FCC Web Documents citing 73.3587

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

• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-01-1223A1.doc
  • 309(d)(1) of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended, and Section 73.3584 of the Commission's rules, require that petitions to deny be supported by affidavits or declarations under penalty of perjury from persons with personal knowledge of the facts set forth in the petition. Therefore, we will dismiss the petition and treat it as an informal objection pursuant to Section 73.3587 of the Commission's rules. 10. Julien alleges that Marri failed to publish local notice of its application as required by Section 73.3580 of the Commission's rules. Julien asserts that local notice was not published in either of the two daily newspapers located in the Virgin Islands, The St. Croix Avis or The Virgin Islands Daily News. Julien further states that
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-04-418A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-04-418A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-04-418A1.txt
  • Application, Response to Section IV, Question 5. Amendment (filed Apr. 9, 2003). See WTB Public Notice Report No. 1237 (rel. Jul. 24, 2002). Reply to Opposition to Petition to Deny (filed Nov. 13, 2002). Supplement to Petition to Deny and Reply to Opposition to Petition to Deny (filed May 23, 2003). 47 C.F.R. �� 74.910, 74.912. See 47 C.F.R. � 73.3587. WorldCom Petition, Engineering Statement of Kanwar-Preet S. Jolly; Northwest Petition, Engineering Statement of Kanwar-Preet S. Jolly. Opposition at 3-6. Opposition at 8-10. Reply at 2-3. Id. at 3-4. 47 C.F.R. � 74.903(a)(2). 47 C.F.R. � 74.903(b). See Application, Response to Section I, Question 3. Application, Exhibit EE at 1. (...continued from previous page) (continued....) Federal Communications Commission DA 04-418 Federal
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-05-1306A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-05-1306A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-05-1306A1.txt
  • C.F.R. � 73.3584(a). The Salazar Letter thus fails to meet the requirements of a petition to deny. In addition, as of the release of this decision the staff has not received a copy through official Commission channels and learned of it only through MBC Grand's counsel. Nonetheless, we will treat the Salazar Letter as an informal objection, pursuant to Section 73.3587 of the Commission's rules. 47 C.F.R. � 73.3587. At the time it filed the Application, MBC Grand was also the licensee of AM broadcast station KDTA, Delta, Colorado. It has since assigned the station's license to United Ministries, pursuant to the Commission consent granted in File No. BAL-20040813AAR. Our records indicate that the parties consummated the KDTA assignment on November
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-05-1316A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-05-1316A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-05-1316A1.txt
  • falling within one of the exceptions listed in section 309(c) . . . are not subject to . . . petitions to deny.''). We note that in some cases the Commission has stated that petitions to deny are not permitted against involuntary assignment applications, but then has considered the pleadings on its merits as an informal objection, pursuant to Section 73.3587. See D.H. Overmyer, 94 F.C.C.2d at 118 n.1 (1983) (recognizing that Section 309 of the Communications Act ``does not provide for the filing of petitions to deny against involuntary transfer applications,'' but treating the petition to deny as an informal objection under section 73.3587 of the Commission's rules); Applications of Kirk Merkley, Receiver, Memorandum Opinion and Order, 94 F.C.C.2d 829,
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-05-1945A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-05-1945A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-05-1945A1.txt
  • 6-7. See High Plains, 276 F.3d at 605. 47 U.S.C � 309(l). See, e.g., Delta Radio, Inc., 18 FCC Rcd 16889 (2003), aff'd, 387 F.3d 897 (D.C. Cir. 2004). See also Implementation of Section 309(j) of the Communications Act - Competitive Bidding for Commercial Broadcast and Instructional Television Fixed Service Licenses, 13 FCC Rcd 15920, 15952-53 (1998). 47 C.F.R. � 73.3587. Willsyr Petition at 7-12. See Murray v. Watts, Case Number CVS 03-978, Superior Court, Buncombe County, North Carolina (selected portions of record provided with Willsyr Petition at Exhibits 2-3). Willsyr Petition at 8. Liberty Opposition at 4-10 (citing Liberty Order, 16 FCC Rcd at 12075-77, 81-84). See Liberty Order, 16 FCC Rcd at 12075-76. Id. at 12075. See Willsyr Petition
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-05-1948A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-05-1948A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-05-1948A1.txt
  • Cave Country Christian Radio, Inc. The other applications in this mutually exclusive group (Group No. 84) Oregonians for Responsible Conservation Alliance (File No. BNPL-20010615ARE) and Cave County Christian Radio, Inc. (File No. BNPL-20010615AUA) were dismissed by Bureau staff on January 18, 2005, and March 22, 2005, respectively. We will treat ORCA's filing as an informal objection under 47 C.F.R. � 73.3587. 47 C.F.R. Section � 73.854. TCA filed an opposition to ORCA's objection on September 19, 2001. On September 28, 2001, ORCA filed a ``Response [to] (Opposition) to Petition to Deny'' which we will treat as a ``reply,'' to TCA's opposition. See TCA Opposition at 3-4. Letter to Jonathan Klein, Ph.D., Reference 1800B3-SS (MB Feb. 25, 2005). In keeping with clear
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-05-2225A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-05-2225A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-05-2225A1.txt
  • Sweetwater transfer application - Max Media does not compete with Sweetwater in this television market and has not shown how it will be prejudiced by the grant of this application. In light of Max Media's failure to meet its burden to establish standing, we will dismiss its petition and treat it as an informal objection pursuant to 47 C.F.R. � 73.3587. Moreover, after considering Max Media's and Sweetwater's pleadings, we find that no substantial and material question has been presented concerning BTC's participation in the affairs of KCWY. However, as discussed below, it appears that Sweetwater has violated the Commission's Rules with respect to the reporting and filing of certain contracts, as well as placing copies thereof in the station's public
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-05-2243A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-05-2243A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-05-2243A1.txt
  • that CCMI was separately incorporated within Manitowac. In the Matter of Creation of Low Power Radio Service (MM Docket No. 99-25), 15 FCC Rcd 2205 (2000). Paragraph 132 states in relevant part: ``Petitions and informal objections will not be considered unless and until the application has been tentatively selected for processing and found acceptable for filing.'' See 47 C.F.R. � 73.3587. In its informal objection, the Lawyers Guild argues that CCMI ``fails to satisfactorily establish that it has a distinct local mission that can be distinguished from the purpose of the national Calvary Chapel.'' Lawyers Guild Informal Objection at 4. To support this allegation, the Lawyers Guild references portions of CCMI's statement of educational purpose, which it claims is ``nearly word-for-word
• 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
  • grant of the covering license application is final. Accordingly, to extent that the MCR Petition is a Motion for Stay, it will be dismissed. 9. Finally, because formal petitions to deny do not lie against minor modification applications such as that of EMF here, the MCR Petition will be considered as an informal objection to the Modification Application under Section 73.3587 of the Rules. Although petitions to deny do lie against applications for assignment of license, MCR's pleading was filed more than eight months after the filing of the Assignment Application, long after the 30-day period for filing petitions to deny that application. Accordingly, it will be considered as an informal objection to the Assignment Application. 10. Substantive Matters. Antenna Height
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-06-1427A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-06-1427A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-06-1427A1.txt
  • and a frequent listener of the station, we find that Cusak has not established the requisite standing because he has not ``demonstrated'' that he lives within WVXG(FM)'s signal coverage area and acknowledges that he lives in Westerville, not in the station's community of license, Mt. Gilead, Ohio. We will, therefore, treat Cusak's pleading as an informal objection pursuant to Section 73.3587 of the Commission's rules. Substantive Matters. In evaluating an application for license renewal, the Commission's decision is governed by Section 309(k) of the Act. That section provides that if, upon consideration of the application and pleadings, we find: (1) the station has served the public interest, convenience, and necessity; (2) there have been no serious violations of the Communications Act
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-06-1429A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-06-1429A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-06-1429A1.txt
  • at Charlotte, North Carolina. Also on file is the April 9, 2004, Petition to Deny the application (``Petition'') filed by Susquehanna Radio Corp. (``Susquehanna'') former licensee of first-adjacent channel FM station WABZ-FM, Channel 265A (100.9 MHz), Albemarle, North Carolina. The Petition is untimely, which Susquehanna acknowledges, and therefore we will treat it as an informal objection (``Objection'') pursuant to Section 73.3587 of the Commission's rules. For the reasons set forth below, we grant the Objection in part and grant Central's application with the condition that the maximum effective radiated power (``ERP'') for the facility shall not exceed 0.045 kW and the minimum ERP shall not be less than 0.043 kW. Background. On July 2, 1999, the Commission issued a Notice of
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-06-1477A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-06-1477A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-06-1477A1.txt
  • reflect the transaction was consummated on March 24, 1995. WKGH-FM is now known as WZUU(FM). Spectrum Communications, Inc. sold WZUU(FM) to Forum Communications, Inc. pursuant to Application No. BALH-19970311WV, granted July 3, 1997. This sale was consummated on August 12, 1997. Olejniczak submitted his letter as an Informal Objection and it will be treated as such under 47 C.F.R. � 73.3587. See Attachment to Olejniczak's October 14, 2004, Rebuttal to Synergy's Opposition. See John F. Runner, Receiver (KBIF), 36 Rad. Red. 2d (P&F) 773, 778 (1976); Listener's Guild, Inc. v. FCC, 813 F.2d 465, 469 (D.C. Cir. 1987); Decatur Telecasting, Inc., 7 FCC Rcd 8622, 8624 (1992). Notably, Olejniczak filed an informal objection against the sale of WKGH-FM in 1997. That
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-06-1549A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-06-1549A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-06-1549A1.txt
  • 1934, as amended, (``Act''). Additionally, Alex failed to serve a copy of the pleading on the applicant or its counsel, as required by Section 309(d)(1) of the Act and Section 1.47 of the Commission's Rules. Accordingly, Alex's petition to deny is procedurally defective and must be dismissed. We will, however, treat the petition as an informal objection pursuant to Section 73.3587 of the Commission's Rules. Substantive Matters. In evaluating an application for license renewal, the Commission's decision is governed by Section 309(k) of the Act. That section provides that we are to grant the renewal application if, upon consideration of the application and pleadings, we find that (1) the station has served the public interest, convenience, and necessity; (2) there have
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-06-1550A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-06-1550A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-06-1550A1.txt
  • to which BCI replied on July 19, 2005. CCBL filed a ``Motion for Leave to File a Surreply'' and ``Surreply'' on August 8, 2005. Because petitions to deny do not lie against covering license applications, see 47 U.S.C. � 309(c) and 47 C.F.R. �� 73.3580 and 73.3594(a), we will treat Blakeney's Petition as an informal objection under 47 C.F.R. � 73.3587. Further, because there is no formal pleading cycle established by the Commission's rules in the context of an informal objection, we are free to consider CCBL's ``Surreply'' and will do so here. 47 C.F.R. � 73.3598(a). 47 U.S.C. � 319(b). See 47 C.F.R. � 73.3598(a), revised in 1998 Biennial Regulatory Review - Streamlining of Mass Media Applications, Rules, and Processes,
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-06-1923A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-06-1923A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-06-1923A1.txt
  • filed by the May 1, 2004, deadline ``for petitions or objections.'' The Licensee contends that pursuant to Section 73.3516(e) of the Rules, interested parties are afforded three full months, in this case between February 2 and May 1, 2004, to supply ``input on the stations' renewal applications.'' We disagree. Section 73.3516(e) pertains only to petitions to deny. Pursuant to Section 73.3587 of the Rules, any person may file an informal objection before the Commission has taken action on any application for an instrument of authorization. Therefore, we reject the Licensee's claim and will discuss the merits of WJZD's Objection to the captioned applications. Substantive Matters. In evaluating an application for license renewal, the Commission's decision is governed by Section 309(k) of
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-06-205A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-06-205A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-06-205A1.txt
  • Doyle Chief, Audio Division Media Bureau The former call sign of the subject station is WJTM(FM). See Letter to John Crigler, Esquire (MB Nov. 24, 2004). On December 29, 2004, YPR filed an Opposition to the Petition, and on January 6, 2005, Dallavalle filed a Reply. The staff treated all such parties' submissions as informal objections under 47 C.F.R. � 73.3587. The Commission announced acceptance of the Application on January 13, 2004, thereby establishing a February 12, 2004, petition to deny deadline. Dallavalle did not file its ``Petition to Dismiss, Deny or Designate for Hearing'' until February 25, 2004. 4 FCC Rcd 8803 (Rev. Bd. 1989). 47 C.F.R. � 73.3580. 47 U.S.C. � 405(a). 47 C.F.R. � 1.106(b)(1).. See, e.g., Letter
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-06-2087A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-06-2087A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-06-2087A1.txt
  • allegations of fact, as required by Section 309(d)(1) of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended (``Communications Act''). Additionally, Williams failed to serve a copy of the pleading on the applicant or its counsel, as required by Section 309(d)(1). Accordingly, Williams' petition to deny must be dismissed. We will, however, treat the pleading as an informal objection pursuant to Section 73.3587 of the Commission's rules. Substantive Matters. In evaluating an application for license renewal, the Commission's decision is governed by Section 309(k) of the Communications Act. That section provides that we are to grant the renewal application if, upon consideration of the application and pleadings, we find that (1) the station has served the public interest, convenience, and necessity; (2) there
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-06-2253A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-06-2253A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-06-2253A1.txt
  • Service in the Band 88-108 MHz, August 11, 1992 (``1992 FM Broadcast Agreement''). See U.S.-Can.-Mex., H.R. Treaty Doc. No. 159, 103rd Cong., 1st Sess. (1993) (``NAFTA''). XETV(TV) has been the Fox affiliate in the San Diego television market since 1986. Cox provides cable television service in San Diego County. See File No. BPED-20020219ABE. See 47 C.F.R. � 1.110. Id. � 73.3587. Assuming arguendo that SCDDC and XETV had agreed to undertake testing and reporting to permit the Commission to establish interference limits or standards for KSDS operations, we note that no data was submitted regarding the specific facility proposal now before us. The test plan did provide an opportunity for SDCCD to request KSDS testing at power levels exceeding 3 kW.
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-06-2503A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-06-2503A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-06-2503A1.txt
  • Inc. BRCT-20050729AIH 37104 W64CQ Arlington Heights, IL Trinity Broadcasting Network BRTT-20050719AEV 68061 The stations and licensees named in the petition are attached to this letter as an appendix. Third Coast characterizes itself as an independent, volunteer journalism organization located in Chicago, Illinois, acting alongside several individuals and leaders of local community groups. We will exercise our discretion pursuant to section 73.3587 of the Commission's rules and consider all of the allegations raised in the petition and the various oppositions. Petition to Deny, at 1. Id. at 3. Id. at 6. Id. 47 U.S.C. �309(k)(1). 47 U.S.C. �309(d)(1); Astroline Communications Co. Ltd. Partnership v. FCC, 857 F.2d 1556 (D.C. Cir. 1988) (``Astroline''). Gencom, Inc. v. FCC, 832 F.2d 171, 181 (D.C. Cir.
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-06-320A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-06-320A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-06-320A1.txt
  • not be filed with regard to applications that do not require local public notice to be filed pursuant to Section 73.3580 of the Commission's rules. Such local public notice is not required in the case of applications for minor change in the facilities of an authorized station. Accordingly, we will consider the pleading as an informal objection pursuant to Section 73.3587 of the Commission's rules. With respect to the substantive allegations contained in the Petition, we are satisfied that Warren has successfully rebutted the claims. He has presented an affidavit which clearly demonstrates that he possesses a reasonable assurance of site availability from the site owner. The affidavit states that the Affiant is the land owner, that he discussed with the
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-06-500A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-06-500A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-06-500A1.txt
  • that Boothe clearly established that he resides within the WYNI(AM) service area and that he has stated adequate and specific factual allegations to meet the statutory standard. However, Boothe has not submitted the requisite affidavit, and therefore his pleading is procedurally defective and cannot be considered a petition to deny. It will be considered as an informal objection under Section 73.3587 of the Commission's rules. Background. Boothe's informal objection raises two issues: the failure of McKissick to file a license renewal in a timely fashion pursuant to Section 73.3539 and the failure to maintain a public inspection file pursuant to Sections 73.3526. Boothe states that the licensee admits to repetitive and blatant mismanagement of the public trust with the admission of
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-06-645A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-06-645A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-06-645A1.txt
  • to Star were due by June 6, 2005, and petitions to deny the applications to assign WTKE(FM) and WPGG(FM) to Cumulus were due by June 13, 2005. The MAP letter, filed November 21, 2005, fails to meet the requirements of a petition to deny. We will, however, treat the letter as an informal objection (``Objection''), pursuant to 47 C.F.R. � 73.3587. See BALH-20021224ACX. See BALH-20030922AFA. Qantum Corp. is the parent company of Petitioner. See BALH-20031125ALX (granted May 26, 2005). Section 17.1(g) of the Star-Qantum Asset Purchase Agreement (``Agreement'') states, in relevant part, that the Agreement may be terminated ``by written notice of either party to the other if the closing shall not have been consummated on or before the date eighteen
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-06-758A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-06-758A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-06-758A1.txt
  • an ``Objection'' and not a ``Petition to Deny'' which would have required a showing that she is a party in interest. See 47 U.S.C. � 309(d)(1). Because Petitioner has styled her pleading as an ``Objection'' and because she has not made a showing that she has standing, we will treat her filing as an informal objection filed pursuant to Section 73.3587 of the Commission's rules. 47 C.F.R. � 73.3587. See, e.g., USA Broadcasting Inc., 19 FCC Rcd 4253 (2004); Sagittarius Broadcasting Corp., 18 FCC Rcd 22551 (2003). Cf. Letter to Kathleen N. Benfield from Linda B. Blair, Chief, Audio Services Division, 13 FCC Rcd 4102 (1997) citing License Renewal Applications of Certain Commercial Radio Stations, 8 FCC Rcd 6400 (1993). See
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-07-109A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-07-109A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-07-109A1.txt
  • the Station of the programming concerning immigration discussed in the Informal Objection. For the reasons below, we do not conclude that this matter should bar the grant of the Application. The letter fails to satisfy any of the criteria for petitions to deny. See 47 C.F.R. � 73.3584. Accordingly, we will treat it as an informal objection pursuant to Section 73.3587 of the Commission's Rules. See 47 C.F.R. � 73.3587. Amended Informal Objection, Exhibit A, Hernan Rozemberg, ``Spanish radio station could be silenced over segment,'' San Antonio Express News, web posted December 26, 2005. Amended Informal Objection at 2. Blalack indicates that this episode also resulted in a civil judgment against Licensee and Univision. 47 C.F.R. � 73.3584(e). Licensee cites Media
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-07-1206A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-07-1206A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-07-1206A1.txt
  • The United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit affirmed the Commission's action. At the outset, neither the Communications Act of 1934, as amended (the ``Act''), nor the Commission's Rules (the ``Rules'') provides for the filing of a petition to deny a covering license application. We thus treat the DeLaHunt Petition as an informal objection under Section 73.3587 of the Rules. The DeLaHunt Petition was filed before the Commission released its Memorandum Opinion and Order partially granting DeLaHunt's Application for Review. As such, the DeLaHunt Petition merely re-stated the same arguments and facts presented in DeLaHunt's challenges to MCBI's construction permit application. Those issues were adjudicated by the Commission and have been affirmed by the court. Accordingly, the
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-07-1267A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-07-1267A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-07-1267A1.txt
  • named a tentative selectee. In opposition, the Lawyers Guild argues that the cited language speaks only to when particular filings will be considered, not when they may be submitted to the Commission. On this procedural point, the Lawyers Guild is correct. An informal objection may be filed at any time before action on a license application. See 47 C.F.R. � 73.3587. We therefore deny CEC's Motion to Dismiss. Federal Communications Commission Washington, D.C. 20554 March 12, 2007 h h 0 > ? @ B � � � � � ou )�* Q��� "�KY"5_5]'G�",��P����( )��w � �L� ���.T7�ʬ�,aYi� �+5P;� U��� �us�s�Z�Z� �� Ό2ʍ ax-��4��3�� ȕ`��Պ''�@���"� �i}�m'' s��-A�����4�2��W�(R)��J����";L�...\�>=�F'��'...S�"V��sLe�My��/��(v&z.�� �R�phk� �j=3z - �u�:���� ;� qxϵ���+�/� "w) W wU��G3��-���\��kR�I�U-KU]"f'k��rw-tm�ziպ(R)�'b'�tmq@ pM /�L �h���A:˥tK� #��� 4��*��� \,�-ICՈc=i�I�
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-07-1487A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-07-1487A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-07-1487A1.txt
  • Quick acknowledges that while his counsel discussed the status of the proceeding with Lancom's counsel ``from time to time,'' he received no information that the Application was to be so amended ``until well after the Petition to Deny date.'' Reply at 5. 47 U.S.C. � 405(a); see also 47 C.F.R. � 1.106(b)(1). See 47 C.F.R. �1.106(b)(1). See 47 C.F.R. � 73.3587. See Cloud Nine Broadcasting, Inc., Letter, 10 FCC Rcd 11555, 11556 (1995). See Davidson County Broadcasting Co., Inc, Memorandum Opinion and Order, 8 FCC Rcd 1689, 1690 (1993). We do not find Quick's filing of his Petition to constitute an abuse of the Commission's processes, as claimed in the Joint Opposition. The Commission has defined ``abuse of process'' as ``serious
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-07-1550A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-07-1550A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-07-1550A1.txt
  • by Section 309(d)(1) of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended (the "Act"). Additionally, Struhar failed to serve a copy of his pleadings on the Licensee or its counsel, as required by Section 309(d)(1) of the Act and Section 1.47 of the Rules. Accordingly, we will treat these and the other Objections collectively as an informal objection pursuant to Section 73.3587 of the Rules. Substantive Matters. In evaluating an application for license renewal, the Commission's decision is governed by Section 309(k)(1) of the Act. That section provides that the Commission is to grant a license renewal application if, upon consideration of the application and pleadings, we find that: (1) the Station has served the public interest, convenience, and necessity; (2) there
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-07-1650A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-07-1650A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-07-1650A1.txt
  • Public Radio, Inc. (``CPRI'') to Christian Voice of Central Ohio, Inc. (``CVCO''). A number of Station WVXW(FM) listeners have filed objections to the Assignment Application, expressing their appreciation for the programming currently offered over the station and asking the Commission to bar its proposed sale to CVCO. These listener letters will be treated as informal objections in accordance with Section 73.3587 of the Commission's Rules (the ``Rules''). For the reasons stated below, we deny the informal objections and grant the Assignment Application. While the Commission recognizes that Station WVXW(FM)'s format has developed a devoted listenership, it is well-settled policy that the Commission does not regulate programming formats, nor does it take potential format changes into consideration in reviewing license assignment applications.
