FCC Web Documents citing 76.910

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

• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-00-1347A1.doc
  • should be included in the definition of such term. Communications Act � 3(26), 47 U.S.C. � 153(26). The following franchise areas are subject to the petition: (1) Cherokee County (GA0240); (2) Woodstock (GA0239); (3) Cobb County (GA0144); (4) Marietta (GA0973); (5) Fulton County (GA0559); and (6) Roswell (GA0928). Communications Act � 623(a)(4), 47 U.S.C. � 543(a)(4). 47 C.F.R. �� 76.906, 76.910(b)(4). 47 C.F.R. � 76.910(e); 47 C.F.R. � 76.910(b); see also Communications Act � 623(a)(4), 47 U.S.C. � 543(a)(4). 11 FCC Rcd 5937, 5944 (1996). 47 C.F.R. � 76.7. Communications Act � 623(l)(1)(D), 47 U.S.C. � 543(l)(1)(D); See 47 C.F.R. �76.905(b)(4). Time Warner Petition at 1. The Commission determined that the definition of affiliate provided in Section 3 of the 1996
• 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
  • term does not include a person insofar as such person is engaged in the provision of a commercial mobile service under Section 332(c), except to the extent that the Commission finds that such service should be included in the definition of such term. Communications Act ? 3(26), 47 U.S.C. ? 153(26). Communications Act ?623(a)(4), 47 U.S.C. ?543(a)(4). 47 C.F.R. ??76.906, 76.910(b)(4). 47 C.F.R. ?76.910(e); 47 C.F.R. ?76.910(b); see also Communications Act ?623(a)(4), 47 U.S.C. ?543(a)(4). 11 FCC Rcd 5937, 5944 (1996). 47 C.F.R. ?76.7. Communications Act ?623(l)(1)(D), 47 U.S.C. ?543(l)(1)(D); see 47 C.F.R. ?76.905(b)(4). Rifkin Petition at 2. The Commission determined that the definition of affiliate provided in Section 3 of the 1996 Act will apply to the LEC effective competition
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-01-340A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-01-340A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-01-340A1.txt
  • term does not include a person insofar as such person is engaged in the provision of a commercial mobile service under Section 332(c), except to the extent that the Commission finds that such service should be included in the definition of such term. Communications Act � 3(26), 47 U.S.C. � 153(26). Communications Act �623(a)(4), 47 U.S.C. �543(a)(4). 47 C.F.R. ��76.906, 76.910(b)(4). 47 C.F.R. �76.910(e); 47 C.F.R. �76.910(b); see also Communications Act �623(a)(4), 47 U.S.C. �543(a)(4). Communications Act �623(l)(1)(D), 47 U.S.C. �543(l)(1)(D); see 47 C.F.R. �76.905(b)(4). See Implementation of Cable Act Reform Provisions of the Telecommunications Act of 1996, Report and Order, 14 FCC Rcd 5296 (1999). The Commission determined that the definition of affiliate provided in Section 3 of the 1996
• 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
  • 2788 (1996). Time Warner filed a similar petition to change the regulatory status for various cities and towns in Florida, including Cape Canaveral, Melbourne, Satellite Beach, Indiatlantic, Malabar, and Palm Shores. That petition was granted. See Time Warner Entertainment-Advance/Newhouse Partnership, Memorandum Opinion and Order, 13 FCC Rcd 12517 (1998). Communications Act � 623, 47 U.S.C. � 543(a)(4). 47 C.F.R. � 76.910(b). Communications Act of 1934, as amended, � 623(l)(1)(B), 47 U.S.C. � 543 (l)(B); see also, C.F.R. � 76.905(b)(2). Petition at 2. Section 76.905(e) of the Commission's rules state that, for purposes of effective competition, service by an MVPD is deemed offered ``when the [MVPD] is physically able to deliver service to potential subscribers, with the addition of no or only
• 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
  • is subject to effective competition. ordering clauses Accordingly, IT IS ORDERED that the petition for revocation of the certification of the City of Waco, Texas to regulate basic cable service rates in Waco, Texas and for a determination of effective competition in Waco, Texas, filed by Time Warner IS GRANTED. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the certification pursuant to Section 76.910 of the Commission's rules of the City of Waco, Texas, to regulate basic cable service rates in Waco, Texas, IS HEREBY REVOKED. 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 See Public Notice, Cable Services Bureau Registrations; Special Relief and Show
