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.
*****************************************************************
Before the
Federal Communications Commission
Washington, D.C. 20554
In the Matter of ) File No. EB-
02-TC-030
)
Suburban Cable TV Co., Inc. ) CUID No.
NJ0005 (Somers Point)
)
Petition for Reconsideration )
ORDER
Adopted: July 16, 2002 Released: July 17,
2002
By the Chief, Enforcement Bureau:1
1. In this Order, we consider a petition for
reconsideration ("Petition") of Cable Services Bureau Order,
DA 99-878 ("Prior Order"),2 filed with the Federal
Communications Commission ("Commission") by the above-
referenced operator ("Operator").3 The Prior Order resolved
complaints filed against the rates charged by Operator for
its cable programming services tier ("CPST") in the
community referenced above beginning May 15, 1994. In this
Order we grant Operator's Petition and modify the Prior
Order.
2. Under the provisions of the
Communications Act4 that were in effect at the time the
complaints were filed, the Commission is authorized to
review the CPST rates of cable systems not subject to
effective competition to ensure that rates charged are not
unreasonable. The Cable Television Consumer Protection and
Competition Act of 1992 ("1992 Cable Act")5 and the
Commission's rules required the Commission to review CPST
rates upon the filing of a valid complaint by a subscriber
or local franchising authority ("LFA"). The
Telecommunications Act of 1996 ("1996 Act"),6 and the
Commission's rules implementing the legislation ("Interim
Rules"),7 required that a complaint against the CPST rate be
filed with the Commission by an LFA that has received more
than one subscriber complaint. The filing of a valid
complaint triggers an obligation upon the cable operator to
file a justification of its CPST rates.8 If the Commission
finds the rate to be unreasonable, it shall determine the
correct rate and any refund liability.9
3. Operators must use the FCC Form 1200 series to
justify rates for the period beginning May 15, 1994.10
Operators may file an FCC Form 1210 to justify quarterly
rate increases based on the addition and deletion of
channels, changes in certain external costs and inflation.11
Operators may justify their rates on an annual basis using
an FCC Form 1240 to reflect reasonably certain and
quantifiable changes in external costs, inflation, and the
number of regulated channels that are projected for the
twelve months following the rate change.12 Any incurred
cost that is not projected may be accrued with interest and
added to rates at a later time.13
4. In the Prior Order, the Cable Services Bureau
reduced Line C2 (Number of Regulated Non-Broadcast Channels
per tier) of Operator's FCC Form 1200 to reflect the number
of non-broadcast channels shown on Operator's channel line-
up card. In its Petition, Operator provides information
that supports its original calculation of non-broadcast
channels. Operator also provides support for its channel
additions and for the implementation dates of its CPST rate
increases. We are persuaded that Operator's calculations
are accurate and we find Operator's argument to be
compelling. Upon review of Operator's FCC Form 1200 and
subsequent filings, taking into account the revision to Line
C2, channel additions and implementation dates for
Operator's CPST rate increases, we find Operator's actual
CPST rates to be reasonable beginning May 15, 1994.
Therefore, we modify the Prior Order to exclude any refund
liability.
5. Accordingly, IT IS ORDERED, pursuant to Section
1.106 of the Commission's rules, 47 C.F.R. § 1.106, that the
petition for reconsideration filed by Operator is GRANTED.
6. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED, pursuant to Sections 0.111
and 0.311 of the Commission's rules, 47 C.F.R. §§ 0.111 and
0.311, that In The Matter of Suburban Cable TV Co., Inc., DA
99-878, 14 FCC Rcd 7233 (CSB 1999) IS MODIFIED TO THE EXTENT
INDICATED HEREIN.
7. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED, pursuant to Sections 0.111
and 0.311 of the Commission's rules, 47 C.F.R. §§ 0.111 and
0.311, that the CPST rates, charged by Operator in the
community referenced above, beginning May 15, 1994, ARE
REASONABLE.
FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS
COMMISSION
David H. Solomon
Chief, Enforcement Bureau
_________________________
1 Effective March 25, 2002, the Commission transferred
responsibility for resolving cable programming services tier
rate complaints from the former Cable Services Bureau to the
Enforcement Bureau. See Establishment of the Media Bureau,
the Wireline Competition Bureau and the Consumer and
Governmental Affairs Bureau, Reorganization of the
International Bureau and Other Organizational Changes, FCC
02-10, 17 FCC Rcd 4672 (2002).
2 See In The Matter of Suburban Cable TV Co., Inc., DA 99-
878, 14 FCC Rcd 7233 (CSB 1999).
3 The term "Operator" includes Operator's successors and
predecessors in interest.
4 47 U.S.C. §543(c) (1996).
5 Pub. L. No. 102-385, 106 Stat. 1460 (1992).
6 Pub. L. No. 104-104, 110 Stat. 56 (1996).
7 See Implementation of Cable Act Reform Provisions of the
Telecommunications Act of 1996, 11 FCC Rcd 5937 1996).
8 See Section 76.956 of the Commission's rules, 47 C.F.R.
§76.956.
9 See Section 76.957 of the Commission's rules, 47 C.F.R.
§76.957.
10 See Section 76.922 of the Commission's rules, 47 C.F.R.
§76.922.
11 Id.
12 Id.
13 Id.