**DA 06-1428**

In Reply Refer To:

> 1800B3-RDH

Released: July 12, 2006

Mr. Joseph M. Goldsmith

202 Elm Street

P.O. Box 1222

Clinton, SC 29325

In re: **WEPR(FM) Greenville, SC**

**Facility ID No. 60926**

File No. BRED -- 20030729AGY

Application for Renewal of License

**Informal Objection**

Dear Mr. Goldsmith:

This letter concerns the captioned application filed by the South
Carolina Educational Television Commission ("SCETC") to renew the
license of station WEPR(FM), Greenville, South Carolina. Also on file is
Joseph M. Goldsmith's ("Goldsmith") October 10, 2003, informal objection
directed to the subject renewal application.[^1] For the reasons set
forth below, we deny the objection and grant the renewal application.

*Background/Discussion.* On July 29, 2003, SCETC filed the renewal
application for WEPR(FM). It certified that it had no character issues
outstanding with respect to this or any other outstanding broadcast
application to which it was a party and that it had not violated the
Communications Act of 1934, as amended, or the Commission's rules and
regulations during the preceding license term.

In support of his objection, Goldsmith states WEPR(FM) uses a microwave
relay to transmit programming from its studios to its transmission
facilities. As a result, he contends, WEPR(FM) loses its signal for
extended periods of time, particularly during periods of hurricanes and
other inclement weather. This, he states, deprives area residents of
official emergency information. SCETC did not file a response to
Goldsmith's informal objection.

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 have been no serious violations of the Communications Act or the
Commission's Rules; and (3) there have been no other violations which,
taken together, constitute a pattern of abuse.[^2] If, however, the
licensee fails to meet that standard, the Commission may deny the
application -- after notice and opportunity for a hearing under Section
309(e) of the Act -- or grant the application "on terms and conditions
that are appropriate, including a renewal for a term less than the
maximum otherwise permitted."[^3]

The Commission does not have any rules regulating the type of
studio-transmitter link that must be used by radio licensees. Thus,
whether WEPR(FM) uses a telephone line or microwave relay is not
relevant to our license renewal determination. Similarly, the fact that
technical difficulties may cause interruptions in service would not, of
itself, provide a basis for concluding that the station has not served
the public interest. Our rules anticipate that there will be times when
difficulties beyond the control of the licensee result in a
discontinuation of service.[^4] Goldsmith has not alleged that SCETC
violated the regulation governing such temporary service outages.[^5]
Accordingly, we find evidence of neither serious violations of the
Communications Act or the Commission's Rules, nor other violations that,
when considered together, evidence a pattern of abuse. Further, we find
that station WEPR(FM) served the public interest, convenience, and
necessity during the subject license term. Thus, there is no need for
further inquiry regarding grant of the subject renewal application and
we will grant that application.

*Conclusion/Actions.* Accordingly, IT IS ORDERED, that the Goldsmith
objection IS DENIED. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED, that the application for
renewal (File No. BRED -- 20030729AGY) for station WWPR(FM), Greenville,
South Carolina, IS GRANTED.

Sincerely,

Peter H. Doyle

Chief, Audio Division

Media Bureau

cc: South Carolina Educational Television Commission

Margaret L. Miller, Esq.

[^1]: SCETC did not file a response to Mr. Goldsmith's informal
    objection.

[^2]: 47 U.S.C. §309(k)(1). The renewal standard was amended by Section
    204(a) of the Telecommunications Act of 1996, Pub. L. No. 104-104,
    110 Stat. 56 (1996). *See Order, Implementation of Sections 204(a)
    and 204(c) of the Telecommunications Act of 1996 (Broadcast License
    Renewal Procedures)*, 11 FCC Rcd 6363 (1996).

[^3]: 47 U.S.C. §§ 309(k)(2), 309(k)(3).

[^4]: *See* 47 C.F.R. § 73.561(d).

[^5]: When service is suspended due to circumstances beyond the
    licensee's control, Section 73.561(d) provides that the licensee may
    discontinue operation for a period not to exceed 30 days without
    further authorization from the Commission provided that it notifies
    the Commission within ten days of the beginning of limited or
    discontinued operation.