Word Document PDF Document

Mailed Date: September 10, 2007


Communications Division


Policy & Decision Analysis Branch

September 6, 2007


Resolution T- 17107, providing for changes to the Commissions video franchise forms to conform to D. 07-03-014 and DIVCA.



This Resolution makes several changes to the Commission's video franchise forms to make them conform to certain requirements of D. 07-03-014 and DIVCA.


The Digital Infrastructure and Video Competition Act of 2006 (DIVCA) (AB 2987, Ch. 700, Stats. 2006) was signed into law on September 29, 2006, creating for the first time a process for the issuance of state video franchises in California. Earlier this year, the Commission issued D. 07-03-014 (DIVCA Decision) 1, implementing DIVCA, and began accepting video franchising applications immediately thereafter.

On March 28, 2007, the Commission issued an Opinion Modifying D. 07-03-014, brought on its own motion, to modify the DIVCA Decision by making certain changes to the Video Franchise Certificate in order to incorporate language required by the statute that had been inadvertently left out of the Certificate. In its Order, the Commission also concluded that the Director of the Communications Division should be authorized to obtain approval of future modifications to video franchise forms by preparing a resolution for Commission consideration. Pursuant to that authority, this Resolution makes several changes to the video franchise forms, consisting of the video franchise application (Application) and affidavit (Affidavit), in order to make these forms consistent with the DIVCA Decision and DIVCA.2


Three video franchise applications have been submitted to the Commission so far, and all have been issued within the 44-day time period established in DIVCA. In addition, all three state franchisees have now submitted the confidential video and broadband data that the Decision requires holders to submit within 90 days of the franchise grant.

As a result of its experience processing these applications and data submissions, staff has discovered several problems with the video franchise forms. Accordingly, the Director proposes to modify the forms as follows.3

DIVCA § 5890(e) contains two different build out requirements for holders or their affiliates with more than 1,000,000 telephone customers in California, depending on whether such holders are primarily deploying fiber optic facilities to the customer's premise. The Commission will be enforcing these requirements, yet the application fails to ask whether such applicants are primarily deploying fiber optic facilities to the customer's premise. Accordingly, we revise the Application by adding a question seeking this information.

The Affidavit correctly states the requirement that the Applicant or its parent must produce Commission-mandated reports for and on behalf of the Applicant and any and all of its Affiliates that operate in California. However, it is implicit in the DIVCA Decision4 that only one set of annual reports should be filed on behalf of all of a Company's holders and affiliates. It would be a waste of both Company and Commission resources if each holder (or its parent) were to be required to provide duplicative annual reports on behalf of each holder and its affiliates. Thus, we add an additional sentence to the Affidavit clarifying this limitation.

Finally, the Affidavit currently contains a provision requiring the designation of a California corporation as a responsible entity. The DIVCA Decision, however, rejected the requirement that the entity be a California corporation.5 Accordingly, we replace the requirement currently contained in the Affidavit, requiring a California corporation to be the responsible entity, with one requiring only that the applicant be qualified to do business in California and have verifiable assets. This entity shall accept service of process, either directly or through an agent, and submit to the jurisdiction of California courts. 6


In compliance with PU Code Section 311(g), a copy of this proposed Resolution was either mailed or e-mailed to all parties of record in R. 06-10-005 on August 7, 2007.


1. The Commission has authorized the Director of the Communications Division to obtain approval of modifications to video franchise forms by preparing a resolution for Commission consideration.

2. A number of clerical errors exist in the current Application and Affidavit.

3. Certain provisions of the current Application and Affidavit are inconsistent with either DIVCA or the DIVCA Decision.

4. The Communications Division's modifications are reasonable and should be adopted.

5. Parties of Record in R. 06-10-005 were provided with notice of this Resolution in accordance with PU Code Section 311(g).

6. The Communication Division did not receive comments from parties of record in R06-10-0005.


1. The current Video Franchise Application and Affidavit shall be replaced with the documents included in Attachment A, which reflect the modifications contained in this Resolution.

This Resolution is effective today.

I hereby certify that the Public Utilities Commission at its regular meeting on September 6, 2007 adopted this Resolution. The following Commissioners approved it:




Definitions for the purposes of this Application:


Type of Application

1. Check as appropriate:

Applicant Information

2. Applicant's State Video Franchise number (if seeking an amended Franchise):

3. Applicant's full legal name:

4. Name under which the Applicant does or will do business in California:

5. Legal name and contact information of Applicant's parent companies, including the

ultimate parent:

6. Applicant's principal place of business:

7. Contact information for the person responsible for ongoing communication with the Commission about Video Service business:

8. Attach as Appendix A the names and titles of the Applicant's principal officers.

Build-Out Information

Answer questions 9 through 11 only if the Applicant or one of its Affiliates is a Telephone Corporation. Other Applicants should go to Question 13.

