WPCj< 2HBVX@Z3|P (TT)7PC2X'XP\  P6QXP"5@^2CRdd$CCdq2C28dddddddddd88qqqYzoCNzoozzC8C^dCYdYdYCdd88d8ddddCN8ddddY`(`l2CC!CCPRCddYYYYYYzYzYzYzYC8C8C8C8ddddddddddYdddddoddYYYYYzYzYzYddddddPdCdCCCdNdz8zRdddCRoNoNNF2[dCYddddd7>d<d<CCYYdCCddCYCdYzzzzCCCCqodYYYYYYYYYYY8888dddddddndddddddHP LaserJet 4Si/4Si MX- leftHPLA4SMX.WRSXj\  P6G;,, LFXP2& zR@3|PTimes New Roman (TT)Times New Roman (Bold) (TT)Times New Roman (Italic) (TT)"5@^*7DSS77S^*7*.SSSSSSSSSS..^^^Jxooxf]xx7Axfxx]xo]fxxxxf7.7NS7JSJSJ7SS..S.SSSS7A.SSxSSJP!PZ*7777CE7SSxJxJxJxJxJooJfJfJfJfJ7.7.7.7.xSxSxSxSxSxSxSxSxSxSxJxSxSxSxSxS]SxSxJxJoJoJoJfJfJfJxSxSxxSxSxSxSCS7S777SAxSf.fExSxSxSxo7oE]A]AN:*LS7JSSSSS.4}}S2S}277JJS77SS7J72t7[[[[^ee*C`^.wRSSn[Cfx`xWlRx[][ceIfIs`Wx[rriwge*7DSS77S^*7*.SSSSSSSSSS..^^^Jxooxf]xx7Axfxx]xo]fxxxxf7.7NS7JSJSJ7SS..S.SSSS7A.SSxSSJP!PZ7SJSS7]777JJ:S7A7xx*7SSSS!S7.S^7SC[227`L*724S}}}Jxxxxxxoffff7777xxxxxxx^xxxxxx]SJJJJJJoJJJJJ....SSSSSSS[SSSSSSS22 ZXvL p HP LaserJet 4Si/4Si MX- leftHPLA4SMX.WRSC\  P6Q,, LFP I. A. 1. a.(1)(a) i) a) 1. 1. 1. a.(1)(a) i) a)a8DocumentgDocument Style StyleXX` `  ` a4DocumentgDocument Style Style . 2U kd k : v a6DocumentgDocument Style Style GX  a5DocumentgDocument Style Style }X(# a2DocumentgDocument Style Style<o   ?  A.  a7DocumentgDocument Style StyleyXX` ` (#` 2t   8BibliogrphyBibliography:X (# a1Right ParRight-Aligned Paragraph Numbers:`S@ I.  X(# a2Right ParRight-Aligned Paragraph Numbers C @` A. ` ` (#` a3DocumentgDocument Style Style B b  ?  1.  2   r1a3Right ParRight-Aligned Paragraph Numbers L! ` ` @P 1. ` `  (# a4Right ParRight-Aligned Paragraph Numbers Uj` `  @ a. ` (# a5Right ParRight-Aligned Paragraph Numbers _o` `  @h(1)  hh#(#h a6Right ParRight-Aligned Paragraph Numbersh` `  hh#@$(a) hh#((# 2+a7Right ParRight-Aligned Paragraph NumberspfJ` `  hh#(@*i) (h-(# a8Right ParRight-Aligned Paragraph NumbersyW"3!` `  hh#(-@p/a) -pp2(#p Tech InitInitialize Technical Style. k I. A. 1. a.(1)(a) i) a) 1 .1 .1 .1 .1 .1 .1 .1 Technicala1DocumentgDocument Style Style\s0  zN8F I. ׃  29]a5TechnicalTechnical Document Style)WD (1) . a6TechnicalTechnical Document Style)D (a) . a2TechnicalTechnical Document Style<6  ?  A.   a3TechnicalTechnical Document Style9Wg  2  1.   2kYa4TechnicalTechnical Document Style8bv{ 2  a.   a1TechnicalTechnical Document StyleF!<  ?  I.   a7TechnicalTechnical Document Style(@D i) . a8TechnicalTechnical Document Style(D a) . 2-!3DeH  Doc InitInitialize Document Stylez   0*0*0*  I. A. 1. a.(1)(a) i) a) I. 1. A. a.(1)(a) i) a)DocumentgPleadingHeader for Numbered Pleading PaperE!n    X X` hp x (#%'0*,.8135@8:d<d<CCYYdCCddCYCdYzzzzCCCCqodYYYYYYYYYYY8888dddddddnddddddd"5@^2Coddȧ8CCdr2C28ddddddddddCCrrrdzNdzoȐC8CtdCdoYoYCdo8Co8odooYNCodddYO,Oh2CC!CCPRCdodddddȐYYYYYN8N8N8N8oddddooooddoddddzodddYYYYYYddddooPoNoNCNodo8RoodȐYYoNoNNF2ldCddddddd<d<CCoodCCddCoCddzzzzzzzzzzCCCCozdddddddYYYYY8888dddddddndddddYd2\ 9Rh<y.C8*XC\  P6QP.y.G8*X(<G4  pQ7PC2XXP\  P6QXP.7UC2XXU4  pQXW!0(X_h0\  P6QhP I(!XO,(\  P6Q,P!