FCC Web Documents citing 73.3517

as compiled by hallikainen.com/FccRules on 2012 07 01

• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-02-300A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-02-300A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-02-300A1.txt
  • with the Commission. Pursuant to Section 0.11(10)(b), the Secretary is the official custodian of the Commission's documents. Therefore, since formal filing of Olson's reply comments with the Commission cannot be established, they will not be considered herein. Population figures reported herein were taken from the 1990 U.S. Census. KSIR/KNKN advise that they each filed contingent applications simultaneously pursuant to Section 73.3517 of the Commission's Rules which, if granted, would enable KSIR to upgrade to a Class C at Brush (see File No. BPH-20010214ACE), and KNKN would change frequencies and relocate its transmitter site at Pueblo (see File No. BPH-20010214ACF). However, KSIR/KNKN emphasize that their counterproposal filed herein is a separate matter and is not dependent on favorable action on the referenced
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-03-1533A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-03-1533A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-03-1533A1.txt
  • This is precisely what the Joint Parties seek. The Archer City allotment is short-spaced to the KICM construction permit and contingent on the staff granting future applications by AM & FM Broadcasters for both a Class C2 construction permit and license. We reject Joint Parties argument that its downgrade proposal complies with the contingent application procedures set forth in Section 73.3517(e) of the Commission's Rules. Section 73.3517(e) permits the simultaneous acceptance of contingent minor change applications. It does not authorize the filing of contingent rulemaking petitions. Accordingly, the Counterproposal must be dismissed. Alternative Proposals 6. The Joint Parties filed an alternative twelve-allotment proposal in anticipation of a staff determination that the Channel 230C1 Archer City allotment is impermissibly short-spaced to the
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-03-2413A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-03-2413A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-03-2413A1.txt
  • the Berwyn Application. In order to ensure an adequate level of service in Johnston City, the WHTE construction permit includes a condition providing that operations of Station WHTE at Berwyn may not commence until a new local service is initiated at Johnston City. Moreover, the imposition of this condition does not demonstrate that the proposals are impermissibly contingent. First, Section 73.3517 of the Rules is limited to contingent applications and does not apply to related application and rulemaking proceedings. Second, the Commission routinely allows allotment ``backfills'' by existing stations to preserve local service. 8. Accordingly, we believe that the public interest would by served by reallotting Channel 297B from Marion to Johnston City. The reallotment of Channel 297B to Johnston City
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-04-1080A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-04-1080A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-04-1080A1.txt
  • file a Petition for Rule Making proposing the channel substitution at Archer City along with the downgrade of the Station KICM Class C1 allotment. This would be consistent with the procedure used in the cases cited by the Joint Petitioners in their Response to Request for Supplemental Information. The Report and Order also rejected a contingent application procedure under Section 73.3517(e) of the rules suggested by the Joint Petitioners as a means of implementing a Class C2 downgrade for Station KICM and a Channel 230C1 allotment at Archer City. Section 73.3517(e) permits the simultaneous acceptance of contingent applications. This is not the procedure proposed by the Joint Parties and AM & FM Broadcasters. In this instance, the procedure would require a
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-04-3475A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-04-3475A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-04-3475A1.txt
  • in collateral pleadings. It also states that neither KTOV-LP nor KMTV-LP is meeting the obligations of a Class A station with respect to the maintenance of a public inspection file and the presentation of children's programming. CCC also claims that KTOV's filing of the Channel 49 displacement application while simultaneously prosecuting its Channel 7 Class A license application violates Sections 73.3517 and 73.3518 of the Commission's Rules with respect to contingent, inconsistent or conflicting applications. 6. KTOV filed an opposition to the petition to dismiss its Class A license application. It rejects CCC's allegation that it is prosecuting inconsistent applications as its Class A license application and its displacement application to operate on Channel 49 are not mutually exclusive, and are
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-06-1333A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-06-1333A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-06-1333A1.txt
  • tower from Liggett. BBMG states that this documentation shows that the WTRK(FM) antenna is mounted somewhere between 67 and 79 meters above ground level on the tower. 5. On March 25, 2004, BBMG and EMF filed the Assignment Application. EMF shortly thereafter filed the Modification Application, as a contingent filing with BBMG's consent as proposed assignor, as required by Section 73.3517(a) of the Rules, to modify WTRK(FM)'s authorized facilities by increasing to Class C2 facilities (15 kW ERP, Antenna Height Above Average Terrain of 255 meters) at a different site. On June 1, 2004, BBMG timely filed the captioned Renewal Application for WTRK(FM)'s license. 6. On April 19, 2004, Michigan Community Radio (``MCR''), licensee of NCE station WWKM(FM), Imlay City, Michigan,
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-06-337A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-06-337A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-06-337A1.txt
  • acknowledges that its minor change application for Station WTDA(FM) would be short spaced to the Station WJZA(FM) Pickerington rulemaking proposal and suggests an alternate site for the Pickerington allotment so that both proposals can be accommodated. NABC also acknowledges its conflict with the license site for Station WPAY-FM, but argues that it has requested a waiver of Sections 73.207 and 73.3517 of the rules in its application. NABC recognizes that its application is contingent on Station WPAY(FM)'s reclassification as a Class C0 which would occur only if Station WPAY fails to complete its construction as a full Class C at a new site in accordance with its outstanding construction permit. We are dismissing the NABC application. In 2001, NABC filed a
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-06-502A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-06-502A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-06-502A1.txt
  • currently pending. KCI Exhibit with Respect to Section 307(b), first unnumbered page. Id. See, e.g., Potts Camp and Saltillo, Mississippi, 16 FCC Rcd 16116 (2001) (denying relocation of sole local service at a town of 483 to a town of 1,782). See, e.g., Interstate Broadcasting Co., Inc., 35 F.C.C.2d 737, 738 (1972). See supra note 5. See 47 C.F.R. � 73.3517 (``Contingent applications for new stations and for changes in facilities of existing stations are not acceptable for filing.''). While there is an exception for mutually contingent AM applications that cross-reference each other and are filed pursuant to an interference reduction arrangement, no such arrangement is disclosed in either the instant application or the WONX(AM) modification application. Kovas Communications of Indiana,
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-07-1671A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-07-1671A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-07-1671A1.txt
  • Station B to file upgrade from 223A to 223C3. Procedure: Station A must file Form 301 and submit the appropriate minor modification application filing fee. Station B must file Form 301 and submit the appropriate minor modification application fee. See Paragraph 16 and Section 73.203. Both Form 301s must be submitted the same day and reference one another. See Section 73.3517. Example 8 (Involuntary channel substitution to permit upgrade): Station B proposes an involuntary channel change for Station A from 221A to 287A to permit Station B to upgrade from 223A to 223C3. Procedure: Station A files nothing initially. Station A must file Form 301 or 302-FM only if staff issues an order changing its channel pursuant to Section 316 procedures.
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-07-1932A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-07-1932A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-07-1932A1.txt
  • Discussion. As stated in the May 4 Letter, the Commission has undertaken significant initiatives to improve and revitalize the AM service. One such initiative permits licensees to reach agreements to reduce power or cancel their licenses in order to allow other licensees to improve service, and to reduce overall interference. In order to encourage such agreements, the Commission amended Section 73.3517 of the Rules to provide for the acceptance of contingent applications that would facilitate a reduction in overall AM interference. In amending the rule to permit the filing of contingent applications that would ``reduce interference to one or more AM stations or . . . otherwise increase the area of interference-free service,'' the Commission removed regulatory barriers that prevent or
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-08-1109A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-08-1109A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-08-1109A1.txt
  • In support of this contention, PTN states that the Bankruptcy Court's decision is still subject to reconsideration, modification or dismissal and is likely to be rescinded because the unsecured creditors and equity holders presented a joint plan for distribution of the bankruptcy estate. PTN also argues that the application should be rejected as an improperly filed contingent application under Section 73.3517 of the Commission's Rules. PTN states that the application is contingent because the asset purchase agreement submitted with the application is dependent on completion of a tower lease agreement for the station's future digital operations, which is also a precondition for WRNN's loan from Goldman Sachs Specialty Lending Group, L.P. (``Goldman Sachs''), which PTN claims is necessary to complete the
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-08-1302A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-08-1302A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-08-1302A1.txt
  • Joyner Radio, Inc. Facility ID Number 46942 File No. BPH-20080131AKH WIXO(FM), Peoria, Illinois Regent Broadcasting of Peoria, Inc. Facility ID Number 9894 File No. BPH-20080131ALK Dear Counsel: The letter is in reference to the above-captioned minor change applications which propose mutual increases to maximum permissible facilities for both stations that were filed pursuant to the contingent application requirements of Section 73.3517. Background. WCZQ is a Class A FM station licensed (File No. BLH-20000509AAS) to operate on channel 288 at Monticello, Illinois, using 3.00 kilowatts (kW) effective radiated power (ERP) and 89 meters antenna radiation center height above average terrain (HAAT). WIXO is a Class B FM station licensed (File No. BLH-20050407AAA) to operate on channel 289 at Peoria, Illinois, using 32
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-08-1416A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-08-1416A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-08-1416A1.txt
  • Radio One fails to cite any Commission precedent that would support a departure from this processing rule or show that this processing policy was erroneously applied in this case. The decision to reinstate and grant the Application should not be construed as a departure from our policy of permitting contingent filings only in certain narrowly defined circumstances described in Section 73.3517 of the Rules. In this regard, the initial dismissal of the Application was proper. While we recognize that our current processing rules leave open the potential for abuse, we find that it would be inherently unfair and unlawful to adopt a new policy designed to prevent future potential abuses here. To the extent that Radio One believes that a different
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-08-1443A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-08-1443A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-08-1443A1.txt
  • (``Objection'') on May 29, 2007, against the proposed changes. On June 13, 2007, the three applicants (collectively ``Joint Applicants'') filed a Joint Opposition to the Objection (``Joint Opposition''), to which Davis Community replied (``Reply'') on June 26, 2007. For the reasons discussed below, we deny the Objection and grant the Applications. Background. These contingent applications were filed pursuant to Sections 73.3517 and 73.3573(g) of the Commission's Rules (the ``Rules'') which permits the modification of a station's authorization to specify a new community of license without affording other interested parties an opportunity to file a competing expression of interest. Any re-allotment proposal must result in a preferential arrangement of allotments. We make this determination using the FM allotment priorities set forth in
