WPC 2MBERKZ3|X0 X-#XP\  P6Q9XP#"i~'^5>I\\>>>\g0>03\\\\\\\\\\33gggQyyrg>Frgygrr>3>T\>Q\Q\Q>\\33\3\\\\>F3\\\\QX%Xc>0cT>>>0>>>>>>>>\3QQQQQwyQrQrQrQrQ>3>3>3>3\\\\\\\\\\Q\Z\\\g\QQQyQyQycyQtrQrQrQrQ\\\c\c\>3>\>>>\gcc\r3rIr>r>r3\l\\\\y>y>y>gFgFgFgcrMr3rT\\\\\\crQrQrQ\r>\gFr>\t0\\=!=WxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxNBnnBT\>Q\\\\\3;\7;\7>>QQ\??n\\pBnnBmgg>Q\7"yyyy\njc\gnn\HP4M (PCL) (Additional); Local PrintHL4MPCAD.PRS&a\  P6G;\"\&P2gEKX X-#XP\  P6Q9XP#"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$CWxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxNHxxH\dDXddddd8@d<@d<DDXXdDDxddzHxxHvppDXd<"dxtldpxxd2a=5,u&a\  P6G;&P7jC:,9Xj\  P6G;XPl PrintHL4MPCAD.PRS&a\  P6G;\"\&P2EI20VrI30VrI40VrI70Vr2 K< Z0 3|X0"i~'^09CSS999S]+9+/SSSSSSSSSS//]]]Ixnnxg]xx9?xgxx]xn]gxxxxg9/9MS9ISISI9SS//S/SSSS9?/SSxSSIP!PZ9+ZM999+99999999S/xIxIxIxIxIlnIgIgIgIgI9/9/9/9/xSxSxSxSxSxSxSxSxSxSxIxSxRxSxSxS]SxIxIxInInInZnIxigIgIgIgIxSxSxSxZxSxZxS9/9S999Su]ZZxSg/gCg9g9g/xSbxSxSxSxSxn9n9n9]?]?]?]ZgFg/gMxSxSxSxSxSxSxxZgIgIgIxSg9xS]?g9xSi+SS88WuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxNRtoc 2toc 2;` hp x (#` !(#B` !(#B` hp x (#toc 3toc 3<` hp x (#` !(# ` !(# ` hp x (#toc 4toc 4=` hp x (# !(#  !(# ` hp x (#toc 5toc 5>` hp x (#h!(# h!(# ` hp x (#2\?DU@vbWAWBYtoc 6toc 6?` hp x (#!(#!(#` hp x (#toc 7toc 7@ toc 8toc 8A` hp x (#!(#!(#` hp x (#toc 9toc 9B` hp x (#!(#B!(#B` hp x (#2cCF\Dd^E`Fvbindex 1index 1C` hp x (#` !(# ` !(# ` hp x (#index 2index 2D` hp x (#` !(#B` !(#B` hp x (#toatoaE` hp x (#!(# !(# ` hp x (#captioncaptionF 2"eGlHcHrcI&dJ}d_Equation Caption_Equation CaptionG endnote referenceendnote referenceH head1 #I'd#2p}wC@ #a1Paragraph R!1. a. i. (1) (a) (i) 1) a)D )DDDFrfJ$ 2gKTeLeMofN ga2Paragraph 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` ` `  a5Paragraph R!1. a. i. (1) (a) (i) 1) a)D )DDDFrfNP  ` ` ` hhh 2plOgPhQ[iK%ja6Paragraph 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 "i~'^:DpddȨDDDdp4D48ddddddddddDDpppd|Ld|pȐD8DtdDdpXpXDdp8Dp8pdppXLDpdddXP,PhD4htDDD4DDDDDDdDp8dddddȐXXXXXJ8J8J8J8pddddppppddpddddzpdddXXhXXXXXdddhdptL8LpLDLpphhp8ZDP8pppddƐXXXpLpLpLphfDtppppppȐhXXXpDppLDd4ddC6CWxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxNHxxHjdDddddddI\\>>>\g0>03\\\\\\\\\\33gggQyyrg>Frgygrr>3>T\>Q\Q\Q>\\33\3\\\\>F3\\\\QX%Xc>0cT>>>0>>>>>>>>\3QQQQQwyQrQrQrQrQ>3>3>3>3\\\\\\\\\\Q\Z\\\g\QQQyQyQycyQtrQrQrQrQ\\\c\c\>3>\>>>\gcc\r3rIr>r>r3\l\\\\y>y>y>gFgFgFgcrMr3rT\\\\\\crQrQrQ\r>\gFr>\t0\\=!=WxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxNBnnBT\>Q\\\\\3;\7;\7>>QQ\??n\\pBnnBmgg>Q\7"yyyy\njc\gnn\MACDocumentuR      X` hp x (#%'0*,.8135@8:<     #:}D4P XP# T I. A. 1. a.(1)(a) i) a)T,0*ÍÍ,*Í ., US!!!! ! #:}D4P XP#T 1. 1. 1. a.(1)(a) i) a)T     X` hp x (#%'0*,.8135@8:<     #:}D4P XP# ,0*ÍÍ,*Í ., US!!!! ! #:}D4P XP#FootnoteuSÍč"i~'^5>g\\>>>\g0>03\\\\\\\\\\>>ggg\yyrF\yrgyy>3>j\>\gQgQ>\g3>g3g\ggQF>g\\\QI(I_>0_j>>>0>>>>>>\>g3\\\\\QyQyQyQyQD3D3D3D3g\\\\gggg\\g\\\\pg\\\QQ_QyQyQyQyQ\\\_\gjF3FgF>Fgg__gy3ySy>yIy3ggg\\QQQgFgFgFg_y^y>yjgggggg_yQyQyQgy>ggFy>\0\\=2=WxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxNBnnBa\>\\\\\\7>\7>\7>>\\\??n\\pBnnBsgg>\\7"yyyy\nlc\gnn\2#Tv~UvqVWendnote textendnote textT footnote textfootnote textU toa headingtoa headingV` hp x (#(#(#` hp x (#footerfooterW` hp x (# (#  (# ` hp x (#2rXUYmԄZA[υfootnote tex#X'n#d\  PCP# HeadlinenHeading for internal papersYql + WITNESS.STYIN WITNESS WHEREOFZ*Cqw  ` IN WITNESS WHEREOF,1H-ART.STYARTICLES IAD[?qw )ARTICLE Iă  ` 2=\]H^_2H-ART.STYARTICLE II\@`qw %ARTICLE IIЃ  ` 1H-WIL.STYMAIN TITLE]:\ LAST WILL AND TESTAMENT )OFă  ` 4H-ART.STYARTICLE IV^@`qw %ARTICLE IVЃ  ` 3H-ART.STYARTICLE III_Aqw %ARTICLE IIIă  ` 2i`oabc72WILL.STYWILLS FORMATS`H, 3'3'Standard<'$<'StandardZ*pRHP L"nY4   (  '  (  ` hp x (# hp x (#ЁT I. A. 1. a.