WPCia 2BEJ Z Courier c-#XR  P7jQXP#HP LaserJet 4_230_1HPLAS4.PRS 4x  @\_)^X@206{43|wCG Times Bold#XR  P7jQ}XP#CourierCG Times907_1HPLAS4SI.PRSx  @\:WX@3|wCourierCG TimesCG Times BoldTimes New Roman Bold;8wC;,Xw PE37XPD<7zC;,c!Xz_ pi7XANE,ܼ PE37Pd|DdpL|Dd~4ddC$CWxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxNHxxH\dDXddddd8@d<@d<DDXXdDDxddzHxxHvppDXd<"dxtldpxxd2 KbKDYC "i~'^DOuuOOOu=O=AuuuuuuuuuuOOuۨYuۨ騨OAOuOuggOuAOAăugYOuuug]3]yO=yOOO=OOOOOOuOAuuuuu騨gggggVAVAVAVAuuuuuuuuuuuuuggyggggguuuyuYAYYOYyyAiO]Auu稨gggYYYywO騨ygggOYOu=uuN?NWxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxNTT|uOuuuuuuFOuFOuFOOuuuPPuu鏱T錌TƒOuuF"u錊~u匌u"i~'^:DpddȨDDDdp4D48ddddddddddDDpppd|Ld|pȐD8DtdDdpXpXDdp8Dp8pdppXLDpdddXP,PhD4htDDD4DDDDDDdDp8dddddȐXXXXXJ8J8J8J8pddddppppddpddddzpdddXXhXXXXXdddhdptL8LpLDLpphhp8ZDP8pppddƐXXXpLpLpLphfDtppppppȐhXXXpDppLDd4ddC6CWxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxNHxxHjdDddddddANE,ܼ PE37PD=@NE,"#_ pi7?@ND,4  pG;@7nC:,4Xn4  pG;XAV"G($,hG PE37hPB7jC:,4Xj\  P6G;XP W!@(#,4h@\  P6G;hP4wC;,DXw*0 x]7X1mC9,YXm2PG;XP     ",tB^ f ^;C]ddCCCdCCCCddddddddddCCY~~vCN~sk~CCCddCYdYdYCdd88d8ddddJN8ddddYYdYd4dddddCddddddddd8YYYYYY~Y~Y~Y~YC8C8C8C8ddddddddddYdddddsdXdXXXddx|X~d~d|XdddddddC8ddddCdoddd|8|H~d<|8dtddddHHdlLlLlLkd|H|8~ddddddddXXXd~ddkd~ddxCddCCCWxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxNdddCYQQddddddFddddFCChhd44ddzzdddvooChdF"dhd9dCCzCddoddCdYds]zUvdYYCCCCz~ozoY~NYdYC8YooYdYzsdzdd~YYzozzz~CdzYzzzzCCdddddddzCsdYC\   pxtll\tll@\@\`L2qQf #f ?/f : F",tB^ f ^;C]ddCCCdCCCCddddddddddCCdxN`xoCCCddCdoYoYFdo8Co8odooYNCodddYdddd4dddddCddddddddo8dddddYYYYYN8N8N8N8oddddooooddpddddxodddXXddXddXdddddooL8doddNorddo8PdN8ppoddXXdpLoNpLodPDdopoopodXYXodoodddCddCCCWxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxNdddCdUUddddddFddddFCCssd44ddzzddd~ooCsdF"dsd9dCCzCddoddCdYds`zUvdddCCCCzozoYNYYYN8YooYdYzzdzddYYzozzzNdzYzzzzCCdddddddzCzdYC\   pxtll\tll@\@\`L",tB^ f ^ENluuNNNuNNNNuuuuuuuuuuNNhN[}NNNuuNhuhuhNuuAAuAuuuuV[Auuuuhhuhu=uuuuuNuuuuuuuuuAhhhhhhhhhhNANANANAuuuuuuuuuuhuuuuuuguggguuguuguuuuuuuNAuuuuNuuuuATuFAuuuuuTTu~Y~Y~Y}uTAuuuuuuuuggguuu}uuuNuuNNNWxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxNuuuNh__uuuuuuRuuuuRNNyyu<<uuuuuNyuR"uyuCuNNNuuuuNuhulcuhhNNNNh[huhNAhhuhuuuhhNuhNNuuuuuuuNuhN /;k  PP9~~+k~~KkKk&&pY",tB^ f ^ENluuNNNuNNNNuuuuuuuuuuNNu[pNNNuuNuhhRuANAuh[Nuuuhuuuu=uuuuuNuuuuuuuuAuuuuuhhhhh[A[A[A[AuuuuuuuuuuuuugguuguuguuuuuYAuuu[uuA]u[AuugguY[Yu]OuughguuuuNuuNNNWxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxNuuuNuccuuuuuuRuuuuRNNu<<uuuuuNuR"uuCuNNNuuuuNuhupcuuuNNNNh[hhh[Ahhuhuuuhh[uhNNuuuuuuuNuhN /;k  PP9~~+k~~KkKk&&pY"i~'K2^$(8<><q*"xxxxWWxxxWWkkxxxANE,ܼ PE37PD=@NE,"#_ pi7?@ND,4  pG;@7nC:,4Xn4  pG;XAV"G($,hG PE37hPB7jC:,4Xj\  P6G;XP CW!@(#,4h@\  P6G;hP4wC;,DXw*0 x]7X         FOR FCC RECORD ONLY $// Viacom Cable, Eatonville, WA, MO&O, DA 95135//$ $/76.922 Rates for Cable Programming Service tiers/$  Y-$/benchmark cable rates/$T #_  P7jQܼP# ă  a< x` `  hhBefore the FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION  a<Washington, D.C. 20554 ă  X-x` `  hh@hpp   #e  p7sQ# #XW  p7sQ4X#  Y-#XR  P7jQXP#In the Matter of hh@)`(# DA 95135 ă  Y~ -x` `  hh@)hCUID No. WA0258  Yg -Viacom Cable hh@)  YP -Town of Eatonville, Washington )hpp  Y9 - x` `  hh )  Y" -Request to Deny Jurisdictionhh@hpp    Y -: ORDER ă  Y-Adopted: January 31, 1995 hh@hReleased: February 1, 1995 By the Chief, Cable Services Bureau:  I. A. 1. a.