# U ni te d S ta te s Co ur t of A pp ea ls

For the Eig hth Circu it

__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ _

No. 1 6- 16 83

__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ _

Am eren Co rp or at io n; Am eri can Elec tri c Po wer Ser vi ce Co rp or at io n; Cen te rp oi nt
Ene rg y Hou st on Elec tri c, LLC; Vi rg in ia Elec tri c an d P owe r Co m pa ny

ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll l Peti ti on er

s

v.

Fed eral Co m

m un ic at io ns Co m

m is si on ; Un it ed Sta te s o f Am eri ca

ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll l Resp on de nt s

COMP TEL, doi ng bu si ne ss as I NCOMPAS ; Lev el 3 Co m m un ic at io ns ; Nat io na l
Cab le & Tele co m

m un ic at io ns Ass oc ia ti on ; Un it ed Sta te s Tel eco m Ass oc ia ti on

ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll l In te rv en or s

----- ----- ----- ----- ----- -----

Tex as Ind us tri al Ener gy Con su m ers ; Tex as Offic e o f Pu bl ic Uti li ty Cou ns el

ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll l

Amici on Beha lf

of Peti ti on er

__ __ __ __ __ __

Pet it io n fo r Rev ie w of a n Ord er o f th e Fed eral Co m

m un ic at io ns Co m

m is si on

__ __ __ __ __ __

Su bm it te d: Jan ua ry

11 , 20 17
Fil ed : J ul y

31 , 20 17

__ __ __ __ __ __Befo re WOL LMAN, MURPHY, an d C OLLOTO N, Circ ui t J ud ge s.

__ __ __ __ __ __

W OLLMAN, Circ ui t J ud ge

.

Am eren Co rp or at io n; Am eri can Elec tri c Po wer Serv ic e Co rp or a t i o n;

Cen te rPo in t Ene rg y Hou st on Elec tri c, LLC; an d Virg in ia Elec tri c an d P owe r

Co m pa ny (co ll ect iv el y , Pet it io ne rs ) pe ti ti on fo r rev ie w of a Nov em be r 20 15 or de r of

th e Fed eral C o mm

u ni cat io ns Co m

m is si on (FCC ) go ve rn in g th e rat es th at ut il it y

co m pa ni es m ay ch arg e te le co m m un ic at io ns pr ov id ers fo r at ta ch in g th ei r ne two rk s to

ut il it y -o wne d po le s. The FCC, th e Uni te d Stat es , an d in te rv en or s COMP TEL d/ b/ a

INCOMP AS; Nati on al Cab le & Tele co m m un ic at io ns Ass oc ia ti on ; Lev el 3

Co m m un ic at io ns , LLC; an d Uni te d St at es Tele co m Ass oc ia ti on op po se th e pe ti ti on

. W e d en y th e p et it io n.

I. Back gr ou nd

Und er t he Po le Att ach m en ts Act, 4 7 U.S.C. § 22 4, t he FCC h as th e au th or it y

to en su re th at rat es fo r at ta ch m en ts to ut il it y po le s by pr ov id ers of cab le te le vi si on

se rv ic es (cab le pr ov id ers ) an d pr ov id ers of te le co m m un ic at io ns se rv ic es (te le co m m un ic at io ns pr ov id ers ) are “ jus t an d reas o n ab le .” Id

. § 22 4( b) (1 ).

Sect io n 22 4 in it ia ll y ap pl ie d on ly t o cab le pr ov id ers

. The st at ut e se ts fo rth a lo wer
bo un d an d an up pe r bo un d fo r “ jus t an d reas on ab le ” rat es

. The lo wer bo un d is a rat e

th at “ as su res a ut il it y

th e rec ov ery of

no t l es s t ha n th e ad di ti on al co st s o f pr ov id in g

po le att ach m en ts ,” an d t he up pe r bo un d i s a r at e th at is “ de te rm in ed by m ul ti pl y in g

th e pe rcen ta ge of th e to ta l us ab le sp ace

. . . whi ch is oc cu pi ed by th e po le at ta ch m en t by th e su m of th e op erat in g ex pe ns es an d act ua l cap it al co st s of th e ut il it y at tri bu ta bl e

to th e en ti re po le .” Id . § 22 4( d) (1 ). The FCC se t t he rat e fo r th is up pe r bo un d (th e
Cab le Rat e) by m

ul ti pl y in g th ree val ue s: th e sp ace fact or (th e sp ace occ up ie d by an

-2

-at ta ch m en t di vi de d by th e to ta l us ab le sp ace on th e po le ), th e ne t co st of a ba re po le

,

an d a carr y in g c ha rg e rat e. 47 C.F.R. § 1.1 40 9( e)(1 ).

