures set forth in Sections 76.7 and 76.1003 of the Commission's rules that applyto program access complaints involving satellite-delivered, cable-affiliated programming. See47 C.F.R. §§ 76.7, 76.1003. Application of the Rules oThe rules adopted in the First Report and Orderapplyto common carriers and open video system operators, and their affiliated programmers, to the extent that these entities provide video programming to subscribers or consumers, because the Act
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-10-822A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-10-822A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-10-822A1.txt
  • MD0334) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) CSR 8036-E CSR 8037-E Adopted: May 10, 2010 Released: May 11, 2010 By the Senior Deputy Chief, Policy Division, Media Bureau: I. introduction and Background Comcast Cable Communications, LLC, on behalf of its subsidiaries and affiliates, hereinafter referred to as ``Petitioner,'' has filed with the Commission a petition pursuant to Sections 76.7, 76.905(b)(2) and 76.907 of the Commission's rules for a determination that Petitioner is subject to effective competition in the community listed on Attachment A and hereinafter referred to as ``Community.'' Petitioner alleges that its cable system serving the Community is subject to effective competition pursuant to Section 623(1)(1)(B) of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended (``Communications Act'') and the
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-10-823A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-10-823A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-10-823A1.txt
  • Effective Competition in Five Franchise Areas in Maryland ) ) ) ) ) ) CSR 7982-E CSR 7983-E CSR 7984-E Adopted: May 10, 2010 Released: May 11, 2010 By the Senior Deputy Chief, Policy Division, Media Bureau: I. introduction and Background Comcast Cable Communications, LLC, hereinafter referred to as ``Petitioner,'' has filed with the Commission three petitions pursuant to Sections 76.7, 76.905(b)(2) and 76.907 of the Commission's rules for determinations that Petitioner is subject to effective competition in those communities listed on Attachment A and hereinafter referred to as ``Communities.'' Petitioner alleges that its cable systems serving the Communities are subject to effective competition pursuant to Section 623(1)(1)(B) of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended (``Communications Act'') and the Commission's
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-10-826A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-10-826A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-10-826A1.txt
  • Determination of Effective Competition in the Franchise Area of Lyme, CT ) ) ) ) ) ) CSR 7761-E Adopted: May 10, 2010 Released: May 12, 2010 By the Senior Deputy Chief, Policy Division, Media Bureau: I. introduction and Background Comcast Cable Communications, LLC , hereinafter referred to as ``Petitioner,'' has filed with the Commission a petition pursuant to Sections 76.7, 76.905(b)(2) and 76.907 of the Commission's rules for a determination that Petitioner is subject to effective competition in those communities listed on Attachment A and hereinafter referred to as ``Communities'' or the Lyme, CT - Area Franchise. Petitioner alleges that its cable system serving the Communities is subject to effective competition pursuant to Section 623(1)(1)(B) of the Communications Act of
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-10-827A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-10-827A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-10-827A1.txt
  • various Franchise Areas in Pennsylvania ) ) ) ) ) ) ) CSR 7966-E CSR 7967-E CSR 7968-E CSR 7978-E Adopted: May 10, 2010 Released: May 12, 2010 By the Senior Deputy Chief, Policy Division, Media Bureau: I. introduction and Background Comcast Cable Communications, LLC , hereinafter referred to as ``Petitioner,'' has filed with the Commission petitions pursuant to Sections 76.7, 76.905(b)(2), 76.905(b)(1) and 76.907 of the Commission's rules for a determination that Petitioner is subject to effective competition in those communities listed on Attachment A and hereinafter referred to as ``Communities.'' Petitioner alleges that its cable systems serving the communities listed on Attachment B and hereinafter referred to as Group B Communities are subject to effective competition pursuant to Section
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-10-828A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-10-828A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-10-828A1.txt
  • in various Pennsylvania Franchise Areas ) ) ) ) ) ) ) CSR 8024-E CSR 8025-E CSR 8040-E CSR 8045-E Adopted: May 10, 2010 Released: May 12, 2010 By the Senior Deputy Chief, Policy Division, Media Bureau: I. introduction and Background Comcast Cable Communications, LLC , hereinafter referred to as ``Petitioner,'' has filed with the Commission petitions pursuant to Sections 76.7, 76.905(b)(2), 76.905(b)(1) and 76.907 of the Commission's rules for a determination that Petitioner is subject to effective competition in those communities listed on Attachment A and hereinafter referred to as ``Communities.'' Petitioner alleges that its cable systems serving the communities listed on Attachment B and hereinafter referred to as Group B Communities are subject to effective competition pursuant to Section
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-10-841A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-10-841A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-10-841A1.txt
  • and Cox Communications Tulsa Petition for Determination of Effective Competition in Various Oklahoma Communities ) ) ) ) ) ) CSR-8059-E CSR-8060-E Adopted: May 13, 2010 Released: May 13, 2010 By the Senior Deputy Chief, Policy Division, Media Bureau: I. introduction and Background COXCOM, Inc., hereinafter referred to as ``Petitioner,'' has filed with the Commission a petition pursuant to Sections 76.7, 76.905(b)(2), 76.905(b)(1) and 76.907 of the Commission's rules for a determination that Petitioner is subject to effective competition in those communities listed on Attachment A and hereinafter referred to as ``Communities.'' Petitioner alleges that its cable system serving the communities listed on Attachment B and hereinafter referred to as Group B Communities is subject to effective competition pursuant to Section
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-10-843A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-10-843A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-10-843A1.txt
  • in Highland Park Borough, New Jersey ) ) ) ) ) ) ) CSR 8275-E Adopted: May 13, 2010 Released: May 13, 2010 By the Senior Deputy Chief, Policy Division, Media Bureau: introduction and Background CSC TKR Inc., an affiliate of Cablevision Systems Corporation and hereinafter referred to as ``Petitioner,'' has filed with the Commission a Petition pursuant to Sections 76.7 and 76.905(b)(4) and 76.907 of the Commission's rules for a determination that Petitioner is subject to effective competition in Highland Park Borough, New Jersey, hereinafter referred to as the ``Community.'' Petitioner alleges that its cable system serving the Community is subject to effective competition pursuant to Section 623(1)(1)(D) of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended (``Communications Act'') and the
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-10-844A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-10-844A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-10-844A1.txt
  • 8 Communities in New York State ) ) ) ) ) ) CSR 7873-E CSR 7874-E CSR 7875-E Adopted: May 13, 2010 Released: May 14, 2010 By the Senior Deputy Chief, Policy Division, Media Bureau: I. introduction and Background Cablevision Systems Corporation, through several subsidiaries, hereinafter referred to as ``Petitioner,'' has filed with the Commission three petitions pursuant to Sections 76.7 and 76.905(b)(4) and 76.907 of the Commission's rules for a determination that Petitioner is subject to effective competition in those communities listed on Attachment A and hereinafter referred to as ``Communities.'' Petitioner alleges that its cable systems serving the Communities are subject to effective competition pursuant to Section 623(1)(1)(D) of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended (``Communications Act'') and
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-10-847A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-10-847A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-10-847A1.txt
  • for Determination of Effective Competition in Braintree, MA (CUID MA0217) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) CSR 7120-E Adopted: May 13, 2010 Released: May 14, 2010 By the Senior Deputy Chief, Policy Division, Media Bureau: INTRODUCTION AND BACKGROUND Comcast Cable Communications, LLC, hereinafter referred to as ``Petitioner,'' has filed with the Commission a petition pursuant to Sections 76.7 and 76.905(b)(3) and 76.907 of the Commission's rules for a determination that Petitioner is subject to effective competition in those communities listed on Attachment A and hereinafter referred to as ``Communities.'' Petitioner alleges that its cable system serving the Communities is subject to effective competition pursuant to Section 623(1)(1)(C) of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended (``Communications Act'') and
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-10-848A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-10-848A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-10-848A1.txt
  • ) ) ) ) ) ) CSR 7917-E CSR 7918-E CSR 7919-E CSR 7920-E CSR 7921-E CSR 7922-E CSR 7923-E Adopted: May 13, 2010 Released: May 14, 2010 By the Senior Deputy Chief, Policy Division, Media Bureau: I. introduction and Background Comcast Cable Communications, LLC , hereinafter referred to as ``Petitioner,'' has filed with the Commission petitions pursuant to Sections 76.7, 76.905(b)(2) and 76.907 of the Commission's rules for a determination that Petitioner is subject to effective competition in those communities listed on Attachment A and hereinafter referred to as ``Communities.'' Petitioner alleges that its cable system serving the Communities is subject to effective competition pursuant to Section 623(1)(1)(B) of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended (``Communications Act''), and the
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-10-874A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-10-874A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-10-874A1.txt
  • Determination of Effective Competition in various Maine and New Hampshire Communities ) ) ) ) ) ) ) CSR 7534-E Adopted: May 17, 2010 Released: May 18, 2010 By the Senior Deputy Chief, Policy Division, Media Bureau: I. introduction and Background Time Warner Cable Inc., hereinafter referred to as ``Petitioner,'' has filed with the Commission a petition pursuant to Sections 76.7, 76.905(b)(2), 76.905(b)(1) and 76.907 of the Commission's rules for a determination that Petitioner is subject to effective competition in those communities listed on Attachment A and hereinafter referred to as ``Communities.'' Petitioner alleges that its cable system serving the communities listed on Attachment B and hereinafter referred to as Group B Communities is subject to effective competition pursuant to Section
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-10-876A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-10-876A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-10-876A1.txt
  • CSR 7972-E, CSR 7973-E, CSR 7974-E, CSR 7975-E, CSR 7976-E & CSR 7977-E Adopted: May 17, 2010 Released: May 17, 2010 By the Senior Deputy Chief, Policy Division, Media Bureau: I. introduction and Background Comcast Cable Communications, LLC, on behalf of its subsidiaries and affiliates, hereinafter referred to as ``Petitioner,'' has filed with the Commission a petition pursuant to Sections 76.7, 76.905(b)(2), 76.905(b)(1) and 76.907 of the Commission's rules for a determination that Petitioner is subject to effective competition in those communities listed on Attachment A and hereinafter referred to as ``Communities.'' Petitioner alleges that its cable system serving the Communities is subject to effective competition pursuant to Section 623(1) of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended (``Communications Act'') and
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-10-878A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-10-878A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-10-878A1.txt
  • of Effective Competition in Nine Franchise Areas in New Jersey ) ) ) ) ) ) ) CSR 8147 - E Adopted: May 17, 2010 Released: May 17, 2010 By the Senior Deputy Chief, Policy Division, Media Bureau: introduction and Background Time Warner Cable Inc., hereinafter referred to as ``Petitioner,'' has filed with the Commission a petition pursuant to Sections 76.7, 76.905(b), and 76.907 of the Commission's rules for a determination that Petitioner is subject to effective competition in the nine franchise areas listed on the Attachments hereto. Petitioner alleges that its cable system serving the two franchise areas listed in Attachment A hereto (the ``Attachment A Communities'') is subject to ``competing provider'' effective competition pursuant to Section 623(l)(1)(B) of the
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-10-881A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-10-881A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-10-881A1.txt
  • of Charter Communications Petition for Determination of Effective Competition in: Fairfield, Alabama (CUID AL001) ) ) ) ) ) ) CSR 8219-E Adopted: May 18, 2010 Released: May 18, 2010 By the Senior Deputy Chief, Policy Division, Media Bureau: I. introduction and Background Charter Communications, hereinafter referred to as ``Petitioner,'' has filed with the Commission a petition pursuant to Sections 76.7, 76.905(b)(2) and 76.907 of the Commission's rules for a determination that Petitioner is subject to effective competition in the community listed on Attachment A and hereinafter referred to as the ``Community.'' Petitioner alleges that its cable system serving the Community is subject to effective competition pursuant to Section 623(1)(1)(B) of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended (``Communications Act''), and
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-10-889A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-10-889A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-10-889A1.txt
  • Competition in Eclectic, Alabama (AL0143) Millbrook, Alabama (AL0199) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) CSR 8148-E Adopted: May 18, 2010 Released: May 19, 2010 By the Senior Deputy Chief, Policy Division, Media Bureau: I. introduction and Background Bright House Networks LLC, hereinafter referred to as ``Petitioner,'' has filed with the Commission a petition pursuant to Sections 76.7, 76.905(b)(2) and 76.907 of the Commission's rules for a determination that Petitioner is subject to effective competition in those communities listed on Attachment A and hereinafter referred to as ``Communities.'' Petitioner alleges that its cable system serving the Communities is subject to effective competition pursuant to Section 623(1)(1)(B) of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended (``Communications Act''), and the
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-10-890A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-10-890A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-10-890A1.txt
  • ) ) ) ) ) ) CSR 7863-E CSR 7878-E CSR 7879-E CSR 7880-E CSR 7881-E CSR 7882-E CSR 7883-E CSR 7884-E Adopted: May 18, 2010 Released: May 19, 2010 By the Senior Deputy Chief, Policy Division, Media Bureau: introduction and Background Comcast Cable Communications, LLC, hereinafter referred to as ``Petitioner,'' has filed with the Commission petitions pursuant to Sections 76.7, 76.905(b)(2), 76.905(b)(1) and 76.907 of the Commission's rules for a determination that Petitioner is subject to effective competition in those communities listed on Attachment A and hereinafter referred to as ``Communities.'' Petitioner alleges that its cable systems serving the communities listed on Attachment B and hereinafter referred to as Attachment B Communities are subject to effective competition pursuant to Section
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-10-891A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-10-891A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-10-891A1.txt
  • of Effective Competition in various Pennsylvania Franchise Areas ) ) ) ) ) ) ) CSR 8230-E CSR 8231-E CSR 8235-E Adopted: May 18, 2010 Released: May 19, 2010 By the Senior Deputy Chief, Policy Division, Media Bureau: I. introduction and Background Comcast Cable Communications, LLC, hereinafter referred to as ``Petitioner,'' has filed with the Commission petitions pursuant to Sections 76.7, 76.905(b)(2), 76.905(b)(1) and 76.907 of the Commission's rules for a determination that Petitioner is subject to effective competition in those communities listed on Attachment A and hereinafter referred to as ``Communities.'' Petitioner alleges that its cable systems serving the communities listed on Attachment B and hereinafter referred to as Group B Communities are subject to effective competition pursuant to Section
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-10-892A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-10-892A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-10-892A1.txt
  • imposed interim measures pending a revision of the current standards to address systems utilizing all-digital transmission. Montgomery County also submitted a Petition for Stay of the Media Bureau's Order pending reconsideration. RCN filed oppositions to both of these petitions. Discussion Montgomery County's primary argument is that RCN did not serve the affected LFAs with its Petition for Special Relief. Section 76.7 of the Commission's rules requires a petition for special relief to be served on any interested party, including an LFA, who is likely to be directly affected if the requested relief is granted. The proof-of-performance rules provide that operators who cannot meet the technical requirements due to the technology employed by the system may be exempted after a sufficient showing
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-10-894A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-10-894A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-10-894A1.txt
  • for Determination of Effective Competition in Eleven Communities in Georgia ) ) ) ) ) ) CSR 8264-E CSR 8266-E CSR 8278-E Adopted: May 19, 2010 Released: May 19, 2010 By the Senior Deputy Chief, Policy Division, Media Bureau: introduction and Background MCC Georgia LLC, hereinafter referred to as ``Petitioner,'' has filed with the Commission a petitions pursuant to Sections 76.7, 76.905(b)(2), 76.905(b)(1) and 76.907 of the Commission's rules for a determination that Petitioner is subject to effective competition in those communities listed on Attachment A and hereinafter referred to as the ``Communities.'' Petitioner alleges that its cable systems serving the communities listed on Attachment B and hereinafter referred to as the Attachment B Communities are subject to effective competition pursuant
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-10-907A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-10-907A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-10-907A1.txt
  • Petition for Determination of Effective Competition in 16 Communities in Kentucky ) ) ) ) ) ) CSR 8131-E Adopted: May 19, 2010 Released: May 20, 2010 By the Senior Deputy Chief, Policy Division, Media Bureau: I. introduction and Background Insight Kentucky Partners II, L.P., hereinafter referred to as ``Petitioner,'' has filed with the Commission a petition pursuant to Sections 76.7, 76.905(b)(2) and 76.907 of the Commission's rules for a determination that Petitioner is subject to effective competition in those communities listed on Attachment A and hereinafter referred to as ``Communities.'' Petitioner alleges that its cable system serving the Communities is subject to effective competition pursuant to Section 623(1)(1)(B) of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended (``Communications Act''), and the
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-10-908A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-10-908A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-10-908A1.txt
  • for Determination of Effective Competition in Dawson Springs, KY (CUID KY 0032) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) CSR 8195-E Adopted: May 19, 2010 Released: May 20, 2010 By the Senior Deputy Chief, Policy Division, Media Bureau: introduction and Background Insight Communications Midwest, LLC, hereinafter referred to as ``Petitioner,'' has filed with the Commission a petition pursuant to Sections 76.7, 76.905(b)(2) and 76.907 of the Commission's rules for a determination that Petitioner is subject to effective competition in the community listed on Attachment A and hereinafter referred to as the ``Community.'' Petitioner alleges that its cable system serving the Community is subject to effective competition pursuant to Section 623(1)(1)(B) of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended (``Communications Act''), and
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-10-909A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-10-909A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-10-909A1.txt
  • Determination of Effective Competition in Unincorporated Warren, KY (CUID KY 0468) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) CSR 8130-E Adopted: May 19, 2010 Released: May 20, 2010 By the Senior Deputy Chief, Policy Division, Media Bureau: introduction and Background Insight Kentucky Partners II, L.P., hereinafter referred to as ``Petitioner,'' has filed with the Commission a petition pursuant to Sections 76.7, 76.905(b)(2) and 76.907 of the Commission's rules for a determination that Petitioner is subject to effective competition in the community listed on Attachment A and hereinafter referred to as the ``Community.'' Petitioner alleges that its cable system serving the Community is subject to effective competition pursuant to Section 623(1)(1)(B) of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended (``Communications Act''), and
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-10-915A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-10-915A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-10-915A1.txt
  • Communities ) ) ) ) ) ) ) CSR 8260-E, 8262-E, 8267-E, 8269-E Adopted: May 20, 2010 Released: May 21, 2010 By the Senior Deputy Chief, Policy Division, Media Bureau: I. introduction and Background MCC Iowa LLC, MCC Illinois LLC and MCC Missouri LLC ( ``Mediacom''), hereinafter referred to as ``Petitioner,'' has filed with the Commission petitions pursuant to Sections 76.7, 76.905(b)(2) and 76.907 of the Commission's rules for a determination that Petitioner is subject to effective competition in those communities listed on Attachment A and hereinafter referred to as ``Communities.'' Petitioner alleges that its cable system serving the Communities is subject to effective competition pursuant to Section 623(1)(1)(B) of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended (``Communications Act''), and the
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-10-917A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-10-917A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-10-917A1.txt
  • LLC Petitions for Determination of Effective Competition in various Iowa Communities ) ) ) ) ) ) CSR 8261-E, 8263-E, 8265-E, 8268-E Adopted: May 20, 2010 Released: May 21, 2010 By the Senior Deputy Chief, Policy Division, Media Bureau: I. introduction and Background MCC Iowa LLC, hereinafter referred to as ``Petitioner,'' has filed with the Commission petitions pursuant to Sections 76.7, 76.905(b)(2) and 76.907 of the Commission's rules for a determination that Petitioner is subject to effective competition in those communities listed on Attachment A and hereinafter referred to as ``Communities.'' Petitioner alleges that its cable system serving the Communities is subject to effective competition pursuant to Section 623(1)(1)(B) of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended (``Communications Act''), and the
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-10-928A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-10-928A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-10-928A1.txt
  • 7205-E CSR 8216-E, CSR 8217-E & CSR 8221-E CSR 8041-E Adopted: May 24, 2010 Released: May 24, 2010 By the Senior Deputy Chief, Policy Division, Media Bureau: introduction and Background Cebridge Acquisition, L.P. d/b/a Suddenlink (``Suddenlink''), Charter Communications (``Charter''), and Time Warner Entertainment-Advance/Newhouse Partnership (``Time Warner''), hereinafter referred to as ``Petitioners,'' have filed with the Commission petitions pursuant to Sections 76.7, 76.905(b)(2), 76.905(b)(1) and 76.907 of the Commission's rules for a determination that Petitioners are subject to effective competition in those communities listed on Attachment A and hereinafter referred to as ``Communities.'' Petitioners allege that their cable systems serving the Communities are subject to effective competition pursuant to Section 623(1) of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended (``Communications Act'') and
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-10-966A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-10-966A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-10-966A1.txt
  • CSR 7926-E, 7927-E, 7928-E, 7929-E, 7930-E, 7931-E, 7932-E, 7933-E, 7934-E, 7935-E, 7936-E, 7937-E, 7938-E, 7939-E, 7940-E, 7941-E, 7942-E, 7943-E, 7944-E, 7945-E Adopted: May 26, 2010 Released: May 26, 2010 By the Senior Deputy Chief, Policy Division, Media Bureau: I. introduction and Background Comcast Cable Communications, LLC, hereinafter referred to as ``Petitioner,'' has filed with the Commission petitions pursuant to Sections 76.7, 76.905(b)(2), 76.905(b)(1) and 76.907 of the Commission's rules for a determination that Petitioner is subject to effective competition in those communities listed on Attachment A and hereinafter referred to as ``Communities.'' Petitioner alleges that its cable system serving the communities listed on Attachment B and hereinafter referred to as Group B Communities is subject to effective competition pursuant to Section
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-10-970A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-10-970A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-10-970A1.txt
  • CSR 8277-E & CSR 8279-E CSR 8280-E & CSR 8281-E Adopted: May 26, 2010 Released: May 26, 2010 By the Senior Deputy Chief, Policy Division, Media Bureau: introduction and Background Cebridge Acquisition, L.P., d/b/a Suddenlink Communications (``Cebridge''), MCC Georgia LLC (``MCC''), and Mediacom Southeast LLC (``Mediacom''), hereinafter referred to as ``Petitioners,'' have filed with the Commission petitions pursuant to Sections 76.7, 76.905(b)(2) and 76.907 of the Commission's rules for a determination that the Petitioners are subject to effective competition in those communities listed on Attachment A and hereinafter referred to as ``Communities.'' Petitioners allege that their cable systems serving the Communities are subject to effective competition pursuant to Section 623(1)(1)(B) of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended (``Communications Act''), and
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-10-971A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-10-971A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-10-971A1.txt
  • in various Pennsylvania Franchise Areas ) ) ) ) ) ) ) CSR 8167-E CSR 8168-E CSR 8171-E CSR 8172-E Adopted: May 26, 2010 Released: May 27, 2010 By the Senior Deputy Chief, Policy Division, Media Bureau: I. introduction and Background Comcast Cable Communications, LLC , hereinafter referred to as ``Petitioner,'' has filed with the Commission petitions pursuant to Sections 76.7, 76.905(b)(2), 76.905(b)(1) and 76.907 of the Commission's rules for a determination that Petitioner is subject to effective competition in those communities listed on Attachment A and hereinafter referred to as ``Communities.'' Petitioner alleges that its cable systems serving the communities listed on Attachment B and hereinafter referred to as Group B Communities are subject to effective competition pursuant to Section
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-10-972A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-10-972A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-10-972A1.txt
  • of Effective Competition in six Bakersfield, Vermont-Area Franchise Areas ) ) ) ) ) ) ) CSR 8108-E CSR 8109-E Adopted: May 26, 2010 Released: May 27, 2010 By the Senior Deputy Chief, Policy Division, Media Bureau: I. introduction and Background Comcast Cable Communications, LLC , hereinafter referred to as ``Petitioner,'' has filed with the Commission petitions pursuant to Sections 76.7, 76.905(b)(2), 76.905(b)(1) and 76.907 of the Commission's rules for a determination that Petitioner is subject to effective competition in those communities listed on Attachment A and hereinafter referred to as ``Communities.'' Petitioner alleges that its cable system serving the communities listed on Attachment B and hereinafter referred to as Group B Communities is subject to effective competition pursuant to Section
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-11-1013A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-11-1013A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-11-1013A1.txt
  • Cable Inc. Petition for Determination of Effective Competition in various Ohio Franchise Areas ) ) ) ) ) ) CSR 8349-E Adopted: June 6, 2011 Released: June 9, 2011 By the Senior Deputy Chief, Policy Division, Media Bureau: introduction and Background Time Warner Cable Inc., hereinafter referred to as ``Petitioner,'' has filed with the Commission a petition pursuant to Sections 76.7, 76.905(b)(1-2), and 76.907 of the Commission's rules for a determination that Petitioner is subject to effective competition in those communities listed on Attachment A and hereinafter referred to as ``Communities.'' Petitioner alleges that its cable system serving the communities listed on Attachment B and hereinafter referred to as Attachment B Communities, is subject to effective competition pursuant to Section 623(1)
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-11-1023A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-11-1023A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-11-1023A1.txt
  • Determination of Effective Competition in 34 Communities in North Carolina and South Carolina ) ) ) ) ) ) ) CSR 8374-E Adopted: June 8, 2011 Released: June 10, 2011 By the Senior Deputy Chief, Policy Division, Media Bureau: introduction and Background Time Warner Cable Inc., hereinafter referred to as ``Petitioner,'' filed with the Commission a petition pursuant to Sections 76.7, 76.905(b)(1-2), and 76.907 of the Commission's rules for a determination that Petitioner is subject to effective competition in 34 North Carolina and South Carolina communities. The petition alleged that Petitioner's cable system serving most of those communities is subject to effective competition pursuant to Section 623(l)(1)(B) of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended (``Communications Act'') and the Commission's implementing
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-11-1073A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-11-1073A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-11-1073A1.txt
  • CA ) ) ) ) ) ) ) CSR 8485-E CSR 8486-E Adopted: June 17, 2011 Released: June 21, 2011 By the Senior Deputy Chief, Policy Division, Media Bureau: introduction and Background CoxCom, Inc., d/b/a Cox Communications Orange County and Cox Communications Santa Barbara, hereinafter referred to as ``Petitioner'' or ``CoxCom,'' has filed with the Commission petitions pursuant to Sections 76.7, 76.905(b)(2) and 76.907 of the Commission's rules for a determination that Petitioner is subject to effective competition in those communities listed on Attachment A and hereinafter referred to as the ``Communities.'' Petitioner alleges that its cable systems serving the Communities are subject to effective competition pursuant to Section 623(l)(1)(B) of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended (``Communications Act''), and
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-11-1080A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-11-1080A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-11-1080A1.txt
  • Warner Cable Inc. Petition for Determination of Effective Competition in Communities in Ohio ) ) ) ) ) ) CSR 8341-E Adopted: June 21, 2011 Released: June 22, 2011 By the Senior Deputy Chief, Policy Division, Media Bureau: introduction and Background Time Warner Cable Inc., hereinafter referred to as ``Petitioner,'' has filed with the Commission a petition pursuant to Sections 76.7, 76.905(b)(2), and 76.907 of the Commission's rules for a determination that Petitioner is subject to effective competition in those communities listed on Attachment A and hereinafter referred to as the ``Attachment A Communities.'' Petitioner alleges that its cable system serving the Attachment A Communities is subject to effective competition pursuant to Section 623(l)(1)(B) of the Communications Act of 1934, as
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-11-1118A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-11-1118A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-11-1118A1.txt
  • Petition for Determination of Effective Competition in 11 Ohio and Pennsylvania Communities ) ) ) ) ) ) ) CSR 8484-E Adopted: June 24, 2011 Released: June 28, 2011 By the Senior Deputy Chief, Policy Division, Media Bureau: introduction and Background Time Warner Cable Inc., hereinafter referred to as ``Petitioner,'' has filed with the Commission a petition pursuant to Sections 76.7, 76.905(b)(2) and 76.907 of the Commission's rules for a determination that Petitioner is subject to effective competition in those communities listed on Attachment A and hereinafter referred to as the ``Communities.'' Petitioner alleges that its cable system serving the Communities is subject to effective competition pursuant to Section 623(l)(1)(B) of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended (``Communications Act''), and
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-11-1139A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-11-1139A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-11-1139A1.txt
  • Communities ) ) ) ) ) ) ) CSR 8385-E CSR 8386-E Adopted: June 28, 2011 Released: June 30, 2011 By the Senior Deputy Chief, Policy Division, Media Bureau: introduction and background CoxCom, Inc. d/b/a Cox Communications Oklahoma City and Cox Communications Tulsa , hereinafter referred to as ``Cox'' or ``Petitioner,'' has filed with the Commission petitions pursuant to Sections 76.7, 76.905(b)(2), and 76.907 of the Commission's rules for a determination that Petitioner is subject to effective competition in those communities listed on Attachment A (the ``Attachment A Communities''). Petitioner alleges that its cable systems serving the Attachment A Communities are subject to effective competition pursuant to Section 623(l)(1)(B) of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended (``Communications Act'') and the
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-11-11A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-11-11A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-11-11A1.txt
  • Three Communities in Illinois ) ) ) ) ) ) ) CSR 8358-E CSR 8359-E Adopted: January 5, 2011 Released: January 5, 2011 By the Senior Deputy Chief, Policy Division, Media Bureau: introduction and Background Comcast Cable Communications, LLC, on behalf of its subsidiaries and affiliates, hereinafter referred to as ``Petitioner,'' has filed with the Commission petitions pursuant to Sections 76.7, 76.905(b)(2) and 76.907 of the Commission's rules for a determination that Petitioner is subject to effective competition in those communities listed on Attachment A and hereinafter referred to as the ``Communities.'' Petitioner alleges that its cable systems serving the Communities are subject to effective competition pursuant to Section 623(l)(1)(B) of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended (``Communications Act''), and
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-11-122A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-11-122A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-11-122A1.txt
  • Petition for Determination of Effective Competition in Six Gadsden, Alabama, Franchise Areas ) ) ) ) ) ) ) CSR 7203-E Adopted: January 21, 2011 Released: January 24, 2011 By the Senior Deputy Chief, Policy Division, Media Bureau: introduction and Background Comcast Cable Communications, LLC, hereinafter referred to as ``Petitioner,'' has filed with the Commission a petition pursuant to Sections 76.7, 76.905(b)(1-2), and 76.907 of the Commission's rules for a determination that Petitioner is subject to effective competition in those communities listed on Attachment A and hereinafter referred to as the ``Attachment A Communities.'' Petitioner alleges that its cable system serving the Attachment A Communities is subject to effective competition pursuant to Section 623(l) of the Communications Act of 1934, as
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-11-1236A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-11-1236A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-11-1236A1.txt
  • and Pittsylvania County, Virginia ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) CSR 8470-E Adopted: July 25, 2011 Released: July 25, 2011 By the Senior Deputy Chief, Policy Division, Media Bureau: introduction and Background Comcast Cable Communications, LLC, on behalf of its subsidiaries and affiliates, hereinafter referred to as ``Petitioner,'' has filed with the Commission a petition pursuant to Sections 76.7, 76.905(b)(2) and 76.907 of the Commission's rules for a determination that Petitioner is subject to effective competition in those communities listed on Attachment A and hereinafter referred to as the ``Communities.'' Petitioner alleges that its cable system serving the Communities is subject to effective competition pursuant to Section 623(l)(1)(B) of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended (``Communications Act''), and
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-11-1247A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-11-1247A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-11-1247A1.txt
  • MCC IOWA LLC Petition for Determination of Effective Competition in Le Grand, Iowa ) ) ) ) ) ) CSR 8491-E Adopted: July 25, 2011 Released: July 28, 2011 By the Senior Deputy Chief, Policy Division, Media Bureau: introduction and Background MCC Iowa LLC , hereinafter referred to as ``Petitioner,'' has filed with the Commission a petition pursuant to Sections 76.7, 76.905(b)(2) and 76.907 of the Commission's rules for a determination that Petitioner is subject to effective competition in those communities listed on Attachment A and hereinafter referred to as the ``Communities.'' Petitioner alleges that its cable system serving the Communities is subject to effective competition pursuant to Section 623(l)(1)(B) of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended (``Communications Act''), and
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-11-1248A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-11-1248A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-11-1248A1.txt
  • Matter of MCC ILLINOIS LLC Petition for Determination of Effective Competition in Fulton, Illinois ) ) ) ) ) ) CSR 8492-E Adopted: July 25, 2011 Released: July 29, 2011 By the Senior Deputy Chief, Policy Division, Media Bureau: introduction and Background MCC Illinois LLC, hereinafter referred to as ``Petitioner,'' has filed with the Commission a petition pursuant to Sections 76.7, 76.905(b)(2) and 76.907 of the Commission's rules for a determination that Petitioner is subject to effective competition in those communities listed on Attachment A and hereinafter referred to as the ``Communities.'' Petitioner alleges that its cable system serving the Communities is subject to effective competition pursuant to Section 623(l)(1)(B) of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended (``Communications Act''), and
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-11-1249A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-11-1249A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-11-1249A1.txt
  • Matter of MCC GEORGIA LLC Petition for Determination of Effective Competition in Bainbridge, Georgia ) ) ) ) ) ) CSR 8493-E Adopted: July 25, 2011 Released: August 1, 2011 By the Senior Deputy Chief, Policy Division, Media Bureau: introduction and Background MCC Georgia LLC, hereinafter referred to as ``Petitioner,'' has filed with the Commission a petition pursuant to Sections 76.7, 76.905(b)(2) and 76.907 of the Commission's rules for a determination that Petitioner is subject to effective competition in those communities listed on Attachment A and hereinafter referred to as the ``Communities.'' Petitioner alleges that its cable system serving the Communities is subject to effective competition pursuant to Section 623(l)(1)(B) of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended (``Communications Act''), and
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-11-1256A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-11-1256A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-11-1256A1.txt
  • Charter Communications Petition for Determination of Effective Competition in North Platte, Nebraska (CUID NE0023) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) CSR 8384-E Adopted: July 25, 2011 Released: July 27, 2011 By the Senior Deputy Chief, Policy Division, Media Bureau: introduction and Background Charter Communications, hereinafter referred to as ``Petitioner,'' has filed with the Commission a petition pursuant to Sections 76.7, 76.905(b)(2) and 76.907 of the Commission's rules for a determination that Petitioner is subject to effective competition in those communities listed on Attachment A and hereinafter referred to as the ``Communities.'' Petitioner alleges that its cable system serving the Communities is subject to effective competition pursuant to Section 623(l)(1)(B) of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended (``Communications Act''), and
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-11-12A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-11-12A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-11-12A1.txt
  • Determination of Effective Competition in Five Communities in Iowa ) ) ) ) ) ) CSR 8296-E CSR 8298-E CSR 8314-E CSR 8317-E Adopted: January 5, 2011 Released: January 5, 2011 By the Senior Deputy Chief, Policy Division, Media Bureau: introduction and Background MCC Iowa LLC, hereinafter referred to as ``Petitioner,'' has filed with the Commission petitions pursuant to Sections 76.7, 76.905(b)(2) and 76.907 of the Commission's rules for a determination that Petitioner is subject to effective competition in those communities listed on Attachment A and hereinafter referred to as the ``Communities.'' Petitioner alleges that its cable system serving the Communities is subject to effective competition pursuant to Section 623(l)(1)(B) of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended (``Communications Act''), and
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-11-130A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-11-130A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-11-130A1.txt
  • and Pennsylvania ) ) ) ) ) ) ) CSR 8342-E CSR 8343-E CSR 8348-E CSR 8364-E CSR 8365-E CSR 8366-E Adopted: January 21, 2011 Released: January 25, 2011 By the Senior Deputy Chief, Policy Division, Media Bureau: introduction and Background Time Warner Cable Inc., hereinafter referred to as ``Petitioner,'' has filed with the Commission six petitions pursuant to Sections 76.7, 76.905(b)(2) and 76.907 of the Commission's rules for a determination that Petitioner is subject to effective competition in those communities listed on Attachment A and hereinafter referred to as the ``Communities.'' Petitioner alleges that its cable systems serving the Communities are subject to effective competition pursuant to Section 623(l)(1)(B) of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended (``Communications Act''), and
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-11-1317A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-11-1317A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-11-1317A1.txt
  • MCC Iowa LLC Petition for Determination of Effective Competition in Waterloo, Iowa (CUID IA0073) ) ) ) ) ) ) CSR 8398-E Adopted: July 28, 2011 Released: August 3, 2011 By the Senior Deputy Chief, Policy Division, Media Bureau: introduction and Background MCC Iowa LLC, hereinafter referred to as ``Petitioner,'' has filed with the Commission a petition pursuant to Sections 76.7, 76.905(b)(2) and 76.907 of the Commission's rules for a determination that Petitioner is subject to effective competition in the community listed on Attachment A and hereinafter referred to as ``the Community.'' Petitioner alleges that its cable system serving the Community is subject to effective competition pursuant to Section 623(l)(1)(B) of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended (``Communications Act''), and
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-11-1319A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-11-1319A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-11-1319A1.txt
  • Effective Competition in Communities in Virginia ) ) ) ) ) ) CSR 8472-E CSR 8474-E CSR 8475-E CSR 8481-E CSR 8482-E Adopted: July 28, 2011 Released: August 4, 2011 By the Senior Deputy Chief, Policy Division, Media Bureau: introduction and Background Comcast Cable Communications, LLC, hereinafter referred to as ``Petitioner,'' has filed with the Commission petitions pursuant to Sections 76.7, 76.905(b)(2), and 76.907 of the Commission's rules for a determination that Petitioner is subject to effective competition in those communities listed on Attachment A (the ``Attachment A Communities''). Petitioner alleges that its cable system serving the Attachment A Communities is subject to effective competition pursuant to Section 623(l)(1)(B) of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended (``Communications Act'') and the
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-11-1325A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-11-1325A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-11-1325A1.txt
  • Colorado, Montana, and Wyoming ) ) ) ) ) ) ) CSR 8495-E CSR 8496-E CSR 8497-E CSR 8498-E CSR 8499-E CSR 8500-E Adopted: July 29, 2011 Released: August 5, 2011 By the Senior Deputy Chief, Policy Division, Media Bureau: introduction and Background Bresnan Communications, LLC, hereinafter referred to as ``Petitioner,'' has filed with the Commission petitions pursuant to Sections 76.7, 76.905(b)(2) and 76.907 of the Commission's rules for a determination that Petitioner is subject to effective competition in those communities listed on Attachment A and hereinafter referred to as the ``Communities.'' Petitioner alleges that its cable system serving the Communities is subject to effective competition pursuant to Section 623(l)(1)(B) of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended (``Communications Act''), and
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-11-1331A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-11-1331A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-11-1331A1.txt
  • for Determination of Effective Competition in Communities in Ohio ) ) ) ) ) ) CSR 8415-E CSR 8416-E CSR 8417-E Adopted: July 29, 2011 Released: August 2, 2011 By the Senior Deputy Chief, Policy Division, Media Bureau: introduction and Background Time Warner Cable, Inc., hereinafter referred to as ``Petitioner,'' has filed with the Commission three petitions pursuant to Sections 76.7, 76.905(b)(2), and 76.907 of the Commission's rules for a determination that Petitioner is subject to effective competition in those communities listed on Attachment A and hereinafter referred to as the ``Attachment A Communities.'' Petitioner alleges that its cable systems serving the Attachment A Communities are subject to effective competition pursuant to Section 623(l)(1)(B) of the Communications Act of 1934, as
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-11-134A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-11-134A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-11-134A1.txt
  • for Determination of Effective Competition in various Kansas and Missouri Communities ) ) ) ) ) ) ) CSR 8174-E Adopted: January 21, 2011 Released: January 26, 2011 By the Senior Deputy Chief, Policy Division, Media Bureau: I. introduction and Background Time Warner Cable Inc., hereinafter referred to as ``Petitioner,'' has filed with the Commission a petition pursuant to Sections 76.7, 76.905(b)(4) and 76.907 of the Commission's rules for a determination that Petitioner is subject to effective competition in those communities listed on Attachment A and hereinafter referred to as ``Communities.'' Petitioner alleges that its cable system serving the Communities is subject to effective competition pursuant to Section 623(1)(1)(D) of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended (``Communications Act'') and the
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-11-1364A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-11-1364A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-11-1364A1.txt
  • Petitions for Determination of Effective Competition in Communities in Ohio ) ) ) ) ) ) CSR 8418-E CSR 8419-E CSR 8420-E Adopted: August 4, 2011 Released: August 8, 2011 By the Senior Deputy Chief, Policy Division, Media Bureau: introduction and Background Time Warner Cable Inc., hereinafter referred to as ``Petitioner,'' has filed with the Commission petitions pursuant to Sections 76.7, 76.905(b)(2), and 76.907 of the Commission's rules for a determination that Petitioner is subject to effective competition in those communities listed on Attachment A and hereinafter referred to as the ``Attachment A Communities.'' Petitioner alleges that its cable system serving the Attachment A Communities is subject to effective competition pursuant to Section 623(l)(1)(B) of the Communications Act of 1934, as
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-11-1372A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-11-1372A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-11-1372A1.txt
  • for Determination of Effective Competition in Communities in Ohio and Pennsylvania ) ) ) ) ) ) ) CSR 8489-E CSR 8490-E Adopted: August 5, 2011 Released: August 9, 2011 By the Senior Deputy Chief, Policy Division, Media Bureau: introduction and Background Time Warner Cable Inc., hereinafter referred to as ``Petitioner,'' has filed with the Commission petitions pursuant to Sections 76.7, 76.905(b)(2), and 76.907 of the Commission's rules for a determination that Petitioner is subject to effective competition in those communities listed on Attachment A and hereinafter referred to as the ``Attachment A Communities.'' Petitioner alleges that its cable system serving the Attachment A Communities is subject to effective competition pursuant to Section 623(l)(1)(B) of the Communications Act of 1934, as
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-11-1456A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-11-1456A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-11-1456A1.txt
  • Content-Type: text/plain Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Before the Federal Communications Commission Washington, D.C. 20554 In the Matter of ) ) Puerto Rico Cable Acquisition Corp. d/b/a ) CSR-7201-Z Choice Cable T.V. ) ) Request for Extension of Waiver Pursuant to ) Sections 1.3 and 76.7 of The Commission's Rules ) MEMORANDUM OPION AND ORDER Adopted: August 25, 2011 Released: August 25, 2011 By the Chief, Media Bureau: INTRODUCTION In this Order, we conditionally grant Puerto Rico Cable Acquisition Corp. d/b/a Choice Cable T.V.'s (``Choice'' or ``Petitioner'') unopposed request for a three-year extension of the waiver of the ban on integrated set-top boxes. As described below,
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-11-1457A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-11-1457A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-11-1457A1.txt
  • coverage area. Thus, we conclude that continuing Petitioner's waiver of the integration ban for a limited period of six months for the Motorola DCT-700, DCT-2500, DCT-2000, DSR-410 and DSR-470 is in the public interest, and that Petitioner has met the standard for waiver under the Commission's rules. IV. ORDERING CLAUSES Accordingly, IT IS ORDERED that, pursuant to Sections 1.3 and 76.7 of the Commission's rules, 47 C.F.R. §§ 1.3 & 76.7, the request for waiver of Section 76.1204(a)(1) of the Commission's rules, 47 C.F.R. § 76.1204(a)(1), filed by James Communications, LLC, IS GRANTED, IN PART, for six months from the date this Order is released. This action is taken pursuant to authority delegated by Section 0.283 of the Commission's rules, 47
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-11-1478A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-11-1478A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-11-1478A1.txt
  • LLC Petition for Determination of Effective Competition in 12 Pennsylvania Franchise Areas ) ) ) ) ) ) CSR 8503-E Adopted: August 31, 2011 Released: September 1, 2011 By the Senior Deputy Chief, Policy Division, Media Bureau: introduction and Background Comcast Cable Communications, LLC , hereinafter referred to as ``Petitioner,'' has filed with the Commission a petition pursuant to Sections 76.7, 76.905(b)(2) and 76.907 of the Commission's rules for a determination that Petitioner is subject to effective competition in those communities listed on Attachment A and hereinafter referred to as the ``Communities.'' Petitioner alleges that its cable system serving the Communities is subject to effective competition pursuant to Section 623(l)(1)(B) of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended (``Communications Act''), and
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-11-1479A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-11-1479A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-11-1479A1.txt
  • Petition for Determination of Effective Competition in Three Pennsylvania Franchise Areas ) ) ) ) ) ) ) CSR 8506-E Adopted: August 31, 2011 Released: September 2, 2011 By the Senior Deputy Chief, Policy Division, Media Bureau: introduction and Background Comcast Cable Communications, LLC , hereinafter referred to as ``Petitioner,'' has filed with the Commission a petition pursuant to Sections 76.7, 76.905(b)(2) and 76.907 of the Commission's rules for a determination that Petitioner is subject to effective competition in those communities listed on Attachment A and hereinafter referred to as the ``Communities.'' Petitioner alleges that its cable system serving the Communities is subject to effective competition pursuant to Section 623(l)(1)(B) of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended (``Communications Act''), and
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-11-1516A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-11-1516A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-11-1516A1.txt
  • service. We believe it would be inconsistent with consumer expectations and thus affirmatively misleading for digital cable ready receivers not to include digital over-the-air reception capability.'' On June 7, 2011, TiVo filed a request for waiver of the Commission's tuner requirements with respect to its TiVo Premiere Elite DVR, pursuant to Section 629(c) of the Communications Act and Sections 1.3, 76.7, and 76.1207 of the Commission's rules. TiVo explained that it ``recently developed the Premiere Elite, which is an all-digital, CableCard-enabled DVR designed specifically for use in all-digital cable systems.'' Further, TiVo explained that it ``is already taking orders for a version of the Premier Elite from cable operators.'' TiVo states that it can sell the product to cable operators for
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-11-1532A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-11-1532A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-11-1532A1.txt
  • Petitions for Determination of Effective Competition in Four Communities in Virginia ) ) ) ) ) ) CSR 8502-E CSR 8505-E Adopted: September 12, 2011 Released: September 13, 2011 By the Senior Deputy Chief, Policy Division, Media Bureau: introduction and Background Comcast Cable Communications, LLC, hereinafter referred to as ``Petitioner,'' has filed with the Commission a petition pursuant to Sections 76.7, 76.905(b)(2), and 76.907 of the Commission's rules for a determination that Petitioner is subject to effective competition in the three Virginia communities listed on Attachment A and hereinafter referred to as the ``Attachment A Communities.'' Petitioner alleges that its cable systems serving the Attachment A Communities are subject to effective competition pursuant to Section 623(l)(1)(B) of the Communications Act of
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-11-1585A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-11-1585A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-11-1585A1.txt
  • states that it requested carriage on Bardstown's cable system by letter dated February 24, 2011. On April 1, 2011, W06AY-D states that Bardstown denied carriage, claiming that W06AY-D did not provide a ``good quality signal'' at the cable system's principal headend. As a result, W06AY-D states that it filed the instant complaint within the 60-day period required pursuant to Section 76.7(c)(4)(iii) of the Commission's rules. W06AY-D argues that it is a ``qualified'' low power station pursuant to Section 76.55(d) of the Commission's rules and is thus entitled to carriage on Bardstown's cable system. W06AY-D states that it broadcasts 168 hours per week; adheres to all relevant Commission requirements imposed on full-power television stations regarding non-entertainment, political and children's programming; broadcasts news
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-11-1683A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-11-1683A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-11-1683A1.txt
  • Determination of Effective Competition in 19 Texas Communities ) ) ) ) ) ) CSR 8511-E CSR 8512-E CSR 8513-E CSR 8514-E Adopted: October 6, 2011 Released: October 11, 2011 By the Senior Deputy Chief, Policy Division, Media Bureau: introduction and Background Time Warner Cable Inc., hereinafter referred to as ``Petitioner,'' has filed with the Commission petitions pursuant to Sections 76.7, 76.905(b)(2), and 76.907 of the Commission's rules for a determination that Petitioner is subject to effective competition in those communities listed on Attachment A and hereinafter referred to as the ``Attachment A Communities.'' Petitioner alleges that its cable system serving the Attachment A Communities is subject to effective competition pursuant to Section 623(l)(1)(B) of the Communications Act of 1934, as
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-11-1778A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-11-1778A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-11-1778A1.txt
  • Cable Inc. Petition for Determination of Effective Competition in 12 Communities in Texas ) ) ) ) ) ) CSR 8519-E Adopted: October 21, 2011 Released: October 26, 2011 By the Senior Deputy Chief, Policy Division, Media Bureau: introduction and Background Time Warner Cable Inc., hereinafter referred to as ``Petitioner,'' has filed with the Commission a petition pursuant to Sections 76.7, 76.905(b)(2), and 76.907 of the Commission's rules for a determination that Petitioner is subject to effective competition in those communities listed on Attachment A and hereinafter referred to as the ``Attachment A Communities.'' Petitioner alleges that its cable system serving the Attachment A Communities is subject to effective competition pursuant to Section 623(l)(1)(B) of the Communications Act of 1934, as
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-11-177A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-11-177A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-11-177A1.txt
  • Inc., Petitions for Determination of Effective Competition in Three Virginia Communities ) ) ) ) ) ) CSR 8377-E Adopted: January 21, 2011 Released: January 28, 2011 By the Senior Deputy Chief, Policy Division, Media Bureau: introduction and Background CoxCom, Inc., d/b/a/ Cox Communications Roanoke, hereinafter referred to as ``Petitioner,'' has filed with the Commission a petition pursuant to Sections 76.7, 76.905(b)(2) and 76.907 of the Commission's rules for a determination that Petitioner is subject to effective competition in those communities listed on Attachment A and hereinafter referred to as the ``Communities.'' Petitioner alleges that its cable system serving the Communities is subject to effective competition pursuant to Section 623(l)(1)(B) of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended (``Communications Act''), and
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-11-1780A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-11-1780A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-11-1780A1.txt
  • Cable Inc. Petition for Determination of Effective Competition in Thirty Ohio Franchise Areas ) ) ) ) ) ) CSR 8515-E Adopted: October 21, 2011 Released: October 27, 2011 By the Senior Deputy Chief, Policy Division, Media Bureau: introduction and Background Time Warner Cable Inc., hereinafter referred to as ``Petitioner,'' has filed with the Commission a petition pursuant to Sections 76.7, 76.905(b)(2) and 76.907 of the Commission's rules for a determination that Petitioner is subject to effective competition in those communities listed on Attachment A and hereinafter referred to as the ``Communities.'' Petitioner alleges that its cable system serving the Communities is subject to effective competition pursuant to Section 623(l)(1)(B) of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended (``Communications Act''), and
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-11-1781A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-11-1781A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-11-1781A1.txt
  • Inc. Petitions for Determination of Effective Competition in Six Ohio Franchise Areas ) ) ) ) ) ) CSR 8516-E CSR 8517-E Adopted: October 21, 2011 Released: October 28, 2011 By the Senior Deputy Chief, Policy Division, Media Bureau: introduction and Background Time Warner Cable Inc., hereinafter referred to as ``Petitioner,'' has filed with the Commission petitions pursuant to Sections 76.7, 76.905(b)(2) and 76.907 of the Commission's rules for a determination that Petitioner is subject to effective competition in those communities listed on Attachment A and hereinafter referred to as the ``Communities.'' Petitioner alleges that its cable systems serving the Communities are subject to effective competition pursuant to Section 623(l)(1)(B) of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended (``Communications Act''), and
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-11-1792A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-11-1792A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-11-1792A1.txt
  • Petitions for Determination of Effective Competition in Four New York Communities ) ) ) ) ) ) CSR 8520-E CSR 8521-E CSR 8522-E Adopted: October 21, 2011 Released: October 31, 2011 By the Senior Deputy Chief, Policy Division, Media Bureau: introduction and Background Subsidiaries of Cablevision, hereinafter referred to as ``Petitioner,'' have filed with the Commission petitions pursuant to Sections 76.7, 76.905(b)(4) and 76.907 of the Commission's rules for a determination that Petitioner is subject to effective competition in those communities listed on Attachment A and hereinafter referred to as the ``Communities.'' Petitioner alleges that its cable systems serving the Communities are subject to effective competition pursuant to Section 623(l)(1)(D) of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended (``Communications Act'') and
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-11-181A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-11-181A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-11-181A1.txt
  • Petition for Determination of Effective Competition in Berwyn Heights, Maryland (CUID MD0142) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) CSR 8375-E Adopted: January 21, 2011 Released: January 31, 2011 By the Senior Deputy Chief, Policy Division, Media Bureau: introduction and Background Comcast Cable Communications, LLC, hereinafter referred to as ``Petitioner,'' has filed with the Commission a petition pursuant to Sections 76.7, 76.905(b)(2) and 76.907 of the Commission's rules for a determination that Petitioner is subject to effective competition in the community listed on Attachment A and hereinafter referred to as the ``Community.'' Petitioner alleges that its cable system serving the Community is subject to effective competition pursuant to Section 623(l)(1)(B) of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended (``Communications Act''), and
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-11-1824A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-11-1824A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-11-1824A1.txt
  • Cable Inc. Petition for Determination of Effective Competition in Six North Carolina Communities ) ) ) ) ) ) CSR 8523-E Adopted: October 21, 2011 Released: November 1, 2011 By the Senior Deputy Chief, Policy Division, Media Bureau: introduction and Background Time Warner Cable Inc., hereinafter referred to as ``Petitioner,'' has filed with the Commission a Petition pursuant to Sections 76.7, 76.905(b)(2) and 76.907 of the Commission's rules for a determination that Petitioner is subject to effective competition in those communities listed on Attachment A and hereinafter referred to as the ``Communities.'' Petitioner alleges that its cable system serving the Communities is subject to effective competition pursuant to Section 623(l)(1)(B) of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended (``Communications Act''), and
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-11-1827A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-11-1827A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-11-1827A1.txt
  • Cable Communications, LLC Petition for Determination of Effective Competition in Two Virginia Communities ) ) ) ) ) ) CSR 8526-E Adopted: October 21, 2011 Released: November 2, 2011 By the Senior Deputy Chief, Policy Division, Media Bureau: introduction and Background Comcast Cable Communications, LLC, hereinafter referred to as ``Petitioner,'' has filed with the Commission a petition pursuant to Sections 76.7, 76.905(b)(2), and 76.907 of the Commission's rules for a determination that Petitioner is subject to effective competition in the community listed on Attachment A and hereinafter referred to as the ``Attachment A Community.'' Petitioner alleges that its cable system serving the Attachment A Community is subject to effective competition pursuant to Section 623(l)(1)(B) of the Communications Act of 1934, as
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-11-1850A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-11-1850A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-11-1850A1.txt
  • Cable Communications, LLC Petition for Determination of Effective Competition in Three Maryland Communities ) ) ) ) ) ) CSR 8531-E Adopted: October 21, 2011 Released: November 3, 2011 By the Senior Deputy Chief, Policy Division, Media Bureau: introduction and Background Comcast Cable Communications, LLC, hereinafter referred to as ``Petitioner,'' has filed with the Commission a petition pursuant to Sections 76.7, 76.905(b)(2) and 76.907 of the Commission's rules for a determination that Petitioner is subject to effective competition in those communities listed on Attachment A and hereinafter referred to as the ``Communities.'' Petitioner alleges that its cable system serving the Communities is subject to effective competition pursuant to Section 623(l)(1)(B) of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended (``Communications Act''), and
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-11-2088A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-11-2088A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-11-2088A1.txt
  • Petitions for Determination of Effective Competition in 23 Ohio Communities ) ) ) ) ) ) CSR 8534-E CSR 8535-E CSR 8536-E Adopted: December 28, 2011 Released: December 29, 2011 By the Senior Deputy Chief, Policy Division, Media Bureau: introduction and Background Time Warner Cable Inc., hereinafter referred to as ``Petitioner,'' has filed with the Commission petitions pursuant to Sections 76.7, 76.905(b)(2) and 76.907 of the Commission's rules for determinations that Petitioner is subject to effective competition in those communities listed on Attachment A and hereinafter referred to as the ``Communities.'' Petitioner alleges that its cable system serving the Communities is subject to effective competition pursuant to Section 623(l)(1)(B) of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended (``Communications Act''), and the
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-11-2095A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-11-2095A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-11-2095A1.txt
  • 12-1 in the proceeding number field. Once the Media Bureau has issued a Special Relief and Show Cause Petition Public Notice, you can find the petition at issue by using the newly assigned docket number or the CSR or CSC number. Enter the CSR or CSC number into the Bureau Identification Number field in ECFS. for assistance. Pursuant to Section 76.7 of the Commission's Rules, you should include the following documentation in filing any CSR petition. The documentation required for the electronic filing of CSRs and CSCs is the same as currently required for paper filings; the substance has not changed, only the means. ``Requests should set forth clearly and concisely the facts relied upon, the relief sought, the statutory and/or
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-11-227A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-11-227A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-11-227A1.txt
  • In the Matter of Charter Communications Petition for Determination of Effective Competition in Fergus Falls, MN (CUID MN017) ) ) ) ) ) ) CSR 7075-E Adopted: January 21, 2011 Released: February 7, 2011 By the Senior Deputy Chief, Policy Division, Media Bureau: I. introduction and background Charter Communications (``Petitioner'') has filed with the Commission a petition pursuant to Sections 76.7, 76.905(b)(2), 76.905(b)(4) and 76.907 of the Commission's rules for a determination that Petitioner is subject to effective competition in the community listed on Attachment A (the ``Community''). Petitioner alleges that its cable system serving the Community is subject to effective competition pursuant to Section 623(1)(1)(B) of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended (``Communications Act'') and the Commission's implementing rules,
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-11-237A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-11-237A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-11-237A1.txt
  • of Effective Competition in the Delmarva, Delaware Franchise Area ) ) ) ) ) ) ) CSR 8135-E CSR 8136-E Adopted: February 7, 2011 Released: February 10, 2011 By the Senior Deputy Chief, Policy Division, Media Bureau: I. introduction and Background Comcast Cable Communications, LLC , hereinafter referred to as ``Petitioner,'' has filed with the Commission petitions pursuant to Sections 76.7, 76.905(b)(2) and 76.907 of the Commission's rules for a determination that Petitioner is subject to effective competition in those communities listed on Attachment A and hereinafter referred to as ``Communities.'' Petitioner alleges that its cable systems serving the Communities are subject to effective competition pursuant to Section 623(1)(1)(B) of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended (``Communications Act'') and the
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-11-251A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-11-251A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-11-251A1.txt
  • Cable Inc. Petition for Determination of Effective Competition in Ten Nebraska Franchise Areas ) ) ) ) ) ) CSR 8376-E Adopted: February 7, 2011 Released: February 11, 2011 By the Senior Deputy Chief, Policy Division, Media Bureau: introduction and Background Time Warner Cable Inc., hereinafter referred to as ``Petitioner,'' has filed with the Commission a petition pursuant to Sections 76.7, 76.905(b)(1-2), and 76.907 of the Commission's rules for a determination that Petitioner is subject to effective competition in those communities listed on Attachment A (the ``Attachment A Communities''). Petitioner alleges that its cable system serving the Attachment A Communities is subject to effective competition pursuant to Section 623(l) of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended (``Communications Act'') and the
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-11-254A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-11-254A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-11-254A1.txt
  • Illinois and Kentucky Communities ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) CSR 7753-E Adopted: February 9, 2011 Released: February 9, 2011 By the Senior Deputy Chief, Policy Division, Media Bureau: introduction and Background Comcast Cable Communications, LLC, on behalf of its subsidiaries and affiliates, hereinafter referred to as ``Petitioner,'' has filed with the Commission a petition pursuant to Sections 76.7, 76.905(b)(1-2), and 76.907 of the Commission's rules for a determination that Petitioner is subject to effective competition in those communities listed on Attachment A and hereinafter referred to as the ``Communities.'' Petitioner alleges that its cable system serving the Communities is subject to effective competition pursuant to Section 623(1) of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended (``Communications Act'') and
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-11-26A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-11-26A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-11-26A1.txt
  • for Determination of Effective Competition in Seven Minnesota Communities ) ) ) ) ) ) CSR 8299-E CSR 8318-E CSR 8320-E CSR 8331-E Adopted: January 6, 2011 Released: January 6, 2011 By the Senior Deputy Chief, Policy Division, Media Bureau: introduction and Background Mediacom Minnesota LLC, hereinafter referred to as ``Petitioner,'' has filed with the Commission petitions pursuant to Sections 76.7, 76.905(b)(2) and 76.907 of the Commission's rules for a determination that Petitioner is subject to effective competition in the communities listed on Attachment A and hereinafter referred to as the ``Communities.'' Petitioner alleges that its cable system serving the Communities is subject to effective competition pursuant to Section 623(l)(1)(B) of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended (``Communications Act''), and
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-11-270A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-11-270A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-11-270A1.txt
  • Inc. Petition for Determination of Effective Competition in Cheshire, MA ) ) ) ) ) ) CSR 7233-E Adopted: February 7, 2011 Released: February 15, 2011 By the Senior Deputy Chief, Policy Division, Media Bureau: introduction and Background Time Warner Cable Inc., hereinafter referred to as ``Petitioner'' or ``Time Warner,'' has filed with the Commission a petition pursuant to Sections 76.7, 76.905(b)(2) and 76.907 of the Commission's rules for a determination that Petitioner is subject to effective competition in the community listed on Attachment A and hereinafter referred to as the ``Community.'' Petitioner alleges that its cable system serving the Community is subject to effective competition pursuant to Section 623(1)(1)(B) of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended (``Communications Act'') and
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-11-279A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-11-279A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-11-279A1.txt
  • L.P. Petition for Determination of Effective Competition in Eight Communities in Kentucky ) ) ) ) ) ) CSR 8129-E Adopted: January 21, 2011 Released: February 14, 2011 By the Senior Deputy Chief, Policy Division, Media Bureau: introduction and Background Insight Kentucky Partners II, L.P., hereinafter referred to as ``Petitioner,'' has filed with the Commission a petition pursuant to Sections 76.7, 76.905(b)(2) and 76.907 of the Commission's rules for a determination that Petitioner is subject to effective competition in the eight communities listed on Attachment A and hereinafter referred to as the ``Communities.'' Petitioner alleges that its cable system serving the Communities is subject to effective competition pursuant to Section 623(1)(1)(B) of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended (``Communications Act''),
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-11-30A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-11-30A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-11-30A1.txt
  • Competition in Various Iowa Communities ) ) ) ) ) ) ) CSR 8297-E CSR 8329-E CSR 8315-E Adopted: January 7, 2011 Released: January 7, 2011 By the Senior Deputy Chief, Policy Division, Media Bureau: introduction and Background MCC Iowa LLC and Mediacom Iowa LLC , hereinafter referred to as ``Petitioners,'' have filed with the Commission petitions pursuant to Sections 76.7, 76.905(b)(2) and 76.907 of the Commission's rules for a determination that Petitioners are subject to effective competition in those communities listed on Attachment A and hereinafter referred to as the ``Communities.'' Petitioners allege that their cable systems serving the Communities are subject to effective competition pursuant to Section 623(l)(1)(B) of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended (``Communications Act''), and
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-11-318A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-11-318A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-11-318A1.txt
  • the Matter of Charter Communications Petition for Determination of Effective Competition in Eau Claire, Wisconsin ) ) ) ) ) ) CSR 8379-E Adopted: February 17, 2011 Released: February 18, 2011 By the Senior Deputy Chief, Policy Division, Media Bureau: introduction and Background Charter Communications, hereinafter referred to as ``Petitioner,'' has filed with the Commission a petition pursuant to Sections 76.7, 76.905(b)(2) and 76.907 of the Commission's rules for a determination that Petitioner is subject to effective competition in the community listed on Attachment A and hereinafter referred to as the ``Community.'' Petitioner alleges that its cable system serving the Community is subject to effective competition pursuant to Section 623(l)(1)(B) of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended (``Communications Act''), and
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-11-31A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-11-31A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-11-31A1.txt
  • Petitions for Determination of Effective Competition in Five Wisconsin Franchise Areas ) ) ) ) ) ) CSR 8304-E CSR 8305-E CSR 8311-E Adopted: January 7, 2011 Released: January 10, 2011 By the Senior Deputy Chief, Policy Division, Media Bureau: introduction and Background Mediacom Wisconsin LLC, hereinafter referred to as ``Petitioner,'' has filed with the Commission petitions pursuant to Sections 76.7, 76.905(b)(2) and 76.907 of the Commission's rules for a determination that Petitioner is subject to effective competition in those communities listed on Attachment A and hereinafter referred to as the ``Communities.'' Petitioner alleges that its cable systems serving the Communities are subject to effective competition pursuant to Section 623(l)(1)(B) of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended (``Communications Act''), and
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-11-320A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-11-320A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-11-320A1.txt
  • House Networks LLC Petition for Determination of Effective Competition in Five Indiana Communities ) ) ) ) ) ) CSR 8124-E Adopted: February 17, 2011 Released: February 22, 2011 By the Senior Deputy Chief, Policy Division, Media Bureau: introduction and Background Bright House Networks LLC, hereinafter referred to as ``Petitioner,'' has filed with the Commission a petition pursuant to Sections 76.7, 76.905(b)(2), and 76.907 of the Commission's rules for a determination that Petitioner is subject to effective competition in those communities listed on Attachment A and hereinafter referred to as the ``Attachment A Communities.'' Petitioner alleges that its cable system serving the Attachment A Communities is subject to effective competition pursuant to Section 623(l)(1)(B) of the Communications Act of 1934, as
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-11-350A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-11-350A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-11-350A1.txt
  • in Communities in Kansas ) ) ) ) ) ) ) CSR 8222-E CSR 8223-E CSR 8224-E CSR 8225-E CSR 8226-E CSR 8227-E CSR 8228-E Adopted: February 23, 2011 Released: February 24, 2011 By the Senior Deputy Chief, Policy Division, Media Bureau: I. introduction and Background Cox Communications Kansas, LLC (``Cox''), has filed with the Commission petitions pursuant to Sections 76.7 and 76.907 of the Commission's rules for a determination that it is subject to effective competition in those communities listed on Attachment A (the ``Attachment A Communities''). Cox alleges that its cable systems serving the Attachment A Communities are subject to effective competition pursuant to Section 623(1)(1)(B) of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended (``Communications Act'') and the Commission's
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-11-351A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-11-351A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-11-351A1.txt
  • Warner Cable Inc. Petition for Determination of Effective Competition in Communities in Ohio ) ) ) ) ) ) CSR 7798-E Adopted: February 24, 2011 Released: February 28, 2011 By the Senior Deputy Chief, Policy Division, Media Bureau: introduction and Background Time Warner Cable Inc. (``Time Warner'' or the ``Company''), has filed with the Commission a petition pursuant to Sections 76.7, 76.905(b)(2), and 76.907 of the Commission's rules for a determination that Time Warner is subject to effective competition in those communities listed on Attachment A (the ``Attachment A Communities''). Time Warner alleges that its cable system serving the Attachment A Communities is subject to effective competition pursuant to Section 623(l)(1)(B) of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended (``Communications Act'')
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-11-39A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-11-39A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-11-39A1.txt
  • ) ) ) CSR 8308-E CSR 8319-E CSR 8322-E CSR 8323-E CSR 8324-E CSR 8325-E CSR 8327-E CSR 8328-E CSR 8330-E CSR 8332-E Adopted: January 10, 2011 Released: January 10, 2011 By the Senior Deputy Chief, Policy Division, Media Bureau: introduction and Background Several Mediacom companies, hereinafter referred to as ``Petitioner,'' have filed with the Commission petitions pursuant to Sections 76.7, 76.905(b)(2) and 76.907 of the Commission's rules for a determination that Petitioner is subject to effective competition in those communities listed on Attachment A and hereinafter referred to as the ``Communities.'' Petitioner alleges that its cable system serving the Communities is subject to effective competition pursuant to Section 623(l)(1)(B) of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended (``Communications Act''), and
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-11-429A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-11-429A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-11-429A1.txt
  • Communications, LLC Petition for Determination of Effective Competition in 7 Washington Franchise Areas ) ) ) ) ) ) CSR 7159-E Adopted: March 3, 2011 Released: March 4, 2011 By the Senior Deputy Chief, Policy Division, Media Bureau: introduction and Background Comcast Cable Communications, LLC, hereinafter referred to as ``Petitioner,'' has filed with the Commission a petition pursuant to Sections 76.7, 76.905(b)(2) and 76.907 of the Commission's rules for a determination that Petitioner is subject to effective competition in seven franchise areas in the State of Washington. The seven franchise areas in question are listed on Attachment A and are hereinafter referred to collectively as the ``Communities.'' A grant of the petition would end regulation of Petitioner's basic cable service by
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-11-430A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-11-430A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-11-430A1.txt
  • Cable Communications, LLC Petition for Determination of Effective Competition in Five Illinois Communities ) ) ) ) ) ) CSR 7390-E Adopted: March 3, 2011 Released: March 7, 2011 By the Senior Deputy Chief, Policy Division, Media Bureau: I. introduction and Background Comcast Cable Communications, LLC (``Comcast'' or the ``Company''), has filed with the Commission a petition pursuant to Sections 76.7 and 76.907 of the Commission's rules for a determination that it is subject to effective competition in the five franchise areas north of Chicago, Illinois, that are listed on Attachment A (the ``Communities''). Comcast alleges that its cable system serving the Communities is subject to effective competition pursuant to Section 623(1)(1)(B) of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended (``Communications
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-11-448A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-11-448A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-11-448A1.txt
  • the unincorporated area of Sussex County known as Clarksville, DE ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) CSR 8019-E Adopted: March 8, 2011 Released: March 9, 2011 By the Senior Deputy Chief, Policy Division, Media Bureau: I. introduction and Background Mediacom Delaware LLC , hereinafter referred to as ``Petitioner,'' has filed with the Commission a petition pursuant to Sections 76.7 and 76.905(b)(4) and 76.907 of the Commission's rules for a determination that Petitioner is subject to effective competition in those communities listed on Attachment A and hereinafter referred to as ``Communities or the ``unincorporated areas.'' Petitioner alleges that its cable system serving the Communities is subject to effective competition pursuant to Section 623(l)(1)(D) of the Communications Act of 1934, as
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-11-466A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-11-466A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-11-466A1.txt
  • LLC Petition for Determination of Effective Competition in Four Communities in Illinois ) ) ) ) ) ) CSR 7391-E Adopted: March 8, 2011 Released: March 10, 2011 By the Senior Deputy Chief, Policy Division, Media Bureau: introduction and Background Comcast Cable Communications, LLC (``Comcast''), hereinafter referred to as ``Comcast,'' has filed with the Commission a petition pursuant to Sections 76.7, 76.905(b)(2) and 76.907 of the Commission's rules for a determination that Comcast is subject to effective competition in the four communities listed on Attachment A and hereinafter referred to as the ``Communities.'' Comcast alleges that its cable system serving the four Communities is subject to effective competition pursuant to Section 623(l)(1)(B) of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended (``Communications
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-11-467A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-11-467A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-11-467A1.txt
  • Matter of Comcast Cable Communications, LLC Petitions for Determination of Effective Competition in Two Communities in Michigan ) ) ) ) ) ) CSR 7422-E Adopted: March 8, 2011 Released: March 11, 2011 By the Senior Deputy Chief, Policy Division, Media Bureau: introduction and Background Comcast Cable Communications, LLC (``Comcast''), has filed with the Commission a petition pursuant to Sections 76.7, 76.905(b)(2) and 76.907 of the Commission's rules for a determination that Comcast is subject to effective competition in those communities listed on Attachment A and hereinafter referred to as the ``Communities.'' Comcast alleges that its cable system serving the Communities is subject to effective competition pursuant to Section 623(l)(1)(B) of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended (``Communications Act''), and
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-11-491A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-11-491A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-11-491A1.txt
  • in Communities in Ohio and Kentucky ) ) ) ) ) ) ) CSR 8380-E CSR 8381-E CSR 8388-E CSR 8389-E Adopted: March 14, 2011 Released: March 15, 2011 By the Senior Deputy Chief, Policy Division, Media Bureau: introduction and Background Time Warner Cable, Inc., hereinafter referred to as ``Petitioner,'' has filed with the Commission four petitions pursuant to Sections 76.7, 76.905(b)(2), and 76.907 of the Commission's rules for a determination that Petitioner is subject to effective competition in those communities listed on Attachment A and hereinafter referred to as the ``Attachment A Communities.'' Petitioner alleges that its cable system serving the Attachment A Communities is subject to effective competition pursuant to Section 623(l)(1)(B) of the Communications Act of 1934, as
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-11-494A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-11-494A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-11-494A1.txt
  • for Determination of Effective Competition in Wilson, North Carolina (CUID NC0110) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) CSR 7199-E Adopted: March 11, 2011 Released: March 16, 2011 By the Senior Deputy Chief, Policy Division, Media Bureau: introduction and Background Time Warner Entertainment-Advance/Newhouse Partnership (``Time Warner'' or the ``Company''), has filed with the Commission a petition pursuant to Sections 76.7, 76.905(b)(2) and 76.907 of the Commission's rules for a determination that Time Warner is subject to effective competition in Wilson, North Carolina (``Wilson''). Time Warner alleges that its cable system serving Wilson is subject to effective competition pursuant to Section 623(l)(1)(B) of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended (``Communications Act''), and the Commission's implementing rules, and is therefore exempt
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-11-495A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-11-495A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-11-495A1.txt
  • Entertainment-Advance/Newhouse Partnership Petition for Determination of Effective Competition in South Carolina Communities ) ) ) ) ) ) ) CSR 7395-E Adopted: March 11, 2011 Released: March 17, 2011 By the Senior Deputy Chief, Policy Division, Media Bureau: introduction and Background Time Warner Entertainment-Advance/Newhouse Partnership (``Time Warner'' or the ``Company'') has filed with the Commission a petition pursuant to Sections 76.7, 76.905(b)(2), and 76.907 of the Commission's rules for a determination that the Company is subject to effective competition in the six communities listed on Attachment A and hereinafter referred to as the ``Attachment A Communities.'' Time Warner alleges that its cable system serving the Attachment A Communities is subject to effective competition pursuant to Section 623(l)(1)(B) of the Communications Act
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-11-496A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-11-496A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-11-496A1.txt
  • of Comcast Cable Communications, LLC Petition for Determination of Effective Competition in Nine Texas Communities ) ) ) ) ) ) CSR 7470-E Adopted: March 14, 2011 Released: March 18, 2011 By the Senior Deputy Chief, Policy Division, Media Bureau: introduction and Background Comcast Cable Communications, LLC (``Comcast'' or the ``Company''), filed with the Commission a petition pursuant to Sections 76.7 and 76.907 of the Commission's rules for a determination that it is subject to effective competition in nine communities in the Houston and Galveston areas of Texas. Comcast alleges that its cable system serving those communities is subject to effective competition pursuant to Section 623(l)(1)(B) of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended (``Communications Act''), and the Commission's implementing rules,
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-11-509A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-11-509A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-11-509A1.txt
  • for Determination of Effective Competition in Virginia and North Carolina Franchise Areas ) ) ) ) ) ) ) CSR 8061-E Adopted: March 16, 2011 Released: March 21, 2011 By the Senior Deputy Chief, Policy Division, Media Bureau: introduction and Background Cox Communications Hampton Roads, LLC (``Cox'' or the ``Company''), has filed with the Commission a petition pursuant to Sections 76.7, 76.905(b)(2), and 76.907 of the Commission's rules for a determination that the Company is subject to effective competition in those communities listed on Attachment A (the ``Attachment A Communities''). Cox alleges that its cable system serving the Attachment A Communities is subject to effective competition pursuant to Section 623(1)(1)(B) of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended (the ``Act'') and
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-11-522A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-11-522A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-11-522A1.txt
  • Communications, LLC, Petition for Determination of Effective Competition in Two Minnesota Franchise Areas ) ) ) ) ) ) CSR 7475-E Adopted: March 17, 2011 Released: March 22, 2011 By the Senior Deputy Chief, Policy Division, Media Bureau: introduction and Background Comcast Cable Communications, LLC, hereinafter referred to as ``Comcast,'' has filed with the Commission a petition pursuant to Sections 76.7, 76.905(b)(2) and 76.907 of the Commission's rules for a determination that Comcast is subject to effective competition in the two communities listed on Attachment A and hereinafter referred to as the ``Communities.'' Comcast alleges that its cable system serving the Communities is subject to effective competition pursuant to Section 623(l)(1)(B) of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended (``Communications Act''),
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-11-524A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-11-524A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-11-524A1.txt
  • Matter of Comcast Cable Communications, LLC Petition for Determination of Effective Competition in Tuscaloosa, AL (CUID AL0042) ) ) ) ) ) ) CSR 7477-E Adopted: March 17, 2011 Released: March 23, 2011 By the Senior Deputy Chief, Policy Division, Media Bureau: introduction and Background Comcast Cable Communications, LLC (``Comcast''), has filed with the Commission a petition pursuant to Sections 76.7, 76.905(b)(2) and 76.907 of the Commission's rules for a determination that it is subject to effective competition in Tuscaloosa, Alabama. Comcast alleges that its cable system serving Tuscaloosa is subject to effective competition pursuant to Section 623(l)(1)(B) of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended (``Communications Act''), and the Commission's implementing rules, and is therefore exempt from cable rate regulation
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-11-525A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-11-525A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-11-525A1.txt
  • Comcast Cable Communications, LLC Petition for Determination of Effective Competition in Six Michigan Communities ) ) ) ) ) ) CSR 7514-E Adopted: March 17, 2011 Released: March 24, 2011 By the Senior Deputy Chief, Policy Division, Media Bureau: introduction and Background Comcast Cable Communications, LLC (``Comcast'' or the ``Company''), has filed with the Commission a petition pursuant to Sections 76.7, 76.905(b)(2) and 76.907 of the Commission's rules for a determination that Comcast is subject to effective competition in those communities listed on Attachment A and hereinafter referred to as the ``Communities.'' Comcast alleges that its cable system serving the Communities is subject to effective competition pursuant to Section 623(l)(1)(B) of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended (``Communications Act''), and
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-11-526A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-11-526A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-11-526A1.txt
  • Communications, LLC Petition for Determination of Effective Competition in Mossyrock, Washington (CUID WA0327) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) CSR 7697-E Adopted: March 17, 2011 Released: March 25, 2011 By the Senior Deputy Chief, Policy Division, Media Bureau: introduction and Background Comcast Cable Communications, LLC (``Comcast'' or the ``Company''), has filed with the Commission a petition pursuant to Sections 76.7, 76.905(b)(2) and 76.907 of the Commission's rules for a determination that the Company is subject to effective competition in Mossyrock, Washington. Comcast alleges that its cable system serving Mossyrock is subject to effective competition pursuant to Section 623(l)(1)(B) of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended (``Communications Act''), and the Commission's implementing rules, and is therefore exempt from cable rate
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-11-557A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-11-557A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-11-557A1.txt
  • Cable Communications, LLC Petition for Determination of Effective Competition in 12 Mississippi Franchise Areas ) ) ) ) ) ) CSR 7478-E Adopted: March 24, 2011 Released: March 28, 2011 By the Senior Deputy Chief, Policy Division, Media Bureau: introduction and Background Comcast Cable Communications, LLC (``Comcast'' or the ``Company''), has filed with the Commission a petition pursuant to Sections 76.7, 76.905(b)(2), and 76.907 of the Commission's rules for a determination that the Company is subject to effective competition in those communities listed on Attachment A (the ``Attachment A Communities''), all of which are in the Jackson, Mississippi, area. Comcast alleges that its cable system serving the Attachment A Communities is subject to effective competition pursuant to Section 623(l)(1)(B) of the
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-11-617A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-11-617A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-11-617A1.txt
  • Time Warner Cable Inc. Petition for Determination of Effective Competition in Kansas Communities ) ) ) ) ) ) CSR 8173-E Adopted: April 5, 2011 Released: April 7, 2011 By the Senior Deputy Chief, Policy Division, Media Bureau: introduction and Background Time Warner Cable Inc., hereinafter referred to as ``Petitioner,'' has filed with the Commission a petition pursuant to Sections 76.7, 76.905(b)(4) and 76.907 of the Commission's rules for a determination that Petitioner is subject to effective competition in those communities listed on Attachment A and hereinafter referred to as the ``Communities.'' Petitioner alleges that its cable system serving the Communities is subject to effective competition pursuant to Section 623(l)(1)(D) of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended (``Communications Act'') and
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-11-618A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-11-618A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-11-618A1.txt
  • devices. The Bureau has already granted GCL a limited waiver of the ban on integrated set top boxes for the Scientific Atlanta Explorer 1850 as well as the Scientific Atlanta Explorer 2200 and the Scientific Atlanta Explorer 8300 digital video recorder, finding that the extraordinary typhoon damage that GCL has endured demonstrated good cause for waiver under Sections 1.3 and 76.7 of the Commission's rules. BACKGROUND Through Section 629 of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended (the ``Act''), Congress intended to ensure that consumers have the opportunity to purchase navigation devices such as set top boxes from sources other than their multichannel video programming distributor (``MVPD''). To achieve the goals set forth in the Act, the Commission in 1998 adopted
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-11-620A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-11-620A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-11-620A1.txt
  • limited to one year. discussion Baja seeks an extension of at least one year for the time-limited portion of the waiver, and a clarification that the waiver for refurbished devices applies to all refurbished devices, and is not limited to high-definition (``HD'') set top boxes and digital video recorder (``DVR'') devices. Baja filed its request pursuant to Sections 1.3 and 76.7 of the Commission's rules. The Bureau has granted waiver of the integration ban pursuant to those rule sections in cases of non-speculative, extraordinary financial hardship. In light of Baja's demonstrated financial hardship, and consistent with Bureau precedent, we conclude that a limited extension of Baja's request for waiver of the integration ban for new non-HD, non-DVR set top boxes is
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-11-621A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-11-621A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-11-621A1.txt
  • their MVPD. Although the cable industry has challenged the lawfulness of the integration ban on three separate occasions, in each of those cases the D.C. Circuit denied those petitions. In limited circumstances, however, operators may be eligible for waiver of the integration ban. discussion Petitioner makes its request for waiver pursuant to the Financial Hardship Order and Sections 1.3 and 76.7 of the Commission's rules. In light of Petitioner's demonstrated financial hardship, we conclude that, consistent with the Financial Hardship Order, a grant of its Waiver Request for one year from the release date of this Order is justified under Sections 1.3 and 76.7 of the Commission's rules. We therefore grant Petitioner a time-limited waiver of the integration ban. On June
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-11-649A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-11-649A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-11-649A1.txt
  • ) ) ) ) ) ) CSR 8391-E, CSR 8392-E , CSR 8393-E, CSR 8394-E, CSR 8395-E, CSR 8396-E & CSR 8397-E Adopted: April 8, 2011 Released: April 8, 2011 By the Senior Deputy Chief, Policy Division, Media Bureau: introduction and Background Time Warner Cable Inc., hereinafter referred to as ``Petitioner,'' has filed with the Commission petitions pursuant to Sections 76.7, 76.905(b)(1) and 76.907 of the Commission's rules for a determination that Petitioner is subject to effective competition in those communities listed on Attachment A and hereinafter referred to as ``Communities.'' Petitioner alleges that its cable system serving the Communities is subject to effective competition pursuant to Section 623(l)(1)(A) of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended (``Communications Act'') and the
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-11-697A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-11-697A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-11-697A1.txt
  • for Determination of Effective Competition in St. Louis, Missouri (CUID MO0545) ) ) ) ) ) ) CSR 6916-E MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER Adopted: April 15, 2011 Released: April 18, 2011 By the Senior Deputy Chief, Policy Division, Media Bureau: Introduction Charter Communications Entertainment I LLC (``Charter'' or ``the Company'') has filed with the Commission a Petition pursuant to Sections 76.7, 76.905(b)(2) and 76.907 of the Commission's rules for a determination that the Company is subject to effective competition in St. Louis, Missouri. Charter alleges that its cable system serving St. Louis is subject to effective competition pursuant to Section 623(1)(1)(B) of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended (``Communications Act'') and the Commission's implementing rules, and is therefore exempt from
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-11-716A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-11-716A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-11-716A1.txt
  • ) ) ) ) CSR 8284-E CSR 8285-E CSR 8286-E CSR 8288-E CSR 8291-E CSR 8292-E Adopted: April 19, 2011 Released: April 21, 2011 By the Senior Deputy Chief, Policy Division, Media Bureau: introduction and Background Mediacom Illinois LLC, Mediacom Indiana LLC, and MCC Missouri LLC hereinafter referred to as ``Petitioner,'' has filed with the Commission petitions pursuant to Sections 76.7, 76.905(b)(2) and 76.907 of the Commission's rules for a determination that Petitioner is subject to effective competition in the communities listed on Attachment A and hereinafter referred to as the ``Communities.'' Petitioner alleges that its cable systems serving the Communities are subject to effective competition pursuant to Section 623(l)(1)(B) of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended (``Communications Act''), and
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-11-725A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-11-725A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-11-725A1.txt
  • CSR 8401-E CSR 8402-E CSR 8403-E CSR 8404-E CSR 8405-E CSR 8406-E CSR 8407-E CSR 8408-E CSR 8409-E CSR 8410-E CSR 8412-E CSR 8413-E CSR 8414-E Adopted: April 21, 2011 Released: April 22, 2011 By the Senior Deputy Chief, Policy Division, Media Bureau: introduction and Background Bresnan Communications, LLC (``Bresnan''), has filed with the Commission a petition pursuant to Sections 76.7, 76.905(b)(2) and 76.907 of the Commission's rules for a determination that Bresnan is subject to effective competition in those communities listed on Attachment A and hereinafter referred to as the ``Communities.'' Bresnan alleges that its cable system serving the Communities is subject to effective competition pursuant to Section 623(l)(1)(B) of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended (``Communications Act''), and
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-11-726A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-11-726A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-11-726A1.txt
  • CSR 8425-E CSR 8426-E CSR 8427-E CSR 8428-E CSR 8429-E CSR 8430-E CSR 8431-E CSR 8432-E CSR 8433-E CSR 8434-E CSR 8435-E CSR 8436-E CSR 8437-E Adopted: April 21, 2011 Released: April 22, 2011 By the Senior Deputy Chief, Policy Division, Media Bureau: introduction and Background Bresnan Communications, LLC (``Bresnan''), has filed with the Commission a petition pursuant to Sections 76.7, 76.905(b)(2) and 76.907 of the Commission's rules for a determination that Bresnan is subject to effective competition in those communities listed on Attachment A and hereinafter referred to as the ``Communities.'' Bresnan alleges that its cable system serving the Communities is subject to effective competition pursuant to Section 623(l)(1)(B) of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended (``Communications Act''), and
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-11-727A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-11-727A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-11-727A1.txt
  • CSR 8445-E CSR 8446-E CSR 8447-E CSR 8448-E CSR 8449-E CSR 8450-E CSR 8451-E CSR 8452-E CSR 8453-E CSR 8454-E CSR 8455-E Adopted: April 21, 2011 Released: April 22, 2011 By the Senior Deputy Chief, Policy Division, Media Bureau: introduction and Background Bresnan Communications, LLC, hereinafter referred to as ``Petitioner,'' has filed with the Commission a petition pursuant to Sections 76.7, 76.905(b)(2) and 76.907 of the Commission's rules for a determination that Petitioner is subject to effective competition in those communities listed on Attachment A and hereinafter referred to as the ``Communities.'' Petitioner alleges that its cable system serving the Communities is subject to effective competition pursuant to Section 623(l)(1)(B) of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended (``Communications Act''), and
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-11-728A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-11-728A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-11-728A1.txt
  • 8458-E CSR 8459-E CSR 8460-E CSR 8461-E CSR 8462-E CSR 8463-E CSR 8464-E CSR 8465-E CSR 8466-E CSR 8467-E CSR 8468-E CSR 8469-E Adopted: April 21, 2011 Released: April 22, 2011 By the Senior Deputy Chief, Policy Division, Media Bureau: introduction and Background Bresnan Communications, LLC (``Bresnan'' or ``the Company''), has filed with the Commission a petition pursuant to Sections 76.7, 76.905(b)(2) and 76.907 of the Commission's rules for a determination that the Company is subject to effective competition in those communities listed on Attachment A and hereinafter referred to as the ``Communities.'' Bresnan alleges that its cable system serving the Communities is subject to effective competition pursuant to Section 623(l)(1)(B) of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended (``Communications Act''),
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-11-933A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-11-933A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-11-933A1.txt
  • for Determination of Effective Competition in Georgia and Tennessee Franchise Areas ) ) ) ) ) ) ) CSR 8478-E Adopted: May 19, 2011 Released: May 24, 2011 By the Senior Deputy Chief, Policy Division, Media Bureau: introduction and Background Comcast Cable Communications, LLC , hereinafter referred to as ``Petitioner,'' has filed with the Commission a petition pursuant to Sections 76.7 and 76.907 of the Commission's rules for a determination that Petitioner is subject to effective competition in certain Georgia and Tennessee Franchise Areas. Petitioner alleges that its cable system serving the community of Chattanooga (``the Attachment A Community'') is subject to effective competition pursuant to Section 623(l)(1)(C) of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended (``Communications Act''), and the Commission's
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-11-934A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-11-934A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-11-934A1.txt
  • for Determination of Effective Competition in Maryland and West Virginia Franchise Areas ) ) ) ) ) ) ) CSR 8476-E Adopted: May 19, 2011 Released: May 23, 2011 By the Senior Deputy Chief, Policy Division, Media Bureau: introduction and Background Comcast Cable Communications, LLC, hereinafter referred to as ``Petitioner,'' has filed with the Commission a petition pursuant to Sections 76.7, 76.905(b)(2) and 76.907 of the Commission's rules for a determination that Petitioner is subject to effective competition in those communities listed on Attachment A and hereinafter referred to as the ``Communities.'' Petitioner alleges that its cable systems serving the Communities are subject to effective competition pursuant to Section 623(l)(1)(B) of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended (``Communications Act''), and
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-11-935A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-11-935A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-11-935A1.txt
  • Warner Cable Inc. Petition for Determination of Effective Competition in Eight Ohio Communities ) ) ) ) ) ) CSR 8341-E Adopted: May 19, 2011 Released: May 26, 2011 By the Senior Deputy Chief, Policy Division, Media Bureau: introduction and Background Time Warner Cable Inc., hereinafter referred to as ``Petitioner,'' has filed with the Commission a petition pursuant to Sections 76.7, 76.905(b)(2), and 76.907 of the Commission's rules for a determination that Petitioner is subject to effective competition in the six communities listed on Attachment A and hereinafter referred to as the ``Attachment A Communities.'' Petitioner alleges that its cable system serving the Attachment A Communities is subject to effective competition pursuant to Section 623(l)(1)(B) of the Communications Act of 1934,
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-11-946A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-11-946A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-11-946A1.txt
  • Effective Competition in various Iowa Communities ) ) ) ) ) ) ) CSR 8271-E CSR 8287-E CSR 8289-E CSR 8290-E CSR 8293-E Adopted: May 23, 2011 Released: May 25, 2011 By the Senior Deputy Chief, Policy Division, Media Bureau: introduction and Background MCC Iowa LLC, hereinafter referred to as ``Petitioner,'' has filed with the Commission petitions pursuant to Sections 76.7, 76.905(b)(2) and 76.907 of the Commission's rules for a determination that Petitioner is subject to effective competition in the communities listed on Attachment A and hereinafter referred to as the ``Communities.'' Petitioner alleges that its cable systems serving the Communities are subject to effective competition pursuant to Section 623(l)(1)(B) of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended (``Communications Act''), and
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-11-947A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-11-947A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-11-947A1.txt
  • of Bright House Networks, LLC Petition for Determination of Effective Competition in Farmington, Michigan (CUID MI0640) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) CSR 8086-E Adopted: May 24, 2011 Released: May 27, 2011 By the Senior Deputy Chief, Policy Division, Media Bureau: introduction and Background Bright House Networks, LLC (``Petitioner''), has filed with the Commission a petition pursuant to Sections 76.7, 76.905(b)(4) and 76.907 of the Commission's rules for a determination that Petitioner is subject to effective competition in the Detroit suburb of Farmington, Michigan, which is listed on Attachment A. Petitioner alleges that its cable system serving Farmington is subject to effective competition pursuant to Section 623(l)(1)(D) of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended (``Communications Act''), and the Commission's
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-11-948A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-11-948A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-11-948A1.txt
  • Warner Cable Inc. Petition for Determination of Effective Competition in Communities in Ohio ) ) ) ) ) ) CSR 7707-E Adopted: May 24, 2011 Released: May 31, 2011 By the Senior Deputy Chief, Policy Division, Media Bureau: introduction and Background Time Warner Cable Inc. (``Time Warner'' or the ``Company'') has filed with the Commission a petition pursuant to Sections 76.7, 76.905(b)(1-2), and 76.907 of the Commission's rules for a determination that the Company is subject to effective competition in franchise areas (the ``Communities'') in Ohio. Time Warner alleges that its cable system serving the communities listed on the Attachments hereto is subject to effective competition pursuant to Section 623(1)(1)(A & B) of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended (``Communications
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-11-956A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-11-956A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-11-956A1.txt
  • reception by subscribers located in the market. 47 C.F.R. § 76.66(a)(6). Under Section 76.66(m)(3) of the Commission's rules, a local television broadcast station that disputes a response by a satellite carrier that it is in compliance with its must carry obligations may obtain review of such denial or response by filing a ``complaint'' with the Commission in accordance with Section 76.7. 47 C.F.R. § 76.66(m)(3); 47 C.F.R.§ 76.7. Although styled a ``complaint,'' a carriage complaint filed against a satellite carrier is treated by the Commission as a petition for special relief for purposes of the Commission's pleading requirements. See 1998 Biennial Regulatory Review: Part 76 - Cable Television Service Pleading and Complaint Rules, 14 FCC Rcd 418 (1999). We find that
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-11-957A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-11-957A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-11-957A1.txt
  • and affiliates Petition for Determination of Effective Competition in Hoover, Alabama ) ) ) ) ) ) ) CSR 7546-E Adopted: May 25, 2011 Released: June 2, 2011 By the Senior Deputy Chief, Policy Division, Media Bureau: introduction and Background Charter Communications (``Charter''), on behalf of its subsidiaries and affiliates, has filed with the Commission a petition pursuant to Sections 76.7, 76.905(b)(2) and 76.907 of the Commission's rules for a determination that Charter is subject to effective competition in the Birmingham suburb of Hoover, Alabama. Charter alleges that its cable system serving Hoover is subject to effective competition pursuant to Section 623(l)(1)(B) of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended (``Communications Act''), and the Commission's implementing rules, and is therefore exempt
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-11-958A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-11-958A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-11-958A1.txt
  • Communications, LLC Petitions for Determination of Effective Competition in 50 Communities in Illinois ) ) ) ) ) ) CSR 7135-E CSR 7162-E Adopted: May 25, 2011 Released: June 1, 2011 By the Senior Deputy Chief, Policy Division, Media Bureau: introduction and Background Comcast Cable Communications, LLC (``Comcast'' or the ``Company''), has filed with the Commission petitions pursuant to Sections 76.7, 76.905(b)(2) and 76.907 of the Commission's rules for a determination that the Company is subject to effective competition in those communities listed on Attachment A and hereinafter referred to as the ``Communities.'' Comcast alleges that its cable systems serving the Communities are subject to effective competition pursuant to Section 623(l)(1)(B) of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended (``Communications Act''),
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-12-169A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-12-169A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-12-169A1.txt
  • Content-Type: text/plain Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit February 8, 2012 NOTICE OF EFFECTIVE DATE OF PROGRAM CARRIAGE COMPLAINT RULES: 47 C.F.R. §§ 1.221(h); 1.229(b)(3), (b)(4); 1.248(a), (b); 76.7(g)(2); 76.1302(c)(1), (d), (e)(1), (k) MB Docket No. 07-42 On July 29, 2011, the Commission adopted the Second Report and Order in MB Docket No. 07-42, which promulgated rules to improve the Commission's procedures for addressing program carriage complaints. These rules became effective on October 31, 2011, except for the following rules which contain new information collection requirements that are subject
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-12-310A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-12-310A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-12-310A1.txt
  • of installation, and any CableCARD-related service calls over the previous twelve months. Petitioners shall file these reports beginning one year from the release date of this Order. We will use the information from the reports to ensure that grant of this waiver continues to serve the public interest. ORDERING CLAUSES Accordingly, IT IS ORDERED that, pursuant to Sections 1.3 and 76.7 of the Commissions rules, 47 C.F.R. §§ 1.3, 76.7, a waiver of the integration ban portion of Section 76.1204(a)(1) of the Commission's rules, 47 C.F.R. § 76.1204(a)(1) IS GRANTED to San Juan Cable LLC d/b/a OneLink Communications and Liberty Cablevision of Puerto Rico, Ltd. for three years from the date of this Order. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that, as a
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-12-473A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-12-473A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-12-473A1.txt
  • * See 47 C.F.R. Part 1. Leased Commercial Access; Development of Competition and Diversity in Video Programming Distribution and Carriage, Second Report and Order, 26 FCC Rcd 11494 (2011) (``Second Report and Order''). See id. at 11552. See id. at 11548-49, ¶ 94. Notice of Effective Date of Program Carriage Complaint Rules: 47 C.F.R. §§ 1.221(h); 1.229(b)(3), (b)(4); 1.248(a), (b); 76.7(g)(2); 76.1302(c)(1), (d), (e)(1), (k), Public Notice, DA 12-169 (MB, Feb. 8, 2012). See Amendment of Parts 0, 1, 73, and 74 of the Commission's Rules, Order, 26 FCC Rcd 13538, 13539-40, ¶ 4 and 13549 (OMD, 2011). The Second Report and Order moved Section 1.229(b)(3) to Section 1.229(b)(4), but this change had not yet become effective when the Office of
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-12-507A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-12-507A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-12-507A1.txt
  • CY-A257, Washington, D.C., 20554. These documents will also be available via ECFS. Documents will be available electronically in ASCII, Microsoft Word, and/or Adobe Acrobat. or call the FCC's Consumer and Governmental Affairs Bureau at (202) 418-0530 (voice), (202) 418-0432 (TTY). ). - FCC - This action is taken pursuant to Section 4(j) of the Act and Sections 1.1, 1.1200(a), and 76.7(e) of the Commission's Rules. See 47 U.S.C. § 4(j); 47 C.F.R §§ 1.1, 1.1200(a), 76.7(e). See 47 U.S.C. § 548; 47 C.F.R. §§ 76.1000-1004. Among other things, these rules require cable-affiliated programmers to make their programming available to MVPDs on nondiscriminatory rates, terms, and conditions. See 47 U.S.C. § 325(b)(3)(C)(ii); 47 C.F.R. § 76.65(b). Among other things, these rules require
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-12-52A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-12-52A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-12-52A1.txt
  • sports networks [REDACTED]. The disclosure of the Agreements shall be governed by the Protective Order dated October 29, 2010, and shall be deemed Highly Confidential Information for ``Outside Counsel's Eyes Only.'' Accordingly, IT IS ORDERED that, pursuant to Sections 4(i), 4(j), and 628 of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended, 47 U.S.C. §§ 154(i), 154(j), and 548, and Sections 76.7(f) and 76.1000-76.1003 of the Commission's rules, 47 C.F.R. §§ 76.7(f) and 76.1000-76.1003, DISH disclose to Defendants' outside counsel the Agreements as set forth above. This action is taken pursuant to authority delegated by Section 0.283 of the Commission's rules. FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION William T. Lake Chief, Media Bureau See DISH Network L.L.C., Program Access Complaint, File No. CSR-8367-P (filed Sept.