(1)(a) i) a) I. 1. 1. a.(1)(a) i) a)  Y-x1. In this Order we dismiss a complaint against the price Viacom Cable was charging for its cable programming service (CPS) tier in the Town of Eatonville, Washington, CUID No. WA0258, on the ground that the complaint concerns rates that are outside the jurisdiction and authority of this Commission. As explained below, the Commission regulates rates for CPS only, and then only upon filing of a valid complaint. Our review reveals that the complaint filed against Viacom Cable in CUID No. WA0258, while asserting that it challenges CPS rates, challenges only rates for basic service, not for CPS. This complaint therefore does not trigger the Commission's jurisdiction, and it is accordingly dismissed.  Y-x2. The Cable Television Consumer Protection and Competition Act of 1992 (Cable  Y-Act of 1992)f Y-#XR  P7jQXP##XR  P7jQXP##Xj\  P6G;XP#э #XTvN  x7BQ X## XR  P7jQXP#Cable Television Consumer Protection and Competition Act, Pub. L. No. 102385, 106 Stat. 1460 (1992) (Cable Act of 1992).f distinguishes among basic cable service, premium cable service, and cable  Yn-programming service;nc Y#-#XR  P7jQXP##XR  P7jQXP##Xj\  P6G;XP#э #XR  P7jQXP# Cable Act of 1992, Section 602, 47 U.S.C. 522. this Commission regulates rates only for cable programming service. The basic service tier includes (at a minimum) the broadcast signals distributed by the cable operator along with any public, educational, and governmental (PEG) access channels that the local franchising authority requires the cable operator to carry. At the cable operator's discretion, this basic service tier may also include additional program services. Except in limited circumstances, the   Commission does not have jurisdiction over rates for the basic service tier, and cannot act upon complaints concerning rates for that tier. Premium cable"#0*0*0*%" service consists of channels that are paid for individually (perchannel), such as Home Box"#0*0*0*%" Office (HBO) and CineMax. Channels for which the operator charges a perchannel or per Y"-program rate are not subject to rate regulation.#x6X@KX@##:s2PkC XP## o\  PCyoXP# #XR  P7jQ}XP#CPS includes all video programming distributed over the system that is not on the basic service tier and for which the operator"#0*0*0*$" does not charge on a perchannel or perprogram basis. Rates for CPS tiers are subject to regulation by the Commission in response to a valid complaint. x3. The filing of a complaint regarding CPS rates that is not returned by the Commission establishes our jurisdiction, and triggers the operator's obligation to provide rate  Y-justification.gx4 Y-#XR  P7jQ}XP#э 47 C.F.R.  76.956.g The complaint noted here was accepted for filing after preliminary review. Viacom Cable subsequently filed a response to the complaint stating that it concerns basic, not CPS, rates. Viacom Cable argues that challenges against rates for basic service should be submitted to the appropriate local franchising authority rather than to the Commission. x4. The complaint under consideration here was filed with this Commission on an FCC Form 