********************************************************    
                         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                     )
                                     )
Cox Communications, Inc.             )     CUID No.   VA0166 (City of Virginia Beach)
                                     )
Complaint Regarding                  )                 
Cable Programming Services Tier Rates      )


                                  ORDER

   Adopted:  May 29, 1998     Released:  June 2, 1998  

By the Chief, Financial Analysis and Compliance Division, Cable Services Bureau:

      1.    In this Order we consider a complaint against the December 1, 1997 rate increase of the
above-referenced operator ("Operator") for its cable programming services tier ("CPST") in the community
referenced above.  We have already resolved all previous complaints filed against Operator's CPST rates. 
This Order addresses only the reasonableness of Operator's December 1, 1997 CPST rate increase.    

      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.  If the Commission finds a rate to be
unreasonable, it shall determine the correct rate and any refund liability.  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 more than one subscriber complaint. 

      3.     The LFA for the franchise area referenced above filed a complaint with the Commission
on March 16, 1998 against Operator's December 1, 1997 CPST rate increase from $16.40 to $17.00.  The
LFA verified that it received more than one subscriber complaint for the franchise area and that the first
valid complaint was received by the LFA on December 8, 1997.  The filing of a complete and timely LFA
complaint triggers an obligation upon the cable operator to file a justification of its CPST rates.  The
Operator has the burden of demonstrating that the CPST rates complained about are reasonable. 

      4.      To justify rates for the period beginning May 15, 1994 through a benchmark showing,
operators must use the FCC Form 1200 series.  Operators may 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.

     5.    Upon review of Operator's FCC Form 1240, for the projected period December 1, 1997
through November 30, 1998, we find Operator's actual CPST rate of $17.00, effective December 1, 1997,
to be reasonable.  

     6.    Accordingly, IT IS ORDERED, pursuant to Section 0.321 of the Commission's rules, 47
C.F.R.  0.321, that the CPST rate of $17.00, charged by Operator in the franchise area referenced above,
effective December 1, 1997, IS REASONABLE.

     7.    IT IS FURTHER ORDERED, pursuant to Section 0.321 of the Commission's rules, 47
C.F.R.  0.321, that the referenced complaint IS DENIED.


     FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION 



     Elizabeth W. Beaty
     Chief, Financial Analysis and Compliance Division  
     Cable Services Bureau