WPCe 2MBER ZCourierw Roman c-#XR  P7jQ=9XP#HP4Si (Additional); Rm. 918_1; LPT2HPLA4SAD.PRSx  @\pNX@|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<"dxtldpxxd3|w); Rm. 918_1; LPT2HPLA4SAD.PRSXj\  P6G;\pNXP2j f 3|jCourierCG TimesCG Times Boldn BoldTimes New RomanTimes New Roman ItalicCG Times ItalicCG Times Bold",tB^ f ^;C]ddCCCdCCCCddddddddddCCY~~vCN~sk~CCCddCYdYdYCdd88d8ddddJN8ddddYYdYd4dddddCddddddddd8YYYYYY~Y~Y~Y~YC8C8C8C8ddddddddddYdddddsdXdXXXddx|X~d~d|XdddddddC8ddddCdoddd|8|H~d<|8dtddddHHdlLlLlLkd|H|8~ddddddddXXXd~ddkd~ddxCddCCCWxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxNdddCYQQddddddFddddFCChhd44ddzzdddvooChdF"dhd9dCCzCddoddCdYds]zUvdYYCCCCz~ozoY~NYdYC8YooYdYzsdzdd~YYzozzz~CdzYzzzzCCdddddddzCsdYC\   pxtll\tll@\@\`L24D[;vCourierCG TimesCG Times BoldTimes New Roman BoldjQXP#CourierCG TimesCG Times BoldTimes New Roman BoldTimes New Roman\]SX@CourierCG TimesCG Times BoldTimes New Roman BoldTimes New RomanTimes New Roman Italic8wC;,=9Xw PE37XPD7zC;,BXz_ pi7X@ND,,ʼ4  pG;dddddddddYdddddsdXdXXXddx|X~d~d|XdddddddC8ddddCdoddd|8|H~d<|8dtddddHHdlLlLlLkd|H|8~ddddddddXXXd~ddkd~ddxCddCCCWxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxNdddCYQQddddddFddddFCChhd44ddzzdddvooChdF"dhd9dCCzCddoddCdYds]zUvdYYCCCCz~ozoY~NYdYC8YooYdYzsdzdd~YYzozzz~CdzYzzzzCCdddddddzCsdYC\   pxtll\tll@\@\`La8DocumentgDocument Style StyleXX` `  ` 24pIkk$a4DocumentgDocument Style Style . a6DocumentgDocument Style Style GX  a5DocumentgDocument Style Style }X(# a2DocumentgDocument Style Style<o   ?  A.  2 vftP a7DocumentgDocument Style StyleyXX` ` (#` BibliogrphyBibliography:X (# a1Right ParRight-Aligned Paragraph Numbers:`S@ I.  X(# a2Right ParRight-Aligned Paragraph Numbers C @` A. ` ` (#` 2#  f! " "a3DocumentgDocument Style Style B b  ?  1.  a3Right ParRight-Aligned Paragraph Numbers L! ` ` @P 1. ` `  (# a4Right ParRight-Aligned Paragraph Numbers Uj` `  @ a. ` (# a5Right ParRight-Aligned Paragraph Numbers _o` `  @h(1)  hh#(#h 2)'#$P%)&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 Tech InitInitialize Technical Style. k I. A. 1. a.(1)(a) i) a) 1 .1 .1 .1 .1 .1 .1 .1 Technical2)['+((9)a1DocumentgDocument Style Style\s0  zN8F I. ׃  a5TechnicalTechnical Document Style)WD (1) . a6TechnicalTechnical Document Style)D (a) . a2TechnicalTechnical Document Style<6  ?  A.   2,**f+(,a3TechnicalTechnical Document Style9Wg  2  1.   a4TechnicalTechnical Document Style8bv{ 2  a.   a1TechnicalTechnical Document StyleF!<  ?  I.   a7TechnicalTechnical Document Style(@D i) . 23,3f-.e2a8TechnicalTechnical 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:Fx6X@`7X@8wC;,=9Xw PE37XPD7zC;,BXz_ pi7X@ND,,ʼ4  pG;7jC:,4+Xj\  P6G;XP7nC:,Xn4  pG;XW!@(#,49h@\  P6G;hP\5hC:,DXh*f9 xr G;XX6uC;,[~Xu&_ x7XXêUUUUUUPUUUUUUPUUUUUUPUUUUUUWªªxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxNdddCdUUddddddFddddFCCssd44ddzzddd~ooCsdF"dsd9dCCzCddoddCdYds`zUvdddCCCCzozoYNYYYN8YooYdYzzdzddYYzozzzNdzYzzzzCCdddddddzCzdYC\   pxtll\tll@\@\`L2f rZe",tB^ f ^;C`ddCCCdCCCCddddddddddCCdxxxsCYoxxdoxxooCCCddCddYdY8dd88Y8ddddLL8dYYYLYdYd4dddddCddddddddd8xdxdxdxdxdYxYxYxYxYC8C8C8C8dddddddddoYxddddoYdxdxdxdxdXXddxxXxdxdxXdddddddD8ddddCdddddp8pHodp8p8dxddddxLxLxddLdLdLddpHp8odddddddodpLpLpLdoddddododxCddCCCWxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxNdddCd]]ddddddFddddFCCddd88ddzzdddkddCddF"ddd9dCCzCdzdoddCdYds]zUvdYYCCCCzzzozoYzNoYdYC8YooYdYzzdzddoYoYzzozzzzzCdoozYzzzzCCddddzdddooozCsdYC\   pxtll\tll@\@\`L ^ $//US Cable Corporation, Paterson, NJ, MO&O 951743//$ $/76.922 Rates for Cable Programming Service tiers/$ $/benchmark cable rates/$  a<Ԋ 0#4  pG;,ʼ#Before the FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION  a<Washington, D.C. 20554#Xj\  P6G;+XP#X01Í ÍX01Í Í҃  X- ) DA 951743 ĐX(#P  X} -In the Matter of hh@)hpp  Xf -x` `  hh@)h  XO -US Cable Corporationhh@)hCUID No. NJ0566 (Paterson)  X8 -x` `  hh@)h  X! -Benchmark Filing to Supporthh@)  X -Cable Programming Service Pricehh@)  X-  MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER ă  X-x` ` Adopted: August 8, 1995@hReleased: September 8, 1995 By the Chief, Cable Services Bureau:  X;- I. A. 1. a.(1)(a) i) a) I. 1. 1. a.