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-02-2693A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-02-2693A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-02-2693A1.txt
  • again be subject to the DPUC's rate regulation authority. The recertification process begins upon issuance of an order granting the underlying petition for recertification. Once the DPUC has filed Form 328 with the Commission specifying the entities and franchise areas in which it desires to regulate basic cable service rates, its rate regulation authority will become effective pursuant to Section 76.910 of the Commission's rules. The DPUC's authority shall be prospective from the date the certification becomes effective. We concur with Cablevision that operators subject to recertification should be treated in the same fashion as small operators that lose their eligibility for small operator treatment. In the small operator context, we sought to minimize the disruption to consumers and operators caused
• 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
  • for revocation of the certifications of the Cities of Dunedin, Oldsmar, Safety Harbor, and Tarpon Springs Florida to regulate basic cable service rates in those cities, and for a determination of effective competition in the Cities of Dunedin, Oldsmar, Safety Harbor, and Tarpon Springs, filed by Time Warner IS GRANTED. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the certifications pursuant to Section 76.910 of the Commission's rules of the Cities of Dunedin, Oldsmar, Safety Harbor, and Tarpon Springs to regulate basic cable service rates in those cities IS HEREBY REVOKED. 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, Media Bureau See Public Notice, Cable Services Bureau Registrations;
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-04-2458A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-04-2458A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-04-2458A1.txt
  • Notice of Proposed Rulemaking seeking comment on revisions to the Commission's current rate rules. To be certified to regulate rates, the County had to certify that it would adopt and administer regulations with respect to BST rates that are consistent with the regulations prescribed by the Commission for regulation of the BST. See 47 U.S.C. � 543(a)(3)(A); 47 C.F.R. � 76.910(b)(1). (...continued from previous page) (continued....) Federal Communications Commission DA 04-2458 Federal Communications Commission FCC 00-XXX �@��� �@��� 5 � @& tm 0 x �
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-05-1524A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-05-1524A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-05-1524A1.txt
  • local franchising authorities and the Commission. Need: The rules ensure that subscribers pay reasonable rates for regulated cable services with minimum regulatory and administrative burden on cable entities. . Section Number and Title: 76.901 Definitions. 76.905 Standards for identification of cable systems subject to effective competition. 76.906 Presumption of no effective competition. 76.907 Petition for a determination of effective competition. 76.910 Franchising authority certification. 76.911 Petition for reconsideration of certification. 76.912 Joint certification. 76.913 Assumption of jurisdiction by the Commission. 76.914 Revocation of certification. 76.916 Petition for recertification. 76.917 Notification of certification withdrawal. 76.920 Composition of the basic tier. 76.921 Buy-through of other tiers prohibited. 76.922 Rates for the basic service tier and cable programming services tiers. 76.923 Rates for equipment
• 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
  • � 76.905(b)(4). 47 C.F. R. � 76.911(a)(1). The Greater Metro Telecommunications Consortium filed its opposition on behalf of Arvada, Aurora, Brighton, Centennial, Commerce City, Federal Heights, Greenwood Village, Lafayette, Lakewood, Littleon, Lone Tree, Louisville, Northglenn, Sheridan, Thornton, Westminster, Castle Rock, Erie, Parker, Adams, Arapahoe, Douglas, Jefferson, and Broomfield, Colorado. Communications Act � 623(a)(4), 47 U.S.C. � 543(a)(4). 47 C.F.R. � 76.910(e). Certification becomes effective unless the Commission determines that: (1) the franchising authority will not adopt and administer rate regulations that are consistent with the Commission's regulations; (2) the franchising authority lacks the legal authority to adopt, and the personnel to administer, rate regulation; (3) procedural laws and regulations, applicable to rate regulation proceedings by the franchising authority do not provide
