FCC Web Documents citing 73.3566

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

• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-03-2747A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-03-2747A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-03-2747A1.txt
  • the record in this proceeding, as confirmed by an independent engineering study performed by Division staff, we find that Shekinah's proposed station fails to provide at least 45 dB of co-channel interference protection within the PSA of previously authorized Station WHR940. Accordingly, we will direct the Licensing and Technical Analysis Branch to dismiss its application as defective pursuant to Section 73.3566 of the Commission's Rules. Accordingly, IT IS ORDERED, pursuant to Sections 4(i) and 309 of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended, 47 U.S.C. �� 154(i), 309, and Section 74.912 of the Commission's rules, 47 C.F.R. � 74.912, the petition to deny filed by the CAI Wireless Systems, Inc. on December 8, 1998 IS GRANTED. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED, pursuant
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-03-2748A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-03-2748A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-03-2748A1.txt
  • amended, 47 U.S.C. � 154(i), 309, and Section 74.911 of the Commission's Rules, 47 C.F.R. � 74.911, the Petition to Deny filed by the Twin Cities Telecommunications Group Inc. on October 1, 2002, IS GRANTED. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED, pursuant to Sections 4(i) and 309 of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended, 47 U.S.C. � 154(i), 309, and Sections 73.3566 and 74.912 of the Commission's rules, 47 C.F.R. �� 73.3566, 74.912, that the Licensing and Technical Analysis Branch, Public Safety and Private Wireless Division, Wireless Telecommunications Bureau SHALL DISMISS the application filed on July 29, 2002 by the Sherburne Wright Educational Technology Cooperative (File No. BLMPIF-20020729AAB). This action is taken under delegated authority pursuant to Sections 0.131 and 0.331 of
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-03-2792A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-03-2792A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-03-2792A1.txt
  • protection from harmful interference with respect to its operation of Station KNZ70. conclusion and ordering clauses Because TVC's application was filed after the May 26, 1983, the date designated by the Commission after which no new applications for ITFS applications for the E and F Group Channels would be accepted, we conclude that the application is defective pursuant to Section 73.3566 of the Commission's Rules. We therefore dismiss the application. Accordingly, IT IS ORDERED, pursuant to Sections 4(i) and 309 of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended, 47 U.S.C. �� 154(i), 309, and Sections 1.939(g), 21.30 and 74.912 of the Commission's rules, 47 C.F.R. �� 1.939(g), 21.30, 74.912, the Petition to Deny filed by the Grand MMDS Alliance New York
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-03-2793A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-03-2793A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-03-2793A1.txt
  • the Commission's rules, 47 C.F.R. �� 21.30, 74.912, the Petition to Deny filed by the Grand MMDS Alliance New York F/P Partnership Inc. on April 2, 2001, IS DISMISSED IN PART AND GRANTED IN PART. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED, pursuant to Sections 4(i) and 309 of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended, 47 U.S.C. � 154(i), 309, and Sections 73.3566 and 74.912 of the Commission's rules, 47 C.F.R. �� 73.3566, 74.912, that the applications filed by Trans Video Communications, Inc., FCC File Nos. BPIFH-20000818AJP, BPIFH-20000818ALR, BPIFH-20000818BDO, BPIFH-20000818BYE, BPIFH-20000818BYH, and BPIFH-20000818CGV, ARE DISMISSED. This action is taken under delegated authority pursuant to Sections 0.131 and 0.331 of the Commission's rules, 47 C.F.R. � 0.131, 0.331. FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION D'wana R. Terry
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-03-2921A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-03-2921A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-03-2921A1.txt
  • consent letter for all of the reasons stated herein. In sum, we find that Centre has failed to demonstrate that there are sufficient reasons for granting its request for reconsideration. We, therefore, deny Centre's Petition. Accordingly, IT IS ORDERED, pursuant to Sections 4(i) and 309 of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended, 47 U.S.C. �� 154(i), 309, and Section 73.3566 of the Commission's Rules, 47 C.F.R. � 73.3566, the Petition for Reconsideration filed by the Centre Unified School #397 on December 21, 1992 IS DENIED. This action is taken under delegated authority pursuant to Sections 0.131 and 0.331 of the Commission's rules, 47 C.F.R. �� 0.131, 0.331. FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION D'wana R. Terry Chief, Public Safety and Private Wireless Division
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-03-2942A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-03-2942A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-03-2942A1.txt
  • Alliance in 1983, and (3) misconstrues the dual purpose of the Commission's policy underlying Section 74.902(c); that is, to promote spectrum efficiency as well as to protect the interest of MDS applicants from grandfathered or new ITFS stations on E and F Channel Blocks. DISCUSSION The Commission may waive its rules ``if good cause therefor is shown.'' Pursuant to Section 73.3566(a) of the Commission's Rules, ``[r]equests for waiver shall show the nature of the waiver or exception desired and shall set forth the reasons in support thereof.'' ``An applicant for waiver faces a high hurdle even at the starting gate. `When an applicant seeks a waiver of a rule, it must plead with particularity the facts and circumstances which warrant such
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-03-3025A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-03-3025A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-03-3025A1.txt
  • as the Commission stated in the Second MO&O, we caution the Applicants that they will be required to conform all facilities to any new rules that the Commission subsequently adopts for the 2500-2690 MHz Band. Accordingly, IT IS ORDERED that, pursuant to Section 4(i) of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended, 47 U.S.C. � 154(i), and Sections 21.19 and 73.3566 of the Commission's Rules, 47 C.F.R. �� 21.19, 73.3566 the requests for waiver associated with the captioned applications filed by the Trustees of Indiana University, Wireless Cable of Indianapolis, Inc., and Alda Wireless Holdings, Inc. on July 3, 2003 and July 10, 2003 ARE GRANTED to the extent indicated. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that, pursuant to Sections 4(i) and 309
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-03-3182A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-03-3182A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-03-3182A1.txt
  • this subpart, authority to operate is forfeited and the licensee shall forward the station license to the Commission for cancellation. For the purposes of this section, a station which is not operated for a period of one year is considered to have been permanently discontinued. The Commission may waive its rules ``if good cause therefor is shown.'' Pursuant to Section 73.3566(a) of the Commission's Rules, ``[r]equests for waiver shall show the nature of the waiver or exception desired and shall set forth the reasons in support thereof.'' An applicant for waiver faces a ``high hurdle'' and ``must plead with particularity the facts and circumstances which warrant such action.'' Moreover, ``the applicant for waiver must articulate a specific pleading, and adduce concrete
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-03-3621A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-03-3621A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-03-3621A1.txt
  • n.40 (WTB PSPWD 2000). 47 C.F.R. � 1.106(d)(1). 47 C.F.R. � 74.903(a) (``Harmful interference will be considered present when the reference receiving antenna is oriented to receive the maximum desired signal, and a free space calculation determines that the desired to undesired signal ratio is less than the value specified for the respective channel under consideration''). See 47 C.F.R. � 73.3566(a) (applications which are patently not in accordance with the rules and do not contain a request for waiver will be dismissed as defective). The Division did not address Ball State's argument that the Indianapolis Application was also defective because HITN would cause interference to Stations WNC277 and WNC278, Napolean, Indiana. See Ball State Opposition at 6-8. In light of the
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-03-3668A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-03-3668A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-03-3668A1.txt
  • Act of 1934, as amended, 47 U.S.C. � 154(i), and Section 21.19 of the Commission's Rules, 47 C.F.R. � 21.19, that the waiver request filed by the School Board of Dade County on April 7, 1995 IS DENIED. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED, pursuant to Section 4(i) of the Communication Act of 1934, as amended, 47 U.S.C. � 154(i), and Section 73.3566 of the Commission's Rules, 47 C.F.R. � 73.3566, that we direct the Licensing and Technical Analysis Branch to DISMISS the School Board of Dade County's application File No. BMPLIF-950407DG filed on April 7, 1995. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED, pursuant to Sections 4(i) and 309 of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended, 47 U.S.C. � 154(i), 309 and Section 21.30