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-08-1660A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-08-1660A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-08-1660A1.txt
  • goal of reducing overall AM interference. With respect to KGA(AM) in particular, the Response argues that the station will maintain its current daytime service and will maintain a fully adequate ``local service floor'' for nighttime service. The Response also notes that the predicted loss of the station's protected skywave service does not implicate the Commission's ``loss area'' policies. Discussion. Section 73.3517 of the Rules generally prohibits the filing of contingent applications for new stations or for the modification of existing stations. It does, however, provide an exception for contingent applications whose grant would ``reduce interference to one or more AM stations or otherwise increase the area of interference-free service.'' The statutes and policy governing contingent agreements that propose a deletion or
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-08-1946A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-08-1946A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-08-1946A1.txt
  • Station WGBW(AM), Two Rivers, Wisconsin, would be reduced. Discussion. Interference Reduction. In recent years the Commission has acted to revitalize and improve the AM service. As part of this effort, we permit licensees to reach agreements to reduce power or cancel their licenses in order to permit other licensees to improve service, and to reduce overall interference. In amending Section 73.3517 of the Rules to permit contingent applications that would ``reduce interference to one or more AM stations or . . . otherwise decrease the area of interference,'' the Commission removed regulatory barriers that had previously prevented or discouraged individual AM licensees from entering into private agreements to decrease inter-station interference and improve the overall quality of AM service. When such
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-08-2392A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-08-2392A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-08-2392A1.txt
  • relating to the character qualifications of Potomac. Discussion Interference Reduction Agreement In recent years the Commission has acted to revitalize and improve the AM service. As part of this effort, we permit licensees to reach agreements to reduce power or cancel their licenses in order to permit other licensees to improve service, and to reduce overall interference. In amending Section 73.3517 of the Rules to permit contingent applications that would ``reduce interference to one or more AM stations or . . . otherwise decrease the area of interference,'' the Commission removed regulatory barriers that had previously prevented or discouraged individual AM licensees from entering into private agreements to decrease inter-station interference and improve the overall quality of AM service. When such
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-08-2455A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-08-2455A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-08-2455A1.txt
  • nighttime facilities are required to begin operation using their nighttime facilities at local sunset. III DISCUSSION 5. WCAR/WOAP IRA. Certain Commission rules are intended to help revitalize and improve the AM service. Licensees may enter into agreements to reduce power or cancel their licenses in order to permit other licensees to improve service and/or reduce overall interference. In amending Section 73.3517 of the Rules to permit contingent applications that would ``reduce interference to one or more AM stations or . . . otherwise decrease the area of interference,'' the Commission removed regulatory barriers that prevent or discourage individual AM licensees from entering into private agreements to decrease inter-station interference and improve the overall quality of AM service. 6. When such contingent
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-08-626A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-08-626A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-08-626A1.txt
  • served by dismissing the FLEF application. In light of the foregoing, Application BPED-20070907ACH is unacceptable for filing and is HEREBY DISMISSED pursuant to Section 73.3566(a) of the Rules. This action is taken pursuant to Section 0.283 of the Rules. Sincerely, Peter H. Doyle Chief, Audio Division Media Bureau cc: Jefferson G. Brock 47 C.F.R. � 73.525. See id. at � 73.3517. See WAIT Radio v. FCC, 418 F.2d1153, 1158 (D.C. Cir. 1969), aff'd 459 F.2d 1103 (D.C. Cir. 1972), cert. denied, 409 U.S. 1027 (1972). For example, acceptance of an NCE new station application filed in the October 2007 window that includes a contingent agreement with a Channel 6 station could unfairly skew the ``fair distribution'' analysis to the detriment of
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-08-673A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-08-673A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-08-673A1.txt
  • Georgia Eagle had ample opportunity to object to the WMGL Application prior to the staff action. As a result, Georgia Eagle does not have standing to file a petition for reconsideration in this proceeding. For these reasons, the Petition will be dismissed. Moreover, even if we were to consider the merits of Georgia Eagle's Petition, we would deny it. Section 73.3517(e) of the Rules states in pertinent part: The Commission will accept up to four contingently related applications filed by FM licensees and/or permittees for minor modification of facilities. Two applications are related if the grant of one is necessary to permit the grant of the second application. Each application must state that it is filed as part of a related
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-09-1033A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-09-1033A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-09-1033A1.txt
  • complied with TV Channel 6 protection requirements, that waiver of this rule was justified, or that a conditional grant of the Application was warranted. In particular, the Staff Decision noted that acceptance of the Application would be unfair to those window applicants that filed rule-compliant proposals. The staff also found that: (1) the proposal constituted a ``contingent application'' under Section 73.3517 of the Rules; (2) a waiver of the contingent application rule would be necessary to grant the Application; and (3) a waiver of the rule in this case would be contrary to the public interest. Accordingly, the staff dismissed the Application. In its Petition, SBBC argues that the Staff Decision's denial of its requests for a waiver of Section 73.525
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-09-2627A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-09-2627A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-09-2627A1.txt
  • Bureau, to Lewis Leonard, Alaska Educational Radio System, Inc. (Jan. 28, 2008.)) Petition at 3. The COL Applications were an attempt to ``bring an existing operation into compliance with the rules.'' Id. 47 C.F.R. � 73.3573(g)(2). See Letter from Rodolfo F. Bonacci, Assistant Chief, Audio Division, Media Bureau, to Alaska Educational Radio System, Inc. (Feb. 5, 2008) (citing 47 C.F.R. 73.3517(e), which states that dismissal of any one of the related applications as unacceptable will result in the dismissal of all the related applications). AERS shortly thereafter filed the May 2008 STA Request for permission to operate from the same facilities as those proposed in the dismissed COL Application. File No. BSTA-20080508ACJ, Attachment 24. AERS claimed that KWMD and KABN(FM)'s operations
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-09-801A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-09-801A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-09-801A1.txt
  • removing the sole signal service from a community. Discussion. Interference Reduction. In recent years the Commission has acted to revitalize and improve the AM service. As part of this effort, we permit licensees to reach agreements to reduce power or cancel their licenses in order to permit other licensees to improve service, and to reduce overall interference. In amending Section 73.3517 of the Rules to permit contingent applications that would ``reduce interference to one or more AM stations or . . . otherwise decrease the area of interference,'' the Commission removed regulatory barriers that had previously prevented or discouraged individual AM licensees from entering into private agreements to decrease inter-station interference and improve the overall quality of AM service. When such
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-10-604A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-10-604A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-10-604A1.txt
  • Section 73.525 of the Rules, that waiver of this rule was not justified, and that a conditional grant of the Application was not warranted. In particular, the Staff Decision noted that acceptance of the Application would be unfair to those window applicants that filed rule-compliant proposals. The staff also found that: (1) the proposal constituted a ``contingent application'' under Section 73.3517 of the Rules; (2) a waiver of the contingent application rule would be necessary to grant the Application; and (3) a waiver of the rule in this case would be contrary to the public interest. Accordingly, the staff dismissed the Application. In its Petition, Heartland argues that the Media Bureau (the ``Bureau'') should reconsider its denial of its requests for
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-11-1237A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-11-1237A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-11-1237A1.txt
  • 1993 are inapplicable here. In adopting these policies, the Commission sought ``to encourage interstation agreements proposing a reduction in AM interference and to provide a procedural framework that would facilitate such agreements.'' Accordingly, the Commission created an exception to the general prohibition on filing of contingent applications for construction permits proposing either new or modified facilities set forth in Section 73.3517 of the Rules to permit the filing of contingent applications that lead to ``an overall reduction in AM interference.'' Nelson has not indicated that it has entered into an Interference Reduction Agreement with any other licensee - a key prerequisite to application of the Commission's Interference Reduction Policy. Moreover, nothing suggests that the Nelson Application is a contingent application. While
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-11-1460A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-11-1460A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-11-1460A1.txt
  • Oak View Application. Background. The Oak View and Goleta Applications were filed pursuant to Section 73.3573 of the Commission's Rules, which permits the modification of a station's authorization to specify a new community of license without affording other interested parties an opportunity to file competing expressions of interest. The Oak View and Goleta Applications were also filed pursuant to Section 73.3517(e) which permits FM licensees or permittees to file up to four contingently related applications for minor modification of facilities. The Oak View Application requests the change of community of license for Station KRRF(FM) from Channel 292A at Goleta, California, to Channel 292A at Oak View, California, with a change of transmitter site, and the modification of Cumulus's license to reflect
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-11-2008A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-11-2008A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-11-2008A1.txt
  • However, Channel 268C3 at Peach Springs, mutually exclusive with the KCLS(FM) Amended Application, needed to be protected until the Mexican government concurred in the move to Oatman. See File No. BNPH-20091016ADO; and Peach Springs, Arizona, Report and Order, 25 FCC Rcd 16104 (MB 2010). See File No. BMPED-20091016AEN, Amendment of October 25, 2010, at Exhibit 1. See 47 C.F.R. � 73.3517(e). See also 1998 Biennial Regulatory Review - Streamlining of Radio Technical Rules in Parts 73 and 74 of the Commission's Rules, First Report and Order, 14 FCC Rcd 5272, 5282, � 14 (1999) (``Applications will be processed together and, if grantable, will be granted simultaneously''). The FM allotment priorities are: (1) first fulltime aural service; (2) second fulltime aural service;
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-11-412A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-11-412A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-11-412A1.txt