Co ng res s am en de d § 22 4 in 19 96 , e xp an di ng it to co ve r po le at ta ch m en ts by

te le co m m un ic at io ns pr ov id ers

. Sect io n § 22 4( e) se ts fo rth m et ho ds fo r ap po rti on in g

th e co st of a po le am on g t el eco m m un ic at io ns pro vi de rs :

(2 ) A ut il it y sh al l ap po rti on th e co st of pr ov id in g sp ace on a po le

, du ct

,
co nd ui t, or rig ht -o f-way ot he r th an th e us ab le sp ace a m on g en ti ti es so th at su ch ap po rti on m en t eq ua ls two -th ird s of th e c o s t s of pr ov id in g
sp ace ot he r th an th e us ab le sp ace th at wou ld be al lo cat ed to su ch en ti ty

un de r an eq ua l ap po rti on m en t of su ch co st s am on g al l at ta ch in g en ti ti es

.

(3 ) A ut il it y sh al l ap po rti on th e co st of pr ov id in g us ab le sp ace am on g al l

en ti ti es acco rd in g to th e pe rcen ta ge of us ab le s p a c e req ui red fo r each

en ti ty.

Id

. § 22 4( e )

. Th i s rev is io n th us es ta bl is he d a se pa rat e fo rm ul a fo r de te rm in in g th e

rat e fo r po le att ach m en ts by tele co m m un ic at io ns pro vi de rs (th e Tel eco m Rat e).

Unt il 20 11

, th e FCC de te rm in ed “ co st ” fo r th e Tele co m Rat e th e sa m e way as

fo r th e Cab le Rat e (n et co st of a ba re po le m ul ti pl ie d by a carr y in g ch arg e rat e), an d

im pl em en te d § 22 4( e)(2 ) by cal cu la ti ng th e s p a c e fact or di ffer en tl y , ap po rti on in g

two -th ird s of th e co st s of th e un us a bl e sp ace am on g at ta ch in g te le co m m un ic at io ns

pr ov id ers

. Thu s, th e Tele co m Rat e was typic al ly hi gh er th an th e Cab le Rat e, be cau se

th e va lu es fo r th e ne t cos t of a ba re po le an d th e car ry in g c ha rg e rat e were t he same

fo r bo th t h e C a b l e R at e an d th e Tele co m Rat e, whi le th e va lu e fo r th e sp ace fact or

was typic al ly hi gh er in th e Tele co m Rat e be cau se it in cl ud ed two -th ir d s of th e

un us ab le sp ace o n t he po le

.

-3

-In res po ns e to co nc ern s th at th e ri s k of ha vi ng to pa y th e Tele co m Rat e m ay

ha ve de te rred cab le pr ov id ers fro m ex pa nd in g th ei r se rv ic es , th e FCC ad op te d an

or de r in Apr il 20 11 de si gn ed to eq ua li ze th e Cab le an d Tele co m Rat es

. In th e Mat te r

of Im pl em en ta ti on of Sect io n 22 4 of th e Act, Re p o r t an d Ord er an d Ord er on

Rec on si de rat io n, 2 6 F C C Rcd

. 52 40 (2 01 1) (th e Apr il 20 11 Ord er). Thi s Ord er
rei nt erp ret ed th e te rm “ co st ” in § 22 4( e)(2 ) by de fin in g th e “ co st ” fo r an ur ba n- area

po le as 66 p e r c e n t o f t he po le ’s fu ll y al lo cat ed co st s (th e ne t co st of a ba re po le

m ul ti pl ie d by th e carr y in g cha rg e rat e), and for a no n- ur ba n- area po le as 44 pe rcen t

of th e po le ’s fu ll y al lo cat ed co st s. Id

. a t 5 3 0 4

, ¶ 1 4 9

. Und er th e FCC’s reb ut ta bl e

pr es um pt io ns of 5 at ta ch ers to an ur ba n- area po le an d 3 at ta ch ers to a no n- ur ba n- area

po le , I n th e Mat te r of Im

pl em en ta ti on of

Sect io n 2 24 of th e Act, Ord er an d Fu rth er

Not ic e of Pro po se d Ru le m ak in g, 25 FCC Rcd

. 11 86 4, 11 91 3, ¶ 11 9 n.3 24 (2 01 0)

, th e

ne w Telec om

Rat e u nd er t he Apri l 2 01 1 Ord er ap pr ox im at ed th e Cab le Rat e.