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-12-553A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-12-553A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-12-553A1.txt
  • clarity, we will refer to the incumbent cable operator throughout this Order. Opposition to Petition for Recertification (``Opposition''). City of Boston Reply to Opposition (``Reply''). Motion for Acceptance of Surreply and Surreply of Comcast Cable Communications, LLC (``Surreply''). Pleadings in excess of the usual Petition, Opposition and Reply are allowed only on a showing of extraordinary circumstances. 47 C.F.R. § 76.7(d). We find an extraordinary circumstance here, namely the emergence of a new issue in Comcast's Opposition - a second possible form of effective competition in Boston. See infra ¶ 9. The City, addressing the new issue in its Reply, made some arguments for the first time. See Reply at 6-8. Fairness dictates that Comcast be allowed to file a Surreply
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-12-645A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-12-645A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-12-645A1.txt
  • of Effective Competition in North Castle, New York (CUID NY1277) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) CSR 7619-E Adopted: April 24, 2012 Released: April 26, 2012 By the Senior Deputy Chief, Policy Division, Media Bureau: I. introduction and Background Cablevision of Southern Westchester, Inc., hereinafter referred to as ``Petitioner,'' has filed with the Commission a petition pursuant to Sections 76.7 and 76.905(b)(4) and 76.907 of the Commission's rules for determinations that Petitioner is subject to effective competition in the community listed on Attachment A and hereinafter referred to as the ``Community.'' Petitioner alleges that its cable systems serving the Community is subject to effective competition pursuant to Section 623(1)(1)(D) of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended (``Communications Act'') and
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-12-649A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-12-649A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-12-649A1.txt
  • Petition for Determination of Effective Competition in 26 Pennsylvania Communities ) ) ) ) ) ) CSR 8564-E CSR 8565-E CSR 8566-E Adopted: April 24, 2012 Released: April 27, 2012 By the Senior Deputy Chief, Policy Division, Media Bureau: introduction and Background Comcast Cable Communications, LLC, hereinafter referred to as ``Petitioner,'' has filed with the Commission petitions pursuant to Sections 76.7, 76.905(b)(2), and 76.907 of the Commission's rules for a determination that Petitioner is subject to effective competition in the 20 communities listed on Attachment A and hereinafter referred to as the ``Attachment A Communities.'' Petitioner alleges that its cable system serving the Attachment A Communities is subject to effective competition pursuant to Section 623(l)(1)(B) of the Communications Act of 1934,
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-12-694A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-12-694A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-12-694A1.txt
  • complaint to the extent described above, and further direct Comcast to file the information described above to provide the facts necessary to determine complete relief. Ordering clauses Accordingly, IT IS ORDERED, pursuant to Sections 4(i) and (j), 303(r), 309, and 310(d) of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended, 47 U.S.C. §§ 154(i), 154(j), 303(r), 309, 310(d), and Sections 1.3, 76.7, and 76.1302 of the Commission's rules, 47 C.F.R. §§ 1.3, 76.7, 76.1302, that the above-captioned complaint filed by Bloomberg, L.P. against Comcast Cable Communications, LLC IS GRANTED to the extent set forth above. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that on each headend in the top-35 most populous Nielsen Designated Market Areas that (i) carries Bloomberg Television, (ii) has a grouping of
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-12-739A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-12-739A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-12-739A1.txt
  • threshold for establishing a prima facie case does not mean that we have found each evidentiary proffer set forth above necessarily persuasive, nor have we weighed GSN's evidence in light of rebuttal evidence offered by Cablevision. At hearing, the ALJ will be able to fully weigh all evidence offered by the parties. Referral to ALJ or ADR Pursuant to Section 76.7(g)(2) of the Commission's Rules, each party will have ten days following release of this Order to notify the Chief, Enforcement Bureau and Chief ALJ, in writing, of its election to resolve this dispute through ADR. The hearing proceeding will be suspended during this ten-day period. In the event that both parties elect ADR, the hearing proceeding will remain suspended, and
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-12-899A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-12-899A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-12-899A1.txt
  • its financial position has not improved over the past year. The Consumer Electronics Association filed an ex parte letter opposing additional waivers of the integration ban due to DTA shortages as a matter of principle, but no party specifically argued the facts of Baja's request or filed a formal opposition to Baja's request under the procedures set forth in Section 76.7(b)(1) of the Commission's rules. discussion Based on the lack of DTA boxes available to Baja and Baja's continued financial hardship, we conclude that Baja has demonstrated good cause for a limited, conditional waiver. As we explained in the 2011 Extension Order and established over five years ago in the Charter Waiver Order, the Bureau will grant waiver of the integration
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-202530A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-202530A1.txt
  • be served by the indirect foreign ownership of PacAmTel LLC, a holder of common carrier point-to-point microwave licenses, in excess of the 25% statutory limit. Applicant requests Commission approval for the indirect foreign ownership specified below. Applicant seeks approval for an aggregate level of indirect foreign ownership by citizens from WTO Members (or overseas territories of WTO Members) up to 76.7 %. The proposed indirect foreign ownership of PacAmTel is as follows: 31.2% Bermudian, 32.1% British Virgin Islands, 3.4% Indonesian and 10% will be issued through a stock option plan to employees, all of whom are citizens of WTO Members. Indirect foreign ownership from citizens of non-WTO Members does not exceed 25%. ISP-PDR-20000428-00009 Mountain Union Telecom, L.L.C. Petition for Declaratory Ruling
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-203940A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-203940A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-203940A1.txt
  • lists those filings processed by the Cable Service Bureau as registrations pursuant to §76.1801 of the Commission's Rules. Should any of these registrations contain a request for special relief, such waiver requests will be handled separately through the special relief process. Furthermore, parties seeking special relief are advised that such requests must be initiated through the special relief provisions of §76.7 of the Rules. This Notice also lists special relief and other filings. Files containing these petitions can be reviewed in the Commissions Reference Information Center, CY-Level, 445 12th Street, SW Washington, DC 20554. The letter code following a CSR Number refers to the particular subject of the petition. Those currently in use are: A - ADI; M - must carry;
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-207570A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-207570A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-207570A1.txt
  • lists those filings processed by the Cable Service Bureau as registrations pursuant to §76.1801 of the Commission's Rules. Should any of these registrations contain a request for special relief, such waiver requests will be handled separately through the special relief process. Furthermore, parties seeking special relief are advised that such requests must be initiated through the special relief provisions of §76.7 of the Rules. This Notice also lists special relief and other filings. Files containing these petitions can be reviewed in the Commissions Reference Information Center, CY-Level, 445 12th Street, SW Washington, DC 20554. The letter code following a CSR Number refers to the particular subject of the petition. Those currently in use are: A - ADI; M - must carry;
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-207713A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-207713A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-207713A1.txt
  • lists those filings processed by the Cable Service Bureau as registrations pursuant to §76.1801 of the Commission's Rules. Should any of these registrations contain a request for special relief, such waiver requests will be handled separately through the special relief process. Furthermore, parties seeking special relief are advised that such requests must be initiated through the special relief provisions of §76.7 of the Rules. This Notice also lists special relief and other filings. Files containing these petitions can be reviewed in the Commissions Reference Information Center, CY-Level, 445 12th Street, SW Washington, DC 20554. The letter code following a CSR Number refers to the particular subject of the petition. Those currently in use are: A - ADI; M - must carry;
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-208573A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-208573A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-208573A1.txt
  • lists those filings processed by the Cable Service Bureau as registrations pursuant to §76.1801 of the Commission's Rules. Should any of these registrations contain a request for special relief, such waiver requests will be handled separately through the special relief process. Furthermore, parties seeking special relief are advised that such requests must be initiated through the special relief provisions of §76.7 of the Rules. This Notice also lists special relief and other filings. Files containing these petitions can be reviewed in the Commissions Reference Information Center, CY-Level, 445 12th Street, SW Washington, DC 20554. The letter code following a CSR Number refers to the particular subject of the petition. Those currently in use are: A - ADI; M - must carry;
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-209059A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-209059A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-209059A1.txt
  • lists those filings processed by the Cable Service Bureau as registrations pursuant to §76.1801 of the Commission's Rules. Should any of these registrations contain a request for special relief, such waiver requests will be handled separately through the special relief process. Furthermore, parties seeking special relief are advised that such requests must be initiated through the special relief provisions of §76.7 of the Rules. This Notice also lists special relief and other filings. Files containing these petitions can be reviewed in the Commissions Reference Information Center, CY-Level, 445 12th Street, SW Washington, DC 20554. The letter code following a CSR Number refers to the particular subject of the petition. Those currently in use are: A - ADI; M - must carry;
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-210673A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-210673A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-210673A1.txt
  • lists those filings processed by the Cable Service Bureau as registrations pursuant to §76.1801 of the Commission's Rules. Should any of these registrations contain a request for special relief, such waiver requests will be handled separately through the special relief process. Furthermore, parties seeking special relief are advised that such requests must be initiated through the special relief provisions of §76.7 of the Rules. This Notice also lists special relief and other filings. Files containing these petitions can be reviewed in the Commissions Reference Information Center, CY-Level, 445 12th Street, SW Washington, DC 20554. The letter code following a CSR Number refers to the particular subject of the petition. Those currently in use are: A - ADI; M - must carry;
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-211195A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-211195A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-211195A1.txt
  • lists those filings processed by the Cable Service Bureau as registrations pursuant to §76.1801 of the Commission's Rules. Should any of these registrations contain a request for special relief, such waiver requests will be handled separately through the special relief process. Furthermore, parties seeking special relief are advised that such requests must be initiated through the special relief provisions of §76.7 of the Rules. This Notice also lists special relief and other filings. Files containing these petitions can be reviewed in the Commissions Reference Information Center, CY-Level, 445 12th Street, SW Washington, DC 20554. The letter code following a CSR Number refers to the particular subject of the petition. Those currently in use are: A - ADI; M - must carry;
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-211400A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-211400A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-211400A1.txt
  • lists those filings processed by the Cable Service Bureau as registrations pursuant to §76.1801 of the Commission's Rules. Should any of these registrations contain a request for special relief, such waiver requests will be handled separately through the special relief process. Furthermore, parties seeking special relief are advised that such requests must be initiated through the special relief provisions of §76.7 of the Rules. This Notice also lists special relief and other filings. Files containing these petitions can be reviewed in the Commissions Reference Information Center, CY-Level, 445 12th Street, SW Washington, DC 20554. The letter code following a CSR Number refers to the particular subject of the petition. Those currently in use are: A - ADI; M - must carry;
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-212598A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-212598A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-212598A1.txt
  • lists those filings processed by the Cable Service Bureau as registrations pursuant to §76.1801 of the Commission's Rules. Should any of these registrations contain a request for special relief, such waiver requests will be handled separately through the special relief process. Furthermore, parties seeking special relief are advised that such requests must be initiated through the special relief provisions of §76.7 of the Rules. This Notice also lists special relief and other filings. Files containing these petitions can be reviewed in the Commissions Reference Information Center, CY-Level, 445 12th Street, SW Washington, DC 20554. The letter code following a CSR Number refers to the particular subject of the petition. Those currently in use are: A - ADI; M - must carry;
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-212743A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-212743A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-212743A1.txt
  • this Public Notice have been produced by the Cable Services Bureau's computer-based Data Management systems. This Public Notice is intended to list only special relief requests, petitions for order to show cause and related petitions for reconsideration or applications for review. Parties seeking special relief are advised that such requests must be initiated through the special relief provisions of Section 76.7 of the Rules. Many of these filings are subject to the pleading cycle rules set forth in Section 76.7, while others have their own pleading cycle relative to the particular rule involved. Files containing these petitions can be reviewed in the Commissions Reference Information Center, CY-Level, 445 12th Street, SW Washington, DC 20554. The letter code following a CSR Number
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-212816A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-212816A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-212816A1.txt
  • this Public Notice have been produced by the Cable Services Bureau's computer-based Data Management systems. This Public Notice is intended to list only special relief requests, petitions for order to show cause and related petitions for reconsideration or applications for review. Parties seeking special relief are advised that such requests must be initiated through the special relief provisions of Section 76.7 of the Rules. Many of these filings are subject to the pleading cycle rules set forth in Section 76.7, while others have their own pleading cycle relative to the particular rule involved. Files containing these petitions can be reviewed in the Commissions Reference Information Center, CY-Level, 445 12th Street, SW Washington, DC 20554. The letter code following a CSR Number
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-213510A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-213510A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-213510A1.txt
  • this Public Notice have been produced by the Cable Services Bureau's computer-based Data Management systems. This Public Notice is intended to list only special relief requests, petitions for order to show cause and related petitions for reconsideration or applications for review. Parties seeking special relief are advised that such requests must be initiated through the special relief provisions of Section 76.7 of the Rules. Many of these filings are subject to the pleading cycle rules set forth in Section 76.7, while others have their own pleading cycle relative to the particular rule involved. Files containing these petitions can be reviewed in the Commissions Reference Information Center, CY-Level, 445 12th Street, SW Washington, DC 20554. The letter code following a CSR Number
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-213810A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-213810A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-213810A1.txt
  • lists those filings processed by the Cable Service Bureau as registrations pursuant to §76.1801 of the Commission's Rules. Should any of these registrations contain a request for special relief, such waiver requests will be handled separately through the special relief process. Furthermore, parties seeking special relief are advised that such requests must be initiated through the special relief provisions of §76.7 of the Rules. Files containing these registrations can be reviewed in the Commissions Reference Information Center, CY-Level, 445 12th Street, SW Washington, DC 20554. It is requested that all responses or statements refer to the FCC assigned Community Unit Identification (CUID) Number; e.g., AL0075. For further information about this Public Notice contact the Cable Services Bureau at (202) 418-7000. REPORT
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-214751A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-214751A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-214751A1.txt
  • this Public Notice have been produced by the Cable Services Bureau's computer-based Data Management systems. This Public Notice is intended to list only special relief requests, petitions for order to show cause and related petitions for reconsideration or applications for review. Parties seeking special relief are advised that such requests must be initiated through the special relief provisions of Section 76.7 of the Rules. Many of these filings are subject to the pleading cycle rules set forth in Section 76.7, while others have their own pleading cycle relative to the particular rule involved. Files containing these petitions can be reviewed in the Commissions Reference Information Center, CY-Level, 445 12th Street, SW Washington, DC 20554. The letter code following a CSR Number
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-215659A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-215659A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-215659A1.txt
  • this Public Notice have been produced by the Cable Services Bureau's computer-based Data Management systems. This Public Notice is intended to list only special relief requests, petitions for order to show cause and related petitions for reconsideration or applications for review. Parties seeking special relief are advised that such requests must be initiated through the special relief provisions of Section 76.7 of the Rules. Many of these filings are subject to the pleading cycle rules set forth in Section 76.7, while others have their own pleading cycle relative to the particular rule involved. Files containing these petitions can be reviewed in the Commissions Reference Information Center, CY-Level, 445 12th Street, SW Washington, DC 20554. The letter code following a CSR Number
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-215937A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-215937A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-215937A1.txt
  • lists those filings processed by the Cable Service Bureau as registrations pursuant to §76.1801 of the Commission's Rules. Should any of these registrations contain a request for special relief, such waiver requests will be handled separately through the special relief process. Furthermore, parties seeking special relief are advised that such requests must be initiated through the special relief provisions of §76.7 of the Rules. Files containing these registrations can be reviewed in the Commissions Reference Information Center, CY-Level, 445 12th Street, SW Washington, DC 20554. It is requested that all responses or statements refer to the FCC assigned Community Unit Identification (CUID) Number; e.g., AL0075. For further information about this Public Notice contact the Cable Services Bureau at (202) 418-7000. REPORT
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-216338A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-216338A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-216338A1.txt
  • lists those filings processed by the Cable Service Bureau as registrations pursuant to §76.1801 of the Commission's Rules. Should any of these registrations contain a request for special relief, such waiver requests will be handled separately through the special relief process. Furthermore, parties seeking special relief are advised that such requests must be initiated through the special relief provisions of §76.7 of the Rules. Files containing these registrations can be reviewed in the Commissions Reference Information Center, CY-Level, 445 12th Street, SW Washington, DC 20554. It is requested that all responses or statements refer to the FCC assigned Community Unit Identification (CUID) Number; e.g., AL0075. For further information about this Public Notice contact the Cable Services Bureau at (202) 418-7000. REPORT
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-216496A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-216496A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-216496A1.txt
  • lists those filings processed by the Cable Service Bureau as registrations pursuant to §76.1801 of the Commission's Rules. Should any of these registrations contain a request for special relief, such waiver requests will be handled separately through the special relief process. Furthermore, parties seeking special relief are advised that such requests must be initiated through the special relief provisions of §76.7 of the Rules. Files containing these registrations can be reviewed in the Commissions Reference Information Center, CY-Level, 445 12th Street, SW Washington, DC 20554. It is requested that all responses or statements refer to the FCC assigned Community Unit Identification (CUID) Number; e.g., AL0075. For further information about this Public Notice contact the Cable Services Bureau at (202) 418-7000. REPORT
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-216581A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-216581A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-216581A1.txt
  • this Public Notice have been produced by the Cable Services Bureau's computer-based Data Management systems. This Public Notice is intended to list only special relief requests, petitions for order to show cause and related petitions for reconsideration or applications for review. Parties seeking special relief are advised that such requests must be initiated through the special relief provisions of Section 76.7 of the Rules. Many of these filings are subject to the pleading cycle rules set forth in Section 76.7, while others have their own pleading cycle relative to the particular rule involved. Files containing these petitions can be reviewed in the Commissions Reference Information Center, CY-Level, 445 12th Street, SW Washington, DC 20554. The letter code following a CSR Number
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-216637A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-216637A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-216637A1.txt
  • lists those filings processed by the Cable Service Bureau as registrations pursuant to §76.1801 of the Commission's Rules. Should any of these registrations contain a request for special relief, such waiver requests will be handled separately through the special relief process. Furthermore, parties seeking special relief are advised that such requests must be initiated through the special relief provisions of §76.7 of the Rules. Files containing these registrations can be reviewed in the Commissions Reference Information Center, CY-Level, 445 12th Street, SW Washington, DC 20554. It is requested that all responses or statements refer to the FCC assigned Community Unit Identification (CUID) Number; e.g., AL0075. For further information about this Public Notice contact the Cable Services Bureau at (202) 418-7000. REPORT
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-216860A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-216860A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-216860A1.txt
  • this Public Notice have been produced by the Cable Services Bureau's computer-based Data Management systems. This Public Notice is intended to list only special relief requests, petitions for order to show cause and related petitions for reconsideration or applications for review. Parties seeking special relief are advised that such requests must be initiated through the special relief provisions of Section 76.7 of the Rules. Many of these filings are subject to the pleading cycle rules set forth in Section 76.7, while others have their own pleading cycle relative to the particular rule involved. Comments or oppositions concerning must carry complaints must be submitted within 20 days after the date of this Notice, pursuant to Section 76.7(b)(1) . The time for filing
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-217040A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-217040A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-217040A1.txt
  • this Public Notice have been produced by the Cable Services Bureau's computer-based Data Management systems. This Public Notice is intended to list only special relief requests, petitions for order to show cause and related petitions for reconsideration or applications for review. Parties seeking special relief are advised that such requests must be initiated through the special relief provisions of Section 76.7 of the Rules. Many of these filings are subject to the pleading cycle rules set forth in Section 76.7, while others have their own pleading cycle relative to the particular rule involved. Comments or oppositions concerning must carry complaints must be submitted within 20 days after the date of this Notice, pursuant to Section 76.7(b)(1) . The time for filing
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-217091A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-217091A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-217091A1.txt
  • lists those filings processed by the Cable Service Bureau as registrations pursuant to §76.1801 of the Commission's Rules. Should any of these registrations contain a request for special relief, such waiver requests will be handled separately through the special relief process. Furthermore, parties seeking special relief are advised that such requests must be initiated through the special relief provisions of §76.7 of the Rules. Files containing these registrations can be reviewed in the Commissions Reference Information Center, CY-Level, 445 12th Street, SW Washington, DC 20554. It is requested that all responses or statements refer to the FCC assigned Community Unit Identification (CUID) Number; e.g., AL0075. For further information about this Public Notice contact the Cable Services Bureau at (202) 418-7000. REPORT
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-217148A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-217148A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-217148A1.txt
  • this Public Notice have been produced by the Cable Services Bureau's computer-based Data Management systems. This Public Notice is intended to list only special relief requests, petitions for order to show cause and related petitions for reconsideration or applications for review. Parties seeking special relief are advised that such requests must be initiated through the special relief provisions of Section 76.7 of the Rules. Many of these filings are subject to the pleading cycle rules set forth in Section 76.7, while others have their own pleading cycle relative to the particular rule involved. Comments or oppositions concerning must carry complaints must be submitted within 20 days after the date of this Notice, pursuant to Section 76.7(b)(1) . The time for filing
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-217414A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-217414A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-217414A1.txt
  • this Public Notice have been produced by the Cable Services Bureau's computer-based Data Management systems. This Public Notice is intended to list only special relief requests, petitions for order to show cause and related petitions for reconsideration or applications for review. Parties seeking special relief are advised that such requests must be initiated through the special relief provisions of Section 76.7 of the Rules. Many of these filings are subject to the pleading cycle rules set forth in Section 76.7, while others have their own pleading cycle relative to the particular rule involved. Comments or oppositions concerning must carry complaints must be submitted within 20 days after the date of this Notice, pursuant to Section 76.7(b)(1) . The time for filing
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-217594A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-217594A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-217594A1.txt
  • this Public Notice have been produced by the Cable Services Bureau's computer-based Data Management systems. This Public Notice is intended to list only special relief requests, petitions for order to show cause and related petitions for reconsideration or applications for review. Parties seeking special relief are advised that such requests must be initiated through the special relief provisions of Section 76.7 of the Rules. Many of these filings are subject to the pleading cycle rules set forth in Section 76.7, while others have their own pleading cycle relative to the particular rule involved. Comments or oppositions concerning must carry complaints must be submitted within 20 days after the date of this Notice, pursuant to Section 76.7(b)(1) . The time for filing
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-217743A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-217743A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-217743A1.txt
  • this Public Notice have been produced by the Cable Services Bureau's computer-based Data Management systems. This Public Notice is intended to list only special relief requests, petitions for order to show cause and related petitions for reconsideration or applications for review. Parties seeking special relief are advised that such requests must be initiated through the special relief provisions of Section 76.7 of the Rules. Many of these filings are subject to the pleading cycle rules set forth in Section 76.7, while others have their own pleading cycle relative to the particular rule involved. Comments or oppositions concerning must carry complaints must be submitted within 20 days after the date of this Notice, pursuant to Section 76.7(b)(1) . The time for filing
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-217969A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-217969A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-217969A1.txt
  • lists those filings processed by the Cable Service Bureau as registrations pursuant to §76.1801 of the Commission's Rules. Should any of these registrations contain a request for special relief, such waiver requests will be handled separately through the special relief process. Furthermore, parties seeking special relief are advised that such requests must be initiated through the special relief provisions of §76.7 of the Rules. Files containing these registrations can be reviewed in the Commissions Reference Information Center, CY-Level, 445 12th Street, SW Washington, DC 20554. It is requested that all responses or statements refer to the FCC assigned Community Unit Identification (CUID) Number; e.g., AL0075. For further information about this Public Notice contact the Cable Services Bureau at (202) 418-7000. REPORT
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-218237A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-218237A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-218237A1.txt
  • lists those filings processed by the Cable Service Bureau as registrations pursuant to §76.1801 of the Commission's Rules. Should any of these registrations contain a request for special relief, such waiver requests will be handled separately through the special relief process. Furthermore, parties seeking special relief are advised that such requests must be initiated through the special relief provisions of §76.7 of the Rules. Files containing these registrations can be reviewed in the Commissions Reference Information Center, CY-Level, 445 12th Street, SW Washington, DC 20554. It is requested that all responses or statements refer to the FCC assigned Community Unit Identification (CUID) Number; e.g., AL0075. For further information about this Public Notice contact the Cable Services Bureau at (202) 418-7000. REPORT
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-218307A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-218307A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-218307A1.txt
  • this Public Notice have been produced by the Cable Services Bureau's computer-based Data Management systems. This Public Notice is intended to list only special relief requests, petitions for order to show cause and related petitions for reconsideration or applications for review. Parties seeking special relief are advised that such requests must be initiated through the special relief provisions of Section 76.7 of the Rules. Many of these filings are subject to the pleading cycle rules set forth in Section 76.7, while others have their own pleading cycle relative to the particular rule involved. Comments or oppositions concerning must carry complaints must be submitted within 20 days after the date of this Notice, pursuant to Section 76.7(b)(1) . The time for filing
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-218467A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-218467A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-218467A1.txt
  • this Public Notice have been produced by the Cable Services Bureau's computer-based Data Management systems. This Public Notice is intended to list only special relief requests, petitions for order to show cause and related petitions for reconsideration or applications for review. Parties seeking special relief are advised that such requests must be initiated through the special relief provisions of Section 76.7 of the Rules. Many of these filings are subject to the pleading cycle rules set forth in Section 76.7, while others have their own pleading cycle relative to the particular rule involved. Comments or oppositions concerning must carry complaints must be submitted within 20 days after the date of this Notice, pursuant to Section 76.7(b)(1) . The time for filing
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-218653A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-218653A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-218653A1.txt
  • lists those filings processed by the Cable Service Bureau as registrations pursuant to §76.1801 of the Commission's Rules. Should any of these registrations contain a request for special relief, such waiver requests will be handled separately through the special relief process. Furthermore, parties seeking special relief are advised that such requests must be initiated through the special relief provisions of §76.7 of the Rules. Files containing these registrations can be reviewed in the Commissions Reference Information Center, CY-Level, 445 12th Street, SW Washington, DC 20554. It is requested that all responses or statements refer to the FCC assigned Community Unit Identification (CUID) Number; e.g., AL0075. For further information about this Public Notice contact the Cable Services Bureau at (202) 418-7000. MO1114
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-218754A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-218754A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-218754A1.txt
  • this Public Notice have been produced by the Cable Services Bureau's computer-based Data Management systems. This Public Notice is intended to list only special relief requests, petitions for order to show cause and related petitions for reconsideration or applications for review. Parties seeking special relief are advised that such requests must be initiated through the special relief provisions of Section 76.7 of the Rules. Many of these filings are subject to the pleading cycle rules set forth in Section 76.7, while others have their own pleading cycle relative to the particular rule involved. Comments or oppositions concerning must carry complaints must be submitted within 20 days after the date of this Notice, pursuant to Section 76.7(b)(1) . The time for filing
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-218755A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-218755A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-218755A1.txt
  • this Public Notice have been produced by the Cable Services Bureau's computer-based Data Management systems. This Public Notice is intended to list only special relief requests, petitions for order to show cause and related petitions for reconsideration or applications for review. Parties seeking special relief are advised that such requests must be initiated through the special relief provisions of Section 76.7 of the Rules. Many of these filings are subject to the pleading cycle rules set forth in Section 76.7, while others have their own pleading cycle relative to the particular rule involved. Comments or oppositions concerning must carry complaints must be submitted within 20 days after the date of this Notice, pursuant to Section 76.7(b)(1) . The time for filing
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-219086A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-219086A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-219086A1.txt
  • lists those filings processed by the Cable Service Bureau as registrations pursuant to §76.1801 of the Commission's Rules. Should any of these registrations contain a request for special relief, such waiver requests will be handled separately through the special relief process. Furthermore, parties seeking special relief are advised that such requests must be initiated through the special relief provisions of §76.7 of the Rules. Files containing these registrations can be reviewed in the Commissions Reference Information Center, CY-Level, 445 12th Street, SW Washington, DC 20554. It is requested that all responses or statements refer to the FCC assigned Community Unit Identification (CUID) Number; e.g., AL0075. For further information about this Public Notice contact the Cable Services Bureau at (202) 418-7000. KS0716
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-219087A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-219087A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-219087A1.txt
  • lists those filings processed by the Cable Service Bureau as registrations pursuant to §76.1801 of the Commission's Rules. Should any of these registrations contain a request for special relief, such waiver requests will be handled separately through the special relief process. Furthermore, parties seeking special relief are advised that such requests must be initiated through the special relief provisions of §76.7 of the Rules. Files containing these registrations can be reviewed in the Commissions Reference Information Center, CY-Level, 445 12th Street, SW Washington, DC 20554. It is requested that all responses or statements refer to the FCC assigned Community Unit Identification (CUID) Number; e.g., AL0075. For further information about this Public Notice contact the Cable Services Bureau at (202) 418-7000. REPORT
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-219091A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-219091A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-219091A1.txt
  • this Public Notice have been produced by the Cable Services Bureau's computer-based Data Management systems. This Public Notice is intended to list only special relief requests, petitions for order to show cause and related petitions for reconsideration or applications for review. Parties seeking special relief are advised that such requests must be initiated through the special relief provisions of Section 76.7 of the Rules. Many of these filings are subject to the pleading cycle rules set forth in Section 76.7, while others have their own pleading cycle relative to the particular rule involved. Comments or oppositions concerning must carry complaints must be submitted within 20 days after the date of this Notice, pursuant to Section 76.7(b)(1) . The time for filing
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-219357A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-219357A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-219357A1.txt
  • this Public Notice have been produced by the Cable Services Bureau's computer-based Data Management systems. This Public Notice is intended to list only special relief requests, petitions for order to show cause and related petitions for reconsideration or applications for review. Parties seeking special relief are advised that such requests must be initiated through the special relief provisions of Section 76.7 of the Rules. Many of these filings are subject to the pleading cycle rules set forth in Section 76.7, while others have their own pleading cycle relative to the particular rule involved. Comments or oppositions concerning must carry complaints must be submitted within 20 days after the date of this Notice, pursuant to Section 76.7(b)(1) . The time for filing
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-220015A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-220015A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-220015A1.txt
  • this Public Notice have been produced by the Cable Services Bureau's computer-based Data Management systems. This Public Notice is intended to list only special relief requests, petitions for order to show cause and related petitions for reconsideration or applications for review. Parties seeking special relief are advised that such requests must be initiated through the special relief provisions of Section 76.7 of the Rules. Many of these filings are subject to the pleading cycle rules set forth in Section 76.7, while others have their own pleading cycle relative to the particular rule involved. Comments or oppositions concerning must carry complaints must be submitted within 20 days after the date of this Notice, pursuant to Section 76.7(b)(1) . The time for filing
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-220016A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-220016A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-220016A1.txt
  • this Public Notice have been produced by the Cable Services Bureau's computer-based Data Management systems. This Public Notice is intended to list only special relief requests, petitions for order to show cause and related petitions for reconsideration or applications for review. Parties seeking special relief are advised that such requests must be initiated through the special relief provisions of Section 76.7 of the Rules. Many of these filings are subject to the pleading cycle rules set forth in Section 76.7, while others have their own pleading cycle relative to the particular rule involved. Comments or oppositions concerning must carry complaints must be submitted within 20 days after the date of this Notice, pursuant to Section 76.7(b)(1) . The time for filing
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-220101A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-220101A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-220101A1.txt
  • lists those filings processed by the Cable Service Bureau as registrations pursuant to §76.1801 of the Commission's Rules. Should any of these registrations contain a request for special relief, such waiver requests will be handled separately through the special relief process. Furthermore, parties seeking special relief are advised that such requests must be initiated through the special relief provisions of §76.7 of the Rules. Files containing these registrations can be reviewed in the Commissions Reference Information Center, CY-Level, 445 12th Street, SW Washington, DC 20554. It is requested that all responses or statements refer to the FCC assigned Community Unit Identification (CUID) Number; e.g., AL0075. For further information about this Public Notice contact the Cable Services Bureau at (202) 418-7000. REPORT
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-220161A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-220161A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-220161A1.txt
  • this Public Notice have been produced by the Cable Services Bureau's computer-based Data Management systems. This Public Notice is intended to list only special relief requests, petitions for order to show cause and related petitions for reconsideration or applications for review. Parties seeking special relief are advised that such requests must be initiated through the special relief provisions of Section 76.7 of the Rules. Many of these filings are subject to the pleading cycle rules set forth in Section 76.7, while others have their own pleading cycle relative to the particular rule involved. Comments or oppositions concerning must carry complaints must be submitted within 20 days after the date of this Notice, pursuant to Section 76.7(b)(1) . The time for filing
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-220371A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-220371A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-220371A1.txt
  • lists those filings processed by the Cable Service Bureau as registrations pursuant to §76.1801 of the Commission's Rules. Should any of these registrations contain a request for special relief, such waiver requests will be handled separately through the special relief process. Furthermore, parties seeking special relief are advised that such requests must be initiated through the special relief provisions of §76.7 of the Rules. Files containing these registrations can be reviewed in the Commissions Reference Information Center, CY-Level, 445 12th Street, SW Washington, DC 20554. It is requested that all responses or statements refer to the FCC assigned Community Unit Identification (CUID) Number; e.g., AL0075. For further information about this Public Notice contact the Cable Services Bureau at (202) 418-7000. REPORT
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-220372A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-220372A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-220372A1.txt
  • lists those filings processed by the Cable Service Bureau as registrations pursuant to §76.1801 of the Commission's Rules. Should any of these registrations contain a request for special relief, such waiver requests will be handled separately through the special relief process. Furthermore, parties seeking special relief are advised that such requests must be initiated through the special relief provisions of §76.7 of the Rules. Files containing these registrations can be reviewed in the Commissions Reference Information Center, CY-Level, 445 12th Street, SW Washington, DC 20554. It is requested that all responses or statements refer to the FCC assigned Community Unit Identification (CUID) Number; e.g., AL0075. For further information about this Public Notice contact the Cable Services Bureau at (202) 418-7000. REPORT
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-220628A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-220628A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-220628A1.txt
  • this Public Notice have been produced by the Cable Services Bureau's computer-based Data Management systems. This Public Notice is intended to list only special relief requests, petitions for order to show cause and related petitions for reconsideration or applications for review. Parties seeking special relief are advised that such requests must be initiated through the special relief provisions of Section 76.7 of the Rules. Many of these filings are subject to the pleading cycle rules set forth in Section 76.7, while others have their own pleading cycle relative to the particular rule involved. Comments or oppositions concerning must carry complaints must be submitted within 20 days after the date of this Notice, pursuant to Section 76.7(b)(1) . The time for filing
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-220844A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-220844A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-220844A1.txt
  • with the Commission a petition alleging that Charter is subject to effective competition from competing service providers in two separate San Luis Obispo County, California Franchise Areas (the ``County''). Charter alleges that its cable systems serving the County are subject to effective competition, pursuant to Section 623 (a)(1) of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended ("Communications Act"), and Sections 76.7(a)(1) and 76.905(b)(2) of the Commission's rules. Charter bases its allegation of effective competition on the competing services provided by two direct broadcast satellite ("DBS") providers, DirecTV, Inc. (``DirecTV'') and EchoStar Communications Corporation (``EchoStar''). No opposition to the petition was filed. background Section 623(l)(1)(B) of the Communications Act provides that a cable operator is subject to effective competition if the franchise
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-221270A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-221270A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-221270A1.txt
  • lists those filings processed by the Cable Service Bureau as registrations pursuant to §76.1801 of the Commission's Rules. Should any of these registrations contain a request for special relief, such waiver requests will be handled separately through the special relief process. Furthermore, parties seeking special relief are advised that such requests must be initiated through the special relief provisions of §76.7 of the Rules. Files containing these registrations can be reviewed in the Commissions Reference Information Center, CY-Level, 445 12th Street, SW Washington, DC 20554. It is requested that all responses or statements refer to the FCC assigned Community Unit Identification (CUID) Number; e.g., AL0075. For further information about this Public Notice contact the Cable Services Bureau at (202) 418-7000. REPORT
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-221379A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-221379A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-221379A1.txt
  • of this Public Notice have been produced by the Media Bureau's computer-based Data Management systems. This Public Notice is intended to list only special relief requests, petitions for order to show cause and related petitions for reconsideration or applications for review. Parties seeking special relief are advised that such requests must be initiated through the special relief provisions of Section 76.7 of the Rules. Many of these filings are subject to the pleading cycle rules set forth in Section 76.7, while others have their own pleading cycle relative to the particular rule involved. Files containing these petitions can be reviewed in the Commissions Reference Information Center, CY-Level, 445 12th Street, SW Washington, DC 20554. The letter code following a CSR Number
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-221550A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-221550A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-221550A1.txt
  • of this Public Notice have been produced by the Media Bureau's computer-based Data Management systems. This Public Notice is intended to list only special relief requests, petitions for order to show cause and related petitions for reconsideration or applications for review. Parties seeking special relief are advised that such requests must be initiated through the special relief provisions of Section 76.7 of the Rules. Many of these filings are subject to the pleading cycle rules set forth in Section 76.7, while others have their own pleading cycle relative to the particular rule involved. Files containing these petitions can be reviewed in the Commissions Reference Information Center, CY-Level, 445 12th Street, SW Washington, DC 20554. The letter code following a CSR Number
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-221551A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-221551A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-221551A1.txt
  • lists those filings processed by the Cable Service Bureau as registrations pursuant to §76.1801 of the Commission's Rules. Should any of these registrations contain a request for special relief, such waiver requests will be handled separately through the special relief process. Furthermore, parties seeking special relief are advised that such requests must be initiated through the special relief provisions of §76.7 of the Rules. Files containing these registrations can be reviewed in the Commissions Reference Information Center, CY-Level, 445 12th Street, SW Washington, DC 20554. It is requested that all responses or statements refer to the FCC assigned Community Unit Identification (CUID) Number; e.g., AL0075. For further information about this Public Notice contact the Cable Services Bureau at (202) 418-7000. REPORT
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-221713A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-221713A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-221713A1.txt
  • of this Public Notice have been produced by the Media Bureau's computer-based Data Management systems. This Public Notice is intended to list only special relief requests, petitions for order to show cause and related petitions for reconsideration or applications for review. Parties seeking special relief are advised that such requests must be initiated through the special relief provisions of Section 76.7 of the Rules. Many of these filings are subject to the pleading cycle rules set forth in Section 76.7, while others have their own pleading cycle relative to the particular rule involved. Files containing these petitions can be reviewed in the Commissions Reference Information Center, CY-Level, 445 12th Street, SW Washington, DC 20554. The letter code following a CSR Number
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-222061A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-222061A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-222061A1.txt
  • review. CSR (cable special relief) petitions and CSC (cable show cause) petitions refer to cable-related matters pursuant to Part 76. The newly-designated BSR (broadcast special relief) petitions refer to certain non-application-related broadcast matters pursuant to Part 73. Parties seeking special relief pursuant to Part 76 are advised that such requests must be initiated through the special relief provisions of Section 76.7 of the Rules. Many of these filings are subject to the pleading cycle rules set forth in Section 76.7, while others have their own pleading cycle relative to the particular rule involved. Please note that for BSR petitions filed pursuant to Part 73, the pleading cycle will be the same as that mandated by Section 76.7 unless stated otherwise. Files
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-222063A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-222063A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-222063A1.txt
  • lists those filings processed by the Cable Service Bureau as registrations pursuant to §76.1801 of the Commission's Rules. Should any of these registrations contain a request for special relief, such waiver requests will be handled separately through the special relief process. Furthermore, parties seeking special relief are advised that such requests must be initiated through the special relief provisions of §76.7 of the Rules. Files containing these registrations can be reviewed in the Commissions Reference Information Center, CY-Level, 445 12th Street, SW Washington, DC 20554. It is requested that all responses or statements refer to the FCC assigned Community Unit Identification (CUID) Number; e.g., AL0075. For further information about this Public Notice contact the Cable Services Bureau at (202) 418-7000. REPORT
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-222268A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-222268A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-222268A1.txt
  • review. CSR (cable special relief) petitions and CSC (cable show cause) petitions refer to cable-related matters pursuant to Part 76. The newly-designated BSR (broadcast special relief) petitions refer to certain non-application-related broadcast matters pursuant to Part 73. Parties seeking special relief pursuant to Part 76 are advised that such requests must be initiated through the special relief provisions of Section 76.7 of the Rules. Many of these filings are subject to the pleading cycle rules set forth in Section 76.7, while others have their own pleading cycle relative to the particular rule involved. Please note that for BSR petitions filed pursuant to Part 73, the pleading cycle will be the same as that mandated by Section 76.7 unless stated otherwise. Files
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-222295A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-222295A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-222295A1.txt
  • lists those filings processed by the Cable Service Bureau as registrations pursuant to §76.1801 of the Commission's Rules. Should any of these registrations contain a request for special relief, such waiver requests will be handled separately through the special relief process. Furthermore, parties seeking special relief are advised that such requests must be initiated through the special relief provisions of §76.7 of the Rules. Files containing these registrations can be reviewed in the Commissions Reference Information Center, CY-Level, 445 12th Street, SW Washington, DC 20554. It is requested that all responses or statements refer to the FCC assigned Community Unit Identification (CUID) Number; e.g., AL0075. For further information about this Public Notice contact the Cable Services Bureau at (202) 418-7000. REPORT
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-222571A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-222571A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-222571A1.txt
  • review. CSR (cable special relief) petitions and CSC (cable show cause) petitions refer to cable-related matters pursuant to Part 76. The newly-designated BSR (broadcast special relief) petitions refer to certain non-application-related broadcast matters pursuant to Part 73. Parties seeking special relief pursuant to Part 76 are advised that such requests must be initiated through the special relief provisions of Section 76.7 of the Rules. Many of these filings are subject to the pleading cycle rules set forth in Section 76.7, while others have their own pleading cycle relative to the particular rule involved. Please note that for BSR petitions filed pursuant to Part 73, the pleading cycle will be the same as that mandated by Section 76.7 unless stated otherwise. Files
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-222788A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-222788A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-222788A1.txt
  • review. CSR (cable special relief) petitions and CSC (cable show cause) petitions refer to cable-related matters pursuant to Part 76. The newly-designated BSR (broadcast special relief) petitions refer to certain non-application-related broadcast matters pursuant to Part 73. Parties seeking special relief pursuant to Part 76 are advised that such requests must be initiated through the special relief provisions of Section 76.7 of the Rules. Many of these filings are subject to the pleading cycle rules set forth in Section 76.7, while others have their own pleading cycle relative to the particular rule involved. Please note that for BSR petitions filed pursuant to Part 73, the pleading cycle will be the same as that mandated by Section 76.7 unless stated otherwise. Files
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-222970A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-222970A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-222970A1.txt
  • lists those filings processed by the Cable Service Bureau as registrations pursuant to §76.1801 of the Commission's Rules. Should any of these registrations contain a request for special relief, such waiver requests will be handled separately through the special relief process. Furthermore, parties seeking special relief are advised that such requests must be initiated through the special relief provisions of §76.7 of the Rules. Files containing these registrations can be reviewed in the Commissions Reference Information Center, CY-Level, 445 12th Street, SW Washington, DC 20554. It is requested that all responses or statements refer to the FCC assigned Community Unit Identification (CUID) Number; e.g., AL0075. For further information about this Public Notice contact the Cable Services Bureau at (202) 418-7000. REPORT
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-223004A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-223004A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-223004A1.txt
  • review. CSR (cable special relief) petitions and CSC (cable show cause) petitions refer to cable-related matters pursuant to Part 76. The newly-designated BSR (broadcast special relief) petitions refer to certain non-application-related broadcast matters pursuant to Part 73. Parties seeking special relief pursuant to Part 76 are advised that such requests must be initiated through the special relief provisions of Section 76.7 of the Rules. Many of these filings are subject to the pleading cycle rules set forth in Section 76.7, while others have their own pleading cycle relative to the particular rule involved. Please note that for BSR petitions filed pursuant to Part 73, the pleading cycle will be the same as that mandated by Section 76.7 unless stated otherwise. Files
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-223151A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-223151A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-223151A1.txt
  • review. CSR (cable special relief) petitions and CSC (cable show cause) petitions refer to cable-related matters pursuant to Part 76. The newly-designated BSR (broadcast special relief) petitions refer to certain non-application-related broadcast matters pursuant to Part 73. Parties seeking special relief pursuant to Part 76 are advised that such requests must be initiated through the special relief provisions of Section 76.7 of the Rules. Many of these filings are subject to the pleading cycle rules set forth in Section 76.7, while others have their own pleading cycle relative to the particular rule involved. Please note that for BSR petitions filed pursuant to Part 73, the pleading cycle will be the same as that mandated by Section 76.7 unless stated otherwise. Files
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-223155A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-223155A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-223155A1.txt
  • lists those filings processed by the Cable Service Bureau as registrations pursuant to §76.1801 of the Commission's Rules. Should any of these registrations contain a request for special relief, such waiver requests will be handled separately through the special relief process. Furthermore, parties seeking special relief are advised that such requests must be initiated through the special relief provisions of §76.7 of the Rules. Files containing these registrations can be reviewed in the Commissions Reference Information Center, CY-Level, 445 12th Street, SW Washington, DC 20554. It is requested that all responses or statements refer to the FCC assigned Community Unit Identification (CUID) Number; e.g., AL0075. For further information about this Public Notice contact the Cable Services Bureau at (202) 418-7000. REPORT
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-223512A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-223512A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-223512A1.txt
  • lists those filings processed by the Cable Service Bureau as registrations pursuant to §76.1801 of the Commission's Rules. Should any of these registrations contain a request for special relief, such waiver requests will be handled separately through the special relief process. Furthermore, parties seeking special relief are advised that such requests must be initiated through the special relief provisions of §76.7 of the Rules. Files containing these registrations can be reviewed in the Commissions Reference Information Center, CY-Level, 445 12th Street, SW Washington, DC 20554. It is requested that all responses or statements refer to the FCC assigned Community Unit Identification (CUID) Number; e.g., AL0075. For further information about this Public Notice contact the Cable Services Bureau at (202) 418-7000. REPORT
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-223854A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-223854A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-223854A1.txt
  • review. CSR (cable special relief) petitions and CSC (cable show cause) petitions refer to cable-related matters pursuant to Part 76. The newly-designated BSR (broadcast special relief) petitions refer to certain non-application-related broadcast matters pursuant to Part 73. Parties seeking special relief pursuant to Part 76 are advised that such requests must be initiated through the special relief provisions of Section 76.7 of the Rules. Many of these filings are subject to the pleading cycle rules set forth in Section 76.7, while others have their own pleading cycle relative to the particular rule involved. Please note that for BSR petitions filed pursuant to Part 73, the pleading cycle will be the same as that mandated by Section 76.7 unless stated otherwise. Files
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-224234A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-224234A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-224234A1.txt
  • review. CSR (cable special relief) petitions and CSC (cable show cause) petitions refer to cable-related matters pursuant to Part 76. The newly-designated BSR (broadcast special relief) petitions refer to certain non-application-related broadcast matters pursuant to Part 73. Parties seeking special relief pursuant to Part 76 are advised that such requests must be initiated through the special relief provisions of Section 76.7 of the Rules. Many of these filings are subject to the pleading cycle rules set forth in Section 76.7, while others have their own pleading cycle relative to the particular rule involved. Please note that for BSR petitions filed pursuant to Part 73, the pleading cycle will be the same as that mandated by Section 76.7 unless stated otherwise. Files
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-224377A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-224377A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-224377A1.txt
  • Notice lists those filings processed by the Media Bureau as registrations pursuant to §76.1801 of the Commission's Rules. Should any of these registrations contain a request for special relief, such waiver requests will be handled separately through the special relief process. Furthermore, parties seeking special relief are advised that such requests must be initiated through the special relief provisions of §76.7 of the Rules. Files containing these registrations can be reviewed in the Commissions Reference Information Center, CY-Level, 445 12th Street, SW Washington, DC 20554. It is requested that all responses or statements refer to the FCC assigned Community Unit Identification (CUID) Number; e.g., AL0075. For further information about this Public Notice contact the Media Bureau at (202) 418-7000. REPORT NO:
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-224461A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-224461A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-224461A1.txt
  • review. CSR (cable special relief) petitions and CSC (cable show cause) petitions refer to cable-related matters pursuant to Part 76. The newly-designated BSR (broadcast special relief) petitions refer to certain non-application-related broadcast matters pursuant to Part 73. Parties seeking special relief pursuant to Part 76 are advised that such requests must be initiated through the special relief provisions of Section 76.7 of the Rules. Many of these filings are subject to the pleading cycle rules set forth in Section 76.7, while others have their own pleading cycle relative to the particular rule involved. Please note that for BSR petitions filed pursuant to Part 73, the pleading cycle will be the same as that mandated by Section 76.7 unless stated otherwise. Files
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-224879A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-224879A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-224879A1.txt
  • Notice lists those filings processed by the Media Bureau as registrations pursuant to §76.1801 of the Commission's Rules. Should any of these registrations contain a request for special relief, such waiver requests will be handled separately through the special relief process. Furthermore, parties seeking special relief are advised that such requests must be initiated through the special relief provisions of §76.7 of the Rules. Files containing these registrations can be reviewed in the Commissions Reference Information Center, CY-Level, 445 12th Street, SW Washington, DC 20554. It is requested that all responses or statements refer to the FCC assigned Community Unit Identification (CUID) Number; e.g., AL0075. For further information about this Public Notice contact the Media Bureau at (202) 418-7000. REPORT NO:
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-225230A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-225230A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-225230A1.txt
  • review. CSR (cable special relief) petitions and CSC (cable show cause) petitions refer to cable-related matters pursuant to Part 76. The newly-designated BSR (broadcast special relief) petitions refer to certain non-application-related broadcast matters pursuant to Part 73. Parties seeking special relief pursuant to Part 76 are advised that such requests must be initiated through the special relief provisions of Section 76.7 of the Rules. Many of these filings are subject to the pleading cycle rules set forth in Section 76.7, while others have their own pleading cycle relative to the particular rule involved. Please note that for BSR petitions filed pursuant to Part 73, the pleading cycle will be the same as that mandated by Section 76.7 unless stated otherwise. Files
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-225457A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-225457A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-225457A1.txt
  • signals are distributed to the public by the cable system. SPECIAL RELIEF PETITIONS On petition for special relief by any interested person, the Commission may waive any provision of the rules relating to cable television systems or issue a ruling on a complaint or disputed question. A fee will be charged for Cable Special Relief Petitions filed according to Section 76.7 of the Rules seeking the imposition of special requirements beyond those provided for in the rules. REGISTRATION STATEMENTS A cable system community unit is required, prior to commencing operations, to provide the Commission with an identification of the system's operator, a description of the television broadcast signals to be carried, and certain other information called for by Section 76.1801 (formerly
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-225527A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-225527A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-225527A1.txt
  • Notice lists those filings processed by the Media Bureau as registrations pursuant to §76.1801 of the Commission's Rules. Should any of these registrations contain a request for special relief, such wavier requests will be handled separately through the special relief process. Furthermore, parties seeking special relief are advised that such requests must be initiated through the special relief provisions of §76.7 of the Rules. Files containing these registrations can be reviewed in the Commissions Reference Information Center, CY-Level, 445 12th Street, S.W. Washington, DC 20054. It is requested that all responses or statements refer to the FCC assigned Community Unit Identification (CUID) Number; e.g., AL0001. For further information about this Public Notice contact the Media Bureau at (202) 418-7000. REPORT NO:
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-225667A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-225667A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-225667A1.txt
  • review. CSR (cable special relief) petitions and CSC (cable show cause) petitions refer to cable-related matters pursuant to Part 76. The newly-designated BSR (broadcast special relief) petitions refer to certain non-application-related broadcast matters pursuant to Part 73. Parties seeking special relief pursuant to Part 76 are advised that such requests must be initiated through the special relief provisions of Section 76.7 of the Rules. Many of these filings are subject to the pleading cycle rules set forth in Section 76.7, while others have their own pleading cycle relative to the particular rule involved. Please note that for BSR petitions filed pursuant to Part 73, the pleading cycle will be the same as that mandated by Section 76.7 unless stated otherwise. Files
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-225888A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-225888A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-225888A1.txt
  • Notice lists those filings processed by the Media Bureau as registrations pursuant to §76.1801 of the Commission's Rules. Should any of these registrations contain a request for special relief, such wavier requests will be handled separately through the special relief process. Furthermore, parties seeking special relief are advised that such requests must be initiated through the special relief provisions of §76.7 of the Rules. Files containing these registrations can be reviewed in the Commissions Reference Information Center, CY-Level, 445 12th Street, S.W. Washington, DC 20054. It is requested that all responses or statements refer to the FCC assigned Community Unit Identification (CUID) Number; e.g., AL0001. For further information about this Public Notice contact the Media Bureau at (202) 418-7000. REPORT NO:
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-226113A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-226113A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-226113A1.txt
  • Notice lists those filings processed by the Media Bureau as registrations pursuant to §76.1801 of the Commission's Rules. Should any of these registrations contain a request for special relief, such wavier requests will be handled separately through the special relief process. Furthermore, parties seeking special relief are advised that such requests must be initiated through the special relief provisions of §76.7 of the Rules. Files containing these registrations can be reviewed in the Commissions Reference Information Center, CY-Level, 445 12th Street, S.W. Washington, DC 20054. It is requested that all responses or statements refer to the FCC assigned Community Unit Identification (CUID) Number; e.g., AL0001. For further information about this Public Notice contact the Media Bureau at (202) 418-7000. REPORT NO:
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-226261A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-226261A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-226261A1.txt
  • review. CSR (cable special relief) petitions and CSC (cable show cause) petitions refer to cable-related matters pursuant to Part 76. The newly-designated BSR (broadcast special relief) petitions refer to certain non-application-related broadcast matters pursuant to Part 73. Parties seeking special relief pursuant to Part 76 are advised that such requests must be initiated through the special relief provisions of Section 76.7 of the Rules. Many of these filings are subject to the pleading cycle rules set forth in Section 76.7, while others have their own pleading cycle relative to the particular rule involved. Please note that for BSR petitions filed pursuant to Part 73, the pleading cycle will be the same as that mandated by Section 76.7 unless stated otherwise. Files
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-226354A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-226354A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-226354A1.txt
  • Notice lists those filings processed by the Media Bureau as registrations pursuant to §76.1801 of the Commission's Rules. Should any of these registrations contain a request for special relief, such wavier requests will be handled separately through the special relief process. Furthermore, parties seeking special relief are advised that such requests must be initiated through the special relief provisions of §76.7 of the Rules. Files containing these registrations can be reviewed in the Commissions Reference Information Center, CY-Level, 445 12th Street, S.W. Washington, DC 20054. It is requested that all responses or statements refer to the FCC assigned Community Unit Identification (CUID) Number; e.g., AL0001. For further information about this Public Notice contact the Media Bureau at (202) 418-7000. REPORT NO:
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-226505A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-226505A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-226505A1.txt
  • review. CSR (cable special relief) petitions and CSC (cable show cause) petitions refer to cable-related matters pursuant to Part 76. The newly-designated BSR (broadcast special relief) petitions refer to certain non-application-related broadcast matters pursuant to Part 73. Parties seeking special relief pursuant to Part 76 are advised that such requests must be initiated through the special relief provisions of Section 76.7 of the Rules. Many of these filings are subject to the pleading cycle rules set forth in Section 76.7, while others have their own pleading cycle relative to the particular rule involved. Please note that for BSR petitions filed pursuant to Part 73, the pleading cycle will be the same as that mandated by Section 76.7 unless stated otherwise. Files
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-227004A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-227004A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-227004A1.txt
  • review. CSR (cable special relief) petitions and CSC (cable show cause) petitions refer to cable-related matters pursuant to Part 76. The newly-designated BSR (broadcast special relief) petitions refer to certain non-application-related broadcast matters pursuant to Part 73. Parties seeking special relief pursuant to Part 76 are advised that such requests must be initiated through the special relief provisions of Section 76.7 of the Rules. Many of these filings are subject to the pleading cycle rules set forth in Section 76.7, while others have their own pleading cycle relative to the particular rule involved. Please note that for BSR petitions filed pursuant to Part 73, the pleading cycle will be the same as that mandated by Section 76.7 unless stated otherwise. Files
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-227339A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-227339A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-227339A1.txt
  • Notice lists those filings processed by the Media Bureau as registrations pursuant to §76.1801 of the Commission's Rules. Should any of these registrations contain a request for special relief, such wavier requests will be handled separately through the special relief process. Furthermore, parties seeking special relief are advised that such requests must be initiated through the special relief provisions of §76.7 of the Rules. Files containing these registrations can be reviewed in the Commissions Reference Information Center, CY-Level, 445 12th Street, S.W. Washington, DC 20054. It is requested that all responses or statements refer to the FCC assigned Community Unit Identification (CUID) Number; e.g., AL0001. For further information about this Public Notice contact the Media Bureau at (202) 418-7000. REPORT NO:
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-227646A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-227646A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-227646A1.txt
  • Notice lists those filings processed by the Media Bureau as registrations pursuant to §76.1801 of the Commission's Rules. Should any of these registrations contain a request for special relief, such wavier requests will be handled separately through the special relief process. Furthermore, parties seeking special relief are advised that such requests must be initiated through the special relief provisions of §76.7 of the Rules. Files containing these registrations can be reviewed in the Commissions Reference Information Center, CY-Level, 445 12th Street, S.W. Washington, DC 20054. It is requested that all responses or statements refer to the FCC assigned Community Unit Identification (CUID) Number; e.g., AL0001. For further information about this Public Notice contact the Media Bureau at (202) 418-7000. REPORT NO:
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-227785A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-227785A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-227785A1.txt
  • review. CSR (cable special relief) petitions and CSC (cable show cause) petitions refer to cable-related matters pursuant to Part 76. The newly-designated BSR (broadcast special relief) petitions refer to certain non-application-related broadcast matters pursuant to Part 73. Parties seeking special relief pursuant to Part 76 are advised that such requests must be initiated through the special relief provisions of Section 76.7 of the Rules. Many of these filings are subject to the pleading cycle rules set forth in Section 76.7, while others have their own pleading cycle relative to the particular rule involved. Please note that for BSR petitions filed pursuant to Part 73, the pleading cycle will be the same as that mandated by Section 76.7 unless stated otherwise. Files
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-227895A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-227895A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-227895A1.txt
  • Notice lists those filings processed by the Media Bureau as registrations pursuant to §76.1801 of the Commission's Rules. Should any of these registrations contain a request for special relief, such wavier requests will be handled separately through the special relief process. Furthermore, parties seeking special relief are advised that such requests must be initiated through the special relief provisions of §76.7 of the Rules. Files containing these registrations can be reviewed in the Commissions Reference Information Center, CY-Level, 445 12th Street, S.W. Washington, DC 20054. It is requested that all responses or statements refer to the FCC assigned Community Unit Identification (CUID) Number; e.g., AL0001. For further information about this Public Notice contact the Media Bureau at (202) 418-7000. REPORT NO:
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-228003A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-228003A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-228003A1.txt
  • review. CSR (cable special relief) petitions and CSC (cable show cause) petitions refer to cable-related matters pursuant to Part 76. The newly-designated BSR (broadcast special relief) petitions refer to certain non-application-related broadcast matters pursuant to Part 73. Parties seeking special relief pursuant to Part 76 are advised that such requests must be initiated through the special relief provisions of Section 76.7 of the Rules. Many of these filings are subject to the pleading cycle rules set forth in Section 76.7, while others have their own pleading cycle relative to the particular rule involved. Please note that for BSR petitions filed pursuant to Part 73, the pleading cycle will be the same as that mandated by Section 76.7 unless stated otherwise. Files
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-228124A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-228124A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-228124A1.txt
  • Notice lists those filings processed by the Media Bureau as registrations pursuant to §76.1801 of the Commission's Rules. Should any of these registrations contain a request for special relief, such wavier requests will be handled separately through the special relief process. Furthermore, parties seeking special relief are advised that such requests must be initiated through the special relief provisions of §76.7 of the Rules. Files containing these registrations can be reviewed in the Commissions Reference Information Center, CY-Level, 445 12th Street, S.W. Washington, DC 20054. It is requested that all responses or statements refer to the FCC assigned Community Unit Identification (CUID) Number; e.g., AL0001. For further information about this Public Notice contact the Media Bureau at (202) 418-7000. REPORT NO:
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-228235A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-228235A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-228235A1.txt
  • review. CSR (cable special relief) petitions and CSC (cable show cause) petitions refer to cable-related matters pursuant to Part 76. The newly-designated BSR (broadcast special relief) petitions refer to certain non-application-related broadcast matters pursuant to Part 73. Parties seeking special relief pursuant to Part 76 are advised that such requests must be initiated through the special relief provisions of Section 76.7 of the Rules. Many of these filings are subject to the pleading cycle rules set forth in Section 76.7, while others have their own pleading cycle relative to the particular rule involved. Please note that for BSR petitions filed pursuant to Part 73, the pleading cycle will be the same as that mandated by Section 76.7 unless stated otherwise. Files
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-228578A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-228578A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-228578A1.txt
  • review. CSR (cable special relief) petitions and CSC (cable show cause) petitions refer to cable-related matters pursuant to Part 76. The newly-designated BSR (broadcast special relief) petitions refer to certain non-application-related broadcast matters pursuant to Part 73. Parties seeking special relief pursuant to Part 76 are advised that such requests must be initiated through the special relief provisions of Section 76.7 of the Rules. Many of these filings are subject to the pleading cycle rules set forth in Section 76.7, while others have their own pleading cycle relative to the particular rule involved. Please note that for BSR petitions filed pursuant to Part 73, the pleading cycle will be the same as that mandated by Section 76.7 unless stated otherwise. Files
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-228892A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-228892A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-228892A1.txt
  • Notice lists those filings processed by the Media Bureau as registrations pursuant to §76.1801 of the Commission's Rules. Should any of these registrations contain a request for special relief, such wavier requests will be handled separately through the special relief process. Furthermore, parties seeking special relief are advised that such requests must be initiated through the special relief provisions of §76.7 of the Rules. Files containing these registrations can be reviewed in the Commissions Reference Information Center, CY-Level, 445 12th Street, S.W. Washington, DC 20054. It is requested that all responses or statements refer to the FCC assigned Community Unit Identification (CUID) Number; e.g., AL0001. For further information about this Public Notice contact the Media Bureau at (202) 418-7000. REPORT NO:
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-229197A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-229197A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-229197A1.txt
  • review. CSR (cable special relief) petitions and CSC (cable show cause) petitions refer to cable-related matters pursuant to Part 76. The newly-designated BSR (broadcast special relief) petitions refer to certain non-application-related broadcast matters pursuant to Part 73. Parties seeking special relief pursuant to Part 76 are advised that such requests must be initiated through the special relief provisions of Section 76.7 of the Rules. Many of these filings are subject to the pleading cycle rules set forth in Section 76.7, while others have their own pleading cycle relative to the particular rule involved. Please note that for BSR petitions filed pursuant to Part 73, the pleading cycle will be the same as that mandated by Section 76.7 unless stated otherwise. Files
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-229469A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-229469A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-229469A1.txt
  • review. CSR (cable special relief) petitions and CSC (cable show cause) petitions refer to cable-related matters pursuant to Part 76. The newly-designated BSR (broadcast special relief) petitions refer to certain non-application-related broadcast matters pursuant to Part 73. Parties seeking special relief pursuant to Part 76 are advised that such requests must be initiated through the special relief provisions of Section 76.7 of the Rules. Many of these filings are subject to the pleading cycle rules set forth in Section 76.7, while others have their own pleading cycle relative to the particular rule involved. Please note that for BSR petitions filed pursuant to Part 73, the pleading cycle will be the same as that mandated by Section 76.7 unless stated otherwise. Files
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-229632A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-229632A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-229632A1.txt
  • Notice lists those filings processed by the Media Bureau as registrations pursuant to §76.1801 of the Commission's Rules. Should any of these registrations contain a request for special relief, such wavier requests will be handled separately through the special relief process. Furthermore, parties seeking special relief are advised that such requests must be initiated through the special relief provisions of §76.7 of the Rules. Files containing these registrations can be reviewed in the Commissions Reference Information Center, CY-Level, 445 12th Street, S.W. Washington, DC 20054. It is requested that all responses or statements refer to the FCC assigned Community Unit Identification (CUID) Number; e.g., AL0001. For further information about this Public Notice contact the Media Bureau at (202) 418-7000. REPORT NO:
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-229719A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-229719A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-229719A1.txt
  • review. CSR (cable special relief) petitions and CSC (cable show cause) petitions refer to cable-related matters pursuant to Part 76. The newly-designated BSR (broadcast special relief) petitions refer to certain non-application-related broadcast matters pursuant to Part 73. Parties seeking special relief pursuant to Part 76 are advised that such requests must be initiated through the special relief provisions of Section 76.7 of the Rules. Many of these filings are subject to the pleading cycle rules set forth in Section 76.7, while others have their own pleading cycle relative to the particular rule involved. Please note that for BSR petitions filed pursuant to Part 73, the pleading cycle will be the same as that mandated by Section 76.7 unless stated otherwise. Files
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-229936A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-229936A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-229936A1.txt
  • review. CSR (cable special relief) petitions and CSC (cable show cause) petitions refer to cable-related matters pursuant to Part 76. The newly-designated BSR (broadcast special relief) petitions refer to certain non-application-related broadcast matters pursuant to Part 73. Parties seeking special relief pursuant to Part 76 are advised that such requests must be initiated through the special relief provisions of Section 76.7 of the Rules. Many of these filings are subject to the pleading cycle rules set forth in Section 76.7, while others have their own pleading cycle relative to the particular rule involved. Please note that for BSR petitions filed pursuant to Part 73, the pleading cycle will be the same as that mandated by Section 76.7 unless stated otherwise. Files
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-230154A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-230154A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-230154A1.txt
  • review. CSR (cable special relief) petitions and CSC (cable show cause) petitions refer to cable-related matters pursuant to Part 76. The newly-designated BSR (broadcast special relief) petitions refer to certain non-application-related broadcast matters pursuant to Part 73. Parties seeking special relief pursuant to Part 76 are advised that such requests must be initiated through the special relief provisions of Section 76.7 of the Rules. Many of these filings are subject to the pleading cycle rules set forth in Section 76.7, while others have their own pleading cycle relative to the particular rule involved. Please note that for BSR petitions filed pursuant to Part 73, the pleading cycle will be the same as that mandated by Section 76.7 unless stated otherwise. Files
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-230364A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-230364A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-230364A1.txt
  • review. CSR (cable special relief) petitions and CSC (cable show cause) petitions refer to cable-related matters pursuant to Part 76. The newly-designated BSR (broadcast special relief) petitions refer to certain non-application-related broadcast matters pursuant to Part 73. Parties seeking special relief pursuant to Part 76 are advised that such requests must be initiated through the special relief provisions of Section 76.7 of the Rules. Many of these filings are subject to the pleading cycle rules set forth in Section 76.7, while others have their own pleading cycle relative to the particular rule involved. Please note that for BSR petitions filed pursuant to Part 73, the pleading cycle will be the same as that mandated by Section 76.7 unless stated otherwise. Files
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-230435A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-230435A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-230435A1.txt
  • Notice lists those filings processed by the Media Bureau as registrations pursuant to §76.1801 of the Commission's Rules. Should any of these registrations contain a request for special relief, such wavier requests will be handled separately through the special relief process. Furthermore, parties seeking special relief are advised that such requests must be initiated through the special relief provisions of §76.7 of the Rules. Files containing these registrations can be reviewed in the Commissions Reference Information Center, CY-Level, 445 12th Street, S.W. Washington, DC 20054. It is requested that all responses or statements refer to the FCC assigned Community Unit Identification (CUID) Number; e.g., AL0001. For further information about this Public Notice contact the Media Bureau at (202) 418-7000. REPORT NO:
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-230763A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-230763A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-230763A1.txt
  • review. CSR (cable special relief) petitions and CSC (cable show cause) petitions refer to cable-related matters pursuant to Part 76. The newly-designated BSR (broadcast special relief) petitions refer to certain non-application-related broadcast matters pursuant to Part 73. Parties seeking special relief pursuant to Part 76 are advised that such requests must be initiated through the special relief provisions of Section 76.7 of the Rules. Many of these filings are subject to the pleading cycle rules set forth in Section 76.7, while others have their own pleading cycle relative to the particular rule involved. Please note that for BSR petitions filed pursuant to Part 73, the pleading cycle will be the same as that mandated by Section 76.7 unless stated otherwise. Files
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-230911A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-230911A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-230911A1.txt
  • Notice lists those filings processed by the Media Bureau as registrations pursuant to §76.1801 of the Commission's Rules. Should any of these registrations contain a request for special relief, such wavier requests will be handled separately through the special relief process. Furthermore, parties seeking special relief are advised that such requests must be initiated through the special relief provisions of §76.7 of the Rules. Files containing these registrations can be reviewed in the Commissions Reference Information Center, CY-Level, 445 12th Street, S.W. Washington, DC 20054. It is requested that all responses or statements refer to the FCC assigned Community Unit Identification (CUID) Number; e.g., AL0001. For further information about this Public Notice contact the Media Bureau at (202) 418-7000. REPORT NO:
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-230997A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-230997A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-230997A1.txt
  • review. CSR (cable special relief) petitions and CSC (cable show cause) petitions refer to cable-related matters pursuant to Part 76. The newly-designated BSR (broadcast special relief) petitions refer to certain non-application-related broadcast matters pursuant to Part 73. Parties seeking special relief pursuant to Part 76 are advised that such requests must be initiated through the special relief provisions of Section 76.7 of the Rules. Many of these filings are subject to the pleading cycle rules set forth in Section 76.7, while others have their own pleading cycle relative to the particular rule involved. Please note that for BSR petitions filed pursuant to Part 73, the pleading cycle will be the same as that mandated by Section 76.7 unless stated otherwise. Files
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-231219A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-231219A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-231219A1.txt
  • review. CSR (cable special relief) petitions and CSC (cable show cause) petitions refer to cable-related matters pursuant to Part 76. The newly-designated BSR (broadcast special relief) petitions refer to certain non-application-related broadcast matters pursuant to Part 73. Parties seeking special relief pursuant to Part 76 are advised that such requests must be initiated through the special relief provisions of Section 76.7 of the Rules. Many of these filings are subject to the pleading cycle rules set forth in Section 76.7, while others have their own pleading cycle relative to the particular rule involved. Please note that for BSR petitions filed pursuant to Part 73, the pleading cycle will be the same as that mandated by Section 76.7 unless stated otherwise. Files
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-231520A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-231520A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-231520A1.txt
  • Notice lists those filings processed by the Media Bureau as registrations pursuant to §76.1801 of the Commission's Rules. Should any of these registrations contain a request for special relief, such wavier requests will be handled separately through the special relief process. Furthermore, parties seeking special relief are advised that such requests must be initiated through the special relief provisions of §76.7 of the Rules. Files containing these registrations can be reviewed in the Commissions Reference Information Center, CY-Level, 445 12th Street, S.W. Washington, DC 20054. It is requested that all responses or statements refer to the FCC assigned Community Unit Identification (CUID) Number; e.g., AL0001. For further information about this Public Notice contact the Media Bureau at (202) 418-7000. REPORT NO:
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-231631A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-231631A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-231631A1.txt
  • review. CSR (cable special relief) petitions and CSC (cable show cause) petitions refer to cable-related matters pursuant to Part 76. The newly-designated BSR (broadcast special relief) petitions refer to certain non-application-related broadcast matters pursuant to Part 73. Parties seeking special relief pursuant to Part 76 are advised that such requests must be initiated through the special relief provisions of Section 76.7 of the Rules. Many of these filings are subject to the pleading cycle rules set forth in Section 76.7, while others have their own pleading cycle relative to the particular rule involved. Please note that for BSR petitions filed pursuant to Part 73, the pleading cycle will be the same as that mandated by Section 76.7 unless stated otherwise. Files
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-231783A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-231783A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-231783A1.txt
  • review. CSR (cable special relief) petitions and CSC (cable show cause) petitions refer to cable-related matters pursuant to Part 76. The newly-designated BSR (broadcast special relief) petitions refer to certain non-application-related broadcast matters pursuant to Part 73. Parties seeking special relief pursuant to Part 76 are advised that such requests must be initiated through the special relief provisions of Section 76.7 of the Rules. Many of these filings are subject to the pleading cycle rules set forth in Section 76.7, while others have their own pleading cycle relative to the particular rule involved. Please note that for BSR petitions filed pursuant to Part 73, the pleading cycle will be the same as that mandated by Section 76.7 unless stated otherwise. Files
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-231982A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-231982A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-231982A1.txt
  • Notice lists those filings processed by the Media Bureau as registrations pursuant to §76.1801 of the Commission's Rules. Should any of these registrations contain a request for special relief, such wavier requests will be handled separately through the special relief process. Furthermore, parties seeking special relief are advised that such requests must be initiated through the special relief provisions of §76.7 of the Rules. Files containing these registrations can be reviewed in the Commissions Reference Information Center, CY-Level, 445 12th Street, S.W. Washington, DC 20054. It is requested that all responses or statements refer to the FCC assigned Community Unit Identification (CUID) Number; e.g., AL0001. For further information about this Public Notice contact the Media Bureau at (202) 418-7000. REPORT NO:
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-232113A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-232113A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-232113A1.txt
  • review. CSR (cable special relief) petitions and CSC (cable show cause) petitions refer to cable-related matters pursuant to Part 76. The newly-designated BSR (broadcast special relief) petitions refer to certain non-application-related broadcast matters pursuant to Part 73. Parties seeking special relief pursuant to Part 76 are advised that such requests must be initiated through the special relief provisions of Section 76.7 of the Rules. Many of these filings are subject to the pleading cycle rules set forth in Section 76.7, while others have their own pleading cycle relative to the particular rule involved. Please note that for BSR petitions filed pursuant to Part 73, the pleading cycle will be the same as that mandated by Section 76.7 unless stated otherwise. Files
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-232314A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-232314A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-232314A1.txt
  • Notice lists those filings processed by the Media Bureau as registrations pursuant to §76.1801 of the Commission's Rules. Should any of these registrations contain a request for special relief, such wavier requests will be handled separately through the special relief process. Furthermore, parties seeking special relief are advised that such requests must be initiated through the special relief provisions of §76.7 of the Rules. Files containing these registrations can be reviewed in the Commissions Reference Information Center, CY-Level, 445 12th Street, S.W. Washington, DC 20054. It is requested that all responses or statements refer to the FCC assigned Community Unit Identification (CUID) Number; e.g., AL0001. For further information about this Public Notice contact the Media Bureau at (202) 418-7000. REPORT NO:
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-232366A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-232366A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-232366A1.txt
  • review. CSR (cable special relief) petitions and CSC (cable show cause) petitions refer to cable-related matters pursuant to Part 76. The newly-designated BSR (broadcast special relief) petitions refer to certain non-application-related broadcast matters pursuant to Part 73. Parties seeking special relief pursuant to Part 76 are advised that such requests must be initiated through the special relief provisions of Section 76.7 of the Rules. Many of these filings are subject to the pleading cycle rules set forth in Section 76.7, while others have their own pleading cycle relative to the particular rule involved. Please note that for BSR petitions filed pursuant to Part 73, the pleading cycle will be the same as that mandated by Section 76.7 unless stated otherwise. Files
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-232624A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-232624A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-232624A1.txt
  • review. CSR (cable special relief) petitions and CSC (cable show cause) petitions refer to cable-related matters pursuant to Part 76. The newly-designated BSR (broadcast special relief) petitions refer to certain non-application-related broadcast matters pursuant to Part 73. Parties seeking special relief pursuant to Part 76 are advised that such requests must be initiated through the special relief provisions of Section 76.7 of the Rules. Many of these filings are subject to the pleading cycle rules set forth in Section 76.7, while others have their own pleading cycle relative to the particular rule involved. Please note that for BSR petitions filed pursuant to Part 73, the pleading cycle will be the same as that mandated by Section 76.7 unless stated otherwise. Files
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-232951A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-232951A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-232951A1.txt
  • review. CSR (cable special relief) petitions and CSC (cable show cause) petitions refer to cable-related matters pursuant to Part 76. The newly-designated BSR (broadcast special relief) petitions refer to certain non-application-related broadcast matters pursuant to Part 73. Parties seeking special relief pursuant to Part 76 are advised that such requests must be initiated through the special relief provisions of Section 76.7 of the Rules. Many of these filings are subject to the pleading cycle rules set forth in Section 76.7, while others have their own pleading cycle relative to the particular rule involved. Please note that for BSR petitions filed pursuant to Part 73, the pleading cycle will be the same as that mandated by Section 76.7 unless stated otherwise. Files
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-233149A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-233149A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-233149A1.txt
  • Notice lists those filings processed by the Media Bureau as registrations pursuant to §76.1801 of the Commission's Rules. Should any of these registrations contain a request for special relief, such wavier requests will be handled separately through the special relief process. Furthermore, parties seeking special relief are advised that such requests must be initiated through the special relief provisions of §76.7 of the Rules. Files containing these registrations can be reviewed in the Commissions Reference Information Center, CY-Level, 445 12th Street, S.W. Washington, DC 20054. It is requested that all responses or statements refer to the FCC assigned Community Unit Identification (CUID) Number; e.g., AL0001. For further information about this Public Notice contact the Media Bureau at (202) 418-7000. REPORT NO:
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-233359A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-233359A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-233359A1.txt
  • review. CSR (cable special relief) petitions and CSC (cable show cause) petitions refer to cable-related matters pursuant to Part 76. The newly-designated BSR (broadcast special relief) petitions refer to certain non-application-related broadcast matters pursuant to Part 73. Parties seeking special relief pursuant to Part 76 are advised that such requests must be initiated through the special relief provisions of Section 76.7 of the Rules. Many of these filings are subject to the pleading cycle rules set forth in Section 76.7, while others have their own pleading cycle relative to the particular rule involved. Please note that for BSR petitions filed pursuant to Part 73, the pleading cycle will be the same as that mandated by Section 76.7 unless stated otherwise. Files
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-233668A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-233668A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-233668A1.txt
  • review. CSR (cable special relief) petitions and CSC (cable show cause) petitions refer to cable-related matters pursuant to Part 76. The newly-designated BSR (broadcast special relief) petitions refer to certain non-application-related broadcast matters pursuant to Part 73. Parties seeking special relief pursuant to Part 76 are advised that such requests must be initiated through the special relief provisions of Section 76.7 of the Rules. Many of these filings are subject to the pleading cycle rules set forth in Section 76.7, while others have their own pleading cycle relative to the particular rule involved. Please note that for BSR petitions filed pursuant to Part 73, the pleading cycle will be the same as that mandated by Section 76.7 unless stated otherwise. Files
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-233968A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-233968A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-233968A1.txt
  • Notice lists those filings processed by the Media Bureau as registrations pursuant to §76.1801 of the Commission's Rules. Should any of these registrations contain a request for special relief, such wavier requests will be handled separately through the special relief process. Furthermore, parties seeking special relief are advised that such requests must be initiated through the special relief provisions of §76.7 of the Rules. Files containing these registrations can be reviewed in the Commissions Reference Information Center, CY-Level, 445 12th Street, S.W. Washington, DC 20054. It is requested that all responses or statements refer to the FCC assigned Community Unit Identification (CUID) Number; e.g., AL0001. For further information about this Public Notice contact the Media Bureau at (202) 418-7000. REPORT NO:
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-234036A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-234036A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-234036A1.txt
  • review. CSR (cable special relief) petitions and CSC (cable show cause) petitions refer to cable-related matters pursuant to Part 76. The newly-designated BSR (broadcast special relief) petitions refer to certain non-application-related broadcast matters pursuant to Part 73. Parties seeking special relief pursuant to Part 76 are advised that such requests must be initiated through the special relief provisions of Section 76.7 of the Rules. Many of these filings are subject to the pleading cycle rules set forth in Section 76.7, while others have their own pleading cycle relative to the particular rule involved. Please note that for BSR petitions filed pursuant to Part 73, the pleading cycle will be the same as that mandated by Section 76.7 unless stated otherwise. Files
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-234173A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-234173A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-234173A1.txt
  • Notice lists those filings processed by the Media Bureau as registrations pursuant to §76.1801 of the Commission's Rules. Should any of these registrations contain a request for special relief, such wavier requests will be handled separately through the special relief process. Furthermore, parties seeking special relief are advised that such requests must be initiated through the special relief provisions of §76.7 of the Rules. Files containing these registrations can be reviewed in the Commissions Reference Information Center, CY-Level, 445 12th Street, S.W. Washington, DC 20054. It is requested that all responses or statements refer to the FCC assigned Community Unit Identification (CUID) Number; e.g., AL0001. For further information about this Public Notice contact the Media Bureau at (202) 418-7000. REPORT NO:
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-234243A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-234243A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-234243A1.txt
  • review. CSR (cable special relief) petitions and CSC (cable show cause) petitions refer to cable-related matters pursuant to Part 76. The newly-designated BSR (broadcast special relief) petitions refer to certain non-application-related broadcast matters pursuant to Part 73. Parties seeking special relief pursuant to Part 76 are advised that such requests must be initiated through the special relief provisions of Section 76.7 of the Rules. Many of these filings are subject to the pleading cycle rules set forth in Section 76.7, while others have their own pleading cycle relative to the particular rule involved. Please note that for BSR petitions filed pursuant to Part 73, the pleading cycle will be the same as that mandated by Section 76.7 unless stated otherwise. Files
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-234595A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-234595A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-234595A1.txt
  • review. CSR (cable special relief) petitions and CSC (cable show cause) petitions refer to cable-related matters pursuant to Part 76. The newly-designated BSR (broadcast special relief) petitions refer to certain non-application-related broadcast matters pursuant to Part 73. Parties seeking special relief pursuant to Part 76 are advised that such requests must be initiated through the special relief provisions of Section 76.7 of the Rules. Many of these filings are subject to the pleading cycle rules set forth in Section 76.7, while others have their own pleading cycle relative to the particular rule involved. Please note that for BSR petitions filed pursuant to Part 73, the pleading cycle will be the same as that mandated by Section 76.7 unless stated otherwise. Files
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-234699A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-234699A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-234699A1.txt
  • Notice lists those filings processed by the Media Bureau as registrations pursuant to §76.1801 of the Commission's Rules. Should any of these registrations contain a request for special relief, such wavier requests will be handled separately through the special relief process. Furthermore, parties seeking special relief are advised that such requests must be initiated through the special relief provisions of §76.7 of the Rules. Files containing these registrations can be reviewed in the Commissions Reference Information Center, CY-Level, 445 12th Street, S.W. Washington, DC 20054. It is requested that all responses or statements refer to the FCC assigned Community Unit Identification (CUID) Number; e.g., AL0001. For further information about this Public Notice contact the Media Bureau at (202) 418-7000. REPORT NO:
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-234792A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-234792A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-234792A1.txt
  • review. CSR (cable special relief) petitions and CSC (cable show cause) petitions refer to cable-related matters pursuant to Part 76. The newly-designated BSR (broadcast special relief) petitions refer to certain non-application-related broadcast matters pursuant to Part 73. Parties seeking special relief pursuant to Part 76 are advised that such requests must be initiated through the special relief provisions of Section 76.7 of the Rules. Many of these filings are subject to the pleading cycle rules set forth in Section 76.7, while others have their own pleading cycle relative to the particular rule involved. Please note that for BSR petitions filed pursuant to Part 73, the pleading cycle will be the same as that mandated by Section 76.7 unless stated otherwise. Files
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-235230A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-235230A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-235230A1.txt
  • review. CSR (cable special relief) petitions and CSC (cable show cause) petitions refer to cable-related matters pursuant to Part 76. The newly-designated BSR (broadcast special relief) petitions refer to certain non-application-related broadcast matters pursuant to Part 73. Parties seeking special relief pursuant to Part 76 are advised that such requests must be initiated through the special relief provisions of Section 76.7 of the Rules. Many of these filings are subject to the pleading cycle rules set forth in Section 76.7, while others have their own pleading cycle relative to the particular rule involved. Please note that for BSR petitions filed pursuant to Part 73, the pleading cycle will be the same as that mandated by Section 76.7 unless stated otherwise. Files
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-235308A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-235308A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-235308A1.txt
  • Notice lists those filings processed by the Media Bureau as registrations pursuant to §76.1801 of the Commission's Rules. Should any of these registrations contain a request for special relief, such wavier requests will be handled separately through the special relief process. Furthermore, parties seeking special relief are advised that such requests must be initiated through the special relief provisions of §76.7 of the Rules. Files containing these registrations can be reviewed in the Commissions Reference Information Center, CY-Level, 445 12th Street, S.W. Washington, DC 20054. It is requested that all responses or statements refer to the FCC assigned Community Unit Identification (CUID) Number; e.g., AL0001. For further information about this Public Notice contact the Media Bureau at (202) 418-7000. REPORT NO:
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-235360A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-235360A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-235360A1.txt
  • review. CSR (cable special relief) petitions and CSC (cable show cause) petitions refer to cable-related matters pursuant to Part 76. The newly-designated BSR (broadcast special relief) petitions refer to certain non-application-related broadcast matters pursuant to Part 73. Parties seeking special relief pursuant to Part 76 are advised that such requests must be initiated through the special relief provisions of Section 76.7 of the Rules. Many of these filings are subject to the pleading cycle rules set forth in Section 76.7, while others have their own pleading cycle relative to the particular rule involved. Please note that for BSR petitions filed pursuant to Part 73, the pleading cycle will be the same as that mandated by Section 76.7 unless stated otherwise. Files
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-235639A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-235639A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-235639A1.txt
  • review. CSR (cable special relief) petitions and CSC (cable show cause) petitions refer to cable-related matters pursuant to Part 76. The newly-designated BSR (broadcast special relief) petitions refer to certain non-application-related broadcast matters pursuant to Part 73. Parties seeking special relief pursuant to Part 76 are advised that such requests must be initiated through the special relief provisions of Section 76.7 of the Rules. Many of these filings are subject to the pleading cycle rules set forth in Section 76.7, while others have their own pleading cycle relative to the particular rule involved. Please note that for BSR petitions filed pursuant to Part 73, the pleading cycle will be the same as that mandated by Section 76.7 unless stated otherwise. Files
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-236268A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-236268A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-236268A1.txt
  • Notice lists those filings processed by the Media Bureau as registrations pursuant to §76.1801 of the Commission's Rules. Should any of these registrations contain a request for special relief, such waiver requests will be handled separately through the special relief process. Furthermore, parties seeking special relief are advised that such requests must be initiated through the special relief provisions of §76.7 of the Rules. Files containing these registrations can be reviewed in the Commissions Reference Information Center, CY-Level, 445 12th Street, SW Washington, DC 20554. It is requested that all responses or statements refer to the FCC assigned Community Unit Identification (CUID) Number; e.g., AL0075. For further information about this Public Notice contact the Media Bureau at (202) 418-7000. CA1635 VANDENBERG
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-236323A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-236323A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-236323A1.txt
  • Notice lists those filings processed by the Media Bureau as registrations pursuant to §76.1801 of the Commission's Rules. Should any of these registrations contain a request for special relief, such waiver requests will be handled separately through the special relief process. Furthermore, parties seeking special relief are advised that such requests must be initiated through the special relief provisions of §76.7 of the Rules. Files containing these registrations can be reviewed in the Commissions Reference Information Center, CY-Level, 445 12th Street, SW Washington, DC 20554. It is requested that all responses or statements refer to the FCC assigned Community Unit Identification (CUID) Number; e.g., AL0075. For further information about this Public Notice contact the Media Bureau at (202) 418-7000. CA1635 VANDENBERG
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-236505A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-236505A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-236505A1.txt
  • review. CSR (cable special relief) petitions and CSC (cable show cause) petitions refer to cable-related matters pursuant to Part 76. The newly-designated BSR (broadcast special relief) petitions refer to certain non-application-related broadcast matters pursuant to Part 73. Parties seeking special relief pursuant to Part 76 are advised that such requests must be initiated through the special relief provisions of Section 76.7 of the Rules. Many of these filings are subject to the pleading cycle rules set forth in Section 76.7, while others have their own pleading cycle relative to the particular rule involved. Please note that for BSR petitions filed pursuant to Part 73, the pleading cycle will be the same as that mandated by Section 76.7 unless stated otherwise. Files
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-236554A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-236554A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-236554A1.txt
  • Notice lists those filings processed by the Media Bureau as registrations pursuant to §76.1801 of the Commission's Rules. Should any of these registrations contain a request for special relief, such waiver requests will be handled separately through the special relief process. Furthermore, parties seeking special relief are advised that such requests must be initiated through the special relief provisions of §76.7 of the Rules. Files containing these registrations can be reviewed in the Commissions Reference Information Center, CY-Level, 445 12th Street, SW Washington, DC 20554. It is requested that all responses or statements refer to the FCC assigned Community Unit Identification (CUID) Number; e.g., AL0075. For further information about this Public Notice contact the Media Bureau at (202) 418-7000. PA3439 WV1284
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-236758A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-236758A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-236758A1.txt
  • review. CSR (cable special relief) petitions and CSC (cable show cause) petitions refer to cable-related matters pursuant to Part 76. The newly-designated BSR (broadcast special relief) petitions refer to certain non-application-related broadcast matters pursuant to Part 73. Parties seeking special relief pursuant to Part 76 are advised that such requests must be initiated through the special relief provisions of Section 76.7 of the Rules. Many of these filings are subject to the pleading cycle rules set forth in Section 76.7, while others have their own pleading cycle relative to the particular rule involved. Please note that for BSR petitions filed pursuant to Part 73, the pleading cycle will be the same as that mandated by Section 76.7 unless stated otherwise. Files
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-236816A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-236816A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-236816A1.txt
  • Notice lists those filings processed by the Media Bureau as registrations pursuant to §76.1801 of the Commission's Rules. Should any of these registrations contain a request for special relief, such waiver requests will be handled separately through the special relief process. Furthermore, parties seeking special relief are advised that such requests must be initiated through the special relief provisions of §76.7 of the Rules. Files containing these registrations can be reviewed in the Commissions Reference Information Center, CY-Level, 445 12th Street, SW Washington, DC 20554. It is requested that all responses or statements refer to the FCC assigned Community Unit Identification (CUID) Number; e.g., AL0075. For further information about this Public Notice contact the Media Bureau at (202) 418-7000. REPORT NO:
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-236817A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-236817A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-236817A1.txt
  • Notice lists those filings processed by the Media Bureau as registrations pursuant to §76.1801 of the Commission's Rules. Should any of these registrations contain a request for special relief, such waiver requests will be handled separately through the special relief process. Furthermore, parties seeking special relief are advised that such requests must be initiated through the special relief provisions of §76.7 of the Rules. Files containing these registrations can be reviewed in the Commissions Reference Information Center, CY-Level, 445 12th Street, SW Washington, DC 20554. It is requested that all responses or statements refer to the FCC assigned Community Unit Identification (CUID) Number; e.g., AL0075. For further information about this Public Notice contact the Media Bureau at (202) 418-7000. REPORT NO:
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-237016A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-237016A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-237016A1.txt
  • Notice lists those filings processed by the Media Bureau as registrations pursuant to §76.1801 of the Commission's Rules. Should any of these registrations contain a request for special relief, such waiver requests will be handled separately through the special relief process. Furthermore, parties seeking special relief are advised that such requests must be initiated through the special relief provisions of §76.7 of the Rules. Files containing these registrations can be reviewed in the Commissions Reference Information Center, CY-Level, 445 12th Street, SW Washington, DC 20554. It is requested that all responses or statements refer to the FCC assigned Community Unit Identification (CUID) Number; e.g., AL0075. For further information about this Public Notice contact the Media Bureau at (202) 418-7000. REPORT NO:
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-237240A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-237240A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-237240A1.txt
  • review. CSR (cable special relief) petitions and CSC (cable show cause) petitions refer to cable-related matters pursuant to Part 76. The newly-designated BSR (broadcast special relief) petitions refer to certain non-application-related broadcast matters pursuant to Part 73. Parties seeking special relief pursuant to Part 76 are advised that such requests must be initiated through the special relief provisions of Section 76.7 of the Rules. Many of these filings are subject to the pleading cycle rules set forth in Section 76.7, while others have their own pleading cycle relative to the particular rule involved. Please note that for BSR petitions filed pursuant to Part 73, the pleading cycle will be the same as that mandated by Section 76.7 unless stated otherwise. Files
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-237335A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-237335A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-237335A1.txt
  • Notice lists those filings processed by the Media Bureau as registrations pursuant to §76.1801 of the Commission's Rules. Should any of these registrations contain a request for special relief, such waiver requests will be handled separately through the special relief process. Furthermore, parties seeking special relief are advised that such requests must be initiated through the special relief provisions of §76.7 of the Rules. Files containing these registrations can be reviewed in the Commissions Reference Information Center, CY-Level, 445 12th Street, SW Washington, DC 20554. It is requested that all responses or statements refer to the FCC assigned Community Unit Identification (CUID) Number; e.g., AL0075. For further information about this Public Notice contact the Media Bureau at (202) 418-7000. REPORT NO:
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-237433A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-237433A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-237433A1.txt
  • review. CSR (cable special relief) petitions and CSC (cable show cause) petitions refer to cable-related matters pursuant to Part 76. The newly-designated BSR (broadcast special relief) petitions refer to certain non-application-related broadcast matters pursuant to Part 73. Parties seeking special relief pursuant to Part 76 are advised that such requests must be initiated through the special relief provisions of Section 76.7 of the Rules. Many of these filings are subject to the pleading cycle rules set forth in Section 76.7, while others have their own pleading cycle relative to the particular rule involved. Please note that for BSR petitions filed pursuant to Part 73, the pleading cycle will be the same as that mandated by Section 76.7 unless stated otherwise. Files
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-237548A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-237548A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-237548A1.txt
  • Notice lists those filings processed by the Media Bureau as registrations pursuant to §76.1801 of the Commission's Rules. Should any of these registrations contain a request for special relief, such waiver requests will be handled separately through the special relief process. Furthermore, parties seeking special relief are advised that such requests must be initiated through the special relief provisions of §76.7 of the Rules. Files containing these registrations can be reviewed in the Commissions Reference Information Center, CY-Level, 445 12th Street, SW Washington, DC 20554. It is requested that all responses or statements refer to the FCC assigned Community Unit Identification (CUID) Number; e.g., AL0075. For further information about this Public Notice contact the Media Bureau at (202) 418-7000. REPORT NO:
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-238174A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-238174A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-238174A1.txt
  • review. CSR (cable special relief) petitions and CSC (cable show cause) petitions refer to cable-related matters pursuant to Part 76. The newly-designated BSR (broadcast special relief) petitions refer to certain non-application-related broadcast matters pursuant to Part 73. Parties seeking special relief pursuant to Part 76 are advised that such requests must be initiated through the special relief provisions of Section 76.7 of the Rules. Many of these filings are subject to the pleading cycle rules set forth in Section 76.7, while others have their own pleading cycle relative to the particular rule involved. Please note that for BSR petitions filed pursuant to Part 73, the pleading cycle will be the same as that mandated by Section 76.7 unless stated otherwise. Files
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-238326A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-238326A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-238326A1.txt
  • Notice lists those filings processed by the Media Bureau as registrations pursuant to §76.1801 of the Commission's Rules. Should any of these registrations contain a request for special relief, such waiver requests will be handled separately through the special relief process. Furthermore, parties seeking special relief are advised that such requests must be initiated through the special relief provisions of §76.7 of the Rules. Files containing these registrations can be reviewed in the Commissions Reference Information Center, CY-Level, 445 12th Street, SW Washington, DC 20554. It is requested that all responses or statements refer to the FCC assigned Community Unit Identification (CUID) Number; e.g., AL0075. For further information about this Public Notice contact the Media Bureau at (202) 418-7000. CUID CODE
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-238682A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-238682A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-238682A1.txt
  • review. CSR (cable special relief) petitions and CSC (cable show cause) petitions refer to cable-related matters pursuant to Part 76. The newly-designated BSR (broadcast special relief) petitions refer to certain non-application-related broadcast matters pursuant to Part 73. Parties seeking special relief pursuant to Part 76 are advised that such requests must be initiated through the special relief provisions of Section 76.7 of the Rules. Many of these filings are subject to the pleading cycle rules set forth in Section 76.7, while others have their own pleading cycle relative to the particular rule involved. Please note that for BSR petitions filed pursuant to Part 73, the pleading cycle will be the same as that mandated by Section 76.7 unless stated otherwise. Files
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-238785A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-238785A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-238785A1.txt
  • Notice lists those filings processed by the Media Bureau as registrations pursuant to §76.1801 of the Commission's Rules. Should any of these registrations contain a request for special relief, such waiver requests will be handled separately through the special relief process. Furthermore, parties seeking special relief are advised that such requests must be initiated through the special relief provisions of §76.7 of the Rules. Files containing these registrations can be reviewed in the Commissions Reference Information Center, CY-Level, 445 12th Street, SW Washington, DC 20554. It is requested that all responses or statements refer to the FCC assigned Community Unit Identification (CUID) Number; e.g., AL0075. For further information about this Public Notice contact the Media Bureau at (202) 418-7000. CUID CODE
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-238785A2.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-238785A2.txt
  • Notice lists those filings processed by the Media Bureau as registrations pursuant to §76.1801 of the Commission's Rules. Should any of these registrations contain a request for special relief, such waiver requests will be handled separately through the special relief process. Furthermore, parties seeking special relief are advised that such requests must be initiated through the special relief provisions of §76.7 of the Rules. Files containing these registrations can be reviewed in the Commissions Reference Information Center, CY-Level, 445 12th Street, SW Washington, DC 20554. It is requested that all responses or statements refer to the FCC assigned Community Unit Identification (CUID) Number; e.g., AL0075. For further information about this Public Notice contact the Media Bureau at (202) 418-7000. News media
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-238891A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-238891A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-238891A1.txt
  • review. CSR (cable special relief) petitions and CSC (cable show cause) petitions refer to cable-related matters pursuant to Part 76. The newly-designated BSR (broadcast special relief) petitions refer to certain non-application-related broadcast matters pursuant to Part 73. Parties seeking special relief pursuant to Part 76 are advised that such requests must be initiated through the special relief provisions of Section 76.7 of the Rules. Many of these filings are subject to the pleading cycle rules set forth in Section 76.7, while others have their own pleading cycle relative to the particular rule involved. Please note that for BSR petitions filed pursuant to Part 73, the pleading cycle will be the same as that mandated by Section 76.7 unless stated otherwise. Files
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-238972A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-238972A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-238972A1.txt
  • Notice lists those filings processed by the Media Bureau as registrations pursuant to §76.1801 of the Commission's Rules. Should any of these registrations contain a request for special relief, such waiver requests will be handled separately through the special relief process. Furthermore, parties seeking special relief are advised that such requests must be initiated through the special relief provisions of §76.7 of the Rules. Files containing these registrations can be reviewed in the Commissions Reference Information Center, CY-Level, 445 12th Street, SW Washington, DC 20554. It is requested that all responses or statements refer to the FCC assigned Community Unit Identification (CUID) Number; e.g., AL0075. For further information about this Public Notice contact the Media Bureau at (202) 418-7000. CUID CODE
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-239112A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-239112A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-239112A1.txt
  • Notice lists those filings processed by the Media Bureau as registrations pursuant to §76.1801 of the Commission's Rules. Should any of these registrations contain a request for special relief, such waiver requests will be handled separately through the special relief process. Furthermore, parties seeking special relief are advised that such requests must be initiated through the special relief provisions of §76.7 of the Rules. Files containing these registrations can be reviewed in the Commissions Reference Information Center, CY-Level, 445 12th Street, SW Washington, DC 20554. It is requested that all responses or statements refer to the FCC assigned Community Unit Identification (CUID) Number; e.g., AL0075. For further information about this Public Notice contact the Media Bureau at (202) 418-7000. CUID CODE
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-239396A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-239396A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-239396A1.txt
  • Notice lists those filings processed by the Media Bureau as registrations pursuant to §76.1801 of the Commission's Rules. Should any of these registrations contain a request for special relief, such waiver requests will be handled separately through the special relief process. Furthermore, parties seeking special relief are advised that such requests must be initiated through the special relief provisions of §76.7 of the Rules. Files containing these registrations can be reviewed in the Commissions Reference Information Center, CY-Level, 445 12th Street, SW Washington, DC 20554. It is requested that all responses or statements refer to the FCC assigned Community Unit Identification (CUID) Number; e.g., AL0075. For further information about this Public Notice contact the Media Bureau at (202) 418-7000. CUID CODE
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-239557A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-239557A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-239557A1.txt
  • review. CSR (cable special relief) petitions and CSC (cable show cause) petitions refer to cable-related matters pursuant to Part 76. The newly-designated BSR (broadcast special relief) petitions refer to certain non-application-related broadcast matters pursuant to Part 73. Parties seeking special relief pursuant to Part 76 are advised that such requests must be initiated through the special relief provisions of Section 76.7 of the Rules. Many of these filings are subject to the pleading cycle rules set forth in Section 76.7, while others have their own pleading cycle relative to the particular rule involved. Please note that for BSR petitions filed pursuant to Part 73, the pleading cycle will be the same as that mandated by Section 76.7 unless stated otherwise. Files
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-239651A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-239651A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-239651A1.txt
  • Notice lists those filings processed by the Media Bureau as registrations pursuant to §76.1801 of the Commission's Rules. Should any of these registrations contain a request for special relief, such waiver requests will be handled separately through the special relief process. Furthermore, parties seeking special relief are advised that such requests must be initiated through the special relief provisions of §76.7 of the Rules. Files containing these registrations can be reviewed in the Commissions Reference Information Center, CY-Level, 445 12th Street, SW Washington, DC 20554. It is requested that all responses or statements refer to the FCC assigned Community Unit Identification (CUID) Number; e.g., AL0075. For further information about this Public Notice contact the Media Bureau at (202) 418-7000. CUID CODE
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-239797A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-239797A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-239797A1.txt
  • review. CSR (cable special relief) petitions and CSC (cable show cause) petitions refer to cable-related matters pursuant to Part 76. The newly-designated BSR (broadcast special relief) petitions refer to certain non-application-related broadcast matters pursuant to Part 73. Parties seeking special relief pursuant to Part 76 are advised that such requests must be initiated through the special relief provisions of Section 76.7 of the Rules. Many of these filings are subject to the pleading cycle rules set forth in Section 76.7, while others have their own pleading cycle relative to the particular rule involved. Please note that for BSR petitions filed pursuant to Part 73, the pleading cycle will be the same as that mandated by Section 76.7 unless stated otherwise. Files
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-239898A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-239898A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-239898A1.txt
  • Notice lists those filings processed by the Media Bureau as registrations pursuant to §76.1801 of the Commission's Rules. Should any of these registrations contain a request for special relief, such waiver requests will be handled separately through the special relief process. Furthermore, parties seeking special relief are advised that such requests must be initiated through the special relief provisions of §76.7 of the Rules. Files containing these registrations can be reviewed in the Commissions Reference Information Center, CY-Level, 445 12th Street, SW Washington, DC 20554. It is requested that all responses or statements refer to the FCC assigned Community Unit Identification (CUID) Number; e.g., AL0075. For further information about this Public Notice contact the Media Bureau at (202) 418-7000. CUID CODE
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-240172A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-240172A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-240172A1.txt
  • Notice lists those filings processed by the Media Bureau as registrations pursuant to §76.1801 of the Commission's Rules. Should any of these registrations contain a request for special relief, such waiver requests will be handled separately through the special relief process. Furthermore, parties seeking special relief are advised that such requests must be initiated through the special relief provisions of §76.7 of the Rules. Files containing these registrations can be reviewed in the Commissions Reference Information Center, CY-Level, 445 12th Street, SW Washington, DC 20554. It is requested that all responses or statements refer to the FCC assigned Community Unit Identification (CUID) Number; e.g., AL0075. For further information about this Public Notice contact the Media Bureau at (202) 418-7000. CUID CODE
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-240237A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-240237A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-240237A1.txt
  • review. CSR (cable special relief) petitions and CSC (cable show cause) petitions refer to cable-related matters pursuant to Part 76. The newly-designated BSR (broadcast special relief) petitions refer to certain non-application-related broadcast matters pursuant to Part 73. Parties seeking special relief pursuant to Part 76 are advised that such requests must be initiated through the special relief provisions of Section 76.7 of the Rules. Many of these filings are subject to the pleading cycle rules set forth in Section 76.7, while others have their own pleading cycle relative to the particular rule involved. Please note that for BSR petitions filed pursuant to Part 73, the pleading cycle will be the same as that mandated by Section 76.7 unless stated otherwise. Files
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-240465A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-240465A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-240465A1.txt
  • Notice lists those filings processed by the Media Bureau as registrations pursuant to §76.1801 of the Commission's Rules. Should any of these registrations contain a request for special relief, such waiver requests will be handled separately through the special relief process. Furthermore, parties seeking special relief are advised that such requests must be initiated through the special relief provisions of §76.7 of the Rules. Files containing these registrations can be reviewed in the Commissions Reference Information Center, CY-Level, 445 12th Street, SW Washington, DC 20554. It is requested that all responses or statements refer to the FCC assigned Community Unit Identification (CUID) Number; e.g., AL0075. For further information about this Public Notice contact the Media Bureau at (202) 418-7000. CUID CODE
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-240760A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-240760A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-240760A1.txt
  • Notice lists those filings processed by the Media Bureau as registrations pursuant to §76.1801 of the Commission's Rules. Should any of these registrations contain a request for special relief, such waiver requests will be handled separately through the special relief process. Furthermore, parties seeking special relief are advised that such requests must be initiated through the special relief provisions of §76.7 of the Rules. Files containing these registrations can be reviewed in the Commissions Reference Information Center, CY-Level, 445 12th Street, SW Washington, DC 20554. It is requested that all responses or statements refer to the FCC assigned Community Unit Identification (CUID) Number; e.g., AL0075. For further information about this Public Notice contact the Media Bureau at (202) 418-7000. CUID CODE
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-240889A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-240889A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-240889A1.txt
  • review. CSR (cable special relief) petitions and CSC (cable show cause) petitions refer to cable-related matters pursuant to Part 76. The newly-designated BSR (broadcast special relief) petitions refer to certain non-application-related broadcast matters pursuant to Part 73. Parties seeking special relief pursuant to Part 76 are advised that such requests must be initiated through the special relief provisions of Section 76.7 of the Rules. Many of these filings are subject to the pleading cycle rules set forth in Section 76.7, while others have their own pleading cycle relative to the particular rule involved. For BSR petitions filed pursuant to Part 73, the pleading cycle will be the same as that mandated by Section 76.7 unless stated otherwise. Please note that petitions
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-241100A1.doc
  • Notice lists those filings processed by the Media Bureau as registrations pursuant to §76.1801 of the Commission's Rules. Should any of these registrations contain a request for special relief, such waiver requests will be handled separately through the special relief process. Furthermore, parties seeking special relief are advised that such requests must be initiated through the special relief provisions of §76.7 of the Rules. Files containing these registrations can be reviewed in the Commissions Reference Information Center, CY-Level, 445 12th Street, SW Washington, DC 20554. It is requested that all responses or statements refer to the FCC assigned Community Unit Identification (CUID) Number; e.g., AL0075. For further information about this Public Notice contact the Media Bureau at (202) 418-7000. CUID CODE
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-241285A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-241285A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-241285A1.txt
  • review. CSR (cable special relief) petitions and CSC (cable show cause) petitions refer to cable-related matters pursuant to Part 76. The newly-designated BSR (broadcast special relief) petitions refer to certain non-application-related broadcast matters pursuant to Part 73. Parties seeking special relief pursuant to Part 76 are advised that such requests must be initiated through the special relief provisions of Section 76.7 of the Rules. Many of these filings are subject to the pleading cycle rules set forth in Section 76.7, while others have their own pleading cycle relative to the particular rule involved. For BSR petitions filed pursuant to Part 73, the pleading cycle will be the same as that mandated by Section 76.7 unless stated otherwise. Please note that petitions
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-241368A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-241368A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-241368A1.txt
  • Notice lists those filings processed by the Media Bureau as registrations pursuant to §76.1801 of the Commission's Rules. Should any of these registrations contain a request for special relief, such waiver requests will be handled separately through the special relief process. Furthermore, parties seeking special relief are advised that such requests must be initiated through the special relief provisions of §76.7 of the Rules. Files containing these registrations can be reviewed in the Commissions Reference Information Center, CY-Level, 445 12th Street, SW Washington, DC 20554. It is requested that all responses or statements refer to the FCC assigned Community Unit Identification (CUID) Number; e.g., AL0075. For further information about this Public Notice contact the Media Bureau at (202) 418-7000. CUID CODE
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-241482A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-241482A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-241482A1.txt
  • review. CSR (cable special relief) petitions and CSC (cable show cause) petitions refer to cable-related matters pursuant to Part 76. The newly-designated BSR (broadcast special relief) petitions refer to certain non-application-related broadcast matters pursuant to Part 73. Parties seeking special relief pursuant to Part 76 are advised that such requests must be initiated through the special relief provisions of Section 76.7 of the Rules. Many of these filings are subject to the pleading cycle rules set forth in Section 76.7, while others have their own pleading cycle relative to the particular rule involved. For BSR petitions filed pursuant to Part 73, the pleading cycle will be the same as that mandated by Section 76.7 unless stated otherwise. Please note that petitions
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-241630A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-241630A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-241630A1.txt
  • Notice lists those filings processed by the Media Bureau as registrations pursuant to §76.1801 of the Commission's Rules. Should any of these registrations contain a request for special relief, such waiver requests will be handled separately through the special relief process. Furthermore, parties seeking special relief are advised that such requests must be initiated through the special relief provisions of §76.7 of the Rules. Files containing these registrations can be reviewed in the Commissions Reference Information Center, CY-Level, 445 12th Street, SW Washington, DC 20554. It is requested that all responses or statements refer to the FCC assigned Community Unit Identification (CUID) Number; e.g., AL0075. For further information about this Public Notice contact the Media Bureau at (202) 418-7000. CUID CODE
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-241833A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-241833A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-241833A1.txt
  • Notice lists those filings processed by the Media Bureau as registrations pursuant to §76.1801 of the Commission's Rules. Should any of these registrations contain a request for special relief, such waiver requests will be handled separately through the special relief process. Furthermore, parties seeking special relief are advised that such requests must be initiated through the special relief provisions of §76.7 of the Rules. Files containing these registrations can be reviewed in the Commissions Reference Information Center, CY-Level, 445 12th Street, SW Washington, DC 20554. It is requested that all responses or statements refer to the FCC assigned Community Unit Identification (CUID) Number; e.g., AL0075. For further information about this Public Notice contact the Media Bureau at (202) 418-7000. CUID CODE
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-242032A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-242032A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-242032A1.txt
  • Notice lists those filings processed by the Media Bureau as registrations pursuant to §76.1801 of the Commission's Rules. Should any of these registrations contain a request for special relief, such waiver requests will be handled separately through the special relief process. Furthermore, parties seeking special relief are advised that such requests must be initiated through the special relief provisions of §76.7 of the Rules. Files containing these registrations can be reviewed in the Commissions Reference Information Center, CY-Level, 445 12th Street, SW Washington, DC 20554. It is requested that all responses or statements refer to the FCC assigned Community Unit Identification (CUID) Number; e.g., AL0075. For further information about this Public Notice contact the Media Bureau at (202) 418-7000. CA1641 LOS
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-242075A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-242075A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-242075A1.txt
  • review. CSR (cable special relief) petitions and CSC (cable show cause) petitions refer to cable-related matters pursuant to Part 76. The newly-designated BSR (broadcast special relief) petitions refer to certain non-application-related broadcast matters pursuant to Part 73. Parties seeking special relief pursuant to Part 76 are advised that such requests must be initiated through the special relief provisions of Section 76.7 of the Rules. Many of these filings are subject to the pleading cycle rules set forth in Section 76.7, while others have their own pleading cycle relative to the particular rule involved. For BSR petitions filed pursuant to Part 73, the pleading cycle will be the same as that mandated by Section 76.7 unless stated otherwise. Please note that petitions
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-242341A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-242341A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-242341A1.txt
  • review. CSR (cable special relief) petitions and CSC (cable show cause) petitions refer to cable-related matters pursuant to Part 76. The newly-designated BSR (broadcast special relief) petitions refer to certain non-application-related broadcast matters pursuant to Part 73. Parties seeking special relief pursuant to Part 76 are advised that such requests must be initiated through the special relief provisions of Section 76.7 of the Rules. Many of these filings are subject to the pleading cycle rules set forth in Section 76.7, while others have their own pleading cycle relative to the particular rule involved. For BSR petitions filed pursuant to Part 73, the pleading cycle will be the same as that mandated by Section 76.7 unless stated otherwise. Please note that petitions
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-242515A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-242515A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-242515A1.txt
  • Notice lists those filings processed by the Media Bureau as registrations pursuant to §76.1801 of the Commission's Rules. Should any of these registrations contain a request for special relief, such waiver requests will be handled separately through the special relief process. Furthermore, parties seeking special relief are advised that such requests must be initiated through the special relief provisions of §76.7 of the Rules. Files containing these registrations can be reviewed in the Commissions Reference Information Center, CY-Level, 445 12th Street, SW Washington, DC 20554. It is requested that all responses or statements refer to the FCC assigned Community Unit Identification (CUID) Number; e.g., AL0075. For further information about this Public Notice contact the Media Bureau at (202) 418-7000. GA1073 POOLER
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-242765A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-242765A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-242765A1.txt
  • review. CSR (cable special relief) petitions and CSC (cable show cause) petitions refer to cable-related matters pursuant to Part 76. The newly-designated BSR (broadcast special relief) petitions refer to certain non-application-related broadcast matters pursuant to Part 73. Parties seeking special relief pursuant to Part 76 are advised that such requests must be initiated through the special relief provisions of Section 76.7 of the Rules. Many of these filings are subject to the pleading cycle rules set forth in Section 76.7, while others have their own pleading cycle relative to the particular rule involved. For BSR petitions filed pursuant to Part 73, the pleading cycle will be the same as that mandated by Section 76.7 unless stated otherwise. Please note that petitions
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-242880A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-242880A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-242880A1.txt
  • Notice lists those filings processed by the Media Bureau as registrations pursuant to §76.1801 of the Commission's Rules. Should any of these registrations contain a request for special relief, such waiver requests will be handled separately through the special relief process. Furthermore, parties seeking special relief are advised that such requests must be initiated through the special relief provisions of §76.7 of the Rules. Files containing these registrations can be reviewed in the Commissions Reference Information Center, CY-Level, 445 12th Street, SW Washington, DC 20554. It is requested that all responses or statements refer to the FCC assigned Community Unit Identification (CUID) Number; e.g., AL0075. For further information about this Public Notice contact the Media Bureau at (202) 418-7000. GA1074 HARALSON
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-243063A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-243063A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-243063A1.txt
  • Notice lists those filings processed by the Media Bureau as registrations pursuant to §76.1801 of the Commission's Rules. Should any of these registrations contain a request for special relief, such waiver requests will be handled separately through the special relief process. Furthermore, parties seeking special relief are advised that such requests must be initiated through the special relief provisions of §76.7 of the Rules. Files containing these registrations can be reviewed in the Commissions Reference Information Center, CY-Level, 445 12th Street, SW Washington, DC 20554. It is requested that all responses or statements refer to the FCC assigned Community Unit Identification (CUID) Number; e.g., AL0075. For further information about this Public Notice contact the Media Bureau at (202) 418-7000. IA0990 SANBORN
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-243529A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-243529A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-243529A1.txt
  • Notice lists those filings processed by the Media Bureau as registrations pursuant to §76.1801 of the Commission's Rules. Should any of these registrations contain a request for special relief, such waiver requests will be handled separately through the special relief process. Furthermore, parties seeking special relief are advised that such requests must be initiated through the special relief provisions of §76.7 of the Rules. Files containing these registrations can be reviewed in the Commissions Reference Information Center, CY-Level, 445 12th Street, SW Washington, DC 20554. It is requested that all responses or statements refer to the FCC assigned Community Unit Identification (CUID) Number; e.g., AL0075. For further information about this Public Notice contact the Media Bureau at (202) 418-7000. AL0809 VALLEY
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-243762A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-243762A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-243762A1.txt
  • Notice lists those filings processed by the Media Bureau as registrations pursuant to §76.1801 of the Commission's Rules. Should any of these registrations contain a request for special relief, such waiver requests will be handled separately through the special relief process. Furthermore, parties seeking special relief are advised that such requests must be initiated through the special relief provisions of §76.7 of the Rules. Files containing these registrations can be reviewed in the Commissions Reference Information Center, CY-Level, 445 12th Street, SW Washington, DC 20554. It is requested that all responses or statements refer to the FCC assigned Community Unit Identification (CUID) Number; e.g., AL0075. For further information about this Public Notice contact the Media Bureau at (202) 418-7000. FL1288 LAKES
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-243878A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-243878A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-243878A1.txt
  • review. CSR (cable special relief) petitions and CSC (cable show cause) petitions refer to cable-related matters pursuant to Part 76. The newly-designated BSR (broadcast special relief) petitions refer to certain non-application-related broadcast matters pursuant to Part 73. Parties seeking special relief pursuant to Part 76 are advised that such requests must be initiated through the special relief provisions of Section 76.7 of the Rules. Many of these filings are subject to the pleading cycle rules set forth in Section 76.7, while others have their own pleading cycle relative to the particular rule involved. For BSR petitions filed pursuant to Part 73, the pleading cycle will be the same as that mandated by Section 76.7 unless stated otherwise. Please note that petitions
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-244239A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-244239A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-244239A1.txt
  • Notice lists those filings processed by the Media Bureau as registrations pursuant to §76.1801 of the Commission's Rules. Should any of these registrations contain a request for special relief, such waiver requests will be handled separately through the special relief process. Furthermore, parties seeking special relief are advised that such requests must be initiated through the special relief provisions of §76.7 of the Rules. Files containing these registrations can be reviewed in the Commissions Reference Information Center, CY-Level, 445 12th Street, SW Washington, DC 20554. It is requested that all responses or statements refer to the FCC assigned Community Unit Identification (CUID) Number; e.g., AL0075. For further information about this Public Notice contact the Media Bureau at (202) 418-7000. IN1135 OHIO
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-244419A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-244419A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-244419A1.txt
  • review. CSR (cable special relief) petitions and CSC (cable show cause) petitions refer to cable-related matters pursuant to Part 76. The newly-designated BSR (broadcast special relief) petitions refer to certain non-application-related broadcast matters pursuant to Part 73. Parties seeking special relief pursuant to Part 76 are advised that such requests must be initiated through the special relief provisions of Section 76.7 of the Rules. Many of these filings are subject to the pleading cycle rules set forth in Section 76.7, while others have their own pleading cycle relative to the particular rule involved. For BSR petitions filed pursuant to Part 73, the pleading cycle will be the same as that mandated by Section 76.7 unless stated otherwise. Please note that petitions
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-244693A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-244693A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-244693A1.txt
  • review. CSR (cable special relief) petitions and CSC (cable show cause) petitions refer to cable-related matters pursuant to Part 76. The newly-designated BSR (broadcast special relief) petitions refer to certain non-application-related broadcast matters pursuant to Part 73. Parties seeking special relief pursuant to Part 76 are advised that such requests must be initiated through the special relief provisions of Section 76.7 of the Rules. Many of these filings are subject to the pleading cycle rules set forth in Section 76.7, while others have their own pleading cycle relative to the particular rule involved. For BSR petitions filed pursuant to Part 73, the pleading cycle will be the same as that mandated by Section 76.7 unless stated otherwise. Please note that petitions
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-244744A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-244744A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-244744A1.txt
  • Notice lists those filings processed by the Media Bureau as registrations pursuant to §76.1801 of the Commission's Rules. Should any of these registrations contain a request for special relief, such waiver requests will be handled separately through the special relief process. Furthermore, parties seeking special relief are advised that such requests must be initiated through the special relief provisions of §76.7 of the Rules. Files containing these registrations can be reviewed in the Commissions Reference Information Center, CY-Level, 445 12th Street, SW Washington, DC 20554. It is requested that all responses or statements refer to the FCC assigned Community Unit Identification (CUID) Number; e.g., AL0075. For further information about this Public Notice contact the Media Bureau at (202) 418-7000. OH2762 ADDISON
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-244918A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-244918A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-244918A1.txt
  • review. CSR (cable special relief) petitions and CSC (cable show cause) petitions refer to cable-related matters pursuant to Part 76. The newly-designated BSR (broadcast special relief) petitions refer to certain non-application-related broadcast matters pursuant to Part 73. Parties seeking special relief pursuant to Part 76 are advised that such requests must be initiated through the special relief provisions of Section 76.7 of the Rules. Many of these filings are subject to the pleading cycle rules set forth in Section 76.7, while others have their own pleading cycle relative to the particular rule involved. For BSR petitions filed pursuant to Part 73, the pleading cycle will be the same as that mandated by Section 76.7 unless stated otherwise. Please note that petitions
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-245044A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-245044A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-245044A1.txt
  • Notice lists those filings processed by the Media Bureau as registrations pursuant to §76.1801 of the Commission's Rules. Should any of these registrations contain a request for special relief, such waiver requests will be handled separately through the special relief process. Furthermore, parties seeking special relief are advised that such requests must be initiated through the special relief provisions of §76.7 of the Rules. Files containing these registrations can be reviewed in the Commissions Reference Information Center, CY-Level, 445 12th Street, SW Washington, DC 20554. It is requested that all responses or statements refer to the FCC assigned Community Unit Identification (CUID) Number; e.g., AL0075. For further information about this Public Notice contact the Media Bureau at (202) 418-7000. FL1289 LAKE
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-245369A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-245369A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-245369A1.txt
  • review. CSR (cable special relief) petitions and CSC (cable show cause) petitions refer to cable-related matters pursuant to Part 76. The newly-designated BSR (broadcast special relief) petitions refer to certain non-application-related broadcast matters pursuant to Part 73. Parties seeking special relief pursuant to Part 76 are advised that such requests must be initiated through the special relief provisions of Section 76.7 of the Rules. Many of these filings are subject to the pleading cycle rules set forth in Section 76.7, while others have their own pleading cycle relative to the particular rule involved. For BSR petitions filed pursuant to Part 73, the pleading cycle will be the same as that mandated by Section 76.7 unless stated otherwise. Please note that petitions
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-245847A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-245847A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-245847A1.txt
  • Notice lists those filings processed by the Media Bureau as registrations pursuant to §76.1801 of the Commission's Rules. Should any of these registrations contain a request for special relief, such waiver requests will be handled separately through the special relief process. Furthermore, parties seeking special relief are advised that such requests must be initiated through the special relief provisions of §76.7 of the Rules. Files containing these registrations can be reviewed in the Commissions Reference Information Center, CY-Level, 445 12th Street, SW Washington, DC 20554. It is requested that all responses or statements refer to the FCC assigned Community Unit Identification (CUID) Number; e.g., AL0075. For further information about this Public Notice contact the Media Bureau at (202) 418-7000. CA1642 LOS
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-246063A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-246063A1.txt
  • Notice lists those filings processed by the Media Bureau as registrations pursuant to §76.1801 of the Commission's Rules. Should any of these registrations contain a request for special relief, such waiver requests will be handled separately through the special relief process. Furthermore, parties seeking special relief are advised that such requests must be initiated through the special relief provisions of §76.7 of the Rules. Files containing these registrations can be reviewed in the Commissions Reference Information Center, CY-Level, 445 12th Street, SW Washington, DC 20554. It is requested that all responses or statements refer to the FCC assigned Community Unit Identification (CUID) Number; e.g., AL0075. For further information about this Public Notice contact the Media Bureau at (202) 418-7000. REPORT NO:
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-246376A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-246376A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-246376A1.txt
  • review. CSR (cable special relief) petitions and CSC (cable show cause) petitions refer to cable-related matters pursuant to Part 76. The newly-designated BSR (broadcast special relief) petitions refer to certain non-application-related broadcast matters pursuant to Part 73. Parties seeking special relief pursuant to Part 76 are advised that such requests must be initiated through the special relief provisions of Section 76.7 of the Rules. Many of these filings are subject to the pleading cycle rules set forth in Section 76.7, while others have their own pleading cycle relative to the particular rule involved. For BSR petitions filed pursuant to Part 73, the pleading cycle will be the same as that mandated by Section 76.7 unless stated otherwise. Please note that petitions
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-246960A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-246960A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-246960A1.txt
  • review. CSR (cable special relief) petitions and CSC (cable show cause) petitions refer to cable-related matters pursuant to Part 76. The newly-designated BSR (broadcast special relief) petitions refer to certain non-application-related broadcast matters pursuant to Part 73. Parties seeking special relief pursuant to Part 76 are advised that such requests must be initiated through the special relief provisions of Section 76.7 of the Rules. Many of these filings are subject to the pleading cycle rules set forth in Section 76.7, while others have their own pleading cycle relative to the particular rule involved. For BSR petitions filed pursuant to Part 73, the pleading cycle will be the same as that mandated by Section 76.7 unless stated otherwise. Please note that petitions
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-247480A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-247480A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-247480A1.txt
  • review. CSR (cable special relief) petitions and CSC (cable show cause) petitions refer to cable-related matters pursuant to Part 76. The newly-designated BSR (broadcast special relief) petitions refer to certain non-application-related broadcast matters pursuant to Part 73. Parties seeking special relief pursuant to Part 76 are advised that such requests must be initiated through the special relief provisions of Section 76.7 of the Rules. Many of these filings are subject to the pleading cycle rules set forth in Section 76.7, while others have their own pleading cycle relative to the particular rule involved. For BSR petitions filed pursuant to Part 73, the pleading cycle will be the same as that mandated by Section 76.7 unless stated otherwise. Please note that petitions
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-247754A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-247754A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-247754A1.txt
  • review. CSR (cable special relief) petitions and CSC (cable show cause) petitions refer to cable-related matters pursuant to Part 76. The newly-designated BSR (broadcast special relief) petitions refer to certain non-application-related broadcast matters pursuant to Part 73. Parties seeking special relief pursuant to Part 76 are advised that such requests must be initiated through the special relief provisions of Section 76.7 of the Rules. Many of these filings are subject to the pleading cycle rules set forth in Section 76.7, while others have their own pleading cycle relative to the particular rule involved. For BSR petitions filed pursuant to Part 73, the pleading cycle will be the same as that mandated by Section 76.7 unless stated otherwise. Please note that petitions
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-248005A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-248005A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-248005A1.txt
  • review. CSR (cable special relief) petitions and CSC (cable show cause) petitions refer to cable-related matters pursuant to Part 76. The newly-designated BSR (broadcast special relief) petitions refer to certain non-application-related broadcast matters pursuant to Part 73. Parties seeking special relief pursuant to Part 76 are advised that such requests must be initiated through the special relief provisions of Section 76.7 of the Rules. Many of these filings are subject to the pleading cycle rules set forth in Section 76.7, while others have their own pleading cycle relative to the particular rule involved. For BSR petitions filed pursuant to Part 73, the pleading cycle will be the same as that mandated by Section 76.7 unless stated otherwise. Please note that petitions
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-248404A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-248404A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-248404A1.txt
  • review. CSR (cable special relief) petitions and CSC (cable show cause) petitions refer to cable-related matters pursuant to Part 76. The newly-designated BSR (broadcast special relief) petitions refer to certain non-application-related broadcast matters pursuant to Part 73. Parties seeking special relief pursuant to Part 76 are advised that such requests must be initiated through the special relief provisions of Section 76.7 of the Rules. Many of these filings are subject to the pleading cycle rules set forth in Section 76.7, while others have their own pleading cycle relative to the particular rule involved. For BSR petitions filed pursuant to Part 73, the pleading cycle will be the same as that mandated by Section 76.7 unless stated otherwise. Please note that petitions
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-248826A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-248826A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-248826A1.txt
  • review. CSR (cable special relief) petitions and CSC (cable show cause) petitions refer to cable-related matters pursuant to Part 76. The newly-designated BSR (broadcast special relief) petitions refer to certain non-application-related broadcast matters pursuant to Part 73. Parties seeking special relief pursuant to Part 76 are advised that such requests must be initiated through the special relief provisions of Section 76.7 of the Rules. Many of these filings are subject to the pleading cycle rules set forth in Section 76.7, while others have their own pleading cycle relative to the particular rule involved. For BSR petitions filed pursuant to Part 73, the pleading cycle will be the same as that mandated by Section 76.7 unless stated otherwise. Please note that petitions
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-249198A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-249198A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-249198A1.txt
  • review. CSR (cable special relief) petitions and CSC (cable show cause) petitions refer to cable-related matters pursuant to Part 76. The newly-designated BSR (broadcast special relief) petitions refer to certain non-application-related broadcast matters pursuant to Part 73. Parties seeking special relief pursuant to Part 76 are advised that such requests must be initiated through the special relief provisions of Section 76.7 of the Rules. Many of these filings are subject to the pleading cycle rules set forth in Section 76.7, while others have their own pleading cycle relative to the particular rule involved. For BSR petitions filed pursuant to Part 73, the pleading cycle will be the same as that mandated by Section 76.7 unless stated otherwise. Please note that petitions
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-249240A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-249240A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-249240A1.txt
  • review. CSR (cable special relief) petitions and CSC (cable show cause) petitions refer to cable-related matters pursuant to Part 76. The newly-designated BSR (broadcast special relief) petitions refer to certain non-application-related broadcast matters pursuant to Part 73. Parties seeking special relief pursuant to Part 76 are advised that such requests must be initiated through the special relief provisions of Section 76.7 of the Rules. Many of these filings are subject to the pleading cycle rules set forth in Section 76.7, while others have their own pleading cycle relative to the particular rule involved. For BSR petitions filed pursuant to Part 73, the pleading cycle will be the same as that mandated by Section 76.7 unless stated otherwise. Please note that petitions
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-249262A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-249262A1.txt
  • 13.4 5.4 9.0 1.9 -99.2 India 32.0 58.2 109.4 202.9 298.1 409.7 417.6 523.1 542.0 493.8 372.8 -9.0 Israel 93.5 105.0 128.5 119.1 103.4 41.5 12.6 16.7 11.9 2.1 8.2 -80.2 Italy 60.2 85.2 72.3 65.9 51.8 63.1 54.3 66.4 37.9 46.2 70.2 11.3 Jamaica 64.7 78.4 93.1 99.4 115.5 132.3 154.9 154.5 89.7 61.6 67.2 -49.2 Japan 39.0 52.6 76.7 119.3 169.0 210.7 65.9 61.1 43.8 39.2 42.1 -80.0 Korea, Republic of 92.8 103.2 111.0 118.7 122.1 101.5 18.4 32.3 6.8 12.7 8.9 -91.2 Mexico 677.7 720.0 818.9 871.7 875.0 703.3 648.9 652.3 755.7 471.2 421.9 -40.0 Morocco 7.9 7.5 9.8 11.0 5.5 3.4 1.4 17.1 6.4 7.8 17.8 n.m. Netherlands 10.2 8.0 10.8 22.3 22.8 16.5 11.3 (0.1) 7.8
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-249403A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-249403A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-249403A1.txt
  • review. CSR (cable special relief) petitions and CSC (cable show cause) petitions refer to cable-related matters pursuant to Part 76. The newly-designated BSR (broadcast special relief) petitions refer to certain non-application-related broadcast matters pursuant to Part 73. Parties seeking special relief pursuant to Part 76 are advised that such requests must be initiated through the special relief provisions of Section 76.7 of the Rules. Many of these filings are subject to the pleading cycle rules set forth in Section 76.7, while others have their own pleading cycle relative to the particular rule involved. For BSR petitions filed pursuant to Part 73, the pleading cycle will be the same as that mandated by Section 76.7 unless stated otherwise. Please note that petitions
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-249709A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-249709A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-249709A1.txt
  • review. CSR (cable special relief) petitions and CSC (cable show cause) petitions refer to cable-related matters pursuant to Part 76. The newly-designated BSR (broadcast special relief) petitions refer to certain non-application-related broadcast matters pursuant to Part 73. Parties seeking special relief pursuant to Part 76 are advised that such requests must be initiated through the special relief provisions of Section 76.7 of the Rules. Many of these filings are subject to the pleading cycle rules set forth in Section 76.7, while others have their own pleading cycle relative to the particular rule involved. For BSR petitions filed pursuant to Part 73, the pleading cycle will be the same as that mandated by Section 76.7 unless stated otherwise. Please note that petitions
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-249892A3.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-249892A3.pdf
  • signals are distributed to the public by the cable system. SPECIAL RELIEF PETITIONS On petition for special relief by any interested person, the Commission may waive any provision of the rules relating to cable television systems or issue a ruling on a complaint or disputed question. A fee will be charged for Cable Special Relief Petitions filed according to Section 76.7 of the Rules seeking the imposition of special requirements beyond those provided for in the rules. CABLE COMMUNITY REGISTRATION A cable system community unit is required, prior to commencing operations, to provide the Commission with an identification of the system's operator, a description of the television broadcast signals to be carried, and certain other information called for by Section 76.1801
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-250278A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-250278A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-250278A1.txt
  • review. CSR (cable special relief) petitions and CSC (cable show cause) petitions refer to cable-related matters pursuant to Part 76. The newly-designated BSR (broadcast special relief) petitions refer to certain non-application-related broadcast matters pursuant to Part 73. Parties seeking special relief pursuant to Part 76 are advised that such requests must be initiated through the special relief provisions of Section 76.7 of the Rules. Many of these filings are subject to the pleading cycle rules set forth in Section 76.7, while others have their own pleading cycle relative to the particular rule involved. For BSR petitions filed pursuant to Part 73, the pleading cycle will be the same as that mandated by Section 76.7 unless stated otherwise. Please note that petitions
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-250940A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-250940A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-250940A1.txt
  • review. CSR (cable special relief) petitions and CSC (cable show cause) petitions refer to cable-related matters pursuant to Part 76. The newly-designated BSR (broadcast special relief) petitions refer to certain non-application-related broadcast matters pursuant to Part 73. Parties seeking special relief pursuant to Part 76 are advised that such requests must be initiated through the special relief provisions of Section 76.7 of the Rules. Many of these filings are subject to the pleading cycle rules set forth in Section 76.7, while others have their own pleading cycle relative to the particular rule involved. For BSR petitions filed pursuant to Part 73, the pleading cycle will be the same as that mandated by Section 76.7 unless stated otherwise. Please note that petitions
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-251116A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-251116A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-251116A1.txt
  • review. CSR (cable special relief) petitions and CSC (cable show cause) petitions refer to cable-related matters pursuant to Part 76. The newly-designated BSR (broadcast special relief) petitions refer to certain non-application-related broadcast matters pursuant to Part 73. Parties seeking special relief pursuant to Part 76 are advised that such requests must be initiated through the special relief provisions of Section 76.7 of the Rules. Many of these filings are subject to the pleading cycle rules set forth in Section 76.7, while others have their own pleading cycle relative to the particular rule involved. For BSR petitions filed pursuant to Part 73, the pleading cycle will be the same as that mandated by Section 76.7 unless stated otherwise. Please note that petitions
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-251396A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-251396A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-251396A1.txt
  • review. CSR (cable special relief) petitions and CSC (cable show cause) petitions refer to cable-related matters pursuant to Part 76. The newly-designated BSR (broadcast special relief) petitions refer to certain non-application-related broadcast matters pursuant to Part 73. Parties seeking special relief pursuant to Part 76 are advised that such requests must be initiated through the special relief provisions of Section 76.7 of the Rules. Many of these filings are subject to the pleading cycle rules set forth in Section 76.7, while others have their own pleading cycle relative to the particular rule involved. For BSR petitions filed pursuant to Part 73, the pleading cycle will be the same as that mandated by Section 76.7 unless stated otherwise. Please note that petitions
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-251994A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-251994A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-251994A1.txt
  • review. CSR (cable special relief) petitions and CSC (cable show cause) petitions refer to cable-related matters pursuant to Part 76. The newly-designated BSR (broadcast special relief) petitions refer to certain non-application-related broadcast matters pursuant to Part 73. Parties seeking special relief pursuant to Part 76 are advised that such requests must be initiated through the special relief provisions of Section 76.7 of the Rules. Many of these filings are subject to the pleading cycle rules set forth in Section 76.7, while others have their own pleading cycle relative to the particular rule involved. For BSR petitions filed pursuant to Part 73, the pleading cycle will be the same as that mandated by Section 76.7 unless stated otherwise. Please note that petitions
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-252432A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-252432A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-252432A1.txt
  • review. CSR (cable special relief) petitions and CSC (cable show cause) petitions refer to cable-related matters pursuant to Part 76. The newly-designated BSR (broadcast special relief) petitions refer to certain non-application-related broadcast matters pursuant to Part 73. Parties seeking special relief pursuant to Part 76 are advised that such requests must be initiated through the special relief provisions of Section 76.7 of the Rules. Many of these filings are subject to the pleading cycle rules set forth in Section 76.7, while others have their own pleading cycle relative to the particular rule involved. For BSR petitions filed pursuant to Part 73, the pleading cycle will be the same as that mandated by Section 76.7 unless stated otherwise. Please note that petitions
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-252765A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-252765A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-252765A1.txt
  • review. CSR (cable special relief) petitions and CSC (cable show cause) petitions refer to cable-related matters pursuant to Part 76. The newly-designated BSR (broadcast special relief) petitions refer to certain non-application-related broadcast matters pursuant to Part 73. Parties seeking special relief pursuant to Part 76 are advised that such requests must be initiated through the special relief provisions of Section 76.7 of the Rules. Many of these filings are subject to the pleading cycle rules set forth in Section 76.7, while others have their own pleading cycle relative to the particular rule involved. For BSR petitions filed pursuant to Part 73, the pleading cycle will be the same as that mandated by Section 76.7 unless stated otherwise. Please note that petitions
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-253155A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-253155A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-253155A1.txt
  • review. CSR (cable special relief) petitions and CSC (cable show cause) petitions refer to cable-related matters pursuant to Part 76. The newly-designated BSR (broadcast special relief) petitions refer to certain non-application-related broadcast matters pursuant to Part 73. Parties seeking special relief pursuant to Part 76 are advised that such requests must be initiated through the special relief provisions of Section 76.7 of the Rules. Many of these filings are subject to the pleading cycle rules set forth in Section 76.7, while others have their own pleading cycle relative to the particular rule involved. For BSR petitions filed pursuant to Part 73, the pleading cycle will be the same as that mandated by Section 76.7 unless stated otherwise. Please note that petitions
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-253416A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-253416A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-253416A1.txt
  • review. CSR (cable special relief) petitions and CSC (cable show cause) petitions refer to cable-related matters pursuant to Part 76. The newly-designated BSR (broadcast special relief) petitions refer to certain non-application-related broadcast matters pursuant to Part 73. Parties seeking special relief pursuant to Part 76 are advised that such requests must be initiated through the special relief provisions of Section 76.7 of the Rules. Many of these filings are subject to the pleading cycle rules set forth in Section 76.7, while others have their own pleading cycle relative to the particular rule involved. For BSR petitions filed pursuant to Part 73, the pleading cycle will be the same as that mandated by Section 76.7 unless stated otherwise. Please note that petitions
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-253840A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-253840A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-253840A1.txt
  • review. CSR (cable special relief) petitions and CSC (cable show cause) petitions refer to cable-related matters pursuant to Part 76. The newly-designated BSR (broadcast special relief) petitions refer to certain non-application-related broadcast matters pursuant to Part 73. Parties seeking special relief pursuant to Part 76 are advised that such requests must be initiated through the special relief provisions of Section 76.7 of the Rules. Many of these filings are subject to the pleading cycle rules set forth in Section 76.7, while others have their own pleading cycle relative to the particular rule involved. For BSR petitions filed pursuant to Part 73, the pleading cycle will be the same as that mandated by Section 76.7 unless stated otherwise. Please note that petitions
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-254015A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-254015A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-254015A1.txt
  • review. CSR (cable special relief) petitions and CSC (cable show cause) petitions refer to cable-related matters pursuant to Part 76. The newly-designated BSR (broadcast special relief) petitions refer to certain non-application-related broadcast matters pursuant to Part 73. Parties seeking special relief pursuant to Part 76 are advised that such requests must be initiated through the special relief provisions of Section 76.7 of the Rules. Many of these filings are subject to the pleading cycle rules set forth in Section 76.7, while others have their own pleading cycle relative to the particular rule involved. For BSR petitions filed pursuant to Part 73, the pleading cycle will be the same as that mandated by Section 76.7 unless stated otherwise. Please note that petitions
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-254471A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-254471A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-254471A1.txt
  • review. CSR (cable special relief) petitions and CSC (cable show cause) petitions refer to cable-related matters pursuant to Part 76. The newly-designated BSR (broadcast special relief) petitions refer to certain non-application-related broadcast matters pursuant to Part 73. Parties seeking special relief pursuant to Part 76 are advised that such requests must be initiated through the special relief provisions of Section 76.7 of the Rules. Many of these filings are subject to the pleading cycle rules set forth in Section 76.7, while others have their own pleading cycle relative to the particular rule involved. For BSR petitions filed pursuant to Part 73, the pleading cycle will be the same as that mandated by Section 76.7 unless stated otherwise. Please note that petitions
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-254684A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-254684A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-254684A1.txt
  • review. CSR (cable special relief) petitions and CSC (cable show cause) petitions refer to cable-related matters pursuant to Part 76. The newly-designated BSR (broadcast special relief) petitions refer to certain non-application-related broadcast matters pursuant to Part 73. Parties seeking special relief pursuant to Part 76 are advised that such requests must be initiated through the special relief provisions of Section 76.7 of the Rules. Many of these filings are subject to the pleading cycle rules set forth in Section 76.7, while others have their own pleading cycle relative to the particular rule involved. For BSR petitions filed pursuant to Part 73, the pleading cycle will be the same as that mandated by Section 76.7 unless stated otherwise. Please note that petitions
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-254997A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-254997A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-254997A1.txt
  • review. CSR (cable special relief) petitions and CSC (cable show cause) petitions refer to cable-related matters pursuant to Part 76. The newly-designated BSR (broadcast special relief) petitions refer to certain non-application-related broadcast matters pursuant to Part 73. Parties seeking special relief pursuant to Part 76 are advised that such requests must be initiated through the special relief provisions of Section 76.7 of the Rules. Many of these filings are subject to the pleading cycle rules set forth in Section 76.7, while others have their own pleading cycle relative to the particular rule involved. For BSR petitions filed pursuant to Part 73, the pleading cycle will be the same as that mandated by Section 76.7 unless stated otherwise. Please note that petitions
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-255212A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-255212A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-255212A1.txt
  • review. CSR (cable special relief) petitions and CSC (cable show cause) petitions refer to cable-related matters pursuant to Part 76. The newly-designated BSR (broadcast special relief) petitions refer to certain non-application-related broadcast matters pursuant to Part 73. Parties seeking special relief pursuant to Part 76 are advised that such requests must be initiated through the special relief provisions of Section 76.7 of the Rules. Many of these filings are subject to the pleading cycle rules set forth in Section 76.7, while others have their own pleading cycle relative to the particular rule involved. For BSR petitions filed pursuant to Part 73, the pleading cycle will be the same as that mandated by Section 76.7 unless stated otherwise. Please note that petitions
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-255431A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-255431A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-255431A1.txt
  • review. CSR (cable special relief) petitions and CSC (cable show cause) petitions refer to cable-related matters pursuant to Part 76. The newly-designated BSR (broadcast special relief) petitions refer to certain non-application-related broadcast matters pursuant to Part 73. Parties seeking special relief pursuant to Part 76 are advised that such requests must be initiated through the special relief provisions of Section 76.7 of the Rules. Many of these filings are subject to the pleading cycle rules set forth in Section 76.7, while others have their own pleading cycle relative to the particular rule involved. For BSR petitions filed pursuant to Part 73, the pleading cycle will be the same as that mandated by Section 76.7 unless stated otherwise. Please note that petitions
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-255825A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-255825A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-255825A1.txt
  • review. CSR (cable special relief) petitions and CSC (cable show cause) petitions refer to cable-related matters pursuant to Part 76. The newly-designated BSR (broadcast special relief) petitions refer to certain non-application-related broadcast matters pursuant to Part 73. Parties seeking special relief pursuant to Part 76 are advised that such requests must be initiated through the special relief provisions of Section 76.7 of the Rules. Many of these filings are subject to the pleading cycle rules set forth in Section 76.7, while others have their own pleading cycle relative to the particular rule involved. For BSR petitions filed pursuant to Part 73, the pleading cycle will be the same as that mandated by Section 76.7 unless stated otherwise. Please note that petitions
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-255954A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-255954A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-255954A1.txt
  • review. CSR (cable special relief) petitions and CSC (cable show cause) petitions refer to cable-related matters pursuant to Part 76. The newly-designated BSR (broadcast special relief) petitions refer to certain non-application-related broadcast matters pursuant to Part 73. Parties seeking special relief pursuant to Part 76 are advised that such requests must be initiated through the special relief provisions of Section 76.7 of the Rules. Many of these filings are subject to the pleading cycle rules set forth in Section 76.7, while others have their own pleading cycle relative to the particular rule involved. For BSR petitions filed pursuant to Part 73, the pleading cycle will be the same as that mandated by Section 76.7 unless stated otherwise. Please note that petitions
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-256267A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-256267A1.txt
  • 0.0 1,411,221,240 44.4 0.7 30.4 11.8 12.8 Kampuchea $0 $0 $0 0 Korea, North $207,337 0.0 6.4 45.5 33.9 14.2 $0 $0 535,693 0.0 7.3 52.0 28.1 12.6 Korea, South $110,922,241 66.6 1.7 18.3 12.4 1.0 $39,292,340 48.3 0.0 28.5 23.1 0.2 $448 43.3 0.0 56.7 0.0 0.0 720,103,303 46.1 4.5 24.3 19.6 5.5 Laos $1,307,351 6.0 13.2 0.3 3.9 76.7 $876 0.0 0.0 99.9 0.0 0.1 $0 8,864,577 3.0 9.5 0.4 1.7 85.4 Macau $1,736,354 63.8 1.0 15.1 14.9 5.2 $363,812 58.2 0.9 19.5 21.4 0.0 $4,069 2.2 81.9 0.0 15.9 0.0 14,089,617 31.0 5.6 31.4 20.4 11.6 Malaysia $50,495,803 62.4 1.7 23.7 10.5 1.6 $5,560,176 12.4 0.4 35.3 51.9 0.1 $105,062 1.6 88.5 9.9 0.0 0.0 300,777,724 24.3 6.8
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-256409A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-256409A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-256409A1.txt
  • review. CSR (cable special relief) petitions and CSC (cable show cause) petitions refer to cable-related matters pursuant to Part 76. The newly-designated BSR (broadcast special relief) petitions refer to certain non-application-related broadcast matters pursuant to Part 73. Parties seeking special relief pursuant to Part 76 are advised that such requests must be initiated through the special relief provisions of Section 76.7 of the Rules. Many of these filings are subject to the pleading cycle rules set forth in Section 76.7, while others have their own pleading cycle relative to the particular rule involved. For BSR petitions filed pursuant to Part 73, the pleading cycle will be the same as that mandated by Section 76.7 unless stated otherwise. Please note that petitions
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-256698A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-256698A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-256698A1.txt
  • review. CSR (cable special relief) petitions and CSC (cable show cause) petitions refer to cable-related matters pursuant to Part 76. The newly-designated BSR (broadcast special relief) petitions refer to certain non-application-related broadcast matters pursuant to Part 73. Parties seeking special relief pursuant to Part 76 are advised that such requests must be initiated through the special relief provisions of Section 76.7 of the Rules. Many of these filings are subject to the pleading cycle rules set forth in Section 76.7, while others have their own pleading cycle relative to the particular rule involved. For BSR petitions filed pursuant to Part 73, the pleading cycle will be the same as that mandated by Section 76.7 unless stated otherwise. Please note that petitions
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-256867A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-256867A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-256867A1.txt
  • review. CSR (cable special relief) petitions and CSC (cable show cause) petitions refer to cable-related matters pursuant to Part 76. The newly-designated BSR (broadcast special relief) petitions refer to certain non-application-related broadcast matters pursuant to Part 73. Parties seeking special relief pursuant to Part 76 are advised that such requests must be initiated through the special relief provisions of Section 76.7 of the Rules. Many of these filings are subject to the pleading cycle rules set forth in Section 76.7, while others have their own pleading cycle relative to the particular rule involved. For BSR petitions filed pursuant to Part 73, the pleading cycle will be the same as that mandated by Section 76.7 unless stated otherwise. Please note that petitions
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-257172A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-257172A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-257172A1.txt
  • review. CSR (cable special relief) petitions and CSC (cable show cause) petitions refer to cable-related matters pursuant to Part 76. The newly-designated BSR (broadcast special relief) petitions refer to certain non-application-related broadcast matters pursuant to Part 73. Parties seeking special relief pursuant to Part 76 are advised that such requests must be initiated through the special relief provisions of Section 76.7 of the Rules. Many of these filings are subject to the pleading cycle rules set forth in Section 76.7, while others have their own pleading cycle relative to the particular rule involved. For BSR petitions filed pursuant to Part 73, the pleading cycle will be the same as that mandated by Section 76.7 unless stated otherwise. Please note that petitions
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-257353A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-257353A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-257353A1.txt
  • review. CSR (cable special relief) petitions and CSC (cable show cause) petitions refer to cable-related matters pursuant to Part 76. The newly-designated BSR (broadcast special relief) petitions refer to certain non-application-related broadcast matters pursuant to Part 73. Parties seeking special relief pursuant to Part 76 are advised that such requests must be initiated through the special relief provisions of Section 76.7 of the Rules. Many of these filings are subject to the pleading cycle rules set forth in Section 76.7, while others have their own pleading cycle relative to the particular rule involved. For BSR petitions filed pursuant to Part 73, the pleading cycle will be the same as that mandated by Section 76.7 unless stated otherwise. Please note that petitions
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-257515A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-257515A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-257515A1.txt
  • review. CSR (cable special relief) petitions and CSC (cable show cause) petitions refer to cable-related matters pursuant to Part 76. The newly-designated BSR (broadcast special relief) petitions refer to certain non-application-related broadcast matters pursuant to Part 73. Parties seeking special relief pursuant to Part 76 are advised that such requests must be initiated through the special relief provisions of Section 76.7 of the Rules. Many of these filings are subject to the pleading cycle rules set forth in Section 76.7, while others have their own pleading cycle relative to the particular rule involved. For BSR petitions filed pursuant to Part 73, the pleading cycle will be the same as that mandated by Section 76.7 unless stated otherwise. Please note that petitions
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-257902A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-257902A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-257902A1.txt
  • review. CSR (cable special relief) petitions and CSC (cable show cause) petitions refer to cable-related matters pursuant to Part 76. The newly-designated BSR (broadcast special relief) petitions refer to certain non-application-related broadcast matters pursuant to Part 73. Parties seeking special relief pursuant to Part 76 are advised that such requests must be initiated through the special relief provisions of Section 76.7 of the Rules. Many of these filings are subject to the pleading cycle rules set forth in Section 76.7, while others have their own pleading cycle relative to the particular rule involved. For BSR petitions filed pursuant to Part 73, the pleading cycle will be the same as that mandated by Section 76.7 unless stated otherwise. Please note that petitions
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-257944A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-257944A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-257944A1.txt
  • review. CSR (cable special relief) petitions and CSC (cable show cause) petitions refer to cable-related matters pursuant to Part 76. The newly-designated BSR (broadcast special relief) petitions refer to certain non-application-related broadcast matters pursuant to Part 73. Parties seeking special relief pursuant to Part 76 are advised that such requests must be initiated through the special relief provisions of Section 76.7 of the Rules. Many of these filings are subject to the pleading cycle rules set forth in Section 76.7, while others have their own pleading cycle relative to the particular rule involved. For BSR petitions filed pursuant to Part 73, the pleading cycle will be the same as that mandated by Section 76.7 unless stated otherwise. Please note that petitions
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-258074A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-258074A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-258074A1.txt
  • review. CSR (cable special relief) petitions and CSC (cable show cause) petitions refer to cable-related matters pursuant to Part 76. The newly-designated BSR (broadcast special relief) petitions refer to certain non-application-related broadcast matters pursuant to Part 73. Parties seeking special relief pursuant to Part 76 are advised that such requests must be initiated through the special relief provisions of Section 76.7 of the Rules. Many of these filings are subject to the pleading cycle rules set forth in Section 76.7, while others have their own pleading cycle relative to the particular rule involved. For BSR petitions filed pursuant to Part 73, the pleading cycle will be the same as that mandated by Section 76.7 unless stated otherwise. Please note that petitions
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-258158A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-258158A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-258158A1.txt
  • review. CSR (cable special relief) petitions and CSC (cable show cause) petitions refer to cable-related matters pursuant to Part 76. The newly-designated BSR (broadcast special relief) petitions refer to certain non-application-related broadcast matters pursuant to Part 73. Parties seeking special relief pursuant to Part 76 are advised that such requests must be initiated through the special relief provisions of Section 76.7 of the Rules. Many of these filings are subject to the pleading cycle rules set forth in Section 76.7, while others have their own pleading cycle relative to the particular rule involved. For BSR petitions filed pursuant to Part 73, the pleading cycle will be the same as that mandated by Section 76.7 unless stated otherwise. Please note that petitions
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-258297A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-258297A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-258297A1.txt
  • review. CSR (cable special relief) petitions and CSC (cable show cause) petitions refer to cable-related matters pursuant to Part 76. The newly-designated BSR (broadcast special relief) petitions refer to certain non-application-related broadcast matters pursuant to Part 73. Parties seeking special relief pursuant to Part 76 are advised that such requests must be initiated through the special relief provisions of Section 76.7 of the Rules. Many of these filings are subject to the pleading cycle rules set forth in Section 76.7, while others have their own pleading cycle relative to the particular rule involved. For BSR petitions filed pursuant to Part 73, the pleading cycle will be the same as that mandated by Section 76.7 unless stated otherwise. Please note that petitions
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-258594A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-258594A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-258594A1.txt
  • review. CSR (cable special relief) petitions and CSC (cable show cause) petitions refer to cable-related matters pursuant to Part 76. The newly-designated BSR (broadcast special relief) petitions refer to certain non-application-related broadcast matters pursuant to Part 73. Parties seeking special relief pursuant to Part 76 are advised that such requests must be initiated through the special relief provisions of Section 76.7 of the Rules. Many of these filings are subject to the pleading cycle rules set forth in Section 76.7, while others have their own pleading cycle relative to the particular rule involved. For BSR petitions filed pursuant to Part 73, the pleading cycle will be the same as that mandated by Section 76.7 unless stated otherwise. Please note that petitions
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-258663A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-258663A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-258663A1.txt
  • review. CSR (cable special relief) petitions and CSC (cable show cause) petitions refer to cable-related matters pursuant to Part 76. The newly-designated BSR (broadcast special relief) petitions refer to certain non-application-related broadcast matters pursuant to Part 73. Parties seeking special relief pursuant to Part 76 are advised that such requests must be initiated through the special relief provisions of Section 76.7 of the Rules. Many of these filings are subject to the pleading cycle rules set forth in Section 76.7, while others have their own pleading cycle relative to the particular rule involved. For BSR petitions filed pursuant to Part 73, the pleading cycle will be the same as that mandated by Section 76.7 unless stated otherwise. Please note that petitions
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-258861A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-258861A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-258861A1.txt
  • review. CSR (cable special relief) petitions and CSC (cable show cause) petitions refer to cable-related matters pursuant to Part 76. The newly-designated BSR (broadcast special relief) petitions refer to certain non-application-related broadcast matters pursuant to Part 73. Parties seeking special relief pursuant to Part 76 are advised that such requests must be initiated through the special relief provisions of Section 76.7 of the Rules. Many of these filings are subject to the pleading cycle rules set forth in Section 76.7, while others have their own pleading cycle relative to the particular rule involved. For BSR petitions filed pursuant to Part 73, the pleading cycle will be the same as that mandated by Section 76.7 unless stated otherwise. Please note that petitions
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-259126A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-259126A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-259126A1.txt
  • review. CSR (cable special relief) petitions and CSC (cable show cause) petitions refer to cable-related matters pursuant to Part 76. The newly-designated BSR (broadcast special relief) petitions refer to certain non-application-related broadcast matters pursuant to Part 73. Parties seeking special relief pursuant to Part 76 are advised that such requests must be initiated through the special relief provisions of Section 76.7 of the Rules. Many of these filings are subject to the pleading cycle rules set forth in Section 76.7, while others have their own pleading cycle relative to the particular rule involved. For BSR petitions filed pursuant to Part 73, the pleading cycle will be the same as that mandated by Section 76.7 unless stated otherwise. Please note that petitions
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-259273A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-259273A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-259273A1.txt
