******************************************************** 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 Nos. MD0080 (Randallstown) ) MD0081 (Catonsville) Comcast Cablevision of Baltimore, Inc. ) MD0082 (Pikesville) ) MD0083 (Woodlawn) ) MD0084 (Arbutus) ) MD0085 (Lansdowne) ) MD0086 (Edgemere) ) MD0087 (West Baltimore County) ) MD0088 (Lutherville/Timonium) ) MD0089 (Reisterstown) ) MD0090 (North Baltimore County) ) MD0091 (Overlea) ) MD0092 (Owings Mills) ) MD0093 (Towson) ) MD0094 (Parkville) ) MD0095 (Perry Hall) ) MD0096 (Middle River) ) MD0097 (Rosedale) ) MD0098 (Essex) Complaint Regarding ) MD0099 (Dundalk) Cable Programming Services Tier Rates ) MD0100 (East Baltimore County) ORDER Adopted: April 14, 1998 Released: April 17, 1998 By the Acting Chief, Cable Services Bureau: 1. In this Order we consider a complaint against the November 1, 1997 rate increase of the above-referenced operator ("Operator") for its cable programming services tier ("CPST") in the communities referenced above. We have already issued orders in which we resolved all prior complaints against Operator's CPST rates in the communities referenced above. Accordingly, this Order addresses only the reasonableness of Operator's November 1, 1997 CPST rate increase for its rebuild and non-rebuild areas. 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 21, 1998, against Operator's November 1, 1997 CPST rate increase from $19.35 to $20.58 for its rebuild area and $18.16 to $18.93 for its non-rebuild area. The LFA verified that it received more than one subscriber complaint and that the first complaints for each community were received by the LFA on the dates listed in Appendix A attached hereto. 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 alternatively 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. In response to a request made by Commission staff, Operator filed amended FCC Form 1240s for the projected periods November 1, 1996 through October 31, 1997 and November 1, 1997 through October 31, 1998 for both its rebuild and non-rebuild areas ("First Form 1240s") on March 31, 1998. Upon review of Operator's FCC Form 1240s for the projected period November 1, 1996 through October 31, 1997, we find Operator's maximum permitted rates ("MPRs") to be reasonable for both its rebuild and non-rebuild areas. 6. Upon review of Operator's FCC Form 1240s for the projected period November 1, 1997 through October 31, 1998 ("Second Form 1240s"), we adjusted Operator's Line A1 to $19.3426 for its rebuild area and $18.0754 for its non-rebuild area to coincide with Line I9 of its prior FCC Form 1240s in accordance with FCC Form 1240 Instructions. We adjusted Operator's Line D6 (Current True-Up Segment) to coincide with Line I8 of Operator's prior FCC Form 1240 filing, in accordance with the FCC Form 1240 Instructions. We adjusted Operator's Line D7 (Current Inflation Segment) to include the amount from Lines I5 and G5 of its prior FCC Form 1240 per the FCC Form 1240 Instructions and pursuant to Annual Rate Adjustment System for Cable Service Rates ("Waiver Order"). Although Operator took advantage of the Waiver Order, Operator failed to fully remove its estimated true-up amount, found on Lines H7 and H8 of its First Form 1240s, from Line H13 (Total True-Up Adjustment) in its Second Form 1240s as required by the Waiver Order. Consequently, we recalculated Operator's Line H13 on Operator's Second Form 1240s and this recalculation, performed pursuant to the Waiver Order, reduced Operator's Line H13 on both of its Second Form 1240s. These adjustments required us to adjust the Inflation Factors on Operator's Worksheet 1 to reflect the most accurate inflation data currently available. This resulted in an adjustment to Operator's Line C1 (Inflation Factor for True-Up Period 1) to 1.0206. We also adjusted Operator's Line C3 (Current FCC Inflation Factor) to 1.0143. Our adjustments resulted in a revised MPR for the projected period of $20.22 rather than Operator's calculated MPR for the projected period of $20.55 for the rebuild area. Our adjustments resulted in a revised MPR for the projected period of $18.44 rather than Operator's calculated MPR for the projected period of $18.85 for the non-rebuild area. Because Operator's actual CPST rates of $20.58 for the rebuild area and $18.93 for the non-rebuild area exceed its revised MPRs, we find Operator's actual CPST rates of $20.58 for the rebuild area and $18.93 for the non-rebuild area, effective November 1, 1997, to be unreasonable. 7. Accordingly, IT IS ORDERED, pursuant to Section 0.321 of the Commission's rules, 47 C.F.R. Section 0.321, that the CPST rates of $20.58 for the rebuild area and $18.93 for the non-rebuild area, charged by Operator in the communities referenced above effective November 1, 1997, ARE UNREASONABLE. 8. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED, pursuant to Section 76.961 of the Commission's rules, 47 C.F.R.  76.961, that Operator shall refund to subscribers in the franchise areas referenced above that portion of the amount paid in excess of the maximum permitted CPST rates of $20.22 for the rebuild area and $18.44 for the non-rebuild area per month (plus franchise fees), plus interest to the date of the refund, for the period beginning on the date listed on Appendix A for each community through the day before Operator implements the maximum permitted CPST rates of $20.22 for the rebuild area and $18.44 for the non-rebuild area. 9. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Operator shall promptly determine the overcharges to CPST subscribers for the stated periods, and shall within 30 days of the release of this Order, file a report with the Chief, Cable Services Bureau, stating the cumulative refund amount so determined (including franchise fees and interest), describing the calculation thereof, and describing its plan to implement the refund within 60 days of Commission approval of the plan. 10. 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. 11. 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 GRANTED. FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION John E. Logan Acting Chief, Cable Services Bureau APPENDIX A CUID NO. COMMUNITY DATE FIRST VALID COMPLAINT FILED WITH LFA MD0080 Randallstown 1/13/98 MD0081 Catonsville 11/3/97 MD0082 Pikesville 11/7/97 MD0083 Woodlawn 11/3/97 MD0084 Arbutus 11/3/97 MD0085 Lansdowne 11/3/97 MD0086 Edgemere 11/3/97 MD0087 West Baltimore County 11/7/97 MD0088 Lutherville/Timonium 11/3/97 MD0089 Reisterstown 11/3/97 MD0090 North Baltimore County 11/10/97 MD0091 Overlea 11/7/97 MD0092 Owings Mills 11/7/97 MD0093 Towson 11/6/97 MD0094 Parkville 11/3/97 MD0095 Perry Hall 11/3/97 MD0096 Middle River 12/29/97 MD0097 Rosedale 11/7/97 MD0098 Essex 11/3/97 MD0099 Dundalk 11/5/97 MD0100 East Baltimore County 11/3/97