Click here for Adobe Acrobat version
Click here for Microsoft Word version

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

This document was converted from Microsoft Word.

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
Microsoft Word or Adobe Acrobat version.

*****************************************************************

Federal Communications Commission DA 16-1127
Before the
Federal Communications Commission
Washington, DC 20554
In the Matter of
Comcast Corporation
)
)
)
)
)
File No.: EB-IHD-15-00018079
1
Acct. No.: 201632080013
FRN: 0015401581
ORDER
Adopted: October 11, 2016 Released: October 11, 2016
By the Chief, Enforcement Bureau:
1. The Enforcement Bureau (Bureau) of the Federal Communications Commission has
entered into a Consent Decree to resolve its investigation into whether Comcast Corporation (Comcast)
improperly charged its subscribers for services or equipment that they never requested and, in so doing,
burdened them with the responsibility to discover such wrongful charges and seek corrective action.
2. “Negative option billing” is the practice of charging cable subscribers for services or
equipment that they did not affirmatively request.
2
It is equivalent to the illegal practice known as
“cramming” (the unauthorized placement of charges on telephone bills).
3
In place for over 20 years, the
negative option billing prohibition has been interpreted and enforced as a customer service rule, and the
“Commission as well as state and local governments have concurrent jurisdiction to regulate cable
operators’ negative option billing practices.”
4
3. Congress enacted Section 623(f) of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended (Act),
to ensure that customers would not have to pay for cable services or equipment without affirmatively
requesting those services or equipment.
5
The Commission subsequently implemented the negative option
billing prohibition by adopting Section 76.981(a) of the Commission’s rules (Rules) in 1993.
6

The negative option billing prohibition therefore relieves subscribers of the need to spend significant time
and effort in seeking redress for any unwanted service or equipment, which is often manifested in long
telephone wait times, unreturned phone calls from customer service, unmet promises of refunds, and
hours of effort wasted while pursuing corrections.
14

6. The prohibitions on negative option billing allow cable operators to make certain
adjustments to subscribers’ services and rates, provided that they “do not constitute a fundamental change
in the nature of an existing service or tier of service and are otherwise consistent with applicable
regulations.”
15
Cable operators enjoy the freedom to offer their customers beneficial upgrades and, when
appropriately justified, to expand system capacity.
16
(Continued from previous page)
S14248 (daily ed. Sept. 21, 1992) (statement of Sen. Gorton); 138 Cong. Rec. S567-S568 (daily ed. Jan. 29, 1992)
(statement of Sen. Gorton).
6
See Implementation of Sections 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 (1993) (Rate
Regulation Order).
7
47 U.S.C. § 543(f).
8
47 CFR § 76.981(a) (providing that “[a] cable operator shall not charge a subscriber for any service or equipment
that the subscriber has not affirmatively requested by name”). See Implementation of Sections of the Cable
Television Consumer Protection and Competition Act of 1992: Rate Regulation, Sixth Order on Reconsideration, 10
FCC Rcd 1226, 1296, Appendix B, para. 4 (1994) (Sixth Order on Recons.).
9
47 CFR § 76.981(a). The rule also provides that the required consent may be made orally or in writing. Id.
10
See 2011 Declaratory Ruling, 26 FCC Rcd at 2234, para. 10.
11
Id.
12
Id. at 2236, para. 14.
13
Monmouth Cablevision, Monmouth County, New Jersey, Memorandum Opinion and Order, 10 FCC Rcd 9438,
9440, para. 11 (Cable Servs. Bur. 1995).
14
Cf. Warner Cable Communications, Milwaukee, Wisconsin, Letter of Inquiry—Negative Option Billing Issue, 10
FCC Rcd 2103, 2105, para. 13 (Cable Servs. Bur. 1995) (describing the negative option billing prohibition’s role as
“a consumer protection mechanism”).
15
47 CFR § 76.981(b).
16
As the Commission has explained, the negative option billing prohibition does not apply to “a change in the mix
of channels in a tier, including additions or deletions of channels . . . unless they change the fundamental nature of
the tier” or to rate increases unless the “price change is accompanied by a fundamental change in service, such as the
addition of a new tier.” Rate Regulation Order, 8 FCC Rcd at 5906, para. 440; see 2011 Declaratory Ruling, 26
(continued….)
Federal Communications Commission DA 16-1127
3
7. Comcast provides cable, telephone, and Internet services to customers throughout the
United States and charges its subscribers monthly for these services and related equipment. As noted
above, subject to limited exceptions, federal law requires that cable operators such as Comcast charge
subscribers only for services or equipment that the customer affirmatively requested. A cable operator
may not infer that a subscriber accepted the addition of new services or equipment from the subscriber’s
failure to refuse them.
8. The Commission received numerous complaints from consumers alleging that Comcast
imposed charges for equipment and services that customers did not order. Although the specific details
vary, many complaints allege that Comcast added services or equipment to subscribers’ cable service
without their knowledge or permission. Some complaints claim that services or equipment were added or
upgraded after subscribers specifically declined an offer by Comcast representatives to do so. Many of
the complaints describe multiple attempts by subscribers to obtain clarification or redress of billing issues
during hours-long and repeated phone calls; allege unhelpful or abusive behavior by customer service
representatives (such as unexplained disconnections, refusal to transfer calls to supervisory personnel,
threats of service interruptions, or assertions that subscribers bore the responsibility to know how much
their bill ought to be); and allege repeated, unmet promises by Comcast employees to apply credits or
billing adjustments. The following examples are representative of the many consumer complaints
received by the Commission that led the Bureau to undertake an investigation of Comcast.
17
9. Subscriber A.
18
On August 5, 2015, Subscriber A, a Florida resident, filed a complaint
with the Commission. Subscriber A stated that on August 4, 2015, she called Comcast’s automated bill
payment line and was informed she owed more than $300. According to Subscriber A, she had been
receiving the same services from Comcast (digital starter cable service and essential Internet access
service) in her more than nine years as a subscriber; the only change, she stated, was the addition of the
TV Latino service, priced at $9.99 per month, in May 2015. After the call, Subscriber A wrote, she
logged into her Comcast account and “noticed that my bill showed services that I did not have. . . . [an]
Xfinity 3450 Latino triple play Bundle with a two year agreement” that “includes voice service with
international calling.” She also alleged that she was being charged for “equipment that was mailed to me
according to the Comcast bill.” Subscriber A claimed that she then called Comcast to ask for an
explanation; the service representative allegedly stated that the changes to her account were made on July
18, but he was unable to say how or why the changes occurred. The representative reportedly told
Subscriber A to call the billing department as they alone could add or remove services from her account.
Subscriber A claimed she then requested to speak with a supervisor, but was informed that none were
available:
I was told that all supervisors were on a call and that my name can be
added to a list and someone would call me back within 48hours. I said
no that I would hold and I was told I that I was not able to wait on the
line. The process was for him to provide me with the telephone number
and for me to call because he’s transfer bottom was not working, by now
I have been on the phone for almost an hour. I insisted on staying on the
line and the representative told me that he was going to hang up on me.
(Continued from previous page)
FCC Rcd at 2231, para. 5. Similarly, system-wide equipment upgrades are excluded from the negative option
billing prohibition so as not to “deter beneficial upgrades” and thereby undermine the Cable Act of 1992’s goal of
“‘ensur[ing] at cable operators continue to expand, where economically justified, their capacity.’” Rate Regulation
Order, 8 FCC Rcd at 5908, para. 442 (quoting Cable Act of 1992 § 2(b)(3)).
17
We cite to complaints filed by Comcast subscribers with the Commission without identifying any of the
complainants by name. In addition, complainant quotes are reproduced precisely without inserting [sic] for any
errors, except that references to specific Comcast employees are redacted.
18
See Complaint 448664 (on file in EB-IHD-00018079).
Federal Communications Commission DA 16-1127
4
Subscriber A stated that she then called the billing department and, after a 15-minute wait, informed
another representative of her account issues:
After placing me on hold a couple of times he was not able to find a
reason for the changes. He stated that he had reviewed a system were the
customer voice are recorded consenting to any changes to their accounts,
and there was not recording or calls from me in their system requesting
any upgrades or changes to my account.
Subscriber A was then reportedly transferred to the resolution team due to the billing department
representative’s inability to alter her account:
The person that I spoke to in this department was sarcastic had not
customer service skills, show no empathy for my situation. She had the
nerve to ask me if I enjoyed the new service, I was so upset at this
question that I asked her how was I suppose to enjoy something I didn’t
even know I had her answer was that I should’ve known.
According to Subscriber A, the resolution team representative was also unable to resolve her account
issues:
[The customer service representative] offered to changed back my
account but was not able to help me with the internet service I had to
contat a different department to help me with that. She did not know
why the changes were made and didn’t really care. I requested to speak
to a supervisor and I was told that there was no supervisor available until
Thursday. I requested to have my service change back to what I had and
to have my service cancel, I was told the she was only allow one
transaction per day. After spending over 3 hours on the phone with [the
customer service representative] from the Customer resolution team
transferred me to a fax machine.
10. Subscriber B.
19
On August 8, 2015, Subscriber B, a Colorado resident, filed a complaint
with the Commission, claiming that Comcast had wrongfully billed him for an extra cable box for over
two-and-a-half years. According to Subscriber B, he located the extra charge after eighteen months had
passed, and repeatedly and unsuccessfully attempted to obtain a refund over the course of the following
year:
For the last year after I noticed the overcharge, I have been regularly
calling to ask them to fix it they have not fixed it they have been putting
it off and putting it off and putting it off. Then finally I told two weeks
ago that their computers only go back six months. I went to the service
center they told me the same thing so for a long time they put me off and
said they were working on it and going to fix the problem just to have me
wait long enough that they can only go back six months and they don't
have to ever pay me back therefore I have a large outstanding bill that I
owe them and was told it would be looked into. I feel completely taken
advantage of! I do not want to lay what I now owe because of the 2+
years I have been overcharged (through no fault of my own). The bills
are so confusing the extra charge was hard to find. Please help. I have
spent close to 15 hours on the phone with comcast and now close to five
hours in person.

