********************************************************    
                         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                   )    
                              )    CUID No.  PA1344 (Mt. Lebanon)
Mt. Lebanon Cablevision, Inc. d/b/a          )              
Adelphia Cable Communications      )
                              )
Complaint Regarding                )              
Cable Programming Services Tier Rates   )              

          
                             ORDER

     Adopted:  February 22, 1999             Released:  March 3, 1999  

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

     1.   In this Order we consider a complaint against the August 1, 1998 rate increase by the above-
referenced operator ("Operator") for its cable programming services tier ("CPST") in the community referenced
above.  We have previously resolved all prior complaints against Operator's CPST rates in the community
referenced above ("Prior Order").  This Order addresses only the reasonableness of Operator's August 1, 1998
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 the 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
January 26, 1999, against Operator's August 1, 1998 CPST rate increase from $20.79 to $23.45.  The LFA
verified that it received more than one subscriber complaint and the first valid complaint was received by the
LFA on August 3, 1998.  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 are permitted to make changes to their rates on a
quarterly basis using FCC Form 1210.  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 August 1, 1998 through
July 31, 1999, we adjusted Operator's Line F2 (Markup Method Segment for True-Up Period 1) and Line I2
(Markup Method Segment for Projected Period) to $0.00 for channel additions under the "markup method"
because we allowed Operator's adjustment for channel additions under the "CAPS method".  We adjusted the
Inflation Factors at Worksheet 1 (True-up Period Inflation) which adjusted Line C3 (Inflation Factor for True-
up Period 1) to 1.0136.  We also revised Line C5 (Current FCC Inflation Factor) to 1.0082.  Our
adjustments resulted in a revised maximum permitted rate ("MPR") of $24.61 for the projected period rather
than Operator's calculated MPR for the projected period of $24.71.  Because Operator's actual CPST rate of
$23.45, effective August 1, 1998, does not exceed its revised MPR, we find Operator's actual CPST rate of
$23.45, effective August 1, 1998, 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 $23.45, charged by Operator in the franchise area referenced above,
effective August 1, 1998, IS REASONABLE.
     
     7.   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.

     8.   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 



                         Patrick A. Boateng, Acting Chief
                         Financial Analysis and Compliance Division
                         Cable Services Bureau