$/ FOR FCC RECORD ONLY /$
$// MO&O, Cable Act of 1992, DA 94-1393//$

$/ 300.623 Regulation of Rates /$
$/ 1.106 Petitions for Reconsideration /$
$/ 76.906 Presumption of no effective competition /$
$/ 76.910 Franchising authority certification /$
$/ 76.911 Petition for reconsideration of certification /$

                                Before the
                     FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION
                          Washington, D.C.  20554

In the Matter of:    )               DA 94-1393           
              )                  
BROOKRIDGE CABLE SPECIAL PURPOSE    )
PARTNERSHIP II, PARENT COMPANY OF   )  
OF BROOKSHIRE CABLE TV, L.P.        )
              )      
Petition for Reconsideration        )
              )      
of the Certification of             )
Jefferson Township, Pennsylvania,   )
to Regulate Basic Cable Service Rates      )
(PA2869)      )

                       MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER

Adopted:  December 5, 1994            Released:  December 5, 1994

By the Chief, Cable Services Bureau:
                                     
I.     INTRODUCTION

       1.     On November 22, 1993, Brookridge Cable Special Purpose Partnership II,
parent company of Brookshire Cable TV, L.P., ("Brookridge") filed a timely petition for
reconsideration challenging the certification of Jefferson Township, Pennsylvania,
("Jefferson") to regulate rates for basic cable service and associated equipment.  Jefferson
opposes Brookshire's petition. 
 
       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 franchise authority
has actual knowledge to the contrary.  Such certification becomes effective 30 days from the
date of filing unless the Commission finds that the authority does not meet the statutory
certification requirements.  Cable operators may file petitions for reconsideration of the
franchising authority's certification within 30 days of the date such certification becomes
effective.  Regulation of rates is automatically stayed pending review of a timely filed
petition for reconsideration alleging effective competition.

II.    DISCUSSION

       3.     In its petition, Brookridge states that its system serving Jefferson Township, 
Pennsylvania, its franchise area, is subject to effective competition because the system serves
fewer than 30 percent of the homes within its franchise area.  Specifically, Brookridge states
under penalty of perjury that it serves 419 subscribers in an area with 1,988 homes. 
Therefore, Brookridge argues, its system serves only 21 percent of the homes within the
franchise area.  As support Brookridge submits a declaration under penalty of perjury in
which it states that it serves 419 subscribers in a township with 1,988 "Homes" according to
the 1990 Census.  

       4.     In opposition, Jefferson argues that Brookridge's calculation of the number of
households is not in accordance with the Commission's Rules.  Specifically, it argues that
Brookridge incorrectly relied on the number of persons residing in each household, rather
than the total number of households.  Jefferson states that when the total number of
households, (that is, occupied housing units) is used, Brookridge's penetration is actually 57
percent.  As support, Jefferson submits a copy of the relevant page from the 1990 Census
indicating that there are 1,988 persons in a household, but only 733 households, (that is,
occupied housing units) within Jefferson Township.  
       
5.      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, exists in the franchise
area.  Brookridge has failed to meet this burden.  Specifically, Brookridge's claim is
inappropriately based on the number of persons within a household.  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, MM Docket Nos. 92-266 and 92-
262, 9 FCC Rcd 4316, 4324 (1994) ("Third Recon Order").  According Brookridge's
petition is denied. 

III.   ORDERING CLAUSES

       6.     According, IT IS ORDERED that the petition for reconsideration filed by
Brookridge Cable Special Purpose Partnership II, parent company of Brookshire Cable TV,
L.P., challenging the certification of Jefferson Township, Pennsylvania, to regulate its 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 Brookshire Cable Special Purpose
Partnership II, parent company of Brookshire Cable TV, L.P., SHALL FILE the required
rate justifications on the appropriate forms with Jefferson Township within 30 days from the
release date of this Memorandum Opinion and Order or 30 days from the date of receipt of
notice from Jefferson Township, Pennsylvania, that it is regulating 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