WPCw 2MBVRKZ3|X7jC:,+Xj\  P6G;XP"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$CWxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxNHxxH\dDXddddd8@d<@d<DDXXdDDxddzHxxHvppDXd<"dxtldpxxdHP4Si (Additional); Rm. 907_1; LPT2HPLA4SAD.PRSXj\  P6G;\! EXP2> K Z3|X"i~'^09CSS999S]+9+/SSSSSSSSSS//]]]Ixnnxg]xx9?xgxx]xn]gxxxxg9/9MS9ISISI9SS//S/SSSS9?/SSxSSIP!PZ9+ZM999+99999999S/xIxIxIxIxIlnIgIgIgIgI9/9/9/9/xSxSxSxSxSxSxSxSxSxSxIxSxRxSxSxS]SxIxIxInInInZnIxigIgIgIgIxSxSxSxZxSxZxS9/9S999Su]ZZxSg/gCg9g9g/xSbxSxSxSxSxn9n9n9]?]?]?]ZgFg/gMxSxSxSxSxSxSxxZgIgIgIxSg9xS]?g9xSi+SS88WuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxNeBDoc InitInitialize Document Stylez   0*0*0*  I. A. 1. a.(1)(a) i) a) I. 1. A. a.(1)(a) i) a)DocumentgPleadingHeader for Numbered Pleading PaperE!n    X X` hp x (#%'0*,.8135@8:Ltoc 2toc 2;` hp x (#` !(#B` !(#B` hp x (#toc 3toc 3<` hp x (#` !(# ` !(# ` hp x (#toc 4toc 4=` hp x (# !(#  !(# ` hp x (#toc 5toc 5>` hp x (#h!(# h!(# ` hp x (#2U?N@vQA}QBStoc 6toc 6?` hp x (#!(#!(#` hp x (#toc 7toc 7@ toc 8toc 8A` hp x (#!(#!(#` hp x (#toc 9toc 9B` hp x (#!(#B!(#B` hp x (#2\CUD XE'ZFvE\index 1index 1C` hp x (#` !(# ` !(# ` hp x (#index 2index 2D` hp x (#` !(#B` !(#B` hp x (#toatoaE` hp x (#!(# !(# ` hp x (#captioncaptionF 2abGl\HrY]K]K`_Equation Caption_Equation CaptionG endnote referenceendnote referenceH "i~'^:DPddDDDdp4D48dddddddddd88pppX|pDL|pp||D8D\dDXdXdXDdd88d8ddddDL8ddddX`(`lD4l\DDD4DDDDDDDDd8XXXXXX|X|X|X|XD8D8D8D8ddddddddddXdbdddpdXXXXXlX~|X|X|X|XdddldldD8DdDDDdplld|8|P|D|D|8dvddddDDDpLpLpLpl|T|8|\ddddddl|X|X|Xd|DdpL|Dd~4ddC$CWxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxNHxxH\dDXddddd8@d<@d<DDXXdDDxddzHxxHvppDXd<"dxtldpxxd"i~'^:DpddȨDDDdp4D48ddddddddddDDpppd|Ld|pȐD8DtdDdpXpXDdp8Dp8pdppXLDpdddXP,PhD4htDDD4DDDDDDdDp8dddddȐXXXXXJ8J8J8J8pddddppppddpddddzpdddXXhXXXXXdddhdptL8LpLDLpphhp8ZDP8pppddƐXXXpLpLpLphfDtppppppȐhXXXpDppLDd4ddC6CWxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxNHxxHjdDdddddd/>/>/>/x]SSSSx]x]x]x]xSxSx]SSxSxSf]xSxSxSxIxIxWxIx{nInInInISSSWS]a?/?]?9?]]WW]n/nKn9nCn/x]xx]x]SSxxIxIxI]?]?]?]WnUn9nax]x]x]x]x]x]xxWnInInIx]n9x]]?n9xSz+SS8-8WuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxN8HH"&H>XHH8HB8>HH^HH>"".2",2,2,"222N2222"&22H22,006"6."""""""""""2H,H,H,H,H,XAB,>,>,>,>,""""H2H2H2H2H2H2H2H2H2H2H,H2H1H2H2H282H,H,H,B,B,B6B,H?>,>,>,>,H2H2H2H6H2H6H2""2"""2F866H2>>(>">">H2;H2H2H2H2XHB"B"B"8&8&8&86>*>>.H2H2H2H2H2H2^HH6>,>,>,H2>"H28&>"H2?22!!WFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxN$<<$.2",2222`2 LL2 LL2L"",,2d""Commission on June 19, 1995 against Operator's CPST rate of $7.03. The LFA filed its June  x19, 1995 complaint in response to Operator's filing an FCC Form 1210 with the LFA in March  x/of 1995 to justify an increase in Operator's basic tier rate. In a Motion to Dismiss, Operator  xargues that the complaint was untimely filed under the Commission's rules as its CPST rate of  X1- xy$7.03 took effect on July 14, 1994.1_ {O- x;ԍ See Letter dated June 15, 1995 to the Federal Communications Commission from Joe A. Johnson, Senior Vice President, Falcon Cable Systems Company. In subsequent documentation, the LFA admitted that it had  X - xmissed the opportunity to complain about Operator's CPST rate of $7.03. _ {O- xԍ See "Narrative Description of the County of San Luis Obispo Complaint Regarding Falcon's Cable Programming Services Rate" filed March 28, 1997. Based on our review  xof the record, we agree that the complaint was not timely filed. Consequently, the complaint  X -does not trigger the Commission's jurisdiction and Operator's Motion to Dismiss is granted.K h _ {O-ԍ See 47 C.F.R. 76.953. K  X - ` 2x4.` ` On March 28, 1997, the LFA filed a timely complaint with the Commission against  xzOperator's January 17, 1997 CPST rate increase. The LFA verified that it received more than  xone subscriber complaint for each community referenced above and that the first valid complaint  xfor each of the communities referenced above was received by the LFA on January 21, 1997.  