******************************************************** NOTICE ******************************************************** This document was converted from WordPerfect or Word 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 ) ) Mediacom California LLC ) CUID No. CA0590 (Kern County) ) Complaint Regarding Cable Programming ) Services Tier Rates ) ORDER Adopted: December 8, 1999 Released: December 10, 1999 By the Acting Chief, Financial Analysis and Compliance Division, Cable Services Bureau: 1. In this Order we consider a complaint against the April 1, 1995 rate increase by the above- referenced operator ("Operator") for its cable programming services tier ("CPST") in the community referenced above. On June 16, 1995, a complaint was filed with the Federal Communications Commission ("Commission") against Operator's April 1, 1995 CPST rate increase. On July 12, 1995, Operator filed a motion to dismiss the complaint ("Motion") because it was not timely filed. In this Order we grant Operator's Motion and dismiss the complaint. 2. Under the Communications Act, the Commission is authorized to review the CPST rates of cable systems not subject to effective competition upon the filing of a valid complaint. Section 623(c)(3) of the Communications Act requires that complaints be filed within "a reasonable period of time" following a change in rates. We have determined that "a reasonable period of time" is 45 days. In order to facilitate subscriber knowledge of the nature and extent of a rate increase and provide evidence of subscribership and the rate and service involved, we determined that we would compute the time period for filing a complaint from the date the complainant receives a bill from a cable operator that reflects the rate change. Section 76.953 of the Commission's rules, in effect at the time the complaint was filed, provides that complaints against CPST rate increases must be filed with the Commission within 45 days from that date. 3. The complaint alleges that the first bill reflecting the rate increase was received on June 4, 1995. In its Motion, Operator claims that the April 1, 1995 rate increase was reflected in bills that would have been received by subscribers on or about April 1, 1995. Our review of the subscriber bill reveals that the CPST rate increase was reflected in a prior bill which was paid on or about March 31, 1995. Therefore, the complaint was not filed within 45 days of the first bill reflecting the rate increase. We will dismiss the June 16, 1995 complaint filed against Operator's April 1, 1995 CPST rate increase because the complaint was not timely filed with the Commission. 4. Accordingly, IT IS ORDERED, pursuant to Section 0.321 of the Commission's rules, 47 C.F.R. 0.321, that the June 16, 1995 complaint referenced herein against the CPST rate charged by Operator in the community referenced above IS DISMISSED. FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION Kathleen F. Costello, Acting Chief Financial Analysis and Compliance Division Cable Services Bureau