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/Bureaus/Miscellaneous/Public_Notices/

*****************************************************************
********
$// Memorandum Opinion and Order, Scripps Howard, DA 96-184
$/ 76.956 re. Cable Programming Service Rates
$/ 76.922 Rates for the basic service tier and cable programming service tier
            

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


                                                                  DA 96-184

In the Matter of)  
     )
Scripps Howard Cable Company     )     CUID No. GA0055 (City of Elberton)
     )
Withdrawal of FCC Form 329       )
Rate Complaint  )
     
     
     
                       MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER

     Adopted:  February 14, 1996       Released:  March 11, 1996  

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

     1.  The local franchising authority ("LFA") in the above-referenced community filed a
complaint with this Commission alleging that the prices charged by Scripps Howard Cable
Company ("Scripps Howard") for cable programming service tier ("CPS") services in that
community were unreasonably high.  In July 1995, the LFA wrote to the Commission stating
that it wished to withdraw its complaint in this community.  In this community, the LFA was
the only complainant that filed a valid complaint 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
this complaint, 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     
I.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.

     1.  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.  

     2.  This Commission has now received from the LFA in this community a letter
stating that it wishes to withdraw its CPS rate complaint against Scripps Howard.  Under our
rules, this Commission's authority to regulate CPS rates arises when a valid complaint against
those rates is filed.  In the community referenced above, the LFA is the only complainant. 
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 any such agreements here.   We will accordingly allow the LFA to withdraw
its complaint.  Because our review of the rate justification showings is predicated on the
existence of a rate complaint, we are terminating our review of Scripps Howard's filings in
the above-referenced community. 

     3.  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 to the
extent discussed herein.


     
     FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION




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