FOR FCC RECORD ONLY

$// MO&O, Cable Act of 1992, DA 94-1438//$
$/ 300.623 Regulation of rates /$
$/ 1.106 Petitions for Reconsideration /$
$/ 76.906 Presumption of no effective competition /$
$/ 76.910 Franchising authority certification /$
$/ 76.911 Petition for reconsideration of certification /$
                                    
                               Before the
                    FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION
                        Washington, D.C.   20554

In the Matter of:                    )     DA 94-1438
                                     )
C-TEC CABLE SYSTEMS OF               )
MICHIGAN, INC.                       )
                                     )
Petition for Reconsideration         )
                                     )
of Certification of                  )
Venice Township, MI                  )
to Regulate Basic Cable Service Rates)
(MI0649)                             )


                      MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER

Adopted:  December 9, 1994          Released:  December 12, 1994

By the Chief, Cable Services Bureau:

I.     INTRODUCTION

       1.     On November 1, 1993, C-TEC Cable Systems of Michigan, Inc. ("C-TEC")
filed a timely petition for reconsideration, challenging the certification of Venice Township,
Michigan ("the Township") to regulate C-TEC's rates for basic cable service and associated
equipment.  C-TEC filed additional documentation in support of its original petition pursuant
to a recent Commission Order.  In addition, C-TEC submitted a response dated November
30, 1994 to a Bureau
letter requesting clarification of previously filed information.  The Township did not file an
opposition to C-TEC's petition.

       2.     Section 623(a)(4) of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended, allows
franchising authorities to become certified to regulate the basic cable service rates of cable
operators that are not subject to effective competition.  For purposes of the initial request
for certification, local franchising authorities may rely on the presumption that cable
operators within their jurisdiction are not subject to effective competition, unless they have
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.  Rate regulation is automatically stayed pending review of a timely-filed petition
for reconsideration alleging the presence of effective competition.  

II.    DISCUSSION

       3.     C-TEC asserts that its cable system is subject to effective competition because
it serves fewer than 30 percent of the households in Venice Township, its franchise area. 
Specifically, C-TEC claims that it serves 170 of the 812 households in Venice Township or
approximately 21 percent of the total number of households.  As supporting documentation,
C-TEC provides 1990 Census data, which demonstrates that there are 812 occupied housing
units in Venice Township.  In addition, C-TEC submits a computer-generated print-out with
sufficient subscriber information to support its claim that it serves 170 subscribers in the
franchise area.  Finally, C-TEC submits a declaration under penalty of perjury from a
responsible official certifying the accuracy of the data 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  76.905 of the Commission's rules, is present within the
franchise area.  C-TEC has met this burden.  C-TEC has appropriately relied on data
reflecting the number of households as required by our rules.  Relying on this data, C-TEC
has submitted sufficient evidence demonstrating that its cable system serves fewer than 30
percent of the households in its franchise area.  Thus, we find that C-TEC's system serving
Venice Township is subject to effective competition.  Accordingly, its petition is granted.

III.   ORDERING CLAUSES

       5.     Accordingly, IT IS ORDERED that the petition for reconsideration, filed by
C-TEC Cable Systems of Michigan, Inc., challenging the certification of Venice Township to
regulate basic cable rates IS GRANTED.

       6.     IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the certification of Venice Township,
Michigan, to regulate the basic cable service rates of C-TEC Cable Systems of Michigan,
Inc., IS RESCINDED.

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

              FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION




              Meredith J. Jones
              Chief, Cable Services Bureau