[Federal Register Volume 59, Number 73 (Friday, April 15, 1994)]
[Unknown Section]
[Page 0]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 94-8999]


[[Page Unknown]]

[Federal Register: April 15, 1994]


=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION

47 CFR Part 76

[MM Docket No. 92-266, FCC 94-38]

 

Cable Television Act of 1992

AGENCY: Federal Communications Commission.

ACTION: Proposed rule.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: This proposed rule is one segment of the Second Order On 
Reconsideration, Fourth Report and Order, and Fifth Notice of Proposed 
Rulemaking in this proceeding. The final rules adopted in this decision 
may be found elsewhere in this issue. In the Fifth Notice of Proposed 
Rulemaking in this proceeding, the Commission: (1) Provided notice 
concerning further rate requirements for systems currently eligible for 
transition treatment; (2) sought comment on the treatment of systems 
with more than 100 channels; (3) sought comment on the proper 
compensation to operators adding or deleting channels; and, (4) sought 
comment on regulations governing rates charged to commercial 
establishments.

DATES: Comments are due on or before June 29, 1994 and Reply comments 
are due on or before July 29, 1994.

ADDRESSES: Federal Communications Commission, Washington, DC 20554.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Joel Kaufman (202) 416-1164, Aliza 
Katz (202) 416-0939 or Kathleen Franco (202) 416-0956, Cable Services 
Bureau.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This is a synopsis of the proposed rules 
segment of the Commission's Second Order on Reconsideration, Fourth 
Report and Order, and Fifth Notice of Proposed Rulemaking in MM Docket 
No. 92-266, FCC 94-38, adopted February 22, 1994, and released March 
30, 1994. The Complete text of this document is available for 
inspection and copying during normal business hours in the FCC 
Reference Center (room 239), 1919 M Street, NW., Washington, DC 20554, 
and may be purchased from the Commission's copy contractor, 
International Transcription Service at (202) 857-3800, 2100 M Street, 
NW., suite 140, Washington, DC 20037.

Synopsis of Fifth Notice of Proposed Rulemaking

    1. Termination of transition relief. As determined in the Second 
Order on Reconsideration in this proceeding, systems owned by small 
operators and systems with low prices will not have to apply the full 
17 percent competitive differential pending our analysis of the 
relationship between costs and prices for those systems. We are 
initiating these cost studies in our Cost Proceeding. Accordingly, we 
are here providing notice that we will establish further requirements 
concerning permitted rates for systems currently eligible for 
transition treatment. As stated, depending on the results of our cost 
studies, these further provisions could require such systems to 
terminate transition relief and establish full reduction rates.
    2. Going-forward methodology. Cable operators are actively 
exploring new technical developments that may enable them to provide up 
to 500 channels. Some of these technical capabilities may involve 
significant modifications or additions to distribution plant. Others 
may involve compression and multiplexing techniques that permit 
derivation of many channels without significant new distribution plant. 
The benchmark table adopted in the Rate Order (58 FR 29716, May 21, 
1993) and our table reflecting the efficiency curve observed in our 
Competitive Survey, establish per channel adjustments for systems with 
total channels on regulated tiers of 100 channels or less. It does not 
currently establish per channel rates for systems that provide more 
than 100 channels.
    3. We solicit comment on whether we should establish a methodology 
for adjusting capped rates in situations where there are more than 100 
regulated channels. We solicit comment generally on what that 
methodology should be. We also seek comment on whether we could use 
mathematical formulations derived from existing data or tables. We also 
solicit comment on whether, instead of adopting a methodology for 
setting rates for offerings of more than 100 channels, we should cap 
rates at the 100 channel level unless the operator could justify a 
higher rate based on a cost-of-service showing. We solicit comments on 
how any of these proposals would effect incentives for operators to 
provide additional channels on an ``a la carte'' basis. We additionally 
solicit comment on whether our going-forward methodology should be 
modified to provide greater or lesser compensation to operators for 
adjustments to capped rates when channels are added or deleted from 
regulated tiers, and whether this would better meet our goals of 
encouraging infrastructure development and growth of programming. 
Operators should provide a complete factual justification for any 
claims that the current methodology is inadequate.
    4. Commercial rates. We have determined that we would not establish 
rules permitting special rates for regulated commercial cable service 
on reconsideration of the Rate Order. We stated, however, that 
allowances for commercial rates might help assure that rates for 
subscribers are reasonable if higher commercial earnings were offset by 
savings to consumers. Therefore, we solicit comment on whether we 
should establish regulations governing rates for regulated cable 
service provided to commercial establishments. In particular, we ask 
whether higher earnings for commercial establishments should be offset 
by lower rates to other subscribers. We solicit comment on whether the 
offset in rates to other subscribers should be exactly equal to the 
additional earnings from higher commercial rates. Alternatively, we 
could establish regulations that would mandate a specified level of 
sharing of earnings from higher commercial rates between operators and 
subscribers. We solicit comment on which approach would best serve 
subscribers and operators. We also solicit comment on what standards of 
reasonableness we could establish to govern commercial rates.

