FCC Web Documents citing 76.923

as compiled by hallikainen.com/FccRules on 2012 07 01

• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-00-1554A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-00-1554A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-00-1554A1.txt
  • its rules and policies if evidence demonstrates that such costs have not been adequately accounted for under the existing approach. According to the Company, there is no finding that its installation rates accounted for costs not recovered during the promotions. The City objects, pointing to the Cable Services Bureau's previous determination that offsets of promotional discounts are not permitted. Section 76.923(j) of the Commission's rules provides that operators may not recover the cost of a promotional offering by increasing the charges for other equipment basket elements or by increasing rates for programming services above the maximum monthly charge prescribed by the Commission's rules. United Cable Television of California, Inc., acknowledged by the Company and relied on by the City, clarifies that
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-00-2748A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-00-2748A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-00-2748A1.txt
  • Operators Using FCC Form 1240 Now Available, DA 98-1292 (released June 30, 1998). City Opposition at 15-16. Comcast Reply at 15 n.52. Comcast states that this lag is consistent with past rate filings. Its 1997 rate filing used data from its 1995 fiscal year. Consultant's Report at 2-3. Id. Comcast Appeal at 18-20. City Opposition at 16-17. 47 C.F.R. � 76.923(n)(3); Implementation of Sections of the Cable Television Consumer Protection and Competition Act of 1992: Rate Regulation, Thirteenth Order on Reconsideration, 11 FCC Rcd 388, 423-24 (1995). Id. at 424 para. 88. Form 1205 Instructions for Determining Costs of Regulated Cable Equipment and Installation at 6, Question 2 (June 1996) (``FCC Form 1205 Instructions''). FCC Form 1205 Instructions at 3. Communications
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-01-1459A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-01-1459A1.txt
  • the Commission's rules. It addressed additional outlet charges alleged to be inconsistent with the Commission's rate rules. Nothing in the Resolution or the order adopting it precludes future charges imposed in compliance with Commission rules. Cost-based charges for the installation and monthly use of connections for additional television receivers are permitted by section 623(b)(3)(B) of the Communications Act and section 76.923(b), (h) of the Commission's rules and are recoverable as part of the Equipment Basket described in section 76.923. Charges for additional connections used to receive the basic service tier are subject to franchising authority review pursuant to the procedures established in section 76.933 of the Commission's rules. An additional outlet charge applied solely to CPST subscribers, as was the case
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-01-1460A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-01-1460A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-01-1460A1.txt
  • C), depending on the type of cost involved. Regardless of the appropriate schedule for a cost, however, the operator must be permitted to recover its costs through Form 1205. In the cases before us, the Cities disallowed the disputed costs, stating these are overhead costs that do not belong on Schedule C for the capital costs of leased equipment. Section 76.923(f) and (g) of the Commission's rules provides that capital costs of leased equipment ``shall consist of the average annual unit purchase cost of [the category of equipment] leased, including acquisition price and incidental costs such as sales tax, financing and storage up to the time it is provided to the customer.'' The costs of delivering the equipment to the operator,
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-01-154A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-01-154A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-01-154A1.txt
  • 7180 (1994), in which we concluded that A/B switches were not subject to rate regulation because, inter alia, ``competitive sources for such switches exist in the community through which subscribers may obtain them.'' The Cable Television Consumer Protection and Competition Act of 1992 (``1992 Cable Act''), Pub. L. No. 102-385, 106 Stat. 1460. 47 U.S.C. � 543(b)(3); 47 C.F.R. � 76.923(a)(2). Reconsideration Order at 1192. (...continued from previous page) (continued....) Federal Communications Commission DA 01-154 Federal Communications Commission DA 01-154 � � � � �����������"����(c)(c)������������� � � � @& �0� �0� �0� �0� �0� �0� ��� �
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-01-483A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-01-483A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-01-483A1.txt
  • to Petition for Stay of Enforcement Pending Review (June 3, 1999); Falcon Reply to Opposition to Petition for Stay of Enforcement Pending Review (June 11, 1999). In light of our action on the merits, the stay request is dismissed as moot. 47 U.S.C. � 543(a)(2). 47 U.S.C. � 543(b)(1); 47 C.F.R. � 76.922. 47 U.S.C. � 543(b)(3); 47 C.F.R. � 76.923(a)(2). See Implementation of Sections of the Cable Television Consumer Protection and Competition Act of 1992: Rate Regulation, Report and Order and Further Notice of Proposed Rulemaking, Second Order on Reconsideration, Fourth Report and Order, and Fifth Notice of Proposed Rulemaking, 9 FCC Rcd 4119 (1994) ("Second Reconsideration Order"); FCC Form 1200, Setting Maximum Initial Permitted Rates for Regulated Cable Services
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-01-718A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-01-718A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-01-718A1.txt
  • the right to order additional rate reductions and refunds based on any future Commission action. That issue was not appealed. FCC Form 393 is the official form used by the Commission to determine whether an operator's regulated rates for programming, equipment and installations were reasonable during the time period from September 1, 1993 until May 14, 1994. 47 C.F.R. � 76.923(k). FCC Form 1200 is the official form used to determine whether initial regulated rates for programming are reasonable under the revised benchmark rules which apply to cable operators beginning May 15, 1994, or upon the expiration of the deferral period provided under our rules for operators to comply with the revisions to the rules. (...continued from previous page) (continued...) Federal
