10 FCC Red No. 18 Federal Communications Commission Record DA 95-1142
Before the
Federal Communications Commission 
Washington, D.C. 20554
In the Matter of
TCI Cablevision
of Pinellas County, Inc.
United Cable 
Television of 
Baltimore 
Limited Partnership
TCI Cablevision 
of Tulsa, Inc.
TCI Cablevision 
of North Texas, Inc.
TCI of 
Virginia, Inc.
TCI Cablevision 
of Washington, Inc.
CUID No. FL0716 
(Oldsmar)
CUID No. MD0269 (Baltimore)
CUID No. OK0061 (Tulsa) 
CUID No. TX0642 (Alien)
CUID Nos. VA0067 (Orange) and 
VA0284 (Chesapeake)
CUID No. WA0166 (Lacey)
TCI of Tacoma, Inc. CUID No. WA0187 (Tacoma)
Benchmark Filings to Support 
Cable Programming Service Prices
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
Adopted: May 22,1995; Released: May 25,1995
By the Chief, Cable Services Bureau:
1. Here we consider complaints about the prices that the 
above-captioned operators (individually "Operator" and, 
collectively, "Operators") were charging for their cable 
programming service ("CPS") tiers in the communities
designated above. Operators have chosen to attempt to 
justify their prices through benchmark showings on FCC 
Form 393. This Order addresses the reasonableness of Op 
erators' prices only through May 14, 1994. At a later date 
we will issue a separate order addressing the reasonableness 
of the prices after that date.1
2. Under the Cable Television Consumer Protection and 
Competition Act of 1992,2 and our rules implementing it, 
47 C.F.R. Part 76, Subpart N, the Commission must review 
CPS prices upon the filing of a valid complaint. The filing 
of a valid complaint triggers an obligation on behalf of the 
cable operator to file a justification of its CPS prices.3 Un 
der our rules, an operator may attempt to justify its prices 
through either a benchmark showing or a cost-of-service 
showing.4 In either case, the operator has the burden of 
demonstrating that its CPS prices are not unreasonable.5
3. The Commission's original rate regulations took effect 
on September 1, 1993.6 The Commission subsequently re 
vised its rate regulations effective May 15, 1994.7 Operators 
with valid CPS complaints filed against them prior to May 
15, 1994 must demonstrate that their CPS prices were in 
compliance with the Commission's initial rules from the 
time the complaint was filed through May 14, 1994, and 
that their prices were in compliance with the revised rules 
from May 15, 1994 forward.8 Operators attempting to jus 
tify their prices for the period prior to May 15, 1994 
through a benchmark showing must complete and file FCC 
Form 393.9 Generally, to justify their prices for the period 
beginning May 15, 1994 through a benchmark showing, 
operators must use the FCC Form 1200 series. 10
4. The first valid CPS complaints in each of the franchise 
areas which are the subject of this Order were completed 
and served on the respective Operators and received by the 
Commission on the dates set forth on Appendix A. Oper 
ators filed FCC Form 393s in response; Operators have 
also filed amended and supplemental Form 393 filings. 11
5. Operators' actual CPS tier prices were above the maxi 
mum permitted prices that Operators calculated for the 
CPS tier and, thus, Operators failed to demonstrate that 
their prices for the CPS tier were not unreasonable. Fur 
thermore, upon review of Operators' submissions for the 
franchise areas designated by CUID Nos. MD0269 and 
OK0061, we have found that the Operators miscalculated 
their maximum permitted prices, and it is therefore appro 
priate to make the following adjustments to the Operators' 
calculations in their Form 393s:
1 The findings in this Order do not In any way prejudge the 
reasonableness of the prices for CPS service after May 14, 1994 
under our new rate regulations. However, to the extent Oper 
ators have sought to take advantage of the refund deferral 
period under the Second Order on Reconsideration, Fourth 
Report and Order, and Fifth Notice of Proposed Rulemaking, 
MM Docket No. 92-266, FCC 94-38, 9 FCC Red 4119 (1994) 
("Second Order on Reconsideration"), the maximum permitted 
CPS prices determined herein might also apply from May 15, 
1994 until the date on which such Operators implemented its 
CPS prices under the new regulations. See para. 3, infra. Fur 
ther, to the extent that the prices as of March 31, 1994 are 
found to be excessive, reductions in prices for the period after 
May 14, 1994 may be required to reflect the fact that the prices 
during the earlier period, which are used as the starting point 
to calculate the prices for the prospective period., were un-
' reasonable. See 47 C.F.R. § 76.922(b)(4)(C).
2 Pub. L. No. 102-385, 106 Stat. 1460 (1992); Communications 
Act, § 623(c), as amended, 47 U.S.C. § 543(c) (1993).