(1)(a) i) a)  x1. Here we consider complaints about the price that the abovecaptioned operator ("Operator") was charging for its cable programming service ("CPS") tier in the community referenced above. Operator has chosen to attempt to justify its price through a benchmark showing on FCC Form 393. This Order addresses the reasonableness of Operator's price only through May 14, 1994. At a later date we will issue a separate order addressing the  X-reasonableness of the price after that date. ^ XA-ԍ 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 Rulemaking, MM  X -Docket No. 92266, FCC 9438, 9 FCC Rcd 4119 (1994) ("Second Order on  X!-Reconsideration"), the maximum permitted CPS price determined herein might also apply  Y"-from May 15, 1994 until the date on which Operator #XR  P7jQ=9XP#implemented its CPS price under the  Y#<new regulations. See para. 3, infra.#x6X@`7>FX@# #XR  P7jQ=9XP#Further, to the extent that the price as of March 31, 1994 is found to be excessive, a reduction 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  YK'-unreasonable. See 47 C.F.R.  76.922(b)(4)(C). " 0*0*0*l"Ԍ X-  x2. Under the Cable Television Consumer Protection and Competition Act of 1992, Xy-ԍ Pub. L. No. 102385, 106 Stat. 1460 (1992); Communications Act,  623(c), as  Xd-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  X-obligation on behalf of the cable operator to file a justification of its CPS prices.@ Xb-ԍ 47 C.F.R.  76.956.@ Under our rules, an operator may attempt to justify its prices through either a benchmark showing or a  X-costofservice showing.Cy X-ԍ 47 C.F.R.  76.956(b).C In either case, the operator has the burden of demonstrating that its  X-CPS prices are not unreasonable.3* X -ԍ Id.3  Xv-x3. The Commission's original rate regulations took effect on September 1, 1993.v X -ԍ 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).  X_-The Commission subsequently revised its rate regulations effective May 15, 1994.C_`  Xp-ԍ 47 C.F.R.  76.922(b).C Operators with valid CPS complaints filed against them prior to May 15, 1994 must  X1-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  X -compliance with the revised rules from May 15, 1994 forward.w   X-ԍ See Second Order on Reconsideration, 9 FCC Rcd at 4190, paras. 150152.w Operators attempting to justify their prices for the period prior to May 15, 1994 through a benchmark showing must  X -complete and file FCC Form 393.3  XJ-ԍ Id.3 Generally, to justify their prices for the period beginning  X -May 15, 1994 through a benchmark showing, operators must use the FCC Form 1200 series.  w X-ԍ 47 C.F.R.  76.922(b)(6); see also Second Order on Reconsideration, 9 FCC Rcd at 4189 n.195.  Xb- x4. The first valid CPS complaint in the franchise area which is the subject of this Order was completed and served on Operator on February 22, 1994 and received by the"K 0*((" Commission on February 28, 1994. Operator filed FCC Form 393 in response; Operator has  X-also filed amended and supplemental Form 393 filings, most recently on January 17, 1995.C 3 Xb-ԍ Operator filed an amended FCC Form 393 in response to a Cable Services Bureau Order citing common deficiencies observed in benchmark filings generally. Cable Operators' Rate Justification Filings, 9 FCC Rcd 7752 (Cab. Serv. Bur. 1994). Operator also submitted additional information in response to a Cable Services Bureau Public Notice offering operators the opportunity to make optional supplemental filings. Public Notice: Cable Services Bureau Announces Optional Procedures with Respect to Pending PreMay 15 Benchmark Cases, DA 941556 (Dec. 29, 1994) and Public Notice: Cable Services Bureau Announces Extension of Time to File Under Optional Procedures with Respect to Pending PreMay 15 Benchmark  X -Cases, DA 9587 (Jan. 20, 1995) (together, Public Notice).C  X-x5. Operator asserts that its monthly CPS tier price of $13.27 (plus franchise fee) is higher than its maximum permitted charge of $13.15 per month (plus franchise fee), as calculated in the filing. Thus, Operator has failed to demonstrate that its monthly CPS tier price is not unreasonable. In addition, 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:  X1-Xxa.` ` Operator's Form 393, Part II, Worksheet 1, Line 104 entry does not represent its current monthly equipment revenue as of the initial date of regulation. Since Operator restructured its rates, including its equipment rates, on September 1, 1993, the current monthly equipment revenue figure it entered on Line 104 should have been  X -close or identical to its equipment cost figure on Part III, Step G, Line 34.   