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-01-939A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-01-939A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-01-939A1.txt
  • Attachment A. We note that TCI was provided with a copy of the consultant's letter to the Telecommunications Director and the Telecommunications Director's Memorandum to the Mayor and City Council. TCI submitted a response arguing that unbundling concerns should not preclude legitimate cost recovery and that its converter insurance cost falls within the category of incidental costs allowed under section 76.923(f), (g) of the Commission's rules, 47 C.F.R. � 76.923(f), (g). See TCI 1997 Appeal, Attachment B, Memorandum from P.S. Jacobs to Mayor and City Council (June 9, 1997), p.8; Attachment C, Letter from J.C. Smith (Public Knowledge) to P.S. Jacobs (May 28, 1997), pp. 19, 20; Attachment D, Letter from D.L. Walton (TCI) to P.S. Jacobs (June 18, 1997) at
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-02-1475A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-02-1475A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-02-1475A1.txt
  • make and it should be disturbed only if it is found to be factually unfounded or contrary to Commission rules or policies, neither of which is true in this case. The City's requirement that Falcon remove contract labor costs from programming rates on Form 1200 rather than from later-filed equipment rates is consistent with the requirements in 47 C.F.R. � 76.923(b) and (c) that the operator unbundle equipment from BST rates and include ``all costs associated with providing customer equipment and installation'' in the equipment basket. Inflation Adjustment 9. While this proceeding was pending, Falcon filed a subsequent Form 1240, which included a true-up adjustment for its prior excessive inflation charge. The City does not controvert this fact. As a result,
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-02-1768A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-02-1768A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-02-1768A1.txt
  • IS GRANTED and said local rate order is IS HEREBY VACATED. This action is taken pursuant to authority delegated by � 0.283 of the Commission's rules. 47 C.F.R. � 0.283. FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION Steven Broeckaert Acting Chief, Policy Division Media Bureau 47 U.S.C. � 543(a)(2). 47 U.S.C. � 543(b)(1); 47 C.F.R. � 76.922. 47 U.S.C. � 543(b)(3); 47 C.F.R. � 76.923(a)(2). See Implementation of Sections of the Cable Television Consumer Protection and Competition Act of 1992: Rate Regulation, 9 FCC Rcd 4119 (1994) ("Second Reconsideration Order"); FCC Form 1200, Setting Maximum Initial Permitted Rates for Regulated Cable Services Pursuant to Rules Adopted February 22, 1994. Operators may also elect to justify rates with a cost-of-service showing. 47 C.F.R � 76.922(d), (e),
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-03-1200A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-03-1200A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-03-1200A1.txt
  • L. James, Esq., April 7, 2003. Petition at 3. Id. Id. Id. at 4. Id. The National Cable Television Association's Office of Cable Signal Theft estimates the average percentage of basic service tier theft at 11.5 % nationwide. See . See, e. g., Liberty Cablevision of Puerto Rico, 15 FCC Rcd 15064 (2000). 47 C.F.R. � 76.922. 47 C.F.R. � 76.923. Id. 47 C.F.R. �76.923(a)(2). 47 C.F.R. �0.321. (continued....) Federal Communications Commission DA 03-1200 Federal Communications Commission DA 03-1200 J K K � � @& � ` @ B* `J 0 ; �0 �0 �0 �0 �0 0 ; �o �o �o �o K ; �
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-03-177A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-03-177A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-03-177A1.txt
  • subscribers. The Town also ordered TWC to refresh the inflation rates in the 2002 filing prior to calculating its 2003 FCC 1240. Because the Town ignored the Commission's rules and established precedent, TWC argues that the Commission should impose sanctions on the Town, including the payment of TWC's attorney's fees. TWC's Company-wide Form 1205 Rate Calculations. TWC argues that Sections 76.923(c)(1) and (3) state that when a cable operator submits installation and equipment costs based on average charges, the operator must provide a general description of the averaging methodology employed and a justification that the averaging methodology produces reasonable rates. TWC indicates that its December 6, 2001 letter to the Town clearly indicated that the individual data from all of the
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-03-178A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-03-178A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-03-178A1.txt
  • the rates for the BST and equipment pursuant to guidelines established by the Commission, and the Commission would regulate the rates for the cable programming service tier (``CPST''). 3. The 1992 Cable Act requires operators to fully ``unbundle'' equipment and installation costs from programming costs. The Commission's regulations implement Congress' directive by requiring operators to establish an ``equipment basket.'' Section 76.923(c) of the Commission's regulations specifically provides that equipment basket costs shall include ``the direct and indirect material and labor of providing, leasing, installing, repairing, and servicing customer equipment.'' In the order adopting this regulation, the Commission further explained it by stating that ``[t]he basket will include an allocation of all those system joint and company costs that service installation, leasing
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-03-179A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-03-179A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-03-179A1.txt
