Federal Communications Commission DA 13-562 
Before the
Federal Communications Commission
Washington, D.C. 20554
In the Matter of
Time Warner Cable Inc.
Petitions for Determination of Effective 
Competition in Communities in Indiana and 
Kentucky
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
MB Docket No. 12-136, CSR 8634-E
MB Docket No. 12-141, CSR 8639-E
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
Adopted:  March 26, 2013 Released:  March 27, 2013
By the Senior Deputy Chief, Policy Division, Media Bureau:
I. INTRODUCTION AND BACKGROUND
1. Time Warner Cable Inc., hereinafter referred to as “Petitioner,” has filed with the 
Commission petitions pursuant to Sections 76.7, 76.905(b)(2), and 76.907 of the Commission’s rules for a 
determination that Petitioner is subject to effective competition in those communities listed on 
Attachment A and hereinafter referred to as the “Attachment A Communities.”  Petitioner alleges that its 
cable system serving the Attachment A Communities is subject to effective competition pursuant to 
Section 623(l)(1)(B) of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended (“Communications Act”),1 and the 
Commission’s implementing rules,2 and is therefore exempt from cable rate regulation in those 
Communities because of the competing service provided by two direct broadcast satellite (“DBS”) 
providers, DIRECTV, Inc. (“DIRECTV”), and DISH Network (“DISH”).  Petitioner additionally claims 
to be exempt from cable rate regulation in the communities listed on Attachment B and hereinafter 
referred to as the “Attachment B Communities,” pursuant to Section 623(l)(1)(A) of the Communications 
Act3 and Section 76.905(b)(1) of the Commission’s rules,4 because the Petitioner serves fewer than 30 
percent of the households in the franchise area.  The petitions are unopposed.
2. In the absence of a demonstration to the contrary, cable systems are presumed not to be 
subject to effective competition,5 as that term is defined by Section 623(l) of the Communications Act and 
Section 76.905 of the Commission’s rules.6 The cable operator bears the burden of rebutting the 
presumption that effective competition does not exist with evidence that effective competition is present 
within the relevant franchise area.7 For the reasons set forth below, we find that Petitioner is subject to 
effective competition in the Communities listed on Attachments A and B, with the exception of one of the 
Attachment A Communities—the City of Taylorsville, Kentucky.  Except for that community, the 
petitions are granted.
  
1 See 47 U.S.C. § 543(l)(1)(B).
2 47 C.F.R. § 76.905(b)(2).
3 See 47 U.S.C. § 543(l)(1)(A).
4 47 C.F.R. § 76.905(b)(1).
5 Id. § 76.906.
6 See 47 U.S.C. § 543(l); 47 C.F.R. § 76.905.
7 See 47 C.F.R. §§ 76.906-.907(b).
Federal Communications Commission DA 13-562 
2
II. DISCUSSION
A. The Competing Provider Test
3. Section 623(l)(1)(B) of the Communications Act provides that a cable operator is subject 
to effective competition if the franchise area is (a) served by at least two unaffiliated multichannel video 
programming distributors (“MVPDs”) each of which offers comparable video programming to at least 50 
percent of the households in the franchise area; and (b) the number of households subscribing to 
programming services offered by MVPDs other than the largest MVPD exceeds 15 percent of the 
households in the franchise area.8 This test is referred to as the “competing provider” test.
4. The first prong of this test has three elements:  the franchise area must be “served by” at 
least two unaffiliated MVPDs who offer “comparable programming” to at least “50 percent” of the 
households in the franchise area.9 It is undisputed that the Attachment A Communities are “served by” 
both DBS providers, DIRECTV and DISH, and that these two MVPD providers are unaffiliated with 
Petitioner or with each other.  A franchise area is considered “served by” an MVPD if that MVPD’s 
service is both technically and actually available in the franchise area.  DBS service is presumed to be 
technically available due to its nationwide satellite footprint, and presumed to be actually available if 
households in the franchise area are made reasonably aware of the service’s availability.10 The 
Commission has held that a party may use evidence of penetration rates in the franchise area (the second 
prong of the competing provider test discussed below) coupled with the ubiquity of DBS services to show 
that consumers are reasonably aware of the availability of DBS service.11 We further find that Petitioner 
has provided sufficient evidence to support its assertion that potential customers in those Communities 
are reasonably aware that they may purchase the service of these MVPD providers.12 The “comparable 
programming” element is met if a competing MVPD provider offers at least 12 channels of video 
programming, including at least one channel of nonbroadcast service programming,13 and is supported in 
these petitions with citations to the channel lineups for both DIRECTV and DISH.14 Also undisputed is 
Petitioner’s assertion that both DIRECTV and DISH offer service to at least “50 percent” of the 
households in the Attachment A Communities because of their national satellite footprint.15 Accordingly, 
we find that the first prong of the competing provider test is satisfied.  