  • review. CSR (cable special relief) petitions and CSC (cable show cause) petitions refer to cable-related matters pursuant to Part 76. The newly-designated BSR (broadcast special relief) petitions refer to certain non-application-related broadcast matters pursuant to Part 73. Parties seeking special relief pursuant to Part 76 are advised that such requests must be initiated through the special relief provisions of Section 76.7 of the Rules. Many of these filings are subject to the pleading cycle rules set forth in Section 76.7, while others have their own pleading cycle relative to the particular rule involved. For BSR petitions filed pursuant to Part 73, the pleading cycle will be the same as that mandated by Section 76.7 unless stated otherwise. Please note that petitions
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-259398A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-259398A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-259398A1.txt
  • review. CSR (cable special relief) petitions and CSC (cable show cause) petitions refer to cable-related matters pursuant to Part 76. The newly-designated BSR (broadcast special relief) petitions refer to certain non-application-related broadcast matters pursuant to Part 73. Parties seeking special relief pursuant to Part 76 are advised that such requests must be initiated through the special relief provisions of Section 76.7 of the Rules. Many of these filings are subject to the pleading cycle rules set forth in Section 76.7, while others have their own pleading cycle relative to the particular rule involved. For BSR petitions filed pursuant to Part 73, the pleading cycle will be the same as that mandated by Section 76.7 unless stated otherwise. Please note that petitions
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-259561A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-259561A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-259561A1.txt
  • review. CSR (cable special relief) petitions and CSC (cable show cause) petitions refer to cable-related matters pursuant to Part 76. The newly-designated BSR (broadcast special relief) petitions refer to certain non-application-related broadcast matters pursuant to Part 73. Parties seeking special relief pursuant to Part 76 are advised that such requests must be initiated through the special relief provisions of Section 76.7 of the Rules. Many of these filings are subject to the pleading cycle rules set forth in Section 76.7, while others have their own pleading cycle relative to the particular rule involved. For BSR petitions filed pursuant to Part 73, the pleading cycle will be the same as that mandated by Section 76.7 unless stated otherwise. Please note that petitions
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-259889A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-259889A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-259889A1.txt
  • review. CSR (cable special relief) petitions and CSC (cable show cause) petitions refer to cable-related matters pursuant to Part 76. The newly-designated BSR (broadcast special relief) petitions refer to certain non-application-related broadcast matters pursuant to Part 73. Parties seeking special relief pursuant to Part 76 are advised that such requests must be initiated through the special relief provisions of Section 76.7 of the Rules. Many of these filings are subject to the pleading cycle rules set forth in Section 76.7, while others have their own pleading cycle relative to the particular rule involved. For BSR petitions filed pursuant to Part 73, the pleading cycle will be the same as that mandated by Section 76.7 unless stated otherwise. Please note that petitions
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-260028A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-260028A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-260028A1.txt
  • review. CSR (cable special relief) petitions and CSC (cable show cause) petitions refer to cable-related matters pursuant to Part 76. The newly-designated BSR (broadcast special relief) petitions refer to certain non-application-related broadcast matters pursuant to Part 73. Parties seeking special relief pursuant to Part 76 are advised that such requests must be initiated through the special relief provisions of Section 76.7 of the Rules. Many of these filings are subject to the pleading cycle rules set forth in Section 76.7, while others have their own pleading cycle relative to the particular rule involved. For BSR petitions filed pursuant to Part 73, the pleading cycle will be the same as that mandated by Section 76.7 unless stated otherwise. Please note that petitions
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-260092A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-260092A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-260092A1.txt
  • review. CSR (cable special relief) petitions and CSC (cable show cause) petitions refer to cable-related matters pursuant to Part 76. The newly-designated BSR (broadcast special relief) petitions refer to certain non-application-related broadcast matters pursuant to Part 73. Parties seeking special relief pursuant to Part 76 are advised that such requests must be initiated through the special relief provisions of Section 76.7 of the Rules. Many of these filings are subject to the pleading cycle rules set forth in Section 76.7, while others have their own pleading cycle relative to the particular rule involved. For BSR petitions filed pursuant to Part 73, the pleading cycle will be the same as that mandated by Section 76.7 unless stated otherwise. Please note that petitions
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-260420A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-260420A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-260420A1.txt
  • review. CSR (cable special relief) petitions and CSC (cable show cause) petitions refer to cable-related matters pursuant to Part 76. The newly-designated BSR (broadcast special relief) petitions refer to certain non-application-related broadcast matters pursuant to Part 73. Parties seeking special relief pursuant to Part 76 are advised that such requests must be initiated through the special relief provisions of Section 76.7 of the Rules. Many of these filings are subject to the pleading cycle rules set forth in Section 76.7, while others have their own pleading cycle relative to the particular rule involved. For BSR petitions filed pursuant to Part 73, the pleading cycle will be the same as that mandated by Section 76.7 unless stated otherwise. Please note that petitions
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-260512A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-260512A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-260512A1.txt
  • review. CSR (cable special relief) petitions and CSC (cable show cause) petitions refer to cable-related matters pursuant to Part 76. The newly-designated BSR (broadcast special relief) petitions refer to certain non-application-related broadcast matters pursuant to Part 73. Parties seeking special relief pursuant to Part 76 are advised that such requests must be initiated through the special relief provisions of Section 76.7 of the Rules. Many of these filings are subject to the pleading cycle rules set forth in Section 76.7, while others have their own pleading cycle relative to the particular rule involved. For BSR petitions filed pursuant to Part 73, the pleading cycle will be the same as that mandated by Section 76.7 unless stated otherwise. Please note that petitions
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-260646A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-260646A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-260646A1.txt
  • review. CSR (cable special relief) petitions and CSC (cable show cause) petitions refer to cable-related matters pursuant to Part 76. The newly-designated BSR (broadcast special relief) petitions refer to certain non-application-related broadcast matters pursuant to Part 73. Parties seeking special relief pursuant to Part 76 are advised that such requests must be initiated through the special relief provisions of Section 76.7 of the Rules. Many of these filings are subject to the pleading cycle rules set forth in Section 76.7, while others have their own pleading cycle relative to the particular rule involved. For BSR petitions filed pursuant to Part 73, the pleading cycle will be the same as that mandated by Section 76.7 unless stated otherwise. Please note that petitions
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-260848A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-260848A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-260848A1.txt
  • review. CSR (cable special relief) petitions and CSC (cable show cause) petitions refer to cable-related matters pursuant to Part 76. The newly-designated BSR (broadcast special relief) petitions refer to certain non-application-related broadcast matters pursuant to Part 73. Parties seeking special relief pursuant to Part 76 are advised that such requests must be initiated through the special relief provisions of Section 76.7 of the Rules. Many of these filings are subject to the pleading cycle rules set forth in Section 76.7, while others have their own pleading cycle relative to the particular rule involved. For BSR petitions filed pursuant to Part 73, the pleading cycle will be the same as that mandated by Section 76.7 unless stated otherwise. Please note that petitions
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-261024A2.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-261024A2.txt
  • 13.4 5.4 9.0 1.9 (2.8) -101.8 India 58.2 109.4 202.9 298.1 409.7 417.6 523.1 542.0 493.8 372.8 168.8 -59.6 Israel 105.0 128.5 119.1 103.4 41.5 12.6 16.7 11.9 2.1 8.2 13.0 2.9 Italy 85.2 72.3 65.9 51.8 63.1 54.3 66.4 37.9 46.2 70.2 65.3 20.1 Jamaica 78.4 93.1 99.4 115.5 132.3 154.9 154.5 89.7 61.6 67.2 47.2 -69.5 Japan 52.6 76.7 119.3 169.0 210.7 65.9 61.1 43.8 39.2 42.1 29.3 -55.6 Korea, Republic of 103.2 111.0 118.7 122.1 101.5 18.4 32.3 6.8 12.7 8.9 (1.2) -106.3 Mexico 720.0 818.9 871.7 875.0 703.3 648.9 652.3 755.7 471.2 421.9 360.2 -44.5 Morocco 7.5 9.8 11.0 5.5 3.4 1.4 17.1 6.4 7.8 17.8 12.1 n.m. Netherlands 8.0 10.8 22.3 22.8 16.5 11.3 (0.1) 7.8
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-261221A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-261221A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-261221A1.txt
  • review. CSR (cable special relief) petitions and CSC (cable show cause) petitions refer to cable-related matters pursuant to Part 76. The newly-designated BSR (broadcast special relief) petitions refer to certain non-application-related broadcast matters pursuant to Part 73. Parties seeking special relief pursuant to Part 76 are advised that such requests must be initiated through the special relief provisions of Section 76.7 of the Rules. Many of these filings are subject to the pleading cycle rules set forth in Section 76.7, while others have their own pleading cycle relative to the particular rule involved. For BSR petitions filed pursuant to Part 73, the pleading cycle will be the same as that mandated by Section 76.7 unless stated otherwise. Please note that petitions
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-261699A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-261699A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-261699A1.txt
  • review. CSR (cable special relief) petitions and CSC (cable show cause) petitions refer to cable-related matters pursuant to Part 76. The newly-designated BSR (broadcast special relief) petitions refer to certain non-application-related broadcast matters pursuant to Part 73. Parties seeking special relief pursuant to Part 76 are advised that such requests must be initiated through the special relief provisions of Section 76.7 of the Rules. Many of these filings are subject to the pleading cycle rules set forth in Section 76.7, while others have their own pleading cycle relative to the particular rule involved. For BSR petitions filed pursuant to Part 73, the pleading cycle will be the same as that mandated by Section 76.7 unless stated otherwise. Please note that petitions
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-262084A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-262084A1.txt
  • 99.2 97.9 98.2 98.3 98.9 $75,000 + 99.0 99.3 99.1 99.5 97.6 97.8 99.2 99.5 RACE HISPANIC TOTAL WHITE BLACK ORIGIN 29 Table 4 Percentage of Households with a Telephone by Income Unit Avail Unit Avail Unit Avail Unit Avail MARCH 2004 TOTAL 94.2 95.1 94.9 95.7 90.1 91.1 90.5 91.6 UNDER $5,000 80.1 83.4 82.1 85.1 76.9 79.8 74.9 76.7 $5,000 - $7,499 85.1 86.8 84.4 85.9 86.7 88.8 83.9 85.1 $7,500 - $9,999 88.1 89.4 89.2 90.5 82.8 84.2 85.5 87.7 $10,000 - $12,499 90.2 91.7 90.8 91.8 88.5 91.3 85.3 85.9 $12,500 - $14,999 90.8 92.8 91.9 93.8 87.9 89.8 88.0 90.1 $15,000 - $19,999 91.2 92.6 92.1 93.4 88.8 90.4 88.1 89.7 $20,000 - $24,999 94.2 95.1
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-262167A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-262167A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-262167A1.txt
  • review. CSR (cable special relief) petitions and CSC (cable show cause) petitions refer to cable-related matters pursuant to Part 76. The newly-designated BSR (broadcast special relief) petitions refer to certain non-application-related broadcast matters pursuant to Part 73. Parties seeking special relief pursuant to Part 76 are advised that such requests must be initiated through the special relief provisions of Section 76.7 of the Rules. Many of these filings are subject to the pleading cycle rules set forth in Section 76.7, while others have their own pleading cycle relative to the particular rule involved. For BSR petitions filed pursuant to Part 73, the pleading cycle will be the same as that mandated by Section 76.7 unless stated otherwise. Please note that petitions
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-262394A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-262394A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-262394A1.txt
  • review. CSR (cable special relief) petitions and CSC (cable show cause) petitions refer to cable-related matters pursuant to Part 76. The newly-designated BSR (broadcast special relief) petitions refer to certain non-application-related broadcast matters pursuant to Part 73. Parties seeking special relief pursuant to Part 76 are advised that such requests must be initiated through the special relief provisions of Section 76.7 of the Rules. Many of these filings are subject to the pleading cycle rules set forth in Section 76.7, while others have their own pleading cycle relative to the particular rule involved. For BSR petitions filed pursuant to Part 73, the pleading cycle will be the same as that mandated by Section 76.7 unless stated otherwise. Please note that petitions
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-262544A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-262544A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-262544A1.txt
  • review. CSR (cable special relief) petitions and CSC (cable show cause) petitions refer to cable-related matters pursuant to Part 76. The newly-designated BSR (broadcast special relief) petitions refer to certain non-application-related broadcast matters pursuant to Part 73. Parties seeking special relief pursuant to Part 76 are advised that such requests must be initiated through the special relief provisions of Section 76.7 of the Rules. Many of these filings are subject to the pleading cycle rules set forth in Section 76.7, while others have their own pleading cycle relative to the particular rule involved. For BSR petitions filed pursuant to Part 73, the pleading cycle will be the same as that mandated by Section 76.7 unless stated otherwise. Please note that petitions
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-262602A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-262602A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-262602A1.txt
  • review. CSR (cable special relief) petitions and CSC (cable show cause) petitions refer to cable-related matters pursuant to Part 76. The newly-designated BSR (broadcast special relief) petitions refer to certain non-application-related broadcast matters pursuant to Part 73. Parties seeking special relief pursuant to Part 76 are advised that such requests must be initiated through the special relief provisions of Section 76.7 of the Rules. Many of these filings are subject to the pleading cycle rules set forth in Section 76.7, while others have their own pleading cycle relative to the particular rule involved. For BSR petitions filed pursuant to Part 73, the pleading cycle will be the same as that mandated by Section 76.7 unless stated otherwise. Please note that petitions
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-262743A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-262743A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-262743A1.txt
  • review. CSR (cable special relief) petitions and CSC (cable show cause) petitions refer to cable-related matters pursuant to Part 76. The newly-designated BSR (broadcast special relief) petitions refer to certain non-application-related broadcast matters pursuant to Part 73. Parties seeking special relief pursuant to Part 76 are advised that such requests must be initiated through the special relief provisions of Section 76.7 of the Rules. Many of these filings are subject to the pleading cycle rules set forth in Section 76.7, while others have their own pleading cycle relative to the particular rule involved. For BSR petitions filed pursuant to Part 73, the pleading cycle will be the same as that mandated by Section 76.7 unless stated otherwise. Please note that petitions
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-262986A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-262986A1.txt
  • 98.2 98.3 98.9 $75,000 + 99.0 99.3 99.1 99.5 97.6 97.8 99.2 99.5 RACE HISPANIC TOTAL WHITE BLACK ORIGIN 6 - 37 Table 6.7 Percentage of Households with a Telephone by Income Unit Avail Unit Avail Unit Avail Unit Avail MARCH 2004 TOTAL 94.2 95.1 94.9 95.7 90.1 91.1 90.5 91.6 UNDER $5,000 80.1 83.4 82.1 85.1 76.9 79.8 74.9 76.7 $5,000 - $7,499 85.1 86.8 84.4 85.9 86.7 88.8 83.9 85.1 $7,500 - $9,999 88.1 89.4 89.2 90.5 82.8 84.2 85.5 87.7 $10,000 - $12,499 90.2 91.7 90.8 91.8 88.5 91.3 85.3 85.9 $12,500 - $14,999 90.8 92.8 91.9 93.8 87.9 89.8 88.0 90.1 $15,000 - $19,999 91.2 92.6 92.1 93.4 88.8 90.4 88.1 89.7 $20,000 - $24,999 94.2 95.1
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-262986A8.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-262986A8.txt
  • 98.2 98.3 98.9 $75,000 + 99.0 99.3 99.1 99.5 97.6 97.8 99.2 99.5 RACE HISPANIC TOTAL WHITE BLACK ORIGIN 6 - 37 Table 6.7 Percentage of Households with a Telephone by Income Unit Avail Unit Avail Unit Avail Unit Avail MARCH 2004 TOTAL 94.2 95.1 94.9 95.7 90.1 91.1 90.5 91.6 UNDER $5,000 80.1 83.4 82.1 85.1 76.9 79.8 74.9 76.7 $5,000 - $7,499 85.1 86.8 84.4 85.9 86.7 88.8 83.9 85.1 $7,500 - $9,999 88.1 89.4 89.2 90.5 82.8 84.2 85.5 87.7 $10,000 - $12,499 90.2 91.7 90.8 91.8 88.5 91.3 85.3 85.9 $12,500 - $14,999 90.8 92.8 91.9 93.8 87.9 89.8 88.0 90.1 $15,000 - $19,999 91.2 92.6 92.1 93.4 88.8 90.4 88.1 89.7 $20,000 - $24,999 94.2 95.1
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-262986A9.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-262986A9.txt
  • November 112.4 99.8 120.8 82.7 80.7 87.0 67.5 December 112.2 99.9 121.0 82.6 80.7 86.7 67.4 2003January 112.6 100.4 121.3 83.4 81.9 87.0 67.6 February 113.5 100.5 121.2 83.5 82.2 86.9 67.7 March 114.2 99.7 121.7 81.5 79.8 85.1 67.6 April 113.9 98.7 121.9 79.2 77.4 83.1 67.5 May 113.7 98.1 122.0 77.9 76.0 81.8 67.5 June 113.8 97.5 122.2 76.7 74.6 80.8 66.3 July 114.0 98.1 123.1 77.2 75.6 80.8 66.2 August 114.4 97.8 123.7 76.0 74.0 79.7 66.1 September 114.8 97.4 123.8 75.2 73.3 78.9 66.1 October 114.6 97.1 124.0 74.3 72.1 78.7 66.1 November 114.3 97.2 124.2 74.1 71.8 78.3 66.7 December 114.2 97.2 124.1 74.3 72.0 78.6 66.5 2004January 114.8 97.0 124.4 73.9 71.6 78.0 66.3 February
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-263010A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-263010A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-263010A1.txt
  • review. CSR (cable special relief) petitions and CSC (cable show cause) petitions refer to cable-related matters pursuant to Part 76. The newly-designated BSR (broadcast special relief) petitions refer to certain non-application-related broadcast matters pursuant to Part 73. Parties seeking special relief pursuant to Part 76 are advised that such requests must be initiated through the special relief provisions of Section 76.7 of the Rules. Many of these filings are subject to the pleading cycle rules set forth in Section 76.7, while others have their own pleading cycle relative to the particular rule involved. For BSR petitions filed pursuant to Part 73, the pleading cycle will be the same as that mandated by Section 76.7 unless stated otherwise. Please note that petitions
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-263332A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-263332A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-263332A1.txt
  • review. CSR (cable special relief) petitions and CSC (cable show cause) petitions refer to cable-related matters pursuant to Part 76. The newly-designated BSR (broadcast special relief) petitions refer to certain non-application-related broadcast matters pursuant to Part 73. Parties seeking special relief pursuant to Part 76 are advised that such requests must be initiated through the special relief provisions of Section 76.7 of the Rules. Many of these filings are subject to the pleading cycle rules set forth in Section 76.7, while others have their own pleading cycle relative to the particular rule involved. For BSR petitions filed pursuant to Part 73, the pleading cycle will be the same as that mandated by Section 76.7 unless stated otherwise. Please note that petitions
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-263434A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-263434A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-263434A1.txt
  • review. CSR (cable special relief) petitions and CSC (cable show cause) petitions refer to cable-related matters pursuant to Part 76. The newly-designated BSR (broadcast special relief) petitions refer to certain non-application-related broadcast matters pursuant to Part 73. Parties seeking special relief pursuant to Part 76 are advised that such requests must be initiated through the special relief provisions of Section 76.7 of the Rules. Many of these filings are subject to the pleading cycle rules set forth in Section 76.7, while others have their own pleading cycle relative to the particular rule involved. For BSR petitions filed pursuant to Part 73, the pleading cycle will be the same as that mandated by Section 76.7 unless stated otherwise. Please note that petitions
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-263749A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-263749A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-263749A1.txt
  • review. CSR (cable special relief) petitions and CSC (cable show cause) petitions refer to cable-related matters pursuant to Part 76. The newly-designated BSR (broadcast special relief) petitions refer to certain non-application-related broadcast matters pursuant to Part 73. Parties seeking special relief pursuant to Part 76 are advised that such requests must be initiated through the special relief provisions of Section 76.7 of the Rules. Many of these filings are subject to the pleading cycle rules set forth in Section 76.7, while others have their own pleading cycle relative to the particular rule involved. For BSR petitions filed pursuant to Part 73, the pleading cycle will be the same as that mandated by Section 76.7 unless stated otherwise. Please note that petitions
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-263857A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-263857A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-263857A1.txt
  • review. CSR (cable special relief) petitions and CSC (cable show cause) petitions refer to cable-related matters pursuant to Part 76. The newly-designated BSR (broadcast special relief) petitions refer to certain non-application-related broadcast matters pursuant to Part 73. Parties seeking special relief pursuant to Part 76 are advised that such requests must be initiated through the special relief provisions of Section 76.7 of the Rules. Many of these filings are subject to the pleading cycle rules set forth in Section 76.7, while others have their own pleading cycle relative to the particular rule involved. For BSR petitions filed pursuant to Part 73, the pleading cycle will be the same as that mandated by Section 76.7 unless stated otherwise. Please note that petitions
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-264043A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-264043A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-264043A1.txt
  • review. CSR (cable special relief) petitions and CSC (cable show cause) petitions refer to cable-related matters pursuant to Part 76. The newly-designated BSR (broadcast special relief) petitions refer to certain non-application-related broadcast matters pursuant to Part 73. Parties seeking special relief pursuant to Part 76 are advised that such requests must be initiated through the special relief provisions of Section 76.7 of the Rules. Many of these filings are subject to the pleading cycle rules set forth in Section 76.7, while others have their own pleading cycle relative to the particular rule involved. For BSR petitions filed pursuant to Part 73, the pleading cycle will be the same as that mandated by Section 76.7 unless stated otherwise. Please note that petitions
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-264133A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-264133A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-264133A1.txt
  • review. CSR (cable special relief) petitions and CSC (cable show cause) petitions refer to cable-related matters pursuant to Part 76. The newly-designated BSR (broadcast special relief) petitions refer to certain non-application-related broadcast matters pursuant to Part 73. Parties seeking special relief pursuant to Part 76 are advised that such requests must be initiated through the special relief provisions of Section 76.7 of the Rules. Many of these filings are subject to the pleading cycle rules set forth in Section 76.7, while others have their own pleading cycle relative to the particular rule involved. For BSR petitions filed pursuant to Part 73, the pleading cycle will be the same as that mandated by Section 76.7 unless stated otherwise. Please note that petitions
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-264309A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-264309A1.txt
  • 39.7 3.1 49.6 2.3 5.2 Antigua and Barbuda $9,177,327 56.7 12.2 12.8 13.3 5.0 $588,731 43.8 0.0 14.5 25.6 16.1 $12,471 98.3 0.0 0.1 0.0 1.6 46,050,254 44.7 15.1 16.1 17.6 6.4 Aruba $12,186,854 37.2 1.7 35.9 21.6 3.5 $754,634 32.0 0.0 34.7 23.3 10.0 $44,843 0.0 0.0 0.9 92.3 6.8 74,240,211 25.9 2.0 42.1 24.2 5.8 Bahamas, The $34,082,171 76.7 2.2 7.6 12.3 1.3 $3,879,277 49.5 3.1 28.8 15.9 2.7 $63,599 0.0 16.8 83.1 0.0 0.1 198,357,121 68.3 6.9 10.7 9.7 4.3 Barbados $15,108,358 45.0 17.5 10.9 23.3 3.3 $903,620 20.2 6.4 13.1 35.4 24.9 $77,719 0.0 99.9 0.1 0.0 0.0 85,977,843 24.5 30.0 12.2 26.8 6.5 Bermuda $11,213,390 59.6 1.2 23.0 14.5 1.6 $1,341,549 22.5 0.0 57.6 16.4 3.5
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-264406A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-264406A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-264406A1.txt
  • review. CSR (cable special relief) petitions and CSC (cable show cause) petitions refer to cable-related matters pursuant to Part 76. The newly-designated BSR (broadcast special relief) petitions refer to certain non-application-related broadcast matters pursuant to Part 73. Parties seeking special relief pursuant to Part 76 are advised that such requests must be initiated through the special relief provisions of Section 76.7 of the Rules. Many of these filings are subject to the pleading cycle rules set forth in Section 76.7, while others have their own pleading cycle relative to the particular rule involved. For BSR petitions filed pursuant to Part 73, the pleading cycle will be the same as that mandated by Section 76.7 unless stated otherwise. Please note that petitions
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-264668A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-264668A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-264668A1.txt
  • review. CSR (cable special relief) petitions and CSC (cable show cause) petitions refer to cable-related matters pursuant to Part 76. The newly-designated BSR (broadcast special relief) petitions refer to certain non-application-related broadcast matters pursuant to Part 73. Parties seeking special relief pursuant to Part 76 are advised that such requests must be initiated through the special relief provisions of Section 76.7 of the Rules. Many of these filings are subject to the pleading cycle rules set forth in Section 76.7, while others have their own pleading cycle relative to the particular rule involved. For BSR petitions filed pursuant to Part 73, the pleading cycle will be the same as that mandated by Section 76.7 unless stated otherwise. Please note that petitions
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-264917A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-264917A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-264917A1.txt
  • review. CSR (cable special relief) petitions and CSC (cable show cause) petitions refer to cable-related matters pursuant to Part 76. The newly-designated BSR (broadcast special relief) petitions refer to certain non-application-related broadcast matters pursuant to Part 73. Parties seeking special relief pursuant to Part 76 are advised that such requests must be initiated through the special relief provisions of Section 76.7 of the Rules. Many of these filings are subject to the pleading cycle rules set forth in Section 76.7, while others have their own pleading cycle relative to the particular rule involved. For BSR petitions filed pursuant to Part 73, the pleading cycle will be the same as that mandated by Section 76.7 unless stated otherwise. Please note that petitions
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-265239A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-265239A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-265239A1.txt
  • review. CSR (cable special relief) petitions and CSC (cable show cause) petitions refer to cable-related matters pursuant to Part 76. The newly-designated BSR (broadcast special relief) petitions refer to certain non-application-related broadcast matters pursuant to Part 73. Parties seeking special relief pursuant to Part 76 are advised that such requests must be initiated through the special relief provisions of Section 76.7 of the Rules. Many of these filings are subject to the pleading cycle rules set forth in Section 76.7, while others have their own pleading cycle relative to the particular rule involved. For BSR petitions filed pursuant to Part 73, the pleading cycle will be the same as that mandated by Section 76.7 unless stated otherwise. Please note that petitions
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-265261A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-265261A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-265261A1.txt
  • review. CSR (cable special relief) petitions and CSC (cable show cause) petitions refer to cable-related matters pursuant to Part 76. The newly-designated BSR (broadcast special relief) petitions refer to certain non-application-related broadcast matters pursuant to Part 73. Parties seeking special relief pursuant to Part 76 are advised that such requests must be initiated through the special relief provisions of Section 76.7 of the Rules. Many of these filings are subject to the pleading cycle rules set forth in Section 76.7, while others have their own pleading cycle relative to the particular rule involved. For BSR petitions filed pursuant to Part 73, the pleading cycle will be the same as that mandated by Section 76.7 unless stated otherwise. Please note that petitions
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-265356A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-265356A1.txt
  • 99.2 97.9 98.2 98.3 98.9 $75,000 + 99.0 99.3 99.1 99.5 97.6 97.8 99.2 99.5 RACE HISPANIC TOTAL WHITE BLACK ORIGIN 29 Table 4 Percentage of Households with a Telephone by Income Unit Avail Unit Avail Unit Avail Unit Avail MARCH 2004 TOTAL 94.2 95.1 94.9 95.7 90.1 91.1 90.5 91.6 UNDER $5,000 80.1 83.4 82.1 85.1 76.9 79.8 74.9 76.7 $5,000 - $7,499 85.1 86.8 84.4 85.9 86.7 88.8 83.9 85.1 $7,500 - $9,999 88.1 89.4 89.2 90.5 82.8 84.2 85.5 87.7 $10,000 - $12,499 90.2 91.7 90.8 91.8 88.5 91.3 85.3 85.9 $12,500 - $14,999 90.8 92.8 91.9 93.8 87.9 89.8 88.0 90.1 $15,000 - $19,999 91.2 92.6 92.1 93.4 88.8 90.4 88.1 89.7 $20,000 - $24,999 94.2 95.1
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-265358A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-265358A1.txt
  • Decrease is statistically significant at the 95% confidence level. Note: Changes may not appear to be the same as calculated differences due to rounding. 10 Table 4 Percentage of Households with Telephone Service in March Total Household Income in March 1984 Dollars * 1984 1985 1986 1987 1988 1989 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 Alabama $9,999 or less 77.4 77.8 76.7 72.8 75.8 81.4 79.6 81.8 79.1 85.2 83.1 $10,000 - $19,999 91.2 85.1 89.9 91.3 89.1 88.9 85.0 89.0 93.2 93.4 92.7 $20,000 - $29,999 91.0 96.6 96.2 92.2 94.1 97.6 94.9 95.5 95.0 96.3 94.1 $30,000 - $39,999 100.0 99.2 100.0 97.0 100.0 98.6 98.6 96.9 99.0 95.5 96.1 $40,000 or more 98.3 100.0 99.4 99.1 99.0 100.0 99.1
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-265440A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-265440A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-265440A1.txt
  • review. CSR (cable special relief) petitions and CSC (cable show cause) petitions refer to cable-related matters pursuant to Part 76. The newly-designated BSR (broadcast special relief) petitions refer to certain non-application-related broadcast matters pursuant to Part 73. Parties seeking special relief pursuant to Part 76 are advised that such requests must be initiated through the special relief provisions of Section 76.7 of the Rules. Many of these filings are subject to the pleading cycle rules set forth in Section 76.7, while others have their own pleading cycle relative to the particular rule involved. For BSR petitions filed pursuant to Part 73, the pleading cycle will be the same as that mandated by Section 76.7 unless stated otherwise. Please note that petitions
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-265585A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-265585A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-265585A1.txt
  • review. CSR (cable special relief) petitions and CSC (cable show cause) petitions refer to cable-related matters pursuant to Part 76. The newly-designated BSR (broadcast special relief) petitions refer to certain non-application-related broadcast matters pursuant to Part 73. Parties seeking special relief pursuant to Part 76 are advised that such requests must be initiated through the special relief provisions of Section 76.7 of the Rules. Many of these filings are subject to the pleading cycle rules set forth in Section 76.7, while others have their own pleading cycle relative to the particular rule involved. For BSR petitions filed pursuant to Part 73, the pleading cycle will be the same as that mandated by Section 76.7 unless stated otherwise. Please note that petitions
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-265859A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-265859A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-265859A1.txt
  • review. CSR (cable special relief) petitions and CSC (cable show cause) petitions refer to cable-related matters pursuant to Part 76. The newly-designated BSR (broadcast special relief) petitions refer to certain non-application-related broadcast matters pursuant to Part 73. Parties seeking special relief pursuant to Part 76 are advised that such requests must be initiated through the special relief provisions of Section 76.7 of the Rules. Many of these filings are subject to the pleading cycle rules set forth in Section 76.7, while others have their own pleading cycle relative to the particular rule involved. For BSR petitions filed pursuant to Part 73, the pleading cycle will be the same as that mandated by Section 76.7 unless stated otherwise. Please note that petitions
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-265970A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-265970A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-265970A1.txt
  • review. CSR (cable special relief) petitions and CSC (cable show cause) petitions refer to cable-related matters pursuant to Part 76. The newly-designated BSR (broadcast special relief) petitions refer to certain non-application-related broadcast matters pursuant to Part 73. Parties seeking special relief pursuant to Part 76 are advised that such requests must be initiated through the special relief provisions of Section 76.7 of the Rules. Many of these filings are subject to the pleading cycle rules set forth in Section 76.7, while others have their own pleading cycle relative to the particular rule involved. For BSR petitions filed pursuant to Part 73, the pleading cycle will be the same as that mandated by Section 76.7 unless stated otherwise. Please note that petitions
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-266068A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-266068A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-266068A1.txt
  • review. CSR (cable special relief) petitions and CSC (cable show cause) petitions refer to cable-related matters pursuant to Part 76. The newly-designated BSR (broadcast special relief) petitions refer to certain non-application-related broadcast matters pursuant to Part 73. Parties seeking special relief pursuant to Part 76 are advised that such requests must be initiated through the special relief provisions of Section 76.7 of the Rules. Many of these filings are subject to the pleading cycle rules set forth in Section 76.7, while others have their own pleading cycle relative to the particular rule involved. For BSR petitions filed pursuant to Part 73, the pleading cycle will be the same as that mandated by Section 76.7 unless stated otherwise. Please note that petitions
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-266284A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-266284A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-266284A1.txt
  • review. CSR (cable special relief) petitions and CSC (cable show cause) petitions refer to cable-related matters pursuant to Part 76. The newly-designated BSR (broadcast special relief) petitions refer to certain non-application-related broadcast matters pursuant to Part 73. Parties seeking special relief pursuant to Part 76 are advised that such requests must be initiated through the special relief provisions of Section 76.7 of the Rules. Many of these filings are subject to the pleading cycle rules set forth in Section 76.7, while others have their own pleading cycle relative to the particular rule involved. For BSR petitions filed pursuant to Part 73, the pleading cycle will be the same as that mandated by Section 76.7 unless stated otherwise. Please note that petitions
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-266504A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-266504A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-266504A1.txt
  • review. CSR (cable special relief) petitions and CSC (cable show cause) petitions refer to cable-related matters pursuant to Part 76. The newly-designated BSR (broadcast special relief) petitions refer to certain non-application-related broadcast matters pursuant to Part 73. Parties seeking special relief pursuant to Part 76 are advised that such requests must be initiated through the special relief provisions of Section 76.7 of the Rules. Many of these filings are subject to the pleading cycle rules set forth in Section 76.7, while others have their own pleading cycle relative to the particular rule involved. For BSR petitions filed pursuant to Part 73, the pleading cycle will be the same as that mandated by Section 76.7 unless stated otherwise. Please note that petitions
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-266857A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-266857A1.txt
  • November 112.4 99.8 120.8 82.7 80.7 87.0 67.5 December 112.2 99.9 121.0 82.6 80.7 86.7 67.4 2003January 112.6 100.4 121.3 83.4 81.9 87.0 67.6 February 113.5 100.5 121.2 83.5 82.2 86.9 67.7 March 114.2 99.7 121.7 81.5 79.8 85.1 67.6 April 113.9 98.7 121.9 79.2 77.4 83.1 67.5 May 113.7 98.1 122.0 77.9 76.0 81.8 67.5 June 113.8 97.5 122.2 76.7 74.6 80.8 66.3 July 114.0 98.1 123.1 77.2 75.6 80.8 66.2 August 114.4 97.8 123.7 76.0 74.0 79.7 66.1 September 114.8 97.4 123.8 75.2 73.3 78.9 66.1 October 114.6 97.1 124.0 74.3 72.1 78.7 66.1 November 114.3 97.2 124.2 74.1 71.8 78.3 66.7 December 114.2 97.2 124.1 74.3 72.0 78.6 66.5 2004January 114.8 97.0 124.4 73.9 71.6 78.0 66.3 February
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-267028A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-267028A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-267028A1.txt
  • review. CSR (cable special relief) petitions and CSC (cable show cause) petitions refer to cable-related matters pursuant to Part 76. The newly-designated BSR (broadcast special relief) petitions refer to certain non-application-related broadcast matters pursuant to Part 73. Parties seeking special relief pursuant to Part 76 are advised that such requests must be initiated through the special relief provisions of Section 76.7 of the Rules. Many of these filings are subject to the pleading cycle rules set forth in Section 76.7, while others have their own pleading cycle relative to the particular rule involved. For BSR petitions filed pursuant to Part 73, the pleading cycle will be the same as that mandated by Section 76.7 unless stated otherwise. Please note that petitions
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-267188A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-267188A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-267188A1.txt
  • review. CSR (cable special relief) petitions and CSC (cable show cause) petitions refer to cable-related matters pursuant to Part 76. The newly-designated BSR (broadcast special relief) petitions refer to certain non-application-related broadcast matters pursuant to Part 73. Parties seeking special relief pursuant to Part 76 are advised that such requests must be initiated through the special relief provisions of Section 76.7 of the Rules. Many of these filings are subject to the pleading cycle rules set forth in Section 76.7, while others have their own pleading cycle relative to the particular rule involved. For BSR petitions filed pursuant to Part 73, the pleading cycle will be the same as that mandated by Section 76.7 unless stated otherwise. Please note that petitions
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-267427A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-267427A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-267427A1.txt
  • review. CSR (cable special relief) petitions and CSC (cable show cause) petitions refer to cable-related matters pursuant to Part 76. The newly-designated BSR (broadcast special relief) petitions refer to certain non-application-related broadcast matters pursuant to Part 73. Parties seeking special relief pursuant to Part 76 are advised that such requests must be initiated through the special relief provisions of Section 76.7 of the Rules. Many of these filings are subject to the pleading cycle rules set forth in Section 76.7, while others have their own pleading cycle relative to the particular rule involved. For BSR petitions filed pursuant to Part 73, the pleading cycle will be the same as that mandated by Section 76.7 unless stated otherwise. Please note that petitions
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-267544A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-267544A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-267544A1.txt
  • review. CSR (cable special relief) petitions and CSC (cable show cause) petitions refer to cable-related matters pursuant to Part 76. The newly-designated BSR (broadcast special relief) petitions refer to certain non-application-related broadcast matters pursuant to Part 73. Parties seeking special relief pursuant to Part 76 are advised that such requests must be initiated through the special relief provisions of Section 76.7 of the Rules. Many of these filings are subject to the pleading cycle rules set forth in Section 76.7, while others have their own pleading cycle relative to the particular rule involved. For BSR petitions filed pursuant to Part 73, the pleading cycle will be the same as that mandated by Section 76.7 unless stated otherwise. Please note that petitions
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-267890A3.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-267890A3.pdf
  • signals are distributed to the public by the cable system. SPECIAL RELIEF PETITIONS On petition for special relief by any interested person, the Commission may waive any provision of the rules relating to cable television systems or issue a ruling on a complaint or disputed question. A fee will be charged for Cable Special Relief Petitions filed according to Section 76.7 of the Rules seeking the imposition of special requirements beyond those provided for in the rules. CABLE COMMUNITY REGISTRATION A Cable Community Registration (Form 322) must be filed electronically prior to commencing operations, to provide the Commission with an identification of the system's operator, a description of the television broadcast signals to be carried, and certain other information called for
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-268564A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-268564A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-268564A1.txt
  • review. CSR (cable special relief) petitions and CSC (cable show cause) petitions refer to cable-related matters pursuant to Part 76. The newly-designated BSR (broadcast special relief) petitions refer to certain non-application-related broadcast matters pursuant to Part 73. Parties seeking special relief pursuant to Part 76 are advised that such requests must be initiated through the special relief provisions of Section 76.7 of the Rules. Many of these filings are subject to the pleading cycle rules set forth in Section 76.7, while others have their own pleading cycle relative to the particular rule involved. For BSR petitions filed pursuant to Part 73, the pleading cycle will be the same as that mandated by Section 76.7 unless stated otherwise. Please note that petitions
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-268844A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-268844A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-268844A1.txt
  • review. CSR (cable special relief) petitions and CSC (cable show cause) petitions refer to cable-related matters pursuant to Part 76. The newly-designated BSR (broadcast special relief) petitions refer to certain non-application-related broadcast matters pursuant to Part 73. Parties seeking special relief pursuant to Part 76 are advised that such requests must be initiated through the special relief provisions of Section 76.7 of the Rules. Many of these filings are subject to the pleading cycle rules set forth in Section 76.7, while others have their own pleading cycle relative to the particular rule involved. For BSR petitions filed pursuant to Part 73, the pleading cycle will be the same as that mandated by Section 76.7 unless stated otherwise. Please note that petitions
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-268937A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-268937A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-268937A1.txt
  • review. CSR (cable special relief) petitions and CSC (cable show cause) petitions refer to cable-related matters pursuant to Part 76. The newly-designated BSR (broadcast special relief) petitions refer to certain non-application-related broadcast matters pursuant to Part 73. Parties seeking special relief pursuant to Part 76 are advised that such requests must be initiated through the special relief provisions of Section 76.7 of the Rules. Many of these filings are subject to the pleading cycle rules set forth in Section 76.7, while others have their own pleading cycle relative to the particular rule involved. For BSR petitions filed pursuant to Part 73, the pleading cycle will be the same as that mandated by Section 76.7 unless stated otherwise. Please note that petitions
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-268965A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-268965A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-268965A1.txt
  • review. CSR (cable special relief) petitions and CSC (cable show cause) petitions refer to cable-related matters pursuant to Part 76. The newly-designated BSR (broadcast special relief) petitions refer to certain non-application-related broadcast matters pursuant to Part 73. Parties seeking special relief pursuant to Part 76 are advised that such requests must be initiated through the special relief provisions of Section 76.7 of the Rules. Many of these filings are subject to the pleading cycle rules set forth in Section 76.7, while others have their own pleading cycle relative to the particular rule involved. For BSR petitions filed pursuant to Part 73, the pleading cycle will be the same as that mandated by Section 76.7 unless stated otherwise. Please note that petitions
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-269127A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-269127A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-269127A1.txt
  • review. CSR (cable special relief) petitions and CSC (cable show cause) petitions refer to cable-related matters pursuant to Part 76. The newly-designated BSR (broadcast special relief) petitions refer to certain non-application-related broadcast matters pursuant to Part 73. Parties seeking special relief pursuant to Part 76 are advised that such requests must be initiated through the special relief provisions of Section 76.7 of the Rules. Many of these filings are subject to the pleading cycle rules set forth in Section 76.7, while others have their own pleading cycle relative to the particular rule involved. For BSR petitions filed pursuant to Part 73, the pleading cycle will be the same as that mandated by Section 76.7 unless stated otherwise. Please note that petitions
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-269239A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-269239A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-269239A1.txt
  • review. CSR (cable special relief) petitions and CSC (cable show cause) petitions refer to cable-related matters pursuant to Part 76. The newly-designated BSR (broadcast special relief) petitions refer to certain non-application-related broadcast matters pursuant to Part 73. Parties seeking special relief pursuant to Part 76 are advised that such requests must be initiated through the special relief provisions of Section 76.7 of the Rules. Many of these filings are subject to the pleading cycle rules set forth in Section 76.7, while others have their own pleading cycle relative to the particular rule involved. For BSR petitions filed pursuant to Part 73, the pleading cycle will be the same as that mandated by Section 76.7 unless stated otherwise. Please note that petitions
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-269251A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-269251A1.txt
  • 98.2 98.3 98.9 $75,000 + 99.0 99.3 99.1 99.5 97.6 97.8 99.2 99.5 RACE HISPANIC TOTAL WHITE BLACK ORIGIN 6 - 39 Table 6.10 Percentage of Households with a Telephone by Income Unit Avail Unit Avail Unit Avail Unit Avail MARCH 2004 TOTAL 94.2 95.1 94.9 95.7 90.1 91.1 90.5 91.6 UNDER $5,000 80.1 83.4 82.1 85.1 76.9 79.8 74.9 76.7 $5,000 - $7,499 85.1 86.8 84.4 85.9 86.7 88.8 83.9 85.1 $7,500 - $9,999 88.1 89.4 89.2 90.5 82.8 84.2 85.5 87.7 $10,000 - $12,499 90.2 91.7 90.8 91.8 88.5 91.3 85.3 85.9 $12,500 - $14,999 90.8 92.8 91.9 93.8 87.9 89.8 88.0 90.1 $15,000 - $19,999 91.2 92.6 92.1 93.4 88.8 90.4 88.1 89.7 $20,000 - $24,999 94.2 95.1
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-269251A8.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-269251A8.txt
  • 98.2 98.3 98.9 $75,000 + 99.0 99.3 99.1 99.5 97.6 97.8 99.2 99.5 RACE HISPANIC TOTAL WHITE BLACK ORIGIN 6 - 39 Table 6.10 Percentage of Households with a Telephone by Income Unit Avail Unit Avail Unit Avail Unit Avail MARCH 2004 TOTAL 94.2 95.1 94.9 95.7 90.1 91.1 90.5 91.6 UNDER $5,000 80.1 83.4 82.1 85.1 76.9 79.8 74.9 76.7 $5,000 - $7,499 85.1 86.8 84.4 85.9 86.7 88.8 83.9 85.1 $7,500 - $9,999 88.1 89.4 89.2 90.5 82.8 84.2 85.5 87.7 $10,000 - $12,499 90.2 91.7 90.8 91.8 88.5 91.3 85.3 85.9 $12,500 - $14,999 90.8 92.8 91.9 93.8 87.9 89.8 88.0 90.1 $15,000 - $19,999 91.2 92.6 92.1 93.4 88.8 90.4 88.1 89.7 $20,000 - $24,999 94.2 95.1
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-269251A9.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-269251A9.txt
  • CUUR0000SEED02 CUUR0000SS27051 CUUR0000SS27061 CUUR0000SEED03 Table 7.4 Consumer Price Indices (December 1997 = 100) BLS Series ID 2003January 112.6 100.4 121.3 83.4 81.9 87.0 67.6 February 113.5 100.5 121.2 83.5 82.2 86.9 67.7 March 114.2 99.7 121.7 81.5 79.8 85.1 67.6 April 113.9 98.7 121.9 79.2 77.4 83.1 67.5 May 113.7 98.1 122.0 77.9 76.0 81.8 67.5 June 113.8 97.5 122.2 76.7 74.6 80.8 66.3 July 114.0 98.1 123.1 77.2 75.6 80.8 66.2 August 114.4 97.8 123.7 76.0 74.0 79.7 66.1 September 114.8 97.4 123.8 75.2 73.3 78.9 66.1 October 114.6 97.1 124.0 74.3 72.1 78.7 66.1 November 114.3 97.2 124.2 74.1 71.8 78.3 66.7 December 114.2 97.2 124.1 74.3 72.0 78.6 66.5 2004January 114.8 97.0 124.4 73.9 71.6 78.0 66.3 February
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-269267A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-269267A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-269267A1.txt
  • review. CSR (cable special relief) petitions and CSC (cable show cause) petitions refer to cable-related matters pursuant to Part 76. The newly-designated BSR (broadcast special relief) petitions refer to certain non-application-related broadcast matters pursuant to Part 73. Parties seeking special relief pursuant to Part 76 are advised that such requests must be initiated through the special relief provisions of Section 76.7 of the Rules. Many of these filings are subject to the pleading cycle rules set forth in Section 76.7, while others have their own pleading cycle relative to the particular rule involved. For BSR petitions filed pursuant to Part 73, the pleading cycle will be the same as that mandated by Section 76.7 unless stated otherwise. Please note that petitions
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-269446A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-269446A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-269446A1.txt
  • The Bureau determined that the set-top box at issue is not the type of low-cost, limited capability box envisioned by the Commission in its 2005 Order. The Bureau did find, however, that Bend's plan to migrate to an all-digital network, if accomplished by 2008 (the timeframe set forth in Bend's waiver request) justifies a waiver pursuant to Sections 1.3 and 76.7 of the Commission's rules. Thus, the Bureau granted Bend a waiver conditioned upon Bend's migration to an all-digital network by 2008 and upon Bend meeting certain milestones related to that migration. In addition, the Bureau noted the difficulties that small cable operators may face in complying with the July 1, 2007 deadline for separated security because manufacturers prioritize orders from
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-269474A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-269474A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-269474A1.txt
  • review. CSR (cable special relief) petitions and CSC (cable show cause) petitions refer to cable-related matters pursuant to Part 76. The newly-designated BSR (broadcast special relief) petitions refer to certain non-application-related broadcast matters pursuant to Part 73. Parties seeking special relief pursuant to Part 76 are advised that such requests must be initiated through the special relief provisions of Section 76.7 of the Rules. Many of these filings are subject to the pleading cycle rules set forth in Section 76.7, while others have their own pleading cycle relative to the particular rule involved. For BSR petitions filed pursuant to Part 73, the pleading cycle will be the same as that mandated by Section 76.7 unless stated otherwise. Please note that petitions
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-270363A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-270363A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-270363A1.txt
  • review. CSR (cable special relief) petitions and CSC (cable show cause) petitions refer to cable-related matters pursuant to Part 76. The newly-designated BSR (broadcast special relief) petitions refer to certain non-application-related broadcast matters pursuant to Part 73. Parties seeking special relief pursuant to Part 76 are advised that such requests must be initiated through the special relief provisions of Section 76.7 of the Rules. Many of these filings are subject to the pleading cycle rules set forth in Section 76.7, while others have their own pleading cycle relative to the particular rule involved. For BSR petitions filed pursuant to Part 73, the pleading cycle will be the same as that mandated by Section 76.7 unless stated otherwise. Please note that petitions
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-270435A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-270435A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-270435A1.txt
  • review. CSR (cable special relief) petitions and CSC (cable show cause) petitions refer to cable-related matters pursuant to Part 76. The newly-designated BSR (broadcast special relief) petitions refer to certain non-application-related broadcast matters pursuant to Part 73. Parties seeking special relief pursuant to Part 76 are advised that such requests must be initiated through the special relief provisions of Section 76.7 of the Rules. Many of these filings are subject to the pleading cycle rules set forth in Section 76.7, while others have their own pleading cycle relative to the particular rule involved. For BSR petitions filed pursuant to Part 73, the pleading cycle will be the same as that mandated by Section 76.7 unless stated otherwise. Please note that petitions
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-270460A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-270460A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-270460A1.txt
  • review. CSR (cable special relief) petitions and CSC (cable show cause) petitions refer to cable-related matters pursuant to Part 76. The newly-designated BSR (broadcast special relief) petitions refer to certain non-application-related broadcast matters pursuant to Part 73. Parties seeking special relief pursuant to Part 76 are advised that such requests must be initiated through the special relief provisions of Section 76.7 of the Rules. Many of these filings are subject to the pleading cycle rules set forth in Section 76.7, while others have their own pleading cycle relative to the particular rule involved. For BSR petitions filed pursuant to Part 73, the pleading cycle will be the same as that mandated by Section 76.7 unless stated otherwise. Please note that petitions
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-270787A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-270787A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-270787A1.txt
  • review. CSR (cable special relief) petitions and CSC (cable show cause) petitions refer to cable-related matters pursuant to Part 76. The newly-designated BSR (broadcast special relief) petitions refer to certain non-application-related broadcast matters pursuant to Part 73. Parties seeking special relief pursuant to Part 76 are advised that such requests must be initiated through the special relief provisions of Section 76.7 of the Rules. Many of these filings are subject to the pleading cycle rules set forth in Section 76.7, while others have their own pleading cycle relative to the particular rule involved. For BSR petitions filed pursuant to Part 73, the pleading cycle will be the same as that mandated by Section 76.7 unless stated otherwise. Please note that petitions
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-271006A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-271006A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-271006A1.txt
  • review. CSR (cable special relief) petitions and CSC (cable show cause) petitions refer to cable-related matters pursuant to Part 76. The newly-designated BSR (broadcast special relief) petitions refer to certain non-application-related broadcast matters pursuant to Part 73. Parties seeking special relief pursuant to Part 76 are advised that such requests must be initiated through the special relief provisions of Section 76.7 of the Rules. Many of these filings are subject to the pleading cycle rules set forth in Section 76.7, while others have their own pleading cycle relative to the particular rule involved. For BSR petitions filed pursuant to Part 73, the pleading cycle will be the same as that mandated by Section 76.7 unless stated otherwise. Please note that petitions
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-271268A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-271268A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-271268A1.txt
  • review. CSR (cable special relief) petitions and CSC (cable show cause) petitions refer to cable-related matters pursuant to Part 76. The newly-designated BSR (broadcast special relief) petitions refer to certain non-application-related broadcast matters pursuant to Part 73. Parties seeking special relief pursuant to Part 76 are advised that such requests must be initiated through the special relief provisions of Section 76.7 of the Rules. Many of these filings are subject to the pleading cycle rules set forth in Section 76.7, while others have their own pleading cycle relative to the particular rule involved. For BSR petitions filed pursuant to Part 73, the pleading cycle will be the same as that mandated by Section 76.7 unless stated otherwise. Please note that petitions
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-271484A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-271484A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-271484A1.txt
  • review. CSR (cable special relief) petitions and CSC (cable show cause) petitions refer to cable-related matters pursuant to Part 76. The newly-designated BSR (broadcast special relief) petitions refer to certain non-application-related broadcast matters pursuant to Part 73. Parties seeking special relief pursuant to Part 76 are advised that such requests must be initiated through the special relief provisions of Section 76.7 of the Rules. Many of these filings are subject to the pleading cycle rules set forth in Section 76.7, while others have their own pleading cycle relative to the particular rule involved. For BSR petitions filed pursuant to Part 73, the pleading cycle will be the same as that mandated by Section 76.7 unless stated otherwise. Please note that petitions
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-271556A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-271556A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-271556A1.txt
  • review. CSR (cable special relief) petitions and CSC (cable show cause) petitions refer to cable-related matters pursuant to Part 76. The newly-designated BSR (broadcast special relief) petitions refer to certain non-application-related broadcast matters pursuant to Part 73. Parties seeking special relief pursuant to Part 76 are advised that such requests must be initiated through the special relief provisions of Section 76.7 of the Rules. Many of these filings are subject to the pleading cycle rules set forth in Section 76.7, while others have their own pleading cycle relative to the particular rule involved. For BSR petitions filed pursuant to Part 73, the pleading cycle will be the same as that mandated by Section 76.7 unless stated otherwise. Please note that petitions
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-271731A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-271731A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-271731A1.txt
  • review. CSR (cable special relief) petitions and CSC (cable show cause) petitions refer to cable-related matters pursuant to Part 76. The newly-designated BSR (broadcast special relief) petitions refer to certain non-application-related broadcast matters pursuant to Part 73. Parties seeking special relief pursuant to Part 76 are advised that such requests must be initiated through the special relief provisions of Section 76.7 of the Rules. Many of these filings are subject to the pleading cycle rules set forth in Section 76.7, while others have their own pleading cycle relative to the particular rule involved. For BSR petitions filed pursuant to Part 73, the pleading cycle will be the same as that mandated by Section 76.7 unless stated otherwise. Please note that petitions
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-272153A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-272153A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-272153A1.txt
  • review. CSR (cable special relief) petitions and CSC (cable show cause) petitions refer to cable-related matters pursuant to Part 76. The newly-designated BSR (broadcast special relief) petitions refer to certain non-application-related broadcast matters pursuant to Part 73. Parties seeking special relief pursuant to Part 76 are advised that such requests must be initiated through the special relief provisions of Section 76.7 of the Rules. Many of these filings are subject to the pleading cycle rules set forth in Section 76.7, while others have their own pleading cycle relative to the particular rule involved. For BSR petitions filed pursuant to Part 73, the pleading cycle will be the same as that mandated by Section 76.7 unless stated otherwise. Please note that petitions
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-272338A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-272338A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-272338A1.txt
  • review. CSR (cable special relief) petitions and CSC (cable show cause) petitions refer to cable-related matters pursuant to Part 76. The newly-designated BSR (broadcast special relief) petitions refer to certain non-application-related broadcast matters pursuant to Part 73. Parties seeking special relief pursuant to Part 76 are advised that such requests must be initiated through the special relief provisions of Section 76.7 of the Rules. Many of these filings are subject to the pleading cycle rules set forth in Section 76.7, while others have their own pleading cycle relative to the particular rule involved. For BSR petitions filed pursuant to Part 73, the pleading cycle will be the same as that mandated by Section 76.7 unless stated otherwise. Please note that petitions
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-272521A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-272521A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-272521A1.txt
  • review. CSR (cable special relief) petitions and CSC (cable show cause) petitions refer to cable-related matters pursuant to Part 76. The newly-designated BSR (broadcast special relief) petitions refer to certain non-application-related broadcast matters pursuant to Part 73. Parties seeking special relief pursuant to Part 76 are advised that such requests must be initiated through the special relief provisions of Section 76.7 of the Rules. Many of these filings are subject to the pleading cycle rules set forth in Section 76.7, while others have their own pleading cycle relative to the particular rule involved. For BSR petitions filed pursuant to Part 73, the pleading cycle will be the same as that mandated by Section 76.7 unless stated otherwise. Please note that petitions
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-272728A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-272728A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-272728A1.txt
  • review. CSR (cable special relief) petitions and CSC (cable show cause) petitions refer to cable-related matters pursuant to Part 76. The newly-designated BSR (broadcast special relief) petitions refer to certain non-application-related broadcast matters pursuant to Part 73. Parties seeking special relief pursuant to Part 76 are advised that such requests must be initiated through the special relief provisions of Section 76.7 of the Rules. Many of these filings are subject to the pleading cycle rules set forth in Section 76.7, while others have their own pleading cycle relative to the particular rule involved. For BSR petitions filed pursuant to Part 73, the pleading cycle will be the same as that mandated by Section 76.7 unless stated otherwise. Please note that petitions
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-272854A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-272854A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-272854A1.txt
  • review. CSR (cable special relief) petitions and CSC (cable show cause) petitions refer to cable-related matters pursuant to Part 76. The newly-designated BSR (broadcast special relief) petitions refer to certain non-application-related broadcast matters pursuant to Part 73. Parties seeking special relief pursuant to Part 76 are advised that such requests must be initiated through the special relief provisions of Section 76.7 of the Rules. Many of these filings are subject to the pleading cycle rules set forth in Section 76.7, while others have their own pleading cycle relative to the particular rule involved. For BSR petitions filed pursuant to Part 73, the pleading cycle will be the same as that mandated by Section 76.7 unless stated otherwise. Please note that petitions
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-272904A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-272904A1.txt
  • 99.2 97.9 98.2 98.3 98.9 $75,000 + 99.0 99.3 99.1 99.5 97.6 97.8 99.2 99.5 RACE HISPANIC TOTAL WHITE BLACK ORIGIN 29 Table 4 Percentage of Households with a Telephone by Income Unit Avail Unit Avail Unit Avail Unit Avail MARCH 2004 TOTAL 94.2 95.1 94.9 95.7 90.1 91.1 90.5 91.6 UNDER $5,000 80.1 83.4 82.1 85.1 76.9 79.8 74.9 76.7 $5,000 - $7,499 85.1 86.8 84.4 85.9 86.7 88.8 83.9 85.1 $7,500 - $9,999 88.1 89.4 89.2 90.5 82.8 84.2 85.5 87.7 $10,000 - $12,499 90.2 91.7 90.8 91.8 88.5 91.3 85.3 85.9 $12,500 - $14,999 90.8 92.8 91.9 93.8 87.9 89.8 88.0 90.1 $15,000 - $19,999 91.2 92.6 92.1 93.4 88.8 90.4 88.1 89.7 $20,000 - $24,999 94.2 95.1
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-272906A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-272906A1.txt
  • Increase is statistically significant at the 95% confidence level. # Decrease is statistically significant at the 95% confidence level. Note: Changes may not appear to be the same as calculated differences due to rounding. 10 Total Household Income in March 1984 Dollars * 1984 1985 1986 1987 1988 1989 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 $9,999 or less 77.4 77.8 76.7 72.8 75.8 81.4 79.6 81.8 79.1 85.2 83.1 79.9 $10,000 - $19,999 91.2 85.1 89.9 91.3 89.1 88.9 85.0 89.0 93.2 93.4 92.7 95.6 $20,000 - $29,999 91.0 96.6 96.2 92.2 94.1 97.6 94.9 95.5 95.0 96.3 94.1 96.1 $30,000 - $39,999 100.0 99.2 100.0 97.0 100.0 98.6 98.6 96.9 99.0 95.5 96.1 100.0 $40,000 or more 98.3 100.0 99.4
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-273121A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-273121A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-273121A1.txt
  • review. CSR (cable special relief) petitions and CSC (cable show cause) petitions refer to cable-related matters pursuant to Part 76. The newly-designated BSR (broadcast special relief) petitions refer to certain non-application-related broadcast matters pursuant to Part 73. Parties seeking special relief pursuant to Part 76 are advised that such requests must be initiated through the special relief provisions of Section 76.7 of the Rules. Many of these filings are subject to the pleading cycle rules set forth in Section 76.7, while others have their own pleading cycle relative to the particular rule involved. For BSR petitions filed pursuant to Part 73, the pleading cycle will be the same as that mandated by Section 76.7 unless stated otherwise. Please note that petitions
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-273281A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-273281A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-273281A1.txt
  • review. CSR (cable special relief) petitions and CSC (cable show cause) petitions refer to cable-related matters pursuant to Part 76. The newly-designated BSR (broadcast special relief) petitions refer to certain non-application-related broadcast matters pursuant to Part 73. Parties seeking special relief pursuant to Part 76 are advised that such requests must be initiated through the special relief provisions of Section 76.7 of the Rules. Many of these filings are subject to the pleading cycle rules set forth in Section 76.7, while others have their own pleading cycle relative to the particular rule involved. For BSR petitions filed pursuant to Part 73, the pleading cycle will be the same as that mandated by Section 76.7 unless stated otherwise. Please note that petitions
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-274170A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-274170A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-274170A1.txt
  • review. CSR (cable special relief) petitions and CSC (cable show cause) petitions refer to cable-related matters pursuant to Part 76. The newly-designated BSR (broadcast special relief) petitions refer to certain non-application-related broadcast matters pursuant to Part 73. Parties seeking special relief pursuant to Part 76 are advised that such requests must be initiated through the special relief provisions of Section 76.7 of the Rules. Many of these filings are subject to the pleading cycle rules set forth in Section 76.7, while others have their own pleading cycle relative to the particular rule involved. For BSR petitions filed pursuant to Part 73, the pleading cycle will be the same as that mandated by Section 76.7 unless stated otherwise. Please note that petitions
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-274873A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-274873A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-274873A1.txt
  • review. CSR (cable special relief) petitions and CSC (cable show cause) petitions refer to cable-related matters pursuant to Part 76. The newly-designated BSR (broadcast special relief) petitions refer to certain non-application-related broadcast matters pursuant to Part 73. Parties seeking special relief pursuant to Part 76 are advised that such requests must be initiated through the special relief provisions of Section 76.7 of the Rules. Many of these filings are subject to the pleading cycle rules set forth in Section 76.7, while others have their own pleading cycle relative to the particular rule involved. For BSR petitions filed pursuant to Part 73, the pleading cycle will be the same as that mandated by Section 76.7 unless stated otherwise. Please note that petitions
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-274896A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-274896A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-274896A1.txt
  • review. CSR (cable special relief) petitions and CSC (cable show cause) petitions refer to cable-related matters pursuant to Part 76. The newly-designated BSR (broadcast special relief) petitions refer to certain non-application-related broadcast matters pursuant to Part 73. Parties seeking special relief pursuant to Part 76 are advised that such requests must be initiated through the special relief provisions of Section 76.7 of the Rules. Many of these filings are subject to the pleading cycle rules set forth in Section 76.7, while others have their own pleading cycle relative to the particular rule involved. For BSR petitions filed pursuant to Part 73, the pleading cycle will be the same as that mandated by Section 76.7 unless stated otherwise. Please note that petitions
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-274972A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-274972A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-274972A1.txt
  • review. CSR (cable special relief) petitions and CSC (cable show cause) petitions refer to cable-related matters pursuant to Part 76. The newly-designated BSR (broadcast special relief) petitions refer to certain non-application-related broadcast matters pursuant to Part 73. Parties seeking special relief pursuant to Part 76 are advised that such requests must be initiated through the special relief provisions of Section 76.7 of the Rules. Many of these filings are subject to the pleading cycle rules set forth in Section 76.7, while others have their own pleading cycle relative to the particular rule involved. For BSR petitions filed pursuant to Part 73, the pleading cycle will be the same as that mandated by Section 76.7 unless stated otherwise. Please note that petitions
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-275172A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-275172A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-275172A1.txt
  • review. CSR (cable special relief) petitions and CSC (cable show cause) petitions refer to cable-related matters pursuant to Part 76. The newly-designated BSR (broadcast special relief) petitions refer to certain non-application-related broadcast matters pursuant to Part 73. Parties seeking special relief pursuant to Part 76 are advised that such requests must be initiated through the special relief provisions of Section 76.7 of the Rules. Many of these filings are subject to the pleading cycle rules set forth in Section 76.7, while others have their own pleading cycle relative to the particular rule involved. For BSR petitions filed pursuant to Part 73, the pleading cycle will be the same as that mandated by Section 76.7 unless stated otherwise. Please note that petitions
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-275231A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-275231A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-275231A1.txt
  • review. CSR (cable special relief) petitions and CSC (cable show cause) petitions refer to cable-related matters pursuant to Part 76. The newly-designated BSR (broadcast special relief) petitions refer to certain non-application-related broadcast matters pursuant to Part 73. Parties seeking special relief pursuant to Part 76 are advised that such requests must be initiated through the special relief provisions of Section 76.7 of the Rules. Many of these filings are subject to the pleading cycle rules set forth in Section 76.7, while others have their own pleading cycle relative to the particular rule involved. For BSR petitions filed pursuant to Part 73, the pleading cycle will be the same as that mandated by Section 76.7 unless stated otherwise. Please note that petitions
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-275412A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-275412A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-275412A1.txt
  • review. CSR (cable special relief) petitions and CSC (cable show cause) petitions refer to cable-related matters pursuant to Part 76. The newly-designated BSR (broadcast special relief) petitions refer to certain non-application-related broadcast matters pursuant to Part 73. Parties seeking special relief pursuant to Part 76 are advised that such requests must be initiated through the special relief provisions of Section 76.7 of the Rules. Many of these filings are subject to the pleading cycle rules set forth in Section 76.7, while others have their own pleading cycle relative to the particular rule involved. For BSR petitions filed pursuant to Part 73, the pleading cycle will be the same as that mandated by Section 76.7 unless stated otherwise. Please note that petitions
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-275471A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-275471A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-275471A1.txt
  • review. CSR (cable special relief) petitions and CSC (cable show cause) petitions refer to cable-related matters pursuant to Part 76. The newly-designated BSR (broadcast special relief) petitions refer to certain non-application-related broadcast matters pursuant to Part 73. Parties seeking special relief pursuant to Part 76 are advised that such requests must be initiated through the special relief provisions of Section 76.7 of the Rules. Many of these filings are subject to the pleading cycle rules set forth in Section 76.7, while others have their own pleading cycle relative to the particular rule involved. For BSR petitions filed pursuant to Part 73, the pleading cycle will be the same as that mandated by Section 76.7 unless stated otherwise. Please note that petitions
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-275535A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-275535A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-275535A1.txt
  • review. CSR (cable special relief) petitions and CSC (cable show cause) petitions refer to cable-related matters pursuant to Part 76. The newly-designated BSR (broadcast special relief) petitions refer to certain non-application-related broadcast matters pursuant to Part 73. Parties seeking special relief pursuant to Part 76 are advised that such requests must be initiated through the special relief provisions of Section 76.7 of the Rules. Many of these filings are subject to the pleading cycle rules set forth in Section 76.7, while others have their own pleading cycle relative to the particular rule involved. For BSR petitions filed pursuant to Part 73, the pleading cycle will be the same as that mandated by Section 76.7 unless stated otherwise. Please note that petitions
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-275763A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-275763A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-275763A1.txt
  • review. CSR (cable special relief) petitions and CSC (cable show cause) petitions refer to cable-related matters pursuant to Part 76. The newly-designated BSR (broadcast special relief) petitions refer to certain non-application-related broadcast matters pursuant to Part 73. Parties seeking special relief pursuant to Part 76 are advised that such requests must be initiated through the special relief provisions of Section 76.7 of the Rules. Many of these filings are subject to the pleading cycle rules set forth in Section 76.7, while others have their own pleading cycle relative to the particular rule involved. For BSR petitions filed pursuant to Part 73, the pleading cycle will be the same as that mandated by Section 76.7 unless stated otherwise. Please note that petitions
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-275874A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-275874A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-275874A1.txt
  • review. CSR (cable special relief) petitions and CSC (cable show cause) petitions refer to cable-related matters pursuant to Part 76. The newly-designated BSR (broadcast special relief) petitions refer to certain non-application-related broadcast matters pursuant to Part 73. Parties seeking special relief pursuant to Part 76 are advised that such requests must be initiated through the special relief provisions of Section 76.7 of the Rules. Many of these filings are subject to the pleading cycle rules set forth in Section 76.7, while others have their own pleading cycle relative to the particular rule involved. For BSR petitions filed pursuant to Part 73, the pleading cycle will be the same as that mandated by Section 76.7 unless stated otherwise. Please note that petitions
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-276346A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-276346A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-276346A1.txt
  • review. CSR (cable special relief) petitions and CSC (cable show cause) petitions refer to cable-related matters pursuant to Part 76. The newly-designated BSR (broadcast special relief) petitions refer to certain non-application-related broadcast matters pursuant to Part 73. Parties seeking special relief pursuant to Part 76 are advised that such requests must be initiated through the special relief provisions of Section 76.7 of the Rules. Many of these filings are subject to the pleading cycle rules set forth in Section 76.7, while others have their own pleading cycle relative to the particular rule involved. For BSR petitions filed pursuant to Part 73, the pleading cycle will be the same as that mandated by Section 76.7 unless stated otherwise. Please note that petitions
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-276625A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-276625A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-276625A1.txt
  • review. CSR (cable special relief) petitions and CSC (cable show cause) petitions refer to cable-related matters pursuant to Part 76. The newly-designated BSR (broadcast special relief) petitions refer to certain non-application-related broadcast matters pursuant to Part 73. Parties seeking special relief pursuant to Part 76 are advised that such requests must be initiated through the special relief provisions of Section 76.7 of the Rules. Many of these filings are subject to the pleading cycle rules set forth in Section 76.7, while others have their own pleading cycle relative to the particular rule involved. For BSR petitions filed pursuant to Part 73, the pleading cycle will be the same as that mandated by Section 76.7 unless stated otherwise. Please note that petitions
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-276745A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-276745A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-276745A1.txt
  • review. CSR (cable special relief) petitions and CSC (cable show cause) petitions refer to cable-related matters pursuant to Part 76. The newly-designated BSR (broadcast special relief) petitions refer to certain non-application-related broadcast matters pursuant to Part 73. Parties seeking special relief pursuant to Part 76 are advised that such requests must be initiated through the special relief provisions of Section 76.7 of the Rules. Many of these filings are subject to the pleading cycle rules set forth in Section 76.7, while others have their own pleading cycle relative to the particular rule involved. For BSR petitions filed pursuant to Part 73, the pleading cycle will be the same as that mandated by Section 76.7 unless stated otherwise. Please note that petitions
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-276977A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-276977A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-276977A1.txt
  • review. CSR (cable special relief) petitions and CSC (cable show cause) petitions refer to cable-related matters pursuant to Part 76. The newly-designated BSR (broadcast special relief) petitions refer to certain non-application-related broadcast matters pursuant to Part 73. Parties seeking special relief pursuant to Part 76 are advised that such requests must be initiated through the special relief provisions of Section 76.7 of the Rules. Many of these filings are subject to the pleading cycle rules set forth in Section 76.7, while others have their own pleading cycle relative to the particular rule involved. For BSR petitions filed pursuant to Part 73, the pleading cycle will be the same as that mandated by Section 76.7 unless stated otherwise. Please note that petitions
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-277132A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-277132A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-277132A1.txt
  • review. CSR (cable special relief) petitions and CSC (cable show cause) petitions refer to cable-related matters pursuant to Part 76. The newly-designated BSR (broadcast special relief) petitions refer to certain non-application-related broadcast matters pursuant to Part 73. Parties seeking special relief pursuant to Part 76 are advised that such requests must be initiated through the special relief provisions of Section 76.7 of the Rules. Many of these filings are subject to the pleading cycle rules set forth in Section 76.7, while others have their own pleading cycle relative to the particular rule involved. For BSR petitions filed pursuant to Part 73, the pleading cycle will be the same as that mandated by Section 76.7 unless stated otherwise. Please note that petitions
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-277272A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-277272A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-277272A1.txt
  • review. CSR (cable special relief) petitions and CSC (cable show cause) petitions refer to cable-related matters pursuant to Part 76. The newly-designated BSR (broadcast special relief) petitions refer to certain non-application-related broadcast matters pursuant to Part 73. Parties seeking special relief pursuant to Part 76 are advised that such requests must be initiated through the special relief provisions of Section 76.7 of the Rules. Many of these filings are subject to the pleading cycle rules set forth in Section 76.7, while others have their own pleading cycle relative to the particular rule involved. For BSR petitions filed pursuant to Part 73, the pleading cycle will be the same as that mandated by Section 76.7 unless stated otherwise. Please note that petitions
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-277472A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-277472A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-277472A1.txt
  • review. CSR (cable special relief) petitions and CSC (cable show cause) petitions refer to cable-related matters pursuant to Part 76. The newly-designated BSR (broadcast special relief) petitions refer to certain non-application-related broadcast matters pursuant to Part 73. Parties seeking special relief pursuant to Part 76 are advised that such requests must be initiated through the special relief provisions of Section 76.7 of the Rules. Many of these filings are subject to the pleading cycle rules set forth in Section 76.7, while others have their own pleading cycle relative to the particular rule involved. For BSR petitions filed pursuant to Part 73, the pleading cycle will be the same as that mandated by Section 76.7 unless stated otherwise. Please note that petitions
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-277861A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-277861A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-277861A1.txt
  • review. CSR (cable special relief) petitions and CSC (cable show cause) petitions refer to cable-related matters pursuant to Part 76. The newly-designated BSR (broadcast special relief) petitions refer to certain non-application-related broadcast matters pursuant to Part 73. Parties seeking special relief pursuant to Part 76 are advised that such requests must be initiated through the special relief provisions of Section 76.7 of the Rules. Many of these filings are subject to the pleading cycle rules set forth in Section 76.7, while others have their own pleading cycle relative to the particular rule involved. For BSR petitions filed pursuant to Part 73, the pleading cycle will be the same as that mandated by Section 76.7 unless stated otherwise. Please note that petitions
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-278214A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-278214A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-278214A1.txt
  • review. CSR (cable special relief) petitions and CSC (cable show cause) petitions refer to cable-related matters pursuant to Part 76. The newly-designated BSR (broadcast special relief) petitions refer to certain non-application-related broadcast matters pursuant to Part 73. Parties seeking special relief pursuant to Part 76 are advised that such requests must be initiated through the special relief provisions of Section 76.7 of the Rules. Many of these filings are subject to the pleading cycle rules set forth in Section 76.7, while others have their own pleading cycle relative to the particular rule involved. For BSR petitions filed pursuant to Part 73, the pleading cycle will be the same as that mandated by Section 76.7 unless stated otherwise. Please note that petitions
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-278578A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-278578A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-278578A1.txt
  • review. CSR (cable special relief) petitions and CSC (cable show cause) petitions refer to cable-related matters pursuant to Part 76. The newly-designated BSR (broadcast special relief) petitions refer to certain non-application-related broadcast matters pursuant to Part 73. Parties seeking special relief pursuant to Part 76 are advised that such requests must be initiated through the special relief provisions of Section 76.7 of the Rules. Many of these filings are subject to the pleading cycle rules set forth in Section 76.7, while others have their own pleading cycle relative to the particular rule involved. For BSR petitions filed pursuant to Part 73, the pleading cycle will be the same as that mandated by Section 76.7 unless stated otherwise. Please note that petitions
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-278775A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-278775A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-278775A1.txt
  • review. CSR (cable special relief) petitions and CSC (cable show cause) petitions refer to cable-related matters pursuant to Part 76. The newly-designated BSR (broadcast special relief) petitions refer to certain non-application-related broadcast matters pursuant to Part 73. Parties seeking special relief pursuant to Part 76 are advised that such requests must be initiated through the special relief provisions of Section 76.7 of the Rules. Many of these filings are subject to the pleading cycle rules set forth in Section 76.7, while others have their own pleading cycle relative to the particular rule involved. For BSR petitions filed pursuant to Part 73, the pleading cycle will be the same as that mandated by Section 76.7 unless stated otherwise. Please note that petitions
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-278883A2.pdf
  • toward ensuring that MVPD subscribers are able to enjoy this technological advancement. As explained below, this milestone has been achieved with respect to cable subscribers through a 2007 Commission Order. The Commission is expected to complete this milestone with respect to satellite subscribers before the end of the digital transition. 89 47 C.F.R. §§ 76.1614, 76.1709. 90 47 C.F.R. §§ 76.7, 76.61. 43 1. Timeframes and Steps: Cable Operations Commence proceeding to consider digital signal quality requirement with respect to cable operations (COMPLETED 1998)91: The Communications Act requires that cable operators carry local broadcast signals "without material degradation," and instructs the Commission to "adopt carriage standards to ensure that, to the extent technically feasible, the quality of signal processing and carriage
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-278924A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-278924A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-278924A1.txt
  • review. CSR (cable special relief) petitions and CSC (cable show cause) petitions refer to cable-related matters pursuant to Part 76. The newly-designated BSR (broadcast special relief) petitions refer to certain non-application-related broadcast matters pursuant to Part 73. Parties seeking special relief pursuant to Part 76 are advised that such requests must be initiated through the special relief provisions of Section 76.7 of the Rules. Many of these filings are subject to the pleading cycle rules set forth in Section 76.7, while others have their own pleading cycle relative to the particular rule involved. For BSR petitions filed pursuant to Part 73, the pleading cycle will be the same as that mandated by Section 76.7 unless stated otherwise. Please note that petitions
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-279099A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-279099A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-279099A1.txt
  • review. CSR (cable special relief) petitions and CSC (cable show cause) petitions refer to cable-related matters pursuant to Part 76. The newly-designated BSR (broadcast special relief) petitions refer to certain non-application-related broadcast matters pursuant to Part 73. Parties seeking special relief pursuant to Part 76 are advised that such requests must be initiated through the special relief provisions of Section 76.7 of the Rules. Many of these filings are subject to the pleading cycle rules set forth in Section 76.7, while others have their own pleading cycle relative to the particular rule involved. For BSR petitions filed pursuant to Part 73, the pleading cycle will be the same as that mandated by Section 76.7 unless stated otherwise. Please note that petitions
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-279226A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-279226A1.txt
  • 86.4 EMPLOYED 94.6 96.1 95.4 96.7 87.9 91.0 86.3 88.3 UNEMPLOYED 82.7 86.1 85.3 88.2 74.0 79.3 77.0 79.6 NOT IN LABOR FORCE 92.7 93.9 94.2 95.2 82.2 85.5 82.5 84.1 1988 ANNUAL AVERAGE TOTAL CNP 93.8 95.2 94.9 96.1 85.6 88.7 83.6 86.1 EMPLOYED 94.9 96.2 95.6 96.8 88.5 91.5 85.4 87.7 UNEMPLOYED 83.3 86.8 85.9 88.9 75.4 80.5 76.7 80.3 NOT IN LABOR FORCE 92.8 94.2 94.3 95.5 83.1 86.0 81.5 84.0 1989 ANNUAL AVERAGE TOTAL CNP 94.1 95.5 95.3 96.4 85.8 89.0 84.7 87.0 EMPLOYED 95.2 96.5 96.0 97.1 88.8 91.7 86.6 89.0 UNEMPLOYED 83.9 87.1 86.2 88.8 77.0 82.5 75.1 78.6 NOT IN LABOR FORCE 93.1 94.4 94.7 95.7 82.8 85.9 82.6 84.6 1990 ANNUAL AVERAGE TOTAL
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-279226A8.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-279226A8.txt
  • 86.4 EMPLOYED 94.6 96.1 95.4 96.7 87.9 91.0 86.3 88.3 UNEMPLOYED 82.7 86.1 85.3 88.2 74.0 79.3 77.0 79.6 NOT IN LABOR FORCE 92.7 93.9 94.2 95.2 82.2 85.5 82.5 84.1 1988 ANNUAL AVERAGE TOTAL CNP 93.8 95.2 94.9 96.1 85.6 88.7 83.6 86.1 EMPLOYED 94.9 96.2 95.6 96.8 88.5 91.5 85.4 87.7 UNEMPLOYED 83.3 86.8 85.9 88.9 75.4 80.5 76.7 80.3 NOT IN LABOR FORCE 92.8 94.2 94.3 95.5 83.1 86.0 81.5 84.0 1989 ANNUAL AVERAGE TOTAL CNP 94.1 95.5 95.3 96.4 85.8 89.0 84.7 87.0 EMPLOYED 95.2 96.5 96.0 97.1 88.8 91.7 86.6 89.0 UNEMPLOYED 83.9 87.1 86.2 88.8 77.0 82.5 75.1 78.6 NOT IN LABOR FORCE 93.1 94.4 94.7 95.7 82.8 85.9 82.6 84.6 1990 ANNUAL AVERAGE TOTAL
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-279226A9.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-279226A9.txt
  • November 112.4 99.8 120.8 82.7 80.7 87.0 67.5 December 112.2 99.9 121.0 82.6 80.7 86.7 67.4 2003January 112.6 100.4 121.3 83.4 81.9 87.0 67.6 February 113.5 100.5 121.2 83.5 82.2 86.9 67.7 March 114.2 99.7 121.7 81.5 79.8 85.1 67.6 April 113.9 98.7 121.9 79.2 77.4 83.1 67.5 May 113.7 98.1 122.0 77.9 76.0 81.8 67.5 June 113.8 97.5 122.2 76.7 74.6 80.8 66.3 July 114.0 98.1 123.1 77.2 75.6 80.8 66.2 August 114.4 97.8 123.7 76.0 74.0 79.7 66.1 September 114.8 97.4 123.8 75.2 73.3 78.9 66.1 October 114.6 97.1 124.0 74.3 72.1 78.7 66.1 November 114.3 97.2 124.2 74.1 71.8 78.3 66.7 December 114.2 97.2 124.1 74.3 72.0 78.6 66.5 Table 7.4 Consumer Price Indices (December 1997 = 100)
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-279306A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-279306A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-279306A1.txt
  • review. CSR (cable special relief) petitions and CSC (cable show cause) petitions refer to cable-related matters pursuant to Part 76. The newly-designated BSR (broadcast special relief) petitions refer to certain non-application-related broadcast matters pursuant to Part 73. Parties seeking special relief pursuant to Part 76 are advised that such requests must be initiated through the special relief provisions of Section 76.7 of the Rules. Many of these filings are subject to the pleading cycle rules set forth in Section 76.7, while others have their own pleading cycle relative to the particular rule involved. For BSR petitions filed pursuant to Part 73, the pleading cycle will be the same as that mandated by Section 76.7 unless stated otherwise. Please note that petitions
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-279575A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-279575A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-279575A1.txt
  • review. CSR (cable special relief) petitions and CSC (cable show cause) petitions refer to cable-related matters pursuant to Part 76. The newly-designated BSR (broadcast special relief) petitions refer to certain non-application-related broadcast matters pursuant to Part 73. Parties seeking special relief pursuant to Part 76 are advised that such requests must be initiated through the special relief provisions of Section 76.7 of the Rules. Many of these filings are subject to the pleading cycle rules set forth in Section 76.7, while others have their own pleading cycle relative to the particular rule involved. For BSR petitions filed pursuant to Part 73, the pleading cycle will be the same as that mandated by Section 76.7 unless stated otherwise. Please note that petitions
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-279716A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-279716A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-279716A1.txt
  • review. CSR (cable special relief) petitions and CSC (cable show cause) petitions refer to cable-related matters pursuant to Part 76. The newly-designated BSR (broadcast special relief) petitions refer to certain non-application-related broadcast matters pursuant to Part 73. Parties seeking special relief pursuant to Part 76 are advised that such requests must be initiated through the special relief provisions of Section 76.7 of the Rules. Many of these filings are subject to the pleading cycle rules set forth in Section 76.7, while others have their own pleading cycle relative to the particular rule involved. For BSR petitions filed pursuant to Part 73, the pleading cycle will be the same as that mandated by Section 76.7 unless stated otherwise. Please note that petitions
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-279940A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-279940A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-279940A1.txt
  • review. CSR (cable special relief) petitions and CSC (cable show cause) petitions refer to cable-related matters pursuant to Part 76. The newly-designated BSR (broadcast special relief) petitions refer to certain non-application-related broadcast matters pursuant to Part 73. Parties seeking special relief pursuant to Part 76 are advised that such requests must be initiated through the special relief provisions of Section 76.7 of the Rules. Many of these filings are subject to the pleading cycle rules set forth in Section 76.7, while others have their own pleading cycle relative to the particular rule involved. For BSR petitions filed pursuant to Part 73, the pleading cycle will be the same as that mandated by Section 76.7 unless stated otherwise. Please note that petitions
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-279997A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-279997A1.txt
  • 86.4 EMPLOYED 94.6 96.1 95.4 96.7 87.9 91.0 86.3 88.3 UNEMPLOYED 82.7 86.1 85.3 88.2 74.0 79.3 77.0 79.6 NOT IN LABOR FORCE 92.7 93.9 94.2 95.2 82.2 85.5 82.5 84.1 1988 ANNUAL AVERAGE TOTAL CNP 93.8 95.2 94.9 96.1 85.6 88.7 83.6 86.1 EMPLOYED 94.9 96.2 95.6 96.8 88.5 91.5 85.4 87.7 UNEMPLOYED 83.3 86.8 85.9 88.9 75.4 80.5 76.7 80.3 NOT IN LABOR FORCE 92.8 94.2 94.3 95.5 83.1 86.0 81.5 84.0 1989 ANNUAL AVERAGE TOTAL CNP 94.1 95.5 95.3 96.4 85.8 89.0 84.7 87.0 EMPLOYED 95.2 96.5 96.0 97.1 88.8 91.7 86.6 89.0 UNEMPLOYED 83.9 87.1 86.2 88.8 77.0 82.5 75.1 78.6 NOT IN LABOR FORCE 93.1 94.4 94.7 95.7 82.8 85.9 82.6 84.6 1990 ANNUAL AVERAGE TOTAL
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-280238A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-280238A1.pdf
  • signals are distributed to the public by the cable system. SPECIAL RELIEF PETITIONS On petition for special relief by any interested person, the Commission may waive any provision of the rules relating to cable television systems or issue a ruling on a complaint or disputed question. A fee will be charged for Cable Special Relief Petitions filed according to Section 76.7 of the Rules seeking the imposition of special requirements beyond those provided for in the rules. CABLE COMMUNITY REGISTRATION A Cable Community Registration (Form 322) must be filed electronically prior to commencing operations, to provide the Commission with an identification of the system's operator, a description of the television broadcast signals to be carried, and certain other information called for
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-280279A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-280279A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-280279A1.txt
  • review. CSR (cable special relief) petitions and CSC (cable show cause) petitions refer to cable-related matters pursuant to Part 76. The newly-designated BSR (broadcast special relief) petitions refer to certain non-application-related broadcast matters pursuant to Part 73. Parties seeking special relief pursuant to Part 76 are advised that such requests must be initiated through the special relief provisions of Section 76.7 of the Rules. Many of these filings are subject to the pleading cycle rules set forth in Section 76.7, while others have their own pleading cycle relative to the particular rule involved. For BSR petitions filed pursuant to Part 73, the pleading cycle will be the same as that mandated by Section 76.7 unless stated otherwise. Please note that petitions
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-280485A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-280485A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-280485A1.txt
  • review. CSR (cable special relief) petitions and CSC (cable show cause) petitions refer to cable-related matters pursuant to Part 76. The newly-designated BSR (broadcast special relief) petitions refer to certain non-application-related broadcast matters pursuant to Part 73. Parties seeking special relief pursuant to Part 76 are advised that such requests must be initiated through the special relief provisions of Section 76.7 of the Rules. Many of these filings are subject to the pleading cycle rules set forth in Section 76.7, while others have their own pleading cycle relative to the particular rule involved. For BSR petitions filed pursuant to Part 73, the pleading cycle will be the same as that mandated by Section 76.7 unless stated otherwise. Please note that petitions
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-280533A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-280533A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-280533A1.txt
  • review. CSR (cable special relief) petitions and CSC (cable show cause) petitions refer to cable-related matters pursuant to Part 76. The newly-designated BSR (broadcast special relief) petitions refer to certain non-application-related broadcast matters pursuant to Part 73. Parties seeking special relief pursuant to Part 76 are advised that such requests must be initiated through the special relief provisions of Section 76.7 of the Rules. Many of these filings are subject to the pleading cycle rules set forth in Section 76.7, while others have their own pleading cycle relative to the particular rule involved. For BSR petitions filed pursuant to Part 73, the pleading cycle will be the same as that mandated by Section 76.7 unless stated otherwise. Please note that petitions
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-280683A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-280683A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-280683A1.txt
  • review. CSR (cable special relief) petitions and CSC (cable show cause) petitions refer to cable-related matters pursuant to Part 76. The newly-designated BSR (broadcast special relief) petitions refer to certain non-application-related broadcast matters pursuant to Part 73. Parties seeking special relief pursuant to Part 76 are advised that such requests must be initiated through the special relief provisions of Section 76.7 of the Rules. Many of these filings are subject to the pleading cycle rules set forth in Section 76.7, while others have their own pleading cycle relative to the particular rule involved. For BSR petitions filed pursuant to Part 73, the pleading cycle will be the same as that mandated by Section 76.7 unless stated otherwise. Please note that petitions
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-281004A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-281004A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-281004A1.txt
  • review. CSR (cable special relief) petitions and CSC (cable show cause) petitions refer to cable-related matters pursuant to Part 76. The newly-designated BSR (broadcast special relief) petitions refer to certain non-application-related broadcast matters pursuant to Part 73. Parties seeking special relief pursuant to Part 76 are advised that such requests must be initiated through the special relief provisions of Section 76.7 of the Rules. Many of these filings are subject to the pleading cycle rules set forth in Section 76.7, while others have their own pleading cycle relative to the particular rule involved. For BSR petitions filed pursuant to Part 73, the pleading cycle will be the same as that mandated by Section 76.7 unless stated otherwise. Please note that petitions
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-281300A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-281300A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-281300A1.txt
  • review. CSR (cable special relief) petitions and CSC (cable show cause) petitions refer to cable-related matters pursuant to Part 76. The newly-designated BSR (broadcast special relief) petitions refer to certain non-application-related broadcast matters pursuant to Part 73. Parties seeking special relief pursuant to Part 76 are advised that such requests must be initiated through the special relief provisions of Section 76.7 of the Rules. Many of these filings are subject to the pleading cycle rules set forth in Section 76.7, while others have their own pleading cycle relative to the particular rule involved. For BSR petitions filed pursuant to Part 73, the pleading cycle will be the same as that mandated by Section 76.7 unless stated otherwise. Please note that petitions