19
See Complaint 457187 (on file in EB-IHD-00018079).
Federal Communications Commission DA 16-1127
5
11. Subscriber C.
20
On June 10, 2015, Subscriber C, a Florida resident, filed a complaint
with the Commission, claiming that he was charged for a pay-per-view boxing match that he never
ordered. According to Subscriber C, he informed a Comcast representative of this and was told that a
one-time courtesy refund would be applied. Apparently, the credit was denied and the refund was never
applied, compelling Subscriber C’s wife to spend over two hours on the phone with a customer service
representative “who cannot transfer us to a supervisor.”
12. Subscriber D.
21
On July 20, 2015, Subscriber D, a Florida resident, filed a complaint
with the Commission. Subscriber D alleged that although he had been a Comcast customer for only three
months, the bill was “always wrong” with “services added I didn’t order, contract price change without
my consent.” Subscriber D stated that “when I call to fix they give me credits to fix, so I pay bill and next
mounth there is money owed from previous bill. and when I call on that the notes for credits are
mysteriously gone.”
13. Subscriber E.
22
On June 11, 2014, Subscriber E, a District of Columbia resident, filed a
complaint with the Commission, which stated:
I have been being charged for showtime by Comcast for over a year
despite the fact that I never asked for it, and can't even access it! When I
called in to inquire and have the charges removed, I was told they would
only go back 6 months! I explained to them that I never asked for it not
did I or could I use it and they still refused to refund me for all the
months I've paid for it! I explained to them that it went unnoticed simply
because I open the bill, look at the amount, pay it and trash it!
14. The Bureau subsequently launched an investigation of Comcast’s compliance with the
negative option billing prohibition and other requirements under the Act and the Rules. Comcast
cooperated in the investigation.
15. To settle this investigation, Comcast has agreed to pay a civil penalty of $2,300,000 to
the United States Treasury. The Consent Decree will also require Comcast to, among other things:
develop and implement a five-year compliance plan, including procedures designed to obtain customers’
affirmative informed consent prior to charging them for new services or equipment; send customers an
order confirmation, separate from any other bill, that clearly and conspicuously describes newly added
services and equipment and their associated charges; offer mechanisms to customers that, at no cost,
enable them to block the addition of new services or equipment to their accounts; implement a detailed
program for redressing disputed charges in a standardized and expedient fashion; limit adverse actions
(such as referring an account to collections or suspending service) while a disputed charge is being
investigated; designate a senior corporate manager as a compliance officer; and implement a training
program to ensure customer service personnel resolve customer complaints about unauthorized charges.
16. After reviewing the terms of the Consent Decree and evaluating the facts before us, we
find that the public interest would be served by adopting the Consent Decree and terminating the
referenced investigation regarding Comcast’s compliance with Section 623(f) of the Act
23
and Section
76.981(a) of the Rules.
24
The Bureau and Comcast have negotiated the terms of the Consent Decree that
resolves these matters. The Consent Decree is attached hereto and incorporated by reference.

