# Before the

# Federal Communications Commission

# Washington, D.C. 20554

)

In re Application of )

)

Robert Fetterman ) File No. 26834-CD-P-93

)

For Reconsideration of an Authorization for a )

Facility to Operate on Frequency 454.125 MHz )

at Trevorton, Pennsylvania )

# ORDER ON RECONSIDERATION

**Adopted: November 19, 1999 Released: November 19, 1999**

By the Chief, Policy and Rules Branch, Commercial Wireless Division,
Wireless Telecommunications Bureau:

1.  This Order denies a Petition for Reconsideration (Petition),[^1]
    filed by Robert Fetterman d/b/a R.F. Communications (RF) on March
    14, 1994, of the dismissal of the captioned application by the
    Commercial Wireless Division (Division). For the reasons discussed
    below, we deny the Petition.

2.  In its application, RF requested authority to operate a new Domestic
    Public Land Mobile Radio Service station on the frequency 454.125
    MHz at Trevorton, Pennsylvania. By letter dated February 10, 1994,
    the Division notified RF that its application failed to 1) identify
    co-channel station KSV940 licensed to Richard Blyler d/b/a Lebanon
    Mobilefone (Blyler), and 2) provide an interference study showing
    that RF's proposed facility would not cause harmful interference to
    Blyler, as required under Section 22.15(b)(2) of the Commission's
    rules.[^2] The Division, therefore, dismissed the application as
    unacceptable for filing under Section 22.20 of the Commission's
    rules.[^3]

3.  In its Petition, RF argues that the Division's dismissal of its
    application was unlawful because Blyler did not have a valid
    construction permit for frequency 454.125 MHz. Specifically, RF
    states that the Public Notice of the grant of Blyler's application
    for frequency 454.125 MHz is invalid because the underlying
    construction permit did not include frequency 454.125 MHz. RF
    therefore argues that when it submitted the captioned application,
    it was not required to provide an interference study. We disagree.
    While RF is correct that the underlying construction permit did not
    include frequency 454.125 MHz, the Public Notice of the grant of
    Blyler's application for frequency 454.125 MHz is proof that the
    agency authorized Blyler to use the frequency and provided notice to
    RF. The failure to include frequency 454.125 MHz on the underlying
    construction permit was a clerical error, which has been corrected
    by the Division, and it is undisputed that administrative agencies
    may correct inadvertent, ministerial errors.[^4] Because RF did not
    identify co-channel station KSV940 nor provide an interference study
    in accordance with Section 22.15(b)(2) of the Commission's rules, we
    deny RF's Petition and affirm the Division's decision to dismiss the
    captioned application.

4.  Accordingly, IT IS ORDERED that, pursuant to sections 4(i) and 405
    of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended, 47 U.S.C. §§ 154(i),
    405, and sections 0.331, 1.106, and 22.128(d) of the Commission's
    rules, 47 C.F.R. §§ 0.331, 1.106, 22.128(d), the Petition for
    Reconsideration filed by Robert Fetterman d/b/a R.F. Communications
    on March 14, 1994 is DENIED.

    FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION

    Paul D'Ari

    Chief, Policy and Rules Branch

    Commercial Wireless Division

    Wireless Telecommunications Bureau

[^1]: Petition for Reconsideration filed March 14, 1994.

[^2]: 47 C.F.R. § 22.15(b)(2) (1994).

[^3]: 47 C.F.R. § 22.20 (1994).

[^4]: *Chlorine Institute v. OSHA*, 613 F.2d 120, 123 (5^th^ Cir. 1990);
    *see American Trucking Ass'n v. Frisco Transportation Co.*, 358 U.S.
    133, 145-146 (1958).