Cable, State Interests Agree on Basic Tier Rules Changes but No Further Consensus
Cable and state franchise authority interests agree about the need for updating the basic cable rate regulatory regime but beyond that are at odds, according to docket 17-105 reply comments posted Tuesday. The lack of consensus beyond the FCC's doing…
Sign up for a free preview to unlock the rest of this article
Timely, relevant coverage of court proceedings and agency rulings involving tariffs, classification, valuation, origin and antidumping and countervailing duties. Each day, Trade Law Daily subscribers receive a daily headline email, in-depth PDF edition and access to all relevant documents via our trade law source document library and website.
"a nonsubstantive house cleaning" of the current rules points to the need for eliminating outdated requirements but refraining from changes beyond that, Hawaii said. Pushing all rate setting to franchising authorities removes the FCC from its statutorily required role and could lead to inconsistencies in interpretation, Hawaii said. It said the agency shouldn't let cable operators set regulated rates based on what they charge for comparable services in other communities since those rates are often inflated. It said decades of FCC precedent and court decisions are justification for continuing to subject all equipment used to receive basic service tier (BST) to rate regulation. The Massachusetts Department of Telecommunications and Cable (MDTC) said the proposal to use an unregulated rate comparison as a means of rate regulation violates federal law by ignoring most of the seven criteria the agency is supposed to use in determining BST rates are reasonable. MDTC disagrees with Hawaii that the Further NPRM adopted in October (see 1811300003) could lead to a regime under which any equipment that can be used for both the BST and expanded tiers would be unregulated, and the FCC should make clear that's not the aim. It opposed using the unregulated rate before a franchising authority's certification as the initial regulated rate since rates in unregulated communities aren't "necessarily ... reasonable." NCTA said in many cases the Hawaii and MDTC proposals would worsen existing burdens on operators, local franchise authorities, consumers and the agency. It said its updated competitive benchmark methodology for rate setting falls within the FCC's recognition that a benchmark based on rates charged by systems subject to effective competition is consistent with the Communications Act. NCTA said arguments against changes to equipment rules aren't grounded in policy or law.