$//Withdrawal of Rate Complaints, River Raisin Cablevision, Coldwater Cablevision//$
$/47 C.F.R. 76.922 Cable Rates/$
FOR RECORD ONLY
                                Before the
                     FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION
                          Washington, D.C. 20554

                     DA 94-1515

In the matter of  )
 )     
Withdrawal of FCC Form 329    )    MI0052  City of Sturgis    
Rate Complaints Against )     MI0302  Sturgis Township
Coldwater Cablevision   )
 )
Withdrawal of FCC Form 329    )    MI0765  City of Monroe
Rate Complaints Against )     MI0531  Frenchtown Charter Township
River Raisin Cablevision)


                       MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER

 Adopted:  December 16, 1994        Released:  December 19, 1994

By the Chief, Cable Services Bureau:

 1.  In each of the cases noted above, the local franchising authority (LFA) filed a
complaint with this Commission alleging that the prices charged by Coldwater Cablevision
(Coldwater) or River Raisin Cablevision (River Raisin) for cable programming service tier
(CPS) services in its community were unreasonably high.  These complaints, and the local
franchising authorities and filing dates, are noted at Attachment A.  Between September 30
and October 18, 1994, each of  these LFAs wrote to the Commission to withdraw its CPS
complaints.   In each case, the LFA was the only complainant who filed with this
Commission.  Our jurisdiction to regulate CPS rates arises with the filing of a valid complaint
against those rates.  The withdrawal of the only complaint against an operator's CPS rates in
a community constitutes the termination of our jurisdiction to regulate those rates.  We will
allow the withdrawal of these complaints, and our review of these filings will therefore be
terminated. 

 2.  Under the Cable Television Consumer Protection and Competition Act of 1992,
and our rules implementing it, 47 C.F.R. Part 76, Subpart N, the Commission must review
CPS prices upon the filing of a valid complaint.  The filing of a valid complaint triggers an
obligation on behalf of the cable operator to file a justification of its CPS prices.  Under our
rules, an operator may attempt to justify its prices through either a benchmark showing or a
cost-of-service showing.  In either case, the operator has the burden of demonstrating that its
CPS prices are not unreasonable.

 3.  The Commission's original rate regulations took effect on September 1, 1993. 
The Commission subsequently revised its rate regulations effective May 15, 1994.  Operators
with valid CPS complaints filed against them prior to May 15, 1994 must demonstrate that
their CPS prices were in compliance with the Commission's initial rules from the time the
complaint was filed through May 14, 1994, and that their prices were in compliance with the
revised rules from May 15, 1994 forward.  Operators attempting to justify their prices for the
period prior to May 15, 1994 through a benchmark showing must complete and file FCC
Form 393.  In each case captioned above, C-TEC did file either an FCC Form 393
benchmark rate justification submission, or a cost of service rate justification submission.
 
 4.  This Commission has now received from each of the captioned local franchising
authorities a letter stating that it wished to withdraw its CPS rate complaint against Coldwater
or River Raisin.  Under our rules, this Commission's authority to regulate CPS cable rates
arises when a valid complaint against those rates is filed.  In each case noted here, the LFA is
the only complainant against this operator in this community.  Our mandate is to "protect
subscribers of any cable system that is not subject to effective competition from rates that
exceed the rates that would be charged if such a system were subject to effective
competition."  While our rules forbid collusive agreements between operators and local
franchising authorities regarding forebearance from rate regulation, there is no evidence of
such an agreement here.  In fact, the LFA in each case here states that it has completed a rate
review of the basic rates, and has found them reasonable.  It is on the basis of this finding of
reasonableness, rather than on the basis of an underlying agreement to forebear, that these
LFAs are seeking to withdraw their CPS rate complaints.  We will accordingly allow these
complainants to withdraw their complaints.  Because our review of the rate justification
showings is predicated on the existence of a rate complaint, in those instances where the
operator no longer faces rate complaints in the above-noted communities, we are terminating
our review of those filings. 

 5.  Accordingly, IT IS ORDERED that permission to withdraw the FCC Form 329
rate complaints against cable programming service rates in the above-noted communities IS
GRANTED, and the review of the resulting rate justification filings IS TERMINATED.


 
 FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION




 Meredith J. Jones
 Chief, Cable Services Bureau

 
                                         Attachment A


CUID No., Local Franchising        Complaints       Complaints                                   
 Authority         FiledWithdrawn


Coldwater Cablevision

MI0052  City of Sturgis 11/18/93   9/30/94

MI0302  Sturgis Township11/19/93   10/3/94


River Raisin Cablevision

MI0765  City of Monroe  11/18/93   10/18/94

MI0531  Frenchtown Charter Township11/29/93         9/28/94