The Uni te d St at es Co ur t of App eal s fo r th e Dis tri ct of Co lu m bi a Ci rcu it up he ld

th e Apr il 20 11 Ord er ag ai ns t cl ai m s th at it was in co ns is t e n t w i t h § 22 4. Am . El ec.

Po wer Serv

. Co rp

. v. FCC, 70 8 F.3 d 18 3 (D.C. Ci r.), cer t. de ni ed

, 13 4 S. Ct

. 11 8
(2 01 3)

. The el ect ric ut il it ie s’ pe ti ti on fo r rev ie w arg ue d th at “ co st ” in § 22 4( e) m us t

m ean th e fu ll y al lo cat ed co st s of a po le

, n ot th e Apr il 20 11 Ord er’s de fin it io n of

“ co st ” as eit he r 66 or 4 4 p erce nt of t he po le ’s ful ly allo cat ed co st s. Id . at 1 89 . The

D.C. Ci rcu it no te d th at § 22 4( e) “ is in im po rta nt res pe ct s le ss sp eci fic th an § 22 4( d) ,”

be cau se “ whi le § 22 4( e) pr es cri be s th e ap po rti on m en t c r it eri a rat he r sp eci fic al ly, it

no whe re de fin es th e te rm ‘cos t.’” Id

. at 18 8- 89

. Eva lu at in g th e Apr il 2 0 11 Ord er

un de r th e st an da rd se t fo rth in C h e v r o n , U S A, In c. v. Natu ral Res ou rces Defen se

Co u n c i l

, I n c ., 46 7 U.S. 83 7 (1 98 4)

, th e co ur t he ld th at th e te rm “ co st ” as us ed in
§ 22 4( e) is am

bi gu ou s an d th at th e FCC’s in te rp ret at io n of th e st at ut e was reas on ab le

in li gh t of it s po li cy in te res t in el im in at in g m ark et di st or ti on cau se d by th e di ffer en ce
be twee n t h e C a b l e Rat e an d th e Tele co m Rat e. Am . El ec. Po wer, 70 8 F.3 d at 18 6,

18 9- 90

.

-4

-In Nov em be r 20 15

, the FCC ag ai n al te red th e Tele co m Rat e, ad op ti ng th e or de r

at is su e in th is cas e. In th e Mat te r of Im pl em en ta ti on of Sect io n 22 4 of th e Act, Ord er

on Rec on si de rat io n, 30 FCC Rcd

. 13 73 1 (2 01 5) (th e Nov em be r 2 0 15 Ord er). The

FCC fo un d th at th e Apr il 20 11 Ord er ha d fai le d to eq ua li ze th e Tele co m Rat e an d th e
Cab le Rat e, be cau se ut il it ie s freq ue nt ly reb ut te d th e pr es um pt io ns of 5 at ta ch ers in

an ur ba n area an d 3 at ta ch ers in a no n- ur ba n area , whi ch res ul te d in a hi gh er Tele co m

Rat e. Id

. at 13 73 8, ¶ 18

. The FCC was al so co nc ern ed th at i t s r ecen t or de r
cl as si fy in g ret ai l br oa db an d in te rn et se rv ic e as a te le co m m un ic at io ns se rv ic e, In th e

Mat te r of Pro te ct in g an d Pro m ot in g th e Ope n In te rn et

, Rep or t an d Ord er on Rem an d,

Decl arat or y R u l i n g , an d Ord er, 30 FCC Rcd

. 56 01

, 57 34

, ¶ 30 8 (2 01 5)

, in

co nju nc ti on wit h th e c o n t i n ue d di sp ari ty be twee n th e Cab le Rat e an d th e Tele co m

Rat e, wou ld le ad to rat e in crea se s fo r cab le pr ov id ers of feri ng br oa db an d se rv i c e

. Nov em be r 20 15 Ord er at 13 74 1, ¶ 21

. Fu rth er, th e FCC was co nc ern ed th at

, be cau se

so m e st at es t h a t h a d el ect ed to reg ul at e po le at ta ch m en ts un de r 47 U.S.C. § 22 4( c)

us ed th e Cab le Rat e, a hi gh er Tele co m Rat e wou ld de te r te l e c om m un ic at io ns

in ve st m en t in st at es wher e th e FCC ’s Telec om Rat e ap pl ie d. Id . at 1 37 41 -4 2, ¶ 2 2.

