********************************************************    
                         NOTICE
********************************************************

This document was converted from
WordPerfect to ASCII Text format.

Content from the original version of the document such as
headers, footers, footnotes, endnotes, graphics, and page numbers
will not show up in this text version.

All text attributes such as bold, italic, underlining, etc. from the
original document will not show up in this text version.

Features of the original document layout such as
columns, tables, line and letter spacing, pagination, and margins
will not be preserved in the text version.

If you need the complete document, download the
WordPerfect version or Adobe Acrobat version, if available.

*****************************************************************
                            Before the
                Federal Communications Commission
                      Washington, D.C. 20554


In the Matter of                   )
                              )
Century New Mexico Cable Corp.          )    CUID No. NM0003 (Silver City)
                              )
Order Denying Jurisdiction              )


                              ORDER

     Adopted:  February 3, 1997                                    Released:  February 11, 1997

By the Chief, Financial Analysis and Compliance Division, Cable Services Bureau:

     1.   In this Order we dismiss a complaint against the rates that the above captioned
operator ("Operator") was charging for its cable programming services tier ("CPST") in the
community set forth above on the grounds that the complaint concerns rates that are outside the
jurisdiction of the Federal Communications Commission ("Commission").  Under the
Communications Act, the Commission regulates the CPST rates of cable systems not subject to
effective competition upon the filing of a valid complaint.  Our review reveals that the complaint
filed against Operator, while asserting that it challenges the CPST rate, challenges only a rate for the
Operator's century select package.  Therefore, the complaint does not trigger the Commission's
jurisdiction.

     2.        On July 5, 1995 the Operator filed a motion to dismiss the subject complaint on the
grounds that they offered only a basic service tier and a few a la carte channels.  To support their
motion the Operator referred to a previous Commission decision. In that decision the Commission
dismissed pending complaints against the Operator's century select package because sufficient
information regarding the Operator's restructured offering in accordance with our Going Forward
rules could be treated as a new product tier.  We agree that in this instance the Operator had met its
burden and agree that the century select package complained about falls under the guidelines of a
new product tier.


     3.   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. Section 543(a)(2)(A) and (B), that the
complaint against the CPST rates charged by Operator in the community referenced above IS
DISMISSED and the motion to dismiss is GRANTED.

     4.  This action is taken pursuant to delegated authority under Section 0.321 of the
Commission's rules, 47 C.F.R.  0.321.  

                         FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION



                         Elizabeth W. Beaty
                         Chief, Financial Analysis and Compliance Division
                         Cable Services Bureau