  • the rates for the BST and equipment pursuant to guidelines established by the Commission, and the Commission would regulate the rates for the cable programming service tier (``CPST''). 3. The 1992 Cable Act requires operators to fully ``unbundle'' equipment and installation costs from programming costs. The Commission's regulations implement Congress' directive by requiring operators to establish an ``equipment basket.'' Section 76.923(c) of the Commission's regulations specifically provides that equipment basket costs shall include ``the direct and indirect material and labor of providing, leasing, installing, repairing, and servicing customer equipment.'' In the order adopting this regulation, the Commission further explained it by stating that ``[t]he basket will include an allocation of all those system joint and company costs that service installation, leasing
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-03-180A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-03-180A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-03-180A1.txt
  • the rates for the BST and equipment pursuant to guidelines established by the Commission, and the Commission would regulate the rates for the cable programming service tier (``CPST''). 3. The 1992 Cable Act requires operators to fully ``unbundle'' equipment and installation costs from programming costs. The Commission's regulations implement Congress' directive by requiring operators to establish an ``equipment basket." Section 76.923(c) of the Commission's regulations specifically provides that equipment basket costs shall include ``the direct and indirect material and labor of providing, leasing, installing, repairing, and servicing customer equipment.'' In the order adopting this regulation, the Commission further explained it by stating that ``[t]he basket will include an allocation of all those system joint and company costs that service installation, leasing
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-03-2339A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-03-2339A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-03-2339A1.txt
  • Protection & Competition Act, 8 FCC Rcd 5631 (1993), 9 FCC Rcd 4316, 4346 (1994) � 81. See Commission web page, http://www.fcc.gov/mb/mbform.html (visited June 24, 2003). Under 47 C.F.R. � 76.933(g)(2), if the franchising authority fails to act within 12 months, it may not order a refund or reduction. Extension of Time to File Form 1205 Pursuant to Sections 76.922, 76.923 of the Commission's Rules, 12 FCC Rcd 10193, 10194-95 (1996) � 4 n.14. Opposition of the Cable Television Division of the Massachusetts Department of Telecommunications and Energy to Adelphia Communications Corporation's Appeal of Local Rate Order (``Opposition''), filed by Adelphia on Sept. 3, 2002. Opposition at 3. Rate Order in DTE Docket No. CTV 00-5, issued March 12, 2001, Exhibit
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-03-3127A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-03-3127A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-03-3127A1.txt
  • 76.922(e)(2)(ii)(A). This same analysis applies to the language that the Cities quote from the decision in Comcast Cable Commun., Inc., 18 FCC Rcd 4540, 4542 (2003) � 6, application for review pending. City of Mt. Sterling Opposition at 11; City of Winchester Opposition at 11-12. See supra note 34. 47 C.F.R. � 76.922(e)(2)(iii)(B). 47 C.F.R. � 76.922(e)(2)(iii)(C). 47 C.F.R. � 76.923(o). TCI Cablevision of Dallas, Inc., 15 FCC Rcd 7379, 7381 (2000) � 8; Implementation of Sections of the Cable Television Consumer Protection & Competition Act of 1992: Rate Regulation, 11 FCC Rcd 388, 427 (1995) � 95. 47 C.F.R. � 76.933(g). 47 C.F.R. � 76.1603(b). See supra �� 11-12. See supra nn.20, 29. 47 C.F.R. � 76.922(e). Exceptions to this
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-03-3658A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-03-3658A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-03-3658A1.txt
  • at 2-3. Id. at 3. Id. Id. at 4. Id. Id. at 5. Id. at 5. Id. OCTV Response at 1. OCTV Response at 2. Id. See Cencom Cable Income Partners II, L.P., 12 FCC Rcd 7948 (1997). Communications Act � 623, 47 U.S.C. � 543. Communications Act � 623(b)(1), (3), 47 U.S.C. � 543(b)(1), (3); 47 C.F.R. �� 76.922, 76.923. Communications Act � 623 (b)(5)(B), 47 U.S.C. � 543(b)(5)(B); 47 C.F. R. � 76.944. See Cencom, 12 FCC Rcd 7948, 7958. See id. See Continental, 10 FCC Rcd 7569-70 (CSB 1995). Id. (continued....) Federal Communications Commission DA 03-3658 Federal Communications Commission DA 03-3658 �@��� �@��� ' ( ) * + + , . ? C I L [ \ �
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-03-784A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-03-784A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-03-784A1.txt
  • Cablevision, 10 FCC Rcd 2106 (1995). Id. Reply at 5. See Comcast Cablevision, 10 FCC Rcd at 2109. Id. Id. at 5-6. 47 U.S.C. � 543(f). Comcast Cablevision, 10 FCC Rcd 2106 (1995). Id. Id. Appeal Petition at 17. Id. Id. at 18. Id. Id. at 19. Id. Opposition at 7. Id. Reply at 6. Id. See 47 C.F.R. � 76.923(c). See also TCI Cablevision of St. Louis, Inc, 12 FCC Rcd 15287 (CSB 1997). We note that Form 1205 may be used to update permitted regulated equipment and installation charges based on equipment basket costs. Id. Appeal Petition at 19. Id. Id. at 20. See Third Order on Reconsideration, 9 FCC Rcd at 4353. Id. See Community TV Corporation, 10
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-04-1496A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-04-1496A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-04-1496A1.txt
  • A of the Worksheet for Calculating Permitted Equipment and Installation Charges and does not address TCI's failure to use the ``step-by-step'' approach required by the Form 1205. In reply, TCI argues that it used the same methodology in compiling the previous year's entry, which the City accepted. Moreover, there is nothing improper with TCI's method of calculating the HSC. Sections 76.923(c)(1) and (3) of our rules provide that a cable operator may aggregate equipment and installation costs on a franchise, system, regional, or company level. In addition, when submitting its equipment and installation costs based on average charges, the cable operator must provide a general description of the averaging methodology employed and a justification that its averaging methodology produces reasonable rates.