The Nov em

be r 20 15 Ord er ad dr es se d th es e co nc ern s by eli m in at in g t he di st in ct io n
be twee n po le s in ur ba n an d no n- ur ba n area s, in st ead ba si ng “ c o s t ” o n th e av erag e

nu m be r of at ta ch ers to a po le wit hi n an area : “co s t ” i n a r eas wit h an av erag e of 5

at ta ch ers is de fin ed as 66 pe rcen t of fu ll y al lo cat ed co st s, 56 pe rcen t fo r 4 at ta ch ers , 44 p e r c e nt fo r 3 at ta ch ers , an d 31 pe rcen t fo r 2 at ta ch ers

. Id

. at 13 75 6. In se rv ic e

area s wh ere t he av erag e nu m be r of at ta ch ers is no t a who le nu m be r, th e p erce nt ag e
is in te rp ol at ed fro m

th e p erce nt ag es ass ig ne d t o t he ne ares t wh ol e n um be rs . Id.

II. Dis cu ss io n

W e rev ie w th e FCC’s in te rp ret at io n of § 22 4( e) un de r th e two -s te p fram ewo rk

se t fo rth in Ch ev ro n. W e fir st de te rm in e “ whe th er Co ng res s ha s d ire ct ly spo ke n to

th e pr eci se qu es ti on at is su e,” an d if it ha s, we “ m us t gi ve effe ct to th e un am bi gu ou sl y

-5

-ex pr es se d in te nt of Co ng res s.” Ch ev ro n, 46 7 U.S. at 84 2- 43

. “ [I]f th e st at ut e is si le nt

or am bi gu ou s wit h res pe ct to th e sp eci fic is su e, th e qu es ti on fo r th e co ur t is whe th er

th e ag en cy ’s an swe r is ba se d on a pe rm is si bl e co ns tru ct io n of th e st at ut e.” Id

. at 84 3.

The ag en cy ’s vi ew “g o v e r n s if it is a reas on ab le in te rp ret at io n of th e st at ut e—n ot

ne ces sa ril y th e on ly po ss ib le in te rp ret at io n, no r ev en th e in te rp ret at io n de em ed mos t

reas on ab le by th e co ur ts .” Ent erg y Co rp

. v. Ri ve rk eep er, In c., 55 6 U.S. 20 8, 21 8
(2 00 9)

. Eve n whe n an ag en c y p o l i c y rep res en ts a ch an ge fro m pa st po li cy , th e

ag en cy ge ne ral ly ne ed no t de m on st rat e th at “ th e reas on s fo r th e ne w po li cy are be tt er
th an th e rea so ns for

th e o ld on e; it su ffi ces th at th e n ew po li cy is pe rm is si bl e u nd er

th e st at ut e , t h a t t h e r e are go od reas on s fo r it

, an d th at th e ag en cy be li eves it to be

be tt er.” FC C v . Fox Tele vi si on Sta ti on s, In c., 55 6 U.S. 5 02 , 51 5 (2 00 9)

.

W e co nc lu de th at th e te rm “ co st ” in § 22 4 is a mbig uo us

. “ The fact is th at

wit ho ut an y be tt er in di cat io n of m ean in g th an th e un ad or ne d te rm , th e wor d ‘cos t’ in
[a di ffer en t st at ut e], as in acco un ti ng ge ne ral ly, is ‘a ch am el eo n , ’ a ‘v i rtu al ly

m ean in gl es s te rm .’ ” See Veri zo n Co m m c’ns

, In c. v. FCC, 53 5 U.S. 46 7, 50 0 (2 00 2)
(ci ta ti on s om it te d)

. In de ed , § 22 4( d) us es th e te rm “ co st ” in di ffer en t way s. It se ts

fo rth as a lo wer b ou nd “ th e ad di ti on al co st s o f pr ov id in g po le att ach m en ts .” It s et s

fo rth as an up pe r bo un d a r a t e e q ua l to th e pe rcen ta ge of th e po le ’s us ab le sp ace

oc cu pi ed by th e at ta ch m en t m ul ti pl ie d by th e “ op erat in g ex pe ns es an d act ua l cap it al

co st s of th e ut il it y at tri bu ta bl e to th e en ti re po le .” In § 22 4( e), by co nt ras t, Co ng res s
di d no t sp eci fy wha t type of “ co st ” it m ean t, pr ov id in g in st ead th at