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-03-794A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-03-794A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-03-794A1.txt
  • as Appendices A and B of the Second LPFM R&O. See Media Bureau to Open Low Power FM Major Amendment Window from October 28, through November 1, 2002, for Certain Pending New Station Applications Procedures Announced to Permit Certain Applicants to Comply with Third-adjacent Channel Protection Requirements, DA 02-2178, (rel. September 9, 2002) (Remedial Window Public Notice''). See 47 C.F.R. 73.3566(a). The actions taken herein are solely reflective of the applications' failure to comply with the third-adjacent channel protection standards of 47 C.F.R. � 73.807. No determination has been made regarding the legal eligibility of a particular applicant. Additionally, all outstanding pleadings associated with a specific application are also dismissed. Such pleadings include petitions to deny, informal objections, and any amendments
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-04-570A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-04-570A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-04-570A1.txt
  • of license and transfer of control of the above-referenced television stations from the licensee subsidiaries of Cunningham Broadcasting Corporation (Cunningham) to the licensee subsidiaries of Sinclair Broadcast Group, Inc. (Sinclair). On December 19, 2003, Rainbow/PUSH Coalition (Rainbow) filed a petition to deny the applications. For the reasons set forth below, we dismiss as defective the applications in accordance with Section 73.3566 of the Communications Rules and deny the petition to deny filed by Rainbow. This is the third time these parties have been before the Commission seeking approval of transactions involving the sale of television stations. In 1998, Sinclair and Cunningham (then Glencairn, Ltd.) sought to acquire certain television stations from Sullivan Broadcasting Company. Rainbow opposed the applications arguing that the
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-04-670A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-04-670A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-04-670A1.txt
  • 94 FCC 2d 1203, 1236 � 85 (1983). Amendment of Parts 2, 21, 74 and 94 of the Commission's Rules and Regulations in Regard to Frequency Allocation to the Instructional Television Fixed Service, the Multipoint Distribution Service, and the Private Operational Fixed Service, Order on Reconsideration, 98 FCC 2d 129, 134 � 14 (1984) (1984 Reconsideration Order) 47 C.F.R. � 73.3566(a) (1998). Opposition at 3-7. Petition at 8-10. Opposition at 10. Id. 47 C.F.R. � 1.41. See, e.g., Ronald Brasher, Order to Show Cause, Hearing Designation Order and Notice of Opportunity for Hearing, 15 FCC Rcd 16326, 16328 n.1 (2000) (Brasher). See, e.g., Roy M. Speer, et al., Memorandum Opinion and Order and Notice of Apparent Liability, 11 FCC Rcd 18393,
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-05-1941A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-05-1941A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-05-1941A1.txt
  • 685, 686 (1964), aff'd sub nom., The Lorain Journal Co. v. FCC, 351 F.2d 824 (D.C. Cir. 1965), cert. denied, 383 U.S. 967 (1966). See also 47 C.F.R. � 1.106. See WAIT Radio v. FCC, 418 F.2d 1153, 1157-59 (D.C. Cir. 1969). See also 47 C.F.R. � 1.3 (rule provisions may be waived ``for good cause shown''); 47 C.F.R. � 73.3566(a) (requests for waiver ``shall show the nature of the waiver or exception desired and shall set forth reasons in support thereof''). Rio Grande Family Radio Fellowship, Inc. v. FCC, 406 F.2d 664, 665-66 (D.C. Cir. 1968). Technical Streamlining Order, 15 FCC Rcd at 21670. Id. (emphasis added). The Commission stated: ``To ensure efficient processing of NCE FM applications, we waive
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-05-2270A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-05-2270A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-05-2270A1.txt
  • Ownership Report and Order, 18 FCC Rcd at 13729-30. As discussed infra p. 6, two other markets are formed over land. Waiver Request, Technical Exhibit at 3. 47 C.F.R. � 73.3555(a)(1)(iii). 418 F. 2d 1153, 1157-59 (D.C. Cir. 1969)). See also 47 C.F.R. � 1.3 (stating that rule provisions may be waived "for good cause shown") and 47 C.F.R. � 73.3566(a) (providing that requests for waiver "shall show the nature of the waiver or exception desired and shall set forth the reasons in support thereof''). The Commission declined to adopt any specific waiver criteria relating to radio station ownership in the Ownership Report and Order, but stated that ``[p]arties who believe that the particular facts of their case warrant a waiver
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-05-2899A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-05-2899A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-05-2899A1.txt
  • 5109 (MB 2005). Technical Exhibit of R. Stuart Graham, Jr. at 1. Statement of Frank Sundram, Acting Manager of WKGC(AM) at 3. Technical Exhibit of R. Stuart Graham, Jr. at 1. Reconsideration Petition at 2. 47 C.F.R. � 1.106(d)(1). Id. at � 1.106(c). Rio Grande Family Radio Fellowship, Inc. v. FCC, 406 F.2d 664 (D.C. Cir. 1968). In addition, Section 73.3566(a) of the Commission's rules provides that requests for waiver ``shall show the nature of the waiver or exception desired and shall set forth the reasons in support thereof.'' 47 C.F.R. � 73.3566(a). Northeast Cellular Telephone Co. v. F.C.C., 897 F.2d 1164, 1166 (D.C. Cir. 1990) (citing WAIT Radio v. F.C.C., 418 F.2d 1153, 1157-59 (D.C. Cir. 1969)). In addition, a
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-06-1488A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-06-1488A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-06-1488A1.txt
  • Id. at 1076. 47 C.F.R. �� 73.3573(f)(5)(i), 73.5005(a). These Sections require a winning bidder to file its long-form application within 30 days of the release of the public notice announcing the close of the auction. 47 C.F.R. � 1.2104(g). 47 C.F.R. � 73.5005(a). Rio Grande Family Radio Fellowship, Inc. v. FCC, 406 F.2d 664 (D.C. Cir. 1968). In addition, Section 73.3566(a) of the Commission's radio broadcast rules provides that requests for waiver ``shall show the nature of the waiver or exception desired and shall set forth the reasons in support thereof.'' 47 C.F.R. � 73.3566(a). Northeast Cellular Telephone Co. v. FCC, 897 F.2d 1164, 1166 (D.C. Cir. 1990) (citing WAIT Radio v. FCC, 418 F.2d 1153, 1157-59 (D.C. Cir. 1969)). See,
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-06-1547A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-06-1547A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-06-1547A1.txt
  • Peter H. Doyle Chief, Audio Division Media Bureau cc: Julian L. Shepard, Esq. 47 C.F.R. � 73.1125. See Request for Waiver - Exhibit A, which contains maps contrasting the driving distances from Hatteras to Engelhard and Nags Head. Request for Waiver at 3. Rio Grande Family Radio Fellowship, Inc. v. FCC, 406 F.2d 664 (D.C. Cir. 1968). In addition, Section 73.3566(a) of the Commission's radio broadcast rules provides that requests for waiver ``shall show the nature of the waiver or exception desired and shall set forth the reasons in support thereof.'' 47 C.F.R. � 73.3566(a). Northeast Cellular Telephone Co. v. FCC, 897 F.2d 1164, 1166 (D.C. Cir. 1990) (citing WAIT Radio v. FCC, 418 F.2d 1153, 1157-59 (D.C. Cir. 1969)). 47
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-07-3617A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-07-3617A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-07-3617A1.txt
  • �� 73.3573(f)(5)(i), 73.5005(a). These Sections require a winning bidder to file its long-form application within 30 days of the release of the public notice announcing the close of the auction. Exhibit 1 to Application. Id. 47 C.F.R. � 1.2104(g). 47 C.F.R. � 73.5005(a). Rio Grande Family Radio Fellowship, Inc. v. FCC, 406 F.2d 664 (D.C. Cir. 1968). In addition, Section 73.3566(a) of the Commission's radio broadcast rules provides that requests for waiver ``shall show the nature of the waiver or exception desired and shall set forth the reasons in support thereof.'' 47 C.F.R. � 73.3566(a). Northeast Cellular Telephone Co. v. FCC, 897 F.2d 1164, 1166 (D.C. Cir. 1990) (citing WAIT Radio v. FCC, 418 F.2d 1153, 1157-59 (D.C. Cir. 1969)). See,
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-07-3618A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-07-3618A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-07-3618A1.txt
  • 73.3573(f)(5)(i), 73.5005(a). These Sections require a winning bidder to file its long-form application within 30 days of the release of the public notice announcing the close of the auction. Exhibit 1 to Application. Id. Id. 47 C.F.R. � 1.2104(g). 47 C.F.R. � 73.5005(a). Rio Grande Family Radio Fellowship, Inc. v. FCC, 406 F.2d 664 (D.C. Cir. 1968). In addition, Section 73.3566(a) of the Commission's radio broadcast rules provides that requests for waiver ``shall show the nature of the waiver or exception desired and shall set forth the reasons in support thereof.'' 47 C.F.R. � 73.3566(a). Northeast Cellular Telephone Co. v. FCC, 897 F.2d 1164, 1166 (D.C. Cir. 1990) (citing WAIT Radio v. FCC, 418 F.2d 1153, 1157-59 (D.C. Cir. 1969)). See,