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-04-1703A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-04-1703A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-04-1703A1.txt
  • Inc., d/b/a/ Adelphia Cable Commun., 15 FCC Rcd 13311, 13314-13 (2000) � 7 (``absent a stay, cable operators are expected to comply with valid rate orders when issued''). See, e.g., Flower Mound Appeal at 3 n.7; Flower Mound Opposition at 5; Flower Mound Reply at 2. 47 U.S.C. � 543(a)(2)(A). Concerning rates for outlets in particular, see 47 C.F.R. � 76.923 (a, h). See, e.g., Bedford Appeal at 2 & Attachment A (City of Bedford Ordinance No. 04-2737) at 2, �� 2.3, 3.3; Farmers Branch Appeal at 2 & Attachment A (City of Farmers Branch, Texas, Ordinance No. 2748) at 2-3, �� 2.3, 3.3. See, e.g., Flower Mound Opposition at 4. Falcon Cablevision, 13 FCC Rcd 16847, 16849 (1998) � 6
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-04-2079A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-04-2079A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-04-2079A1.txt
  • regulate the rates for the BST and equipment pursuant to guidelines established by the Commission, and the Commission would regulate the rates for the cable programming service tier (``CPST''). The 1992 Cable Act requires operators to fully ``unbundle'' equipment and installation costs from programming costs. The Commission's regulations implement Congress' directive by requiring operators to establish an ``equipment basket.'' Section 76.923(c) of the Commission's regulations provides that equipment basket costs shall include ``the direct and indirect material and labor of providing, leasing, installing, repairing, and servicing customer equipment.'' In the order adopting this regulation, the Commission further explained that ``[t]he basket will include an allocation of all those system joint and company costs that service installation, leasing and equipment repair share
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-04-2448A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-04-2448A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-04-2448A1.txt
  • ``double recovering'' equipment costs through both equipment lease rates and BST rates. Jones states that the GMA points out that Jones' predecessor, Time Warner, did not identify certain equipment-related costs when it first established unbundled equipment rates and that the City and County question Jones' current converter charges based on comparisons with Time Warner's previous filing. Jones argues that Section 76.923 of the Commission's rules and Form 1205 require cable operators to establish equipment and installation charges based on actual costs and the fact that an operator treats certain costs differently than they were treated in the past does not mean that the costs should be ignored. Jones asserts that the critical question for the reviewing authority is whether the costs
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-04-2458A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-04-2458A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-04-2458A1.txt
  • is not recomputed or re-approved each year that it is available to the cable operator. Id. at 3, 14-15, 17. The rates of effective competition systems were based on ``anecdotal evidence'' drawn from contacts with TWC customer service representatives in April 2003. Id. at 14, 15 n.4. Id. at 14, 16, 17. See 47 U.S.C. � 543(a)(7)(A); 47 C.F.R. � 76.923(c)(1), (3). Durham County, NC, Review of FCC Form 1240 Annual Rate Adjustment Request, FCC Form 1235 Abbreviated Cost of Service Rate Request, and FCC 1205 Equipment and Installation Rate Request filed by Time Warner Cable, at 2-3 (Feb. 9, 2004), TWC 2004 Appeal, Ex. A. Id. at 2. Id. Action Audits, LLC, Durham County, NC-0343 and NC-0650, Review of Time
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-04-2851A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-04-2851A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-04-2851A1.txt
  • See generally id. at 2-7. Comcast Cablevision of Dallas, Inc., DA 04-1703 at � 19 (released June 14, 2004), available at 2004 WL 1322925; Implementation of Section 309(j) of the Telecommunications Act of 1996: Aggregation of Equipment Costs by Cable Operators, 11 FCC Rcd 6778, 6782 (1996) � 8, 11 FCC Rcd 15097, 15100 (1996) � 9. 47 C.F.R. � 76.923(c)(1). Implementation of Section 301(j) of the Telecommunications Act of 1996: Aggregation of Equipment Costs by Cable Operators, 11 FCC Rcd 6778, 6778-79 (1996) � 2. See TCI of Pennsylvania, Inc., 13 FCC Rcd 5119, 5121 (1998) � 9; Paragon Cable, 10 FCC Rcd 3963, 3964 (1995) � 7. Comcast Cablevision of Dallas, Inc., supra note 20, at � 19 (reversing
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-04-34A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-04-34A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-04-34A1.txt
  • Preparation Documentation 1996 Annual Filing, Line C1. Pursuant to the 1992 Cable Act, the Commission has established standards for setting equipment and installation rates that allow operators to recover the actual costs of the installation and lease of customer-premises equipment used by subscribers to receive the basic service tier. Communications Act � 623(b)(3), 47 U.S.C. � 543(b)(3); 47 C.F.R. � 76.923. Order at 4. Id. 10 FCC Rcd 9390 (1995). Appeal at 6-7. Form 1205 Instructions at 3, ``General Instructions.'' See Implementation of Sections of the Cable Television Consumer Protection and Competition Act of 1992: Rate Regulation and Adoption of a Uniform Accounting System for Provision of Regulated Cable Service, MM Docket No. 93-215 and CS Docket No. 94-28, Second Report
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-04-3618A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-04-3618A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-04-3618A1.txt
  • Competition Act, 8 FCC Rcd 5631 (1993), 9 FCC Rcd 4316, 4346 (1994) � 81. Comcast Cable of Indiana/Michigan/Texas, Inc (``Irving Order''), Order DA 04-2615 at � 11 (rel. Aug. 24, 2004), available at 2004 WL 1883980; Dallas Order, 19 FCC Rcd at 10634, � 15. 47 U.S.C. � 543(a)(2). Concerning rates for outlets in particular, see 47 C.F.R. � 76.923(a, h). Dallas Order, 19 FCC Rcd at 10634, � 15. Id. at 10635, � 17. Petition at 2, 5. Irving Order, supra note 9, at � 13. Id. (footnotes omitted). Petition at 3-5; Allen & DeSoto Response at 3-4; Three City Response at 2-3; McKinney Response at 1-3; Reply at 2-3. The Responses, in the last pages just cited, allege
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-05-1524A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-05-1524A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-05-1524A1.txt
  • of effective competition. 76.910 Franchising authority certification. 76.911 Petition for reconsideration of certification. 76.912 Joint certification. 76.913 Assumption of jurisdiction by the Commission. 76.914 Revocation of certification. 76.916 Petition for recertification. 76.917 Notification of certification withdrawal. 76.920 Composition of the basic tier. 76.921 Buy-through of other tiers prohibited. 76.922 Rates for the basic service tier and cable programming services tiers. 76.923 Rates for equipment and installation used to receive the basic service tier. 76.924 Allocation to service cost categories. 76.925 Costs of franchise requirements. 76.930 Initiation of review of basic cable service and equipment rates. 76.933 Franchising authority review of basic cable rates and equipment costs. 76.934 Small systems and small cable companies. 76.935 Participation of interested parties. 76.936 Written decision.
