Click here for Adobe Acrobat version
Click here for Microsoft Word version

******************************************************** 
                      NOTICE
********************************************************

This document was converted from Microsoft Word.

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
Microsoft Word or Adobe Acrobat version.

*****************************************************************



                           Before the
                Federal Communications Commission
                     Washington, D.C. 20554
                                

In the Matter of                )       File No.   EB-02-TC-086
                                )       
Jones Spacelink, Ltd.           )       CUID     No.       IL1050 
(Wheaton)
                                )  
Petition for Reconsideration    )       


                              ORDER

     Adopted:  January 24, 2003                             
Released:  January 27, 2003        

By the Chief, Enforcement Bureau:  

     1.   In this Order, we  deny a petition for  reconsideration 
("Petition")1 of  a  Cable  Services  Bureau  Order,  DA  95-2170 
("Prior Order").2   The Prior  Order  granted a  complaint  filed 
against  the  cable  programming  services  tier  ("CPST")  rates 
charged  by  the  above-referenced  operator  ("Operator")3  from 
January 10,  1994  through May  14,  1994.4  The  Cable  Services 
Bureau found Operator's CPST rates to be unreasonable and ordered 
refunds.  In this Order, we affirm the Prior Order and  calculate 
Operator's refund liability.

     2.   Under the provisions  of the  Communications Act5  that 
were in effect at the time the referenced complaints were  filed, 
the Commission had authority  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  19926  ("1992  Cable  Act") 
required the Commission to review CPST rates upon the filing of a 
valid complaint by a  subscriber or local franchising  authority.  
The filing  of  a  complete and  timely  complaint  triggered  an 
obligation upon the cable operator to file a justification of its 
CPST rates.7  The Operator had  the burden of demonstrating  that 
the  CPST  rates  complained  about  were  reasonable.8   If  the 
Commission found a  rate to  be unreasonable,  it determined  the 
correct rate and any refund liability.9

     3.   In its Petition, Operator does not challenge any of the 
substantive findings of the Prior Order.  Rather, Operator argues 
that it is entitled to an  increase in its CPST rates to  account 
for external cost  increases incurred during  the period of  time 
from the effective date of the 1992 Cable Act through the initial 
date of regulation.  Our rules  allow certain cable operators  to 
make an "adjustment for changes in external costs for the  period 
between September 30, 1992, and the initial date of regulation or 
February28, 1994, whichever is applicable . . .". 10  Therefore, 
to the extent that Operator is entitled to take an adjustment for 
increases in external  costs that Operator  incurred during  this 
period,  it  may  do  so  pursuant  to  the  Commission's  rules.  
Operator attached a chart to its Petition that purported to  show 
an external  cost  adjustment  of $0.37,  for  increases  between 
September 1992 and January 1994.   However, in its FCC Form  393, 
which was reviewed in the Prior Order, Operator used October 1993 
as its initial date of regulation for purposes of calculating its 
FCC Form 393 CPST rate.   Therefore, Operator is only entitled to 
an adjustment  for  changes  in external  costs  for  the  period 
between September 1992 and October  1993.  In order to  determine 
the correct figure for the initial date of regulation of  October 
1993, we review Line B7 (Avg. Ext. per Sub. Per Tier on Beginning 
Date) of  Operator's  FCC Form  1200.   Our review  reveals  that 
Operator's September  1992 external  costs, as  indicated on  the 
attachment to its Petition, were higher than Operator's  external 
costs as of the initial date  of regulation, as reported on  Line 
B7 of  Operator's  FCC  Form  1200.11   Therefore,  there  is  no 
external cost increase for Operator to claim and it is  therefore 
denied as factually unsubstantiated.12

     4.   Operator also  argues that  it should  be permitted  to 
offset its CPST overcharges with its purported basic service tier 
("BST") undercharges.   The  Commission addressed  the  issue  of 
inter-tier offsets in Cencom Cable Income Partners  ("Cencom"),13 
subsequent to  the  filing  of this  Petition.   In  Cencom,  the 
Commission  determined   that   such   inter-tier   offsets   are 
"inconsistent   with   the   Commission's   conclusion   in   the 
[Implementation of  Sections  of the  Cable  Television  Consumer 
Protection and  Competition  Act  of 1992,  Rate  Regulation,  MM 
Docket 92-266, Report  and Order and  Further Notice of  Proposed 
Rulemaking]14 that  cable operators  should not  balance low  BST 
rates with CPST rates that exceed the maximum permitted rate  for 
the  tier."15   Operator  offers  no  new  arguments  that  would 
persuade  us  to  deviate  from  this  policy,  which  has   been 
consistently applied  in  CPST  rate cases.16   For  the  reasons 
discussed above, we conclude  that Operator's Petition should  be 
denied.
     5.   Operator  filed  four  refund  plans  along  with   its 
Petition.   Upon  review  of   the  refund  plan  calculated   in 
accordance with the Prior Order, we find that Operator calculated 
too much  refund liability.17   Therefore, we  reject  Operator's 
refund plan and calculate Operator's refund liability as follows: 
For the period  from January 10,  1994 through May  14, 1994,  we 
calculate an  overcharge  of  $0.70  per  month  per  subscriber. 
Operator's actual CPST rate  for this period  was $10.28 and  its 
maximum  permitted  rate  was   $9.58.  Our  total   calculation, 
including franchise fees and interest on the overcharges  through 
December 31,  2002,  equals  $52,740.00.  We  order  Operator  to 
refund this amount, plus any  additional interest accrued to  the 
date of refund,  to its CPST  subscribers within 60  days of  the 
release of this Order.
     6.   Accordingly, IT IS ORDERED,  pursuant to Section  1.115 
of the Commission's Rules, 47  C.F.R.  1.115, that the  Petition 
for Reconsideration of In the Matter of Jones Spacelink, Ltd., DA 
95-2170, 10 FCC Rcd 11562 (CSB 1995) IS DENIED.

