Federal Communications Commission DA 12-1702
Before the
Federal Communications Commission
Washington, D.C. 20554
In the Matter of
Petition of Rural Telecommunications Group, Inc. 
to Impose a Spectrum Aggregation Limit on all 
Commercial Terrestrial Wireless Spectrum Below 
2.3 GHz  
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
RM No. 11498
(Terminated)
ORDER
Adopted:  October 23, 2012 Released:  October 23, 2012
By the Chief, Wireless Telecommunications Bureau
1.  On July 16, 2008, the Rural Telecommunications Group (RTG) filed a petition asking the 
Commission to initiate a rulemaking regarding spectrum aggregation limits.1 Specifically, the RTG 
Petition requested that the Commission initiate a rulemaking aimed at imposing, on a county level, a 110 
megahertz cap on the amount of commercial terrestrial wireless spectrum below 2.3 GHz that one entity 
can hold.2 On October 10, 2008, the Wireless Telecommunications Bureau released a public notice 
seeking comment on the RTG Petition.3 In response, some parties urged the Commission to dismiss 
RTG’s petition and not initiate the requested rulemaking,4 while others supported the petition and 
recommended that the Commission initiate the rulemaking sought by RTG.5 As courts have long 
recognized, the Commission has broad discretion to determine whether and when to initiate a 
rulemaking.6
2. In a recently released Notice of Proposed Rulemaking,7 the Commission declined to initiate the 
rulemaking RTG requested in its petition and instead launched a broader rulemaking that will address 
policies regarding mobile spectrum holdings from a more comprehensive perspective.8 In light of the 
  
1 See RTG Petition for Rulemaking filed July 16, 2008, RM 11498 (RTG Petition).  
2 See id. at 3 and 5.  
3 Wireless Telecommunications Bureau Seeks Comment on Petition for Rulemaking of Rural Telecommunications 
Group, Inc. to Impose a Spectrum Aggregation Limit on All Commercial Terrestrial Wireless Spectrum Below 2.3 
GHz, Public Notice, 23 FCC Rcd 14875 (“WTB Public Notice”). Comments on the petition were due December 2, 
2008, and reply comments were due December 22, 2008.  
4 See, e.g., Comments of AT&T Inc., RM No. 11498 (Dec. 2, 2008).
5 See, e.g., Comments of Leap Wireless International, Inc. (Dec. 2, 2008).
6 See, e.g., WWHT, Inc. v. FCC, 656 F.2d 807, 817 (D.C. Cir. 1981).
7 In the Matter of Policies Regarding Mobile Spectrum Holdings, Notice of Proposed Rulemaking, WT Docket No. 
12-269, FCC 12-119 (rel. Sept. 28, 2012).
8 See id. at 10, n.41.
Federal Communications Commission DA 12-1702
2
broader rulemaking recently initiated, we now exercise our discretion, pursuant to the authority delegated 
under  Sections 0.131 and 0.331 of the Commission’s rules,9 and deny the RTG Petition and terminate 
this proceeding.
3.  Accordingly, IT IS ORDERED, pursuant to Sections 4(i) and 303(r) of the Communications 
Act of 1934, as amended, 47 U.S.C. §§ 154(i), 303(r), and Section 1.401(e) of the Commission’s Rules, 
47 C.F.R. § 1.401(e), and the authority delegated under Sections 0.131 and 0.331 of the Commission’s 
Rules, 47 C.F.R. §§ 0.131, 0.331, that the Petition for Rulemaking filed by RTG is DENIED and the 
proceeding in RM-11498 IS TERMINATED.
FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION
Ruth Milkman
Chief, Wireless Telecommunications Bureau
  
9 47 C.F.R. §§ 0.131 and 0.331.