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-05-392A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-05-392A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-05-392A1.txt
  • Commission policy to exclude franchise fees from the FCC Form 1240 calculations, we find that St. Louis acted unreasonably in applying the Commission's rules. B. Charges for "unreturned equipment" Charges for equipment which is used to receive the basic service tier are subject to regulation by the local franchising authority pursuant to section 623(b)(3) of the Cable Act and section 76.923 of the Commission's rules. These charges are based on actual costs. Cable operators annually calculate permitted cost-based equipment and installation rates using the FCC Form 1205. At issue in this appeal is whether fees that Charter imposes on subscribers for failure to return equipment, such as converters, are subject to the Commission's equipment regulations and should be calculated on the
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-05-681A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-05-681A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-05-681A1.txt
  • file an aggregated Form 1205 for all its cable systems. We rejected this argument in TCI Cablevision of Oregon, Inc., and we re-affirm that decision's analysis here: ``We disagree that considering whether a cost was previously unbundled is at odds with the cost aggregation policy reflected in 47 U.S.C. � 543(a)(7)(A) and implemented by the Commission in 47 C.F.R. � 76.923(c)(1). . . . Nothing in the statute or the Commission's rules . . . suggests that cost aggregation is permitted so that operators can recover the same costs through both programming and equipment rates. . . . Changing accounting practices when changing to company-wide cost aggregation necessarily involves some burden, but this does not relieve an operator of . .
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-07-3157A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-07-3157A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-07-3157A1.txt
  • to authority delegated by � 0.283 of the Commission's rules. 47 C.F.R. � 0.283. FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION John B. Norton Deputy Chief, Policy Division Media Bureau See Cencom Cable Income Partners II, L.P., 12 FCC Rcd 7948 (1997). Communications Act � 623, 47 U.S.C. � 543. Communications Act � 623(b)(1), (3), 47 U.S.C. � 543(b)(1), (3); 47 C.F.R. �� 76.922, 76.923. Communications Act � 623 (b)(5)(B), 47 U.S.C. � 543(b)(5)(B); 47 C.F. R. � 76.944. See Cencom, 12 FCC Rcd 7948, 7958. See id. We most recently addressed this issue in Cablevision of New Jersey, Inc., 18 FCC Rcd 24018 (2003). In addition, all CPST complaint issues involving the referenced community, CUID No. NJ0476, were resolved by resolution. See Cablevision Systems
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-01-22A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-01-22A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-01-22A1.txt
  • 47 U.S.C. �535(h). Some cable subscribers have older televisions that are not capable of receiving all broadcast stations due to on-channel placement at a channel number beyond the range of the receiver. These subscribers rent a set-top box from the cable system for which the system may charge a monthly fee pursuant to 47 U.S.C. �543(b)(3)(A). See also 47 C.F.R. �76.923. See also, Complaint of WLIG, CSR 3903-M (Cab. Serv.Bur. rel. Nov. 10, 1993)(requiring the cable operator to provide boxes to subscribers so that they are able to view a local television broadcast signal). See Compatibility Between Cable Systems and Consumer Electronics Equipment, at � 36. In this proceeding, the cable and consumer electronics industries are required to report on their
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-01-98A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-01-98A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-01-98A1.txt
  • regulations adopted under section 629 will cease to apply when, inter alia, the Commission determines that the market for multichannel video programming distributors and the market for navigation devices are fully competitive. We also note that a cable operator will not be subject to the related restrictions on cable equipment pricing contained in section 623 of the Act and section 76.923(b) of the Commission's rules, where the Commission finds that the cable operator is subject to effective competition. The CPE market is already fully competitive, in large part as a result of the Commission's bundling policies, and it is therefore unnecessary to retain the bundling restriction for nondominant interexchange carriers. We decline to adopt an ``unbundled option'' requirement that interexchange carriers
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-02-177A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-02-177A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-02-177A1.txt
  • alternative for BST regulation. We seek comment on this question as well as what further actions should be taken in the pending ``COS'' docket in light of the end of CPST rate regulation. We also seek comment on any impact these questions regarding cost-of-service rules for BST rates will have on determinations of equipment and installation rates pursuant to section 76.923 of the Commission's rules and FCC Form 1205, and on determinations of rate increases for network upgrade surcharges pursuant to section 76.922(j) of our rules and FCC Form 1235. Both incorporate cost-of-service components and section 76.924 cost allocation categories. Abbreviated cost-of-service showing on FCC Form 1235 We seek comment about the abbreviated cost-of-service showing permitted for significant network upgrades. This
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-03-212A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-03-212A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-03-212A1.txt
  • by laws administered by any regulatory body or officer acting under statutory authority of this State or the United States. Similarly, Section 4 of the Illinois Uniform Deceptive Trade Practices Act states that the Act does not apply to ``conduct in compliance with the orders or rules of a statute administered by a Federal, state or local governmental agency.'' Section 76.923 of the Commission's rules requires cable operators to unbundle wire maintenance fees. Therefore, by their own terms, neither state statute appears to apply to Omnicom's actions taken to comply with the Commission's rules. Furthermore, we note that Greenberg has not referred to specific language from an Illinois statute or a decision from an Illinois state court that holds that unbundling
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-10-60A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-10-60A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-10-60A1.txt
