NOTICE


    *********************************************************    

       

                         NOTICE


   *********************************************************


This document was originally prepared in Word Perfect.  

If the original document contained--

                    *  Footnotes
                    *  Boldface & Italics

--this information  is missing in this version

The document format (spacing, margins, tabs, etc.) is changed
too.

If you need the complete document, download the Word Perfect
version.

For information about downloading documents (FTP) see file
 how2ftp.

File  how2ftp (.txt & .wp) is in directory
\pub\Public_Notices\Miscellaneous.

*****************************************************************
********
$//Vantage Cable Associates, L.P., MO&O, DA 95-2151//$
$76.922 Rates for Cable Programming Service tiers/$
$/benchmark cable rates/$            

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

                     DA 95-2151

In the matter of  )     
 )     CUID No. WY0087 (Pinedale, Wyoming)
Withdrawal of FCC Form 329    )    
Rate Complaints Against Vantage    )
Cable Associates  )     
 

                       MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER

 Adopted:    October 12, 1995        Released:  October 24, 1995

By  Chief, Financial Analysis and Compliance Division, Cable Services Bureau:

 1.  In the case above, the local franchising authority (LFA) filed a complaint with this
Commission alleging that the price charged by Vantage Cable Associates ("Operator") for
cable programming service tier (CPS) services in Pinedale, Wyoming was unreasonably high.  
Subsequently, on January 25, 1995, the LFA wrote to the Commission to withdraw its CPS
complaint.  The LFA was the only complainant in this community who filed with this
Commission.  Our jurisdiction to regulate CPS rates arises with the filing of a valid complaint
against those rates.  We will allow the withdrawal of this complaint, and our review of this
filing will therefore terminate. 

 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.  
 
 4.  This Commission has received from the LFA a letter stating that it wishes to
withdraw its CPS rate complaint against Operator.  Under our rules, this Commission's
authority to regulate CPS cable rates arises when a valid complaint against those rates is filed. 
In the 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.  We will accordingly allow this complainant to
withdraw its complaint.  Because our review of the rate justification showing is predicated on
the existence of a rate complaint and Operator no longer faces a rate complaint, we are
terminating our review of this filing. 

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


 FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION




 JoAnn Lucanik
 Chief, Financial Analysis and Compliance Division
 Cable Services Bureau