*Pages 1--2 from  Microsoft Word - 7935.doc*
 Federal  Communications  Commission  DA  01-  819 
 Before  the 
 Federal  Communications  Commission 
 Washington,  D.  C.  20554 


 In  the  Matter  of 
 BRUCE  K.  EDMARK 
 Request  for  Reinstatement  of  Private 
 Carrier  Paging  Stations 


 ) 
 ) 
 ) 
 ) 
 ) 
 ) 
 ) 
 ) 
 ) 


 WPIP670,  WPIP687 
 WPIR920,  WPIR963 


 ORDER 
 Adopted:  March  30,  2001  Released:  April  2,  2001 
 By  the  Chief,  Commercial  Wireless  Division,  Wireless  Telecommunications  Bureau: 
 1.  This  order  addresses  the  Petition  for  Reconsideration  (Petition)  filed  by  Bruce  K.  Edmark 
 (Edmark)  on  October  29,  1999.  Edmark  filed  his  Petition  at  the  Commission’s  Gettysburg,  Pennsylvania 
 office  and  seeks  reconsideration  of  the  Commercial  Wireless  Division,  Policy  and  Rules  Branch  (Branch) 
 decision  dated  October  1,  1999,  which  denied  Edmark’s  request  for  reinstatement  of  the  above-  captioned 
 station  licenses.  1  For  the  reasons  set  forth  below,  we  dismiss  Edmark’s  Petition  as  procedurally  defective. 


 2.  The  plain  language  of  section  1.106  of  the  Commission’s  rules  requires  petitions  for 
 reconsideration  to  be  received  by  the  Commission’s  Office  of  the  Secretary  within  thirty  days  from  the 
 release  date  of  the  underlying  action.  2  By  filing  his  Petition  at  the  incorrect  location,  Edmark  failed  to 
 properly  file  his  pleading  in  accordance  with  Commission  rules.  3 


 3.  We  note  also  that  Edmark’s  Petition  fails  to  raise  any  persuasive  argument  which  would 
 warrant  reconsideration  of  the  underlying  order  and  that  the  Petition  does  not  present  evidence  that  the 
 referenced  stations  were  in  fact  timely  constructed  in  accordance  with  our  rules.  4 


 1  Bruce  K.  Edmark,  Request  for  Reinstatement  of  Private  Carrier  Paging  Stations,  Order,  DA  99-  2052  (Comm. 
 Wireless  Div.  Oct.  1,  1999). 
 2  47  C.  F.  R.  §  1.106  (f);  §  1.106  (i)  (“  Petitions  for  Reconsideration  .  .  .  shall  be  submitted  to  the  Secretary,  Federal 


 Communications  Commission,  Washington,  D.  C.,  20554”)  (emphasis  added). 
 3  Id.  at  §  1.  7  (“[  P]  leadings  and  other  documents  are  considered  to  be  filed  with  the  Commission  upon  their 


 receipt  at  the  location  designated  by  the  Commission").  In  addition,  as  further  required  by  section  1.106(  i), 
 Edmark’s  Petition  does  not  comply  with  sections  1.49(  a),  1.51(  c)(  2),  and  1.52  of  the  Commission’s  rules.  Id.  at 
 §  1.106(  i)  (“  Petitions  for  Reconsideration  .  .  .  shall  conform  to  the  requirements  of  §§  1.49,  1.51,  and  1.52”) 
 (emphasis  added);  §  1.49(  a)  (requiring  all  pleadings  to  be  typewritten  or  prepared  by  mechanical  processing 
 methods);  §  1.51(  c)(  2)  (designating  number  of  copies  to  be  filed);  §  1.52  (requiring  that  a  party  not  represented 
 by  counsel  verify  the  pleading  and  state  his  address). 


 4  In  addition,  we  note  that  the  frequencies  associated  with  former  call  signs  WPIP670,  WPIP687,  WPIR920,  and 


 (continued….) 
1
 Federal  Communications  Commission  DA  01-  819 
 2 
 4.  Accordingly,  IT  IS  ORDERED  that,  pursuant  to  authority  delegated  by  sections  4(  i)  and 
 303  of  the  Communications  Act,  as  amended,  47  U.  S.  C.  §§  154(  i),  303,  and  by  sections  0.331  and  1.106 
 of  the  Commission’s  rules,  47  C.  F.  R.  §§  0.331,  1.106,  the  Petition  for  Reconsideration  submitted  by  Bruce 
 K.  Edmark,  on  October  29,  1999,  in  the  above-  captioned  matter  is  DISMISSED. 


 FEDERAL  COMMUNICATIONS  COMMISSION 
 William  W.  Kunze 
 Chief,  Commercial  Wireless  Division 
 Wireless  Telecommunications  Bureau 


 (Continued  from  previous  page) 
 WPIR963  are  shared  frequencies  pursuant  to  Commission  rule  90.494  (b)  and  are  not  assigned  on  an  exclusive 
 basis.  4  Accordingly,  current  rule  section  90.494  (g),  47  C.  F.  R.  §  90.494  (g),  provides,  in  pertinent  part,  that 
 “paging  licenses  may  be  granted  on  these  shared  paging  channels  only  for  expansion  (addition  of  new  sites  or 
 relocation  of  existing  sites)  or  other  modification  …  of  existing,  licensed  private  or  commercial  paging  systems, 
 and  for  new,  private,  internal-  use  paging  systems….” 
2