20
See Complaint 333638 (on file in EB-IHD-00018079).
21
See Complaint 412884 (on file in EB-IHD-00018079).
22
See Complaint 335794 (on file in EB-IHD-00018079).
23
47 U.S.C. § 623(f).
24
47 CFR § 76.981(a).
Federal Communications Commission DA 16-1127
6
17. In the absence of material new evidence relating to this matter, we conclude that our
investigation raises no substantial or material questions of fact as to whether Comcast possesses the basic
qualifications, including those related to character, to hold or obtain any Commission license or
authorization.
18. Accordingly, IT IS ORDERED, pursuant to Section 4(i) of the Communications Act of
1934, as amended,
25
and the authority delegated by Sections 0.111 and 0.311 of the Commission’s rules,
26
the attached Consent Decree IS ADOPTED and its terms incorporated by reference.
19. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the above-captioned matter IS TERMINATED.
20. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that a copy of this Order and Consent Decree shall be
sent by first-class mail and certified mail, return receipt requested, to David H. Solomon, Esq., and J.
Wade Lindsay, Esq., Attorneys for Comcast Corporation, Wilkinson Barker Knauer, LLP, 1800 M Street,
NW, Suite 800 N, Washington, DC 20036.
FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION
Travis LeBlanc
Chief, Enforcement Bureau

25
47 U.S.C. § 154(i).
26
47 CFR §§ 0.111, 0.311.
Federal Communications Commission DA 16-1127
Before the
Federal Communications Commission
Washington, DC 20554
In the Matter of
Comcast Corporation
)
)
)
)
)
File No.: EB-IHD-15-00018079
1
Acct. No.: 201632080013
FRN: 0015401581
CONSENT DECREE
1. The Enforcement Bureau of the Federal Communications Commission and Comcast
Corporation, by their authorized representatives, hereby enter into this Consent Decree for the purpose of
terminating the Enforcement Bureau’s investigation into Comcast Cable Communications, LLC’s
compliance with Sections 623(f) and 632 of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended, and Sections
76.309(c)(1)(i)-(iv) and (3), 76.981, and 76.1619 of the Commission’s rules, conducted by means of a
subpoena issued January 30, 2015, File No. EB-IHD-15-00018079, and a supplemental subpoena issued
October 2, 2015, under the same file number.
I. DEFINITIONS
2. For the purposes of this Consent Decree, the following definitions shall apply:
(a) “Act” means the Communications Act of 1934, as amended.
2
(b) “Adopting Order” means an order of the Bureau adopting the terms of this
Consent Decree without change, addition, deletion, or modification.
(c) “Affiliate” shall have the same meaning as Section 3(2) of the Act.
3
(d) “Affirmative Informed Consent” means an affirmative act or statement or series of
acts or statements evidencing that a Customer affirmatively requested to acquire
or subscribe to a Product whose description and price have been disclosed to the
Customer prior to, or at the time of, or contemporaneous with, ordering, or which
are otherwise disclosed in accordance with the Rules or applicable law. For
purposes of this Consent Decree, “act or statement” may include (i) an oral or
written (including electronic) statement or (ii) other conduct that reasonably
connotes an affirmative request to acquire or subscribe to such Product in
accordance with applicable law (e.g., the purchase of an on-demand movie via a
remote control and set-top box).
(e) “Bill” means a Customer’s invoice (paper, electronic, video, or other means)
issued by Comcast.
(f) “Blocking” means a restriction, which may include security PINs, passwords, or
similar authentication measures, that a Customer, at the Customer’s election, may
place on the Customer’s account that limits the ability of non-authorized persons
to purchase new Products.

1
The investigation began under File No. EB-IHD-14-00017459 and was subsequently assigned File No. EB-IHD-15-
00018079. Any future correspondence with the Commission concerning this matter should reflect File Number EB-
IHD-15-00018079.
2
47 U.S.C. § 151 et seq.
3
Id. § 153(2).
Federal Communications Commission DA 16-1127
2
(g) “Bureau” means the Enforcement Bureau of the Federal Communications
Commission.
(h) “Clear and Conspicuous” means a statement is disclosed in such size, color,
contrast, and/or location that it is readily noticeable, readable, and understandable.
(i) “Comcast” means Comcast Cable Communications, LLC and its affiliates,
subsidiaries, predecessors-in-interest, and successors-in-interest that provide cable
services, and to the extent they are providing such services.
(j) “Commission” and “FCC” mean the Federal Communications Commission and all
of its bureaus and offices.
(k) “Communications Laws” means collectively, the Act, the Rules, and the published
and promulgated orders and decisions of the Commission to which Comcast is
subject by virtue of its business activities, including but not limited to the
Negative Option Billing Laws.
(l) “Compliance Plan” means the compliance obligations, program, and procedures
described in this Consent Decree at paragraph 15.
(m) “Customer(s)” means a Comcast residential account holder, subscriber, or any
Person to whom Comcast provides cable service, cable equipment, or cable
modems for which charges are or were placed on the Customer’s Bill. For
purposes of this Consent Decree, a Person who is authorized by the Customer to
make changes to the Customer’s account in accordance with Comcast’s
reasonable procedures may, if the context warrants, also be deemed a Customer.
“Customer” does not include any business entity or any state, federal, local, or
other governmental entity if the business entity or government, and not the
employees or individuals working for or with that business entity or government,
is solely liable to Comcast for payment of all charges billed on an account.
“Customer” may include a former customer, if such former customer has a dispute
with Comcast regarding an Unauthorized Product Charge that is subject to the
terms of this Consent Decree as of or after the time such customer terminated
service with Comcast.
(n) “Customer Complaint” means any complaint, inquiry, or other notification,
whether made orally or in writing, alleging the existence of an Unauthorized
Product Charge and for which Comcast creates a complaint ticket and opens a
work log to track progress in handling the complaint. These include: (1) formal
written consumer complaints that Comcast receives from consumer protection and
regulatory agencies, such as the Better Business Bureau, state attorneys general,
and the FCC; (2) customer contacts that Comcast customer care agents or vendors
serving Comcast’s divisions or regions and the “We’re On It” program forward to
Comcast’s Executive Customer Relations (ECR) team; (3) customer contacts
made to the office of the Senior Vice President, Customer Experience, via the
Comcast website, that are forwarded to the ECR team; and (4) customer contacts
made through Comcast’s social media platforms that are forwarded to the ECR
team.
(o) “Effective Date” means the date by which both the Bureau and Comcast have
signed this Consent Decree.
(p) “Investigation” means the inquiry conducted by the Bureau in File No. EB-IHD-
15-00018079 (formerly EB-IHD-14-00017459) regarding Comcast’s compliance
with Sections 623(f) and 632 of the Act and Sections 76.309(c)(1)(i)-(iv) and (3),
76.981, and 76.1619 of the Rules, as conducted by means of a subpoena issued
Federal Communications Commission DA 16-1127
3
January 30, 2015, under File No. EB-IHD-15-00018079, and a supplemental
subpoena issued October 2, 2015, under the same file number.
(q) “Negative Option Billing Laws” means Section 623(f) of the Act, Section
76.981(a) of the Rules, and Commission orders related to such provisions.
(r) “Newly Acquired Entities” means any entities Comcast acquires in the future.
(s) “Parties” means Comcast and the Bureau, each of which is a “Party.”
(t) “Person” shall have the same meaning as Section 3(39) of the Act.
4
(u) “Product” means any cable service, cable equipment, or cable modem for which
charges are placed on the Customer’s Bill.
(v) “Rules” mean the Commission’s regulations found in Title 47 of the Code of
Federal Regulations.
(w) “Unauthorized Product Charge” means a charge for new cable services, new cable
equipment, or a new cable modem that is placed on a Customer’s Bill without the
Customer’s Affirmative Informed Consent. “Unauthorized Product Charge” does
not include rate adjustments made in accordance with applicable law, including
any charges for or adjustments made to any taxes or fees imposed by a
governmental entity, after notice is given to Customers in accordance with
Commission Rules or applicable law, and the additions, deletions, restructurings,
or divisions described in Section 76.981(b) of the Rules as provided by and
subject to the terms of Section 76.981(b) of the Rules.
II. BACKGROUND
3. Comcast is one of the nation’s largest providers of cable, high-speed Internet, and voice
services. It has 27.7 million customers, of which 22.3 million are cable subscribers.
5
Comcast charges its
subscribers monthly for cable, voice, and Internet services, and related equipment. Since December of
2014, the Bureau has been investigating Comcast’s compliance with Sections 623(f) and 632 of the Act
and Sections 76.309(c)(1)(i)-(iv) and (3), 76.981, and 76.1619 of the Rules. In connection with that
investigation, the Bureau has reviewed consumer complaints, including complaints alleging that Comcast
charged its subscribers for cable-related services and equipment that customers did not request. Comcast
cooperated in the Investigation and provided the Bureau with additional Customer Complaints.
4. Although specific circumstances differ, Customer Complaints reviewed by the Bureau
contain allegations that Comcast added charges for new Products to their Bills without authorization,
including Unauthorized Product Charges for premium channels
6
and additional cable boxes, digital video

