WPCtL 2BJ  Courier3|ws BoldTimes New RomanE37XPCG Timeset 4_230_1HPLAS4.PRS 4x  @\_)^X@2 6f F Z  3|w",tB^ f ^;C]ddCCCdCCCCddddddddddCCY~~vCN~sk~CCCddCYdYdYCdd88d8ddddJN8ddddYYdYd4dddddCddddddddd8YYYYYY~Y~Y~Y~YC8C8C8C8ddddddddddYdddddsdXdXXXddx|X~d~d|XdddddddC8ddddCdoddd|8|H~d<|8dtddddHHdlLlLlLkd|H|8~ddddddddXXXd~ddkd~ddxCddCCCWxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxNdddCYQQddddddFddddFCChhd44ddzzdddvooChdF"dhd9dCCzCddoddCdYds]zUvdYYCCCCz~ozoY~NYdYC8YooYdYzsdzdd~YYzozzz~CdzYzzzzCCdddddddzCsdYC\   pxtll\tll@\@\`LHP LaserJet 4_230_1HPLAS4.PRS 4Xw PE37\_)^XP2B vpkCG TimesCG Times Bold"i~'K2^$(8<><q*"xxxxWWxxxWWkkxxxS9K;?8wC;,Xw PE37XPD@7zC;, c!Xz_ pi7XAV"G($,hG PE37hP7jC:,Xj\  P6G;XP><q*"xxxxWWxxxWWkkxxxf >QY CG TimesCG Times BoldTimes New RomanTimes New Roman ItalicCG Times ItalicCourier",tB^ f ^;C]ddCCCdCCCCddddddddddCCdxN`xoCCCddCdoYoYFdo8Co8odooYNCodddYdddd4dddddCddddddddo8dddddYYYYYN8N8N8N8oddddooooddpddddxodddXXddXddXdddddooL8doddNorddo8PdN8ppoddXXdpLoNpLodPDdopoopodXYXodoodddCddCCCWxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxNdddCdUUddddddFddddFCCssd44ddzzddd~ooCsdF"dsd9dCCzCddoddCdYds`zUvdddCCCCzozoYNYYYN8YooYdYzzdzddYYzozzzNdzYzzzzCCdddddddzCzdYC\   pxtll\tll@\@\`L2ZJZrL?8wC;,Xw PE37XPD@7zC;, c!Xz_ pi7XAV"G($,hG PE37hPB7jC:,Xj\  P6G;XP\5hC:,'Xh*f9 xr G;XX4ddC$C X- FOR FCC RECORD ONLY  Y- $//Kansas City Cable Partners of Grandview and Parkville, MO, MO&O, DA95285 //$ $/76.922 Rates for Cable Programming Service tier /$ $/benchmark cable rates/$  Xv- (2Before the  Federal Communications Commission  XH-Washington, D.C. ă  X -x` `  hh@ DA 95285  Y -In the matter of hh@)  Y -x` `  hh@)h  Y -Kansas City Cable Partners dbahh@)  Y -American Cablevision hh@)hCUID Nos. MO0070 and MO0126  Y-Kansas City, Missourihh@)hpp  x` `  hh@)  Yb-Benchmark Filings To Supporthh@)  YK-Cable Programming Service Priceshh@)  Y- Memorandum Opinion and Order ă  Y-Adopted: February 21, 1995 hh@hReleased: February 23, 1995 By the Deputy Chief, Cable Services Bureau:  Xf- Introduction   Y8-x1.` ` Here we consider complaints about the price Kansas City Cable Partners dba American Cablevision ("Cablevision") was charging for its cable programming service ("CPS") tier in Kansas City, Missouri, CUID Nos. MO0070 and MO0126. Cablevision has attempted to justify its price through a benchmark showing on FCC Form 393. This Order addresses the reasonableness of Cablevision's price only through May 14, 1994. At a later  Y -time we will issue a separate order addressing the reasonableness of the price after that date.f ȝ Y>#-#Xw PE37XP#э #Xj\  P6G;XP#The findings in this Order do not in any way prejudge the reasonableness of the price for CPS service after May 14, 1994 under our new rate regulations. However, to the extent  X%-Cablevision has sought to take advantage of the refund deferral period under the Second  V%-Order on Reconsideration, Fourth Report and Order, and Fifth Notice of Proposed  X&-Rulemaking, MM Docket No. 92266, FCC 9438, 9 FCC Rcd 4119 (1994) ("Second Order  X'-on Reconsideration"), the maximum permitted CPS price determined herein might also apply from May 15, 1994 until the date on which Cablevision implemented its CPS price under the"(0*0*0*("  X-new regulations. See para. 3, infra." {0*0*0*!"Ԍx  Y-x2.` ` Under the Cable Television Consumer Protection and Competition Act of"0*0*0*"  Y-1992,|M Yy-#Xw PE37}XP##Xw PE37}XP#э#Xw PE37}XP# #Xj\  P6G;yoXP#Pub. L. No. 102385, 106 Stat. 1460 (1992); Communications Act,  623(c), as  Xe-amended, 47 U.S.C.  543(c) (1993).#Xw PE37}XP#| 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  Y-triggers an obligation on behalf of the cable operator to file a justification of its CPS prices.gM Y-#Xw PE37}XP##Xw PE37}XP#э#Xw PE37}XP# #Xj\  P6G;yoXP#47 C.F.R.  76.956.