******************************************************** 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 ) ) Jones Intercable, Inc. ) CUID No. GA0113 (McDuffie County) ) Cost of Service Showing to Support) Basic Service Tier Rate and ) Cable Programming Services ) ORDER Adopted: September 15, 1997 Released: September 17, 1997 By the Acting Chief, Financial Analysis and Compliance Division, Cable Services Bureau: I. INTRODUCTION 1. On September 28, 1994, the above-referenced operator ("Operator") serving the community referenced above, filed a cost of service showing on FCC Form 1220 with the Commission, seeking to justify its Basic Service Tier ("BST") rate. On September 15, 1994, the City petitioned the Commission to review the BST cost of service showing. The Commission granted the City's request on February 14, 1995, and agreed to review Operator's cost of service showing for the BST rate. 2. The earliest valid complaint was filed with the Commission on April 5, 1996 regarding Operator's CPST rates in the above-referenced community. On May 6, 1996, Operator filed FCC Forms 1210 with the Commission in response to the April 5, 1996 complaint that alleges that the Operator's CPST rate of $15.78 for its cable programming services tier (CPST) in the above-referenced franchise was unreasonable. 3. According to information provided by Operator in its cost of service showing, the franchise area comprised approximately 15,128 BST subscribers and 14,998 CPST subscribers at the time of the filings. Operator provided 15 BST channels and 16 CPST channels. In this review process, pursuant to the Cable Television Consumer Protection and Competition Act of 1992 ("1992 Cable Act"), we analyzed Operator's FCC Form 1220 to ensure that the rates charged were not unreasonable and to determine any associated refund liability. 4. In this review we analyzed BST rates charged for the period from September 1, 1993 to the present. Operator's FCC Form 1220 seeks to justify a maximum permitted rate ("MPR") for its BST of $26.10 per month, excluding franchise fees, based on its cost of providing service. Our analysis indicates that Operator's BST MPR was not justified but that the actual BST rate of $10.59 that Operator was charging from September 1, 1993 was justified under the Commission's rules. II. ADJUSTMENTS 5. Upon review of Operator's FCC Form 1220, Operator's Rate base and expense items have been evaluated to determine whether Operator should be permitted to recover those items. Where a certain rate base or expense element was not supported, was excessive, or was unrelated to providing regulated cable service, such cost was disallowed in whole or in part. The following adjustments were made to Operator's filing: a) Operator allocated all common costs on FCC Form 1220 based on "weighted channels", i.e. a ratio of the product of tier channels times tier subscribed to the product of total channels times total subscribers. For reasons described in paragraph 123 of the Final Cost Rules, the Commission has deemed this methodology unacceptable. Therefore, we reallocated common costs reported by Operator based on channel ratios, i.e. a ratio of tier channels to total channels. b) Operator reported system-level Gross Intangible Assets valued at $21,531,000 on FCC Form 1220, Worksheet A. In accordance with our Final Costs Rules at paragraph 59, we reduced reported Gross Intangible Assets by 34% of the purchase price, or $9,479,200. Similarly, we restated Accumulated Amortization to reflect 4 years of amortization that should have been recorded from 1990, the year the system was acquired, until the end of test year 1993. Our adjustment to Accumulated Amortization reduced total net rate base by $2,785,600. c) We reduced reported Amortization Expenses consistent with our reductions to Gross Intangible Assets. This lowered total Operating Expenses by $2,338,550. d) Operator reported no revenue and income adjustments to its regulated tiers in its FCC Form 1220 filing. However, based on supplementary general ledger data in the filing, we determined that $27,060 in Home Shopping revenues should have been assigned to the basic tier, on which the Home Shopping channel is offered, and $110,623 in Advertising Revenues should have been assigned directly to the CPST, on which the majority of advertising time is available. Consistent with the latter adjustment, we reassigned all advertising expenses directly to the CPST to accord with the matching principle under GAP. Additionally, we allocated $169,524 in Late Fees to the tiers based on channel ratios. e) Interest expenses have been restated based on the theoretical 55% debt, 45% equity capital structure and 8.5% cost of debt described under paragraph 104 of the Final Cost Rules. Our adjustments reduced Operator's MPR for its BST to $14.05. However, we find that Operator's monthly BST rate of $10.59 for the period under review has been justified. 6. Our review of Operator's BST rate included an analysis of its Equipment and Installation rates. The 1992 Act requires that cable operators base their equipment and installation rates on their actual costs. We have reviewed Operator's cost of service showing and related FCC Form 1205 (Equipment Form) and find that the equipment and installation rates Operator charged in connection with its BST for the period under review are not unreasonable. 7. We also analyzed Operator's CPST rates, as reported on two FCC Forms 1210, for the periods from April 1, 1994 to December 31, 1994 and January 1, 1995 to December 31, 1995. Our review of the record indicates that Operator's CPST rates, as established in its FCC Forms 1210 are justified under the Commission's rules. 8. Upon review of Operator's FCC Form 1210 covering the period April 1, 1994 to December 31, 1994, we adjusted the permitted charge on Line A2 to match the revised MPR of $16.23 from the previous FCC Form 1220. This adjustment resulted in a reduction of the MPR for this period from $31.95 to $18.50, effective January 1, 1995. Upon review of Operator's FCC Form 1210 covering the period January 1, 1995 to December 31, 1995, we adjusted the permitted charge on Line A2 to match the revised MPR of $18.50 from the previous FCC Form 1210. This adjustment resulted in a reduction of the MPR for this period from $33.15 to $19.35, effective January 1, 1996. Because Operator's actual CPST rate of $15.78 is less than its MPR, we find Operator's CPST rate of $15.78, effective February 1, 1996 to be not unreasonable. III. CONCLUSION 9. Based on our review of Operator's FCC Form 1220 and FCC Form 1210 filings and upon applying the Commission's most current rules, we find that, as discussed above, Operator has justified the monthly BST rate of $10.59 (plus franchise fee) for the period after September 1, 1993 and its CPST rate of $15.78, effective February 1, 1996. 10. Accordingly, IT IS ORDERED, pursuant to Section 0.321 of the Commission's rules, 47 C.F.R. Section 0.321, that the monthly BST rate of $10.59 and associated equipment and installation rates charged by Operator with respect to the above-referenced community, effective September 1, 1993, IS NOT UNREASONABLE. 11. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED, pursuant to Section 0.321 of the Commission's rules, 47 C.F.R. Section 0.321, that the monthly CPST rate of $15.78, effective February 1, 1996, IS NOT UNREASONABLE. 12. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that, pursuant to Section 0.321 of the Commission's rules, 47 C.F.R. Section 0.321, that the complaint against the monthly CPST rate charged by Operator with respect to the above-referenced CUID number, IS DENIED. 13. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED, pursuant to Section 76.933(d) of the Commission's rules, 47 C.F.R. Section 76.933(d), that this ruling on the rate Operator was charging for its BST rate is binding on the local franchising authority, the McDuffie County, and the cable operator, Jones Intercable, Inc. FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION Margaret M. Egler Acting Chief, Financial Analysis and Compliance Division Cable Services Bureau