329. FCC Form 329 is used by subscribers or local franchising authorities wishing to lodge with the Commission a complaint about an operator's CPS rates. The form is entitled "Cable Programming Service Rate Complaint." While it is designed for use in challenging upper tier rates, the form itself does not explain or define basic tier, premium, or cable programming services tier, but simply uses the term 'cable programming services' or 'CPS.' It is thus possible that a complainant might complete such a complaint form, and might check the box which states that "this complaint challenges the operator's CPS rates," without actually having distinguished or understood the difference between basic tier rates,  YK-premium service rates, and CPS tier rates.SKyx4 Yu-#XR  P7jQ}XP#э#o\  PCyoXP# #XR  P7jQ}XP#We note that operators have great latitude in determining what channels will be included in the basic tier; once the statutory minimum (broadcast and PEG channels, as discussed above) is met, the operator may include as many additional channels in the basic tier as it wants, or it may move additional channels to a higher tier. Thus it is possible that a complainant might not clearly understand which channels are part of which tier.S x5. We have examined the complaint and Viacom Cable's response, and we conclude that the complaint challenges only basic rates, not CPS rates. Although the complainant has checked the box indicating that the rates challenged are CPS rates, and that these rates  Y-violate the Commission's rules,`x4 YX-#XR  P7jQ}XP#э#o\  PCyoXP# #XR  P7jQ}XP#The form was changed in December 1993. See News Release of December 13, 1993. The change produced a simpler, clearer form, but even the new form does not provide definitions of or distinctions among the various service tiers. The specific assertion that the complainant is challenging CPS rates that violate the Commission's rules is question 13 on the original form; we note that this question has been eliminated on the new form. The complaint was filed on the original, premodification complaint form, and contains the certification that it challenges CPS rates.  the specific information provided by the complainant indicates that only basic rates are actually at issue. When only basic rates are being challenged, the complaint should properly be brought to the attention of the local franchising authority in the first instance, and not filed with this Commission. If the complaint does in"0*((}" fact challenge CPS rates, the complainant should file a petition for reconsideration providing information adequate to support his challenge. x  Yv-x6. Accordingly, IT IS ORDERED, pursuant to Section 623(a)(2)(A) and (B) of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended, 47 U.S.C. 543(a)(2)(A) and (B), that the complaint filed on November 8, 1993, against the cable programming service price charged by Viacom Cable in the Town of Eatonville, Washington, CUID No. WA0258, IS DISMISSED.  Y -x7. This action is taken pursuant to delegated authority under Section 0.321 of the Commission's Rules, 47 C.F.R.  0.321. x x` ` x` `  hhFEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION x` `   x` `  hh x` `  hhMeredith J. Jones x` `  hhChief, Cable Services Bureau"b0*(("