(1)(a) i) a) I I I I I (a) i) a)TLH-TXTFull ltr, date, etc. etc.a' %June 9, 1989 LH-FULLFull Ltr headbLr   'h *  'LH-LOC.STYALL LOCATIONS LTR HEADcNp%` hp x (#` hp x (# 857 %June 16, 1989 ` hp x (#` hp x (#2՗de0;fkgCOL.STY3 columns w/line in meddoLj XX ` hp x (#` hp x (#CH$҇` hp x (#` hp x (#ЈCH$CH$SIGNLNS.STYWITNESS & ADDRESS LNS.eٹH0   'h%%++0  @ ` WITNESS `   h%%+ HxFF KK(#Q `   h%%++00p6@64ADDRESS  'h%%++0  @ ` WITNESS `   h%%+  `   h%%++0@0p/ADDRESS  'h%%++0  @ ` WITNESS  Memo Headerf(? i3$W Page  $= LetterheadPersonal letterhead with address, etc.gG 37 J.G. Harrington ă 57221 Beechwood Road 1Alexandria, Virginia 22307 7(703) 7686987 >2eh|iXjbۘk(=Normalh$ Xx  @ Headeripage numberpage numberj heading 3heading 3k` hp x (#@ HPX @ HPX ` hp x (#2l(mnݟoheading 4heading 4l` hp x (# @ HPX  @ HPX ` hp x (#heading 5heading 5m` hp x (#@ HPX @ HPX ` hp x (#heading 6heading 6n` hp x (#@ l HPX @ l HPX ` hp x (#heading 7heading 7o` hp x (#@ HPX @ HPX ` hp x (#2pKqirlsheading 8heading 8p` hp x (#@ HPX @ HPX ` hp x (#heading 9heading 9q` hp x (#@ HPX @ HPX ` hp x (#macromacror` hp x (#  @ `PX #d6X@DQ@##Xv6X@CX@#  @ `PX ` hp x (#APOAPOs` hp x (#@ HPX @ HPX ` hp x (#2tCulavͱwlwenvelope addressenvelope addresst` hp x (#@ HPX @ HPX ` hp x (#envelope returnenvelope returnu` hp x (#@ HPX #b6X@C@##Xv6X@CX@#@ HPX ` hp x (#whitewhitev.$US?? ??USWFG Letter HeadingWFG Letter Headingw2AKK`KK"i~'^09]SS999S]+9+/SSSSSSSSSS99]]]Sxnxxng?Snxgx]nxxxxn9/9aS9S]I]I9S]/9]/]S]]I?9]SxSSIC%CW9+Wa999+999999S9]/xSxSxSxSxSxxInInInInI>/>/>/>/x]SSSSx]x]x]x]xSxSx]SSxSxSf]xSxSxSxIxIxWxIx{nInInInISSSWS]a?/?]?9?]]WW]n/nKn9nCn/x]xx]x]SSxxIxIxI]?]?]?]WnUn9nax]x]x]x]x]x]xxWnInInIx]n9x]]?n9xSz+SS8-8WuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxN%7777777777>>>0eOIIOD>OO%*ODaOO>OI>DOOgOOD%%37%07070%777V7777%*77O77055;%;3%%%%%%%%%%%7O0O0O0O0O0aHI0D0D0D0D0%%%%O7O7O7O7O7O7O7O7O7O7O0O7O6O7O7O7>7O0O0O0I0I0I;I0OED0D0D0D0O7O7O7O;O7O;O7%%7%%%7M>;;O7DD,D%D%DO7AO7O7O7O7aOI%I%I%>*>*>*>;D.DD3O7O7O7O7O7O7gOO;D0D0D0O7D%O7>*D%O7E77%%WMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxN(BB(37%07777j7#TT7!#TT7T!%%007n&&Bn77lCTn(nBB(A\\>>n%07\n!"IIIITTenn7TnB@;7>lBBn7"i~'^"(22TN"""28"2222222222888,\HBBH>8HH"&H>XHH8HB8>HH^HH>"".2",2,2,"222N2222"&22H22,006"6."""""""""""2H,H,H,H,H,XAB,>,>,>,>,""""H2H2H2H2H2H2H2H2H2H2H,H2H1H2H2H282H,H,H,B,B,B6B,H?>,>,>,>,H2H2H2H6H2H6H2""2"""2F866H2>>(>">">H2;H2H2H2H2XHB"B"B"8&8&8&86>*>>.H2H2H2H2H2H2^HH6>,>,>,H2>"H28&>"H2?22!!WFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxN$<<$.2",2222`2 LL2 LL2L"",,2d""M\\>>>\}0>03\\\\\\\\\\>>}}}\rryrr>Qygyrr\grrggF3FM\>\\Q\Q3\\33Q3\\\\FF3\QyQQFI3Ic>0cM>>>0>>>>>>\>\3r\r\r\r\r\yyQrQrQrQrQ>3>3>3>3y\\\\\\\\\gQr\\\\gQ\r\r\r\r\yQyQycyQnrQrQrQrQ\\\c\c\>3>\>>>\\ccyQg3gBg>g;g3y\jy\y\\\yrFrFrF\F\F\FccgBg3gM\\\\\\ygcgFgFgF\g>y\\Fg>g\n0\\=(=WddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddNBnnB_\F\\\\\\3;\7;\7>>gg\??n\\pBnnBb\\>g\7"yyyy\njc\}nn\Sy.X80,X\  P6G;PT7jC:,9Xj\  P6G;XPU7nC:,|Xn4  pG;XW2a=5,&a\  P6G;&P V2e=5,&e4  pG;&Xy.\80,T\4  pG;YP:% ,J:\  P6G;JPZH5!,i,5\  P6G;,P\[{,W80,%0W*f9 xr G;X\0_=5,%&_*f9 xr G;&X yO- X   U S- #Xj\  P6G;9XP# #&a\  P6G;&P#Federal Communications Commission`(# DA 98114 ă  yxdddy UՊ#X\  P6G;P# v3 Before the Federal Communications Commission  yO} Washington, D.C. 20554 ă  XX-#Xj\  P6G;9XP#  SA-#&a\  P6G;&P#In the Matter ofR) R)  S-TCI Cablevision of Greater MichiganR)hCUID Nos. MI0040 (City of Petoskey)  S-R)hpp MI0126 (City of Harbor Springs)  S-R)hpp MI0294 (Resort Township)  Sy-R)hpp MI0357 (Bear Creek Township)  SQ-X` hp x (#%'0*,.8135@8:referenced above. We have already resolved all the complaints filed from September 1, 1993 through  S- xSeptember 15, 1995. {Oa- xԍ See In The Matter of TCI Cablevision of Greater Michigan, Inc., 10 FCC Rcd 6655 (1995); vacated and  {O+-superseded, In the Matter of TCI Communications, Inc., 11 FCC Rcd 14696 (1996). This Order addresses only the reasonableness of Operator's June 1, 1997 CPST rate increase.  