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.

*****************************************************************
********
$//Plum Cable TV Inc., Plum Borough, PA, MO&O, DA 95-2459//$
$/76.922 Rates for cable programming service tiers/$
$/76.934 Small systems/$
$/small system cable rat           es/$ 

                                Before the
                     Federal Communications Commission
                             Washington, D.C.

                                                                             DA 95-2459

In the Matter of     )
              )       
Plum Cable TV ) CUID No. PA 1391 (Plum Borough)           
              )
Small System Filing to Support      )      
Cable Programming Service Price     )                     


              Memorandum Opinion and Order

       Adopted:  December 11, 1995  Released:  January 17, 1996

By the Chief, Cable Services Bureau:


       1.  Here we consider complaints about the price that Plum Cable TV ("Plum") was
charging for its cable programming service ("CPS") tier in Plum Borough, PA. Plum has
chosen to attempt to justify its price through a small system cost of service showing on FCC
Form 1230. On October 10, 1995, Plum Cable TV filed FCC Form 1230 seeking to justify
its rate through the simplified small system cost of service procedures under the
Commission's Small System Order.  In this Order we grant Plum's request for small system
relief under the Small System Order and deny the pending CPS complaints.
 
       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 a
cable operator's rates for its CPS tier 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 rates.  Under our rules, an operator may attempt to justify its rates through a
benchmark showing, a cost-of-service showing, or a small system cost of service showing. 
In any case, the operator has the burden of demonstrating that its CPS rates 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.  In a
further effort to offer small cable companies administrative relief from rate regulation, the
Commission amended the definition of small cable companies and small systems and
introduced a simplified form of small system rate relief in the Small System Order.  Cable
systems serving 15,000 or fewer subscribers, and owned by a company having 400,000 or
fewer subscribers, may elect to use the new small cable system rate mechanism in lieu of
other Commission rate processes, provided the Commission has not reached a final resolution
on the rate complaint[s] filed against the system.  Operators attempting to justify their rates
through small system relief must file FCC Form 1230.  If the maximum rate established on
Form 1230 does not exceed $1.24 per channel, the rate shall be presumed reasonable.

     4.  We find that Plum is a company with fewer than 400,000 total subscribers and
that the system in question serves fewer than 15,000 subscribers, making it eligible for small
system relief.  Plum's CPS rate is less than $1.24 per channel and, therefore, is presumed
reasonable.  There is nothing in the pleading that refutes this presumption, therefore, we
find the rate to be not unreasonable.

     5.   Accordingly, IT IS ORDERED, pursuant to Section 0.321 of the Commission's
Rules, 47 C.F.R.  0.321, that Plum Cable TV's request for small system relief is
GRANTED.
     
     6.  IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the CPS rate charged by Plum Cable TV with
respect to the above-referenced CUID number, IS JUSTIFIED.
          
     7. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the complaints against the CPS rate charged by 
Plum Cable TV with respect to the above-referenced CUID number, ARE DENIED.
                         
                         FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION

                         
                         
                         Meredith J. Jones
                         Chief, Cable Services Bureau