WPC) 2MBERK Z3|w Y-#Xw PE37K:c0= e=!l="i~'^#)0<#x?$lz?%l?Document 8Document 8" Document 4Document 4#  Document 6Document 6$ Document 5Document 5% 2E&l@'l@(\A)zCDocument 2Document 2& Document 7Document 7' Right Par 1Right Par 1(` hp x (#X` hp x (#X` hp x (#` hp x (#Right Par 2Right Par 2)` hp x (#X` hp x (#0X` hp x (#0` hp x (#2L*lE+6F,TH-rJDocument 3Document 3* Right Par 3Right Par 3+` hp x (#X` P hp x (#X` P hp x (#` hp x (#Right Par 4Right Par 4,` hp x (#X` hp x (#0X` hp x (#0` hp x (#Right Par 5Right Par 5-` hp x (#X` hp x (#X` hp x (#` hp x (#2DU.L/N0P1(SRight Par 6Right Par 6.` hp x (#X` hp x (#0X` hp x (#0` hp x (#Right Par 7Right Par 7/` hp x (#X` hp x (#X` hp x (#` hp x (#Right Par 8Right Par 80` hp x (#X` hp x (#0X` hp x (#0` hp x (#Document 1Document 11` hp x (#X` hp x (#X` hp x (#` hp x (#2Z2$vU3$W4lY5l*ZTechnical 5Technical 52` hp x (#X` hp x (# X` hp x (#` hp x (#Technical 6Technical 63` hp x (#X` hp x (# X` hp x (#` hp x (#Technical 2Technical 24 Technical 3Technical 35 2a6$Z7l\8$X]9$|_Technical 4Technical 46` hp x (#X` hp x (# X` hp x (#` hp x (#Technical 1Technical 17 Technical 7Technical 78` hp x (#X` hp x (# X` hp x (#` hp x (#Technical 8Technical 89` hp x (#X` hp x (# X` hp x (#` hp x (#2Jj:a;c<f=,htoc 1toc 1:` hp x (#!(#B!(#B` hp x (#toc 2toc 2;` hp x (#` !(#B` !(#B` hp x (#toc 3toc 3<` hp x (#` !(# ` !(# ` hp x (#toc 4toc 4=` hp x (# !(#  !(# ` hp x (#2Lq>|j?l@vnA.otoc 5toc 5>` hp x (#h!(# h!(# ` hp x (#toc 6toc 6?` hp x (#!(#!(#` hp x (#toc 7toc 7@ toc 8toc 8A` hp x (#!(#!(#` hp x (#2yB~qCsDuEwtoc 9toc 9B` hp x (#!(#B!(#B` hp x (#index 1index 1C` hp x (#` !(# ` !(# ` hp x (#index 2index 2D` hp x (#` !(#B` !(#B` hp x (#toatoaE` hp x (#!(# !(# ` hp x (#2{Fv(zGlzHr {I|{captioncaptionF _Equation Caption_Equation CaptionG endnote referenceendnote referenceH head1 #I'd#2p}wC@ #2c~J}-|K|L2}M}a1Paragraph R!1. a. i. (1) (a) (i) 1) a)D )DDDFrfJ$ a2Paragraph R!1. a. i. (1) (a) (i) 1) a)D )DDDFrfK/` ` ` a3Paragraph R!1. a. i. (1) (a) (i) 1) a)D )DDDFrfL:` ` `  a4Paragraph R!1. a. i. (1) (a) (i) 1) a)D )DDDFrfME` ` `  2{N~O>PQa5Paragraph R!1. a. i. (1) (a) (i) 1) a)D )DDDFrfNP  ` ` ` hhh a6Paragraph R!1. a. i. (1) (a) (i) 1) a)D )DDDFrfO[   a7Paragraph R!1. a. i. (1) (a) (i) 1) a)D )DDDFrfPf  a8Paragraph R!1. a. i. (1) (a) (i) 1) a)D )DDDFrfQq 23ZKq͊27jC:,Xj\  P6G;XP8wC;,><q*"xxxxWWxxxWWkkxxx46./3jIQ(' t X-   (2Before the W FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION  X-Washington, D.C. 20554 ă X-#Xj\  P6G;XP#  X- x` `  hh@hpp DA 95 2257  Xv-#Xj\  P6G;XP#In the Matter of: hh@) x` `  hh@)  XH-TCI OF ILLINOIS, INC.hh@)  X1-City of Macomb, Illinoishh@) x` `  hh@)  X -Appeal of Local hh@)  X -Rate Order of City ofhh@)  X -Macomb, Illinois hh@)  X -W MEMORANDUM AND  ORDER ă  Xy-  _i   _i Adopted : September 27, 1995@hpp Released : November 8, 1995 By the Chief, Cable Services Bureau:  X- I.xINTRODUCTION  X-1.xOn January 19, 1995, TCI of Illinois, Inc. ("TCII") filed with the Commission an appeal of the local rate order adopted by the City of Macomb, Illinois (the "City") on  X-December 20, 1994. X:-#Xj\  P6G;XP#эxUnder the Cable Television Consumer Protection and Competition Act of 1992, Pub. L. No. 102385, 106 Stat. 1460 (1992), Communications Act of 1934,  623(b), 47 U.S.C.  543(b) (the "Cable Act of 1992"), and the Commission's implementing regulations, local  X-franchising authorities may regulate rates for basic cable service and associated equipment.