Regulatory Activities - DPUC Dockets of Interest

For all CATV Active Dockets click here

Cable Competition from telecoms

• Docket # 05-06-12 SBC Communications, Inc. and Verizon Communications Inc. have separately indicated that they intend to offer video programming to consumers. In this proceeding, the Department intends to determine the terms and conditions under which these companies' video products could be offered in Connecticut. Draft Conclusion: DPUC finds that SBC's planned IPTV service is merely another form of data stream transmitted like data over the Internet, and as such it is not subject to legacy cable franchising requirements.
  Hightlights: Pro P.E.G./franchising
  • AG Reply
  • OCC Reply
  • NECTA Reply
  • CACSCC Reply

Docket # 05-09-07: DPUC Regulations Concerning Required Number of Community Access Channels: Draft Decision To consider what changes if any may be necessary to update the "80% threshold" set forth in Conn. Agencies Regs. Section 16-331a-2 in light of changes in community access and the CATV industry since the regulation was established. CACSCC Response

1. Does the term "capacity," as used in Conn. Agencies Regs. § 16-331a-2, apply to a single community access channel, or all access channels combined? 2. What weight, if any, should be ascribed to repeat programming in terms of meeting the 80% threshold? 3. Should the term "in use," as used in Conn. Agencies Regs. § 16-331a-2, apply to community calendar-type programming (e.g., scroll or "crawl")? 4. Should programming that is not locally produced (e.g., "sponsored" or "imported" programming) be given less weight than programming produced within the franchise area or local community? If so, how should the source of the programming (native vs. import) be considered? 5. Is the 80%/five hour/weekday/six consecutive week window adequate? What changes, if any are warranted to these criteria? 6. If the five hour block is adequate, is it appropriate to designate what time of day the five hour block should fall within? 7. What qualitative assessments, if any, of the programming content are appropriate in terms of meeting the 80% threshold? 8. If no qualitative assessments of programming content area are appropriate, comment on the possibility for abuse (e.g., "live" camera pointed out a window) in attempt to reach the 80% threshold. 9. Is it appropriate to include CT-N programming in consideration of the 80% threshold? 10. What changes, if any, are warranted to Conn. Agencies Regs. § 16-331a-2? 11. Comment on any other aspect of Conn. Agencies Regs. § 16-331a-2 which may be useful to the Department in its review.

Docket # 05-09-22: DPUC Review of Comcast of Connecticut/Branford FCC Forms 1240 and 1205
1. reconciles the copyright fees,franchise costs with with the month, period, number of subscribers and effective rate 2. Related to unbundled costs for utilities, property taxes and insurance. What is refund liability for Connecticut Comcast subscribers?.

PETITION OF CABLE ADVISORY COUNCIL OF SOUTH CENTRAL CONNECTICUT FOR A DECLARATORY RULING

 MadisonTV: Prior to Application for Docket 06-02-18 CACSCC had correspondence related to this topic: Original Inquiry from Atty. Cramer , Response to Cramer Inquiry Outcome: Update for Town of Madison