DA 95-1956 Federal Communications Commission Record 10 FCC Red No. 20
Before the
Federal Communications Commission 
Washington, D.C. 20554
In the Matter of
Chattanooga Cable TV Company CUID No. TN0065 
(Red Bank)
Benchmark Filing to Support 
Cable Programming Service Price
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER 
Adopted: September 12, 1995; Released: September 18, 1995
By the Chief, Financial Analysis and Compliance Di 
vision, Cable Services Bureau:
1. Here we consider a complaint about the price the 
above-captioned operator ("Operator") was charging for its 
cable programming service ("CPS") tier in the community 
referenced above. Operator has chosen to attempt to justify 
its price through a benchmark showing on FCC Form 393. 
This Order addresses the reasonableness of Operator's price 
only through May 14. 1994. At a later time we will issue a 
separate order addressing the reasonableness of the price 
after that date.1
2. Under the Cable Television Consumer Protection and 
Competition Act of 1992.2 and our rules implementing it. 
47 C.F.R. Part 76. Subpart N. the Commission must review 
CPS prices upon the filing of a complete and timely com 
plaint. The filing of a complete and timely complaint 
triggers an obligation on behalf of the cable operator to file 
a justification of its CPS prices.3 Under our rules, an 
operator may attempt to justify its prices through either a 
benchmark showing or a cost-of-service showing.4 In either 
case, the operator has the burden of demonstrating that its 
CPS prices are not unreasonable.5
3. The Commission's original rate regulations took effect 
on September 1. 1993." The Commission subsequently re 
vised its rate regulations effective May 15, 1994.7 Operators 
with complete and timely 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.8 Oper 
ators attempting to justify their prices for the period prior 
to May 15, 1994 through a benchmark showing must com 
plete and file FCC Form 393.9 Generally, to justify their 
prices for the period beginning May 15, 1994 through a 
benchmark showing, operators must use the FCC Form 
1200 series. 10
4. The complaint in the franchise area which is the 
subject, of this Order was completed and served on Oper 
ator on October 4, 1993 and received by the Commission 
on October 8, 1993. Operator filed FCC Form 393 in 
response. In a letter accompanying its Form 393 filing, 
Operator argues that the complaint should be dismissed 
because the complainant completed question number 7 on 
FCC Form 329, indicating that he was challenging the 
reasonableness of a rate increase which was first reflected 
on a bill received on or about September 16. 1993. Oper 
ator states that it did not increase its rates in September 
1993, but only restructured its rates to be consistent with 
the Commission's regulations. Operator also states that the 
complainant's response to question number 8 on FCC 
Form 329 sets forth rates that were inconsistent with the 
bill attached to the complaint.
5. Operator's assertions do not persuade us that the 
complaint is invalid or should be dismissed. In general, we 
will find valid any complaint that states a claim on which 
relief can be granted and provides adequate information to 
allow us to process the complaint, despite minor flaws or 
inaccuracies. We believe this approach best implements the 
mandate of the 1992 Cable Act. We reject Operator's ar 
gument that the complaint should be dismissed because it 
complained of a rate increase that did not occur. The two 
bills attached to the complaint indicate that when Operator 
restructured its rates in September 1993. the complainant's 
rate did increase. In addition, although the complainant on 
question number 8 entered the current rate for the pre 
vious rate and vice versa, it is clear from his complaint and 
the attached bills that he objected to Operator's 
restructured CPS tier rate and that he believed that rate 
was unreasonable.
6. In its Form 393 filing. Operator calculated a maxi 
mum permitted rate for its CPS tier of $15.56 per month 
(plus franchise fee). However, Operator's actual monthly 
charge for the CPS tier was $15.57 (plus franchise fee). 
Upon review of Operator's Form 393 filing, we find that 
Operator's actual charge of $15.57 (plus franchise fee) is 
justified. The Operator made an error in its filing by failing 
to round its calculations to at least three decimal points per 
the instructions." Correctly calculated. Operator's maxi 
mum permitted per channel rate is $0.519. instead of 
$0.52.
1 The findings in this Order do not in any way prejudge the 
reasonableness of the price for CPS service after May 14. 1994 
under our new rate regulations. However, to the extent Oper 
ator has sought to take advantage of the refund deferral period 
under the Second Order on Reconsideration, Fourth Report 
and Order, and Fifth Notice of Proposed Rulemaking, MM 
Docket No. 92-266. FCC 94-38, 9 FCC Red 4119 ("Second Order 
on Reconsideration"), the maximum permitted CPS price deter 
mined herein might also apply from May 15, 1994 until the date 
on which Operator implemented its CPS price under the new 
regulations. See para. 3, infra.
z Pub. L. No. 102-385, 106 Stat. 1460 (1992) ("1992 Cable Act"): 
Communications Act, § 623(c), as amended, 47 U.S.C. § 543(c) 
(1993).
1 47 C.F.R. § 76.956.
4 47 C.F.R. § 76.956( b).
5 Id.
h Order in MM Docket No. 92-266, Implementation of Sections
of the Cable Consumer Protection and Competition Act of 1992:
Rate Regulation, FCC 93-372, 58 Fed. Reg. 41042 (Aug. 2, 1993).
" 47 C.F.R. § 76.922(b).
8 See Second Order on Reconsideration, 9 FCC Red at 4190,
paras. 150-152."" Id.
10 47 C.F.R. § 76.922(b)(6); see also Second Order on Reconsi 
deration. 9 FCC Red at 4189 n.195.
11 FCC Form 393 Instructions at 10.
10324
10 FCC Red NO. 20 Federal Communications Commission Record DA 95-1956
7. Upon review of the record herein, and having incor 
porated the adjustment discussed above", we conclude that 
Operator's actual CPS price of $15.57 per month (plus 
franchise fee) was justified for the period in question. 
Operator's showing justifies a maximum reasonable CPS 
tier price of $15.57 per month (plus franchise fee) for the 
period from October 8, 1993 to May 14, 1995.12
8. Accordingly, IT IS ORDERED, pursuant to Section 
0.321 of the Commission's Rules, 47 C.F.R. § 0.321, that 
the request of Operator to dismiss the complaint filed in 
the community referenced above IS DENIED.
9. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the complaint 
referenced herein against the cable programming service 
price charged by Operator in the community referenced 
above IS DENIED TO THE EXTENT INDICATED 
HEREIN.
FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION
JoAnn Lucanik
Chief, Financial Analysis and Compliance Division
Cable Services Bureau
12 This finding is based solely on the representations of Oper- Order is not to be construed as a finding that we have accepted 
ator and the modification described herein. Should information as correct any specific entry, explanation or argument made by 
come to our attention that these representations were materially any party to this proceeding not specifically addressed herein, 
inaccurate, we reserve the right to take appropriate action. This
10325