******************************************************** 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 ) ) CSR No. 5171-R Apache CableVision) CUID Nos. AZ0125 (San Carlos) ) AZ0126 (Peridot) Petition for Special Relief ) AZ0334 (Bylas) ORDER Adopted: February 17, 1998 Released: February 20, 1998 By the Chief, Financial Analysis and Compliance Division, Cable Services Bureau: 1. In this Order, we address a petition for special relief ("Petition") in which Apache CableVision ("Operator") seeks exemption from rate regulation for its cable systems in the communities referenced above pursuant to Section 76.1403 of the Commission's rules. Operator certifies that it was eligible for "Small Cable Operator" status under Section 623(m) of the Communications Act. No opposition was filed in this proceeding. 2. The Communications Act authorized the Federal Communications Commission ("Commission") to review the cable programming service tier ("CPST") rates of cable systems not subject to effective competition to ensure that rates charged are not unreasonable on receipt of a complaint as to such rates and to determine correct rates and any refund liability. Throughout the rate regulation process initiated by the 1992 Cable Act, special attention has been given to the needs of small cable systems. 3. In the Telecommunications Act of 1996 ("1996 Act"), Congress amended Section 623 of the Communication Act and redefined a small cable operator as one that "directly or through an affiliate, serves in the aggregate fewer than 1 percent of all subscribers in the United States and is not affiliated with any entity or entities whose gross annual revenues in the aggregate exceed $250,000,000." The Commission's rules currently define one percent of all cable subscribers in the United States as equivalent to 617,000 subscribers. The Commission's rules also define an affiliated entity as one which "holds a 20 percent or greater equity interest, passive or active, in the operator or exercises de jure or de facto control over the operator." In the 1996 Act, Congress determined that, effective February 8, 1996, the Commission shall not apply its CPST rate regulation rules, promulgated under Section 623(a), (b) and (c) of the Communications Act, to a small cable operator in any franchise area in which that operator services 50,000 or fewer subscribers. Section 76.1403 of the Commission's rules allows operators to certify that they meet the small operator criteria of the Communications Act and are therefore exempt from CPST rate regulation. Such operators are also exempt from basic service tier ("BST") rate regulation if their BST was their only service tier subject to rate regulation as of December 31, 1994. 4. In its Petition, Operator certifies that its cable systems in the communities referenced above each have less than 50,000 subscribers; that it serves less than one percent of all the subscribers in the United States; and that its annual revenues do not exceed $250,000,000 when combined with the total revenues of all of its affiliates. Operator also states that it offered only a BST on December 31, 1994 on its systems in San Carlos, Arizona and Peridot, Arizona. Upon review, we have determined that in the relevant franchise areas Operator fits the definition of a "small cable operator" as defined in Section 623(m)(2) of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended ("Communications Act") and the Commission's rules thereunder. Therefore we find that Operator is exempt from rate regulation on its BST in San Carlos, Arizona and Peridot, Arizona, and on its CPST in Bylas, Arizona. 5. Accordingly, IT IS ORDERED that the Petition for Special Relief filed by Apache CableVision requesting small cable operator relief IS GRANTED. 6. This action is taken pursuant to delegated authority under Section 0.321 of the Commission's rules, 47 C.F.R. Section 0.321. FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION Elizabeth W. Beaty Chief, Financial Analysis and Compliance Division Cable Services Bureau