**Before the**

**Federal Communications Commission**

**Washington, D.C. 20554**

+----------------------------------+---+------------------------------+
| In the Matter of                 | * | CUID No. MD0355 (Howard      |
|                                  | * | County)                      |
| Mid-Atlantic CATV Limited        | ) |                              |
| Partnership                      | * |                              |
|                                  | * |                              |
| Petition for reconsideration     |   |                              |
|                                  | * |                              |
|                                  | * |                              |
|                                  | ) |                              |
|                                  | * |                              |
|                                  | * |                              |
|                                  |   |                              |
|                                  | * |                              |
|                                  | * |                              |
|                                  | ) |                              |
|                                  | * |                              |
|                                  | * |                              |
|                                  |   |                              |
|                                  | * |                              |
|                                  | * |                              |
|                                  | ) |                              |
|                                  | * |                              |
|                                  | * |                              |
|                                  |   |                              |
|                                  | * |                              |
|                                  | * |                              |
|                                  | ) |                              |
|                                  | * |                              |
|                                  | * |                              |
+----------------------------------+---+------------------------------+

ORDER ON RECONSIDERATION

**Adopted:** **March 14, 2002** **Released: March 20, 2002**

By the Deputy Chief, Cable Services Bureau:

1\. In this Order we consider a petition for reconsideration
(\"Petition\") of our Order, DA 94-1147 (\"Prior Order\")[^1] filed with
the Federal Communications Commission (\"Commission\") by the local
franchising authority (\"LFA\") for the above-referenced community. Our
Prior Order found Operator\'s cable programming service tier (\"CPST\")
rates to be reasonable based on our review of Operator cost of service
FCC Form 1220 filing. In this Order we dismiss the LFA\'s Petition.

2\. Under the Communications Act,[^2] 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. If the
Commission finds a rate to be unreasonable, it shall determine the
correct rate and any refund liability.[^3] The Cable Television Consumer
Protection and Competition Act of 1992 (\"1992 Cable Act\"),[^4] in
effect at the time the referenced complaints were filed, required the
Commission to review CPST rates upon the filing of a valid complaint by
a subscriber or LFA.

3\. Cable operators may justify their rates through a cost of service
showing using FCC Form 1220.[^5] In reviewing an operator\'s FCC Form
1220 cost of service showing, we evaluate the operator\'s rate base and
expense elements to determine whether the operator should be permitted
to recover those items. Where a certain rate base or expense element is
not justified under our rules, such cost is disallowed in whole or in
part.[^6] Where reported costs are disallowed, we make appropriate
adjustments.

4\. In our Prior Order, we reviewed Operator's cost of service filing,
applied general cost of service principles and applicable allocation
rules and found that Operator justified its CPST rate for the period
under review. In its Petition, the LFA alleges that Operator may have
violated the Commission\'s Rate Freeze Order.[^7] The LFA requests that
the Commission inquire into this possibility. In its Opposition,
Operator responds that under the Commission\'s rules, the LFA is
prohibited from raising new issues on appeal.[^8] We agree. The
referenced complaints did not raise, and we did not address in our Prior
Order, the possibility of a violation of the Rate Freeze Order. In its
Petition, the LFA does not raise any issues concerning our review of
Operator\'s FCC Form 1220 and our conclusion that Operator\'s CPST rates
were reasonable, based on that review. Therefore, we will dismiss the
LFA\'s Petition.

5\. Accordingly, IT IS ORDERED, pursuant to Section 1.106 of the
Commission\'s rules, 47 C.F.R. § 1.106 that the local franchising
authority\'s petition for reconsideration IS DISMISSED.

FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION

William H. Johnson

Deputy Chief

Cable Services Bureau

[^1]: In the Matter of Mid-Atlantic CATV Limited Partnership, DA
    94-1147, 9 FCC Rcd 7204 (1994).

[^2]: Communications Act, Section 623(c), as amended, 47 U.S.C. §543(c)
    (1996).

[^3]: *See* Section 76.957 of the Commission\'s Rules, 47 C.F.R.
    §76.957.

[^4]: Pub. L. No. 102-385, 106 Stat. 1460 (1992).

[^5]: *See* Section 76.922(l) of the Commission\'s Rules, 47 C.F.R.
    §76.922(l). *See also*, Second Report and Order, First Order on
    Reconsideration, and Further Notice of Proposed Rulemaking, MM
    Docket No. 93‑215 and CS Docket No. 94‑28, FCC 95‑502, 11 FCC Rcd
    2220 (1996) (\"Final Cost Order\").

[^6]: The Commission made clear that the fact that an operator has
    incurred costs does not necessarily establish its right to recover
    those costs from subscribers. *See* Implementation of Sections of
    the Cable Television Consumer Protection and Competition Act of
    1992: Rate Regulation, MM Docket No. 92-266, Report and Order and
    Further Notice of Proposed Rulemaking, 8 FCC Rcd 5631, 5794 at n.
    619 (1993) (\"Rate Order\").

[^7]: Implementation of Sections of the Cable Television Consumer
    Protection and Competition Act of 1992: Rate Regulation, MM Docket
    92-266, 8 FCC Rcd 2921 (1993).

[^8]: *See* Section 1.106 of the Commission\'s rules, 47 C.F.R. § 1.106.