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-07-4827A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-07-4827A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-07-4827A1.txt
  • with the local radio ownership rule. 47 U.S.C. � 310(d). See Northeast Cellular Telephone Co. v. F.C.C., 897 F.2d 1164, 1166 (D.C. Cir. 1990) (citing WAIT Radio v. F.C.C., 418 F. 2d 1153, 1157-59 (D.C. Cir. 1969) (``WAIT Radio'')). See also 47 C.F.R. � 1.3 (stating that rule provisions may be waived "for good cause shown") and 47 C.F.R. � 73.3566(a) (providing that requests for waiver "shall show the nature of the waiver or exception desired and shall set forth the reasons in support thereof''). The Commission declined to adopt any specific waiver criteria relating to radio station ownership in the 2002 Biennial Regulatory Review-Review of the Commission's Broadcast Ownership Rules and Other Rules Adopted Pursuant to Section 202 of the
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-08-2099A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-08-2099A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-08-2099A1.txt
  • reasonable assurance of the transmitter site at the time it filed its application could not cure fatal defect by amending to specify a new site); Blue Lake Academy, Inc., Letter, 20 FCC Rcd 12066, 12068-69 (MB 2005) (holding that failure to properly incorporate prior to filing a noncommercial broadcast application is a defect that cannot be cured). See 47 C.F.R. 73.3566(a) (``Applications which are determined to be patently not in accordance with the FCC rules, regulations, or other requirements, unless accompanied by an appropriate request for waiver, will be considered defective and will not be accepted for filing or if inadvertently accepted for filing will be dismissed.''). Pacific II, 19 FCC Rcd at 10958 (holding that any party may ``file a
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-08-309A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-08-309A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-08-309A1.txt
  • `Favorita,' noting that Favorita appears on a railroad utility box and in the 2007 Rand McNally Road Atlas. See Verified Statement of Randy Woods, Technical Director, Central (June 4, 2007). See Jefferson City, TN, Notice of Proposed Rulemaking, 9 FCC Rcd 5738 (MB 1994) (citing Oak Beach and Bay Shore, New York, 57 RR2d 1275 (1980)). See 47 C.F.R. � 73.3566. As discussed supra, Favorita and Favoretta appear one and the same. A dismissed NCE applicant generally has one opportunity to make any corrections that can be accomplished through a "minor" amendment within 30 days of dismissal, accompanied by a petition for reconsideration and request that the amended application be considered nunc pro tunc. Applicants specifying a non-licensable community, however, cannot
• 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
  • unfair to those applicants that have filed applications that complied with Section 73.525 and to those potential applicants that deferred their filings as a result of Channel 6 protection requirement issues. The public interest is better 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).
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-09-1084A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-09-1084A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-09-1084A1.txt
  • unacceptable). See Northeast Cellular Telephone Co. v. F.C.C., 897 F.2d 1164, 1166 (D.C. Cir. 1990) (``[A] waiver is appropriate only if special circumstances warrant a deviation from the general rule and such deviation will serve the public interest,'' citing WAIT Radio v. F.C.C., 418 F.2d 1153, 1157-59 (D.C. Cir. 1969)); see also 47 C.F.R. � 1.3. See 47 C.F.R. � 73.3566(a) (applications which are determined to be patently not in accordance with the FCC rules, regulations, or other requirements, unless accompanied by an appropriate request for waiver, will be considered defective and will not be accepted for filing). (...continued from previous page) (continued....) Federal Communications Commission Washington, D.C. 20554 May 18, 2009 2 3 � � � &`#$ �%���PNG �` �`
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-09-2637A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-09-2637A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-09-2637A1.txt
  • the proposed Paragon reallotment would remove the sole local operating service assigned to Morgantown. It concluded that Calvary Chapel had failed to demonstrate that the facts of this case constitute the rare situation in which a presumptively disfavored removal of a sole local service would be in the public interest. Accordingly, the Division Letter dismissed the Application pursuant to Sections 73.3566(a) and 0.283 of the Rules. In its Petition, Calvary Chapel requests that we reconsider and set aside as erroneous the Division Letter. In support of this position, Calvary Chapel alleges that no service is being removed from Morgantown because Station WCJL never provided a local service to the community. It states that the original construction permit for Station WCJL was
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-09-441A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-09-441A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-09-441A1.txt
  • filed by New Bohemia Group, Inc. (``New Bohemia'') on December 20, 2007, to which Plus replied on January 3, 2008 (``Reply''). For the reasons set forth below, we deny the Petition. Background. On October 22, 2007, Plus filed an application to construct a new noncommercial educational (``NCE'') station to serve Coggon, Iowa. The staff dismissed the Application pursuant to Section 73.3566(a) of the Commission's rules (``Rules''), finding that the facility proposed in the Application failed to provide adequate community coverage as required by Section 73.515 of the Rules. Specifically, the Dismissal Letter held that the ``proposed 60 dBu contour fails to cover at least 50 percent of the community of license of Coggon, Iowa.'' In its Petition, Plus argues that it
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-10-1046A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-10-1046A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-10-1046A1.txt
  • to Petition at 2, citing U.S. v. Storer Broadcasting Co., 351 U.S. 192, 201-202 (1956). Opposition to Petition at 4. Id. at 3. Opposition to Supplement at 3. Id. Id. at 2-3. Supplement at 4-5. Opposition to Supplement at 2. Id. at 2-3. CCR Petition at 3. Id. at 3-5 Id. at 5-6. Joint Petitions at 2. 47 C.F.R � 73.3566(a) (``Applications which are determined to be patently not in accordance with the FCC rules, regulations, or other requirements, unless accompanied by an appropriate request for waiver, will be considered defective and will not be accepted for filing or if inadvertently accepted for filing will be dismissed. Requests for waiver shall show the nature of the waiver or exception desired and
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-10-130A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-10-130A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-10-130A1.txt
  • than a licensee . . . the applicable statute of limitations was one year, pursuant to section 503(b)(6)(B).) Lutheran Church-Missouri Synod, Memorandum Opinion and Order, 12 FCC Rcd 2152, 2167 (1997), rev'd on other grounds, Lutheran Church-Missouri Synod v. FCC, 141 F 3d 344 (D.C. Cir. 1998). See 47 C.F.R. � 1.1914. 47 C.F.R. � 0.283. See 47 C.F.R. � 73.3566(a). 47 C.F.R. � 73.3598(a). (Continued from previous page) (continued . . .) Federal Communications Commission DA 10-130 Federal Communications Commission DA 10-130 4 5 � � � � � \ < = P Q < = P Q < = P Q 0 < = P Q � � � � �
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-10-1958A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-10-1958A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-10-1958A1.txt
  • Inc. (``New Bohemia'') and Plus. For the reasons set forth below, we deny both Petitions. BACKGROUND Plus and New Bohemia each applied to construct a new noncommercial educational (``NCE'') station to serve Coggon, Iowa, during a filing window for NCE FM applications in October 2007. On November 8, 2007, the staff dismissed the Plus Application (``Dismissal Letter'') pursuant to Section 73.3566(a) of the Rules, because Plus' proposed facility failed to provide adequate community coverage as required by Section 73.515 of the Rules. On December 7, 2007, Plus petitioned for reconsideration of the dismissal and requested leave to amend its application and have it reinstated nunc pro tunc (``December 2007 Petition''). Specifically, Plus asserted that it inadvertently checked the box ``east longitude''
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-10-1960A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-10-1960A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-10-1960A1.txt
  • Rcd 10213, 10215-16 (MB 2008) (``Fair Distribution Order''). Archangel Petition to Deny at 3. Id. Id. at 4. Id. at 1, 5. Id. TBTA Opposition at 3. 47 C.F.R. � 73.509(a). Letter to Stuart W. Nolan, Jr., Esq. and Patrick J. Vaughn, Esq. from James Bradshaw, Deputy Chief, Audio Division, Media Bureau (dated May 20, 2010); see 47 C.F.R. � 73.3566. The 3 second terrain data submitted by Archangel is more granular than the 30 second terrain data that we originally reviewed. Archangel also asserts that TBTA misrepresented the number of pending applications for broadcast authorizations in its submissions to the Commission. Archangel Petition to Deny at 3. According to Archangel, TBTA improperly certified in its Application that it had no
