********************************************************    
                         NOTICE
********************************************************

This document was converted from
WordPerfect to ASCII Text format.

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
WordPerfect version or Adobe Acrobat version, if available.

*****************************************************************
                                Before the
                     Federal Communications Commission
                          Washington, D.C. 20554
                                     
In the Matter of  )     
                  )     
Lenfest New Castle County     )      CUID No.  DE0012 (Newark)      
d/b/a Suburban Cable TV )     
                  )
Complaint Regarding     )     
Cable Programming Services Tier Rates      )           


ORDER
                        
        Adopted:  February 17, 1998                Released:  February 20, 1998  

By the Chief, Financial Analysis and Compliance Division, Cable Services Bureau:

  1.    In this Order we consider a complaint against the rate the above-referenced operator
("Operator") was charging for its cable programming services tier ("CPST") in the community referenced
above.  This Order addresses only Operator's July 1, 1997 rate increase.

  2.    Under the Communications Act, 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 Telecommunications Act of 1996 ("1996 Act") and our rules implementing the legislation ("Interim
Rules"), require that a complaint against the CPST rate be filed with the Commission by a local
franchising authority ("LFA") that has received more than one subscriber complaint.  

  3.     The LFA for the franchise area referenced above filed a complaint with the Commission
on December 15, 1997 against Operator's July 1, 1997 CPST rate increase from $17.19 to $19.46.  The
LFA verified that it received more than one subscriber complaint for the franchise area and that the first
valid complaint was received by the LFA on July 16, 1997.  The filing of a complete and timely
complaint triggers an obligation upon the cable operator to file a justification of its CPST rates.  The
Operator has the burden of demonstrating that the CPST rates complained about are reasonable.  If the
Commission finds a rate to be unreasonable, it shall determine the correct rate and any refund liability.

  4.      Operators may justify their rates on an annual basis using 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.  Any incurred cost that is
not projected may be accrued with interest and added to rates at a later time.
  
  5.   Upon review of Operator's FCC Form 1240 for the projected period July 1, 1997 through
June 30, 1998, we find that Operator has not correctly calculated its maximum permitted rate ("MPR"). 
Operator used its actual CPST rate as the starting rate on Line A1 of its FCC Form 1240.  Operator
included true-up adjustments for the period March 1, 1996 through January 31, 1997.  However, because
Operator filed its FCC Form 1240 with the Commission in response to a CPST complaint, and Operator
was not subject to regulation by the Commission at the time the complaint was filed, Operator is not
entitled to any true-up adjustment.  Therefore, we recalculated Operator's FCC Form 1240 without the
true-up adjustment in Module I, Line I8.  We also corrected Operator's Line C5 (Current FCC Inflation
Factor) to 1.0143 rather than 1.0183 in accordance with the FCC Form 1240 Instructions.  These
adjustments resulted in a revised MPR of $20.05 for the projected period rather than Operator's
calculated MPR of $20.37 for the projected period.  Because Operator's actual CPST rate of $19.46,
effective July 1, 1997, does not exceed its revised MPR of $20.05, we find Operator's actual CPST rate
of $19.46 to be reasonable.

  6.   Accordingly, IT IS ORDERED, pursuant to Section 0.321 of the Commission's rules,
47 C.F.R.  0.321, that the CPST rate of $19.46, charged by Operator in the franchise area referenced
above, effective July 1, 1997, IS REASONABLE.

  7.   IT IS FURTHER ORDERED, pursuant to Section 0.321 of the Commission's rules, 47
C.F.R.  0.321, that Operator take into account our FCC Form 1240 adjustments when calculating its
maximum permitted rate and performing the true-up calculation on its next FCC Form 1240.    

  8.   IT IS FURTHER ORDERED, pursuant to Section 0.321 of the Commission's rules, 47
C.F.R.  0.321, that the referenced complaint IS  DENIED.

       FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION 



       Elizabeth W. Beaty
       Chief, Financial Analysis and Compliance Division
       Cable Services Bureau