S- ` Ex2..` ` Under the Communications Act,$ {OE-#X\  P6G;P#э Communications Act, Section 623(c), as amended, 47 U.S.C. 543(c) (1996). the Federal Communications Commission  x!("Commission") is authorized to review the CPST rates of cable systems not subject to effective  xcompetition to ensure that rates charged are not unreasonable. If the Commission finds a rate to be  S - xunreasonable, it shall determine the correct rate and any refund liability.  {O_ -#X\  P6G;P#э  See Section 76.957 of the Commission's Rules, 47 C.F.R. 76.957. The Telecommunications At  S- xMof 1996 ("1996 Act")SH yO"-ԍ Pub. L. No. 104104, 110 Stat. 56 (1996).S and our rules implementing the new legislation ("Interim Rules"), {OY$- xԍ See Implementation of Cable Act Reform Provisions of the Telecommunications Act of 1996, 11 FCC Rcd 5937 (1996). require that  xcomplaints against CPST rates be filed with the Commission by a local franchising authority ("LFA") that  S-has received more than one subscriber complaint.2  {Oc(-ԍ See Communications Act, Section 623(c), as amended, 47 U.S.C. Section 543(c) (1996). " ,**88"Ԍ S- ` ԙx3.` ` The LFA for the franchise areas referenced above filed complaints with the Commission  xon October 30, 1997, against Operator's June 1, 1997 CPST rate increase from $13.51 to $13.90. The  S- xLFA verified that it received more than one subscriber complaint for each of the franchise areas.z * yO- xԍ The first subscriber complaint concerning the CPST rate increase was received by the LFA on June 17, 1997  x,for CUID No. MI0040 (City of Petoskey); July 15, 1997 for CUID No. MI0126 (City of Harbor Springs); and June 3, 1997 for CUID No. MI0294 (Resort Township) and CUID No. MI0357 (Bear Creek Township). z The  x\filing of a complete and timely LFA complaint triggers an obligation upon the cable operator to file a  S`- xjustification of its CPST rates.?`* yO -ԍ 47 C.F.R  76.956.? The Operator has the burden of demonstrating that the CPST rates  S8-complained about are reasonable.3 8@* {O -ԍ  Id.3  S- ` ~x4.` ` In its complaints, the LFA requests that the Commission review Operator's charges for  x.equipment related to the CPST. Operator responds that it does not have any equipment that is specific  S- xto the CPST. * {O -#X\  P6G;P#э See Facsimile Transmittal dated January 7, 1998 from A. Bricmont. Under Section 76.923(a) of the Commission's rules,i d * yO-ԍ #X\  P6G;P#47 C.F.R. 76.923(a).i all equipment used to receive the  xbasic service tier ("BST") is subject to rate regulation, regardless of whether such equipment is used to  SH - xyreceive other tiers of regulated programming and/or unregulated service.Z H * {O-ԍ #X\  P6G;P#Id.Z Such equipment related charges  xMare subject to regulation by the LFA. According to Operator, subscribers use the same equipment to  xreceive both BST and CPST programming. Therefore, the LFA's complaints do not trigger our  xjurisdiction to regulate Operator's equipment charges. However, the LFA has jurisdiction to determine the reasonableness of Operator's equipment rates.  SX- ` x5.` ` The LFA also attached to its complaints a Memorandum X * {O~- x#X\  P6G;P#э  See Memorandum dated September 26, 1997 to the FCC Cable Services Bureau from John W. Pestle and Patrick A. Miles, Jr. ("Memorandum"). citing news articles indicating  xthat Operator was receiving revenues from programmers and asserting that these revenues should be used  xto offset increases in Operator's external costs. Operator responded to the LFA's Memorandum by  xreviewing the various programming deals discussed in the Memorandum and stating that "any revenues  xwhich [Operator] may have received in connection with these deals do not require offsetting under the  S-Commission's offset rule . . . and various clarifications of this rule."