NOTICE


*************************************************************************
             

                         NOTICE


*************************************************************************

This document was originally prepared in Word Perfect.  

If the original document contained--

                    *  Footnotes
                    *  Boldface & Italics

--this information  is missing in this version

The document format (spacing, margins, tabs, etc.) is changed too.

If you need the complete document, download the Word Perfect version.

For information about downloading documents (FTP) see file pnmc5021.

File  pnmc5021 (.txt & .wp) is in directory \pub\Public_Notices\Miscellaneous.

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


         In the Matter of)
     )
     Post-Newsweek Cable, Inc.)  CUID No. TX0045 (Odessa)
         )
        )  
       )
     
      Complaint Regarding )
  Cable Programming Services Tier Rates)


                             ORDER

    Adopted:  September 20, 1996  Released:  September 25, 1996  

By the Chief, Financial Analysis and Compliance Division, Cable Services Bureau:

     1.  In this Order we consider a complaint concerning the rates the above-captioned operator
("Operator") was charging for its cable programming services tier ("CPST") in the community
referenced above.  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.  Under the Communications Act, the Commission is authorized to review CPST rates of
cable systems not 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.

     3.  Pursuant to the Cable Television Consumer Protection and Competition Act of 1992, and
our rules implementing it, 47 C.F.R. Part 76, Subpart N, Operator filed its FCC Forms 1200 and
1210 for the period from May 15, 1994 to March 31, 1995 in response to the complaint referenced
herein.  Although we have made certain adjustments to Operator's FCC Form 1200 and FCC Form
1210s, upon review of Operator's filings, 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.

     4.    Accordingly, IT IS ORDERED, pursuant to Section 0.321 of the Commission's rules,
47 C.F.R.  0.321, that Operator's CPST rates in effect during the period from May 15, 1996 to
March 31, 1996 ARE NOT UNREASONABLE.  

     5.  IT IS FURTHER ORDERED, pursuant to Section 0.321 of the Commission's rules, 47
C.F.R.  0.321, that the complaint 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 IS
DENIED.

     FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION 



     Elizabeth W. Beaty
     Chief, Financial Analysis and Compliance Division
                                     Cable Services Bureau