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-07-1701A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-07-1701A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-07-1701A1.txt
  • ``Rules''), petitions to deny were due on July 21, 2006, 30 days after the date of the Public Notice. Because the MRI Petition was filed 35 days after the Public Notice, on July 26, 2006, it was late-filed. Accordingly, the MRI Petition must be dismissed. We will, however, treat and consider the pleading as an informal objection pursuant to Section 73.3587 of the Rules. The sole issue raised by MRI regarding the KAAK(FM) Assignment Application is that certain exhibits to the Purchase and Sales Agreement (``Agreement'') between Fisher and CCR referred to in that application were not in the station's public file. In its Opposition, Fisher responds that, consistent with Commission policy, it was not required to place copies of these
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-07-1949A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-07-1949A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-07-1949A1.txt
  • communities in Montana, because their licenses expired on April 1, 2005, the applicable petition filing deadline was March 1, 2005. 47 C.F.R. � 73.1020(a)(10). The pleadings filed by Scott Nicolson, MHRN, Keith Hammer, Christine Kaufman and Ken Toole thus fail to meet the requirements of a petition to deny. We will, however, treat them as informal objections, pursuant to Section 73.3587 of the Commission's Rules (the ``Rules''). See 47 C.F.R. � 73.3587. Informal Objections were filed by Neal Brown on May 18, 2005, Roger and Susan Sherman, Susan Waldron and Clark Reynolds on February 22, 2005, Celeste and George McLean on February 17, 2005, Sheila Conners on February 25, 2005, and Lorney Jay Deist on April 5, 2005. In its Opposition,
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-07-2382A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-07-2382A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-07-2382A1.txt
  • deadline for petitions to deny the Applications was July 1, 2004. Accordingly, because the August 9 and August 23 Petitions were filed after this deadline, we will dismiss them pursuant to Section 73.3584(e) of the Rules. Moreover, petitions to deny do not lie against covering license applications. We will nevertheless consider them each as an informal objection pursuant to Section 73.3587 of the Rules. Informal Objections. We deny the August 9 and August 23 petitions under the pleading standards for the evaluation of informal objections. Informal objections must, pursuant to Section 309(e) of the Act, provide properly supported allegations of fact that, if true, would establish a substantial and material question of fact that grant of the application would be prima
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-07-3222A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-07-3222A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-07-3222A1.txt
  • filed on March 10, 2005, by Stephen Diliberto IS DENIED, and the application (File No. BRED-20050201AZE) of Pittsburg State University for renewal of license for noncommercial educational Station KRPS(FM), Pittsburg, Kansas, IS GRANTED. Sincerely, Peter H. Doyle Chief, Audio Division Media Bureau cc: Pittsburg State University We are treating the untitled filing by Diliberto as an Informal Objection under Section 73.3587 of the Commission's Rules (the ``Rules''), 47 C.F.R. � 73.3587, because it fails to comply with the procedural requirements for filing a Petition to Deny, e.g., it was not served on KRPS(FM) or its counsel, and it is not supported by affidavit. See 37 U.S.C. � 309(d), 47 C.F.R. � 73.3584. Informal Objection at 2. Id. Id. at 3. Id.
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-07-3223A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-07-3223A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-07-3223A1.txt
  • Scott Clem IS DENIED, and the application (File No. BRH-200407AAI) of Three Angels Broadcasting Network, Inc. for renewal of license for Station WDQN-FM, Du Quoin, Illinois, IS GRANTED. Sincerely, Peter H. Doyle Chief, Audio Division Media Bureau cc: Three Angels Broadcasting Network, Inc We are treating the Clem's ``Petition Deny Renewal of Broadcast License'' as an ``Informal Objection'' under Section 73.3587 of the Commission's Rules (the ``Rules''), 47 C.F.R. � 73.3587, because it fails to comply with the procedural requirements for filing a Petition to Deny, e.g., it was not served on WDQN-FM or its representative, and it is not supported by affidavit. See 47 U.S.C. � 309(d) and 47 C.F.R. � 73.3584. See, e.g., WWOR-TV, Inc., Memorandum Opinion and Order,
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-07-3251A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-07-3251A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-07-3251A1.txt
  • Bureau cc: Lewis J. Paper, Esq. Jerrold Miller, Esq. Cote's Objection also contains a challenge to the license renewal application of KUTE(FM), Ignacio, California, which was granted by the Staff on March 10, 2005. Cote did not file his Objection until November 16, 2005. Accordingly, we will not consider Cote's objection against the KUTE(FM) renewal application. See 47 C.F.R. � 73.3587 (informal objections must be filed prior to grant of the pertinent applications). See The Association for Community Education, Memorandum Opinion and Order, 19 FCC Rcd 12682, 12684 (2004). Inland's Opposition to Informal Objection (``Inland Opposition''), filed on January 9, 2006, and Sunset's Opposition to Informal Objection (``Sunset's Opposition''), filed on January 4, 2006 On July 11, 1994, Cote was convicted
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-07-3384A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-07-3384A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-07-3384A1.txt
  • the public interest, convenience, and necessity. Accordingly, the informal objection filed by Robert Hawxhurst IS DENIED. Sincerely, Barbara A. Kreisman Chief, Video Division Media Bureau We exercise our discretion to consider the allegations contained in the letter, which does not meet the pleading requirements of section 309(d) of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended (the ``Act''), pursuant to section 73.3587 of the Commission's rules. 47 C.F.R. �73.3587. Clear Channel Broadcasting Licenses, Inc., Notice of Apparent Liability for Forfeiture, 21 FCC Rcd 4072 (IHD 2006); 47 C.F.R. � 73.1216. Clear Channel Broadcasting Licenses, Inc., 21 FCC Rcd at 4074. 47 U.S.C. �309(k)(1). 47 U.S.C. �309(d)(1); Astroline Communications Co. Ltd. Partnership v. FCC, 857 F.2d 1556 (D.C. Cir. 1988) (``Astroline''). Astroline, 857
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-07-3385A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-07-3385A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-07-3385A1.txt
  • Barbara A. Kreisman Chief, Video Division Media Bureau Various requests for extensions of time and oppositions have been filed. We will exercise our discretion and consider any late-filed pleadings, and the allegations raised therein, that have been filed by the parties as informal objections. Thus, we do not need to address the merits of the requests. See 47 C.F.R. � 73.3587. This action is taken pursuant to authority delegated by sections 0.61 and 0.283 of the Commission's rules. 47 C.F.R �� 0.61 and 0.283. The Petitioners launched a website publicizing the BGH dispute on the same day they filed suit in Florida state court. Opposition to Petition to Deny at Exhibit 1, Page 4. Although there has been much back-and-forth among
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-07-3419A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-07-3419A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-07-3419A1.txt
  • WGLF(FM) and WHBT(AM), Tallahassee, Florida, and WWLD(FM), Cairo, Georgia, all of which are licensed to Cumulus Licensing, LLC. The applications of Stations WBZE(FM), WGLF(FM) and WHBT(AM) had been granted prior to the Commission's receipt of the Informal Objection on February 10, 2004. Accordingly, we are only considering the Informal Objection with regard to Stations WHBX(FM) and WWLD(FM). See 47 C.F.R 73.3587 (informal objections must be filed prior to grant of the pertinent application). 47 U.S.C. �� 309(k), 503(b); 47 C.F.R. � 1.80. See 47 C.F.R. � 0.283. See 47 C.F.R. �1.17(a)(1) and (2). See, e.g., WWOR-TV, Inc., Memorandum Opinion and Order, 6 FCC Rcd 193, 197 note 10 (1990), aff'd sub nom. Garden State Broadcasting L.P. v. FCC, 996 F.2d 386
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-07-3475A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-07-3475A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-07-3475A1.txt
  • whether there is a substantial and material question of fact requiring resolution in a hearing. If the facts are not disputed, but disposition turns on inferences and legal conclusions to be drawn from facts already known, a hearing is unnecessary. NABET's petition was untimely filed and procedurally defective. We will, therefore, treat it as an informal objection pursuant to Section 73.3587 of the Commission's rules. Furthermore, we conclude that NABET has failed to raise a substantial and material question of fact sufficient to show that grant of the subject application would be inconsistent with the public interest. Accordingly, NABET's informal objection will be denied. When viewed in totality, the agreements between Parkin and New Vision do not give New Vision an
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-07-3510A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-07-3510A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-07-3510A1.txt
  • C.F.R. � 73.3516(e). For radio stations licensed in communities in Minnesota, because their licenses expired on April 1, 2005, the applicable petition filing deadline was March 1, 2005. 47 C.F.R. � 73.1020(a)(10). The pleading filed by Neidhardt thus fails to meet the requirements of a petition to deny. We will, however, treat it as an informal objection, pursuant to Section 73.3587 of the Rules. See 47 C.F.R. � 73.3587. Licensee asserts that the Objection must be dismissed for lack of standing because Neidhardt has not demonstrated that he is a ``party in interest'' as a Station employee. Opposition at 5. Because we dismiss the Objection on other grounds, we will not address this argument further. See 47 C.F.R. � 73.1216. See
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-07-3515A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-07-3515A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-07-3515A1.txt
  • not provide in any of its pleadings either an affidavit or declaration specifically raising a specific injury that would be caused to it by grant of the WBFH(FM) renewal application or attempt to establish listener/residence status as a basis for standing. Therefore, we find that Superior lacks standing. Nevertheless, we will consider Superior's Petition as an informal objection under Section 73.3587 of the Rules. 9. Substantive Issues. WBFH(FM) Renewal Application. Signature Requirement. RB argues in its November 17, 2005, Petition to Rescind Grant and Dismiss Application (``Objection'') that the Licensee's application is defective and should be dismissed because it was not signed in accordance with Section 73.3513 of the Rules. Section 73.3513(a)(5) states that an application of a governmental entity, such
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-07-3760A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-07-3760A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-07-3760A1.txt
  • standing to bring a petition to deny WDCG(FM)'s renewal application because he lives in Charlotte, which is outside WDCG(FM)'s service area, and has not indicated that he is a regular listener of the station. Given these procedural defects, the petitions to deny filed by these Objectors must be dismissed. We will, however, treat them as informal objections pursuant to Section 73.3587 of the Commission's Rules (the ``Rules''). Substantive Matters. In evaluating an application for license renewal, the Commission's decision is governed by Section 309(k)(1) of the Act. That section provides that if, upon consideration of the application and pleadings, we find that (1) the station has served the public interest, convenience, and necessity; (2) there have been no serious violations of
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-07-3838A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-07-3838A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-07-3838A1.txt
  • qualifications to hold a Commission license, based on past indecency violations and pending payola allegations. The Objection requests that the Commission forbear from any action on the Assignment Application until such misconduct allegations are resolved. Discussion. Procedural Issue. Entercom argues that death has terminated Stolz's standing to file the Objection. Parties that lack standing, however, may file informal objections. Section 73.3587 of the Commission's Rules (the ``Rules'') permits the filing of an informal objection by any person, any time ``[B]efore FCC action on any application for an instrument of authorization . . . . '' Given that Stolz died before the Objection was filed, the pleading should have been submitted in the name of the Executor, on behalf of the Estate.
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-07-3865A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-07-3865A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-07-3865A1.txt
  • such a retroactive declaration is inadequate to cure the failure to provide such an affidavit or declaration with the Petition. Accordingly, we find that Howard has not established standing to file a petition to deny, nor has he provided a sufficient affidavit or declaration in support of the Petition. We therefore consider his Petition as an informal objection under Section 73.3587 of the Rules. Substantive Matters. In evaluating an application for license renewal, the Commission's decision is governed by Section 309(k) of the Act. That section provides that if, upon consideration of the application and pleadings, we find that (1) the station has served the public interest, convenience, and necessity; (2) there have been no serious violations of the Act or
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-07-3904A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-07-3904A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-07-3904A1.txt
  • a new AM station at Escanaba, Michigan, as amended; and (2) the November 9, 2006, ``Motion to Dismiss'' ( the ``Motion'') the application filed on behalf of KMB Broadcasting, Inc. (``KMB''), licensee of stations WDBC and WYKX(FM), Escanaba, as supplemented on December 22, 2006. For the reasons set forth below, we treat the Motion as an Informal Objection under Section 73.3587 of the Commission's Rules (the ``Rules'') and deny it, and we grant the Application. Background. On January 29, 2004, Lyle Robert Evans (``Evans'') filed a ``short form'' FCC Form 175 application for a new AM station in Escanaba, Michigan, during the filing window for AM Auction No. 84 (the ``Short Form Application''). That proposal specified the following antenna coordinates for
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-07-3932A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-07-3932A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-07-3932A1.txt
  • in the Petition as required by Section 309(d)(1) of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended (the ``Act''). There is attached a notarized signature of Petitioner Huston. No affidavit stating that he has personal knowledge of the facts alleged in the Petition, however, was provided by Petitioners. Nevertheless, we will consider the filing as an informal objection pursuant to Section 73.3587 of the Commission's Rules (the ``Rules''). Substantive Issues. In evaluating an application for license renewal, the Commission's decision is governed by Section 309(k) of the Act. That Section provides that we are to grant the renewal application if, upon consideration of the application and pleadings, we find that (1) the station has served the public interest, convenience, and necessity; (2)
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-07-3960A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-07-3960A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-07-3960A1.txt
  • whether there is a substantial and material question of fact requiring resolution in a hearing. If the facts are not disputed, but disposition turns on inferences and legal conclusions to be drawn from facts already known, a hearing is unnecessary. Blanchard's petition was untimely filed and procedurally defective. We will, therefore, treat it as an informal objection pursuant to Section 73.3587 of the Commission's rules. Furthermore, we conclude that Blanchard has failed to raise a substantial and material question of fact sufficient to show that grant of the subject application would be inconsistent with the public interest. The Commission's policy is that there must be an ultimate adjudication by an appropriate trier of fact, either by a government agency or court,
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-07-4025A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-07-4025A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-07-4025A1.txt
  • C.F.R. � 73.3516(e). For radio stations licensed in communities in Arizona, because their licenses expired on October 1, 2005, the applicable petition filing deadline was September 1, 2005. 47 C.F.R. � 73.1020(a)(10). The pleading filed by Thayer thus fails to meet the requirements of a petition to deny. We will, however, treat it as an informal objection, pursuant to Section 73.3587 of the Commission's Rules. See 47 C.F.R. � 73.3587. Id. Id. Thayer also alleges that that Station's manager, Lisa Youvella, has made false statements about the Station's recruiting and hiring practices in a local newspaper article. Id. at 3. The Commission only considers misrepresentation allegations to the extent that the alleged misrepresentation is made to a governmental unit. See Policy
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-07-4266A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-07-4266A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-07-4266A1.txt
  • for renewal of license for Station KNUZ(AM), Bellville, Texas, IS GRANTED. Sincerely, Peter H. Doyle Chief, Audio Division Media Bureau cc: Robert J. Buenzle, Esquire On May 16, 2005, the Commission received via the U.S. Postal Service an identical letter from Conway dated May 5, 2005. We are treating the untitled letter by Conway as an Informal Objection under Section 73.3587 of the Commission's Rules (the ``Rules''), 47 C.F.R. � 73.3587, because it fails to comply with the procedural requirements for filing a Petition to Deny, e.g., it was not served on the Licensee or its counsel, and the factual assertions contained in the filings are not supported by an affiant with personal knowledge. See 47 U.S.C. � 309(d), 47 C.F.R.
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-07-4300A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-07-4300A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-07-4300A1.txt
  • IS GRANTED, and the application to assign the license of Station KBAC(FM), Las Vegas, New Mexico (File No. BALH-20070628ABV) from Educational Media Foundation to Hutton Broadcasting, LLC IS GRANTED. Sincerely, Peter H. Doyle Chief, Audio Division Media Bureau cc: Lee J. Peltzman, Esq. David D. Oxenford, Esq. These listener letters will be treated as informal objections in accordance with Section 73.3587 of the Commission's Rules (the ``Rules''). On July 2, 2007, Hutton filed a Consolidated Opposition to Informal Objections and Request for Expedited Processing. See Changes in the Entertainment Formats of Broadcast Stations, Memorandum Opinion and Order, 60 FCC2d 858, 865-66 (1976), recon. denied, Memorandum Opinion and Order, 66 FCC 2d 78 (1977), rev'd sub nom., WNCN Listeners Guild v. FCC,
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-07-4340A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-07-4340A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-07-4340A1.txt
  • deny''). Id. See also, Secret Communications II, LLC, Memorandum Opinion and Order, 18 FCC Rcd 9139 (2003); Heidi Damsky, Order, 13 FCC Rcd 16352 (1998); Pikes Peak Broadcasting Co., Memorandum Opinion and Order, 12 FCC Rcd 4626 (1997). Furthermore, Blanchard did not sign or provide her address with her informal objection, rendering it procedurally defective under 47 C.F.R. �� 1.52, 73.3587. 47 U.S.C. � 309(k). Federal Communications Commission Washington, D.C. 20554 October 19, 2007 = > 8 9 ; = > ? I L U n } � � � � � � �%���PNG �` �` b``D� 4 �&)�@�-�@�@�7 H >��O��� p j�� �2�=��k��� �"_� - J��, �Nt�Rb �7�P���U�ZS '��wp��ˈ jP�T{.|�87w]�g��yA�Ҩ-��=T#�O> �#W p����U�^S� �t�''�TxNt�l ۦ��X6`T{������:�r�� �A�R\ )]h]e�M8�I̟`�?K^��� ?C��A�UU �3ꡟ=��A � \�+�_
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-07-4342A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-07-4342A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-07-4342A1.txt
  • provide an affidavit or declaration raising a specific injury that would be caused to him by grant of the WHYY-FM renewal application or that establishes listener/residence status as a basis for standing. Therefore, we find that Smith lacks standing to file a petition to deny in this proceeding. Nevertheless, we will consider Smith's Petition as an informal objection under Section 73.3587 of the Rules. Informal objections must, pursuant to Section 309(e) of the Act, provide properly supported allegations of fact that, if true, would establish a substantial and material question of fact that grant of the application would be prima facie inconsistent with Section 309(k) of the Act, which governs our evaluation of an application for license renewal. Specifically, Section 309(k)(1)
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-07-4352A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-07-4352A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-07-4352A1.txt
  • affidavit or declaration alleging a specific injury that would be caused by grant of the KTMP(AM) renewal application or attempt to establish listener/residence status as a basis for standing. Therefore, we find that both Johnson and Guthrie lack standing to file petitions to deny in this proceeding. Nevertheless, we will consider Johnson and Guthrie's Petitions as informal objections under Section 73.3587 of the Rules. 6. Both Johnson and Guthrie allege that the Station's tower is not secured properly. Johnson also alleges that the Licensee has ``sent out false affidavits the entire 2005 year'' and that ``KTMP has ran (sic) contests on air and then refused to give away the prizes offered. . . .'' Guthrie alleges that when he viewed the
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-07-4359A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-07-4359A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-07-4359A1.txt
  • Fox Television Stations, Inc., the ultimate parent of certain owned-and-operated Fox Television Network affiliates. Accordingly, it is ordered that the petition to deny filed by Chad Meli IS DENIED. Sincerely, Barbara A. Kreisman Chief, Video Division Media Bureau We do not need to reach the issue of standing in this case since we will exercise our discretion pursuant to section 73.3587 of the Commission's rules and address the arguments raised by Mr. Meli. 47 C.F.R. �73.3587. 47 U.S.C. �309(k)(1). 47 U.S.C. �309(d)(1); Astroline Communications Co. Ltd. Partnership v. FCC, 857 F.2d 1556 (D.C. Cir. 1988) (``Astroline''). Astroline, 857 F.2d at 1561. Petition to Deny, at 1. While Mr. Meli maintains that the renewal application should not be granted until the Commission
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-07-450A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-07-450A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-07-450A1.txt
  • Rules. Sincerely, Peter H. Doyle Chief, Audio Division Media Bureau The Commission received objections to the above-captioned assignment application from 263 informal objectors. Each of these individuals will receive a copy of this letter. KJC ``Response to Informal Objections,'' filed July 28, 2006, Attachment A at 1. These listener letters will be treated as informal objections in accordance with Section 73.3587 of the Commission's Rules. . FCC v. WNCN Listener's Guild, 450 U.S. 582, 585 (1981). 47 U.S.C. � 310(d) (when acting on assignment or transfer applications, the Commission may not consider whether the public interest, convenience and necessity might be served by assignment or transfer of the license to an entity other than the proposed assignee or transferee). Where permission
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-07-4683A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-07-4683A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-07-4683A1.txt
  • Broadcasting Licenses, Ltd. for the renewal of license of broadcast station WJMO(AM), Cleveland, Ohio. For the reasons set forth herein, we deny the Objection. We find the Objection deficient on procedural grounds. The Application was granted on September 20, 2004, yet Petitioners filed the Objection nine days after this grant. Section 73.8537 of the Commission's rules (the ``Rules''), 47 C.F.R. �73.3587, states that any person may file an informal objection to an application ``before FCC action'' (emphasis added). Petitioners failed to meet this requirement. Further, we cannot treat the Objection as a petition for reconsideration or application for review. Section 1.106 of the Rules, 47 C.F.R. �1.106, governs the filing of petitions for reconsideration of a Commission action, and Section 1.115
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-07-4701A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-07-4701A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-07-4701A1.txt
  • persons not for the protection of their private interests, but only to vindicate the public interest. Consistent with this principle, creditors are generally not permitted to participate in an application proceeding solely on the ground that they have a financial stake in the survival of the parties. Accordingly, the Petition will be treated an informal objection (the ``Objection'') under Section 73.3587 of the Rules. 5. Substantive Issues. Financial Qualifications. Royce states that, prior to the filing of the Applications, Entercom informed the Securities and Exchange Commission ("SEC") that Entercom had "substantial indebtedness'' and that it had "no assurances that [it]will be able to obtain other funding, additional financing or the approvals, if necessary, for these transactions." Royce maintains that this indebtedness
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-07-4714A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-07-4714A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-07-4714A1.txt
  • ARE DENIED. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the application (File No. BRCT-20060601ASL) of KUTV Holdings, Inc., for renewal of license for station KUTV(TV), Salt Lake City, Utah, IS GRANTED. Sincerely, Monica Shah Desai Chief, Media Bureau The Objectors did not serve the licensee, or otherwise provide a return address on the petition. We will exercise our discretion pursuant to section 73.3587 of the Commission's rules, however, and consider the filing as an informal objection. 47 C.F.R. �73.3587. In the Matter of Complaints Against Various Television Licensees Concerning Their December 31, 2004, Broadcast of the Program ``Without a Trace,'' Notice of Apparent Liability for Forfeiture, 21 FCC Rcd 2732 (2006). Viacom, Inc. et al, Order, 19 FCC Rcd 23100 (2004) (``2004 Consent
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-07-4926A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-07-4926A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-07-4926A1.txt
  • Monica Shah Desai Chief, Media Bureau A pleading entitled ``Petition to Deny Transfer'' was filed by five Senators from the Legislature of the Virgin Islands (the ``Senators'') on January 11, 2007. Because the Senators' pleading was not served on the Licensee as required by 47 U.S.C. � 309(d), it will be treated as an informal objection under 47 C.F.R. � 73.3587. Additional informal objections were filed by a group of permanent residents of St. Croix, and several individual residents of St. Croix (collectively, the ``Objectors''), on January 11, 2007, January 18, 2007, and February 6, 2007. Extensive responsive pleadings were filed in this matter. Each pleading was fully considered and for administrative convenience we will refer to the groups of pleadings
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-08-1034A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-08-1034A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-08-1034A1.txt
  • of the Rules, petitions to deny a renewal application must be filed by the first day of the last full calendar month of the expiring license term. Thus, Jeantet's petition to deny should have been filed by May 1, 2006. Because Jeantet's pleading was filed after the petition to deny deadline we will consider it an informal objection under Section 73.3587 of the Rules. Informal Objections. Pursuant to Section 309(e) of the Act, informal objections, like petitions to deny, must provide properly supported allegations of fact that, if true, would establish a substantial and material question of fact that grant of the application would be prima facie inconsistent with Section 309(k) of the Act, which governs our evaluation of an application
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-08-1138A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-08-1138A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-08-1138A1.txt
  • deny. Petitions to deny may not be filed with regard to applications that do not require local public notice pursuant to Section 73.3580 of the Commission's Rules. Such local public notice is not required in the case of an application for an STA or an extension thereof. Accordingly, we will consider the pleading as an informal objection pursuant to Section 73.3587 of the Commission's Rules. With respect to the petition to deny filed against the WEBR-CA renewal application, a party has standing to file a petition to deny if grant of the application would result in, or be reasonably likely to result in, some injury of a direct, tangible or substantial nature. The Commission also accords party-in-interest status to a petitioner
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-08-1372A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-08-1372A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-08-1372A1.txt
  • Valley News, Inc. and Mr. Howard C. Toole, Letter, 22 FCC Rcd 18600 (MB 2007), petition for recon. pending (``Toole Decision''). Objection at 2. Id. Id. Opposition at 3-4. Memorandum Opinion and Order, 11 FCC Rcd 15464 (1996) (``Greater Muskegon Broadcasters''). Id. at 15472 (emphasis added). See, e.g., 47 U.S.C. � 309(d); 47 C.F.R. �� 1.17, 1.41 - 1.77, 73.3584, 73.3587, 73.5006, 73.7004. See, e.g., 47 C.F.R. �� 1.52, 73.3584(b). Coleman Objection, first unnumbered page. Id., second unnumbered page. Id., second-third unnumbered pages. See 47 U.S.C. � 310(d); Dorothy J. Owens, Debtor-in-Possession, Memorandum Opinion and Order, 5 FCC Rcd 6615 (1990). Cf. Policy Regarding Character Qualifications in Broadcast Licensing, Report, Order and Policy Statement, 102 FCC 2d 1179, 1223-25 (1986) (there
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-08-1409A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-08-1409A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-08-1409A1.txt
  • taken, shall be supported by affidavit of a person or persons with personal knowledge thereof.'' The factual allegations contained in the ``Petition to Deny'' were not supported by an affidavit or sworn declaration of either Fisher or a member and viewer of the ``Project Truth of Rocky Mount.'' Accordingly, we will consider this filing as an informal objection under Section 73.3587 of the Commission's Rules. Fisher's objection is directed against three separate applications filed by ACTBN - the above-referenced applications for a digital companion channel and for a Class A television license, and an application for minor modification of the analog facilities of WHIG-LP. The grant of the minor modification application was placed on public notice on December 19, 2006, nine
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-08-144A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-08-144A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-08-144A1.txt
  • an affidavit or declaration that establishes standing. Pelley fails to provide such an affidavit or declaration. Accordingly, Pelley has not met the statutory standard for standing set forth in Section 309(d) of the Act, and his pleading will be dismissed as a petition to deny. We will, however, treat and consider the pleading as an informal objection pursuant to Section 73.3587 of the Commission's Rules (the ``Rules''). Private Contractual Claim. Pelley's request for compensation for engineering services rendered at the Station relates to contractual claims that constitute a private controversy. The Commission has consistently held that it is not the proper forum for the resolution of such private disputes, and that the parties should seek redress for such matters in courts
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-08-1469A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-08-1469A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-08-1469A1.txt
  • Gannett's response, we conclude that Station KTHV(TV)'s public inspection file complied with Section 73.3526(e)(10). Accordingly, it is ordered that the petition to deny filed by Chad Meli IS DENIED. Sincerely, Barbara A. Kreisman Chief, Video Division Media Bureau We do not need to reach the issue of standing in this case since we will exercise our discretion pursuant to section 73.3587 of the Commission's rules and address the arguments raised by Mr. Meli. 47 C.F.R. �73.3587. Petition to Deny, at 1. While Mr. Meli maintains that the renewal application should not be granted until the Commission adjudicates all indecency complaints involving Station KTHV(TV), he does not state whether such complaints involve broadcasts other than the one specifically mentioned in the petition.