x!Along with its complaint, the LFA filed FCC Forms 1200, 1210 and 1240 which had been  xsubmitted by the Operator. Operator filed amended FCC Forms 1210 and 1240 with the  xCommission on April 14, 1997. The filing of a complete and timely LFA complaint triggers an  X- xobligation upon the cable operator to file a justification of its CPST rates.?  _ yO-ԍ 47 C.F.R. 76.956.? The Operator has  X-the burden of demonstrating that the CPST rates complained about are reasonable.3  _ {OA"-ԍ Id.3  X- ` x5.` ` To justify rates for the period beginning May 15, 1994 through a benchmark  X- xshowing, operators must use the FCC Form 1200 series.f _ yO&-ԍ#X\  P6G;IP# 47 C.F.R. 76.922.f Operators are permitted to make" ,N(N(ZZ"  X- xychanges to their rates on a quarterly basis using FCC Form 1210.Z _ {Oy-ԍ#X\  P6G;IP#  Id.Z Operators may alternatively  xyjustify adjustments to their rates on an annual basis using FCC Form 1240 to reflect reasonably  xicertain and quantifiable changes in external costs, inflation, and the number of regulated channels  X- xLthat are projected for the twelve months following the rate change.ZZ_ {O-ԍ#X\  P6G;IP#  Id.Z Any incurred cost that is  X-not projected may be accrued with interest and added to rates at a later time._ {OA -ԍ#X\  P6G;IP#  Id.#Xj\  P6G;+XP#с x  Xv- ` x6.` ` In its complaint, the LFA argues that Operator has incorrectly completed its forms.  xSpecifically, the LFA states that Operator has used a rate other than the maximum permitted rate  x("MPR") from a prior FCC Form 1210 or 1200 as the starting rate on Line A2 (Permitted  x?Charge) in its FCC Form 1210 for the period January 1, 1995 to December 31, 1995 ("1995  X - xForm 1210").eX ~_ yOI- xiԍ The LFA indicates that the rate on Line A2 is $7.03, Operator's actual CPST rate, effective July 15, 1994.  xThe amended 1995 Form 1210 which Operator filed with the Commission indicates $7.95, Operator's actual CPST rate effective October 15, 1995, as the Permitted Charge on Line A2.e The LFA argues that this is inconsistent with the Commission's rules. In a letter  x"to the LFA, dated February 26, 1997, Operator argues it should be permitted to use a  X - xL"grandfathered" rate, i.e., an actual rate, as the starting rate on Line A2 of its 1995 Form 1210. _ yO;- xԍ Letter to Ellen O. Sturtz, Franchise Administrator, San Luis Obispo County, from Emerson Yearwood, Director of Government Relations, Falcon Cable Systems Company, dated February 26, 1997.  xIt then argues that the resulting MPR from the 1995 Form 1210 should be used as the beginning  X - xrate on Line A1 of its FCC Form 1240.2 _ {Og-ԍ Id.2 Operator contends that the Commission, when it  xMcreated FCC Form 1240, intended to amend FCC Form 1210 so that, regardless of Operator's  xprior MPR, an actual rate could be used on Line A2 in the same way an actual rate is used on  X{-Line A1 on FCC Form 1240.{ _ yO- xxԍ The instructions for FCC Form 1240, Line A1 require the Operator to "enter the maximum rate which you  xare currently permitted to charge for regulated programming services according to Commission regulations. If you  xhave previously filed Form 1240, this figure is on Line I9. If this is your first Form 1240, this figure can be found  xon the last line of your most recently filed Form 1210. . . . If your franchise area is not subject to CPST regulation  xand you are filing this Form 1240 in response to a CPST rate complaint, enter the rate you were charging prior to the rate increase which triggered the rate complaint." FCC Form 1240 Instructions at p.12.  XM- ` $x7.` ` We disagree with Operator. Other than that FCC Form 1240 was created after  x?the Commission order adopting the annual rate adjustment methodology ("Annual Rate"6,N(N(ZZf"  X- xKAdjustment Order"),+Z_ {Oy- xԍ See In the Matter of Implementation of Sections of the Cable Television Consumer Protection and  xwCompetition Act of 1992: Rate Regulation, MM Docket No. 92266, Thirteenth Order on Reconsideration, 11 FCC Rcd 388 (1995).