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-
037
                              )         
Time Warner Entertainment Company, LP   )    CUID   No.    WI0265 
(West Allis)
                              )    
Petition for Reconsideration            )    


                              ORDER

     Adopted:  October 30, 2002         Released:   October   31, 
2002 

By the Chief, Enforcement Bureau:

     1.   In   this   Order,   we   consider   a   petition   for 
reconsideration  ("Petition")  of   Order,  DA  02-1050   ("Prior 
Order"),1 filed  with  the  Commission  by  the  above-referenced 
operator ("Operator").2  In the Prior Order, we found  Operator's 
cable programming services tier ("CPST") rates to be unreasonable 
for the  period from  May 15,  1994 through  March 31,  1999  and 
ordered refunds.  In this Order  we deny Operator's Petition  and 
calculate Operator's refund liability.  
 
             2.     Under the  provisions of  the  Communications 
Act3 that were in  effect at the  time the referenced  complaints 
were filed,  the Commission  was authorized  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  19924 
("1992 Cable Act") required the  Commission to review CPST  rates 
upon the filing  of a valid  complaint by a  subscriber or  local 
franchising authority  ("LFA").  The  filing  of a  complete  and 
timely complaint triggers an  obligation upon the cable  operator 
to file a justification of its CPST rates.5  The Operator has the 
burden of demonstrating that the CPST rates complained about  are 
reasonable.6  If the Commission finds a rate to be  unreasonable, 
it shall determine the correct rate and any refund liability.7

     3.   In its Petition, Operator does not challenge any of the 
substantive findings of  the Prior Order.   Operator argues  that 
because the cable system was purchased by Time Warner Cable,  and 
the Commission entered into a  Social Contract8 with Time  Warner 
Cable in 1995, any overcharges by the previous owner prior to the 
sale and by Operator after the  sale were resolved by the  Social 
Contract.  Operator does not provide  any argument in support  of 
its proposition  other than  citing to  Jones Cable.9   In  Jones 
Cable, the Enforcement Bureau acknowledged that a previous  Cable 
Services  Bureau  Order,  DA  98-1026  ("Rittman  Order")10   had 
concluded that complaints filed against the operator in  Rittman, 
Ohio had been resolved  by the Social  Contract and a  subsequent 
Order.11  Because the Rittman Order did not explicitly dispose of 
a pending application for review of DA 95-174212 (the first order 
resolving the  referenced  complaints),  the  Enforcement  Bureau 
vacated  DA  95-1742  on  its   own  motion  and  dismissed   the 
application for review as moot.  
     4.   Unlike the  underlying  circumstances  in  the  Rittman 
Order, in this case Operator did not acquire this system  shortly 
after the Social Contract was  entered into, no order was  issued 
incorporating this system into the Social Contract and  resolving 
pending matters, and  no Cable Services  Bureau order was  issued 
acknowledging a resolution of pending complaints.  Paragraph 6 of 
the Social Contract states that the Social Contract will  resolve 
Time Warner  Cable's  pending CPST  cases,  including  complaints 
filed against  recently  acquired systems,  because  Time  Warner 
Cable was  making  cash  refunds  in the  form  of  bill  credits 
totaling $4.7 million plus  interest.  Because the Rittman  Order 
does not specify what arrangements were made by Time Warner Cable 
to resolve the  referenced complaints,  we can  only assume  that 
arrangements were made to address refund liability in that  case.  
In any event, Operator offers no argument or facts from which  we 
could conclude that Operator's refund liability in this case  has 
been satisfied.   There are  no  facts in  this case  that  would 
support Operator's proposition that its refund liability in  this 
case has been satisfied merely  because the system was  purchased 
by Time Warner Cable. Therefore, we deny Operator's Petition.   
     5.   Because  Operator  did  not  file  a  refund  plan,  we 
calculate Operator's refund liability as follows: For the  period 
from May  15,  1994  through  July  14,  1994,  we  calculate  an 
overcharge of $0.26 per  month per subscriber. Operator's  actual 
CPST rate for this  period was $10.27  and its maximum  permitted 
rate ("MPR") was  $10.01. For  the period July  15, 1994  through 
July 31, 1994, we calculate an overcharge of $0.31 per month  per 
subscriber. Operator's  actual  CPST  rate for  this  period  was 
$10.27 and  its MPR  was $9.96.  For the  period August  1,  1994 
through September 30, 1994, we  calculate an overcharge of  $0.59 
per month per subscriber.  Operator's  actual CPST rate for  this 
period was $10.55 and its MPR was $9.96.  For the period  October 
1, 1994 through October 31,  1994, we calculate an overcharge  of 
$0.41 per month per subscriber.  Operator's actual CPST rate  for 
this period was  $10.55 and its  MPR was $10.14.  For the  period 
November 1,  1994  through December  31,  1994, we  calculate  an 
overcharge of $1.21 per  month per subscriber. Operator's  actual 
CPST rate for this period was $11.35 and its MPR was $10.14.  For 
the period January 1, 1995  through March 31, 1995, we  calculate 
an overcharge  of  $1.01  per month  per  subscriber.  Operator's 
actual CPST  rate for  this period  was $11.35  and its  MPR  was 
$10.34.  For the period  April 1, 1995 through  May 31, 1995,  we 
calculate an  overcharge  of  $1.08  per  month  per  subscriber. 
Operator's actual CPST rate  for this period  was $11.35 and  its 
MPR was $10.27.   For the period  June 1, 1995  through June  30, 
1995,  we  calculate  an  overcharge  of  $1.21  per  month   per 
subscriber. Operator's  actual  CPST  rate for  this  period  was 
$11.48 and its MPR was $10.27.   For the period December 1,  1998 
through December 31,  1998, we calculate  an overcharge of  $4.52 
per month per  subscriber. Operator's actual  CPST rate for  this 
period was $16.30 and its MPR was $11.78.  For the period January 
1, 1999 through  March 31,  1999, we calculate  an overcharge  of 
$6.96 per month per subscriber.  Operator's actual CPST rate  for 
this period  was $18.28  and  its MPR  was $11.32.13   Our  total 
calculation,  including  interest  on  the  overcharges   through 
November 30, 2002, equals $773,350.00.  Our calculation does  not 
include franchise fees.  We order Operator to refund this amount, 
plus any additional interest accrued to the date of refund,  plus 
franchise fees,  if  any,  and  interest  on  the  franchise  fee 
principal amount, to its CPST  subscribers within 60 days of  the 
release of this Order.
     6.   Accordingly, IT IS ORDERED,  pursuant to Section  1.106 
of the Commission's rules, 47  C.F.R.  1.106, that the  petition 
for reconsideration filed by Operator is DENIED.