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-08-1536A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-08-1536A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-08-1536A1.txt
  • filed a ``Supplement to Petition to Revoke Constriction Permit'' on April 30, 1998. Logos filed an ``Opposition to Supplement to Motion to Revoke Construction Permit'' on May 22, 1998. RRI filed a ``Reply to Opposition to Supplement to Petition to Revoke Construction Permit'' on June 8, 1998. RRI requests that its pleadings be treated as informal objections pursuant to Section 73.3587 of the Rules. See 47 C.F.R. 73.3587 File No. BLED-19950929KC. 47 U.S.C. � 309(e). 47 U.S.C. � 309(a). See, e.g., WWOR-TV, Inc., Memorandum Opinion and Order, 6 FCC Rcd 193, 197 n.10 (1990), aff'd sub nom. Garden State Broadcasting L.P. v. FCC, 996 F.2d 386 (D.C. Cir. 1993), rehearing denied (Sept. 10, 1993); Area Christian Television, Inc., Memorandum Opinion and
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-08-1576A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-08-1576A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-08-1576A1.txt
  • be remedied with the Commission's denial of the pending application. KSU has not established how grant of the Assignment Application would result in a direct injury to it or how denial of the Assignment Application would redress that injury. Therefore, KSU lacks standing to petition the Assignment Application. We will, however, treat KSU's pleading as an Informal Objection under Section 73.3587 of the Rules. 7. Filing Deadline and Finality. Staff action taken pursuant to delegated authority generally becomes final and not subject to administrative review forty days after the release of public notice announcing the action, unless a petition for reconsideration or an application for review has been filed. The Commission has made exceptions to the administrative doctrine of finality when
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-08-1676A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-08-1676A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-08-1676A1.txt
  • and Anne Zevich IS DENIED, and the application (File No. BR-20051201BBG) of Saga Communications of New England, LLC for renewal of license for Station WBAE(AM), Portland, Maine, IS GRANTED. Sincerely, Peter H. Doyle Chief, Audio Division Media Bureau cc: Saga Communications of New England, LLC We are treating the untitled filing by the Objectors as an Informal Objection under Section 73.3587 of the Commission's Rules (the ``Rules''), 47 C.F.R. � 73.3587, because it fails to comply with the procedural requirements for filing a Petition to Deny, e.g., it was not served on the Station or its counsel, and it is not supported by affidavit. See 37 U.S.C. � 309(d), 47 C.F.R. � 73.3584. ``Opposition to Informal Objection'' (``Opposition''). Informal Objection at
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-08-16A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-08-16A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-08-16A1.txt
  • is styled a ``Petition to Deny,'' there is no indication in the pleading that it was properly served on the Licensees. Accordingly, the pleading does not meet the procedural requirements for petitions to deny set forth in Section 309(d) of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended (the ``Act''). It will therefore be treated as an informal objection under Section 73.3587 of the Commission's Rules (the ``Rules''). Discussion. Pursuant to Section 309(e) of the Act, informal objections must provide properly supported allegations of fact that, if true, would establish a substantial and material question of fact that grant of the application would be prima facie inconsistent with Section 309(k) of the Act, which governs our evaluation of an application for license
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-08-1743A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-08-1743A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-08-1743A1.txt
  • for KTLA Venture subsequently filed the license application to cover the construction of the channel 6 facility. Section 73.3584(a) of the rules states that petitions to deny will not be entertained against low power displacement applications. See 47 C.F.R. � 73.3584(a). Petitions to deny that are filed against these applications are instead treated as informal objections. See 47 C.F.R. � 73.3587. Also pending at the time of the release of the Video Division's decision were ``petitions to deny'' filed by RT and USC that repeat the arguments in their earlier informal objections. Although these pleadings were not specifically mentioned in its decision, the arguments raised by RT and USC in their petitions were considered and rejected by the Video Division. See
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-08-1837A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-08-1837A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-08-1837A1.txt
  • pleadings either an affidavit or declaration raising a specific injury that would be caused to it by grant of the Application or attempting to establish listener/residence status as a basis for standing. Therefore, we find that MUC lacks standing to file a petition to deny the Application. Nevertheless, we will consider MUC's Petition as an informal objection (``Objection'') under Section 73.3587 of the Rules. Substantive Issues: In applying Section 73.503 of the Rules, the Commission has required that NCE applicants be: (a) a government or public educational agency, board or institution; (b) a private, nonprofit educational organization; or (c) a nonprofit entity with a demonstrated educational purpose. We require that an applicant described in (a) or (b) above have an educational
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-08-1845A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-08-1845A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-08-1845A1.txt
  • Application or the Assignment Application, as an aggrieved competitor, assumes an actual state of competition, not merely a history as a former applicant whose application was dismissed nine years ago. Therefore, Astounding has failed to establish that it is a party in interest as contemplated by the Act. Nevertheless, we shall treat its pleadings as informal objections pursuant to Section 73.3587 of the Rules. Substantive Issues. Astounding claims that the Commission cannot grant the Assignment Application ``without final action granting the underlying construction permit to Intermart.'' We disagree. When a private contractual dispute concerning a Commission license is the subject of a pending court proceeding, in the absence of a stay or an injunction (neither of which are present here), it
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-08-1936A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-08-1936A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-08-1936A1.txt
  • Spirit Response at 9, Exh. 8. One possible explanation is that Spirit, upon learning that the cap would allow it to file fewer applications than originally intended, renegotiated its all-inclusive arrangement to pay only for engineering services actually used. Spirit Response at 4. Helpline Response at 4. Spirit Response, Exh. 3. See Spirit Response, Exh. 15. See 47 C.F.R. � 73.3587; Lowery Communications, Hearing Designation Order, 5 FCC Rcd 4222 (MB 1990). E.g., Randolph Victor Bell, Hearing Designation Order, 3 FCC Rcd 5365 (MB 1988). See 47 C.F.R. � 73.7000. Attributable interests can be direct or indirect. See 47 C.F.R. � 73.3555, n.1. Note 2 sets forth various cognizable interests including those of certain owners, partners, stockholders, officers, directors, and time
• 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
  • Actions, Public Notice, Report No. 46470 (Apr. 23, 2007) at 2. See July 2008 Amendment to the dismissed WMCW Application, Attachment 1, at 1. Id. Petitions to deny do not lie against minor change applications. See 47 U.S.C. � 309(d)(1); 47 C.F.R. � 73.3580(a). Accordingly, the Heller Petition will be treated herein as an Informal Objection pursuant to 47 C.F.R.� 73.3587. See 47 C.F.R. � 73.3517. See, e.g., Review of the Technical Assignment Criteria for the AM Broadcast Service, 6 FCC Rcd 6273 (1991), recon. granted in part and denied in part, 8 FCC Rcd 3250 (1993). Policies to Encourage Interference Reduction between AM Broadcast Stations, 5 FCC Rcd 4492 (1990) (``Interference Reduction''). 47 C.F.R. � 73.3517. Interference Reduction, 5 FCC
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-08-1950A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-08-1950A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-08-1950A1.txt
  • why it ``was not possible for him to participate in the earlier stages of a proceeding.'' By Clay's own admission it was possible for him to do so - he simply elected not to. His failure to comply with Section 1.106(b)(1), therefore, compels dismissal of his Petition. We will not consider the Petition as an informal objection pursuant to Section 73.3587 of the Rules. Such informal objections must be filed ``[b]efore FCC action on any application for an instrument of authorization.'' Clay's Petition, however, postdates grant of the KCIL(FM) Application. Therefore, Clay's Petition - even considered as an informal objection - is untimely, mandating its dismissal. Its procedural infirmities aside, Clay's Petition lacks substantive merit. Sunburst has demonstrated that it meets
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-08-1988A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-08-1988A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-08-1988A1.txt
  • Community Radio, Inc. (``ICR'') for a construction permit for a new noncommercial educational (``NCE'') FM station to serve Watkins Glen, New York (the ``Application''). We also have before us: (1) a two-page letter received November 26, 2007, opposing the Application, filed by Darin Johnson (``Johnson''), which will be treated as an Informal Objection (the ``Johnson Objection'') in accordance with Section 73.3587 of the Commission's Rules (the ``Rules''); (2) a December 14, 2007, Petition to Deny (the ``Petition'') filed by Ithaca College (the ``College''), licensee of NCE station WICB(FM), Ithaca, New York; and (3) a two-page letter received June 24, 2008, opposing the Application, filed by Ray Smith (``Smith''), which will be treated as an Informal Objection (the ``Smith Objection'') in accordance
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-08-2251A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-08-2251A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-08-2251A1.txt
  • apparently has no main studio or personnel. The status of the television station has no nexus with the Local Radio Ownership Rule - radio and television are separate broadcast services. FLAIM is mistaken that its Petition is acceptable - under what it calls a ``worst case scenario'' - because FLAIM could have filed a post-grant Informal Objection pursuant to Section 73.3587 of the Rules. Informal Objections, however, are acceptable only ``[b]efore FCC action on any application for an instrument of authorization.'' Thus, even were we to treat FLAIM's Petition as the equivalent of an Informal Objection, we would dismiss it because it was filed after the Applications were granted. Indeed, even were we to reach FLAIM's Petition on the merits, we
• 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
  • However, since standing is not a perquisite to the filing of an informal objection, Potomac's contention that Birach does not have standing is misplaced. See Nextel License Holdings 4, Inc., Order, 17 FCC Rcd 7028, 7033 (WTB 2002) (noting ``there is no standing requirement to file an informal objection pursuant to [47 C.F.R. � 1.41].'')); see also 47 C.F.R. � 73.3587. Id. at 4. Id. at 5. For example, Potomac notes that DRRTS has also been represented by David W. Brown, Esq., of the law firm of Knopf & Brown. See Opposition, Exhibit A. Indeed, Mr. Brown submitted a pre-hearing statement in the very zoning hearing with which Birach takes issue. See id. Potomac also submits the minutes of the Montgomery
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-08-2467A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-08-2467A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-08-2467A1.txt
  • for Expedited Action will be dismissed as moot. R&R filed a contingent Motion for Extension of Time. R&R sought the extension if the Gold Coast Opposition was deemed a formal opposition governed by the filing deadlines in 47 C.F.R. � 1.45. The Motion for Extension of Time will be dismissed as moot. Gold Coast filed its Opposition ``pursuant to Section 73.3587 of the Commission's Rules'' (the ``Rules'') governing informal objections. The 47 C.F.R. � 1.45 filing deadlines do not apply to informal objections. The Application was filed pursuant to Section 73.3573(g) of the Rules which permits the modification of a station's authorization to specify a new community of license without affording other interested parties the opportunity to file competing expressions of
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-08-2501A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-08-2501A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-08-2501A1.txt
  • did not sign the Objection). Accordingly, we find that Myers has not established standing to file a petition to deny, nor has he provided a sufficient affidavit or declaration in support of the Objection. Because the Objection was untimely and did not comply with the Act or the Commission's Rules, we therefore consider it as an informal objection under Section 73.3587 of the Rules. Substantive Matters. As with all petitions or objections seeking to deny an application for a new station, here we must first determine whether Myers has made specific allegations of fact that, if true, would demonstrate that grant of the application would be prima facie inconsistent with the public interest. These specific allegations must be supported by the
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-08-348A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-08-348A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-08-348A1.txt
  • failure to serve his Petition on the licensee as required by Section 309(d)(1) of the Act. Moreover, although Pennino has not demonstrated that he is a party in interest and his filing does not meet the requirements of a formal petition to deny under Section 309(d) of the Act, we will treat the filing as an informal objection under Section 73.3587 of the Rules. Notably, Pennino does not claim that Infinity has violated the Act or any of the Commission's Rules. Rather, his core complaint is the lack of coverage of environmental issues on WCCO(AM). While we recognize Pennino's concerns about the quality of the Station's programming, the role of the Commission in overseeing program content is limited. The First Amendment
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-08-349A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-08-349A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-08-349A1.txt
  • to the original proceeding it must show good reason for why it was unable to participate in the earlier proceeding. JNE's Informal Objection was filed nearly eleven months after the Siga Application was filed. JNE provides no explanation for why it was unable to participate in the original proceeding. JNE attempts to excuse the delay by pointing out that Section 73.3587 of the Rules contains no deadline for the filing of an informal objection and that it could not have known of the grant of Siga's application since the informal objection was filed before public notice of the Commission's action was published. While Section 73.3587 of the Rules does not contain a filing deadline for informal objections, it specifically states that
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-08-407A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-08-407A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-08-407A1.txt
  • sent to BBC explaining why she signed Residents' Objection. Ms. Sutcliffe recites that KRPI interferes with her reception of other, unspecified, stations; that KRPI interferes with the public address system at her church and that KRPI causes ``background noise'' in residential and business telephones. We accept Ms. Sutcliffe's letter to BBC as an informal objection pursuant to 47 C.F.R. � 73.3587. However, the matters raised by Ms. Sutcliffe are fully addressed in our discussion of the Residents' Objection and we thus make no further specific reference to Ms. Sutcliffe's letter. See Objection at 4, 35. Id. at 7. Id. at 12. Id. at 47. Id. at 42. Id. at 36. Opposition at 11. Id. at 14-17. Id., Attachment to Engineering Statement
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-08-483A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-08-483A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-08-483A1.txt
  • Petition to Deny, at 4. See Advanced Television Systems and Their Impact Upon the Existing Television Broadcast Service, Fifth Report and Order, 12 FCC Rcd 12809, 12821 (1997), recon. denied, 13 FCC Rcd 6860 (1998). 47 C.F.R. �73.1150(a). The Petition to Deny was filed after the filing deadline and, therefore, will be considered as an informal objection pursuant to Section 73.3587 of the Commission's rules. Petition to Deny, at 4. Opposition to Petition to Deny, at ii. Television Satellite Stations, 6 FCC Rcd at 4212, 4215. 47 C.F.R. �73.3555, Note 5. 47 C.F.R. �73.3555, Note 4. Television Satellite Stations, 6 FCC Rcd at 4215-4216. The Commission stated that applicants seeking to transfer or assign a television satellite station are entitled to
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-08-494A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-08-494A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-08-494A1.txt
  • license renewal application, in effect making GEMB's pleading a petition to deny. Williamson states that GEMB's informal objection cannot be considered a petition to deny because it was filed after the deadline for petitions to deny had passed and GEMB does not have standing as a party in interest. We find that GEMB properly filed an informal objection under Section 73.3587 of the Rules. 4. Substantive Matters. In its Objection, GEMB first argues that Williamson ``clearly falls short of the Commission's norm of `continued compliance''' with the Rules because he failed to timely file the license renewal application for the Station. GEMB is correct that that the WGYV(AM) license renewal application was not timely filed under Section 73.3539 of the Rules.
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-08-556A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-08-556A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-08-556A1.txt
  • pleadings styled as ``Petitions to Deny.'' However, these and the remaining objections filed by the Objectors listed in Appendix A fail to meet the requirements of a petition to deny because they were either late-filed or failed to provide sworn statements supporting factual allegations. See 47 U.S.C. � 309(d). We will, however, treat them as informal objections, pursuant to Section 73.3587 of the Commission's Rules (the ``Rules''). See 47 C.F.R. � 73.3587. Petition at 15-16. See id. See, e.g., Informal Objection filed by Alexander J. Alfano, Esq. on Nov. 5, 2007 (``Alfano Objection''), at 3. See, e.g., Informal Objection filed by Jane Abruzzo on October 1, 2007 (``Abruzzo Objection''), at 1. 47 U.S.C. � 310(d). 47 U.S.C. � 309(d)(1). See id.;
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-08-627A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-08-627A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-08-627A1.txt
  • provided support for his allegations of Rule violation(s), we find that he has not raised a substantial and material question of fact warranting further inquiry. Accordingly, IT IS ORDERED that the Petition to Deny filed by Robert W. Cowan, IS DISMISSED. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that said Petition to Deny, considered as an informal objection pursuant to 47 C.F.R. � 73.3587 is DENIED. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the Motion for Leave to File Opposition Out of Time, filed by Birach Broadcasting Corporation, IS GRANTED. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the Motion for Expedited Processing filed by Birach Broadcasting Corporation is DISMISSED AS MOOT. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the Applications for Commission Consent to Assignment of License of Stations WVBA
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-09-1257A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-09-1257A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-09-1257A1.txt
  • of the Station, they are exempt from the Commission's prohibition against ex parte presentations. The pleadings were filed after the deadline for filing petitions to deny had passed (i.e., later than 30 days after the date of the Public Notice listing the Assignment Application as accepted for filing). Therefore, we will treat these ``listener complaints'' as informal objections under Section 73.3587 of the Commission's Rules (the ``Rules''). Substantive Matters. Section 310(d) of the Act requires the Commission to make a determination whether the proposed transfer or assignment of a broadcast license would be in the public interest. Pursuant to Sections 309(d) and (e) of the Act, petitions to deny and informal objections must provide properly supported allegations of fact that, if
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-09-14A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-09-14A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-09-14A1.txt
  • Ronald P. Marsh and Norman Remington ARE DENIED, and the application (File No. BRED-20051201CHG) of the University of Rhode Island for renewal of license for Station WRIU(FM), Kingston, Rhode Island, IS GRANTED. Sincerely, Peter H. Doyle Chief, Audio Division Media Bureau Marsh and Remington styled their pleadings ``Petitions to Deny.'' We are treating the pleadings as Informal Objections under Section 73.3587 of the Commission's Rules (the ``Rules''), 47 C.F.R. � 73.3587, because they fail to comply with the procedural requirements for filing Petitions to Deny, e.g., they were not served on the Station, and they are not supported by affidavit signed by a person with personal knowledge of the facts contained in the pleading. See 37 U.S.C. � 309(d), 47 C.F.R.
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-09-1524A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-09-1524A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-09-1524A1.txt
  • it has determined that the Station is being operated in accordance with the Rules and corporate laws of the United States, Indiana, and Illinois. Discussion. Procedural Matter. Because formal petitions to deny do not lie against minor modification applications, such as that of Benton-Weatherford's here, the Watson pleading will be considered as an informal objection to the Application under Section 73.3587 of the Rules. Substantive Matters. Watson's request as a minority shareholder for notification regarding operation of the Station relates to a shareholder dispute which constitutes a private controversy. Watson, as a Benton-Weatherford shareholder, has other avenues open to him should he believe that there is a breach of fiduciary duty on the part of the Benton-Weatherford board of directors. The
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-09-1796A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-09-1796A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-09-1796A1.txt
  • of the identical facts alleged in each of the Objections. Accordingly, we find that objector Cherry has not provided a sufficient affidavit or declaration in support of either the Florida/Georgia or Georgia Objection. Because these filings do not comply with the Act or the Rules regarding petitions to deny, we will consider each as an informal objection pursuant to Section 73.3587 of the Rules. Substantive Matters. Section 310(d) of the Act requires the Commission to make a determination whether the proposed transfer or assignment of a broadcast license would be in the public interest. Pursuant to Sections 309(d) and (e) of the Act, informal objections must provide properly supported allegations of fact that, if true, would establish a substantial and material
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-09-2033A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-09-2033A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-09-2033A1.txt
  • of 1934, as amended (the ``Act''). Additionally, Miller's failure to properly serve the pleading on either the licensee or its counsel violates Section 309(d)(1) of the Act, and Section 1.47 of the Commission's Rules (the ``Rules''). Accordingly, we will dismiss Miller's pleading as a petition to deny. We will, however, treat the pleading as an informal objection pursuant to Section 73.3587 of the Rules. Substantive Issues. As noted, Simpson is President and majority shareholder of Farm and Home. Miller has failed to provide documentation demonstrating that Simpson lacks authority to enter into an agreement on behalf of Farm and Home for the sale of certain Farm and Home assets. Moreover, the issues raised by Miller constitute a private controversy. The Commission
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-09-2470A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-09-2470A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-09-2470A1.txt
  • pleading is defective as a ``Petition to Deny,'' and that it should be dismissed. We agree. Because the Petition was filed two days after the Application had been granted and because formal petitions to deny do not lie against minor modification applications, such as that of Fern Creek's here, we will treat the Petition as an Informal Objection under Section 73.3587 of the Rules. Substantive Matters. In the Petition, Fern Creek requests that we ``thoroughly review'' Brycc's qualifications as an LPFM licensee. It contends that (1) the Timeshare Site is outside the 10 mile radius required under Section 73.853 of the Rules; (2) Brycc's ownership has changed 100% since the original construction permit was issued, in violation of Section 73.865 of
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-09-524A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-09-524A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-09-524A1.txt
  • Rev. Hare that ``the facts and statements therein are true and correct to the best of my information and belief,'' the factual allegations contained in the Petition were not supported by an affidavit or declaration under penalty of perjury of either Rev. Hare, Mr. Beverage, or Ms. Warren. Accordingly, we will consider this filing as an informal objection under Section 73.3587 of the Commission's Rules. NJPBA Motion to Strike. In its Motion to Strike WRI's Reply, NJPBA states that WRI's Reply improperly raises a ``wholly new claim'' that NJPBA never had permission to use the proposed site, based solely on the fact that NJPBA did not address it in its Opposition. We agree. Accordingly, we will grant the Motion to Strike.