9. Does the Applicant alone or together with its Affiliates have more than 1,000,000 telephone customers in California?

10. Does the Video Service Area include areas outside of the Telephone Service Area of the

11. Is the Applicant primarily deploying fiber optic facilities to the customer's premise?

12. Excluding direct-to-home satellite, is Video Service currently offered by another Video

Existing Local Cable or Video Franchise Holder Information

13. Does the Applicant alone or together with its Affiliates currently hold a local franchise, or has the Applicant held a local franchise in the Video Service Area in the last six months,?

Video Service Area Information

14. Utilizing the template provided at http://www.cpuc.ca.gov/video/application (as applicable), provide a geographic description of the Video Service Area and input the expected date for the deployment of each Area in the Video Service Area.

15. Socioeconomic status information of residents within the Video Service Area

16. Socioeconomic status information of residents within the Telephone Service Area

Financial, Legal, and Technical Qualifications

17. Provide or attest in the attached Affidavit that Applicant shall provide a copy of a fully executed bond in the amount of $100,000 per 20,000 households in the Video Service Area, with a $100,000 minimum and a $500,000 maximum per State Video Franchise Holder, to the Executive Director prior to initiating video service and no later than 5 business days after the date of the Commission's issuance of a State Video Franchise to the Applicant. The bond must list the Commission as obligee and be issued by a corporate surety authorized to transact a surety business in California.

Local Entity Contact Information

18. Utilizing the template provided at http://www.cpuc.ca.gov/video/application, the

Application Fee

19. Attach to this Application a check in the amount of $2,000 made payable to the "California Public Utilities Commission."


20. Complete and submit the affidavit attached as Appendix B to this Application.







STATE OF ________________

COUNTY OF ________________

My name is ____________________________. I am ___________________(Title) of __________________________ (Company). My personal knowledge of the facts stated herein has been derived from my employment with ____________________________ (Company).

I swear or affirm that I have personal knowledge of the facts stated in this Application for a California State Video Franchise to provide Video Service, I am competent to testify to them, and I have the authority to make this Application on behalf of and to bind the Company.

I further swear or affirm that ________________________ [Name of Applicant] shall fulfill the following requirements:

I further swear or affirm that ________________________ [Name of Company] agrees to comply with all federal and state statutes, rules, and regulations, including, but not limited to, the following:

I swear or affirm that all of the statements and representations made in this Application are true and correct.

Signature and title

Typed or printed name and title

SUBSCRIBED AND SWORN to before me on the _____ day of _____ ,20____.

Notary Public In and For the State of __________________.

My Commission expires: ______________________

1 Decision Adopting a General Order and Procedures to Implement the Digital Infrastructure and Video Competition Act of 2006, in Rulemaking for Adoption of a General Order and Procedures to Implement the Digital Infrastructure and Video Competition Act of 2006 (D. 07-03-014, March 3, 2007).

2 A copy of the revised Application and Affidavit are attached as Attachment A.

3 In addition, several clerical errors currently in the Application and Affidavit, not discussed here, have also been corrected.

4 See DIVCA Decision, p.32, et seq.

5 See DIVCA Decision, p.37-39; Conclusion of Law Para. 31.

6 DIVCA Decision, Conclusion of Law Para. 31.

7 Cal. Pub. Util. Code § 5840(c). This fee is not levied for general revenue purposes, consistent with Public Utilities Code § 5840(c).

8 Id. at § 5830(a). The Federal Communications Commission currently uses the term "broadband" and "advanced telecommunications capability" to describe services and facilities with an upstream (customer-to-provider) and downstream (provider-to-customer) transmission speed of more than 200 kilobits per second. Federal Communications Commission, Availability of Advanced Telecommunications Capability in the United States, Fourth Report to Congress, FCC 04-208, 10 (Sept. 9, 2004). This definition, however, is under review by the Commission, and it may evolve in response to rapid technological changes in the marketplace. Id.

9 Cal. Pub. Util. Code at § 5960(a).

10 Id. at § 5890(j)(1).

11 Id.

12 Id. at § 5830(k).

13 Id. at § 5890(j)(2) (defining "low-income households" for the purposes of imposing build-out requirements).

14 Id. at § 5830(p).

15 Id. at § 5830(i).

16 Id. at § 5830(s).

17 Id. at § 5830(t).

Top Of Page