[Federal Register Volume 62, Number 136 (Wednesday, July 16, 1997)]
[Notices]
[Pages 38088-38090]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 97-18690]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION
[CS Docket No. 97-141, FCC 97-194]
Annual Assessment of the Status of Competition in Markets for the
Delivery of Video Programming
AGENCY: Federal Communications Commission.
ACTION: Notice of inquiry.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The Commission is required to report annually to Congress on
the status of competition in markets for the delivery of video
programming pursuant to Section 628(g) of the Communications Act of
1934, as amended. On June 3, 1997, the Commission adopted a Notice of
Inquiry to solicit information from the public for use in preparing the
competition report that is to be submitted to Congress in December
1997. The Notice of Inquiry will provide parties with an opportunity to
submit comments and information to be used in conjunction with publicly
available information and filings submitted in relevant Commission
proceedings to assess the extent of competition in the market for the
delivery of video programming.
DATES: Comments are due by July 23, 1997, and reply comments are due by
August 20, 1997.
ADDRESSES: Federal Communications Commission, Washington, D.C. 20554.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Marcia Glauberman, Cable Services
Bureau, (202) 418-7200, or Rebecca Dorch, Office of General Counsel,
(202) 418-1880.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This is a synopsis of the Commission's
Notice of Inquiry in CS Docket No. 97-141, FCC 97-194, adopted June 3,
1997, and released June 6, 1997. The complete text of this Notice of
Inquiry is available for inspection and copying during normal business
hours in the FCC Reference Center (Room 239), 1919 M Street, N.W.,
Washington, D.C., 20554, and may also be purchased from the
Commission's copy contractor, International Transcription Service (202)
857-3800, 1900 M Street, N.W., Washington, D.C. 20054.
Synopsis of the Notice of Inquiry
1. Section 628(g) of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended
(``Communications Act''), 47 U.S.C. Sec. 548(g), requires the
Commission to deliver an annual report to Congress on the status of
competition in markets for the delivery of video programming. The
Notice of Inquiry (``NOI'' ) is designed to solicit comments and
information that the Commission can use to prepare its fourth annual
report (``1997 Competition Report''). Specifically, the NOI invites
commenters to submit data, information and analysis regarding the cable
industry, existing and potential competitors to cable systems, and
prospects for increasing competition in markets for delivery of video
programming. Commenters also are requested to identify and comment on
existing statutory provisions they perceive as restraining competition
or inhibiting development of robust competition in markets for the
delivery of video programming. The Commission expects to use the
information that is submitted by commenters to supplement publicly
available information and relevant comments that have been filed in
other Commission proceedings.
2. As in previous reports, we seek factual information and
statistical data regarding the status of video programming distributors
using different technologies, and changes that have occurred in the
past year. We seek information on multichannel video programming
distributors (``MPVDs'') using predominantly wired distribution
technologies, including cable systems, private cable or satellite
master antenna television (``SMATV'') systems, and open video systems
(``OVS''). We also request data for those relying predominantly on
wireless distribution technologies, such as over-the-air broadcast
television, multichannel multipoint distribution service (``MMDS''),
instructional television fixed service (``ITFS''), local multipoint
distribution service (``LMDS''), direct broadcast satellite (``DBS'')
service, and home satellite dish (``HSD'') service, and for other
potential distribution mechanisms, including interactive video and data
services (``IVDS''), the Internet, and public utility companies.
3. The NOI asks a variety of questions concerning each of these
video delivery services. In addition to statistical data on each of
these delivery services, we seek information regarding: (a) industry
transactions, including information on mergers, acquisitions,
consolidations, swaps and trades, and cross-ownership; (b) other
structural developments that affect distributors' delivery of video
programming; (c) regulatory and judicial developments that affect use
of different technologies; and (d) the effects of the
Telecommunications Act of 1996 (``1996 Act'') and its implementation.
