Regulators

California regulators have approved the sale of Cox Communications to cable giant Charter Communications — the final hurdle in a marathon review to clear the $34.5-billion cable consolidation.

With Thursday’s sign-off by the California Public Utilities Commission, the mammoth merger is expected to close next week.

The deal will make Charter’s Spectrum the dominant broadband internet and cable television service in Southern California, with millions of customers scattered throughout Santa Barbara, Bakersfield, Los Angeles, Palos Verdes Estates, Newport Beach, Irvine, Riverside and San Diego.

Charter’s acquisition of Cox, unveiled 15 months ago, will solidify Charter’s status as the nation’s largest cable company, eclipsing Philadelphia-based Comcast Corp., which serves San Francisco and other Northern California communities.

“This transformative deal will benefit millions of consumers who will soon have access to greater value and opportunities to save, including our fully converged mobile-broadband bundle savings guarantee, combined with our industry-leading Customer Commitment and the 100% U.S.-based sales and service employees Spectrum is known for,” Charter said in a statement.

After weeks of behind-the-scenes wrangling, the CPUC voted unanimously to approve two settlement agreements with Charter that allow the merger to move forward. The agency attached conditions that it hopes will protect consumers and expand broadband access.

“This decision secures significant commitments that will benefit Californians through expanded affordable broadband options, major infrastructure investments, improved customer protections, and meaningful support for digital inclusion,” Commissioner Matthew Baker, who helped negotiate the agreements, said in a statement.

Federal regulators approved the deal months ago, as had other state regulators.

“This proceeding was a heavy lift for everyone,” Commissioner Darcie L. Houck acknowledged during Thursday’s hearing, which was held in San Francisco.

Through the settlements, Houck said she hoped Charter would address a disparity in which low-income residents are often stuck with higher phone and internet bills than residents in more affluent areas. Higher-income neighborhoods often benefit from increased competition as multiple providers jockey for business.

“There are many areas of the state that do have low-income communities that are paying higher costs for telecommunication services,” Houck said. “I’m hopeful that the provisions in this settlement agreement will help ensure more equity in pricing.”

Atlanta-based Cox has long been viewed as a lucrative prize. In addition to serving coastal communities in Southern California, it also has customers in growing population hubs such as Las Vegas, Phoenix and Tucson.

To win CPUC approval, the Stamford, Conn.-based cable giant agreed to offer more affordable packages for low-income residents, including several tiers of the California LifeLine service, for up to five years.

Advocates had pushed for a longer commitment.

Charter promised to invest $30 million in education and awareness initiatives in California, including community outreach and digital literacy training. In addition, Charter agreed to spend at least $275 million on upgrades to its equipment in its existing Spectrum service area — including completing a 1-gigabit service buildout — within three years.

The company also must provide free broadband and Wi-Fi service for dozens of eligible community centers, including schools and libraries.

Spectrum will be required to provide automatic bill credits for customers for qualifying service outages that last at least two hours. And the company must honor eligible “price for life” service agreements held by some residential subscribers.

Charter Chief Executive Chris Winfrey has told investors that his firm was aiming to close the merger this month. Several commissioners noted the looming deadline as they opted for the settlement that Baker helped negotiate.

Regulators said the two companies generate more than $10 billion in revenue from their California customers. In addition to serving more than 5 million homes, they also provide telephone service to 1.5 million subscribers in the state.

California regulators have approved Charter’s $34.5-billion purchase of Cox Communications.

(Kevin Dietsch / Getty Images)

After the deal closes, Cox customers will be switched to Spectrum service, most likely by mid-September. They should also get SportsNet LA — the Dodgers’ television channel — as part oftheir lineups.

For more than a decade, Cox has refused to carry the channel, owned by the Dodgers organization, due to its high license fee — leading to one of the television industry’s longest blackouts.

The Nuclear Regulatory Commission is proposing to eliminate a foundational safety principle that has for 50 years minimized the radiation people in the United States are exposed to and that has been adopted around the world.

Currently, facilities such as nuclear plants, hospitals or academic institutions that use radioactive materials must ensure radiation exposures are kept “as low as reasonably achievable” — the ALARA principle. The NRC proposal would abandon that philosophy while keeping a separate standard on maximum radiation exposure.

The two standards have worked together in radiation safety. Dose limits set the maximum amount of radiation the public and radiation workers can be exposed to, while ALARA kept radiation exposure as low as practical under those limits. Research shows radiation exposure increases a person’s chance of getting cancer, a risk that increases as the dose increases.