3 47 C.F.R. § 76.956.
4 47 C.F.R. § 76.956(b).
5 Id.
6 Order in MM Docket No. 92-266, Implementation of Sections
of the Cable Television Consumer Protection and Competition
Act of 1992: Rate Regulation, FCC 93-372, 58 Fed. Reg. 41042
(Aug. 2, 1993).
t 47 C.F.R. § 76.922(b).
8 See Second Order on Reconsideration, 9 FCC Red at 4190,
paras. 150-152.5 Id.
10 47 C.F.R. § 76.922(b)(6); see also Second Order on Reconsi 
deration, 9 FCC Red at 4189 n.195.
11 For example, Operators filed amended FCC Forms 393 in 
response to a Cable Services Bureau Order citing common
9411
DA 95-1142 Federal Communications Commission Record 10 FCC Red No. 18
a. On its Form 393 filing for CUID No. MD0269, the 
Operator calculated the Inflation Adjustment Factor 
as of the end of December 1993. However, the Oper 
ator cannot permissibly calculate inflation through 
the end .of December 1993. Based on the service date 
of the earliest valid complaint, the Operator was 
required to file a rate justification no later than 
November 29, 1993.12 If the Operator had filed FCC 
Form 393 by that date, the instructions to Form 393 
would have required it to calculate the inflation ad 
justment only through October 1993.13 The Operator 
cannot claim an additional inflation adjustment sim 
ply because it filed Form 393 late. We therefore must 
recalculate the Inflation Adjustment Factor on the 
basis of the most accurate data currently available for 
the date that the Operator should have filed Form 
393.14 On July 29, 1994, the U.S. Department of 
Commerce released corrected inflation data including 
Gross National Product Price Index ("GNP-PI") fig 
ures of 122.3 for the third quarter of 1992 and 125.7 
for the third quarter of 1993. Using these GNP-PI 
figures, we calculate an Inflation Adjustment Factor 
through October 1993, the base date the Operator 
should have used in justifying its rate for CUID No. 
MD0269, of 1.030.
b. On its Form 393 filing for CUID No. OK0061, the 
Operator calculated the Inflation Adjustment Factor 
as of the end of March 1994. However, the Operator 
cannot permissibly calculate inflation through the 
end of March 1994. Based on the service date of the 
earliest valid complaint, the Operator was required to 
file a rate justification no later than January 5, 
1994. 15 If the Operator had filed FCC Form 393 by 
that date, the instructions to Form 393 would have 
required it to calculate the inflation adjustment only 
through December 1993.16 The Operator cannot 
claim an additional inflation adjustment simply be 
cause it filed Form 393 late. We therefore must recal 
culate the Inflation Adjustment Factor on the basis of 
the most accurate data currently available for the 
date that the Operator should have filed Form 393.17 
On July 29, 1994, the U.S. Department of Commerce 
released corrected inflation data including Gross Na 
tional Product Price Index ("GNP-PI") figures of 
122.3 for the third quarter of 1992 and 126.5 for the 
fourth quarter of 1993. Using these GNP-PI figures, 
we calculate an Inflation Adjustment Factor through 
December 1993, the base date the Operator should 
have used in justifying its rate for CUID No. 
OK0061, of 1.034.
6. For the remaining franchise areas, we have found no 
apparent errors in Operators' calculation of their maxi 
mum permitted rates. However, Operators' actual CPS tier 
prices were above the maximum permitted prices that Op 
erators calculated for the CPS tier. Accordingly, Operators 
have failed to demonstrate that their prices for the CPS tier 
were not unreasonable, and we therefore must recalculate 
the Inflation Adjustment Factor in Form 393, Part II, 
Worksheets 1 and 4, on the basis of the most accurate data 
currently available for the date for which Operators filed:18
On their amended Form 393s, Operators calculated 
the Inflation Adjustment Factor as of the end of 
December 1993 using data released on December 1, 
1993. On July 29, 1994, the U.S. Department of 
Commerce released corrected inflation data including 
Gross National Product Price Index ("GNP-PI") fig 
ures of 122.3 for the third quarter of 1992 and 126.5 
for the fourth quarter of 1993. Using these GNP-PI 
figures, we calculate an Inflation Adjustment Factor 
through December 1993, the base date Operators 
used in justifying their rates, of 1.034.