4. The 1996 Competition Report described various technological
advances that may affect industry structure and competition in markets
for the delivery of video programming. For this year's report, we seek
updated information on: (a) developments in the deployment, or planned
deployment, of advanced technologies, such as digital compression,
switched digital services, and upgraded architectures; (b) different
transmission facilities used for distribution of multichannel video
programming, such as copper wire, coaxial cable, optical fiber,
broadcast and other terrestrial radio frequency communications,
terrestrial microwave, satellites, and use of the Internet; (c) the
hybridization of different transmission media; and (d) system
configurations and designs that may facilitate competition, such as the
distribution of different types of signals and different types of
services over the same transmission facility. In addition, we request
information about developments in set-top boxes, including updates on
interoperability, portability and market-driven standards. We also seek
information on whether multichannel video distributors are leasing or
selling reception equipment to subscribers, and the competitive impact,
if any, of these marketplace alternatives. We further invite comment on
the use of digital forms of communications and on
[[Page 38089]]
potential problems and new issues relevant to multichannel video
distribution competition in a digital environment.
5. In the 1997 Competition Report, we will provide updated
information on the structure and rivalry of markets for the delivery of
video programming. We seek information on changes in the number and
market share of all MVPDs, and the effects of MVPD horizontal
concentration at the local, regional and national levels. We seek
comment on the definition of the relevant market as revised in the 1996
Competition Report, which posited alternative approaches to measuring
concentration in the average local market, and identified product
differentiation and entry conditions as factors affecting competition.
In local markets where incumbent cable operators face competition from
one or more other video programming distributors, we seek information
on: (a) the identity of the competitors; (b) the distribution
technology used by each competitor; (c) the date that each competitor
entered the market; (d) the location of the market, including whether
it is predominantly urban or rural; (e) an estimate of the
subscribership and market share for the services of each competitor;
(f) a description of the service offerings of each competitor; (g)
differentiation strategies each competitor is pursuing; and (h) the
prices charged for the service offerings.
6. Mergers, acquisitions, consolidations and corporate
restructuring are important causes of change in industry structure and
in the intensity of market competition. We seek information on such
events over the past year, their effects on industry structure, and
impact on markets for the delivery of video programming. In particular,
we solicit maps that show the ownership patterns that have resulted
from industry restructuring and the effects of these changes on
competition in markets for the delivery of video programming.
7. In the 1997 Competition Report, we will update information on
existing and planned programming services, with particular focus on
those programming services that are affiliated with video programming
distributors. Thus, we seek information and ask a variety of questions
on programming services that are affiliated with cable operators,
affiliated with other non-cable video programming distributors, and
unaffiliated with any MVPD.
8. As in prior reports, we seek to update our assessment of the
effectiveness of our program access, program carriage, and channel
occupancy rules. In the 1996 Competition Report, we observed a concern
that the program access rules may be too narrowly focused to address
some current issues related to access to programming and noted that the
1996 Act expanded the program access rules to apply to OVS operators
and common carriers in the same manner as they apply to cable
operators. Therefore, we seek information on the effectiveness of the
program access rules during the past year, including the effect of
expansion of these rules to OVS operators and common carriers, and on
any remaining issues of concern to video programming providers or
MVPDs. We also solicit comment on our leased access rules and, in
particular, our recent revision of the formula for calculating the
maximum reasonable rate for the carriage of leased access programming.
9. Moreover, as we did in the 1996 Competition Report, we will
examine the effect of competition in local markets through case studies
of local markets where cable operators faced actual competition from
MVPD entrants. We seek updated information on the effects of actual and
potential competition in these local markets and in others where
consumers have, or soon will have, a choice between MVPDs, including
information on incumbent MVPDs responses, such as decreased rates or
increased service offerings, to anticipated and actual entry by
competing MVPDs. In addition, we request identification of particular
strategic behavior and conduct by other MVPDs that affect competition
in markets characterized by head-to-head competition between or among
MVPDs.