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-09-57A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-09-57A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-09-57A1.txt
  • of Ithaca Community Radio, Inc. (``ICR'') for a construction permit for a new noncommercial educational (``NCE'') FM station to serve Odessa, New York (the ``Application''). We also have before us a two-page letter received June 30, 2008, opposing the Application, filed by Ray Smith (``Smith''), which will be treated as an Informal Objection (the ``Smith Objection'') in accordance with Section 73.3587 of the Commission's Rules (the ``Rules''). ICR filed an Opposition to the Smith Objection on August 1, 2008. For the reasons set forth below, we dismiss the Smith Objection and grant the Application. Background/Discussion. On October 18, 2007, ICR tendered its Application for a new NCE-FM station on Channel 210 at Odessa, New York. On June 30, 2008, an individual
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-10-1037A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-10-1037A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-10-1037A1.txt
  • (the ``Rules''). Hensley attempted to correct these defects in his December Objection, but that pleading was not filed within the 30-day period for filing petitions to deny established by the Public Notice announcing the acceptance of the Application. Accordingly, we will dismiss Hensley's pleadings as petitions to deny. We will, however, treat the pleadings as informal objections pursuant to Section 73.3587 of the Rules. Substantive Issues. Pursuant to Section 309(e) of the Act, informal objections must provide properly supported allegations of fact that, if true, would establish a substantial and material question of fact that grant of the application would be prima facie inconsistent with the public interest, convenience, and necessity. Given the speculative nature of Hensley's unsupported allegations, we find
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-10-2004A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-10-2004A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-10-2004A1.txt
  • 2009. The Fourth Matthews Objection, also styled as a ``NEPA petition,'' was filed February 3, 2010. Matthews sent an affidavit (``Matthews Affidavit''), a DVD and a doctor's report on May 13, 2010, as addenda to the Fourth Matthews Objection. Because petitions to deny do not lie against minor modification applications, Matthews' pleadings will be considered as informal objections under � 73.3587 of the Rules. See 47 U.S.C. � 309(c) and 47 C.F.R. �� 73.3584, 73.3587; see also Change of Community, Report and Order, 21 FCC Rcd 14212, 14220 (2006); CMP-Houston KC, LLC, Memorandum Opinion and Order, 23 FCC Rcd 10656, 10660 n.31 (2008), citing Cloud Nine Broadcasting, Inc., Letter, 10 FCC Rcd 11555, 11556 (1995). Filed on Mar. 10, 2009. The
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-10-2064A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-10-2064A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-10-2064A1.txt
  • 1.16 of the Rules (47 C.F.R. � 1.16). While Section 73.3584(b) of the Rules requires allegations of fact or denials thereof in oppositions to petitions to deny to be supported by affidavit of a person or persons with personal knowledge thereof, there is no such legal or regulatory requirement for responses to informal objections (See 47 C.F.R. �� 73.3584(b) and 73.3587 (discussing informal objections)). Consolidated Opposition at 4. See Joint Opposition at Exhibit 2 (Declaration of David Vacharesse, President of Starboard). See Georgia Public Telecommunication Commission, 7 FCC Rcd 7996, 7998 (1992) (``Georgia Public'') citing Astroline Communications Co. v. FCC, 857 F.2d 1556, 1564 (D.C. Cir. 1998); KOWL, Inc., South Lake Tahoe, Calif., Memorandum Opinion and Order, 49 FCC 2d 962
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-10-442A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-10-442A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-10-442A1.txt
  • (2) traceable to the respondent's conduct and (3) redressable by the relief requested. Procedural Issue. Standing. Metro Radio argues that the Petition should be dismissed on procedural grounds because Group A has not demonstrated why it did not participate earlier in the proceeding. We disagree. Although Group A did not file an informal objection to the Application pursuant to Section 73.3587 of the Rules, on February 22, 2006, Group A filed an interference complaint with the staff. The issues raised in the interference complaint and, now, on reconsideration, substantially overlap. That complaint remained pending until the issuance of the Staff Decision. We find that Group A has adequately participated in this proceeding prior to the grant of the Application, and it
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-10-628A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-10-628A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-10-628A1.txt
  • assertions about membership in the ``broadcast community'' and investment and engineering interests in unspecified broadcast facilities are insufficient to confer standing. We find that Lewis lacks standing to file a petition to deny the Assignment Application. Accordingly, we will dismiss Lewis' Objection as a petition to deny. We will, however, treat the Objection as an informal objection pursuant to Section 73.3587 of the Rules. Other Procedural Defects. Applicants allege that Lewis' pleading contains additional procedural defects. We agree. While Lewis asserts that ``[a]ll Commission copies were signed,'' the pleading received by the Commission is not signed as required by Section 1.52 of the Rules. Moreover, Lewis fails to provide an affidavit to support the allegations made in the Petition, as required
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-10-764A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-10-764A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-10-764A1.txt
  • local radio ownership rules. In addition, ROI argues that the Commission should refrain from action on any Saga applications until a false certification claim made against Saga in another proceeding is resolved. In its Opposition, Saga argues that ROI's Objection is untimely, without merit, and must be dismissed. In Reply, ROI argues that the Objection is timely, pursuant to Sections 73.3587, 1.102(b)(1) and 1.4 of the Commission's Rules (the ``Rules''). Discussion. Procedural Issue. As noted above, the Application was granted by the staff one day after it was filed and on the same day that the Objection was filed. Thus, the staff was unaware of ROI's Objection when it granted the Application. Because the staff did not consider the arguments made
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-11-1113A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-11-1113A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-11-1113A1.txt
  • granted by the staff only two days after it was filed. Consequently, BSR argues that pursuant to Section 1.106(b)(2) of the Rules, it has made an adequate showing as to why it was not able to participate in the earlier stages of the proceeding and, thus, its Informal Objection should be considered as a Petition for Reconsideration. We agree. Section 73.3587 of the Rules requires that an informal objection to a broadcast application be filed prior to action on the application and, thus, the Informal Objection ordinarily would be subject to dismissal without consideration. The Commission, however, has historically accorded standing to petitioners for reconsideration who failed to file pre-grant objections when prompt staff action ``effectively precludes participation during the initial
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-11-1226A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-11-1226A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-11-1226A1.txt
  • not located in the same market as the Station, and Georgia Eagle has not demonstrated that it competes with the Station for listeners or advertisers. Moreover, Georgia Eagle proffers no other basis to establish its standing to file a petition to deny the Assignment Application. Therefore, the Georgia Eagle 2010 Petition will be considered an informal objection, pursuant to Section 73.3587 of the Rules. Reversionary Interest. Petitioners argue that approval of the 2010 Assignment Application would give effect to an unlawful ``reversionary interest.'' Specifically, they argue that the 2010 Trust Agreement contains a clause stating, ``. . . consistent with FCC rules and policies, the Trustee shall . . . assign and otherwise convey the Station . . . to Citadel.''
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-11-1227A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-11-1227A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-11-1227A1.txt
  • Street, Lafayette, Louisiana 70501, and to Miracle Radio, Inc., 3801 North Pace Blvd., Pensacola, Florida 32505, and to its counsel, David Tillotson, Esq., 4606 Charleston Terrace, Washington, DC 20007. FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION Peter H. Doyle Chief, Audio Division Media Bureau This pleading is captioned as a ``Motion to Dismiss,'' but we shall consider it an Informal Objection pursuant to Section 73.3587 of the Commission's Rules (the ``Rules''). Letter to Miracle Radio, Inc., Ref. 1800B3 (MB rel. Jan. 21, 2011) (``Staff Decision''). File No. BLSTA-20110426AAX (the ``Silent STA Request''). File No. BSTA-20110616AAQ (the ``Technical STA Request''). 47 U.S.C. �� 309(k), 503(b); 47 C.F.R. � 1.80. See 47 C.F.R. � 0.283. See 47 C.F.R. � 73.3539. See 47 U.S.C. � 301. 47 C.F.R.
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-11-1520A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-11-1520A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-11-1520A1.txt
  • has not shown any such misconduct by CE. See, e.g. FCC v. WOKO, Inc., 329 U.S. 223 (1946); Contemporary Media v. FCC, 214 F.3d 187 (D.C. Cir. 2000); San Francisco Unified School District, 19 FCC Rcd 13326 (2004); Fox Television Stations, Inc., 10 FCC Rcd 8452 (1995); Fox River Broadcasting, Inc., 93 FCC 2d 127 (1983). See 47 C.F.R. � 73.3587. See, e.g., Order, 24 FCC Rcd at 14537 (prematurely-filed ``Petition to Dismiss'' in another group not considered but would be held in abeyance for later consideration as an informal objection in the event that the filing party did not submit a petition to deny). Petition at 4. In this manner, the Bureau maintains the efficiency as well as integrity of
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-11-1948A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-11-1948A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-11-1948A1.txt
  • defective and should have been dismissed. The Commission addressed these pleadings in the 37 Groups Comparative Order. First, the Commission found that while HSARG could have raised its objections to the MBMC Application in its own Petition to Deny rather than in its Opposition to MBMC's Petition to Deny, the Opposition met the requirements of an informal objection under Section 73.3587 of the Rules. Accordingly, the Commission declined to dismiss the Opposition and instead treated the portion that addressed the MBMC Application as an informal objection. Second, the Commission agreed with HSARG that MBMC's documentation to support its diversity claim was insufficient and that it thus erred in awarding points to MBMC for that criterion. Third, the Commission recognized that the
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-11-695A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-11-695A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-11-695A1.txt
  • December 20, 2010. Janet Greenberg's objection is styled as a ``Request for Rejection of Assignment of Broadcast License.'' The objection fails to meet the requirements of a petition to deny because it was late-filed and failed to provide sworn statements supporting factual allegations. See 47 U.S.C. � 309(d). We will treat it, however, as an informal objection pursuant to Section 73.3587 of the Commission's rules. See 47 C.F.R. � 73.3587. Station listeners Karen Bush and William McGuinness, IV also filed Informal Objections pursuant to Section 73.3587 of the Commission's rules. Their objections were in the form of letters to Senator Kay Bailey Hutchison, who then forwarded the letters to the Commission. The letters were then served on the parties and placed
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-11-91A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-11-91A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-11-91A1.txt
  • it asserts in its petition with an ``affidavit of a person or persons with personal knowledge thereof.'' 47 U.S.C. � 309(d)(1). Although Like It Is claims that it submitted a declaration by its chairperson attesting to the facts, the petition does not contain such a declaration. Therefore, Like It Is' petition will be treated as an Informal Objection. 47 C.F.R �73.3587. Thus, we need not address the issue of service. Petition at 2. Id. at 5. Id. at 6. Id. at 8. Infra � 4. Opposition at 2-3 (citing License Renewal Applications of Certain Commercial Television Stations Serving Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, Memorandum Opinion & Order, 5 FCC Rcd 3847, 3847 (1990), recon. denied.); Id. at 3-4 (citing In re Dena Pictures, Inc.
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-12-167A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-12-167A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-12-167A1.txt
  • Washington, DC 20036-7322; and to Ms. Martha Vockrodt-Moran, D.T. Fleming Arboretum, P.O. Box 101, Makawao, Maui, HI 96768. FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION William T. Lake, Chief Media Bureau File Nos. BLH-20090410ARC (``KAOI-FM covering license application'') and BLH-20100119AAO (``KNUQ(FM) covering license application''). Although the pleading is styled as an ``Opposition,'' we will treat it as an informal objection. See 47 C.F.R � 73.3587. On March 9, 2006, Visionary filed a response. 47 C.F.R. � 1.1310. See, e.g., OET Bulletin 65. Complaint of D.T. Fleming Arboretum and Martha Vockrodt-Moran at 1 (``Complaint''). Complaint at 1. Id. at 1-2. See Notice of Violation, File No. EB-03-HL-090 (``KAOI NOV''), citing 47 C.F.R � 73.1690 (providing that licensee may not change the height of an antenna more
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-12-565A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-12-565A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-12-565A1.txt
  • a Petition for Reconsideration filed on June 16, 2003, by Dale Charles et al. (``Charles Petition''), and a pleading labeled ``Petition to Deny Transfer of License'' submitted on April 28, 2003, by D.A. Lams, President of the Student Government Association of Philander Smith College (``Lams Objection''), which it characterized as untimely but treated as an informal objection under 47 C.F.R. �73.3587. MO&O, 23 FCC Rcd at 14300 n.14. These petitioners did not appeal the MO&O. On March 10, 2003, Nameloc also filed a ``Complaint Against ABC, Inc., Petition for Investigation Pursuant to Section 403 of the Communications Act and Request for Declaratory Ruling'' (the ``Complaint'') with the Enforcement Bureau. In the Complaint, Nameloc alleged that ABC prematurely assumed control of the
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-00-381A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-00-381A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-00-381A1.txt
  • an informal staff request. The Commission, in its discretion, can consider this information to the extent necessary to resolve the instant allegations. 47 C.F.R. Section 73.3514. Letter to Henry E. Crawford, Esq., reference 1800B3-BSH (M.M. Bur., June 10, 1998). Under WWOR-TV, 6 FCC Rcd 193, 197 n.10 (1990) the Commission, in evaluating an informal objection under 47 C.F. R. Section 73.3587, will review the objectors' pleadings ``to determine whether it has alleged properly supported facts that, if true, would establish a substantial and material question of fact that a grant of the application would be inconsistent with the public interest.'' See, e.g., Informal Objection, Exhibit 1 (July 25, 1997 Declaration of Cheryl L. Wood, General Partner, Nationwide), and January 27, 2000
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-00-391A1.doc
  • the nature of a property right as a result of the granting of a license.") 47 CFR �1.102 See Fed.R.Civ.Pro. 62. See e.g. SEC v. Unifund Sal, 910 F.2d 1028, 1036, 1039 (2d Cir. 1990); United States v. Siemens Corp., 621 F.2d 499 , 505-06 (2d. Cir. 1980) This conclusion is bolstered by our rule on ``informal objections'', 47 C.F.R. �73.3587, which plainly authorizes non-party submissions to ensure the widest possible opportunity to gather facts to protect the public interest. Those filing ``informal objections'' function similarly to "private attorneys general" under other federal statutory regimes. The role of "private attorneys general" is not uncommon in modern legislative programs and is generally designed to support the protection of the public interest. Trafficante
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-02-159A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-02-159A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-02-159A1.txt
  • since it is a competitor of Clear Channel in the Monterey-Salinas market. FCC v. Sanders Brothers Radio Station, 309 U.S. 470 (1940). Elznic styled his pleading as ``Informal Comments to Deny.'' The pleading was not supported by an affidavit from someone with personal knowledge of the facts alleged and, therefore, will be considered as an informal objection pursuant to Section 73.3587 of the Commission's rules. 47 C.F.R. �73.3587. On November 14, 2001, the Commission received a one-page comment from Brown and Cole Stores requesting that the Commission condition grant of the KVOS-TV application on retaining NewsView, a locally oriented news program. On November 21, 2001 the Commission received comments from the Northwest Air Pollution Authority and Michael Frome, Ph.D., and on
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-02-303A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-02-303A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-02-303A1.txt
  • stations shall make records available to the Commission for its review. (5) The public may file complaints throughout the license term based on a station's Form 397 or the contents of a station's public file. Provisions concerning filing, withdrawing, or non-filing of informal objections or petitions to deny license renewal, assignment, or transfer applications are delineated in �� 73.3584 and 73.3587-3589 of the Commission's Rules. (g) Sanctions and Remedies. The Commission may issue appropriate sanctions and remedies for any violation of this Rule. ***** II. Part 76 of Chapter 1 of the Code of Federal Regulations is amended as follows: Subpart E -- Equal Employment Opportunity Requirements Section 76.75 is revised by amending paragraphs (b), (f); deleting existing paragraphs (g), (h),
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-02-62A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-02-62A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-02-62A1.txt
  • II at 11. Davis's Reply in the Solar Application proceeding at 59. Davis's Reply in the Solar Application proceeding at 58. Id. (citations and footnotes omitted). Davis Petition to Deny I at 8-12 and Davis Petition to Deny II at 3-10. Davis Petition to Deny II at 14-15. We treat Rainbow/PUSH's letter as an informal objection pursuant to 47 C.F.R. �73.3587. It was filed after the deadline for petitions to deny. See 47 C.F.R. �73.3584(a). Cumulus May 12, 1999 Opposition to Petition to Deny and Informal Objection at 3-9. See, e.g., Cumulus May 12, 1999 Opposition to Petition to Deny and Informal Objection at 9-34; Cumulus October 10, 2000 Opposition to Petition to Deny Assignment Applications, to Terminate Local Marketing Agreement,
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-03-218A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-03-218A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-03-218A1.txt
  • demonstrate standing. Office of Communications for the United Church of Christ v. FCC, 359 F.2d 994 (D.C. Cir. 1966); Chet-5 Broadcasting, L.P., 14 FCC Rcd 13041 (1999). Elgin's letter, though styled as a ``Petition to Deny,'' does not meet the pleading requirements of Section 309(d)(1) of the Communications Act and, therefore, will be considered an informal objection pursuant to Section 73.3587 of the Commission's rules. 47 U.S.C. � 309(d)(1); 47 C.F.R. � 73.3587. Spanish Broadcasting System, Inc. (SBS) has made numerous oral presentations to Commission staff and, in connection with the presentation, has filed numerous written exhibits that have been made part of the record. We have considered all written and oral ex parte presentations in reaching this decision. -Scott-Rodino Antitrust
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-03-239A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-03-239A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-03-239A1.txt
  • Cf., Policy Statement, Industry Guidance on the Commission's Case Law Interpreting 18 U.S.C. � 1464 and Enforcement Policies Regarding Broadcasting Indecency, 16 FCC Rcd 7999, 8004 (2001) (summary of indecency cases includes one Stern Show broadcast by a Philadelphia station). Shareholders of CBS Corporation, 15 FCC Rcd 8230, 8242 (2000), recon. denied, 16 FCC Rcd 16072. See 47 C.F.R. � 73.3587. See 47 U.S.C �� 309(d)(2) and (k). Pursuant to Section 309(k), the Commission shall grant an application for license renewal if, during the preceding license term, the station has served the public interest, the licensee has not had serious rule violations at that station, and there has been no pattern of abuse at that station. Cf. Letter to CBS Radio,
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-04-114A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-04-114A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-04-114A1.txt
  • the required affidavit. GGPR submitted in its February 18, 1998, reply pleading two affidavits from GGPR principals indicating that they each reside within the KALW(FM) listening area and are each members of the KALW(FM) listening audience. This attempt to cure the procedural defect in the Petition is untimely. We therefore will treat GGPR's Petition as an informal objection under Section 73.3587. 5. Service and Verification of pleading. A petitioner must serve a copy of its petition to deny on the applicant. GGPR did not serve SFUSD with a complete copy of the petition until December 11, 1997, more than one month after filing the petition with the Commission. We find that GGPR has not offered any compelling reason to justify this
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-04-155A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-04-155A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-04-155A1.txt
  • treated as a petition for reconsideration of the October 22, 1998, grant of that application. The substantive issue raised in that objection - that the 1998 Modification Application should not be granted because K211DK's proposed operation ``would be likely to interfere with the off-air reception of KCRW(FM)'' - is repeated in its December 3, 2001, Application for Review. 6. Section 73.3587 of the Commission's rules requires that an informal objection to a broadcast application be filed prior to action on the application. Additionally, under Section 1.106 of the Commission's rules, petitions for reconsideration from parties that did not participate prior to grant must contain a justification for the party's failure to do so. While the Commission has accorded standing to petitioners
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-04-94A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-04-94A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-04-94A1.txt
  • his office at 226 Montello Street, Brockton, Massachusetts. Thus, he claimed, matters addressed to DRI at the Hyannis address would not likely have been dealt with in a timely manner. Along with the instant license renewal application, DRI filed a Change of Address form noting that its official address should be changed to the Brockton address. See 47 C.F.R. � 73.3587 (informal objection may be filed ``before FCC action on any application for an instrument of authorization'') (emphasis supplied). See, e.g., Atlantic Morris Broadcasting, Inc., 11 FCC Rcd 4723 n. 3 (``Motion to Add Misrepresentation Issue'' treated as a ``Reply'' pursuant to Section 1.45). See also In the Matter of Policies and Rules Concerning Operator Service Access and Pay Telephone Compensation,
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-05-107A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-05-107A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-05-107A1.txt
  • application on September 27, 2001. Bureau staff denied the Lawyers Guild informal objection on December 22, 2004. Radio Training Network, Inc. (``RTN''), filed a petition to deny Iglesia's application on April 13, 2004. However, petitions to deny the captioned Gibsonton applications were due April 12, 2004. We will, therefore, treat the RTN filing as an informal objection pursuant to Section 73.3587. No parties filed petitions to deny or informal objections in response to the other captioned applications. For the reasons set forth herein, we deny the RTN objection. II. DISCUSSION 2. In its objection, RTN alleges that the grant of Iglesia's application would cause interference to FM translator station W244BE. LPFM applications must meet the minimum spacing requirements set forth in
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-05-108A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-05-108A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-05-108A1.txt
  • filed an informal objection against CCG's application on September 27, 2001. Additionally, Florida Minority Educational Media Association (``FMEMA'') filed a ``Petition to Deny'' against each of the other captioned applications on May 13, 2004. However, petitions to deny the captioned Gainesville applications were due April 12, 2004. We will, therefore, treat the FMEMA filings as informal objections pursuant to Section 73.3587. For the reasons set forth herein, we deny the Lawyers Guild informal objection and the FMEMA informal objections, and we grant the CCG, Civic Media, and Faith Presbyterian applications, pursuant to a time-share agreement as discussed below. II. DISCUSSION 2. Lawyers Guild Informal Objection. In its informal objection to CCG's application, Lawyers Guild alleges, among other things, that CCG does
• 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