{,C8*X3ֳC*f9 xQX5PC2X3_XP*f9 xQXXh 0  Times New RomanֽG}oy:`S b! jofJW"3!. ks0WDD6Wg yO- X   )ę X-x  #XP\  P6QXP#Federal Communications Commission`*(# DA 961822 ă  yxdddy )v3 Before the Federal Communications Commission  yO Washington, D.C. 20554 ă  yO -T#XP\  P6QXP#у  X-X` hp x (#%'0*,.8135@8:#C\  P6QP#эxThe Petition filed on April 5, 1994 opposed the license grant of Contel Cellular which is listed under the heading "Petition III" in Appendix A. and April 18, 1994,AF yO< -  #C\  P6QP#эxThe Petition filed on April 18, 1994 opposed the license grants of the licensees listed under the heading "Petition IV" in Appendix A. by the  xCommittee for Effective Cellular Rules ("CECR"), requesting that any grants of the captioned  xLapplications be expressly conditioned on the final disposition of CECR's Petition for Review in  xthe United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit with respect to the  X_- x-Commission's unserved area cellular rules._( AF {O8-#C\  P6QP#эxCommittee For Effective Cellular Rules v. FCC, 53 F.3d 1309 (D.C. Cir. 1995). For the reasons discussed below, we dismiss CECR's  XH-Petitions for Reconsideration as moot.XH AF yO-  #C\  P6QP#эx CECR also filed a Petition for Reconsideration on April 11, 1994 against the Contel Cellular license grant  x-for Market 98B, DavenportRock Island, Moline MSA. On April 19, 1994, CECR filed a Motion to Dismiss its Petition because it duplicated the petition which was filed on April 5, 1994. We grant this motion.  X - II. DISCUSSION T  X -  TPx2. In 1992, the Commission adopted the Cellular Unserved Second Report and Order,  xkwhich modified its licensing rules in the Domestic Public Cellular Radiotelephone Service to  xrequire a new method for determining the Cellular Geographic Service Areas (CGSAs) of cellular  xsystems, to allow expansion of the CGSA during the five year buildout period, and to clarify  X- xfiling requirements for cellular unserved areas.^AF {O-  #C\  P6QP#эxAmendment of Part 22 of the Commission's Rules to Provide for Filing and Processing of Applications for  {O- xUnserved Areas in the Cellular Service and to Modify other Cellular Rules, Second Report and Order, CC Docket  {O -No. 906, 7 FCC Rcd 2449 (1992) (Cellular Unserved Second Report and Order). CECR filed a Petition for Reconsideration of  X{- xthe Cellular Unserved Second Report and Order, requesting that the Commission rescind its  xmodification of all cellular licenses and suspend the use of the new mathematical formula as the  xmeans of determining CGSAs until the renewal of existing licenses or the issuance of new  xlicenses. CECR claimed that the Commission exceeded its statutory authority by improperly  xkmodifying the licenses of existing cellular systems. In 1993, the Commission denied CECR's"! ,T'T'33"  X- x\Petition for Reconsideration.(AF {Oy-  #C\  P6QP#эxAmendment of Part 22 of the Commission's Rules to Provide for Filing and Processing of Applications for  {OC- xiUnserved Areas in the Cellular Service and to Modify other Cellular Rules, Memorandum Opinion and Order on  {O - xReconsideration, Docket No. 906, 8 FCC Rcd 1363,  23 (1992) (Memorandum Opinion and Order on  {O-Reconsideration). On March 22, 1993, CECR filed a Petition for Review with the  xUnited States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit requesting that the court  X- xvacate the Cellular Unserved Second Report and Order and the Memorandum Opinion and Order  X- xon Reconsideration. CECR also requested that the Commission and the Court of Appeals stay  xthe grant of any application for new cell sites in Unserved Areas. Both the Commission and the  X-Court of Appeals denied CECR's stay requests. AF {O - xKԍ Order, CC Docket No. 906, 8 FCC Rcd 5087,  4 (1993); Order, Committee for Effective Cellular Rules v.  {O -FCC,, No. 931220 (D.C.Cir. September 29, 1993).    !x3. On four separate occasions in 1994, the Commission granted construction permits to  XL- xa total of sixty unserved area cellular applicants.9 LAF yO-  /#C\  P6QP#эxPublic Notice, Report No. CL9432, Feb. 1, 1994; Public Notice, Report No. CL9438, Feb. 11, 1994; Public Notice, Report No. CL9445, Mar. 11, 1994; Public Notice, Report No. CL9448, Mar. 18, 1994.9 CECR filed a Petition for Reconsideration  x(Petition) of each of these grants. Each Petition requested that the Commission explicitly  xcondition the grant of the construction permits upon the final disposition of CECR's Petition for  X - xReview with the court.  l AF yO$-#C\  P6QP#эxPetition I at 12; Petition II at 5; Petition III at 45; Petition IV at 45. Additionally, each Petition incorporated CECR's previously filed  X -motions for stay by reference. AF yO-#C\  P6QP#эxPetition I at 10; Petition II at 3; Petition III at 3; Petition IV at 3. x   x4. On May 9, 1995, the Court of Appeals dismissed CECR's petition for review and  X - xaffirmed the Cellular Unserved Order, holding that the Commission did not act arbitrarily and  xlcapriciously when it amended its cellular regulations through a noticeandcomment rule  X- xmaking.v  AF {O-ԍxCommittee for Effective Cellular Rules v. FCC, 53 F.3d at 1312.v The court concluded that the Commission acted within its statutory authority when it  xmimplemented a servicewide change through its rule making authority to the technical  XQ- x.requirements for cellular licenses and significantly reduced the unserved areas.QAF {O !-#C\  P6QP#эxId. ` ` Ă Because the  xCourt of Appeals denied the request for judicial relief upon which CECR's Petitions were based,  x/all of CECR's petitions for reconsideration are rendered moot. Accordingly, we dismiss the  X -petitions in their entirety. x` ` " ,T'T'33 "Ԍx X- III. ORDERING CLAUSES R   CTPx5. IT IS ORDERED that pursuant to Sections 4(i), 303(r), 309 and 405 of the  X- x.Communications Act of 1934, as amended, 47 U.S.C.  154(i), 303(r), 309 and 405, and Section  x22.128 of the Commission's rules, 47 C.F.R.  22.128, and the authority delegated under Section  x0.331 of the Commission's rules, 47 C.F.R.  0.331, that the Petitions for Reconsideration filed  xby the Committee for Effective Cellular Rules on March 3, 1994, March 14, 1994, April 5, 1994, April 11, 1994 and April 18, 1994 respectively ARE DISMISSED as moot.   x6. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that pursuant to Sections 4(i), 303(r), 309 and 405 of  X - xthe Communications Act of 1934, as amended, 47 U.S.C.  154(i), 303(r), 309 and 405, and  xSection 22.119 of the Commission's rules, 47 C.F.R.  22.119, that waivers of Section 22.105(d)  xlof the Commission's rules, 47 C.F.R.  22.105(d) filed on March 21, 1994 and April 1, 1994 respectively ARE DENIED. x ` ` hx` ` hhFEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION  x` ` hhMichele C. Farquhar x` ` hhChief, Wireless Telecommunications Bureau" ,T'T'33V"  X-) òAPPENDIX A T` h` h  X-TP` h` h PETITION I  X-x Southwestern Bell Mobile Systems, Inc.Collectively SBMS  X-xSBMS Cellular Telecomm. Springfield, Inc. Collectively SBMS  Xv-xChampaign CellTelCohh@Collectively SBMS  X_-xAbilene SMSA L.P.hh@Collectively SBMS  XH-xMidland/Odessa SMSA L.P.hh@(2 Markets)Collectively SBMS  X1-xMississippi Cellular Telephone Co.