, am on g

te le co m m un ic at io ns pr ov id ers , t he “ co st ” of pr ov id in g us ab le sp ace on a po le sh al l

be ap po rti on ed acco rd in g to th e pe rcen ta ge of us ab le sp ace req ui red fo r each at ta ch er,

a nd th e “ co st ” of pr ov id in g un us ab le sp ace on a po le sh al l be ap po rti on ed to e a c h

at ta ch er su ch th at it s sh are eq ua ls two -th ird s of th e co st s it wou ld be al lo cat ed un de r

an eq ua l a p p o r t io nm en t of su ch co st s. Thu s, whi le th e Cab le Rat e un de r § 22 4( d)

m us t fal l wit hi n a ran ge de fin ed by two di ffer en t, sp eci fie d types of “ co st ,” § 22 4( e)

do es no t s pe ci fy

what type o f “ co st ” m

us t b e u se d t o d et erm in e th e Tel eco m Rat e.

-6

-Pet it io ne rs arg ue th at th e Nov em be r 20 15 Ord er de fie s C o n g r es s’s in te nt to

es ta bl is h two di ffer en t rat es in § 22 4( d) (1 ) an d § 22 4( e). W e di sa gr ee th at th e st at ut e

ev in ces su ch an in te nt . Sect io n 2 24 (d ) req ui res th at po le att ach m en t ra te s fo r cab le

pr ov id ers fal l wit hi n a cert ai n ran ge

. Sect io n 22 4( e) req u i r e s th at po le at ta ch m en t

rat es fo r te le co m

m un ic at io ns pr ov id ers be cal cu la te d acco rd in g to a cert ai n fo rm ul a.

Bec au se th e te rm “ co st ” in § 22 4( e) is am bi gu ou s, th e sa m e “ co st ” de fin it io n ne ed no t

be us ed to de te rm in e th e up pe r bo un d fo r cab le rat es un de r § 22 4( d) an d th e rat e fo r

te le co m m un ic at io ns pr ov id ers un de r § 22 4( e). Acco rd in gl y , th e st at ut e pe rm it s, bu t

do es no t re qu ire , th e Cab le Rat e an d t he Tele co m Rat e to di ve rg e.

Lik ewis e, we reject Pet it io ne rs ’ arg um en t th at th e FCC’s in te rp ret at io n of th e

st at ut e ren de rs § 22 4( e) su pe rfl uo us

. See Co rle y v. Uni te d St at es , 55 6 U.S. 30 3, 31 4
(2 00 9) (“ [A] s ta tu te sh ou ld be co ns tru ed so th at effe ct is gi ve n t o a ll it s p ro vi si on s,

so th at no pa rt wil l be in op erat iv e or su pe rfl uo us , vo id or in si gn ifi can t

. . . .” (q uo ti ng

Hib bs v. W in n, 54 2 U.S. 88

, 10 1 (2 00 4) )). As se t fo rth ab ov e, th e st at ut e al lo ws th e

Cab le Rat e a n d th e Tele co m Rat e to di ve rg e, bu t do es no t req ui re th em to do so

. W he th er or not th e rat es di ve rg e, th e Cab le Rat e m us t fal l with in th e ran ge se t fort h

in § 22 4( d) an d th e Tele co m Rat e m us t be cal cu la te d acco rd in g to t h e fo rm ul a se t

fo rth in § 22 4( e). Thu s, th e fo rm ul a fo r cal cu la ti ng th e Tele co m Rat e un de r § 22 4( e)

is no t s up erfl uo us

. 1

In li gh t of thi s con cl us io n, we ne ed no t ad dr es s t he FCC’s argu m en t th at th e 1

a lt ern at iv e, co st -cau sa ti on fo rm ul a fo r de te rm in in g th e Tele co m Rat e u n d e r 47 C.F.R. § 1.1 40 9( e)(2 )(i i) pr ev en ts § 22 4( e) fro m be co m in g su pe rfl uo us un de r th e Nov em be r 20 15 Orde r.