  • and Title: 73.686(d) Field strength measurements. SUBPART H-RULES APPLICABLE TO ALL BROADCAST STATIONS Brief Description: This rule sets forth standards for filing contingent applications under specific circumstances. Need: This rule is needed to ensure that frivolous and unacceptable applications are not submitted for processing by the Commission. Legal Basis: 47 U.S.C. 154, 303, 334 and 336. Section Number and Title: 73.3517(e) Contingent applications. PART 76-MULTICHANNEL VIDEO AND CABLE TELEVISION SERVICE SUBPART A-GENERAL Brief Description: This rule sets forth the requirements for pleadings in multichannel video and cable television service proceedings. Need: This rule simplifies the Commission's procedural rules for filing petitions and complaints pursuant to part 76. Legal Basis: 47 U.S.C. 151, 152, 153, 154, 301, 302, 303, 303a, 307, 308,
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-12-512A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-12-512A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-12-512A1.txt
  • 2008) (``Notice and OSC''). See Revision of Procedures Governing Amendments to FM Table of Allotments and Changes of Community of License in the Radio Broadcast Services, Report and Order, 21 FCC Rcd 14212 (2006) (``Revision of Allocation Procedures''). See File No. BPH-20070119AEI (``Application''). See Revision of Allocation Procedures, 21 FCC Rcd at 14223, � 17. See also 47 C.F.R. � 73.3517(e). (...continued from previous page) (continued....) Federal Communications Commission DA 12-512 Federal Communications Commission DA 12-512 F F ` ` �� h k `
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-12-640A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-12-640A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-12-640A1.txt
  • The Belfair and Oakville Applications were filed pursuant to Section 73.3573 of the Commission's Rules, which permits the modification of a station's authorization or a winning bidder's FM assignment to specify a new community of license, without affording other interested parties an opportunity to file competing expressions of interest. The Belfair and Oakville Applications were also filed pursuant to Section 73.3517(e), which permits FM licensees or permittees to file up to four contingently related applications for minor modification of facilities. The BelfairApplication requests a minor modification to change the community of license for Station KOMO-FM from Channel 249C at Oakville to Channel 249C at Belfair, without a change of transmitter site or existing facilities. To prevent the removal of Oakville's sole
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-265810A1.pdf
  • LICENSED FACILITY ACCEPTED FOR FILING KMEN 88205 MBP LICENSEE, LLC CA MENDOTA , CA BPH-20060526ADD 100.5 MHZ E Minor change in licensed facilities. FM STATION APPLICATIONS FOR MINOR CHANGE TO A LICENSED FACILITY PETITION FOR RECONSIDERATION WCTU 72070 STAIR COMPANY, INC TN TAZEWELL , TN BPH-20060221AFF 105.9 MHZ E Minor change in licensed facilities. Waivers of Section 73.207 and Section 73.3517 denied and application dismissed 4/28/2006 Petition for Reconsideration and Reinstatement Nunc Pro Tunc filed 6/2/06 by ("Stair") FM TRANSLATOR APPLICATIONS FOR MINOR CHANGE TO A LICENSED FACILITY ACCEPTED FOR FILING K259AE 24827 GRANTS PASS BROADCASTING CORPORATION OR WOLF CREEK , OR BPFT-20060605ABB 99.7 MHZ E Minor change in licensed facilities, callsign K259AE. W222AH 86135FAMILY LIFE MINISTRIES, INC. NY CORTLAND ,
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-265956A1.pdf
  • LOCATION N A T U R E O F A P P L I C A T I O N STATEFILE NUMBER E/P FM STATION APPLICATIONS FOR MINOR CHANGE TO A LICENSED FACILITY PETITION FOR RECONSIDERATION WCTU 72070 STAIR COMPANY, INC TN TAZEWELL , TN BPH-20060221AFF 105.9 MHZ E Minor change in licensed facilities. Waivers of Section 73.207 and Section 73.3517 denied and application dismissed 4/28/2006 Petition for Reconsideration and Reinstatement Nunc Pro Tunc filed 6/2/06 by ("Stair") Withdrawal of Petition for Reconsideration and Reinstatement Nunc Pro Tunc filed 6/9/06 by ("Stair") Petition for Reconsideration dismissed per applicant's request 6/13/2006 (no letter sent) LOW POWER FM APPLICATIONS FOR MINOR CHANGE TO A LICENSED FACILITY ACCEPTED FOR FILING WLMP-LP 126648 CALVARY CHAPEL
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-267291A1.pdf
  • NO.46318 APPLICANT AND LOCATION CALL LETTERS N A T U R E O F A P P L I C A T I O N FILE NUMBER STATE E/P 09/07/2006 Actions of: FM STATION APPLICATIONS FOR MINOR CHANGE TO A LICENSED FACILITY DISMISSED , MALJAMAR 105.1 MHZ E NM Minor change in licensed facilities. Dismissed pursuant to 47 CFR Section 73.3517(e) 9/7/2006 (no letter sent) MTD, INC. KWMW 39522 BPH-20060103ACL NM , LEVELLAND 105.3 MHZ E TX Minor change in licensed facilities. Dismissed per applicant's request 9/7/2006 PAUL R. BEANE KLVT-FM 30027 BPH-20060104AAL TX AM STATION APPLICATIONS FOR ASSIGNMENT OF LICENSE GRANTED , RICHMOND 950 KHZ E VA Voluntary Assignment of License From: RED ZEBRA BROADCASTING, LICENSEE, LLC To: RED ZEBRA
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-270790A1.pdf
  • change in licensed facilities, proposing community of license change from Benton, MS to Flora, MS Engineering Amendment filed 01/17/2007 Dismissed 2/22/2007 as untimely filed SSR COMMUNICATIONS, INC. WYAB 77646 BPH-20061226AAD MS , MIDDLETOWN 98.7 MHZ E CA Minor change in licensed facilities. Engineering Amendment filed 01/23/2007 Engineering Amendment filed 02/01/2007 Engineering Amendment filed 02/07/2007 Dismissed pursuant to 47 CFR Section 73.3517(e) by letter 2/22/2007 COMMONWEALTH BROADCASTING, LLC KSXY 72925 BPH-20070119ADI CA , SANTA ROSA 91.9 MHZ E CA Minor change in licensed facilities. Engineering Amendment filed 02/12/2007 Waiver request denied by letter 2/22/2007 Application dismissed by letter 2/22/2007 EDUCATIONAL MEDIA FOUNDATION KLVR 18801 BPED-20070119AFR CA Page 3 of 11 Broadcast Actions 2/27/2007 PUBLIC NOTICEFederal Communications Commission 445 Twelfth Street SW Washington,
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-272017A1.pdf
  • L I C A T I O N STATEFILE NUMBER E/P FM STATION APPLICATIONS FOR MINOR CHANGE TO A LICENSED FACILITY PETITION FOR RECONSIDERATION KSXY 72925 COMMONWEALTH BROADCASTING, LLC CA MIDDLETOWN , CA BPH-20070119ADI 98.7 MHZ E Minor change in licensed facilities. Engineering Amendment filed 01/23/2007 Engineering Amendment filed 02/01/2007 Engineering Amendment filed 02/07/2007 Dismissed pursuant to 47 CFR Section 73.3517(e) by letter 2/22/2007 Joint Petition for Reconsideration filed 3/29/07 by ("Commonwealth") and ("EMF") KLVR 18801 EDUCATIONAL MEDIA FOUNDATION CA SANTA ROSA , CA BPED-20070119AFR 91.9 MHZ E Minor change in licensed facilities. Engineering Amendment filed 02/12/2007 Waiver request denied by letter 2/22/2007 Application dismissed by letter 2/22/2007 Joint Petition for Reconsideration filed 3/29/07 by ("Commonwealth") and ("EMF") KYAR 36844 EDUCATIONAL
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-272991A1.pdf
  • for Reconsideration filed 5/2/07 by Linda C. Corso and McMurray Communications, Inc. Petition for Reconsideration dismissed per applicants' 5/2/07 request 5/9/2007 (no letter sent) KSXY 72925 COMMONWEALTH BROADCASTING, LLC CA MIDDLETOWN , CA BPH-20070119ADI 98.7 MHZ E Minor change in licensed facilities. Engineering Amendment filed 01/23/2007 Engineering Amendment filed 02/01/2007 Engineering Amendment filed 02/07/2007 Dismissed pursuant to 47 CFR Section 73.3517(e) by letter 2/22/2007 Joint Petition for Reconsideration filed 3/29/07 by ("Commonwealth") and ("EMF") Request to Withdraw Joint Petition for Reconsideration filed 5/7/07 by (""Commonwealth") and ("EMF") Petition for Reconsideration dismissed per applicants' 5/7/07 request 5/9/2007 (no letter sent) Page 15 of 23 Broadcast Applications 5/14/2007 PUBLIC NOTICEFederal Communications Commission 445 Twelfth Street SW Washington, D.C. 20554 Recorded listing of releases
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-277239A1.pdf
  • LOCATION CALL LETTERS N A T U R E O F A P P L I C A T I O N FILE NUMBER STATE E/P 10/09/2007 Actions of: FM STATION APPLICATIONS FOR MINOR MODIFICATION TO A CONSTRUCTION PERMIT DISMISSED , COOLIDGE 89.9 MHZ E AZ Mod of CP to chg Engineering Amendment filed 08/06/2007 Dismissed by letter 10/9/2007 (Section 73.3517(e)) EDUCATIONAL MEDIA FOUNDATION KZAI 94226 BMPED-20070803ACM AZ , GLOBE 88.7 MHZ E AZ Mod of CP to chg Informal Objection filed 9/27/2007 Informal Objections filed 9/26/2007 (Several filings) Dismissed by letter 10/9/2007 (Section 73.510 violation) Informal Objections dismissed as moot 10/9/2007 (no letter sent) AMERICAN EDUCATIONAL BROADCASTING, INC. KLKA 82692 BMPED-20070803ACY AZ FM STATION APPLICATIONS FOR MINOR CHANGE TO A
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-278241A1.pdf
  • MO FESTUS , MO BPED-20070117AEV 89.3 MHZ E Minor change in licensed facilities. Application dismissed 4/9/07. Petition for Reconsideration filed 4/26/07 by CSN International Petition for Reconsideration dismissed at request of Licensee on 11-15-07. No letter sent. KAIC 78758 EDUCATIONAL MEDIA FOUNDATION AZ TUCSON , AZ BPED-20070803ACO 88.9 MHZ E Minor change in licensed facilities. Dismissed by letter 10/9/2007 (Section 73.3517(e)) Petition for Reconsideration filed 11/13/07 by ("AEB") & ("EMF") FM TRANSLATOR APPLICATIONS FOR MINOR CHANGE TO A LICENSED FACILITY ACCEPTED FOR FILING K238AV 139605EDUCATIONAL MEDIA FOUNDATION CA YUBA CITY , CA BPFT-20071114AAQ 95.5 MHZ E Minor change in licensed facilities, callsign K238AV. LOW POWER FM APPLICATIONS FOR MINOR CHANGE TO A LICENSED FACILITY ACCEPTED FOR FILING KHFG-LP 131415 KHFG-LP, INC.
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-281547A1.pdf
  • of Petition to Deny amended application filed 11/7/2007 (Sheyenne) Engineering Amendment filed 11/09/2007 Reply to Opposition to Informal Objection filed 11/21/2007 (Monterey) ERRATUM - Reply to Opposition to Informal Objection filed 12/5/2007 (Monterey) Motion to Dismiss Reply filed 12/3/2007 (Garcia) Opposition to Motion to Dismiss Reply filed 12/5/2007 (Monterey) Informal Objection denied by letter 4/11/2008 Waiver of 47 CFR Section 73.3517(e) granted by letter 4/11/2008 Page 3 of 4 Broadcast Applications 4/16/2008 PUBLIC NOTICEFederal Communications Commission 445 Twelfth Street SW Washington, D.C. 20554 Recorded listing of releases and texts202 / 418-2222 202 / 418-0500 News media information REPORT NO.26716 CALL LETTERSAPPLICANT AND LOCATION N A T U R E O F A P P L I C A T I O
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-282048A1.pdf
  • of Petition to Deny amended application filed 11/7/2007 (Sheyenne) Engineering Amendment filed 11/09/2007 Reply to Opposition to Informal Objection filed 11/21/2007 (Monterey) ERRATUM - Reply to Opposition to Informal Objection filed 12/5/2007 (Monterey) Motion to Dismiss Reply filed 12/3/2007 (Garcia) Opposition to Motion to Dismiss Reply filed 12/5/2007 (Monterey) Informal Objection denied by letter 4/11/2008 Waiver of 47 CFR Section 73.3517(e) granted by letter 4/11/2008 GARCIA JR., JOSE J NEW 166039 BNPH-20060310ACW ND Page 5 of 10 Broadcast Actions 5/12/2008 PUBLIC NOTICEFederal Communications Commission 445 Twelfth Street SW Washington, D.C. 20554 Recorded listing of releases and texts202 / 418-2222 202 / 418-0500 News media information REPORT NO.46734 APPLICANT AND LOCATION CALL LETTERS N A T U R E O F A
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-282220A1.pdf
  • LICENSED FACILITY ACCEPTED FOR FILING WEKV 61177 EDUCATIONAL MEDIA FOUNDATION OH SOUTH WEBSTER , OH BPH-20080514AGP 94.9 MHZ E Minor change in licensed facilities. FM STATION APPLICATIONS FOR MINOR CHANGE TO A LICENSED FACILITY PETITION FOR RECONSIDERATION KAIC 78758 EDUCATIONAL MEDIA FOUNDATION AZ TUCSON , AZ BPED-20070803ACO 88.9 MHZ E Minor change in licensed facilities. Dismissed by letter 10/9/2007 (Section 73.3517(e)) Petition for Reconsideration filed 11/13/07 by ("AEB") & ("EMF") Engineering Amendment filed 11/13/2007 FM TRANSLATOR APPLICATIONS FOR MINOR CHANGE TO A LICENSED FACILITY ACCEPTED FOR FILING W266BL 150894ALLAN G. STROH AL GREENVILLE , AL BPFT-20080514ADB 101.1 MHZ E Minor change in licensed facilities, callsign W266BL. W287BK 148120SEQUACHEE CHRISTIAN MINISTRIES TN SHERWOOD , TN BPFT-20080514AGG 105.3 MHZ E Minor change in
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-296158A1.pdf
  • 101.7 MHZ E CA Minor change in licensed facilities. Published in the Federal Register 8/14/09. Dismissed per applicant's 1/28/2010 request 2/1/2010 (No letter sent) AGM CALIFORNIA KGFM 36234 BPH-20090710ASB CA , OJAI 105.5 MHZ E CA Minor change in licensed facilities. Published in the Federal Register 8/14/2009 Dismissed via Public Notice with no letter sent pursuant to 47 CFR Section 73.3517(e) 2/1/2010 (Contingent application BPH-20090710ASB dismissed 2/1/2010) GOLD COAST BROADCASTING LLC KFYV 7744 BPH-20090710ASH CA Page 5 of 18 Broadcast Actions 2/4/2010 PUBLIC NOTICEFederal Communications Commission 445 Twelfth Street SW Washington, D.C. 20554 Recorded listing of releases and texts202 / 418-2222 202 / 418-0500 News media information REPORT NO.47166 APPLICANT AND LOCATION CALL LETTERS N A T U R E O
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-296798A1.pdf
