FCC Record, Volume 2, No. 9, Pages 2437 to 2750, April 27 - May 8, 1987 Page: 2,495
This book is part of the collection entitled: Federal Communications Commission Record and was provided to UNT Digital Library by the UNT Libraries Government Documents Department.
Extracted Text
The following text was automatically extracted from the image on this page using optical character recognition software:
2 FCC Red Vol. 9
Federal Communications Commission RecordDA 87-494
in CGSA was entirely over water (namely, the Gulf of
Mexico). The other entry of an unintended reduction to
45 Watts ERP was ignored even though the intention was
evident. GTE has done nothing which is not permitted
under the Rules as such extension under the circumstances
is not considered a major modification.
15. As to whether the Bureau's aforementioned public
notice was insufficient, as stated before, under the Rules
in Cellular Radio, movement of a cell site is a permissive
change provided it does not modify the CGSA. Notification
by FCC Form 489 is acceptable as long as it is filed
prior to the modified site's being placed in operation. No
formal notification to the public is necessary.
16. Concerning whether GTE's covering license application
was prematurely filed. The Commission does
accept covering licenses to be filed for partial completing
of construction permits. This is particularity true in the
case of cellular service. When one or more sites of a
multiple-site complex have been completed. an application
for covering license for those sites may be filed. It
must be filed once the site is completed but before the
station is placed in operation. In this case, partial coverage
was requested and. again. no Rules were violated.
CONCLUSION
17. We find that GTE is legally and technically qualified
to hold a license to provide cellular service to the
public in the Galveston MSA. Our decision turns on the
clear and significant benefit to the public that we envision
from the rapid introduction of this new service. We
therefore conclude that the public should be afforded the
opportunity to use this cellular service without additional
delay.9
18. Accordingly, IT IS ORDERED that the application
of GTE Mobilnet of Houston Limited Partnership for
covering license for the Galveston Metropolitan Statistical
Area, File No. 10018-CL-L-87. IS GRANTED.
19. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the petition to
dismiss, deny or defer filed by Houston Cellular Telephone
Company IS DENIED.
20. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the request of
Lynn J. Juanes to dismiss her petition IS GRANTED.
21. This order is issued under Section 0.291 of the
Commission's rules and is effective on its adoption date.
Petitions for reconsideration under Section 1.106 or applications
for review under Section 1.115 of the rules may
be filed within 30 days of the date of public notice of this
order. See Section 1.4(b)(2).FOOTNOTES
l The Galveston non-wireline tentative selected, Lynn J.
Juanes ("Juanes"), also filed a petition for deferral of operating
authority against GTE's application but subsequently filed a
request for dismissal of its petition, stating that Juanes and
GTE have resolved their differences. We have reviewed Juane's
petition and find it is in the public interest to grant her request
for dismissal of the petition.
2 See Public Notice, Report No. CL-87-116, Mimeo No. 1362,
at 2, released Jan. 5, 1987. :)
3 HCTC references the application of GTE Mobilnet of Houston
Limited Partnership for stations KNKA 221 and KNKA 459,
File No. 0079-CL-MP-87.
4 HCTC says it is unclear whether GTE constructed Cell 1 at
its new site because on the one hand, GTE represents its
construction to be complete within 0() days of its FCC 489 filing
but on the other hand, GTE says changes have been made.
5 On February 2, 1987, GTE filed an Amendment of Notification
and on March 2, 1987, filed a second Amendment of
Notification which corrected certain clerical errors contained in
the February 2, 1987, submission. See paragraphs 12-14. infra,
for amplification.
' We emphasize that we are only considering at this time
GTE's request for covering license in the Galveston' MSA and
are not addressing any issues surrounding GTE's combination
request for Houston and Galveston. We will give prompt consideration
to HCTC's arguments when we address arguments
surrounding GTE's application to combine the Houston and
Galveston MSAs.
7 In order to have roamer and NXX agreements, resale agreements
would first have to be concluded.
8 See Rogers Radio Communications Inc. v. FCC, 593 F.2d
1225 (D.C. Cir. 1974).
' As the court said in MCI Telephone Co. v. FCC, "it is high
time to move cellular telephone services from the FCC's regulatory
process to the marketplace." 738 F.2d 1322, 1328 (D.C.
Cir. 1984).FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION
Kevin J. Kelley
Chief, Mobile Services Division
Upcoming Pages
Here’s what’s next.
Search Inside
This book can be searched. Note: Results may vary based on the legibility of text within the document.
Tools / Downloads
Get a copy of this page or view the extracted text.
Citing and Sharing
Basic information for referencing this web page. We also provide extended guidance on usage rights, references, copying or embedding.
Reference the current page of this Book.
United States. Federal Communications Commission. FCC Record, Volume 2, No. 9, Pages 2437 to 2750, April 27 - May 8, 1987, book, May 1987; Washington D.C.. (https://digital.library.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metadc1602/m1/64/: accessed May 25, 2024), University of North Texas Libraries, UNT Digital Library, https://digital.library.unt.edu; crediting UNT Libraries Government Documents Department.