NOTICE ************************************************************************* NOTICE ************************************************************************* This document was originally prepared in Word Perfect. If the original document contained-- * Footnotes * Boldface & Italics --this information is missing in this version The document format (spacing, margins, tabs, etc.) is changed too. If you need the complete document, download the Word Perfect version. For information about downloading documents (FTP) see file pnmc5021. File pnmc5021 (.txt & .wp) is in directory \pub\Public_Notices\Miscellaneous. ************************************************************************* Before the Federal Communications Commission Washington, D.C. 20554 In the Matter of ) ) InterMedia Partners ) CUID No. GA0296 (City of Oakwood) Cost of Service Showing to Support ) ) Basic Tier Rate and ) Cable Programming Services Tier Rate ) ORDER Adopted: August 16, 1996 Released: August 19, 1996 By the Chief, Financial Analysis and Compliance Division, Cable Services Bureau: INTRODUCTION 1. On August 12, 1994, Robin Cable Systems d/b/a InterMedia Partners ("InterMedia") serving CUID Number GA0296, filed a cost of service showing with its local franchising authority, the City of Oakwood, Georgia ("City"), seeking to justify its Basic Service Tier ("BST") rate. Thereafter, on September 13, 1994, the City petitioned the Commission to review the BST cost of service showing. On March 15, 1995, the Commission granted the City's request and agreed to review InterMedia's cost of service showing for the BST rate. 2. On June 20, 1996, InterMedia filed an FCC Form 1240 with the Commission in response to complaints that allege that InterMedia's January 1, 1996 rate increase of $0.61 on its cable programming services tier ("CPST") in the above-referenced franchise was unreasonable. 3. According to information provided by InterMedia in its cost of service showings, the franchise area comprised approximately 197 BST subscribers and 192 CPST subscribers at the time of the August 12, 1994 filing, and approximately 217 BST subscribers and 208 CPST subscribers at the time of the June 20, 1996 filing. InterMedia provided 11 BST channels and 16 CPST channels at the time of the filings. In this review process, pursuant to the Cable Television Consumer Protection and Competition Act of 1992 ("1992 Cable Act"), we analyzed InterMedia's BST and CPST cost of service showings to ensure that the rates charged were not unreasonable and to determine any associated refund liability. 4. In this review, we analyzed BST rates charged for the period from September 1, 1993 to present. Our review of InterMedia's BST also included an analysis of its equipment and installation rates, as presented on InterMedia's FCC Form 1205 filed April 3, 1995. InterMedia's cost of service filing seeks to establish that its rate of $8.72 per month for this period is justified based on its cost of providing service on its BST. Our analysis indicates that the BST rate that InterMedia was charging from the period beginning September 1, 1993, was justified under the Commission's rules. 5. We also analyzed InterMedia's CPST rates charged after January 1, 1996. Intermedia has subsequently filed a FCC Form 1240 to justify its CPST rate increase of $0.61 due to changes in channels, external costs and inflation, for the period from January 1, 1996 to December 31, 1996. Our review of the record indicates that InterMedia's CPST rates, as established in its FCC Form 1240, are justified under the Commission's rules. ADJUSTMENTS 6. Rate base and expense items have been evaluated to determine whether InterMedia should be permitted to recover those items. Where a certain rate base or expense element was not supported, was excessive, or was unrelated to providing regulated cable service, such cost was disallowed in whole or in part. Where reported costs were disallowed, we have made appropriate adjustments. Even with our adjustments and disallowances, however, we find that InterMedia's monthly BST and CPST rates for the periods under review have been justified. 7. Equipment and Installation Rates: Our review of InterMedia's BST rate included an analysis of its Equipment and Installation rates. The 1992 Act requires that cable operators base their equipment and installation rates on their actual costs. We have reviewed InterMedia's cost of service showing and related FCC Form 1205 (Equipment Form) and find that the equipment and installation rates InterMedia charged in connection with its BST for the period under review are not unreasonable. 8. FCC Form 1240 Filing: InterMedia filed FCC Form 1240 to justify subsequent increases to its CPST rate to reflect changes in channels, external costs and inflation. The FCC Form 1240 submitted by InterMedia covers the period from January 1, 1996 to December 31, 1996. The monthly CPST rate charged by InterMedia for the period from January 1, 1996 to December 31, 1996 was $14.54. We reviewed InterMedia's FCC Form 1240 filing and found no errors in the methodology that InterMedia applied. We find therefore that the CPST rate increase of $0.61 that InterMedia charged pursuant to its FCC Form 1240 filing was not unreasonable. CONCLUSION 9. Based on our review of InterMedia's cost of service filing and supplemental information and applying the Commission's most current rules, we find that, as discussed above, InterMedia has justified the monthly BST rate of $8.72 (plus franchise fee) and equipment and installation rate for the period after September 1, 1993. 10. Based on our review of InterMedia's FCC Form 1240, we find that, as discussed above, InterMedia has justified its monthly CPST rate increase of $0.61 for the period from January 1, 1996 to December 31, 1996. 11. Accordingly, IT IS ORDERED, pursuant to Section 0.321 of the Commission's rules, 47 C.F.R. Section 0.321, that the monthly BST rate of $8.72 and associated equipment and installation rates, as stated on its FCC Form 1205, charged by InterMedia Partners with respect to the above-referenced community, for the period under review, ARE JUSTIFIED. 12. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED, pursuant to Section 76.933(d) of the Commission's rules, 47 C.F.R. Section 76.933(d), that this ruling on the rates InterMedia was charging for its BST and associated equipment and installation are binding on the local franchising authority, the City of Oakwood and the cable operator, InterMedia. 13. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED, pursuant to Section 0.321 of the Commission's rules, 47 C.F.R. Section 0.321, that the monthly CPST rate of $14.54 charged for the period from January 1, 1996 to December 31, 1996, by InterMedia Partners with respect to the above-referenced community, IS JUSTIFIED. 14. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that, pursuant to Section 0.321 of the Commission's rules, 47 C.F.R. Section 0.321, that the complaints against the monthly CPST rates charged by InterMedia with respect to the above-referenced CUID number, ARE DENIED. FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION Elizabeth W. Beaty Chief, Financial Analysis and Compliance Division Cable Services Bureau