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-281473A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-281473A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-281473A1.txt
  • review. CSR (cable special relief) petitions and CSC (cable show cause) petitions refer to cable-related matters pursuant to Part 76. The newly-designated BSR (broadcast special relief) petitions refer to certain non-application-related broadcast matters pursuant to Part 73. Parties seeking special relief pursuant to Part 76 are advised that such requests must be initiated through the special relief provisions of Section 76.7 of the Rules. Many of these filings are subject to the pleading cycle rules set forth in Section 76.7, while others have their own pleading cycle relative to the particular rule involved. For BSR petitions filed pursuant to Part 73, the pleading cycle will be the same as that mandated by Section 76.7 unless stated otherwise. Please note that petitions
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-281624A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-281624A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-281624A1.txt
  • review. CSR (cable special relief) petitions and CSC (cable show cause) petitions refer to cable-related matters pursuant to Part 76. The newly-designated BSR (broadcast special relief) petitions refer to certain non-application-related broadcast matters pursuant to Part 73. Parties seeking special relief pursuant to Part 76 are advised that such requests must be initiated through the special relief provisions of Section 76.7 of the Rules. Many of these filings are subject to the pleading cycle rules set forth in Section 76.7, while others have their own pleading cycle relative to the particular rule involved. For BSR petitions filed pursuant to Part 73, the pleading cycle will be the same as that mandated by Section 76.7 unless stated otherwise. Please note that petitions
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-281767A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-281767A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-281767A1.txt
  • review. CSR (cable special relief) petitions and CSC (cable show cause) petitions refer to cable-related matters pursuant to Part 76. The newly-designated BSR (broadcast special relief) petitions refer to certain non-application-related broadcast matters pursuant to Part 73. Parties seeking special relief pursuant to Part 76 are advised that such requests must be initiated through the special relief provisions of Section 76.7 of the Rules. Many of these filings are subject to the pleading cycle rules set forth in Section 76.7, while others have their own pleading cycle relative to the particular rule involved. For BSR petitions filed pursuant to Part 73, the pleading cycle will be the same as that mandated by Section 76.7 unless stated otherwise. Please note that petitions
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-281916A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-281916A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-281916A1.txt
  • review. CSR (cable special relief) petitions and CSC (cable show cause) petitions refer to cable-related matters pursuant to Part 76. The newly-designated BSR (broadcast special relief) petitions refer to certain non-application-related broadcast matters pursuant to Part 73. Parties seeking special relief pursuant to Part 76 are advised that such requests must be initiated through the special relief provisions of Section 76.7 of the Rules. Many of these filings are subject to the pleading cycle rules set forth in Section 76.7, while others have their own pleading cycle relative to the particular rule involved. For BSR petitions filed pursuant to Part 73, the pleading cycle will be the same as that mandated by Section 76.7 unless stated otherwise. Please note that petitions
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-282197A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-282197A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-282197A1.txt
  • review. CSR (cable special relief) petitions and CSC (cable show cause) petitions refer to cable-related matters pursuant to Part 76. The newly-designated BSR (broadcast special relief) petitions refer to certain non-application-related broadcast matters pursuant to Part 73. Parties seeking special relief pursuant to Part 76 are advised that such requests must be initiated through the special relief provisions of Section 76.7 of the Rules. Many of these filings are subject to the pleading cycle rules set forth in Section 76.7, while others have their own pleading cycle relative to the particular rule involved. For BSR petitions filed pursuant to Part 73, the pleading cycle will be the same as that mandated by Section 76.7 unless stated otherwise. Please note that petitions
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-282385A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-282385A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-282385A1.txt
  • review. CSR (cable special relief) petitions and CSC (cable show cause) petitions refer to cable-related matters pursuant to Part 76. The newly-designated BSR (broadcast special relief) petitions refer to certain non-application-related broadcast matters pursuant to Part 73. Parties seeking special relief pursuant to Part 76 are advised that such requests must be initiated through the special relief provisions of Section 76.7 of the Rules. Many of these filings are subject to the pleading cycle rules set forth in Section 76.7, while others have their own pleading cycle relative to the particular rule involved. For BSR petitions filed pursuant to Part 73, the pleading cycle will be the same as that mandated by Section 76.7 unless stated otherwise. Please note that petitions
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-282589A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-282589A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-282589A1.txt
  • review. CSR (cable special relief) petitions and CSC (cable show cause) petitions refer to cable-related matters pursuant to Part 76. The newly-designated BSR (broadcast special relief) petitions refer to certain non-application-related broadcast matters pursuant to Part 73. Parties seeking special relief pursuant to Part 76 are advised that such requests must be initiated through the special relief provisions of Section 76.7 of the Rules. Many of these filings are subject to the pleading cycle rules set forth in Section 76.7, while others have their own pleading cycle relative to the particular rule involved. For BSR petitions filed pursuant to Part 73, the pleading cycle will be the same as that mandated by Section 76.7 unless stated otherwise. Please note that petitions
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-282624A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-282624A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-282624A1.txt
  • review. CSR (cable special relief) petitions and CSC (cable show cause) petitions refer to cable-related matters pursuant to Part 76. The newly-designated BSR (broadcast special relief) petitions refer to certain non-application-related broadcast matters pursuant to Part 73. Parties seeking special relief pursuant to Part 76 are advised that such requests must be initiated through the special relief provisions of Section 76.7 of the Rules. Many of these filings are subject to the pleading cycle rules set forth in Section 76.7, while others have their own pleading cycle relative to the particular rule involved. For BSR petitions filed pursuant to Part 73, the pleading cycle will be the same as that mandated by Section 76.7 unless stated otherwise. Please note that petitions
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-282813A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-282813A1.txt
  • 24.8 797.4 286.9 71.7 438.8 797.4 MA Michigan 1,009.9 0.4 1,009.5 256.9 752.6 279.0 80.7 369.5 729.2 23.4 MI Minnesota 437.6 0.0 437.6 60.2 377.5 84.1 40.1 234.6 358.8 18.7 MN Mississippi 271.5 1.0 270.5 26.5 244.0 92.4 36.8 103.7 232.9 11.0 MS Missouri 798.8 1.7 797.1 220.8 576.4 188.9 62.0 308.3 559.2 17.2 MO Montana 116.6 16.4 100.2 23.6 76.7 27.3 10.7 34.7 72.7 4.0 MT Nebraska 217.1 4.5 212.6 56.2 156.4 41.0 19.8 91.5 152.3 4.1 NE Nevada 251.1 250.9 19.3 231.6 86.3 38.6 104.1 229.0 2.5 NV New Hampshire 167.4 0.3 167.1 19.2 147.9 54.1 17.0 76.8 147.9 NH New Jersey 1,396.8 2.8 1,394.0 174.1 1,219.9 401.0 123.8 695.1 1,219.9 NJ New Mexico 263.2 0.0 263.2 48.6 214.6
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-282903A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-282903A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-282903A1.txt
  • review. CSR (cable special relief) petitions and CSC (cable show cause) petitions refer to cable-related matters pursuant to Part 76. The newly-designated BSR (broadcast special relief) petitions refer to certain non-application-related broadcast matters pursuant to Part 73. Parties seeking special relief pursuant to Part 76 are advised that such requests must be initiated through the special relief provisions of Section 76.7 of the Rules. Many of these filings are subject to the pleading cycle rules set forth in Section 76.7, while others have their own pleading cycle relative to the particular rule involved. For BSR petitions filed pursuant to Part 73, the pleading cycle will be the same as that mandated by Section 76.7 unless stated otherwise. Please note that petitions
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-283091A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-283091A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-283091A1.txt
  • review. CSR (cable special relief) petitions and CSC (cable show cause) petitions refer to cable-related matters pursuant to Part 76. The newly-designated BSR (broadcast special relief) petitions refer to certain non-application-related broadcast matters pursuant to Part 73. Parties seeking special relief pursuant to Part 76 are advised that such requests must be initiated through the special relief provisions of Section 76.7 of the Rules. Many of these filings are subject to the pleading cycle rules set forth in Section 76.7, while others have their own pleading cycle relative to the particular rule involved. For BSR petitions filed pursuant to Part 73, the pleading cycle will be the same as that mandated by Section 76.7 unless stated otherwise. Please note that petitions
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-283443A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-283443A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-283443A1.txt
  • review. CSR (cable special relief) petitions and CSC (cable show cause) petitions refer to cable-related matters pursuant to Part 76. The newly-designated BSR (broadcast special relief) petitions refer to certain non-application-related broadcast matters pursuant to Part 73. Parties seeking special relief pursuant to Part 76 are advised that such requests must be initiated through the special relief provisions of Section 76.7 of the Rules. Many of these filings are subject to the pleading cycle rules set forth in Section 76.7, while others have their own pleading cycle relative to the particular rule involved. For BSR petitions filed pursuant to Part 73, the pleading cycle will be the same as that mandated by Section 76.7 unless stated otherwise. Please note that petitions
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-283785A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-283785A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-283785A1.txt
  • review. CSR (cable special relief) petitions and CSC (cable show cause) petitions refer to cable-related matters pursuant to Part 76. The newly-designated BSR (broadcast special relief) petitions refer to certain non-application-related broadcast matters pursuant to Part 73. Parties seeking special relief pursuant to Part 76 are advised that such requests must be initiated through the special relief provisions of Section 76.7 of the Rules. Many of these filings are subject to the pleading cycle rules set forth in Section 76.7, while others have their own pleading cycle relative to the particular rule involved. For BSR petitions filed pursuant to Part 73, the pleading cycle will be the same as that mandated by Section 76.7 unless stated otherwise. Please note that petitions
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-284040A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-284040A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-284040A1.txt
  • review. CSR (cable special relief) petitions and CSC (cable show cause) petitions refer to cable-related matters pursuant to Part 76. The newly-designated BSR (broadcast special relief) petitions refer to certain non-application-related broadcast matters pursuant to Part 73. Parties seeking special relief pursuant to Part 76 are advised that such requests must be initiated through the special relief provisions of Section 76.7 of the Rules. Many of these filings are subject to the pleading cycle rules set forth in Section 76.7, while others have their own pleading cycle relative to the particular rule involved. For BSR petitions filed pursuant to Part 73, the pleading cycle will be the same as that mandated by Section 76.7 unless stated otherwise. Please note that petitions
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-284268A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-284268A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-284268A1.txt
  • review. CSR (cable special relief) petitions and CSC (cable show cause) petitions refer to cable-related matters pursuant to Part 76. The newly-designated BSR (broadcast special relief) petitions refer to certain non-application-related broadcast matters pursuant to Part 73. Parties seeking special relief pursuant to Part 76 are advised that such requests must be initiated through the special relief provisions of Section 76.7 of the Rules. Many of these filings are subject to the pleading cycle rules set forth in Section 76.7, while others have their own pleading cycle relative to the particular rule involved. For BSR petitions filed pursuant to Part 73, the pleading cycle will be the same as that mandated by Section 76.7 unless stated otherwise. Please note that petitions
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-284321A2.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-284321A2.txt
  • 5.2 47.1 Tonga $2,811,383 0.0 5.4 0.019.7 74.9 $320,615 0.0 0.0 0.0 2.7 97.3 $19 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0100.0 21,875,564 0.0 0.9 0.018.9 80.2 Tuvalu $25,848 0.0 0.0 0.029.5 70.4 $93 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0100.0 $0 42,355 0.0 0.0 0.036.8 63.2 Vanuatu $439,093 0.023.4 0.0 7.1 69.5 $1,745 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0100.0 $15 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0100.0 846,086 0.013.2 0.010.1 76.7 Wallis and Futuna $108,839 1.3 0.0 0.023.9 74.8 $236 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0100.0 $9 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0100.0 131,075 0.7 0.0 0.034.7 64.6 Western Samoa $2,031,944 0.018.4 0.113.0 68.5 $10,737 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0100.0 $0 6,851,051 0.012.2 0.014.5 73.3 American Samoa $3,776,994 0.044.2 0.011.7 44.0 $348,536 0.028.4 0.060.6 11.0 $0 18,043,622 0.035.7 0.037.9 26.4 Baker Island $0 $0 $0 0
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-284786A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-284786A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-284786A1.txt
  • review. CSR (cable special relief) petitions and CSC (cable show cause) petitions refer to cable-related matters pursuant to Part 76. The newly-designated BSR (broadcast special relief) petitions refer to certain non-application-related broadcast matters pursuant to Part 73. Parties seeking special relief pursuant to Part 76 are advised that such requests must be initiated through the special relief provisions of Section 76.7 of the Rules. Many of these filings are subject to the pleading cycle rules set forth in Section 76.7, while others have their own pleading cycle relative to the particular rule involved. For BSR petitions filed pursuant to Part 73, the pleading cycle will be the same as that mandated by Section 76.7 unless stated otherwise. Please note that petitions
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-284923A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-284923A1.txt
  • 86.4 EMPLOYED 94.6 96.1 95.4 96.7 87.9 91.0 86.3 88.3 UNEMPLOYED 82.7 86.1 85.3 88.2 74.0 79.3 77.0 79.6 NOT IN LABOR FORCE 92.7 93.9 94.2 95.2 82.2 85.5 82.5 84.1 1988 ANNUAL AVERAGE TOTAL CNP 93.8 95.2 94.9 96.1 85.6 88.7 83.6 86.1 EMPLOYED 94.9 96.2 95.6 96.8 88.5 91.5 85.4 87.7 UNEMPLOYED 83.3 86.8 85.9 88.9 75.4 80.5 76.7 80.3 NOT IN LABOR FORCE 92.8 94.2 94.3 95.5 83.1 86.0 81.5 84.0 1989 ANNUAL AVERAGE TOTAL CNP 94.1 95.5 95.3 96.4 85.8 89.0 84.7 87.0 EMPLOYED 95.2 96.5 96.0 97.1 88.8 91.7 86.6 89.0 UNEMPLOYED 83.9 87.1 86.2 88.8 77.0 82.5 75.1 78.6 NOT IN LABOR FORCE 93.1 94.4 94.7 95.7 82.8 85.9 82.6 84.6 1990 ANNUAL AVERAGE TOTAL
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-284934A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-284934A1.txt
  • 112.4 99.8 120.8 82.7 80.7 87.0 67.5 December 112.2 99.9 121.0 82.6 80.7 86.7 67.4 2003 January 112.6 100.4 121.3 83.4 81.9 87.0 67.6 February 113.5 100.5 121.2 83.5 82.2 86.9 67.7 March 114.2 99.7 121.7 81.5 79.8 85.1 67.6 April 113.9 98.7 121.9 79.2 77.4 83.1 67.5 May 113.7 98.1 122.0 77.9 76.0 81.8 67.5 June 113.8 97.5 122.2 76.7 74.6 80.8 66.3 July 114.0 98.1 123.1 77.2 75.6 80.8 66.2 August 114.4 97.8 123.7 76.0 74.0 79.7 66.1 September 114.8 97.4 123.8 75.2 73.3 78.9 66.1 October 114.6 97.1 124.0 74.3 72.1 78.7 66.1 November 114.3 97.2 124.2 74.1 71.8 78.3 66.7 December 114.2 97.2 124.1 74.3 72.0 78.6 66.5 2004 January 114.8 97.0 124.4 73.9 71.6 78.0 66.3
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-284993A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-284993A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-284993A1.txt
  • review. CSR (cable special relief) petitions and CSC (cable show cause) petitions refer to cable-related matters pursuant to Part 76. The newly-designated BSR (broadcast special relief) petitions refer to certain non-application-related broadcast matters pursuant to Part 73. Parties seeking special relief pursuant to Part 76 are advised that such requests must be initiated through the special relief provisions of Section 76.7 of the Rules. Many of these filings are subject to the pleading cycle rules set forth in Section 76.7, while others have their own pleading cycle relative to the particular rule involved. For BSR petitions filed pursuant to Part 73, the pleading cycle will be the same as that mandated by Section 76.7 unless stated otherwise. Please note that petitions
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-285347A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-285347A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-285347A1.txt
  • review. CSR (cable special relief) petitions and CSC (cable show cause) petitions refer to cable-related matters pursuant to Part 76. The newly-designated BSR (broadcast special relief) petitions refer to certain non-application-related broadcast matters pursuant to Part 73. Parties seeking special relief pursuant to Part 76 are advised that such requests must be initiated through the special relief provisions of Section 76.7 of the Rules. Many of these filings are subject to the pleading cycle rules set forth in Section 76.7, while others have their own pleading cycle relative to the particular rule involved. For BSR petitions filed pursuant to Part 73, the pleading cycle will be the same as that mandated by Section 76.7 unless stated otherwise. Please note that petitions
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-285488A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-285488A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-285488A1.txt
  • review. CSR (cable special relief) petitions and CSC (cable show cause) petitions refer to cable-related matters pursuant to Part 76. The newly-designated BSR (broadcast special relief) petitions refer to certain non-application-related broadcast matters pursuant to Part 73. Parties seeking special relief pursuant to Part 76 are advised that such requests must be initiated through the special relief provisions of Section 76.7 of the Rules. Many of these filings are subject to the pleading cycle rules set forth in Section 76.7, while others have their own pleading cycle relative to the particular rule involved. For BSR petitions filed pursuant to Part 73, the pleading cycle will be the same as that mandated by Section 76.7 unless stated otherwise. Please note that petitions
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-285626A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-285626A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-285626A1.txt
  • review. CSR (cable special relief) petitions and CSC (cable show cause) petitions refer to cable-related matters pursuant to Part 76. The newly-designated BSR (broadcast special relief) petitions refer to certain non-application-related broadcast matters pursuant to Part 73. Parties seeking special relief pursuant to Part 76 are advised that such requests must be initiated through the special relief provisions of Section 76.7 of the Rules. Many of these filings are subject to the pleading cycle rules set forth in Section 76.7, while others have their own pleading cycle relative to the particular rule involved. For BSR petitions filed pursuant to Part 73, the pleading cycle will be the same as that mandated by Section 76.7 unless stated otherwise. Please note that petitions
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-285680A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-285680A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-285680A1.txt
  • review. CSR (cable special relief) petitions and CSC (cable show cause) petitions refer to cable-related matters pursuant to Part 76. The newly-designated BSR (broadcast special relief) petitions refer to certain non-application-related broadcast matters pursuant to Part 73. Parties seeking special relief pursuant to Part 76 are advised that such requests must be initiated through the special relief provisions of Section 76.7 of the Rules. Many of these filings are subject to the pleading cycle rules set forth in Section 76.7, while others have their own pleading cycle relative to the particular rule involved. For BSR petitions filed pursuant to Part 73, the pleading cycle will be the same as that mandated by Section 76.7 unless stated otherwise. Please note that petitions
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-285840A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-285840A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-285840A1.txt
  • review. CSR (cable special relief) petitions and CSC (cable show cause) petitions refer to cable-related matters pursuant to Part 76. The newly-designated BSR (broadcast special relief) petitions refer to certain non-application-related broadcast matters pursuant to Part 73. Parties seeking special relief pursuant to Part 76 are advised that such requests must be initiated through the special relief provisions of Section 76.7 of the Rules. Many of these filings are subject to the pleading cycle rules set forth in Section 76.7, while others have their own pleading cycle relative to the particular rule involved. For BSR petitions filed pursuant to Part 73, the pleading cycle will be the same as that mandated by Section 76.7 unless stated otherwise. Please note that petitions
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-286013A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-286013A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-286013A1.txt
  • review. CSR (cable special relief) petitions and CSC (cable show cause) petitions refer to cable-related matters pursuant to Part 76. The newly-designated BSR (broadcast special relief) petitions refer to certain non-application-related broadcast matters pursuant to Part 73. Parties seeking special relief pursuant to Part 76 are advised that such requests must be initiated through the special relief provisions of Section 76.7 of the Rules. Many of these filings are subject to the pleading cycle rules set forth in Section 76.7, while others have their own pleading cycle relative to the particular rule involved. For BSR petitions filed pursuant to Part 73, the pleading cycle will be the same as that mandated by Section 76.7 unless stated otherwise. Please note that petitions
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-286104A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-286104A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-286104A1.txt
  • review. CSR (cable special relief) petitions and CSC (cable show cause) petitions refer to cable-related matters pursuant to Part 76. The newly-designated BSR (broadcast special relief) petitions refer to certain non-application-related broadcast matters pursuant to Part 73. Parties seeking special relief pursuant to Part 76 are advised that such requests must be initiated through the special relief provisions of Section 76.7 of the Rules. Many of these filings are subject to the pleading cycle rules set forth in Section 76.7, while others have their own pleading cycle relative to the particular rule involved. For BSR petitions filed pursuant to Part 73, the pleading cycle will be the same as that mandated by Section 76.7 unless stated otherwise. Please note that petitions
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-286247A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-286247A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-286247A1.txt
  • review. CSR (cable special relief) petitions and CSC (cable show cause) petitions refer to cable-related matters pursuant to Part 76. The newly-designated BSR (broadcast special relief) petitions refer to certain non-application-related broadcast matters pursuant to Part 73. Parties seeking special relief pursuant to Part 76 are advised that such requests must be initiated through the special relief provisions of Section 76.7 of the Rules. Many of these filings are subject to the pleading cycle rules set forth in Section 76.7, while others have their own pleading cycle relative to the particular rule involved. For BSR petitions filed pursuant to Part 73, the pleading cycle will be the same as that mandated by Section 76.7 unless stated otherwise. Please note that petitions
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-286603A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-286603A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-286603A1.txt
  • review. CSR (cable special relief) petitions and CSC (cable show cause) petitions refer to cable-related matters pursuant to Part 76. The newly-designated BSR (broadcast special relief) petitions refer to certain non-application-related broadcast matters pursuant to Part 73. Parties seeking special relief pursuant to Part 76 are advised that such requests must be initiated through the special relief provisions of Section 76.7 of the Rules. Many of these filings are subject to the pleading cycle rules set forth in Section 76.7, while others have their own pleading cycle relative to the particular rule involved. For BSR petitions filed pursuant to Part 73, the pleading cycle will be the same as that mandated by Section 76.7 unless stated otherwise. Please note that petitions
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-286775A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-286775A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-286775A1.txt
  • review. CSR (cable special relief) petitions and CSC (cable show cause) petitions refer to cable-related matters pursuant to Part 76. The newly-designated BSR (broadcast special relief) petitions refer to certain non-application-related broadcast matters pursuant to Part 73. Parties seeking special relief pursuant to Part 76 are advised that such requests must be initiated through the special relief provisions of Section 76.7 of the Rules. Many of these filings are subject to the pleading cycle rules set forth in Section 76.7, while others have their own pleading cycle relative to the particular rule involved. For BSR petitions filed pursuant to Part 73, the pleading cycle will be the same as that mandated by Section 76.7 unless stated otherwise. Please note that petitions
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-287034A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-287034A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-287034A1.txt
  • review. CSR (cable special relief) petitions and CSC (cable show cause) petitions refer to cable-related matters pursuant to Part 76. The newly-designated BSR (broadcast special relief) petitions refer to certain non-application-related broadcast matters pursuant to Part 73. Parties seeking special relief pursuant to Part 76 are advised that such requests must be initiated through the special relief provisions of Section 76.7 of the Rules. Many of these filings are subject to the pleading cycle rules set forth in Section 76.7, while others have their own pleading cycle relative to the particular rule involved. For BSR petitions filed pursuant to Part 73, the pleading cycle will be the same as that mandated by Section 76.7 unless stated otherwise. Please note that petitions
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-287194A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-287194A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-287194A1.txt
  • review. CSR (cable special relief) petitions and CSC (cable show cause) petitions refer to cable-related matters pursuant to Part 76. The newly-designated BSR (broadcast special relief) petitions refer to certain non-application-related broadcast matters pursuant to Part 73. Parties seeking special relief pursuant to Part 76 are advised that such requests must be initiated through the special relief provisions of Section 76.7 of the Rules. Many of these filings are subject to the pleading cycle rules set forth in Section 76.7, while others have their own pleading cycle relative to the particular rule involved. For BSR petitions filed pursuant to Part 73, the pleading cycle will be the same as that mandated by Section 76.7 unless stated otherwise. Please note that petitions
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-287688A1.pdf
  • 86.4 EMPLOYED 94.6 96.1 95.4 96.7 87.9 91.0 86.3 88.3 UNEMPLOYED 82.7 86.1 85.3 88.2 74.0 79.3 77.0 79.6 NOT IN LABOR FORCE 92.7 93.9 94.2 95.2 82.2 85.5 82.5 84.1 1988 ANNUAL AVERAGE TOTAL CNP 93.8 95.2 94.9 96.1 85.6 88.7 83.6 86.1 EMPLOYED 94.9 96.2 95.6 96.8 88.5 91.5 85.4 87.7 UNEMPLOYED 83.3 86.8 85.9 88.9 75.4 80.5 76.7 80.3 NOT IN LABOR FORCE 92.8 94.2 94.3 95.5 83.1 86.0 81.5 84.0 1989 ANNUAL AVERAGE TOTAL CNP 94.1 95.5 95.3 96.4 85.8 89.0 84.7 87.0 EMPLOYED 95.2 96.5 96.0 97.1 88.8 91.7 86.6 89.0 UNEMPLOYED 83.9 87.1 86.2 88.8 77.0 82.5 75.1 78.6 NOT IN LABOR FORCE 93.1 94.4 94.7 95.7 82.8 85.9 82.6 84.6 1990 ANNUAL AVERAGE TOTAL
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-287688A8.pdf
  • 86.4 EMPLOYED 94.6 96.1 95.4 96.7 87.9 91.0 86.3 88.3 UNEMPLOYED 82.7 86.1 85.3 88.2 74.0 79.3 77.0 79.6 NOT IN LABOR FORCE 92.7 93.9 94.2 95.2 82.2 85.5 82.5 84.1 1988 ANNUAL AVERAGE TOTAL CNP 93.8 95.2 94.9 96.1 85.6 88.7 83.6 86.1 EMPLOYED 94.9 96.2 95.6 96.8 88.5 91.5 85.4 87.7 UNEMPLOYED 83.3 86.8 85.9 88.9 75.4 80.5 76.7 80.3 NOT IN LABOR FORCE 92.8 94.2 94.3 95.5 83.1 86.0 81.5 84.0 1989 ANNUAL AVERAGE TOTAL CNP 94.1 95.5 95.3 96.4 85.8 89.0 84.7 87.0 EMPLOYED 95.2 96.5 96.0 97.1 88.8 91.7 86.6 89.0 UNEMPLOYED 83.9 87.1 86.2 88.8 77.0 82.5 75.1 78.6 NOT IN LABOR FORCE 93.1 94.4 94.7 95.7 82.8 85.9 82.6 84.6 1990 ANNUAL AVERAGE TOTAL
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-287688A9.pdf
  • 112.4 99.8 120.8 82.7 80.7 87.0 67.5 December 112.2 99.9 121.0 82.6 80.7 86.7 67.4 2003 January 112.6 100.4 121.3 83.4 81.9 87.0 67.6 February 113.5 100.5 121.2 83.5 82.2 86.9 67.7 March 114.2 99.7 121.7 81.5 79.8 85.1 67.6 April 113.9 98.7 121.9 79.2 77.4 83.1 67.5 May 113.7 98.1 122.0 77.9 76.0 81.8 67.5 June 113.8 97.5 122.2 76.7 74.6 80.8 66.3 July 114.0 98.1 123.1 77.2 75.6 80.8 66.2 August 114.4 97.8 123.7 76.0 74.0 79.7 66.1 September 114.8 97.4 123.8 75.2 73.3 78.9 66.1 October 114.6 97.1 124.0 74.3 72.1 78.7 66.1 November 114.3 97.2 124.2 74.1 71.8 78.3 66.7 December 114.2 97.2 124.1 74.3 72.0 78.6 66.5 2004 January 114.8 97.0 124.4 73.9 71.6 78.0 66.3
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-287739A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-287739A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-287739A1.txt
  • review. CSR (cable special relief) petitions and CSC (cable show cause) petitions refer to cable-related matters pursuant to Part 76. The newly-designated BSR (broadcast special relief) petitions refer to certain non-application-related broadcast matters pursuant to Part 73. Parties seeking special relief pursuant to Part 76 are advised that such requests must be initiated through the special relief provisions of Section 76.7 of the Rules. Many of these filings are subject to the pleading cycle rules set forth in Section 76.7, while others have their own pleading cycle relative to the particular rule involved. For BSR petitions filed pursuant to Part 73, the pleading cycle will be the same as that mandated by Section 76.7 unless stated otherwise. Please note that petitions
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-287908A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-287908A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-287908A1.txt
  • review. CSR (cable special relief) petitions and CSC (cable show cause) petitions refer to cable-related matters pursuant to Part 76. The newly-designated BSR (broadcast special relief) petitions refer to certain non-application-related broadcast matters pursuant to Part 73. Parties seeking special relief pursuant to Part 76 are advised that such requests must be initiated through the special relief provisions of Section 76.7 of the Rules. Many of these filings are subject to the pleading cycle rules set forth in Section 76.7, while others have their own pleading cycle relative to the particular rule involved. For BSR petitions filed pursuant to Part 73, the pleading cycle will be the same as that mandated by Section 76.7 unless stated otherwise. Please note that petitions
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-288060A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-288060A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-288060A1.txt
  • review. CSR (cable special relief) petitions and CSC (cable show cause) petitions refer to cable-related matters pursuant to Part 76. The newly-designated BSR (broadcast special relief) petitions refer to certain non-application-related broadcast matters pursuant to Part 73. Parties seeking special relief pursuant to Part 76 are advised that such requests must be initiated through the special relief provisions of Section 76.7 of the Rules. Many of these filings are subject to the pleading cycle rules set forth in Section 76.7, while others have their own pleading cycle relative to the particular rule involved. For BSR petitions filed pursuant to Part 73, the pleading cycle will be the same as that mandated by Section 76.7 unless stated otherwise. Please note that petitions
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-288164A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-288164A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-288164A1.txt
  • review. CSR (cable special relief) petitions and CSC (cable show cause) petitions refer to cable-related matters pursuant to Part 76. The newly-designated BSR (broadcast special relief) petitions refer to certain non-application-related broadcast matters pursuant to Part 73. Parties seeking special relief pursuant to Part 76 are advised that such requests must be initiated through the special relief provisions of Section 76.7 of the Rules. Many of these filings are subject to the pleading cycle rules set forth in Section 76.7, while others have their own pleading cycle relative to the particular rule involved. For BSR petitions filed pursuant to Part 73, the pleading cycle will be the same as that mandated by Section 76.7 unless stated otherwise. Please note that petitions
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-288912A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-288912A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-288912A1.txt
  • review. CSR (cable special relief) petitions and CSC (cable show cause) petitions refer to cable-related matters pursuant to Part 76. The newly-designated BSR (broadcast special relief) petitions refer to certain non-application-related broadcast matters pursuant to Part 73. Parties seeking special relief pursuant to Part 76 are advised that such requests must be initiated through the special relief provisions of Section 76.7 of the Rules. Many of these filings are subject to the pleading cycle rules set forth in Section 76.7, while others have their own pleading cycle relative to the particular rule involved. For BSR petitions filed pursuant to Part 73, the pleading cycle will be the same as that mandated by Section 76.7 unless stated otherwise. Please note that petitions
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-289051A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-289051A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-289051A1.txt
  • review. CSR (cable special relief) petitions and CSC (cable show cause) petitions refer to cable-related matters pursuant to Part 76. The newly-designated BSR (broadcast special relief) petitions refer to certain non-application-related broadcast matters pursuant to Part 73. Parties seeking special relief pursuant to Part 76 are advised that such requests must be initiated through the special relief provisions of Section 76.7 of the Rules. Many of these filings are subject to the pleading cycle rules set forth in Section 76.7, while others have their own pleading cycle relative to the particular rule involved. For BSR petitions filed pursuant to Part 73, the pleading cycle will be the same as that mandated by Section 76.7 unless stated otherwise. Please note that petitions
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-289154A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-289154A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-289154A1.txt
  • review. CSR (cable special relief) petitions and CSC (cable show cause) petitions refer to cable-related matters pursuant to Part 76. The newly-designated BSR (broadcast special relief) petitions refer to certain non-application-related broadcast matters pursuant to Part 73. Parties seeking special relief pursuant to Part 76 are advised that such requests must be initiated through the special relief provisions of Section 76.7 of the Rules. Many of these filings are subject to the pleading cycle rules set forth in Section 76.7, while others have their own pleading cycle relative to the particular rule involved. For BSR petitions filed pursuant to Part 73, the pleading cycle will be the same as that mandated by Section 76.7 unless stated otherwise. Please note that petitions
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-289169A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-289169A1.txt
  • 86.4 EMPLOYED 94.6 96.1 95.4 96.7 87.9 91.0 86.3 88.3 UNEMPLOYED 82.7 86.1 85.3 88.2 74.0 79.3 77.0 79.6 NOT IN LABOR FORCE 92.7 93.9 94.2 95.2 82.2 85.5 82.5 84.1 1988 ANNUAL AVERAGE TOTAL CNP 93.8 95.2 94.9 96.1 85.6 88.7 83.6 86.1 EMPLOYED 94.9 96.2 95.6 96.8 88.5 91.5 85.4 87.7 UNEMPLOYED 83.3 86.8 85.9 88.9 75.4 80.5 76.7 80.3 NOT IN LABOR FORCE 92.8 94.2 94.3 95.5 83.1 86.0 81.5 84.0 1989 ANNUAL AVERAGE TOTAL CNP 94.1 95.5 95.3 96.4 85.8 89.0 84.7 87.0 EMPLOYED 95.2 96.5 96.0 97.1 88.8 91.7 86.6 89.0 UNEMPLOYED 83.9 87.1 86.2 88.8 77.0 82.5 75.1 78.6 NOT IN LABOR FORCE 93.1 94.4 94.7 95.7 82.8 85.9 82.6 84.6 1990 ANNUAL AVERAGE TOTAL
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-289816A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-289816A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-289816A1.txt
  • review. CSR (cable special relief) petitions and CSC (cable show cause) petitions refer to cable-related matters pursuant to Part 76. The newly-designated BSR (broadcast special relief) petitions refer to certain non-application-related broadcast matters pursuant to Part 73. Parties seeking special relief pursuant to Part 76 are advised that such requests must be initiated through the special relief provisions of Section 76.7 of the Rules. Many of these filings are subject to the pleading cycle rules set forth in Section 76.7, while others have their own pleading cycle relative to the particular rule involved. For BSR petitions filed pursuant to Part 73, the pleading cycle will be the same as that mandated by Section 76.7 unless stated otherwise. Please note that petitions
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-290290A3.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-290290A3.pdf
  • signals are distributed to the public by the cable system. SPECIAL RELIEF PETITIONS On petition for special relief by any interested person, the Commission may waive any provision of the rules relating to cable television systems or issue a ruling on a complaint or disputed question. A fee will be charged for Cable Special Relief Petitions filed according to Section 76.7 of the Rules seeking the imposition of special requirements beyond those provided for in the rules. CABLE COMMUNITY REGISTRATION A Cable Community Registration (Form 322) must be filed electronically prior to commencing operations, to provide the Commission with an identification of the system's operator, a description of the television broadcast signals to be carried, and certain other information called for
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-290333A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-290333A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-290333A1.txt
  • review. CSR (cable special relief) petitions and CSC (cable show cause) petitions refer to cable-related matters pursuant to Part 76. The newly-designated BSR (broadcast special relief) petitions refer to certain non-application-related broadcast matters pursuant to Part 73. Parties seeking special relief pursuant to Part 76 are advised that such requests must be initiated through the special relief provisions of Section 76.7 of the Rules. Many of these filings are subject to the pleading cycle rules set forth in Section 76.7, while others have their own pleading cycle relative to the particular rule involved. For BSR petitions filed pursuant to Part 73, the pleading cycle will be the same as that mandated by Section 76.7 unless stated otherwise. Please note that petitions
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-290491A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-290491A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-290491A1.txt
  • review. CSR (cable special relief) petitions and CSC (cable show cause) petitions refer to cable-related matters pursuant to Part 76. The newly-designated BSR (broadcast special relief) petitions refer to certain non-application-related broadcast matters pursuant to Part 73. Parties seeking special relief pursuant to Part 76 are advised that such requests must be initiated through the special relief provisions of Section 76.7 of the Rules. Many of these filings are subject to the pleading cycle rules set forth in Section 76.7, while others have their own pleading cycle relative to the particular rule involved. For BSR petitions filed pursuant to Part 73, the pleading cycle will be the same as that mandated by Section 76.7 unless stated otherwise. Please note that petitions
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-290734A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-290734A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-290734A1.txt
  • review. CSR (cable special relief) petitions and CSC (cable show cause) petitions refer to cable-related matters pursuant to Part 76. The newly-designated BSR (broadcast special relief) petitions refer to certain non-application-related broadcast matters pursuant to Part 73. Parties seeking special relief pursuant to Part 76 are advised that such requests must be initiated through the special relief provisions of Section 76.7 of the Rules. Many of these filings are subject to the pleading cycle rules set forth in Section 76.7, while others have their own pleading cycle relative to the particular rule involved. For BSR petitions filed pursuant to Part 73, the pleading cycle will be the same as that mandated by Section 76.7 unless stated otherwise. Please note that petitions
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-291086A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-291086A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-291086A1.txt
  • review. CSR (cable special relief) petitions and CSC (cable show cause) petitions refer to cable-related matters pursuant to Part 76. The newly-designated BSR (broadcast special relief) petitions refer to certain non-application-related broadcast matters pursuant to Part 73. Parties seeking special relief pursuant to Part 76 are advised that such requests must be initiated through the special relief provisions of Section 76.7 of the Rules. Many of these filings are subject to the pleading cycle rules set forth in Section 76.7, while others have their own pleading cycle relative to the particular rule involved. For BSR petitions filed pursuant to Part 73, the pleading cycle will be the same as that mandated by Section 76.7 unless stated otherwise. Please note that petitions
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-291222A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-291222A1.txt
  • 98.7 98.4 98.8 98.4 98.4 96.7 97.9 $75,000 - $99,999 98.2 98.6 98.5 98.9 95.5 96.0 98.1 99.0 $100,000 - $149,999 99.0 99.3 99.0 99.2 99.6 100.0 98.9 99.5 $150,000 + 99.0 99.3 99.0 99.3 97.6 97.6 98.9 99.0 2008 ANNUAL AVERAGE TOTAL HOUSEHOLDS 95.2 95.9 95.9 96.5 91.0 91.9 91.7 92.7 UNDER $5,000 83.3 86.0 85.7 88.3 78.6 81.5 76.7 80.9 $5,000 - $7,499 87.1 88.9 88.2 90.2 84.4 85.9 84.6 87.6 $7,500 - $9,999 89.4 90.8 90.0 91.1 87.6 89.0 86.0 87.4 $10,000 - $12,499 91.3 92.5 91.7 92.9 89.2 90.4 85.5 87.8 $12,500 - $14,999 92.7 93.7 93.1 94.1 91.2 92.2 87.3 89.1 $15,000 - $19,999 93.6 94.3 94.5 95.1 89.8 90.7 91.4 91.9 $20,000 - $24,999 94.8
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-291241A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-291241A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-291241A1.txt
  • review. CSR (cable special relief) petitions and CSC (cable show cause) petitions refer to cable-related matters pursuant to Part 76. The newly-designated BSR (broadcast special relief) petitions refer to certain non-application-related broadcast matters pursuant to Part 73. Parties seeking special relief pursuant to Part 76 are advised that such requests must be initiated through the special relief provisions of Section 76.7 of the Rules. Many of these filings are subject to the pleading cycle rules set forth in Section 76.7, while others have their own pleading cycle relative to the particular rule involved. For BSR petitions filed pursuant to Part 73, the pleading cycle will be the same as that mandated by Section 76.7 unless stated otherwise. Please note that petitions
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-291508A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-291508A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-291508A1.txt
  • review. CSR (cable special relief) petitions and CSC (cable show cause) petitions refer to cable-related matters pursuant to Part 76. The newly-designated BSR (broadcast special relief) petitions refer to certain non-application-related broadcast matters pursuant to Part 73. Parties seeking special relief pursuant to Part 76 are advised that such requests must be initiated through the special relief provisions of Section 76.7 of the Rules. Many of these filings are subject to the pleading cycle rules set forth in Section 76.7, while others have their own pleading cycle relative to the particular rule involved. For BSR petitions filed pursuant to Part 73, the pleading cycle will be the same as that mandated by Section 76.7 unless stated otherwise. Please note that petitions
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-292003A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-292003A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-292003A1.txt
  • review. CSR (cable special relief) petitions and CSC (cable show cause) petitions refer to cable-related matters pursuant to Part 76. The newly-designated BSR (broadcast special relief) petitions refer to certain non-application-related broadcast matters pursuant to Part 73. Parties seeking special relief pursuant to Part 76 are advised that such requests must be initiated through the special relief provisions of Section 76.7 of the Rules. Many of these filings are subject to the pleading cycle rules set forth in Section 76.7, while others have their own pleading cycle relative to the particular rule involved. For BSR petitions filed pursuant to Part 73, the pleading cycle will be the same as that mandated by Section 76.7 unless stated otherwise. Please note that petitions
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-292195A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-292195A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-292195A1.txt
  • review. CSR (cable special relief) petitions and CSC (cable show cause) petitions refer to cable-related matters pursuant to Part 76. The newly-designated BSR (broadcast special relief) petitions refer to certain non-application-related broadcast matters pursuant to Part 73. Parties seeking special relief pursuant to Part 76 are advised that such requests must be initiated through the special relief provisions of Section 76.7 of the Rules. Many of these filings are subject to the pleading cycle rules set forth in Section 76.7, while others have their own pleading cycle relative to the particular rule involved. For BSR petitions filed pursuant to Part 73, the pleading cycle will be the same as that mandated by Section 76.7 unless stated otherwise. Please note that petitions
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-292461A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-292461A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-292461A1.txt
  • review. CSR (cable special relief) petitions and CSC (cable show cause) petitions refer to cable-related matters pursuant to Part 76. The newly-designated BSR (broadcast special relief) petitions refer to certain non-application-related broadcast matters pursuant to Part 73. Parties seeking special relief pursuant to Part 76 are advised that such requests must be initiated through the special relief provisions of Section 76.7 of the Rules. Many of these filings are subject to the pleading cycle rules set forth in Section 76.7, while others have their own pleading cycle relative to the particular rule involved. For BSR petitions filed pursuant to Part 73, the pleading cycle will be the same as that mandated by Section 76.7 unless stated otherwise. Please note that petitions
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-292593A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-292593A1.txt
  • statistically significant at the 95% confidence level. Note: Changes may not appear to be the same as calculated differences due to rounding. 10 Table 4 Percentage of Households with Telephone Service in March Total Household Income in March 1984 Dollars * 1984 1985 1986 1987 1988 1989 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 Alabama $9,999 or less 77.4 77.8 76.7 72.8 75.8 81.4 79.6 81.8 79.1 85.2 83.1 79.9 81.9 $10,000 - $19,999 91.2 85.1 89.9 91.3 89.1 88.9 85.0 89.0 93.2 93.4 92.7 95.6 95.6 $20,000 - $29,999 91.0 96.6 96.2 92.2 94.1 97.6 94.9 95.5 95.0 96.3 94.1 96.1 97.3 $30,000 - $39,999 100.0 99.2 100.0 97.0 100.0 98.6 98.6 96.9 99.0 95.5 96.1 100.0 92.9 $40,000 or
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-292759A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-292759A1.txt
  • 98.7 98.4 98.8 98.4 98.4 96.7 97.9 $75,000 - $99,999 98.2 98.6 98.5 98.9 95.5 96.0 98.1 99.0 $100,000 - $149,999 99.0 99.3 99.0 99.2 99.6 100.0 98.9 99.5 $150,000 + 99.0 99.3 99.0 99.3 97.6 97.6 98.9 99.0 2008 ANNUAL AVERAGE TOTAL HOUSEHOLDS 95.2 95.9 95.9 96.5 91.0 91.9 91.7 92.7 UNDER $5,000 83.3 86.0 85.7 88.3 78.6 81.5 76.7 80.9 $5,000 - $7,499 87.1 88.9 88.2 90.2 84.4 85.9 84.6 87.6 $7,500 - $9,999 89.4 90.8 90.0 91.1 87.6 89.0 86.0 87.4 $10,000 - $12,499 91.3 92.5 91.7 92.9 89.2 90.4 85.5 87.8 $12,500 - $14,999 92.7 93.7 93.1 94.1 91.2 92.2 87.3 89.1 $15,000 - $19,999 93.6 94.3 94.5 95.1 89.8 90.7 91.4 91.9 $20,000 - $24,999 94.8
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-293135A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-293135A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-293135A1.txt
  • review. CSR (cable special relief) petitions and CSC (cable show cause) petitions refer to cable-related matters pursuant to Part 76. The newly-designated BSR (broadcast special relief) petitions refer to certain non-application-related broadcast matters pursuant to Part 73. Parties seeking special relief pursuant to Part 76 are advised that such requests must be initiated through the special relief provisions of Section 76.7 of the Rules. Many of these filings are subject to the pleading cycle rules set forth in Section 76.7, while others have their own pleading cycle relative to the particular rule involved. For BSR petitions filed pursuant to Part 73, the pleading cycle will be the same as that mandated by Section 76.7 unless stated otherwise. Please note that petitions
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-293268A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-293268A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-293268A1.txt
  • review. CSR (cable special relief) petitions and CSC (cable show cause) petitions refer to cable-related matters pursuant to Part 76. The newly-designated BSR (broadcast special relief) petitions refer to certain non-application-related broadcast matters pursuant to Part 73. Parties seeking special relief pursuant to Part 76 are advised that such requests must be initiated through the special relief provisions of Section 76.7 of the Rules. Many of these filings are subject to the pleading cycle rules set forth in Section 76.7, while others have their own pleading cycle relative to the particular rule involved. For BSR petitions filed pursuant to Part 73, the pleading cycle will be the same as that mandated by Section 76.7 unless stated otherwise. Please note that petitions
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-293528A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-293528A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-293528A1.txt
  • review. CSR (cable special relief) petitions and CSC (cable show cause) petitions refer to cable-related matters pursuant to Part 76. The newly-designated BSR (broadcast special relief) petitions refer to certain non-application-related broadcast matters pursuant to Part 73. Parties seeking special relief pursuant to Part 76 are advised that such requests must be initiated through the special relief provisions of Section 76.7 of the Rules. Many of these filings are subject to the pleading cycle rules set forth in Section 76.7, while others have their own pleading cycle relative to the particular rule involved. For BSR petitions filed pursuant to Part 73, the pleading cycle will be the same as that mandated by Section 76.7 unless stated otherwise. Please note that petitions
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-293661A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-293661A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-293661A1.txt
  • review. CSR (cable special relief) petitions and CSC (cable show cause) petitions refer to cable-related matters pursuant to Part 76. The newly-designated BSR (broadcast special relief) petitions refer to certain non-application-related broadcast matters pursuant to Part 73. Parties seeking special relief pursuant to Part 76 are advised that such requests must be initiated through the special relief provisions of Section 76.7 of the Rules. Many of these filings are subject to the pleading cycle rules set forth in Section 76.7, while others have their own pleading cycle relative to the particular rule involved. For BSR petitions filed pursuant to Part 73, the pleading cycle will be the same as that mandated by Section 76.7 unless stated otherwise. Please note that petitions
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-293905A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-293905A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-293905A1.txt
  • review. CSR (cable special relief) petitions and CSC (cable show cause) petitions refer to cable-related matters pursuant to Part 76. The newly-designated BSR (broadcast special relief) petitions refer to certain non-application-related broadcast matters pursuant to Part 73. Parties seeking special relief pursuant to Part 76 are advised that such requests must be initiated through the special relief provisions of Section 76.7 of the Rules. Many of these filings are subject to the pleading cycle rules set forth in Section 76.7, while others have their own pleading cycle relative to the particular rule involved. For BSR petitions filed pursuant to Part 73, the pleading cycle will be the same as that mandated by Section 76.7 unless stated otherwise. Please note that petitions
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-294168A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-294168A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-294168A1.txt
  • review. CSR (cable special relief) petitions and CSC (cable show cause) petitions refer to cable-related matters pursuant to Part 76. The newly-designated BSR (broadcast special relief) petitions refer to certain non-application-related broadcast matters pursuant to Part 73. Parties seeking special relief pursuant to Part 76 are advised that such requests must be initiated through the special relief provisions of Section 76.7 of the Rules. Many of these filings are subject to the pleading cycle rules set forth in Section 76.7, while others have their own pleading cycle relative to the particular rule involved. For BSR petitions filed pursuant to Part 73, the pleading cycle will be the same as that mandated by Section 76.7 unless stated otherwise. Please note that petitions
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-294374A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-294374A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-294374A1.txt
  • review. CSR (cable special relief) petitions and CSC (cable show cause) petitions refer to cable-related matters pursuant to Part 76. The newly-designated BSR (broadcast special relief) petitions refer to certain non-application-related broadcast matters pursuant to Part 73. Parties seeking special relief pursuant to Part 76 are advised that such requests must be initiated through the special relief provisions of Section 76.7 of the Rules. Many of these filings are subject to the pleading cycle rules set forth in Section 76.7, while others have their own pleading cycle relative to the particular rule involved. For BSR petitions filed pursuant to Part 73, the pleading cycle will be the same as that mandated by Section 76.7 unless stated otherwise. Please note that petitions
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-294530A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-294530A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-294530A1.txt
  • review. CSR (cable special relief) petitions and CSC (cable show cause) petitions refer to cable-related matters pursuant to Part 76. The newly-designated BSR (broadcast special relief) petitions refer to certain non-application-related broadcast matters pursuant to Part 73. Parties seeking special relief pursuant to Part 76 are advised that such requests must be initiated through the special relief provisions of Section 76.7 of the Rules. Many of these filings are subject to the pleading cycle rules set forth in Section 76.7, while others have their own pleading cycle relative to the particular rule involved. For BSR petitions filed pursuant to Part 73, the pleading cycle will be the same as that mandated by Section 76.7 unless stated otherwise. Please note that petitions
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-294546A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-294546A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-294546A1.txt
  • review. CSR (cable special relief) petitions and CSC (cable show cause) petitions refer to cable-related matters pursuant to Part 76. The newly-designated BSR (broadcast special relief) petitions refer to certain non-application-related broadcast matters pursuant to Part 73. Parties seeking special relief pursuant to Part 76 are advised that such requests must be initiated through the special relief provisions of Section 76.7 of the Rules. Many of these filings are subject to the pleading cycle rules set forth in Section 76.7, while others have their own pleading cycle relative to the particular rule involved. For BSR petitions filed pursuant to Part 73, the pleading cycle will be the same as that mandated by Section 76.7 unless stated otherwise. Please note that petitions
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-294634A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-294634A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-294634A1.txt
  • review. CSR (cable special relief) petitions and CSC (cable show cause) petitions refer to cable-related matters pursuant to Part 76. The newly-designated BSR (broadcast special relief) petitions refer to certain non-application-related broadcast matters pursuant to Part 73. Parties seeking special relief pursuant to Part 76 are advised that such requests must be initiated through the special relief provisions of Section 76.7 of the Rules. Many of these filings are subject to the pleading cycle rules set forth in Section 76.7, while others have their own pleading cycle relative to the particular rule involved. For BSR petitions filed pursuant to Part 73, the pleading cycle will be the same as that mandated by Section 76.7 unless stated otherwise. Please note that petitions
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-294849A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-294849A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-294849A1.txt
  • review. CSR (cable special relief) petitions and CSC (cable show cause) petitions refer to cable-related matters pursuant to Part 76. The newly-designated BSR (broadcast special relief) petitions refer to certain non-application-related broadcast matters pursuant to Part 73. Parties seeking special relief pursuant to Part 76 are advised that such requests must be initiated through the special relief provisions of Section 76.7 of the Rules. Many of these filings are subject to the pleading cycle rules set forth in Section 76.7, while others have their own pleading cycle relative to the particular rule involved. For BSR petitions filed pursuant to Part 73, the pleading cycle will be the same as that mandated by Section 76.7 unless stated otherwise. Please note that petitions
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-294983A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-294983A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-294983A1.txt
  • review. CSR (cable special relief) petitions and CSC (cable show cause) petitions refer to cable-related matters pursuant to Part 76. The newly-designated BSR (broadcast special relief) petitions refer to certain non-application-related broadcast matters pursuant to Part 73. Parties seeking special relief pursuant to Part 76 are advised that such requests must be initiated through the special relief provisions of Section 76.7 of the Rules. Many of these filings are subject to the pleading cycle rules set forth in Section 76.7, while others have their own pleading cycle relative to the particular rule involved. For BSR petitions filed pursuant to Part 73, the pleading cycle will be the same as that mandated by Section 76.7 unless stated otherwise. Please note that petitions
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-295212A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-295212A1.txt
  • 98.7 98.4 98.8 98.4 98.4 96.7 97.9 $75,000 - $99,999 98.2 98.6 98.5 98.9 95.5 96.0 98.1 99.0 $100,000 - $149,999 99.0 99.3 99.0 99.2 99.6 100.0 98.9 99.5 $150,000 + 99.0 99.3 99.0 99.3 97.6 97.6 98.9 99.0 2008 ANNUAL AVERAGE TOTAL HOUSEHOLDS 95.2 95.9 95.9 96.5 91.0 91.9 91.7 92.7 UNDER $5,000 83.3 86.0 85.7 88.3 78.6 81.5 76.7 80.9 $5,000 - $7,499 87.1 88.9 88.2 90.2 84.4 85.9 84.6 87.6 $7,500 - $9,999 89.4 90.8 90.0 91.1 87.6 89.0 86.0 87.4 $10,000 - $12,499 91.3 92.5 91.7 92.9 89.2 90.4 85.5 87.8 $12,500 - $14,999 92.7 93.7 93.1 94.1 91.2 92.2 87.3 89.1 $15,000 - $19,999 93.6 94.3 94.5 95.1 89.8 90.7 91.4 91.9 $20,000 - $24,999 94.8
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-295442A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-295442A1.txt
  • 98.7 98.4 98.8 98.4 98.4 96.7 97.9 $75,000 - $99,999 98.2 98.6 98.5 98.9 95.5 96.0 98.1 99.0 $100,000 - $149,999 99.0 99.3 99.0 99.2 99.6 100.0 98.9 99.5 $150,000 + 99.0 99.3 99.0 99.3 97.6 97.6 98.9 99.0 2008 ANNUAL AVERAGE TOTAL HOUSEHOLDS 95.2 95.9 95.9 96.5 91.0 91.9 91.7 92.7 UNDER $5,000 83.3 86.0 85.7 88.3 78.6 81.5 76.7 80.9 $5,000 - $7,499 87.1 88.9 88.2 90.2 84.4 85.9 84.6 87.6 $7,500 - $9,999 89.4 90.8 90.0 91.1 87.6 89.0 86.0 87.4 $10,000 - $12,499 91.3 92.5 91.7 92.9 89.2 90.4 85.5 87.8 $12,500 - $14,999 92.7 93.7 93.1 94.1 91.2 92.2 87.3 89.1 $15,000 - $19,999 93.6 94.3 94.5 95.1 89.8 90.7 91.4 91.9 $20,000 - $24,999 94.8
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-295442A8.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-295442A8.txt
  • 98.7 98.4 98.8 98.4 98.4 96.7 97.9 $75,000 - $99,999 98.2 98.6 98.5 98.9 95.5 96.0 98.1 99.0 $100,000 - $149,999 99.0 99.3 99.0 99.2 99.6 100.0 98.9 99.5 $150,000 + 99.0 99.3 99.0 99.3 97.6 97.6 98.9 99.0 2008 ANNUAL AVERAGE TOTAL HOUSEHOLDS 95.2 95.9 95.9 96.5 91.0 91.9 91.7 92.7 UNDER $5,000 83.3 86.0 85.7 88.3 78.6 81.5 76.7 80.9 $5,000 - $7,499 87.1 88.9 88.2 90.2 84.4 85.9 84.6 87.6 $7,500 - $9,999 89.4 90.8 90.0 91.1 87.6 89.0 86.0 87.4 $10,000 - $12,499 91.3 92.5 91.7 92.9 89.2 90.4 85.5 87.8 $12,500 - $14,999 92.7 93.7 93.1 94.1 91.2 92.2 87.3 89.1 $15,000 - $19,999 93.6 94.3 94.5 95.1 89.8 90.7 91.4 91.9 $20,000 - $24,999 94.8
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-295442A9.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-295442A9.txt
  • 112.4 99.8 120.8 82.7 80.7 87.0 67.5 December 112.2 99.9 121.0 82.6 80.7 86.7 67.4 2003 January 112.6 100.4 121.3 83.4 81.9 87.0 67.6 February 113.5 100.5 121.2 83.5 82.2 86.9 67.7 March 114.2 99.7 121.7 81.5 79.8 85.1 67.6 April 113.9 98.7 121.9 79.2 77.4 83.1 67.5 May 113.8 98.1 122.0 77.9 76.0 81.8 67.5 June 113.9 97.5 122.2 76.7 74.6 80.8 66.3 July 114.0 98.1 123.1 77.2 75.6 80.8 66.2 August 114.4 97.8 123.7 76.0 74.0 79.7 66.1 September 114.8 97.4 123.8 75.2 73.3 78.9 66.1 October 114.7 97.1 124.0 74.3 72.1 78.7 66.1 November 114.4 97.2 124.2 74.1 71.8 78.3 66.7 December 114.3 97.2 124.1 74.3 72.0 78.6 66.5 2004 January 114.8 97.0 124.4 73.9 71.6 78.0 66.3
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-295681A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-295681A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-295681A1.txt
  • review. CSR (cable special relief) petitions and CSC (cable show cause) petitions refer to cable-related matters pursuant to Part 76. The newly-designated BSR (broadcast special relief) petitions refer to certain non-application-related broadcast matters pursuant to Part 73. Parties seeking special relief pursuant to Part 76 are advised that such requests must be initiated through the special relief provisions of Section 76.7 of the Rules. Many of these filings are subject to the pleading cycle rules set forth in Section 76.7, while others have their own pleading cycle relative to the particular rule involved. For BSR petitions filed pursuant to Part 73, the pleading cycle will be the same as that mandated by Section 76.7 unless stated otherwise. Please note that petitions
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-296062A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-296062A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-296062A1.txt
  • review. CSR (cable special relief) petitions and CSC (cable show cause) petitions refer to cable-related matters pursuant to Part 76. The newly-designated BSR (broadcast special relief) petitions refer to certain non-application-related broadcast matters pursuant to Part 73. Parties seeking special relief pursuant to Part 76 are advised that such requests must be initiated through the special relief provisions of Section 76.7 of the Rules. Many of these filings are subject to the pleading cycle rules set forth in Section 76.7, while others have their own pleading cycle relative to the particular rule involved. For BSR petitions filed pursuant to Part 73, the pleading cycle will be the same as that mandated by Section 76.7 unless stated otherwise. Please note that petitions
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-296121A1.pdf
  • 98.7 98.4 98.8 98.4 98.4 96.7 97.9 $75,000 - $99,999 98.2 98.6 98.5 98.9 95.5 96.0 98.1 99.0 $100,000 - $149,999 99.0 99.3 99.0 99.2 99.6 100.0 98.9 99.5 $150,000 + 99.0 99.3 99.0 99.3 97.6 97.6 98.9 99.0 2008 ANNUAL AVERAGE TOTAL HOUSEHOLDS 95.2 95.9 95.9 96.5 91.0 91.9 91.7 92.7 UNDER $5,000 83.3 86.0 85.7 88.3 78.6 81.5 76.7 80.9 $5,000 - $7,499 87.1 88.9 88.2 90.2 84.4 85.9 84.6 87.6 $7,500 - $9,999 89.4 90.8 90.0 91.1 87.6 89.0 86.0 87.4 $10,000 - $12,499 91.3 92.5 91.7 92.9 89.2 90.4 85.5 87.8 $12,500 - $14,999 92.7 93.7 93.1 94.1 91.2 92.2 87.3 89.1 $15,000 - $19,999 93.6 94.3 94.5 95.1 89.8 90.7 91.4 91.9 $20,000 - $24,999 94.8
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-296208A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-296208A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-296208A1.txt
  • review. CSR (cable special relief) petitions and CSC (cable show cause) petitions refer to cable-related matters pursuant to Part 76. The newly-designated BSR (broadcast special relief) petitions refer to certain non-application-related broadcast matters pursuant to Part 73. Parties seeking special relief pursuant to Part 76 are advised that such requests must be initiated through the special relief provisions of Section 76.7 of the Rules. Many of these filings are subject to the pleading cycle rules set forth in Section 76.7, while others have their own pleading cycle relative to the particular rule involved. For BSR petitions filed pursuant to Part 73, the pleading cycle will be the same as that mandated by Section 76.7 unless stated otherwise. Please note that petitions
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-296239A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-296239A1.txt
  • * American Samoa * * * * * Arizona 85.3 76.3 43.2 37.6 13.5 Arkansas 82.7 76.6 * * * California 86.2 78.3 40.5 19.7 3.9 Colorado 87.8 77.5 44.5 39.0 1.5 Connecticut 87.9 80.8 46.5 37.5 * Delaware 82.5 75.6 * * * District of Columbia 62.6 55.7 39.6 22.6 5.0 Florida 86.0 82.2 51.8 40.3 8.6 Georgia 81.8 76.7 43.8 23.7 1.8 Guam * * * * * Hawaii 92.5 88.3 60.5 * * Idaho 81.6 72.4 35.1 * * Illinois 87.9 79.6 43.0 31.9 7.5 Indiana 84.3 76.2 45.8 32.6 13.9 Iowa 87.0 74.6 46.5 * * Kansas 83.3 77.0 42.8 33.7 3.8 Kentucky 88.5 76.7 49.3 31.2 26.2 Louisiana 85.3 81.7 39.0 * * Maine 86.0 82.9
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-296370A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-296370A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-296370A1.txt
  • review. CSR (cable special relief) petitions and CSC (cable show cause) petitions refer to cable-related matters pursuant to Part 76. The newly-designated BSR (broadcast special relief) petitions refer to certain non-application-related broadcast matters pursuant to Part 73. Parties seeking special relief pursuant to Part 76 are advised that such requests must be initiated through the special relief provisions of Section 76.7 of the Rules. Many of these filings are subject to the pleading cycle rules set forth in Section 76.7, while others have their own pleading cycle relative to the particular rule involved. For BSR petitions filed pursuant to Part 73, the pleading cycle will be the same as that mandated by Section 76.7 unless stated otherwise. Please note that petitions
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-296483A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-296483A1.txt
  • ALSAT - (ALSAT) FRONTIER HUB - ANIK E1 - (118.7 W.L.) FRONTIER HUB - ANIK E2 - (111.1 W.L) E000075 SES-RWL-20100216-00193 E Date Effective: 02/22/2010 Class of Station: Fixed Earth Stations Grant of Authority 03/29/2010 - 03/29/2025 Renewal PREPA Networks Corp. Nature of Service: International Fixed Satellite Service 18 ° 9 ' 5.00 " N LAT. SITE ID: 1 KILOMETER 76.7, STATE ROAD NO. 3, RIO ABAJO, HUMACAO, PR 65 ° 47 ' 20.00 " W LONG. LOCATION: VERTEX 1 18.3 meters ANTENNA ID: 18.3 KPC 75.10 dBW DIGITAL DATA, 8PSK 2/3 FEC 34368 Kbps 5925.0000 - 6425.0000 MHz 20M6G7D 69.50 dBW DIGITAL DATA, 8PSK 2/3 FEC 8448 Kbps 5925.0000 - 6425.0000 MHz 5M70G7D 64.20 dBW DIGITAL DATA, QPSK 3/4 FEC
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-296558A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-296558A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-296558A1.txt
  • review. CSR (cable special relief) petitions and CSC (cable show cause) petitions refer to cable-related matters pursuant to Part 76. The newly-designated BSR (broadcast special relief) petitions refer to certain non-application-related broadcast matters pursuant to Part 73. Parties seeking special relief pursuant to Part 76 are advised that such requests must be initiated through the special relief provisions of Section 76.7 of the Rules. Many of these filings are subject to the pleading cycle rules set forth in Section 76.7, while others have their own pleading cycle relative to the particular rule involved. For BSR petitions filed pursuant to Part 73, the pleading cycle will be the same as that mandated by Section 76.7 unless stated otherwise. Please note that petitions
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-296700A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-296700A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-296700A1.txt
  • review. CSR (cable special relief) petitions and CSC (cable show cause) petitions refer to cable-related matters pursuant to Part 76. The newly-designated BSR (broadcast special relief) petitions refer to certain non-application-related broadcast matters pursuant to Part 73. Parties seeking special relief pursuant to Part 76 are advised that such requests must be initiated through the special relief provisions of Section 76.7 of the Rules. Many of these filings are subject to the pleading cycle rules set forth in Section 76.7, while others have their own pleading cycle relative to the particular rule involved. For BSR petitions filed pursuant to Part 73, the pleading cycle will be the same as that mandated by Section 76.7 unless stated otherwise. Please note that petitions
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-297200A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-297200A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-297200A1.txt
  • review. CSR (cable special relief) petitions and CSC (cable show cause) petitions refer to cable-related matters pursuant to Part 76. The newly-designated BSR (broadcast special relief) petitions refer to certain non-application-related broadcast matters pursuant to Part 73. Parties seeking special relief pursuant to Part 76 are advised that such requests must be initiated through the special relief provisions of Section 76.7 of the Rules. Many of these filings are subject to the pleading cycle rules set forth in Section 76.7, while others have their own pleading cycle relative to the particular rule involved. For BSR petitions filed pursuant to Part 73, the pleading cycle will be the same as that mandated by Section 76.7 unless stated otherwise. Please note that petitions
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-297269A2.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-297269A2.txt
  • 88.0 $24,099,413 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0100.0 5,409,659,962 0.0 0.0 2.8 12.2 85.0 Belize $10,804,000 0.0 0.0 0.4 31.3 68.2 $209,934 0.0 0.0 0.0 74.1 25.9 $93,725 0.0 0.0 0.0 97.7 2.3 58,326,058 0.0 0.0 0.4 43.7 55.9 Canada $583,654,798 0.0 0.0 0.0 28.3 71.7 $47,938,915 0.0 0.0 0.0 35.5 64.5 $61,583,569 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0100.0 18,966,750,165 0.0 0.0 0.0 23.3 76.7 Costa Rica $42,661,800 0.0 0.0 2.2 5.3 92.5 $2,514,491 0.0 0.0 0.0 32.8 67.2 $3,238 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0100.0 488,175,231 0.0 0.0 4.7 9.1 86.2 El Salvador $99,038,187 0.0 0.0 6.1 10.5 83.3 $7,504,830 0.0 0.0 0.0 7.8 92.2 $630,414 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0100.0 1,643,523,877 0.0 0.0 3.6 9.0 87.4 Guatemala $191,970,359 0.0 0.0 5.9 4.0 90.0 $4,259,339 0.0 0.0
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-297496A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-297496A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-297496A1.txt
  • review. CSR (cable special relief) petitions and CSC (cable show cause) petitions refer to cable-related matters pursuant to Part 76. The newly-designated BSR (broadcast special relief) petitions refer to certain non-application-related broadcast matters pursuant to Part 73. Parties seeking special relief pursuant to Part 76 are advised that such requests must be initiated through the special relief provisions of Section 76.7 of the Rules. Many of these filings are subject to the pleading cycle rules set forth in Section 76.7, while others have their own pleading cycle relative to the particular rule involved. For BSR petitions filed pursuant to Part 73, the pleading cycle will be the same as that mandated by Section 76.7 unless stated otherwise. Please note that petitions
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-297682A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-297682A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-297682A1.txt
  • review. CSR (cable special relief) petitions and CSC (cable show cause) petitions refer to cable-related matters pursuant to Part 76. The newly-designated BSR (broadcast special relief) petitions refer to certain non-application-related broadcast matters pursuant to Part 73. Parties seeking special relief pursuant to Part 76 are advised that such requests must be initiated through the special relief provisions of Section 76.7 of the Rules. Many of these filings are subject to the pleading cycle rules set forth in Section 76.7, while others have their own pleading cycle relative to the particular rule involved. For BSR petitions filed pursuant to Part 73, the pleading cycle will be the same as that mandated by Section 76.7 unless stated otherwise. Please note that petitions
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-297986A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-297986A1.txt
  • statistically significant at the 95% confidence level. Note: Changes may not appear to be the same as calculated differences due to rounding. 10 Table 4 Percentage of Households with Telephone Service in March Total Household Income in March 1984 Dollars * 1984 1985 1986 1987 1988 1989 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 Alabama $9,999 or less 77.4 77.8 76.7 72.8 75.8 81.4 79.6 81.8 79.1 85.2 83.1 79.9 81.9 $10,000 - $19,999 91.2 85.1 89.9 91.3 89.1 88.9 85.0 89.0 93.2 93.4 92.7 95.6 95.6 $20,000 - $29,999 91.0 96.6 96.2 92.2 94.1 97.6 94.9 95.5 95.0 96.3 94.1 96.1 97.3 $30,000 - $39,999 100.0 99.2 100.0 97.0 100.0 98.6 98.6 96.9 99.0 95.5 96.1 100.0 92.9 $40,000 or
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-298333A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-298333A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-298333A1.txt
  • review. CSR (cable special relief) petitions and CSC (cable show cause) petitions refer to cable-related matters pursuant to Part 76. The newly-designated BSR (broadcast special relief) petitions refer to certain non-application-related broadcast matters pursuant to Part 73. Parties seeking special relief pursuant to Part 76 are advised that such requests must be initiated through the special relief provisions of Section 76.7 of the Rules. Many of these filings are subject to the pleading cycle rules set forth in Section 76.7, while others have their own pleading cycle relative to the particular rule involved. For BSR petitions filed pursuant to Part 73, the pleading cycle will be the same as that mandated by Section 76.7 unless stated otherwise. Please note that petitions
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-298848A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-298848A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-298848A1.txt
  • review. CSR (cable special relief) petitions and CSC (cable show cause) petitions refer to cable-related matters pursuant to Part 76. The newly-designated BSR (broadcast special relief) petitions refer to certain non-application-related broadcast matters pursuant to Part 73. Parties seeking special relief pursuant to Part 76 are advised that such requests must be initiated through the special relief provisions of Section 76.7 of the Rules. Many of these filings are subject to the pleading cycle rules set forth in Section 76.7, while others have their own pleading cycle relative to the particular rule involved. For BSR petitions filed pursuant to Part 73, the pleading cycle will be the same as that mandated by Section 76.7 unless stated otherwise. Please note that petitions
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-299023A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-299023A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-299023A1.txt
  • review. CSR (cable special relief) petitions and CSC (cable show cause) petitions refer to cable-related matters pursuant to Part 76. The newly-designated BSR (broadcast special relief) petitions refer to certain non-application-related broadcast matters pursuant to Part 73. Parties seeking special relief pursuant to Part 76 are advised that such requests must be initiated through the special relief provisions of Section 76.7 of the Rules. Many of these filings are subject to the pleading cycle rules set forth in Section 76.7, while others have their own pleading cycle relative to the particular rule involved. For BSR petitions filed pursuant to Part 73, the pleading cycle will be the same as that mandated by Section 76.7 unless stated otherwise. Please note that petitions
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-299673A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-299673A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-299673A1.txt
  • review. CSR (cable special relief) petitions and CSC (cable show cause) petitions refer to cable-related matters pursuant to Part 76. The newly-designated BSR (broadcast special relief) petitions refer to certain non-application-related broadcast matters pursuant to Part 73. Parties seeking special relief pursuant to Part 76 are advised that such requests must be initiated through the special relief provisions of Section 76.7 of the Rules. Many of these filings are subject to the pleading cycle rules set forth in Section 76.7, while others have their own pleading cycle relative to the particular rule involved. For BSR petitions filed pursuant to Part 73, the pleading cycle will be the same as that mandated by Section 76.7 unless stated otherwise. Please note that petitions
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-300565A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-300565A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-300565A1.txt
  • review. CSR (cable special relief) petitions and CSC (cable show cause) petitions refer to cable-related matters pursuant to Part 76. The newly-designated BSR (broadcast special relief) petitions refer to certain non-application-related broadcast matters pursuant to Part 73. Parties seeking special relief pursuant to Part 76 are advised that such requests must be initiated through the special relief provisions of Section 76.7 of the Rules. Many of these filings are subject to the pleading cycle rules set forth in Section 76.7, while others have their own pleading cycle relative to the particular rule involved. For BSR petitions filed pursuant to Part 73, the pleading cycle will be the same as that mandated by Section 76.7 unless stated otherwise. Please note that petitions
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-301069A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-301069A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-301069A1.txt
  • review. CSR (cable special relief) petitions and CSC (cable show cause) petitions refer to cable-related matters pursuant to Part 76. The newly-designated BSR (broadcast special relief) petitions refer to certain non-application-related broadcast matters pursuant to Part 73. Parties seeking special relief pursuant to Part 76 are advised that such requests must be initiated through the special relief provisions of Section 76.7 of the Rules. Many of these filings are subject to the pleading cycle rules set forth in Section 76.7, while others have their own pleading cycle relative to the particular rule involved. For BSR petitions filed pursuant to Part 73, the pleading cycle will be the same as that mandated by Section 76.7 unless stated otherwise. Please note that petitions
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-301294A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-301294A1.txt
  • of June 30, 2009 10 6 Chart 11 Distribution of Connections by Downstream Speed Selected Technologies as of June 30, 2009 (In thousands) * Includes sDSL, Other Wireline, Satellite, Fixed Wireless, Power Line and Other. aDSL Cable Modem FTTP Mobile Wireless All Other* 4.1 77.7 16.5 2.5 55.8 8.1 33.5 4.1 33.7 11.3 50.4 3.6 34.0 60.0 95.4 4.3 21.5 76.7 11.8 21.3 66.8 Per cen t 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100% (a) Greater than 200 kbps and less than 768 kbps (b) At least 768 kbps and less than 1.5 mbps (c) At least 1.5 mbps and less than 3 mbps (d) At least 3 mbps and less than 6 mbps (e) At least
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-301505A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-301505A1.txt
  • Interstate Total Subject State Interstate to to to Separations Separations Separations All Reporting Cos. $3,203.0 -$608.5 $3,780.8 $892.0 $2,863.1 $119.9 ($3.1) $2,957.2 $1,138.6 $1,033.4 $613.4 $414.7 Bell Operating Cos. 3,203.0 -608.5 3,780.8 892.0 2,863.1 119.9 (3.1) 2,957.2 N/A N/A N/A N/A All Other Cos. N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 1,138.6 1,033.4 613.4 414.7 Alabama 88.6 0.3 105.4 76.7 28.7 (3.0) 4.0 30.6 41.8 28.3 17.6 10.7AL Arizona 9.5 (0.4) 39.9 3.1 36.3 8.0 2.9 29.4 AZ Arkansas 83.6 (4.1) 67.2 33.7 32.9 (3.1) 2.3 32.1 AR California 794.4 (31.0) 791.4 285.7 501.9 101.8 (36.6) 448.8 54.3 46.1 36.2 9.9CA Colorado 94.4 (16.8) 134.9 9.1 125.9 9.7 5.1 107.8 CO Connecticut 71.2 (25.1) 32.9 (21.2) 52.0 3.0 (10.7) 58.7
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-301823A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-301823A1.txt
  • * American Samoa * * * * * Arizona 85.3 76.3 43.2 37.6 13.5 Arkansas 82.7 76.6 * * * California 86.2 78.3 40.5 19.7 3.9 Colorado 87.8 77.5 44.5 39.0 1.5 Connecticut 87.9 80.8 46.5 37.5 * Delaware 82.5 75.6 * * * District of Columbia 62.6 55.7 39.6 22.6 5.0 Florida 86.0 82.2 51.8 40.3 8.6 Georgia 81.8 76.7 43.8 23.7 1.8 Guam * * * * * Hawaii 92.5 88.3 60.5 * * Idaho 81.6 72.4 35.1 * * Illinois 87.9 79.6 43.0 31.9 7.5 Indiana 84.3 76.2 45.8 32.6 13.9 Iowa 87.0 74.6 46.5 * * Kansas 83.3 77.0 42.8 33.7 3.8 Kentucky 88.5 76.7 49.3 31.2 26.2 Louisiana 85.3 81.7 39.0 * * Maine 86.0 82.9
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-301834A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-301834A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-301834A1.txt
  • review. CSR (cable special relief) petitions and CSC (cable show cause) petitions refer to cable-related matters pursuant to Part 76. The newly-designated BSR (broadcast special relief) petitions refer to certain non-application-related broadcast matters pursuant to Part 73. Parties seeking special relief pursuant to Part 76 are advised that such requests must be initiated through the special relief provisions of Section 76.7 of the Rules. Many of these filings are subject to the pleading cycle rules set forth in Section 76.7, while others have their own pleading cycle relative to the particular rule involved. For BSR petitions filed pursuant to Part 73, the pleading cycle will be the same as that mandated by Section 76.7 unless stated otherwise. Please note that petitions
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-301998A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-301998A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-301998A1.txt
  • review. CSR (cable special relief) petitions and CSC (cable show cause) petitions refer to cable-related matters pursuant to Part 76. The newly-designated BSR (broadcast special relief) petitions refer to certain non-application-related broadcast matters pursuant to Part 73. Parties seeking special relief pursuant to Part 76 are advised that such requests must be initiated through the special relief provisions of Section 76.7 of the Rules. Many of these filings are subject to the pleading cycle rules set forth in Section 76.7, while others have their own pleading cycle relative to the particular rule involved. For BSR petitions filed pursuant to Part 73, the pleading cycle will be the same as that mandated by Section 76.7 unless stated otherwise. Please note that petitions
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-302332A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-302332A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-302332A1.txt
  • review. CSR (cable special relief) petitions and CSC (cable show cause) petitions refer to cable-related matters pursuant to Part 76. The newly-designated BSR (broadcast special relief) petitions refer to certain non-application-related broadcast matters pursuant to Part 73. Parties seeking special relief pursuant to Part 76 are advised that such requests must be initiated through the special relief provisions of Section 76.7 of the Rules. Many of these filings are subject to the pleading cycle rules set forth in Section 76.7, while others have their own pleading cycle relative to the particular rule involved. For BSR petitions filed pursuant to Part 73, the pleading cycle will be the same as that mandated by Section 76.7 unless stated otherwise. Please note that petitions
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-302481A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-302481A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-302481A1.txt
  • review. CSR (cable special relief) petitions and CSC (cable show cause) petitions refer to cable-related matters pursuant to Part 76. The newly-designated BSR (broadcast special relief) petitions refer to certain non-application-related broadcast matters pursuant to Part 73. Parties seeking special relief pursuant to Part 76 are advised that such requests must be initiated through the special relief provisions of Section 76.7 of the Rules. Many of these filings are subject to the pleading cycle rules set forth in Section 76.7, while others have their own pleading cycle relative to the particular rule involved. For BSR petitions filed pursuant to Part 73, the pleading cycle will be the same as that mandated by Section 76.7 unless stated otherwise. Please note that petitions
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-302636A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-302636A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-302636A1.txt
  • review. CSR (cable special relief) petitions and CSC (cable show cause) petitions refer to cable-related matters pursuant to Part 76. The newly-designated BSR (broadcast special relief) petitions refer to certain non-application-related broadcast matters pursuant to Part 73. Parties seeking special relief pursuant to Part 76 are advised that such requests must be initiated through the special relief provisions of Section 76.7 of the Rules. Many of these filings are subject to the pleading cycle rules set forth in Section 76.7, while others have their own pleading cycle relative to the particular rule involved. For BSR petitions filed pursuant to Part 73, the pleading cycle will be the same as that mandated by Section 76.7 unless stated otherwise. Please note that petitions
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-302716A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-302716A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-302716A1.txt
  • review. CSR (cable special relief) petitions and CSC (cable show cause) petitions refer to cable-related matters pursuant to Part 76. The newly-designated BSR (broadcast special relief) petitions refer to certain non-application-related broadcast matters pursuant to Part 73. Parties seeking special relief pursuant to Part 76 are advised that such requests must be initiated through the special relief provisions of Section 76.7 of the Rules. Many of these filings are subject to the pleading cycle rules set forth in Section 76.7, while others have their own pleading cycle relative to the particular rule involved. For BSR petitions filed pursuant to Part 73, the pleading cycle will be the same as that mandated by Section 76.7 unless stated otherwise. Please note that petitions
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-302932A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-302932A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-302932A1.txt
  • review. CSR (cable special relief) petitions and CSC (cable show cause) petitions refer to cable-related matters pursuant to Part 76. The newly-designated BSR (broadcast special relief) petitions refer to certain non-application-related broadcast matters pursuant to Part 73. Parties seeking special relief pursuant to Part 76 are advised that such requests must be initiated through the special relief provisions of Section 76.7 of the Rules. Many of these filings are subject to the pleading cycle rules set forth in Section 76.7, while others have their own pleading cycle relative to the particular rule involved. For BSR petitions filed pursuant to Part 73, the pleading cycle will be the same as that mandated by Section 76.7 unless stated otherwise. Please note that petitions
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-303004A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-303004A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-303004A1.txt
  • review. CSR (cable special relief) petitions and CSC (cable show cause) petitions refer to cable-related matters pursuant to Part 76. The newly-designated BSR (broadcast special relief) petitions refer to certain non-application-related broadcast matters pursuant to Part 73. Parties seeking special relief pursuant to Part 76 are advised that such requests must be initiated through the special relief provisions of Section 76.7 of the Rules. Many of these filings are subject to the pleading cycle rules set forth in Section 76.7, while others have their own pleading cycle relative to the particular rule involved. For BSR petitions filed pursuant to Part 73, the pleading cycle will be the same as that mandated by Section 76.7 unless stated otherwise. Please note that petitions
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-303688A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-303688A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-303688A1.txt
  • review. CSR (cable special relief) petitions and CSC (cable show cause) petitions refer to cable-related matters pursuant to Part 76. The newly-designated BSR (broadcast special relief) petitions refer to certain non-application-related broadcast matters pursuant to Part 73. Parties seeking special relief pursuant to Part 76 are advised that such requests must be initiated through the special relief provisions of Section 76.7 of the Rules. Many of these filings are subject to the pleading cycle rules set forth in Section 76.7, while others have their own pleading cycle relative to the particular rule involved. For BSR petitions filed pursuant to Part 73, the pleading cycle will be the same as that mandated by Section 76.7 unless stated otherwise. Please note that petitions
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-303837A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-303837A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-303837A1.txt
  • review. CSR (cable special relief) petitions and CSC (cable show cause) petitions refer to cable-related matters pursuant to Part 76. The newly-designated BSR (broadcast special relief) petitions refer to certain non-application-related broadcast matters pursuant to Part 73. Parties seeking special relief pursuant to Part 76 are advised that such requests must be initiated through the special relief provisions of Section 76.7 of the Rules. Many of these filings are subject to the pleading cycle rules set forth in Section 76.7, while others have their own pleading cycle relative to the particular rule involved. For BSR petitions filed pursuant to Part 73, the pleading cycle will be the same as that mandated by Section 76.7 unless stated otherwise. Please note that petitions
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-303872A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-303872A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-303872A1.txt
  • review. CSR (cable special relief) petitions and CSC (cable show cause) petitions refer to cable-related matters pursuant to Part 76. The newly-designated BSR (broadcast special relief) petitions refer to certain non-application-related broadcast matters pursuant to Part 73. Parties seeking special relief pursuant to Part 76 are advised that such requests must be initiated through the special relief provisions of Section 76.7 of the Rules. Many of these filings are subject to the pleading cycle rules set forth in Section 76.7, while others have their own pleading cycle relative to the particular rule involved. For BSR petitions filed pursuant to Part 73, the pleading cycle will be the same as that mandated by Section 76.7 unless stated otherwise. Please note that petitions
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-303886A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-303886A1.txt
  • 98.7 98.4 98.8 98.4 98.4 96.7 97.9 $75,000 - $99,999 98.2 98.6 98.5 98.9 95.5 96.0 98.1 99.0 $100,000 - $149,999 99.0 99.3 99.0 99.2 99.6 100.0 98.9 99.5 $150,000 + 99.0 99.3 99.0 99.3 97.6 97.6 98.9 99.0 2008 ANNUAL AVERAGE TOTAL HOUSEHOLDS 95.2 95.9 95.9 96.5 91.0 91.9 91.7 92.7 UNDER $5,000 83.3 86.0 85.7 88.3 78.6 81.5 76.7 80.9 $5,000 - $7,499 87.1 88.9 88.2 90.2 84.4 85.9 84.6 87.6 $7,500 - $9,999 89.4 90.8 90.0 91.1 87.6 89.0 86.0 87.4 $10,000 - $12,499 91.3 92.5 91.7 92.9 89.2 90.4 85.5 87.8 $12,500 - $14,999 92.7 93.7 93.1 94.1 91.2 92.2 87.3 89.1 $15,000 - $19,999 93.6 94.3 94.5 95.1 89.8 90.7 91.4 91.9 $20,000 - $24,999 94.8
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-303886A8.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-303886A8.txt
  • 98.7 98.4 98.8 98.4 98.4 96.7 97.9 $75,000 - $99,999 98.2 98.6 98.5 98.9 95.5 96.0 98.1 99.0 $100,000 - $149,999 99.0 99.3 99.0 99.2 99.6 100.0 98.9 99.5 $150,000 + 99.0 99.3 99.0 99.3 97.6 97.6 98.9 99.0 2008 ANNUAL AVERAGE TOTAL HOUSEHOLDS 95.2 95.9 95.9 96.5 91.0 91.9 91.7 92.7 UNDER $5,000 83.3 86.0 85.7 88.3 78.6 81.5 76.7 80.9 $5,000 - $7,499 87.1 88.9 88.2 90.2 84.4 85.9 84.6 87.6 $7,500 - $9,999 89.4 90.8 90.0 91.1 87.6 89.0 86.0 87.4 $10,000 - $12,499 91.3 92.5 91.7 92.9 89.2 90.4 85.5 87.8 $12,500 - $14,999 92.7 93.7 93.1 94.1 91.2 92.2 87.3 89.1 $15,000 - $19,999 93.6 94.3 94.5 95.1 89.8 90.7 91.4 91.9 $20,000 - $24,999 94.8
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-303886A9.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-303886A9.txt
  • 95.9 131.2 68.2 64.8 73.9 64.6 September 125.8 96.1 131.8 68.3 65.0 74.0 64.7 October 125.1 96.8 131.9 69.8 67.0 75.5 64.6 November 124.9 96.5 132.0 69.3 66.8 75.3 64.6 December 125.1 96.8 132.4 69.6 66.9 76.1 64.6 2007January 125.5 96.9 132.5 69.8 67.2 75.9 64.6 February 126.2 97.1 133.3 69.9 67.2 75.9 64.6 March 127.3 97.5 133.9 70.5 67.2 76.7 64.6 April 128.1 97.6 134.6 70.3 67.5 76.6 64.6 May 128.9 98.5 135.0 72.2 68.5 80.6 64.5 June 129.2 98.5 135.3 72.2 68.5 80.8 64.4 July 129.1 98.6 136.1 72.0 68.5 80.8 64.3 August 128.9 98.8 136.6 72.2 68.7 81.1 64.4 September 129.3 98.9 137.0 72.2 68.7 81.0 64.4 October 129.5 99.0 137.6 72.1 68.7 80.9 64.4 November 130.3 98.8
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-304107A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-304107A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-304107A1.txt
  • review. CSR (cable special relief) petitions and CSC (cable show cause) petitions refer to cable-related matters pursuant to Part 76. The newly-designated BSR (broadcast special relief) petitions refer to certain non-application-related broadcast matters pursuant to Part 73. Parties seeking special relief pursuant to Part 76 are advised that such requests must be initiated through the special relief provisions of Section 76.7 of the Rules. Many of these filings are subject to the pleading cycle rules set forth in Section 76.7, while others have their own pleading cycle relative to the particular rule involved. For BSR petitions filed pursuant to Part 73, the pleading cycle will be the same as that mandated by Section 76.7 unless stated otherwise. Please note that petitions
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-304445A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-304445A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-304445A1.txt
  • review. CSR (cable special relief) petitions and CSC (cable show cause) petitions refer to cable-related matters pursuant to Part 76. The newly-designated BSR (broadcast special relief) petitions refer to certain non-application-related broadcast matters pursuant to Part 73. Parties seeking special relief pursuant to Part 76 are advised that such requests must be initiated through the special relief provisions of Section 76.7 of the Rules. Many of these filings are subject to the pleading cycle rules set forth in Section 76.7, while others have their own pleading cycle relative to the particular rule involved. For BSR petitions filed pursuant to Part 73, the pleading cycle will be the same as that mandated by Section 76.7 unless stated otherwise. Please note that petitions
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-304618A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-304618A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-304618A1.txt
  • review. CSR (cable special relief) petitions and CSC (cable show cause) petitions refer to cable-related matters pursuant to Part 76. The newly-designated BSR (broadcast special relief) petitions refer to certain non-application-related broadcast matters pursuant to Part 73. Parties seeking special relief pursuant to Part 76 are advised that such requests must be initiated through the special relief provisions of Section 76.7 of the Rules. Many of these filings are subject to the pleading cycle rules set forth in Section 76.7, while others have their own pleading cycle relative to the particular rule involved. For BSR petitions filed pursuant to Part 73, the pleading cycle will be the same as that mandated by Section 76.7 unless stated otherwise. Please note that petitions
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-304734A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-304734A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-304734A1.txt
  • review. CSR (cable special relief) petitions and CSC (cable show cause) petitions refer to cable-related matters pursuant to Part 76. The newly-designated BSR (broadcast special relief) petitions refer to certain non-application-related broadcast matters pursuant to Part 73. Parties seeking special relief pursuant to Part 76 are advised that such requests must be initiated through the special relief provisions of Section 76.7 of the Rules. Many of these filings are subject to the pleading cycle rules set forth in Section 76.7, while others have their own pleading cycle relative to the particular rule involved. For BSR petitions filed pursuant to Part 73, the pleading cycle will be the same as that mandated by Section 76.7 unless stated otherwise. Please note that petitions
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-304828A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-304828A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-304828A1.txt
  • review. CSR (cable special relief) petitions and CSC (cable show cause) petitions refer to cable-related matters pursuant to Part 76. The newly-designated BSR (broadcast special relief) petitions refer to certain non-application-related broadcast matters pursuant to Part 73. Parties seeking special relief pursuant to Part 76 are advised that such requests must be initiated through the special relief provisions of Section 76.7 of the Rules. Many of these filings are subject to the pleading cycle rules set forth in Section 76.7, while others have their own pleading cycle relative to the particular rule involved. For BSR petitions filed pursuant to Part 73, the pleading cycle will be the same as that mandated by Section 76.7 unless stated otherwise. Please note that petitions
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-304998A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-304998A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-304998A1.txt
  • review. CSR (cable special relief) petitions and CSC (cable show cause) petitions refer to cable-related matters pursuant to Part 76. The newly-designated BSR (broadcast special relief) petitions refer to certain non-application-related broadcast matters pursuant to Part 73. Parties seeking special relief pursuant to Part 76 are advised that such requests must be initiated through the special relief provisions of Section 76.7 of the Rules. Many of these filings are subject to the pleading cycle rules set forth in Section 76.7, while others have their own pleading cycle relative to the particular rule involved. For BSR petitions filed pursuant to Part 73, the pleading cycle will be the same as that mandated by Section 76.7 unless stated otherwise. Please note that petitions
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-305263A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-305263A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-305263A1.txt
  • review. CSR (cable special relief) petitions and CSC (cable show cause) petitions refer to cable-related matters pursuant to Part 76. The newly-designated BSR (broadcast special relief) petitions refer to certain non-application-related broadcast matters pursuant to Part 73. Parties seeking special relief pursuant to Part 76 are advised that such requests must be initiated through the special relief provisions of Section 76.7 of the Rules. Many of these filings are subject to the pleading cycle rules set forth in Section 76.7, while others have their own pleading cycle relative to the particular rule involved. For BSR petitions filed pursuant to Part 73, the pleading cycle will be the same as that mandated by Section 76.7 unless stated otherwise. Please note that petitions
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-305382A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-305382A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-305382A1.txt
  • review. CSR (cable special relief) petitions and CSC (cable show cause) petitions refer to cable-related matters pursuant to Part 76. The newly-designated BSR (broadcast special relief) petitions refer to certain non-application-related broadcast matters pursuant to Part 73. Parties seeking special relief pursuant to Part 76 are advised that such requests must be initiated through the special relief provisions of Section 76.7 of the Rules. Many of these filings are subject to the pleading cycle rules set forth in Section 76.7, while others have their own pleading cycle relative to the particular rule involved. For BSR petitions filed pursuant to Part 73, the pleading cycle will be the same as that mandated by Section 76.7 unless stated otherwise. Please note that petitions
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-305558A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-305558A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-305558A1.txt
  • review. CSR (cable special relief) petitions and CSC (cable show cause) petitions refer to cable-related matters pursuant to Part 76. The newly-designated BSR (broadcast special relief) petitions refer to certain non-application-related broadcast matters pursuant to Part 73. Parties seeking special relief pursuant to Part 76 are advised that such requests must be initiated through the special relief provisions of Section 76.7 of the Rules. Many of these filings are subject to the pleading cycle rules set forth in Section 76.7, while others have their own pleading cycle relative to the particular rule involved. For BSR petitions filed pursuant to Part 73, the pleading cycle will be the same as that mandated by Section 76.7 unless stated otherwise. Please note that petitions
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-305785A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-305785A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-305785A1.txt
  • review. CSR (cable special relief) petitions and CSC (cable show cause) petitions refer to cable-related matters pursuant to Part 76. The newly-designated BSR (broadcast special relief) petitions refer to certain non-application-related broadcast matters pursuant to Part 73. Parties seeking special relief pursuant to Part 76 are advised that such requests must be initiated through the special relief provisions of Section 76.7 of the Rules. Many of these filings are subject to the pleading cycle rules set forth in Section 76.7, while others have their own pleading cycle relative to the particular rule involved. For BSR petitions filed pursuant to Part 73, the pleading cycle will be the same as that mandated by Section 76.7 unless stated otherwise. Please note that petitions
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-306225A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-306225A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-306225A1.txt
  • review. CSR (cable special relief) petitions and CSC (cable show cause) petitions refer to cable-related matters pursuant to Part 76. The newly-designated BSR (broadcast special relief) petitions refer to certain non-application-related broadcast matters pursuant to Part 73. Parties seeking special relief pursuant to Part 76 are advised that such requests must be initiated through the special relief provisions of Section 76.7 of the Rules. Many of these filings are subject to the pleading cycle rules set forth in Section 76.7, while others have their own pleading cycle relative to the particular rule involved. For BSR petitions filed pursuant to Part 73, the pleading cycle will be the same as that mandated by Section 76.7 unless stated otherwise. Please note that petitions
