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


                                )                              
                                                               
                                )                              
                                    File Number EB-09-SE-011   
     In the Matter of           )                              
                                    NAL/Acct. No.200932100033  
     Cox Communications, Inc.   )                              
                                    FRN 0016034050             
                                )                              
                                                               
                                )                              


             NOTICE OF APPARENT LIABILITY FOR FORFEITURE AND ORDER

   Adopted: January 19, 2009 Released: January 19, 2009

   By the Chief, Enforcement Bureau:

   I. INTRODUCTION

    1. In this Notice of Apparent Liability for Forfeiture and Order ("NAL
       and Order"), we find that Cox Communications, Inc.'s cable systems
       serving Surprise, Arizona ("Cox") apparently willfully violated
       Section 76.1603(b)  of the Commission's Rules ("Rules"). Specifically,
       Cox failed to provide the requisite thirty (30) days advance written
       notice to its customers, before implementing a change in rates,
       programming services or channel positions as required under the Rules.
       We conclude, pursuant to Section 503(b) of the Communications Act of
       1934, as amended ("Act"), that Cox is apparently liable for a
       forfeiture in the amount of fifteen thousand dollars ($15,000). We
       also order Cox, within ninety (90) days of this NAL and Order, to
       issue refunds to the customers affected by the change in rates,
       programming services or channel position as explained more fully
       below.

   II. BACKGROUND

    2. On March 7, 2008, the Commission received a complaint asserting that
       Cox, in Surprise, Arizona had "moved two channels ... CSPAN-2 and TCM
       from standard cable to Digital Cable." According to the Complainant,
       this change was made without prior notice.

   III. DISCUSSION

   A. Cox Apparently Violated Section 76.1603(b) By Failing To Provide Proper
   Notice to its Customers.

    3. Based on the record before us, we find that Cox apparently willfully
       violated Section 76.1603(b) two times by failing to notify its
       customers before implementing a change in rates, programming services
       or channel positions as required under the Rules.

    4. Section 76.1603(b) of the Rules provides, in relevant part, as
       follows:

   Customers will be notified of any changes in rates, programming services
   or channel positions as soon as possible in writing. Notice must be given
   to subscribers a minimum of thirty (30) days in advance of such changes if
   the change is within the control of the cable operator. In addition, the
   cable operator shall notify subscribers 30 days in advance of any
   significant changes in the other information required by S: 76.1602.

    5. We find that the migration of each channel constitutes a change in
       rates, programming services or channel positions under the Rules. We
       also find that the migration was a change within the control of the
       Cox because we are unaware of external forces that would have required
       the Cox to make such a change, particularly without giving 30 days
       notice. In our Letter of Inquiry issued to Cox on October 30, 2008, we
       asked for a range of information related to the migration of channels,
       including evidence that consumers were provided with the notice
       required under our rules. Unfortunately, Cox failed to produce any
       evidence on this point in response to our request, including any
       evidence that the requisite notice was provided of the migration that
       is the subject of this NAL and Order.

    6. Therefore, for the reasons stated above, we find that Cox apparently
       violated Section 76.1603(b) two times by failing to provide its
       customers at least thirty (30) days notice in writing of a change in
       rates, programming services or channel positions.

   B. Forfeiture Calculation

    7. Under Section 503(b)(1)(B) of the Act, any person who is determined by
       the Commission to have willfully or repeatedly failed to comply with
       any provision of the Act or any rule, regulation, or order issued by
       the Commission shall be liable to the United States for a forfeiture
       penalty. To impose such a forfeiture penalty, the Commission must
       issue a notice of apparent liability and the person against whom such
       notice has been issued must have an opportunity to show, in writing,
       why no such forfeiture penalty should be imposed. The Commission will
       then issue a forfeiture if it finds by a preponderance of the evidence
       that the person has violated the Act or a Commission rule. Based on
       the analysis set forth below, we conclude that Cox is apparently
       liable for a forfeiture in the amount of fifteen thousand dollars
       ($15,000) for its willful violations of Section 76.1603(b) of the
       Rules.

    8. Under Section 503(b)(2)(A) and Section 1.80(b)(1) of the Commission's
       Rules, we may assess a cable television operator a forfeiture of up to
       $32,000 for each violation or each day of a continuing violation, up
       to a statutory maximum forfeiture of $325,000 for any single
       continuing violation. In exercising such authority, we are required to
       take into account "the nature, circumstances, extent, and gravity of
       the violation and, with respect to the violator, the degree of
       culpability, any history of prior offenses, ability to pay, and such
       other matters as justice may require."