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-10-2065A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-10-2065A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-10-2065A1.txt
  • that application, and indicated that, if, after that 30-day petition period had run, there was no substantial and material question concerning the Edinboro Application, it would, by Public Notice, dismiss the other mutually exclusive applications and grant the Edinboro Application. Allied argues in the Petition that the Application is defective and must be dismissed without opportunity to amend under Section 73.3566 of the Commission's Rules (``Rules''). Specifically, Allied asserts that Edinboro: (1) is not a non-profit corporation; (2) failed to disclose its ownership of Station WEES-LP; (3) improperly claimed points for diversity of ownership; (4) did not fully disclose its existing authorizations and pending NCE applications; and (5) improperly claimed points as an established local applicant. Edinboro did not respond to
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-11-1320A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-11-1320A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-11-1320A1.txt
  • new FM Station, Union Gap, Washington, and CCR-Tri Cities IV, LLC (``CCR''), licensee of Stations KONA(AM), Richland-Kennewick-Pasco, Washington, KONA-FM, Kennewick, Washington, and KZHR(FM), Dayton, Washington, each filed a Petition to Deny the Assignment Applications. For the reasons stated below, we dismiss the Petitions to Deny as moot, and dismiss the Assignment Applications as inadvertently accepted for filing, pursuant to Section 73.3566(a) of the Commission's Rules (the ``Rules''). Background. On May 28, 2010, the Media Bureau (the ``Bureau'') granted consent to the assignment of licenses of 31 New Northwest Broadcasters, LLC (``NNB'') radio stations in Alaska, Oregon, and Washington, to the Receiver following insolvency proceedings in the Superior Court for the State of Washington for King County (the ``Washington Court''). The Assignment
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-11-1673A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-11-1673A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-11-1673A1.txt
  • �� 73.3573(f)(5)(i), 73.5005(a). These Sections require a winning bidder to file its long-form application within 30 days of the release of the public notice announcing the close of the auction. Exhibit 1 to Application. Id. 47 C.F.R. � 1.2104(g). 47 C.F.R. � 73.5005(a). Rio Grande Family Radio Fellowship, Inc. v. FCC, 406 F.2d 664 (D.C. Cir. 1968). In addition, Section 73.3566(a) of the Commission's radio broadcast rules provides that requests for waiver ``shall show the nature of the waiver or exception desired and shall set forth the reasons in support thereof.'' 47 C.F.R. � 73.3566(a). Northeast Cellular Telephone Co. v. FCC, 897 F.2d 1164, 1166 (D.C. Cir. 1990) (citing WAIT Radio v. FCC, 418 F.2d 1153, 1157-59 (D.C. Cir. 1969)). See,
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-11-1789A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-11-1789A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-11-1789A1.txt
  • Bishop, California. On May 27, 2010, Benett Kessler (``Kessler'') filed a Petition for Reconsideration (the ``Petition'') seeking reconsideration of the dismissal of an earlier Petition for Reconsideration (``2008 Petition'') that she had filed on September 12, 2008. For the reasons set forth below, we grant the Petition, rescind our grant of the Application and dismiss the Application pursuant to Section 73.3566(a) of the Commission's Rules (``Rules''). We also grant a Motion for Leave to Submit Declaration of Brian Law (``Motion'') filed by Kessler on June 1, 2011. Background. In a decision released on June 30, 2008, we awarded Nevada-Utah a dispositive preference under Section 307(b) of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended, and designated Nevada-Utah the tentative selectee for NCE
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-11-1853A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-11-1853A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-11-1853A1.txt
  • pursuant to these procedures. SPB claims that grant of the Channel 296C Petition and the Second Amendment will serve the public interest because there will be a net gain of 84,136 persons and 19,003 square kilometers in coverage. Discussion. First, although the Second Amendment was previously accepted for filing, we now recognize that it should be dismissed, pursuant to Section 73.3566, as patently not in accordance with the Commission's Rules. While Section 73.3573(a)(i) and (ii) provide that a winning auction bidder's long- form application for a new station may include a minor amendment to change the proposed community of license or to upgrade to an adjacent channel, it does not permit an upgrade in channel class on a non-adjacent channel. On
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-11-735A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-11-735A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-11-735A1.txt
  • to Opposition to Petition to Deny at 3, citing Okla. Stat. tit. 18 � 1027(B) (2010). Moreover, Oklahoma law provides a means by which a church or religious society that does not desire to become incorporated may organize and enjoy some of the benefits of incorporation, without formally incorporating. Okla. Stat. tit. 18 � 562 (2010). ). 47 C.F.R � 73.3566(a) (``Applications which are determined to be patently not in accordance with the FCC rules, regulations, or other requirements, unless accompanied by an appropriate request for waiver, will be considered defective and will not be accepted for filing or if inadvertently accepted for filing will be dismissed. Requests for waiver shall show the nature of the waiver or exception desired and
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-12-1004A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-12-1004A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-12-1004A1.txt
  • a winning bidder to file its long-form application within 30 days of the release of the public notice announcing the close of the auction, unless a longer period is specified in that closing public notice. 47 C.F.R. � 1.2104(g). 47 C.F.R. � 73.5005(c). Rio Grande Family Radio Fellowship, Inc. v. FCC, 406 F.2d 664 (D.C. Cir. 1968). In addition, Section 73.3566(a) of the Commission's radio broadcast rules provides that requests for waiver ``shall show the nature of the waiver or exception desired and shall set forth the reasons in support thereof.'' 47 C.F.R. � 73.3566(a). See NetworkIP, LLC v. FCC, 548 F.3d 116, 125-28 (D.C.Cir 2008); Northeast Cellular Telephone Co. v. FCC, 897 F.2d 1164, 1166 (D.C. Cir. 1990) (citing WAIT
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-12-871A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-12-871A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-12-871A1.txt
  • FCC form and for this reason, too, it must be dismissed. Conclusions/Actions. Accordingly, for the reasons set forth above, IT IS ORDERED, that the Application (File No. BAL-20120106AAD) for consent to assign the license of Station WEGA(AM), Vega Baja, Puerto Rico, from A Radio Company, Inc., to Carmelo Santiago Roman, IS DISMISSED as patently defective pursuant to 47 C.F.R. � 73.3566. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED, that the February 9, 2012, Petition to Deny filed by A Radio Company, Inc., IS DISMISSED AS MOOT. Sincerely, Peter H. Doyle Chief, Audio Division Media Bureau Roman filed an Opposition to the Petition on February 23, 2012, to which A Radio replied on March 6, 2012. See 47 C.F.R. � 73.3566. See VI/MAN Broadcasting System
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-01-336A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-01-336A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-01-336A1.txt
  • permitted to own under the Commission's broadcast multiple ownership rules. For the reasons set forth below, we grant in part and deny in part the petitions to deny, issue notices of apparent liability to Sinclair and Glencairn for their actions, and conditionally grant the above-referenced applications with the exception of the WFBC-TV application, which we dismiss in accordance with Section 73.3566 of the Commission's Rules. II. BACKGROUND A. Applications This proceeding began in 1998 when SBH proposed to sell its television stations to Sinclair and Glencairn. Glencairn was to obtain WRGT-TV, Dayton, Ohio, WTAT-TV, Charleston, South Carolina, WVAH-TV, Charleston, West Virginia, KOKH-TV, Oklahoma City, Oklahoma, and W34BX, Bluefield, West Virginia (Sullivan III Stations) with SBH's remaining stations being sold to Sinclair.
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-03-201A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-03-201A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-03-201A1.txt
  • file its waiver request on one of those forms, nor did it pay a fee. The Media Bureau has no rules-based waiver standard corresponding to 47 C.F.R. � 1.925. Section 1.3 of the Rules (47 C.F.R. � 1.3), under Part 1 - Practice and Procedure, states that rule provisions may be waived ``for good cause shown,'' and 47 C.F.R. � 73.3566(a), under Part 73 - Radio Broadcast Services, Subpart H - Rules Applicable to All Broadcast Stations, provides that requests for waiver ``shall show the nature of the waiver or exception desired and shall set forth the reasons in support thereof.'' The specific waiver standard to be used by the Media Bureau, however, utilizes a case-by-case analysis governed by decisional precedent.
