*Pages 1--2 from  Microsoft Word - 13026.doc*
 Federal  Communications  Commission  DA  01-  2718 
 Before  the 
 Federal  Communications  Commission 
 Washington,  D.  C.  20554 


 In  the  Matter  of  ) 
 ) 
 Midwest  Cablevision  )  CUID  No.  MN0085  (Pipestone) 
 ) 
 Multimedia  Cablevision  )  CUID  No.  NC0188  (Nash  County) 
 ) 
 Complaints  Regarding  ) 
 Cable  Programming  Services  Tier  Rates  ) 


 ORDER 
 Adopted:  November  16,  2001  Released:  November  21, 
 2001 


 By  the  Deputy  Chief,  Cable  Services  Bureau: 
 1.  In  this  Order  we  dismiss  complaints  filed  with  the  Federal  Communications  Commission 
 ("  Commission")  against  cable  programming  services  tier  ("  CPST")  rate  increases  by  the  above-  referenced 
 operators  in  the  communities  referenced  above.  The  complainants  are  various  hotels  and  motels  in  the 
 respective  communities  referenced  above  that  are  charged  bulk  discount  rates  for  the  CPST.  At  the  time  the 
 complaint  was  filed,  the  Commission  was  authorized  by  the  Communications  Act  1  to  review  the  CPST 
 rates  of  cable  systems  not  subject  to  effective  competition  to  ensure  that  rates  charged  are  not 
 unreasonable.  2 


 2.  Section  623  (d)  of  the  Communications  Act  required  that  a  cable  operator's  rate  structure 
 be  uniform  throughout  a  geographic  area.  3  The  Commission  concluded  that  Section  623(  d)  did  not 
 preclude  the  establishment  by  cable  operators  of  reasonable  categories  of  customers  and  service.  4  The 
 Commission  found  that  uniform,  non-  predatory  bulk  discounts  to  multiple  dwelling  units,  including  hotels, 
 could  form  a  valid  basis  for  distinctions  among  subscribers.  5  The  Commission  required  that  all  multiple 
 dwelling  buildings  in  a  franchise  area  receive  the  same  bulk  discount  rate  structure.  6  Following  the  passage 
 of  the  Telecommunications  Act  of  1996,  the  uniform  rate  requirement  no  longer  applied  to  bulk  discounts 


 1  Communications  Act,  Section  623(  c),  as  amended,  47  U.  S.  C.  §543(  c)  (1996). 
 2  47  U.  S.  C.  §543(  c)  (1996). 


 3  Id.  at  §543  (d). 
 4  In  the  Matter  of  Implementation  of  Sections  of  the  Cable  Television  Consumer  Protection  and  Competition  Act  of 
 1992:  Rate  Regulation,  MM  Docket  92-  266,  FCC  93-  177,  8  FCC  Rcd  5631  at  ¶  423  (1993). 
 5  Id. 


 6  Id.  at  ¶  424. 
1
 Federal  Communications  Commission  DA  01-  2718 
 2 
 to  multiple  dwelling  units,  so  long  as  the  prices  were  not  predatory.  7 
 3.  Therefore,  at  the  time  the  complaints  were  filed,  a  valid  complaint  by  a  hotel  against  its 
 bulk  discount  CPST  rates,  at  a  minimum,  would  need  to  allege  that  the  rate  charged  was  higher  than  the 
 maximum  permitted  regular  residential  CPST  rate,  or  that  the  complainant  was  being  charged  a  higher  rate 
 than  other  subscribers  in  the  same  class  or  category.  Because  none  of  the  referenced  complaints  made 
 allegations  that  would  call  into  question  the  reasonableness  of  the  rates  in  issue  under  the  Commission's 
 policies,  we  find  that  the  complaints  do  not  meet  the  minimum  showing  required  to  process  the  complaints. 
 Therefore,  we  will  dismiss  the  complaints. 


 4.  Accordingly,  IT  IS  ORDERED,  pursuant  to  Section  0.  32l  of  the  Commission's  rules,  47 
 C.  F.  R.  §  0.321,  that  the  complaints  referenced  herein  against  the  CPST  rates  charged  by  Operator  in  the 
 communities  referenced  above,  ARE  DISMISSED. 


 FEDERAL  COMMUNICATIONS  COMMISSION 


 William  H.  Johnson,  Deputy  Chief 
 Cable  Services  Bureau 


 7  Telecommunications  Act  of  1996  Act,  Pub.  L.  No.  104-  104,  110  Stat.  56  (1996). 
2