[Federal Register Volume 59, Number 201 (Wednesday, October 19, 1994)]
[Unknown Section]
[Page 0]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 94-25865]
[[Page Unknown]]
[Federal Register: October 19, 1994]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION
[PR Docket No. 94-105; DA 94-1115]
Commercial Mobile Radio Services; California State Petition To
Retain Regulatory Authority Over Intrastate Cellular Service Rates
AGENCY: Federal Communications Commission.
ACTION: Proposed rule; order waiving certain pleading rules and denying
deferral of filing dates, and dismissing a request for issuance of
public notice.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The amendments to the Communications Act in the Omnibus Budget
Reconciliation Act of 1993 preempted state rate and entry regulation of
commercial mobile radio services. States were given the opportunity to
file petitions for the authority to continue regulating these
intrastate rates. Under Commission rules, this proceeding contemplates
only the filing of comments and replies on the state's petition. This
Order waives the prohibition on additional pleadings found in
Sec. 20.13(a)(5) of the Commission's Rules and permits additional
pleadings to be filed, pursuant to the terms of Sec. 1.45 of the
Commission's Rules. The Order also denies a motion filed by Cellular
Resellers Association, Inc., Cellular Service, Inc. and ComTech Mobile
Telephone Company to defer filing dates for the filing of replies for
reasons of efficient administration and docket management. This Order
also dismisses as moot a Request for Issuance of a public notice filed
by National Cellular Resellers Association.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Regina Harrison, Private Radio Bureau, Land Mobile and Microwave
Division, (202) 632-7125.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Order Waiving Certain Pleading Rules and Denying Deferral of Filing
Dates
In the Matter of: Petition of People of the State of California
and the Public Utilities Commission of the State of California to
Retain Regulatory Authority Over Intrastate Cellular Service Rates.
Adopted: October 7, 1994;
Released: October 7, 1994
By the Chief, Private Radio Bureau:
1. The Commission's rule governing the filing of pleadings in this
proceeding contemplates only the filing of comments and replies on the
state's petition to retain authority over intrastate cellular rates. It
thus excludes Section 1.45,\1\ which governs the general filing periods
for motions, from the procedural rules which may apply.\2\ This
proceeding, however, raises confidentiality issues that have generated
the filing of several motions and requests.\3\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\47 CFR 1.45.
\2\Second Report and Order, Implementation of Sections 3(n) and
332 of the Communications Act, Regulatory Treatment of Mobile
Services, 9 FCC Rcd 1411, 1522 (1994), 59 Fed. Reg. 18493 (Apr. 19,
1994) (to be codified at 47 CFR 20.13 (a)(5)).
\3\See, e.g., Motion of the Cellular Carriers Association of
California to Reject Petition or, Alternatively, Reject Redacted
Information (Sept. 19, 1994); Request for Access to California
Petition for State Regulatory Authority Pursuant to the Terms of a
Protective Order, filed by the National Cellular Resellers
Association (Sept. 19, 1994); Emergency Motion to Compel Production
to the California Public Utilities Commission of Information
Contained in Oppositions to California's Petition to Retain State
Regulatory Authority over Intrastate Cellular Service Rates (dated
Sept. 29, 1994).
We have also received PR Docket No. 94-105 Notice of Ex Parte
Contact and Request for Issuance of a Public Notice (Sept. 23,
1994), filed by the National Cellular Resellers Association (NCRA),
asking that the Commission issue a Public Notice permitting any
interested party to participate by telephone or in person in a
September 30, 1994 meeting on confidentiality issues. All parties to
the proceeding were given actual notice of the meeting and permitted
to participate either in person or by telephone. Moreover, on
September 30, 1994, the Commission issued a Public Notice of Comment
Sought on Draft Protective Order, DA 94-1083, announcing that all
interested parties could comment by October 7, 1994 on a draft
protective agreement that had been distributed to all parties of
record. We believe that these actions have rendered the NCRA request
moot and we dismiss it on that ground.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
2. We believe that equity requires that we permit interested
parties to file nonfrivolous pleadings on confidentiality and related
issues. We thus waive the prohibition of Sec. 20.13 on additional
pleadings, and permit necessary additional pleadings to be filed
pursuant to the terms of Sec. 1.45 of the Commission's Rules.
3. We have also received a Motion to Defer Filing Dates.\4\ Movants
ask that we defer the filing of replies, due October 19, 1994, to
either (1) two weeks after opposing parties file any supplemental
comments based on the disclosure of confidential information or (2) two
weeks after the Commission issues a decision denying access to such
confidential information. Movants contend that if additional
information is disclosed, this will require supplemental pleadings that
will duplicate the October 19 replies and ``needlessly expand the
number of pleadings (and the time involved) for consideration by the
Commission.''\5\ They argue that a grant of the Motion will expedite
review by permitting the filing of a consolidated reply. They add that
if additional disclosure is not made, and the Commission moves quickly
in reaching that decision, the proposed procedure will result in only
minimal delay.\6\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\4\Motion to Defer Filing Dates (Motion) of Cellular Resellers
Association, Cellular Service, Inc. and Com Tech Mobile Telephone
Co. (Oct. 4, 1994) (collectively Movants).
\5\Motion at 3.
\6\Motion at 3-4.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
4. We deny the Motion. As we explained in a recent order granting
the parties a 15-day extension to file replies, the Commission must
meet a one-year statutory deadline for ruling on the state's petition
and deciding any reconsideration. We stressed that, ``The Commission is
faced with stringent statutory deadlines in a complex and massive
proceeding.''\7\ Although we agree with Movants that disclosure of
additional information may require that we permit the parties to
supplement their comments, we cannot now predict whether such
additional disclosure will be necessary. We believe that efficient
administration and docket management requires adherence to the October
19, 1994 deadline for filing replies in this proceeding. For the
foregoing reasons, we do not believe that good cause has been shown for
the requested deferral.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\7\Order Extending Time and Permitting Replies to Revised
Petition, DA 94-1054 (Sept. 26, 1994) at 1-2.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
5. Pursuant to Sec. 0.331 of the Commission's Rules,\8\ the
provisions of Sec. 20.13(a)(5) are waived to the extent indicated
herein, the Motion to Defer Filing Dates filed by Cellular Resellers
Association, Inc., Cellular Service, Inc., and ComTech Mobile Telephone
Company is denied, and PR Docket No. 94-105 Notice of Ex Parte Contact
and Request for Issuance of a Public Notice is dismissed as moot to the
extent indicated herein.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\8\47 CFR 0.331.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Gerald P. Vaughan,
Deputy Chief, Private Radio Bureau.
[FR Doc. 94-25865 Filed 10-18-94; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6712-01-M
