WPC_l 2BJ Z Courier3|ww RomanCG Times@`7X@HP LaserJet 4_230_1HPLAS4.PRS 4x  @\oeX@2W6FlK 3|wCourierTimes New Roman1tional)HL4MPCAD.PRSx  @\΅X@ Y-#Xj\  P6G;XP##Xw PE37XP#"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$CWxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxNHxxH\dDXddddd8@d<@d<DDXXdDDxddzHxxHvppDXd<"dxtldpxxd2Evpkoka8DocumentgDocument Style StyleXX` `  ` a4DocumentgDocument Style Style . a6DocumentgDocument Style Style GX  a5DocumentgDocument Style Style }X(# 2wvta2DocumentgDocument Style Style<o   ?  A.  a7DocumentgDocument Style StyleyXX` ` (#` BibliogrphyBibliography:X (# a1Right ParRight-Aligned Paragraph Numbers:`S@ I.  X(# 2}  u   a2Right ParRight-Aligned Paragraph Numbers C @` A. ` ` (#` a3DocumentgDocument Style Style B b  ?  1.  a3Right ParRight-Aligned Paragraph Numbers L! ` ` @P 1. ` `  (# a4Right ParRight-Aligned Paragraph Numbers Uj` `  @ a. ` (# 2  n 6 a5Right ParRight-Aligned Paragraph Numbers _o` `  @h(1)  hh#(#h a6Right ParRight-Aligned Paragraph Numbersh` `  hh#@$(a) hh#((# a7Right ParRight-Aligned Paragraph NumberspfJ` `  hh#(@*i) (h-(# a8Right ParRight-Aligned Paragraph NumbersyW"3!` `  hh#(-@p/a) -pp2(#p 2hTech 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) . a6TechnicalTechnical Document Style)D (a) . 2!va2TechnicalTechnical Document Style<6  ?  A.   a3TechnicalTechnical Document Style9Wg  2  1.   a4TechnicalTechnical Document Style8bv{ 2  a.   a1TechnicalTechnical Document StyleF!<  ?  I.   2S3Oa7TechnicalTechnical 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)DocumentgPleadingHeader for Numbered Pleading PaperE!n    X X` hp x (#%'0*,.8135@8:><q*"xxxxWWxxxWWkkxxx O Y5<ԍ#XR  P7jQXP# The findings in this Order do not in any way prejudge the reasonableness of the price for CPS service after May 14, 1994 under our new rate regulations. However, to the extent Operator has sought to take advantage of the refund deferral period under the Second Order on Reconsideration, Fourth Report and Order, and Fifth Notice of Proposed  Y"-Rulemaking, MM Docket No. 92266, FCC 9438, 9 FCC Rcd 4119 (1994) ("Second Order  Y#-on Reconsideration"), the maximum permitted CPS price determined herein might also apply  Y$-from May 15, 1994 until the date on which Operator #XR  P7jQXP#implemented its CPS price under the  Y%<new regulations. See para. 3, infra.#x6X@`72X@# #XR  P7jQXP#Further, to the extent that the price as of March 31, 1994 is found to be excessive, reductions in Operator's price for the period after May 14, 1994 may be required to reflect the fact that Operator's price during the earlier period, which is used as the starting point to calculate its price for the prospective period, was  Y>)-unreasonable.  See 47 C.F.R.  76.922(b)(4)(C).>" 0*0*0*"Ԍ Y-ԙ  x2. Under the Cable Television Consumer Protection and Competition Act of 1992,* Yy<ԍ#XR  P7jQXP# Pub. L. No. 102385, 106 Stat. 1460 (1992); Communications Act,  623(c), as  Yd-amended, 47 U.S.C.  543(c) (1993). and our rules implementing it, 47 C.F.R. Part 76, Subpart N, the Commission must review CPS prices upon the filing of a valid complaint. The filing of a valid complaint triggers an  Y-obligation on behalf of the cable operator to file a justification of its CPS prices.gfF Y<ԍ#Xw PE37XP# 47 C.F.R.  76.956.g Under our rules, an operator may attempt to justify its prices through either a benchmark showing or a  Y-costofservice showing.jF YU <ԍ#Xw PE37XP# 47 C.F.R.  76.956(b).j In either case, the operator has the burden of demonstrating that its  Yv-CPS prices are not unreasonable.ZvF Y <ԍ#Xw PE37XP#  Id.Z  YH-x3. The Commission's original rate regulations took effect on September 1, 1993.H{F Yt<ԍ#Xw PE37XP# Order in MM Docket No. 92266, Implementation of Sections of the Cable Television Consumer Protection and Competition Act of 1992: Rate Regulation, FCC 93372, 58 Fed. Reg. 41042 (Aug. 2, 1993).  Y1-The Commission subsequently revised its rate regulations effective May 15, 1994.|1 F Y<ԍ#Xw PE37XP#  47 C.F.R.  76.922(b).| Operators with valid CPS complaints filed against them prior to May 15, 1994 must demonstrate that their CPS prices were in compliance with the Commission's initial rules from the time the complaint was filed through May 14, 1994, and that their prices were in  Y -compliance with the revised rules from May 15, 1994 forward. F Y5<ԍ#Xw PE37XP#  See Second Order on Reconsideration, 9 FCC Rcd at 4190, paras. 150152. Operators attempting to justify their prices for the period prior to May 15, 1994 through a benchmark showing must  Y -complete and file FCC Form 393.Z bF Y<ԍ#Xw PE37XP# Id.Z Generally, to justify their prices for the period beginning May 15, 1994 through a benchmark showing, operators must use the FCC Form 1200  Yy-series. yF Y?"<ԍ#Xw PE37XP# 47 C.F.R.  76.922(b)(6); see also Second Order on Reconsideration, 9 FCC Rcd at 4189 n.195.  YK- x4. The complaint was served on Operator on February 28, 1994 and was received by the Commission on the same date. In response, Operator filed FCC Form 393 on May 31, 1994. " 0*((7"Ԍ Y-ԙ  x5. In its benchmark filing, Operator calculated a maximum permitted CPS rate of $14.35 per month (plus franchise fee). Operator's actual monthly charge for its CPS tier was $14.40 (plus franchise fee). Thus, Operator has failed to show that its rate for the CPS tier was not unreasonable. Furthermore, upon review of Operator's Form 393 filing, we have found that it has not correctly calculated its maximum permitted price, and it is therefore appropriate to make the following adjustments to Operator's calculations in Form 393: Xx` ` a. Operator's benchmark calculation for its regulated offerings as of September 30, 1992 (Part II, Worksheet 2, Line 220) is based upon 35 regulated channels and 26 satellite channels. We were able to verify the 35 regulated channels used for the benchmark calculation, but we were unable to verify Operator's count of 26 satellite channels. Based upon our review of Operator's channel lineup card, we reduced the number of satellite channels from 26 to 25. This adjustment reduces the benchmark channel rate entered on Line 220 of Worksheet 2.