* {O#- xZԍ  See Letter dated January 12, 1998 to William Agee, Legal Advisor, Cable Services Bureau from Douglas G. Garrett, Senior Regulatory Counsel, TCI Communications, Inc.  S@- ` Px6.` ` The Communications Act states that the Commission, in determining whether CPST rates  x[are unreasonable, shall consider "the revenues (if any) received by a cable operator from advertising from  x>programming that is carried as part of the service for which a rate is being established, and changes in":,p(p(88C"  S- xLsuch revenues, or from other consideration obtained in connection" with the CPST.* {Oh-#X\  P6G;P#э Communications Act, Section 623(c)(2)(F), as amended, 47 U.S.C. 543(c)(2)(F) (1996). In Implementation  xjof Sections of the Cable Television Consumer Protection and Competition Act of 1992: Rate Regulation,  S- xReport and Order and Further Notice of Proposed Rulemaking, MM Docket No. 92266 ("Rate Order"),Z* yO-#X\  P6G;P# 8 FCC Rcd 5631 at para. 253, n. 602 (1993).  x{the Commission concluded that cable operators may recover increased costs of programming from  xsubscribers but not to the extent an operator receives revenues from the programmer on account of  xcarriage of programming. The Commission developed rules that required that an operator's increases in  S- x?programming costs be offset by any revenues received by the operator from programmers.SD* {O - x#X\  P6G;P#э See former Section 76.922(d)(2)(ii) of the Commission's rules, 47 C.F.R. 76.922(d)(2)(vii) (1993); former  xSection 76.922(d)(3)(x) of the Commission's rules, 47 C.F.R. 76.922(d)(3)(x) (1994); and former Section  x76.922(d)(3)(x) of the Commission's rules, 47 C.F.R. 76.922(d)(3)(x) (1995). In Implementation of Sections of the  xCable Television Consumer Protection and Competition Act of 1992: Rate Regulation, MM Docket No. 92266,  xYThirteenth Order on Reconsideration, 11 FCC Rcd 388 (1996), the Commission relocated the revenue offset rule to  {O- xSection 76.922(f)(7) of the Commission's rules, 47 C.F.R. 76.922(f)(7) (1996). See also, Instructions for FCC Form  x1210 at p.9, Line B1a (May 1994), "Programming costs are your actual net cost of programming services. ... Net programming costs are your programming costs less any payments by programmers to you."S The  xCommission, however, did not "require cable companies to report increases in advertising revenues and  S-to offset those increases against any external costs."= * {OV- xԍ  Time Warner Entertainment, Inc. v. Federal Communications Commission, 56 F.3d 151, 172 (D.C. Cir.  x<1995). The U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit also stated that while it found the Commission's decision  xnot to require cable companies to offset reasonable, it did not "rule out the possibility, however, that this decision  xcould become unreasonable over time if evidence comes before the Commission clearly demonstrating that  xadvertising revenues have become a steady and significant source of increased revenue for cable operators, thereby  {O@-calling in question the reasonableness of the rates they may charge under the price cap formula." Id. at 172173.=  Sp- ` $x7.` ` The Cable Services Bureau ("Bureau") has stated that payments from programmers to  xoperators need only be offset on a channel by channel basis; so that any rebates or payments in  xconsideration of carriage from a programmer will be applied to payments from the operator to that  S - xprogrammer but will not offset payments to other programmers.4$ r* {O - xY#X\  P6G;P#э See Letter dated May 6, 1994 to QVC Network, Inc. from Alexandra M. Wilson, Acting Chief, Cable Services  {O- xBureau, 75 Rad. Reg. 2d (P&F) 292 (1994); see also Letter dated May 6, 1994 to The Home Shopping network from  xJAlexandra M. Wilson, Acting Chief, Cable Services Bureau. The application of the revenue offset rule on a channel by channel basis was later codified in 47 C.F.R. 76.922(d)(3)(x) (1995). 