******************************************************** 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 ) ) CUID Nos. VA0020 (Fredericksburg) Media General Cable of Fredericksburg ) VA0023 (Stafford) ) Petition for Reconsideration ) ORDER ON RECONSIDERATION Adopted: December 9, 1999 Released: December 13, 1999 By the Deputy Chief, Cable Services Bureau: 1. In this Order we consider a petition for reconsideration ("Petition") of our Order, DA 98-882 ("Reconsideration Order"), filed with the Federal Communications Commission ("Commission") by the above- referenced operator ("Operator") on May 29, 1998. In our Reconsideration Order, we vacated our Order, DA 95- 1185 and found Operator's cable programming services tier ("CPST") rates in the above-referenced communities to be unreasonable, effective May 15, 1994 through October 25, 1994. Operator also filed a request for stay of our Reconsideration Order. In this order, we grant Operator's Petition in part and dismiss the request for stay as moot. 2. Under the Communications Act, the Commission is 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 1992 ("1992 Cable Act"), and our rules in effect at the time the complaints were filed, required the Commission to review CPST rates upon the filing of a valid complaint by a subscriber or local franchising authority ("LFA"). The Telecommunications Act of 1996 ("1996 Act"), and our rules implementing the legislation ("Interim Rules"), require that a complaint against the CPST rate be filed with the Commission by an LFA that has received more than one subscriber complaint. The filing of a valid complaint triggers an obligation upon the cable operator to file a justification of its CPST rates. If the Commission finds the rate to be unreasonable, it shall determine the correct rate and any refund liability. 3. In its Petition, Operator asserts that it mistakenly filed incomplete CPST rate information with the Cable Services Bureau ("Bureau"), which the Bureau relied on in the Reconsideration Order. Specifically, Operator provided a rate card dated October 26, 1994 in support of the reduction of its CPST rate from $8.62 for both communities to $7.84 for Fredericksburg, CUID No. VA0020 and $8.03 for Stafford, CUID No. VA0023. The Bureau logically concluded that Operator continued to charge $8.62 in both communities through October 25, 1994. Operator asserts in its Petition that it actually reduced its CPST rates beginning July 14, 1994. Operator attached a copy of a rate card dated July 14, 1994 showing the reduced CPST rates along with a declaration under penalty of perjury by Donald W. Craig, president of Media General Cable of Fredericksburg that the rate card accurately reflects the rates that went into effect on July 14, 1994. Because Operator has provided credible evidence of the actual rate charged for the appropriate period, we find Operator's argument compelling and we will grant Operator's Petition to that extent. Because Operator's actual CPST rates of $7.84 for Fredericksburg, CUID No. VA0020 and $8.03 for Stafford, CUID No. VA0023, do not exceed the maximum permitted rates ("MPRs") approved in our Reconsideration Order, we find those rates to be reasonable, effective July 14, 1994 through October 25, 1994. We will modify our Reconsideration Order to reflect this adjustment. 4. Operator raises one other issue in its Petition. Operator asserts that it is entitled to defer its refund liability for the period from May 15, 1994 through July 13, 1994, pursuant to Section 76.922(b)(6)(ii) of the Commission's rules, even though Operator failed to notify the Commission by June 15, 1994 that it elected to defer refund liability. In the Matter of Implementation of Sections of the Cable Television Consumer Protection and Competition Act of 1992: Rate Regulation ("Second Reconsideration Order"), the Commission established June 15, 1994 as the deadline for filing an FCC Form 1200 if an operator was subject to regulation as of May 15, 1994. The Second Reconsideration Order also established a methodology for the deferral of refund liability for 60 days from May 15, 1994 to July 14, 1994 if certain conditions were met. One of those conditions required operators to "notify the Commission by the date on which its rate justification on an FCC Form is due [June 15, 1994] that it is electing that option." Because Operator did not file its notification, it is not entitled to defer refund liability for the period May 15, 1994 through July 13, 1994. Therefore, we will deny Operator' Petition in part and affirm our conclusion in the Reconsideration Order that Operator refund overcharges for its CPST in the above- referenced communities for the period May 15, 1994 through July 13, 1994. Because we reviewed Operator's Petition herein, we will dismiss Operator's request for stay as moot. 5. Accordingly, IT IS ORDERED, pursuant to Section 1.106 of the Commission's rules, 47 C.F.R.  1.106, that Operator's Petition for Reconsideration of In the Matter of Media General Cable of Fredericksburg, DA 98-882, 13 FCC Rcd 11103 (1998), IS GRANTED IN PART AND DENIED IN PART TO THE EXTENT INDICATED HEREIN. 6. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED, pursuant to Section 0.321 of the Commission's rules, 47 C.F.R.  0.321, In the Matter of Media General Cable of Fredericksburg, DA 98-882, 13 FCC Rcd 11103 (1998), IS AMENDED TO THE EXTENT INDICATED HEREIN. 7. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED, pursuant to Section 1.106 of the Commission's rules, 47 C.F.R. 1.106, that Operator's Request for Stay IS DISMISSED AS MOOT. 8. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED, pursuant to Section 76.961 of the Commission's rules, 47 C.F.R.  76.961, that Operator shall refund to subscribers in the franchise area of Fredericksburg, CUID No. VA0020, that portion of the amount paid in excess of the maximum permitted CPST rate of $7.84 per month (plus franchise fees), plus interest to the date of the refund, for the period May 15, 1994 through July 13, 1994. 9. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED, pursuant to Section 76.961 of the Commission's rules, 47 C.F.R.  76.961, that Operator shall refund to subscribers in the franchise area of Stafford, CUID No. VA0023, that portion of the amount paid in excess of the maximum permitted CPST rate of $8.03 per month (plus franchise fees), plus interest to the date of the refund, for the period May 15, 1994 through July 13, 1994. 10. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Operator shall promptly determine the overcharges to CPST subscribers for the stated period, and shall within 30 days of the release of this Order, file a report with the Chief, Cable Services Bureau, stating the cumulative refund amount so determined (including franchise fees and interest), describing the calculation thereof, and describing its plan to implement the refund within 60 days of Commission approval of the plan. FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION William H. Johnson Deputy Chief, Cable Services Bureau