Subject: [NEXTEL-1] Bronx Communications & United States Virgin Islands (USVI)

From: Marcel <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 05 Dec 2002 15:11:15 -0500

Hmm? I wonder if this is the same Bronx Communication that use to rent repeater space at
a site near the GWB?
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Before the
Federal Communications Commission
Washington, D.C. 20554

In the Matter of Application of

BRONX COMMUNICATIONS

For Private Land Mobile Radio Station )
)
)
)
)

FCC File No. 0000499276

ORDER

   Adopted:  December 3, 2002 Released:  December 5, 2002

By the Deputy Chief, Policy and Rules Branch, Public Safety and Private Wireless Division,
Wireless Telecommunications Bureau:

1. On June 26, 2001, Ralph Addington d/b/a Arcom Communications (Arcom), filed a “Petition
to Deny (Informal Request)”  against the above-captioned application of Bronx
Communications.   For the reasons discussed below, we deny Arcom’s Petition.

2. On June 22, 2001, Bronx Communications filed an application for a new private land
mobile radio station in the United States Virgin Islands (USVI).   On June 26, 2001, Arcom
filed its Petition with the Commission seeking denial of Bronx Communications’s
application based on allegations that Hughroy Thomas, the owner of Bronx Communications,
was selling radio equipment in the USVI in violation of several Commission rules.   In its
Petition, Arcom asserts that Mr. Thomas, both directly and through Bronx Communications,
has been involved in the widespread sale of unauthorized radio equipment to customers in
the USVI, including agencies of the USVI Government.   According to the Petition, the USVI
Government sought assistance from the Commission’s Enforcement Bureau in this matter.

3. We deny Arcom’s Petition because it does not raise substantial or material questions of
fact with respect to Bronx Communications’s application.  According to the Enforcement
Bureau, Mr. Thomas brought the matter of the sale of unauthorized radio equipment to the
Bureau’s attention before Arcom filed its Petition and promptly took corrective action.
After examining these facts and the evidence in this matter, the Enforcement Bureau
decided that no enforcement action is warranted under the specific circumstances of this
case.  Consistent with the Enforcement Bureau’s decision that no enforcement action is
warranted under the specific circumstances of this case, we find that Thomas’ voluntarily
admitted violations are not grounds for denial of the captioned Bronx Communications
application because the allegations contained in Arcom’s Petition, even if true, do not
raise a substantial or material question of fact warranting designation of the application
for hearing.  We therefore deny Arcom’s Petition  and refer the captioned Bronx
Communications application to the Public Safety and Private Wireless Division’s Licensing
and Technical Analysis Branch for further processing in accordance with Commission rules.

4. Accordingly, IT IS ORDERED that pursuant to Sections 5(i), 303(r), and 309(d) of the
Communications Act of 1934, as amended, 47 U.S.C. §§ 154(i), 303(r), 309(d), and Sections
0.331 and 1.41 of the Commission’s Rules, 47 C.F.R. §§ 0.331, 1.41, the Petition to Deny
(Informal Objection) filed by Ralph Addington d/b/a Arcom Communications on June 26, 2001,
IS DENIED.
     FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION

     Scot Stone
     Deputy Chief, Policy and Rules Branch
     Public Safety and Private Wireless Division
     Wireless Telecommunications Bureau

Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/