FOR FCC RECORD ONLY
$//Jones Intercable, MO&O, DA 95-321//$
$/76.922 Rates for Cable Programming Service tiers/$
$/benchmark cable rates/$

                                Before the
                     FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION
                             Washington, D.C.
                                                                DA 95-321

In the Matter of                   )
                              )
Jones Spacelink, Ltd.,             )    HI0022, HI0040, HI0079    
Hawaii                        )
                                   )
Jones Intercable, Inc.                       )    MO0108, MO0154, MO0196
Blue Springs and Independence, Missouri )                                  
Jones Intercable Investors, L.P.        )
                                             )
Jones Intercable, Inc.             )    MD0033
Charles County, Maryland           )                                           
                              )           
Jones Intercable, Inc.             )    KS0261
Olathe, Kansas                )    
Jones Intercable Investors, L.P.        )
                              )
Jones Intercable, Inc.             )    NJ0452, NJ0462, NJ0466, NJ0477
New Jersey                         )    NJ0579, NJ0580, NJ0581
Cable TV Fund 14-A, Ltd.           )
                              )
Jones Intercable, Inc.             )    SC0019, SC0381
South Carolina                )
Jones Cable Income Fund 1-B, Ltd.  )
                              )
Benchmark Filings To Support       )
Cable Programming Service Prices        )

                       MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER

          Adopted:  February 21, 1995       Released:  February 22, 1995

By the Deputy Chief, Cable Services Bureau:

     1.   Here we consider complaints about the prices Jones Spacelink, Ltd. and Jones
Intercable, Inc., and their subsidiaries, (collectively "Jones") were charging for their cable
programming service ("CPS") tier in several locations as captioned above.  Jones has chosen
to attempt to justify its prices through benchmark showings on FCC Form 393.  This Order
addresses the reasonableness of Jones' prices only through May 14, 1994.  At a later time we
will issue a separate order addressing the reasonableness of the prices after that date.

     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 complete and timely complaint.  The filing of a complete and
timely 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 complete and timely 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.  Generally, to justify their prices for the
period beginning May 15, 1994 through a benchmark showing, operators must use the FCC
Form 1200 series.

     4.  Jones asserts that its monthly CPS prices are justified by its benchmark filings
because these prices are less than the maximum permitted charges.  Upon review, we have
found no apparent errors that would require a recalculation of Jones' maximum permitted
CPS prices.

     5.  Accordingly, IT IS ORDERED, pursuant to Section 0.321 of the Commission's
Rules, 47 C.F.R.  0.321, that the complaints referenced herein against the cable
programming service prices charged by Jones Spaceklink, Ltd. and Jones Intercable, Inc.,
and their subsidiaries, as indicated in the caption, ARE DENIED TO THE EXTENT
INDICATED HEREIN.

     6.  IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the benchmark filing submitted by Jones
Spacelink, Ltd. and Jones Intercable, Inc., and their subsidiaries as indicated in the caption,
justify the prices charged for the cable programming service tier for the period from
September 1, 1993 to May 14, 1994 of $12.78 (plus franchise fee) in Hawaii, CUID Nos.
HI0022, and HI0040; $8.45 (plus franchise fee) in Hawaii, CUID No. HI0079; $13.68 (plus
franchise fee) in Blue Springs and Independence, Missouri, CUID Nos. MO0108, MO0154
and MO0196; $13.09 (plus franchise fee) in Charles County, Maryland, CUID No.
MD0033; $13.68 (plus franchise fee) in Olathe, Kansas, CUID No. KS0261; $11.07 (plus
franchise fee) in New Jersey, CUID Nos. NJ0452, NJ0462, NJ0466, NJ0477, NJ0579,
NJ0580 and NJ0581; $10.93 (plus franchise fee) in South Carolina, CUID No. SC0019; and 
$10.91 (plus franchise fee) in South Carolina, CUID No. SC0381.

                                                     FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION


                                                     Gregory J. Vogt  
                                                     Deputy Chief, Cable Service Bureau