10. We also noted in the 1996 Competition Report that laws,
regulations, and strategic behavior by incumbents can create
impediments to entry and competition in markets for the delivery of
video programming, and endeavored to briefly assess our efforts to
reduce some of those impediments. We request information regarding
existing or potential regulatory impediments that may have the effect
of deterring entry or preventing expansion of competitive opportunities
in video program delivery markets. In addition, we ask commenters to
identify specific statutory provisions that are perceived as advancing
or inhibiting competition or that have differential application and may
distort competition among MVPDs, or that restrain competitive
opportunities within markets for the delivery of multichannel video
programming.
11. A number of the provisions of the 1996 Act were intended to
encourage competition in markets for the delivery of video programming.
In the 1997 Competition Report, we would like to update our assessment
of the effects of the various provisions of the 1996 Act on the status
of competition. In particular, we seek comment on ten specific changes
from the 1996 Act relating to competition in video markets: (a) the
establishment of OVS; (b) preemption of restrictions on over-the-air
reception devices; (c) the change in the definition of cable
television; (d) a new ``effective competition'' definition; (e) changes
in rate regulation provisions; (f) rate competition in multiple
dwelling units; (g) competition in MVPD ``navigation'' equipment
markets; (h) the entry of exempt public utility companies into video
markets; (i) pole attachment regulation; and (j) the elimination of
entrance barriers for entrepreneurs and small businesses.
12. Finally, as provided in our Report submitted to Congress on
July 29, 1996, concerning Video Programming Accessibility,
Implementation of Section 305 of the Telecommunications Act of 1996--
Video Programming Accessibility, 61 FR 4249 (August 14, 1996), we seek
information on methods and schedules for providing greater
accessibility to video programs for persons with visual disabilities.
In the Video Programming Accessibility Report, which was required by
Section 713(f) of the Communications Act, we concluded that the record
before us was insufficient to assess the appropriate methods and
schedules for phasing video description into the marketplace and
indicated that we would collect additional information in the context
of the 1997 Competition Report. Accordingly, in the Notice, we request
data and information including: (a) the availability and cost of
secondary audio programming (``SAP'') channels needed to deploy video
description; (b) the cost and possible funding of video description;
(c) the impact that implementation of digital technologies could have;
(d) specific methods and schedules for ensuring that video programming
includes descriptions; and (e) any other relevant technical, quality,
legal and policy issues. We will use this additional record to better
assess those issues that were not fully addressed in the Video
Accessibility Report.
Administrative Matters
Ex Parte
13. There are no ex parte or disclosure requirements applicable to
this proceeding pursuant to 47 CFR Sec. 1.1204(a)(4).
[[Page 38090]]
Comment Dates
14. Pursuant to applicable procedures set forth in Sections 1.415
and 1.419 of the Commission's Rules, 47 CFR Secs. 1.415 and 1.419,
interested parties may file comments on or before July 23, 1997, and
reply comments on or before August 20, 1997. To file formally in this
proceeding, participants must file an original and four copies of all
comments, reply comments and supporting comments. If participants want
each Commissioner to receive a personal copy of their comments, an
original plus ten copies must be filed. Comments and reply comments
should be sent to the Office of the Secretary, Federal Communications
Commission, Washington, D.C. 20554. Comments and reply comments will be
available for public inspection during regular business hours in the
FCC Reference Center (Room 239) of the Federal Communications
Commission, 1919 M Street, N.W., Washington, D.C. 20554.
Ordering Clauses
15. This Notice of Inquiry is issued pursuant to authority
contained in Sections 4(i), 4(j), 403 and 628(g) of the Communications
Act of 1934, as amended.
List of Subjects in 47 CFR Part 76
Cable television.
Federal Communications Commission.
William F. Caton,
Acting Secretary.
[FR Doc. 97-18690 Filed 7-15-97; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6712-01-P