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-07-1083A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-07-1083A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-07-1083A1.txt
  • using household and subscriber data for the authorized area in the franchise. III. DISCUSSION 3. Comcast states that the City filed with the Commission its "Certification of Franchising Authority to Regulate Basic Cable Service Rates and Initial Finding of Effective Competition" on FCC Form 328 to become certified to regulate the cable rates in its Franchising Area. Pursuant to Section 76.910(e) of the Commission's rules, certification became effective 30 days from filing. Comcast filed a ``Petition for Reconsideration of the Rate Regulation Certification,'' maintaining that it meets the requirements of the low penetration effective competition test because fewer than 30 percent of the households in the franchise area subscribe to its cable system. 4. In its petition, Comcast relied upon Census
• 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
  • of Salamanca and the Town of Little Valley (filed July 30, 2004) (``Opposition''). Request for Leave to Correct the Record and Response to Replies, Filed by the City of Salamanca, the Town of Salamanca and the Town of Little Valley at 2 (Sept. 27, 2004) (``Opponents' Response''). Id. at 3. Id. at 3 & n. 8; see also 47 C.F.R. �76.910. See Petition for Reconsideration of the City of Salamanca For Certification of Franchising Authority to Regulate Basic Cable Service Rates and Initial Finding of Lack of Effective Competition (Aug. 6, 2004) (``City of Salamanca Petition for Reconsideration); Petition for Reconsideration of the Town of Little Valley For Certification of Franchising Authority to Regulate Basic Cable Service Rates and Initial Finding
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-07-3340A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-07-3340A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-07-3340A1.txt
  • were permitted to supplement any existing opposition or file an opposition based on supplemental data within 50 days from the date of the Commission's letter. The above-captioned cable operator, Mediacom, filed the requested information for the above-captioned petition. No opposition to Mediacom's filing has been received by the Commission. Communications Act � 623(a)(4), 47 U.S.C. � 543(a)(4). 47 C.F.R. � 76.910(b). 47 C.F.R. � 76.910(e). Certification becomes effective unless the Commission determines that: (1) the franchising authority will not adopt and administer rate regulations that are consistent with the Commission's regulations; (2) the franchising authority lacks the legal authority to adopt, and the personnel to administer, rate regulation; (3) procedural laws and regulations, applicable to rate regulation proceedings by the franchising
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-09-1725A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-09-1725A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-09-1725A1.txt
  • provider effective competition there, the area is ripe for re-regulation by the County. The County asks to be re-certified to regulate Charter's basic rates, apparently retroactive to the October 25, 2004, date on which the County petitioned for re-certification. Its Petition for Recertification is in order, and we grant it. We caution the County to observe the requirements of Section 76.910(c-e) of our rules before it resumes regulation of Charter's rates for basic cable service. Pursuant to Section 76.910(e), unless the Commission notifies the County otherwise and subject to the other qualifications in subsection (e), thirty days after filing the written certification with this Commission, the County will be re-certified to regulate Charter's basic cable service retroactive to October 25, 2004.