  • argument is speculative and would depend, in part, on whether it attempted to file another transfer application were the instant ones denied. Furthermore, if Tribune's position were correct, it would effectively prevent any party from filing a petition to deny against a requested waiver of the ownership rules when non-compliant combinations are transferred to a new owner. 47 C.F.R. � 73.3587. Id. See, e.g., Exhibit 5 to Application for Transfer of Control of WPIX(TV), New York, New York. Exhibit 5 is identical in all of the transfer applications. Exhibit 6, which is also identical in all of the applications, contains the Agreement and Plan of Merger, the Securities Purchase Agreement, the ESOP Purchase Agreement and the documents setting up the ESOP
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-07-24A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-07-24A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-07-24A1.txt
  • (2002). Letter from Bruce A. Eisen to Marlene H. Dortch, Secretary, Federal Communications Commission (August 23, 2006) (``White Letter''). Letter from Scott Flick, Esq., to Marlene Dortch, Secretary, Federal Communications Commission (September 6, 2006). Rincon & Associates Petition to Deny, filed September 5, 2006. Rincon's petition is late-filed and, therefore, will be considered as an informal objection pursuant to section 73.3587 of the Commission's rules. 47 C.F.R. �73.3587. Rincon filed a ``corrected version'' of the petition on September 11, 2006. Rincon & Associates Corrected Petition to Deny, filed September 11, 2006, (original and corrected version collectively referred to herein as ``Rincon Informal Objection''). Univision Communications, Inc. Opposition to Petition to Deny, filed on September 20, 2006; Letter from Mace Rosenstein, Esq.,
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-07-41A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-07-41A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-07-41A1.txt
  • it was not received by the Commission until May 3, 2006. It is well established that petitions to deny are considered to be timely filed with the Commission only upon receipt, not when they are mailed or postmarked. Accordingly, the Binghamton Petition was not filed by the appropriate deadline. Nevertheless, we will consider it an informal objection pursuant to Section 73.3587 of the Rules. The Commission has long held that licensees of radio stations have an obligation to provide coverage of significant issues facing their communities. However, given the First Amendment rights of broadcasters and the non-censorship provisions of the Act, each licensee retains the discretion to make operational and programming decisions. The Commission will not take adverse action on a
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-08-139A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-08-139A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-08-139A1.txt
  • precluded from filing a petition to deny in the initial stage of this proceeding, as petitions to deny do not lie against minor modification applications. See 47 C.F.R. �� 73.3580(a)(1) and 73.3584(a). As indicated above (see supra note 7), Appellants submitted notification of their concerns about the Application, which is appropriately treated as an informal objection under 47 C.F.R. � 73.3587. Accordingly, we find that Appellants ``participated in our processes to the fullest extent permitted'' and have met the good cause standard of 47 C.F.R. � 1.106(b)(1). Cloud Nine, 10 FCC Rcd at 11556. See Wendell and Associates, Memorandum Opinion and Order, 14 FCC Rcd 1671, 1679 (1998) (``It is clear from the staff's order that it considered [the objector's] pleadings,
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-08-37A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-08-37A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-08-37A1.txt
  • an Informal Objection to the JBN application on May 7, 2004 (the ``WTL Objection''). JBN filed a ``Petition to Deny'' EPRS' application on February 7, 2005. However, petitions to deny the captioned Hendersonville applications were due no later than April 12, 2004. We will, therefore, treat the untimely JBN filing as an informal objection (the ``JBN Objection'') pursuant to Section 73.3587 of the Commission's Rules (the ``Rules''). For the following reasons, we grant the WTL Objection to the extent indicated, deny the JBN Objection, and grant both the JBN and EPRS applications. II. DISCUSSION 2. WTL Informal Objection. WTL argues in its Objection that: (1) JBN failed to demonstrate that it was a nonprofit legal entity, as it failed to provide
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-08-38A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-08-38A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-08-38A1.txt
  • Lake City Petition and WTL Objection to the extent indicated; (2) deny the Hayden Petition; (3) dismiss the Hayden application; and (4) grant the Lake City application. II. DISCUSSION 2. Lake City timely filed its Petition on February 26, 2004. Because WTL submitted its Objection after the petition period, its pleading will be considered as an informal objection under Section 73.3587 of the Rules. We have evaluated the merits of Lake City's Petition and Hayden's Opposition and conclude that Hayden is not entitled to the comparative point that it claimed for ``established community presence.'' Accordingly, we will disallow that point and reevaluate the applications on a comparative basis. 4. Section III, Item 1 of the LPFM construction permit application form, FCC
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-08-3A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-08-3A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-08-3A1.txt
  • a Lexington, Kentucky address in the Young Petition, and claiming, in an unsworn, handwritten note on the petition, that he is a listener of the station, there is nothing in the record to establish that Young has the requisite standing to file a petition to deny. Accordingly, we will treat the Young Petition as an informal objection pursuant to Section 73.3587 of the Rules. b. Substantive Arguments Background. Young takes exception to CCC's proposal to change from being a publicly-held corporation to a privately-held company under the control of several private equity firms. Young states that ``this level of secrecy is not in the public interest.'' While noting that the proposed reduction in stations to be operated by NewCCC compared to
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-08-40A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-08-40A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-08-40A1.txt
  • 2004; EPC filed Petitions to Deny UUF's, and MKWS's applications on March 1, 2004; EPC filed an informal objection on March 3, 2004, to the now-dismissed Vineyard application, which we dismiss, as moot. Because the deadline for petitions to deny was February 27, 2004, we will treat EPC's remaining petitions to deny as informal objections pursuant to 47 C.F.R. � 73.3587. Because EPC's objections did not indicate service upon the applicants, on May 18, 2005, the Bureau provided each applicant with a copy of each respective objection and gave it 20 days in which to respond. MKWS, the only applicant to respond, submitted an e-mail response on May 21, 2005, inquiring about unrelated transferability matters. On June 6, 2005, EPC filed
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-08-41A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-08-41A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-08-41A1.txt
  • Anchorage, Alaska. The ACL and OND applications were accepted for filing and each applicant was tentatively awarded three points under the selection procedure set forth in Section 73.872 of the Commission's Rules (the ``Rules''). OND timely filed its Petition; because WTL submitted its Objection after the petition period, its untimely pleading will be considered as an informal objection under Section 73.3587 of the Rules. 3. OND Petition to Deny. We have evaluated the merits of OND's Petition and ACL's Opposition, and conclude that ACL is not entitled to the point that it claimed for ``established community presence.'' Accordingly, for the reasons discussed herein, we disallow that point and reevaluate the applications on a comparative basis. 4. Section III, Item 1 of
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-11-67A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-11-67A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-11-67A1.txt
  • any information to support its claim that it qualifies as a statewide network. 52 Groups Comparative Order, supra note 24, 25 FCC Rcd at 8812-13. Id. at 8813. Id. Id. at 8813, 8841. MBMC Petition at 3-4. Id. at 2, 6. Id. at 7. Opposition at 3-4. Opposition at 4-8. Reply at 3-4. Reply at 2-3. See 47 C.F.R. � 73.3587. We deny MBMC's request that we strike these portions of the HSARG Objection because they are not responsive to matters set forth in the MBMC Petition. Reply at 3, citing Aljir Broadcasting Co., Inc., Memorandum Opinion and Order, 12 FCC 2d 163 (Rev. Bd. 1968) (``Aljir''). We note that Aljir enunciated the principle laid out in Section 1.45(c) of the
• http://transition.fcc.gov/Bureaus/Mass_Media/Notices/1998/fcc98057.pdf http://transition.fcc.gov/Bureaus/Mass_Media/Notices/1998/fcc98057.wp
  • of this area, see Stephen F. Sewell, Assignments and Transfers of Control of FCC Authorizations Under Section 310(d) of the Communications Act of 1934, 43 Fed. Comm. L. J. 277 (1991). 95 47 U.S.C. � 310(d). 96 47 U.S.C. � 309(b), (c)(2)(B), (d). In the case of short form applications, however, the Commission entertains informal objections, under 47 C.F.R. � 73.3587, which may be filed any time up until Commission action on the application. 97 47 C.F.R. � 73.3540(f). The standard for determining when a "long form" as opposed to a "short form" is required and vice versa is set out in Clay Broadcasters, 21 RR 2d 442 (1971); Barnes Enterprises, 55 FCC 2d 721, 725 n.4 (1975); Grace Missionary Baptist
• http://transition.fcc.gov/Bureaus/Mass_Media/Notices/1998/fcc98117.pdf http://transition.fcc.gov/Bureaus/Mass_Media/Notices/1998/fcc98117.wp
  • Sections 73.3571, 73.3572 and 73.3573 of the Commission's Rules, First Report and Order in MM Docket 83-1377, 56 RR 2d 941, 943 (1984). 81 Id. at � 74.1233. 82 See 47 U.S.C. � 309(b); 47 C.F.R. �� 73.3573(e), 73.3580. 83 See First Report and Order, 56 RR 2d at 943. 84 47 U.S.C. � 405; 47 C.F.R. �� 1.106, 73.3564, 73.3587; see First Report and Order, 56 Rad. Reg. 2d at 943- 44 (employing similar analysis in classifying commercial FM band station facilities increases as minor changes). 85 See, e.g., Report and Order, 8 FCC Rcd at 4738 (acknowledging that adopting cut-off protection for minor change applications could foreclose prospective petitioners' opportunities to request modifications); Amendment of Part 74 of the
• http://transition.fcc.gov/Bureaus/Mass_Media/Orders/2000/fcc00020.doc http://transition.fcc.gov/Bureaus/Mass_Media/Orders/2000/fcc00020.pdf http://transition.fcc.gov/Bureaus/Mass_Media/Orders/2000/fcc00020.txt
  • shall make records available to the Commission for its review. (5) The public may file complaints throughout the license term based on a station's Statement of Compliance or the contents of a station's public file. Provisions concerning filing, withdrawing, or non-filing of informal objections or petitions to deny license renewal, assignment, or transfer applications are delineated in �� 73.3584 and 73.3587-3589 of the Commission's Rules. (j) Sanctions and Remedies. The Commission may issue appropriate sanctions and remedies for any violation of this Rule. Section 73.3526 is revised by amending paragraph (e)(7) to read as follows: � 73.3526 Local public inspection file of commercial stations. * * * * * (e) * * * (7) Equal Employment Opportunity file. Such information as
• http://transition.fcc.gov/fcc-bin/audio/FCC-99-55A1.doc http://transition.fcc.gov/fcc-bin/audio/FCC-99-55A1.pdf
  • over their communities of license. See 47 C.F.R. �� 73.24(i), 73.315(a). As discussed in the Notice, the Commission provides public notice of the tendering of minor change applications and the public has the opportunity to file informal objections and seek reconsideration of staff actions. See Notice, 13 FCC Rcd at 14871; 47 U.S.C. � 405; 47 C.F.R. �� 1.106, 73.3564, 73.3587. See Notice, 13 FCC Rcd at 14875-76. See supra, n. 13 and accompanying text. As mentioned earlier, FM translators, as a secondary service, are exempted from local service obligations and, therefore, may request community of license changes as minor changes. 47 C.F.R. � 74.1233; see Amendment of Part 74 of the Commission's Rules Concerning FM Translator Stations, Report and Order
• http://transition.fcc.gov/fcc-bin/audio/amfmrule.html
  • 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 for renewal, assignment or transfer of control. [672]TEXT [673]PDF 73.3580 Local public notice of filing of broadcast applications. [674]TEXT [675]PDF 73.3584 Procedure for filing petitions to deny. [676]TEXT [677]PDF 73.3587 Procedure for filing informal objections. [678]TEXT [679]PDF 73.3588 Dismissal of petitions to deny or withdrawal of informal objections. [680]TEXT [681]PDF 73.3589 Threats to file petitions to deny or informal objections. [682]TEXT [683]PDF 73.3591 Grants without hearing. [684]TEXT [685]PDF 73.3592 Conditional grant. [686]TEXT [687]PDF 73.3593 Designation for hearing. [688]TEXT [689]PDF 73.3594 Local public notice of designation for hearing. [690]TEXT [691]PDF 73.3597
• http://www.fcc.gov/Bureaus/Mass_Media/Notices/1998/fcc98057.pdf http://www.fcc.gov/Bureaus/Mass_Media/Notices/1998/fcc98057.wp
  • of this area, see Stephen F. Sewell, Assignments and Transfers of Control of FCC Authorizations Under Section 310(d) of the Communications Act of 1934, 43 Fed. Comm. L. J. 277 (1991). 95 47 U.S.C. � 310(d). 96 47 U.S.C. � 309(b), (c)(2)(B), (d). In the case of short form applications, however, the Commission entertains informal objections, under 47 C.F.R. � 73.3587, which may be filed any time up until Commission action on the application. 97 47 C.F.R. � 73.3540(f). The standard for determining when a "long form" as opposed to a "short form" is required and vice versa is set out in Clay Broadcasters, 21 RR 2d 442 (1971); Barnes Enterprises, 55 FCC 2d 721, 725 n.4 (1975); Grace Missionary Baptist
• 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
  • Sections 73.3571, 73.3572 and 73.3573 of the Commission's Rules, First Report and Order in MM Docket 83-1377, 56 RR 2d 941, 943 (1984). 81 Id. at � 74.1233. 82 See 47 U.S.C. � 309(b); 47 C.F.R. �� 73.3573(e), 73.3580. 83 See First Report and Order, 56 RR 2d at 943. 84 47 U.S.C. � 405; 47 C.F.R. �� 1.106, 73.3564, 73.3587; see First Report and Order, 56 Rad. Reg. 2d at 943- 44 (employing similar analysis in classifying commercial FM band station facilities increases as minor changes). 85 See, e.g., Report and Order, 8 FCC Rcd at 4738 (acknowledging that adopting cut-off protection for minor change applications could foreclose prospective petitioners' opportunities to request modifications); Amendment of Part 74 of the
• 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
  • their communities of license. See 47 C.F.R. �� 73.24(i), 73.315(a). 21 As discussed in the Notice, the Commission provides public notice of the tendering of minor change applications and the public has the opportunity to file informal objections and seek reconsideration of staff actions. See Notice, 13 FCC Rcd at 14871; 47 U.S.C. � 405; 47 C.F.R. �� 1.106, 73.3564, 73.3587. 6 of mutually exclusive or competing applications,18 and that these modifications will limit the opportunities for such filings. Nevertheless, we believe that the public interest weighs in favor of the measures we are adopting. The current policy of not providing cut-off protection to minor change applications in the AM, NCE FM and FM translator services exposes applicants to significant uncertainty,
• http://www.fcc.gov/Bureaus/Mass_Media/Orders/2000/fc00019a.doc
  • 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 U.S.C. 1464-restrictions on the transmission of obscene and indecent material. 8. A New Section
• http://www.fcc.gov/Bureaus/Mass_Media/Orders/2000/fcc00020.doc http://www.fcc.gov/Bureaus/Mass_Media/Orders/2000/fcc00020.pdf http://www.fcc.gov/Bureaus/Mass_Media/Orders/2000/fcc00020.txt
  • shall make records available to the Commission for its review. (5) The public may file complaints throughout the license term based on a station's Statement of Compliance or the contents of a station's public file. Provisions concerning filing, withdrawing, or non-filing of informal objections or petitions to deny license renewal, assignment, or transfer applications are delineated in �� 73.3584 and 73.3587-3589 of the Commission's Rules. (j) Sanctions and Remedies. The Commission may issue appropriate sanctions and remedies for any violation of this Rule. Section 73.3526 is revised by amending paragraph (e)(7) to read as follows: � 73.3526 Local public inspection file of commercial stations. * * * * * (e) * * * (7) Equal Employment Opportunity file. Such information as
• http://www.fcc.gov/Bureaus/Mass_Media/Orders/2000/fcc00373.doc
  • that petitions to deny be supported by affidavits or declarations under penalty of perjury from persons with personal knowledge of the facts set forth in the petition. See Columbia Broadcasting System, Inc., 46 FCC 2d 903 (1994). Antonoff failed to provide an affidavit or declaration; nonetheless, we will treat Antonoff's pleading as an informal objection pursuant to 47 C.F.R. � 73.3587. In this pleading, Antonoff asserts that the unauthorized operation of WNWK demonstrates that Multicultural does not have the character qualifications to be a Commission licensee. Antonoff claims that Multicultural misrepresented its operation of WNWK to the Commission; therefore, the renewal of license application for the Chanin facility should be denied, or designated for evidentiary hearing. In its response, Multicultural states
• http://www.fcc.gov/DiversityFAC/041210/career_advancement.pdf
  • shall make records available to the Commission for its review. (5) The public may file complaints throughout the license term based on a station's Form 397 or the contents of a station's public file. Provisions concerning filing, withdrawing, or non-filing of informal objections or petitions to deny license renewal, assignment, or transfer applications are delineated in � � 73.3584 and 73.3587-3589 of the Commission's rules. (g) Sanctions and Remedies. The Commission may issue appropriate sanctions and remedies for any violation of this rule.
• http://www.fcc.gov/DiversityFAC/adopted-recommendations/EEOrule.doc
  • shall make records available to the Commission for its review. (5) The public may file complaints throughout the license term based on a station's Form 397 or the contents of a station's public file. Provisions concerning filing, withdrawing, or non-filing of informal objections or petitions to deny license renewal, assignment, or transfer applications are delineated in � � 73.3584 and 73.3587-3589 of the Commission's rules. (g) Sanctions and Remedies. The Commission may issue appropriate sanctions and remedies for any violation of this rule. 47 CFR 73.2080 (c) � � " ^a�,< � �
• http://www.fcc.gov/fcc-bin/audio/DA-05-1948A1.doc http://www.fcc.gov/fcc-bin/audio/DA-05-1948A1.pdf
  • Cave Country Christian Radio, Inc. The other applications in this mutually exclusive group (Group No. 84) Oregonians for Responsible Conservation Alliance (File No. BNPL-20010615ARE) and Cave County Christian Radio, Inc. (File No. BNPL-20010615AUA) were dismissed by Bureau staff on January 18, 2005, and March 22, 2005, respectively. We will treat ORCA's filing as an informal objection under 47 C.F.R. � 73.3587. 47 C.F.R. Section � 73.854. TCA filed an opposition to ORCA's objection on September 19, 2001. On September 28, 2001, ORCA filed a ``Response [to] (Opposition) to Petition to Deny'' which we will treat as a ``reply,'' to TCA's opposition. See TCA Opposition at 3-4. Letter to Jonathan Klein, Ph.D., Reference 1800B3-SS (MB Feb. 25, 2005). In keeping with clear
• http://www.fcc.gov/fcc-bin/audio/DA-06-1427A1.doc http://www.fcc.gov/fcc-bin/audio/DA-06-1427A1.pdf
  • and a frequent listener of the station, we find that Cusak has not established the requisite standing because he has not ``demonstrated'' that he lives within WVXG(FM)'s signal coverage area and acknowledges that he lives in Westerville, not in the station's community of license, Mt. Gilead, Ohio. We will, therefore, treat Cusak's pleading as an informal objection pursuant to Section 73.3587 of the Commission's rules. Substantive Matters. In evaluating an application for license renewal, the Commission's decision is governed by Section 309(k) of the Act. That section provides that if, upon consideration of the application and pleadings, we find: (1) the station has served the public interest, convenience, and necessity; (2) there have been no serious violations of the Communications Act
• http://www.fcc.gov/fcc-bin/audio/DA-06-1429A1.doc http://www.fcc.gov/fcc-bin/audio/DA-06-1429A1.pdf
  • at Charlotte, North Carolina. Also on file is the April 9, 2004, Petition to Deny the application (``Petition'') filed by Susquehanna Radio Corp. (``Susquehanna'') former licensee of first-adjacent channel FM station WABZ-FM, Channel 265A (100.9 MHz), Albemarle, North Carolina. The Petition is untimely, which Susquehanna acknowledges, and therefore we will treat it as an informal objection (``Objection'') pursuant to Section 73.3587 of the Commission's rules. For the reasons set forth below, we grant the Objection in part and grant Central's application with the condition that the maximum effective radiated power (``ERP'') for the facility shall not exceed 0.045 kW and the minimum ERP shall not be less than 0.043 kW. Background. On July 2, 1999, the Commission issued a Notice of
• http://www.fcc.gov/fcc-bin/audio/DA-06-1477A1.doc http://www.fcc.gov/fcc-bin/audio/DA-06-1477A1.pdf
  • reflect the transaction was consummated on March 24, 1995. WKGH-FM is now known as WZUU(FM). Spectrum Communications, Inc. sold WZUU(FM) to Forum Communications, Inc. pursuant to Application No. BALH-19970311WV, granted July 3, 1997. This sale was consummated on August 12, 1997. Olejniczak submitted his letter as an Informal Objection and it will be treated as such under 47 C.F.R. � 73.3587. See Attachment to Olejniczak's October 14, 2004, Rebuttal to Synergy's Opposition. See John F. Runner, Receiver (KBIF), 36 Rad. Red. 2d (P&F) 773, 778 (1976); Listener's Guild, Inc. v. FCC, 813 F.2d 465, 469 (D.C. Cir. 1987); Decatur Telecasting, Inc., 7 FCC Rcd 8622, 8624 (1992). Notably, Olejniczak filed an informal objection against the sale of WKGH-FM in 1997. That
• http://www.fcc.gov/fcc-bin/audio/DA-06-1549A1.doc http://www.fcc.gov/fcc-bin/audio/DA-06-1549A1.pdf
  • 1934, as amended, (``Act''). Additionally, Alex failed to serve a copy of the pleading on the applicant or its counsel, as required by Section 309(d)(1) of the Act and Section 1.47 of the Commission's Rules. Accordingly, Alex's petition to deny is procedurally defective and must be dismissed. We will, however, treat the petition as an informal objection pursuant to Section 73.3587 of the Commission's Rules. Substantive Matters. In evaluating an application for license renewal, the Commission's decision is governed by Section 309(k) of the Act. That section provides that we are to grant the renewal application if, upon consideration of the application and pleadings, we find that (1) the station has served the public interest, convenience, and necessity; (2) there have
• http://www.fcc.gov/fcc-bin/audio/DA-06-1550A1.doc http://www.fcc.gov/fcc-bin/audio/DA-06-1550A1.pdf
  • to which BCI replied on July 19, 2005. CCBL filed a ``Motion for Leave to File a Surreply'' and ``Surreply'' on August 8, 2005. Because petitions to deny do not lie against covering license applications, see 47 U.S.C. � 309(c) and 47 C.F.R. �� 73.3580 and 73.3594(a), we will treat Blakeney's Petition as an informal objection under 47 C.F.R. � 73.3587. Further, because there is no formal pleading cycle established by the Commission's rules in the context of an informal objection, we are free to consider CCBL's ``Surreply'' and will do so here. 47 C.F.R. � 73.3598(a). 47 U.S.C. � 319(b). See 47 C.F.R. � 73.3598(a), revised in 1998 Biennial Regulatory Review - Streamlining of Mass Media Applications, Rules, and Processes,
• http://www.fcc.gov/fcc-bin/audio/DA-06-1923A1.doc http://www.fcc.gov/fcc-bin/audio/DA-06-1923A1.pdf
  • filed by the May 1, 2004, deadline ``for petitions or objections.'' The Licensee contends that pursuant to Section 73.3516(e) of the Rules, interested parties are afforded three full months, in this case between February 2 and May 1, 2004, to supply ``input on the stations' renewal applications.'' We disagree. Section 73.3516(e) pertains only to petitions to deny. Pursuant to Section 73.3587 of the Rules, any person may file an informal objection before the Commission has taken action on any application for an instrument of authorization. Therefore, we reject the Licensee's claim and will discuss the merits of WJZD's Objection to the captioned applications. Substantive Matters. In evaluating an application for license renewal, the Commission's decision is governed by Section 309(k) of
• http://www.fcc.gov/fcc-bin/audio/DA-06-2087A1.doc http://www.fcc.gov/fcc-bin/audio/DA-06-2087A1.pdf
  • allegations of fact, as required by Section 309(d)(1) of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended (``Communications Act''). Additionally, Williams failed to serve a copy of the pleading on the applicant or its counsel, as required by Section 309(d)(1). Accordingly, Williams' petition to deny must be dismissed. We will, however, treat the pleading as an informal objection pursuant to Section 73.3587 of the Commission's rules. Substantive Matters. In evaluating an application for license renewal, the Commission's decision is governed by Section 309(k) of the Communications Act. That section provides that we are to grant the renewal application if, upon consideration of the application and pleadings, we find that (1) the station has served the public interest, convenience, and necessity; (2) there
• http://www.fcc.gov/fcc-bin/audio/DA-06-2253A1.doc http://www.fcc.gov/fcc-bin/audio/DA-06-2253A1.pdf
  • Service in the Band 88-108 MHz, August 11, 1992 (``1992 FM Broadcast Agreement''). See U.S.-Can.-Mex., H.R. Treaty Doc. No. 159, 103rd Cong., 1st Sess. (1993) (``NAFTA''). XETV(TV) has been the Fox affiliate in the San Diego television market since 1986. Cox provides cable television service in San Diego County. See File No. BPED-20020219ABE. See 47 C.F.R. � 1.110. Id. � 73.3587. Assuming arguendo that SCDDC and XETV had agreed to undertake testing and reporting to permit the Commission to establish interference limits or standards for KSDS operations, we note that no data was submitted regarding the specific facility proposal now before us. The test plan did provide an opportunity for SDCCD to request KSDS testing at power levels exceeding 3 kW.