4
Id. § 153(39).
5
See Comcast, Comcast Reports 4th Quarter and Year End 2015 Results (Feb. 3, 2016),
http://www.cmcsa.com/releasedetail.cfm?ReleaseID=953074.
6
See, e.g., Letter from David H. Solomon, Esq., Counsel to Comcast Corporation, to Jeffrey G. Gee, Chief,
Investigations and Hearings Division, FCC Enforcement Bureau (Oct. 30, 2015) (on file in EB-IHD-15-00018079),
Exhibit 1 at COM-COM-00010020-00010024 (alleging that Comcast added premium channels to subscriber’s
account; account adjusted and customer credited); COM-COM-00008737 (customer placed in promotional package
that included premium channels for price equivalent to the package she was interested in having, but customer
alleges she was unaware of premium channels in package; customer placed on new promotional package that was
even less expensive); COM-COM-00014241-00014243 & 0014250-0014251 (alleging that Comcast added premium
package to customer’s account; Comcast had added a premium package in error and the charge was removed and
backdated, and credit issued for inconvenience). We do not identify any of the complainants discussed here by
name. In addition, we cite to particular documents relating to these complainants by the index numbers provided by
Comcast in its subpoena responses. Letter from David H. Solomon, Esq., Counsel to Comcast Corporation, to
(continued….)
Federal Communications Commission DA 16-1127
4
recorders (DVRs), or cable modems.
7
Some Customers alleged they specifically declined the new
Products offered by Comcast but were nonetheless charged for the unrequested Product on their Bills,
while others simply alleged that they had no knowledge of changes made to their accounts until they
received an email notifying them that changes were made, they received new equipment in the mail, or
after they read their Bills and saw the charges for new Products.
8
And, some Customers alleged that they
were unable to obtain redress from Comcast without substantial time and effort, including allegedly long
telephone wait times, allegedly unreturned calls from Comcast customer service representatives, allegedly
unmet promises of refunds, alleged travel to local Comcast offices to return unrequested equipment, and
hours allegedly spent disputing charges while pursuing refunds.
5. Comcast asserts that, in the vast majority of these instances, the charges were authorized
and that in other instances, when it was notified of such concerns, it took corrective action where
appropriate such as removing items from bills and refunding customers. Further, Comcast’s response to
the Bureau’s October 2 Subpoena indicated that Comcast has a Customer account audit and reconciliation
process to adjust for any errors with installed equipment and to ensure that customers are paying only for
the services and equipment they are receiving. According to Comcast, the process includes daily reviews
of orders and technician receipts to ensure that the equipment matches the service that the customer
ordered. To accomplish this, Comcast states that it runs a report of all orders that have received an
installation of equipment to identify accounts where the equipment on the account does not match the
service. According to Comcast, this reporting tool catches ordering errors that are proactively and
automatically corrected, and equipment errors are given top priority for resolution. To the extent that this
process finds charges for services or equipment not ordered or received, Comcast asserts that it issues a
credit and notifies the Customer. To the extent that this process may result in charges being reinstated,
Comcast states that typically provides the customer written notice before the charge is reinstated.
9

6. The Bureau takes the position that the Customer Complaints and other facts adduced
during the Investigation are evidence of violations of Section 623(f) of the Act and Section 76.981 of the
Commission’s Rules. Section 623(f) of the Act prohibits negative option billing, stating:
A cable operator shall not charge a subscriber for any service or
equipment that the subscriber has not affirmatively requested by name.
For purposes of this subsection, a subscriber’s failure to refuse a cable
operator’s proposal to provide such service or equipment shall not be
deemed to be an affirmative request for such service or equipment.
10
Section 76.981(a) of the Rules mirrors this prohibition, stating:
(Continued from previous page)
Jeffrey J. Gee, Acting Chief, Investigations and Hearings Division, FCC Enforcement Bureau (Feb. 11, 2015) (on
file in EB-IHD-15-00018079).
7
See, e.g., id. at COM-COM-00021064 (alleging that Comcast billed subscriber for two cable boxes she did not
want or have after Comcast performed a service call and the customer renewed); COM-COM-00010202 (alleging
that Comcast charged customer for two additional cable boxes that she replaced, but Comcast had failed to give her
a time to return the replaced boxes); COM-COM-00020642 (due to an incorrect rate code on the account, Comcast
billed subscriber for renting a cable modem when subscriber had own cable modem).
8
See, e.g., id. at COM-COM-00003813 (alleging that Comcast charged account for HD after giving her an HD box
as a replacement despite subscriber’s specific rejection of offer); COM-COM-00018688 (alleging that subscriber’s
bill higher due to service added without authorization after customer told the technician during a service call that
Comcast had cut out 50 channels that she was receiving and asked the technician to add the 50 channels back onto
her account, which resulted in her being moved to a higher tier of service than she expected); COM-COM-00016691
(alleging third-party upgraded service to Triple Play despite subscriber’s specific refusal).
9
Comcast Response to October 2, 2015 Subpoena at 30.
10
47 U.S.C. § 543(f).
Federal Communications Commission DA 16-1127
5
A cable operator shall not charge a subscriber for any service or
equipment that the subscriber has not affirmatively requested by name.
A subscriber’s failure to refuse a cable operator's proposal to provide
such service or equipment is not an affirmative request for service or
equipment. A subscriber’s affirmative request for service or equipment
may be made orally or in writing.
11
Section 76.981(b) clarifies that such prohibitions do not preclude certain rate adjustments, the addition or
deletion of specific programs from service offerings, the addition or deletion of specific channels from
existing tiers or services, or the restructuring of tiers of service, provided such changes do not constitute a
“fundamental change in the nature of an existing service or tier of service.”
12
The “Commission as well
as state and local governments have concurrent jurisdiction to regulate cable operators’ negative option
billing practices.”
13
7. The Bureau interprets Section 623(f) of the Act and Section 76.981 of the Rules as
constituting a per se prohibition on a cable operator’s billing cable subscribers for any services or
equipment that they did not affirmatively request, and as the functional equivalent of the prohibited
practice known as “cramming” (unauthorized placement of charges on telephone bills) with respect to
common carriers. In the Bureau’s view, negative option billing harms subscribers by forcing them to
detect and correct the cable operator’s erroneous placement of unauthorized charges.
14
The Bureau
believes that such subscribers find themselves in an unpredictable environment where some have charges
corrected while others experience persistent efforts to enforce payment of unauthorized charges. The
Bureau believes that such actions cause consumer harm by requiring subscribers to spend considerable
time making telephone calls to customer service agents, escalating their complaints to supervisors, or
having to travel to a customer service location to return wrongly delivered equipment. Thus, the Bureau
contends that Comcast, through the course of conduct described above, violated Section 623(f) of the Act
and Section 76.981(a) of the Rules by charging its Customers for new Products they had not affirmatively
requested.
8. Comcast disputes this contention and the Bureau’s interpretation of the Negative Option
Billing Laws. Comcast notes that the Commission has cautioned against an expansive application of the
Negative Option Billing Laws, stating that a broad reading of the rule could lead to harmful
consequences, such as obligating cable operators to obtain affirmative consent “before making any
change in offerings, including even relatively minor changes . . . .”
15
Indeed, based on Commission