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-306400A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-306400A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-306400A1.txt
  • review. CSR (cable special relief) petitions and CSC (cable show cause) petitions refer to cable-related matters pursuant to Part 76. The newly-designated BSR (broadcast special relief) petitions refer to certain non-application-related broadcast matters pursuant to Part 73. Parties seeking special relief pursuant to Part 76 are advised that such requests must be initiated through the special relief provisions of Section 76.7 of the Rules. Many of these filings are subject to the pleading cycle rules set forth in Section 76.7, while others have their own pleading cycle relative to the particular rule involved. For BSR petitions filed pursuant to Part 73, the pleading cycle will be the same as that mandated by Section 76.7 unless stated otherwise. Please note that petitions
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-306566A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-306566A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-306566A1.txt
  • review. CSR (cable special relief) petitions and CSC (cable show cause) petitions refer to cable-related matters pursuant to Part 76. The newly-designated BSR (broadcast special relief) petitions refer to certain non-application-related broadcast matters pursuant to Part 73. Parties seeking special relief pursuant to Part 76 are advised that such requests must be initiated through the special relief provisions of Section 76.7 of the Rules. Many of these filings are subject to the pleading cycle rules set forth in Section 76.7, while others have their own pleading cycle relative to the particular rule involved. For BSR petitions filed pursuant to Part 73, the pleading cycle will be the same as that mandated by Section 76.7 unless stated otherwise. Please note that petitions
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-306752A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-306752A1.txt
  • 98.7 98.4 98.8 98.4 98.4 96.7 97.9 $75,000 - $99,999 98.2 98.6 98.5 98.9 95.5 96.0 98.1 99.0 $100,000 - $149,999 99.0 99.3 99.0 99.2 99.6 100.0 98.9 99.5 $150,000 + 99.0 99.3 99.0 99.3 97.6 97.6 98.9 99.0 2008 ANNUAL AVERAGE TOTAL HOUSEHOLDS 95.2 95.9 95.9 96.5 91.0 91.9 91.7 92.7 UNDER $5,000 83.3 86.0 85.7 88.3 78.6 81.5 76.7 80.9 $5,000 - $7,499 87.1 88.9 88.2 90.2 84.4 85.9 84.6 87.6 $7,500 - $9,999 89.4 90.8 90.0 91.1 87.6 89.0 86.0 87.4 $10,000 - $12,499 91.3 92.5 91.7 92.9 89.2 90.4 85.5 87.8 $12,500 - $14,999 92.7 93.7 93.1 94.1 91.2 92.2 87.3 89.1 $15,000 - $19,999 93.6 94.3 94.5 95.1 89.8 90.7 91.4 91.9 $20,000 - $24,999 94.8
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-306755A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-306755A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-306755A1.txt
  • review. CSR (cable special relief) petitions and CSC (cable show cause) petitions refer to cable-related matters pursuant to Part 76. The newly-designated BSR (broadcast special relief) petitions refer to certain non-application-related broadcast matters pursuant to Part 73. Parties seeking special relief pursuant to Part 76 are advised that such requests must be initiated through the special relief provisions of Section 76.7 of the Rules. Many of these filings are subject to the pleading cycle rules set forth in Section 76.7, while others have their own pleading cycle relative to the particular rule involved. For BSR petitions filed pursuant to Part 73, the pleading cycle will be the same as that mandated by Section 76.7 unless stated otherwise. Please note that petitions
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-307068A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-307068A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-307068A1.txt
  • review. CSR (cable special relief) petitions and CSC (cable show cause) petitions refer to cable-related matters pursuant to Part 76. The newly-designated BSR (broadcast special relief) petitions refer to certain non-application-related broadcast matters pursuant to Part 73. Parties seeking special relief pursuant to Part 76 are advised that such requests must be initiated through the special relief provisions of Section 76.7 of the Rules. Many of these filings are subject to the pleading cycle rules set forth in Section 76.7, while others have their own pleading cycle relative to the particular rule involved. For BSR petitions filed pursuant to Part 73, the pleading cycle will be the same as that mandated by Section 76.7 unless stated otherwise. Please note that petitions
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-307452A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-307452A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-307452A1.txt
  • review. CSR (cable special relief) petitions and CSC (cable show cause) petitions refer to cable-related matters pursuant to Part 76. The newly-designated BSR (broadcast special relief) petitions refer to certain non-application-related broadcast matters pursuant to Part 73. Parties seeking special relief pursuant to Part 76 are advised that such requests must be initiated through the special relief provisions of Section 76.7 of the Rules. Many of these filings are subject to the pleading cycle rules set forth in Section 76.7, while others have their own pleading cycle relative to the particular rule involved. For BSR petitions filed pursuant to Part 73, the pleading cycle will be the same as that mandated by Section 76.7 unless stated otherwise. Please note that petitions
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-307986A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-307986A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-307986A1.txt
  • review. CSR (cable special relief) petitions and CSC (cable show cause) petitions refer to cable-related matters pursuant to Part 76. The newly-designated BSR (broadcast special relief) petitions refer to certain non-application-related broadcast matters pursuant to Part 73. Parties seeking special relief pursuant to Part 76 are advised that such requests must be initiated through the special relief provisions of Section 76.7 of the Rules. Many of these filings are subject to the pleading cycle rules set forth in Section 76.7, while others have their own pleading cycle relative to the particular rule involved. For BSR petitions filed pursuant to Part 73, the pleading cycle will be the same as that mandated by Section 76.7 unless stated otherwise. Please note that petitions
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-308196A1.doc
  • signals are distributed to the public by the cable system. SPECIAL RELIEF PETITIONS On petition for special relief by any interested person, the Commission may waive any provision of the rules relating to cable television systems or issue a ruling on a complaint or disputed question. A fee will be charged for Cable Special Relief Petitions filed according to Section 76.7 of the Rules seeking the imposition of special requirements beyond those provided for in the rules. CABLE COMMUNITY REGISTRATION A Cable Community Registration (Form 322) must be filed electronically prior to commencing operations, to provide the Commission with an identification of the system's operator, a description of the television broadcast signals to be carried, and certain other information called for
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-308313A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-308313A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-308313A1.txt
  • review. CSR (cable special relief) petitions and CSC (cable show cause) petitions refer to cable-related matters pursuant to Part 76. The newly-designated BSR (broadcast special relief) petitions refer to certain non-application-related broadcast matters pursuant to Part 73. Parties seeking special relief pursuant to Part 76 are advised that such requests must be initiated through the special relief provisions of Section 76.7 of the Rules. Many of these filings are subject to the pleading cycle rules set forth in Section 76.7, while others have their own pleading cycle relative to the particular rule involved. For BSR petitions filed pursuant to Part 73, the pleading cycle will be the same as that mandated by Section 76.7 unless stated otherwise. Please note that petitions
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-308899A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-308899A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-308899A1.txt
  • review. CSR (cable special relief) petitions and CSC (cable show cause) petitions refer to cable-related matters pursuant to Part 76. The newly-designated BSR (broadcast special relief) petitions refer to certain non-application-related broadcast matters pursuant to Part 73. Parties seeking special relief pursuant to Part 76 are advised that such requests must be initiated through the special relief provisions of Section 76.7 of the Rules. Many of these filings are subject to the pleading cycle rules set forth in Section 76.7, while others have their own pleading cycle relative to the particular rule involved. For BSR petitions filed pursuant to Part 73, the pleading cycle will be the same as that mandated by Section 76.7 unless stated otherwise. Please note that petitions
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-309051A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-309051A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-309051A1.txt
  • review. CSR (cable special relief) petitions and CSC (cable show cause) petitions refer to cable-related matters pursuant to Part 76. The newly-designated BSR (broadcast special relief) petitions refer to certain non-application-related broadcast matters pursuant to Part 73. Parties seeking special relief pursuant to Part 76 are advised that such requests must be initiated through the special relief provisions of Section 76.7 of the Rules. Many of these filings are subject to the pleading cycle rules set forth in Section 76.7, while others have their own pleading cycle relative to the particular rule involved. For BSR petitions filed pursuant to Part 73, the pleading cycle will be the same as that mandated by Section 76.7 unless stated otherwise. Please note that petitions
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-309397A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-309397A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-309397A1.txt
  • review. CSR (cable special relief) petitions and CSC (cable show cause) petitions refer to cable-related matters pursuant to Part 76. The newly-designated BSR (broadcast special relief) petitions refer to certain non-application-related broadcast matters pursuant to Part 73. Parties seeking special relief pursuant to Part 76 are advised that such requests must be initiated through the special relief provisions of Section 76.7 of the Rules. Many of these filings are subject to the pleading cycle rules set forth in Section 76.7, while others have their own pleading cycle relative to the particular rule involved. For BSR petitions filed pursuant to Part 73, the pleading cycle will be the same as that mandated by Section 76.7 unless stated otherwise. Please note that petitions
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-309610A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-309610A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-309610A1.txt
  • review. CSR (cable special relief) petitions and CSC (cable show cause) petitions refer to cable-related matters pursuant to Part 76. The newly-designated BSR (broadcast special relief) petitions refer to certain non-application-related broadcast matters pursuant to Part 73. Parties seeking special relief pursuant to Part 76 are advised that such requests must be initiated through the special relief provisions of Section 76.7 of the Rules. Many of these filings are subject to the pleading cycle rules set forth in Section 76.7, while others have their own pleading cycle relative to the particular rule involved. For BSR petitions filed pursuant to Part 73, the pleading cycle will be the same as that mandated by Section 76.7 unless stated otherwise. Please note that petitions
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-309623A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-309623A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-309623A1.txt
  • review. CSR (cable special relief) petitions and CSC (cable show cause) petitions refer to cable-related matters pursuant to Part 76. The newly-designated BSR (broadcast special relief) petitions refer to certain non-application-related broadcast matters pursuant to Part 73. Parties seeking special relief pursuant to Part 76 are advised that such requests must be initiated through the special relief provisions of Section 76.7 of the Rules. Many of these filings are subject to the pleading cycle rules set forth in Section 76.7, while others have their own pleading cycle relative to the particular rule involved. For BSR petitions filed pursuant to Part 73, the pleading cycle will be the same as that mandated by Section 76.7 unless stated otherwise. Please note that petitions
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-309749A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-309749A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-309749A1.txt
  • review. CSR (cable special relief) petitions and CSC (cable show cause) petitions refer to cable-related matters pursuant to Part 76. The newly-designated BSR (broadcast special relief) petitions refer to certain non-application-related broadcast matters pursuant to Part 73. Parties seeking special relief pursuant to Part 76 are advised that such requests must be initiated through the special relief provisions of Section 76.7 of the Rules. Many of these filings are subject to the pleading cycle rules set forth in Section 76.7, while others have their own pleading cycle relative to the particular rule involved. For BSR petitions filed pursuant to Part 73, the pleading cycle will be the same as that mandated by Section 76.7 unless stated otherwise. Please note that petitions
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-310253A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-310253A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-310253A1.txt
  • review. CSR (cable special relief) petitions and CSC (cable show cause) petitions refer to cable-related matters pursuant to Part 76. The newly-designated BSR (broadcast special relief) petitions refer to certain non-application-related broadcast matters pursuant to Part 73. Parties seeking special relief pursuant to Part 76 are advised that such requests must be initiated through the special relief provisions of Section 76.7 of the Rules. Many of these filings are subject to the pleading cycle rules set forth in Section 76.7, while others have their own pleading cycle relative to the particular rule involved. For BSR petitions filed pursuant to Part 73, the pleading cycle will be the same as that mandated by Section 76.7 unless stated otherwise. Please note that petitions
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-310567A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-310567A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-310567A1.txt
  • review. CSR (cable special relief) petitions and CSC (cable show cause) petitions refer to cable-related matters pursuant to Part 76. The newly-designated BSR (broadcast special relief) petitions refer to certain non-application-related broadcast matters pursuant to Part 73. Parties seeking special relief pursuant to Part 76 are advised that such requests must be initiated through the special relief provisions of Section 76.7 of the Rules. Many of these filings are subject to the pleading cycle rules set forth in Section 76.7, while others have their own pleading cycle relative to the particular rule involved. For BSR petitions filed pursuant to Part 73, the pleading cycle will be the same as that mandated by Section 76.7 unless stated otherwise. Please note that petitions
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-310698A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-310698A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-310698A1.txt
  • review. CSR (cable special relief) petitions and CSC (cable show cause) petitions refer to cable-related matters pursuant to Part 76. The newly-designated BSR (broadcast special relief) petitions refer to certain non-application-related broadcast matters pursuant to Part 73. Parties seeking special relief pursuant to Part 76 are advised that such requests must be initiated through the special relief provisions of Section 76.7 of the Rules. Many of these filings are subject to the pleading cycle rules set forth in Section 76.7, while others have their own pleading cycle relative to the particular rule involved. For BSR petitions filed pursuant to Part 73, the pleading cycle will be the same as that mandated by Section 76.7 unless stated otherwise. Please note that petitions
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-311280A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-311280A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-311280A1.txt
  • review. CSR (cable special relief) petitions and CSC (cable show cause) petitions refer to cable-related matters pursuant to Part 76. The newly-designated BSR (broadcast special relief) petitions refer to certain non-application-related broadcast matters pursuant to Part 73. Parties seeking special relief pursuant to Part 76 are advised that such requests must be initiated through the special relief provisions of Section 76.7 of the Rules. Many of these filings are subject to the pleading cycle rules set forth in Section 76.7, while others have their own pleading cycle relative to the particular rule involved. For BSR petitions filed pursuant to Part 73, the pleading cycle will be the same as that mandated by Section 76.7 unless stated otherwise. Please note that petitions
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-311427A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-311427A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-311427A1.txt
  • review. CSR (cable special relief) petitions and CSC (cable show cause) petitions refer to cable-related matters pursuant to Part 76. The newly-designated BSR (broadcast special relief) petitions refer to certain non-application-related broadcast matters pursuant to Part 73. Parties seeking special relief pursuant to Part 76 are advised that such requests must be initiated through the special relief provisions of Section 76.7 of the Rules. Many of these filings are subject to the pleading cycle rules set forth in Section 76.7, while others have their own pleading cycle relative to the particular rule involved. For BSR petitions filed pursuant to Part 73, the pleading cycle will be the same as that mandated by Section 76.7 unless stated otherwise. Please note that petitions
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-311523A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-311523A1.txt
  • 99.0 99.3 99.0 99.3 97.6 97.6 98.9 99.0 RACE HISPANIC TOTAL WHITE BLACK ORIGIN 17 Table 4 Percentage of Households with a Telephone by Income Unit Avail Unit Avail Unit Avail Unit Avail RACE HISPANIC TOTAL WHITE BLACK ORIGIN 2008 ANNUAL AVERAGE TOTAL HOUSEHOLDS 95.2 95.9 95.9 96.5 91.0 91.9 91.7 92.7 UNDER $5,000 83.3 86.0 85.7 88.3 78.6 81.5 76.7 80.9 $5,000 - $7,499 87.1 88.9 88.2 90.2 84.4 85.9 84.6 87.6 $7,500 - $9,999 89.4 90.8 90.0 91.1 87.6 89.0 86.0 87.4 $10,000 - $12,499 91.3 92.5 91.7 92.9 89.2 90.4 85.5 87.8 $12,500 - $14,999 92.7 93.7 93.1 94.1 91.2 92.2 87.3 89.1 $15,000 - $19,999 93.6 94.3 94.5 95.1 89.8 90.7 91.4 91.9 $20,000 - $24,999 94.8
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-311661A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-311661A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-311661A1.txt
  • review. CSR (cable special relief) petitions and CSC (cable show cause) petitions refer to cable-related matters pursuant to Part 76. The newly-designated BSR (broadcast special relief) petitions refer to certain non-application-related broadcast matters pursuant to Part 73. Parties seeking special relief pursuant to Part 76 are advised that such requests must be initiated through the special relief provisions of Section 76.7 of the Rules. Many of these filings are subject to the pleading cycle rules set forth in Section 76.7, while others have their own pleading cycle relative to the particular rule involved. For BSR petitions filed pursuant to Part 73, the pleading cycle will be the same as that mandated by Section 76.7 unless stated otherwise. Please note that petitions
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-311774A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-311774A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-311774A1.txt
  • review. CSR (cable special relief) petitions and CSC (cable show cause) petitions refer to cable-related matters pursuant to Part 76. The newly-designated BSR (broadcast special relief) petitions refer to certain non-application-related broadcast matters pursuant to Part 73. Parties seeking special relief pursuant to Part 76 are advised that such requests must be initiated through the special relief provisions of Section 76.7 of the Rules. Many of these filings are subject to the pleading cycle rules set forth in Section 76.7, while others have their own pleading cycle relative to the particular rule involved. For BSR petitions filed pursuant to Part 73, the pleading cycle will be the same as that mandated by Section 76.7 unless stated otherwise. Please note that petitions
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-311779A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-311779A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-311779A1.txt
  • review. CSR (cable special relief) petitions and CSC (cable show cause) petitions refer to cable-related matters pursuant to Part 76. The newly-designated BSR (broadcast special relief) petitions refer to certain non-application-related broadcast matters pursuant to Part 73. Parties seeking special relief pursuant to Part 76 are advised that such requests must be initiated through the special relief provisions of Section 76.7 of the Rules. Many of these filings are subject to the pleading cycle rules set forth in Section 76.7, while others have their own pleading cycle relative to the particular rule involved. For BSR petitions filed pursuant to Part 73, the pleading cycle will be the same as that mandated by Section 76.7 unless stated otherwise. Please note that petitions
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-312087A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-312087A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-312087A1.txt
  • review. CSR (cable special relief) petitions and CSC (cable show cause) petitions refer to cable-related matters pursuant to Part 76. The newly-designated BSR (broadcast special relief) petitions refer to certain non-application-related broadcast matters pursuant to Part 73. Parties seeking special relief pursuant to Part 76 are advised that such requests must be initiated through the special relief provisions of Section 76.7 of the Rules. Many of these filings are subject to the pleading cycle rules set forth in Section 76.7, while others have their own pleading cycle relative to the particular rule involved. For BSR petitions filed pursuant to Part 73, the pleading cycle will be the same as that mandated by Section 76.7 unless stated otherwise. Please note that petitions
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-312278A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-312278A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-312278A1.txt
  • review. CSR (cable special relief) petitions and CSC (cable show cause) petitions refer to cable-related matters pursuant to Part 76. The newly-designated BSR (broadcast special relief) petitions refer to certain non-application-related broadcast matters pursuant to Part 73. Parties seeking special relief pursuant to Part 76 are advised that such requests must be initiated through the special relief provisions of Section 76.7 of the Rules. Many of these filings are subject to the pleading cycle rules set forth in Section 76.7, while others have their own pleading cycle relative to the particular rule involved. For BSR petitions filed pursuant to Part 73, the pleading cycle will be the same as that mandated by Section 76.7 unless stated otherwise. Please note that petitions
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-312370A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-312370A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-312370A1.txt
  • review. CSR (cable special relief) petitions and CSC (cable show cause) petitions refer to cable-related matters pursuant to Part 76. The newly-designated BSR (broadcast special relief) petitions refer to certain non-application-related broadcast matters pursuant to Part 73. Parties seeking special relief pursuant to Part 76 are advised that such requests must be initiated through the special relief provisions of Section 76.7 of the Rules. Many of these filings are subject to the pleading cycle rules set forth in Section 76.7, while others have their own pleading cycle relative to the particular rule involved. For BSR petitions filed pursuant to Part 73, the pleading cycle will be the same as that mandated by Section 76.7 unless stated otherwise. Please note that petitions
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-312522A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-312522A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-312522A1.txt
  • review. CSR (cable special relief) petitions and CSC (cable show cause) petitions refer to cable-related matters pursuant to Part 76. The newly-designated BSR (broadcast special relief) petitions refer to certain non-application-related broadcast matters pursuant to Part 73. Parties seeking special relief pursuant to Part 76 are advised that such requests must be initiated through the special relief provisions of Section 76.7 of the Rules. Many of these filings are subject to the pleading cycle rules set forth in Section 76.7, while others have their own pleading cycle relative to the particular rule involved. For BSR petitions filed pursuant to Part 73, the pleading cycle will be the same as that mandated by Section 76.7 unless stated otherwise. Please note that petitions
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-312824A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-312824A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-312824A1.txt
  • review. CSR (cable special relief) petitions and CSC (cable show cause) petitions refer to cable-related matters pursuant to Part 76. The newly-designated BSR (broadcast special relief) petitions refer to certain non-application-related broadcast matters pursuant to Part 73. Parties seeking special relief pursuant to Part 76 are advised that such requests must be initiated through the special relief provisions of Section 76.7 of the Rules. Many of these filings are subject to the pleading cycle rules set forth in Section 76.7, while others have their own pleading cycle relative to the particular rule involved. For BSR petitions filed pursuant to Part 73, the pleading cycle will be the same as that mandated by Section 76.7 unless stated otherwise. Please note that petitions
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-313032A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-313032A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-313032A1.txt
  • review. CSR (cable special relief) petitions and CSC (cable show cause) petitions refer to cable-related matters pursuant to Part 76. The newly-designated BSR (broadcast special relief) petitions refer to certain non-application-related broadcast matters pursuant to Part 73. Parties seeking special relief pursuant to Part 76 are advised that such requests must be initiated through the special relief provisions of Section 76.7 of the Rules. Many of these filings are subject to the pleading cycle rules set forth in Section 76.7, while others have their own pleading cycle relative to the particular rule involved. For BSR petitions filed pursuant to Part 73, the pleading cycle will be the same as that mandated by Section 76.7 unless stated otherwise. Please note that petitions
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-313275A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-313275A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-313275A1.txt
  • review. CSR (cable special relief) petitions and CSC (cable show cause) petitions refer to cable-related matters pursuant to Part 76. The newly-designated BSR (broadcast special relief) petitions refer to certain non-application-related broadcast matters pursuant to Part 73. Parties seeking special relief pursuant to Part 76 are advised that such requests must be initiated through the special relief provisions of Section 76.7 of the Rules. Many of these filings are subject to the pleading cycle rules set forth in Section 76.7, while others have their own pleading cycle relative to the particular rule involved. For BSR petitions filed pursuant to Part 73, the pleading cycle will be the same as that mandated by Section 76.7 unless stated otherwise. Please note that petitions
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-313308A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-313308A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-313308A1.txt
  • review. CSR (cable special relief) petitions and CSC (cable show cause) petitions refer to cable-related matters pursuant to Part 76. The newly-designated BSR (broadcast special relief) petitions refer to certain non-application-related broadcast matters pursuant to Part 73. Parties seeking special relief pursuant to Part 76 are advised that such requests must be initiated through the special relief provisions of Section 76.7 of the Rules. Many of these filings are subject to the pleading cycle rules set forth in Section 76.7, while others have their own pleading cycle relative to the particular rule involved. For BSR petitions filed pursuant to Part 73, the pleading cycle will be the same as that mandated by Section 76.7 unless stated otherwise. Please note that petitions
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-313389A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-313389A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-313389A1.txt
  • review. CSR (cable special relief) petitions and CSC (cable show cause) petitions refer to cable-related matters pursuant to Part 76. The newly-designated BSR (broadcast special relief) petitions refer to certain non-application-related broadcast matters pursuant to Part 73. Parties seeking special relief pursuant to Part 76 are advised that such requests must be initiated through the special relief provisions of Section 76.7 of the Rules. Many of these filings are subject to the pleading cycle rules set forth in Section 76.7, while others have their own pleading cycle relative to the particular rule involved. For BSR petitions filed pursuant to Part 73, the pleading cycle will be the same as that mandated by Section 76.7 unless stated otherwise. Please note that petitions
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-313559A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-313559A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-313559A1.txt
  • review. CSR (cable special relief) petitions and CSC (cable show cause) petitions refer to cable-related matters pursuant to Part 76. The newly-designated BSR (broadcast special relief) petitions refer to certain non-application-related broadcast matters pursuant to Part 73. Parties seeking special relief pursuant to Part 76 are advised that such requests must be initiated through the special relief provisions of Section 76.7 of the Rules. Many of these filings are subject to the pleading cycle rules set forth in Section 76.7, while others have their own pleading cycle relative to the particular rule involved. For BSR petitions filed pursuant to Part 73, the pleading cycle will be the same as that mandated by Section 76.7 unless stated otherwise. Please note that petitions
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-313777A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-313777A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-313777A1.txt
  • review. CSR (cable special relief) petitions and CSC (cable show cause) petitions refer to cable-related matters pursuant to Part 76. The newly-designated BSR (broadcast special relief) petitions refer to certain non-application-related broadcast matters pursuant to Part 73. Parties seeking special relief pursuant to Part 76 are advised that such requests must be initiated through the special relief provisions of Section 76.7 of the Rules. Many of these filings are subject to the pleading cycle rules set forth in Section 76.7, while others have their own pleading cycle relative to the particular rule involved. For BSR petitions filed pursuant to Part 73, the pleading cycle will be the same as that mandated by Section 76.7 unless stated otherwise. Please note that petitions
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-314077A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-314077A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-314077A1.txt
  • review. CSR (cable special relief) petitions and CSC (cable show cause) petitions refer to cable-related matters pursuant to Part 76. The newly-designated BSR (broadcast special relief) petitions refer to certain non-application-related broadcast matters pursuant to Part 73. Parties seeking special relief pursuant to Part 76 are advised that such requests must be initiated through the special relief provisions of Section 76.7 of the Rules. Many of these filings are subject to the pleading cycle rules set forth in Section 76.7, while others have their own pleading cycle relative to the particular rule involved. For BSR petitions filed pursuant to Part 73, the pleading cycle will be the same as that mandated by Section 76.7 unless stated otherwise. Please note that petitions
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-314155A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-314155A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-314155A1.txt
  • review. CSR (cable special relief) petitions and CSC (cable show cause) petitions refer to cable-related matters pursuant to Part 76. The newly-designated BSR (broadcast special relief) petitions refer to certain non-application-related broadcast matters pursuant to Part 73. Parties seeking special relief pursuant to Part 76 are advised that such requests must be initiated through the special relief provisions of Section 76.7 of the Rules. Many of these filings are subject to the pleading cycle rules set forth in Section 76.7, while others have their own pleading cycle relative to the particular rule involved. For BSR petitions filed pursuant to Part 73, the pleading cycle will be the same as that mandated by Section 76.7 unless stated otherwise. Please note that petitions
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-314401A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-314401A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-314401A1.txt
  • review. CSR (cable special relief) petitions and CSC (cable show cause) petitions refer to cable-related matters pursuant to Part 76. The newly-designated BSR (broadcast special relief) petitions refer to certain non-application-related broadcast matters pursuant to Part 73. Parties seeking special relief pursuant to Part 76 are advised that such requests must be initiated through the special relief provisions of Section 76.7 of the Rules. Many of these filings are subject to the pleading cycle rules set forth in Section 76.7, while others have their own pleading cycle relative to the particular rule involved. For BSR petitions filed pursuant to Part 73, the pleading cycle will be the same as that mandated by Section 76.7 unless stated otherwise. Please note that petitions
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-314524A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-314524A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-314524A1.txt
  • review. CSR (cable special relief) petitions and CSC (cable show cause) petitions refer to cable-related matters pursuant to Part 76. The newly-designated BSR (broadcast special relief) petitions refer to certain non-application-related broadcast matters pursuant to Part 73. Parties seeking special relief pursuant to Part 76 are advised that such requests must be initiated through the special relief provisions of Section 76.7 of the Rules. Many of these filings are subject to the pleading cycle rules set forth in Section 76.7, while others have their own pleading cycle relative to the particular rule involved. For BSR petitions filed pursuant to Part 73, the pleading cycle will be the same as that mandated by Section 76.7 unless stated otherwise. Please note that petitions
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-314792A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-314792A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-314792A1.txt
  • review. CSR (cable special relief) petitions and CSC (cable show cause) petitions refer to cable-related matters pursuant to Part 76. The newly-designated BSR (broadcast special relief) petitions refer to certain non-application-related broadcast matters pursuant to Part 73. Parties seeking special relief pursuant to Part 76 are advised that such requests must be initiated through the special relief provisions of Section 76.7 of the Rules. Many of these filings are subject to the pleading cycle rules set forth in Section 76.7, while others have their own pleading cycle relative to the particular rule involved. For BSR petitions filed pursuant to Part 73, the pleading cycle will be the same as that mandated by Section 76.7 unless stated otherwise. Please note that petitions
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-00-208A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-00-208A1.pdf
  • and subscribership in unserved and underserved regions of our Nation, including tribal lands and insular areas, and proposed particular changes to our universal service rules to overcome these impediments. Although approximately 94 percent of all households in the United States have telephone service today, penetration levels among particular areas and populations are significantly below the national average. For example, only 76.7 percent of rural households earning less than $5,000 have a telephone, and only 47 percent of Indian tribal households on reservations and other tribal lands have a telephone. These statistics demonstrate, most notably, that existing universal service support mechanisms are not adequate to sustain telephone subscribership on tribal lands. Central to the issues addressed in the Further Notice is the
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-00-417A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-00-417A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-00-417A1.txt
  • such notification and comply with such obligations or state its reasons for believing that it is in compliance with such obligations. A local television broadcast station that disputes a response by a satellite carrier that it is in compliance with such obligations may obtain review of such denial or response by filing a complaint with the Commission, in accordance with §76.7 of title 47, Code of Federal Regulations. Such complaint shall allege the manner in which such satellite carrier has failed to meet its obligations and the basis for such allegations. (4) The satellite carrier against which a complaint is filed is permitted to present data and arguments to establish that there has been no failure to meet its obligations under
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-01-11A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-01-11A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-01-11A1.txt
  • Order, 15 FCC Rcd 5445 (2000). Within "its IM offerings," we include the IM offered as part of AOL's basic proprietary Internet access service, AIM, ICQ, any IM that is sponsored by AOL Time Warner and is included in Road Runner, and any new IM-based service that uses the NPD that AOL uses for its IM. Cf. 47 C.F.R. § 76.7 The Commission acted pursuant to Sections 4(i) and (j), 214(a), 214(c), 309, and 310(d) of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended, 47 U.S.C. §§ 154(i), 154(j), 214(a), 214(c), 309, 310(d), (...continued from previous page) (continued...) New Conditions as of 1/11/01 PRIVILEGED AND CONFIDENTIAL - FOR INTERNAL USE ONLY Federal Communications Commission FCC 01-XXX PUBLIC NOTICE Federal Communications Commission 445
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-01-12A1.doc
  • Order, 15 FCC Rcd 5445 (2000). Within "its IM offerings," we include the IM offered as part of AOL's basic proprietary Internet access service, AIM, ICQ, any IM that is sponsored by AOL Time Warner and is included in Road Runner, and any new IM-based service that uses the NPD that AOL uses for its IM. Cf. 47 C.F.R. § 76.7 See para. 126F, supra. See 1999 Competition Report, 15 FCC Rcd at 980 ¶ 3 (generally describing the various types of MVPDs) (Section 628(g) of the Communications Act, 47 U.S.C. § 548(g), requires the Commission to report annually to Congress on the status of competition in markets for the delivery of video programming). DBS operators provide programming via satellite to
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-01-13A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-01-13A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-01-13A1.txt
  • measure based on households. See Petition at 6. Mescalero states that 569 of these lines are residential, noting that 80 residences have multiple lines. Mescalero ex parte at 3. The balance of these lines are broken down in the following manner: 356 business and/or tribal government and 26 payphone. Id. In the Twelfth Report and Order, we noted that only 76.7 percent of rural households earning less than $5,000 have a telephone, and only 47 percent of Indian tribal households on reservations and other tribal lands have a telephone in comparison to 94 percent of all households in the United States. See Twelfth Report and Order at para. 26 (citing Housing of American Indians on Reservations - Equipment and Fuels, Statistical
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-01-219A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-01-219A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-01-219A1.txt
  • licensee of television station WFTV, Orlando, Florida, has filed an Application for Review of the Memorandum Opinion and Order in Diversified Communications ("Bureau Order") pursuant to Section 1.115 of the Commission's rules. The Bureau Order granted a petition for special relief filed by Diversified Communications ("Diversified") for modification of the television market of Station WCJB-TV, Gainesville, Florida, pursuant to Sections 76.7 and 76.59 of the Commission's rules, and added certain communities in Marion County, Florida to WCJB-TV's market. Diversified, licensee of WCJB-TV, filed an opposition to the application for review. No reply was filed. The Application for Review is denied. Discussion Section 614(h)(1)(C)(i) of the Communications Act authorizes the Commission to add communities to, or delete communities from a television station's
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-01-227A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-01-227A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-01-227A1.txt
  • the Commission: introduction Christian Faith Broadcast, Inc. ("Christian"), licensee of television station WGGN-TV, Sandusky, Ohio, has filed an Application for Review of Cablevision of Cleveland, L.P. and V Cable, Inc., d/b/a Cablevision of Ohio ("Bureau Order"). The Bureau Order granted in part the petition of Cablevision of Cleveland, L.P. and V Cable, Inc., d/b/a Cablevision of Ohio ("Cablevision") under Sections 76.7(a) and 76.59(a) of the Commission's rules, and deleted certain communities (``the Communities") served by Cablevision's cable system from WGGN-TV's television market. Cablevision filed an opposition to the application for review, and Christian filed a reply. The Application for Review is denied. discussion Section 614(h)(1)(C)(i) of the Communications Act authorizes the Commission to add communities to, or delete communities from a
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-01-229A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-01-229A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-01-229A1.txt
  • in its defense. As the Commission noted in the First Report and Order, placing the burden of proof on the complainant: . . . should not be interpreted as permitting a broadcaster to remain mute in the face of allegations of a [good faith] violation. After service of a complaint, a broadcaster must file an answer as required by Section 76.7, which advises the parties and the Commission fully and completely of any and all defenses, responds specifically to all material allegations of the complaint, and admits or denies the averments on which the party relies. In addition, where necessary the Commission has discretion to impose discovery requests on a defendant to a [good faith] complaint. However, in the end, the
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-01-22A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-01-22A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-01-22A1.txt
  • channel capacity for the provision of other services if such channel capacity is not being used for the purposes designated, and (2) rules and procedures under which such permitted use shall cease.") Must Carry Order, 8 FCC Rcd. at 2972, 2984. DTV Must Carry Notice,13 FCC Rcd. at 15126. CBA Comments at 5; Pappas Comments at 32. 47 C.F.R. §§ 76.7 and 76.61. 47 U.S.C. §534(d)(3). DTV Must Carry Notice, 13 FCC Rcd at 15131. Id. See AAPTS Comments at 54. 47 U.S.C. §573(c)(1). 47 U.S.C. §573(c)(2)(A). See Implementation of Section 302 of the Telecommunications Act of 1996, Second Report and Order, 11 FCC Rcd 18223, 18307-08 (1996). Id. at 18308-09, n.371. We note, however, that an OVS operator must make
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-01-235A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-01-235A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-01-235A1.txt
  • FCC Rcd at 5305. See supra nn. 2, & 3. See 47 C.F.R. § 76.905(e)(2). We note that our decision today is without prejudice to any of the affected cable operators from re-filing a petition for determination of effective competition based on changed circumstances or updated information sufficient to overcome the presumption of no effective competition. See 47 C.F.R. §§ 76.7, 76.907. (...continued from previous page) (continued....) Federal Communications Commission FCC 01-235 Federal Communications Commission FCC 01-235 U V � @& „0ý „0ý „0ý „0ý „0ý „0ý „ðñ á
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-01-250A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-01-250A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-01-250A1.txt
  • September 10, 2001 By the Commission: introduction Ortiz Broadcasting Corp. ("Ortiz"), licensee of television station KTRG ("KTRG"), Del Rio, Texas, has filed an Application for Review of KBL Cablesystems of the Southwest, Inc., 12 FCC Rcd 21923 (CSB 1997) ("Bureau Order"). The Bureau Order granted the petition of KBL Cablesystems of the Southwest, Inc. d/b/a Paragon Cable ("Paragon") under Sections 76.7(a) and 76.59(a) of the Commission's rules, and deleted San Antonio, Texas, and certain other communities in Bexar County, Texas, (the Communities") served by Paragon's cable system from KTRG's television market. Paragon filed an opposition to the application, and Ortiz filed a reply. For the reasons stated below, we deny the Application for Review. discussion Section 614(h)(1)(C)(i) of the Communications Act
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-01-277A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-01-277A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-01-277A1.txt
  • 4834-A CSR 4631-M Adopted: September 25, 2001 Released: October 4, 2001 By the Commission: introduction Christian Faith Broadcast, Inc. ("Christian"), licensee of television station WGGN-TV, Sandusky, Ohio, has filed an Application for Review of Armstrong Utilities, Inc. d/b/a Armstrong Cable Services ("Bureau Order"). The Bureau Order granted the petition of Armstrong Utilities, Inc. d/b/a Armstrong Cable Services ("Armstrong") under Sections 76.7(a) and 76.59(a) of the Commission's rules, and deleted the communities of Ashland and Medina, Ohio and certain other nearby communities (the Communities") served by Armstrong's cable system from WGGN-TV's television market. Armstrong filed an opposition to the application for review, and Christian filed a reply. For the reasons discussed below, we affirm the Bureau's action and deny the Application for
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-01-354A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-01-354A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-01-354A1.txt
  • and General Counsel, Gemstar Development Corp. (June 15, 2000). Gemstar Comments to Time Warner Petition at 2. Gemstar Comments to Time Warner Petition at 11. NAB Comments to Time Warner Petition at 5. Id. at 8. Time Warner Reply to Time Warner Petition at 3. Id. at 4. Id. at 5, citing DTV Carriage Order ¶ 64. 47 C.F.R. § 76.7(a)(1); see also 47 C.F.R. § 1.2. DTV Carriage Order ¶ 122. Time Warner Petition at 1. 47 U.S.C. § 534. 47 U.S.C. § 534(b)(3)(A). Id. Id. 693 F.2d 622 (7th Cir. 1982). The Commission originally cited the WGN case at 685 F.2d 218 (7th Cir. 1982), which was the original citation to the case prior to rehearing. See Implementation of
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-01-42A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-01-42A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-01-42A1.txt
  • 20, 2001 By the Commission: I. INTRODUCTION 1. Paxson Boston License, Inc. ("Paxson"), licensee of WGOT-TV, Merrimack, New Hampshire, has filed an Application for Review of the Cable Services Bureau's (the "Bureau") order in Greater Worcester Cablevision, Inc., et al. ("Bureau Order"). The Bureau Order granted the combined petition of Greater Worcester Cablevision, Inc., et al. (``Petitioner'') pursuant to Sections 76.7(a) and 76.59 (a) of the Commission's rules, and deleted the designated communities in Worcester County (``the System'') from the Boston, Massachusetts area of dominant influence (``ADI'') from WGOT's television market for must carry purposes. Petitioner filed an opposition to the application for review, and Paxson filed a reply. II. BACKGROUND 2. Section 614(h)(1)(C)(i) of the Communications Act authorizes the Commission
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-01-80A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-01-80A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-01-80A1.txt
  • INTRODUCTION 1. Paxson Boston License, Inc. ("Paxson"), licensee of WPXB-TV, Merrimack, New Hampshire, has filed an Application for Review of the Cable Services Bureau's (the "Bureau") Order in Harron Cablevision of Massachusetts, d/b/a Harron Communications Corp. ("Bureau Order"). The Bureau Order granted the Petition for Special Relief of Harron Cablevision of Massachusetts, d/b/a Harron Communications Corp. (``Harron'') pursuant to Sections 76.7(a) and 76.59(a) of the Commission's rules, and deleted certain communities in Plymouth County, Massachusetts from WPXB-TV's Boston television market for must carry purposes. Harron filed an opposition to the application for review, and Paxson filed a reply. II. DISCUSSION 2. Section 614(h)(1)(C)(i) of the Communications Act authorizes the Commission to add communities to, or delete communities from a television station's
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-02-287A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-02-287A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-02-287A1.txt
  • then blackout protection would be removed under Section 76.127(a), and notifications would need to be sent out under Section 76.127(c). We also recognize that in some circumstances pre-season sporting events will use sports blackout protection similar to regular season games. See Letter from Philip R. Hochberg (filed May 10, 2002). See amended rule section 76.127 in Appendix B. 47 C.F.R. §76.7(a). Section 76.5(gg) defined ``basic cable service'' for purposes of basic cable service rate regulation and incorporated the standard for carriage of broadcast television signals under the Commission's original 1972 must-carry rules. The former Section 76.5(gg) provided that Basic Cable must include: (1) For communities located outside all major and smaller television markets (as defined in this section): (i) Television broadcast
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-03-225A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-03-225A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-03-225A1.txt
  • account its effect on consumers, [l]icensees and [c]able [o]perators; competition, innovation, developments in technology; and the need to protect [content].'' We hereby clarify that, to the extent a DFAST licensee seeks Commission review of proposed changes to the compliance and robustness rules, we will consider such petitions on a case-by-case basis pursuant to our normal procedures and timing under Section 76.7 of the Commission's rules. B. Approval of New Outputs and Associated Content Protection Technologies As in the case of the compliance and robustness rules, the DFAST license reserves for the Commission an appellate role in overseeing initial determinations by CableLabs approving new outputs or associated content protection technologies for use with unidirectional digital cable products. When CableLabs disapproves a particular
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-03-273A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-03-273A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-03-273A1.txt
  • recording method accommodates consumers' use and enjoyment of Unencrypted Digital Terrestrial Broadcast Content; and (4) Any other relevant factors the Commission determines warrant consideration. (e) Revocation of Approval. (1) If the security of a content protection technology or recording method approved for use in Covered Demodulator Products has been compromised, a person may seek revocation of such approval pursuant to §76.7 of this chapter. (2) Petitioners seeking revocation of a content protection technology or recording method's approval for use in Covered Demodulator Products shall articulate in detail the extent to which the content protection or recording technology has been compromised and demonstrate why alternative measures are insufficient to address the breach in security. § 73.9009 Manufacture for Exportation. The requirements of
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-03-330A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-03-330A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-03-330A1.txt
  • ability to use its television duopolies and RSNs to cross-promote the outlets, bundle sales of advertising time, and gain leverage in retransmission consent negotiations). EchoStar Petition at 19. EchoStar contends that the good faith requirement, as interpreted by the Commission, applies to the process of negotiations, not the substantive terms. Id. JCC Comments at 31 (citing 47 C.F.R. §§ 76.65(c), 76.7). ACA Comments at 11-12. ACA Comments at 11-12; JCC Comments at 34; JCC Aug. 4 Ex Parte, Rogerson Analysis II at 39. Cablevision Comments at 19-20. Cablevision Comments at 19. Cablevision Comments at 19-20. Cablevision Comments at 20. Applicants' Reply, Exhibit B, CRA Analysis at 43-46. CRA also considers whether the transaction would enhance News Corp.'s incentive and ability to
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-03-333A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-03-333A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-03-333A1.txt
  • its complaint here. Third, WOW could file a claim at the Commission under the uniform price provisions of the Communications Act and the Commission's rules. ordering clause ACCORDINGLY, IT IS ORDERED, pursuant to sections 1, 4(i), 4(j), 601, and 632 of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended, 47 U.S.C. §§ 151, 154(i), 154(j), 521, and 552, and sections 76.6, 76.7, 76.1602, and 76.1603 of the Commission's rules, 47 C.F.R. §§ 76.6-76.7, and 76.1602-1603, that the Complaint filed by WideOpen West Holdings, LLC against Comcast Corporation for systemic abuse of customer service standards established by the Federal Communications Commission pursuant to Section 632(b) of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended, IS DISMISSED in its entirety with prejudice. FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-03-3A2.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-03-3A2.txt
  • Complaint regarding a service not subject to petition. In an instance in which a party entitled to be a Complainant has a substantial basis to believe and does believe in good faith that a service within a Defined Business Model has been launched without a petition as required by this Rule, such party may file a complaint pursuant to section 76.7 of the Commission's rules, and in appropriate circumstances the Commission shall rule upon the complaint within 90 days. 8 3. Encoding Rules for Undefined Business Models. (a) Upon public notice and subject to requirements as set forth herein a Covered Entity may launch a program service pursuant to an Undefined Business Model. Subject to Commission review upon Complaint, the Covered
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-03-9A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-03-9A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-03-9A1.txt
  • we decline to adopt DirecTV's proposal to allow MDU owners to require sharing of incumbent-owned cable wiring. We expect these modifications of our home wiring rules to increase their effectiveness and simplify their use. We recognize, however, that there may be situations in which questions arise regarding proper application of the rules. We note that, pursuant to 47 C.F.R. § 76.7, parties may file petitions for declaratory rulings on questions regarding the proper application and interpretation of our rules and complaints alleging violation of our rules. issues raised in the petitions for reconsideration Legal Authority Several petitioners question the Commission's authority to regulate the disposition of cable home run wiring in the first instance. We carefully considered these arguments at length
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-04-192A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-04-192A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-04-192A1.txt
  • APPENDIX D DTV STATIONS AUTHORIZED TO BE ON THE AIR As of July 28, 2004 Category # DTV Paired Licenses # DTV Stations on Air % On the Air With Licensed Facility or Program Tests With STAs Top 30 Market Network Affiliates 119 119 100 percent 110 9 Other Commercial* 1230 1018 82.8 percent 342 676 Non-Commercial Educational** 373 286 76.7 percent 182 104 Total 1722 1423 82.6 percent 634 789 * May 1, 2002 Build Out Deadline ** May 1, 2003 Build Out Deadline A total of 843 commercial television stations subject to the May 1, 2002, deadline requested an initial extension of time to complete construction. The Media Bureau granted 772 of these initial extension requests upon showings that
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-04-193A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-04-193A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-04-193A1.txt
  • provisions in other license agreements, we are not inclined to intervene in the negotiation of this specific license term. MPAA Opposition to TiVo at 9; MPAA Opposition to Microsoft at 10; MPAA Opposition to RealNetworks at 10-11. TiVo Reply at 12-17. Id. at 15-16. RealNetworks Reply at 11; Microsoft Reply at 22-27. Microsoft Reply at 22-26. 47 C.F.R. §§ 73.9008(e), 76.7; see also 47 C.F.R. § 1.41. MPAA Opposition to Philips and Hewlett Packard at 5-7; MPAA Opposition to TiVo at 10; MPAA Opposition to RealNetworks at 9-10; MPAA Opposition to Microsoft at 11. Just as it had initially challenged the enforcement provisions of the SmartRight adopter agreement, MPAA at first questioned its change management terms, but later acquiesced to new
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-04-5A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-04-5A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-04-5A1.txt
  • Comcast SportsNet has always been available for carriage by RCN. Id. at 15. See Appendix B, Table B-1. See also NCTA Comments at 8. DirecTV Comments at 11. See Appendix B, Table B-1. Under Section 76.907, a cable operator (or other interested party) may petition the Commission for a determination of effective competition pursuant to Commission's procedural rules in Section 76.7. See 47 C.F.R. §§ 76.7, 76.907. In its petition, a cable operator must provide evidence that it meets one of the statutory tests for the existence of effective competition. See 47 U.S.C. § 543 (1)(l)(A)-(D). See also 47 C.F.R. § 76.905(b). Based on the evidence provided in the petition and any opposition received, the Commission determines whether to grant effective
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-05-119A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-05-119A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-05-119A1.txt
  • agreement not to compete or to fix prices, or involves the exercise of market power in one market in order to foreclose competitors from participation in another market -- is not within the competitive marketplace considerations standard included in the statute. 6. Finally, the Good Faith Order established procedural rules for the filing of good faith complaints pursuant to Section 76.7 of the Commission's rules. The burden of proof is on the complainant to establish a good faith violation and complaints are subject to a one year limitations period. III. DISCUSSION 7. In enacting the SHVERA good faith negotiation obligation for MVPDs, Congress used language identical to that of the SHVIA imposing a good faith obligation on broadcasters, requiring the Commission,
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-05-13A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-05-13A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-05-13A1.txt
  • ¶ 123. See Appendix B, Table B-1. See also NCTA Comments at 8. Previous year numbers in Table B-1 have been revised due to improved data sources. See New Jersey Comments at 8. Under Section 76.907, a cable operator (or other interested party) may petition the Commission for a determination of effective competition pursuant to Commission's procedural rules in Section 76.7. See 47 C.F.R. §§ 76.7, 76.907. In its petition, a cable operator must provide evidence that it meets one of the statutory tests for the existence of effective competition. See 47 U.S.C. § 543 (l)(1)(A)-(D). See also 47 C.F.R. § 76.905(b). Based on the evidence provided in the petition and any opposition received, the Commission determines whether to grant effective
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-05-187A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-05-187A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-05-187A1.txt
  • our rules to satellite carriers. Revised Section 76.54 will now reference satellite carriers and the new SV List, but will not alter the procedures as in effect on April 15, 1976. Thus, we now require satellite carriers or broadcast stations seeking significantly viewed status to follow the same petition process in place for cable operators, as required by Sections 76.5, 76.7 and 76.54 of our rules. [IV.A.3.] With respect to the application of the Commission's network non-duplication and syndicated exclusivity rules to the carriage of significantly viewed stations, we implement the SHVERA provision to create a limited right for a station or distributor to assert exclusivity with respect to a station carried by a satellite carrier as significantly viewed; allow that
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-05-24A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-05-24A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-05-24A1.txt
  • the process of the rule. In light of the statutory restriction to use rules in effect on April 15, 1976, we seek comment on our proposed amendments to Section 76.54. Additionally, we propose to require satellite carriers or broadcast stations seeking satellite carriage to follow the same petition process now in place for cable operators, as required by Sections 76.5, 76.7 and 76.54 of our rules. We believe, however, that it is not necessary to amend Sections 76.5 and 76.7 in order to permit the filing of such petitions for significantly viewed status by satellite carriers or broadcast stations seeking satellite carriage. A station or cable operator that wishes to have a station/community designated significantly viewed would file a petition pursuant
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-05-49A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-05-49A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-05-49A1.txt
  • agreement not to compete or to fix prices, or involves the exercise of market power in one market in order to foreclose competitors from participation in another market -- is not within the competitive marketplace considerations standard included in the statute. 6. Finally, the Good Faith Order established procedural rules for the filing of good faith complaints pursuant to Section 76.7 of the Commission's rules. The burden of proof is on the complainant to establish a good faith violation and complaints are subject to a one year limitations period. B. The Reciprocal Bargaining Obligations of SHVERA 7. In enacting the SHVERA good faith negotiation obligation for MVPDs, Congress used language identical to that of the SHVIA imposing a good faith obligation
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-06-111A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-06-111A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-06-111A1.txt
  • matter to the Commission within 45 days. Referral to Administrative Law Judge or Alternative Dispute Resolution We direct that an Administrative Law Judge resolve the factual disputes with respect to both claims and return a recommended decision and a recommended remedy, if necessary, to the Commission within 45 days of the stay of this Order being lifted. Pursuant to Section 76.7(g)(2) of the Commission's rules, TCR and Comcast will have ten days following the lifting of the stay of this Order to elect to resolve this dispute through ADR. Each party will notify the Commission, in writing, of its election within 10 days of release of this Order and, in the event that ADR is chosen, will update the Commission monthly
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-06-150A2.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-06-150A2.txt
  • 2448 34.6 25045MDHAGERSTOWN 25 26 575 359 74627 393945 775754 22215 1362 28.7 10259MDHAGERSTOWN 68 39 82.5 394 74528 395331 775802 13861 814 6 65943MDHAGERSTOWN 31 44 209 359 33311 393904 775815 15728 977 4.1 40619MDOAKLAND 36 36 71.7 291 75062 392414 791737 10542 216 6.8 71218MDSALISBURY 16 21 635 279 64847 383017 753837 21695 659 0 40618MDSALISBURY 28 28 76.7 157 74642 382309 753533 14077 426 0 16455MDSALISBURY 47 47 225 292 75201 383006 754400 18171 579 0.3 39659MEAUGUSTA 10 10 15.3 305 74406 440916 700037 25690 818 1.3 39644MEBANGOR 2 2 2.37 199 74986 444410 684017 19580 334 0 3667MEBANGOR 7 7 14.5 250 74374 444535 683401 24704 334 0.6 17005MEBANGOR 5 19 465 402 74868 444213 690447 30384
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-07-127A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-07-127A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-07-127A1.txt
  • denied Comcast's request for waiver of the ban on integrated set-top boxes, finding that the boxes for which Comcast sought waiver (the ``Subject Boxes'') are not eligible for relief under (1) Section 629(c) of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended (the ``Act''); (2) the waiver policy established by the Commission for low-cost, limited-capability devices; and/or (3) Sections 1.3 and 76.7 of the Commission's rules. As set forth below, we deny Comcast's Application for Review and affirm the Bureau's Order. BACKGROUND Congress directed the Commission to adopt regulations to assure the commercial availability of navigation devices more than ten years ago as part of the Telecommunications Act of 1996. The Commission implemented this directive in 1998 through the adoption of the
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-07-127A3.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-07-127A3.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-07-127A3.txt
  • and were granted relief for exactly the same boxes covered by the Comcast request. The basis for granting the waivers had nothing to do with the boxes - in each instance, the Bureau found the two-way functionality of these boxes to be too advanced to qualify as limited-capability devices. Instead, the Bureau orders used generic regulations in Sections 1.3 and 76.7 of the CFR to grant waivers based on certain characteristics of the operator - for instance, the operator's ``demonstrated financial hardship,'' the operator's delivery of service to an area prone to natural disasters, or most often, the operator's commitment to migrate to an all-digital network before the digital transition date for broadcast television. We concur in this Order because of
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-07-138A2.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-07-138A2.txt
  • 2448 34.6 25045MDHAGERSTOWN 25 26 575 359 74627 393945 775754 22215 1362 28.7 10259MDHAGERSTOWN 68 39 82.5 394 74528 395331 775802 13861 814 6 65943MDHAGERSTOWN 31 44 209 359 33311 393904 775815 15728 977 4.1 40619MDOAKLAND 36 36 71.7 291 75062 392414 791737 10542 216 6.8 71218MDSALISBURY 16 21 635 279 64847 383017 753837 21695 659 0 40618MDSALISBURY 28 28 76.7 157 382309 753533 14077 426 0 16455MDSALISBURY 47 47 225 292 75201 383006 754400 18155 579 0.4 39659MEAUGUSTA 10 10 15.3 305 74406 440916 700037 25690 818 1.3 39644MEBANGOR 2 2 2.37 199 74986 444410 684017 19580 334 0 3667MEBANGOR 7 7 14.5 250 74374 444535 683401 24704 334 0.6 17005MEBANGOR 5 19 465 402 74868 444213 690447 30384 488
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-07-169A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-07-169A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-07-169A1.txt
  • dispute resolution. Within 20 days of the close of the pleading cycle, the parties to the program access dispute may voluntarily engage in alternative dispute resolution, including commercial arbitration. The Commission will suspend action on the complaint if both parties agree to use alternative dispute resolution. (j) Discovery. In addition to the general pleading and discovery rules contained in § 76.7 of this part, parties to a program access complaint may serve requests for discovery directly on opposing parties, and file a copy of the request with the Commission. The respondent shall have the opportunity to object to any request for documents that are not in its control or relevant to the dispute. Such request shall be heard, and determination made,
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-07-172A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-07-172A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-07-172A1.txt
  • Transfer of Control of Licenses, Adelphia Communications Corporation, Assignors to Time Warner Cable, Inc., et al., Memorandum Opinion and Order, MB Docket No. 05-192, 21 FCC Rcd 8203, 8287 at ¶ 190 (rel. July 21, 2006) (``Adelphia Order''). The Petition was put on public notice on February 7, 2007. Responsive pleadings were due by February 27, 2007. 47 C.F.R. § 76.7. In addition to TAC's filing, the Commission received comments from The Africa Channel on February 26, 2007 (expressing concern that TAC would ``jump ahead'' of more established networks in the distribution queue) and from Altitude on February 27, 2007 (claiming TAC qualifies neither as a regional nor sports network). Comcast filed its Reply on March 9, 2007. On March 9,
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-07-18A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-07-18A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-07-18A1.txt
  • 9 FCC Rcd at 2652. Id. at 2648. Id. at 2656. Id. at 2653. Implementation of Sections 12 and 19 of the Cable Television Consumer Protection and Competition Act of 1992 and Development of Competition and Diversity in Video Programming Distribution and Carriage, 9 FCC Rcd 2642, 2648 (1993); 47 C.F.R. § 76.1302(c)(3). 47 C.F.R. § 76.1302; 47 C.F.R. § 76.7(g). TCR Sports Broadcasting Holding, L.L.P. v. Comcast Corporation, MB Docket No. 06-148, FCC 06-111 (rel. July 31, 2006) (``TCR Order'') at ¶ 13, et seq. See 5 U.S.C. § 603. The RFA, see 5 U.S.C. §§ 601 - 612, has been amended by the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996 (``SBREFA''), Pub. L. No. 104-121, Title II, 110
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-07-208A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-07-208A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-07-208A1.txt
  • the Media Bureau issues a public notice announcing the complaint has been filed rather than from the date the complaint was filed. TWC argues that such a change will serve the public interest by: (i) allowing other parties to participate in the complaint process; (ii) integrating the leased access pleading cycle with the generally applicable complaint pleading cycle in Section 76.7; and (iii) avoiding the need for cable operators to respond to informal correspondence filed by leased access programmers with the Commission that may not warrant treatment as a complaint. Cable operators also urge the Commission to retain the independent accountant requirement for resolving leased access rate disputes, arguing that it provides a low cost, streamlined process for obtaining an independent
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-07-7A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-07-7A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-07-7A1.txt
  • Procedures This Notice also seeks comment on whether and how our procedures for resolving program access disputes under Section 628 should be modified. Our rules provide that any MVPD aggrieved by conduct that it believes constitutes a violation of Section 628 and the Commission's program access rules may file a complaint at the Commission in accordance with 47 C.F.R. §§ 76.7 and 76.1003. The Commission's rules provide that before an MVPD may file such a complaint, it must first notify the cable operator or satellite programming vendor that it intends to file the complaint. The complaining MVPD must allow the cable operator or vendor 10 days to respond to the prefiling notice prior to filing its complaint with the Commission. The
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-08-72A2.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-08-72A2.txt
  • 575 359 74627 393945 775754 22215 1362 28.7 10259MD HAGERSTOWN 68 39 82.5 394 74528 395331 775802 13861 814 6 65943MD HAGERSTOWN 31 44 209 359 33311 393904 775815 15728 977 4.1 40619MD OAKLAND 36 36 71.7 291 75062 392414 791737 10550 216 6.7 71218MD SALISBURY 16 21 635 279 64847 383017 753837 21695 659 0 40618MD SALISBURY 28 28 76.7 157 382309 753533 14077 426 0 16455MD SALISBURY 47 47 225 292 75201 383006 754400 18155 579 0.4 39659ME AUGUSTA 10 10 15.3 305 74406 440916 700037 25690 818 1.3 39644ME BANGOR 2 2 3.02 192 84817 444410 684017 22407 339 0 3667ME BANGOR 7 7 14.5 250 74374 444535 683401 24704 334 0.6 Appendix B Federal Communications Commission FCC
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-09-45A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-09-45A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-09-45A1.txt
  • further contends that use of CableCARD devices does not present a reasonable solution because such devices are prohibitively costly at ``$300 to $400 per'' device. Finally, Cable One reasserts its position that waiver will further the public interest, for the same reasons provided in the Waiver Request. discussion Cable One makes its request for waiver pursuant to Sections 1.3 and 76.7 of the Commission's rules, as clarified by the low-cost, limited-capability standard set forth in the Commission's 2005 Deferral Order. As discussed below, we find good cause to grant Cable One's waiver under Sections 1.3 and 76.7 of the Commission's rules because (1) the limited functionality, one-way device Cable One plans to deploy is unlikely to have a significant effect on
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-09-46A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-09-46A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-09-46A1.txt
  • to support CableCARD technology. Finally, Evolution states that its waiver request is time-limited as required by Section 629(c) of the Act. discussion Evolution makes its request for waiver pursuant to Section 629(c) of the Communications Act, Section 706 of the Telecommunications Act of 1996, and Section 76.1207 of the Commission's rules. Alternatively, Evolution seeks waiver pursuant to Sections 1.3 and 76.7 of the Commission's rules as clarified by the 2005 Deferral Order. Accordingly, we analyze its request pursuant to the waiver standards set forth in Section 629(c) and under the general waiver provisions found in Sections 1.3 and 76.7 of the Commission's rules as clarified by the low-cost, limited-capability standard set forth in the Commission's 2005 Deferral Order. As discussed below,
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-09-93A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-09-93A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-09-93A1.txt
  • Public Notice, 23 FCC Rcd 14873 (2008). -2. 47 U.S.C. § 503(b). Id. at § 403. See, e.g., 47 C.F.R. § 1.41 (authorizing the filing of informal complaints). Adelphia/Time Warner/Comcast Order, 21 FCC Rcd 8203, 8298, para. 220 (2006). Comcast Network Management Practices Order, 23 FCC Rcd at 13032-33, paras. 10-11. 47 C.F.R. § 1.711 et seq. 47 C.F.R. § 76.7; see also 47 C.F.R. § 76.1003 (program access complaints). 47 C.F.R. §§ 1.200 et seq. See 47 C.F.R. § 1.1206(b)(2). 47 C.F.R. § 1.1206(b). 47 C.F.R. §§ 1.415, 1.419. See Electronic Filing of Documents in Rulemaking Proceedings, 63 Fed. Reg. 24121 (1998). See 5 U.S.C. § 603. Pub. L. No. 104-13. Pub. L. No. 107-198. See 44 U.S.C. § 3506(c)(4).
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-10-129A7.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-10-129A7.txt
  • * American Samoa * * * * * Arizona 85.3 76.3 43.2 37.6 13.5 Arkansas 82.7 76.6 * * * California 86.2 78.3 40.5 19.7 3.9 Colorado 87.8 77.5 44.5 39.0 1.5 Connecticut 87.9 80.8 46.5 37.5 * Delaware 82.5 75.6 * * * District of Columbia 62.6 55.7 39.6 22.6 5.0 Florida 86.0 82.2 51.8 40.3 8.6 Georgia 81.8 76.7 43.8 23.7 1.8 Guam * * * * * Hawaii 92.5 88.3 60.5 * * Idaho 81.6 72.4 35.1 * * Illinois 87.9 79.6 43.0 31.9 7.5 Indiana 84.3 76.2 45.8 32.6 13.9 Iowa 87.0 74.6 46.5 * * Kansas 83.3 77.0 42.8 33.7 3.8 Kentucky 88.5 76.7 49.3 31.2 26.2 Louisiana 85.3 81.7 39.0 * * Maine 86.0 82.9
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-10-130A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-10-130A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-10-130A1.txt
  • viewing hours. 47 C.F.R. § 76.5(i)(1)-(2). The Commission's rules define network station as one of the ``three major national television networks'' (i.e., ABC, CBS or NBC). 47 C.F.R. § 76.5(j) and (k). Parties may demonstrate that stations are significantly viewed either on a community basis or on a county-wide basis. 47 C.F.R. § 76.54(b), (d). See 47 C.F.R. §§ 76.5, 76.7, 76.54. A TV station, cable operator or satellite carrier that wishes to have a station designated significantly viewed must file a petition pursuant to the pleading requirements in 47 C.F.R. § 76.7(a)(1) and use the method described in 47 C.F.R. § 76.54 to demonstrate that the station is significantly viewed as defined in 47 C.F.R. § 76.5(i). SHVERA Significantly Viewed
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-10-17A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-10-17A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-10-17A1.txt
  • terrestrially delivered programming, unlike complaints involving satellite-delivered programming, entail an additional factual inquiry regarding whether the unfair act has the purpose or effect set forth in Section 628(b). With the exception of the additional burdens described below and the additional time for defendants to file an Answer, these proceedings will be subject to the same procedures set forth in Sections 76.7 and 76.1003 of the Commission's rules that apply to program access complaints involving satellite-delivered, cable-affiliated programming. Among other things, these rules provide for pre-filing notices, discovery, remedies, potential defenses, and the required contents of and deadlines for filing the complaint, answer, and reply. Additional Burdens in Program Access Complaint Proceedings Alleging Unfair Acts Involving Terrestrially Delivered, Cable-Affiliated Programming We are
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-10-181A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-10-181A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-10-181A1.txt
  • beyond what is allowed under Sections 76.1201 and 76.1204 of our rules. They assert that these licensing terms limit innovation. To the extent that any interested party has concerns that an aspect of the CableCard licensing regime violates Sections 76.1201 through 76.1204 of the Commission's rules, that party may allege a specific violation of the Commission's rules pursuant to Section 76.7 of our rules. We decline to adopt IPCO and Nagravision's proposal to extend certification rules to the CableCARD security modules by dictating the specific testing procedures that CableLabs must use to certify CableCARD security modules. CableCARDs are an important part of protecting signal theft and protecting cable networks. Section 629(b) prohibits the Commission from adopting regulations that would jeopardize the
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-10-193A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-10-193A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-10-193A1.txt
  • rules define network station as one of the ``three major national television networks'' (i.e., ABC, CBS or NBC). 47 C.F.R. § 76.5(j) and (k). Parties may demonstrate that stations are significantly viewed either on a community basis or on a county-wide basis. 47 C.F.R. § 76.54(b), (d). See 17 U.S.C. § 122(j)(2)(A) (defining ``local market''). See 47 C.F.R. §§ 76.5, 76.7, 76.54. A TV station, cable operator or satellite carrier that wishes to have a station designated significantly viewed must file a petition pursuant to the pleading requirements in 47 C.F.R. § 76.7(a)(1) and use the method described in 47 C.F.R. § 76.54 to demonstrate that the station is significantly viewed as defined in 47 C.F.R. § 76.5(i). . See 47
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-10-30A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-10-30A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-10-30A1.txt
  • FCC 10-17 (rel. Jan. 20, 2010) (``First Report and Order''). See id. at ¶ 57. The First Report and Order explained that, with the exception of the certain additional burdens and the additional time for defendants to file an Answer, complaints alleging unfair acts involving terrestrially delivered, cable-affiliated programming will be subject to the same procedures set forth in Sections 76.7 and 76.1003 of the rules that apply to complaints involving satellite-delivered, cable-affiliated programming. See id. at ¶ 49. While we amended Section 76.1003(g)(1)-(2) to reflect that complaints may be filed with respect to terrestrial cable programming, we neglected to make a similar amendment to Section 76.1003(g)(3). See id., Appendix B at ¶ 5. (continued....) Federal Communications Commission FCC 10-30 Federal
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-10-84A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-10-84A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-10-84A1.txt
  • permits within specified time periods); Knology Comments at 20 (suggesting that the Commission modify the pole attachment rule governing Petitions for Temporary Stay so that they may be used in make-ready situations); T-Mobile Comments at 8-9 (proposing accelerated treatment of pole attachment disputes). National Broadband Plan at 112. See 47 C.F.R. §§ 1.1401-1.418. 47 C.F.R. §§ 1.720-1.736. 47 C.F.R. § 76.7; see also 47 C.F.R. § 76.1003 (program access complaints). Improving Public Safety Communications in the 800 MHz Band, WT Docket No. 02-55, Report and Order, Fifth Report and Order, Fourth Memorandum Opinion and Order, and Order, 19 FCC Rcd 14969, 14986, para. 27 (2004) (800 MHz Report and Order) (creating an independent third party responsible for mediating certain spectrum reconfiguration
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-11-119A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-11-119A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-11-119A1.txt
  • not believe that the 240-calendar-day deadline adopted herein will unduly interfere with the ALJ's independence, and this deadline will not be used for performance appraisals. We also amend certain procedural deadlines applicable to adjudicatory hearings to reflect that an adjudicatory hearing involving a program carriage complaint does not commence until a party elects not to pursue ADR pursuant to Section 76.7(g)(2) or, if the parties have mutually elected to pursue ADR, the parties fail to resolve their dispute through ADR. We also adopt expedited deadlines to account for the 240-calendar-day deadline for the ALJ's initial decision. First, we revise the deadline for filing a written appearance in a program carriage matter referred to an ALJ. Section 1.221(c) of the Commission's rules
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-11-16A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-11-16A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-11-16A1.txt
  • See generally 47 C.F.R. §§ 1.1208 (rules applicable to restricted proceedings), 1.1212 (procedures for handling prohibited ex parte presentations). MAP Comments at 2. See 47 U.S.C. § 208; 47 C.F.R. §§ 1.720 et seq. See 47 U.S.C. § 224; 47 C.F.R. §§ 1.1401 et seq. See 47 U.S.C. § 222; 47 C.F.R. §§ 64.2001 et seq. See 47 C.F.R. §§ 76.7 et seq. See id. §§ 1.4000 et seq. See id. § 54.314. We note that other bureaus and offices may wish to complete independent proceedings to transition matters within their jurisdiction into the formal docketing process, and direct CGB to take particular care to consult with the bureaus and offices in this regard. We note that any subsequent determination that
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-11-182A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-11-182A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-11-182A1.txt
  • 60 day requirement provides the Media Bureau with adequate time to contact the waiver applicant in the event of a question regarding its certification. See 47 C.F.R. § 1.3. ``Financial hardship'' or ``general'' waiver requests filed by cable operators pursuant to CALM Act §§ 2(b)(2) and 2(b)(3) and 47 C.F.R. § 1.3 are not ``Cable Special Relief Petitions'' under section 76.7 of the Commission's rules, and are therefore not subject to a statutory filing fee. See 47 U.S.C. § 158(g). Section 76.7(a)(1) of the rules provides, inter alia, that the Commission may waive ``any provision of this part 76'' in response to a petition by a cable operator. Requests by cable operators for CALM Act relief pursuant to CALM Act §§
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-12-11A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-12-11A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-12-11A1.txt
  • regions established pursuant to the Alaska Native Claims Settlement Act (85 Stat. 688), and Indian allotments.'' The changes were a direct response to the disproportionately low subscribership to telecommunications services among Tribal communities at the time. For example, in 2000, only an estimated 47 percent of Tribal households had phone service compared to 94 percent of all American households and 76.7 percent of rural households earning less than $5,000 per year. The rules adopted in 2000 were designed to address this urgent challenge. Relying on both section 254 and the unique trust relationship between the federal government and American Indian Tribes and Alaska Native Villages, the Commission created a fourth tier of Lifeline support, providing up to an additional $25 (for
• http://transition.fcc.gov/Bureaus/Cable/Notices/1998/fcc98068.pdf http://transition.fcc.gov/Bureaus/Cable/Notices/1998/fcc98068.wp
  • and to repeal or modify Federal Communications Commission FCC 98-68 447 U.S.C. § 161. 5See Cable Communications Policy Act of 1984, Pub. L. No. 98-549, 98 Stat. 2779 (1984); Cable Television Consumer Protection and Competition Act, Pub. L. No. 102-385, 106 Stat. 1460 (1992); Telecommunications Act of 1996, Pub. L. No. 104-104, 110 Stat. 56 (1996). 6See 47 C.F.R. § 76.7(d). 747 C.F.R. § 76.9(d). 2 any regulation it determines to be no longer in the public interest."4 Although Section 11 does not specifically refer to cable operators, the Commission has determined that the first biennial review presents an opportunity for a thorough examination of all of the Commission's regulations. We believe that, where possible, simplification of the complaint processes for
• http://transition.fcc.gov/Bureaus/Cable/Notices/1998/fcc98153.pdf http://transition.fcc.gov/Bureaus/Cable/Notices/1998/fcc98153.wp
  • by November 1999, there are eleven counties that were not part of the Denver ADI but are part of the Denver DMA. Copyright issues may also be implicated as a television station's signal, either analog or digital, may be considered "distant" under Section 111 of the Copyright Act if the signal is carried outside its designated local market. 17447 C.F.R. §76.7. 17547 U.S.C. §534(d)(3). 176We note that we recently issued a Notice of Proposed Rulemaking seeking comment on methods to streamline the cable television complaint rules, generally. See 1998 Biennial Regulatory Review, Part 76 Cable Television Service Pleading and Complaint Rules, CS Docket 98-54, FCC 98-68, 1998 WL 187918 (rel. Apr. 22, 1998). 177Amendment of Part 76 of the Commission's Rules
• http://transition.fcc.gov/Bureaus/Cable/Orders/1998/fcc98116.pdf http://transition.fcc.gov/Bureaus/Cable/Orders/1998/fcc98116.wp
  • 224NPRM, 12 FCC Rcd at 5662. 225We note, for example, that § 76.605(b) of our rules allows for a waiver of certain technical standards on "an adequate showing . . . which establishes that the public interest is benefited." This lets cable systems of specialized design to operate, without prescribing any particular showing. 47 C.F.R. § 76.605(b). 22647 C.F.R. § 76.7. 227See Part 76 - Cable Television Service Pleading and Complaint Rules, CS Docket No. 98-54, Notice of Proposed Rule Making, FCC 98-68 (rel. April 22, 1998) (seeking comment on making Part 76 pleading and complaint process rules more uniform). 228GI Comments at 82; NCTA Comments at 41; PrimeStar Comments at 27; SA Comments at 28; TW Comments at 45; US
• http://transition.fcc.gov/Bureaus/Cable/Orders/1999/fcc99057.pdf http://transition.fcc.gov/Bureaus/Cable/Orders/1999/fcc99057.txt http://transition.fcc.gov/Bureaus/Cable/Orders/1999/fcc99057.wp
  • adopted with the 1992 Cable Act by filing a petition for change in regulatory status with the appropriate franchising authority,98 or by filing with the Commission a petition for reconsideration or revocation of the LFA's certification to regulate rates.99 Our interim rules provide that LEC effective competition cases should be filed as petitions for determination of effective competition under Section 76.7 of our rules.100 In the Notice, we proposed to adopt a uniform procedure applicable to all four tests for effective competition.101 In 1998 Biennial Regulatory Review -- Part 76 - Cable Television Service Pleading and Complaint Rules ("1998 Biennial Regulatory Review"), we consolidated the procedures regarding petitions for effective competition to achieve a uniform procedure applicable to all petitions seeking
• http://transition.fcc.gov/Bureaus/Cable/Orders/2000/fcc00099.doc http://transition.fcc.gov/Bureaus/Cable/Orders/2000/fcc00099.pdf http://transition.fcc.gov/Bureaus/Cable/Orders/2000/fcc00099.txt
  • into exclusive retransmission consent agreements, but also negotiating exclusive agreements that would take effect after the sunset of the prohibition. The Commission's rules regarding exclusive retransmission consent agreements sunset on January 1, 2006. 10. An MVPD believing itself to be aggrieved under Section 325(b)(3)(C) may file a complaint with the Commission. The Order provides that the procedural provisions of Section 76.7 will govern good faith and exclusivity complaints. The Order directs Commission staff to expedite resolution of good faith and exclusivity complaints. The Order provides that the burden of proof with regard to such complaints is on the MVPD complainant. IV. GOOD FAITH NEGOTIATION REQUIREMENT A. Congressional Intent in Amending Section 325 of the Communications Act 11. In SHVIA, Congress amended
• http://transition.fcc.gov/Bureaus/Cable/Orders/2001/fcc01022.doc http://transition.fcc.gov/Bureaus/Cable/Orders/2001/fcc01022.pdf http://transition.fcc.gov/Bureaus/Cable/Orders/2001/fcc01022.txt
  • channel capacity for the provision of other services if such channel capacity is not being used for the purposes designated, and (2) rules and procedures under which such permitted use shall cease.") Must Carry Order, 8 FCC Rcd. at 2972, 2984. DTV Must Carry Notice,13 FCC Rcd. at 15126. CBA Comments at 5; Pappas Comments at 32. 47 C.F.R. §§ 76.7 and 76.61. 47 U.S.C. §534(d)(3). DTV Must Carry Notice, 13 FCC Rcd at 15131. Id. See AAPTS Comments at 54. 47 U.S.C. §573(c)(1). 47 U.S.C. §573(c)(2)(A). See Implementation of Section 302 of the Telecommunications Act of 1996, Second Report and Order, 11 FCC Rcd 18223, 18307-08 (1996). Id. at 18308-09, n.371. We note, however, that an OVS operator must make
• http://transition.fcc.gov/Bureaus/Engineering_Technology/News_Releases/1998/et8002a.pdf http://transition.fcc.gov/Bureaus/Engineering_Technology/News_Releases/1998/et8002a.txt http://transition.fcc.gov/Bureaus/Engineering_Technology/News_Releases/1998/et8002a.wp
  • 11527 725 12220 726 0.2 0.0 90.0 NV LAS VEGAS 21 22 103.2 353.0 12232 728 11359 726 0.6 0.0 99.9 NV LAS VEGAS 33 29 50.0 581.0 13627 726 12481 726 0.0 0.0 100.0 NV PARADISE 39 40 102.1 367.0 9421 724 8797 724 0.0 0.0 100.0 NV RENO 2 32 1000.0 656.0 27353 385 35365 451 0.0 0.0 76.7 NV RENO 4 34 1000.0 133.0 11905 331 18649 393 0.0 0.0 63.7 NV RENO 5 15 50.0 140.0 5739 293 7799 315 0.0 0.0 73.3 NV RENO 8 23 315.2 893.0 33814 480 34281 492 0.0 0.0 97.3 NV RENO 11 44 525.4 856.0 27170 388 28173 392 0.0 0.0 94.7 NV RENO 21 22 50.0 189.0 5432 265
• http://transition.fcc.gov/Bureaus/Engineering_Technology/Orders/1997/fc97115a.pdf http://transition.fcc.gov/Bureaus/Engineering_Technology/Orders/1997/fc97115a.wp
  • 99.9 NVLASVEGAS 15 16 50.0 564.0 13102 726 12220 726 0.2 0.0 99.7 NVLASVEGAS 21 20 94.2 353.0 12324 728 11359 726 0.6 0.0 99.8 NVLASVEGAS 33 32 50.0 581.0 13527 726 12481 726 0.0 0.0 100.0 NVPARADISE 39 38 94.1 367.0 9533 724 8797 724 0.0 0.0 100.0 NVRENO 2 32 1000.0 656.0 27417 381 35369 451 0.0 0.0 76.7 NVRENO 4 33 1000.0 133.0 11130 283 18649 393 0.0 0.0 59.4 NVRENO 5 15 50.0 140.0 5755 293 7799 315 0.0 0.0 73.4 NVRENO 8 23 301.7 893.0 33971 488 34277 492 0.0 0.0 97.6 NVRENO 11 41 475.5 856.0 27599 389 28169 392 0.0 0.0 95.6 NVRENO 21 22 50.0 189.0 5858 267 5264 261 1.0 0.4 99.2
• http://transition.fcc.gov/Bureaus/Engineering_Technology/Orders/1998/fc98024a.pdf http://transition.fcc.gov/Bureaus/Engineering_Technology/Orders/1998/fc98024a.txt http://transition.fcc.gov/Bureaus/Engineering_Technology/Orders/1998/fc98024a.wp
  • 11527 725 12220 726 0.2 0.0 90.0 NV LAS VEGAS 21 22 103.2 353.0 12232 728 11359 726 0.6 0.0 99.9 NV LAS VEGAS 33 29 50.0 581.0 13627 726 12481 726 0.0 0.0 100.0 NV PARADISE 39 40 102.1 367.0 9421 724 8797 724 0.0 0.0 100.0 NV RENO 2 32 1000.0 656.0 27353 385 35365 451 0.0 0.0 76.7 NV RENO 4 34 1000.0 133.0 11905 331 18649 393 0.0 0.0 63.7 NV RENO 5 15 50.0 140.0 5739 293 7799 315 0.0 0.0 73.3 NV RENO 8 23 315.2 893.0 33814 480 34281 492 0.0 0.0 97.3 NV RENO 11 44 525.4 856.0 27170 388 28173 392 0.0 0.0 94.7 NV RENO 21 22 50.0 189.0 5432 265
• http://transition.fcc.gov/Bureaus/Mass_Media/Orders/1998/fcc98236.pdf http://transition.fcc.gov/Bureaus/Mass_Media/Orders/1998/fcc98236.txt http://transition.fcc.gov/Bureaus/Mass_Media/Orders/1998/fcc98236.wp
  • citing 47 C.F.R. § 76.1003(a). See also 47 C.F.R. § 76.1302(a) (notice required prior to filing a complaint alleging violation of carriage agreement rules). NCTA also cites the must-carry complaint resolution process noting that such complaints must be sent by a broadcaster to a cable operator prior to filing with the Commission. NCTA Opposition at 17 citing 47 C.F.R. §§ 76.7(4)(i) and 76.61(a). 388NAD/CAN Reply at 8 citing NCTA Opposition at 17. 389NAD/CAN Reply at 8. See also COR Opposition at 3-5. COR asserts that the Commission has already deemed monitoring and reporting requirements necessary to ensure accountability and compliance with the children's programming rules and argues that networks should be required to maintain information on captioned programs, exemptions claimed and
• http://transition.fcc.gov/Bureaus/Mass_Media/Orders/1998/fcc98315.pdf http://transition.fcc.gov/Bureaus/Mass_Media/Orders/1998/fcc98315.txt http://transition.fcc.gov/Bureaus/Mass_Media/Orders/1998/fcc98315.wp
  • 11527 725 12220 726 0.2 0.0 90.0 NV LAS VEGAS 21 22 103.2 353.0 12232 728 11359 726 0.6 0.0 99.9 NV LAS VEGAS 33 29 50.0 581.0 13627 726 12481 726 0.0 0.0 100.0 NV PARADISE 39 40 102.1 367.0 9421 724 8797 724 0.0 0.0 100.0 NV RENO 2 32 1000.0 656.0 27353 385 35365 451 0.0 0.0 76.7 NV RENO 4 34 1000.0 133.0 11905 331 18649 393 0.0 0.0 63.7 NV RENO 5 15 50.0 140.0 5739 293 7799 315 0.0 0.0 73.3 NV RENO 8 23 315.2 893.0 33814 480 34281 492 0.0 0.0 97.3 NV RENO 11 44 525.4 856.0 27170 388 28173 392 0.0 0.0 94.7 NV RENO 21 22 50.0 189.0 5432 265
• http://transition.fcc.gov/Bureaus/Wireless/Notices/1999/fcc99205.doc http://transition.fcc.gov/Bureaus/Wireless/Notices/1999/fcc99205.pdf http://transition.fcc.gov/Bureaus/Wireless/Notices/1999/fcc99205.txt
  • carriers - whether wireline, terrestrial wireless, or satellite ( that serve such areas. BACKGROUND As discussed in greater detail in the Universal Service Further Notice, the lack of access on tribal areas to basic telecommunications services is well-documented. A 1998 survey indicated that while the nationwide average penetration rate for those with incomes below $5,000 living in rural areas was 76.7 percent, the telephone penetration rates for individuals living on tribal lands at that same income level averaged approximately 46.6 percent. In individual cases, penetration rates are often lower still. For example, the penetration rate is 16.1 percent on the San Carlos reservation in Arizona, and 18.4 percent on the Navajo reservation and trust lands in Arizona, New Mexico, and Utah.
• http://transition.fcc.gov/cgb/dro/comments/99339/5507117121.pdf http://transition.fcc.gov/cgb/dro/comments/99339/5507117121.txt
  • and prime time in the Central time zone. "Prime time" fof single-transponder networks like TBSS is considered to coincide nationwide with prime time in the Eastern time zone. However, "prime time" is at times reported on the basis of 8:00-l 0:OO p,m. Monday- Sunday. Moreover, the Commission's rules contain a more expansive definition of "prime time" for purposes of Part 76.7 The definition of "prime time" is important in defining which nonbroadcast networks incur Part 79 obligations, and in defining the time period in which these obligations must be carried out. If the many MVPDs subject to Part 79 adopt inconsistent definitions of "prime time," the five covered nonbroadcast networks will be severely prejudiced. Given the importance of the definition, in
• http://transition.fcc.gov/eb/Orders/2004/FCC-03-333A1.html
  • its complaint here.39 Third, WOW could file a claim at the Commission under the uniform price provisions of the Communications Act and the Commission's rules.40 IV. ORDERING CLAUSE ACCORDINGLY, IT IS ORDERED, pursuant to sections 1, 4(i), 4(j), 601, and 632 of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended, 47 U.S.C. 151, 154(i), 154(j), 521, and 552, and sections 76.6, 76.7, 76.1602, and 76.1603 of the Commission's rules, 47 C.F.R. 76.6-76.7, and 76.1602-1603, that the Complaint filed by WideOpen West Holdings, LLC against Comcast Corporation for systemic abuse of customer service standards established by the Federal Communications Commission pursuant to Section 632(b) of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended, IS DISMISSED in its entirety with prejudice. FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION Marlene
• http://transition.fcc.gov/fees/2000csbguide.doc http://transition.fcc.gov/fees/2000csbguide.pdf http://transition.fcc.gov/fees/2000csbguide.txt
  • signals are distributed to the public by the cable system. Special Relief Petitions. On petition for special relief by any interested person, the Commission may waive any provision of the rules relating to cable television systems or issue a ruling on a complaint or disputed question. A fee will be charged for Cable Special Relief Petitions filed according to Section 76.7 of the Rules seeking the imposition of special requirements beyond those provided for in the rules. Registration Statements. A cable system community unit is required, prior to commencing operations, to provide the Commission with an identification of the system's operator, a description of the television broadcast signals to be carried, and certain other information called for by Section 76.1801 (formerly
• http://transition.fcc.gov/ib/sand/mniab/traffic/files09/CREPOR09.pdf
  • circuits 1 2 3 4Other Revenues1 2 3 4Other Revenues 1 2 3 4 Other Revenues1 2 3 4 Other Andorra 0 $0 $0 $0 Austria 0 $0 $0 $0 Belgium 0 $0 $0 $0 Cyprus 0 $0 $0 $0 Denmark 0 $0 $0 $0 Finland 0 $0 $0 $0 France 186,650 0.0 10.10.00.0 89.9 $0 $11,859,064 0.0 23.3 0.00.0 76.7 $177,7780.00.00.00.0 100.0 Germany 439,920 0.0 68.50.00.0 31.5 $0 $1,697,352 0.1 87.2 0.00.0 12.8 $267,9180.00.00.00.0 100.0 Gibraltar 0 $0 $0 $0 Greece 0 $0 $0 $0 Greenland 0 $0 $0 $0 Iceland 0 $0 $0 $0 Ireland 0 $0 $0 $0 Italy 2,520 0.0100.00.00.0 0.0 $0 $50,488 0.0 78.6 0.00.0 21.4 $0 Liechtenstein 0 $0 $0 $0 Luxembourg 0 $0 $0
• http://transition.fcc.gov/ownership/materials/already-released/review090001.pdf
  • 17 14 34.865.493.6 Mar-01 7 37 17 12 34.467.793.5 Boston Mar-96 10 54 36 18 23.6 n/a 78.0 Nov-97 10 55 38 20 36.9n/a 91.7 Nov-98 10 55 38 19 42.2 n/a 91.5 Mar-00 8 55 34 17 42.959.890.6 Mar-01 8 56 35 16 41.560.390.1 Washington DC Mar-96 8 48 31 15 19.8n/a 56.4 Nov-97 8 47 27 18 26.0n/a 76.7 Nov-98 8 47 25 16 29.8 n/a 83.5 Mar-00 9 47 23 16 30.154.882.4 Mar-01 9 47 21 16 29.655.280.5 Appendix F: Market by Market Data Radio Market Date RankStationsOwnersFormatsCR1CR2CR4 Houston-Galveston Mar-96 9 50 28 14 19.0n/a 59.5 Nov-97 9 55 30 15 21.6n/a 68.1 Nov-98 9 55 26 15 39.3 n/a 77.7 Mar-00 10 55 24 17 37.765.986.8 Mar-01
• http://www.fcc.gov/Bureaus/Cable/Notices/1998/fcc98068.pdf http://www.fcc.gov/Bureaus/Cable/Notices/1998/fcc98068.txt http://www.fcc.gov/Bureaus/Cable/Notices/1998/fcc98068.wp
  • and to repeal or modify Federal Communications Commission FCC 98-68 447 U.S.C. § 161. 5See Cable Communications Policy Act of 1984, Pub. L. No. 98-549, 98 Stat. 2779 (1984); Cable Television Consumer Protection and Competition Act, Pub. L. No. 102-385, 106 Stat. 1460 (1992); Telecommunications Act of 1996, Pub. L. No. 104-104, 110 Stat. 56 (1996). 6See 47 C.F.R. § 76.7(d). 747 C.F.R. § 76.9(d). 2 any regulation it determines to be no longer in the public interest."4 Although Section 11 does not specifically refer to cable operators, the Commission has determined that the first biennial review presents an opportunity for a thorough examination of all of the Commission's regulations. We believe that, where possible, simplification of the complaint processes for
• http://www.fcc.gov/Bureaus/Cable/Notices/1998/fcc98153.pdf http://www.fcc.gov/Bureaus/Cable/Notices/1998/fcc98153.txt http://www.fcc.gov/Bureaus/Cable/Notices/1998/fcc98153.wp
  • by November 1999, there are eleven counties that were not part of the Denver ADI but are part of the Denver DMA. Copyright issues may also be implicated as a television station's signal, either analog or digital, may be considered "distant" under Section 111 of the Copyright Act if the signal is carried outside its designated local market. 17447 C.F.R. §76.7. 17547 U.S.C. §534(d)(3). 176We note that we recently issued a Notice of Proposed Rulemaking seeking comment on methods to streamline the cable television complaint rules, generally. See 1998 Biennial Regulatory Review, Part 76 Cable Television Service Pleading and Complaint Rules, CS Docket 98-54, FCC 98-68, 1998 WL 187918 (rel. Apr. 22, 1998). 177Amendment of Part 76 of the Commission's Rules
• http://www.fcc.gov/Bureaus/Cable/Notices/1999/fcc99406.doc
  • to adopt to further the pro-competitive goals of the 1999 SHVIA. Commenters should state whether the same set of enforcement procedures should apply to both the exclusivity prohibition and the good faith negotiation requirement, or whether the Commission should adopt different procedures tailored to each prohibition. We seek comment regarding whether special relief procedures of the type found in Section 76.7 of the Commission's rules provide an appropriate framework for addressing issues arising under Section 325(b)(3)(C). We seek comment on whether expedited procedures are necessary to the appropriate resolution of either exclusivity or good faith proceedings. We seek comment on whether there are circumstances in which the use of alternative dispute resolution services would assist in determining whether a television broadcast
• http://www.fcc.gov/Bureaus/Cable/Notices/2000/fcc00341.doc
  • privacy of his or her home. Fair use exists to address only unauthorized recordings. Unlike the entertainment industry, the law recognizes this distinction. The Commission should not criminalize such conduct.'' HRRC Reply at 5(footnote omitted). We note that nothing in our decision today is intended to alter ``fair use'' under copyright law. Parties may present such concerns pursuant to Section 76.7 of the Commission's rules, 47 C.F.R. § 76.7. The Commission will review only those terms of DFAST licenses that a complainant alleges violate a specific navigation devices rule. Circuit City Comments at 19; HRCC Comments at 13. Circuit City Comments at 20; CERC Reply Comments at 10. See, e.g., Sony Pictures Entertainment August 21, 2000 ex parte presentation at 1-2;
• http://www.fcc.gov/Bureaus/Cable/Orders/1998/fcc98116.pdf http://www.fcc.gov/Bureaus/Cable/Orders/1998/fcc98116.wp
  • 224NPRM, 12 FCC Rcd at 5662. 225We note, for example, that § 76.605(b) of our rules allows for a waiver of certain technical standards on "an adequate showing . . . which establishes that the public interest is benefited." This lets cable systems of specialized design to operate, without prescribing any particular showing. 47 C.F.R. § 76.605(b). 22647 C.F.R. § 76.7. 227See Part 76 - Cable Television Service Pleading and Complaint Rules, CS Docket No. 98-54, Notice of Proposed Rule Making, FCC 98-68 (rel. April 22, 1998) (seeking comment on making Part 76 pleading and complaint process rules more uniform). 228GI Comments at 82; NCTA Comments at 41; PrimeStar Comments at 27; SA Comments at 28; TW Comments at 45; US
• http://www.fcc.gov/Bureaus/Cable/Orders/1999/fcc99057.pdf http://www.fcc.gov/Bureaus/Cable/Orders/1999/fcc99057.txt http://www.fcc.gov/Bureaus/Cable/Orders/1999/fcc99057.wp
  • adopted with the 1992 Cable Act by filing a petition for change in regulatory status with the appropriate franchising authority,98 or by filing with the Commission a petition for reconsideration or revocation of the LFA's certification to regulate rates.99 Our interim rules provide that LEC effective competition cases should be filed as petitions for determination of effective competition under Section 76.7 of our rules.100 In the Notice, we proposed to adopt a uniform procedure applicable to all four tests for effective competition.101 In 1998 Biennial Regulatory Review -- Part 76 - Cable Television Service Pleading and Complaint Rules ("1998 Biennial Regulatory Review"), we consolidated the procedures regarding petitions for effective competition to achieve a uniform procedure applicable to all petitions seeking
• http://www.fcc.gov/Bureaus/Cable/Orders/2000/da000063.doc
  • the authority does not meet the statutory certification requirements. In Implementation of Cable Act Reform Provisions of the Telecommunications Act of 1996 ("Cable Act Reform Order"), the Commission instructed cable operators believing themselves subject to local exchange carrier ("LEC") effective competition under Section 623(l)(1)(D) of the Communications Act to file a petition for determination of effective competition pursuant to Section 76.7 of the Commission's rules. Section 623(l)(1)(D) of the Communications Act provides that a cable operator is subject to effective competition where: a local exchange carrier or its affiliate (or any multichannel video programming distributor using the facilities of such carrier or its affiliate) offers video programming services directly to subscribers by any means (other than direct-to-home satellite services) in the
• http://www.fcc.gov/Bureaus/Cable/Orders/2000/da000179.doc
  • ) ) ) CSR-5439-M Adopted: January 28, 2000 Released: February 1, 2000 By the Chief, Consumer Protection and Competition Division, Cable Services Bureau: 1. The Board of Education of the City of New York (``Board''), licensee of noncommercial educational television station WNYE-TV (Ch. 25), New York, New York, has filed a petition with the Commission pursuant to Section 76.61(b) and 76.7 of the Commission's rules requesting carriage of WNYE-TV on Comcast Cable Communications, Inc. and its affiliates and subsidiaries, Comcast CBV of Ocean City, Service Electric Cable TV of New Jersey, Inc., Cable TV of Tri-States, Inc., MediaOne, Inc., MediaOne of Massachusetts, Inc., and MediaOne of Greater New York, Inc. (collectively the ``Cable/OVS Operators''). 2. In its petition, the Board suggests
• http://www.fcc.gov/Bureaus/Cable/Orders/2000/da000180.doc
  • the system's costs per subscriber in providing service in a particular geographical area. Regulatory relief is granted to small systems insofar as such systems generally face significantly higher costs per subscriber in providing cable service. We note that with respect to these factors, NCT's Aiken system resembles a small system according to most of the pertinent criteria. 16. Under Section 76.7(c)(1) of the Commission's rules, a petition for special relief ``shall state fully and precisely all pertinent facts and considerations relied on to demonstrate the need for the relief requested and to support a determination that a grant of such relief would serve the public interest.'' NCT has adequately established its ``need for the relief requested'' as required by Section 76.7(c)(1).