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-03-266A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-03-266A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-03-266A1.txt
  • (Oct. 20, 1995) (collectively, Cover Letters). Specifically, the ``acceptability'' of the Savannah Applications was ``contingent upon the outcome of the [consolidated] petition to deny filed by Wireless Cable of Florida, Inc. against the application[s] of'' the Pembroke Permittees for extensions of time to construct their facilities. See, e.g., AFR at 7. See 47 C.F.R. � 74.910 (applying 47 C.F.R. � 73.3566, broadcast rule barring contingent applications, to ITFS). See Contingent Applications in the Broadcast Services, Report and Order, 22 RR 299 (1961); Amendment of Sections 1.517 and 1.520 of the Commission's Rules, Report and Order, 61 F.C.C. 2d 238 (1976). 47 C.F.R. � 74.903(b). See, e.g., 47 C.F.R. � 74.903(a)(5). Westel Samoa, Inc., Memorandum Opinion and Order, 13 FCC Rcd 6342,
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-03-281A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-03-281A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-03-281A1.txt
  • Furthermore, the patent omissions in the technically critical proofs of performance and RF radiation compliance showing - which are essential for the staff to determine whether the terms and conditions of the construction permit have been satisfied and whether the constructed facilities will operate in conformance with the Commission's rules -- can only be characterized as major deficiencies. 7. Section 73.3566(a) directs the staff to dismiss nonconforming applications: ``Applications which are determined to be patently not in accordance with the FCC rules, regulations, or other requirements, unless accompanied by an appropriate request for waiver, will be considered defective and will not be accepted for filing or if inadvertently accepted for filing will be dismissed.'' Consistent with this directive, the staff routinely
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-04-6A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-04-6A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-04-6A1.txt
  • 2001, Form 301 long-form application for compliance with the Commission's multiple ownership rules. Moreover, an informal objection may be filed against the KMC application at any time prior to staff action on the application. KMC's failure to cure any multiple ownership rule violation that is identified during the staff's grantability review will subject the application to dismissal pursuant to Section 73.3566(a) of the Commission's rules. 10. In summary, we find that the Bureau correctly determined that KMC's proposed first local service to the community of Makaha merited a dispositive Section 307(b) preference over ALM's proposal for fourth local service to Waipahu. ALM has thus failed to raise a substantial and material question of fact on these grounds. 11. Status of KMC
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-07-211A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-07-211A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-07-211A1.txt
  • Mark R. Fratrik, Vice President of BIA Financial Network (Fratrik Report), Exhibit 18, File No. BTCCT-20070501AFL. Television Satellite Stations, 6 FCC Rcd at 4215. Id. Fratrik Report at 3 n.1. Id. at 6. Id. at 10. Id. at 7-8. Id. at 11-12. Id. at 9. Id. at 10. Id. at 6. Id. Id. at 10-11. See, e.g., 47 C.F.R. � 73.3566 (2006). 47 U.S.C. � 307(c)(2000); 47 C.F.R. � 1.62 (2006). In any event, we are granting the renewal applications in this order. If the transaction is not consummated, Tribune's existing grandfathered newspaper/broadcast combination in Chicago, Illinois will remain undisturbed. Likewise, its existing waiver of the NBCO rule in the Miami, Florida market shall continue under the terms set out in
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-08-6A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-08-6A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-08-6A1.txt
  • recommendations regarding the LPFM interference study do not have the force of law, and cannot overturn this directive. Therefore, applications must conform to this standard unless Congress repeals or changes Section 632(a)(1) of the Act. An application, such as Iglesia's, that fails to provide protection for third-adjacent channel facilities is patently defective and is properly dismissed under Sections 73.807 and 73.3566 of the Rules. 5. Iglesia also argues that reinstatement of its LPFM application is in the public interest because it facilitates the establishment of LPFM service and supports the Commission's ``Localism in Broadcasting'' initiative. It is true that LPFM service has a uniquely local character, and the Commission remains committed to fostering a vibrant and meaningful LPFM service consistent with
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-12-28A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-12-28A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-12-28A1.txt
  • FM translator ``a routine consideration prior to grant of an LPFM application'' and instead providing that, should such interference occur, an LPFM station must immediately cease operation until appropriate remedial actions have been taken). See Mitre Corporation's Technical Report, ``Experimental Measurements of the Third-Adjacent-Channel Impacts of Low-Power FM Stations,'' Section 2.7 or pages 2-16, 2-17, 2-18. See 47 C.F.R. � 73.3566(a). This equation is as follows: du = 133.5 antilog [(Peu + Gru - Grd - Ed) / 20], where du = the minimum allowed separation in km, Peu = LPFM ERP in dBW, Gru = gain (dBd) of the translator receive antenna in the direction of the LPFM site, Grd = gain (dBd) of the translator receive antenna in the
• http://transition.fcc.gov/fcc-bin/audio/FCC-12-28A1.doc http://transition.fcc.gov/fcc-bin/audio/FCC-12-28A1.pdf
  • FM translator ``a routine consideration prior to grant of an LPFM application'' and instead providing that, should such interference occur, an LPFM station must immediately cease operation until appropriate remedial actions have been taken). See Mitre Corporation's Technical Report, ``Experimental Measurements of the Third-Adjacent-Channel Impacts of Low-Power FM Stations,'' Section 2.7 or pages 2-16, 2-17, 2-18. See 47 C.F.R. � 73.3566(a). This equation is as follows: du = 133.5 antilog [(Peu + Gru - Grd - Ed) / 20], where du = the minimum allowed separation in km, Peu = LPFM ERP in dBW, Gru = gain (dBd) of the translator receive antenna in the direction of the LPFM site, Grd = gain (dBd) of the translator receive antenna in the
• http://transition.fcc.gov/fcc-bin/audio/amfmrule.html
  • [646]TEXT [647]PDF 73.3550 Requests for new or modified call sign assignments. [648]TEXT [649]PDF 73.3555 Multiple ownership. [650]TEXT [651]PDF 73.3556 Duplication of programming on commonly owned or time brokered stations. [652]TEXT [653]PDF 73.3561 Staff consideration of applications requiring Commission action. [654]TEXT [655]PDF 73.3562 Staff consideration of applications not requiring action by the Commission. [656]TEXT [657]PDF 73.3564 Acceptance of applications. [658]TEXT [659]PDF 73.3566 Defective applications. [660]TEXT [661]PDF 73.3568 Dismissal of applications. [662]TEXT [663]PDF 73.3571 Processing of AM broadcast station applications. [664]TEXT [665]PDF 73.3572 Processing of TV broadcast, Class A TV broadcast, low power TV, TV translators, and TV booster applications. [666]TEXT [667]PDF 73.3573 Processing FM broadcast station applications. [668]TEXT [669]PDF 73.3574 Processing of international broadcast station applications. [670]TEXT [671]PDF 73.3578 Amendments to applications
• http://www.fcc.gov/Bureaus/Mass_Media/Orders/2000/fc00019a.doc
  • 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 applications not requiring action by the Commission. Section 73.3566-Defective applications. Section 73.3568-Dismissal of applications. Section 73.3584-Procedure for filing petitions to deny. Section 73.3587-Procedure for filing informal objections. Section 73.3588-Dismissal of petitions to deny or withdrawal of informal objections. Section 73.3589-Threats to file petitions to deny or informal objections. Section 73.3591-Grants without hearing. Section 73.3593-Designation for hearing. Section 73.3598-Period of construction. Section 73.3599-Forfeiture of construction permit. Section 73.3999-Enforcement of 18
• http://www.fcc.gov/Bureaus/Mass_Media/Orders/2000/fcc00382.doc