  • of CP to chg Published in the Federal Register 10/20/2008 Engineering Amendment filed 12/09/2008 Informal Objection Filed 01/09/2009 by White Park Broadcasting, Inc. Opposition Filed 01/23/2009 by Legend Communications of Wyoming, LLC Published in the Federal Register 02/06/2009 Reply Filed 02/17/2009 by White Park Broadcasting, Inc. Engineering Amendment filed 04/28/2009 Engineering Amendment filed 10/06/2009 Dismissed pursuant to 47 CFR Section 73.3517(e) on 3/9/2010 via Public Notice with no letter sent (Contingent application BP-20081209ACV dismissed 3/9/10 for failure to prosecute) GLOBAL NEWS CONSULTANTS, LLC KYTS 165979 BPH-20080916ABE WY TV TRANSLATOR OR LPTV STATION APPLICATIONS FOR LICENSE TO COVER DISMISSED , SMITH HILL CHAN-13 E TX License to cover construction permit no: BMPTVL-20070424ABJ, callsign K13YN. HISPANIC CHRISTIAN COMMUNITY NETWORK, INC. DK13YN 130310 BLTVL-20070502AAV
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-296840A1.pdf
  • F A P P L I C A T I O N FILE NUMBER STATE E/P 03/11/2010 Actions of: FM STATION APPLICATIONS FOR MINOR CHANGE TO A LICENSED FACILITY DISMISSED , NEW BOSTON 104.1 MHZ E OH Minor change in licensed facilities. Engineering Amendment filed 03/07/2007 Engineering Amendment filed 04/09/2008 Engineering Amendment filed 05/08/2009 Dismissed pursuant to 47 CFR Section 73.3517(e) on 3/11/2010 via Public Notice with no letter sent (Contingent application BPH-20070119ACO dismissed 3/11/2010 for failure to prosecute) RADIO STATIONS WPAY/WPFB, INC. WPAY-FM 54813 BPH-20070119ACD OH , RICHWOOD 104.3 MHZ E OH Minor change in licensed facilities. Published in the Federal Register 2/14/07 Engineering Amendment filed 03/07/2007 Engineering Amendment filed 06/06/2007 Published in the Federal Register 7/09/2007 Engineering Amendment filed
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-297144A1.pdf
  • of CP to chg Published in the Federal Register 10/20/2008 Engineering Amendment filed 12/09/2008 Informal Objection Filed 01/09/2009 by White Park Broadcasting, Inc. Opposition Filed 01/23/2009 by Legend Communications of Wyoming, LL Published in the Federal Register 02/06/2009 Reply Filed 02/17/2009 by White Park Broadcasting, Inc. Engineering Amendment filed 04/28/2009 Engineering Amendment filed 10/06/2009 Dismissed pursuant to 47 CFR Section 73.3517(e) on 3/9/2010 via Public Notice with no letter sent (Contingent application BP-20081209ACV dismissed 3/9/10 for failure to prosecute) Petition for Reconsideration Filed 03/18/2010 by Global News Consultants, LLC FM TRANSLATOR APPLICATIONS FOR MINOR CHANGE TO A LICENSED FACILITY ACCEPTED FOR FILING K275AZ 142879COMBINED MEDIA GROUP, INC. AR COLLEGE CITY , AR BPFT-20100325AAW 103.1 MHZ E Minor change in licensed facilities,
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-297373A1.pdf
  • of CP to chg Published in the Federal Register 10/20/2008 Engineering Amendment filed 12/09/2008 Informal Objection Filed 01/09/2009 by White Park Broadcasting, Inc. Opposition Filed 01/23/2009 by Legend Communications of Wyoming, LL Published in the Federal Register 02/06/2009 Reply Filed 02/17/2009 by White Park Broadcasting, Inc. Engineering Amendment filed 04/28/2009 Engineering Amendment filed 10/06/2009 Dismissed pursuant to 47 CFR Section 73.3517(e) on 3/9/2010 via Public Notice with no letter sent (Contingent application BP-20081209ACV dismissed 3/9/10 for failure to prosecute) Petition for Reconsideration Filed 03/18/2010 by Global News Consultants, LLC Petition for Reconsideration granted 4/5/2010 Application reinstated to pending status 4/5/2010 (No letter sent) Page 6 of 8 Broadcast Applications 4/8/2010 PUBLIC NOTICEFederal Communications Commission 445 Twelfth Street SW Washington, D.C. 20554
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-300833A1.pdf
  • of CP to chg Published in the Federal Register 10/20/2008 Engineering Amendment filed 12/09/2008 Informal Objection Filed 01/09/2009 by White Park Broadcasting, Inc. Opposition Filed 01/23/2009 by Legend Communications of Wyoming, LLC Published in the Federal Register 02/06/2009 Reply Filed 02/17/2009 by White Park Broadcasting, Inc. Engineering Amendment filed 04/28/2009 Engineering Amendment filed 10/06/2009 Dismissed pursuant to 47 CFR Section 73.3517(e) on 3/9/2010 via Public Notice with no letter sent (Contingent application BP-20081209ACV dismissed 3/9/10 for failure to prosecute) Petition for Reconsideration Filed 03/18/2010 by Global News Consultants, LLC Petition for Reconsideration granted 4/5/2010 Application reinstated to pending status 4/5/2010 (No letter sent) Dismissed per applicant's request 8/10/2010 (No letter sent) GLOBAL NEWS CONSULTANTS, LLC KYTS 165979 BPH-20080916ABE WY Page 2
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-314421A1.pdf
  • FOR THE ARTS WHBP 172716 BPED-20100707DZD MI , GERLACH 90.9 MHZ E NV Minor change in licensed facilities. Dismissed per applicant's request 5/31/2012 (No letter sent) FRIENDS OF BLACK ROCK HIGH ROCK INC. KFBR 175807 BPED-20110225ACR NV , WASHINGTON 106.5 MHZ E IN Minor change in licensed facilities. Published in the Federal Register 4/22/2011. Dismissed by letter dated 5/31/2012 (Section 73.3517(e)) OLD NORTHWEST BROADCASTING, INC. WWBL 50239 BPH-20110302AAC IN , PETERSBURG 102.5 MHZ E IN Minor change in licensed facilities. Published in the Federal Register 4/22/2011. Dismissed by letter dated 5/31/2012 THE ORIGINAL COMPANY, INC WBTO-FM 52567 BPH-20110302AAE IN Page 2 of 15 Broadcast Actions 6/5/2012 PUBLIC NOTICEFederal Communications Commission 445 Twelfth Street SW Washington, D.C. 20554 Recorded listing of releases
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-314528A1.pdf
  • MHZ E CA Low Power FM Mod of CP to chg Section 73.870 Waiver denied and application dismissed by letter dated 6/6/12 CALIFORNIA BLACK CHAMBER OF COMMERCE KDEE-LP 123915 BMPL-20111220AGC CA FM STATION APPLICATIONS FOR MINOR CHANGE TO A LICENSED FACILITY DISMISSED , DOUGLAS 106.7 MHZ E GA Minor change in licensed facilities. Dismissed 6/6/12 Pursuant to 47 CFR Section 73.3517(e) (no letter sent) COFFEE COUNTY BROADCASTERS, INC. WOKA-FM 12203 BPH-20120131AHF GA Page 1 of 24 Broadcast Actions 6/11/2012 PUBLIC NOTICEFederal Communications Commission 445 Twelfth Street SW Washington, D.C. 20554 Recorded listing of releases and texts202 / 418-2222 202 / 418-0500 News media information REPORT NO.47756 APPLICANT AND LOCATION CALL LETTERS N A T U R E O F A P
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-00-368A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-00-368A1.pdf
  • yet cannot be granted unless a Class C station fails to carry out authorized facility upgrades. Until the relevant international agreements can be modified to reflect the new Class C0, Class C0 station allotments and assignments in the Canadian and Mexican border areas will be treated as Class C for the purpose of complying with such agreements. 47 C.F.R. � 73.3517; see First Report and Order in MM Docket No. 98-93, FCC 99-55 at �� 11-18 (amending the contingent application rule to permit commercial FM broadcasters to undertake certain mutual facility modifications without being subject to competing applications). 47 C.F.R. �� 1.87(b), 1.411, et seq. (Rule Making Proceedings). 47 C.F.R. � 73.3584 (Procedure for filing petitions to deny); see 47 U.S.C.
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-00-456A2.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-00-456A2.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-00-456A2.txt
  • and Order). The proposals upon which the Commission has not yet acted pertain to whether the Commission should allow negotiated interference agreements between or among FM broadcast stations to accept new or increased interference in connection with substantial facilities improvements. Technical Streamlining Notice, 13 FCC Rcd at 14857-63, paras. 17-27. 47 C.F.R. �� 73.3571, 73.3573, and 74.1233. 47 C.F.R. � 73.3517. Two applications are ``related'' if the grant of one is necessary to permit the grant of the second application. Thus, the ``lead'' application in a group typically will not be ``contingent'' on any other application, but nevertheless will be counted as a ``related'' application. 1999 Technical Streamlining Report and Order, 14 FCC Rcd at 5282 n.43. Second Report and Order
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-03-104A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-03-104A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-03-104A1.txt
  • and ICBC. For the reasons set forth below, the Application for Review is denied. 2. Background. On November 18, 1994, ICBC filed construction permit applications to modify the licensed facilities of WOWO (BP-941118AB) (the ``WOWO 1994 CP Application'') and WLIB (BP-941118AA) (the ``WLIB 1994 CP Application'') (collectively, the ``1994 CP Applications''). The 1994 CP Applications were filed pursuant to Section 73.3517(c) of the Commission's rules, to effectuate an Interference Reduction Arrangement (``IRA'') involving WOWO and WLIB, both of which operate on 1190 kHz (the ``1994 IRA''). Pursuant to the 1994 IRA, WOWO would relinquish its Class A status, thus permitting WLIB to initiate nighttime operations. The 1994 CP Applications were granted on October 18, 1995 (resulting in the ``WOWO 1995 CP''
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-03-18A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-03-18A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-03-18A1.txt
  • 16479 (WTB/MMB 2001). 254 F.3d 226 (D.C. Cir. 2001). 47 C.F.R. � 73.3598. A ``backfill'' allotment is one specifically made to replace a station that is being re-allotted to a new community of license. See, e.g., Cheboygan, Rogers City, Bear Lake, Bellaire, Rapid River, Manistique, Ludington, Walhalla and Onaway, Michigan, 17 FCC Rcd 20491 (MB 2002). See 47 C.F.R. � 73.3517. 1998 Biennial Regulatory Review - Streamlining of Mass Media Applications, Rules, and Processes, Memorandum Opinion and Order, 14 FCC Rcd 17525, 17540 n.55 (1999) (licensee has at best an ``implied STA'' to operate formerly licensed facilities following final order in rule making proceeding modifying facilities). Federal Communications Commission FCC 03-18 Federal Communications Commission FCC 03-18 � � �� R R
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-03-268A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-03-268A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-03-268A1.txt
  • C.F.R. � 73.207. Cut and Shoot, Texas, 11 FCC Rcd 16383 (M.M.B. 1996). Streamlining of Radio Technical Rules, 14 FCC Rcd 5272, n.45 (1999). Amendment of Table of Allotments (Amherst and Lynchburg, Virginia), 11 FCC Rcd 5247 (M.M.B. 1996). See File No. BLH-19970924KE. 47 C.F.R. � 73.207. Cut and Shoot, Texas, 11 FCC Rcd at 16383-84. See 47 C.F.R. � 73.3517 (1996), modified Streamlining of Radio Technical Rules, Report and Order, 14 FCC Rcd 5272 (1999). See, e.g., State of Oregon, Memorandum Opinion and Order, 15 FCC Rcd 15456 (2000) (affirming dismissal of application for a new construction permit that would conflict with another station's licensed facilities, despite the existing station's pending application to license different facilities). 47 C.F.R. � 73.208
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-04-140A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-04-140A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-04-140A1.txt
  • Withers, Pacific Broadcasting of Missouri, LLC (MMB Apr. 13, 2001). See Order, 18 FCC Rcd 2296 (``Backfill allotments permit the filing of inherently contingent proposals, and create the potential for the type of problems and resource burdens that led to the codification of the Commission's general prohibition on filing contingent applications''). See also n.6, supra. See, e.g., 47 C.F.R. � 73.3517. Pacific states that it was unable to construct STA facilities at the Refugio site Pacific proposed October 10, 2003, due to denial of permission ``by the hospital governing board at the proposed site.'' See State of Oregon, 15 FCC Rcd 24039 (2000). 47 C.F.R. � 1.106(b)(2)(i)-(ii). The Commission postponed Broadcast Auction No. 37, originally scheduled for February 21, 2001 (see
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-05-120A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-05-120A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-05-120A1.txt
  • Broadcasting Petition at 29. Id. at 10 n.30. Ashbacker v. U.S., 326 U.S. 327 (1945) (Commission may not grant one of two mutually exclusive applications without affording the parties the opportunity for a hearing). Id. at 10-11; One-Step Order, 8 FCC Rcd at 4739 and n.28. Id. at 4739, citing U.S. v. Storer, 351 U.S. 192 (1956). 47 C.F.R. � 73.3517. Commenters supporting the proposal were Radio One, Inc. (``Radio One''); Station Resource Group (``SRG''); Vox Radio Group, LP (``Vox Radio''); Minority Media and Telecommunications Council (``MMTC''); Univision Radio, Inc. (``Univision''); Cox Radio, Inc. (``Cox''); Keymarket Licenses, LLC, Forever Broadcasting, LLC, Forever Communications, Inc., Forever of Johnstown, LLC, Megahertz Licenses, LLC and Forever of PA, LLC (collectively ``Keymarket''); Michael R Birdsill
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-06-163A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-06-163A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-06-163A1.txt
  • MO&O''). See NPRM, 20 FCC Rcd at 11171, 11175-77. Because nighttime AM signal propagation can result in interference between distant stations, potentially enabling community of license moves of hundreds of miles under this proposal, we limit the definition of ``mutually exclusive'' to daytime facilities. FM daytime and nighttime facilities and coverage areas are uniform for all dayparts. 47 C.F.R. � 73.3517(e). See, e.g., Friendship Comments at 1 (suggesting number of contingent applications be increased from four to five; not counting certain changes against the four-application limit should provide some relief). The four-application limit is set forth in 47 C.F.R. � 73.3517(e). NPRM, 20 FCC Rcd at 11178. Revision of FM Assignment Policies and Procedures, 90 FCC 2d 88 (1982) (``FM Assignment