4 The channel by channel standard for  x\offsetting may also be applied on a programmer specific basis, where the programmers are ultimately  S - xycontrolled by separate and distinct entities.# ^* {O"- x#X\  P6G;P#э See Letter dated December 19, 1994 to Black Entertainment Television, Inc. from Meredith J. Jones, Chief, Cable Services Bureau, 10 FCC Rcd 685 (1995) (DA 941473, released December 21, 1994).# On May 19, 1994, the Bureau stated that an operator need  xnot offset "a programmer's payments to an operator for advertising time to promote the programmer's  xofferings, or payments to reimburse the operator for reasonable, documented expenses of marketing the"X,p(p(88K"  xprogram service to consumers," provided "the programmer has routinely and ordinarily reimbursed the  S-cable operator for promotional expenditures prior to [May 19, 1994].+* {O@- x#X\  P6G;P#э See Letter dated May 19, 1994 to The Disney Channel from Kathleen M.H. Wallman, Acting Chief, Cable Services Bureau, 9 FCC Rcd 7762 (1994) (DA 94520, released May 23, 1994) ("Disney Channel Letter").+  S- ` x8.` ` In Implementation of Sections of the Cable Television Consumer Protection and  xlCompetition Act of 1992: Rate Regulation, MM Docket Nos. 92266 and 93215, Sixth Order on  xLReconsideration, Fifth Report and Order, and Seventh Notice of Proposed Rulemaking ("Going Forward  S- xOrder"),p"* yO -#X\  P6G;P#э 10 FCC Rcd 1226 (1995). p the Commission also required an operator to offset revenues received from programmers against  xits per channel adjustment under the new going forward methodology. Specifically, the Going Forward  xOrder provided that revenues received from programmers must be deducted from programming costs and,  S- x[to the extent revenues remain, from the operator's per channel markup.q* yO -ԍ #X\  P6G;P# Going Forward Order at para. 74.q In Implementation of Sections  xof the Cable Television Consumer Protection and Competition Act of 1992: Rate Regulation, MM Docket  SH - xNos. 92266 and 93215, Twelfth Order on Reconsideration ("Twelfth Reconsideration Order"),oH B* yO*-#X\  P6G;P#э 11 FCC Rcd 785 (1996). o the  xCommission eliminated the requirement that home shopping service commissions be offset against the per  S -channel markup. * {Oj-#X\  P6G;P#э See Section 76.922(e)(3)(ii) of the Commission's rules, 47 C.F.R. 76.922(e)(3)(ii) (1996).  7$9   S - ` # 7$9 x9.` ` In its response to the LFA's Memorandum, Operator cites generally the applicable rule  d * yO- xԍ Operator cites the current revenue offset rule, 47 C.F.R. 76.922(f)(7) (1996). The rule states that  xi"[a]djustments to permitted charges on account of increases in costs of programming shall be further adjusted to  xJreflect any revenues received by the operator from the programmer. Such adjustments shall apply on a channelbychannel basis."  x.and Bureau letters regarding the offsetting of programming costs with additional revenues received from  xthe programmer. The Operator fails to provide a specific explanation concerning the application of those  x]rules to the revenues involved in the subject CPST rate justification. The Bureau's statement that  xreimbursements for customary and verifiable promotional costs do not require offsetting "does not permit,  xabsent special circumstances justifying a waiver, programmers to initiate reimbursement of promotional  S- xexpenses, or significantly expand reimbursements, without the offsetting . . . ."XL * {O -ԍ See Disney Channel Letter at p. 2.X The Commission's rules  x[seek "to safeguard against programmers initiating or significantly expanding promotional reimbursements  x.and recovering the