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-09-2515A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-09-2515A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-09-2515A1.txt
  • response, filed a new petition claiming that it was still subject to effective competition. Ruling on these rival petitions earlier this year, the Commission found that Charter had not shown it was subject to effective competition. The Commission allowed the County to resume regulating Charter's rates upon compliance with the certification procedures set forth in our rules, 47 C.F.R. �� 76.910 et seq, which requires to County to execute a new Form 328. The County did this and the Commission received the County's new Form on September 24, 2009. Pursuant to the Commission's rules, the County could resume regulating Charter's rates 30 days later (on October 26, 30 days plus a weekend). On November 12, 2009, Charter filed its Petition alleging
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-09-68A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-09-68A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-09-68A1.txt
  • a LFA could not in good faith affirmatively respond to Question 6 of Form 328. For further information, contact Senior Deputy Chief, Policy Division, Media Bureau, Steven Broeckaert, (202) 418-1075, Steven.Broeckaert@fcc.gov, TTY (202) 418-7171. - FCC - Pub. Law No 102-385, � 3, 106 Stat. 1460 (1992), codified as, 47 U.S.C. � 543. 47 U.S.C. � 543(a)(3)(A)-(C); 47 C.F.R. � 76.910(b)(1)-(3). In Implementation of Sections of the Cable Television Consumer Protection and Competition Act of 1992: Rate Regulation, 8 FCC Rcd 5631, 5686-87 (1993) (``Rate Order''). See FCC Form 328 (OMB 3060-0550) available at, http://www.fcc.gov/Forms/Form328/328.pdf (``Form 328'). See Form 328 at Question 6. The term ``effective competition'' means that: (A) fewer than 30 percent of the households in the franchise area
• 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
  • COMMISSION Steven A. Broeckaert ATTACHMENT A CSR 8242-E AREA SERVED BY CHARTER COMMUNICATIONS OR ITS SUBSIDIARIES AND AFFILIATES DBS Communities CUID(s) CPR* Households Subscribers New Hanover NC0152 23.53% 6,919 1,628 County, North NC0369 Carolina *CPR = Percent of competitive DBS penetration rate. Petition for Reconsideration of Rate Regulation Certification, dated Nov. 12, 2009. By way of background, 47 C.F.R. � 76.910 provides for the Commission to certificate the County to regulate Charter's basic rates. The County filed a request for certification with the Commission, which was dated September 14, 2009. 47 C.F.R. � 76.910(e) provides for the automatic grant of the County's request 30 days later, absent intervening circumstances. 47 C.F.R. � 76.911(b) provides that the filing of Charter's petition was
• 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
  • Exh. A. Comments at 6, citing Reconsideration Order, 9 FCC Rcd at 3656, � 2(3) (cable operators petitioning for reconsideration of franchise authorities' certification to regulate basic cable rates ``must rely on subscriber data as of or approximately as of the time of certification, but no earlier than two months before the request for certification was filed''). 46 C.F.R. � 76.910(e). 46 U.S.C. � 405(a). Implementation of Section 19 of the Cable Television Consumer Protection & Competition Act of 1992, Annual Assessment of the Status of Competition in the Market for the Delivery of Video Services, 9 FCC Rcd 7442, 7474, � 63 (1994) (``On June 17, 1994, DirecTV . . . began providing high-power DBS service''); id. at 7476, �
• 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
  • less than thorough decision could result.'' Accordingly, we do not address Comcast's claim of competing provider effective competition at this time. We would, however, accept a renewed request for special relief on those grounds as described in the following paragraph. conclusion We grant the City's petition to be re-certified to regulate Comcast's basic rates in Boston, Massachusetts. Pursuant to Section 76.910(e), unless the Commission notifies the County otherwise and subject to the other qualifications in subsection (e), 30 days after release of this Memorandum Opinion and Order, the City will be re-certified to regulate Comcast's basic cable service. Comcast may, no later than that date, file a petition for reconsideration of the City of Boston's certification raising the competing provider effective
