Before the
                     FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION           DA 94-1373
                          Washington, D.C.  20554

In the Matter of:    )
              )
HORIZON CABLE I LIMITED PARTNERSHIP )
              )
Petition for Reconsideration        )
              )
of Certification of  )
Green Oak Township (MI0905)         )
To Regulate Basic Cable Rates       )

                       MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER

Adopted:  December 1, 1994          Released:  December 1, 994

By the Chief, Cable Services Bureau:

I.     INTRODUCTION

       1.     On November 12, 1993, Horizon Cable I Limited Partnership ("Horizon"),
filed a timely petition for reconsideration challenging the certification of Green Oak
Township ("Green Oak") to regulate the system's rates for basic cable service and associated
equipment.  Green Oak filed an objection to Horizon's petition for reconsideration to which
Horizon filed a reply.  In addition, both parties filed additional pleadings pursuant to the
Commission's July 29, 1994 Order.

       2.     Section 623(a)(4) of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended, allows
franchising authorities to become certified to regulate basic cable service rates of cable
operators which are not subject to effective competition.  For purposes of the initial request
for certification, local franchising authorities may rely on a presumption that cable operators
within their jurisdiction are not subject to effective competition, unless the franchising
authority has actual knowledge to the contrary.  Certification becomes effective 30 days
from the date of filing unless the Commission finds that the franchising authority does not
meet the statutory certification requirements.  Cable operators may file petitions for
reconsideration of the franchising authority's certification within 30 days from the date such
certification becomes effective.  Regulation of rates is automatically stayed pending review
of a timely-filed petition for reconsideration alleging the presence of effective competition.

II.    DISCUSSION

Horizon's Effective Competition Claim

       3.     Horizon argues that its cable system is subject to effective competition because
it serves fewer than 30 percent of the households in Green Oak Township, its franchise area. 
Horizon claims that it serves only 538 of the 4,256 "homes" in its franchise area, or 13
percent of the total number of "homes."  As supporting documentation, Horizon provides a
copy of the relevant page of the 1990 Census data which shows that there are 4,256 "housing
units" in Green Oak Township.  In addition, Horizon submits a copy of a subscriber printout
dated October 21, 1993, which demonstrates that Horizon has 538 subscribers.  Finally,
Horizon provides a declaration under penalty of perjury by a responsible official certifying to
the accuracy of the data included in the petition.     

     4.   In the absence of a demonstration to the contrary, cable systems are presumed
not to be subject to effective competition.  The cable operator bears the burden of rebutting
the presumption that effective competition does not exist with evidence that effective
competition, as defined by Section 76.905 of the Commission's rules, is present within the
franchise area.  Horizon has failed to meet this burden.  Specifically, Horizon
inappropriately relied upon "housing unit" data rather than "household" data to support its 
effective competition claim.  Horizon's claim is inappropriately based on the number of
housing units (that is, occupied and vacant units) within the franchise area.  Our rules,
however, require the use of data reflecting the number of "households" (i.e., occupied
housing units) in the franchise area.  See Third Order on Reconsideration, in MM Docket
Nos. 92-266 and 92-262, 9 FCC Rcd 4316, 4324 (1994) ("Third Recon. Order").  As
Horizon has failed to base its effective competition claim on household data as required by
our rules, we will deny its petition.

Other Matters

     5.   In its objection to Horizon's petition, Green Oak argues that Horizon is not
subject to effective competition because it has "redefined" its franchise area.  Green Oak
alleges that Horizon has made an affirmative decision to limit its service area to scattered
areas in the southeastern portion of Green Oak even though its franchise does not restrict
service to a specific area of the township.  In light of this, Green Oak argues that Horizon's
showing of effective competition must be based on its "redefined" franchise area.  In reply,
Horizon denies Green Oak's allegation, asserting that the terms of its franchise agreement
with Green Oak require Horizon to expand into unserved areas of the township when
population density reaches a level of 30 households per cable mile.  Horizon claims that it
has been expanding its service area in Green Oak on an ongoing basis, and has increased the
number of homes passed in Green Oak by 37 percent over the past three years.  In light of
our decision that Horizon has failed to rely on appropriate housing data for purposes of
demonstrating effective competition, we see no need to address Green Oak's argument at this
time.

III. ORDERING CLAUSES

     6.   Accordingly, IT IS ORDERED that the petition for reconsideration filed by
Horizon Cable I Limited Partnership challenging the certification of Green Oak Township to
regulate Horizon's basic cable service rates IS DENIED.

     7.   IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the automatic stay imposed by Section
76.911(c) of the Commission's Rules, as amended, 47 C.F.R.  76.911(c) IS
TERMINATED.

     8.   IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Horizon SHALL FILE the required rate
justifications on the appropriate forms with Green Oak Township, MI within thirty (30) days
of the release date of this Memorandum Opinion and Order or within thirty (30) days of
receipt of notice from the franchising authority that it is regulating Horizon's rates,
whichever is later.

     9.   This action is taken pursuant to delegated authority under Section 0.321 of the
Commission's rules, as amended, 47 C.F.R.  0.321.


                         FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION




                         Meredith J. Jones
                         Chief, Cable Services Bureau