5. The second prong of the competing provider test requires that the number of households 
subscribing to MVPDs, other than the largest MVPD, exceed 15 percent of the households in a franchise 
area.  Petitioner asserts that it is the largest MVPD in the Attachment A Communities.16 Petitioner sought 
to determine the competing provider penetration there by purchasing a subscriber tracking report from the 
Satellite Broadcasting and Communications Association that identified the number of subscribers 
attributable to the DBS providers within the Attachment A Communities on a zip code plus four basis.17
  
8 47 U.S.C. § 543(l)(1)(B); 47 C.F.R. § 76.905(b)(2).
9 47 U.S.C. § 543(l)(1)(B)(i); 47 C.F.R. § 76.905(b)(2)(i).
10 See Petitions at 3-5.
11 Mediacom Illinois LLC, 21 FCC Rcd 1175, 1176, ¶ 3 (2006).
12 47 C.F.R. § 76.905(e)(2); see Petitions at 4-5.   
13 See 47 C.F.R. § 76.905(g).  See also Petitions at 5-6.
14 See Petitions at 6 & n.17.
15 See id. at 6.
16 Id. at 7.
17 See id. at 7-8.
Federal Communications Commission DA 13-562 
3
6. Based upon the aggregate DBS subscriber penetration levels that were calculated using 
Census 2010 household data,18 as reflected in Attachment A, we find that Petitioner has demonstrated that 
the number of households subscribing to programming services offered by MVPDs, other than the largest 
MVPD, exceeds 15 percent of the households in all but one of the Attachment A Communities.  
7. In the City of Taylorsville, Petitioner claims to be subject to competing provider effective 
competition based on evidence of 49 DBS subscribers and 325 households.19 Using those numbers, 
Petitioner claims DBS subscribership of 15.08 percent.20 Although a chart provided by Petitioner 
indicates that there are 325 occupied housing units in the City of Taylorsville, Kentucky,21 data on the 
U.S. Census Bureau website reflects that there are 330 occupied housing units in this locality.22 Using the 
correct figure for occupied housing units, our calculations show DBS subscribership in the City of 
Taylorsville to be 14.85 percent.  This level of subscribership is below the 15 percent statutory minimum 
for competing provider effective competition.  Accordingly, we deny the petitions as to the City of 
Taylorsville, Kentucky.
8. In sum, the second prong of the competing provider test is satisfied for each of the 
Attachment A Communities except for the City of Taylorsville.  Based on the foregoing, we conclude that 
Petitioner has submitted sufficient evidence demonstrating that both prongs of the competing provider test 
are satisfied and Petitioner is subject to effective competition in the Attachment A Communities with the 
exception of the City of Taylorsville.
B. The Low Penetration Test
9. Section 623(l)(1)(A) of the Communications Act provides that a cable operator is subject 
to effective competition if the Petitioner serves fewer than 30 percent of the households in the franchise 
area.  This test is referred to as the “low penetration” test.23 Petitioner alleges that it is subject to effective 
competition under the low penetration effective competition test because it serves less than 30 percent of 
the households in the Attachment B Communities.24
10. Based upon the subscriber penetration level calculated by Petitioner, as reflected in 
Attachment B, we find that Petitioner has demonstrated that the percentage of households subscribing to 
its cable service is less than 30 percent of the households in the Attachment B Communities.  Therefore, 
the low penetration test is satisfied as to the Attachment B Communities.