The dose limits are not changing. But the NRC, which regulates civilian nuclear energy technologies and radioactive materials, now wants to replace ALARA with a “graded approach” that includes several actions facilities must take depending on the potential dose of radiation to workers. More rigorous radiation protection measures would be required when approaching dose limits to ensure they aren’t exceeded.

This comes as President Trump attempts to quadruple domestic nuclear energy production because of surging electricity demand amid a data center and artificial intelligence boom. Reforming the NRC is one way Trump is trying to speed up nuclear reactor development. He instructed the federal agency in an executive order last year to “adopt science-based radiation limits.”

The Energy Department, which oversees national energy policies, has already stopped using ALARA. The NRC expects to finalize its radiation protection regulations in the coming months.

NRC Chairman Ho Nieh said the commission is not lowering the bar on safety.

“We’re just removing the ambiguity,” he said in a call with reporters. “But the standard for exposure to workers and the public, those are not changing. We’re just putting in place greater clarification.”

Nieh doesn’t expect major changes within the nation’s existing fleet of large, traditional reactors. But companies designing and building new, smaller reactors could move faster with a clearer picture of the radiation protection requirements, he said.

Could radiation doses creep higher?

The NRC said radiation exposure limits are set well below levels associated with health effects, and it expects remaining standards and industry practices to keep radiation doses far below the limits. There’s incentive to do so — it’s more expensive and time-consuming to work in areas with higher radiation because access must be restricted and more surveys are required.

The nuclear industry’s trade association agrees with the NRC.

“We will always continue to look at what can we do to reduce the dose to workers, and maintain our doses to the off-site public as low as possible,” said Doug True, chief nuclear officer at the Nuclear Energy Institute. “It’s not like we’re just going to throw open the doors and let everything run up to the limits.”

ALARA created a “moving target” for regulation, said Justin Friedman, a nuclear energy consultant who previously spent three decades at the U.S. Department of State. Getting rid of the rule would allow NRC scientists to make more rational decisions about appropriate levels of manageable risk, he added.

Some experts question cutting ALARA

Edwin Lyman, director of nuclear power safety at the Union of Concerned Scientists, cautions that some parts of the NRC proposal could raise permissible radiation doses in certain cases, while still staying below the cap. Lyman highlighted a proposed revision to radionuclide emissions standards, in particular.

Radiation exposure to the general public is limited to 100 millirem per year. A typical dose of radiation from a chest X-ray is 10 millirem.

The NRC wants to increase its radionuclide emissions standards from a conservative, 10 millirem per year dose to 25 millirem per year, based on a hypothetical person living in a house at the property line for a nuclear plant.

The NRC says actual doses to the public would remain far lower because, in reality, people live farther from nuclear sites and benefit from dispersion in air and water.

The NRC should improve, rather than eliminate, ALARA, Lyman said, to protect the public and workers. ALARA has become a political target because some people mistakenly believe radiation exposures have to be as low as possible no matter the cost, Lyman said. In reality, it allows trade-offs.

Katy Huff, a former U.S. assistant secretary for nuclear energy, said in some cases, the requirement may be challenging to regulate. Additional clarity would improve the regulatory environment without harming the public, added Huff, a professor and department chair at the University of Wisconsin-Madison.

However, Huff said, she thought the NRC was going to clarify what “reasonably” means in ALARA without scrapping it. She said she’s open to being convinced the graded approach will be just as effective.

One expert sees a mixed bag

The National Council on Radiation Protection and Measurements, chartered by Congress to provide independent scientific guidance, has not formally weighed in yet. Council President Kathryn Higley said she likes some things in the 180-page document but thinks others are problematic.

The NRC should look at the whole picture for managing risk, she said. For instance, if a worker at a nuclear power plant were to enter an area where airborne radioactive materials are present, in keeping with ALARA, they might wear full personal protective equipment with respirators, said Higley, professor emeritus at Oregon State University. That makes them move slower, potentially subjecting them to heat stress that could hurt them more than a low dose of radioactivity, she said.

A concern with the proposal, Higley said, is that it maintains the current occupational dose limit for adult radiation workers at 5 rem, or 5,000 millirem, per year. With ALARA in place, the average dose to workers has been well below that cap.

The International Commission on Radiological Protection recommends an occupational dose of 2 rem per year on average. The NRC previously found it wasn’t justified to match that, because workers were exposed to less than that and changing regulations is costly.

Higley said the U.S. may need to align with the international community if ALARA is going away.

