FCC Reports, Second Series, Volume 104, Number 2, Pages 375 to 719, August 1986 Page: 413
ix, 375-719 p. ; 23 cm.View a full description of this report.
Extracted Text
The following text was automatically extracted from the image on this page using optical character recognition software:
Cable TV Hardware
dum Opinion and Order in CC Docket 78-144, 77 FCC 2d 187
(1980), aff'd, Monongahela Power Co. v. FCC, 655 F.2d 1254 (D.C.
Cir. 1981). Recently the United States Court of Appeals for the
District of Columbia Circuit determined in Alabama Power
Company v. FCC, 773 F.2d 362 (1985) (Alabama Power),1 that the
Commission's methodology did not result in the calculation of the
maximum just and reasonable rate allowable under the Act and
the Commission had not adequately explained its rationale.
Accordingly, this Notice of Proposed Rulemaking will offer
proposed policy changes and revised rules for comment, pursuant
to Sections 1, 4(i), and 403 of the Communications Act, 47 U.S.C.
151, 154(i), and 403.2
A. Legislative History of Section 224
2. It has been common practice for cable television operators to
lease space on utility poles in order to provide cable television
service to a community. This arrangement was unregulated by
any federal authority until the late 1970's, when Congress, in
response to concern raised by the cable industry, enacted the Pole
Attachment Act of 1978, Pub. Law No. 95-234, 6, 92 Stat. 33,
35 (codified at 47 U.S.C. 224). In Section 224 Congress
established a range of just and reasonable pole attachment rates
which "assures a utility the recovery of not less than the
additional costs of providing pole attachments, nor more than an
amount determined by multiplying the percentage of the total
usable space ... which is occupied by the pole attachment by the
sum of the operating expenses and actual capital costs of the
utility attributable to the entire pole... ." 47 U.S.C. 224(d)(1).
1 That case was on appeal of a Commission order, Teleprompter Corp. v.
Alabama Power Co., FCC 83-500 (released Nov. 3, 1983), which granted in part
Alabama Power's application for review of an Order by the Chief, Common
Carrier Bureau, Mimeo No. 001808 (released June 29, 1981).
2 Two weeks after the Alabama Power case was decided the United States Court
of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit held that Section 224 is unconstitutional.
Florida Power Corp. v. FCC, 772 F.2d 1537 (1985), appeal pending. The
Commission's request for rehearing en banc was denied. We believe the Florida
Power case wrongly decided and deem it necessary and appropriate to conduct
this rulemaking proceeding notwithstanding that decision. The purpose of this
proceeding is primarily to develop rules and policies which will meet the
requirements established by the court in Alabama Power so that justice will
not be delayed in a circumstance where the Commission is the sole arbiter of
just and reasonable rates in accordance with the will of Congress. Accordingly,
we will not entertain comments herein regarding the Florida Power case and
expect all interested parties to file statements without regard to positions they
may have taken in that proceeding. In the event further changes are
necessitated in our regulations by action of the Supreme Court, we will
promptly do so.104 F.C.C. 2d
413
Upcoming Pages
Here’s what’s next.
Search Inside
This report can be searched. Note: Results may vary based on the legibility of text within the document.
Tools / Downloads
Get a copy of this page or view the extracted text.
Citing and Sharing
Basic information for referencing this web page. We also provide extended guidance on usage rights, references, copying or embedding.
Reference the current page of this Report.
United States. Federal Communications Commission. FCC Reports, Second Series, Volume 104, Number 2, Pages 375 to 719, August 1986, report, 1986-08~; Washington D.C.. (https://digital.library.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metadc306573/m1/51/: accessed July 17, 2024), University of North Texas Libraries, UNT Digital Library, https://digital.library.unt.edu; crediting UNT Libraries Government Documents Department.