-7

-W e co nc lu d e th at th e Nov em be r 20 15 Ord er co ns ti tu te s a reas on ab le

in te rp ret at io n of th e am

bi gu it y in § 22 4( e). The FCC so ug ht to el im in at e th e 2

di sp ari ty be twee n th e Cab le an d Tele co m Rat es in or d e r t o av oi d su bjec ti ng cab le

pr ov id ers of

feri ng br oa db an d se rv ic e to th e hi gh er Tele co m Rat e, an d t o av oi d rat e
di sp ari ty b et ween st at es who se po le at ta ch m en t rat e s a re reg ul at ed by t he FCC an d

th os e st at es th at ha d el ect ed to reg ul at e po le at ta ch m en t rat es u s i n g t he Cab le Rat e

ev en fo r te l e c om m

un ic at io ns pr ov id ers

. Fi nd in g th at th e Apr il 20 11 Ord er’s

pr es um pt io ns of fiv e at ta ch ers in ur ba n area s an d th ree att ach ers in no n- ur ba n area s

were in ad eq ua te to ach ie ve th es e go al s, th e FCC ad op te d th e m ul ti pl e co st al lo cat or s

s e t f o r t h in th e Nov em

be r 20 15 Ord er. Thi s ap pr oa ch rep res en ts a “ reas on ab le

po li cy ” ch oi ce, an d th us we de fer to th e FCC’s in te rp ret at io n. See Veri zo n, 53 5 U.S.

at 52 3. 3

W e fin d th e D .C. Ci rcu it ’s de ci si on in Am eri can Elec tri c Po wer to be

pe rs ua si ve

. Pe t i t io ne rs at te m pt to di st in gu is h th is cas e fro m Am eri can Elec tri c

Po wer, no ti ng th at

, un de r th e Apr il 20 11 Ord er up he ld in th at cas e, th e Tele co m Rat e
di d no t va ry ba se d on th e nu m be r of at ta ch ers (in st ead va ry in g ba se d on ur ba n or no nTo th e ex te nt th a t Pet it io ne rs arg ue th at th e Nov em be r 20 15 Ord er res ul te d 2

fro m arb i t r a r y an d cap ric io us de ci si on m ak in g in vi ol at io n of th e Adm in is tra ti ve Pro ced ur e Act, 5 U.S.C. § 70 6, th ei r arg um en t fai ls fo r th e sa m e reas on s th at ex pl ai n why th e Nov em

be r 20 15 Ord er is re as on ab le . See Sh ay s v

. Fed

. Elec ti on Co m m ’n,
41 4 F.3 d 76 , 9 6 (D.C. Ci r. 20 05 ) (“ [O]ur in qu iry at th e se co nd st ep of Ch ev ro n

. . .
ov erl ap s wit h t h e a r b it rary an d cap ric io us st an da rd

. . . .” (q uo ti ng Ch am be r of
Co m m erce of th e U.S. v. Fed

. Elec ti on Co m m ’n, 76 F.3 d 12 34

, 12 35 (D.C. Ci r. 19 96 ))).

Pet it io ne rs co nt en d th at “ [t]he re is si m pl y no ev id en ce in th e reco rd su ffi ci en t 3

to su pp or t a de te rm in at io n” th at eq ua ti ng th e Tele co m Rat e an d th e Cab le Rat e wil l

en co ur ag e th e ex pa ns io n of bro ad ba nd se rv ic es

. Pet ’rs’ Br. 39. This cla im is ti m eba rred un de r 28 U.S.C. § 23 44 in li gh t o f P et it io ne rs ’ fai lu re to ch al le ng e th at de te rm in at io n wi th in si xt y da y s o f th e en try of t he Apri l 2 01 1 o rd er.

-8

-ur ba n lo cat io n) ; th at th e Apr il 20 11 Orde r ad op te d o nl y two de fin it io ns of th e te rm

“ co st ,” as op po se d to th e po te nt ia ll y in fin it e de fin it io ns in th e Nov em be r 20 15 Ord er;

an d, “ pe rh ap s m os t im

po rta nt ly,” th at un de r th e Apr i l 20 11 Ord er it was at le as t

po ss ib le fo r th e Cab le an d Tele co m Rat es to di ve rg e. Pet r’s’ Br. 21 -2 2. W e co nc lu de

th at th os e di st in ct io ns are of no si gn ifi can ce. The D.C. Ci rc u i t c o n c lu de d th at th e

te rm “ co s t ” w a s am

bi gu ou s an d th at th e FCC’s ch oi ce to de fin e “ co st ” so as to

eq ua li ze t he Cab le an d Tel eco m Rat es was re as on ab le . Am . El ec. Po wer, 70 8 F .3d

at 18 8- 90 . That reas on in g a pp li es wit h e qu al for ce h ere.

The pe ti ti on for rev ie w is de ni ed

.

__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __

-9

-