    9. The Commission's Forfeiture Policy Statement and Section 1.80 of the
       Rules do not establish a specific base forfeiture for violation of
       Section 76.1603's notice requirements. Based on the totality of
       circumstances here and the Commission's past precedent, we find that
       $7,500 is an appropriate base forfeiture for the failure to notify its
       customers of Cox's change in service. Accordingly, we conclude that
       Cox is apparently liable for a total forfeiture of $15,000 for each of
       its willful violations of Section 76.1603(c) of the Rules (failing to
       give the required notice for each of the two channels at issue in this
       complaint).

   C. Cox Must Issue Refund To Customers Harmed By Its Failure To Provide
   Notice.

   10. Cox's change in rates, programming services or channel positions
       without the required notice has harmed its customers who purchased
       services based on the reasonable assumption that Cox would not be
       moving significant portions of programming from standard service tiers
       to digital cable tiers without providing the notice required under our
       Rules. In effect, Cox's movement of programming to a digital tier
       without any reduction in subscriber fees has substantially diminished
       the value of the programming Complainant receives. The Complainant
       must now pay the same monthly rate for cable service even though
       Complainant can view fewer channels.

   11. Thus, we order Cox, within ninety (90) days of this NAL and Order, to
       issue refunds to affected customers who did not receive the required
       notice of the date of the programming change. Specifically, Cox must
       provide refunds as follows:

   Cox must refund the customer's subscriber fees of all affected customers
   who did not receive the required notice based on the diminished value of
   their service following the movement of programming without proper notice
   by $0.10 per channel moved per month and reduce complainant's rates on a
   going-forward basis accordingly until the notice required under our rules
   has been provided.

   12. In addition, we order Cox to submit to the Bureau within 30 days of
       the issuance of refunds a report in the form of a letter advising the
       Bureau that such refunds have been paid and that affected subscribers'
       fees have been reduced as directed.

   IV. ordering clauses

   13. Accordingly, IT IS ORDERED, pursuant to section 503(b) of the
       Communications Act of 1934, as amended, 47 U.S.C. S: 503(b)(5), and
       section 1.80 of the Commission's rules, 47 C.F.R. S: 1.80, and under
       the authority delegated by sections 0.111 and 0.311 of the
       Commission's rules,47 C.F.R. S: 0.111, 0.311, Cox is NOTIFIED of its
       APPARENT LIABILITY FOR A FORFEITURE in the amount of fifteen thousand
       dollars ($15,000) for willful violation of Section 76.1603(b) of the
       Rules.

   14. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that, pursuant to Section 1.80 of the Rules,
       within thirty days of the release date of this Notice of Apparent
       Liability for Forfeiture and Order, Cox Systems Corp. SHALL PAY the
       full amount of the proposed forfeiture or SHALL FILE a written
       statement seeking reduction or cancellation of the proposed
       forfeiture.

   15. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that, pursuant to sections 1, 4(i), 4(j), 601,
       and 629 of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended 47 U.S.C. S:S:
       151, 154(i), 154(j), 521, 549, Cox must take the steps set forth in
       paragraphs 10, 11, and 12 of this NAL and Order.

   16. Payment of the forfeiture must be made by check or similar instrument,
       payable to the order of the Federal Communications Commission. The
       payment must include the NAL/Account Number and FRN Number referenced
       above. Payment by check or money order may be mailed to Federal
       Communications Commission, P.O. Box 979088, St. Louis, MO 63197-9000.
       Payment by overnight mail may be sent to U.S. Bank - Government
       Lockbox #979088, SL-MO-C2-GL, 1005 Convention Plaza, St. Louis, MO
       63101. Payment by wire transfer may be made to ABA Number 021030004,
       receiving bank TREAS/NYC, and account number 27000001. For payment by
       credit card, an FCC Form 159 (Remittance Advice) must be submitted.
       When completing the FCC Form 159, enter the NAL/Account number in
       block number 23A (call sign/other ID), and enter the letters "FORF" in
       block number 24A (payment type code). Requests for full payment under
       an installment plan should be sent to: Chief Financial Officer --
       Financial Operations, 445 12th Street, S.W., Room 1-A625, Washington,
       D.C.  20554. Please contact the Financial Operations Group Help Desk
       at 1-877-480-3201 or Email: ARINQUIRIES@fcc.gov with any questions
       regarding payment procedures. Oceanic will also send electronic
       notification on the date said payment is made to Kathy.Berthot@fcc.gov
       and to JoAnnLucanik@fcc.gov.

   17. The response, if any, must be mailed to the Office of the Secretary,
       Federal Communications Commission, 445 12th Street, S.W., Washington,
       D.C. 20554, ATTN: Enforcement Bureau - Spectrum Enforcement Division,
       and must include the NAL/Acct. No. referenced in the caption.