11
47 CFR § 76.981(a).
12
Id. § 76.981(b).
13
Implementation of Sections of the Cable Television Consumer Protection and Competition Act of 1992: Rate
Regulation Buy-Through Prohibition, Third Order on Reconsideration, 9 FCC Rcd 4316, 4361, para. 130 (1994),
aff’d, Time Warner Entm’t Co. v. FCC, 56 F.3d 151, 194 (D.C. Cir. 1995).
14
Monmouth Cablevision, Monmouth County, New Jersey, Memorandum Opinion and Order, 10 FCC Rcd 9438,
9440, para. 11 (Cable Servs. Bur. 1995) (concluding that the cable operator had violated the negative option billing
prohibition when it automatically billed its customers the $5.00 sale price of a remote control, which had previously
been leased to customers for $1.00/month unless the customer took action to remove the charge).
15
Implementation of Sections of the Cable Television Consumer Protection and Competition Act of 1992; Rate
Regulation, Sixth Order on Reconsideration, Fifth Report and Order, and Seventh Notice of Proposed Rulemaking,
10 FCC Rcd 1226, 1263, para. 107 (1994); see also Implementation of Sections 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, 5907, para. 440 (1993) (emphasis added) (Rate Regulation Order) (“We do not
believe subscribers also need the additional protection of the negative option billing provision for every proposed
rate increase, unless a price change accompanies a fundamental change in service, such as the addition of a tier.”);
Petition for Declaratory Ruling Regarding Negative Option Billing Restrictions of Section 623(f) of the
Communications Act and the FCC’s Rules and Policies, Declaratory Ruling, 26 FCC Rcd 2229, 2231, para. 5 (MB
(continued….)
Federal Communications Commission DA 16-1127
6
precedent, Comcast contends that the Negative Option Billing Laws are not per se prohibitions, but
instead are targeted only at affirmatively deceptive conduct on the part of cable operators,
16
and
Commission enforcement requires a demonstrated pattern of violation.
17
As such, Comcast asserts that
erroneous charges, including those occasioned by employee error, which do not involve deceit or the
company’s intentionally “duping” customers, cannot constitute prohibited negative option billing within
the meaning of relevant authority or Commission precedent. Comcast believes that this is particularly
true where, as here, the company took actions such as removing items from bills and making refunds to
customers and where the company had effective audit processes.
9. The Bureau and Comcast desire to resolve this Investigation and the related disputes
without engaging in further litigation on the terms and subject to the conditions hereinafter set forth.
III. TERMS OF AGREEMENT
10. Adopting Order. The provisions of this Consent Decree shall be incorporated by the
Bureau in an Adopting Order.
11. Jurisdiction. Comcast agrees that the Bureau has jurisdiction over it, the matters that
were the subject of the Investigation, and the enforcement of this Consent Decree and has the authority to
enter into, adopt and enforce this Consent Decree.
12. Effective Date; Violations. The Parties agree that this Consent Decree shall become
operative on the Effective Date. As of the Effective Date, the Adopting Order and this Consent Decree
shall have the same force and effect as any other order of the Commission. For Newly Acquired Entities,
Comcast shall have a reasonable period of time, which in no event shall exceed twelve (12) months, in
which to bring said entities into compliance with this Consent Decree. Any violation of the Adopting
Order or of the terms of this Consent Decree shall constitute a separate violation of a Commission order,
entitling the Commission to exercise any rights and remedies attendant to the enforcement of a
Commission order. The Bureau retains the right to take additional action or seek modification of this
Consent Decree if the Bureau determines that Comcast made any material misrepresentation or material
omission relevant to the resolution of this Investigation.
13. Termination of Investigation. In express reliance on the covenants and representations
in this Consent Decree and to avoid further expenditure of public resources, the Bureau agrees to
terminate the Investigation. In consideration for the termination of the Investigation, Comcast agrees to
the terms, conditions, and procedures contained herein. The Parties, by and through their counsel, have
agreed that this Consent Decree fully and finally resolves all issues between them arising from or related
to the Investigation and all other matters addressed in this Consent Decree (including with respect to
claims or issues of Unauthorized Product Charges, claims or issues of unauthorized charges or
overcharges for other service or equipment, including modems, and credit and collections conduct or
(Continued from previous page)
2011) (2011 Declaratory Ruling) (noting that Commission has rejected an “expansive reading of the statute” that
would “require[] affirmative consent prior to any change in service, no matter how minor”) (citation omitted);
Comcast Cablevision, Tallahassee, Florida Letter of Inquiry – Negative Option Billing Issue, Memorandum Opinion
and Order, 10 FCC Rcd 2106, 2107-08, paras. 8-10 (Cable Servs. Bur. 1995) (finding that Comcast’s practice of
automatically subscribing its customers to (a) individual a la carte channels or an a la carte package, depending upon
their previous level of service, and (b) a wire maintenance service plan, did not, on the facts of that case, violate the
negative option billing provisions because such changes did not propose any fundamental change in the nature of the
existing tiers or service or impose an additional expense); Warner Cable Communications Milwaukee, Wisconsin
Letter of Inquiry – Negative Option Billing Issue, Memorandum Opinion and Order, 10 FCC Rcd 2103, 2104-05,
para. 10 (Cable Servs. Bur. 1995) (same).
16
2011 Declaratory Ruling, 26 FCC Rcd 2229, 2230, 2234-35, paras. 4, 10, 12-13 (references to the negative option
billing prohibition as protecting customers from being “duped”).
17
See Rate Regulation Order, 8 FCC Rcd at 5905, para. 439.
Federal Communications Commission DA 16-1127
7
policies associated with customer charges), for all time periods up to the date of entry of this Consent
Decree, and precludes further investigations, litigation, or enforcement action between the Commission
and Comcast on the resolved issues except for purposes of enforcing this Consent Decree.
18
14. Compliance Officer. Within thirty (30) days of the Effective Date, Comcast shall
designate a senior corporate manager with the requisite corporate and organizational authority to serve as
Compliance Officer. The Compliance Officer shall be responsible for developing, implementing, and
administering the Compliance Plan and ensuring that Comcast complies with the terms and conditions of
the Compliance Plan and this Consent Decree. In addition to the general knowledge of the
Communications Laws necessary to discharge his or her duties under this Consent Decree, the
Compliance Officer shall have relevant knowledge of the matters addressed in this Consent Decree prior
to assuming his or her duties.
15. Compliance Plan. Comcast shall implement and comply with the following processes
and procedures with respect to Products sold after the Effective Date of this Consent Decree:
(a) Authorization of New Products. To the extent that it has not already done so,
Comcast shall develop one or more processes or procedures, which processes or
procedures shall be fully implemented by Comcast (except as indicated otherwise
below) no later than July 1, 2017, through which Comcast shall obtain Affirmative
Informed Consent from a Customer before a Customer is billed for any new
Product. Such processes or procedures, whether individually or taken together,
shall cover every sales channel including, but not limited to, online orders,
telephone orders, set-top box orders, and field technician-generated orders.
Beginning no later than December 31, 2017, Comcast shall retain sufficient
information and documentation to allow such Affirmative Informed Consent to be
verified for a period of not less than twelve (12) months (or five (5) months in the
case of telephone recordings). A Customer may provide Affirmative Informed
Consent either to Comcast or to a Person or entity responsible to Comcast for
receiving such Affirmative Informed Consent. If Affirmative Informed Consent is
not directly obtained by Comcast, Comcast shall implement reasonable policies and
practices to confirm that Affirmative Informed Consent is appropriately obtained
and documented by that Person or entity responsible to Comcast before that
Customer is billed for any new Product and to confirm that such Person or entity
retains sufficient information and documentation consistent with the requirements
of this subparagraph. Comcast shall monitor and enforce those policies and
practices to confirm that Affirmative Informed Consent is appropriately obtained
and documented, and where Affirmative Informed Consent has not been
appropriately obtained and documented, Comcast shall require remedial action by
the Person or entity responsible for doing so (which may include, for example,
suspension of employment, proactive credits for subscribers, or employee
retraining) or cease billing for such new Product.
(b) Purchase Confirmation for Products. To the extent that it does not already do
so, by July 1, 2017, Comcast shall implement processes or procedures through
which Comcast shall send Customers an order confirmation separate from any Bill
or other invoice for any new Product. Such purchase confirmation must Clearly
and Conspicuously describe the Product, the price charged, and the length of any
trial or promotional period, and shall be delivered by any reasonable means through
which the Customer is capable of receiving such confirmation, including via U.S.

