WPC; 2B'J CourierTimes New RomanCG TimesCG Times Bold6G;XP3|j0_1HPLAS4.PRS 4x  @\_)^X@26] Zm Times New RomanCG TimesCG Times Bold3|jHP LaserJet 4_230_1HPLAS4.PRS 4Xj\  P6G;\_)^XP2KvNpk4"i~'^:DPddDDDdp4D48dddddddddd88pppX|pDL|pp||D8D\dDXdXdXDdd88d8ddddDL8ddddX`(`lD4l\DDD4DDDDDDDDd8XXXXXX|X|X|X|XD8D8D8D8ddddddddddXdbdddpdXXXXXlX~|X|X|X|XdddldldD8DdDDDdplld|8|P|D|D|8dvddddDDDpLpLpLpl|T|8|\ddddddl|X|X|Xd|DdpL|Dd~4ddC$CWxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxNHxxH\dDXddddd8@d<@d<DDXXdDDxddzHxxHvppDXd<"dxtldpxxda8DocumentgDocument Style StyleXX` `  ` a4DocumentgDocument Style Style . a6DocumentgDocument Style Style GX  2k<vtWa5DocumentgDocument Style Style }X(# a2DocumentgDocument Style Style<o   ?  A.  a7DocumentgDocument Style StyleyXX` ` (#` BibliogrphyBibliography:X (# 2   :  a1Right ParRight-Aligned Paragraph Numbers:`S@ I.  X(# a2Right ParRight-Aligned Paragraph Numbers C @` A. ` ` (#` a3DocumentgDocument Style Style B b  ?  1.  a3Right ParRight-Aligned Paragraph Numbers L! ` ` @P 1. ` `  (# 2  t 3  a4Right ParRight-Aligned Paragraph Numbers Uj` `  @ a. ` (# a5Right ParRight-Aligned Paragraph Numbers _o` `  @h(1)  hh#(#h a6Right ParRight-Aligned Paragraph Numbersh` `  hh#@$(a) hh#((# a7Right ParRight-Aligned Paragraph NumberspfJ` `  hh#(@*i) (h-(# 2- a8Right ParRight-Aligned Paragraph NumbersyW"3!` `  hh#(-@p/a) -pp2(#p Tech InitInitialize Technical Style. k I. A. 1. a.(1)(a) i) a) 1 .1 .1 .1 .1 .1 .1 .1 Technicala1DocumentgDocument Style Style\s0  zN8F I. ׃  a5TechnicalTechnical Document Style)WD (1) . 2_;a6TechnicalTechnical Document Style)D (a) . a2TechnicalTechnical Document Style<6  ?  A.   a3TechnicalTechnical Document Style9Wg  2  1.   a4TechnicalTechnical Document Style8bv{ 2  a.   2[3a1TechnicalTechnical Document StyleF!<  ?  I.   a7TechnicalTechnical Document Style(@D i) . a8TechnicalTechnical Document Style(D a) . Doc InitInitialize Document Stylez   0*0*0*  I. A. 1. a.(1)(a) i) a) I. 1. A. a.(1)(a) i) a)Documentg2FeJ/PleadingHeader for Numbered Pleading PaperE!n    X X` hp x (#%'0*,.8135@8:><q*"xxxxWWxxxWWkkxxx-x8.` ` Dimension next contends that the City improperly disallowed its additional outlet charge. Dimension claims, and the City does not dispute the claim, that the charge is assessed to recover additional program supplier costs for the cable programming service (CPS) tier and therefore only subscribers receiving the CPS tier are assessed the additional charge. Characterizing the charge as related exclusively to programming costs for its CPS tier, Dimension further contends that the City lacked jurisdiction to rule on the matter. The City counters that Dimension did not adequately justify its claim that the charge was due to additional programming costs for CPS tier subscribers. The City states that, since CPS"7 0*((n" subscribers with additional outlets also receive basic service over the same outlet, it does indeed have jurisdiction to regulate the charge. Additional outlets, the City contends, are equipment used to receive basic service and therefore subject to rate review by the City.  Y-x9.` ` The jurisdiction of local franchising authorities to regulate cable television  Y-rates is limited to those charges and services associated with the basic service tier.`  Y-ԍxSee 47 U.S.C.  543(a)(2)(B) (1992). ` Charges  Yv-associated solely with the CPS tier are under the Commission's jurisdiction.3v{ Y -ԍ Id.3 Because most equipmentrelated charges imposed on the CPS tier are also imposed on the basic tier, local franchising authorities almost always regulate such charges. In rare instances, however, certain equipmentrelated charges may be related only to the CPS tier, such as additional programming costs for channels only carried on the CPS tier, placing the charges under Commission jurisdiction. The City does not contest Dimension's assertion that the additional outlet charges at issue are imposed only on CPS subscribers to recover programming costs associated with the CPS tier. Because the additional outlet charges are imposed only in connection with programming carried on the CPS tier, the Commission, not the City, has  Y -jurisdiction over this matter.