reimbursements in higher programming charges to operators that could, in turn, result  S@- xin higher charges to subscribers . . . ."3@* {O$-ԍ Id.3 We have previously stated that we would monitor the application  S- xof the limitation closely.3p* {O('-ԍ Id.3 We order Operator to provide, for each CPST channel for which programming",p(p(88q"  xcosts are being increased or revenues are being received from programmers, a channel by channel  xyexplanation of the revenues received from programmers, a description of the revenue, as well as a channel  xby channel explanation of its programming costs increases, along with documentation explaining why,  xpursuant to the Commission's rules, the revenues received from programmers should not offset the  S`-increases in Operator's programming costs.`* yO- x<ԍ We reserve the right to modify this Order, if necessary, based on our review of the additional information provided by Operator.  S- ` x10.` ` We have examined the documentation, including FCC Forms, which Operator has  x[submitted to justify its June 1, 1997 CPST rate. To justify rates for the period beginning May 15, 1994  S- xythrough a benchmark showing, operators must use the FCC Form 1200 series.f * yO -ԍ#X\  P6G;P# 47 C.F.R. 76.922.f Operators are permitted  S- xjto make changes to their rates on a quarterly basis using FCC Form 1210.Z * {O -ԍ#X\  P6G;P#  Id.Z Operators may alternatively  xjustify adjustments to their rates on an annual basis using FCC Form 1240 to reflect reasonably certain  SH - x0and quantifiable changes in external costs, inflation, and the number of regulated channels that are  S - xprojected for the twelve months following the rate change.Z! B* {O-ԍ#X\  P6G;P#  Id.Z Any incurred cost that is not projected may  S -be accrued with interest and added to rates at a later time." * {Ol-ԍ#X\  P6G;P#  Id.#Xj\  P6G;9XP#с x` `  S - ` x11.` ` On February 22, 1996, the Commission issued an order granting Operator a waiver (the  x"Waiver Order") of certain rate adjustment requirements in its initial filing of the Commission's annual  SX- x=rate adjustment form (FCC Form 1240).#Xf * {O^- xԍ See Annual Rate Adjustment System for Cable Service Rates, Request for Waiver of Requirements Contained in the Thirteenth Order on Reconsideration, (DA 96220, released February 22, 1996). Specifically, the Waiver Order allowed Operator, in its initial  xFCC Form 1240 filings, to include estimated changes in costs, inflation, channels and subscriber  xinformation attributable to the period between the last date for which actual cost data was available and  xthe effective date of the new rates. In the Waiver Order, Operator was instructed to include in its initial  x0FCC Form 1240 filing certain calculations, such calculations to be performed on FCC Form 1240  x.(primarily in Module G), or off FCC Form 1240, in an alternative showing done pursuant to the Waiver  Sh- xOrder's "General Guidelines."D$h * yO -ԍ Waiver Order at Appendix A.D Operator chose to use an alternative showing pursuant to the "General Guidelines" rather than perform its calculations directly on FCC Form 1240.  S- ` 2x12.` ` On October 25, 1996, Operator wrote to the Commission requesting review and approval  x\of a modified FCC Form 1240 to justify rates for the projected period from June 1, 1997 to May 31,"P $,p(p(88$"  S- x1998.%* {Oh- xԍ See Letter from Angela Montoya, TCI Communications, Inc., to Alex Byron, Cable Services Bureau, Federal Communications Commission, dated October 25, 1996. On January 9, 1997, we consented to the Operator's use of the form for such period in lieu of  S-filings on the Commission's standard FCC Form 1240.&"* {O- xwԍ See Letter from Meredith Jones, Chief, Cable Services Bureau, Federal Communications Commission to Angela Montoya, TCI Communications, Inc., Dated January 9, 1997.  