McDermott writes for the Associated Press.

Paramount Skydance has notched a needed win as it continues to pursue its $111-billion deal to buy Warner Bros. Discovery.

On Wednesday, the European Commission gave its consent, allowing tech scion David Ellison’s industry-reshaping merger to move forward in the countries that make up the European Union.

Europe joins 64 other regulatory entities that have either approved the deal or chosen not to challenge it, Paramount said in a statement.

“These clearances recognize that the combination of Paramount and WBD will enhance consumer choice and enable a creative-first company to invest in more projects and bring stories to audiences worldwide,” Paramount said. “It will create a scaled media and entertainment company capable of competing with the tech companies that have come to dominate the industry.”

European regulators added just one condition: Paramount must end a partnership with Universal Pictures to share distribution of movies in Europe. Beyond that, regulators concluded that even with the proposed Paramount-Warner consolidation there were enough producers to avoid competitive harms.

“The Commission found that, at film production level, enough film studios remain as competitors,” the European Commission said in a statement. “These include other major US studios like Disney, NBC Universal … and Sony, along with smaller US studios such as Amazon MGM, A24 and Lionsgate, as well as European studios.”

But the merger would result in a “high concentration” of film distribution, the commission said, so Paramount would have 13 months to end its joint venture, United International Pictures, which distributes Paramount and Universal films to cinema owners in Europe.

Paramount must not “directly or indirectly … enter into any agreement or understanding with Universal to jointly co-distribute films” in the European countries for 10 years, the commission said.

Despite early concerns about potential dominance in the children’s television market, Paramount will not be required to divest Cartoon Network, a Warner asset, because of its ownership of Nickelodeon.

“The Commission found that streaming platforms offering children’s content will continue to act as a competitive constraint on the merged entity’s TV channels,” the agency said.

The European Commission joins regulators in Australia, Brazil, Canada, China, Saudi Arabia, Serbia and South Africa that have found the deal would not crush competition in their respective markets. Britain’s Competition and Markets Authority is still investigating the merger’s impacts.

Paramount secured the approval of the U.S. Justice Department last month. The company was hoping to close its blockbuster acquisition of Warner Bros., which owns HBO, CNN and the Burbank studios behind such popular characters as Batman, Superman, Harry Potter, Scooby-Doo, by the end of September to avoid a larger payout to Warner Bros. Discovery shareholders.

The European Commission’s approval came two days after Ellison’s firm was dealt a substantial setback.

A federal judge in Oakland on Monday issued a temporary restraining order preventing Paramount from finalizing the acquisition for at least 14 days as that antitrust case heats up. The decision came after 12 state attorneys general, led by California Atty. Gen. Rob Bonta, filed a lawsuit last week alleging the merger would violate U.S. antitrust rules.

District Judge Araceli Martínez-Olguín scheduled an Aug. 3 hearing to determine whether a longer-term pause is warranted. The states are expected to seek a preliminary injunction, which would tie up Paramount’s merger for months.

Paramount, in its statement, noted the European Commission’s conclusions “directly refute key assumptions that underpin the state AGs’ complaint seeking to block the transaction,” including whether big-budget or blockbuster films should be considered a market.

Wednesday’s approval “marks another significant milestone in bringing Paramount and Warner Bros. Discovery together,” Makan Delrahim, Paramount’s chief legal officer said in the statement. “We appreciate the Commission’s constructive engagement and thorough analysis throughout its review.”

Deal critic Alvaro Bedoya, a former Federal Trade Commission member who is now a senior adviser at the American Economic Liberties Project, offered a conflicting view.

“This is not remotely over. The United States is not Europe,” Bedoya said in a statement.

The Writers Guild of America joined the legal fray last week by filing its own antitrust complaint against Paramount, alleging the proposed union of two of Hollywood’s biggest studios would lead to fewer jobs and lower pay for writers. The WGA is also seeking an injunction.

The 37-page lawsuit filed by the state attorneys general alleges that Paramount’s proposed takeover — the largest Hollywood deal in decades — would violate the U.S. Clayton Antitrust Act, a century-old law to prevent mergers that weaken competition and raise costs for consumers.

In her order granting the states’ request for a temporary restraining order, Martínez-Olguín wrote: “The Transaction would also be difficult, if not impossible, to unwind if permitted to proceed given the anticipated consolidation of operations, sharing of business-sensitive information, and potential termination or reassignment of employees.”

Paramount faces a potential $7 billion payment to Warner Bros. should the company fail to close the transaction by next summer.