• http://www.fcc.gov/fcc-bin/audio/DA-06-320A1.doc http://www.fcc.gov/fcc-bin/audio/DA-06-320A1.pdf
  • not be filed with regard to applications that do not require local public notice to be filed pursuant to Section 73.3580 of the Commission's rules. Such local public notice is not required in the case of applications for minor change in the facilities of an authorized station. Accordingly, we will consider the pleading as an informal objection pursuant to Section 73.3587 of the Commission's rules. With respect to the substantive allegations contained in the Petition, we are satisfied that Warren has successfully rebutted the claims. He has presented an affidavit which clearly demonstrates that he possesses a reasonable assurance of site availability from the site owner. The affidavit states that the Affiant is the land owner, that he discussed with the
• http://www.fcc.gov/fcc-bin/audio/DA-06-500A1.doc http://www.fcc.gov/fcc-bin/audio/DA-06-500A1.pdf
  • that Boothe clearly established that he resides within the WYNI(AM) service area and that he has stated adequate and specific factual allegations to meet the statutory standard. However, Boothe has not submitted the requisite affidavit, and therefore his pleading is procedurally defective and cannot be considered a petition to deny. It will be considered as an informal objection under Section 73.3587 of the Commission's rules. Background. Boothe's informal objection raises two issues: the failure of McKissick to file a license renewal in a timely fashion pursuant to Section 73.3539 and the failure to maintain a public inspection file pursuant to Sections 73.3526. Boothe states that the licensee admits to repetitive and blatant mismanagement of the public trust with the admission of
• http://www.fcc.gov/fcc-bin/audio/DA-06-645A1.doc http://www.fcc.gov/fcc-bin/audio/DA-06-645A1.pdf
  • to Star were due by June 6, 2005, and petitions to deny the applications to assign WTKE(FM) and WPGG(FM) to Cumulus were due by June 13, 2005. The MAP letter, filed November 21, 2005, fails to meet the requirements of a petition to deny. We will, however, treat the letter as an informal objection (``Objection''), pursuant to 47 C.F.R. � 73.3587. See BALH-20021224ACX. See BALH-20030922AFA. Qantum Corp. is the parent company of Petitioner. See BALH-20031125ALX (granted May 26, 2005). Section 17.1(g) of the Star-Qantum Asset Purchase Agreement (``Agreement'') states, in relevant part, that the Agreement may be terminated ``by written notice of either party to the other if the closing shall not have been consummated on or before the date eighteen
• http://www.fcc.gov/fcc-bin/audio/DA-06-758A1.doc http://www.fcc.gov/fcc-bin/audio/DA-06-758A1.pdf
  • an ``Objection'' and not a ``Petition to Deny'' which would have required a showing that she is a party in interest. See 47 U.S.C. � 309(d)(1). Because Petitioner has styled her pleading as an ``Objection'' and because she has not made a showing that she has standing, we will treat her filing as an informal objection filed pursuant to Section 73.3587 of the Commission's rules. 47 C.F.R. � 73.3587. See, e.g., USA Broadcasting Inc., 19 FCC Rcd 4253 (2004); Sagittarius Broadcasting Corp., 18 FCC Rcd 22551 (2003). Cf. Letter to Kathleen N. Benfield from Linda B. Blair, Chief, Audio Services Division, 13 FCC Rcd 4102 (1997) citing License Renewal Applications of Certain Commercial Radio Stations, 8 FCC Rcd 6400 (1993). See
• http://www.fcc.gov/fcc-bin/audio/DA-07-109A1.doc http://www.fcc.gov/fcc-bin/audio/DA-07-109A1.pdf
  • the Station of the programming concerning immigration discussed in the Informal Objection. For the reasons below, we do not conclude that this matter should bar the grant of the Application. The letter fails to satisfy any of the criteria for petitions to deny. See 47 C.F.R. � 73.3584. Accordingly, we will treat it as an informal objection pursuant to Section 73.3587 of the Commission's Rules. See 47 C.F.R. � 73.3587. Amended Informal Objection, Exhibit A, Hernan Rozemberg, ``Spanish radio station could be silenced over segment,'' San Antonio Express News, web posted December 26, 2005. Amended Informal Objection at 2. Blalack indicates that this episode also resulted in a civil judgment against Licensee and Univision. 47 C.F.R. � 73.3584(e). Licensee cites Media
• http://www.fcc.gov/fcc-bin/audio/DA-07-1206A1.doc http://www.fcc.gov/fcc-bin/audio/DA-07-1206A1.pdf
  • The United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit affirmed the Commission's action. At the outset, neither the Communications Act of 1934, as amended (the ``Act''), nor the Commission's Rules (the ``Rules'') provides for the filing of a petition to deny a covering license application. We thus treat the DeLaHunt Petition as an informal objection under Section 73.3587 of the Rules. The DeLaHunt Petition was filed before the Commission released its Memorandum Opinion and Order partially granting DeLaHunt's Application for Review. As such, the DeLaHunt Petition merely re-stated the same arguments and facts presented in DeLaHunt's challenges to MCBI's construction permit application. Those issues were adjudicated by the Commission and have been affirmed by the court. Accordingly, the
• http://www.fcc.gov/fcc-bin/audio/DA-07-1550A1.doc http://www.fcc.gov/fcc-bin/audio/DA-07-1550A1.pdf
  • by Section 309(d)(1) of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended (the "Act"). Additionally, Struhar failed to serve a copy of his pleadings on the Licensee or its counsel, as required by Section 309(d)(1) of the Act and Section 1.47 of the Rules. Accordingly, we will treat these and the other Objections collectively as an informal objection pursuant to Section 73.3587 of the Rules. Substantive Matters. In evaluating an application for license renewal, the Commission's decision is governed by Section 309(k)(1) of the Act. That section provides that the Commission is to grant a license renewal application if, upon consideration of the application and pleadings, we find that: (1) the Station has served the public interest, convenience, and necessity; (2) there
• http://www.fcc.gov/fcc-bin/audio/DA-07-1650A1.doc http://www.fcc.gov/fcc-bin/audio/DA-07-1650A1.pdf
  • Public Radio, Inc. (``CPRI'') to Christian Voice of Central Ohio, Inc. (``CVCO''). A number of Station WVXW(FM) listeners have filed objections to the Assignment Application, expressing their appreciation for the programming currently offered over the station and asking the Commission to bar its proposed sale to CVCO. These listener letters will be treated as informal objections in accordance with Section 73.3587 of the Commission's Rules (the ``Rules''). For the reasons stated below, we deny the informal objections and grant the Assignment Application. While the Commission recognizes that Station WVXW(FM)'s format has developed a devoted listenership, it is well-settled policy that the Commission does not regulate programming formats, nor does it take potential format changes into consideration in reviewing license assignment applications.
• http://www.fcc.gov/fcc-bin/audio/DA-07-1701A1.doc http://www.fcc.gov/fcc-bin/audio/DA-07-1701A1.pdf
  • ``Rules''), petitions to deny were due on July 21, 2006, 30 days after the date of the Public Notice. Because the MRI Petition was filed 35 days after the Public Notice, on July 26, 2006, it was late-filed. Accordingly, the MRI Petition must be dismissed. We will, however, treat and consider the pleading as an informal objection pursuant to Section 73.3587 of the Rules. The sole issue raised by MRI regarding the KAAK(FM) Assignment Application is that certain exhibits to the Purchase and Sales Agreement (``Agreement'') between Fisher and CCR referred to in that application were not in the station's public file. In its Opposition, Fisher responds that, consistent with Commission policy, it was not required to place copies of these
• http://www.fcc.gov/fcc-bin/audio/DA-07-1949A1.doc http://www.fcc.gov/fcc-bin/audio/DA-07-1949A1.pdf
  • communities in Montana, because their licenses expired on April 1, 2005, the applicable petition filing deadline was March 1, 2005. 47 C.F.R. � 73.1020(a)(10). The pleadings filed by Scott Nicolson, MHRN, Keith Hammer, Christine Kaufman and Ken Toole thus fail to meet the requirements of a petition to deny. We will, however, treat them as informal objections, pursuant to Section 73.3587 of the Commission's Rules (the ``Rules''). See 47 C.F.R. � 73.3587. Informal Objections were filed by Neal Brown on May 18, 2005, Roger and Susan Sherman, Susan Waldron and Clark Reynolds on February 22, 2005, Celeste and George McLean on February 17, 2005, Sheila Conners on February 25, 2005, and Lorney Jay Deist on April 5, 2005. In its Opposition,
• http://www.fcc.gov/fcc-bin/audio/DA-07-2382A1.doc http://www.fcc.gov/fcc-bin/audio/DA-07-2382A1.pdf
  • deadline for petitions to deny the Applications was July 1, 2004. Accordingly, because the August 9 and August 23 Petitions were filed after this deadline, we will dismiss them pursuant to Section 73.3584(e) of the Rules. Moreover, petitions to deny do not lie against covering license applications. We will nevertheless consider them each as an informal objection pursuant to Section 73.3587 of the Rules. Informal Objections. We deny the August 9 and August 23 petitions under the pleading standards for the evaluation of informal objections. Informal objections must, pursuant to Section 309(e) of the Act, provide properly supported allegations of fact that, if true, would establish a substantial and material question of fact that grant of the application would be prima
• http://www.fcc.gov/fcc-bin/audio/DA-07-3222A1.doc http://www.fcc.gov/fcc-bin/audio/DA-07-3222A1.pdf
  • filed on March 10, 2005, by Stephen Diliberto IS DENIED, and the application (File No. BRED-20050201AZE) of Pittsburg State University for renewal of license for noncommercial educational Station KRPS(FM), Pittsburg, Kansas, IS GRANTED. Sincerely, Peter H. Doyle Chief, Audio Division Media Bureau cc: Pittsburg State University We are treating the untitled filing by Diliberto as an Informal Objection under Section 73.3587 of the Commission's Rules (the ``Rules''), 47 C.F.R. � 73.3587, because it fails to comply with the procedural requirements for filing a Petition to Deny, e.g., it was not served on KRPS(FM) or its counsel, and it is not supported by affidavit. See 37 U.S.C. � 309(d), 47 C.F.R. � 73.3584. Informal Objection at 2. Id. Id. at 3. Id.
• http://www.fcc.gov/fcc-bin/audio/DA-07-3223A1.doc http://www.fcc.gov/fcc-bin/audio/DA-07-3223A1.pdf
  • Scott Clem IS DENIED, and the application (File No. BRH-200407AAI) of Three Angels Broadcasting Network, Inc. for renewal of license for Station WDQN-FM, Du Quoin, Illinois, IS GRANTED. Sincerely, Peter H. Doyle Chief, Audio Division Media Bureau cc: Three Angels Broadcasting Network, Inc We are treating the Clem's ``Petition Deny Renewal of Broadcast License'' as an ``Informal Objection'' under Section 73.3587 of the Commission's Rules (the ``Rules''), 47 C.F.R. � 73.3587, because it fails to comply with the procedural requirements for filing a Petition to Deny, e.g., it was not served on WDQN-FM or its representative, and it is not supported by affidavit. See 47 U.S.C. � 309(d) and 47 C.F.R. � 73.3584. See, e.g., WWOR-TV, Inc., Memorandum Opinion and Order,
• http://www.fcc.gov/fcc-bin/audio/DA-07-3251A1.doc http://www.fcc.gov/fcc-bin/audio/DA-07-3251A1.pdf
  • Bureau cc: Lewis J. Paper, Esq. Jerrold Miller, Esq. Cote's Objection also contains a challenge to the license renewal application of KUTE(FM), Ignacio, California, which was granted by the Staff on March 10, 2005. Cote did not file his Objection until November 16, 2005. Accordingly, we will not consider Cote's objection against the KUTE(FM) renewal application. See 47 C.F.R. � 73.3587 (informal objections must be filed prior to grant of the pertinent applications). See The Association for Community Education, Memorandum Opinion and Order, 19 FCC Rcd 12682, 12684 (2004). Inland's Opposition to Informal Objection (``Inland Opposition''), filed on January 9, 2006, and Sunset's Opposition to Informal Objection (``Sunset's Opposition''), filed on January 4, 2006 On July 11, 1994, Cote was convicted
• http://www.fcc.gov/fcc-bin/audio/DA-07-3419A1.doc http://www.fcc.gov/fcc-bin/audio/DA-07-3419A1.pdf
  • WGLF(FM) and WHBT(AM), Tallahassee, Florida, and WWLD(FM), Cairo, Georgia, all of which are licensed to Cumulus Licensing, LLC. The applications of Stations WBZE(FM), WGLF(FM) and WHBT(AM) had been granted prior to the Commission's receipt of the Informal Objection on February 10, 2004. Accordingly, we are only considering the Informal Objection with regard to Stations WHBX(FM) and WWLD(FM). See 47 C.F.R 73.3587 (informal objections must be filed prior to grant of the pertinent application). 47 U.S.C. �� 309(k), 503(b); 47 C.F.R. � 1.80. See 47 C.F.R. � 0.283. See 47 C.F.R. �1.17(a)(1) and (2). See, e.g., WWOR-TV, Inc., Memorandum Opinion and Order, 6 FCC Rcd 193, 197 note 10 (1990), aff'd sub nom. Garden State Broadcasting L.P. v. FCC, 996 F.2d 386
• http://www.fcc.gov/fcc-bin/audio/DA-07-3510A1.doc http://www.fcc.gov/fcc-bin/audio/DA-07-3510A1.pdf
  • C.F.R. � 73.3516(e). For radio stations licensed in communities in Minnesota, because their licenses expired on April 1, 2005, the applicable petition filing deadline was March 1, 2005. 47 C.F.R. � 73.1020(a)(10). The pleading filed by Neidhardt thus fails to meet the requirements of a petition to deny. We will, however, treat it as an informal objection, pursuant to Section 73.3587 of the Rules. See 47 C.F.R. � 73.3587. Licensee asserts that the Objection must be dismissed for lack of standing because Neidhardt has not demonstrated that he is a ``party in interest'' as a Station employee. Opposition at 5. Because we dismiss the Objection on other grounds, we will not address this argument further. See 47 C.F.R. � 73.1216. See
• http://www.fcc.gov/fcc-bin/audio/DA-07-3515A1.doc http://www.fcc.gov/fcc-bin/audio/DA-07-3515A1.pdf
  • not provide in any of its pleadings either an affidavit or declaration specifically raising a specific injury that would be caused to it by grant of the WBFH(FM) renewal application or attempt to establish listener/residence status as a basis for standing. Therefore, we find that Superior lacks standing. Nevertheless, we will consider Superior's Petition as an informal objection under Section 73.3587 of the Rules. 9. Substantive Issues. WBFH(FM) Renewal Application. Signature Requirement. RB argues in its November 17, 2005, Petition to Rescind Grant and Dismiss Application (``Objection'') that the Licensee's application is defective and should be dismissed because it was not signed in accordance with Section 73.3513 of the Rules. Section 73.3513(a)(5) states that an application of a governmental entity, such
• http://www.fcc.gov/fcc-bin/audio/DA-07-3838A1.doc http://www.fcc.gov/fcc-bin/audio/DA-07-3838A1.pdf
  • qualifications to hold a Commission license, based on past indecency violations and pending payola allegations. The Objection requests that the Commission forbear from any action on the Assignment Application until such misconduct allegations are resolved. Discussion. Procedural Issue. Entercom argues that death has terminated Stolz's standing to file the Objection. Parties that lack standing, however, may file informal objections. Section 73.3587 of the Commission's Rules (the ``Rules'') permits the filing of an informal objection by any person, any time ``[B]efore FCC action on any application for an instrument of authorization . . . . '' Given that Stolz died before the Objection was filed, the pleading should have been submitted in the name of the Executor, on behalf of the Estate.
• http://www.fcc.gov/fcc-bin/audio/DA-07-3865A1.doc http://www.fcc.gov/fcc-bin/audio/DA-07-3865A1.pdf
  • such a retroactive declaration is inadequate to cure the failure to provide such an affidavit or declaration with the Petition. Accordingly, we find that Howard has not established standing to file a petition to deny, nor has he provided a sufficient affidavit or declaration in support of the Petition. We therefore consider his Petition as an informal objection under Section 73.3587 of the Rules. Substantive Matters. In evaluating an application for license renewal, the Commission's decision is governed by Section 309(k) of the Act. That section provides that if, upon consideration of the application and pleadings, we find that (1) the station has served the public interest, convenience, and necessity; (2) there have been no serious violations of the Act or
• http://www.fcc.gov/fcc-bin/audio/DA-07-3904A1.doc http://www.fcc.gov/fcc-bin/audio/DA-07-3904A1.pdf
  • a new AM station at Escanaba, Michigan, as amended; and (2) the November 9, 2006, ``Motion to Dismiss'' ( the ``Motion'') the application filed on behalf of KMB Broadcasting, Inc. (``KMB''), licensee of stations WDBC and WYKX(FM), Escanaba, as supplemented on December 22, 2006. For the reasons set forth below, we treat the Motion as an Informal Objection under Section 73.3587 of the Commission's Rules (the ``Rules'') and deny it, and we grant the Application. Background. On January 29, 2004, Lyle Robert Evans (``Evans'') filed a ``short form'' FCC Form 175 application for a new AM station in Escanaba, Michigan, during the filing window for AM Auction No. 84 (the ``Short Form Application''). That proposal specified the following antenna coordinates for
• http://www.fcc.gov/fcc-bin/audio/DA-07-3932A1.doc http://www.fcc.gov/fcc-bin/audio/DA-07-3932A1.pdf
  • in the Petition as required by Section 309(d)(1) of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended (the ``Act''). There is attached a notarized signature of Petitioner Huston. No affidavit stating that he has personal knowledge of the facts alleged in the Petition, however, was provided by Petitioners. Nevertheless, we will consider the filing as an informal objection pursuant to Section 73.3587 of the Commission's Rules (the ``Rules''). Substantive Issues. In evaluating an application for license renewal, the Commission's decision is governed by Section 309(k) of the Act. That Section provides that we are to grant the renewal application if, upon consideration of the application and pleadings, we find that (1) the station has served the public interest, convenience, and necessity; (2)
• http://www.fcc.gov/fcc-bin/audio/DA-07-4025A1.doc http://www.fcc.gov/fcc-bin/audio/DA-07-4025A1.pdf
  • C.F.R. � 73.3516(e). For radio stations licensed in communities in Arizona, because their licenses expired on October 1, 2005, the applicable petition filing deadline was September 1, 2005. 47 C.F.R. � 73.1020(a)(10). The pleading filed by Thayer thus fails to meet the requirements of a petition to deny. We will, however, treat it as an informal objection, pursuant to Section 73.3587 of the Commission's Rules. See 47 C.F.R. � 73.3587. Id. Id. Thayer also alleges that that Station's manager, Lisa Youvella, has made false statements about the Station's recruiting and hiring practices in a local newspaper article. Id. at 3. The Commission only considers misrepresentation allegations to the extent that the alleged misrepresentation is made to a governmental unit. See Policy
• http://www.fcc.gov/fcc-bin/audio/DA-07-4266A1.doc http://www.fcc.gov/fcc-bin/audio/DA-07-4266A1.pdf
  • for renewal of license for Station KNUZ(AM), Bellville, Texas, IS GRANTED. Sincerely, Peter H. Doyle Chief, Audio Division Media Bureau cc: Robert J. Buenzle, Esquire On May 16, 2005, the Commission received via the U.S. Postal Service an identical letter from Conway dated May 5, 2005. We are treating the untitled letter by Conway as an Informal Objection under Section 73.3587 of the Commission's Rules (the ``Rules''), 47 C.F.R. � 73.3587, because it fails to comply with the procedural requirements for filing a Petition to Deny, e.g., it was not served on the Licensee or its counsel, and the factual assertions contained in the filings are not supported by an affiant with personal knowledge. See 47 U.S.C. � 309(d), 47 C.F.R.