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-289834A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-289834A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-289834A1.txt
  • over which the Commission has assumed jurisdiction pursuant to �76.913 of this chapter; (3) All materials associated with Commission review of franchise authority decisions concerning the rate charged for the basic cable service tier and associated equipment pursuant to �76.944 of this chapter; (4) All materials associated with local government requests for authorization to regulate basic cable rates pursuant to �76.910 of this chapter (Form 328); (5) All materials associated with the certification of Open Video System (OVS) operators pursuant to �76.1502 of this chapter; (6) A list of all registered cable communities is maintained electronically at ; and (7) Public notices issued related to CARS licenses, Cable Special Relief Petitions, and other filings are available electronically at . (b) Office
• http://transition.fcc.gov/Bureaus/Cable/Notices/1998/fcc98068.pdf http://transition.fcc.gov/Bureaus/Cable/Notices/1998/fcc98068.wp
  • least thirteen different types of petition or complaints that could be filed to initiate Commission action on these rules: 1) petition for special relief (47 C.F.R. � 76.7(a)(1)); 2) must-carry complaint (47 C.F.R. � 76.7(a)(1)); 3) petition to show cause (47 C.F.R. � 76.9); 4) request for temporary authority (47 C.F.R. � 76.29); 5) franchising authority certification (47 C.F.R. � 76.910(b)); 6) petition for reconsideration of certification (47 C.F.R. � 76.911); 7) petition for recertification (47 C.F.R. � 76.916); 8) petition for review of rates (47 C.F.R. � 76.933); 9) rate complaint (47 C.F.R. � 76.950); 10) commercial leased access dispute (47 C.F.R. � 76.975); 11) program access adjudicatory proceedings (47 C.F.R. � 76.1003); 12) petition for exclusivity (47 C.F.R. �
• 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
  • and any procedural requirements that we impose. Before turning to those procedures, we agree with commenters representing both the cable industry and LFAs that urge us to make clear that LFAs Federal Communications Commission FCC 99-57 121NCTA Comments at 27; Massachusetts Cable Commission Comments at 16. 122Massachusetts Cable Commission Comments at 8; NCTA Comments at 27. 123See 47 C.F.R. � 76.910. 124New Jersey Ratepayer Advocate Comments at 12. 125See 1996 Act, � 301(b)(1)(A), 110 Stat. 115. 126Fleischman Comments at 19. Accord NCTA Comments at 25. 127Fleischman Comments at 19. 128Id. See 47 U.S.C. 543(c)(1)(C) ("refund such portion of the rates or charges that were paid by subscribers after the filing of the first complaint filed with the franchising authority . .
• 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
  • least thirteen different types of petition or complaints that could be filed to initiate Commission action on these rules: 1) petition for special relief (47 C.F.R. � 76.7(a)(1)); 2) must-carry complaint (47 C.F.R. � 76.7(a)(1)); 3) petition to show cause (47 C.F.R. � 76.9); 4) request for temporary authority (47 C.F.R. � 76.29); 5) franchising authority certification (47 C.F.R. � 76.910(b)); 6) petition for reconsideration of certification (47 C.F.R. � 76.911); 7) petition for recertification (47 C.F.R. � 76.916); 8) petition for review of rates (47 C.F.R. � 76.933); 9) rate complaint (47 C.F.R. � 76.950); 10) commercial leased access dispute (47 C.F.R. � 76.975); 11) program access adjudicatory proceedings (47 C.F.R. � 76.1003); 12) petition for exclusivity (47 C.F.R. �
• http://www.fcc.gov/Bureaus/Cable/Orders/1999/da992760.doc
  • to regulate Time Warner Cable's basic cable service and equipment rates IS REVOKED. 9. 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 Communications Act � 623(l)(1)(C), 47 U.S.C. � 543(l)(1)(C). Communications Act � 623(a)(4), 47 U.S.C. � 543(a)(4). 47 C.F.R. � 76.910(e); 47 C.F.R. � 76.910(b); see also Communications Act � 623(a)(4), 47 U.S.C. � 543(a)(4). 47 C.F.R. �� 1.106, 76.911; Implementation of Section of the Cable Television Consumer Protection and Competition Act of 1992: Rate Regulation, Report and Order and Further Notice of Proposed Rulemaking, 8 FCC Rcd 5631, 5693 (1993) (``Rate Order''). 47 C.F.R. � 76.911(c). 47 C.F.R. � 76.914.
