********************************************************    
                         NOTICE
********************************************************

This document was converted from
WordPerfect to ASCII Text format.

Content from the original version of the document such as
headers, footers, footnotes, endnotes, graphics, and page numbers
will not show up in this text version.

All text attributes such as bold, italic, underlining, etc. from the
original document will not show up in this text version.

Features of the original document layout such as
columns, tables, line and letter spacing, pagination, and margins
will not be preserved in the text version.

If you need the complete document, download the
WordPerfect version or Adobe Acrobat version, if available.

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


                         January 29, 1997


John Prendergast, Esq.                            Released:  January 29, 1997
Blooston, Mordkofsky, Jackson & Dickens
2120 L Street, N.W., Suite 300
Washington, D.C. 20037

     Re:  Brookings Municipal Utilities' Request for Waiver of Sections 24.8313(a)(3), 
          24.709(a)(2), and 24.709(b)

Dear Mr. Prendergast:

     On May 22, 1996, Brookings Municipal Utilities ("BMU"), a successful bidder for licenses
in the Broadband C Block Personal Communications Services ("PCS"), filed an FCC Form 600
which included a request for waiver of Sections 24.8313(a)(3), 24.709(a)(2), and 24.709(b) of the
Commission's rules.  Specifically, BMU sought a waiver of Section 24.813(a)(3) to the extent that
the rule required it to disclose "any person holding five percent or more of...[its] debt securities
together with the amount and percentage held...."  Additionally, BMU requested a waiver of
Sections 24.709(a)(2) and 24.709(b), seeking to exclude the "personal incomes and assets of
[BMU's] Board Members" from a determination of its attributable assets.  Upon review of BMU's
arguments we grant its request for waiver of Section 24.813(a)(3), and dismiss its request for waiver
of Sections 24.709(a)(2), and 24.709(b) as moot.  
          
     In its waiver request, BMU states that it is a political subdivision of the City of Brookings,
South Dakota ("the City" or "Brookings").  Although South Dakota municipal law prohibits the City
from issuing warrants or options, BMU explains that Brookings "has issued debt securities...for the
construction of a wastewater treatment plant" and has entered into a "revenue obligation loan
agreement with the South Dakota Conservancy District...to finance improvements to the wastewater
collection system...."  BMU argues that these debt securities were "issued as bearer bonds, and
neither the paying agent for the issue...nor the underwriter...have any records of original or current
bond holders."  Furthermore, BMU maintains that "because the debt securities...do not endow their
respective holders with any control over the Applicant, such debt securities are not those...envisaged
by the Commission's disclosure rules" and, BMU should, therefore, be exempt from Section
24.813(a)(3)'s reporting requirements.

     Section 24.819(a)(ii) of the Commission's rules states that a request for waiver may be
granted upon an affirmative showing that the "unique facts and circumstances of a particular case
render application of the rule inequitable, unduly burdensome or otherwise contrary to the public
interest."  We find that BMU has demonstrated such a showing in this instance.  
          
     First, the Commission has eliminated personal net worth requirements for C Block
applicants, attributable investors, and affiliates. Thus, BMU's request for waiver of Sections
24.709(a)(2) and 24.709(b) is moot.  

     Second, "[t]he purpose of PCS ownership disclosure requirements is to allow the
Commission to determine who is the real party in interest, to determine compliance with the anti-
collusion rules, the applicable spectrum caps...and the alien ownership restrictions."  Here, the bond
holders have no control over BMU.  Therefore, strict enforcement of Section 24.813(a)(3) would not
serve the underlying purpose of the rule.  Furthermore, because information regarding the Brookings
bond holders is not readily available, disclosure of the "names, addresses, citizenship and principal
businesses of any person holding five percent or more of [its] . . . debt securities" would be unduly
burdensome for the applicant.  Accordingly, BMU's request for waiver of Section 24.813(a)(3) is
granted.  








     
     Brookings Municipal Utilities' request for waiver of Section 24.813(a)(3) IS GRANTED, and
its request for waiver of Sections 24.709(a)(2), and 24.709(b) IS DISMISSED.  This action is taken
pursuant to the delegated authority under Section 0.331 of the Commission's rules, 47 C.F.R. 
0.331.  

                         Sincerely,


                                   

                         David Furth
                         Chief, Commercial Wireless Division
                         Wireless Telecommunications Bureau