  • Company and Lindsay Television Company; (b) Petitioner's Reply to Filing of Charlottesville Broadcasting Corporation, filed June 13, 2000, by Givens & Bell; (c) Enforcement Bureau's Opposition to Pleading filed by Givens & Bell, filed June 14, 2000; and (d) Reply to Enforcement Bureau's Opposition to Pleading, filed June 21, 2000, by Givens & Bell. The Bureau relies on Sections 73.3564(a)-(c), 73.3566(a), and 73.3572(f) of the Commission's Rules, 47 C.F.R. �� 73.3564(a)-(c), 73.3566(a), and 73.3572(f), as they existed in September 1996 when Givens & Bell's application was tendered for filing. Read together, those provisions make clear that Givens & Bell's September 1996 application was not entitled to competitive consideration with the 1986 applications of Achernar and Lindsay for that same channel, and
• http://www.fcc.gov/Forms/Form345/345.pdf
  • within the lesser of : (a) the 2 mV/m daytime contour of the AM primary station being rebroadcast, or (b) a 25-mile radius centered at the AM primary station's transmitter site. If the answer to both "a" and "b" is "No" and no waiver has been justified, the application will be dismissed as unacceptable for filing under 47 C.F.R. Sections 73.3566(a) and 74.1232(d). Applicants for FM booster stations, as well as applicants proposing noncommercial educational translator operation, should mark "N/A" to both parts of this question. K. Item 12: Compliance with 47 C.F.R. Section 74.1232(e). This question requires the FM translator applicant to certify that it complies with the rule regarding financial and technical assistance from the primary station to be
• http://www.fcc.gov/Forms/Form349/349.pdf
  • within the lesser of : (a) the 2 mV/m daytime contour of the AM primary station being rebroadcast, or (b) a 25-mile radius centered at the AM primary station's transmitter site. If the answer to both "a" and "b" is "No" and no waiver has been justified, the application will be dismissed as unacceptable for filing under 47 C.F.R. Sections 73.3566(a) and 74.1232(d). Applicants for FM booster stations, as well as applicants proposing noncommercial educational translator operation, should mark "N/A" to both parts of this question. D. Item 4: Compliance with 47 C.F.R. Section 74.1232(e). This question requires the FM translator applicant to certify that it complies with the rule regarding financial and technical assistance from the primary station to be
• http://www.fcc.gov/fcc-bin/audio/DA-05-1941A1.doc http://www.fcc.gov/fcc-bin/audio/DA-05-1941A1.pdf
  • 685, 686 (1964), aff'd sub nom., The Lorain Journal Co. v. FCC, 351 F.2d 824 (D.C. Cir. 1965), cert. denied, 383 U.S. 967 (1966). See also 47 C.F.R. � 1.106. See WAIT Radio v. FCC, 418 F.2d 1153, 1157-59 (D.C. Cir. 1969). See also 47 C.F.R. � 1.3 (rule provisions may be waived ``for good cause shown''); 47 C.F.R. � 73.3566(a) (requests for waiver ``shall show the nature of the waiver or exception desired and shall set forth reasons in support thereof''). Rio Grande Family Radio Fellowship, Inc. v. FCC, 406 F.2d 664, 665-66 (D.C. Cir. 1968). Technical Streamlining Order, 15 FCC Rcd at 21670. Id. (emphasis added). The Commission stated: ``To ensure efficient processing of NCE FM applications, we waive
• http://www.fcc.gov/fcc-bin/audio/DA-06-1488A1.doc http://www.fcc.gov/fcc-bin/audio/DA-06-1488A1.pdf
  • Id. at 1076. 47 C.F.R. �� 73.3573(f)(5)(i), 73.5005(a). These Sections require a winning bidder to file its long-form application within 30 days of the release of the public notice announcing the close of the auction. 47 C.F.R. � 1.2104(g). 47 C.F.R. � 73.5005(a). Rio Grande Family Radio Fellowship, Inc. v. FCC, 406 F.2d 664 (D.C. Cir. 1968). In addition, Section 73.3566(a) of the Commission's radio broadcast rules provides that requests for waiver ``shall show the nature of the waiver or exception desired and shall set forth the reasons in support thereof.'' 47 C.F.R. � 73.3566(a). Northeast Cellular Telephone Co. v. FCC, 897 F.2d 1164, 1166 (D.C. Cir. 1990) (citing WAIT Radio v. FCC, 418 F.2d 1153, 1157-59 (D.C. Cir. 1969)). See,
• http://www.fcc.gov/fcc-bin/audio/DA-06-1547A1.doc http://www.fcc.gov/fcc-bin/audio/DA-06-1547A1.pdf
  • Peter H. Doyle Chief, Audio Division Media Bureau cc: Julian L. Shepard, Esq. 47 C.F.R. � 73.1125. See Request for Waiver - Exhibit A, which contains maps contrasting the driving distances from Hatteras to Engelhard and Nags Head. Request for Waiver at 3. Rio Grande Family Radio Fellowship, Inc. v. FCC, 406 F.2d 664 (D.C. Cir. 1968). In addition, Section 73.3566(a) of the Commission's radio broadcast rules provides that requests for waiver ``shall show the nature of the waiver or exception desired and shall set forth the reasons in support thereof.'' 47 C.F.R. � 73.3566(a). Northeast Cellular Telephone Co. v. FCC, 897 F.2d 1164, 1166 (D.C. Cir. 1990) (citing WAIT Radio v. FCC, 418 F.2d 1153, 1157-59 (D.C. Cir. 1969)). 47
• http://www.fcc.gov/fcc-bin/audio/DA-07-3617A1.doc http://www.fcc.gov/fcc-bin/audio/DA-07-3617A1.pdf
  • �� 73.3573(f)(5)(i), 73.5005(a). These Sections require a winning bidder to file its long-form application within 30 days of the release of the public notice announcing the close of the auction. Exhibit 1 to Application. Id. 47 C.F.R. � 1.2104(g). 47 C.F.R. � 73.5005(a). Rio Grande Family Radio Fellowship, Inc. v. FCC, 406 F.2d 664 (D.C. Cir. 1968). In addition, Section 73.3566(a) of the Commission's radio broadcast rules provides that requests for waiver ``shall show the nature of the waiver or exception desired and shall set forth the reasons in support thereof.'' 47 C.F.R. � 73.3566(a). Northeast Cellular Telephone Co. v. FCC, 897 F.2d 1164, 1166 (D.C. Cir. 1990) (citing WAIT Radio v. FCC, 418 F.2d 1153, 1157-59 (D.C. Cir. 1969)). See,
• http://www.fcc.gov/fcc-bin/audio/DA-07-3618A1.doc http://www.fcc.gov/fcc-bin/audio/DA-07-3618A1.pdf
  • 73.3573(f)(5)(i), 73.5005(a). These Sections require a winning bidder to file its long-form application within 30 days of the release of the public notice announcing the close of the auction. Exhibit 1 to Application. Id. Id. 47 C.F.R. � 1.2104(g). 47 C.F.R. � 73.5005(a). Rio Grande Family Radio Fellowship, Inc. v. FCC, 406 F.2d 664 (D.C. Cir. 1968). In addition, Section 73.3566(a) of the Commission's radio broadcast rules provides that requests for waiver ``shall show the nature of the waiver or exception desired and shall set forth the reasons in support thereof.'' 47 C.F.R. � 73.3566(a). Northeast Cellular Telephone Co. v. FCC, 897 F.2d 1164, 1166 (D.C. Cir. 1990) (citing WAIT Radio v. FCC, 418 F.2d 1153, 1157-59 (D.C. Cir. 1969)). See,
• http://www.fcc.gov/fcc-bin/audio/DA-08-2099A1.doc http://www.fcc.gov/fcc-bin/audio/DA-08-2099A1.pdf
  • reasonable assurance of the transmitter site at the time it filed its application could not cure fatal defect by amending to specify a new site); Blue Lake Academy, Inc., Letter, 20 FCC Rcd 12066, 12068-69 (MB 2005) (holding that failure to properly incorporate prior to filing a noncommercial broadcast application is a defect that cannot be cured). See 47 C.F.R. 73.3566(a) (``Applications which are determined to be patently not in accordance with the FCC rules, regulations, or other requirements, unless accompanied by an appropriate request for waiver, will be considered defective and will not be accepted for filing or if inadvertently accepted for filing will be dismissed.''). Pacific II, 19 FCC Rcd at 10958 (holding that any party may ``file a
• http://www.fcc.gov/fcc-bin/audio/DA-08-309A1.doc http://www.fcc.gov/fcc-bin/audio/DA-08-309A1.pdf
  • `Favorita,' noting that Favorita appears on a railroad utility box and in the 2007 Rand McNally Road Atlas. See Verified Statement of Randy Woods, Technical Director, Central (June 4, 2007). See Jefferson City, TN, Notice of Proposed Rulemaking, 9 FCC Rcd 5738 (MB 1994) (citing Oak Beach and Bay Shore, New York, 57 RR2d 1275 (1980)). See 47 C.F.R. � 73.3566. As discussed supra, Favorita and Favoretta appear one and the same. A dismissed NCE applicant generally has one opportunity to make any corrections that can be accomplished through a "minor" amendment within 30 days of dismissal, accompanied by a petition for reconsideration and request that the amended application be considered nunc pro tunc. Applicants specifying a non-licensable community, however, cannot
• http://www.fcc.gov/fcc-bin/audio/DA-08-626A1.doc http://www.fcc.gov/fcc-bin/audio/DA-08-626A1.pdf
  • unfair to those applicants that have filed applications that complied with Section 73.525 and to those potential applicants that deferred their filings as a result of Channel 6 protection requirement issues. The public interest is better 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).