• http://www.fcc.gov/Bureaus/Cable/Orders/2000/da000181.doc
  • rate relief for small systems, because low subscriber density implies higher costs per subscriber. 14. A final factor weighing in favor of granting small system status to IMC is the absence of any opposition to its Petition, despite service of the Petition on the pertinent local franchising authorities and public notice of the Petition by the Commission. 15. Under section 76.7(c)(1) of the Commission's rules, a petition for special relief ``shall state fully and precisely all pertinent facts and considerations relied on to demonstrate the need for the relief requested and to support a determination that a grant of such relief would serve the public interest.'' IMC has adequately established its ``need for the relief requested'' as required by Section 76.7(c)(1).
• http://www.fcc.gov/Bureaus/Cable/Orders/2000/da000340.doc
  • of KGMC(TV) Clovis, California ) ) ) ) ) ) ) CSR-5456-M Adopted: February 22, 2000 Released: February 24, 2000 By the Chief, Consumer Protection and Competition Division, Cable Services Bureau: INTRODUCTION Gary M. Cocola, licensee of KGMC(TV) (Ch. 43), Clovis, California, has filed a must carry complaint, pursuant to Section 614 of the Communications Act, as amended, and Sections 76.7 and 76.61(a) of the Commission's rules, alleging that Northland Cable Television (``Northland'') has denied carriage of KGMC(TV) on Northland's cable systems serving Mariposa, Oakhurst, Fish Camp, Lushmeadows, and Coarsegold, California, and neighboring communities (the ``Northland cable communities''). No opposition was received. II. BACKGROUND Pursuant to Section 614 of the Communications Act and implementing rules adopted by the Commission in Implementation
• http://www.fcc.gov/Bureaus/Cable/Orders/2000/da000387.doc
  • ) ) ) CSR 5464-M Adopted: February 24, 2000 Released: February 28, 2000 By the Chief, Consumer Protection and Competition Division, Cable Services Bureau: INTRODUCTION SAH Houston License Corporation, a wholly owned subsidiary of Shop At Home, Inc. ("Shop at Home"), licensee of commercial television station KZJL-TV 61 ("KZJL" or the "Station"), Houston, Texas filed a complaint pursuant to Sections 76.7 and 76.61 of the Commission's rules claiming mandatory carriage rights for KZJL on Falcon Telecable's (``Falcon'') cable systems serving West Columbia, Wharton, Palacios, and Sweeny, Texas and the surrounding areas ("cable communities"). Falcon filed an opposition to the complaint, and Shop at Home filed a reply. BACKGROUND Pursuant to Section 614 of the Communications Act and the implementing rules adopted
• http://www.fcc.gov/Bureaus/Cable/Orders/2000/da000390.doc
  • Puerto Rico ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) CSR-5453-M Adopted: February 24, 2000 Released: February 28, 2000 By the Chief, Consumer Protection and Competition Division, Cable Services Bureau: I. INTRODUCTION 1. Ebenezer Broadcasting Group, Inc., licensee of television broadcast station WIDP, Channel 46, Guayama, Puerto Rico (``WIDP''), has filed a petition with the Commission pursuant to Sections 76.7 and 76.55(e) of the Commission's rules requesting carriage of WIDP on the Cable Television Company of Greater San Juan (``CTC''), the cable system serving the communities of San Juan, Bayamon, Trujillo Alto, Guaynabo, Carolina, Toa Baja, Catano, and Toa Alta (the ``Communities''). CTC filed an opposition to which WIDP replied. 2. Pursuant to Section 614 of the Communications Act and
• http://www.fcc.gov/Bureaus/Cable/Orders/2000/da000499.doc
  • the Diversified proceeding. Rather, in this instance, Time Warner argues that it is merely asserting its clear right under Section 76.56(b)(5) to avoid having to dedicate valuable channel capacity to a second, and far more distant, ABC affiliate. Further, Time Warner states that because any petition for waiver of Part 76 of the rules must be filed pursuant to Section 76.7(a)(1) and be accompanied by a filing fee, the Bureau is barred from considering WTXL-TV's request for waiver of Section 76.56 in the instant proceeding. WTXL-TV reiterates its argument that the Bureau's Diversified decision assumed that WTXL-TV would be carried on the Live Oak cable system despite the inclusion of Live Oak in WCJB's market. Indeed, WTXL-TV points out that, in
• http://www.fcc.gov/Bureaus/Cable/Orders/2000/da000505.doc
  • Inc. v. Adelphia Cable ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) CSR 5463-M Adopted: March 2, 2000 Released: March 6, 2000 By the Chief, Consumer Protection and Competition Division, Cable Services Bureau: INTRODUCTION West Coast Christian Television, Inc. ("West Coast"), licensee of commercial television station WRXY-TV 49 ("WRXY" or the "Station"), Tice, Florida filed a complaint pursuant to Sections 76.7 and 76.61 of the Commission's rules claiming mandatory carriage rights for WRXY on Telesat Acquisition Limited Partnership, d/b/a Adelphia Cable Communications (``Adelphia'') cable systems serving the Fort Myers-Naples designated market area ("cable communities"). Adelphia filed an opposition to the complaint, and West Coast filed a reply. Adelphia filed a supplement to its opposition that included a more recent signal strength
• http://www.fcc.gov/Bureaus/Cable/Orders/2000/da000551.doc
  • Mid-Hudson Cablevision, Inc. Petition for Modification of the ADI Market of Station WYPX, Channel 55 Amsterdam, New York ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) CSR-5451-A Adopted: March 9, 2000 Released: March 13, 2000 By the Deputy Chief, Cable Services Bureau: I. INTRODUCTION 1. Mid-Hudson Cablevision, Inc. (``Mid-Hudson'') has filed a petition with the Commission pursuant to Sections 76.7 and 76.59 of the Commission's rules which seeks to delete certain communities served by Mid-Hudson from the television market of WYPX, (Channel 55), Amsterdam, New York. Specifically, Mid-Hudson requests that the communities served by its Catskill, New York headend be excluded from WYPX's television market. The communities include Ashland, Athens (Town), Athens (Village), Bethlehem, Cairo, Catskill (Town), Catskill (Village), Claverack,
• http://www.fcc.gov/Bureaus/Cable/Orders/2000/da000720.doc
  • Carriage of KGMC(TV) Clovis, California ) ) ) ) ) ) ) Adopted: March 29, 2000 Released: March 31, 2000 By the Chief, Consumer Protection and Competition Division, Cable Services Bureau: INTRODUCTION Gary M. Cocola, licensee of KGMC(TV) (Ch. 43), Clovis, California, has filed a must carry complaint, pursuant to Section 614 of the Communications Act, as amended, and Sections 76.7 and 76.61(a) of the Commission's rules, alleging that UACC Midwest, Inc. d/b/a AT&T Cable Services (``UACC Midwest'') has denied carriage of KGMC(TV) on UACC Midwest's cable systems serving Merced and Los Banos, California, and neighboring communities (the ``UACC Midwest cable communities''). An opposition to the complaint was filed by Televents of San Joaquin, Inc. and UACC Midwest, Inc. (``Cable Operator'').
• http://www.fcc.gov/Bureaus/Cable/Orders/2000/da000722.doc
  • October 1, 1999. Therefore, WMEI is deemed to be a must carry station and, if it is not being carried, can now file a new request for mandatory carriage on Cable TV's system. IV. ORDERING CLAUSE 6. Accordingly, IT IS ORDERED, that pursuant to Section 614 of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended, 47 U.S.C. § 534(d)(3), and Sections 76.7 and 76.61(a) of the Commission's rules, 47 C.F.R. §§ 76.7 and 76.61(a), the Petition for Reconsideration filed by Hector Negroni Cartagena against Cable TV of Greater San Juan, Inc. and Century Communications in file CSR 5233-M IS DENIED. 7. 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
• http://www.fcc.gov/Bureaus/Cable/Orders/2000/da000738.doc
  • W. Hoffman, Esq., Trustee in Bankruptcy for the Estate of Astroline Communications L.P., licensee of television station WHCT-TV (``WHCT'' or ``Petitioner''), located in Hartford, Connecticut filed a petition for reconsideration (``Petition'') of a Memorandum Opinion and Order (``Order'') released by the Cable Services Bureau (the ``Bureau''). In that Order, the Bureau denied Petitioner's must carry complaint, filed pursuant to Section 76.7(c)(4)(iii)(B) of the Commission's rules, as untimely. Century Cable Management Corp. and Century Norwich Corp. (``Century'') filed an Opposition to the Petition for Reconsideration, to which Petitioner replied. background Pursuant to Section 614 of the Communications Act and implementing rules adopted by the Commission in Implementation of the Cable Television Consumer Protection and Competition Act of 1992, Broadcast Signal Carriage Issues
• http://www.fcc.gov/Bureaus/Cable/Orders/2000/da000840.doc
  • 20554 In the Matter of: ) ) Midcontinent Cable Co. ) CSR-5462-Z ) ) Petition for Special Relief ) MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER Adopted: April 11, 2000 Released: April 13, 2000 By the Chief, Cable Services Bureau: INTRODUCTION 1. Midcontinent Cable Co., on behalf of its subsidiaries and affiliates ("Midcontinent"), has filed a petition for special relief, pursuant to Section 76.7 of the Commission's rules, requesting an extension to and including September 30, 2000 in which to comply with Section 76.605(a)(6)(ii) of the rules. The rule, which went into effect on December 30, l999, requires measurement of a cable television system's amplitude characteristic at the subscriber terminal, thereby including the converter box in the measurement. Midcontinent seeks a limited extension of
• http://www.fcc.gov/Bureaus/Cable/Orders/2000/da000860.doc
  • petition for a determination of effective competition filed by Jones Intercable IS GRANTED. This action is taken pursuant to delegated authority pursuant to Section 0.321 of the Commission's rules. FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION William H. Johnson Deputy Chief, Cable Service Bureau Jones filed the petition pursuant to Section 76.915(f) of the Commission's rules, which was eliminated and is superceded by Section 76.7 of the Commission's rules. See Implementation of Cable Act Reform Provisions of the Telecommunications Act of 1996, 14 FCC Rcd 5296, 5313 (1999). We will treat Jones' petition as filed pursuant to Section 76.7. See 47 C.F.R. § 76.7. 47 U.S.C. § 543. 47 C.F.R. § 76.905(b)(2). Communications Act of 1934, § 623(1)(1)(B), 47 U.S.C. §543(1)(1)(B); see also 47 C.F.R.
• http://www.fcc.gov/Bureaus/Cable/Orders/2000/da000872.doc
  • 16 or Another Mutually Agreeable Channel ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) CSR-5466-M Adopted: April 14, 2000 Released: April 17, 2000 By the Chief, Consumer Protection and Competition Division, Cable Services Bureau: INTRODUCTION Maranatha Broadcasting Company, Inc. (``MBC''), licensee of UHF independent television broadcast station WFMZ-TV, Channel 69, Allentown, Pennsylvania, has filed a complaint, pursuant to Section 76.7(a)(2) of the Commission's rules, requesting that the Commission issue an Order directing Comcast Cablevision of Mercer County, Inc. (``Comcast'') to carry the signal of WFMZ-TV on Cable Channel 4 or 16 or another mutually agreeable channel. Comcast filed an opposition to the complaint and WFMZ-TV filed a reply. In addition, Comcast filed a ``Motion to Strike Maranatha Broadcasting Reply or,
• http://www.fcc.gov/Bureaus/Cable/Orders/2000/da000880.doc
  • Adopted: April 14, 2000 Released: April 18, 2000 By the Deputy Chief, Cable Services Bureau: introduction Community Television Systems, Inc. and United Cable Television Services Corporation ("TCI-C") have filed a petition seeking partial reconsideration of Paxson New York License, Inc., ("Bureau Order"), which granted in part a market modification petition filed by Paxson New York License, Inc. pursuant to Sections 76.7(a) and 76.59(a) of the Commission's rules. The Bureau Order added a number of Connecticut communities to the market of television station WBPT-TV, Bridgeport, Connecticut, and declined to add certain other communities to that station's market. TCI-C's petition seeks reconsideration of the determination to add the communities of Berlin, Bristol, Farmington, New Britain, and Plainville, Connecticut (the ``Communities'') to WBPT-TV's market.
• http://www.fcc.gov/Bureaus/Cable/Orders/2000/da000935.doc
  • unincorporated areas of Cherokee, Dekalb, Gwinnett and Cobb Counties, Georgia IS GRANTED. 5. This action is taken pursuant to delegated authority pursuant to Section 0.321 of the Commission's rules. FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION William H. Johnson Deputy Chief, Cable Services Bureau In 1998, the Mass Media Bureau informed BellSouth Corporation that it must observe the Cable Services Bureau's special relief Rule 76.7 when BellSouth submits showings that its wireless cable systems comply with Rule 21.912 based upon the "effective competition" exception to Section 21.912. Letter dated January 21, 1998, from Roy J. Stewart, Chief, Mass Media Bureau to Charles G. Cline, Kenneth W. Garrard, BellSouth Wireless Cable, Inc. and BellSouth Corporation (File Nos. 50849-CM-AL(1)-97 and 50851-CM-AL(2)-97). The scope of this Order is
• http://www.fcc.gov/Bureaus/Cable/Orders/2000/da000997.doc
  • ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) CSR-5498-M Adopted: May 4, 2000 Released: May 10, 2000 By the Chief, Consumer Protection and Competition Division, Cable Services Bureau: introduction SAH Acquisition Corporation II (``SAH''), licensee of television broadcast station KCNS-TV, San Francisco, California (``KCNS'' or the ``Station''), has filed a must carry complaint with the Commission pursuant to Sections 76.7 and 76.61 of the Commission's rules, claiming that Wander Cable Television (``Wander'') has failed to commence carriage of KCNS on Wander's system serving Gualala and Bolinas, California and the surrounding areas (``the cable communities''). SAH requests that the Commission order Wander to commence carriage of KCNS on Channel 38 of the cable system serving the cable communities. No opposition to
• http://www.fcc.gov/Bureaus/Cable/Orders/2000/da001065.doc
  • Determination of Effective Competition in Wapakoneta, Ohio (CUID No. OH0053) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) CSR 5405-E Adopted: May 9, 2000 Released: May 12, 2000 By the Deputy Chief, Cable Services Bureau: introduction Time Warner Entertainment Company, L.P. ("Time Warner") has filed with the Commission a petition for a determination of effective competition, pursuant to Section 76.7 of the Commission's rules. Time Warner alleges that its cable system serving Wapakoneta, Ohio, (the ``City'') is subject to effective competition pursuant to Section 623 of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended ("Communications Act"), and the Commission's implementing rules, and is therefore exempt from cable rate regulation. Time Warner bases its allegations of the presence of effective competition in
• http://www.fcc.gov/Bureaus/Cable/Orders/2000/da001066.doc
  • filed by Time Warner Entertainment-Advance/Newhouse Partnership d/b/a Time Warner Communications IS GRANTED. This action is taken pursuant to delegated authority pursuant to Section 0.321 of the Commission's rules. FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION William H. Johnson Deputy Chief, Cable Services Bureau Time Warner filed the petition pursuant to Section 76.915(f) of the Commission's rules, which was eliminated and is superceded by Section 76.7 of the Commission's rules. See Implementation of Cable Act Reform Provisions of the Telecommunications Act of 1996, 14 FCC Rcd 5296, 5313 (1999). We will treat Time Warner's petition as filed pursuant to Section 76.7. See 47 C.F.R. § 76.7. 47 U.S.C. § 543. 47 C.F.R. § 76.905(b)(2). DirectTV, Inc. has acquired PRIMESTAR and U.S Satellite Broadcasting., Inc. Time Warner
• http://www.fcc.gov/Bureaus/Cable/Orders/2000/da001074.doc
  • special relief requesting a finding of effective competition filed by BellSouth IS GRANTED. This action is taken pursuant to delegated authority pursuant to Section 0.321 of the Commission's rules. FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION William H. Johnson Deputy Chief, Cable Services Bureau In 1998, the Mass Media Bureau informed BellSouth Corporation that it must observe the Cable Services Bureau's special relief Rule 76.7 when BellSouth submits showings that its wireless cable systems comply with Rule 21.912 based upon the "effective competition" exception to Section 21.912. Letter dated January 21, 1998, from Roy J. Stewart, Chief, Mass Media Bureau to Charles G. Cline, Kenneth W. Garrard, BellSouth Wireless Cable, Inc. and BellSouth Corporation (File Nos. 50849-CM-AL(1)-97 and 50851-CM-AL(2)-97). The scope of this Order is
• http://www.fcc.gov/Bureaus/Cable/Orders/2000/da001081.doc
  • Allentown, Pennsylvania ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) CSR-5495-M Adopted: May 15, 2000 Released: May 16, 2000 By the Acting Chief, Consumer Protection and Competition Division, Cable Services Bureau: introduction Maranatha Broadcasting Company, Inc. (``Maranatha''), licensee of independent television broadcast station WFMZ-TV (``WFMZ'' or the ``Station''), Channel 69, Allentown, Pennsylvania, filed a complaint pursuant to Section 76.7(a)(2) of the Commission's rules claiming mandatory carriage for WFMZ on Suburban Cable TV Co. Inc.'s (``Suburban'') cable system serving Arden, Ardencroft, Bellefonte. Elsmere, Newark, New Castle, Newport and Wilmington, Delaware. Suburban is affiliated with Lenfest New Castle County (``Lenfest''). Lenfest filed an opposition to the complaint. Maranatha filed a reply. background Pursuant to Section 614 of the Communications Act and
• http://www.fcc.gov/Bureaus/Cable/Orders/2000/da001088.doc
  • the motions of Orange County for dismissal of the petition ARE DENIED. This action is taken pursuant to delegated authority pursuant to Section 0.321 of the Commission's rules. FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION William H. Johnson Deputy Chief, Cable Service Bureau Time Warner filed the petition pursuant to Section 76.915(f) of the Commission's rules, which was eliminated and is superceded by Section 76.7 of the Commission's rules. See Implementation of Cable Act Reform Provisions of the Telecommunications Act of 1996, 14 FCC Rcd 5296, 5313 (1999). As discussed below, the County filed to voluntarily cede its certification to regulate basic cable rates. Therefore, Time Warner's petition to revoke such certification is procedurally inappropriate. However, we will treat Time Warner's petition as a petition
• http://www.fcc.gov/Bureaus/Cable/Orders/2000/da001089.doc
  • ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) CSR-5502-M Adopted: May 16, 2000 Released: May 17, 2000 By the Acting Chief, Consumer Protection and Competition Division, Cable Services Bureau: introduction SAH Houston License Corporation (``SAH''), licensee of television broadcast station KZJL-TV, Houston, Texas (``KZJL'' or the ``Station''), has filed a must carry complaint with the Commission pursuant to Sections 76.7 and 76.61 of the Commission's rules, claiming that Tri-Cities Cablevision (``Tri-Cities'') has failed to commence carriage of KZJL on Tri-Cities' system serving Cleveland, Texas and the surrounding areas (``the cable communities''). SAH requests that the Commission order Tri-Cities to commence carriage of KZJL on Channel 61 of the cable system serving the cable communities. No opposition to the complaint was
• http://www.fcc.gov/Bureaus/Cable/Orders/2000/da001127.doc
  • ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) CSR-5505-M Adopted: May 19, 2000 Released: May 23, 2000 By the Acting Chief, Consumer Protection and Competition Division, Cable Services Bureau: introduction Aerco Broadcasting, Corp. (``Aerco''), licensee of television broadcast station WRWR-TV, San Juan, Puerto Rico (``WRWR'' or the ``Station''), has filed a must carry complaint with the Commission pursuant to Sections 76.7 and 76.61 of the Commission's rules, claiming that BuenaVision CATV (``BuenaVision'') has failed to commence carriage of WRWR on BuenaVision's system serving Caguas, Aguas Buenas, Cidra, Gurabo, Juncos and San Lorenzo, Puerto Rico (``the cable communities''). No opposition to the complaint was received. background Pursuant to Section 614 of the Communications Act and implementing rules adopted by the Commission in
• http://www.fcc.gov/Bureaus/Cable/Orders/2000/da001241.doc
  • Petition for Determination of Effective Competition in Conway, South Carolina (CUID No. SC0023) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) CSR 5541-E Adopted: June 5, 2000 Released: June 7, 2000 By the Deputy Chief, Cable Services Bureau: introduction Time Warner Entertainment-Advance/Newhouse Partnership, d/b/a Time Warner Company ("Time Warner") has filed with the Commission a petition pursuant to Sections 76.7, 76.907 and 76.905(b)(4) of the Commission's rules for a revocation of the certification of the City of Conway, South Carolina (the ``City''), to regulate cable rates due to the presence of effective competition. Time Warner alleges that its cable system serving the City is subject to effective competition pursuant to Section 623(a)(2) of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended
• http://www.fcc.gov/Bureaus/Cable/Orders/2000/da001554.doc
  • North Carolina (CUID Nos. NC0084, NC0112, & NC0320) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) CSR 5218-E Adopted: July 10, 2000 Released: July 13, 2000 By the Deputy Chief, Cable Services Bureau: introduction TWI Summit Communications/Summit Cable Services of Thom-a-Lex, Inc. and TW Fanch-One Co. (``Time Warner'') have filed with the Commission a petition pursuant to Sections 76.7 and 76.907 of the Commission's rules for a determination of effective competition in the City of Lexington and Davidson County, North Carolina (the ``Communities''). Time Warner alleges that its cable systems serving the Communities are subject to effective competition pursuant to Section 623(a)(2) of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended ("Communications Act"), and the Commission's implementing rules, and is
• http://www.fcc.gov/Bureaus/Cable/Orders/2000/da001672.doc
  • Matter of: MediaOne of Colorado, Inc. Petition for Determination of Effective Competition in Atlanta, Georgia and Nearby Communities ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) CSR 5413-E Adopted: July 21, 2000 Released: July 28, 2000 By the Deputy Chief, Cable Services Bureau: introduction MediaOne of Colorado, Inc. (MediaOne) has filed with the Commission a petition pursuant to Sections 76.7 and 76.907 of the Commission's rules for a determination of effective competition in the City of Atlanta, Georgia, and certain surrounding cable service franchise areas (the ``Communities''). MediaOne alleges that its cable systems serving the Communities are subject to effective competition pursuant to Section 623(a)(2) of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended ("Communications Act"), and the Commission's implementing rules,
• http://www.fcc.gov/Bureaus/Cable/Orders/2000/da001804.doc
  • factors as mountains and valleys that are not specifically reflected in a traditional Grade B contour analysis. In situations involving mountainous terrain or other unusual geographical features, Longley-Rice propagation studies can aid in determining whether or not a television station actually provides local service to a community under factor two of the market modification test. 47 C.F.R. §76.59(b). 47 C.F.R. §76.7. 47 U.S.C. §534. 47 C.F.R. §0.321. (...continued from previous page) (continued...) Federal Communications Commission DA 00-1804 Federal Communications Commission DA 00-1804 p ° ° @& ° Š `
• http://www.fcc.gov/Bureaus/Cable/Orders/2000/da001866.doc
  • ) ) ) ) ) ) ) CSR 5565-M Adopted: August 14, 2000 Released: August 15, 2000 By the Chief, Consumer Protection and Competition Division, Cable Services Bureau: introduction Hispanic Keys Broadcasting Corp. (``Hispanic Keys''), licensee of commercial television station WWTU(TV), Key West, Florida (``WWTU''), filed a complaint pursuant to Section 614 of the Communications Act, as amended, and Sections 76.7 and 76.61(a) of the Commission's Rules, claiming entitlement to mandatory carriage of WWTU in the communities of Homestead, Key Biscayne, North Dade, and South Dade, Florida, (the ``Communities'') served by cable systems of Adelphia Cable Partners, L.P. d/b/a Adelphia Communications (``Adelphia''). Adelphia filed an opposition to the complaint, and Hispanic Keys filed a reply. background Section 614(h)(1)(C) of the Communications
• http://www.fcc.gov/Bureaus/Cable/Orders/2000/da001868.doc
  • ) ) ) ) ) ) Adopted: August 14, 2000 Released: August 15, 2000 By the Chief, Consumer Protection and Competition Division, Cable Services Bureau: INTRODUCTION Costa de Oro Television, Inc., licensee of television broadcast station KJLA (Ch. 57), Ventura, California (``Costa'' or the ``station''), filed the above-captioned must carry complaint against Strategic Technologies Cable System (``Strategic''), pursuant to Sections 76.7 and 76.61 of the Commission's rules for its failure to commence carriage of KJLA's signal on Strategic's system serving Stevenson Ranch, California. Costa requests that the Commission order Strategic to carry the station on its system serving that community. No opposition to this complaint was received. BACKGROUND Pursuant to Section 614 of the Communications Act and implementing rules adopted by
• http://www.fcc.gov/Bureaus/Cable/Orders/2000/da001880.doc
  • 8bit d Before the Federal Communications Commission Washington, D.C. 20554 In the Matter of Time Warner Cable Petition for Special Relief ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) CSR-5533 Adopted: August 11, 2000 Released: August 18, 2000 By the Chief, Cable Services Bureau: Introduction We have before us a Petition for Special Relief (``Petition'') filed pursuant to Section 76.7(a)(1) of the Commission's Rules by Time Warner Cable (``TWC'') requesting that it be allowed to file a single Form 320 for each system, identifying the community units served by the system. In so doing TWC would be relieved of the requirement to file a Basic Signal Leakage Report, Form 320, for each and every community unit served by a cable
• http://www.fcc.gov/Bureaus/Cable/Orders/2000/da002039.doc
  • Cable Service, Inc. For Modification of the DMA Market Of Television Station KDOC-TV ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) CSR-5549-A Adopted: September 5, 2000 Released: September 7, 2000 By the Chief, Consumer Protection and Competition Division, Cable Services Bureau: INTRODUCTION Avenue TV Cable Service, Inc. (``Avenue Cable'') has filed a petition with the Commission pursuant to Sections 76.7 and 76.59 of the Commission's rules, seeking to delete certain communities from the designated market area (``DMA'') of television station KDOC-TV, (Channel 56), Anaheim, California (``KDOC''). Specifically, Avenue requests that the City of Ventura and the unincorporated portions of western Ventura County, California (the ``Ventura Communities'') be excluded from KDOC's television market. KDOC filed an opposition to which Avenue replied.
• http://www.fcc.gov/Bureaus/Cable/Orders/2000/da002110.doc
  • Positioning Complaint ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) CSR-5550-M Adopted: September 13, 2000 Released: September 15, 2000 By the Chief, Consumer Protection and Competition Division, Cable Services Bureau: introduction Paxson Oklahoma License, Inc. (``Paxson''), licensee of commercial television station KOPX(TV) (Channel 62), Oklahoma City, Oklahoma (``KPOX'') filed a must carry complaint with the Commission, pursuant to Sections 76.7 and 76.61 of the Commission's rules, asking that the Commission require Cox Communications (``Cox'') to carry Station KOPX (the ``Station'') on its over-the-air channel position, or on a mutually agreeable channel throughout its cable systems serving Edmond, and various communities in Logan, Canadian and Cleveland Counties, Oklahoma (the ``cable communities''). No opposition to the complaint was received. background Pursuant to
• http://www.fcc.gov/Bureaus/Cable/Orders/2000/da002394.doc
  • in Ada County (CUID ID0097), Canyon County (CUID ID0098) and Meridian (CUID ID0064), Idaho ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) Adopted: October 19, 2000 Released: October 25, 2000 By the Deputy Chief, Cable Services Bureau: introduction United Cable Television Corporation d/b/a TCI Cablevision of Treasure Valley (``TCI'') has filed with the Commission a petition pursuant to Sections 76.7 and 76.907 of the Commission's rules for a determination of effective competition in Meridian and the unincorporated portions of Ada and Canyon Counties, Idaho. TCI alleges that its cable systems serving these communities are subject to effective competition pursuant to Section 623(1) of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended ("Communications Act"), and the Commission's implementing rules, and are therefore
• http://www.fcc.gov/Bureaus/Cable/Orders/2000/fcc00099.doc http://www.fcc.gov/Bureaus/Cable/Orders/2000/fcc00099.pdf http://www.fcc.gov/Bureaus/Cable/Orders/2000/fcc00099.txt
  • into exclusive retransmission consent agreements, but also negotiating exclusive agreements that would take effect after the sunset of the prohibition. The Commission's rules regarding exclusive retransmission consent agreements sunset on January 1, 2006. 10. An MVPD believing itself to be aggrieved under Section 325(b)(3)(C) may file a complaint with the Commission. The Order provides that the procedural provisions of Section 76.7 will govern good faith and exclusivity complaints. The Order directs Commission staff to expedite resolution of good faith and exclusivity complaints. The Order provides that the burden of proof with regard to such complaints is on the MVPD complainant. IV. GOOD FAITH NEGOTIATION REQUIREMENT A. Congressional Intent in Amending Section 325 of the Communications Act 11. In SHVIA, Congress amended
• http://www.fcc.gov/Bureaus/Cable/Orders/2001/fcc01012.doc http://www.fcc.gov/Bureaus/Cable/Orders/2001/fcc01012.pdf http://www.fcc.gov/Bureaus/Cable/Orders/2001/fcc01012.txt
  • Order, 15 FCC Rcd 5445 (2000). Within "its IM offerings," we include the IM offered as part of AOL's basic proprietary Internet access service, AIM, ICQ, any IM that is sponsored by AOL Time Warner and is included in Road Runner, and any new IM-based service that uses the NPD that AOL uses for its IM. Cf. 47 C.F.R. § 76.7 See para. 126F, supra. See 1999 Competition Report, 15 FCC Rcd at 980 ¶ 3 (generally describing the various types of MVPDs) (Section 628(g) of the Communications Act, 47 U.S.C. § 548(g), requires the Commission to report annually to Congress on the status of competition in markets for the delivery of video programming). DBS operators provide programming via satellite to
• http://www.fcc.gov/Bureaus/Cable/Orders/2001/fcc01022.doc http://www.fcc.gov/Bureaus/Cable/Orders/2001/fcc01022.pdf http://www.fcc.gov/Bureaus/Cable/Orders/2001/fcc01022.txt
  • channel capacity for the provision of other services if such channel capacity is not being used for the purposes designated, and (2) rules and procedures under which such permitted use shall cease.") Must Carry Order, 8 FCC Rcd. at 2972, 2984. DTV Must Carry Notice,13 FCC Rcd. at 15126. CBA Comments at 5; Pappas Comments at 32. 47 C.F.R. §§ 76.7 and 76.61. 47 U.S.C. §534(d)(3). DTV Must Carry Notice, 13 FCC Rcd at 15131. Id. See AAPTS Comments at 54. 47 U.S.C. §573(c)(1). 47 U.S.C. §573(c)(2)(A). See Implementation of Section 302 of the Telecommunications Act of 1996, Second Report and Order, 11 FCC Rcd 18223, 18307-08 (1996). Id. at 18308-09, n.371. We note, however, that an OVS operator must make
• http://www.fcc.gov/Bureaus/Cable/Public_Notices/1999/pncb9006.doc
  • filings processed by the Cable Television Branch as registrations pursuant to Section 76.1801 of the Commission's Rules. Should any of these registrations contain a request for special relief, such waiver requests will be handled separately through the special relief process. Furthermore, parties seeking special relief are advised that such requests must be initiated through the special relief provisions of Section 76.7 of the Rules. This Notice also lists special relief and other filings. Files containing these petitions can be reviewed in the Commissions Reference Information Center, CY Level, 445 12th Street, SW. The letter codes following a CSR Number refers to the particular subject of the petition. Those currently in use are: A -- ADI; M -- must carry; T --
• http://www.fcc.gov/Bureaus/Cable/Public_Notices/1999/pncb9007.doc
  • those filings processed by the Cable Television Branch as registrations pursuant to Section 76.1801 of the Commission's Rules. Should any of these registrations contain a request for special relief, such waiver requests will be handled through the special relief process. Furthermore, parties seeking special relief are advised that such requests must be initiated through the special relief provisions of Section 76.7 of the Rules. It is requested that all responses or statements refer to the FCC assigned Community Identification Number; e.g., AL0075. REPORT NO: 1245 CABLE TELEVISION SERVICE REGISTRATIONS; September 10, 1999 SPECIAL RELIEF AND SHOW CAUSE PETITIONS CSR Number Petitioner Communities Code CSR- 5426-A MEDIA GENERAL OF FAIRFAX COUNTY Various communities in Fairfax County, VA No Code ( ) (vs.
• http://www.fcc.gov/Bureaus/Cable/Public_Notices/1999/pncb9015.doc
  • filings processed by the Cable Television Branch as registrations pursuant to Section 76.1801 of the Commission's Rules. Should any of these registrations contain a request for special relief, such waiver requests will be handled separately through the special relief process. Furthermore, parties seeking special relief are advised that such requests must be initiated through the special relief provisions of Section 76.7 of the Rules. This Notice also lists special relief and other filings. Files containing these petitions can be reviewed in the Commissions Reference Information Center, CY Level, 445 12th Street, SW. The letter codes' following a CSR Number refers to the particular subject of the petition. Those currently in use are: A -- ADI; M -- must carry; T --
• http://www.fcc.gov/Bureaus/Cable/Public_Notices/1999/pncb9016.doc
  • filings processed by the Cable Television Branch as registrations pursuant to Section 76.1801 of the Commission's Rules. Should any of these registrations contain a request for special relief, such waiver requests will be handled separately through the special relief process. Furthermore, parties seeking special relief are advised that such requests must be initiated through the special relief provisions of Section 76.7 of the Rules. This Notice also lists special relief and other filings. Files containing these petitions can be reviewed in the Commissions Reference Information Center, CY Level, 445 12th Street, SW. The letter codes following a CSR Number refers to the particular subject of the petition. Those currently in use are: A -- ADI; M -- must carry; T --
• http://www.fcc.gov/Bureaus/Cable/Public_Notices/1999/pncb9018.doc
  • lists those filings processed by the Cable Service Bureau as registrations pursuant to §76.1801 of the Commission's Rules. Should any of these registrations contain a request for special relief, such waiver requests will be handled separately through the special relief process. Furthermore, parties seeking special relief are advised that such requests must be initiated through the special relief provisions of §76.7 of the Rules. This Notice also lists special relief and other filings. Files containing these petitions can be reviewed in the Commissions Reference Information Center, CY-Level, 445 12th Street, SW Washington, DC 20554. The letter code following a CSR Number refers to the particular subject of the petition. Those currently in use are: A -- ADI; M -- must carry;
• http://www.fcc.gov/Bureaus/Cable/Public_Notices/2000/da000670.doc
  • Content-Type: text/plain Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION 445 12TH STREET, S.W. WASHINGTON, D.C. 20554 DA 00-670 News media information 202/418-0500 Fax-On-Demand 202/418-2830 Internet: http://www.fcc.gov ftp.fcc.gov CABLE SERVICES BUREAU ACTION March 24, 2000 PETITION FOR SPECIAL RELIEF SEEKING COMMISSION ORDER TO DISCONTINUE STRIPPING INFORMATION FROM BROADCAST VBI CSR 5528-Z Pursuant to Section 76.7 of the Commission's rules, 47 C.F.R. § 76.7, Gemstar International Group, Ltd. and its wholly-owned subsidiary Gemstar Development Corp. (collectively ``Gemstar'') filed a petition for special relief asking the Commission to order Time Warner Cable (``Time Warner'') to discontinue removing data provided by Gemstar in the vertical blanking interval (VBI) of local broadcast television stations carried on Time Warner's cable
• http://www.fcc.gov/Bureaus/Cable/Public_Notices/2000/da000994.doc
  • Content-Type: text/plain Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION 445 12TH STREET, S.W. WASHINGTON, D.C. 20554 DA 00-994 News media information 202/418-0500 Fax-On-Demand 202/418-2830 Internet: http://www.fcc.gov ftp.fcc.gov CABLE SERVICES BUREAU ACTION May 5, 2000 PETITION FOR WAIVER FROM REQUIREMENT TO PROVIDE POINT OF DEPLOYMENT MODULES CSR 5545-Z Pursuant to Section 76.7 of the Commission's rules, 47 C.F.R. § 76.7, Charter Communications, Inc. (``Charter'') filed a petition for special relief requesting a waiver of 47 C.F.R. § 76.1204. Charter seeks a waiver from the requirement to offer point of deployment modules (``PODs'') for some of its cable systems. Pursuant to Section 1.1208, of the Commission's rules, 47 C.F.R. § 1.1208, this proceeding
• http://www.fcc.gov/Bureaus/Cable/Public_Notices/2000/da001056.doc
  • Content-Type: text/plain Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit PUBLIC NOTICE FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION 445 12TH STREET, S.W. WASHINGTON, D.C. 20554 DA 00-1056 News media information 202/418-0500 Fax-On-Demand 202/418-2830 Internet: http://www.fcc.gov ftp.fcc.gov CABLE SERVICES BUREAU ACTION May 11, 2000 PETITION FOR WAIVER FROM REQUIREMENT TO PROVIDE POINT OF DEPLOYMENT MODULES CSR 5548-Z Pursuant to Section 76.7 of the Commission's rules, 47 C.F.R. § 76.7, AT&T Broadband, L.L.C. (``AT&T) filed a petition for special relief requesting a waiver of 47 C.F.R. § 76.1204. AT&T seeks a waiver from the requirement to offer point of deployment modules (``PODs'') for some of its cable systems. Pursuant to Section 1.1208, of the Commission's rules, 47 C.F.R. § 1.1208, this proceeding
• http://www.fcc.gov/Bureaus/Cable/Public_Notices/2000/da001333.doc
  • Content-Type: text/plain Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit PUBLIC NOTICE FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION 445 12TH STREET, S.W. WASHINGTON, D.C. 20554 DA 00-1333 News media information 202/418-0500 Fax-On-Demand 202/418-2830 Internet: http://www.fcc.gov ftp.fcc.gov CABLE SERVICES BUREAU ACTION June 16, 2000 PETITION FOR WAIVER FROM REQUIREMENT TO PROVIDE POINT OF DEPLOYMENT MODULES CSR 5558-Z Pursuant to Section 76.7 of the Commission's rules, 47 C.F.R. § 76.7, Insight Communications Company, L.P. (``Insight'') filed a petition for special relief requesting a waiver of 47 C.F.R. § 76.1204. Insight seeks a waiver from the requirement to offer point of deployment modules (``PODs'') for some of its cable systems. Pursuant to Section 1.1208, of the Commission's rules, 47 C.F.R. § 1.1208, this
• http://www.fcc.gov/Bureaus/Cable/Public_Notices/2000/da001541.doc
  • Content-Type: text/plain Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit PUBLIC NOTICE FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION 445 12TH STREET, S.W. WASHINGTON, D.C. 20554 DA 00-1541 News media information 202/418-0500 Fax-On-Demand 202/418-2830 Internet: http://www.fcc.gov ftp.fcc.gov CABLE SERVICES BUREAU ACTION July 11, 2000 MEDIACOM PETITION FOR WAIVER FROM REQUIREMENT TO PROVIDE POINT OF DEPLOYMENT MODULES CSR 5569-Z Pursuant to Section 76.7 of the Commission's rules, 47 C.F.R. § 76.7, Mediacom Communications Corporation (``Mediacom'') filed a petition for special relief requesting a waiver of 47 C.F.R. § 76.1204. Mediacom seeks a waiver from the requirement to offer point of deployment modules (``PODs'') for some of its cable systems. Pursuant to Section 1.1208, of the Commission's rules, 47 C.F.R. § 1.1208, this proceeding
• http://www.fcc.gov/Bureaus/Cable/Public_Notices/2000/da001542.doc
  • Content-Type: text/plain Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit PUBLIC NOTICE FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION 445 12TH STREET, S.W. WASHINGTON, D.C. 20554 DA 00-1542 News media information 202/418-0500 Fax-On-Demand 202/418-2830 Internet: http://www.fcc.gov ftp.fcc.gov CABLE SERVICES BUREAU ACTION July 11, 2000 TIME WARNER PETITION FOR WAIVER FROM REQUIREMENT TO PROVIDE POINT OF DEPLOYMENT MODULES CSR 5572-Z Pursuant to Section 76.7 of the Commission's rules, 47 C.F.R. § 76.7, Time Warner Cable (``Time Warner'') filed a petition for special relief requesting a waiver of 47 C.F.R. § 76.1204. Time Warner seeks a waiver from the requirement to offer point of deployment modules (``PODs'') for some of its cable systems. Pursuant to Section 1.1208, of the Commission's rules, 47 C.F.R. § 1.1208,
• http://www.fcc.gov/Bureaus/Cable/Public_Notices/2000/da001543.doc
  • Content-Type: text/plain Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit PUBLIC NOTICE FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION 445 12TH STREET, S.W. WASHINGTON, D.C. 20554 DA 00-1543 News media information 202/418-0500 Fax-On-Demand 202/418-2830 Internet: http://www.fcc.gov ftp.fcc.gov CABLE SERVICES BUREAU ACTION July 11, 2000 CABLEAMERICA PETITION FOR WAIVER FROM REQUIREMENT TO PROVIDE POINT OF DEPLOYMENT MODULES CSR 5570-Z Pursuant to Section 76.7 of the Commission's rules, 47 C.F.R. § 76.7, CableAmerica Corporation (``CableAmerica'') filed a petition for special relief requesting a waiver of 47 C.F.R. § 76.1204. CableAmerica seeks a waiver from the requirement to offer point of deployment modules (``PODs'') for some of its cable systems. Pursuant to Section 1.1208, of the Commission's rules, 47 C.F.R. § 1.1208, this proceeding is
• http://www.fcc.gov/Bureaus/Cable/Public_Notices/2000/pncb0002.doc
  • lists those filings processed by the Cable Service Bureau as registrations pursuant to §76.1801 of the Commission's Rules. Should any of these registrations contain a request for special relief, such waiver requests will be handled separately through the special relief process. Furthermore, parties seeking special relief are advised that such requests must be initiated through the special relief provisions of §76.7 of the Rules. This Notice also lists special relief and other filings. Files containing these petitions can be reviewed in the Commissions Reference Information Center, CY-Level, 445 12th Street, SW Washington, DC 20554. The letter code following a CSR Number refers to the particular subject of the petition. Those currently in use are: A - ADI; M - must carry;
• http://www.fcc.gov/Bureaus/Cable/Public_Notices/2000/pncb0006.doc
  • lists those filings processed by the Cable Service Bureau as registrations pursuant to §76.1801 of the Commission's Rules. Should any of these registrations contain a request for special relief, such waiver requests will be handled separately through the special relief process. Furthermore, parties seeking special relief are advised that such requests must be initiated through the special relief provisions of §76.7 of the Rules. This Notice also lists special relief and other filings. Files containing these petitions can be reviewed in the Commissions Reference Information Center, CY-Level, 445 12th Street, SW Washington, DC 20554. The letter code following a CSR Number refers to the particular subject of the petition. Those currently in use are: A - ADI; M - must carry;
• http://www.fcc.gov/Bureaus/Cable/Public_Notices/2000/pncb0007.doc
  • lists those filings processed by the Cable Service Bureau as registrations pursuant to §76.1801 of the Commission's Rules. Should any of these registrations contain a request for special relief, such waiver requests will be handled separately through the special relief process. Furthermore, parties seeking special relief are advised that such requests must be initiated through the special relief provisions of §76.7 of the Rules. This Notice also lists special relief and other filings. Files containing these petitions can be reviewed in the Commissions Reference Information Center, CY-Level, 445 12th Street, SW Washington, DC 20554. The letter code following a CSR Number refers to the particular subject of the petition. Those currently in use are: A - ADI; M - must carry;
• http://www.fcc.gov/Bureaus/Cable/Public_Notices/2000/pncb0011.doc
  • lists those filings processed by the Cable Service Bureau as registrations pursuant to §76.1801 of the Commission's Rules. Should any of these registrations contain a request for special relief, such waiver requests will be handled separately through the special relief process. Furthermore, parties seeking special relief are advised that such requests must be initiated through the special relief provisions of §76.7 of the Rules. This Notice also lists special relief and other filings. Files containing these petitions can be reviewed in the Commissions Reference Information Center, CY-Level, 445 12th Street, SW Washington, DC 20554. The letter code following a CSR Number refers to the particular subject of the petition. Those currently in use are: A - ADI; M - must carry;
• http://www.fcc.gov/Bureaus/Cable/Public_Notices/2001/fcc01011.doc http://www.fcc.gov/Bureaus/Cable/Public_Notices/2001/fcc01011.pdf http://www.fcc.gov/Bureaus/Cable/Public_Notices/2001/fcc01011.txt
  • Order, 15 FCC Rcd 5445 (2000). Within "its IM offerings," we include the IM offered as part of AOL's basic proprietary Internet access service, AIM, ICQ, any IM that is sponsored by AOL Time Warner and is included in Road Runner, and any new IM-based service that uses the NPD that AOL uses for its IM. Cf. 47 C.F.R. § 76.7 The Commission acted pursuant to Sections 4(i) and (j), 214(a), 214(c), 309, and 310(d) of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended, 47 U.S.C. §§ 154(i), 154(j), 214(a), 214(c), 309, 310(d), (...continued from previous page) (continued...) New Conditions as of 1/11/01 PRIVILEGED AND CONFIDENTIAL - FOR INTERNAL USE ONLY Federal Communications Commission FCC 01-XXX PUBLIC NOTICE Federal Communications Commission 445
• http://www.fcc.gov/Bureaus/Common_Carrier/Orders/2000/fcc00208.doc http://www.fcc.gov/Bureaus/Common_Carrier/Orders/2000/fcc00208.pdf http://www.fcc.gov/Bureaus/Common_Carrier/Orders/2000/fcc00208.txt
  • and subscribership in unserved and underserved regions of our Nation, including tribal lands and insular areas, and proposed particular changes to our universal service rules to overcome these impediments. Although approximately 94 percent of all households in the United States have telephone service today, penetration levels among particular areas and populations are significantly below the national average. For example, only 76.7 percent of rural households earning less than $5,000 have a telephone, and only 47 percent of Indian tribal households on reservations and other tribal lands have a telephone. These statistics demonstrate, most notably, that existing universal service support mechanisms are not adequate to sustain telephone subscribership on tribal lands. Central to the issues addressed in the Further Notice is the
• http://www.fcc.gov/Bureaus/Common_Carrier/Orders/2001/fcc01013.doc http://www.fcc.gov/Bureaus/Common_Carrier/Orders/2001/fcc01013.txt
  • measure based on households. See Petition at 6. Mescalero states that 569 of these lines are residential, noting that 80 residences have multiple lines. Mescalero ex parte at 3. The balance of these lines are broken down in the following manner: 356 business and/or tribal government and 26 payphone. Id. In the Twelfth Report and Order, we noted that only 76.7 percent of rural households earning less than $5,000 have a telephone, and only 47 percent of Indian tribal households on reservations and other tribal lands have a telephone in comparison to 94 percent of all households in the United States. See Twelfth Report and Order at para. 26 (citing Housing of American Indians on Reservations - Equipment and Fuels, Statistical
• http://www.fcc.gov/Bureaus/Common_Carrier/Reports/FCC-State_Link/IAD/hspd1208_tables.doc
  • 79.2 74.4 49.8 33.9 3.9 North Dakota 85.4 74.9 53.9 32.4 29.9 Northern Mariana Isl * * * * * Ohio 78.9 71.8 45.2 33.3 4.5 Oklahoma 87.4 70.8 39.3 27.3 2.9 Oregon 85.7 71.0 50.3 38.6 5.2 Pennsylvania 78.7 66.6 56.2 36.8 8.7 Puerto Rico 91.2 69.8 12.8 0.6 0.0 Rhode Island 84.7 80.1 65.2 53.5 52.9 South Carolina 76.7 71.7 48.2 23.8 4.0 South Dakota 80.9 72.5 53.8 36.9 34.0 Tennessee 79.9 72.3 45.9 28.5 2.9 Texas 83.9 75.5 35.8 22.7 5.1 Utah 87.3 70.3 39.1 32.9 2.9 Vermont 74.0 68.9 56.4 36.8 3.6 Virgin Islands 75.9 18.4 * * * Virginia 78.0 68.7 52.2 37.8 21.4 Washington 83.6 67.1 47.7 40.3 5.1 West Virginia 82.5 70.1 48.2 30.3
• http://www.fcc.gov/Bureaus/Common_Carrier/Reports/FCC-State_Link/IAD/ias0609_tables.doc
  • 768 kbps Downstream % at least 3 mbps Downstream % at least 6 mbps Downstream % at least 10 mbps Downstream Alabama 81.8 72.9 40.6 16.8 8.3 Alaska 80.6 66.5 25.5 12.3 3.3 American Samoa * * * * * Arizona 84.0 73.1 40.7 36.4 13.3 Arkansas 80.3 70.8 28.2 19.2 3.0 California 86.0 76.6 36.0 24.6 8.6 Colorado 86.6 76.7 42.7 38.3 1.9 Connecticut 87.5 79.2 43.4 34.5 28.3 Delaware 83.5 65.8 60.2 50.1 35.6 District of Columbia 65.6 45.5 35.7 21.2 19.6 Florida 85.1 79.8 47.3 36.7 13.3 Georgia 81.2 74.1 40.6 22.3 9.4 Guam * * * * * Hawaii 91.4 69.9 55.6 3.9 1.1 Idaho 81.3 70.5 33.6 7.9 1.1 Illinois 87.0 77.1 39.4 28.1 23.9 Indiana
• http://www.fcc.gov/Bureaus/Common_Carrier/Reports/FCC-State_Link/IAD/ias1209_tables.doc
  • 200 kbps Downstream % at least 768 kbps Downstream % at least 3 mbps Downstream % at least 6 mbps Downstream % at least 10 mbps Downstream Alabama 85.0 73.6 37.4 15.2 9.4 Alaska 82.2 70.3 25.7 11.7 3.4 American Samoa * * * * * Arizona 87.6 72.8 39.2 35.6 27.4 Arkansas 88.4 75.7 28.8 18.6 12.6 California 88.4 76.7 33.5 23.8 16.1 Colorado 89.0 76.3 40.4 36.6 10.5 Connecticut 88.6 77.5 40.0 31.4 29.5 Delaware 85.6 73.6 54.8 47.0 40.2 District of Columbia 70.0 42.5 32.0 20.4 18.7 Florida 87.4 80.5 44.1 34.2 23.5 Georgia 84.2 74.7 38.6 21.2 16.3 Guam * * * * * Hawaii 93.0 85.1 53.9 4.5 1.1 Idaho 85.0 63.4 37.3 10.4 2.8 Illinois
• http://www.fcc.gov/Bureaus/Common_Carrier/Reports/FCC-State_Link/IAD/ldrpt103.pdf
  • 101.2 101.5 101.5 101.9 102.0 101.3 1999January 101.9 100.7 102.2 99.9 99.3 101.3 July 103.3 99.5 103.7 96.7 95.3 100.0 2000January 104.6 100.9 104.8 98.5 98.3 100.1 July 107.1 98.2 107.3 91.3 89.8 95.7 2001January 108.5 98.8 110.5 89.9 83.1 94.2 July 110.0 99.6 113.3 88.9 82.0 93.0 2002January 109.7 100.3 115.7 88.2 81.4 92.6 July 111.6 99.5 118.8 84.0 76.7 89.1 2003January 112.6 100.4 121.4 83.4 77.3 87.0 2 Series began in December 1997. BLS Series ID All Items CUUR0000SA0 CUUR0000SEED Local Telephone Services 1 Series revised in December 1997. Current and previous series are not comparable. Intrastate Long Distance Services CUUR0000SS27061 CUUR0000SE270A Table 18 Interstate Long Distance Services CUUR0000SS27051 Source: Bureau of Labor Statistics. Consumer Price Indices (December 1997
• http://www.fcc.gov/Bureaus/Common_Carrier/Reports/FCC-State_Link/IAD/pntris00.pdf
  • dollars. * Change is statistically significant at the 95% confidence level. Note: Changes may not appear to be the same as calculated differences due to rounding. 9 Table 4 Percentage of Households with Telephone Service in March Total Household Income in March 1984 Dollars * 1984 1985 1986 1987 1988 1989 1990 1991 1992 Alabama $9,999 or less 77.4 77.8 76.7 72.8 75.8 81.4 79.6 81.8 79.1 $10,000 - $19,999 91.2 85.1 89.9 91.3 89.1 88.9 85.0 89.0 93.2 $20,000 - $29,999 91.0 96.6 96.2 92.2 94.1 97.6 94.9 95.5 95.0 $30,000 - $39,999 100.0 99.2 100.0 97.0 100.0 98.6 98.6 96.9 99.0 $40,000 or more 98.3 100.0 99.4 99.1 99.0 100.0 99.1 98.3 97.6 All Households 89.0 88.5 89.3 87.4
• http://www.fcc.gov/Bureaus/Common_Carrier/Reports/FCC-State_Link/IAD/pntris01.pdf
  • dollars. * Change is statistically significant at the 95% confidence level. Note: Changes may not appear to be the same as calculated differences due to rounding. 10 Table 4 Percentage of Households with Telephone Service in March Total Household Income in March 1984 Dollars * 1984 1985 1986 1987 1988 1989 1990 1991 1992 Alabama $9,999 or less 77.4 77.8 76.7 72.8 75.8 81.4 79.6 81.8 79.1 $10,000 - $19,999 91.2 85.1 89.9 91.3 89.1 88.9 85.0 89.0 93.2 $20,000 - $29,999 91.0 96.6 96.2 92.2 94.1 97.6 94.9 95.5 95.0 $30,000 - $39,999 100.0 99.2 100.0 97.0 100.0 98.6 98.6 96.9 99.0 $40,000 or more 98.3 100.0 99.4 99.1 99.0 100.0 99.1 98.3 97.6 All Households 89.0 88.5 89.3 87.4
• http://www.fcc.gov/Bureaus/Common_Carrier/Reports/FCC-State_Link/IAD/pntris02.pdf
  • * Change is statistically significant at the 95% confidence level. Note: Changes may not appear to be the same as calculated differences due to rounding. 10 Table 4 Percentage of Households with Telephone Service in March Total Household Income in March 1984 Dollars * 1984 1985 1986 1987 1988 1989 1990 1991 1992 1993 Alabama $9,999 or less 77.4 77.8 76.7 72.8 75.8 81.4 79.6 81.8 79.1 85.2 $10,000 - $19,999 91.2 85.1 89.9 91.3 89.1 88.9 85.0 89.0 93.2 93.4 $20,000 - $29,999 91.0 96.6 96.2 92.2 94.1 97.6 94.9 95.5 95.0 96.3 $30,000 - $39,999 100.0 99.2 100.0 97.0 100.0 98.6 98.6 96.9 99.0 95.5 $40,000 or more 98.3 100.0 99.4 99.1 99.0 100.0 99.1 98.3 97.6 99.1 All
• http://www.fcc.gov/Bureaus/Common_Carrier/Reports/FCC-State_Link/IAD/pntris03.pdf
  • # Decrease is statistically significant at the 95% confidence level. Note: Changes may not appear to be the same as calculated differences due to rounding. 10 Table 4 Percentage of Households with Telephone Service in March Total Household Income in March 1984 Dollars * 1984 1985 1986 1987 1988 1989 1990 1991 1992 1993 Alabama $9,999 or less 77.4 77.8 76.7 72.8 75.8 81.4 79.6 81.8 79.1 85.2 $10,000 - $19,999 91.2 85.1 89.9 91.3 89.1 88.9 85.0 89.0 93.2 93.4 $20,000 - $29,999 91.0 96.6 96.2 92.2 94.1 97.6 94.9 95.5 95.0 96.3 $30,000 - $39,999 100.0 99.2 100.0 97.0 100.0 98.6 98.6 96.9 99.0 95.5 $40,000 or more 98.3 100.0 99.4 99.1 99.0 100.0 99.1 98.3 97.6 99.1 All
• http://www.fcc.gov/Bureaus/Common_Carrier/Reports/FCC-State_Link/IAD/pntris04.pdf
  • Decrease is statistically significant at the 95% confidence level. Note: Changes may not appear to be the same as calculated differences due to rounding. 10 Table 4 Percentage of Households with Telephone Service in March Total Household Income in March 1984 Dollars * 1984 1985 1986 1987 1988 1989 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 Alabama $9,999 or less 77.4 77.8 76.7 72.8 75.8 81.4 79.6 81.8 79.1 85.2 83.1 $10,000 - $19,999 91.2 85.1 89.9 91.3 89.1 88.9 85.0 89.0 93.2 93.4 92.7 $20,000 - $29,999 91.0 96.6 96.2 92.2 94.1 97.6 94.9 95.5 95.0 96.3 94.1 $30,000 - $39,999 100.0 99.2 100.0 97.0 100.0 98.6 98.6 96.9 99.0 95.5 96.1 $40,000 or more 98.3 100.0 99.4 99.1 99.0 100.0 99.1
• http://www.fcc.gov/Bureaus/Common_Carrier/Reports/FCC-State_Link/IAD/quarterly_roll-upsasof110110.pdf
  • Providers (OSPs) 19.6 122.8 29.6 34.0 14.8 31.2 8.3 Prepaid Calling Card Providers 44.8 469.7 454.1 474.7 4.5 471.1 0.8 Satellite Service Providers 54.9 187.8 71.1 88.1 23.9 87.0 1.3 Toll Resellers 467.4 1,686.0 1,145.2 1,192.7 4.1 1,159.5 2.8 VoIP Toll Provider 8/ 93.4 56.9 52.6 50.1 -4.8 40.5 19 Audio Bridge Service Provider 9/ * 8.5 8.1 79.0 874.2 76.7 2.8 Other Toll Carriers 8/ 492.4 146.2 86.3 106.6 23.5 105.3 1.2 Toll Service Providers 4,264.1 9,992.4 7,226.4 7,203.6 -0.3 7,080.1 1.7 All Filers 7/ $15,679.5 $59,932.2 $20,004.3 $20,242.6 1.2%$19,899.6 1.7% See notes at end of tables. Last updated May 17, 2010 4/ Rollup of November 1, 2008 FCC Form 499-Q Filings Detailed Revenues by Type of Carrier: (Dollar Amounts
• http://www.fcc.gov/Bureaus/Common_Carrier/Reports/FCC-State_Link/IAD/ref02.pdf
  • 69.1 75.7 69.5 82.1 86.0 March 69.8 75.7 69.4 82.0 86.0 April 70.6 75.7 69.4 82.0 86.0 May 71.5 75.7 69.6 82.0 86.0 June 72.3 75.6 69.2 82.1 86.4 July 73.1 75.7 69.2 82.1 86.5 August 73.8 75.9 69.5 82.2 86.6 September 74.6 75.8 69.4 82.1 86.6 October 75.2 75.1 68.3 82.1 86.8 November 75.9 76.4 70.4 82.1 86.6 December 76.7 76.9 71.4 82.1 86.6 63 All Goods & Services Telephone Services Local Services Interstate Toll Service Intrastate Toll Service CUUR0000SA0 CUUR0000SE270A CUUR0000SEED01 CUUR0000SS27051 CUUR0000SS27061 Table 3.2 (1982 - 84 = 100) BLS Series ID Consumer Price Indices - Continued 1980January 77.8 76.4 71.0 81.5 86.0 February 78.9 76.1 71.0 81.2 84.3 March 80.0 76.3 71.4 81.2 84.3 April 81.0 76.4
• http://www.fcc.gov/Bureaus/Common_Carrier/Reports/FCC-State_Link/IAD/ref03.pdf
  • February 100.0 97.7 100.2 96.7 110.0 76.8 94.6 103.0 March 100.0 97.2 100.8 94.0 115.1 78.1 93.0 100.5 April 100.0 97.0 99.1 97.8 107.3 78.0 94.4 103.0 May 100.0 97.2 99.9 99.2 107.3 79.6 94.0 102.7 June 100.0 96.4 98.9 99.3 105.3 77.6 93.5 102.2 July 100.0 97.9 100.9 99.0 108.7 76.3 94.3 103.4 August 100.0 97.2 99.6 97.8 109.1 76.7 94.3 102.3 September 100.0 96.8 98.7 97.2 108.3 74.2 94.6 105.8 October 100.0 95.7 98.9 97.5 107.8 76.4 92.0 102.6 November 100.0 94.6 96.3 96.9 102.4 73.2 92.5 102.3 December 100.0 94.8 96.2 96.9 104.2 68.3 93.1 103.4 1999January 100.0 93.9 97.3 97.2 105.0 72.7 89.9 100.0 February 100.0 92.5 95.4 96.4 102.0 69.6 89.1 99.7 March 100.0 93.3 96.9
• http://www.fcc.gov/Bureaus/Common_Carrier/Reports/FCC-State_Link/IAD/ref04.pdf
  • November 112.4 99.8 120.8 82.7 80.7 87.0 67.5 December 112.2 99.9 121.0 82.6 80.7 86.7 67.4 2003January 112.6 100.4 121.3 83.4 81.9 87.0 67.6 February 113.5 100.5 121.2 83.5 82.2 86.9 67.7 March 114.2 99.7 121.7 81.5 79.8 85.1 67.6 April 113.9 98.7 121.9 79.2 77.4 83.1 67.5 May 113.7 98.1 122.0 77.9 76.0 81.8 67.5 June 113.8 97.5 122.2 76.7 74.6 80.8 66.3 July 114.0 98.1 123.1 77.2 75.6 80.8 66.2 August 114.4 97.8 123.7 76.0 74.0 79.7 66.1 September 114.8 97.4 123.8 75.2 73.3 78.9 66.1 October 114.6 97.1 124.0 74.3 72.1 78.7 66.1 November 114.3 97.2 124.2 74.1 71.8 78.3 66.7 December 114.2 97.2 124.1 74.3 72.0 78.6 66.5 Note: Figures for local telephone service, interstate toll service,
• http://www.fcc.gov/Bureaus/Common_Carrier/Reports/FCC-State_Link/IAD/ref05.pdf
  • November 112.4 99.8 120.8 82.7 80.7 87.0 67.5 December 112.2 99.9 121.0 82.6 80.7 86.7 67.4 2003January 112.6 100.4 121.3 83.4 81.9 87.0 67.6 February 113.5 100.5 121.2 83.5 82.2 86.9 67.7 March 114.2 99.7 121.7 81.5 79.8 85.1 67.6 April 113.9 98.7 121.9 79.2 77.4 83.1 67.5 May 113.7 98.1 122.0 77.9 76.0 81.8 67.5 June 113.8 97.5 122.2 76.7 74.6 80.8 66.3 July 114.0 98.1 123.1 77.2 75.6 80.8 66.2 August 114.4 97.8 123.7 76.0 74.0 79.7 66.1 September 114.8 97.4 123.8 75.2 73.3 78.9 66.1 October 114.6 97.1 124.0 74.3 72.1 78.7 66.1 November 114.3 97.2 124.2 74.1 71.8 78.3 66.7 December 114.2 97.2 124.1 74.3 72.0 78.6 66.5 2004January 114.8 97.0 124.4 73.9 71.6 78.0 66.3 February
• http://www.fcc.gov/Bureaus/Common_Carrier/Reports/FCC-State_Link/IAD/ref97.pdf
  • 69.1 75.7 69.5 82.1 86.0 March 69.8 75.7 69.4 82.0 86.0 April 70.6 75.7 69.4 82.0 86.0 May 71.5 75.7 69.6 82.0 86.0 June 72.3 75.6 69.2 82.1 86.4 July 73.1 75.7 69.2 82.1 86.5 August 73.8 75.9 69.5 82.2 86.6 September 74.6 75.8 69.4 82.1 86.6 October 75.2 75.1 68.3 82.1 86.8 November 75.9 76.4 70.4 82.1 86.6 December 76.7 76.9 71.4 82.1 86.6 1980January 77.8 76.4 71.0 81.5 86.0 February 78.9 76.1 71.0 81.2 84.3 March 80.0 76.3 71.4 81.2 84.3 April 81.0 76.4 71.6 81.2 84.5 May 81.8 76.8 72.1 81.2 84.9 June 82.7 77.6 72.8 83.0 85.0 July 82.7 78.1 72.9 84.7 84.9 August 83.3 78.2 72.9 85.0 85.3 September 84.0 78.5 73.3 85.2 85.5 October 84.8
• http://www.fcc.gov/Bureaus/Common_Carrier/Reports/FCC-State_Link/IAD/ref98.pdf
  • 69.1 75.7 69.5 82.1 86.0 March 69.8 75.7 69.4 82.0 86.0 April 70.6 75.7 69.4 82.0 86.0 May 71.5 75.7 69.6 82.0 86.0 June 72.3 75.6 69.2 82.1 86.4 July 73.1 75.7 69.2 82.1 86.5 August 73.8 75.9 69.5 82.2 86.6 September 74.6 75.8 69.4 82.1 86.6 October 75.2 75.1 68.3 82.1 86.8 November 75.9 76.4 70.4 82.1 86.6 December 76.7 76.9 71.4 82.1 86.6 1980 January 77.8 76.4 71.0 81.5 86.0 February 78.9 76.1 71.0 81.2 84.3 March 80.0 76.3 71.4 81.2 84.3 April 81.0 76.4 71.6 81.2 84.5 May 81.8 76.8 72.1 81.2 84.9 June 82.7 77.6 72.8 83.0 85.0 July 82.7 78.1 72.9 84.7 84.9 August 83.3 78.2 72.9 85.0 85.3 September 84.0 78.5 73.3 85.2 85.5 October
• http://www.fcc.gov/Bureaus/Common_Carrier/Reports/FCC-State_Link/IAD/ref99.pdf
  • 69.1 75.7 69.5 82.1 86.0 March 69.8 75.7 69.4 82.0 86.0 April 70.6 75.7 69.4 82.0 86.0 May 71.5 75.7 69.6 82.0 86.0 June 72.3 75.6 69.2 82.1 86.4 July 73.1 75.7 69.2 82.1 86.5 August 73.8 75.9 69.5 82.2 86.6 September 74.6 75.8 69.4 82.1 86.6 October 75.2 75.1 68.3 82.1 86.8 November 75.9 76.4 70.4 82.1 86.6 December 76.7 76.9 71.4 82.1 86.6 73 Table 4.2 Consumer Price Indices (1982 - 1984 = 100) All Goods & Services Telephone Services Local Services Interstate Toll Service Intrastate Toll Service BLS Series ID CUUR0000SA0 CUUR0000SE270A CUUR0000SEED01 CUUR0000SS27051CUUR0000SS27061 1980 January 77.8 76.4 71.0 81.5 86.0 February 78.9 76.1 71.0 81.2 84.3 March 80.0 76.3 71.4 81.2 84.3 April 81.0 76.4 71.6 81.2
• http://www.fcc.gov/Bureaus/Common_Carrier/Reports/FCC-State_Link/IAD/subs0300.pdf
  • 98.1 98.5 98.3 98.7 96.2 96.7 96.9 97.4 $50,000 - $59,999 98.1 98.5 98.2 98.6 96.8 97.5 95.7 96.7 $60,000 - $74,999 98.6 98.8 98.8 99.0 96.9 97.4 97.5 97.5 $75,000 + 99.0 99.2 99.0 99.2 99.1 99.1 98.6 98.8 MARCH 1999 TOTAL 94.0 94.9 95.1 95.8 87.3 89.2 89.2 90.2 UNDER $5,000 75.9 79.6 78.8 82.4 70.5 74.9 73.4 76.7 $5,000 - $7,499 81.4 84.1 83.2 85.5 76.4 80.6 79.5 82.1 $7,500 - $9,999 89.7 91.7 90.8 92.6 86.0 89.3 85.5 86.5 $10,000 - $12,499 88.7 89.9 90.4 91.3 81.6 83.8 83.1 83.9 $12,500 - $14,999 89.6 91.4 90.4 92.0 85.9 88.0 82.9 83.4 $15,000 - $19,999 92.4 93.8 93.5 94.5 87.2 90.1 87.2 88.0 $20,000 - $24,999 93.5 94.2
• http://www.fcc.gov/Bureaus/Common_Carrier/Reports/FCC-State_Link/IAD/subs0301.pdf
  • 98.1 98.5 98.3 98.7 96.2 96.7 96.9 97.4 $50,000 - $59,999 98.1 98.5 98.2 98.6 96.8 97.5 95.7 96.7 $60,000 - $74,999 98.6 98.8 98.8 99.0 96.9 97.4 97.5 97.5 $75,000 + 99.0 99.2 99.0 99.2 99.1 99.1 98.6 98.8 MARCH 1999 TOTAL 94.0 94.9 95.1 95.8 87.3 89.2 89.2 90.2 UNDER $5,000 75.9 79.6 78.8 82.4 70.5 74.9 73.4 76.7 $5,000 - $7,499 81.4 84.1 83.2 85.5 76.4 80.6 79.5 82.1 $7,500 - $9,999 89.7 91.7 90.8 92.6 86.0 89.3 85.5 86.5 $10,000 - $12,499 88.7 89.9 90.4 91.3 81.6 83.8 83.1 83.9 $12,500 - $14,999 89.6 91.4 90.4 92.0 85.9 88.0 82.9 83.4 $15,000 - $19,999 92.4 93.8 93.5 94.5 87.2 90.1 87.2 88.0 $20,000 - $24,999 93.5 94.2
• http://www.fcc.gov/Bureaus/Common_Carrier/Reports/FCC-State_Link/IAD/subs0302.pdf
  • 86.4 EMPLOYED 94.6 96.1 95.4 96.7 87.9 91.0 86.3 88.3 UNEMPLOYED 82.7 86.1 85.3 88.2 74.0 79.3 77.0 79.6 NOT IN LABOR FORCE 92.7 93.9 94.2 95.2 82.2 85.5 82.5 84.1 1988 ANNUAL AVERAGE TOTAL CNP 93.8 95.2 94.9 96.1 85.6 88.7 83.6 86.1 EMPLOYED 94.9 96.2 95.6 96.8 88.5 91.5 85.4 87.7 UNEMPLOYED 83.3 86.8 85.9 88.9 75.4 80.5 76.7 80.3 NOT IN LABOR FORCE 92.8 94.2 94.3 95.5 83.1 86.0 81.5 84.0 1989 ANNUAL AVERAGE TOTAL CNP 94.1 95.5 95.3 96.4 85.8 89.0 84.7 87.0 EMPLOYED 95.2 96.5 96.0 97.1 88.8 91.7 86.6 89.0 UNEMPLOYED 83.9 87.1 86.2 88.8 77.0 82.5 75.1 78.6 NOT IN LABOR FORCE 93.1 94.4 94.7 95.7 82.8 85.9 82.6 84.6 1990 ANNUAL AVERAGE TOTAL
• http://www.fcc.gov/Bureaus/Common_Carrier/Reports/FCC-State_Link/IAD/subs0303.pdf
  • 86.4 EMPLOYED 94.6 96.1 95.4 96.7 87.9 91.0 86.3 88.3 UNEMPLOYED 82.7 86.1 85.3 88.2 74.0 79.3 77.0 79.6 NOT IN LABOR FORCE 92.7 93.9 94.2 95.2 82.2 85.5 82.5 84.1 1988 ANNUAL AVERAGE TOTAL CNP 93.8 95.2 94.9 96.1 85.6 88.7 83.6 86.1 EMPLOYED 94.9 96.2 95.6 96.8 88.5 91.5 85.4 87.7 UNEMPLOYED 83.3 86.8 85.9 88.9 75.4 80.5 76.7 80.3 NOT IN LABOR FORCE 92.8 94.2 94.3 95.5 83.1 86.0 81.5 84.0 1989 ANNUAL AVERAGE TOTAL CNP 94.1 95.5 95.3 96.4 85.8 89.0 84.7 87.0 EMPLOYED 95.2 96.5 96.0 97.1 88.8 91.7 86.6 89.0 UNEMPLOYED 83.9 87.1 86.2 88.8 77.0 82.5 75.1 78.6 NOT IN LABOR FORCE 93.1 94.4 94.7 95.7 82.8 85.9 82.6 84.6 1990 ANNUAL AVERAGE TOTAL
• http://www.fcc.gov/Bureaus/Common_Carrier/Reports/FCC-State_Link/IAD/subs0304.pdf
  • 99.2 97.9 98.2 98.3 98.9 $75,000 + 99.0 99.3 99.1 99.5 97.6 97.8 99.2 99.5 RACE HISPANIC TOTAL WHITE BLACK ORIGIN 31 Table 4 Percentage of Households with a Telephone by Income Unit Avail Unit Avail Unit Avail Unit Avail MARCH 2004 TOTAL 94.2 95.1 94.9 95.7 90.1 91.1 90.5 91.6 UNDER $5,000 80.1 83.4 82.1 85.1 76.9 79.8 74.9 76.7 $5,000 - $7,499 85.1 86.8 84.4 85.9 86.7 88.8 83.9 85.1 $7,500 - $9,999 88.1 89.4 89.2 90.5 82.8 84.2 85.5 87.7 $10,000 - $12,499 90.2 91.7 90.8 91.8 88.5 91.3 85.3 85.9 $12,500 - $14,999 90.8 92.8 91.9 93.8 87.9 89.8 88.0 90.1 $15,000 - $19,999 91.2 92.6 92.1 93.4 88.8 90.4 88.1 89.7 $20,000 - $24,999 94.2 95.1
• http://www.fcc.gov/Bureaus/Common_Carrier/Reports/FCC-State_Link/IAD/subs0305.pdf
  • 99.2 97.9 98.2 98.3 98.9 $75,000 + 99.0 99.3 99.1 99.5 97.6 97.8 99.2 99.5 RACE HISPANIC TOTAL WHITE BLACK ORIGIN 29 Table 4 Percentage of Households with a Telephone by Income Unit Avail Unit Avail Unit Avail Unit Avail MARCH 2004 TOTAL 94.2 95.1 94.9 95.7 90.1 91.1 90.5 91.6 UNDER $5,000 80.1 83.4 82.1 85.1 76.9 79.8 74.9 76.7 $5,000 - $7,499 85.1 86.8 84.4 85.9 86.7 88.8 83.9 85.1 $7,500 - $9,999 88.1 89.4 89.2 90.5 82.8 84.2 85.5 87.7 $10,000 - $12,499 90.2 91.7 90.8 91.8 88.5 91.3 85.3 85.9 $12,500 - $14,999 90.8 92.8 91.9 93.8 87.9 89.8 88.0 90.1 $15,000 - $19,999 91.2 92.6 92.1 93.4 88.8 90.4 88.1 89.7 $20,000 - $24,999 94.2 95.1
• http://www.fcc.gov/Bureaus/Common_Carrier/Reports/FCC-State_Link/IAD/subs0398.pdf
  • 86.4 EMPLOYED 94.6 96.1 95.4 96.7 87.9 91.0 86.3 88.3 UNEMPLOYED 82.7 86.1 85.3 88.2 74.0 79.3 77.0 79.6 NOT IN LABOR FORCE 92.7 93.9 94.2 95.2 82.2 85.5 82.5 84.1 1988 ANNUAL AVERAGE TOTAL CNP 93.8 95.2 94.9 96.1 85.6 88.7 83.6 86.1 EMPLOYED 94.9 96.2 95.6 96.8 88.5 91.5 85.4 87.7 UNEMPLOYED 83.3 86.8 85.9 88.9 75.4 80.5 76.7 80.3 NOT IN LABOR FORCE 92.8 94.2 94.3 95.5 83.1 86.0 81.5 84.0 1989 ANNUAL AVERAGE TOTAL CNP 94.1 95.5 95.3 96.4 85.8 89.0 84.7 87.0 EMPLOYED 95.2 96.5 96.0 97.1 88.8 91.7 86.6 89.0 UNEMPLOYED 83.9 87.1 86.2 88.8 77.0 82.5 75.1 78.6 NOT IN LABOR FORCE 93.1 94.4 94.7 95.7 82.8 85.9 82.6 84.6 1990 ANNUAL AVERAGE TOTAL
• http://www.fcc.gov/Bureaus/Common_Carrier/Reports/FCC-State_Link/IAD/subs0399.pdf
  • 98.1 98.5 98.3 98.7 96.2 96.7 96.9 97.4 $50,000 - $59,999 98.1 98.5 98.2 98.6 96.8 97.5 95.7 96.7 $60,000 - $74,999 98.6 98.8 98.8 99.0 96.9 97.4 97.5 97.5 $75,000 + 99.0 99.2 99.0 99.2 99.1 99.1 98.6 98.8 MARCH 99 TOTAL 94.0 94.9 95.1 95.8 87.3 89.2 89.2 90.2 UNDER $5,000 75.9 79.6 78.8 82.4 70.5 74.9 73.4 76.7 $5,000 - $7,499 81.4 84.1 83.2 85.5 76.4 80.6 79.5 82.1 $7,500 - $9,999 89.7 91.7 90.8 92.6 86.0 89.3 85.5 86.5 $10,000 - $12,499 88.7 89.9 90.4 91.3 81.6 83.8 83.1 83.9 $12,500 - $14,999 89.6 91.4 90.4 92.0 85.9 88.0 82.9 83.4 $15,000 - $19,999 92.4 93.8 93.5 94.5 87.2 90.1 87.2 88.0 $20,000 - $24,999 93.5 94.2
• http://www.fcc.gov/Bureaus/Common_Carrier/Reports/FCC-State_Link/IAD/subs0700.pdf
