Attachment Question - 36

This document pretains to SES-LIC-20091110-01445 for License on a Satellite Earth Station filing.

IBFS_SESLIC2009111001445_777916

                                                                Educational Media Foundation
                                                                                   Page 1 of 1
                                                                           Response to Item 36


                                    Dismissed Applications

        In the past, the Commission has dismissed several of EMF’s applications for new FM
translators and FM radio stations, as well as applications to modify existing EMF broadcast
stations, on technical grounds. EMF has also requested that applications be dismissed with
prejudice as part of the universal settlements of mutually exclusive applications. The dismissal,
or request for dismissal, of these applications did not involve any character issues or other
similar matters relating to EMF’s legal qualifications. In addition, the Commission dismissed
the following application regarding which character issues had been raised:

1.       Application for FM Translator Station at Golf Manor, Ohio (BPFT-19990125TB): On
March 4, 1999, the Board of Trustees of the University of Cincinnati (the "University"), licensee
of WGUC(FM), Cincinnati, Ohio, filed a Petition to Dismiss or Deny EMF's Golf Manor
application in which it alleged that EMF falsely certified that it had reasonable assurance of the
availability of its proposed transmitter site. In its Opposition, filed March 24, 1999, EMF
submitted documentation demonstrating that it had obtained reasonable site assurance from
Motorola Network Services ("Motorola"), a tenant at the site who had indicated to EMF that its
lease with the site owner permitted it to sublease space on the tower. When the tower owner
later contradicted Motorola's assertion, EMF amended its application to relocate the station. On
February 9, 2000, the University challenged EMF’s reasonable site assurance at the new site. In
its Opposition filed on March 2, 2000, EMF submitted the Declaration of Jeff Wall, EMF’s
system designer, who indicated that he had obtained reasonable site assurance from the
operations manager of the station whose licensee owned the tower. By letter dated November
27, 2000, the Commission dismissed the application based on its finding that, despite its
representations to EMF, Motorola had no actual authority to lease space at the original site.
Specifically, the Commission concluded, “[W]hile we find no evidence that EMF misrepresented
the availability of its original site, we believe that EMF has not met its burden of demonstrating
that it had a reasonable assurance that the specified site was in fact available to it.” Letter to
Veronica D. McLaughlin, Esq. from Linda Blair, Chief, Audio Services Division, Mass Media
Bureau, dated November 27, 2000. Because EMF, through no fault of its own, could not have
obtained reasonable site assurance from Motorola, the Commission held that EMF could not
amend its application to propose a new transmitter site. Thus, the Commission did not address
the allegations concerning the site specified in the amended application.



Document Created: 2009-11-09 08:23:28
Document Modified: 2009-11-09 08:23:28

© 2024 FCC.report
This site is not affiliated with or endorsed by the FCC