• http://www.fcc.gov/fcc-bin/audio/DA-09-1084A1.doc http://www.fcc.gov/fcc-bin/audio/DA-09-1084A1.pdf
  • unacceptable). See Northeast Cellular Telephone Co. v. F.C.C., 897 F.2d 1164, 1166 (D.C. Cir. 1990) (``[A] waiver is appropriate only if special circumstances warrant a deviation from the general rule and such deviation will serve the public interest,'' citing WAIT Radio v. F.C.C., 418 F.2d 1153, 1157-59 (D.C. Cir. 1969)); see also 47 C.F.R. � 1.3. See 47 C.F.R. � 73.3566(a) (applications which are determined to be patently not in accordance with the FCC rules, regulations, or other requirements, unless accompanied by an appropriate request for waiver, will be considered defective and will not be accepted for filing). (...continued from previous page) (continued....) Federal Communications Commission Washington, D.C. 20554 May 18, 2009 2 3 � � � &`#$ �%���PNG �` �`
• http://www.fcc.gov/fcc-bin/audio/DA-09-2637A1.doc http://www.fcc.gov/fcc-bin/audio/DA-09-2637A1.pdf
  • the proposed Paragon reallotment would remove the sole local operating service assigned to Morgantown. It concluded that Calvary Chapel had failed to demonstrate that the facts of this case constitute the rare situation in which a presumptively disfavored removal of a sole local service would be in the public interest. Accordingly, the Division Letter dismissed the Application pursuant to Sections 73.3566(a) and 0.283 of the Rules. In its Petition, Calvary Chapel requests that we reconsider and set aside as erroneous the Division Letter. In support of this position, Calvary Chapel alleges that no service is being removed from Morgantown because Station WCJL never provided a local service to the community. It states that the original construction permit for Station WCJL was
• http://www.fcc.gov/fcc-bin/audio/DA-10-1046A1.doc http://www.fcc.gov/fcc-bin/audio/DA-10-1046A1.pdf
  • to Petition at 2, citing U.S. v. Storer Broadcasting Co., 351 U.S. 192, 201-202 (1956). Opposition to Petition at 4. Id. at 3. Opposition to Supplement at 3. Id. Id. at 2-3. Supplement at 4-5. Opposition to Supplement at 2. Id. at 2-3. CCR Petition at 3. Id. at 3-5 Id. at 5-6. Joint Petitions at 2. 47 C.F.R � 73.3566(a) (``Applications which are determined to be patently not in accordance with the FCC rules, regulations, or other requirements, unless accompanied by an appropriate request for waiver, will be considered defective and will not be accepted for filing or if inadvertently accepted for filing will be dismissed. Requests for waiver shall show the nature of the waiver or exception desired and
• http://www.fcc.gov/fcc-bin/audio/DA-10-130A1.doc http://www.fcc.gov/fcc-bin/audio/DA-10-130A1.pdf
  • than a licensee . . . the applicable statute of limitations was one year, pursuant to section 503(b)(6)(B).) Lutheran Church-Missouri Synod, Memorandum Opinion and Order, 12 FCC Rcd 2152, 2167 (1997), rev'd on other grounds, Lutheran Church-Missouri Synod v. FCC, 141 F 3d 344 (D.C. Cir. 1998). See 47 C.F.R. � 1.1914. 47 C.F.R. � 0.283. See 47 C.F.R. � 73.3566(a). 47 C.F.R. � 73.3598(a). (Continued from previous page) (continued . . .) Federal Communications Commission DA 10-130 Federal Communications Commission DA 10-130 4 5 � � � � � \ < = P Q < = P Q < = P Q 0 < = P Q � � � � �
• http://www.fcc.gov/fcc-bin/audio/DA-10-1958A1.doc http://www.fcc.gov/fcc-bin/audio/DA-10-1958A1.pdf
  • Inc. (``New Bohemia'') and Plus. For the reasons set forth below, we deny both Petitions. BACKGROUND Plus and New Bohemia each applied to construct a new noncommercial educational (``NCE'') station to serve Coggon, Iowa, during a filing window for NCE FM applications in October 2007. On November 8, 2007, the staff dismissed the Plus Application (``Dismissal Letter'') pursuant to Section 73.3566(a) of the Rules, because Plus' proposed facility failed to provide adequate community coverage as required by Section 73.515 of the Rules. On December 7, 2007, Plus petitioned for reconsideration of the dismissal and requested leave to amend its application and have it reinstated nunc pro tunc (``December 2007 Petition''). Specifically, Plus asserted that it inadvertently checked the box ``east longitude''
• http://www.fcc.gov/fcc-bin/audio/DA-10-1960A1.doc http://www.fcc.gov/fcc-bin/audio/DA-10-1960A1.pdf
  • Rcd 10213, 10215-16 (MB 2008) (``Fair Distribution Order''). Archangel Petition to Deny at 3. Id. Id. at 4. Id. at 1, 5. Id. TBTA Opposition at 3. 47 C.F.R. � 73.509(a). Letter to Stuart W. Nolan, Jr., Esq. and Patrick J. Vaughn, Esq. from James Bradshaw, Deputy Chief, Audio Division, Media Bureau (dated May 20, 2010); see 47 C.F.R. � 73.3566. The 3 second terrain data submitted by Archangel is more granular than the 30 second terrain data that we originally reviewed. Archangel also asserts that TBTA misrepresented the number of pending applications for broadcast authorizations in its submissions to the Commission. Archangel Petition to Deny at 3. According to Archangel, TBTA improperly certified in its Application that it had no
• http://www.fcc.gov/fcc-bin/audio/DA-10-2065A1.doc http://www.fcc.gov/fcc-bin/audio/DA-10-2065A1.pdf
  • that application, and indicated that, if, after that 30-day petition period had run, there was no substantial and material question concerning the Edinboro Application, it would, by Public Notice, dismiss the other mutually exclusive applications and grant the Edinboro Application. Allied argues in the Petition that the Application is defective and must be dismissed without opportunity to amend under Section 73.3566 of the Commission's Rules (``Rules''). Specifically, Allied asserts that Edinboro: (1) is not a non-profit corporation; (2) failed to disclose its ownership of Station WEES-LP; (3) improperly claimed points for diversity of ownership; (4) did not fully disclose its existing authorizations and pending NCE applications; and (5) improperly claimed points as an established local applicant. Edinboro did not respond to
• http://www.fcc.gov/fcc-bin/audio/DA-11-1320A1.doc http://www.fcc.gov/fcc-bin/audio/DA-11-1320A1.pdf
  • new FM Station, Union Gap, Washington, and CCR-Tri Cities IV, LLC (``CCR''), licensee of Stations KONA(AM), Richland-Kennewick-Pasco, Washington, KONA-FM, Kennewick, Washington, and KZHR(FM), Dayton, Washington, each filed a Petition to Deny the Assignment Applications. For the reasons stated below, we dismiss the Petitions to Deny as moot, and dismiss the Assignment Applications as inadvertently accepted for filing, pursuant to Section 73.3566(a) of the Commission's Rules (the ``Rules''). Background. On May 28, 2010, the Media Bureau (the ``Bureau'') granted consent to the assignment of licenses of 31 New Northwest Broadcasters, LLC (``NNB'') radio stations in Alaska, Oregon, and Washington, to the Receiver following insolvency proceedings in the Superior Court for the State of Washington for King County (the ``Washington Court''). The Assignment
• http://www.fcc.gov/fcc-bin/audio/DA-11-1853A1.doc http://www.fcc.gov/fcc-bin/audio/DA-11-1853A1.pdf
  • pursuant to these procedures. SPB claims that grant of the Channel 296C Petition and the Second Amendment will serve the public interest because there will be a net gain of 84,136 persons and 19,003 square kilometers in coverage. Discussion. First, although the Second Amendment was previously accepted for filing, we now recognize that it should be dismissed, pursuant to Section 73.3566, as patently not in accordance with the Commission's Rules. While Section 73.3573(a)(i) and (ii) provide that a winning auction bidder's long- form application for a new station may include a minor amendment to change the proposed community of license or to upgrade to an adjacent channel, it does not permit an upgrade in channel class on a non-adjacent channel. On
