[Federal Register Volume 59, Number 194 (Friday, October 7, 1994)]
[Unknown Section]
[Page 0]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 94-24831]
[[Page Unknown]]
[Federal Register: October 7, 1994]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION
[PR Docket No. 94-106; DA 94-1067]
Commercial Mobile Radio Services; Connecticut State Petition to
Retain Regulatory Control of Rates of Wholesale Cellular Service
Providers
AGENCY: Federal Communications Commission.
ACTION: Notice; extension of time.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
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. This Order extends the deadlines for reply comments
in this proceeding in response to a request filed by Richard
Blumenthal, Attorney General of the State of Connecticut, the
Connecticut Office of Consumer Counsel, Connecticut Telephone and
Communication Systems, Inc. and Connecticut Mobilecom, Inc. This
extension will provide interested parties enough time to complete their
review and submit meaningful replies on the issues we raised in this
proceeding.
DATES: Reply comments must be filed on or before October 19, 1994.
ADDRESSES: Send reply comments to the Federal Communications
Commission, 1919 M Street, NW., Washington, DC 20554.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Regina Harrison, Private Radio Bureau,
Land Mobile and Microwave Division, (202) 632-7125.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
In the Matter of Petition of the Connecticut Department of Public
Utility Control to Retain Regulatory Control of the Rates of Wholesale
Cellular Service Providers in the State of Connecticut; Order
Adopted: September 28, 1994; Released: September 29, 1994.
By the Chief, Private Radio Bureau:
1. Richard Blumenthal, Attorney General of the State of
Connecticut, the Connecticut Office of Consumer Counsel, Connecticut
Telephone and Communication Systems, Inc. and Connecticut Mobilecom,
Inc. (collectively Movants) have filed a motion for a 15-day
extension of time from the October 4, 1994 deadline for filing reply
comments.\1\ For the reasons given below, we grant the motion.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\Joint Motion for Extension of Time (dated Sept. 26, 1994)
(Motion).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
2. 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. A state could,
however, obtain intrastate rate regulatory authority by filing a
properly supported petition with the FCC.\2\ States with existing
rate regulation could petition by August 10, 1994 to continue
regulating, and would obtain a stay of statutory preemption until
the FCC acted. The Commission has one year in which to rule on the
petition and to decide any reconsideration. New York filed such a
petition on August 9, 1994. Pursuant to the Commission's rules,\3\
interested parties had 30 days in which to comment and then 15 days
for replies.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\2\Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act of 1993, Public Law 103-66,
Title VI, section 6002(b)(2), 107 State. 312, 392 (1993), amending
Section 332(c)(3) of the Communications Act, 47 U.S.C. 332(c)(3).
\3\Second Report and Order, Implementation of Sections 3(n) and
332 of the Communications Act, Regulatory Treatment of Mobile
Services, 9 FCC Rcd 1411, 1522-23 (1994), 59 Fed. Reg. 18493 (Apr.
19, 1994) (to be codified at 47 CFR 20.13).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
3. Movants, who support the petition of the Connecticut
Department of Public Utility Control, state that they need the
requested extension to analyze the filings of the parties opposing
the petition, which contain ``putative antitrust, competitive and
economic analyses of the cellular markets as well as other
testimony.''\4\ They state that grant of this ``modest'' extension
will ensure a complete record in this proceeding and facilitate a
timely Commission decision in the proceeding.\5\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\4\Motion at 2.
\5\Motion at 2-3.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
4. We believe that the motion has merit. The record in this
proceeding is large, and the issues, including the state of
competition in the cellular market in the state and the
reasonableness of rates, intricate. We find that good cause has been
shown for the requested extension.
5. Pursuant to Section 1.46 of the Commission's Rules,\6\ we
GRANT the Joint Motion for Extension of Time of Richard Blumenthal,
Attorney General of the State of Connecticut, the Connecticut Office
of Consumer Counsel, Connecticut Telephone and Communication
Systems, Inc. and Connecticut Mobilecom, Inc., AND HEREBY EXTEND the
period for filing replies UNTIL October 19, 1994.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\6\47 CFR 1.46.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Ralph A. Haller,
Chief, Private Radio Bureau.
[FR Doc. 94-24831 Filed 10-6-94; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6712-01-M