7. Upon review of the record herein, and having incor 
porated the adjustments discussed above, we conclude that 
Operators have failed to justify the rates they were charging 
during the periods in question. Operators' showings justify 
the maximum reasonable CPS tier prices shown on Appen 
dix B (plus franchise fee) for the period from the filing of 
the earliest complaint in each franchise area (as set forth in 
Appendix A) to May 14, 1994.19
8. Accordingly, IT IS ORDERED, pursuant to Section 
0.321 of the Commission's rules, 47 C.F.R. § 0.321, that 
the complaints referred to in Appendix A against the cable 
programming service prices charged by Operators in the 
areas referenced in the caption and at Appendix A herein, 
and all other complaints in these franchise areas related to 
the same prices, ARE GRANTED TO THE EXTENT IN 
DICATED HEREIN.
9. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED, pursuant to Section 
76.961 of the Commission's rules, 47 C.F.R. § 76.961, that 
Operators shall refund to subscribers in the communities 
shown in Appendix B that portion of the amounts paid for 
cable programming service for the period from the filing of 
the first valid complaint in each franchise area (as set forth
deficiencies observed in benchmark filings generally. Cable Op 
erators' Rate Justification Filings, 9 FCC Red 7752 (Cab. Serv. 
Bur. 1994).
12 See 47 C.F.R. § 76.956(a).
13 FCC Form 393, page 11, instructions for Line 124 (Inflation 
Adjustment Factor is calculated using "the number of whole 
months from September 30, 1992 to the date you will submit 
this form").
14 See 47 C.F.R. § 76.922(b)(9)(iii)(if a cable operator fails to 
justify its rates, rates must be adjusted in accordance with the 
most accurate data available at the time of the analysis).
15 See 47 C.F.R. § 76.956(a).
16 FCC Form 393, page 11, instructions for Line 124 (Inflation
Adjustment Factor is calculated using "the number of whole 
months from September 30, 1992 to the date you will submit 
this form").
17 See 47 C.F.R. § 76.922(b)(9)(iii)(if a cable operator fails to 
justify its rates, rates must be adjusted in accordance with the 
most accurate data available at the time of the analysis).18 Id.
19 This finding is based solely on the representations of Oper 
ators and the modifications described herein. Should informa 
tion come to our attention that these representations were 
materially inaccurate, we reserve the right to take appropriate 
action. This Order is not to be construed as a finding that we 
have accepted as correct any specific entry, explanation or ar 
gument made by any party to this proceeding not specifically 
addressed herein.
9412
10 FCC Red No. 18 Federal Communications Commission Record DA 95-1142
on Appendix A)20 to May 14, 1994 which exceeded the maximum price for each franchise area set forth in Appen 
dix B (plus franchise fee) per month, plus interest to the date of the refund.
10. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Operators' shall promptly determine the overcharges to their CPS subscrib 
ers for the stated periods, 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), describ 
ing the calculation thereof, and describing its plan to im plement the refund within 60 days of Commission 
approval of the plan.
11. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED, pursuani; to Section 
76.922(b)(4)(C) of the Commission's rules, 47 C.F.R. § 76.922(b)(4)(Q, that Operators shall, within 30 days of the 
release of this Order, revise their Form 1200 filings with 
respect to the communities listed herein, for the period beginning May 15, 1994, to reduce the monthly charge per 
tier as of March 31, 1994 for Tier 2 (Line A<>b) to equal 
the maximum price in each franchise area set forth in Appendix B (plus franchise fee).21
12. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Operators shall 
place into effect, within 30 days after their submission of 
the revised Form 1200 filings required above, prices that reflect the reductions in the CPS rates determined in this 
Order.
FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION
Meredith J. Jones
Chief, Cable Services Bureau
Appendix A
CUID No.
FL0716
MD0269
OK0061
TX0642
VA0067
VA0284
WA0166
WA0187
Date First Complaint 
Filed with FCC
2/28/94
11/17/93
12/10/93
2/28/94
3/25/94
2/28/94
2/28/94
2/28/94
Date Complaint 
Served
2/28/94
10/28/93
12/6/93
2/28/94
2/25/94
2/28/94
2/26/94
2/28/94
CUID No.
FL0716
MD0269
OK0061
TX0642
VA0067
VA0284
WA0166
WA0187
Appendix B
Actual Rates
$11.98 
$11.48 
$10.98 
$ 8.67 
$10.64 
$11.34 
$10.64 
$11.83
Maximum F'ermitted 
Rates
$11.33 
$11.39 
$10.36 
$ 7.59 
$10.01 
$10.79 
$10.41 
$11.20
20 Our jurisdiction to order a refund dates from the earliest 
date a valid complaint is filed with the Commission. 47 C.F.R. § 
76.961(b).
21 We reserve the right to make further adjustments to Oper 
ators' prices for the period after May 14, 1994, upon completion 
of our review of Operators' Form 1200 filings.
9413