• http://www.fcc.gov/fcc-bin/audio/DA-07-4300A1.doc http://www.fcc.gov/fcc-bin/audio/DA-07-4300A1.pdf
  • IS GRANTED, and the application to assign the license of Station KBAC(FM), Las Vegas, New Mexico (File No. BALH-20070628ABV) from Educational Media Foundation to Hutton Broadcasting, LLC IS GRANTED. Sincerely, Peter H. Doyle Chief, Audio Division Media Bureau cc: Lee J. Peltzman, Esq. David D. Oxenford, Esq. These listener letters will be treated as informal objections in accordance with Section 73.3587 of the Commission's Rules (the ``Rules''). On July 2, 2007, Hutton filed a Consolidated Opposition to Informal Objections and Request for Expedited Processing. See Changes in the Entertainment Formats of Broadcast Stations, Memorandum Opinion and Order, 60 FCC2d 858, 865-66 (1976), recon. denied, Memorandum Opinion and Order, 66 FCC 2d 78 (1977), rev'd sub nom., WNCN Listeners Guild v. FCC,
• http://www.fcc.gov/fcc-bin/audio/DA-07-4340A1.doc http://www.fcc.gov/fcc-bin/audio/DA-07-4340A1.pdf
  • deny''). Id. See also, Secret Communications II, LLC, Memorandum Opinion and Order, 18 FCC Rcd 9139 (2003); Heidi Damsky, Order, 13 FCC Rcd 16352 (1998); Pikes Peak Broadcasting Co., Memorandum Opinion and Order, 12 FCC Rcd 4626 (1997). Furthermore, Blanchard did not sign or provide her address with her informal objection, rendering it procedurally defective under 47 C.F.R. �� 1.52, 73.3587. 47 U.S.C. � 309(k). Federal Communications Commission Washington, D.C. 20554 October 19, 2007 = > 8 9 ; = > ? I L U n } � � � � � � �%���PNG �` �` b``D� 4 �&)�@�-�@�@�7 H >��O��� p j�� �2�=��k��� �"_� - J��, �Nt�Rb �7�P���U�ZS '��wp��ˈ jP�T{.|�87w]�g��yA�Ҩ-��=T#�O> �#W p����U�^S� �t�''�TxNt�l ۦ��X6`T{������:�r�� �A�R\ )]h]e�M8�I̟`�?K^��� ?C��A�UU �3ꡟ=��A � \�+�_
• http://www.fcc.gov/fcc-bin/audio/DA-07-4342A1.doc http://www.fcc.gov/fcc-bin/audio/DA-07-4342A1.pdf
  • provide an affidavit or declaration raising a specific injury that would be caused to him by grant of the WHYY-FM renewal application or that establishes listener/residence status as a basis for standing. Therefore, we find that Smith lacks standing to file a petition to deny in this proceeding. Nevertheless, we will consider Smith's Petition as an informal objection under Section 73.3587 of the Rules. Informal objections must, pursuant to Section 309(e) of the Act, provide properly supported allegations of fact that, if true, would establish a substantial and material question of fact that grant of the application would be prima facie inconsistent with Section 309(k) of the Act, which governs our evaluation of an application for license renewal. Specifically, Section 309(k)(1)
• http://www.fcc.gov/fcc-bin/audio/DA-07-4352A1.doc http://www.fcc.gov/fcc-bin/audio/DA-07-4352A1.pdf
  • affidavit or declaration alleging a specific injury that would be caused by grant of the KTMP(AM) renewal application or attempt to establish listener/residence status as a basis for standing. Therefore, we find that both Johnson and Guthrie lack standing to file petitions to deny in this proceeding. Nevertheless, we will consider Johnson and Guthrie's Petitions as informal objections under Section 73.3587 of the Rules. 6. Both Johnson and Guthrie allege that the Station's tower is not secured properly. Johnson also alleges that the Licensee has ``sent out false affidavits the entire 2005 year'' and that ``KTMP has ran (sic) contests on air and then refused to give away the prizes offered. . . .'' Guthrie alleges that when he viewed the
• http://www.fcc.gov/fcc-bin/audio/DA-07-450A1.doc http://www.fcc.gov/fcc-bin/audio/DA-07-450A1.pdf
  • Rules. Sincerely, Peter H. Doyle Chief, Audio Division Media Bureau The Commission received objections to the above-captioned assignment application from 263 informal objectors. Each of these individuals will receive a copy of this letter. KJC ``Response to Informal Objections,'' filed July 28, 2006, Attachment A at 1. These listener letters will be treated as informal objections in accordance with Section 73.3587 of the Commission's Rules. . FCC v. WNCN Listener's Guild, 450 U.S. 582, 585 (1981). 47 U.S.C. � 310(d) (when acting on assignment or transfer applications, the Commission may not consider whether the public interest, convenience and necessity might be served by assignment or transfer of the license to an entity other than the proposed assignee or transferee). Where permission
• http://www.fcc.gov/fcc-bin/audio/DA-07-4683A1.doc http://www.fcc.gov/fcc-bin/audio/DA-07-4683A1.pdf
  • Broadcasting Licenses, Ltd. for the renewal of license of broadcast station WJMO(AM), Cleveland, Ohio. For the reasons set forth herein, we deny the Objection. We find the Objection deficient on procedural grounds. The Application was granted on September 20, 2004, yet Petitioners filed the Objection nine days after this grant. Section 73.8537 of the Commission's rules (the ``Rules''), 47 C.F.R. �73.3587, states that any person may file an informal objection to an application ``before FCC action'' (emphasis added). Petitioners failed to meet this requirement. Further, we cannot treat the Objection as a petition for reconsideration or application for review. Section 1.106 of the Rules, 47 C.F.R. �1.106, governs the filing of petitions for reconsideration of a Commission action, and Section 1.115
• http://www.fcc.gov/fcc-bin/audio/DA-07-4701A1.doc http://www.fcc.gov/fcc-bin/audio/DA-07-4701A1.pdf
  • persons not for the protection of their private interests, but only to vindicate the public interest. Consistent with this principle, creditors are generally not permitted to participate in an application proceeding solely on the ground that they have a financial stake in the survival of the parties. Accordingly, the Petition will be treated an informal objection (the ``Objection'') under Section 73.3587 of the Rules. 5. Substantive Issues. Financial Qualifications. Royce states that, prior to the filing of the Applications, Entercom informed the Securities and Exchange Commission ("SEC") that Entercom had "substantial indebtedness'' and that it had "no assurances that [it]will be able to obtain other funding, additional financing or the approvals, if necessary, for these transactions." Royce maintains that this indebtedness
• http://www.fcc.gov/fcc-bin/audio/DA-07-4926A1.doc http://www.fcc.gov/fcc-bin/audio/DA-07-4926A1.pdf
  • Monica Shah Desai Chief, Media Bureau A pleading entitled ``Petition to Deny Transfer'' was filed by five Senators from the Legislature of the Virgin Islands (the ``Senators'') on January 11, 2007. Because the Senators' pleading was not served on the Licensee as required by 47 U.S.C. � 309(d), it will be treated as an informal objection under 47 C.F.R. � 73.3587. Additional informal objections were filed by a group of permanent residents of St. Croix, and several individual residents of St. Croix (collectively, the ``Objectors''), on January 11, 2007, January 18, 2007, and February 6, 2007. Extensive responsive pleadings were filed in this matter. Each pleading was fully considered and for administrative convenience we will refer to the groups of pleadings
• http://www.fcc.gov/fcc-bin/audio/DA-08-1034A1.doc http://www.fcc.gov/fcc-bin/audio/DA-08-1034A1.pdf
  • of the Rules, petitions to deny a renewal application must be filed by the first day of the last full calendar month of the expiring license term. Thus, Jeantet's petition to deny should have been filed by May 1, 2006. Because Jeantet's pleading was filed after the petition to deny deadline we will consider it an informal objection under Section 73.3587 of the Rules. Informal Objections. Pursuant to Section 309(e) of the Act, informal objections, like petitions to deny, must provide properly supported allegations of fact that, if true, would establish a substantial and material question of fact that grant of the application would be prima facie inconsistent with Section 309(k) of the Act, which governs our evaluation of an application
• http://www.fcc.gov/fcc-bin/audio/DA-08-1372A1.doc http://www.fcc.gov/fcc-bin/audio/DA-08-1372A1.pdf
  • Valley News, Inc. and Mr. Howard C. Toole, Letter, 22 FCC Rcd 18600 (MB 2007), petition for recon. pending (``Toole Decision''). Objection at 2. Id. Id. Opposition at 3-4. Memorandum Opinion and Order, 11 FCC Rcd 15464 (1996) (``Greater Muskegon Broadcasters''). Id. at 15472 (emphasis added). See, e.g., 47 U.S.C. � 309(d); 47 C.F.R. �� 1.17, 1.41 - 1.77, 73.3584, 73.3587, 73.5006, 73.7004. See, e.g., 47 C.F.R. �� 1.52, 73.3584(b). Coleman Objection, first unnumbered page. Id., second unnumbered page. Id., second-third unnumbered pages. See 47 U.S.C. � 310(d); Dorothy J. Owens, Debtor-in-Possession, Memorandum Opinion and Order, 5 FCC Rcd 6615 (1990). Cf. Policy Regarding Character Qualifications in Broadcast Licensing, Report, Order and Policy Statement, 102 FCC 2d 1179, 1223-25 (1986) (there
• http://www.fcc.gov/fcc-bin/audio/DA-08-144A1.doc http://www.fcc.gov/fcc-bin/audio/DA-08-144A1.pdf
  • an affidavit or declaration that establishes standing. Pelley fails to provide such an affidavit or declaration. Accordingly, Pelley has not met the statutory standard for standing set forth in Section 309(d) of the Act, and his pleading will be dismissed as a petition to deny. We will, however, treat and consider the pleading as an informal objection pursuant to Section 73.3587 of the Commission's Rules (the ``Rules''). Private Contractual Claim. Pelley's request for compensation for engineering services rendered at the Station relates to contractual claims that constitute a private controversy. The Commission has consistently held that it is not the proper forum for the resolution of such private disputes, and that the parties should seek redress for such matters in courts
• http://www.fcc.gov/fcc-bin/audio/DA-08-1536A1.doc http://www.fcc.gov/fcc-bin/audio/DA-08-1536A1.pdf
  • filed a ``Supplement to Petition to Revoke Constriction Permit'' on April 30, 1998. Logos filed an ``Opposition to Supplement to Motion to Revoke Construction Permit'' on May 22, 1998. RRI filed a ``Reply to Opposition to Supplement to Petition to Revoke Construction Permit'' on June 8, 1998. RRI requests that its pleadings be treated as informal objections pursuant to Section 73.3587 of the Rules. See 47 C.F.R. 73.3587 File No. BLED-19950929KC. 47 U.S.C. � 309(e). 47 U.S.C. � 309(a). See, e.g., WWOR-TV, Inc., Memorandum Opinion and Order, 6 FCC Rcd 193, 197 n.10 (1990), aff'd sub nom. Garden State Broadcasting L.P. v. FCC, 996 F.2d 386 (D.C. Cir. 1993), rehearing denied (Sept. 10, 1993); Area Christian Television, Inc., Memorandum Opinion and
• http://www.fcc.gov/fcc-bin/audio/DA-08-1576A1.doc http://www.fcc.gov/fcc-bin/audio/DA-08-1576A1.pdf
  • be remedied with the Commission's denial of the pending application. KSU has not established how grant of the Assignment Application would result in a direct injury to it or how denial of the Assignment Application would redress that injury. Therefore, KSU lacks standing to petition the Assignment Application. We will, however, treat KSU's pleading as an Informal Objection under Section 73.3587 of the Rules. 7. Filing Deadline and Finality. Staff action taken pursuant to delegated authority generally becomes final and not subject to administrative review forty days after the release of public notice announcing the action, unless a petition for reconsideration or an application for review has been filed. The Commission has made exceptions to the administrative doctrine of finality when
• http://www.fcc.gov/fcc-bin/audio/DA-08-1676A1.doc http://www.fcc.gov/fcc-bin/audio/DA-08-1676A1.pdf
  • and Anne Zevich IS DENIED, and the application (File No. BR-20051201BBG) of Saga Communications of New England, LLC for renewal of license for Station WBAE(AM), Portland, Maine, IS GRANTED. Sincerely, Peter H. Doyle Chief, Audio Division Media Bureau cc: Saga Communications of New England, LLC We are treating the untitled filing by the Objectors as an Informal Objection under Section 73.3587 of the Commission's Rules (the ``Rules''), 47 C.F.R. � 73.3587, because it fails to comply with the procedural requirements for filing a Petition to Deny, e.g., it was not served on the Station or its counsel, and it is not supported by affidavit. See 37 U.S.C. � 309(d), 47 C.F.R. � 73.3584. ``Opposition to Informal Objection'' (``Opposition''). Informal Objection at
• http://www.fcc.gov/fcc-bin/audio/DA-08-16A1.doc http://www.fcc.gov/fcc-bin/audio/DA-08-16A1.pdf
  • is styled a ``Petition to Deny,'' there is no indication in the pleading that it was properly served on the Licensees. Accordingly, the pleading does not meet the procedural requirements for petitions to deny set forth in Section 309(d) of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended (the ``Act''). It will therefore be treated as an informal objection under Section 73.3587 of the Commission's Rules (the ``Rules''). Discussion. Pursuant to Section 309(e) of the Act, informal objections must provide properly supported allegations of fact that, if true, would establish a substantial and material question of fact that grant of the application would be prima facie inconsistent with Section 309(k) of the Act, which governs our evaluation of an application for license
• http://www.fcc.gov/fcc-bin/audio/DA-08-1837A1.doc http://www.fcc.gov/fcc-bin/audio/DA-08-1837A1.pdf
  • pleadings either an affidavit or declaration raising a specific injury that would be caused to it by grant of the Application or attempting to establish listener/residence status as a basis for standing. Therefore, we find that MUC lacks standing to file a petition to deny the Application. Nevertheless, we will consider MUC's Petition as an informal objection (``Objection'') under Section 73.3587 of the Rules. Substantive Issues: In applying Section 73.503 of the Rules, the Commission has required that NCE applicants be: (a) a government or public educational agency, board or institution; (b) a private, nonprofit educational organization; or (c) a nonprofit entity with a demonstrated educational purpose. We require that an applicant described in (a) or (b) above have an educational
• http://www.fcc.gov/fcc-bin/audio/DA-08-1845A1.doc http://www.fcc.gov/fcc-bin/audio/DA-08-1845A1.pdf
  • Application or the Assignment Application, as an aggrieved competitor, assumes an actual state of competition, not merely a history as a former applicant whose application was dismissed nine years ago. Therefore, Astounding has failed to establish that it is a party in interest as contemplated by the Act. Nevertheless, we shall treat its pleadings as informal objections pursuant to Section 73.3587 of the Rules. Substantive Issues. Astounding claims that the Commission cannot grant the Assignment Application ``without final action granting the underlying construction permit to Intermart.'' We disagree. When a private contractual dispute concerning a Commission license is the subject of a pending court proceeding, in the absence of a stay or an injunction (neither of which are present here), it
• http://www.fcc.gov/fcc-bin/audio/DA-08-1936A1.doc http://www.fcc.gov/fcc-bin/audio/DA-08-1936A1.pdf
  • Spirit Response at 9, Exh. 8. One possible explanation is that Spirit, upon learning that the cap would allow it to file fewer applications than originally intended, renegotiated its all-inclusive arrangement to pay only for engineering services actually used. Spirit Response at 4. Helpline Response at 4. Spirit Response, Exh. 3. See Spirit Response, Exh. 15. See 47 C.F.R. � 73.3587; Lowery Communications, Hearing Designation Order, 5 FCC Rcd 4222 (MB 1990). E.g., Randolph Victor Bell, Hearing Designation Order, 3 FCC Rcd 5365 (MB 1988). See 47 C.F.R. � 73.7000. Attributable interests can be direct or indirect. See 47 C.F.R. � 73.3555, n.1. Note 2 sets forth various cognizable interests including those of certain owners, partners, stockholders, officers, directors, and time
• http://www.fcc.gov/fcc-bin/audio/DA-08-1946A1.doc http://www.fcc.gov/fcc-bin/audio/DA-08-1946A1.pdf
  • Actions, Public Notice, Report No. 46470 (Apr. 23, 2007) at 2. See July 2008 Amendment to the dismissed WMCW Application, Attachment 1, at 1. Id. Petitions to deny do not lie against minor change applications. See 47 U.S.C. � 309(d)(1); 47 C.F.R. � 73.3580(a). Accordingly, the Heller Petition will be treated herein as an Informal Objection pursuant to 47 C.F.R.� 73.3587. See 47 C.F.R. � 73.3517. See, e.g., Review of the Technical Assignment Criteria for the AM Broadcast Service, 6 FCC Rcd 6273 (1991), recon. granted in part and denied in part, 8 FCC Rcd 3250 (1993). Policies to Encourage Interference Reduction between AM Broadcast Stations, 5 FCC Rcd 4492 (1990) (``Interference Reduction''). 47 C.F.R. � 73.3517. Interference Reduction, 5 FCC
• http://www.fcc.gov/fcc-bin/audio/DA-08-2251A1.doc http://www.fcc.gov/fcc-bin/audio/DA-08-2251A1.pdf
  • apparently has no main studio or personnel. The status of the television station has no nexus with the Local Radio Ownership Rule - radio and television are separate broadcast services. FLAIM is mistaken that its Petition is acceptable - under what it calls a ``worst case scenario'' - because FLAIM could have filed a post-grant Informal Objection pursuant to Section 73.3587 of the Rules. Informal Objections, however, are acceptable only ``[b]efore FCC action on any application for an instrument of authorization.'' Thus, even were we to treat FLAIM's Petition as the equivalent of an Informal Objection, we would dismiss it because it was filed after the Applications were granted. Indeed, even were we to reach FLAIM's Petition on the merits, we
• http://www.fcc.gov/fcc-bin/audio/DA-08-2392A1.doc http://www.fcc.gov/fcc-bin/audio/DA-08-2392A1.pdf
  • However, since standing is not a perquisite to the filing of an informal objection, Potomac's contention that Birach does not have standing is misplaced. See Nextel License Holdings 4, Inc., Order, 17 FCC Rcd 7028, 7033 (WTB 2002) (noting ``there is no standing requirement to file an informal objection pursuant to [47 C.F.R. � 1.41].'')); see also 47 C.F.R. � 73.3587. Id. at 4. Id. at 5. For example, Potomac notes that DRRTS has also been represented by David W. Brown, Esq., of the law firm of Knopf & Brown. See Opposition, Exhibit A. Indeed, Mr. Brown submitted a pre-hearing statement in the very zoning hearing with which Birach takes issue. See id. Potomac also submits the minutes of the Montgomery
• http://www.fcc.gov/fcc-bin/audio/DA-08-2467A1.doc http://www.fcc.gov/fcc-bin/audio/DA-08-2467A1.pdf
  • for Expedited Action will be dismissed as moot. R&R filed a contingent Motion for Extension of Time. R&R sought the extension if the Gold Coast Opposition was deemed a formal opposition governed by the filing deadlines in 47 C.F.R. � 1.45. The Motion for Extension of Time will be dismissed as moot. Gold Coast filed its Opposition ``pursuant to Section 73.3587 of the Commission's Rules'' (the ``Rules'') governing informal objections. The 47 C.F.R. � 1.45 filing deadlines do not apply to informal objections. The Application was filed pursuant to Section 73.3573(g) of the Rules which permits the modification of a station's authorization to specify a new community of license without affording other interested parties the opportunity to file competing expressions of
• http://www.fcc.gov/fcc-bin/audio/DA-08-2501A1.doc http://www.fcc.gov/fcc-bin/audio/DA-08-2501A1.pdf
  • did not sign the Objection). Accordingly, we find that Myers has not established standing to file a petition to deny, nor has he provided a sufficient affidavit or declaration in support of the Objection. Because the Objection was untimely and did not comply with the Act or the Commission's Rules, we therefore consider it as an informal objection under Section 73.3587 of the Rules. Substantive Matters. As with all petitions or objections seeking to deny an application for a new station, here we must first determine whether Myers has made specific allegations of fact that, if true, would demonstrate that grant of the application would be prima facie inconsistent with the public interest. These specific allegations must be supported by the
• http://www.fcc.gov/fcc-bin/audio/DA-08-348A1.doc http://www.fcc.gov/fcc-bin/audio/DA-08-348A1.pdf
  • failure to serve his Petition on the licensee as required by Section 309(d)(1) of the Act. Moreover, although Pennino has not demonstrated that he is a party in interest and his filing does not meet the requirements of a formal petition to deny under Section 309(d) of the Act, we will treat the filing as an informal objection under Section 73.3587 of the Rules. Notably, Pennino does not claim that Infinity has violated the Act or any of the Commission's Rules. Rather, his core complaint is the lack of coverage of environmental issues on WCCO(AM). While we recognize Pennino's concerns about the quality of the Station's programming, the role of the Commission in overseeing program content is limited. The First Amendment
• http://www.fcc.gov/fcc-bin/audio/DA-08-349A1.doc http://www.fcc.gov/fcc-bin/audio/DA-08-349A1.pdf
  • to the original proceeding it must show good reason for why it was unable to participate in the earlier proceeding. JNE's Informal Objection was filed nearly eleven months after the Siga Application was filed. JNE provides no explanation for why it was unable to participate in the original proceeding. JNE attempts to excuse the delay by pointing out that Section 73.3587 of the Rules contains no deadline for the filing of an informal objection and that it could not have known of the grant of Siga's application since the informal objection was filed before public notice of the Commission's action was published. While Section 73.3587 of the Rules does not contain a filing deadline for informal objections, it specifically states that
• http://www.fcc.gov/fcc-bin/audio/DA-08-407A1.doc http://www.fcc.gov/fcc-bin/audio/DA-08-407A1.pdf
  • sent to BBC explaining why she signed Residents' Objection. Ms. Sutcliffe recites that KRPI interferes with her reception of other, unspecified, stations; that KRPI interferes with the public address system at her church and that KRPI causes ``background noise'' in residential and business telephones. We accept Ms. Sutcliffe's letter to BBC as an informal objection pursuant to 47 C.F.R. � 73.3587. However, the matters raised by Ms. Sutcliffe are fully addressed in our discussion of the Residents' Objection and we thus make no further specific reference to Ms. Sutcliffe's letter. See Objection at 4, 35. Id. at 7. Id. at 12. Id. at 47. Id. at 42. Id. at 36. Opposition at 11. Id. at 14-17. Id., Attachment to Engineering Statement
• http://www.fcc.gov/fcc-bin/audio/DA-08-494A1.doc http://www.fcc.gov/fcc-bin/audio/DA-08-494A1.pdf
  • license renewal application, in effect making GEMB's pleading a petition to deny. Williamson states that GEMB's informal objection cannot be considered a petition to deny because it was filed after the deadline for petitions to deny had passed and GEMB does not have standing as a party in interest. We find that GEMB properly filed an informal objection under Section 73.3587 of the Rules. 4. Substantive Matters. In its Objection, GEMB first argues that Williamson ``clearly falls short of the Commission's norm of `continued compliance''' with the Rules because he failed to timely file the license renewal application for the Station. GEMB is correct that that the WGYV(AM) license renewal application was not timely filed under Section 73.3539 of the Rules.
• http://www.fcc.gov/fcc-bin/audio/DA-08-556A1.doc http://www.fcc.gov/fcc-bin/audio/DA-08-556A1.pdf
  • pleadings styled as ``Petitions to Deny.'' However, these and the remaining objections filed by the Objectors listed in Appendix A fail to meet the requirements of a petition to deny because they were either late-filed or failed to provide sworn statements supporting factual allegations. See 47 U.S.C. � 309(d). We will, however, treat them as informal objections, pursuant to Section 73.3587 of the Commission's Rules (the ``Rules''). See 47 C.F.R. � 73.3587. Petition at 15-16. See id. See, e.g., Informal Objection filed by Alexander J. Alfano, Esq. on Nov. 5, 2007 (``Alfano Objection''), at 3. See, e.g., Informal Objection filed by Jane Abruzzo on October 1, 2007 (``Abruzzo Objection''), at 1. 47 U.S.C. � 310(d). 47 U.S.C. � 309(d)(1). See id.;
• http://www.fcc.gov/fcc-bin/audio/DA-08-627A1.doc http://www.fcc.gov/fcc-bin/audio/DA-08-627A1.pdf
  • provided support for his allegations of Rule violation(s), we find that he has not raised a substantial and material question of fact warranting further inquiry. Accordingly, IT IS ORDERED that the Petition to Deny filed by Robert W. Cowan, IS DISMISSED. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that said Petition to Deny, considered as an informal objection pursuant to 47 C.F.R. � 73.3587 is DENIED. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the Motion for Leave to File Opposition Out of Time, filed by Birach Broadcasting Corporation, IS GRANTED. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the Motion for Expedited Processing filed by Birach Broadcasting Corporation is DISMISSED AS MOOT. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the Applications for Commission Consent to Assignment of License of Stations WVBA
• http://www.fcc.gov/fcc-bin/audio/DA-09-1257A1.doc http://www.fcc.gov/fcc-bin/audio/DA-09-1257A1.pdf
  • of the Station, they are exempt from the Commission's prohibition against ex parte presentations. The pleadings were filed after the deadline for filing petitions to deny had passed (i.e., later than 30 days after the date of the Public Notice listing the Assignment Application as accepted for filing). Therefore, we will treat these ``listener complaints'' as informal objections under Section 73.3587 of the Commission's Rules (the ``Rules''). Substantive Matters. Section 310(d) of the Act requires the Commission to make a determination whether the proposed transfer or assignment of a broadcast license would be in the public interest. Pursuant to Sections 309(d) and (e) of the Act, petitions to deny and informal objections must provide properly supported allegations of fact that, if
• http://www.fcc.gov/fcc-bin/audio/DA-09-14A1.doc http://www.fcc.gov/fcc-bin/audio/DA-09-14A1.pdf
  • Ronald P. Marsh and Norman Remington ARE DENIED, and the application (File No. BRED-20051201CHG) of the University of Rhode Island for renewal of license for Station WRIU(FM), Kingston, Rhode Island, IS GRANTED. Sincerely, Peter H. Doyle Chief, Audio Division Media Bureau Marsh and Remington styled their pleadings ``Petitions to Deny.'' We are treating the pleadings as Informal Objections under Section 73.3587 of the Commission's Rules (the ``Rules''), 47 C.F.R. � 73.3587, because they fail to comply with the procedural requirements for filing Petitions to Deny, e.g., they were not served on the Station, and they are not supported by affidavit signed by a person with personal knowledge of the facts contained in the pleading. See 37 U.S.C. � 309(d), 47 C.F.R.
