********************************************************    
                         NOTICE
********************************************************

This document was converted from
WordPerfect to ASCII Text format.

Content from the original version of the document such as
headers, footers, footnotes, endnotes, graphics, and page numbers
will not show up in this text version.

All text attributes such as bold, italic, underlining, etc. from the
original document will not show up in this text version.

Features of the original document layout such as
columns, tables, line and letter spacing, pagination, and margins
will not be preserved in the text version.

If you need the complete document, download the
WordPerfect version or Adobe Acrobat version, if available.

*****************************************************************
                                Before the
                     Federal Communications Commission
                          Washington, D.C. 20554

In the Matter of:                    )
                                     )
COMCAST CABLEVISION OF               )           City of Santa Ana, California
SANTA ANA, INC.                      )           CUID No.  CA0957
                                     )
                                     )
Complaints Regarding Cable           )
Program Service Rates                )

                      MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER

        Adopted:  October 30, 1997                 Released:  November 4, 1997

By the Chief, Cable Services Bureau:

  1.    Here we consider complaints about the price Comcast Cablevision of Santa Ana, Inc.
("Comcast") was charging for its cable programming service ("CPS") tier in the City of Santa Ana,
California ("Santa Ana").  Comcast filed a motion to dismiss the complaints arguing that it was subject
to effective competition at the time the complaints were filed and thus its cable programming service rate
was not subject to regulation by the Commission.  Comcast filed a supplement to its motion to dismiss
on October 23, 1997.  In the alternative, Comcast argues that its rate was justified under Commission
rules.  No oppositions were filed.

  2.     The first valid complaint against Comcast's CPS tier rates in the community referenced
above was filed with the Commission on November 26, 1993.  Because in this Order we are dismissing
the all of the pending complaints on the grounds that effective competition is present, we need not rule
on Comcast's rate justification.

  3.     The Communications Act of 1934, as amended ("Communications Act"), and the
Commission's Rules provide that only rates of cable systems that are not subject to effective competition
may be regulated.  One basis on which a cable system is deemed subject to effective competition is if
fewer than 30 percent of the households in the system's franchise area subscribe to the system's cable
service.

  4.     In its motion to dismiss, Comcast asserts that its cable system was subject to low
penetration effective competition at the time the first valid complaint was filed, and therefore not subject
to rate regulation, because it served fewer than 30 percent of the households (i.e., occupied housing
units) within its franchise area, the City of Santa Ana, California.  Comcast submits 1990 Census data
demonstrating that Santa Ana contains 71,860 households.  In addition, Comcast provides evidence that,
as of October 31, 1993, it served a total of 21,394 subscribers, or 29.8 percent of the total number of
households in Santa Ana.   By December, 1995, the time of the last valid complaint, the number of
subscribers served by Comcast had decreased to 21,073.

  5.     In the absence of a demonstration to the contrary, cable systems are presumed not to be
subject to effective competition.  The cable operator bears the burden of rebutting the presumption that
effective competition does not exist with evidence that effective competition, as defined by Section 76.905
of the Commission's Rules, is present within its franchise area.

  6.     By its submissions, Comcast has demonstrated that its system met the statutory definition
of effective competition at the time of the November 26, 1993 complaint.  In rate complaint proceedings,
the Commission requires cable operators defending against such complaints on the basis of effective
competition to use subscriber data derived from the approximate time the CPS tier complaint was filed. 
According to the Census data provided by Comcast, the total households figure for Santa Ana was
71,860.  Thus, a comparison of the number of subscribers as of October 31, 1993 (21,394) in relation
to the household figure (71,860) yields a penetration rate of 29.8 percent.  A comparison of the number
of subscribers as of December, 1995 (21,073) in relation to the household figure (71,860) yields a
penetration rate of 29.3 percent.    Accordingly, Comcast was subject to low penetration effective
competition at the time the complaints were filed.
  7.     Accordingly, IT IS ORDERED, pursuant to Section 0.321 of the Commission's Rules,
that the motion of Comcast Cablevision of Santa Ana, Inc. to dismiss the complaints against its cable
programming service price charged in the City of Santa Ana, California (CUID No. CA0957) IS
GRANTED.

  8.     IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the complaints against the cable programming service
price charged by Comcast Cablevision of Santa Ana, Inc. in the City of Santa Ana, California (CUID
No. CA0957) ARE DISMISSED.

  FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION



  Meredith J. Jones
  Chief, Cable Services Bureau