(# Xx` ` b. Operator calculated the Inflation Adjustment Factor (Part II, Worksheet 1, Line 127) as of the end of March 1994 using data released by the U.S. Department of Commerce on December 1, 1993. However, Operator's use of March 1994 as the date through which it calculated the inflation adjustment is impermissible. Operator was required to file a justification of its CPS price for the Umatilla franchise area no  Y-later than March 30, 1994. F Y<ԍ#Xw PE37XP# 47 C.F.R.  76.956(a) (operator must file a response within 30 days of the date of service of a complaint). If Operator had filed its justification in a timely fashion, the instructions to Form 393 would have required it to calculate the inflation  Y-adjustment only through February 1994. bF Y<ԍ#Xw PE37XP# FCC Form 393, page 11, instructions for Line 124 (Inflation Adjustment Factor is calculated using "the number of whole months from September 30, 1992 to the date you will submit this form"). Operator cannot be permitted to claim an additional inflation adjustment simply because it filed Form 393 late. We must therefore recalculate the Inflation Adjustment Factor on the basis of the most accurate  Y-data currently available for the date on which Operator should have filed. F Y@ <ԍ#Xw PE37XP# See 47 C.F.R.  76.922(b)(9)(iii) (if a cable operator fails to justify its rates, rates must be adjusted in accordance with the most accurate data available at the time of analysis). On July 29, 1994, the Department of Commerce released corrected inflation data including Gross National Product Price Index ("GNPPI") figures of 122.3 for the third quarter of 1992 and 126.5 for the fourth quarter of 1993. Using these GNPPI figures, we calculate 1.039 as the Inflation Adjustment Factor through February 1994, the base date Operator should have used in justifying its rates.(# "  0*((-"Ԍ Y-  x6. Upon review of the record herein, and having incorporated the adjustments discussed above, we conclude that Operator's showing justifies a maximum reasonable CPS tier price of $14.20 per month (plus franchise fee) for the period February 28, 1994 to May  Y-14, 1994.OvF Y4<ԍ#XR  P7jQXP# This finding is based solely on the representations of Operator and the modifications described herein. Should information come to our attention that these  Y-representations were materially inaccurate, we reserve the right to take appropriate action. This Order is not to be construed as a finding that we have accepted as correct any specific entry, explanation or argument made by any party to this proceeding not specifically  Y -addressed herein.O  Y-x7. Accordingly, IT IS ORDERED, pursuant to Section 0.321 of the Commission's rules, 47 C.F.R.  0.321, that the complaint against the cable programming service price charged by Operator in Umatilla, Florida IS GRANTED TO THE EXTENT INDICATED HEREIN.  Y -x8. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED, pursuant to Section 76.961 of the Commission's rules, 47 C.F.R.  76.961, that Operator shall refund to subscribers in Umatilla, Florida that portion of the amount paid for cable programming service for the period from February 28,  Y -1994 F Y<ԍ#Xw PE37XP# Our jurisdiction to order a refund dates from the earliest date a valid complaint is filed with the Commission. 47 C.F.R.  76.961(b). to May 14, 1994 which exceeded $14.20 (plus franchise fee) per month, plus interest to the date of the refund.  Y-x9. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Operator shall promptly determine the overcharges to CPS subscribers for the stated period, and shall within 30 days of the release of this Order file a report with the Chief, Cable Services Bureau, stating the cumulative refund amount so determined (including franchise fees and interest), describing the calculation thereof, and describing its plan to implement the refund within 60 days of Commission approval of the plan.T  Y-x 10. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED, pursuant to Section 76.922(b)(4)(C) of the Commission's rules, 47 C.F.R.  76.922(b)(4)(C), that Operator shall, within 30 days of the release of this Order, revise its Form 1200 filing with respect to Umatilla, Florida, for the period beginning May 15, 1994, to reduce the monthly charge per tier as of March 31, 1994  Y-for Tier 2 (Line A6b) to equal $14.20 per month (plus franchise fee).1 F Y#<ԍ#Xw PE37XP# We reserve the right to make further adjustments to Operator's price for the period  Y$-after May 14, 1994, upon completion of our review of Operator's Form 1200 filing.#x6Nhez7 XH#1 "|: 0*((m"Ԍ Y-x 11. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Operator shall place into effect, within 30 days after its submission of the revised Form 1200 filing required above, a price that reflects the reduction in the CPS rate determined in this Order. x` `  hhFEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION x` `  hhMeredith J. Jones x` `  hhChief, Cable Services Bureau