******************************************************** 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 Cable Investors, Inc. L.P.) CUID Nos. MI0560 (Waterford) ) MI0996 (Pontiac) ) Complaints Regarding ) Cable Programming Services Tier Rates) ORDER Adopted: September 16, 1997 Released: September 19, 1997 By the Acting Chief, Financial Analysis and Compliance Division, Cable Services Bureau: 1. In this Order we consider complaints concerning the rates of the above-captioned operator ("Operator") for its cable programming services tier ("CPST") in the communities referenced above. Operator's response includes rate justifications filed on FCC Form 393, multiple FCC Forms 1210 and FCC Form 1240. We have already issued an order which resolved a complaint against Operator's rates for the period prior to May 15, 1994 for CUID No. MI0996. Accordingly, this Order resolves complaints against Operator's CPST rates beginning May 15, 1994 for CUID No. MI0996 and beginning September 1, 1993 for CUID No. MI0560. 2. Under the Communications Act, the Federal Communications Commission ("Commission") is authorized 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"), and our rules implementing the 1992 Cable Act, required the Commission to review CPST rates upon the filing of a valid complaint by a subscriber. The filing of a valid complaint under the 1992 Cable Act triggered an obligation on behalf of the cable operator to file a justification of its CPST rates. The Telecommunications Act of 1996 ("1996 Act") and our rules implementing the new legislation ("Interim Rules"), require that complaints against CPST rates be filed with the Commission by a local franchising authority ("LFA") that has received subscriber complaints. An LFA may not file a CPST rate complaint unless it receives more than one subscriber complaint within 90 days after such increase becomes effective. Under both the 1992 Cable Act and the 1996 Act, if the Commission finds the rate to be unreasonable, it shall determine the correct rate and any refund liability. 3. The Commission's original rate regulations took effect on September 1, 1993. The Commission subsequently 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 using a benchmark showing. Cable operators may also justify rate increases based on the addition and deletion of channels, changes in certain external costs, and inflation, by filing FCC Form 1210. An FCC Form 1210 must be filed 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. Operators may alternatively justify adjustments to their rates on an annual basis using FCC Form 1240 to reflect reasonably certain and quantifiable changes in external costs, inflation, and the number of regulated channels that are projected for the twelve months following the rate change. Any incurred cost that is not projected may be accrued with interest and added to rates at a later time. 4. On June 13, 1997, Operator filed a Motion to Dismiss the complaints filed by John C. Lenoir, dated February 25, 1995 and Ardis Nash, dated August 22, 1995. Operator asserts that it was never served a copy of the complaints from the complainants and therefore the complaints should be dismissed. Operator's assertions do not persuade us that the complaints are invalid or should be dismissed. The complainants certified on FCC Forms 329 that they mailed copies to Operator on February 25, 1994 and August 22, 1995. Although Operator asserts that it did not receive copies of the complaints at those times, under our rules service is complete upon mailing. Therefore, we will deny Operator's Motion to Dismiss. 5. Upon review of Operator's FCC Form 393 for CUID No. MI0560 and FCC Forms 1200 and FCC Forms 1210 for both CUID No. MI0996 and MI0560, we find the Operator has justified its CPST rates for the period September 1, 1993 to October 31, 1996 for CUID No MI0560 and from May 15, 1994 to October 31, 1996 for CUID No. MI0996. 6. Upon review of Operator's FCC Forms 1240 for the projected period from November 1, 1996 to October 31, 1997, we find that Operator has justified its MPR of $12.43 in both communities referenced above. Therefore, we find that Operator's actual CPST rate of $12.43, effective November 1, 1996 in the above-referenced communities is not unreasonable. 7. Accordingly, IT IS ORDERED, pursuant to Section 0.321 of the Commission's rules, 47 C.F.R.  0.321, that the monthly CPST rates effective September 1, 1993 to October 31, 1996 for CUID No. MI0560 and from May 15, 1994 to October 31, 1996 for CUID No. MI0996, ARE NOT UNREASONABLE. 8. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED, pursuant to Section 0.321 of the Commission's rules, 47 C.F.R.  0.321, that the monthly CPST rate of $12.43 charged by Operator in the communities referenced above, effective November 1, 1996, IS NOT UNREASONABLE. 9. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED, pursuant to Section 0.321 of the Commission's rules, 47 C.F.R. Section 0.321, that the Motion to Dismiss the complaints filed against the CPST rates charged by Operator in the community referenced above, IS DENIED. 10. 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 charged by Operator in the communities referenced above ARE DENIED. FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION Margaret M. Egler Acting Chief, Financial Analysis and Compliance Division Cable Services Bureau