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-07-217A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-07-217A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-07-217A1.txt
  • modified this proposal to narrow its application. We seek comment on this modified proposal in the Third Further Notice below. Opening FM Spectrum for New Entrants DCS proposes that the Commission take three steps to open FM spectrum for new entrants. First, DCS proposes that we relax the current limit on the filing of contingent applications set forth in Section 73.3517(e) of the Rules, which provides that the Commission will accept up to four contingent applications filed by FM licensees or permittees for minor modification of facilities. Second, DCS proposes that we repeal the third adjacent channel requirements found in Section 73.215(a) of the Rules, or recommend to Congress that we be allowed to do so. Finally, DCS proposes that we
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-11-73A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-11-73A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-11-73A1.txt
  • 2008) (recognizing ``our well-established view that an agency is not bound by the actions of its staff if the agency has not endorsed those actions.''); Amor Family Broadcasting Group v. FCC, 918 F.2d 960 (D.C. Cir. 1990) (Commission not bound by staff actions). The Commission has imposed a similar strict acceptability requirement for contingent application filings. See 47 C.F.R. � 73.3517(e) (requiring the dismissal of all contingently related applications based on the dismissal of any related application). See Milford, Utah, 19 FCC Rcd at 10335; and Kingston, Tennessee, 2 FCC Rcd at 3589. (...continued from previous page) (continued....) Federal Communications Commission FCC 11-73 Federal Communications Commission FCC 11-73 � � � � � � � � � � � � �
• http://transition.fcc.gov/Bureaus/Mass_Media/Notices/1998/fcc98117.pdf http://transition.fcc.gov/Bureaus/Mass_Media/Notices/1998/fcc98117.wp
  • service, contrary to the stated intent of the Notice of Inquiry. Five commenters favored permitting private interference negotiations, stating, among other reasons, that this policy: (1) would make it possible for some Federal Communications Commission FCC 98-117 8 Policies to Encourage Interference Reduction Between AM Broadcast Stations, Report and Order, 5 FCC Rcd 4492 (1990). 9 See 47 C.F.R. � 73.3517(c). As explained in para. 11, infra, the contingent application rule prohibits the filing of an application that cannot be granted until a second, pending application is granted. 10 See Amendment of Part 73 of the Commission's Rules to Permit Short-Spaced FM Station Assignments by Using Directional Antennas, 6 FCC Rcd 5356, 5362 (1991). 11 Open Media Corporation, 8 FCC Rcd
• http://transition.fcc.gov/Bureaus/Mass_Media/Orders/2000/fcc00368.pdf
  • be granted unless a Class C station fails to carry out authorized facility upgrades. 57 Until the relevant international agreements can be modified to reflect the new Class C0, Class C0 station allotments and assignments in the Canadian and Mexican border areas will be treated as Class C for the purpose of complying with such agreements. 58 47 C.F.R. � 73.3517; see First Report and Order in MM Docket No. 98-93, FCC 99-55 at �� 11-18 (amending the contingent application rule to permit commercial FM broadcasters to undertake certain mutual facility modifications without being subject to competing applications). Federal Communications Commission FCC 00-368 16 proposing Class C0 station facilities, i.e., antenna HAAT between 300 and 450 meters, then the station will
• http://transition.fcc.gov/Reports/biennial2000report.doc http://transition.fcc.gov/Reports/biennial2000report.pdf http://transition.fcc.gov/Reports/biennial2000report.txt
  • and Order). The proposals upon which the Commission has not yet acted pertain to whether the Commission should allow negotiated interference agreements between or among FM broadcast stations to accept new or increased interference in connection with substantial facilities improvements. Technical Streamlining Notice, 13 FCC Rcd at 14857-63, �� 17-27. 47 C.F.R. �� 73.3571, 73.3573, and 74.1233. 47 C.F.R. � 73.3517. Two applications are ``related'' if the grant of one is necessary to permit the grant of the second application. Thus, the ``lead'' application in a group typically will not be ``contingent'' on any other application, but nevertheless will be counted as a ``related'' application. 1999 Technical Streamlining Report and Order, 14 FCC Rcd at 5282 n.43. 47 U.S.C. � 623(a)(2);
• http://transition.fcc.gov/fcc-bin/audio/DA-06-337A1.doc http://transition.fcc.gov/fcc-bin/audio/DA-06-337A1.pdf
  • acknowledges that its minor change application for Station WTDA(FM) would be short spaced to the Station WJZA(FM) Pickerington rulemaking proposal and suggests an alternate site for the Pickerington allotment so that both proposals can be accommodated. NABC also acknowledges its conflict with the license site for Station WPAY-FM, but argues that it has requested a waiver of Sections 73.207 and 73.3517 of the rules in its application. NABC recognizes that its application is contingent on Station WPAY(FM)'s reclassification as a Class C0 which would occur only if Station WPAY fails to complete its construction as a full Class C at a new site in accordance with its outstanding construction permit. We are dismissing the NABC application. In 2001, NABC filed a
• http://transition.fcc.gov/fcc-bin/audio/DA-07-1671A1.doc http://transition.fcc.gov/fcc-bin/audio/DA-07-1671A1.pdf
  • Station B to file upgrade from 223A to 223C3. Procedure: Station A must file Form 301 and submit the appropriate minor modification application filing fee. Station B must file Form 301 and submit the appropriate minor modification application fee. See Paragraph 16 and Section 73.203. Both Form 301s must be submitted the same day and reference one another. See Section 73.3517. Example 8 (Involuntary channel substitution to permit upgrade): Station B proposes an involuntary channel change for Station A from 221A to 287A to permit Station B to upgrade from 223A to 223C3. Procedure: Station A files nothing initially. Station A must file Form 301 or 302-FM only if staff issues an order changing its channel pursuant to Section 316 procedures.
• http://transition.fcc.gov/fcc-bin/audio/FCC-06-163A1.doc http://transition.fcc.gov/fcc-bin/audio/FCC-06-163A1.pdf
  • MO&O''). See NPRM, 20 FCC Rcd at 11171, 11175-77. Because nighttime AM signal propagation can result in interference between distant stations, potentially enabling community of license moves of hundreds of miles under this proposal, we limit the definition of ``mutually exclusive'' to daytime facilities. FM daytime and nighttime facilities and coverage areas are uniform for all dayparts. 47 C.F.R. � 73.3517(e). See, e.g., Friendship Comments at 1 (suggesting number of contingent applications be increased from four to five; not counting certain changes against the four-application limit should provide some relief). The four-application limit is set forth in 47 C.F.R. � 73.3517(e). NPRM, 20 FCC Rcd at 11178. Revision of FM Assignment Policies and Procedures, 90 FCC 2d 88 (1982) (``FM Assignment
• http://transition.fcc.gov/fcc-bin/audio/FCC-11-73A1.doc http://transition.fcc.gov/fcc-bin/audio/FCC-11-73A1.pdf
  • 2008) (recognizing ``our well-established view that an agency is not bound by the actions of its staff if the agency has not endorsed those actions.''); Amor Family Broadcasting Group v. FCC, 918 F.2d 960 (D.C. Cir. 1990) (Commission not bound by staff actions). The Commission has imposed a similar strict acceptability requirement for contingent application filings. See 47 C.F.R. � 73.3517(e) (requiring the dismissal of all contingently related applications based on the dismissal of any related application). See Milford, Utah, 19 FCC Rcd at 10335; and Kingston, Tennessee, 2 FCC Rcd at 3589. (...continued from previous page) (continued....) Federal Communications Commission FCC 11-73 Federal Communications Commission FCC 11-73 � � � � � � � � � � � � �
• http://transition.fcc.gov/fcc-bin/audio/FCC-99-55A1.doc http://transition.fcc.gov/fcc-bin/audio/FCC-99-55A1.pdf
  • the availability of spectrum, their foreseeable needs and other factors that may enter into preparing and/or filing applications for improved facilities. We see no reason why this notice and opportunity should not prove sufficient to protect the expansion plans of broadcasters in these services. II. AGREEMENTS INVOLVING APPLICATIONS FOR COORDINATED FM STATION CHANGES A. BACKGROUND 1.11 Proposed Rule Changes. Section 73.3517 of the Commission's rules prohibits the filing of contingent new station and modification applications in the broadcast services. The Commission first announced this policy in a 1961 Public Notice and subsequently codified the restriction. It was adopted to bring greater administrative orderliness to the broadcast licensing process. The Commission found that it was frequently holding applications in pending status that
• http://transition.fcc.gov/fcc-bin/audio/amfmrule.html
  • file. [585]TEXT [586]PDF 73.1944 Reasonable access. [587]TEXT [588]PDF 73.2080 Equal employment opportunities (EEO). [ [589]Media Bureau's EEO Page ] [590]TEXT [591]PDF 73.3500 Application and report forms. [592]TEXT [593]PDF 73.3511 Applications required. [594]TEXT [595]PDF 73.3512 Where to file; number of copies. [596]TEXT [597]PDF 73.3513 Signing of applications. [598]TEXT [599]PDF 73.3514 Content of applications. [600]TEXT [601]PDF 73.3516 Specification of facilities. [602]TEXT [603]PDF 73.3517 Contingent applications. [604]TEXT [605]PDF 73.3518 Inconsistent or conflicting applications. [606]TEXT [607]PDF 73.3519 Repetitious applications. [608]TEXT [609]PDF 73.3520 Multiple applications. [610]TEXT [611]PDF 73.3521 Mutually exclusive applications for low power television, television translators and television booster stations. [612]TEXT [613]PDF 73.3522 Amendment of applications. [614]TEXT [615]PDF 73.3523 Dismissal of applications in renewal proceedings. [616]TEXT [617]PDF 73.3525 Agreements for removing application conflicts. [618]TEXT [619]PDF
• http://wireless.fcc.gov/auctions/32/releases/da992585.doc http://wireless.fcc.gov/auctions/32/releases/da992585.pdf http://wireless.fcc.gov/auctions/32/releases/da992585.txt
  • (the ``WOWO Application'') or mutually exclusive with any such contingent proposal on file by the close of the window. At least one major change and six minor change applications have been filed that are contingent on the grant of the WOWO Application. It appears that certain of these applications are mutually exclusive. Each is subject to dismissal pursuant to Section 73.3517. MMB will retain on file all applications that are contingent on the grant of the WOWO license application provided that they are on file by the close of business on the date of release of this Public Notice. However, it will treat these applications as having been filed during the window, i.e., will not accord first come-first served cut-off rights
• http://www.fcc.gov/Bureaus/Mass_Media/Notices/1998/fcc98117.pdf http://www.fcc.gov/Bureaus/Mass_Media/Notices/1998/fcc98117.txt http://www.fcc.gov/Bureaus/Mass_Media/Notices/1998/fcc98117.wp
  • service, contrary to the stated intent of the Notice of Inquiry. Five commenters favored permitting private interference negotiations, stating, among other reasons, that this policy: (1) would make it possible for some Federal Communications Commission FCC 98-117 8 Policies to Encourage Interference Reduction Between AM Broadcast Stations, Report and Order, 5 FCC Rcd 4492 (1990). 9 See 47 C.F.R. � 73.3517(c). As explained in para. 11, infra, the contingent application rule prohibits the filing of an application that cannot be granted until a second, pending application is granted. 10 See Amendment of Part 73 of the Commission's Rules to Permit Short-Spaced FM Station Assignments by Using Directional Antennas, 6 FCC Rcd 5356, 5362 (1991). 11 Open Media Corporation, 8 FCC Rcd
• http://www.fcc.gov/Bureaus/Mass_Media/Orders/1999/fcc99055.pdf http://www.fcc.gov/Bureaus/Mass_Media/Orders/1999/fcc99055.txt http://www.fcc.gov/Bureaus/Mass_Media/Orders/1999/fcc99055.wp
  • have had ample opportunity to assess the availability of spectrum, their foreseeable needs and other factors that may enter into preparing and/or filing applications for improved facilities. We see no reason why this notice and opportunity should not prove sufficient to protect the expansion plans of broadcasters in these services.31 Federal Communications Commission FCC 99-55 _________________________________________________________________ 32 47 C.F.R. � 73.3517. This section applies to all Part 73 broadcast services. Section 74.780 of the rules prohibits the filing of contingent TV translator, low power television and television booster stations. 47 C.F.R. � 74.780. 33 Public Notice, FCC 61-1286, 22 RR 299 (1961). 34 Amendment of Section 1.517 and 1.520 of the Commission's Rules, Report and Order, 61 FCC 2d 238 (1976).