S- ` x13. ` ` To justify its CPST rate, effective June 1, 1997, Operator submitted two FCC Forms 1240,  x.the first for the projected period June 1, 1996 to May 31, 1997 ("First Form 1240"), and the second for  x=the projected period June 1, 1997 to May 31, 1998 ("Second Form 1240"). Operator's First Form 1240  xused Operator's alternative showing, calculated pursuant to the Waiver Order. Operator's Second Form  x1240 followed the format set forth in Operator's October 25, 1996 letter. On reviewing the submitted  x[forms, we determined that neither of the submitted forms produced identical results to filings that would have been made on the Commission's standard FCC Form 1240.  SH - ` Ax14. ` ` Accordingly, on December 12, 1997, Operator submitted new standard FCC Forms 1240,  xfor the projected periods June 1, 1996 to May 31, 1997, and June 1, 1997 to May 31, 1998, which  xperformed the Waiver Order's calculations directly on the standard FCC Forms 1240 as well as the  S - xcalculations described in Operator's October 25, 1996 letter.H' |* yO- xYԍ Operator submitted these forms but also stated that it "continues to believe that these additional forms are not  xrequired or necessary as [Operator used] the FCC approved waiver in filing the Form 1240 for this system." Letter  xfrom Angela Bricmont, Director of Regulatory Compliance, TCI Communications, Inc., to Margaret Egler, Assistant  xiChief, Financial Analysis and Compliance Division, Cable Services Bureau, Federal Communications Commission dated December 8, 1997.H Review of both standard FCC Forms 1240  xis necessary to calculate the appropriate maximum permitted rate ("MPR") and the refund amount, if any,  xfor the period beginning June 1, 1997. Operator also submitted a refund plan which calculated the amount  xof refunds owed to subscribers in the communities referenced above for the duration of the one year projected period ending May 31, 1998.  S- ` x15.` ` Upon review of Operator's new FCC Form 1240, for the projected period June 1, 1996  xto May 31, 1997, we find that Operator has correctly calculated its MPR of $13.63. Upon review of  xOperator's new FCC Form 1240, for the projected period June 1, 1997 to May 31, 1998, we find that  Sh- xjOperator has correctly calculated its MPR of $13.85.( h, * 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 by any party to this proceeding not specifically addressed herein. However, Operator's actual CPST rate, effective  xJune 1, 1997, is $13.90. Operator has submitted a refund plan which calculates, with interest, the total  xjamount of overcharges that will be collected from CPST subscribers in the communities referenced above  S- xLfrom the date of the first subscriber complaint in each community)Z* {O%- xԍ See Section 623(c)(1)(C) of the Communications Act, 47 U.S.C Section 543(c)(1)(C) (1996). The LFA  xreceived the first subscriber complaint on June 17, 1997 for CUID No. MI0040 (Petoskey City); June 15, 1997 for  xJCUID No. MI0126 (City of Harbor Springs); and June 3, 1997 for CUID No. MI0294 (Resort Township) and CUID"6'(,p(p(W'" No. MI0357 (Bear Creek Township). to May 31, 1998.v*X* {O -ԍ See Section 76.961 of the Commission's Rules, 47 C.F.R. Section 76.961.v Upon review of"*,p(p(88"  xOperator's refund plan, we find that Operator has correctly calculated, with interest, the amount of  x overcharges that will be received from subscribers during the projected period ending May 31, 1998.  