  • 98.1 98.5 98.3 98.7 96.2 96.7 96.9 97.4 $50,000 - $59,999 98.1 98.5 98.2 98.6 96.8 97.5 95.7 96.7 $60,000 - $74,999 98.6 98.8 98.8 99.0 96.9 97.4 97.5 97.5 $75,000 + 99.0 99.2 99.0 99.2 99.1 99.1 98.6 98.8 MARCH 1999 TOTAL 94.0 94.9 95.1 95.8 87.3 89.2 89.2 90.2 UNDER $5,000 75.9 79.6 78.8 82.4 70.5 74.9 73.4 76.7 $5,000 - $7,499 81.4 84.1 83.2 85.5 76.4 80.6 79.5 82.1 $7,500 - $9,999 89.7 91.7 90.8 92.6 86.0 89.3 85.5 86.5 $10,000 - $12,499 88.7 89.9 90.4 91.3 81.6 83.8 83.1 83.9 $12,500 - $14,999 89.6 91.4 90.4 92.0 85.9 88.0 82.9 83.4 $15,000 - $19,999 92.4 93.8 93.5 94.5 87.2 90.1 87.2 88.0 $20,000 - $24,999 93.5 94.2
• http://www.fcc.gov/Bureaus/Common_Carrier/Reports/FCC-State_Link/IAD/subs0701.pdf
  • 98.1 98.5 98.3 98.7 96.2 96.7 96.9 97.4 $50,000 - $59,999 98.1 98.5 98.2 98.6 96.8 97.5 95.7 96.7 $60,000 - $74,999 98.6 98.8 98.8 99.0 96.9 97.4 97.5 97.5 $75,000 + 99.0 99.2 99.0 99.2 99.1 99.1 98.6 98.8 MARCH 1999 TOTAL 94.0 94.9 95.1 95.8 87.3 89.2 89.2 90.2 UNDER $5,000 75.9 79.6 78.8 82.4 70.5 74.9 73.4 76.7 $5,000 - $7,499 81.4 84.1 83.2 85.5 76.4 80.6 79.5 82.1 $7,500 - $9,999 89.7 91.7 90.8 92.6 86.0 89.3 85.5 86.5 $10,000 - $12,499 88.7 89.9 90.4 91.3 81.6 83.8 83.1 83.9 $12,500 - $14,999 89.6 91.4 90.4 92.0 85.9 88.0 82.9 83.4 $15,000 - $19,999 92.4 93.8 93.5 94.5 87.2 90.1 87.2 88.0 $20,000 - $24,999 93.5 94.2
• http://www.fcc.gov/Bureaus/Common_Carrier/Reports/FCC-State_Link/IAD/subs0702.pdf
  • 86.4 EMPLOYED 94.6 96.1 95.4 96.7 87.9 91.0 86.3 88.3 UNEMPLOYED 82.7 86.1 85.3 88.2 74.0 79.3 77.0 79.6 NOT IN LABOR FORCE 92.7 93.9 94.2 95.2 82.2 85.5 82.5 84.1 1988 ANNUAL AVERAGE TOTAL CNP 93.8 95.2 94.9 96.1 85.6 88.7 83.6 86.1 EMPLOYED 94.9 96.2 95.6 96.8 88.5 91.5 85.4 87.7 UNEMPLOYED 83.3 86.8 85.9 88.9 75.4 80.5 76.7 80.3 NOT IN LABOR FORCE 92.8 94.2 94.3 95.5 83.1 86.0 81.5 84.0 1989 ANNUAL AVERAGE TOTAL CNP 94.1 95.5 95.3 96.4 85.8 89.0 84.7 87.0 EMPLOYED 95.2 96.5 96.0 97.1 88.8 91.7 86.6 89.0 UNEMPLOYED 83.9 87.1 86.2 88.8 77.0 82.5 75.1 78.6 NOT IN LABOR FORCE 93.1 94.4 94.7 95.7 82.8 85.9 82.6 84.6 1990 ANNUAL AVERAGE TOTAL
• http://www.fcc.gov/Bureaus/Common_Carrier/Reports/FCC-State_Link/IAD/subs0703.pdf
  • 86.4 EMPLOYED 94.6 96.1 95.4 96.7 87.9 91.0 86.3 88.3 UNEMPLOYED 82.7 86.1 85.3 88.2 74.0 79.3 77.0 79.6 NOT IN LABOR FORCE 92.7 93.9 94.2 95.2 82.2 85.5 82.5 84.1 1988 ANNUAL AVERAGE TOTAL CNP 93.8 95.2 94.9 96.1 85.6 88.7 83.6 86.1 EMPLOYED 94.9 96.2 95.6 96.8 88.5 91.5 85.4 87.7 UNEMPLOYED 83.3 86.8 85.9 88.9 75.4 80.5 76.7 80.3 NOT IN LABOR FORCE 92.8 94.2 94.3 95.5 83.1 86.0 81.5 84.0 1989 ANNUAL AVERAGE TOTAL CNP 94.1 95.5 95.3 96.4 85.8 89.0 84.7 87.0 EMPLOYED 95.2 96.5 96.0 97.1 88.8 91.7 86.6 89.0 UNEMPLOYED 83.9 87.1 86.2 88.8 77.0 82.5 75.1 78.6 NOT IN LABOR FORCE 93.1 94.4 94.7 95.7 82.8 85.9 82.6 84.6 1990 ANNUAL AVERAGE TOTAL
• http://www.fcc.gov/Bureaus/Common_Carrier/Reports/FCC-State_Link/IAD/subs0704.pdf
  • 99.2 97.9 98.2 98.3 98.9 $75,000 + 99.0 99.3 99.1 99.5 97.6 97.8 99.2 99.5 RACE HISPANIC TOTAL WHITE BLACK ORIGIN 31 Table 4 Percentage of Households with a Telephone by Income Unit Avail Unit Avail Unit Avail Unit Avail MARCH 2004 TOTAL 94.2 95.1 94.9 95.7 90.1 91.1 90.5 91.6 UNDER $5,000 80.1 83.4 82.1 85.1 76.9 79.8 74.9 76.7 $5,000 - $7,499 85.1 86.8 84.4 85.9 86.7 88.8 83.9 85.1 $7,500 - $9,999 88.1 89.4 89.2 90.5 82.8 84.2 85.5 87.7 $10,000 - $12,499 90.2 91.7 90.8 91.8 88.5 91.3 85.3 85.9 $12,500 - $14,999 90.8 92.8 91.9 93.8 87.9 89.8 88.0 90.1 $15,000 - $19,999 91.2 92.6 92.1 93.4 88.8 90.4 88.1 89.7 $20,000 - $24,999 94.2 95.1
• http://www.fcc.gov/Bureaus/Common_Carrier/Reports/FCC-State_Link/IAD/subs0798.pdf
  • 86.4 EMPLOYED 94.6 96.1 95.4 96.7 87.9 91.0 86.3 88.3 UNEMPLOYED 82.7 86.1 85.3 88.2 74.0 79.3 77.0 79.6 NOT IN LABOR FORCE 92.7 93.9 94.2 95.2 82.2 85.5 82.5 84.1 1988 ANNUAL AVERAGE TOTAL CNP 93.8 95.2 94.9 96.1 85.6 88.7 83.6 86.1 EMPLOYED 94.9 96.2 95.6 96.8 88.5 91.5 85.4 87.7 UNEMPLOYED 83.3 86.8 85.9 88.9 75.4 80.5 76.7 80.3 NOT IN LABOR FORCE 92.8 94.2 94.3 95.5 83.1 86.0 81.5 84.0 1989 ANNUAL AVERAGE TOTAL CNP 94.1 95.5 95.3 96.4 85.8 89.0 84.7 87.0 EMPLOYED 95.2 96.5 96.0 97.1 88.8 91.7 86.6 89.0 UNEMPLOYED 83.9 87.1 86.2 88.8 77.0 82.5 75.1 78.6 NOT IN LABOR FORCE 93.1 94.4 94.7 95.7 82.8 85.9 82.6 84.6 1990 ANNUAL AVERAGE TOTAL
• http://www.fcc.gov/Bureaus/Common_Carrier/Reports/FCC-State_Link/IAD/subs0799.pdf
  • 98.1 98.5 98.3 98.7 96.2 96.7 96.9 97.4 $50,000 - $59,999 98.1 98.5 98.2 98.6 96.8 97.5 95.7 96.7 $60,000 - $74,999 98.6 98.8 98.8 99.0 96.9 97.4 97.5 97.5 $75,000 + 99.0 99.2 99.0 99.2 99.1 99.1 98.6 98.8 MARCH 99 TOTAL 94.0 94.9 95.1 95.8 87.3 89.2 89.2 90.2 UNDER $5,000 75.9 79.6 78.8 82.4 70.5 74.9 73.4 76.7 $5,000 - $7,499 81.4 84.1 83.2 85.5 76.4 80.6 79.5 82.1 $7,500 - $9,999 89.7 91.7 90.8 92.6 86.0 89.3 85.5 86.5 $10,000 - $12,499 88.7 89.9 90.4 91.3 81.6 83.8 83.1 83.9 $12,500 - $14,999 89.6 91.4 90.4 92.0 85.9 88.0 82.9 83.4 $15,000 - $19,999 92.4 93.8 93.5 94.5 87.2 90.1 87.2 88.0 $20,000 - $24,999 93.5 94.2
• http://www.fcc.gov/Bureaus/Common_Carrier/Reports/FCC-State_Link/IAD/subs1100.pdf
  • 98.1 98.5 98.3 98.7 96.2 96.7 96.9 97.4 $50,000 - $59,999 98.1 98.5 98.2 98.6 96.8 97.5 95.7 96.7 $60,000 - $74,999 98.6 98.8 98.8 99.0 96.9 97.4 97.5 97.5 $75,000 + 99.0 99.2 99.0 99.2 99.1 99.1 98.6 98.8 MARCH 1999 TOTAL 94.0 94.9 95.1 95.8 87.3 89.2 89.2 90.2 UNDER $5,000 75.9 79.6 78.8 82.4 70.5 74.9 73.4 76.7 $5,000 - $7,499 81.4 84.1 83.2 85.5 76.4 80.6 79.5 82.1 $7,500 - $9,999 89.7 91.7 90.8 92.6 86.0 89.3 85.5 86.5 $10,000 - $12,499 88.7 89.9 90.4 91.3 81.6 83.8 83.1 83.9 $12,500 - $14,999 89.6 91.4 90.4 92.0 85.9 88.0 82.9 83.4 $15,000 - $19,999 92.4 93.8 93.5 94.5 87.2 90.1 87.2 88.0 $20,000 - $24,999 93.5 94.2
• http://www.fcc.gov/Bureaus/Common_Carrier/Reports/FCC-State_Link/IAD/subs1101.pdf
  • 98.1 98.5 98.3 98.7 96.2 96.7 96.9 97.4 $50,000 - $59,999 98.1 98.5 98.2 98.6 96.8 97.5 95.7 96.7 $60,000 - $74,999 98.6 98.8 98.8 99.0 96.9 97.4 97.5 97.5 $75,000 + 99.0 99.2 99.0 99.2 99.1 99.1 98.6 98.8 MARCH 1999 TOTAL 94.0 94.9 95.1 95.8 87.3 89.2 89.2 90.2 UNDER $5,000 75.9 79.6 78.8 82.4 70.5 74.9 73.4 76.7 $5,000 - $7,499 81.4 84.1 83.2 85.5 76.4 80.6 79.5 82.1 $7,500 - $9,999 89.7 91.7 90.8 92.6 86.0 89.3 85.5 86.5 $10,000 - $12,499 88.7 89.9 90.4 91.3 81.6 83.8 83.1 83.9 $12,500 - $14,999 89.6 91.4 90.4 92.0 85.9 88.0 82.9 83.4 $15,000 - $19,999 92.4 93.8 93.5 94.5 87.2 90.1 87.2 88.0 $20,000 - $24,999 93.5 94.2
• http://www.fcc.gov/Bureaus/Common_Carrier/Reports/FCC-State_Link/IAD/subs1102.pdf
  • 86.4 EMPLOYED 94.6 96.1 95.4 96.7 87.9 91.0 86.3 88.3 UNEMPLOYED 82.7 86.1 85.3 88.2 74.0 79.3 77.0 79.6 NOT IN LABOR FORCE 92.7 93.9 94.2 95.2 82.2 85.5 82.5 84.1 1988 ANNUAL AVERAGE TOTAL CNP 93.8 95.2 94.9 96.1 85.6 88.7 83.6 86.1 EMPLOYED 94.9 96.2 95.6 96.8 88.5 91.5 85.4 87.7 UNEMPLOYED 83.3 86.8 85.9 88.9 75.4 80.5 76.7 80.3 NOT IN LABOR FORCE 92.8 94.2 94.3 95.5 83.1 86.0 81.5 84.0 1989 ANNUAL AVERAGE TOTAL CNP 94.1 95.5 95.3 96.4 85.8 89.0 84.7 87.0 EMPLOYED 95.2 96.5 96.0 97.1 88.8 91.7 86.6 89.0 UNEMPLOYED 83.9 87.1 86.2 88.8 77.0 82.5 75.1 78.6 NOT IN LABOR FORCE 93.1 94.4 94.7 95.7 82.8 85.9 82.6 84.6 1990 ANNUAL AVERAGE TOTAL
• http://www.fcc.gov/Bureaus/Common_Carrier/Reports/FCC-State_Link/IAD/subs1103.pdf
  • 86.4 EMPLOYED 94.6 96.1 95.4 96.7 87.9 91.0 86.3 88.3 UNEMPLOYED 82.7 86.1 85.3 88.2 74.0 79.3 77.0 79.6 NOT IN LABOR FORCE 92.7 93.9 94.2 95.2 82.2 85.5 82.5 84.1 1988 ANNUAL AVERAGE TOTAL CNP 93.8 95.2 94.9 96.1 85.6 88.7 83.6 86.1 EMPLOYED 94.9 96.2 95.6 96.8 88.5 91.5 85.4 87.7 UNEMPLOYED 83.3 86.8 85.9 88.9 75.4 80.5 76.7 80.3 NOT IN LABOR FORCE 92.8 94.2 94.3 95.5 83.1 86.0 81.5 84.0 1989 ANNUAL AVERAGE TOTAL CNP 94.1 95.5 95.3 96.4 85.8 89.0 84.7 87.0 EMPLOYED 95.2 96.5 96.0 97.1 88.8 91.7 86.6 89.0 UNEMPLOYED 83.9 87.1 86.2 88.8 77.0 82.5 75.1 78.6 NOT IN LABOR FORCE 93.1 94.4 94.7 95.7 82.8 85.9 82.6 84.6 1990 ANNUAL AVERAGE TOTAL
• http://www.fcc.gov/Bureaus/Common_Carrier/Reports/FCC-State_Link/IAD/subs1104.pdf
  • 99.2 97.9 98.2 98.3 98.9 $75,000 + 99.0 99.3 99.1 99.5 97.6 97.8 99.2 99.5 RACE HISPANIC TOTAL WHITE BLACK ORIGIN 28 Table 4 Percentage of Households with a Telephone by Income Unit Avail Unit Avail Unit Avail Unit Avail MARCH 2004 TOTAL 94.2 95.1 94.9 95.7 90.1 91.1 90.5 91.6 UNDER $5,000 80.1 83.4 82.1 85.1 76.9 79.8 74.9 76.7 $5,000 - $7,499 85.1 86.8 84.4 85.9 86.7 88.8 83.9 85.1 $7,500 - $9,999 88.1 89.4 89.2 90.5 82.8 84.2 85.5 87.7 $10,000 - $12,499 90.2 91.7 90.8 91.8 88.5 91.3 85.3 85.9 $12,500 - $14,999 90.8 92.8 91.9 93.8 87.9 89.8 88.0 90.1 $15,000 - $19,999 91.2 92.6 92.1 93.4 88.8 90.4 88.1 89.7 $20,000 - $24,999 94.2 95.1
• http://www.fcc.gov/Bureaus/Common_Carrier/Reports/FCC-State_Link/IAD/subs1196.pdf
  • $59,999 99.0 99.4 99.1 99.5 98.6 98.6 96.2 99.3 $60,000 - $74,999 99.3 99.5 99.2 99.5 99.9 99.9 100.0 100.0 $75,000 + 98.9 99.2 98.9 99.2 99.5 99.5 99.0 99.0 NOVEMBER 95 TOTAL 93.9 95.1 95.0 95.9 86.7 90.0 85.8 87.6 UNDER $5,000 75.0 80.8 79.0 82.9 66.8 76.8 66.6 70.5 $5,000 - $7,499 83.1 86.5 85.0 87.3 77.9 84.8 76.7 78.7 $7,500 - $9,999 87.1 89.2 89.4 91.0 77.8 82.2 76.1 78.4 $10,000 - $12,499 90.3 92.0 91.4 92.8 85.6 88.7 85.4 87.3 $12,500 - $14,999 90.6 92.6 91.9 93.6 83.1 86.0 88.4 89.5 $15,000 - $19,999 93.5 95.5 94.2 95.7 90.2 94.8 85.7 88.2 $20,000 - $24,999 95.1 96.1 95.4 96.4 93.6 94.7 88.4 90.1 $25,000 - $29,999 96.8
• http://www.fcc.gov/Bureaus/Common_Carrier/Reports/FCC-State_Link/IAD/subs1197.pdf
  • $59,999 99.0 99.4 99.1 99.5 98.6 98.6 96.2 99.3 $60,000 - $74,999 99.3 99.5 99.2 99.5 99.9 99.9 100.0 100.0 $75,000 + 98.9 99.2 98.9 99.2 99.5 99.5 99.0 99.0 NOVEMBER 95 TOTAL 93.9 95.1 95.0 95.9 86.7 90.0 85.8 87.6 UNDER $5,000 75.0 80.8 79.0 82.9 66.8 76.8 66.6 70.5 $5,000 - $7,499 83.1 86.5 85.0 87.3 77.9 84.8 76.7 78.7 $7,500 - $9,999 87.1 89.2 89.4 91.0 77.8 82.2 76.1 78.4 $10,000 - $12,499 90.3 92.0 91.4 92.8 85.6 88.7 85.4 87.3 $12,500 - $14,999 90.6 92.6 91.9 93.6 83.1 86.0 88.4 89.5 $15,000 - $19,999 93.5 95.5 94.2 95.7 90.2 94.8 85.7 88.2 $20,000 - $24,999 95.1 96.1 95.4 96.4 93.6 94.7 88.4 90.1 $25,000 - $29,999 96.8
• http://www.fcc.gov/Bureaus/Common_Carrier/Reports/FCC-State_Link/IAD/subs1198.pdf
  • 86.4 EMPLOYED 94.6 96.1 95.4 96.7 87.9 91.0 86.3 88.3 UNEMPLOYED 82.7 86.1 85.3 88.2 74.0 79.3 77.0 79.6 NOT IN LABOR FORCE 92.7 93.9 94.2 95.2 82.2 85.5 82.5 84.1 1988 ANNUAL AVERAGE TOTAL CNP 93.8 95.2 94.9 96.1 85.6 88.7 83.6 86.1 EMPLOYED 94.9 96.2 95.6 96.8 88.5 91.5 85.4 87.7 UNEMPLOYED 83.3 86.8 85.9 88.9 75.4 80.5 76.7 80.3 NOT IN LABOR FORCE 92.8 94.2 94.3 95.5 83.1 86.0 81.5 84.0 1989 ANNUAL AVERAGE TOTAL CNP 94.1 95.5 95.3 96.4 85.8 89.0 84.7 87.0 EMPLOYED 95.2 96.5 96.0 97.1 88.8 91.7 86.6 89.0 UNEMPLOYED 83.9 87.1 86.2 88.8 77.0 82.5 75.1 78.6 NOT IN LABOR FORCE 93.1 94.4 94.7 95.7 82.8 85.9 82.6 84.6 1990 ANNUAL AVERAGE TOTAL
• http://www.fcc.gov/Bureaus/Common_Carrier/Reports/FCC-State_Link/IAD/subs1199.pdf
  • 98.1 98.5 98.3 98.7 96.2 96.7 96.9 97.4 $50,000 - $59,999 98.1 98.5 98.2 98.6 96.8 97.5 95.7 96.7 $60,000 - $74,999 98.6 98.8 98.8 99.0 96.9 97.4 97.5 97.5 $75,000 + 99.0 99.2 99.0 99.2 99.1 99.1 98.6 98.8 MARCH 99 TOTAL 94.0 94.9 95.1 95.8 87.3 89.2 89.2 90.2 UNDER $5,000 75.9 79.6 78.8 82.4 70.5 74.9 73.4 76.7 $5,000 - $7,499 81.4 84.1 83.2 85.5 76.4 80.6 79.5 82.1 $7,500 - $9,999 89.7 91.7 90.8 92.6 86.0 89.3 85.5 86.5 $10,000 - $12,499 88.7 89.9 90.4 91.3 81.6 83.8 83.1 83.9 $12,500 - $14,999 89.6 91.4 90.4 92.0 85.9 88.0 82.9 83.4 $15,000 - $19,999 92.4 93.8 93.5 94.5 87.2 90.1 87.2 88.0 $20,000 - $24,999 93.5 94.2
• http://www.fcc.gov/Bureaus/Common_Carrier/Reports/FCC-State_Link/IAD/trend298.pdf
  • 96.3 Maryland 219 0 100.0 1 0 100.0 220100.0 Massachusetts 282 2 99.3 3 0 100.0 287 99.3 Michigan 329 30 91.6 344 29 92.2 732 91.9 Minnesota 193 0 100.0 541 10 98.2 744 98.7 Mississippi 208 0 100.0 51 12 81.0 271 95.6 Missouri 262 0 100.0 384 103 78.9 749 86.2 Montana 81 0 100.0 158 48 76.7 287 83.3 Nebraska 78 0 100.0 370 28 93.0 476 94.1 Nevada 50 1 98.0 52 25 67.5 128 79.7 New Hampshire 126 1 99.2 28 1 96.6 156 98.7 New Jersey 212 0 100.0 27 1 96.4 240 99.6 New Mexico 72 0 100.0 76 46 62.3 194 76.3 New York 587 1 99.8 299 18 94.3 905 97.9
• http://www.fcc.gov/Bureaus/Common_Carrier/Reports/FCC-State_Link/IAD/trsrv-95.pdf
  • 0.0 $23.9 0.0 64.1 Operator Service, Pay Telephone & Card $2,328.8 14.1 $6,398.5 11.8 $8,727.3 12.3 73.3 Non-Operator Switched Toll Service $12,217.9 73.8 $38,774.8 71.3 $50,992.7 71.9 76.0 Long Distance Private Line Service $1,589.7 9.6 $7,034.6 12.9 $8,624.4 12.2 81.6 All Other Long Distance $392.4 2.4 $2,161.7 4.0 $2,554.1 3.6 84.6 Total Toll Revenues $16,528.8 99.9 $54,369.5 100.0 $70,898.4 99.9 76.7 Total Carrier Revenue ** 100.0 ** 100.0 ** 100.0 76.7 Figures may not add due to rounding and amounts that have been withheld to preserve confidentiality of individual carrier data. ** Denotes amounts that have been omitted to preserve carrier confidentiality. Telecommunications Industry Table 7 Revenue: Toll Resellers TRS Fund Worksheet Data (Dollar amounts shown in millions) 1995 Intrastate Interstate
• http://www.fcc.gov/Bureaus/Common_Carrier/Reports/FCC-State_Link/IAD/trsrv-97.pdf
  • activation, and message charges except toll 230.4 2.0 232.4 2,335.5 166.6 2,502.1 1.6 * 1.6 2,567.5 168.7 2,736.2 Toll service: 29 Operator and toll calls with alternative billing arrangements 52.5 32.0 84.6 19.2 2.8 22.0 122.1 539.3 661.4 193.8 574.2 768.0 (credit card, collect, international call-back, etc.) 30 Other switched toll service (includes MTS, 800/888 service, etc.) 275.6 32.1 307.6 76.7 98.2 174.8 1,648.6 5,283.5 6,932.1 2,000.8 5,413.7 7,414.5 31 Long distance private line services 31.1 28.4 59.5 0.4 0.2 0.6 363.7 860.4 1,224.0 395.1 889.0 1,284.1 32 Satellite services 1.2 15.0 16.2 0.1 567.9 567.9 1.3 582.8 584.2 33 All other long distance services 131.4 13.2 144.6 5.1 0.5 5.6 180.6 1,019.8 1,200.4 317.2 1,033.4 1,350.6 Total toll service provided
• http://www.fcc.gov/Bureaus/Common_Carrier/Reports/FCC-State_Link/IAD/utilizationjun2003.pdf
  • 55.2 50,267 Puerto Rico 3,527 52.0 1 0.0 22 0.3 202 3.0 64 0.9 2,964 43.7 6,780 Rhode Island 1,861 42.9 28 0.6 57 1.3 84 1.9 9 0.2 2,297 53.0 4,336 South Carolina 6,255 39.3 1,281 8.0 112 0.7 377 2.4 254 1.6 7,657 48.0 15,936 South Dakota 1,037 20.3 20 0.4 30 0.6 81 1.6 25 0.5 3,923 76.7 5,116 Tennessee 8,815 37.5 1,368 5.8 110 0.5 592 2.5 217 0.9 12,394 52.7 23,496 Texas 37,149 39.1 2,446 2.6 720 0.8 2,659 2.8 2,538 2.7 49,577 52.1 95,089 Utah 4,652 44.0 25 0.2 84 0.8 308 2.9 97 0.9 5,399 51.1 10,565 Vermont 1,014 27.7 3 0.1 55 1.5 31 0.8 35 1.0 2,522 68.9 3,660 Virgin Islands 128
• http://www.fcc.gov/Bureaus/Common_Carrier/Reports/FCC-State_Link/Intl/crepor03.pdf
  • 0.0 1,411,221,240 44.4 0.7 30.4 11.8 12.8 Kampuchea $0 $0 $0 0 Korea, North $207,337 0.0 6.4 45.5 33.9 14.2 $0 $0 535,693 0.0 7.3 52.0 28.1 12.6 Korea, South $110,922,241 66.6 1.7 18.3 12.4 1.0 $39,292,340 48.3 0.0 28.5 23.1 0.2 $448 43.3 0.0 56.7 0.0 0.0 720,103,303 46.1 4.5 24.3 19.6 5.5 Laos $1,307,351 6.0 13.2 0.3 3.9 76.7 $876 0.0 0.0 99.9 0.0 0.1 $0 8,864,577 3.0 9.5 0.4 1.7 85.4 Macau $1,736,354 63.8 1.0 15.1 14.9 5.2 $363,812 58.2 0.9 19.5 21.4 0.0 $4,069 2.2 81.9 0.0 15.9 0.0 14,089,617 31.0 5.6 31.4 20.4 11.6 Malaysia $50,495,803 62.4 1.7 23.7 10.5 1.6 $5,560,176 12.4 0.4 35.3 51.9 0.1 $105,062 1.6 88.5 9.9 0.0 0.0 300,777,724 24.3 6.8
• http://www.fcc.gov/Bureaus/Common_Carrier/Reports/FCC-State_Link/Intl/itltrd98.pdf
  • 17.4 22.9 28.8 30.1 40.8 51.5 59.6 69.5 77.7 84.2 59.8 85.1 72.2 65.9 51.7 -5.4% Jamaica 1.1 0.9 2.5 3.5 5.6 6.8 1.2 2.9 12.5 17.4 16.0 13.9 24.9 30.3 32.6 47.5 56.2 64.3 78.3 93.0 99.5 115.3 15.1% Japan 2.9 2.9 3.4 9.6 20.5 29.5 29.1 38.0 46.6 59.4 52.9 62.4 78.4 91.4 78.5 72.5 45.3 38.5 52.0 76.7 119.2 169.3 46.1% Korea, Rep. of 3.4 4.8 6.3 8.2 10.8 17.3 18.8 30.4 43.1 60.1 72.0 76.7 85.2 106.2 111.7 110.6 99.3 92.2 103.0 110.9 118.7 122.6 7.4% Mexico NA NA NA 60.1 82.7 84.5 159.0 191.7 201.4 218.4 222.1 247.1 312.6 410.9 533.9 573.5 613.2 676.9 720.0 818.9 871.7 875.0 7.3% Netherlands -0.2 -0.7 -1.9 1.4 1.0 -2.9
• http://www.fcc.gov/Bureaus/Common_Carrier/Reports/FCC-State_Link/Intl/itltrd99.pdf
  • 28.8 30.1 40.8 51.5 59.6 69.5 77.7 84.2 59.8 85.1 72.2 65.9 51.7 63.2 -8.9% Jamaica 1.1 0.9 2.5 3.5 5.6 6.8 1.2 2.9 12.5 17.4 16.0 13.9 24.9 30.3 32.6 47.5 56.2 64.3 78.3 93.0 99.5 115.3 133.2 13.6% Japan 2.9 2.9 3.4 9.6 20.5 29.5 29.1 38.0 46.6 59.4 52.9 62.4 78.4 91.4 78.5 72.5 45.3 38.5 52.0 76.7 119.2 169.3 213.0 43.5% Korea, Rep. of 3.4 4.8 6.3 8.2 10.8 17.3 18.8 30.4 43.1 60.1 72.0 76.7 85.2 106.2 111.7 110.6 99.3 92.2 103.0 110.9 118.7 122.6 100.9 0.6% Mexico NA NA NA 60.1 82.7 84.5 159.0 191.7 201.4 218.4 222.1 247.1 312.6 410.9 533.9 573.5 613.2 676.9 720.0 818.9 871.7 875.0 703.3 0.2% Netherlands -0.2 -0.7 -1.9
• http://www.fcc.gov/Bureaus/Common_Carrier/Reports/FCC-State_Link/Intl/itrnd00.pdf
  • 56.7 106.3 207.8 237.6 158.0 13.4 India 13.8 20.0 27.6 32.0 58.2 109.4 202.9 298.1 409.7 417.6 523.1 Israel 57.5 67.9 93.2 93.5 105.0 128.5 119.1 103.4 41.5 12.6 16.7 Italy 69.5 77.7 84.3 60.2 85.2 72.3 65.9 51.8 63.1 54.3 66.4 Jamaica 32.6 47.5 56.3 64.7 78.4 93.1 99.4 115.5 132.3 154.9 154.5 Japan 78.5 72.5 45.5 39.0 52.6 76.7 119.3 169.0 210.7 65.9 61.1 Korea, Republic of 111.7 110.6 99.9 92.8 103.2 111.0 118.7 122.1 101.5 18.4 32.3 Mexico 9/ 533.9 573.5 613.2 677.7 720.0 818.9 871.7 875.0 703.3 648.9 652.2 Morocco 5.6 6.0 7.8 7.9 7.5 9.8 11.0 5.5 3.4 1.4 17.1 Netherlands 7.0 10.6 10.2 10.2 8.0 10.8 22.3 22.8 16.5 11.3 (0.1) Nigeria 3.5 3.1 10.8
• http://www.fcc.gov/Bureaus/Common_Carrier/Reports/FCC-State_Link/Intl/itrnd01.pdf
  • 13.4 5.4 9.0 1.9 -99.2 India 32.0 58.2 109.4 202.9 298.1 409.7 417.6 523.1 542.0 493.8 372.8 -9.0 Israel 93.5 105.0 128.5 119.1 103.4 41.5 12.6 16.7 11.9 2.1 8.2 -80.2 Italy 60.2 85.2 72.3 65.9 51.8 63.1 54.3 66.4 37.9 46.2 70.2 11.3 Jamaica 64.7 78.4 93.1 99.4 115.5 132.3 154.9 154.5 89.7 61.6 67.2 -49.2 Japan 39.0 52.6 76.7 119.3 169.0 210.7 65.9 61.1 43.8 39.2 42.1 -80.0 Korea, Republic of 92.8 103.2 111.0 118.7 122.1 101.5 18.4 32.3 6.8 12.7 8.9 -91.2 Mexico 677.7 720.0 818.9 871.7 875.0 703.3 648.9 652.3 755.7 471.2 421.9 -40.0 Morocco 7.9 7.5 9.8 11.0 5.5 3.4 1.4 17.1 6.4 7.8 17.8 n.m. Netherlands 10.2 8.0 10.8 22.3 22.8 16.5 11.3 (0.1) 7.8
• http://www.fcc.gov/Bureaus/Common_Carrier/Reports/FCC-State_Link/Monitor/mr03-6.pdf
  • 86.4 EMPLOYED 94.6 96.1 95.4 96.7 87.9 91.0 86.3 88.3 UNEMPLOYED 82.7 86.1 85.3 88.2 74.0 79.3 77.0 79.6 NOT IN LABOR FORCE 92.7 93.9 94.2 95.2 82.2 85.5 82.5 84.1 1988 ANNUAL AVERAGE TOTAL CNP 93.8 95.2 94.9 96.1 85.6 88.7 83.6 86.1 EMPLOYED 94.9 96.2 95.6 96.8 88.5 91.5 85.4 87.7 UNEMPLOYED 83.3 86.8 85.9 88.9 75.4 80.5 76.7 80.3 NOT IN LABOR FORCE 92.8 94.2 94.3 95.5 83.1 86.0 81.5 84.0 1989 ANNUAL AVERAGE TOTAL CNP 94.1 95.5 95.3 96.4 85.8 89.0 84.7 87.0 EMPLOYED 95.2 96.5 96.0 97.1 88.8 91.7 86.6 89.0 UNEMPLOYED 83.9 87.1 86.2 88.8 77.0 82.5 75.1 78.6 NOT IN LABOR FORCE 93.1 94.4 94.7 95.7 82.8 85.9 82.6 84.6 1990 ANNUAL AVERAGE TOTAL
• http://www.fcc.gov/Bureaus/Common_Carrier/Reports/FCC-State_Link/Monitor/mr03-7.pdf
  • February 100.0 97.7 100.2 96.7 110.0 76.8 94.6 103.0 March 100.0 97.2 100.8 94.0 115.1 78.1 93.0 100.5 April 100.0 97.0 99.1 97.8 107.3 78.0 94.4 103.0 May 100.0 97.2 99.9 99.2 107.3 79.6 94.0 102.7 June 100.0 96.4 98.9 99.3 105.3 77.6 93.5 102.2 July 100.0 97.9 100.9 99.0 108.7 76.3 94.3 103.4 August 100.0 97.2 99.6 97.8 109.1 76.7 94.3 102.3 September 100.0 96.8 98.7 97.2 108.3 74.2 94.6 105.8 October 100.0 95.7 98.9 97.5 107.8 76.4 92.0 102.6 November 100.0 94.6 96.3 96.9 102.4 73.2 92.5 102.3 December 100.0 94.8 96.2 96.9 104.2 68.3 93.1 103.4 1999January 100.0 93.9 97.3 97.2 105.0 72.7 89.9 100.0 February 100.0 92.5 95.4 96.4 102.0 69.6 89.1 99.7 March 100.0 93.3 96.9
• http://www.fcc.gov/Bureaus/Common_Carrier/Reports/FCC-State_Link/Monitor/mr04-6.pdf
  • 98.2 98.3 98.9 $75,000 + 99.0 99.3 99.1 99.5 97.6 97.8 99.2 99.5 RACE HISPANIC TOTAL WHITE BLACK ORIGIN 6 - 39 Table 6.7 Percentage of Households with a Telephone by Income Unit Avail Unit Avail Unit Avail Unit Avail MARCH 2004 TOTAL 94.2 95.1 94.9 95.7 90.1 91.1 90.5 91.6 UNDER $5,000 80.1 83.4 82.1 85.1 76.9 79.8 74.9 76.7 $5,000 - $7,499 85.1 86.8 84.4 85.9 86.7 88.8 83.9 85.1 $7,500 - $9,999 88.1 89.4 89.2 90.5 82.8 84.2 85.5 87.7 $10,000 - $12,499 90.2 91.7 90.8 91.8 88.5 91.3 85.3 85.9 $12,500 - $14,999 90.8 92.8 91.9 93.8 87.9 89.8 88.0 90.1 $15,000 - $19,999 91.2 92.6 92.1 93.4 88.8 90.4 88.1 89.7 $20,000 - $24,999 94.2 95.1
• http://www.fcc.gov/Bureaus/Common_Carrier/Reports/FCC-State_Link/Monitor/mr04-7.pdf
  • November 112.4 99.8 120.8 82.7 80.7 87.0 67.5 December 112.2 99.9 121.0 82.6 80.7 86.7 67.4 2003January 112.6 100.4 121.3 83.4 81.9 87.0 67.6 February 113.5 100.5 121.2 83.5 82.2 86.9 67.7 March 114.2 99.7 121.7 81.5 79.8 85.1 67.6 April 113.9 98.7 121.9 79.2 77.4 83.1 67.5 May 113.7 98.1 122.0 77.9 76.0 81.8 67.5 June 113.8 97.5 122.2 76.7 74.6 80.8 66.3 July 114.0 98.1 123.1 77.2 75.6 80.8 66.2 August 114.4 97.8 123.7 76.0 74.0 79.7 66.1 September 114.8 97.4 123.8 75.2 73.3 78.9 66.1 October 114.6 97.1 124.0 74.3 72.1 78.7 66.1 November 114.3 97.2 124.2 74.1 71.8 78.3 66.7 December 114.2 97.2 124.1 74.3 72.0 78.6 66.5 2004January 114.8 97.0 124.4 73.9 71.6 78.0 66.3 February
• http://www.fcc.gov/Bureaus/Common_Carrier/Reports/FCC-State_Link/Monitor/mr04-9.pdf
  • SERVICES PROVIDED TO INTEREXCHANGE CARRIERS -- SPECIAL ACCESS Percent Installation Commitments Met 90.4 85.3 100.0 89.7 77.5 63.9 95.5 98.2 Average Installation Interval (days) 11.8 13.8 13.9 17.7 20.5 13.8 10.1 15.6 Average Repair Interval (hours) 4.6 12.3 2.7 21.0 24.0 11.4 4.5 3.4 LOCAL SERVICES PROVIDED TO RESIDENTIAL AND BUSINESS CUSTOMERS Percent Installation Commitments Met 97.4 98.4 99.9 96.5 76.7 98.8 97.1 97.7 Residence 97.7 98.3 99.9 96.7 77.6 98.7 97.5 97.7 Business 95.2 75.9 99.8 95.8 71.1 98.0 94.2 97.7 Average Installation Interval (days) 1.9 3.6 2.1 5.5 4.8 1.9 1.6 2.0 Residence 1.9 3.3 4.5 5.2 5.0 1.8 1.4 2.0 Business 2.7 4.6 1.8 7.6 3.8 2.7 2.7 2.0 Average Out of Service Repair Interval (hours) 24.8 15.3
• http://www.fcc.gov/Bureaus/Common_Carrier/Reports/FCC-State_Link/Monitor/mr97-1.pdf
  • $59,999 99.0 99.4 99.1 99.5 98.6 98.6 96.2 99.3 $60,000 - $74,999 99.3 99.5 99.2 99.5 99.9 99.9 100.0 100.0 $75,000 + 98.9 99.2 98.9 99.2 99.5 99.5 99.0 99.0 NOVEMBER 95 TOTAL 93.9 95.1 95.0 95.9 86.7 90.0 85.8 87.6 UNDER $5,000 75.0 80.8 79.0 82.9 66.8 76.8 66.6 70.5 $5,000 - $7,499 83.1 86.5 85.0 87.3 77.9 84.8 76.7 78.7 $7,500 - $9,999 87.1 89.2 89.4 91.0 77.8 82.2 76.1 78.4 $10,000 - $12,499 90.3 92.0 91.4 92.8 85.6 88.7 85.4 87.3 $12,500 - $14,999 90.6 92.6 91.9 93.6 83.1 86.0 88.4 89.5 $15,000 - $19,999 93.5 95.5 94.2 95.7 90.2 94.8 85.7 88.2 $20,000 - $24,999 95.1 96.1 95.4 96.4 93.6 94.7 88.4 90.1 $25,000 - $29,999 96.8
• http://www.fcc.gov/Bureaus/Common_Carrier/Reports/FCC-State_Link/Monitor/mr97-5.pdf
  • 84.7 106.7 August 109.7 118.8 137.2 84.4 107.0 September 110.2 118.3 136.5 84.4 106.5 October 110.3 118.9 137.5 84.4 106.8 November 110.4 117.6 135.1 84.4 106.5 December 110.5 117.2 134.4 84.5 106.8 1987January 111.2 116.6 137.6 77.1 107.0 February 111.6 116.4 137.5 77.1 106.4 March 112.1 116.4 137.4 77.1 106.4 April 112.7 116.7 138.2 77.0 106.3 May 113.1 116.4 138.1 76.7 105.2 June 113.5 115.6 137.5 76.7 102.7 July 113.8 116.6 141.0 73.4 104.0 August 114.4 117.0 141.9 73.4 103.8 September 115.0 116.6 140.9 73.7 103.5 October 115.3 117.0 141.3 73.7 104.1 November 115.4 116.9 141.4 73.7 103.6 December 115.4 115.7 138.9 74.0 103.6 1988January 115.7 115.8 139.9 72.2 104.1 February 116.0 116.6 141.6 72.2 103.6 March 116.5 116.2 141.1 72.0
• http://www.fcc.gov/Bureaus/Common_Carrier/Reports/FCC-State_Link/Monitor/mr98-1.pdf
  • activation, and message charges except toll 230.4 2.0 232.4 2,335.5 166.6 2,502.1 1.6 * 1.6 2,567.5 168.7 2,736.2 Toll service: 29 Operator and toll calls with alternative billing arrangements 52.5 32.0 84.6 19.2 2.8 22.0 122.1 539.3 661.4 193.8 574.2 768.0 (credit card, collect, international call-back, etc.) 30 Other switched toll service (includes MTS, 800/888 service, etc.) 275.6 32.1 307.6 76.7 98.2 174.8 1,648.6 5,283.5 6,932.1 2,000.8 5,413.7 7,414.5 31Long distance private line services 31.1 28.4 59.5 0.4 0.2 0.6 363.7 860.4 1,224.0 395.1 889.0 1,284.1 32Satellite services 1.2 15.0 16.2 0.1 567.9 567.9 1.3 582.8 584.2 33All other long distance services 131.4 13.2 144.6 5.1 0.5 5.6 180.6 1,019.8 1,200.4 317.2 1,033.4 1,350.6 Total toll service provided for resale 491.8
• http://www.fcc.gov/Bureaus/Common_Carrier/Reports/FCC-State_Link/Monitor/mr98-6.pdf
  • 86.4 EMPLOYED 94.6 96.1 95.4 96.7 87.9 91.0 86.3 88.3 UNEMPLOYED 82.7 86.1 85.3 88.2 74.0 79.3 77.0 79.6 NOT IN LABOR FORCE 92.7 93.9 94.2 95.2 82.2 85.5 82.5 84.1 1988 ANNUAL AVERAGE TOTAL CNP 93.8 95.2 94.9 96.1 85.6 88.7 83.6 86.1 EMPLOYED 94.9 96.2 95.6 96.8 88.5 91.5 85.4 87.7 UNEMPLOYED 83.3 86.8 85.9 88.9 75.4 80.5 76.7 80.3 NOT IN LABOR FORCE 92.8 94.2 94.3 95.5 83.1 86.0 81.5 84.0 1989 ANNUAL AVERAGE TOTAL CNP 94.1 95.5 95.3 96.4 85.8 89.0 84.7 87.0 EMPLOYED 95.2 96.5 96.0 97.1 88.8 91.7 86.6 89.0 UNEMPLOYED 83.9 87.1 86.2 88.8 77.0 82.5 75.1 78.6 NOT IN LABOR FORCE 93.1 94.4 94.7 95.7 82.8 85.9 82.6 84.6 1990 ANNUAL AVERAGE TOTAL
• http://www.fcc.gov/Bureaus/Common_Carrier/Reports/FCC-State_Link/Monitor/mr98-7.pdf
  • 7 - 8 Table 7.4 Consumer Price Indices (1982-1984=100) All Goods & Services All Telephone Services Local Services Interstate Toll Service Intrastate Toll Service BLS Series ID CUUR0000SA0 CUUR0000SE270A CUUR0000SEED01 CUUR0000SS27051 CUUR0000SS27061 1987January 111.2 116.6 137.6 77.1 107.0 February 111.6 116.4 137.5 77.1 106.4 March 112.1 116.4 137.4 77.1 106.4 April 112.7 116.7 138.2 77.0 106.3 May 113.1 116.4 138.1 76.7 105.2 June 113.5 115.6 137.5 76.7 102.7 July 113.8 116.6 141.0 73.4 104.0 August 114.4 117.0 141.9 73.4 103.8 September 115.0 116.6 140.9 73.7 103.5 October 115.3 117.0 141.3 73.7 104.1 November 115.4 116.9 141.4 73.7 103.6 December 115.4 115.7 138.9 74.0 103.6 1988January 115.7 115.8 139.9 72.2 104.1 February 116.0 116.6 141.6 72.2 103.6 March 116.5 116.2 141.1 72.0
• http://www.fcc.gov/Bureaus/Common_Carrier/Reports/FCC-State_Link/Monitor/mrd99-6.pdf
  • 98.1 98.5 98.3 98.7 96.2 96.7 96.9 97.4 $50,000 - $59,999 98.1 98.5 98.2 98.6 96.8 97.5 95.7 96.7 $60,000 - $74,999 98.6 98.8 98.8 99.0 96.9 97.4 97.5 97.5 $75,000 + 99.0 99.2 99.0 99.2 99.1 99.1 98.6 98.8 MARCH 99 TOTAL 94.0 94.9 95.1 95.8 87.3 89.2 89.2 90.2 UNDER $5,000 75.9 79.6 78.8 82.4 70.5 74.9 73.4 76.7 $5,000 - $7,499 81.4 84.1 83.2 85.5 76.4 80.6 79.5 82.1 $7,500 - $9,999 89.7 91.7 90.8 92.6 86.0 89.3 85.5 86.5 $10,000 - $12,499 88.7 89.9 90.4 91.3 81.6 83.8 83.1 83.9 $12,500 - $14,999 89.6 91.4 90.4 92.0 85.9 88.0 82.9 83.4 $15,000 - $19,999 92.4 93.8 93.5 94.5 87.2 90.1 87.2 88.0 $20,000 - $24,999 93.5 94.2
• http://www.fcc.gov/Bureaus/Common_Carrier/Reports/FCC-State_Link/Monitor/mrd99-7.pdf
  • 8 Table 7.4 Consumer Price Indices (1982-1984 = 100) All Goods & Services All Telephone Services Local Services Interstate Toll Service Intrastate Toll Service BLS Series ID CUUR0000SA0 CUUR0000SE270A CUUR0000SEED01 CUUR0000SS27051 CUUR0000SS27061 1987January 111.2 116.6 137.6 77.1 107.0 February 111.6 116.4 137.5 77.1 106.4 March 112.1 116.4 137.4 77.1 106.4 April 112.7 116.7 138.2 77.0 106.3 May 113.1 116.4 138.1 76.7 105.2 June 113.5 115.6 137.5 76.7 102.7 July 113.8 116.6 141.0 73.4 104.0 August 114.4 117.0 141.9 73.4 103.8 September 115.0 116.6 140.9 73.7 103.5 October 115.3 117.0 141.3 73.7 104.1 November 115.4 116.9 141.4 73.7 103.6 December 115.4 115.7 138.9 74.0 103.6 1988January 115.7 115.8 139.9 72.2 104.1 February 116.0 116.6 141.6 72.2 103.6 March 116.5 116.2 141.1 72.0
• http://www.fcc.gov/Bureaus/Common_Carrier/Reports/FCC-State_Link/Monitor/mrd99-9.pdf
  • 0 0 0 0 0 6 9 14. Remote 0 0 3 0 0 0 2 0 0 15. Other/Unknown 0 1 0 7 1 0 4 0 15 TOTAL OUTAGE LINE-MINUTES PER THOUSAND ACCESS LINES 1. Scheduled 46.9 30.6 188.8 360.6 96.2 458.3 1540.8 1.6 15419.3 2. Proced. Errors -- Telco. (Inst./Maint.) 67.5 0.0 0.0 1860.1 0.0 525.0 0.0 76.7 555.7 3. Proced. Errors -- Telco. (Other) 75.9 26.7 338.6 0.0 2.8 100.4 42.0 102.3 19.8 4. Procedural Errors -- System Vendors 2.7 10.0 89.1 5.0 0.0 427.8 15.6 14.5 27.5 5. Procedural Errors -- Other Vendors 0.0 16.8 31.7 5.6 0.0 0.9 63.3 167.8 0.0 6. Software Design 48.8 624.4 154.4 8.4 0.0 31.8 152.0 380.2 68.3 7. Hardware
• http://www.fcc.gov/Bureaus/Common_Carrier/Reports/FCC-State_Link/Monitor/mrj99-6.pdf
  • 98.1 98.5 98.3 98.7 96.2 96.7 96.9 97.4 $50,000 - $59,999 98.1 98.5 98.2 98.6 96.8 97.5 95.7 96.7 $60,000 - $74,999 98.6 98.8 98.8 99.0 96.9 97.4 97.5 97.5 $75,000 + 99.0 99.2 99.0 99.2 99.1 99.1 98.6 98.8 MARCH 99 TOTAL 94.0 94.9 95.1 95.8 87.3 89.2 89.2 90.2 UNDER $5,000 75.9 79.6 78.8 82.4 70.5 74.9 73.4 76.7 $5,000 - $7,499 81.4 84.1 83.2 85.5 76.4 80.6 79.5 82.1 $7,500 - $9,999 89.7 91.7 90.8 92.6 86.0 89.3 85.5 86.5 $10,000 - $12,499 88.7 89.9 90.4 91.3 81.6 83.8 83.1 83.9 $12,500 - $14,999 89.6 91.4 90.4 92.0 85.9 88.0 82.9 83.4 $15,000 - $19,999 92.4 93.8 93.5 94.5 87.2 90.1 87.2 88.0 $20,000 - $24,999 93.5 94.2
• http://www.fcc.gov/Bureaus/Common_Carrier/Reports/FCC-State_Link/Monitor/mrj99-7.pdf
  • 7 - 8 Table 7.4 Consumer Price Indexes (1982-1984=100) All Goods & Services All Telephone Services Local Services Interstate Toll Service Intrastate Toll Service BLS Series ID CUUR0000SA0 CUUR0000SE270A CUUR0000SEED01 CUUR0000SS27051 CUUR0000SS27061 1987January 111.2 116.6 137.6 77.1 107.0 February 111.6 116.4 137.5 77.1 106.4 March 112.1 116.4 137.4 77.1 106.4 April 112.7 116.7 138.2 77.0 106.3 May 113.1 116.4 138.1 76.7 105.2 June 113.5 115.6 137.5 76.7 102.7 July 113.8 116.6 141.0 73.4 104.0 August 114.4 117.0 141.9 73.4 103.8 September 115.0 116.6 140.9 73.7 103.5 October 115.3 117.0 141.3 73.7 104.1 November 115.4 116.9 141.4 73.7 103.6 December 115.4 115.7 138.9 74.0 103.6 1988January 115.7 115.8 139.9 72.2 104.1 February 116.0 116.6 141.6 72.2 103.6 March 116.5 116.2 141.1 72.0
• http://www.fcc.gov/Bureaus/Common_Carrier/Reports/FCC-State_Link/Monitor/mrs00-0.pdf
  • 98.1 98.5 98.3 98.7 96.2 96.7 96.9 97.4 $50,000 - $59,999 98.1 98.5 98.2 98.6 96.8 97.5 95.7 96.7 $60,000 - $74,999 98.6 98.8 98.8 99.0 96.9 97.4 97.5 97.5 $75,000 + 99.0 99.2 99.0 99.2 99.1 99.1 98.6 98.8 MARCH 1999 TOTAL 94.0 94.9 95.1 95.8 87.3 89.2 89.2 90.2 UNDER $5,000 75.9 79.6 78.8 82.4 70.5 74.9 73.4 76.7 $5,000 - $7,499 81.4 84.1 83.2 85.5 76.4 80.6 79.5 82.1 $7,500 - $9,999 89.7 91.7 90.8 92.6 86.0 89.3 85.5 86.5 $10,000 - $12,499 88.7 89.9 90.4 91.3 81.6 83.8 83.1 83.9 $12,500 - $14,999 89.6 91.4 90.4 92.0 85.9 88.0 82.9 83.4 $15,000 - $19,999 92.4 93.8 93.5 94.5 87.2 90.1 87.2 88.0 $20,000 - $24,999 93.5 94.2
• http://www.fcc.gov/Bureaus/Common_Carrier/Reports/FCC-State_Link/Monitor/mrs01-0.pdf
  • 98.1 98.5 98.3 98.7 96.2 96.7 96.9 97.4 $50,000 - $59,999 98.1 98.5 98.2 98.6 96.8 97.5 95.7 96.7 $60,000 - $74,999 98.6 98.8 98.8 99.0 96.9 97.4 97.5 97.5 $75,000 + 99.0 99.2 99.0 99.2 99.1 99.1 98.6 98.8 MARCH 1999 TOTAL 94.0 94.9 95.1 95.8 87.3 89.2 89.2 90.2 UNDER $5,000 75.9 79.6 78.8 82.4 70.5 74.9 73.4 76.7 $5,000 - $7,499 81.4 84.1 83.2 85.5 76.4 80.6 79.5 82.1 $7,500 - $9,999 89.7 91.7 90.8 92.6 86.0 89.3 85.5 86.5 $10,000 - $12,499 88.7 89.9 90.4 91.3 81.6 83.8 83.1 83.9 $12,500 - $14,999 89.6 91.4 90.4 92.0 85.9 88.0 82.9 83.4 $15,000 - $19,999 92.4 93.8 93.5 94.5 87.2 90.1 87.2 88.0 $20,000 - $24,999 93.5 94.2
• http://www.fcc.gov/Bureaus/Common_Carrier/Reports/FCC-State_Link/Monitor/mrs02-0.pdf
  • 98.1 98.5 98.3 98.7 96.2 96.7 96.9 97.4 $50,000 - $59,999 98.1 98.5 98.2 98.6 96.8 97.5 95.7 96.7 $60,000 - $74,999 98.6 98.8 98.8 99.0 96.9 97.4 97.5 97.5 $75,000 + 99.0 99.2 99.0 99.2 99.1 99.1 98.6 98.8 MARCH 1999 TOTAL 94.0 94.9 95.1 95.8 87.3 89.2 89.2 90.2 UNDER $5,000 75.9 79.6 78.8 82.4 70.5 74.9 73.4 76.7 $5,000 - $7,499 81.4 84.1 83.2 85.5 76.4 80.6 79.5 82.1 $7,500 - $9,999 89.7 91.7 90.8 92.6 86.0 89.3 85.5 86.5 $10,000 - $12,499 88.7 89.9 90.4 91.3 81.6 83.8 83.1 83.9 $12,500 - $14,999 89.6 91.4 90.4 92.0 85.9 88.0 82.9 83.4 $15,000 - $19,999 92.4 93.8 93.5 94.5 87.2 90.1 87.2 88.0 $20,000 - $24,999 93.5 94.2
• http://www.fcc.gov/Bureaus/Common_Carrier/Reports/FCC-State_Link/QualSvc/qual01.pdf
  • 18.0 9.3 13.0 Initial Trouble Reports per Thousand Lines 300.1 128.2 191.8 146.8 212.3 179.1 145.5 164.5 206.3 Total MSA 283.6 128.3 192.3 144.7 199.2 182.0 146.9 157.3 202.3 Total Non MSA 391.8 128.0 186.1 197.9 275.2 159.3 129.6 187.9 214.3 Total Residence 342.8 158.5 250.4 191.2 278.2 210.3 183.2 191.4 245.0 Total Business 187.7 66.7 86.8 70.1 93.5 117.0 76.7 103.0 104.6 Troubles Found per Thousand Lines 159.5 83.8 122.8 115.6 140.8 129.0 102.5 136.9 124.0 Repeat Troubles as a Percent of Trouble Reports 21.3% 28.3% 30.5% 15.8% 16.7% 19.9% 20.1% 13.4% 14.2% Residential Complaints per Million Residential Access Lines 279.0 282.6 587.5 31.5 32.4 212.7 384.9 109.3 197.6 Business Complaints per Million Business Access Lines 106.5 115.3 178.0 7.7
• http://www.fcc.gov/Bureaus/Common_Carrier/Reports/FCC-State_Link/QualSvc/qual03.pdf
  • Access Services Provided to Carriers -- Special Access Percent Installation Commitments Met 90.4 85.3 100.0 89.7 77.5 63.9 95.5 98.2 Average Installation Interval (days) 11.8 13.8 13.9 17.7 20.5 13.8 10.1 15.6 Average Repair Interval (hours) 4.6 12.3 2.7 21.0 24.0 11.4 4.5 3.4 Local Services Provided to Res. and Business Customers Percent Installation Commitments Met 97.4 98.4 99.9 96.5 76.7 98.8 97.1 97.7 Residence 97.7 98.3 99.9 96.7 77.6 98.7 97.5 97.7 Business 95.2 75.9 99.8 95.8 71.1 98.0 94.2 97.7 Average Installation Interval (days) 1.9 3.6 2.1 5.5 4.8 1.9 1.6 2.0 Residence 1.9 3.3 4.5 5.2 5.0 1.8 1.4 2.0 Business 2.7 4.6 1.8 7.6 3.8 2.7 2.7 2.0 Avg. Out of Svc. Repair Interval (hours) 24.8 15.3
• http://www.fcc.gov/Bureaus/Common_Carrier/Reports/FCC-State_Link/QualSvc/qual98.pdf
  • 0 0 0 0 0 6 9 14. Remote 0 0 3 0 0 0 2 0 0 15. Other/Unknown 0 1 0 7 1 0 4 0 15 TOTAL OUTAGE LINE-MINUTES PER THOUSAND ACCESS LINES 1. Scheduled 46.9 30.6 188.8 360.6 96.2 458.3 1540.8 1.6 15419.3 2. Proced. Errors -- Telco. (Inst./Maint.) 67.5 0.0 0.0 1860.1 0.0 525.0 0.0 76.7 555.7 3. Proced. Errors -- Telco. (Other) 75.9 26.7 338.6 0.0 2.8 100.4 42.0 102.3 19.8 4. Procedural Errors -- System Vendors 2.7 10.0 89.1 5.0 0.0 427.8 15.6 14.5 27.5 5. Procedural Errors -- Other Vendors 0.0 16.8 31.7 5.6 0.0 0.9 63.3 167.8 0.0 6. Software Design 48.8 624.4 154.4 8.4 0.0 31.8 152.0 380.2 68.3 7. Hardware
• http://www.fcc.gov/Bureaus/Common_Carrier/Reports/FCC-State_Link/SOCC/00socc.pdf
  • 43.7 153.3 6.8ID Illinois 5,183.2 364.7 4,818.5 3,649.8 1,168.7 475.9 219.6 412.7 1,108.2 60.4IL Indiana 2,351.4 204.2 2,147.1 1,559.4 587.7 276.6 99.6 180.6 556.8 30.9IN Iowa 655.4 33.6 621.9 419.9 202.0 86.7 35.8 72.0 194.5 7.5IA Kansas 1,002.0 117.0 885.0 631.5 253.5 101.5 41.8 102.0 245.3 8.2KS Kentucky 1,457.6 89.1 1,368.5 1,005.2 363.3 184.4 66.7 97.4 348.5 14.8KY Louisiana 1,709.2 76.7 1,632.5 1,270.9 361.6 195.0 68.7 84.7 348.4 13.2LA Maine 509.9 17.7 492.1 348.0 144.1 57.5 32.1 48.1 137.7 6.4ME Maryland 2,353.2 145.5 2,207.8 1,569.9 637.9 284.6 116.3 211.0 611.8 26.1MD Massachusetts 2,943.6 142.3 2,801.3 1,909.3 892.0 395.6 161.7 302.1 859.4 32.5MA Michigan 4,097.8 219.9 3,877.9 2,970.4 907.5 443.6 143.2 300.5 887.3 20.2MI Minnesota 1,459.1 83.2 1,375.8 943.3 432.5 171.0 70.3
• http://www.fcc.gov/Bureaus/Common_Carrier/Reports/FCC-State_Link/SOCC/01socc.pdf
  • 56.7 106.3 207.8 237.6 158.0 13.4 5.4 India 20.0 27.6 32.0 58.2 109.4 202.9 298.1 409.7 417.6 523.1 541.8 Israel 67.9 93.2 93.5 105.0 128.5 119.1 103.4 41.5 12.6 16.7 11.9 Italy 77.7 84.3 60.2 85.2 72.3 65.9 51.8 63.1 54.3 66.4 37.9 Jamaica 47.5 56.3 64.7 78.4 93.1 99.4 115.5 132.3 154.9 154.5 89.7 Japan 72.5 45.5 39.0 52.6 76.7 119.3 169.0 210.7 65.9 61.1 41.7 Korea, Republic of 110.6 99.9 92.8 103.2 111.0 118.7 122.1 101.5 18.4 32.3 6.6 Mexico 2/ 573.5 613.2 677.7 720.0 818.9 871.7 875.0 703.3 648.9 652.3 755.6 Morocco 6.0 7.8 7.9 7.5 9.8 11.0 5.5 3.4 1.4 17.1 6.4 Netherlands 10.6 10.2 10.2 8.0 10.8 22.3 22.8 16.5 11.3 (0.1) 7.8 Nigeria 3.1 10.8
• http://www.fcc.gov/Bureaus/Common_Carrier/Reports/FCC-State_Link/SOCC/02socc.pdf
  • 81.4 9.0 72.4 30.8 14.6 27.1 72.5 VT Virginia 1,238.6 15.4 1,223.2 248.8 974.4 419.6 109.5 445.0 974.1 0.4 VA Washington 1,026.4 33.4 993.0 221.6 771.4 307.1 86.8 357.7 751.6 19.8 WA West Virginia 211.3 2.3 209.0 31.6 177.4 89.0 25.2 63.1 177.3 0.1 WV Wisconsin 442.4 5.8 436.6 78.2 358.4 140.0 50.2 161.7 351.9 6.5 WI Wyoming 87.6 10.8 76.7 8.1 68.7 24.2 11.7 30.5 66.4 2.2 WY Puerto Rico 334.0 334.0 89.3 244.8 175.1 46.8 22.8 244.7 PR 103 Statistics of Communications Common Carriers Table 2.11 - Revenues of Reporting Incumbent Local Exchange Carriers for the Year Ended December 31, 2002 -- Continued Toll Network Service Revenues (Dollar Amounts Shown in Millions) Total Non- Subject to State Interstate Access
• http://www.fcc.gov/Bureaus/Common_Carrier/Reports/FCC-State_Link/SOCC/03socc.pdf
  • 213.3 1,050.3 2,124.6 114.7 TX Utah 686.9 42.9 644.0 394.8 249.2 78.9 32.7 120.0 231.6 17.5 UT Vermont 232.2 8.3 223.9 149.1 74.8 31.3 12.4 27.6 71.3 3.5 VT Virginia 2,956.0 173.2 2,782.8 1,752.2 1,030.6 414.0 127.0 455.0 996.0 34.6 VA Washington 2,367.5 197.2 2,170.3 1,359.9 810.4 319.2 87.9 353.6 760.7 49.7 WA West Virginia 612.7 26.7 586.1 404.4 181.7 76.7 36.7 61.1 174.5 7.2 WV Wisconsin 1,390.1 63.5 1,326.6 938.3 388.3 147.1 47.6 176.0 370.7 17.5 WI Wyoming 209.5 16.4 193.1 117.4 75.7 27.8 12.4 30.9 71.1 4.6 WY Puerto Rico 1,181.9 215.0 966.9 741.0 226.0 144.9 38.6 35.8 219.3 6.6 PR 89 (Dollar Amounts Shown in Millions) Statistics of Communications Common Carriers Table 2.11 - Revenues of Reporting Incumbent
• http://www.fcc.gov/Bureaus/Common_Carrier/Reports/FCC-State_Link/SOCC/95socc.pdf
  • 14.1 15.7 19.5 24.8 33.9 56.7 106.2 India 14.9 7.9 8.1 13.8 20.0 27.6 31.9 58.1 109.3 202.9 Israel 43.9 44.4 47.4 57.5 67.9 93.2 93.3 104.9 128.4 119.0 Italy 40.8 51.5 59.6 69.5 77.7 84.2 59.8 85.1 72.2 65.9 Jamaica 13.9 24.9 30.3 32.6 47.5 56.2 64.3 78.3 93.0 99.5 Japan 62.4 78.4 91.4 78.5 72.5 45.3 38.5 52.0 76.7 119.2 Korea, Rep. of 76.7 85.2 106.2 111.7 110.6 99.3 92.2 103.0 110.9 118.7 Mexico 247.1 312.6 410.9 533.9 573.5 613.2 676.9 720.0 818.9 871.7 Netherlands -2.2 5.1 7.6 7.0 10.6 10.2 10.2 8.1 10.8 22.2 Nigeria 5.7 6.9 5.0 3.5 3.1 10.9 17.0 18.8 9.5 8.5 Pakistan 19.0 28.2 32.0 40.1 43.0 58.3 63.8 69.7 88.0 107.3 Peru 22.3
• http://www.fcc.gov/Bureaus/Common_Carrier/Reports/FCC-State_Link/SOCC/96socc.pdf
  • 59.5 408.6 17.8 TN TEXAS 7,117.2 468.3 6,648.9 5,059.5 1,589.4 775.0 470.1 303.4 1,548.5 40.9 TX UTAH 607.8 21.4 586.4 404.1 182.3 70.6 73.1 33.1 176.8 5.5 UT VERMONT 253.1 7.3 245.8 172.2 73.5 24.1 39.6 7.7 71.5 2.1 VT VIRGINIA 2,793.1 353.7 2,439.4 1,778.6 660.8 295.2 211.4 115.9 622.6 38.2 VA WASHINGTON 2,091.3 112.7 1,978.6 1,423.8 554.8 229.1 214.7 76.7 520.5 34.3WA WEST VIRGINIA 590.7 47.6 543.1 402.5 140.6 82.1 39.1 14.7 135.9 4.7WV WISCONSIN 1,476.2 68.2 1,408.0 1,065.5 342.5 146.3 129.5 57.2 333.0 9.6 WI WYOMING 162.0 4.4 157.5 109.3 48.2 15.4 24.3 7.0 46.7 1.6WY PUERTO RICO 1,175.5 88.8 1,086.8 803.1 283.6 136.3 63.7 71.0 271.0 12.6 PR UNCLASSIFIED 17.9 17.9 166 STATISTICS OF COMMUNICATIONS COMMON CARRIERS T
• http://www.fcc.gov/Bureaus/Common_Carrier/Reports/FCC-State_Link/SOCC/97socc.pdf
  • 14.1 15.7 19.5 24.8 33.9 56.7 106.2 207.9 236.3 India 8.1 13.8 20.0 27.6 31.9 58.1 109.3 202.9 298.0 404.6 Israel 47.4 57.5 67.9 93.2 93.3 104.9 128.4 119.0 103.3 41.3 Italy 59.6 69.5 77.7 84.2 59.8 85.1 72.2 65.9 51.7 63.2 Jamaica 30.3 32.6 47.5 56.2 64.3 78.3 93.0 99.5 115.3 133.2 Japan 91.4 78.5 72.5 45.3 38.5 52.0 76.7 119.2 169.3 212.9 Korea, Rep. of 106.2 111.7 110.6 99.3 92.2 103.0 110.9 118.7 122.6 100.9 Mexico 410.9 533.9 573.5 613.2 676.9 720.0 818.9 871.7 875.0 703.6 Netherlands 7.6 7.0 10.6 10.2 10.2 8.1 10.8 22.2 22.9 16.4 Nigeria 5.0 3.5 3.1 10.9 17.0 18.8 9.5 8.5 41.7 67.1 Pakistan 32.0 40.1 43.0 58.3 63.8 69.7 88.0 107.3 127.6 118.0
• http://www.fcc.gov/Bureaus/Common_Carrier/Reports/FCC-State_Link/SOCC/98SOCC.PDF
  • 2,245.1 755.6 519.8 118.8 102.3 740.8 14.785 MS MISSOURI 7,168.7 314.8 6,853.9 4,934.3 1,919.6 1,064.1 322.0 509.5 1,895.7 23.920MO MONTANA 782.2 20.9 761.2 529.4 231.8 130.6 54.9 45.5 231.0 0.829 MT NEBRASKA 2,185.1 219.5 1,965.7 1,381.2 584.4 263.0 150.6 164.5 578.1 6.349 NE NEVADA 1,831.0 154.1 1,676.9 1,237.9 439.1 238.1 148.7 47.5 434.3 4.804 NV NEW HAMPSHIRE 1,683.8 62.3 1,621.5 1,076.7 544.8 238.0 135.1 168.9 542.0 2.886 NH NEW JERSEY 10,588.0 571.7 10,016.3 6,980.4 3,035.8 1,464.8 573.9 978.5 3,017.2 18.663 NJ NEW MEXICO 2,035.2 79.6 1,955.5 1,399.4 556.2 345.3 113.4 94.0 552.6 3.555 NM NEW YORK 23,548.8 1,111.2 22,437.6 15,860.0 6,577.6 2,568.6 2,151.8 1,806.6 6,526.9 50.665 NY NORTH CAROLINA 8,982.2 427.4 8,554.8 6,397.2 2,157.7 1,390.2 381.2 354.6 2,126.0 31.630 NC NORTH
• http://www.fcc.gov/Bureaus/Common_Carrier/Reports/FCC-State_Link/SOCC/98SOCC.PDF
  • 14.1 15.7 19.5 24.8 33.9 56.7 106.2 207.9 236.7 112.0 India 13.8 20.0 27.6 31.9 58.1 109.3 202.9 298.0 404.3 428.0 Israel 57.5 67.9 93.2 93.3 104.9 128.4 119.0 103.3 41.3 12.4 Italy 69.5 77.7 84.2 59.8 85.1 72.2 65.9 51.7 63.2 54.1 Jamaica 32.6 47.5 56.2 64.3 78.3 93.0 99.5 115.3 133.2 156.0 Japan 78.5 72.5 45.3 38.5 52.0 76.7 119.2 169.3 213.0 92.9 Korea, Rep. of 111.7 110.6 99.3 92.2 103.0 110.9 118.7 122.6 100.9 59.8 Mexico 533.9 573.5 613.2 676.9 720.0 818.9 871.7 875.0 703.3 651.0 Netherlands 7.0 10.6 10.2 10.2 8.1 10.8 22.2 22.9 16.4 13.7 Nigeria 3.5 3.1 10.9 17.0 18.8 9.5 8.5 41.7 67.0 103.5 Pakistan 40.1 43.0 58.3 63.8 69.7 88.0 107.3 127.6 117.7
• http://www.fcc.gov/Bureaus/Common_Carrier/Reports/FCC-State_Link/SOCC/99socc.pdf
  • 364.3 273.2 91.1 78.3 12.7 (0.86) (0.32) 0.08 (1.10) 13.8MO Montana 8.3 10.5 (2.2) (2.2) 0.0 (1.07) (0.42) (0.46) (1.95) 2.0MT Nebraska 129.9 62.8 67.2 48.4 18.8 5.49 3.14 5.14 13.77 5.0NE Nevada 120.3 70.9 49.4 39.6 9.8 0.03 0.15 0.05 0.23 9.5NV New Hampshire 27.9 13.7 14.2 5.4 8.8 0.66 0.21 0.33 1.20 7.6NH New Jersey 337.9 175.5 162.4 76.7 85.7 14.14 10.59 8.87 33.59 52.1 NJ New Mexico 52.0 37.3 14.7 10.4 4.3 (0.64) (0.11) (0.03) (0.78) 5.1NM New York 822.2 340.6 481.6 346.0 135.5 22.62 8.59 25.91 57.11 78.4NY North Carolina 448.8 336.2 112.6 82.4 30.2 3.37 0.71 0.96 5.03 25.2NC North Dakota 6.0 5.6 0.4 0.1 0.2 (0.45) (0.30) (0.38) (1.13) 1.4ND Ohio 435.8 343.4 92.4 62.9
• http://www.fcc.gov/Bureaus/Common_Carrier/Reports/FCC-State_Link/SOCC/prelim02socc.pdf
  • 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 IA Kansas 669.5 98.5 571.0 411.3 161.0 76.3 26.7 44.3 147.3 218.3 KS Kentucky 696.2 81.1 615.1 451.8 163.6 83.3 23.1 32.3 138.7 194.1 KY Louisiana 1,187.0 134.9 1,052.1 788.8 263.6 136.9 31.9 44.6 213.4 289.9 LA Maine 368.7 17.9 350.9 256.3 94.6 33.8 14.7 28.0 76.5 119.2 ME Maryland 1,767.2 140.5 1,626.7 1,148.7 478.1 184.6 76.7 166.5 427.8 671.0 MD Massachusetts 2,358.7 130.5 2,228.2 1,507.6 720.5 186.7 100.4 344.3 631.4 1,076.1 MA Michigan 2,593.1 195.1 2,398.1 1,887.2 513.4 272.1 95.8 91.3 459.2 646.3 MI Minnesota 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 MN Mississippi 716.0 74.7 641.2 470.8 170.6 96.5 21.3 27.9 145.7 194.9 MS Missouri 1,639.2 289.6 1,349.6 981.4 371.0 171.2 57.6
• http://www.fcc.gov/Bureaus/Engineering_Technology/News_Releases/1998/et8002a.pdf http://www.fcc.gov/Bureaus/Engineering_Technology/News_Releases/1998/et8002a.txt http://www.fcc.gov/Bureaus/Engineering_Technology/News_Releases/1998/et8002a.wp
  • 11527 725 12220 726 0.2 0.0 90.0 NV LAS VEGAS 21 22 103.2 353.0 12232 728 11359 726 0.6 0.0 99.9 NV LAS VEGAS 33 29 50.0 581.0 13627 726 12481 726 0.0 0.0 100.0 NV PARADISE 39 40 102.1 367.0 9421 724 8797 724 0.0 0.0 100.0 NV RENO 2 32 1000.0 656.0 27353 385 35365 451 0.0 0.0 76.7 NV RENO 4 34 1000.0 133.0 11905 331 18649 393 0.0 0.0 63.7 NV RENO 5 15 50.0 140.0 5739 293 7799 315 0.0 0.0 73.3 NV RENO 8 23 315.2 893.0 33814 480 34281 492 0.0 0.0 97.3 NV RENO 11 44 525.4 856.0 27170 388 28173 392 0.0 0.0 94.7 NV RENO 21 22 50.0 189.0 5432 265
• http://www.fcc.gov/Bureaus/Engineering_Technology/Orders/1997/fc97115a.pdf http://www.fcc.gov/Bureaus/Engineering_Technology/Orders/1997/fc97115a.wp
  • 99.9 NVLASVEGAS 15 16 50.0 564.0 13102 726 12220 726 0.2 0.0 99.7 NVLASVEGAS 21 20 94.2 353.0 12324 728 11359 726 0.6 0.0 99.8 NVLASVEGAS 33 32 50.0 581.0 13527 726 12481 726 0.0 0.0 100.0 NVPARADISE 39 38 94.1 367.0 9533 724 8797 724 0.0 0.0 100.0 NVRENO 2 32 1000.0 656.0 27417 381 35369 451 0.0 0.0 76.7 NVRENO 4 33 1000.0 133.0 11130 283 18649 393 0.0 0.0 59.4 NVRENO 5 15 50.0 140.0 5755 293 7799 315 0.0 0.0 73.4 NVRENO 8 23 301.7 893.0 33971 488 34277 492 0.0 0.0 97.6 NVRENO 11 41 475.5 856.0 27599 389 28169 392 0.0 0.0 95.6 NVRENO 21 22 50.0 189.0 5858 267 5264 261 1.0 0.4 99.2
• http://www.fcc.gov/Bureaus/Engineering_Technology/Orders/1998/fc98024a.pdf http://www.fcc.gov/Bureaus/Engineering_Technology/Orders/1998/fc98024a.txt http://www.fcc.gov/Bureaus/Engineering_Technology/Orders/1998/fc98024a.wp
  • 11527 725 12220 726 0.2 0.0 90.0 NV LAS VEGAS 21 22 103.2 353.0 12232 728 11359 726 0.6 0.0 99.9 NV LAS VEGAS 33 29 50.0 581.0 13627 726 12481 726 0.0 0.0 100.0 NV PARADISE 39 40 102.1 367.0 9421 724 8797 724 0.0 0.0 100.0 NV RENO 2 32 1000.0 656.0 27353 385 35365 451 0.0 0.0 76.7 NV RENO 4 34 1000.0 133.0 11905 331 18649 393 0.0 0.0 63.7 NV RENO 5 15 50.0 140.0 5739 293 7799 315 0.0 0.0 73.3 NV RENO 8 23 315.2 893.0 33814 480 34281 492 0.0 0.0 97.3 NV RENO 11 44 525.4 856.0 27170 388 28173 392 0.0 0.0 94.7 NV RENO 21 22 50.0 189.0 5432 265
• http://www.fcc.gov/Bureaus/International/Public_Notices/1998/pnin8296.pdf
  • Authority Nature of Service:Domestic Fixed Satellite Service, International Fixed Public Service New application to operate a 4.6-meter Ku-band fixed earth station to provide digital data, IBS, IDR, TDMA, and digital video with associated audio services via ALSAT, Solidaridad 1 & 2, and INTELSAT satellites (for international service only) on a common carrier basis.. LOCATION: SITE ID: 1 ROUTE 3, KILOMETER 76.7, RIO ABAJO, HUMACAO, PR E980469 Class of Station: Fixed Earth Stations SES-LIC-19981020-01463 SCRIPPS HOWARD BROADCASTING COMPANY Application for Authority Page 2 of 6 Nature of Service:Domestic Fixed Satellite Service LOCATION: 111 ° 59 ' 0.20 " W LONG. 33 ° 27 ' 16.00 " N LAT. SITE ID: 1 515 N. GATEWAY BLVD, (KNXV-TV), MARICOPA, PHOENIX, AZ ANTENNA ID: 4.6
• http://www.fcc.gov/Bureaus/International/Public_Notices/2000/da001202.pdf
  • be served by the indirect foreign ownership of PacAmTel LLC, a holder of common carrier point-to-point microwave licenses, in excess of the 25% statutory limit. Applicant requests Commission approval for the indirect foreign ownership specified below. Applicant seeks approval for an aggregate level of indirect foreign ownership by citizens from WTO Members (or overseas territories of WTO Members) up to 76.7 %. The proposed indirect foreign ownership of PacAmTel is as follows: 31.2% Bermudian, 32.1% British Virgin Islands, 3.4% Indonesian and 10% will be issued through a stock option plan to employees, all of whom are citizens of WTO Members. Indirect foreign ownership from citizens of non-WTO Members does not exceed 25%. Grant of Authority Page 1 of 7 ISP-PDR-20000428-00009 Mountain
• http://www.fcc.gov/Bureaus/International/Public_Notices/2000/pnin0084.pdf
  • - 10/04/2009 Nature of Service:Domestic Mobile-Satellite Service SITE ID: 1 CONUS, Alaska, Hawaii, Puerto Rico, US Virgin Islands, all US territories,, all US water LOCATION: E000075 SES-LIC-19990817-02396 TELECOMMUNICACIONES ULTRAMARINAS DE PUERTO RICO Date Effective: 03/29/2000 Class of Station: Grant of Authority Fixed Earth Stations Application for Authority 03/29/2000 - 03/29/2010 Nature of Service:International Fixed Satellite Service SITE ID: 1 KILOMETER 76.7, STATE ROAD NO. 3, RIO ABAJO, HUMACAO, PR LOCATION: E990449 SES-LIC-19991022-01871 SATELLITE COMMUNICATION SYSTEMS, INC. Date Effective: 03/30/2000 Class of Station: Grant of Authority Fixed Earth Stations Application for Authority 03/30/2000 - 03/30/2010 Nature of Service:Domestic Fixed Satellite Service SITE ID: 1 HIGHWAY 12, OKTIBBEHA, STARKVILE, MS LOCATION: Page 3 of 12 E990450 SES-LIC-19991022-01872 SATELLITE COMMUNICATION SYSTEMS, INC. Date Effective:
• http://www.fcc.gov/Bureaus/International/Public_Notices/2000/pnin0119.pdf
  • be served by the indirect foreign ownership of PacAmTel LLC, a holder of common carrier point-to-point microwave licenses, in excess of the 25% statutory limit. Applicant requests Commission approval for the indirect foreign ownership specified below. Applicant seeks approval for an aggregate level of indirect foreign ownership by citizens from WTO Members (or overseas territories of WTO Members) up to 76.7 %. The proposed indirect foreign ownership of PacAmTel is as follows: 31.2% Bermudian, 32.1% British Virgin Islands, 3.4% Indonesian and 10% will be issued through a stock option plan to employees, all of whom are citizens of WTO Members. Indirect foreign ownership from citizens of non-WTO Members does not exceed 25%. ISP-PDR-20000428-00009 Mountain Union Telecom, L.L.C. Petition for Declaratory Ruling
• http://www.fcc.gov/Bureaus/Mass_Media/Orders/1998/fcc98236.pdf http://www.fcc.gov/Bureaus/Mass_Media/Orders/1998/fcc98236.txt http://www.fcc.gov/Bureaus/Mass_Media/Orders/1998/fcc98236.wp
  • citing 47 C.F.R. § 76.1003(a). See also 47 C.F.R. § 76.1302(a) (notice required prior to filing a complaint alleging violation of carriage agreement rules). NCTA also cites the must-carry complaint resolution process noting that such complaints must be sent by a broadcaster to a cable operator prior to filing with the Commission. NCTA Opposition at 17 citing 47 C.F.R. §§ 76.7(4)(i) and 76.61(a). 388NAD/CAN Reply at 8 citing NCTA Opposition at 17. 389NAD/CAN Reply at 8. See also COR Opposition at 3-5. COR asserts that the Commission has already deemed monitoring and reporting requirements necessary to ensure accountability and compliance with the children's programming rules and argues that networks should be required to maintain information on captioned programs, exemptions claimed and
• http://www.fcc.gov/Bureaus/Mass_Media/Orders/1998/fcc98315.pdf http://www.fcc.gov/Bureaus/Mass_Media/Orders/1998/fcc98315.txt http://www.fcc.gov/Bureaus/Mass_Media/Orders/1998/fcc98315.wp
  • 11527 725 12220 726 0.2 0.0 90.0 NV LAS VEGAS 21 22 103.2 353.0 12232 728 11359 726 0.6 0.0 99.9 NV LAS VEGAS 33 29 50.0 581.0 13627 726 12481 726 0.0 0.0 100.0 NV PARADISE 39 40 102.1 367.0 9421 724 8797 724 0.0 0.0 100.0 NV RENO 2 32 1000.0 656.0 27353 385 35365 451 0.0 0.0 76.7 NV RENO 4 34 1000.0 133.0 11905 331 18649 393 0.0 0.0 63.7 NV RENO 5 15 50.0 140.0 5739 293 7799 315 0.0 0.0 73.3 NV RENO 8 23 315.2 893.0 33814 480 34281 492 0.0 0.0 97.3 NV RENO 11 44 525.4 856.0 27170 388 28173 392 0.0 0.0 94.7 NV RENO 21 22 50.0 189.0 5432 265
• http://www.fcc.gov/Bureaus/OMD/Public_Notices/2000/d001760a.doc
  • signals are distributed to the public by the cable system. Special Relief Petitions. On petition for special relief by any interested person, the Commission may waive any provision of the rules relating to cable television systems or issue a ruling on a complaint or disputed question. A fee will be charged for Cable Special Relief Petitions filed according to Section 76.7 of the Rules seeking the imposition of special requirements beyond those provided for in the rules. Registration Statements. A cable system community unit is required, prior to commencing operations, to provide the Commission with an identification of the system's operator, a description of the television broadcast signals to be carried, and certain other information called for by Section 76.1801 (formerly
• http://www.fcc.gov/Bureaus/OMD/Reports/coresforms.pdf
  • most current version or edition by accessing www.fcc.gov/formpage/html 1 SECTION 1 - FILINGS TITLE RESPONSIBLE OFFICE TEST SITE FILINGS (47 CFR Sect 2.948) OET GRANTEE CODE FILINGS OET TCB RELATED FILINGS OET ACCREDITOR/DESIGNATING BODY OET ACCREDITED TEST LABS OET AERONAUTICAL FREQUENCY NOTIFICATIONS (47 CFR Sec. 76.1804) MB CABLE COMMUNITY REGISTRATIONS (47 CFR Sec. 76.1801) MB CABLE SPECIAL REFIEF PETITION (Sec. 76.7) MB REQUEST FOR SPECIAL TEMPORARY AUTHORITY (Pursuant to Sections 78.33, 76.29, 73.1635 AND ALL OTHER SERVICES) ALL BUREAUS MAIN STUDIO REQUEST (Pursuant to Sec. 73.1125) MB DBS MUST CARRY COMPLAINTS MB DESIGNATED MARKET AREA (DMA) COMPLAINTS MB REQUEST FOR SPECIAL FIELD TEST AUTHORIZATION (Pursuant to Sec. 73.1515) MB FCC FILINGS AND FORMS REQUIRING A CORES REGISTRATION NUMBER Updated February 28,
• http://www.fcc.gov/Bureaus/Wireless/Notices/1999/fcc99205.doc http://www.fcc.gov/Bureaus/Wireless/Notices/1999/fcc99205.pdf http://www.fcc.gov/Bureaus/Wireless/Notices/1999/fcc99205.txt
  • carriers - whether wireline, terrestrial wireless, or satellite ( that serve such areas. BACKGROUND As discussed in greater detail in the Universal Service Further Notice, the lack of access on tribal areas to basic telecommunications services is well-documented. A 1998 survey indicated that while the nationwide average penetration rate for those with incomes below $5,000 living in rural areas was 76.7 percent, the telephone penetration rates for individuals living on tribal lands at that same income level averaged approximately 46.6 percent. In individual cases, penetration rates are often lower still. For example, the penetration rate is 16.1 percent on the San Carlos reservation in Arizona, and 18.4 percent on the Navajo reservation and trust lands in Arizona, New Mexico, and Utah.
• http://www.fcc.gov/Daily_Releases/Daily_Digest/2007/dd070702.html
  • (DA No. 07-2919). MB [35]DA-07-2919A1.doc [36]DA-07-2919A1.pdf [37]DA-07-2919A1.txt ARMSTRONG UTILITIES, INC., ET AL. Denied Petitioners' Waiver Requests, but granted Petitioners leave to amend their requests. (Dkt No. 97-80). Action by: Chief, Media Bureau. Adopted: 06/29/2007 by MO&O. (DA No. 07-2916). MB [38]DA-07-2916A1.doc [39]DA-07-2916A1.pdf [40]DA-07-2916A1.txt THE CITY OF CROSSLAKE, MINNESOTA D/B/A CROSSLAKE COMMUNICATIONS. Granted Crosslake's deferral request pursuant to Sections 1.3 and 76.7 of the Commission's rules. (Dkt No. 97-80). Action by: Chief, Media Bureau. Adopted: 06/29/2007 by MO&O. (DA No. 07-2918). MB [41]DA-07-2918A1.doc [42]DA-07-2918A1.pdf [43]DA-07-2918A1.txt CONSOLIDATED REQUESTS FOR WAIVER OF SECTION 76.1204(A)(1) OF THE COMMISSION'S RULES. Granted the Waiver Requests pursuant to Sections 1.3 and 76.7 of the Commission's rules. (Dkt No. 97-80). Action by: Chief, Media Bureau. Adopted: 06/29/2007 by MO&O.
• http://www.fcc.gov/Daily_Releases/Daily_Digest/2012/dd120209.html
  • * ADDENDA: THE FOLLOWING ITEMS, RELEASED FEBRUARY 8, 2012, DID NOT APPEAR IN DIGEST NO. 26: ----------------------------------------------------------------------- --- SUNSHINE NOTICE ----------------------------------------------------------------------- --- FCC TO HOLD OPEN COMMISSION MEETING WEDNESDAY, FEBRUARY 15, 2012 [13]DOC-312362A1.doc [14]DOC-312362A1.pdf [15]DOC-312362A1.txt ----------------------------------------------------------------------- --- PUBLIC NOTICES ----------------------------------------------------------------------- --- Released: 02/08/2012. NOTICE OF EFFECTIVE DATE OF PROGRAM CARRIAGE COMPLAINT RULES: 47 C.F.R. SECTIONS 1.221(H); 1.229(B)(3), (B)(4); 1.248(A), (B); 76.7(G)(2); 76.1302(C)(1), (D), (E)(1), (K). (DA No. 12-169). (Dkt No 07-42 ). MB . Contact: David Konczal at (202) 418-2228, email: David.Konczal@fcc.gov. News Media Contact: Janice Wise at (202) 418-8165, email: Janice.Wise@fcc.gov [16]DA-12-169A1.doc [17]DA-12-169A1.pdf [18]DA-12-169A1.txt Released: 02/08/2012. COMMENT SOUGHT ON A PETITION FILED BY EASTEX TELEPHONE COOPERATIVE, INC. FOR WAIVER CONCERNING THE COMMISSION'S PART 36 JURISDICTIONAL SEPARATIONS RULES. (DA No. 12-168).
• http://www.fcc.gov/cgb/dro/comments/99339/5507117121.pdf http://www.fcc.gov/cgb/dro/comments/99339/5507117121.txt
  • and prime time in the Central time zone. "Prime time" fof single-transponder networks like TBSS is considered to coincide nationwide with prime time in the Eastern time zone. However, "prime time" is at times reported on the basis of 8:00-l 0:OO p,m. Monday- Sunday. Moreover, the Commission's rules contain a more expansive definition of "prime time" for purposes of Part 76.7 The definition of "prime time" is important in defining which nonbroadcast networks incur Part 79 obligations, and in defining the time period in which these obligations must be carried out. If the many MVPDs subject to Part 79 adopt inconsistent definitions of "prime time," the five covered nonbroadcast networks will be severely prejudiced. Given the importance of the definition, in
• http://www.fcc.gov/eb/Orders/2004/FCC-03-333A1.html
  • its complaint here.39 Third, WOW could file a claim at the Commission under the uniform price provisions of the Communications Act and the Commission's rules.40 IV. ORDERING CLAUSE ACCORDINGLY, IT IS ORDERED, pursuant to sections 1, 4(i), 4(j), 601, and 632 of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended, 47 U.S.C. 151, 154(i), 154(j), 521, and 552, and sections 76.6, 76.7, 76.1602, and 76.1603 of the Commission's rules, 47 C.F.R. 76.6-76.7, and 76.1602-1603, that the Complaint filed by WideOpen West Holdings, LLC against Comcast Corporation for systemic abuse of customer service standards established by the Federal Communications Commission pursuant to Section 632(b) of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended, IS DISMISSED in its entirety with prejudice. FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION Marlene
• http://www.fcc.gov/fees/2000csbguide.doc http://www.fcc.gov/fees/2000csbguide.pdf http://www.fcc.gov/fees/2000csbguide.txt
  • signals are distributed to the public by the cable system. Special Relief Petitions. On petition for special relief by any interested person, the Commission may waive any provision of the rules relating to cable television systems or issue a ruling on a complaint or disputed question. A fee will be charged for Cable Special Relief Petitions filed according to Section 76.7 of the Rules seeking the imposition of special requirements beyond those provided for in the rules. Registration Statements. A cable system community unit is required, prior to commencing operations, to provide the Commission with an identification of the system's operator, a description of the television broadcast signals to be carried, and certain other information called for by Section 76.1801 (formerly
• http://www.fcc.gov/ib/sand/mniab/traffic/files/ITRND01.pdf
  • 13.4 5.4 9.0 1.9 (2.8) -101.8 India 58.2 109.4 202.9 298.1 409.7 417.6 523.1 542.0 493.8 372.8 168.8 -59.6 Israel 105.0 128.5 119.1 103.4 41.5 12.6 16.7 11.9 2.1 8.2 13.0 2.9 Italy 85.2 72.3 65.9 51.8 63.1 54.3 66.4 37.9 46.2 70.2 65.3 20.1 Jamaica 78.4 93.1 99.4 115.5 132.3 154.9 154.5 89.7 61.6 67.2 47.2 -69.5 Japan 52.6 76.7 119.3 169.0 210.7 65.9 61.1 43.8 39.2 42.1 29.3 -55.6 Korea, Republic of 103.2 111.0 118.7 122.1 101.5 18.4 32.3 6.8 12.7 8.9 (1.2) -106.3 Mexico 720.0 818.9 871.7 875.0 703.3 648.9 652.3 755.7 471.2 421.9 360.2 -44.5 Morocco 7.5 9.8 11.0 5.5 3.4 1.4 17.1 6.4 7.8 17.8 12.1 n.m. Netherlands 8.0 10.8 22.3 22.8 16.5 11.3 (0.1) 7.8
• http://www.fcc.gov/ib/sand/mniab/traffic/files06/CREPOR06.PDF
  • 5.2 47.1 Tonga $2,811,383 0.0 5.4 0.019.7 74.9 $320,615 0.0 0.0 0.0 2.7 97.3 $19 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0100.0 21,875,564 0.0 0.9 0.018.9 80.2 Tuvalu $25,848 0.0 0.0 0.029.5 70.4 $93 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0100.0 $0 42,355 0.0 0.0 0.036.8 63.2 Vanuatu $439,093 0.023.4 0.0 7.1 69.5 $1,745 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0100.0 $15 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0100.0 846,086 0.013.2 0.010.1 76.7 Wallis and Futuna $108,839 1.3 0.0 0.023.9 74.8 $236 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0100.0 $9 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0100.0 131,075 0.7 0.0 0.034.7 64.6 Western Samoa $2,031,944 0.018.4 0.113.0 68.5 $10,737 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0100.0 $0 6,851,051 0.012.2 0.014.5 73.3 American Samoa $3,776,994 0.044.2 0.011.7 44.0 $348,536 0.028.4 0.060.6 11.0 $0 18,043,622 0.035.7 0.037.9 26.4 Baker Island $0 $0 $0 0
• http://www.fcc.gov/ib/sand/mniab/traffic/files08/CREPOR08.PDF
  • 88.0 $24,099,413 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0100.0 5,409,659,962 0.0 0.0 2.8 12.2 85.0 Belize $10,804,000 0.0 0.0 0.4 31.3 68.2 $209,934 0.0 0.0 0.0 74.1 25.9 $93,725 0.0 0.0 0.0 97.7 2.3 58,326,058 0.0 0.0 0.4 43.7 55.9 Canada $583,654,798 0.0 0.0 0.0 28.3 71.7 $47,938,915 0.0 0.0 0.0 35.5 64.5 $61,583,569 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0100.0 18,966,750,165 0.0 0.0 0.0 23.3 76.7 Costa Rica $42,661,800 0.0 0.0 2.2 5.3 92.5 $2,514,491 0.0 0.0 0.0 32.8 67.2 $3,238 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0100.0 488,175,231 0.0 0.0 4.7 9.1 86.2 El Salvador $99,038,187 0.0 0.0 6.1 10.5 83.3 $7,504,830 0.0 0.0 0.0 7.8 92.2 $630,414 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0100.0 1,643,523,877 0.0 0.0 3.6 9.0 87.4 Guatemala $191,970,359 0.0 0.0 5.9 4.0 90.0 $4,259,339 0.0 0.0
• http://www.fcc.gov/mb/engineering/2008_Fees_Guide.pdf
  • signals are distributed to the public by the cable system. SPECIAL RELIEF PETITIONS On petition for special relief by any interested person, the Commission may waive any provision of the rules relating to cable television systems or issue a ruling on a complaint or disputed question. A fee will be charged for Cable Special Relief Petitions filed according to Section 76.7 of the Rules seeking the imposition of special requirements beyond those provided for in the rules. CABLE COMMUNITY REGISTRATION A Cable Community Registration (Form 322) must be filed electronically prior to commencing operations, to provide the Commission with an identification of the system's operator, a description of the television broadcast signals to be carried, and certain other information called for
• http://www.fcc.gov/mb/engineering/605.html
  • noncoaxial copper cable techniques, specialized coaxial cable and fiber optical cable hybridization techniques or specialized compression techniques or specialized receiving devices, and which, because of their basic design, cannot comply with one or more of the technical standards set forth in paragraph (a) of this section, may be permitted to operate: Provided, That an adequate showing is made pursuant to 76.7 which establishes that the public interest is benefited. In such instances, the Commission may prescribe special technical requirements to ensure that subscribers to such systems are provided with an equivalent level of good quality service. " " NOTE: Note 1: Local franchising authorities of systems serving fewer than 1000 subscribers may adopt standards less stringent than those in 76.605(a). Any
• http://www.fcc.gov/mb/engineering/605print.html
  • noncoaxial copper cable techniques, specialized coaxial cable and fiber optical cable hybridization techniques or specialized compression techniques or specialized receiving devices, and which, because of their basic design, cannot comply with one or more of the technical standards set forth in paragraph (a) of this section, may be permitted to operate: Provided, That an adequate showing is made pursuant to 76.7 which establishes that the public interest is benefited. In such instances, the Commission may prescribe special technical requirements to ensure that subscribers to such systems are provided with an equivalent level of good quality service. " " NOTE: Note 1: Local franchising authorities of systems serving fewer than 1000 subscribers may adopt standards less stringent than those in 76.605(a). Any
• http://www.fcc.gov/mb/engineering/76print.html
  • Content-Type: text/plain Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit THIS DATA CURRENT AS OF THE FEDERAL REGISTER DATED FEBRUARY 21, 2002 __________________________ 47 CFR Telecommunication CHAPTER I FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION (Continued) SUBCHAPTER C -- BROADCAST RADIO SERVICES PART 76 -- MULTICHANNEL VIDEO AND CABLE TELEVISION SERVICE Subpart A -- General Sec. [1]76.1 Purpose. [2]76.3 Other pertinent rules. [3]76.5 Definitions. [4]76.6 General pleading requirements. [5]76.7 General special relief, waiver, enforcement, complaint, show cause, forfeiture, and declaratory ruling procedures. [6]76.8 Status conference. [7]76.9 Confidentiality of proprietary information. [8]76.10 Review. [9]76.11 Lockbox enforcement. Subpart B -- Registration Statements [10]76.29 Special temporary authority. Subpart C -- Federal-State/Local Regulatory Relationships [Reserved] Subpart D -- Carriage of Television Broadcast Signals [11]76.51 Major television markets. [12]76.53 Reference points. [13]76.54 Significantly viewed
• http://www.fcc.gov/mb/engineering/FCC-03-9A1.pdf
  • decline to adopt DirecTV's proposal to allow MDU owners to require sharing of incumbent-owned cable wiring. 5. We expect these modifications of our home wiring rules to increase their effectiveness and simplify their use. We recognize, however, that there may be situations in which questions arise regarding proper application of the rules. We note that, pursuant to 47 C.F.R. § 76.7, parties may file petitions for declaratory rulings on questions regarding the proper application and interpretation of our rules and complaints alleging violation of our rules. II. ISSUES RAISED IN THE PETITIONS FOR RECONSIDERATION A. Legal Authority 6. Several petitioners question the Commission's authority to regulate the disposition of cable home run wiring in the first instance.9 We carefully considered these
• http://www.fcc.gov/mb/engineering/part76.pdf
  • Page > Executive Branch > Code of Federal Regulations > Electronic Code of Federal Regulations e-CFR Data is current as of May 4, 2011 Title 47: Telecommunication Browse Previous | Browse Next PART 76-MULTICHANNEL VIDEO AND CABLE TELEVISION SERVICE Section Contents Subpart A-General § 76.1 Purpose. § 76.3 Other pertinent rules. § 76.5 Definitions. § 76.6 General pleading requirements. § 76.7 General special relief, waiver, enforcement, complaint, show cause, forfeiture, and declaratory ruling procedures. § 76.8 Status conference. § 76.9 Confidentiality of proprietary information. § 76.10 Review. § 76.11 Lockbox enforcement. Subpart B-Registration Statements § 76.29 Special temporary authority. Subpart C-Cable Franchise Applications § 76.41 Franchise application process. Subpart D-Carriage of Television Broadcast Signals § 76.51 Major television markets. § 76.53
• http://www.fcc.gov/ownership/materials/already-released/review090001.pdf
  • 17 14 34.865.493.6 Mar-01 7 37 17 12 34.467.793.5 Boston Mar-96 10 54 36 18 23.6 n/a 78.0 Nov-97 10 55 38 20 36.9n/a 91.7 Nov-98 10 55 38 19 42.2 n/a 91.5 Mar-00 8 55 34 17 42.959.890.6 Mar-01 8 56 35 16 41.560.390.1 Washington DC Mar-96 8 48 31 15 19.8n/a 56.4 Nov-97 8 47 27 18 26.0n/a 76.7 Nov-98 8 47 25 16 29.8 n/a 83.5 Mar-00 9 47 23 16 30.154.882.4 Mar-01 9 47 21 16 29.655.280.5 Appendix F: Market by Market Data Radio Market Date RankStationsOwnersFormatsCR1CR2CR4 Houston-Galveston Mar-96 9 50 28 14 19.0n/a 59.5 Nov-97 9 55 30 15 21.6n/a 68.1 Nov-98 9 55 26 15 39.3 n/a 77.7 Mar-00 10 55 24 17 37.765.986.8 Mar-01
• http://www.fcc.gov/transaction/aol-tw/aol-tw_rc051100.pdf
  • in its rules."). 123 Several of these comments were not properly served on AOL and Time Warner as required under the Commission's rules. Because commenters American Cable Association; Memphis Networx, LLC; Memphis Light, Gas and Water Division; iCast; and Tribal Voice failed to serve the Applicants, their submissions must be treated as informal objections. See 47 C.F.R. §§ 1.47(a), (e); 76.7(b)(1). The few other informal objections, submitted to the Commission via e-mail by certain consumers and one municipality, are likewise not merger specific (and generally raise claims already addressed herein). 46 unauthorized access to its IM servers.124 These two IM competitors, which have sought such unauthorized access, now wish to entangle the FCC in a matter that remains the subject of