XI-ԍ See Questions and Answers on Completion of FCC Form 393 and Associated Filing Requirements, Question and Answer No. 7 (released Nov. 10, 1993) ("Where operators have restructured equipment rates as of September 1, 1993 in accordance with our regulations . . . operators will enter on Line 104 the same, or nearly the same, number as on Line 301."). However, Operator's entries on these two lines differed substantially. We therefore adjusted Line 104 to equal the amount entered on Line 34.(#  Xy-Xxb.` ` In its latest Form 393 filing, Operator incorrectly calculated the Inflation Adjustment Factor (Form 393, Part II, Worksheet 1, Line 127). Lines 122 and 125 of Form 393 require the operator to enter Gross National Product Price Index ("GNPPI") data for the latest quarter for which data is available that ended before the date through which the Inflation Adjustment Factor is calculated. On its most recent Form 393, Operator calculated the Inflation Adjustment Factor through January 1994. However, Operator completed Lines 122 and 125 using GNPPI data (released by the U.S. Department of Commerce on August 31, 1993) for the second quarter of 1993, rather than the fourth quarter of 1993. Operator's calculation of the Inflation Adjustment Factor is therefore incorrect. (# "/ 0*(("ԌXx` ` We must therefore recalculate the Inflation Adjustment Factor on the basis of the most accurate data currently available in accordance with the Form 393  X-Instructions.  XK-ԍ 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 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 an Inflation Adjustment Factor of 1.037 through January 1994, the base date Operator used in justifying its rates. (#  XH- x6. Upon review of the record herein, and having incorporated the adjustments discussed above, we conclude that Operator has failed to justify the rate it was charging during the period in question. Operator's showing justifies a maximum reasonable CPS tier price of $13.03 per month (plus franchise fee) for the period from February 28, 1994 to May  X -14, 1994. d X-ԍ This finding is based solely on the representations of Operator and the modifications described herein. Should information come to our attention that these 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 addressed herein.  X -x7. Accordingly, IT IS ORDERED, pursuant to Section 0.321 of the Commission's Rules, 47 C.F.R.  0.321, that the complaint referenced herein against the cable programming service price charged by Operator in the franchise area referenced in the caption, and all other complaints in this franchise area related to the same price, ARE GRANTED TO THE EXTENT INDICATED HEREIN.  X4-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 the franchise area referenced in the caption that portion of the amount paid for cable programming service for  X-the period from February 28, 1994 XY-ԍ 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 the maximum price of $13.03 per month (plus franchise fee), plus interest to the date of the refund.  X-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"7S 0*(("Ԍ X-ԙx 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 the franchise area referenced in the caption, for the period beginning May 15, 1994, to reduce the monthly charge per tier as of March 31, 1994 for Tier 2 (Line A6b) to equal the maximum permitted price of $13.03  X-(plus franchise fee). X-ԍ We reserve the right to make further adjustments to Operator's price for the period after May 14, 1994, upon completion of our review of Operator's Form 1200 filing.  X_-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 -x 12. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED, pursuant to Section 76.960 of the Commission's Rules, 47 C.F.R.  76.960, that Operator shall not be required to obtain advance approval of adjustments to its CPS price in the franchise area referenced in the caption for one year following the release of this Order, due to Operator's having submitted in good faith an  X -optional supplemental filing in response to our Public Notice. x` `  hhFEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION x` `  hhMeredith J. Jones  X-x` `  hhChief, Cable Services Bureau T