  • in the equipment they purchase? Would the AllVid concept change the economics of consumer preferences? How much would an AllVid adapter cost? How much would it cost to add AllVid compatibility to a navigation device? Should the cost of an AllVid adapter and charges for installation by the MVPD be calculated according to the Commission's rate regulation rules under Section 76.923 in rate-regulated communities? Finally, we seek comment on whether economic or technological factors dictate that AllVid adapters would have to be provided by the MVPD, or whether AllVid adapters could be sold at retail, as NCTA has suggested in the past. Alternative Proposals In response to NBP PN #27, several MVPDs expressed reservations about a ``home gateway'' technology mandate. These
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-10-61A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-10-61A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-10-61A1.txt
  • Association and Tivo Inc., NCTA and TiVo Announce Switched Digital Solution for HD DVRs (Nov. 26, 2007). See Letter from Matt Zinn, Senior Vice President, General Counsel, Secretary, and Chief Privacy Officer, TiVo Inc., to Marlene H. Dortch, Secretary, Federal Communications Commission at 3 (February 17, 2010). For example, do cable operators use the equipment rate formula prescribed in Section 76.923, or is there a different method for determining the lease fee for a CableCARD? See 47 U.S.C. � 549(a) (Regulations adopted pursuant to Section 629 ``shall not prohibit any multichannel video programming distributor from also offering converter boxes, interactive communications equipment, and other equipment used by consumers to access multichannel video programming and other services offered over multichannel video programming
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-12-59A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-12-59A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-12-59A1.txt
  • charge. See, e.g., National Black Religious Broadcasters, Lieberman Broadcasting Inc., Una Vez Mas, ION Media Networks, NRJ TV LLC (collectively ``Must-Carry Broadcasters'') Joint Ex Parte (dated Jun. 9, 2012) at 4, n.6. We note that, to the extent such equipment is subject to rate regulation, operators must also comply with those requirements. See 47 U.S.C. � 543(b)(3); 47 C.F.R. � 76.923. See NAB Ex Parte (dated April 23, 2012) Attachment (providing an economic analysis on the impact of reduced cable carriage on must-carry stations). See also NAB Ex Parte (dated April 23, 2012) Attachment at 3 (if a must-carry station ``were to lose access to a number of cable households through the elimination of the viewability rule, its revenue would certainly
• http://transition.fcc.gov/Bureaus/Cable/Notices/1998/fcc98153.pdf http://transition.fcc.gov/Bureaus/Cable/Notices/1998/fcc98153.wp
  • for under the rules.185 The rules also provide an adjustment process when channels are dropped186 and when channels are moved between tiers.187 An alternative "cost of service" rate regulation process also is available to cable system operators that believe the benchmark process fails to Federal Communications Commission FCC 98-153 188See 47 C.F.R. �76.922(i). 189See 47 C.F.R. �76.922(f). 190See 47 C.F.R. �76.923. 191See 47 C.F.R. �76.987. 192Intermedia Comments at 3. 193See Jon Lafayette and David Hatch, More Doubts About HDTV, ELECTRONIC MEDIA, September 15, 1997 at 45 (Martin Yudkovitz, President of Interactive Media and Business Development at NBC states: "NBC cannot force its affiliates, cable operators or consumers to follow its lead in digital broadcasting, which will require large investments in equipment.").
• http://transition.fcc.gov/Bureaus/Cable/Orders/1998/fcc98116.pdf http://transition.fcc.gov/Bureaus/Cable/Orders/1998/fcc98116.wp
  • equipment or its critical components. Federal Communications Commission FCC 98-116 187In the Matter of 1998 Biennial Regulatory Review -- Review of the Commission's Broadcast Ownership Rules and Other Rules Adopted Pursuant to Section 202 of the Telecommunications Act of 1996, MM Docket No. 98-35, Notice of Inquiry, FCC 98-35 (rel. March 13, 1998). 18847 U.S.C. � 549(a). 18947 C.F.R. � 76.923. 19047 U.S.C. � 549(a). 19147 U.S.C. � 549(f). 35 83. Discussion. Because of the nature of the rules that have been devised, this issue is now of less consequence than it appeared when the NPRM was issued. We believe the structure of the rules will make sure that equipment is available from sources outside of the control of the service
• http://transition.fcc.gov/Bureaus/Cable/Orders/2001/fcc01022.doc http://transition.fcc.gov/Bureaus/Cable/Orders/2001/fcc01022.pdf http://transition.fcc.gov/Bureaus/Cable/Orders/2001/fcc01022.txt
  • 47 U.S.C. �535(h). Some cable subscribers have older televisions that are not capable of receiving all broadcast stations due to on-channel placement at a channel number beyond the range of the receiver. These subscribers rent a set-top box from the cable system for which the system may charge a monthly fee pursuant to 47 U.S.C. �543(b)(3)(A). See also 47 C.F.R. �76.923. See also, Complaint of WLIG, CSR 3903-M (Cab. Serv.Bur. rel. Nov. 10, 1993)(requiring the cable operator to provide boxes to subscribers so that they are able to view a local television broadcast signal). See Compatibility Between Cable Systems and Consumer Electronics Equipment, at � 36. In this proceeding, the cable and consumer electronics industries are required to report on their
• http://transition.fcc.gov/Bureaus/OPP/working_papers/oppwp30.pdf http://transition.fcc.gov/Bureaus/OPP/working_papers/oppwp30.wp
  • additional service will be subject to rate regulation. It would not seem plausible to include cable Internet-based services as BST programming. However, it would appear that if Internet-based services are treated as cable services, section 623(b)(7)(A) would appear to permit cable operators to require Internet subscribers to also subscribe to the operator's 467 47 U.S.C. � 543(b)(3)(A); 47 C.F.R. � 76.923(b) and (c). 468 47 U.S.C. � 551. 107 basic cable service in order to be eligible to receive the Internet-based services. CPST programming, governed by section 623(c), is not subject to similar statutorily deter- mined minimum components, but is subject to rate regulation by the Commission. The terms of that provision refer to "cable programming services," although the term is
• http://www.fcc.gov/Bureaus/Cable/Notices/1998/fcc98153.pdf http://www.fcc.gov/Bureaus/Cable/Notices/1998/fcc98153.txt http://www.fcc.gov/Bureaus/Cable/Notices/1998/fcc98153.wp
  • for under the rules.185 The rules also provide an adjustment process when channels are dropped186 and when channels are moved between tiers.187 An alternative "cost of service" rate regulation process also is available to cable system operators that believe the benchmark process fails to Federal Communications Commission FCC 98-153 188See 47 C.F.R. �76.922(i). 189See 47 C.F.R. �76.922(f). 190See 47 C.F.R. �76.923. 191See 47 C.F.R. �76.987. 192Intermedia Comments at 3. 193See Jon Lafayette and David Hatch, More Doubts About HDTV, ELECTRONIC MEDIA, September 15, 1997 at 45 (Martin Yudkovitz, President of Interactive Media and Business Development at NBC states: "NBC cannot force its affiliates, cable operators or consumers to follow its lead in digital broadcasting, which will require large investments in equipment.").