Administrative Matters

    5. Initial regulatory flexibility analysis for the fifth notice of 
proposed rulemaking. Pursuant to section 603 of the Regulatory 
Flexibility Act, the Commission has prepared the following initial 
regulatory flexibility analysis (IRFA) of the expected impact of these 
proposed policies and rules on small entities. Written public comments 
are requested on the IRFA. These comments must be filed in accordance 
with the same filing deadlines as comments on the rest of the Notice, 
but they must have a separate and distinct heading designating them as 
responses to the regulatory flexibility analysis. The Secretary shall 
cause a copy of the Notice, including the initial regulatory 
flexibility analysis, to be sent to the Chief Counsel for Advocacy of 
the Small Business Administration in accordance with section 603(a) of 
the Regulatory Flexibility Act, Public Law No. 96-354, 94 Stat. 1164, 5 
U.S.C. Section 601 et seq. (1981).
    I. Reason for action. The Cable Television Consumer Protection and 
Competition Act of 1992 requires the Commission to prescribe rules and 
regulations for determining reasonable rates for basic tier cable 
service and to establish criteria for identifying unreasonable rates 
for cable programming services. The Commission has adopted rate 
regulations that require a comparison to the rates of cable systems 
subject to effective competition, as defined in the Cable Act of 1992 
and represented in the revised benchmark formula. This Notice proposes 
to establish regulations governing the setting of rates for regulated 
cable systems with more than 100 channels, and to consider separate 
rate regulations for commercial entities and rules for termination of 
transition relief.
    II. Objectives. To propose rules to implement section 3 of the 
Cable Television Consumer Protection and Competition Act of 1992. We 
also desire to adopt rules that will be easily interpreted and readily 
applicable and, whenever possible, minimize the regulatory burden on 
affected parties.
    III. Legal basis. Action as proposed for this rulemaking is 
contained in sections 4(i), 4(j), 303(r) and 623 of the Communications 
Act of 1934, as amended.
    IV. Description, potential impact and number of small entities 
affected. We anticipate a possible impact on small entities because the 
Notice addresses the termination of transition relief for small systems 
owned by small operators. The Cable Act of 1992 defines a small system 
as serving 1,000 or fewer subscribers.
    V. Reporting, record keeping and other compliance requirements. 
None.
    VI. Federal rules which overlap, duplicate or conflict with this 
rule. None.
    VII. Any significant alternatives minimizing impact on small 
entities and consistent with stated objectives. None.
    6. Paperwork reduction act. The requirements adopted herein have 
been analyzed with respect to the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1980 and 
found to impose a new or modified information collection requirement on 
the public. Implementation of any new or modified requirement will be 
subject to approval by the Office of Management and Budget as 
prescribed by the Act.

Procedural Provisions

    7. Ex parte rules--non-restricted proceeding. This is a non-
restricted notice and comment rulemaking proceeding. Ex parte 
presentations are permitted, except during the Sunshine Agenda period, 
provided that they are disclosed as provided in Commission rules. See 
generally 47 CFR 1.1202, 1.1203, and 1.1206(a).
    8. Pursuant to applicable procedures set forth in Secs. 1.415 and 
1.419 of the Commission's Rules, 47 CFR 1.415 and 1.419, interested 
parties may file comments on or before June 29, 1994 and reply comments 
on or before July 29, 1994. To file formally in this proceeding, you 
must file an original plus four copies of all comments, reply comments, 
and supporting comments. If you want each Commissioner to receive a 
personal copy of your comments and reply comments, you must file an 
original plus nine copies. You should send comments and reply comments 
to Office of the Secretary, Federal Communications Commission, 1919 M 
Street, NW Washington, DC 20554. Comments and reply comments will be 
available for public inspection during regular business hours in the 
FCC Reference Center, room 239, Federal Communications Commission, 1919 
M Street NW., Washington DC 20554.

Ordering Clauses

    9. Authority for this proposed rule is contained in sections 4(i), 
4(j), 303(r), 612, 622(c) and 623 of the Communications Act of 1934, as 
amended, 47 U.S.C. 154(i), 154(j), 303(r), 532, 542(c) and 543.
    10. It is ordered That, pursuant to sections 4(i), 4(j), 303(r), 
612(c), 622(c) and 623 of the Communications act of 1934, 47 U.S.C. 
154(i), 154(j), 303(r), 532(c), 542(c), and 543, Notice is hereby given 
of proposed amendments to part 76, in accordance with the proposals, 
discussions, and statement of issues in this Notice of Proposed 
Rulemaking, and that Comment is Sought regarding such proposals, 
discussion, and statement of issues.

List of Subjects in 47 CFR Part 76

    Cable television.

Federal Communications Commission.
William F. Caton,
Acting Secretary.
[FR Doc. 94-8999 Filed 4-14-94; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6712-01-M