Federal Communications Commission DA 96-1264
Before the
Federal Communications Commission 
Washington, D.C. 20554
In the Matter of )
Robin Cable Systems of Tucson ) CUID No. AZ0159 (Tucson) 
d/b/a Tucson Cablevision )
Complaints Regarding )
Cable Programming Services Tier )
Rate Increase )
ORDER
Adopted: August 22, 1996 Released: September 3, 1996
By the Chief, Financial Analysis and Compliance Division, Cable Services Bureau:
1. In this Order we consider complaints about the rate 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 393 
and FCC Form 1200.
2. Under the Communications Act,2 and our rules implementing it, 47 C.F.R. Part 76, 
the Federal Communications Commission ("Commission") must review a cable operator's rate 
for its CPST 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 CPST rate.3 Under our 
rules, an operator may attempt to justify its rate through either a benchmark showing or a cost-of- 
service showing.4 In either ease, the operator has the burden of demonstrating that its CPST rate 
are not unreasonable.5
1 The Commision received the first valid complaint filed against the Operator on December 9, 1993.
- Communications Act, § 623(c), as amended, 47 U.S.C. § 543(c) (1996).
3 47 C.F.R. § 76.956.
4 47 C.F.R. § 76.956(b).
Id.
10342
Federal Communications Commission DA 96-1264
3. The Commission's original rate regulations took effect on September 1, 1993.6 
The Commission subsequently revised its rate regulations effective May 15, 1994.7 Operators 
with valid CPST rate complaints filed against them prior to May 15, 1994 must demonstrate that 
their CPST rates were in compliance with the Commission's initial rules from the time the 
complaint was filed through May 14, 1994, and that their rates were in compliance with the 
revised rules from May 15, 1994 forward.8 Operators attempting to justify their rate for the 
period prior to May 15, 1994 through a benchmark showing must complete and file FCC Form 
393.9 To justify then: rates for the period beginning May 15,1994 through a benchmark showing, 
operators must use the FCC Form 1200. 10
4. Operator asserts that its monthly CPST rate is justified because the rate is equal 
to or lower than the maximum permitted charge. Upon review of Operator's FCC Form 393 and 
FCC Form 1200, we agree. We found no apparent errors hi Operator's calculation of its 
maximum permitted CPST rate. 11 Therefore, Operator's monthly CPST rates for the periods 
under review ARE justified.
5. Accordingly, IT IS ORDERED, pursuant to Section 0.321 of the Commission's rules, 
47 C.F.R. § 0.321, that the complaints referenced herein against the CPST rate charged by 
Operator in the franchise area referenced in the caption as reflected on Operator's FCC Forms 
393 and 1200 filings, ARE DENIED.
FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION
Elizabeth W. Beaty
Chief, Financial Analysis and Compliance Division
Cable Services Bureau
6 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).
7 47 C.F.R. § 76.922(b).
8 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, 4190 (1994) ("Second Order on Reconsideration").
9 Id
10 47 C.F.R. § 76.922(b)(6); see also Second Order on Reconsideration, 9 FCC Red at 4189 n.195.
11 This finding is based solely on the representations of Comcast Cable Communications, Inc. in its rate filings. 
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.
10343