+ as opposed to FCC Form 1210, which was created prior to the Annual Rate  xAdjustment Order, Operator has provided no basis for its argument. Pursuant to FCC Form 1210,  xthe Permitted Charge, to be inserted on Line A2, "is the rate determined by either [the operator's]  xForm 1200 filing (Full Reduction Rate), a previously filed 1210 (Maximum Permitted Rate), a  xCost of Service Showing, or election of the streamlined rate reduction for qualifying small  X- xysystems (Streamlined Rate).">_ yO( -ԍ FCC Form 1210 at p.3.> The FCC Form 1240 allows the operator to use, as its beginning  x rate on Line A1, the MPR calculated on a prior FCC Form, or, if the FCC Form 1240 is being  xMfiled in response to a CPST rate complaint and the operator is not currently regulated on its  xCPST, the rate the operator was charging prior to the rate increase which triggered the  X1- x{complaint.L1z_ yO\-ԍ FCC Form 1240 Instructions at p.12.L The Commission also permits an operator that is filing an FCC Form 1240 in  xkresponse to a CPST rate complaint, and is not currently regulated on its CPST, to use, as its  x\current MPR on Line A1, an MPR calculated on FCC Forms 1200, 1210 and 1240, even if the MPR has never been put into effect by the operator.  X - ` x8.` ` The Commission will not accept an FCC Form 1210 to justify an MPR unless that  xFCC Form 1210 is being used to adjust a rate previously calculated by an FCC Form 1200 or a  xcostofservice showing. The purpose of the FCC Form 1210 is "to adjust [the operator's]  xmaximum permitted rate, which was determined on [its] Form 1200, a previously filed 1210, or  Xb- xa costofservice showing."Kb _ yO-ԍ FCC Form 1210 Instructions at p.1.K Before an operator completes Form 1210 it "must complete and file  XK- xForm 1200 with the FCC or [its] local franchising authority."3K_ {O-ԍ Id.3 Contrary to Operator's argument,  xthe creation of a new FCC Form does not automatically amend all preceding FCC Forms and the  xpolicies reflected by those forms, unless the Commission acts to amend those forms. That FCC  xForm 1240 was created two years ago, and the Commission has not amended FCC Form 1210  xjto conform to Operator's interpretation of the Commission's intention, indicates that Operator's  x=interpretation is incorrect. We will adjust Line A2 on Operator's 1995 FCC Form 1210 to reflect  X- xthe MPR as calculated on its preceding FCC Form 1210., _ yO"- xԍ This FCC Form 1210 adjusts the MPR of a prior FCC Form 1210 which, in turn, adjusts the MPR of Operator's FCC Form 1200. We will also review the other FCC  X-Forms filed by Operator to justify its January 17, 1997 CPST rate.X _ yO%- xԍ We note that while we do not accept Operator's argument regarding the FCC Form 1210 and "grandfathered"  xxrates, we will allow Operator to attempt to justify, on Line A1 of its FCC Form 1240, a rate higher than the rate it was charging prior to the increase which triggered the current rate complaint, in accordance with our policy. ",N(N(ZZ"Ԍ X- ` ԙ x9.` ` Upon review of Operator's FCC Form 1200, multiple FCC Form 1210s and FCC  xForm 1240, for the period May 15, 1994 through September 30, 1997, we find that Operator has  xnot correctly calculated its MPR and has charged in excess of its MPR beginning January 21,  X- x\1997.x_ yO4- xԍ These findings are based solely on the representations of Operator. Should information come to our attention  xYthat these representations were materially inaccurate, we reserve the right to take appropriate action. This Order is  xnot to be construed as a finding that we have accepted as correct any specific entry, explanation or argument made  xby any party to this proceeding not specifically addressed herein. Information regarding the specific adjustments  xmade to Operator's filings can be found in the public file for CUID No. CA0680, which is available in the Cable  x,Services Bureau's public reference room, or through the Commission's copy contractor, International Transcription Services (ITS), 1919 M Street N.W., Washington, DC, 20554, or by calling ITS at (202) 8573800. We made no adjustments to Operator's FCC Form 1200. Upon review of Operator's  x/FCC Form 1210 for the period July 1, 1994 through September 30, 1994, we adjusted