     7.   IT IS FURTHER  ORDERED, pursuant to  Section 76.962  of 
the Commission's Rules, 47 C.F.R.   76.962, that Operator  shall 
refund to subscribers in the franchise area referenced above  the 
total amount of $52,740.00, plus any additional interest accruing 
between December 31, 2002 and the date of refund, within 60  days 
of the release of this Order.

     8.   IT IS FURTHER  ORDERED, pursuant to  Section 76.962  of 
the Commission's rules, 47 C.F.R.   76.962, that Operator  shall 
file a  certificate of  compliance  with the  Chief,  Enforcement 
Bureau, within 90 days  of the release  of this Order  certifying 
its compliance with this Order.


                              FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION 



                              David H. Solomon
                              Chief, Enforcement Bureau
_________________________

1 The Petition was originally filed as a consolidated application 
for review  of three  separate  orders involving  three  separate 
communities.  The issues concerning  two of the communities  were 
previously resolved.   See In  the  Matter of  Jones  Intercable, 
Inc., FCC  98-192, 13  FCC  Rcd 15883  (1998).  By  letter  dated 
January 21, 2003, Operator  requested that the remaining  issues, 
which concern only the community of Wheaton, IL, CUID No. IL1050, 
be adjudicated as a petition for reconsideration.
2 In the Matter of Jones Spacelink, Ltd., DA 95-2170, 10 FCC  Rcd 
11562 (CSB  1995).   Effective  March 25,  2002,  the  Commission 
transferred  responsibility  for   resolving  cable   programming 
services tier  rate complaints  from  the former  Cable  Services 
Bureau to the Enforcement Bureau.  See Establishment of the Media 
Bureau, the  Wireline Competition  Bureau  and the  Consumer  and 
Governmental Affairs Bureau, Reorganization of the  International 
Bureau and Other  Organizational Changes, FCC  02-10, 17 FCC  Rcd 
4672 (2002).
3  The  term  "Operator"   includes  Operator's  successors   and 
predecessors in interest.
4 The refund  liability period  runs from January  10, 1994,  the 
date the first  valid complaint  was filed  with the  Commission, 
through May 14, 1994.  The Cable Services Bureau found Operator's 
CPST rates to be reasonable beginning  May 15, 1994.  See In  the 
Matter of Jones Growth Partners d/b/a Jones Intercable, Inc.,  DA 
96-1533, 11 FCC Rcd 10656 (CSB 1996).
5 Communications  Act,  Section  623(c), as  amended,  47  U.S.C. 
543(c) (1996).
6 Pub. L. No. 102-385, 106 Stat. 1460 (1992).
7 See  Section 76.956  of  the Commission's  Rules, 47  C.F.R.   
76.956.
8 Id.
9 See  Section 76.957  of  the Commission's  Rules, 47  C.F.R.   
76.957. 
10 See  47 C.F.R.   76.922(f)(4);  Implementation of  the  Cable 
Television Consumer Protection and Competition Act of 1992,  Rate 
Regulation, Memorandum  Opinion  and  Order,  11  FCC  Rcd  20206 
(1996); and Time Warner Entertainment Co., LP v. FCC, 144 F.3d 75 
(D.C. Cir. 1998).
11 See  Appendix  B of  Implementation  of the  Cable  Television 
Consumer Protection and Competition Act of 1992, Rate Regulation, 
Memorandum Opinion  and  Order,  11  FCC  Rcd  20206  (1996)  for 
instructions for calculating the external costs adjustment.
12 Operator  was  unable  to provide  any  additional  supporting 
documentation for its proposed  increase in response to  requests 
by Bureau staff.
13  See In the Matter of  Cencom Cable Income Partners II,  L.P., 
12 FCC Rcd 7948 (1997).
14  8 FCC Rcd 5631 (1993).
15  Cencom at 22 (footnote omitted).
16 See, e.g., In  the Matter of Suburban  Cable TV Co., Inc.,  17 
FCC Rcd 13700 (EB 2002); In the Matter of Cable One, Inc., 15 FCC 
Rcd 20359 (CSB 2000). 
17 Operator calculated a total refund liability of $87,292.25.