******************************************************** 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 ) ) Telerama, Inc. ) CUID No. OH0765 (Richmond Heights) d/b/a Cablevision ) ) Complaint Regarding ) Cable Programming Services Tier Rates ) ORDER Adopted: September 8, 1998 Released: September 10, 1998 By the Acting Chief, Financial Analysis and Compliance Division, Cable Services Bureau: 1. In this Order we consider a complaint against the January 1, 1998 rate increase that the above- captioned operator ("Operator") implemented for its cable programming services tier ("CPST") in the community set forth above. On August 11, 1998, we issued an Order approving a Resolution ("Resolution") which Operator entered into with the Federal Communications Commission ("Commission"), which resolved all previous complaints filed against Operator's CPST rates from September 1, 1993 through August 1, 1997. Operator has attempted to justify its CPST rate increase through a benchmark showing on FCC Form 1240. Accordingly, this Order addresses the reasonableness of Operator's CPST rate increase, effective January 1, 1998. 2. The Communications Act authorizes the Commission 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 the rate 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 the 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, within 90 days after such increase becomes effective, it receives more than one subscriber complaint. 3. Operators may justify 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. Additionally, an Operator may file an FCC Form 1235 (Abbreviated Cost of Service Filing for Cable Network Upgrades). The FCC Form 1235 allows cable operators to justify rate increases related to significant capital expenditures used to improve rate- regulated services. This option is extended only in cases of significant upgrades requiring added capital investment, such as bandwidth capacity and conversion to fiber optics, and for system rebuilds. Normal improvements and expansions of service remain subject to the usual rate adjustments allowed by filing FCC Form 1210s, 1220s and 1240s. Cable operators that incur increases in operating costs associated with a significant network upgrade will be permitted to charge additional rates as justified by their FCC Form 1235 filing. 4. On June 18, 1998, the LFA filed a complaint regarding the January 1, 1998 increase in Operator's CPST rate from $14.07 to $18.23, in the community referenced above. In its complaint, the LFA asserts that it has received more than one subscriber complaint against Operator's CPST rate increase and verified that the first complaint was received on February 12, 1998, thereby triggering the Commission's jurisdiction to review the complaint. The valid complaint from the LFA triggers an obligation by the cable operator to file a justification of its CPST rates with the LFA. Thus, in this case, Operator is required to justify the increase in its CPST rate which is the subject of the LFA's complaint. 5. Upon review of Operator's FCC Form 1240 for the projected period January 1, 1998 to December 31, 1998, we find that Operator did not correctly calculate its maximum permitted rate ("MPR"). We find that Operator has failed to use the most current FCC Inflation Factors available at the time Operator prepared its FCC Form 1240. Therefore, we revised Worksheet 1 (True-Up Period Inflation) which adjusted Line C3 (Inflation Factor for True-Up Period 1) to 1.0056. We also revised Line C4 (Inflation Factor for True-Up Period 2) to 1.0060 and Line C5 (Current FCC Inflation Factor) to 1.0114. These revisions reduced Operator's MPR to $18.73 from Operator's MPR of $19.48, for the projected period January 1, 1998 to December 31, 1998. 6. Upon review of Operator's FCC Form 1235 we find that Operator has justified a network upgrade MPR of $4.14. Thus Operator's total revised MPR for its CPST is $22.87 ($18.73 plus $4.14), effective January 1, 1998. Because Operator's actual CPST rate of $18.23, effective January 1, 1998, does not exceed its revised MPR, we find Operator's actual CPST rate of $18.23, effective January 1, 1998, to be reasonable. 7. Accordingly, IT IS ORDERED, pursuant to Section 0.321 of the Commission's rules, 47 C.F.R.  0.321, that Operator's CPST rate of $18.23, effective January 1, 1998, in the community set forth above, IS REASONABLE. 8. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED, pursuant to Section 0.321 of the Commission's rules, 47 C.F.R.  0.321, that Operator take into account our FCC Form 1240 adjustments when calculating its maximum permitted rate and performing the true-up calculation on its next FCC Form 1240. 9. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED, pursuant to Section 0.321 of the Commission's rules, 47 C.F.R.  0.321, that the complaint referenced herein IS DENIED. FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION Margaret M. Egler Acting Chief, Financial Analysis and Compliance Division Cable Services Bureau