18
The Bureau and Comcast agree that this Consent Decree does not purport to resolve the Parties’ differing
interpretations of the Negative Option Billing Laws.
Federal Communications Commission DA 16-1127
8
mail or email to the physical or email address provided by the Customer or
associated with the account, or accessible via electronic means such as on-screen
confirmations for orders made through set-top boxes, or by making such
confirmation notices available online and expressly referring Customers who will
not provide an email address or do not have an email address to such online
confirmation. Such purchase confirmation shall be sent or made available online
expeditiously and no later than three (3) days following the time a new Product is
purchased.
(c) Billing Redress for Unauthorized Product Charges. By July 1, 2017 (except as
indicated otherwise below), Comcast shall implement billing redress processes or
procedures to include the following requirements:
i. For Products ordered on or after the Effective Date and before December 31,
2017, in the event a Customer disputes a charge for a new Product as an
Unauthorized Product Charge, Comcast shall make the determination as to
whether a charge is an Unauthorized Product Charge based on the content,
presence, or absence of any record, documentation, affirmative conduct, or
other evidence of Affirmative Informed Consent (including the purchase
confirmation provided under subparagraph 15(b), provided that the Customer
had the ability to reject or rescind approval before the Customer was billed for
the Product). Upon determining that such charge is an Unauthorized Product
Charge, Comcast shall timely provide the Customer with a refund or credit of
the Unauthorized Product Charge consistent with the terms and conditions of
the Comcast Agreement for Residential Services.
ii. For Products ordered on or after December 31, 2017, in the event a Customer
disputes a charge for a new Product as an Unauthorized Product Charge, (1)
such charge shall not be deemed an Unauthorized Product Charge if Comcast
has any record contemplated under subparagraph 15(a) documenting the
Customer’s Affirmative Informed Consent, and (2) in circumstances where the
documentation of the Customer’s Affirmative Informed Consent under
subparagraph 15(a) is a telephone recording and Comcast no longer retains that
recording, Comcast may make its determination as to whether a charge is an
Unauthorized Product Charge based upon Customer conduct that reasonably
connotes an affirmative request for such service or charge after a Product had
been ordered and the charges and terms have been confirmed to the Customer
in any written (including electronic) communication. In any disputed charge
case not covered by (1) or (2) of this subparagraph, there shall be a rebuttable
presumption that such disputed charge is an Unauthorized Product Charge if
Comcast does not have any record required by subparagraph 15(a); provided,
however, that Comcast may rebut this presumption based on other records,
documentation, affirmative conduct, or evidence that reasonably connotes an
affirmative request for such service or charge after a Product had been ordered
and the charges and terms have been confirmed to Customer in any written
(including electronic) communication. In the event a Customer disputes a
charge for a new Product as an Unauthorized Product Charge and Comcast
determines that such charge is an Unauthorized Product Charge under this
subparagraph 15(c)(ii), Comcast shall timely provide the Customer with a
refund or credit of the Unauthorized Product Charge. In instances in which it is
technically feasible for Comcast to determine whether the Customer made
actual use of the Product that is the subject of the dispute and Comcast is able
to confirm such use, the associated refund or credit may be limited, in
Comcast’s discretion, to the prior 120 days of related charges to the Customer
Federal Communications Commission DA 16-1127
9
for such Product. In instances in which it is technically feasible for Comcast to
determine whether the Customer made actual use of the Product that is the
subject of the dispute and Comcast is unable to confirm such use, the
associated refund or credit may be limited, in Comcast’s discretion, to the prior
1,095 days of related charges to the Customer for such Product. In instances in
which it is not technically feasible for Comcast to determine whether the
Customer made actual use of the Product that is the subject of the dispute, the
associated refund or credit may be limited, in Comcast’s discretion, to the prior
730 days of related charges to the Customer for such Product. The foregoing
shall not prejudice any rights, claims, or defenses either a Customer or
Comcast may otherwise have under applicable law.
iii. In the event Comcast determines that such charge is not an Unauthorized
Product Charge, Comcast shall provide the Customer with a clear explanation
of its determination and, solely with respect to disputes raised by the Customer
within 120 days of the charge first appearing on a Bill, Comcast shall also: (1)
offer to the Customer to confirm such determination in writing, including a
description of the rationale and documentation on which such determination
was based, by email or, if the Customer is unable or unwilling to provide an
email address, by any other reasonable means by which the Customer is
capable of receiving such determination, including U.S. mail, and (2) afford the
Customer at least thirty (30) days to either pay or make payment arrangements
for such charge, or twenty (20) days in which to request an escalated review of
the matter by Comcast. Any such escalated review shall be resolved within
thirty (30) days, and Comcast shall confirm the outcome of such resolution to
the Customer in writing, including any documentation on which such
resolution was based.
iv. After a Customer has alleged the existence of an Unauthorized Product Charge
for which an investigation is undertaken, and pending Comcast’s final
determination as to whether such charge is an Unauthorized Product Charge,
Comcast shall not: (1) require the Customer to pay the disputed charge,
including any related late fee or penalty (provided that this shall not excuse the
Customer from timely paying all other charges due on such Bill, and the
Customer may be assessed late fees and penalties with respect to any such
other charges); (2) send the Customer’s account to collections solely with
respect to such disputed charge or any related late fee or penalty; (3) make any
adverse credit report based solely upon nonpayment of the disputed charge or
any related late fee or penalty; or (4) suspend, cancel, or take any action that
may adversely affect the Customer’s service for any reason solely related to
nonpayment of the disputed charge or any related late fee or penalty; provided,
however, that, subject to subparagraph 15(c)(v), during the pendency of the
investigation, Comcast shall not be required to reverse any action already
undertaken or reverse any charge or refund any payment previously made, and
that if a Customer evidences, in Comcast’s reasonable determination, a clear
pattern of abusive or bad faith engagement in such dispute process and failure
to demonstrate that charges are Unauthorized Product Charges, Comcast may
undertake any of the above actions without restriction. Upon Comcast’s final
determination that such charge is not an Unauthorized Product Charge,
Comcast may require the Customer to pay any related interest charge, late fee,
or penalty that would otherwise have accrued during the pendency of the
investigation.
Federal Communications Commission DA 16-1127
10
v. In any case where a Customer claims that a Product charge was not authorized
and Comcast (1) has already initiated an action covered by (iv) of this
subparagraph, and (2) intends to exercise or exercises its rights under (ii) of
this subparagraph to deny or investigate the refund claim (other than in a
circumstance in which a Customer evidences, in Comcast’s reasonable
determination, a clear pattern of abusive or bad faith engagement in such
dispute process and failure to demonstrate that charges are Unauthorized
Product Charges), Comcast shall endeavor to suspend such action covered by
(iv) of this subparagraph and shall inform the Customer that Comcast is
reviewing the claim, that the Customer does not have to pay the disputed
charge while it is being reviewed (if it has not yet been paid), and that Comcast
will notify the Customer of the determination of its review of the claim, and of
the Customer’s ability to contest the determination pursuant to the provisions
of subparagraph 15(c)(iii). If, as a result of its review, Comcast determines
that a refund is owed to the Customer, Comcast shall promptly reverse any
action covered by (iv) of this subparagraph that it previously initiated.
(d) Customer Dispute Escalation Process. By July 1, 2017, Comcast shall establish
and implement improved processes and/or procedures for expediting Customer
Complaints for timely redress of any Unauthorized Product Charges.
(e) Information on Account Protection. By July 1, 2017, Comcast shall:
i. implement systems to permit a Customer to initiate and establish Blocking to
help prevent Unauthorized Product Charges that Customers may elect to opt
into at no charge to Customers; and
ii. Clearly and Conspicuously disclose Blocking options, in a written or electronic
form or via a link to electronically accessible information, at or near the time of
subscribing to or purchasing a Product but in any event within thirty (30) days
of subscribing to or purchasing a Product. Customers shall not incur any
Charges for receiving or accessing the information as discussed herein.
(f) Customer Account Audit and Reconciliation Processes. For the duration of this
Consent Decree, Comcast shall maintain the Customer account audit and
reconciliation processes described in paragraph 5 hereto or substantially similar or
substantially equivalent process.
(g) Training. By July 1, 2017, Comcast shall, for five (5) years from the Effective
Date, conduct a training program at least annually with its customer service
representatives and all relevant managers and employees regarding the
requirements of this Consent Decree and direct all relevant employees and
managers, including its customer service representatives, to complete such training
at least annually. Comcast shall require additional re-training of any employee or
group of employees that placed Unauthorized Product Charges on Customer Bills
to a materially disproportionate extent compared to statistical expectations for such
employee(s) within a calendar year.
To the extent any customer service, account management, or sales activities are
conducted by outside vendors or non-Comcast employees, Comcast shall direct
such parties to conduct a training program at least annually and to monitor the
completion of such training.
(h) Record Keeping. By July 1, 2017, Comcast shall implement systems, processes,
and procedures designed to:
Federal Communications Commission DA 16-1127
11
i. maintain records for each Customer documenting Comcast’s receipt of the
Customer’s Affirmative Informed Consent for new Product purchases;
ii. maintain records of Customer Complaints, including information relating to the
nature and resolution of such Customer Complaints;
iii. maintain records on the number of individual employees or group of employees
that have completed training and re-training required under this Consent
Decree;
iv. maintain records sufficient to allow Comcast to identify employees or group of
employees that placed Unauthorized Product Charges on Customer Bills to a
materially disproportionate extent compared to statistical expectations, and
whether Comcast took remedial action against such employees; and
v. maintain such records for periods in accordance with Comcast’s ordinary
course of business and at least twelve (12) months (or five (5) months in the
case of telephone recordings) from the date of a record’s creation.
(i) Reporting Requirements. Comcast shall for five (5) years provide reports to the
Bureau documenting its compliance with the requirements of the Compliance Plan.
Comcast may request that such reports be withheld pursuant to the provisions of
47 CFR §§ 0.457 and 0.459. The first such report shall be submitted within ninety
(90) days of the Effective Date and additional reports shall be submitted every
twelve (12) months (Annual Reports) thereafter.
i. Each Annual Report shall include a detailed description of Comcast’s efforts
during the relevant period to comply with the terms and conditions of this
Consent Decree. In addition, each Annual Report shall include a certification
by the Compliance Officer, as an agent of and on behalf of Comcast, stating
that the Compliance Officer has personal knowledge that (1) Comcast has
established and implemented the Compliance Plan, and (2) he or she is not
aware of any instances of material noncompliance with the terms and
conditions of this Consent Decree.
ii. Annual Reports also shall include reporting to the Bureau: (1) the number of
Customer Complaints and the resolution of such Customer Complaints; and (2)
the total amount of refunds and credits issued pursuant to such claims.
iii. The Compliance Officer’s certification shall be accompanied by a statement
explaining the basis for such certification and shall comply with Section 1.16
of the Rules and be subscribed to as true under penalty of perjury in
substantially the form set forth therein.
19
iv. If the Compliance Officer cannot provide the requisite certification, the
Compliance Officer, as an agent of and on behalf of Comcast, shall provide the
Commission with a detailed explanation of the reason(s) why and describe
fully: (1) each instance of material noncompliance; (2) the steps that Comcast
has taken or will take to remedy such noncompliance, including the schedule
on which proposed remedial actions will be taken; and (3) the steps that
Comcast has taken or will take to prevent the recurrence of any such
noncompliance, including the schedule on which such preventive action will be
taken.