= . Y-ԍxIn Times Mirror Cable Television of Orange County, Inc. (San Juan Capistrano,  Yo-California), 10 FCC Rcd 845, 85152 (Cab. Serv. Bur. 1994), app. for rev. pending, we found this charge unreasonable and ordered the operator to eliminate it.= Under the facts of this case, the City should not have issued a ruling regarding these charges. Since the City did not have jurisdiction to reach the additional outlet charge, we remand this issue to the City so that it may modify its local rate order accordingly.  YK-   X4-x C. Franchise Fees  Y-x10.` ` Dimension next contends that the City improperly excluded a portion of its franchise fees ($33,703) which Dimension included as part of its equipment revenue on Line 204 of Worksheet 2, in Part II of Dimension's Form 393. Dimension argues that the Commission's benchmark rates were calculated by excluding the franchise fee expense on programming service revenues, but not the franchise fee expense on equipment revenues. Dimension claims the City's exclusion of franchise fees from its equipment revenue resulted in a substantial understatement of its base rate per channel. The City contends that allowing Dimension to include within Line 204 equipment revenues allocable to franchise fees yields a double recovery, once for the amount that effectively becomes embedded in Line 204 and again as franchise fees are added as a passthrough to the maximum permitted rates.  Y -x11.` ` The franchise fee issue raised by Dimension's appeal was addressed in one of  Y-our cable programming service rate orders, Times Mirror Cable Television of Orange  Y-County, Inc. (San Juan Capistrano, California), 10 FCC Rcd 845 (Cab. Serv. Bur. 1994)"0*(( "  Y -("Times Mirror San Juan Capistrano"). In Times Mirror San Juan Capistrano, we stated" 0*((!" that, if franchise fees are both included in the base from which maximum permitted rates are calculated and permitted as an addition to maximum permitted rates (as a passthrough), the  Y-operator would recover these costs twice.r YK-ԍxTimes Mirror San Juan Capistrano, 10 FCC at 85051.r We find that, in accordance with Times Mirror  Y-San Juan Capistrano, Dimension should not be allowed to include $33,703 of its franchise fees, from its equipment revenue on Line 204 of Worksheet 2, in Part II of Dimension's Form 393, in justifying its rates for basic cable service, equipment and installations with the City. Accordingly, Dimension's appeal of this issue is denied.  XL- III.xORDERING CLAUSES  Y5-  Y -x12.` ` Accordingly, IT IS ORDERED that Dimension's appeal, with respect to the issue of the regulatory status of its a la carte package and the additional outlet charge outlet  Y -issue, IS GRANTED . IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Dimension's appeal, with respect  Y -to these two issues, IS REMANDED to the City for resolution in accordance with the terms of this Order.  Y-x13.` ` IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Dimension's appeal, with respect to the  Y-issue of including franchise fees as a part of equipment revenue on Form 393, IS DENIED .  YT-x14.` ` 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 (1993). x` `  FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION x` `  Meredith J. Jones  Yn-x` `  Chief, Cable Services Bureau