********************************************************    
                         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                        )
Commercial Leased Access Complaint of        )
                                   )    
STEPHEN S. SMITH,                       )
                 Petitioner,       )
v.                                 )    CSR 5055-L
                                   )
TCI CABLEVISION OF TEXAS, INC.,    )
                 Respondent.       )


                  MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER

   Adopted:  November 6, 1998           
     Released:  November 10, 1998

By the Acting Chief, Consumer Protection and Competition Division, Cable Services Bureau:

I.   Introduction

     1.   TCI Cablevision of Texas, Inc. ("TCI") filed a petition for reconsideration of the Cable
Service Bureau's Memorandum Opinion and Order, DA 98-319 (Feb. 20, 1998) (the "Order"), issued in this
proceeding.  Steven S. Smith did not file an opposition.

II.  Discussion

     2.   In its petition, TCI challenges the Bureau's interpretation in the Order of Section
76.970(h)(1) of our rules that cable operators must respond to both oral and written requests for leased
access information within 15 days.  In the Order, we decided that a request for leased access required a
written request while a request for leased access information could be made orally or in writing because the
subparagraph governing the first request explicitly required a writing while the second subparagraph was
silent on the issue.  According to TCI, the rule requires a written request for both leased access and leased
access information.  TCI states that numerous Commission orders and In re Implementation of Sections of
the Cable Television Consumer Protection and Competition Act of 1992: Leased Commercial Access,
Second Report and Order and Second Order on Reconsideration of the First Report and Order ("Second
Report"), support its position. 

     3.   We have reviewed the Second Report and see no basis therein for TCI's argument that
requests for leased access information must be in writing.  Rather, the text that TCI quotes refers only to
requests for leased access.  However, in orders issued after the Second Report, in dicta, we read the two
subparagraphs of our leased access rules that address requests for leased access information and for leased
access together and stated that the requests required a writing.  

     4.     Upon reconsideration, we conclude that the two subparagraphs should be read together and
that requests for leased access information must be in writing.  Requiring a writing generally avoids disputes
over the date a request was made and ensures that what is requested is accurately reflected in a record for
the cable operator and for us to review, if necessary.  Therefore, a request for leased access information must
be made in writing in order to trigger the fifteen day response requirement of our leased access rules.  
Nevertheless, if a prospective leased access programmer makes an oral request for leased access information
and it is the practice of the cable operator not to respond to oral requests, then the cable operator must inform
the prospective programmer that requests for leased access information must be made in writing.

III. Ordering Clause

     5.   Accordingly, IT IS ORDERED, pursuant to Section 1.106(j) of the Commission's rules, 47
C.F.R.  1.106(j), that the petition for reconsideration of the Cable Services Bureau's Memorandum Opinion
and Order, DA 98-319 (Feb. 20, 1998) filed by TCI Cablevision of Texas, Inc. is GRANTED. 

     6.   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 COMMISSION



                         Deborah Klein, Acting Chief
                         Consumer Protection and Competition Division
                         Cable Services Bureau