******************************************************** NOTICE ******************************************************** This document was converted from WordPerfect to ASCII Text format. Content from the original version of the document such as headers, footers, footnotes, endnotes, graphics, and page numbers will not show up in this text version. All text attributes such as bold, italic, underlining, etc. from the original document will not show up in this text version. Features of the original document layout such as columns, tables, line and letter spacing, pagination, and margins will not be preserved in the text version. If you need the complete document, download the WordPerfect version or Adobe Acrobat version, if available. ***************************************************************** Before the Federal Communications Commission Washington, D.C. 20554 In the Matter of ) ) Comcast Cablevision of Carolina, Inc.) CUID No. SC0050 (Charleston County) ) ) Complaints Regarding ) Cable Programming Services Tier ) Rate Increases ) ORDER Adopted: April 9, 1997 Released: April 11, 1997 By the Chief, Financial Analysis and Compliance Division, Cable Services Bureau: 1. In this Order we consider complaints about rates the above-referenced operator ("Operator") was charging for its cable programming services tier ("CPST") in the community referenced above. Operator increased its CPST rates on February 15, 1995 from $17.82 to $18.21 and again on November 1, 1995 from $18.21 to $19.39. Operator's response includes benchmark justifications filed on FCC Form 1200 and FCC Forms 1210, the latest filed for the period ending September 30, 1995. We conclude that the CPST rate increases implemented by Operator are not unreasonable. 2. On August 2, 1995, Operator filed a motion to dismiss the subject complaint on the grounds that the complaint challenges the reasonableness of the new product tier ("NPT") rate charged by Operator in the above-referenced franchise area. To support their motion the Operator referred to a previous Commission decision. In that decision the Commission determined that Comcast Cablevision of Tallahassee, Inc.'s Value Pak should be treated as an NPT, the creation of which was not an evasion of Commission rules. Even though Operator had removed channels from a regulated tier, Operator was not required to retier because the number of channels removed was small. Operator was allowed to treat its Value Pak offering as an NPT under the Commission's Sixth Order on Reconsideration, Fifth Report and Order, and Seventh Notice of Proposed Rulemaking ("Going Forward Order"). We agree that in this instance Operator's Value Pak is sufficiently similar to the Value Pak offering in Tallahassee, Florida so as to be treated as an NPT. However, we find that the complaint concerns not only an increase in Value Pak charges, but an increase in CPST charges as well. The Commission therefore has jurisdiction over this complaint regarding CPST charges. For this reason, we conclude that Operator's motion to dismiss the complaint is denied. 3. The Communications Act authorizes the Federal Communications Commission ("Commission") to review the CPST rates of cable systems not subject to effective competition to ensure that rates charged are not unreasonable. The Cable Television Consumer Protection and Competition Act of 1992 ("1992 Cable Act") required the Commission to review CPST rates upon the filing of a valid complaint by a subscriber. If the Commission finds rates to be unreasonable, it shall determine correct rates and any refund liability. 4. The Commission's original rate regulations became effective on September 1, 1993. The Commission revised its rate regulations effective May 15, 1994. Operators must use the FCC Form 1200 series to justify their rates for the period beginning May 15, 1994 through a benchmark showing. Cable operators may file a FCC Form 1210 to justify rate increases based on the addition and deletion of channels, changes in certain external costs, and inflation. The Operator must file FCC Form 1210, at least 30 days before new rates are scheduled to go into effect, where the Commission has found the cable programming service rate to be unreasonable less than one year prior to the filing, or where there is a pending complaint against the CPST rate. 5. Upon review of Operator's FCC Forms 1200 and 1210, we conclude that Operator has justified its CPST rates of $18.21, effective February 15, 1995, and $19.39, effective November 1, 1995. Therefore, we find that Operator's CPST rates in the community referenced above are justified and not unreasonable. 6. Accordingly, IT IS ORDERED, pursuant to Section 0.321 of the Commission's Rules, 47 C.F.R.  0.321, that the CPST rates of $18.21 and $19.39 implemented by the Operator on February 15, 1995 and November 1, 1995, respectively, in the community referenced above ARE NOT UNREASONABLE. 7. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED, pursuant to Section 0.321 of the Commission's rules, 47 C.F.R.  0.321, that the complaints referenced herein against the CPST rates of $18.21 and $19.39 implemented by the Operator on February 15, 1995 and November 1, 1995, respectively, in the community referenced above ARE DENIED. 8. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED, pursuant to Section 623(a)(2)(A) and (B) of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended, 47 U.S.C. Section 543(a)(2)(A) and (B), that the motion to dismiss IS DENIED. FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION Elizabeth W. Beaty Chief, Financial Analysis and Compliance Division Cable Services Bureau