   18. The Commission will not consider reducing or canceling a forfeiture in
       response to a claim of inability to pay unless the petitioner submits:
       (1) federal tax returns for the most recent three-year period; (2)
       financial statements prepared according to generally accepted
       accounting practices; or (3) some other reliable and objective
       documentation that accurately reflects the petitioner's current
       financial status. Any claim of inability to pay must specifically
       identify the basis for the claim by reference to the financial
       documentation submitted.

   19. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that a copy of this Notice of Apparent Liability
       for Forfeiture  and Order  shall be sent by first class mail and
       certified mail return receipt requested to Kathleen Q. Abernathy,
       Esq., Counsel for Cox Communications, Inc., Wilkinson Barker Knauer
       LLP, 2300 N Street, NW, Suite 700, Washington, D.C. 20037.

   FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION

   Kris Anne Monteith

   Chief, Enforcement Bureau

   47 C.F.R. S: 76.1603(b).

   47 U.S.C. S: 503(b).

   FCC Complaint 08-C00006550-1.

   47 C.F.R. S: 76.1603(b).

   Letter from Kathryn S. Berthot, Chief, Spectrum Enforcement Division,
   Enforcement Bureau, Federal Communications Commission to Gary S. Lutzker,
   Counsel for Cox Communications, Inc. (Oct. 30, 2008) ("LOI").

   47 U.S.C. S: 503(b)(1)(B); 47 C.F.R. S: 1.80(a)(1).

   47 U.S.C. S: 503(b); 47 C.F.R. S: 1.80(f).

   See, e.g., SBC Communications, Inc., Forfeiture Order, 17 FCC Rcd 7589,
   7591 (2002).

   47 U.S.C. S: 503(b)(2)(A), 47 C.F.R. S: 1.80(b)(1). The Commission has
   repeatedly amended Section 1.80(b)(1) of the Rules to increase the maximum
   forfeiture amounts, in accordance with the inflation adjustment
   requirements contained in the Debt Collection Improvement Act of 1996, 28
   U.S.C. S: 2461. Most recently, the Commission raised the maximum
   forfeitures applicable to cable operators, broadcast licensees, and
   applicants for such authority from $32,500 to $37,500 for a single
   violation, and from $325,000 to $375,000 for a continuing violation. See
   Inflation Adjustment of Maximum Forfeiture Penalties, 73 Fed. Reg. 44663,
   44664 (July 31, 2008). The new forfeiture limits will take effect
   September 2, 2008 and do not apply to this case.

   47 U.S.C. S: 503(b)(2)(E). See also 47 C.F.R. S: 1.80(b)(4), Note to
   paragraph (b)(4): Section II. Adjustment Criteria for Section 503
   Forfeitures.

   See The Commission's Forfeiture Policy Statement and Amendment of Section
   1.80 of the Rules to Incorporate the Forfeiture Guidelines, Report and
   Order, 12 FCC Rcd 17087, 17115 (1997), recon. denied, 15 FCC Rcd 303
   (1999) ("Forfeiture Policy Statement").

   The Commission has substantial discretion, however, in proposing
   forfeitures. See, e.g., InPhonic, Inc., Order of Forfeiture and Further
   Notice of Apparent Liability, 22 FCC Rcd 8689, 8699 (2007); Globcom, Inc.
   d/b/a Globcom Global Commun., Order of Forfeiture, 21 FCC Rcd 4710,
   4723-24 (2006). We may apply the base forfeiture amounts described in the
   Forfeiture Policy Statement and the Commission's rules, or we may depart
   from them altogether as the circumstances demand See 47 C.F.R.
   S:1.80(b)(4) ("The Commission and its staff may use these guidelines in
   particular cases [, and] retain the discretion to issue a higher or lower
   forfeiture than provided in the guidelines, to issue no forfeiture at all,
   or to apply alternative or additional sanctions as permitted by the
   statute.") (emphasis added).

   See also Northland Cable Television, Inc., Memorandum Opinion and Order
   and Notice of Apparent Liability for Forfeiture, 23 FCC Rcd 7865 (Media
   Bur. 2008) (proposing $20,000 forfeiture for apparent violations of
   Section 76.1603 and other rules); Northland Cable Television, Inc.,
   Memorandum Opinion and Order and Notice of Apparent Liability for
   Forfeiture, 23 FCC Rcd 7872 (Media Bur. 2008) (same).

   Thus, for example, if Cox migrated a channel and did not provide proper
   notice for nine months, it must refund $0.90 to each affected customer.
   $0.10 is our best estimate of the relevant license fee per channel. We
   note that Cox did not provide actual per channel license fees as required
   by the LOI. The Bureau will reconsider the appropriate license fee per
   channel should Cox submit a petition for reconsideration that includes
   evidence that the license fees of the affected channels are lower than
   $0.10 per month.

   (...continued from previous page)

                                                              (continued....)

   Federal Communications Commission DA 09-132

                                       2

   Federal Communications Commission DA 09-132