• http://www.fcc.gov/Bureaus/Mass_Media/Orders/2000/fc00019a.doc
  • 73.1692-Broadcast station construction near or installation on an AM broadcast tower. Section 73.1745-Unauthorized operation. Section 73.1750-Discontinuance of operation. Section 73.1920-Personal attacks. Section 73.1940-Legally qualified candidates for public office. Section 73.1941-Equal opportunities. Section 73.1943-Political file. Section 73.1944-Reasonable access. Section 73.3511-Applications required. Section 73.3512-Where to file; number of copies. Section 73.3513-Signing of applications. Section 73.3514-Content of applications. Section 73.3516-Specification of facilities. Section 73.3517-Contingent applications. Section 73.3518-Inconsistent or conflicting applications. Section 73.3519-Repetitious applications. Section 73.3520-Multiple applications. Section 73.3525-Agreements for removing application conflicts. Section 73.3539-Application for renewal of license. Section 73.3542-Application for emergency authorization. Section 73.3545-Application for permit to deliver programs to foreign stations. Section 73.3550-Requests for new or modified call sign assignments. Section 73.3561-Staff consideration of applications requiring Commission consideration. Section 73.3562-Staff consideration of
• http://www.fcc.gov/Bureaus/Mass_Media/Orders/2000/fcc00368.doc http://www.fcc.gov/Bureaus/Mass_Media/Orders/2000/fcc00368.pdf http://www.fcc.gov/Bureaus/Mass_Media/Orders/2000/fcc00368.txt
  • yet cannot be granted unless a Class C station fails to carry out authorized facility upgrades. Until the relevant international agreements can be modified to reflect the new Class C0, Class C0 station allotments and assignments in the Canadian and Mexican border areas will be treated as Class C for the purpose of complying with such agreements. 47 C.F.R. � 73.3517; see First Report and Order in MM Docket No. 98-93, FCC 99-55 at �� 11-18 (amending the contingent application rule to permit commercial FM broadcasters to undertake certain mutual facility modifications without being subject to competing applications). 47 C.F.R. �� 1.87(b), 1.411, et seq. (Rule Making Proceedings). 47 C.F.R. � 73.3584 (Procedure for filing petitions to deny); see 47 U.S.C.
• http://www.fcc.gov/Bureaus/Mass_Media/Public_Notices/da992585.doc http://www.fcc.gov/Bureaus/Mass_Media/Public_Notices/da992585.txt
  • (the ``WOWO Application'') or mutually exclusive with any such contingent proposal on file by the close of the window. At least one major change and six minor change applications have been filed that are contingent on the grant of the WOWO Application. It appears that certain of these applications are mutually exclusive. Each is subject to dismissal pursuant to Section 73.3517. MMB will retain on file all applications that are contingent on the grant of the WOWO license application provided that they are on file by the close of business on the date of release of this Public Notice. However, it will treat these applications as having been filed during the window, i.e., will not accord first come-first served cut-off rights
• http://www.fcc.gov/fcc-bin/audio/DA-06-502A1.doc http://www.fcc.gov/fcc-bin/audio/DA-06-502A1.pdf
  • currently pending. KCI Exhibit with Respect to Section 307(b), first unnumbered page. Id. See, e.g., Potts Camp and Saltillo, Mississippi, 16 FCC Rcd 16116 (2001) (denying relocation of sole local service at a town of 483 to a town of 1,782). See, e.g., Interstate Broadcasting Co., Inc., 35 F.C.C.2d 737, 738 (1972). See supra note 5. See 47 C.F.R. � 73.3517 (``Contingent applications for new stations and for changes in facilities of existing stations are not acceptable for filing.''). While there is an exception for mutually contingent AM applications that cross-reference each other and are filed pursuant to an interference reduction arrangement, no such arrangement is disclosed in either the instant application or the WONX(AM) modification application. Kovas Communications of Indiana,
• http://www.fcc.gov/fcc-bin/audio/DA-07-1932A1.doc http://www.fcc.gov/fcc-bin/audio/DA-07-1932A1.pdf
  • Discussion. As stated in the May 4 Letter, the Commission has undertaken significant initiatives to improve and revitalize the AM service. One such initiative permits licensees to reach agreements to reduce power or cancel their licenses in order to allow other licensees to improve service, and to reduce overall interference. In order to encourage such agreements, the Commission amended Section 73.3517 of the Rules to provide for the acceptance of contingent applications that would facilitate a reduction in overall AM interference. In amending the rule to permit the filing of contingent applications that would ``reduce interference to one or more AM stations or . . . otherwise increase the area of interference-free service,'' the Commission removed regulatory barriers that prevent or
• http://www.fcc.gov/fcc-bin/audio/DA-08-1416A1.doc http://www.fcc.gov/fcc-bin/audio/DA-08-1416A1.pdf
  • Radio One fails to cite any Commission precedent that would support a departure from this processing rule or show that this processing policy was erroneously applied in this case. The decision to reinstate and grant the Application should not be construed as a departure from our policy of permitting contingent filings only in certain narrowly defined circumstances described in Section 73.3517 of the Rules. In this regard, the initial dismissal of the Application was proper. While we recognize that our current processing rules leave open the potential for abuse, we find that it would be inherently unfair and unlawful to adopt a new policy designed to prevent future potential abuses here. To the extent that Radio One believes that a different
• http://www.fcc.gov/fcc-bin/audio/DA-08-1443A1.doc http://www.fcc.gov/fcc-bin/audio/DA-08-1443A1.pdf
  • (``Objection'') on May 29, 2007, against the proposed changes. On June 13, 2007, the three applicants (collectively ``Joint Applicants'') filed a Joint Opposition to the Objection (``Joint Opposition''), to which Davis Community replied (``Reply'') on June 26, 2007. For the reasons discussed below, we deny the Objection and grant the Applications. Background. These contingent applications were filed pursuant to Sections 73.3517 and 73.3573(g) of the Commission's Rules (the ``Rules'') which permits the modification of a station's authorization to specify a new community of license without affording other interested parties an opportunity to file a competing expression of interest. Any re-allotment proposal must result in a preferential arrangement of allotments. We make this determination using the FM allotment priorities set forth in
• http://www.fcc.gov/fcc-bin/audio/DA-08-1660A1.doc http://www.fcc.gov/fcc-bin/audio/DA-08-1660A1.pdf
  • goal of reducing overall AM interference. With respect to KGA(AM) in particular, the Response argues that the station will maintain its current daytime service and will maintain a fully adequate ``local service floor'' for nighttime service. The Response also notes that the predicted loss of the station's protected skywave service does not implicate the Commission's ``loss area'' policies. Discussion. Section 73.3517 of the Rules generally prohibits the filing of contingent applications for new stations or for the modification of existing stations. It does, however, provide an exception for contingent applications whose grant would ``reduce interference to one or more AM stations or otherwise increase the area of interference-free service.'' The statutes and policy governing contingent agreements that propose a deletion or
• http://www.fcc.gov/fcc-bin/audio/DA-08-1946A1.doc http://www.fcc.gov/fcc-bin/audio/DA-08-1946A1.pdf
  • Station WGBW(AM), Two Rivers, Wisconsin, would be reduced. Discussion. Interference Reduction. In recent years the Commission has acted to revitalize and improve the AM service. As part of this effort, we permit licensees to reach agreements to reduce power or cancel their licenses in order to permit other licensees to improve service, and to reduce overall interference. In amending Section 73.3517 of the Rules to permit contingent applications that would ``reduce interference to one or more AM stations or . . . otherwise decrease the area of interference,'' the Commission removed regulatory barriers that had previously prevented or discouraged individual AM licensees from entering into private agreements to decrease inter-station interference and improve the overall quality of AM service. When such
• http://www.fcc.gov/fcc-bin/audio/DA-08-2392A1.doc http://www.fcc.gov/fcc-bin/audio/DA-08-2392A1.pdf
  • relating to the character qualifications of Potomac. Discussion Interference Reduction Agreement In recent years the Commission has acted to revitalize and improve the AM service. As part of this effort, we permit licensees to reach agreements to reduce power or cancel their licenses in order to permit other licensees to improve service, and to reduce overall interference. In amending Section 73.3517 of the Rules to permit contingent applications that would ``reduce interference to one or more AM stations or . . . otherwise decrease the area of interference,'' the Commission removed regulatory barriers that had previously prevented or discouraged individual AM licensees from entering into private agreements to decrease inter-station interference and improve the overall quality of AM service. When such
• http://www.fcc.gov/fcc-bin/audio/DA-08-2455A1.doc http://www.fcc.gov/fcc-bin/audio/DA-08-2455A1.pdf
  • nighttime facilities are required to begin operation using their nighttime facilities at local sunset. III DISCUSSION 5. WCAR/WOAP IRA. Certain Commission rules are intended to help revitalize and improve the AM service. Licensees may enter into agreements to reduce power or cancel their licenses in order to permit other licensees to improve service and/or reduce overall interference. In amending Section 73.3517 of the Rules to permit contingent applications that would ``reduce interference to one or more AM stations or . . . otherwise decrease the area of interference,'' the Commission removed regulatory barriers that prevent or discourage individual AM licensees from entering into private agreements to decrease inter-station interference and improve the overall quality of AM service. 6. When such contingent
• http://www.fcc.gov/fcc-bin/audio/DA-08-626A1.doc http://www.fcc.gov/fcc-bin/audio/DA-08-626A1.pdf
  • served by dismissing the FLEF application. In light of the foregoing, Application BPED-20070907ACH is unacceptable for filing and is HEREBY DISMISSED pursuant to Section 73.3566(a) of the Rules. This action is taken pursuant to Section 0.283 of the Rules. Sincerely, Peter H. Doyle Chief, Audio Division Media Bureau cc: Jefferson G. Brock 47 C.F.R. � 73.525. See id. at � 73.3517. See WAIT Radio v. FCC, 418 F.2d1153, 1158 (D.C. Cir. 1969), aff'd 459 F.2d 1103 (D.C. Cir. 1972), cert. denied, 409 U.S. 1027 (1972). For example, acceptance of an NCE new station application filed in the October 2007 window that includes a contingent agreement with a Channel 6 station could unfairly skew the ``fair distribution'' analysis to the detriment of
• http://www.fcc.gov/fcc-bin/audio/DA-08-673A1.doc http://www.fcc.gov/fcc-bin/audio/DA-08-673A1.pdf