• http://www.fcc.gov/Bureaus/Cable/Orders/1999/da992774.doc
  • more than 90 days from the March 27, 1996 tolling orders in Florence. See TCI-TKR of Northern Kentucky, Inc. 11 FCC Rcd 17353, 17362 (CSB 1996). See Falcon Petition for Review filed May 9, 1997, Attachment A, RCC Order No. 97-13 and Order No. 97-5(Final). Id. Id. 47 U.S.C. � 537. Citing 47 U.S.C. � 541(b)(1) and 47 C.F.R. � 76.910(a). 8 FCC Rcd at 5715. See Chillicothe Cablevision, Inc., 10 FCC Rcd 6055, 6057 (1995). See also Century Cable of Southern California, 11 FCC Rcd 501 (1995); Ultracom of Marple Inc., 10 FCC Rcd 6640 (1995); Falcon Cablevision, 10 FCC Rcd 10409, 10411 (1995); TCI TKR of Houston, 10 FCC Rcd 8063 (1995); A-R Cable Services-ME, Inc., 10 FCC Rcd
• 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
  • and any procedural requirements that we impose. Before turning to those procedures, we agree with commenters representing both the cable industry and LFAs that urge us to make clear that LFAs Federal Communications Commission FCC 99-57 121NCTA Comments at 27; Massachusetts Cable Commission Comments at 16. 122Massachusetts Cable Commission Comments at 8; NCTA Comments at 27. 123See 47 C.F.R. � 76.910. 124New Jersey Ratepayer Advocate Comments at 12. 125See 1996 Act, � 301(b)(1)(A), 110 Stat. 115. 126Fleischman Comments at 19. Accord NCTA Comments at 25. 127Fleischman Comments at 19. 128Id. See 47 U.S.C. 543(c)(1)(C) ("refund such portion of the rates or charges that were paid by subscribers after the filing of the first complaint filed with the franchising authority . .
• http://www.fcc.gov/Bureaus/Cable/Orders/2000/da000039.doc
  • which was filed on June 16, 1997, simply states that, ``[a]fter the Appeal was filed, TCI-EI became aware of an additional rate order . . .'' and ``the responsible staff at TCI did not become aware of the Additional Order until quite recently.'' The Appeal Supplement does not allege that the City failed to provide due process pursuant to Section 76.910(b)(2) of the Commission's rules or to provide public notice of its action or show why, with the exercise of ordinary diligence, the 1997 Order could not have been timely appealed. Accordingly, we conclude that there is no basis shown in the Appeal Supplement for authorizing the pleading and addressing the 1997 Order on the merits. 12. We turn next to
• http://www.fcc.gov/Bureaus/Cable/Orders/2000/da000063.doc
  • include a person insofar as such person is engaged in the provision of a commercial mobile service under Section 332(c), except to the extent that the Commission finds that such service should be included in the definition of such term. Communications Act � 3(26), 47 U.S.C. � 153(26). Communications Act � 623(a)(4), 47 U.S.C. � 543(a)(4). 47 C.F.R. �� 76.906, 76.910(b)(4). 47 C.F.R. � 76.910(e); 47 C.F.R. � 76.910(b). See also Communications Act � 623(a)(4), 47 U.S.C. � 543(a)(4). 11 FCC Rcd 5937, 5944 (1996). 47 C.F.R. � 76.7. Communications Act � 623(l)(1)(D), 47 U.S.C. � 543(l)(1)(D). See also 47 C.F.R. �76.905(b)(4). 47 C.F.R. � 76.905(e). See Implementation of Cable Act Reform Provisions of the Telecommunications Act of 1996, Report and
• http://www.fcc.gov/Bureaus/Cable/Orders/2000/da000577.doc
  • Limited Procedures Review), at p. 2. See Annual Assessment of the Status of Competition in the Market for Delivery of Video Programming, 9 FCC Rcd 7442, 7474 (1994). Daniels, �12-14. See Exhibit 4 of the City's opposition to the revocation petition filed January 10, 1996. See Exhibit B of Daniels' revocation petition filed October 17, 1995. See 47 C.F.R. � 76.910. Daniels also held that Daniels' request for a stay of these appeal proceedings during consideration of the revocation petition was rendered moot. See Daniels, 11 FCC Rcd at 11862, n. 25. Federal Communications Commission DA 00-577 Federal Communications Commission DA 00-577 � � � � � � j q R R R
• http://www.fcc.gov/Bureaus/Cable/Orders/2000/da001002.doc