• http://www.fcc.gov/Bureaus/Cable/Orders/1998/fcc98116.pdf http://www.fcc.gov/Bureaus/Cable/Orders/1998/fcc98116.wp
  • equipment or its critical components. Federal Communications Commission FCC 98-116 187In the Matter of 1998 Biennial Regulatory Review -- Review of the Commission's Broadcast Ownership Rules and Other Rules Adopted Pursuant to Section 202 of the Telecommunications Act of 1996, MM Docket No. 98-35, Notice of Inquiry, FCC 98-35 (rel. March 13, 1998). 18847 U.S.C. � 549(a). 18947 C.F.R. � 76.923. 19047 U.S.C. � 549(a). 19147 U.S.C. � 549(f). 35 83. Discussion. Because of the nature of the rules that have been devised, this issue is now of less consequence than it appeared when the NPRM was issued. We believe the structure of the rules will make sure that equipment is available from sources outside of the control of the service
• http://www.fcc.gov/Bureaus/Cable/Orders/1999/da992227.doc
  • rates at the same time. Contrary to TCI's argument, MACC's order does not revisit established service rates. It follows from the operator's decision in establishing those rates. We disagree that considering whether a cost was previously unbundled is at odds with the cost aggregation policy reflected in 47 U.S.C. � 543(a)(7)(A) and implemented by the Commission in 47 C.F.R. � 76.923(c)(1). Cost aggregation is permitted at the organizational level of the operator's choosing to promote the development of a broadband, two-way telecommunications infrastructure, reduce the cost of advanced technology for consumers, and stimulate the deployment of digital technology. Cost elements present in individual communities may vary from community to community, and some subsidies between systems may result from the averaging methodology
• http://www.fcc.gov/Bureaus/Cable/Orders/2000/da000039.doc
  • applicable to the provision of cable television service; franchise fees; costs of complying with franchise requirements; retransmission consent fees and copyright fees incurred for the carriage of broadcast signals; other programming costs; and Commission cable system regulatory fees pursuant to 47 U.S.C. � 159, 47 C.F.R. � 76.922(f). 47 C.F.R. � 76.922(d), (e). 47 C.F.R. � 76.922(j). 47 C.F.R. � 76.923. See TCI of Southeast Mississippi, 10 FCC Rcd 8728, 8730 (CSB, 1995); reconsideration denied on other grounds, 13 FCC Rcd 11080 (CSB, 1998); TCI Cablevision of Texas, Inc., 13 FCC Rcd 6656, 6658 (CSB, 1998); Century Cable of Southern California, 11 FCC Rcd at 501-502. See April 30, 1999 Appeal of Local Rate Order and Request for Decertification at p.
• http://www.fcc.gov/Bureaus/Cable/Orders/2000/da000656.doc
  • of the operator's rate form. The City's opposition explains that the rate order was based on the City's belief that subscribers needing the new equipment were not receiving benefit from the new cost and on Benchmark's failure to follow prescribed procedures before implementing its new rate. Benchmark's rate for the new converters is subject to regulation by the City. Section 76.923(a) of the Commission's rules provides that equipment used to receive the BST is subject to regulation, even if the equipment is also used to receive unregulated programming. Benchmark's appeal claims that limited basic service is available without the converter box but makes no claim that the converter boxes are used exclusively for unregulated programming. The City found that the price
• http://www.fcc.gov/Bureaus/Cable/Orders/2000/da000950.doc
  • cases. Therefore, the Department concludes, ``This case is distinguishable from the Crown Media and King Videocable cases on both the facts and applicable law. Consequently, the cases cited by Cablevision are not controlling here.'' The Department also claims that Cablevision's reliance upon the Form 1205 Instructions as controlling is misplaced, and that greater consideration must be given to 47 C.F.R. 76.923(f) and (g). These subsections provide standards for establishing charges for remote control units and converters, respectively. Subsection 76.923(f) requires that ``[m]onthly charges for rental of a remote control unit shall consist of the average annual unit purchase cost of the type of remote leased, including acquisition price and incidental costs such as sales tax, financing and storage up to the
• http://www.fcc.gov/Bureaus/Cable/Orders/2000/da001002.doc
  • that the Commission is the only forum for appeals of decisions by franchising authorities. Section 76.944(a) provides that ``[t]he Commission shall be the sole forum for appeals of decisions by franchising authorities on rates for the basic service tier or associated equipment involving whether or not a franchising authority has acted consistently with the Cable Act or �� 76.922 and 76.923.'' Commission review of appeals was intended to ensure uniformity of interpretation of the federal guidelines governing ratemaking. The Commission was concerned that rulings by state or local courts in different parts of the country could produce varying and conflicting interpretations about the Cable Act and the Commission's rules, which would frustrate the purpose of having federal guidelines. We find nothing
• http://www.fcc.gov/Bureaus/Cable/Orders/2000/da001071.doc
  • applicable to the provision of cable television service; franchise fees; costs of complying with franchise requirements; retransmission consent fees and copyright fees incurred for the carriage of broadcast signals; other programming costs; and Commission cable system regulatory fees imposed pursuant to 47 U.S.C. � 159. 47 C.F.R. � 76.922(f). 47 C.F.R. � 76.922(d), (e). 47 C.F.R. � 76.922(j). 47 C.F.R. 76.923. See TCI of Southeast Mississippi, 10 FCC Rcd 8728, 8730 (Cab. Serv. Bur. 1995), reconsideration denied on other grounds, 13 FCC 11080 (Cab. Serv. Bur. 1998); TCI Cablevision of Texas, Inc., 13 FCC Rcd 6656, 6658 (Cab. Serv. Bur. 1998); Century Cable of Southern California, 11 FCC Rcd at 501-502. See Letter from Denise M. Jones of Marcus Cable to
• http://www.fcc.gov/Bureaus/Cable/Orders/2000/da001403.doc
