Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

MCI AIRSIGNAL PENNSYLVANIA v. PENNSYLVANIA PUBLIC UTILITY COMMISSION (12/03/86)

decided: December 3, 1986.

MCI AIRSIGNAL OF PENNSYLVANIA, INC. AND RCCS OF PENNSYLVANIA, INC., PETITIONERS
v.
PENNSYLVANIA PUBLIC UTILITY COMMISSION, RESPONDENT



Appeal from the Order of the Pennsylvania Public Utility Commission in the case of Pennsylvania Public Utility Commission v. The Bell Telephone Company of Pennsylvania, No. R-842779; MCI Airsignal of Pennsylvania, Inc., No. R-842779CO11; and Radio Common Carriers of Pennsylvania, Inc., No. R-842779CO12, dated October 24, 1985.

COUNSEL

Lloyd R. Persun, Shearer, Mette & Woodside, for petitioners.

Bohdan R. Pankiw, Assistant Counsel, with him, Kenneth L. Mickens, Assistant Counsel, Albert W. Johnson, III, Deputy Chief Counsel and Charles F. Hoffman, Chief Counsel, for respondent.

Thomas L. Welch, with him, William L. Leonard, Richard D. Spiegelman, Jon C. Oplinger and Julie A. Conover, for intervenor, The Bell Telephone Company of Pennsylvania.

President Judge Crumlish, Jr. and Judges Craig, MacPhail, Barry and Colins. Opinion by Judge Colins.

Author: Colins

[ 102 Pa. Commw. Page 346]

MCI Airsignal of Pennsylvania, Inc.,*fn1 a radio common carrier providing paging and mobile radio services to the public, and RCCs of Pennsylvania, Inc., a group

[ 102 Pa. Commw. Page 347]

    of 27 such radio common carriers (RCCs, Collectively) seek review of an order of the Pennsylvania Public Utility Commission (Commission) which granted The Bell Telephone Company of Pennsylvania (Bell) additional intrastate annual operating revenues of $36,784,017, an increase of 2.03% in previously allowed revenues, and permitted Bell to charge the RCCs existing tariff rates for certain telecommunication services.

We shall consider solely that part of the Commission's order pertaining to the RCCs.*fn2 This Court's scope of review of a Commission order encompasses a determination whether an error of law was committed or whether the findings, determinations or order of the Commission are supported by substantial evidence. Cohen v. Pennsylvania Public Utility Commission, 90 Pa. Commonwealth Ct. 98, 494 A.2d 58 (1985).

Factual Background

Prior to undertaking a discussion of the legal issues involved, we must detail the functional interrelationship of the telecommunication services at issue here. The RCCs use their own facilities in conjunction with services purchased from Bell to provide one-way paging and two-way mobile radio services to the public.

As an expert witness testified at hearings before the Administrative Law Judge (ALJ), a typical ...


Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.