********************************************************    
                         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 Communications               )     CUID No. CA0082 (Twentynine Palms)
                                     )
Order Denying Jurisdiction           )


                                   ORDER

      Adopted:  October 29, 1997                       Released:  November 4, 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 New Product Tier ("NPT"). 
Therefore, the complaint does not trigger the Commission's jurisdiction.

      2.     On July 21, 1997 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 a la carte package and determined that the a la carte package
should be treated as a NPT.  We agree that in this instance the Operator's a la carte package of three
channels should be treated as a NPT.

      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