19
47 CFR § 1.16.
Federal Communications Commission DA 16-1127
12
v. Annual Reports shall be submitted to the Chief, Investigations and Hearings
Division, Enforcement Bureau, Federal Communications Commission, Room
4-C330, 445 12th Street, SW, Washington, DC 20554, with a copy submitted
electronically to Guy Benson at Guy.Benson@fcc.gov, Joy M. Ragsdale at
Joy.Ragsdale@fcc.gov, Kenneth Scheibel at Kenneth.Scheibel@fcc.gov,
Matthew L. Conaty at Matthew.Conaty@fcc.gov, and Jeffrey J. Gee at
Jeffrey.Gee@fcc.gov.
(j) In reviewing Comcast’s compliance with the requirements of this paragraph 15, the
Bureau shall consider Comcast’s implementation and maintenance of the processes
and procedures set forth herein in light of the totality of the circumstances.
16. Termination Date. The provisions of this Consent Decree shall expire five (5) years
from the Effective Date.
17. Civil Penalty. Comcast will pay a civil penalty to the United States Treasury in the
amount of two million three hundred thousand dollars ($2,300,000.00) within thirty (30) calendar days of
the Effective Date. Comcast shall send electronic notification of payment to Guy Benson at
Guy.Benson@fcc.gov, Joy M. Ragsdale at Joy.Ragsdale@fcc.gov, Kenneth Scheibel at
Kenneth.Scheibel@fcc.gov, Matthew L. Conaty at Matthew.Conaty@fcc.gov, Jeffrey J. Gee at
Jeffrey.Gee@fcc.gov, and fccebaccess@fcc.gov on the date said payment is made. The payment must be
made by check or similar instrument, wire transfer, or credit card, and must include the Account Number
and FRN referenced above. Regardless of the form of payment, a completed FCC Form 159 (Remittance
Advice) must be submitted.
20
When completing the FCC Form 159, enter the Account Number in block
number 23A (call sign/other ID) and enter the letters “FORF” in block number 24A (payment type code).
Below are additional instructions that should be followed based on the form of payment selected:
? Payment by check or money order must be made payable to the order of the Federal
Communications Commission. Such payment (along with the completed Form 159) must be
mailed to Federal Communications Commission, P.O. Box 979088, St. Louis, MO 63197-
9000, or sent via overnight mail to U.S. Bank – Government Lockbox #979088, SL-MO-C2-
GL, 1005 Convention Plaza, St. Louis, MO 63101.
? Payment by wire transfer must be made to ABA Number 021030004, receiving bank
TREAS/NYC, and Account Number 27000001. To complete the wire transfer and ensure
appropriate crediting of the wired funds, a completed Form 159 must be faxed to U.S. Bank
at (314) 418-4232 on the same business day the wire transfer is initiated.
? Payment by credit card must be made by providing the required credit card information on
FCC Form 159 and signing and dating the Form 159 to authorize the credit card payment.
The completed Form 159 must then be mailed to Federal Communications Commission, P.O.
Box 979088, St. Louis, MO 63197-9000, or sent via overnight mail to U.S. Bank –
Government Lockbox #979088, SL-MO-C2-GL, 1005 Convention Plaza, St. Louis, MO
63101.
Questions regarding payment procedures should be addressed to the Financial Operations Group Help
Desk by phone, 1-877-480-3201, or by e-mail, ARINQUIRIES@fcc.gov.
18. Waivers. As of the Effective Date, Comcast waives any and all rights it may have to
seek administrative or judicial reconsideration, review, appeal, or stay, or to otherwise challenge or
contest the validity of this Consent Decree and the Adopting Order. Comcast shall retain the right to
challenge Commission interpretation of the Consent Decree or any terms contained herein. If either Party