@Mississippi Cellular  X -xMcCaw Communications of Nevada, Inc.Collectively McCaw  X -xSanta Barbara Cellular Systems, Ltd.Collectively McCaw  X -xVisalia Cellular Telephone Co.@Collectively McCaw  X -xGTE Mobilnet of Oregon L.P.@Collectively GTEM/CCI  X -xVirginia Cellular L.P.hh@(2 Markets)Collectively GTEM/CCI  X -xContel Cellular of Nashville, Inc.@Collectively GTEM/CCI  X-xTriad Metronet, Inc.hh@Collectively GTEM/CCI  Xy-xCarolina Metronet, Inc.hh@Collectively GTEM/CCI  Xb-xContel Cellular of the South, Inc.@Collectively GTEM/CCI  XK-xSouth Carolina Metronet, Inc.@Collectively GTEM/CCI  X4-xBinghamton MSA L.P.hh@Collectively GTEM/CCI  X-` h` hxGTE Mobilnet of California L.P.@(2 Markets)Collectively GTEM/CCI  X-xRockford MSA L.P.hh@Collectively GTEM/CCI  X-xRoanoke MSA L.P.hh@Collectively GTEM/CCI  X-xFlorence Metronet, Inc.hh@Collectively GTEM/CCI  X-xTuscaloosa Cellular Partnership@Collectively GTEM/CCI  X-xFlorence Cellular Telephone Co., Inc.Collectively GTEM/CCI  X-xEvansville MSA L.P.hh@Collectively GTEM/CCI  X|-xAlabama Cellular Service, Inc.@Alabama Cellular  Xe-xAlbany Telephone Co.hh@Albany Telephone  XN-xALLTEL Mobile Comm. of the Carolinas, Inc.ALLTEL  X7-xAlton Cellular, Inc. hh@Alton Cellular  X -xBay Area Cellular Telephone Co.@Bay Area  X -xCentury Cellunet of Lansing L.P.@Century Cellunet77  X-xChicago SMSA L.P.hh@(2 Markets)Chicago SMSA  X-xColumbus Cellular Telephone Co.@Columbus Cellular  X -xCumberland Cellular Telephone Co.Cumberland Cellular  X!-xEl Paso Cellular Telephone Co.@El Paso  X"-xFlint Cellular Telephone Co.@Flint Cellular  X#-xFlorida Cellular Service, Inc.@Florida Cellular  Xh$-xMinneapolis SMSA L.P.hh@Minneapolis SMSA  XQ%-xMobileTel, Inc.hh@MobileTel  X:&- xWilmington Cellular Communications, Inc.Wilmington Cellular":& ,T'T'33$"Ԍ X-ԙ PETITION II  X-xACC/McCaw Cellular of Fresno@ Jointly ACC/McCaw  X-xMedford Cellular Telephone Co., Inc.Jointly ACC/McCaw  X-xGary Cellular Telephone Co.@ Collectively Gary Cellular  X-xMcAllenEdinburgMission SMSA L.P. Collectively Gary Cellular  Xv-xAmarillo SMSA L.P.hh Collectively Gary Cellular  X_-xChattanooga Cellular Telephone Co.Collectively GTEM/CCI  XH-xContel Cellular of Kentucky, Inc.@ Collectively GTEM/CCI  X1-xContel Cellular of the South, Inc.@Collectively GTEM/CCI  X -xGTE Mobilnet of Terre Haute L.P.@ Collectively GTEM/CCI  X -xContel Cellular of the Southwest, Inc.Collectively GTEM/CCI  X -xDayton Cellular Telephone Co.@Dayton Cellular  X -xHuntsville MSA L.P.hh@Huntsville  X -xLansing Cellular Telephone Co.@Lansing Cellular  X-x  Xy- PETITION III  XK-xContel Cellular of Davenport, Inc.@Contel Cellular  X-  X- PETITION IV  X-xBrown County MSA Cellular L.P.@Brown County  X-xRedding Cellular Partnership@(2 Markets)Redding Cellular  X- ",T'T'33"  X-) APPENDIX B  X-T P  X- OPPOSITION TO PETITIONS xACC/McCaw xAlabama Cellular xAlbany Telephone xALLTEL  XH-xBay Areahh xBrown County xCentury Cellunet xContel Cellular xEl Paso xFlorida Cellular xGary Cellular xGTEM/CCI  X- xHuntsville xMcCaw  Xb-x Mississippi Cellular  XK- x MobileTel xRedding Cellular xSBMS