(#(#X  In its local order, the City approved TCII's proposed rate reduction for its basic service tier from $9.30 to $8.86 and ordered TCII to make refunds to its subscribers  X-in the amount of $1.10 per subscriber for the period May 15, 1994 through August 1, 1994.g Xa -ԍxSee Appeal of Local Rate Order, Attachment A. g The City did not file an opposition to the appeal.  XN-2.xIn its appeal, TCII challenges the City's refund order on the ground that TCII had complied with Commission rules governing deferral of an operator's refund liability and, therefore, TCII was exempt from refund liability during the period at issue. TCII states  X -that, on May 13, 1994, it notified the City that it was electing to defer its refund liability.I  X'-ԍxId., Attachment B.I "  0*((j" TCII further states that it did not change its rates or service offerings during the period from March 30, 1994 through July 14, 1994, that it completed its repricing by July 14, 1994 and that it did not charge subscribers the new rate until August 1, 1994. On August 10, 1994, TCII filed its FCC Form 1200 with the City.  X-  X- II.xSTANDARD OF REVIEW  X_-3.xUnder our rules, rate orders made by local franchising authorities may be appealed to  XH-the Commission.xH Y -#Xw PE37%-ԍxSee Appeal of Local Rate Order at 3.[ TCII's subscribers therefore did not receive the requisite 30 days notice before the rate changes became effective on July 14, 1994. "| 0*((n"Ԍ X-7.xThe Commission also required operators, as a condition of refund liability deferral, to complete restructuring by July 14, 1994 and considered restructuring to be complete "when  X-bills reflecting the rate and service changes ha[d] been issued to subscribers."l XK-ԍxSee Second Recon. Order, 9 FCC Rcd 4185, n.183.l Operators wishing to defer refund liability should have issued subscriber bills reflecting the restructured rates by July 14, 1994, unless advance billing was prohibited by the franchising authority or the operator was using cycle billing. In this case, those exceptions are not applicable. TCII  Xv-states that it operated on a "once a month billing cycle." [v{ X -ԍxSee Appeal of Local Rate Order at 3.[ Further, TCII does not allege that the City prohibited advance billing. Instead of sending subscriber bills by July 14 as required,  XH-TCII states that it issued subscriber bills reflecting the new rates "at the end of July."[H. X' -ԍxSee Appeal of Local Rate Order at 3.[ As a result of the untimeliness of its subscriber bills, TCII did not meet the requirement that all restructuring be completed by July 14, 1994. In order to meet this condition of refund deferral, TCII should have sent out its subscriber bills with the restructured rates by July 14, 1994. It did not. Our rules require that operators who wished to defer refund liability must have complied with each specified condition, which TCI failed to do. TCI did not qualify for deferral of refund liability for the period May 15, 1994 through July 14, 1994 because it failed to provide subscribers with at least 30 days notice of the rate changes and because it failed to complete restructuring by July 14, 1994. Accordingly, TCII's appeal is denied.  Xb- V.xORDERING CLAUSE  X4-8.xAccordingly, IT IS ORDERED that TCII's appeal of the local order of the City of  X-Macomb, Illinois is DENIED.  X-9.xThis 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.  X-x` `  hh FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION (#(#X x` `  hhMeredith J. Jones x` `  hhChief, Cable Services Bureau