  
18 Id. at 8 & Exhs. B, C; Letter from Craig A. Gilley, Counsel for Time Warner Cable Inc., to Marlene H. Dortch, 
Secretary, FCC, at 1 and Attachment (Nov. 14, 2012) (“Nov. 14 Supplement”) (attaching page 8 of the Petition in 
CSR 8634-E). 
19 See Petition in CSR 8634-E at 8; Nov. 14 Supplement.
20 Id.
21 See Petition in CSR 8634-E at Exh. B.
22 See U.S. Census Bureau, 2010 Census Interactive Population Search for KY - Taylorsville city, available at
http://www.census.gov/2010census/popmap/ipmtext.php?fl=2175810.
23 47 U.S.C. § 543(l)(1)(A).
24 See Petition in CSR 8634-E at 9; Petition in CSR 8639-E at 8-9.
Federal Communications Commission DA 13-562 
4
III. ORDERING CLAUSES 
11. Accordingly, IT IS ORDERED that the petitions for a determination of effective 
competition filed in the captioned proceeding by Time Warner Cable Inc. ARE DENIED for the City of 
Taylorsville, Kentucky, and ARE GRANTED for all the other Attachment A and B Communities.
12. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the certification to regulate basic cable service rates 
granted to any of the Communities set forth on Attachments A and B, except for the City of Taylorsville, 
Kentucky, IS REVOKED. 
13. This action is taken pursuant to delegated authority pursuant to Section 0.283 of the 
Commission’s rules.25
FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION
Steven A. Broeckaert
Senior Deputy Chief, Policy Division, Media Bureau
  
25 47 C.F.R. § 0.283.
Federal Communications Commission DA 13-562 
5
ATTACHMENT A
COMMUNITIES SERVED BY TIME WARNER CABLE INC.
MB Docket No. 12-136, CSR 8634-E
Communities CUIDs CPR*
2010 Census
Households
Estimated DBS 
Subscribers
Town of Austin IN0243 17.03 1,674 285
City of Bedford KY1016 39.57 230 91
Town of Campbellsburg IN0938 32.89 228 75
City of Crestwood KY0576 16.05 1,626 261
City of Milton KY1042 32.80 250 82
Town of New Pekin IN0640 17.23 563 97
City of Orchard Grass Hills KY0636 22.64 508 115
City of Salem IN0056 25.10 2,622 658
Town of Saltillo IN0939 45.24 42 19
Town of Scottsburg IN0244 21.24 2,768 588
City of Shelbyville KY0427 
KY0428
24.30 5,235 1,272
City of Simpsonville KY1258 26.31 935 246
City of Taylorsville KY0730 14.85 330 49
MB Docket No. 12-141, CSR 8639-E
Communities CUIDs CPR*
2010 Census
Households
Estimated DBS 
Subscribers
Town of Borden IN0636 29.28 321 94
City of Charlestown IN0083 20.28 2,884 585
Town of Clarksville IN0085 15.85 9,175 1,454
Town of Corydon IN0101 21.40 1,341 287
Town of Georgetown IN0255 20.96 1,088 228
Town of Greenville IN0256 32.42 219 71
Town of Lanesville IN0792 33.20 241 80
Monroe Township IN1073 46.53 1,975 919
City of New Albany IN0194 15.59 15,575 2,428
Town of Palmyra IN0791 19.85 388 77
City of Radcliff KY0396 15.54 8,660 1,346
Town of Sellersburg IN0084 26.44 2,443 646
Town of Utica IN0652 17.07 328 56
City of West Point KY0657 17.16 338 58
*CPR = Percent of competitive DBS penetration rate.
Federal Communications Commission DA 13-562 
6
ATTACHMENT B
COMMUNITIES SERVED BY TIME WARNER CABLE INC.
MB Docket No. 12-136, CSR 8634-E
Communities CUIDs 
Franchise Area 
Households
Cable 
Subscribers
Penetration 
Percentage
Spencer County (Uninc.) KY0729
KY0876
5,835 218 3.74
Trimble County (Uninc.) KY1001
KY1171
2,940 355 12.07
MB Docket No. 12-141, CSR 8639-E
Communities CUIDs 
Franchise Area 
Households
Cable 
Subscribers
Penetration 
Percentage
Hardin County (Uninc.) KY0330 16,517 358 2.17