Click here for Adobe Acrobat version
Click here for Microsoft Word version


This document was converted from Microsoft Word.

Content from the original version of the document such as
headers, footers, footnotes, endnotes, graphics, and page numbers
will not show up in this text version.

All text attributes such as bold, italic, underlining, etc. from the
original document will not show up in this text version.

Features of the original document layout such as
columns, tables, line and letter spacing, pagination, and margins
will not be preserved in the text version.

If you need the complete document, download the
Microsoft Word or Adobe Acrobat version.


                           Before the
                     Washington, D.C.  20554

PHILADELPHIA, INC.,           )
     Complainant,                  )
          v.                  )    File No. PA 01-003
SERVICES, INC.,                    )
     Respondents.                  )

     Adopted:  November 6, 2003              Released:  November 

7, 2003

By the Chief, Market Disputes Resolution Division, Enforcement 

     1.   On March 16, 2001, RCN Telecom Services of 
Philadelphia, Inc. (``RCN'') filed a complaint in the captioned 
matter against PECO Energy Company (``PECO'') alleging that 
PECO's pole attachment rate was unjust and unreasonable 
(``Complaint'').  On May 4, 2001, RCN amended the Complaint to 
add InfraSource Incorporated (``InfraSource'') as a defendant and 
to include allegations that the defendants' make-ready charges 
were unjust and unreasonable (``Amended Complaint'').  On 
December 18, 2002, the Enforcement Bureau issued an order that 
bifurcated the rate issues from the make-ready issues and 
resolved the rate issues (``Phase I Order'').1  On January 17, 
2003, both PECO and InfraSource filed separate Petitions for 
Reconsideration of the Phase I Order.  Subsequently, the parties 
reached a negotiated settlement of the make-ready issues, and the 
Commission granted RCN's motion to withdraw the Amended 
     2.   On November 3, 2003, InfraSource filed a Motion 
requesting that its Petition for Reconsideration be dismissed 
with prejudice.3  The Motion, which does not address the separate 
Petition for Reconsideration filed by PECO, explains that, as a 
result of the resolution of the parties' make-ready dispute, the 
``claims and controversies contained in InfraSource's Petition 
for Reconsideration have been rendered moot.''4  The Motion 
states that InfraSource has contacted counsel for RCN, and that 
RCN does not oppose the Motion.5  
     3.   We are satisfied that dismissing InfraSource's Petition 
for Reconsideration will serve the public interest by promoting 
the private resolution of disputes and by eliminating the need 
for the expenditure of further time and resources of the parties 
and this Commission.
     4.   Accordingly, IT IS ORDERED, pursuant to sections 1, 
4(i), 4(j), and 224 of the Communications Act of 1934, as 
amended, 47 U.S.C.  151, 154(i), 154(j), 224, and the authority 
delegated in sections 0.111, 0.311, and 1.106 of the Commission's 
rules, 47 C.F.R.  0.111, 0.311, and 1.106, that the Motion to 
Dismiss is GRANTED and that the InfraSource Petition for 
Reconsideration of the Phase I Order IS DISMISSED with prejudice.


                         Alexander P. Starr
                         Chief, Market Disputes Resolution 
                         Enforcement Bureau


1    RCN Telecom Services of Philadelphia, Inc. v. PECO Energy 
Company and Exelon Infrastructure Services, Inc., Phase I Order, 
17 FCC Rcd 25238 (Enf. Bur. 2002), petitions for reconsideration 
2    RCN Telecom Services of Philadelphia, Inc. v. PECO Energy 
Company and InfraSource Incorporated, f/k/a Exelon Infrastructure 
Services, Inc., Order, File No. PA 01-003, DA 03-3308 (rel. Oct. 
22, 2003).
3    Motion of InfraSource Incorporated to Withdraw Petition for 
Reconsideration, File No. PA 01-003 (November 3, 2003) 

4    Id. at 1-2.
5    Id. at 2.