     7.   IT IS  FURTHER  ORDERED, pursuant  to  Sections  0.111, 
0.311 and 76.962 of the  Commission's rules, 47 C.F.R.   0.111, 
0.311 and 76.962, that Operator  shall refund to subscribers  in 
the  franchise  area  referenced   above  the  total  amount   of 
$773,350.00,  plus  any  additional  interest  accruing   between 
November 30, 2002 and the date of refund, plus franchise fees, if 
any, and interest on the franchise fee principal amount within 60 
days of the release of this Order.

     8.   IT IS  FURTHER  ORDERED, pursuant  to  Sections  0.111, 
0.311 and 76.962 of the  Commission's rules, 47 C.F.R.   0.111, 
0.311 and 76.962, that Operator 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  See In The Matter of Time Warner Entertainment Company, LP, DA 
02-1050, 17 FCC Rcd 8320 (EB 2002). 
2  The  term  "Operator"   includes  Operator's  successors   and 
predecessors in interest.
3 Communications  Act,  Section  623(c), as  amended,  47  U.S.C. 
543(c) (1996).
4 Pub. L. No. 102-385, 106 Stat. 1460 (1992).
5 See  Section 76.956  of  the Commission's  rules, 47  C.F.R.   
76.956.
6 Id.
7 See  Section 76.957  of  the Commission's  rules, 47  C.F.R.   
76.957. 
8 In the Matter of Social  Contract for Time Warner, FCC  95-478, 
11 FCC Rcd 2788 (1996).
9 In the  Matter of  Jones Intercable, Inc.,  Jones Spacelink  of 
Ohio, DA 02-1059, 17 FCC Rcd 8351 (EB 2002). 
10 See In the Matter of Time Warner Cable, DA 98-1026, 13 FCC Rcd 
13813 (CSB 1998).
11 In the Matter of Time Warner Cable Social Contract, FCC 96-
2192, 12 FCC Rcd 14881 (1996).
12 In the Matter of Jones Spacelink of Ohio, DA 95-1742, 10 FCC 
Rcd 9802 (CSB 1995).
13 Operator's  refund  liability  for the  period  July  1,  1995 
through November 30, 1998  was trued-up in Operator's  subsequent 
FCC Form 1240s that were reviewed in the Prior Order.  Therefore, 
Operator is  not required  to  separately calculate  that  refund 
liability.  We  note that,  although Operator's  trued-up  refund 
liability was spread over the  entire 1999 FCC Form 1240  period, 
because our jurisdiction over  CPST rates ended  as of March  31, 
1999, we cannot order Operator to provide refunds for overcharges 
for CPST services provided after March 31, 1999.