  • Georgia Eagle had ample opportunity to object to the WMGL Application prior to the staff action. As a result, Georgia Eagle does not have standing to file a petition for reconsideration in this proceeding. For these reasons, the Petition will be dismissed. Moreover, even if we were to consider the merits of Georgia Eagle's Petition, we would deny it. Section 73.3517(e) of the Rules states in pertinent part: The Commission will accept up to four contingently related applications filed by FM licensees and/or permittees for minor modification of facilities. Two applications are related if the grant of one is necessary to permit the grant of the second application. Each application must state that it is filed as part of a related
• http://www.fcc.gov/fcc-bin/audio/DA-09-1033A1.doc http://www.fcc.gov/fcc-bin/audio/DA-09-1033A1.pdf
  • complied with TV Channel 6 protection requirements, that waiver of this rule was justified, or that a conditional grant of the Application was warranted. In particular, the Staff Decision noted that acceptance of the Application would be unfair to those window applicants that filed rule-compliant proposals. The staff also found that: (1) the proposal constituted a ``contingent application'' under Section 73.3517 of the Rules; (2) a waiver of the contingent application rule would be necessary to grant the Application; and (3) a waiver of the rule in this case would be contrary to the public interest. Accordingly, the staff dismissed the Application. In its Petition, SBBC argues that the Staff Decision's denial of its requests for a waiver of Section 73.525
• http://www.fcc.gov/fcc-bin/audio/DA-09-2627A1.doc http://www.fcc.gov/fcc-bin/audio/DA-09-2627A1.pdf
  • Bureau, to Lewis Leonard, Alaska Educational Radio System, Inc. (Jan. 28, 2008.)) Petition at 3. The COL Applications were an attempt to ``bring an existing operation into compliance with the rules.'' Id. 47 C.F.R. � 73.3573(g)(2). See Letter from Rodolfo F. Bonacci, Assistant Chief, Audio Division, Media Bureau, to Alaska Educational Radio System, Inc. (Feb. 5, 2008) (citing 47 C.F.R. 73.3517(e), which states that dismissal of any one of the related applications as unacceptable will result in the dismissal of all the related applications). AERS shortly thereafter filed the May 2008 STA Request for permission to operate from the same facilities as those proposed in the dismissed COL Application. File No. BSTA-20080508ACJ, Attachment 24. AERS claimed that KWMD and KABN(FM)'s operations
• http://www.fcc.gov/fcc-bin/audio/DA-09-801A1.doc http://www.fcc.gov/fcc-bin/audio/DA-09-801A1.pdf
  • removing the sole signal service from a community. Discussion. Interference Reduction. In recent years the Commission has acted to revitalize and improve the AM service. As part of this effort, we permit licensees to reach agreements to reduce power or cancel their licenses in order to permit other licensees to improve service, and to reduce overall interference. In amending Section 73.3517 of the Rules to permit contingent applications that would ``reduce interference to one or more AM stations or . . . otherwise decrease the area of interference,'' the Commission removed regulatory barriers that had previously prevented or discouraged individual AM licensees from entering into private agreements to decrease inter-station interference and improve the overall quality of AM service. When such
• http://www.fcc.gov/fcc-bin/audio/DA-10-604A1.doc http://www.fcc.gov/fcc-bin/audio/DA-10-604A1.pdf
  • Section 73.525 of the Rules, that waiver of this rule was not justified, and that a conditional grant of the Application was not warranted. In particular, the Staff Decision noted that acceptance of the Application would be unfair to those window applicants that filed rule-compliant proposals. The staff also found that: (1) the proposal constituted a ``contingent application'' under Section 73.3517 of the Rules; (2) a waiver of the contingent application rule would be necessary to grant the Application; and (3) a waiver of the rule in this case would be contrary to the public interest. Accordingly, the staff dismissed the Application. In its Petition, Heartland argues that the Media Bureau (the ``Bureau'') should reconsider its denial of its requests for
• http://www.fcc.gov/fcc-bin/audio/DA-11-1460A1.doc http://www.fcc.gov/fcc-bin/audio/DA-11-1460A1.pdf
  • Oak View Application. Background. The Oak View and Goleta Applications were filed pursuant to Section 73.3573 of the Commission's Rules, which permits the modification of a station's authorization to specify a new community of license without affording other interested parties an opportunity to file competing expressions of interest. The Oak View and Goleta Applications were also filed pursuant to Section 73.3517(e) which permits FM licensees or permittees to file up to four contingently related applications for minor modification of facilities. The Oak View Application requests the change of community of license for Station KRRF(FM) from Channel 292A at Goleta, California, to Channel 292A at Oak View, California, with a change of transmitter site, and the modification of Cumulus's license to reflect
• http://www.fcc.gov/fcc-bin/audio/DA-11-2008A1.doc http://www.fcc.gov/fcc-bin/audio/DA-11-2008A1.pdf
  • However, Channel 268C3 at Peach Springs, mutually exclusive with the KCLS(FM) Amended Application, needed to be protected until the Mexican government concurred in the move to Oatman. See File No. BNPH-20091016ADO; and Peach Springs, Arizona, Report and Order, 25 FCC Rcd 16104 (MB 2010). See File No. BMPED-20091016AEN, Amendment of October 25, 2010, at Exhibit 1. See 47 C.F.R. � 73.3517(e). See also 1998 Biennial Regulatory Review - Streamlining of Radio Technical Rules in Parts 73 and 74 of the Commission's Rules, First Report and Order, 14 FCC Rcd 5272, 5282, � 14 (1999) (``Applications will be processed together and, if grantable, will be granted simultaneously''). The FM allotment priorities are: (1) first fulltime aural service; (2) second fulltime aural service;
• http://www.fcc.gov/fcc-bin/audio/DA-12-512A1.doc http://www.fcc.gov/fcc-bin/audio/DA-12-512A1.pdf
  • 2008) (``Notice and OSC''). See Revision of Procedures Governing Amendments to FM Table of Allotments and Changes of Community of License in the Radio Broadcast Services, Report and Order, 21 FCC Rcd 14212 (2006) (``Revision of Allocation Procedures''). See File No. BPH-20070119AEI (``Application''). See Revision of Allocation Procedures, 21 FCC Rcd at 14223, � 17. See also 47 C.F.R. � 73.3517(e). (...continued from previous page) (continued....) Federal Communications Commission DA 12-512 Federal Communications Commission DA 12-512 F F ` ` �� h k `
• http://www.fcc.gov/fcc-bin/audio/FCC-03-104A1.doc http://www.fcc.gov/fcc-bin/audio/FCC-03-104A1.pdf
  • and ICBC. For the reasons set forth below, the Application for Review is denied. 2. Background. On November 18, 1994, ICBC filed construction permit applications to modify the licensed facilities of WOWO (BP-941118AB) (the ``WOWO 1994 CP Application'') and WLIB (BP-941118AA) (the ``WLIB 1994 CP Application'') (collectively, the ``1994 CP Applications''). The 1994 CP Applications were filed pursuant to Section 73.3517(c) of the Commission's rules, to effectuate an Interference Reduction Arrangement (``IRA'') involving WOWO and WLIB, both of which operate on 1190 kHz (the ``1994 IRA''). Pursuant to the 1994 IRA, WOWO would relinquish its Class A status, thus permitting WLIB to initiate nighttime operations. The 1994 CP Applications were granted on October 18, 1995 (resulting in the ``WOWO 1995 CP''
• http://www.fcc.gov/fcc-bin/audio/FCC-05-120A1.doc http://www.fcc.gov/fcc-bin/audio/FCC-05-120A1.pdf
  • Broadcasting Petition at 29. Id. at 10 n.30. Ashbacker v. U.S., 326 U.S. 327 (1945) (Commission may not grant one of two mutually exclusive applications without affording the parties the opportunity for a hearing). Id. at 10-11; One-Step Order, 8 FCC Rcd at 4739 and n.28. Id. at 4739, citing U.S. v. Storer, 351 U.S. 192 (1956). 47 C.F.R. � 73.3517. Commenters supporting the proposal were Radio One, Inc. (``Radio One''); Station Resource Group (``SRG''); Vox Radio Group, LP (``Vox Radio''); Minority Media and Telecommunications Council (``MMTC''); Univision Radio, Inc. (``Univision''); Cox Radio, Inc. (``Cox''); Keymarket Licenses, LLC, Forever Broadcasting, LLC, Forever Communications, Inc., Forever of Johnstown, LLC, Megahertz Licenses, LLC and Forever of PA, LLC (collectively ``Keymarket''); Michael R Birdsill
• http://www.fcc.gov/fcc-bin/audio/FCC-06-163A1.doc http://www.fcc.gov/fcc-bin/audio/FCC-06-163A1.pdf
  • MO&O''). See NPRM, 20 FCC Rcd at 11171, 11175-77. Because nighttime AM signal propagation can result in interference between distant stations, potentially enabling community of license moves of hundreds of miles under this proposal, we limit the definition of ``mutually exclusive'' to daytime facilities. FM daytime and nighttime facilities and coverage areas are uniform for all dayparts. 47 C.F.R. � 73.3517(e). See, e.g., Friendship Comments at 1 (suggesting number of contingent applications be increased from four to five; not counting certain changes against the four-application limit should provide some relief). The four-application limit is set forth in 47 C.F.R. � 73.3517(e). NPRM, 20 FCC Rcd at 11178. Revision of FM Assignment Policies and Procedures, 90 FCC 2d 88 (1982) (``FM Assignment
• http://www.fcc.gov/ftp/Bureaus/Mass_Media/Databases/documents_collection/93-301.pdf
  • subsequentlyoverruledthestaffsholdingthereinwhich allowedapplicantstonegotiateacceptableinterference.In ourAmendmentofPart73oftheCommission'sRulesto PermitShort-SpacedFMStationAssignmentsbyUsingDirec- tionalAntennas,6FCCRcd5356,5361(1991),weestab- lishedthatwewerethesolearbiterindetermining interferencestandardsanddisallowedapplicantsfromnego- tiatinginterferencestandardsonacase-by-casebasis.There- in.wefurthernotedthatonestation'sacceptanceof interferencewouldprecludesomefuturefacilitychanges bythestationwhichcausestheinterference.'Furthermore. NewCove-nantinvolvedthirdadjacentchanneloverlap, whereasthiscaseinvolvesfirstadjacentchanneloverlap.In EducationalInformationCorporation,6FCCRcdat2208, wedistinguishedfirst-adjacentchanneloverlapfromsec- ond-orthird-adjacentchannelcontouroverlap: Overlapofco-channelorfirstadjacentchannelsig- nalsisamoreseriousmattersincetheinterference thatmayoccurresultsinthelossofserviceovera widearea.Secondorthirdadjacentchanneloverlap mayresultinthereplacementofonesignalbyan- other(notthecompletelossofservice)andiscon- finedtoaverysmallareaaroundthetransmitterof theinterferingstation.Inaddition.thepotentialfor suchinterferencetooccurdependstoagreatextent onthequalityofthereceiversusedwithintheaf- fectedarea. Finally.wenotethatinNewCovenantthestaffwaivedas deminimisthirdadjacentinterferencewithin2.1%ofthe protectedservicearea.whereasintheinstantcaseap- plicantsseekawaiveroffirstadjacentinterferencewithin 6.9%oftheprotectedservicearea.Inshort.theNewCoven antdecision,totheextentitremainsviable.isnotanalo- (e.g.coveredbyalake),whichhasbeenaconsiderationin previouswaivers.Finally,thereisnosignificancetothefact thatthestationfromwhichOpenMediawouldreceiveinterfer- encereceivesinterferencefromyetanotherstation,asallegedby OpenMedia. FCC93-301 goustothecircumstancespresentedhere.Weconclude thatawaiverinthiscaseongroundsthattheproposed overlapisdeminimisisnotwarranted. 