In the Matter of 
Federal Communications Commission 
.. Before the 
Federal Communications Commission 
Washington, D.C. 20554 
) 
) 
DA 96-1258 
Vision Cable Company of Rhode lslan4 .. Inc. ) CUID No. RIOOOS (Pawtucket) 
) 
) 
) 
Complaints Regarding ) 
Cable Programming Services Tier Rates ) 
ORDER 
Adopted: August 6, 1996 Released: August 16, 1996 
By the Chief, Financial Analysis and Compliance Division, Cable Services Bureau: 
I. In this Order we consider complaints about rates ·the above-captioned operator 
("Operator") was charging for its cable programming services tier ("CPST") in the community 
referenced above. 1 Operator's response includes benchmark justifications filed on FCC Form 
1200 and multiple FCC Form 1210s, the latest FCC Form 1210 filed for the period ending in the 
first quarter of 1995. This Order addresses only the reasonableness of Operator's rates after May 
14, 1994. The Federal Communications Commission ("Commission") has already issued a 
··separate order addressing the reasonableness of Operator's rates prior to that date.2 
2. Under the Communications Act,3 the Commission is authorized to review CPST rates 
of cable systems riot subject to effective competition to ensure that rates charged are not 
. unreasonable. If the Commission finds rates to be unreasonable, it shall determine correct rates 
and any refund liability. 
1 The Commission received the first valid complaint filed against the Operator on February l, 1994. 
2 See Vision Cable Company of Rhode Island, Inc., 10 FCC Red 5536 (1995). 
Communications Act, Section 623(c), as amended, ~7 U.S.C. Section 543(c) (1996). 
9304 
Federal Communications Commission DA 96-1258 
3. Pursuant to the Cable Television Consumer Protection and Competition-Act of 1992,4 
and our rules implementing it, 47 C.F.R. Part 76, Subpart N, Operator filed its FCC Forms 1200 
and 1210 for the period starting May 15, 1994 through March 31, 1995 in response to complaints 
referenced herein. Upon review of Operator's FCC Form 1200 and FCC Form 1210s, we 
conclude that Operator has justified its CPST rates charged during the period under review. 
Therefore, we find that Operator's CPST rates in the above-referenced community are justified 
and not unreasonable.5 
4. Accordingly, IT IS ORDERED, pursuant to Section·0.321 of the Commission's rules, 
47 C.F.R. § 0.321, that complaints referenced herein against CPST rates charged by Operator in 
the franchise area referenced in the caption during the period May 15, 1994 to March 31, 1995 
ARE DENIED. 
FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION 
Eliza.beth W. Beaty 
· Chief, Financial Analysis and Compliance Division 
Cable Services Bureau · 
• 
4 Pub. L. No. 102-385, 106 Stat. 1460 (1992) ("1992 Cable Act"); Communications Act, Section 623(c), as 
amended, 47 U.S.C. Section 543(c) (1993). 
5 This finding is based solely on the representations of Operator. Should information come to our attention that 
these representations were materially inaccurate, we reserve the right to take appropriate action. This Order is not 
to be construed as a finding that we have accepted as correct any specific entry, explanation or argument made by 
any party to this proceeding not specifically addressed herein. 
. . 
9305