#Xw PE37}XP# Under our rules, an operator may attempt to justify its prices through either a benchmark  Y-showing or a costofservice showing.M Yn -#Xw PE37}XP#э#Xj\  P6G;yoXP# #Xj\  P6G;yoXP#47 C.F.R.  76.956(b).#Xw PE37}XP# In either case, the operator has the burden of  Y-demonstrating that its CPS prices are not unreasonable.M Y -#Xw PE37}XP##Xw PE37}XP#э#Xw PE37}XP# #Xj\  P6G;yoXP#Id.#Xw PE37}XP#  Y_-x3. The Commission's original rate regulations took effect on September 1, 1993.2_M Y-ԍ#Xw PE37}XP# Order in MM Docket No. 92266, Implementation of Sections of the Cable Television  Yz-Consumer Protection and Competition Act of 1992: Rate Regulation, FCC 93372, 58 Fed. Reg. 41042 (Aug. 2, 1993).2  YH-The Commission subsequently revised its rate regulations effective May 15, 1994.vH M Y-ԍ#Xw PE37}XP#  47 C.F.R.  76.922(b).v 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  Y -compliance with the revised rules from May 15, 1994 forward. M YT-ԍ#Xw PE37}XP# See Second Order on Reconsideration, 9 FCC Rcd at 4190, paras. 150152. Operators attempting to justify their prices for the period prior to May 15, 1994 through a benchmark showing must  Y -complete and file FCC Form 393.Y jM Y-ԍ#Xw PE37}XP# Id.Y Generally, to justify their prices for the period beginning May 15, 1994 through a benchmark showing, operators must use the FCC Form 1200  Y-series. M Y^!-ԍ#Xw PE37}XP# 47 C.F.R.  76.922(b)(6); see also Second Order on Reconsideration, 9 FCC Rcd at 4189 n.195.  X4-Procedural Matters  x4. The first complete and timely CPS complaints were served on Cablevision on February 24, 1994 for CUID No. MO0070 and on February 26, 1994 for CUID No." 0*0*0*" MO0126. The Commission received the complaints on February 28, 1994.X01Í ÍX01Í Í x5. Cablevision attempted to justify its CPS price through FCC Forms 393 filed on March 22, 1994.  X1- Discussion  x6. Cablevision asserts that its monthly CPS tier price of $13.09 per subscriber is justified by its benchmark filing because its price is equal to the maximum permitted charge of $13.09 as calculated in the filing. Upon review of Cablevision's Form 393, we have found no apparent errors that would result in Cablevision's CPS tier price exceeding its  Y -maximum permitted price.   Xb-Conclusions  x7. Upon review of the record herein, we conclude that Cablevision's showing supports a CPS tier price of $13.09 per month (plus franchise fee) for the period of February  Y-28, 1994 to May 14, 1994. xM Y-  Ѝ#Xw PE37}XP# This finding is based solely on the representations of Cablevision listed in paragraph  Yh-5, supra.  Should information come to our attention that these representations (including  YS-representations as to data regarding installations and customer equipment) were materially  Y<-inaccurate, we reserve the right to take appropriate action. This Order is not to be construed as a finding that we have accepted as correct any specific entry, explanation or argument  Y-made by any party to this proceeding not specifically addressed herein. x8. Accordingly, IT IS ORDERED, pursuant to Section 0.321 of the Commission's Rules, 47 C.F.R.  0.321, that the February 24, 1994 complaint for CUID MO0070 and the February 26, 1994 complaint for CUID No. MO0126 against the cable programming service price charged by Kansas City Cable Partners dba American Cablevision in Kansas City, Missouri, ARE DENIED TO THE EXTENT INDICATED HEREIN. "! 0*0*0*""Ԍx9. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the benchmark filing submitted by Kansas City Cable Partners dba American Cablevision with respect to CUID Nos. MO0070 and MO0126 for the period of February 28, 1994 to May 14, 1994, justify a price of $13.09 per month (plus franchise fee) for American Cablevision's cable programming service tier. x` `  hhFEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION  Y -x` `   hhGregory J. Vogt x` `  hhDeputy Chief, Cable Services Bureau  ? <#x6X@`7X@#