Line E5  x(Inflation Adjustment Factor) from 1.0215 to 1.000 because Operator did not adjust its rates to  Xv- xyaccount for the Inflation Adjustment Factor until October 15, 1995.v_ yO/-ԍ To use the 1.0215 Inflation Adjustment Factor, Operator should have adjusted its rates by August 31, 1995. This resulted in a revised  xMPR of $6.41 rather than Operator's MPR of $6.51. Upon review of Operator's FCC Form 1210  xfiling for the period October 1, 1994 through December 31, 1994, we brought forward the revised  x=MPR from the prior FCC Form 1210. This resulted in a revised MPR of $6.59, effective January 1, 1995, rather than Operator's MPR of $6.69.  X - ` %x10.` ` We next reviewed Operator's FCC Form 1210 for the period January 1, 1995  x.through December 31, 1995. We changed the beginning rate at Line A2 to $6.59 to conform to  xthe MPR on the previous FCC Form 1210. This change resulted in a revised MPR of $8.59, rather than Operator's MPR of $9.99.  Xy- ` x11.` ` We next reviewed Operator's FCC Form 1240 for the projected period October  x1, 1996 through September 30, 1997. We adjusted Operator's Line A1 to reflect the revised  xMPR of $8.59 from the previous FCC Form 1210. We also adjusted Operator's inflation factor  xMat Line C1 to 1.15 percent to reflect a sixmonth trueup. We also reduced Line C3 from 2.39  X- xpercent to 1.83 percent.U_ {Of-ԍ See 47 C.F.R. 76.922(b)(9)(iii). U These calculations resulted in a revised MPR for the projected period  x of $9.32 rather than Operator's MPR for the projected period of $11.69. Because Operator's  xactual CPST rate of $10.67 exceeds its revised MPR for the projected period of $9.32, we find that Operator's actual CPST rate of $10.67, effective January 17, 1997, is unreasonable.  X- ` x12.` ` Accordingly, IT IS ORDERED, pursuant to Section 0.321 of the Commission's  xrules, 47 C.F.R.  0.321, and Section 623(a)(2)(A) and (B) of the Communications Act of 1934,  xzas amended, 47 U.S.C. Section 543(a)(2)(A) and (B), that the June 19, 1995 complaint against  xthe CPST rate charged by Operator in the communities referenced above IS DISMISSED and the motion to dismiss that complaint IS GRANTED. "7* ,N(N(ZZ"Ԍ X- ` 4x13.` ` IT IS FURTHER ORDERED, pursuant to Section 0.321 of the Commission's  x.rules, 47 C.F.R.  0.321, that the CPST rate of $10.67, charged by Operator in the franchise area  X-referenced above beginning January 17, 1997, IS UNREASONABLE.  X- ` x14.` ` IT IS FURTHER ORDERED, pursuant to Section 76.961 of the Commission's  xrules, 47 C.F.R.  76.961, that Operator shall refund to subscribers in the franchise area  xreferenced above that portion of the amount paid in excess of the maximum permitted CPST rate  xof $9.32 per month (plus franchise fees), plus interest to the date of the refund, for the period  xJanuary 21, 1997 through the day before Operator implements the maximum permitted CPST rate of $9.32.  X - x  X - `  x15.` ` IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Operator shall promptly determine the  xyovercharges to CPST subscribers for the stated periods, and shall within 30 days of the release  xof this Order, file a report with the Chief, Cable Services Bureau, stating the cumulative refund  xamount so determined (including franchise fees and interest), describing the calculation thereof,  xand describing its plan to implement the refund within 60 days of Commission approval of the plan.  Xy-  Xb- ` 4x16.` ` IT IS FURTHER ORDERED, pursuant to Section 0.321 of the Commission's  xrules, 47 C.F.R.  0.321, that Operator take into account our FCC Form 1240 adjustments when  xcalculating its maximum permitted rate and performing the trueup calculation on its next FCC  X-Form 1240.` `   X- ` 4x17.` ` IT IS FURTHER ORDERED, pursuant to Section 0.321 of the Commission's  xkrules, 47 C.F.R.  0.321, that the March 28, 1997 complaint against the CPST rate charged by Operator in the communities referenced above IS GRANTED. x` `  hh@FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION x` `  hh@John E. Logan x` `  hh@Deputy Chief, Cable Services Bureau