  • Order on Reconsideration, 9 FCC Rcd 4316, 4346 (1994) (``Third Reconsideration''). Rate Order at 5732. Interlocutory Rate Order, found at the Cable Division's Opposition, Exhibit B at 2-3. Id. at 5. The Cable Division's Opposition at 4, quoting Rate Order, 8 FCC Rcd at 5731 para. 149. Rate Order, 8 FCC Rcd at 5729-30 para. 147. See 47 C.F.R. � 76.910(a), (b); FCC Form 328, Certification of Franchising Authority to Regulate Basic Cable Service Rates and Initial Finding of Lack of Effective Competition (Apr. 1999). Third Reconsideration, 9 FCC Rcd at 4346 para. 81. The Commission is not the appropriate forum for deciding issues of state law. See 47 C.F.R. � 76.944(a). We do not wish to discourage opportunities for operators
• http://www.fcc.gov/Bureaus/Cable/Orders/2000/da001072.doc
  • petition for special relief filed by Time Warner seeking a declaration of effective competition in Daleville, Alabama 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 Communications Act �623(l)(1)(C), 47 U.S.C. �543(l)(1)(C). Communications Act �623(a)(4), 47 U.S.C. �543(a)(4). 47 C.F.R. �76.910(e); 47 C.F.R. �76.910(b); see also Communications Act �623(a)(4), 47 U.S.C. �543(a)(4). Time Warner Petition at 2. Id. Id. at Exhibit E. Id. at Exhibit C. Id. at Exhibit F. The Commission has stated that 1990 Census data is an appropriate measure of households. Operators that have access to more recent data may submit such information. See In the Matter of
• http://www.fcc.gov/Bureaus/Cable/Orders/2000/da001073.doc
  • rules. FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION William H. Johnson Deputy Chief, Cable Services Bureau On Jan. 4, 1994, the City filed an FCC Form 328 to become certified to regulate the basic cable service rates in its franchise area. The City's certification became effective on Feb. 3, 1994. Communications Act �623(l)(1)(C), 47 U.S.C. �543(l)(1)(C). Communications Act �623(a)(4), 47 U.S.C. �543(a)(4). 47 C.F.R. �76.910(e); 47 C.F.R. �76.910(b); see also Communications Act �623(a)(4), 47 U.S.C. �543(a)(4). TCI Petition at 2. Id. Id. Id. at Exhibit B - D. Id. at 2 and Exhibit B. Id. at 4. The Commission has stated that 1990 Census data is an appropriate measure of households. Operators that have access to more recent data may submit such information. See In
• http://www.fcc.gov/mb/engineering/76print.html
  • [81]76.800 Definitions. [82]76.801 Scope. [83]76.802 Disposition of cable home wiring. [84]76.804 Disposition of home run wiring. [85]76.805 Access to molding. [86]76.806 Pre-termination access to cable home wiring. Subpart N -- Cable Rate Regulation [87]76.901 Definitions. [88]76.905 Standards for identification of cable systems subject to effective competition. [89]76.906 Presumption of no effective competition. [90]76.907 Petition for a determination of effective competition. [91]76.910 Franchising authority certification. [92]76.911 Petition for reconsideration of certification. [93]76.912 Joint certification. [94]76.913 Assumption of jurisdiction by the Commission. [95]76.914 Revocation of certification. [96]76.916 Petition for recertification. [97]76.917 Notification of certification withdrawal. [98]76.920 Composition of the basic tier. [99]76.921 Buy-through of other tiers prohibited. [100]76.922 Rates for the basic service tier and cable programming service tiers. [101]76.923 Rates for equipment
• http://www.fcc.gov/mb/engineering/part76.pdf
  • of cable home wiring. � 76.804 Disposition of home run wiring. � 76.805 Access to molding. � 76.806 Pre-termination access to cable home wiring. Subpart N-Cable Rate Regulation � 76.901 Definitions. � 76.905 Standards for identification of cable systems subject to effective competition. � 76.906 Presumption of no effective competition. � 76.907 Petition for a determination of effective competition. � 76.910 Franchising authority certification. � 76.911 Petition for reconsideration of certification. � 76.912 Joint certification. � 76.913 Assumption of jurisdiction by the Commission. � 76.914 Revocation of certification. � 76.916 Petition for recertification. � 76.917 Notification of certification withdrawal. � 76.920 Composition of the basic tier. � 76.921 Buy-through of other tiers prohibited. � 76.922 Rates for the basic service tier