• http://www.fcc.gov/fcc-bin/audio/DA-11-735A1.doc http://www.fcc.gov/fcc-bin/audio/DA-11-735A1.pdf
  • to Opposition to Petition to Deny at 3, citing Okla. Stat. tit. 18 � 1027(B) (2010). Moreover, Oklahoma law provides a means by which a church or religious society that does not desire to become incorporated may organize and enjoy some of the benefits of incorporation, without formally incorporating. Okla. Stat. tit. 18 � 562 (2010). ). 47 C.F.R � 73.3566(a) (``Applications which are determined to be patently not in accordance with the FCC rules, regulations, or other requirements, unless accompanied by an appropriate request for waiver, will be considered defective and will not be accepted for filing or if inadvertently accepted for filing will be dismissed. Requests for waiver shall show the nature of the waiver or exception desired and
• http://www.fcc.gov/fcc-bin/audio/DA-12-1004A1.doc http://www.fcc.gov/fcc-bin/audio/DA-12-1004A1.pdf
  • a winning bidder to file its long-form application within 30 days of the release of the public notice announcing the close of the auction, unless a longer period is specified in that closing public notice. 47 C.F.R. � 1.2104(g). 47 C.F.R. � 73.5005(c). Rio Grande Family Radio Fellowship, Inc. v. FCC, 406 F.2d 664 (D.C. Cir. 1968). In addition, Section 73.3566(a) of the Commission's radio broadcast rules provides that requests for waiver ``shall show the nature of the waiver or exception desired and shall set forth the reasons in support thereof.'' 47 C.F.R. � 73.3566(a). See NetworkIP, LLC v. FCC, 548 F.3d 116, 125-28 (D.C.Cir 2008); Northeast Cellular Telephone Co. v. FCC, 897 F.2d 1164, 1166 (D.C. Cir. 1990) (citing WAIT
• http://www.fcc.gov/fcc-bin/audio/DA-12-871A1.doc http://www.fcc.gov/fcc-bin/audio/DA-12-871A1.pdf
  • FCC form and for this reason, too, it must be dismissed. Conclusions/Actions. Accordingly, for the reasons set forth above, IT IS ORDERED, that the Application (File No. BAL-20120106AAD) for consent to assign the license of Station WEGA(AM), Vega Baja, Puerto Rico, from A Radio Company, Inc., to Carmelo Santiago Roman, IS DISMISSED as patently defective pursuant to 47 C.F.R. � 73.3566. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED, that the February 9, 2012, Petition to Deny filed by A Radio Company, Inc., IS DISMISSED AS MOOT. Sincerely, Peter H. Doyle Chief, Audio Division Media Bureau Roman filed an Opposition to the Petition on February 23, 2012, to which A Radio replied on March 6, 2012. See 47 C.F.R. � 73.3566. See VI/MAN Broadcasting System
• http://www.fcc.gov/fcc-bin/audio/FCC-03-201A1.doc http://www.fcc.gov/fcc-bin/audio/FCC-03-201A1.pdf
  • file its waiver request on one of those forms, nor did it pay a fee. The Media Bureau has no rules-based waiver standard corresponding to 47 C.F.R. � 1.925. Section 1.3 of the Rules (47 C.F.R. � 1.3), under Part 1 - Practice and Procedure, states that rule provisions may be waived ``for good cause shown,'' and 47 C.F.R. � 73.3566(a), under Part 73 - Radio Broadcast Services, Subpart H - Rules Applicable to All Broadcast Stations, provides that requests for waiver ``shall show the nature of the waiver or exception desired and shall set forth the reasons in support thereof.'' The specific waiver standard to be used by the Media Bureau, however, utilizes a case-by-case analysis governed by decisional precedent.
• http://www.fcc.gov/mb/audio/bickel/amfmrule.html
  • [646]TEXT [647]PDF 73.3550 Requests for new or modified call sign assignments. [648]TEXT [649]PDF 73.3555 Multiple ownership. [650]TEXT [651]PDF 73.3556 Duplication of programming on commonly owned or time brokered stations. [652]TEXT [653]PDF 73.3561 Staff consideration of applications requiring Commission action. [654]TEXT [655]PDF 73.3562 Staff consideration of applications not requiring action by the Commission. [656]TEXT [657]PDF 73.3564 Acceptance of applications. [658]TEXT [659]PDF 73.3566 Defective applications. [660]TEXT [661]PDF 73.3568 Dismissal of applications. [662]TEXT [663]PDF 73.3571 Processing of AM broadcast station applications. [664]TEXT [665]PDF 73.3572 Processing of TV broadcast, Class A TV broadcast, low power TV, TV translators, and TV booster applications. [666]TEXT [667]PDF 73.3573 Processing FM broadcast station applications. [668]TEXT [669]PDF 73.3574 Processing of international broadcast station applications. [670]TEXT [671]PDF 73.3578 Amendments to applications
• http://www.fcc.gov/mb/audio/includes/63-amfmrule.htm
  • [599]TEXT [600]PDF 73.3550 Requests for new or modified call sign assignments. [601]TEXT [602]PDF 73.3555 Multiple ownership. [603]TEXT [604]PDF 73.3556 Duplication of programming on commonly owned or time brokered stations. [605]TEXT [606]PDF 73.3561 Staff consideration of applications requiring Commission action. [607]TEXT [608]PDF 73.3562 Staff consideration of applications not requiring action by the Commission. [609]TEXT [610]PDF 73.3564 Acceptance of applications. [611]TEXT [612]PDF 73.3566 Defective applications. [613]TEXT [614]PDF 73.3568 Dismissal of applications. [615]TEXT [616]PDF 73.3571 Processing of AM broadcast station applications. [617]TEXT [618]PDF 73.3572 Processing of TV broadcast, Class A TV broadcast, low power TV, TV translators, and TV booster applications. [619]TEXT [620]PDF 73.3573 Processing FM broadcast station applications. [621]TEXT [622]PDF 73.3574 Processing of international broadcast station applications. [623]TEXT [624]PDF 73.3578 Amendments to applications
• http://www.fcc.gov/ogc/documents/opinions/1996/redrock.html http://www.fcc.gov/ogc/documents/opinions/1996/redrock.wp
  • FCC studies applications for "acceptability," which it defines as "compliance with the technical requirements for FM facilities," id., as set forth in Appendix D. Applications that are "patently not in accordance with the FCC rules, regulations, or other requirements, unless accompanied by an appropriate request for waiver, will be considered defective and will not be accepted for filing...." 47 C.F.R. 73.3566(a). Those applications that are not accepted for filing are returned. 50 Fed. Reg. at 19,941. Applications that are resubmitted with curative amendments after the 30-day period will not receive nunc pro tunc status because "[t]o permit curative amendments after that period poses too great a threat to the orderly functioning of our new processing procedures." Id. Appendix D requires, inter
• http://www.fcc.gov/ogc/documents/opinions/2000/99-15035.html
  • forth "facts . . . as to citizenship, character, and financial, technical, and other qualifications . . . to operate the station"); 47 C.F.R. 73.3533 (listing the various forms that must be completed to apply for a license). Nor was Dunifer's request for a copy of the standards relating to waivers equivalent to a waiver request itself. See 47 C.F.R.S 73.3566(a) (noting that a waiver application must "show the nature of the waiver or exception desired and shall set forth the reasons in support thereof"). [20]^10 47 C.F.R. 1.401(a) provides that "[a]ny interested person may petition for the issuance, amendment or repeal of a rule or regulation" of the FCC. Indeed, the FCC's new lower power regulations were established in response