*Pages 1--2 from  Microsoft Word - 25532.doc*
 Federal  Communications  Commission  DA  03-  642 
 Before  the  Federal  Communications  Commission 
 Washington,  D.  C.  20554 


 In  the  matter  of 
 TRITON  PCS  LICENSE  COMPANY,  L.  L.  C. 
 Petition  for  Waiver  of  Section  22.367  of  the  Rules  Concerning  Wave  Polarization  in  the  Cellular 
 Radiotelephone  Service 
 AT&  T  WIRELESS  SERVICES,  INC. 
 Petition  for  Waiver  of  Section  22.367  of  the  Rules  Concerning  Wave  Polarization  in  the  Cellular 
 Radiotelephone  Service 


 )  ) 
 )  ) 
 )  ) 
 )  ) 
 )  ) 
 )  ) 
 )  ) 


 Order 
 Adopted:  March  6,  2003  Released:  March  6,  2003 
 By  the  Deputy  Chief,  Commercial  Wireless  Division,  Wireless  Telecommunications  Bureau: 


 1.  This  Order  addresses  Petitions  for  Waiver  (“  Petitions”)  filed  separately  by  Triton  PCS  License  Company,  L.  L.  C.  (Triton)  on  March  22,  2002  and  AT&  T  Wireless  Services,  Inc.,  (AWS)  on  April  12, 
 2002,  for  waiver  of  section  22.367  of  the  Commission’s  rules  regarding  vertical  wave  polarization  in  the  cellular  radiotelephone  service.  1  In  their  Petitions,  Triton  and  AWS  request  waivers  of  section 
 22.367(  a)(  4)  of  the  Commission’s  rules  in  order  to  employ  wave  polarization  other  than  vertical.  2 
 2.  The  Commission  released  an  order  on  September  24,  2002,  as  part  of  the  year  2000  Biennial  Review  of  Regulations,  which  modified  or  eliminated  certain  Part  22  Commission  rules.  3  In  the  Part  22 
 Biennial  Review,  the  Commission  eliminated  section  22.367(  a)(  4)  of  the  Commission’s  rules,  which  provided  that  electromagnetic  waves  radiated  by  base,  mobile,  and  auxiliary  test  transmitters  in  the 


 1  See  Triton  PCS  License  Company,  L.  L.  C.,  Petition  for  Waiver  of  Section  22.  367  of  the  Rules  Concerning  Wave 
 Polarization  in  the  Cellular  Radiotelephone  Service,  filed  March  22,  2002;  Triton  PCS  License  Company,  L.  L.  C.,  Petition  for  Waiver  of  Section  22.  367  of  the  Rules  Concerning  Wave  Polarization  in  the  Cellular  Radiotelephone 


 Service  (Supplement  to  Petition  for  Waiver),  filed  May  28,  2002;  AT&  T  Wireless  Services,  Inc.,  Petition  for  Waiver  of  Section  22.  367  of  the  Rules  Concerning  Wave  Polarization  in  the  Cellular  Radiotelephone  Service,  filed  April  12, 
 2002.  2 
 Triton  requests  a  waiver  at  its  transmitter  locations  in  the  Myrtle  Beach,  South  Carolina  cellular  market.  See  Triton  Petition  at  1.  AWS  requests  a  waiver  for  any  transmitter  locations  associated  with  licensees  under  its  control.  See 


 AWS  Petition  at  3.  3 
 See  Year  2000  Biennial  Regulatory  Review  –  Amendment  of  Part  22  of  the  Commission’s  Rules  to  Modify  or  Eliminate  Outdated  Rules  Affecting  the  Cellular  Radiotelephone  Service  and  other  Commercial  Mobile  Radio 


 Services,  WT  Docket  01-  108,  Report  and  Order,  17  FCC  Rcd  18401  (2002)  (Part  22  Biennial  Review). 
1
 DA  03-  642 
 2 
 Cellular  Radiotelephone  Service  had  to  be  vertically  polarized.  4  The  elimination  of  the  vertical  polarization  rule  became  effective  on  February  18,  2003. 
 3.  Because  section  22.367(  a)(  4)  was  eliminated,  we  dismiss  both  Petitions  as  moot. 
 4.  Accordingly,  IT  IS  ORDERED  that,  pursuant  to  section  4(  i)  of  the  Communications  Act,  as  amended,  47  U.  S.  C.  §  154(  i)  and  sections  0.131,  0.331,  1.925  of  the  Commission’s  rules,  47  C.  F.  R.  §§ 
 0.131,  0.331,  and  1.925,  the  Petitions  for  Waiver  filed  by  Triton  PCS  License  Company,  L.  L.  C.,  on  March  22,  2002,  and  AT&  T  Wireless  Services,  Inc.,  on  April  12,  2002  are  DISMISSED  as  moot. 


 FEDERAL  COMMUNICATIONS  COMMISSION 


 Roger  S.  Noel  Deputy  Chief,  Commercial  Wireless  Division 
 Wireless  Telecommunications  Bureau 


 4  Part  22  Biennial  Review  at  18428-  18429,  paras.  47-  51. 
2