xThese calculations result in a total refund amount of $.59 per CPST subscriber in CUID Nos. MI0040 and  xMI0357 including interest, $.55 per CPST subscriber in CUID No. MI0126, and $.60 per CPST subscriber  xkin CUID No. MI0294, including interest. While we reserve for further review the issue of Operator's  xrevenue and any offsets concerning its programming costs ("revenue/offset" issue), we now order Operator  S- x[to pay the refund amount of $.59 to each current CPST subscriber in CUID Nos. MI0040 and MI0357,  x$.55 to each current CPST subscriber in CUID No. MI0126, and $.60 to each current CPST subscriber  S- xin CUID No. MI0294, within 60 days of the release of this order.|+* {OJ -ԍ See Section 76.961(c) of the Commission's rules, 47 C.F.R. Section 76.961(c).| We will also order any rate Operator  xcharges on and after June 1, 1998 shall be premised on Operator's use of (1) the standard FCC Form 1240  xfor rate calculation purposes and (2) $13.85 as Operator's Current Maximum Permitted Rate as called for  x>on Line A1 of its FCC Form 1240 filing for the projected period beginning June 1, 1998. Contingent  x=upon Operator's refund payment to its subscribers, we have determined that Operator's total CPST rate  xLcollections in the communities referenced above, for the projected period June 1, 1997 to May 31, 1998, will be reasonable, pending our review of the revenue/offset issue.  S - ` `x16.` ` Accordingly, IT IS ORDERED, pursuant to Section 76.961 of the Commission's rules,  x47 C.F.R. Section 76.961, that Operator shall refund to CPST subscribers in CUID Nos. MI0040 and MI0357 the amount of $.59 within 60 days of the release of this Order.  S- ` x17.` ` IT IS FURTHER ORDERED, pursuant to Section 76.961 of the Commission's rules, 47  xC.F.R. Section 76.961, that Operator, shall refund to CPST subscribers in CUID No. MI0126 the amount of $.55 within 60 days of the release of this Order.  S@- ` x18.` ` IT IS FURTHER ORDERED, pursuant to Section 76.961 of the Commission's rules, 47  xC.F.R. Section 76.961, that Operator, shall refund to CPST subscribers in CUID No. MI0294 the amount of $.60 within 60 days of the release of this Order.  S- ` x19.` ` IT IS FURTHER ORDERED, pursuant to Section 76.962 of the Commission's rules, 47  xC.F.R. Section 76.962, that Operator, within 90 days of the release of this Order, shall file with the Chief,  xCable Services Bureau, a certification of its compliance with the refund requirements of this Order, and a certification of its intent to comply with all other aspects of this Order.  S- ` x20.` ` IT IS FURTHER ORDERED, pursuant to Section 0.321 of the Commission's rules, 47  x{C.F.R. Section 0.321, that Operator shall use (1) the standard FCC Form 1240 for rate calculation  xpurposes and (2) $13.85 as Operator's Current Maximum Permitted Rate as called for on Line A1 of its  x0FCC Form 1240 filing for the projected period beginning June 1, 1998, pending our review of the revenue/offset issue.  S - ` x21.` ` IT IS FURTHER ORDERED, pursuant to Section 0.321 of the Commission's rules, 47  xC.F.R. Section 0.321, that Operator shall file with the Chief, Cable Services Bureau, within 30 days of"!|+,p(p(887#"  xthe release of this Order, a channel by channel explanation of the revenues received from programmers,  x]a description of the revenue, as well as a channel by channel explanation of its programming costs  xincreases, for each CPST channel for which programming costs are being increased or revenues are being  xreceived from programmers, along with documentation explaining why, pursuant to the Commission's  xrules, the revenues received from programmers should not offset the increases in Operator's programming costs.  S- `  x22.` ` IT IS FURTHER ORDERED, pursuant to Section 0.321 of the Commission's rules, 47  xC.F.R. Section 0.321, that the complaints referenced herein against the rates charged by Operator in the communities set forth above ARE GRANTED TO THE EXTENT INDICATED HEREIN. x` `  hh@FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION x` `  hh@John E. Logan  S -x` `  hh@Deputy Chief, Cable Services Bureauxx  XX-#Xj\  P6G;9XP#