9.Insummary,theoperativefactsarethatOpenMedia's noncompliancewithSection73.509(a)oftheCommission's RulesisvoluntaryandthatOpenMediahasfailedto demonstrateitsentitlementtoawaiver.Absentsucha demonstration,itsapplicationwasproperlyreturned.Ac- cordingly,weaffirmthestaffaction. 10.ReconsiderationofGrantofNIU/REBFApplication.In itspetitionforreconsideration,OpenMediaarguesthatthe staffviolateditsAshbackersrightsandSection73.3591 (Grantswithouthearing)oftheCommission'sRulesin makinganexpartegrantofaconstructionpermitto NIU/REBF.OpenMediaalsoallegesthatNIU/REBFmis- representedandfailedtodemonstrateitsfinancialquali- fications.failedtocomplywithSection1.65ofthe Commission'sRulesandviolatedtheCommission'sex parterules.OpenMediafurtherarguesthatgrantofthe NIU/RBEFapplicationviolatesSection307(b)oftheCom- municationsActof1934,asamended,aswellasSections 73.3517(Contingentapplications),73.3518(Inconsistentor conflictingapplications)and73.3520(Multipleapplica- tions)oftheCommission'sRulesandiscontrarytopublic policy.Finally,petitionerclaimsthatinquiryiswarranted todeterminewhetherNIU/REBFfalselystateditsintended communityoflicense. 11.Wedenyreconsiderationforthefollowingreasons. Initially,thereisnoviolationofOpenMedia'sAshbacker rightsnorviolationofSection73.3591oftheCommission's Rules.Initsletterissuingtheconstructionpermitto NIU/REBFwhileOpenMedia'sapplicationforreviewof thedismissalofitsapplicationwaspending,thestaffcited MeridianCommunications,2FCCRcd5904(Rev.Bd. 1987).ContrarytoOpenMedia'scontentions,wefindthat casetobeapposite.Meridianholdsthatasamatteroflaw andCommissionapplicationprocessingpolicy,grantofan applicationcannotbecomefinaluntilthepetitionforre- considerationorapplicationforreviewchallengingdis- missalofamutuallyexclusiveapplicationisadjudicated. Simplystated,thecloudoverthegrantedapplicationwill notdissipateuntilreconsiderationorreviewisgrantedor denied.Thus,thegranttoNIU/REBFdoesnotprevent OpenMediafromhavingitsapplicationforreviewdecided bytheCommissionandNIU/REBFareonnoticethatthey proceedtoconstructattheirownrisk.Indeed,atpage4of theJanuary23.1990,constructionpermittoNIU/REBF thefollowingstatementappears: Theissuanceofthispermitisconditionedonthe outcomeoftheapplicationforreviewfiledbyOpen MediaCorporation.Accordingly.anyconstruction undertakenpursuanttothispermitisatthe permittee'ssolerisk. Thus.OpenMedia'sAshbackerrightswerenotviolatedby issuanceoftheconstructionpermittoNIU/REBF.More- over,sinceOpenMediahasnotbeenprejudicedbythe grantoftheconstructionpermit,itsallegationswithrespect 5 AshbackerRadioCorp.v.FCC,326U.S.327,333(1945). 6Similarly,NIU/REBF'sfailuretoserveOpenMediawithits December5,1989,responsetotheCommissioninquirydoesnot raiseasubstantialandmaterialquestionoffact.Itiswell FederalCommunicationsCommissionRecord 8FCCRcd.No.13 tononcompliancewithSection73.3591oftheCommis- sion'sRulesareimmaterial.Similarly,totheextentthat theremayhavebeenatechnicalviolationoftheCommis- sion'sexparterulesinthatOpenMediawasnotsenta copyoftheJanuary23,1990,constructionpermitissuedto NIU/REBF.--itwasharmlesserror.WenotethataPublic Notice(ReportNo.20776)oftheactiongrantingthecon- structionpermitwasreleasedonJanuary29,1990.Accord- ingly.OpenMediawasnotprejudicedasisevidencedby thefactthatittimelyfileditspetitionforreconsideration.6 12.WealsorejectOpenMedia'sallegationsthat NIU/REBFwasnotfinanciallyqualified.misrepresented factsandfailedtocomplywithSection1.65oftheCom- mission'sRuleswithrespecttoitsfinancialqualifications. NIU/REBF,intheirapplication,answered"no"tothe questionabouttheirdependenceuponaPublicTelecom- municationsFacilitiesProgram("PTFP")grant.However theyapparentlyhadalsoappliedforaPTFPgrant.The
• http://www.fcc.gov/ftp/Bureaus/Mass_Media/Databases/documents_collection/let19961205.doc
  • changes to reduce interference. Policies to Encourage Interference Reduction Between AM Broadcast Stations, 5 FCC Rcd 4492 (1990) ("Interference Reduction Proceeding"). In order to encourage such agreements, the Commission's rules were amended to provide for the acceptance of contingent applications that would facilitate a reduction in overall AM interference. Id at 4493. The amended contingent application rule, 47 C.F.R. Section 73.3517, applies to both deletions and modifications of existing interfering AM stations. In amending the rule to permit the filing of contingent applications that would "reduce interference to one or more AM stations or . . . otherwise increase the area of interference-free service," the Commission removed regulatory barriers that prevent or discourage individual AM stations from entering into private agreements
• http://www.fcc.gov/ftp/Bureaus/Mass_Media/Databases/documents_collection/let19970116.doc http://www.fcc.gov/ftp/Bureaus/Mass_Media/Databases/documents_collection/let19970116.pdf
  • changes to reduce interference. Policies to Encourage Interference Reduction Between AM Broadcast Stations, 5 FCC Rcd 4492 (1990) ("Interference Reduction Proceeding"). In order to encourage such agreements, the Commission's rules were amended to provide for the acceptance of contingent applications that would facilitate a reduction in overall AM interference. Id. at 4493. The amended contingent application rule, 47 C.F.R. � 73.3517, applies to both deletions and modifications of existing interfering AM stations. In amending the rule to permit the filing of contingent applications that would "reduce interference to one or more AM stations or . . . otherwise increase the area of interference-free service," the Commission removed regulatory barriers that prevent or discourage individual AM stations from entering into private agreements
• http://www.fcc.gov/ftp/Bureaus/Mass_Media/Databases/documents_collection/let19970224.doc http://www.fcc.gov/ftp/Bureaus/Mass_Media/Databases/documents_collection/let19970224.pdf
  • changes to reduce interference. Policies to Encourage Interference Reduction Between AM Broadcast Stations, 5 FCC Rcd 4492 (1990) ("Interference Reduction Proceeding"). In order to encourage such agreements, the Commission's rules were amended to provide for the acceptance of contingent applications that would facilitate a reduction in overall AM interference. Id. at 4493. The amended contingent application rule, 47 C.F.R. � 73.3517, applies to both deletions and modifications of existing interfering AM stations. In amending the rule to permit the filing of contingent applications that would "reduce interference to one or more AM stations or . . . otherwise increase the area of interference-free service," the Commission removed regulatory barriers that prevent or discourage individual AM stations from entering into private agreements
• http://www.fcc.gov/mb/audio/bickel/amfmrule.html
  • file. [585]TEXT [586]PDF 73.1944 Reasonable access. [587]TEXT [588]PDF 73.2080 Equal employment opportunities (EEO). [ [589]Media Bureau's EEO Page ] [590]TEXT [591]PDF 73.3500 Application and report forms. [592]TEXT [593]PDF 73.3511 Applications required. [594]TEXT [595]PDF 73.3512 Where to file; number of copies. [596]TEXT [597]PDF 73.3513 Signing of applications. [598]TEXT [599]PDF 73.3514 Content of applications. [600]TEXT [601]PDF 73.3516 Specification of facilities. [602]TEXT [603]PDF 73.3517 Contingent applications. [604]TEXT [605]PDF 73.3518 Inconsistent or conflicting applications. [606]TEXT [607]PDF 73.3519 Repetitious applications. [608]TEXT [609]PDF 73.3520 Multiple applications. [610]TEXT [611]PDF 73.3521 Mutually exclusive applications for low power television, television translators and television booster stations. [612]TEXT [613]PDF 73.3522 Amendment of applications. [614]TEXT [615]PDF 73.3523 Dismissal of applications in renewal proceedings. [616]TEXT [617]PDF 73.3525 Agreements for removing application conflicts. [618]TEXT [619]PDF
• http://www.fcc.gov/mb/audio/decdoc/pdf/fr03au05-37.pdf
  • be required to publish notice of the application in local newspapers and/or make on-air announcements disclosing the application and soliciting public comment? In the case of FM stations, should such applications be limited to those in which only the applicant's allotment would be changed, or should simultaneous applications to modify different stations pursuant to the contingent application rule (47 CFR 73.3517) be allowed? If the latter, should the contingent application rule be modified in order to allow more contingent applications to be filed simultaneously (47 CFR 73.3517(c) and (e))? Are there other procedures that should be implemented to ensure that section 307(b) of the Communications Act or any other concerns pertaining to applications to change a station's community of license will
• http://www.fcc.gov/mb/audio/includes/63-amfmrule.htm
  • file. [538]TEXT [539]PDF 73.1944 Reasonable access. [540]TEXT [541]PDF 73.2080 Equal employment opportunities (EEO). [ [542]Media Bureau's EEO Page ] [543]TEXT [544]PDF 73.3500 Application and report forms. [545]TEXT [546]PDF 73.3511 Applications required. [547]TEXT [548]PDF 73.3512 Where to file; number of copies. [549]TEXT [550]PDF 73.3513 Signing of applications. [551]TEXT [552]PDF 73.3514 Content of applications. [553]TEXT [554]PDF 73.3516 Specification of facilities. [555]TEXT [556]PDF 73.3517 Contingent applications. [557]TEXT [558]PDF 73.3518 Inconsistent or conflicting applications. [559]TEXT [560]PDF 73.3519 Repetitious applications. [561]TEXT [562]PDF 73.3520 Multiple applications. [563]TEXT [564]PDF 73.3521 Mutually exclusive applications for low power television, television translators and television booster stations. [565]TEXT [566]PDF 73.3522 Amendment of applications. [567]TEXT [568]PDF 73.3523 Dismissal of applications in renewal proceedings. [569]TEXT [570]PDF 73.3525 Agreements for removing application conflicts. [571]TEXT [572]PDF
• http://www.fcc.gov/ogc/documents/opinions/2002/01-1110.doc http://www.fcc.gov/ogc/documents/opinions/2002/01-1110.html http://www.fcc.gov/ogc/documents/opinions/2002/01-1110.pdf
  • the Damascus Application, apparently curing the defect that led to the dismissal of the Damascus Application. See July 18, 2001 Letter Decision at 2. Subsequently, the Mass Media Bureau granted Birach's petition for reconsideration and reinstated the Damascus Application based on Birach's amendment that made the Damascus Application and a new WWCS Application contingent applications pursuant to 47 C.F.R. � 73.3517(c) (allowing AM licensee to file contingent modification applications if granting contingent applications "will reduce interference to one or more AM stations or will otherwise increase the area of interference-free service"). New World then petitioned for reconsideration of the Mass Media Bureau's reinstatement of the Damascus Application, asserting that it improperly relied on the presumed validity of Birach's new WWCS Application,
• http://www.fcc.gov/ogc/documents/opinions/2004/04-1024-122204.pdf
  • � 73.3534) does not 2 require the Commission to give nunc pro tunc effect to a declaration of forfeiture. The Commission has long required an application to be valid as of the filing date, see In re Morningstar Educational Network, 18 F.C.C.R. 19249, 19251 � 8 (2003), and its regulations clearly prohibit contingent applications. See 47 C.F.R. � 74.910; � 73.3517. Contrary to the assertion of appellants, agency practice is clear: later events that occur outside the filing window cannot cure a defective application. So even if the Commission did backdate the forfeiture of the competing permits to 1995, as appellants insist the agency was required to do, the Commission would still have been justified in rejecting the applications of the