• http://www.fcc.gov/fcc-bin/audio/DA-09-1524A1.doc http://www.fcc.gov/fcc-bin/audio/DA-09-1524A1.pdf
  • it has determined that the Station is being operated in accordance with the Rules and corporate laws of the United States, Indiana, and Illinois. Discussion. Procedural Matter. Because formal petitions to deny do not lie against minor modification applications, such as that of Benton-Weatherford's here, the Watson pleading will be considered as an informal objection to the Application under Section 73.3587 of the Rules. Substantive Matters. Watson's request as a minority shareholder for notification regarding operation of the Station relates to a shareholder dispute which constitutes a private controversy. Watson, as a Benton-Weatherford shareholder, has other avenues open to him should he believe that there is a breach of fiduciary duty on the part of the Benton-Weatherford board of directors. The
• http://www.fcc.gov/fcc-bin/audio/DA-09-1796A1.doc http://www.fcc.gov/fcc-bin/audio/DA-09-1796A1.pdf
  • of the identical facts alleged in each of the Objections. Accordingly, we find that objector Cherry has not provided a sufficient affidavit or declaration in support of either the Florida/Georgia or Georgia Objection. Because these filings do not comply with the Act or the Rules regarding petitions to deny, we will consider each as an informal objection pursuant to Section 73.3587 of the Rules. Substantive Matters. Section 310(d) of the Act requires the Commission to make a determination whether the proposed transfer or assignment of a broadcast license would be in the public interest. Pursuant to Sections 309(d) and (e) of the Act, informal objections must provide properly supported allegations of fact that, if true, would establish a substantial and material
• http://www.fcc.gov/fcc-bin/audio/DA-09-2033A1.doc http://www.fcc.gov/fcc-bin/audio/DA-09-2033A1.pdf
  • of 1934, as amended (the ``Act''). Additionally, Miller's failure to properly serve the pleading on either the licensee or its counsel violates Section 309(d)(1) of the Act, and Section 1.47 of the Commission's Rules (the ``Rules''). Accordingly, we will dismiss Miller's pleading as a petition to deny. We will, however, treat the pleading as an informal objection pursuant to Section 73.3587 of the Rules. Substantive Issues. As noted, Simpson is President and majority shareholder of Farm and Home. Miller has failed to provide documentation demonstrating that Simpson lacks authority to enter into an agreement on behalf of Farm and Home for the sale of certain Farm and Home assets. Moreover, the issues raised by Miller constitute a private controversy. The Commission
• http://www.fcc.gov/fcc-bin/audio/DA-09-2470A1.doc http://www.fcc.gov/fcc-bin/audio/DA-09-2470A1.pdf
  • pleading is defective as a ``Petition to Deny,'' and that it should be dismissed. We agree. Because the Petition was filed two days after the Application had been granted and because formal petitions to deny do not lie against minor modification applications, such as that of Fern Creek's here, we will treat the Petition as an Informal Objection under Section 73.3587 of the Rules. Substantive Matters. In the Petition, Fern Creek requests that we ``thoroughly review'' Brycc's qualifications as an LPFM licensee. It contends that (1) the Timeshare Site is outside the 10 mile radius required under Section 73.853 of the Rules; (2) Brycc's ownership has changed 100% since the original construction permit was issued, in violation of Section 73.865 of
• http://www.fcc.gov/fcc-bin/audio/DA-09-524A1.doc http://www.fcc.gov/fcc-bin/audio/DA-09-524A1.pdf
  • Rev. Hare that ``the facts and statements therein are true and correct to the best of my information and belief,'' the factual allegations contained in the Petition were not supported by an affidavit or declaration under penalty of perjury of either Rev. Hare, Mr. Beverage, or Ms. Warren. Accordingly, we will consider this filing as an informal objection under Section 73.3587 of the Commission's Rules. NJPBA Motion to Strike. In its Motion to Strike WRI's Reply, NJPBA states that WRI's Reply improperly raises a ``wholly new claim'' that NJPBA never had permission to use the proposed site, based solely on the fact that NJPBA did not address it in its Opposition. We agree. Accordingly, we will grant the Motion to Strike.
• http://www.fcc.gov/fcc-bin/audio/DA-09-57A1.doc http://www.fcc.gov/fcc-bin/audio/DA-09-57A1.pdf
  • of Ithaca Community Radio, Inc. (``ICR'') for a construction permit for a new noncommercial educational (``NCE'') FM station to serve Odessa, New York (the ``Application''). We also have before us a two-page letter received June 30, 2008, opposing the Application, filed by Ray Smith (``Smith''), which will be treated as an Informal Objection (the ``Smith Objection'') in accordance with Section 73.3587 of the Commission's Rules (the ``Rules''). ICR filed an Opposition to the Smith Objection on August 1, 2008. For the reasons set forth below, we dismiss the Smith Objection and grant the Application. Background/Discussion. On October 18, 2007, ICR tendered its Application for a new NCE-FM station on Channel 210 at Odessa, New York. On June 30, 2008, an individual
• http://www.fcc.gov/fcc-bin/audio/DA-10-1037A1.doc http://www.fcc.gov/fcc-bin/audio/DA-10-1037A1.pdf
  • (the ``Rules''). Hensley attempted to correct these defects in his December Objection, but that pleading was not filed within the 30-day period for filing petitions to deny established by the Public Notice announcing the acceptance of the Application. Accordingly, we will dismiss Hensley's pleadings as petitions to deny. We will, however, treat the pleadings as informal objections pursuant to Section 73.3587 of the Rules. Substantive Issues. Pursuant to Section 309(e) of the Act, informal objections must provide properly supported allegations of fact that, if true, would establish a substantial and material question of fact that grant of the application would be prima facie inconsistent with the public interest, convenience, and necessity. Given the speculative nature of Hensley's unsupported allegations, we find
• http://www.fcc.gov/fcc-bin/audio/DA-10-2004A1.doc http://www.fcc.gov/fcc-bin/audio/DA-10-2004A1.pdf
  • 2009. The Fourth Matthews Objection, also styled as a ``NEPA petition,'' was filed February 3, 2010. Matthews sent an affidavit (``Matthews Affidavit''), a DVD and a doctor's report on May 13, 2010, as addenda to the Fourth Matthews Objection. Because petitions to deny do not lie against minor modification applications, Matthews' pleadings will be considered as informal objections under � 73.3587 of the Rules. See 47 U.S.C. � 309(c) and 47 C.F.R. �� 73.3584, 73.3587; see also Change of Community, Report and Order, 21 FCC Rcd 14212, 14220 (2006); CMP-Houston KC, LLC, Memorandum Opinion and Order, 23 FCC Rcd 10656, 10660 n.31 (2008), citing Cloud Nine Broadcasting, Inc., Letter, 10 FCC Rcd 11555, 11556 (1995). Filed on Mar. 10, 2009. The
• http://www.fcc.gov/fcc-bin/audio/DA-10-2064A1.doc http://www.fcc.gov/fcc-bin/audio/DA-10-2064A1.pdf
  • 1.16 of the Rules (47 C.F.R. � 1.16). While Section 73.3584(b) of the Rules requires allegations of fact or denials thereof in oppositions to petitions to deny to be supported by affidavit of a person or persons with personal knowledge thereof, there is no such legal or regulatory requirement for responses to informal objections (See 47 C.F.R. �� 73.3584(b) and 73.3587 (discussing informal objections)). Consolidated Opposition at 4. See Joint Opposition at Exhibit 2 (Declaration of David Vacharesse, President of Starboard). See Georgia Public Telecommunication Commission, 7 FCC Rcd 7996, 7998 (1992) (``Georgia Public'') citing Astroline Communications Co. v. FCC, 857 F.2d 1556, 1564 (D.C. Cir. 1998); KOWL, Inc., South Lake Tahoe, Calif., Memorandum Opinion and Order, 49 FCC 2d 962
• http://www.fcc.gov/fcc-bin/audio/DA-10-442A1.doc http://www.fcc.gov/fcc-bin/audio/DA-10-442A1.pdf
  • (2) traceable to the respondent's conduct and (3) redressable by the relief requested. Procedural Issue. Standing. Metro Radio argues that the Petition should be dismissed on procedural grounds because Group A has not demonstrated why it did not participate earlier in the proceeding. We disagree. Although Group A did not file an informal objection to the Application pursuant to Section 73.3587 of the Rules, on February 22, 2006, Group A filed an interference complaint with the staff. The issues raised in the interference complaint and, now, on reconsideration, substantially overlap. That complaint remained pending until the issuance of the Staff Decision. We find that Group A has adequately participated in this proceeding prior to the grant of the Application, and it
• http://www.fcc.gov/fcc-bin/audio/DA-10-628A1.doc http://www.fcc.gov/fcc-bin/audio/DA-10-628A1.pdf
  • assertions about membership in the ``broadcast community'' and investment and engineering interests in unspecified broadcast facilities are insufficient to confer standing. We find that Lewis lacks standing to file a petition to deny the Assignment Application. Accordingly, we will dismiss Lewis' Objection as a petition to deny. We will, however, treat the Objection as an informal objection pursuant to Section 73.3587 of the Rules. Other Procedural Defects. Applicants allege that Lewis' pleading contains additional procedural defects. We agree. While Lewis asserts that ``[a]ll Commission copies were signed,'' the pleading received by the Commission is not signed as required by Section 1.52 of the Rules. Moreover, Lewis fails to provide an affidavit to support the allegations made in the Petition, as required
• http://www.fcc.gov/fcc-bin/audio/DA-10-764A1.doc http://www.fcc.gov/fcc-bin/audio/DA-10-764A1.pdf
  • local radio ownership rules. In addition, ROI argues that the Commission should refrain from action on any Saga applications until a false certification claim made against Saga in another proceeding is resolved. In its Opposition, Saga argues that ROI's Objection is untimely, without merit, and must be dismissed. In Reply, ROI argues that the Objection is timely, pursuant to Sections 73.3587, 1.102(b)(1) and 1.4 of the Commission's Rules (the ``Rules''). Discussion. Procedural Issue. As noted above, the Application was granted by the staff one day after it was filed and on the same day that the Objection was filed. Thus, the staff was unaware of ROI's Objection when it granted the Application. Because the staff did not consider the arguments made
• http://www.fcc.gov/fcc-bin/audio/DA-11-1113A1.doc http://www.fcc.gov/fcc-bin/audio/DA-11-1113A1.pdf
  • granted by the staff only two days after it was filed. Consequently, BSR argues that pursuant to Section 1.106(b)(2) of the Rules, it has made an adequate showing as to why it was not able to participate in the earlier stages of the proceeding and, thus, its Informal Objection should be considered as a Petition for Reconsideration. We agree. Section 73.3587 of the Rules requires that an informal objection to a broadcast application be filed prior to action on the application and, thus, the Informal Objection ordinarily would be subject to dismissal without consideration. The Commission, however, has historically accorded standing to petitioners for reconsideration who failed to file pre-grant objections when prompt staff action ``effectively precludes participation during the initial
• http://www.fcc.gov/fcc-bin/audio/DA-11-1226A1.doc http://www.fcc.gov/fcc-bin/audio/DA-11-1226A1.pdf
  • not located in the same market as the Station, and Georgia Eagle has not demonstrated that it competes with the Station for listeners or advertisers. Moreover, Georgia Eagle proffers no other basis to establish its standing to file a petition to deny the Assignment Application. Therefore, the Georgia Eagle 2010 Petition will be considered an informal objection, pursuant to Section 73.3587 of the Rules. Reversionary Interest. Petitioners argue that approval of the 2010 Assignment Application would give effect to an unlawful ``reversionary interest.'' Specifically, they argue that the 2010 Trust Agreement contains a clause stating, ``. . . consistent with FCC rules and policies, the Trustee shall . . . assign and otherwise convey the Station . . . to Citadel.''
• http://www.fcc.gov/fcc-bin/audio/DA-11-1227A1.doc http://www.fcc.gov/fcc-bin/audio/DA-11-1227A1.pdf
  • Street, Lafayette, Louisiana 70501, and to Miracle Radio, Inc., 3801 North Pace Blvd., Pensacola, Florida 32505, and to its counsel, David Tillotson, Esq., 4606 Charleston Terrace, Washington, DC 20007. FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION Peter H. Doyle Chief, Audio Division Media Bureau This pleading is captioned as a ``Motion to Dismiss,'' but we shall consider it an Informal Objection pursuant to Section 73.3587 of the Commission's Rules (the ``Rules''). Letter to Miracle Radio, Inc., Ref. 1800B3 (MB rel. Jan. 21, 2011) (``Staff Decision''). File No. BLSTA-20110426AAX (the ``Silent STA Request''). File No. BSTA-20110616AAQ (the ``Technical STA Request''). 47 U.S.C. �� 309(k), 503(b); 47 C.F.R. � 1.80. See 47 C.F.R. � 0.283. See 47 C.F.R. � 73.3539. See 47 U.S.C. � 301. 47 C.F.R.
• http://www.fcc.gov/fcc-bin/audio/DA-11-1520A1.doc http://www.fcc.gov/fcc-bin/audio/DA-11-1520A1.pdf
  • has not shown any such misconduct by CE. See, e.g. FCC v. WOKO, Inc., 329 U.S. 223 (1946); Contemporary Media v. FCC, 214 F.3d 187 (D.C. Cir. 2000); San Francisco Unified School District, 19 FCC Rcd 13326 (2004); Fox Television Stations, Inc., 10 FCC Rcd 8452 (1995); Fox River Broadcasting, Inc., 93 FCC 2d 127 (1983). See 47 C.F.R. � 73.3587. See, e.g., Order, 24 FCC Rcd at 14537 (prematurely-filed ``Petition to Dismiss'' in another group not considered but would be held in abeyance for later consideration as an informal objection in the event that the filing party did not submit a petition to deny). Petition at 4. In this manner, the Bureau maintains the efficiency as well as integrity of
• http://www.fcc.gov/fcc-bin/audio/DA-11-1948A1.doc http://www.fcc.gov/fcc-bin/audio/DA-11-1948A1.pdf
  • defective and should have been dismissed. The Commission addressed these pleadings in the 37 Groups Comparative Order. First, the Commission found that while HSARG could have raised its objections to the MBMC Application in its own Petition to Deny rather than in its Opposition to MBMC's Petition to Deny, the Opposition met the requirements of an informal objection under Section 73.3587 of the Rules. Accordingly, the Commission declined to dismiss the Opposition and instead treated the portion that addressed the MBMC Application as an informal objection. Second, the Commission agreed with HSARG that MBMC's documentation to support its diversity claim was insufficient and that it thus erred in awarding points to MBMC for that criterion. Third, the Commission recognized that the
• http://www.fcc.gov/fcc-bin/audio/DA-12-167A1.doc http://www.fcc.gov/fcc-bin/audio/DA-12-167A1.pdf
  • Washington, DC 20036-7322; and to Ms. Martha Vockrodt-Moran, D.T. Fleming Arboretum, P.O. Box 101, Makawao, Maui, HI 96768. FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION William T. Lake, Chief Media Bureau File Nos. BLH-20090410ARC (``KAOI-FM covering license application'') and BLH-20100119AAO (``KNUQ(FM) covering license application''). Although the pleading is styled as an ``Opposition,'' we will treat it as an informal objection. See 47 C.F.R � 73.3587. On March 9, 2006, Visionary filed a response. 47 C.F.R. � 1.1310. See, e.g., OET Bulletin 65. Complaint of D.T. Fleming Arboretum and Martha Vockrodt-Moran at 1 (``Complaint''). Complaint at 1. Id. at 1-2. See Notice of Violation, File No. EB-03-HL-090 (``KAOI NOV''), citing 47 C.F.R � 73.1690 (providing that licensee may not change the height of an antenna more
• http://www.fcc.gov/fcc-bin/audio/FCC-04-155A1.doc http://www.fcc.gov/fcc-bin/audio/FCC-04-155A1.pdf
  • treated as a petition for reconsideration of the October 22, 1998, grant of that application. The substantive issue raised in that objection - that the 1998 Modification Application should not be granted because K211DK's proposed operation ``would be likely to interfere with the off-air reception of KCRW(FM)'' - is repeated in its December 3, 2001, Application for Review. 6. Section 73.3587 of the Commission's rules requires that an informal objection to a broadcast application be filed prior to action on the application. Additionally, under Section 1.106 of the Commission's rules, petitions for reconsideration from parties that did not participate prior to grant must contain a justification for the party's failure to do so. While the Commission has accorded standing to petitioners
• http://www.fcc.gov/fcc-bin/audio/FCC-08-139A1.doc http://www.fcc.gov/fcc-bin/audio/FCC-08-139A1.pdf
  • precluded from filing a petition to deny in the initial stage of this proceeding, as petitions to deny do not lie against minor modification applications. See 47 C.F.R. �� 73.3580(a)(1) and 73.3584(a). As indicated above (see supra note 7), Appellants submitted notification of their concerns about the Application, which is appropriately treated as an informal objection under 47 C.F.R. � 73.3587. Accordingly, we find that Appellants ``participated in our processes to the fullest extent permitted'' and have met the good cause standard of 47 C.F.R. � 1.106(b)(1). Cloud Nine, 10 FCC Rcd at 11556. See Wendell and Associates, Memorandum Opinion and Order, 14 FCC Rcd 1671, 1679 (1998) (``It is clear from the staff's order that it considered [the objector's] pleadings,
• http://www.fcc.gov/fcc-bin/audio/FCC-08-37A1.doc http://www.fcc.gov/fcc-bin/audio/FCC-08-37A1.pdf
  • an Informal Objection to the JBN application on May 7, 2004 (the ``WTL Objection''). JBN filed a ``Petition to Deny'' EPRS' application on February 7, 2005. However, petitions to deny the captioned Hendersonville applications were due no later than April 12, 2004. We will, therefore, treat the untimely JBN filing as an informal objection (the ``JBN Objection'') pursuant to Section 73.3587 of the Commission's Rules (the ``Rules''). For the following reasons, we grant the WTL Objection to the extent indicated, deny the JBN Objection, and grant both the JBN and EPRS applications. II. DISCUSSION 2. WTL Informal Objection. WTL argues in its Objection that: (1) JBN failed to demonstrate that it was a nonprofit legal entity, as it failed to provide
• http://www.fcc.gov/fcc-bin/audio/FCC-08-38A1.doc http://www.fcc.gov/fcc-bin/audio/FCC-08-38A1.pdf
  • Lake City Petition and WTL Objection to the extent indicated; (2) deny the Hayden Petition; (3) dismiss the Hayden application; and (4) grant the Lake City application. II. DISCUSSION 2. Lake City timely filed its Petition on February 26, 2004. Because WTL submitted its Objection after the petition period, its pleading will be considered as an informal objection under Section 73.3587 of the Rules. We have evaluated the merits of Lake City's Petition and Hayden's Opposition and conclude that Hayden is not entitled to the comparative point that it claimed for ``established community presence.'' Accordingly, we will disallow that point and reevaluate the applications on a comparative basis. 4. Section III, Item 1 of the LPFM construction permit application form, FCC
• http://www.fcc.gov/fcc-bin/audio/FCC-08-3A1.doc http://www.fcc.gov/fcc-bin/audio/FCC-08-3A1.pdf
  • a Lexington, Kentucky address in the Young Petition, and claiming, in an unsworn, handwritten note on the petition, that he is a listener of the station, there is nothing in the record to establish that Young has the requisite standing to file a petition to deny. Accordingly, we will treat the Young Petition as an informal objection pursuant to Section 73.3587 of the Rules. b. Substantive Arguments Background. Young takes exception to CCC's proposal to change from being a publicly-held corporation to a privately-held company under the control of several private equity firms. Young states that ``this level of secrecy is not in the public interest.'' While noting that the proposed reduction in stations to be operated by NewCCC compared to
• http://www.fcc.gov/fcc-bin/audio/FCC-08-40A1.doc http://www.fcc.gov/fcc-bin/audio/FCC-08-40A1.pdf
  • 2004; EPC filed Petitions to Deny UUF's, and MKWS's applications on March 1, 2004; EPC filed an informal objection on March 3, 2004, to the now-dismissed Vineyard application, which we dismiss, as moot. Because the deadline for petitions to deny was February 27, 2004, we will treat EPC's remaining petitions to deny as informal objections pursuant to 47 C.F.R. � 73.3587. Because EPC's objections did not indicate service upon the applicants, on May 18, 2005, the Bureau provided each applicant with a copy of each respective objection and gave it 20 days in which to respond. MKWS, the only applicant to respond, submitted an e-mail response on May 21, 2005, inquiring about unrelated transferability matters. On June 6, 2005, EPC filed
• http://www.fcc.gov/fcc-bin/audio/FCC-08-41A1.doc http://www.fcc.gov/fcc-bin/audio/FCC-08-41A1.pdf
  • Anchorage, Alaska. The ACL and OND applications were accepted for filing and each applicant was tentatively awarded three points under the selection procedure set forth in Section 73.872 of the Commission's Rules (the ``Rules''). OND timely filed its Petition; because WTL submitted its Objection after the petition period, its untimely pleading will be considered as an informal objection under Section 73.3587 of the Rules. 3. OND Petition to Deny. We have evaluated the merits of OND's Petition and ACL's Opposition, and conclude that ACL is not entitled to the point that it claimed for ``established community presence.'' Accordingly, for the reasons discussed herein, we disallow that point and reevaluate the applications on a comparative basis. 4. Section III, Item 1 of
• http://www.fcc.gov/ftp/Bureaus/Mass_Media/Databases/documents_collection/98-57.doc http://www.fcc.gov/ftp/Bureaus/Mass_Media/Databases/documents_collection/98-57.pdf
  • general survey of this area, see Stephen F. Sewell, Assignments and Transfers of Control of FCC Authorizations Under Section 310(d) of the Communications Act of 1934, 43 Fed. Comm. L. J. 277 (1991). 47 U.S.C. ( 310(d). 47 U.S.C. ( 309(b), (c)(2)(B), (d). In the case of short form applications, however, the Commission entertains informal objections, under 47 C.F.R. ( 73.3587, which may be filed any time up until Commission action on the application. 47 C.F.R. ( 73.3540(f). The standard for determining when a "long form" as opposed to a "short form" is required and vice versa is set out in Clay Broadcasters, 21 RR 2d 442 (1971); Barnes Enterprises, 55 FCC 2d 721, 725 n.4 (1975); Grace Missionary Baptist Church,
• http://www.fcc.gov/mb/audio/bickel/amfmrule.html
  • 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 for renewal, assignment or transfer of control. [672]TEXT [673]PDF 73.3580 Local public notice of filing of broadcast applications. [674]TEXT [675]PDF 73.3584 Procedure for filing petitions to deny. [676]TEXT [677]PDF 73.3587 Procedure for filing informal objections. [678]TEXT [679]PDF 73.3588 Dismissal of petitions to deny or withdrawal of informal objections. [680]TEXT [681]PDF 73.3589 Threats to file petitions to deny or informal objections. [682]TEXT [683]PDF 73.3591 Grants without hearing. [684]TEXT [685]PDF 73.3592 Conditional grant. [686]TEXT [687]PDF 73.3593 Designation for hearing. [688]TEXT [689]PDF 73.3594 Local public notice of designation for hearing. [690]TEXT [691]PDF 73.3597
• http://www.fcc.gov/mb/audio/includes/63-amfmrule.htm
  • 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 for renewal, assignment or transfer of control. [625]TEXT [626]PDF 73.3580 Local public notice of filing of broadcast applications. [627]TEXT [628]PDF 73.3584 Procedure for filing petitions to deny. [629]TEXT [630]PDF 73.3587 Procedure for filing informal objections. [631]TEXT [632]PDF 73.3588 Dismissal of petitions to deny or withdrawal of informal objections. [633]TEXT [634]PDF 73.3589 Threats to file petitions to deny or informal objections. [635]TEXT [636]PDF 73.3591 Grants without hearing. [637]TEXT [638]PDF 73.3592 Conditional grant. [639]TEXT [640]PDF 73.3593 Designation for hearing. [641]TEXT [642]PDF 73.3594 Local public notice of designation for hearing. [643]TEXT [644]PDF 73.3597