  • explaining why the operator's rates are not reasonable. If the franchising authority determines that the operator's rates exceed the maximum permitted rate as determined by the Commission's rules, it may prescribe a rate different from the proposed rate or order refunds, provided that it explains why the operator's rate or rates are unreasonable and any prescribed rate is reasonable. Section 76.923 of the Commission's rules and FCC Forms 393, Part III and 1205 establish standards for the regulation of equipment and installation charges based on actual cost for systems not subject to effective competition. Operators are required to establish an equipment basket to which they assign the direct and appropriately allocated indirect costs of service installation, additional outlets, and leasing and
• http://www.fcc.gov/Bureaus/Cable/Orders/2000/da001544.doc
  • its rules and policies if evidence demonstrates that such costs have not been adequately accounted for under the existing approach. According to the Company, there is no finding that its installation rates accounted for costs not recovered during the promotions. The City objects, pointing to the Cable Services Bureau's previous determination that offsets of promotional discounts are not permitted. Section 76.923(j) of the Commission's rules provides that operators may not recover the cost of a promotional offering by increasing the charges for other equipment basket elements or by increasing rates for programming services above the maximum monthly charge prescribed by the Commission's rules. United Cable Television of California, Inc., acknowledged by the Company and relied on by the City, clarifies that
• http://www.fcc.gov/Bureaus/Cable/Orders/2000/da001867.doc
  • to 31 and raised the rate from $15.92 to $16.74 per month. See Liberty Reply at Exhibit D. Liberty charges $3.55 a month for a set-top box and an additional $0.41 for a remote control unit. See Letter from L. Brett Babb, Regulatory Compliance Officer, Liberty to Thomas Horan, FCC (Mar. 8, 2000). 47 C.F.R. � 76.922. 47 C.F.R. � 76.923. Id. 47 C.F.R. �76.923(a)(2). See Commercial Availability of Navigation Devices, Report and Order, 13 FCC Rcd 14775, 14779 (1998) ("In general, we find that it would be most consistent with our obligations under Section 629 to require that, by July 1, 2000, a security element separated from navigation devices be available from MVPDs so that equipment may be commercially available
• http://www.fcc.gov/Bureaus/Cable/Orders/2001/fcc01022.doc http://www.fcc.gov/Bureaus/Cable/Orders/2001/fcc01022.pdf http://www.fcc.gov/Bureaus/Cable/Orders/2001/fcc01022.txt
  • 47 U.S.C. �535(h). Some cable subscribers have older televisions that are not capable of receiving all broadcast stations due to on-channel placement at a channel number beyond the range of the receiver. These subscribers rent a set-top box from the cable system for which the system may charge a monthly fee pursuant to 47 U.S.C. �543(b)(3)(A). See also 47 C.F.R. �76.923. See also, Complaint of WLIG, CSR 3903-M (Cab. Serv.Bur. rel. Nov. 10, 1993)(requiring the cable operator to provide boxes to subscribers so that they are able to view a local television broadcast signal). See Compatibility Between Cable Systems and Consumer Electronics Equipment, at � 36. In this proceeding, the cable and consumer electronics industries are required to report on their
• http://www.fcc.gov/Bureaus/OPP/working_papers/oppwp30.pdf http://www.fcc.gov/Bureaus/OPP/working_papers/oppwp30.txt http://www.fcc.gov/Bureaus/OPP/working_papers/oppwp30.wp
  • additional service will be subject to rate regulation. It would not seem plausible to include cable Internet-based services as BST programming. However, it would appear that if Internet-based services are treated as cable services, section 623(b)(7)(A) would appear to permit cable operators to require Internet subscribers to also subscribe to the operator's 467 47 U.S.C. � 543(b)(3)(A); 47 C.F.R. � 76.923(b) and (c). 468 47 U.S.C. � 551. 107 basic cable service in order to be eligible to receive the Internet-based services. CPST programming, governed by section 623(c), is not subject to similar statutorily deter- mined minimum components, but is subject to rate regulation by the Commission. The terms of that provision refer to "cable programming services," although the term is
• http://www.fcc.gov/mb/engineering/76print.html
  • of effective competition. [91]76.910 Franchising authority certification. [92]76.911 Petition for reconsideration of certification. [93]76.912 Joint certification. [94]76.913 Assumption of jurisdiction by the Commission. [95]76.914 Revocation of certification. [96]76.916 Petition for recertification. [97]76.917 Notification of certification withdrawal. [98]76.920 Composition of the basic tier. [99]76.921 Buy-through of other tiers prohibited. [100]76.922 Rates for the basic service tier and cable programming service tiers. [101]76.923 Rates for equipment and installation used to receive the basic service tier. [102]76.924 Allocation to service cost categories. [103]76.925 Costs of franchise requirements. [104]76.930 Initiation of review of basic cable service and equipment rates. [105]76.933 Franchising authority review of basic cable rates and equipment costs. [106]76.934 Small systems and small cable companies. [107]76.935 Participation of interested parties. [108]76.936 Written decision.
• http://www.fcc.gov/mb/engineering/part76.pdf
  • for reconsideration of certification. � 76.912 Joint certification. � 76.913 Assumption of jurisdiction by the Commission. � 76.914 Revocation of certification. � 76.916 Petition for recertification. � 76.917 Notification of certification withdrawal. � 76.920 Composition of the basic tier. � 76.921 Buy-through of other tiers prohibited. � 76.922 Rates for the basic service tier and cable programming services tiers. � 76.923 Rates for equipment and installation used to receive the basic service tier. � 76.924 Allocation to service cost categories. � 76.925 Costs of franchise requirements. � 76.930 Initiation of review of basic cable service and equipment rates. � 76.933 Franchising authority review of basic cable rates and equipment costs. � 76.934 Small systems and small cable companies. � 76.935 Participation