FOR RECORD ONLY $//ORDER, in Cablevision of Boston, DA 95-368//$ $/1.106 Petition for Reconsideration/$ $/1.45(d)Request for Stay/$ Before the FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION Washington, D.C. 20554 DA 95-368 In the Matter of: ) ) CABLEVISION OF BOSTON ) LIMITED PARTNERSHIP ) LOI-93-12 ) Petition for Stay ) Pending Reconsideration of ) Order on Letter of Inquiry ) ORDER Adopted: February 24, 1995 Released: February 28, 1995 By the Chief, Cable Services Bureau: I. Introduction 1. On February 16, 1995, Cablevision of Boston Limited Partnership ("Cablevision"), filed a Petition for Stay Pending Reconsideration by the Cable Services Bureau of the Memorandum Opinion and Order issued in the Letter of Inquiry proceeding concerning Cablevision. The LOI Order requires Cablevision to restructure its service offerings on or before March 22, 1995, to treat the channels composing its Family Cable package as rate-regulated channels. Cablevision filed a Petition for Reconsideration of the Order on January 23, 1995. In the instant Petition, Cablevision seeks a stay of the LOI Order pending the resolution of its Petition for Reconsideration. For the reasons set forth below, we grant Cablevision's Petition for Stay. II. Background 2. The Commission received a copy of a letter dated September 9, 1993, from the Office of Cable Communications of the City of Boston, Massachusetts, to Cablevision alleging that Cablevision violated Commission regulations governing cable television service. In response to this complaint, the Commission issued Letter of Inquiry 93-12 ("LOI") to Cablevision on November 17, 1993. The LOI asked Cablevision to provide information concerning, among other issues, its compliance with the Commission's rules governing rate and service changes for regulated cable services. Cablevision responded to our LOI by letter dated December 16, 1993. 3. Based on the information submitted by Cablevision, the Bureau found that Cablevision's Family Cable package, as the offering existed in Boston, Massachusetts, on November 17, 1993, the date of the Commission's Letter of Inquiry, was not exempt from regulation. As a result, the Bureau ordered Cablevision to either (1) offer the channels composing Cablevision's Family Cable package as part of the respective rate-regulated tiers in which they were offered prior to September 1, 1993, or (2) offer the channels collectively as a separate rate-regulated tier of cable programming service. In addition, the Bureau ordered the channels to be counted by Cablevision as rate-regulated channels as of September 1, 1993, for purposes of rate justification. 4. On January 23, 1995, Cablevision filed a Petition for Reconsideration of the LOI Order. In its Petition for Reconsideration, Cablevision stated that it restructured its Family Cable package in July 1994. The Bureau sent a letter requesting additional information to Cablevision on February 3, 1995, to enable the Bureau to "evaluate the status of the offering after July 1994." Cablevision has not yet responded to the Bureau's letter. Subsequently, Cablevision filed the instant Petition for Stay. No opposition to the Petition is on file. III. Discussion 5. The Commission evaluates petitions for stay under well-settled principles. To support a stay, petitioners must demonstrate: (1) that they are likely to prevail on the merits; (2) that they will suffer irreparable harm if a stay is not granted; (3) that other interested parties will not be harmed if the stay is granted; and (4) that the public interest favors grant of a stay. As described below, resolution of this particular stay rests mainly on the strength of Cablevision's argument concerning the second prong of this test. 6. Cablevision claims that it will suffer irreparable injury if it is required to comply with the Bureau's LOI Order, since it would be required to "dismantle" its restructured Family Cable package, restructure its rates for its basic and cable programming services tiers, and provide subscribers with advance notice of all rate and service changes. In addition to subjecting Cablevision to possible refund liability for the time period during which the initial Family Cable package was offered (i.e., September 1, 1993, to July 1994), Cablevision suggests that the LOI Order subjects it possible refund liability for the period of time in which its restructured Family Cable package was offered as a non-rate regulated offering. In the event Cablevision's Petition for Reconsideration is successful on the merits, Cablevision asserts that its financial losses would be unrecoverable. Cablevision also argues that a stay is warranted in this case because the Commission is still in the process of gathering information relevant to assessing the regulatory status of the Family Cable package in its present form. 7. We grant the stay requested by Cablevision pending resolution of its Petition for Reconsideration of the LOI Order. We conclude that a stay of our own order is appropriate under these circumstances since the Bureau has an outstanding request for additional information regarding Cablevision's Family Cable offering, which was restructured subsequent to its response to the Commission's Letter of Inquiry. A response to this request is not due until March 6, 1995. In light of the potential irreparable harm which could result if Cablevision is required to restructure its service offerings before the Bureau has completed its current inquiry, we find that a stay of our own order best serves the public interest. 8. Accordingly, IT IS ORDERED that the Memorandum Opinion and Order issued in Letter of Inquiry proceeding No. LOI-93-12 is STAYED pending the resolution of Cablevision's Petition for Reconsideration. This action is taken by the Chief, Cable Services Bureau, pursuant to authority delegated by Section 0.321 of the Commission's rules. 47 C.F.R.  0.321. FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION Meredith J. Jones Chief, Cable Services Bureau