20
An FCC Form 159 and detailed instructions for completing the form may be obtained at
http://www.fcc.gov/Forms/Form159/159.pdf.
Federal Communications Commission DA 16-1127
13
(or the United States on behalf of the Commission) brings a judicial action to enforce the terms of the
Consent Decree or the Adopting Order, neither Comcast nor the Commission shall contest the validity of
the Consent Decree or the Adopting Order, and Comcast shall waive any statutory right to a trial de novo.
Comcast hereby agrees to waive any claims it may otherwise have under the Equal Access to Justice Act
21
relating to the matters addressed in this Consent Decree.
19. Severability. The Parties agree that if any of the provisions of the Consent Decree shall
be held unenforceable by any court of competent jurisdiction, such unenforceability shall not render
unenforceable the entire Consent Decree, but rather the entire Consent Decree shall be construed as if not
containing the particular unenforceable provision or provisions, and the rights and obligations of the
Parties shall be construed and enforced accordingly.
20. Invalidity. In the event that this Consent Decree in its entirety is rendered invalid by any
court of competent jurisdiction, it shall become null and void and may not be used in any manner in any
legal proceeding.
21. Subsequent Rule or Order. The Parties agree that if any provision of the Consent
Decree conflicts with any subsequent Rule or Order adopted by the Commission (except an Order
specifically intended to revise the terms of this Consent Decree to which Comcast does not expressly
consent), that provision will be superseded by such Rule or Order.
22. Successors and Assigns. Comcast agrees that the provisions of this Consent Decree
shall be binding on its successors, assigns, and transferees.
23. Final Settlement. The Parties agree and acknowledge that this Consent Decree shall
constitute a final settlement between the Parties with respect to the Investigation. Except as expressly
provided in this Consent Decree, this Consent Decree shall not prevent the Commission from
investigating new evidence of noncompliance by Comcast with the Communications Laws.
24. Modifications. This Consent Decree cannot be modified without the advance written
consent of both Parties.
25. Paragraph Headings. The headings of the paragraphs in this Consent Decree are
inserted for convenience only and are not intended to affect the meaning or interpretation of this Consent
Decree.
26. Authorized Representative. Each Party represents and warrants to the other that it has
full power and authority to enter into this Consent Decree. Each person signing this Consent Decree on
behalf of a Party hereby represents that he or she is fully authorized by the Party to execute this Consent
Decree and to bind the Party to its terms and conditions.

21
See 5 U.S.C. § 504; 47 CFR §§ 1.1501-1.1530.
Federal Communications Commission DA 16-1127
14
27. Counterparts. This Consent Decree may be signed in counterpart (including
electronically or by facsimile). Each counterpart, when executed and delivered, shall be an original, and
all of the counterparts together shall constitute one and the same fully executed instrument.
_____________________________________
Travis LeBlanc
Chief
Enforcement Bureau
_____________________________________
Date
_____________________________________
Francis M. Buono
Senior Vice President, Legal Regulatory Affairs
& Senior Deputy General Counsel
Comcast Corporation
_____________________________________
Date