*Pages 1--3 from  Microsoft Word - 4547.doc*
 Federal  Communications  Commission  DA  00-  2423 
 Before  the 
 Federal  Communications  Commission 
 Washington,  D.  C.  20554 


 In  the  Matter  of 
 Amendment  of  Section  73.202(  b), 
 Table  of  Allotments, 
 FM  Broadcast  Stations. 
 (Galesburg,  Illinois  and  Ottumwa,  Iowa) 


 ) 
 ) 
 ) 
 ) 
 ) 
 ) 
 ) 
 ) 
 ) 


 MM  Docket  No.  97-  130 
 RM-  8751 


 MEMORANDUM  OPINION  AND  ORDER  (Proceeding  Terminated) 
 Adopted:  October  18,  2000  Released:  October  27,  2000 
 By  the  Chief,  Allocations  Branch: 
 1.  The  Allocations  Branch  has  before  it  the  Petition  for  Reconsideration  filed  by  Galesburg 
 Broadcasting  Company  (  Galesburg  Broadcasting),  licensee  of  Station  WLSR,  Channel  224A, 
 Galesburg,  Illinois,  directed  to  the  Report  and  Order  in  this  proceeding.  13  FCC  Rcd  20211  91998).  For 
 the  reasons  discussed  below,  we  deny  the  Petition  for  Reconsideration. 


 Background 
 2.  At  the  request  of  Northern  Broadcast  Group,  former  licensee  of  Station  WLSR,  the  Notice  of 
 Proposed  Rule  Making  in  this  proceeding  proposed  the  substitution  of  Channel  224B1  for  Channel  224A  at 
 Galesburg,  and  modification  of  the  Station  WLSR  license  to  specify  operation  on  Channel  224B1.  Prior  to 
 the  comment  date  in  this  proceeding,  Gilbro  Communications,  licensee  of  Station  KTWA,  Channel  224C3, 
 Ottumwa,  Iowa,  filed  a  one-  step  upgrade  application  (File  No.  BPH-  960322IC)  proposing  Class  C2 
 facilities  at  its  current  site.  In  view  of  the  conflict  between  this  application  and  the  underlying  Channel 
 224B1  upgrade  proposal  in  this  proceeding,  the  application  was  treated  as  a  timely  counterproposal.  See 
 Conflicts  Between  Applications  and  Petitions  for  Rule  Making  to  Amend  the  FM  Table  of  Allotments,  7 
 FCC  Rcd  4917,  at  n.  18  (1992),  recon  granted  in  part,  8  FCC  Rcd  4743  (1993).  Conflicting  FM  proposals 
 are  comparatively  considered  under  the  guidelines  set  forth  in  Revision  of  FM  Assignment  Policies  and 
 Procedures,  90  FCC  2d  88  (1982).  1  In  this  situation,  both  proposals  were  for  an  upgrade  of  an  existing 
 facility  and  were  considered  under  Priority  (4)  because  neither  proposal  would  have  provided  either  a  first 
 or  second  fulltime  service  under  Priority  (2)  or  (3).  Under  Priority  (4),  we  will  favor  the  proposal  that 
 would  expand  service  to  the  greatest  number  of  persons. 


 3.  The  Report  and  Order  substituted  Channel  224C2  for  Channel  224C3  at  Ottumwa,  Iowa,  and 


 1  The  FM  priorities  are  as  follows:  (1)  First  fulltime  aural  service,  (2)  Second  fulltime  aural  service,  (3)  First 
 local  service,  and  (4)  Other  public  interest  matters.  Co-  equal  weight  is  given  to  Priorities  (2)  and  (3). 
1
 Federal  Communications  Commission  DA  00-  2423 
 2 
 modified  the  Station  KTWA  license  to  specify  operation  on  Channel  224C2.  In  doing  so,  we  determined 
 that  this  upgrade  would  result  in  Station  KTWA  serving  an  additional  38,492  persons  in  an  area  of  3,757 
 square  kilometers  without  any  area  losing  service.  In  comparison,  and  after  our  review  of  the  Galesburg 
 Broadcasting  Comments,  it  was  determined  that  the  proposed  upgrade  by  Station  WLSR  in  Galesburg 
 would  serve  an  additional  38,591  persons  in  an  area  of  2,464  square  kilometers,  while  1,434  persons  in  an 
 area  of  175  square  kilometers  would  lose  service..  As  such,  the  net  gain  in  service  would  be  37,157 
 persons.  These  calculations  were  in  substantial  agreement  with  the  calculations  set  forth  by  Galesburg 
 Broadcasting  in  its  Comments.  2 


 4.  In  its  Petition  for  Reconsideration,  Galesburg  Broadcasting  argues,  for  the  first  time,  that  the 
 minimum  spacing  requirements  set  forth  in  Section  73.207(  b)  of  the  Rules  affords  a  Class  B1  station 
 operating  at  maximum  facilities  protection  to  its  57dBu  contour.  Since  the  57  dBu  contour  extends  further 
 than  the  60  dBu  contour,  the  proposed  Class  B1  upgrade  for  Station  WLSR  would  provide  service  to  a 
 greater  population  and  area  than  that  which  was  indicated  in  the  Report  and  Order.  In  comparison,  a  Class 
 C2  station  operating  at  maximum  facilities  provides  service  to  only  the  60  dBu  contour.  Under  these 
 circumstances,  its  proposed  Class  B1  upgrade  for  Station  WLSR  would  represents  a  greater  net  service 
 gain  compared  to  the  competing  Station  KTWA  upgrade  in  Ottumwa. 


 5.  We  deny  the  Petition  for  Reconsideration.  Galesburg  Broadcasting  is  setting  forth  new 
 information  with  respect  to  the  service  contour  of  Station  WLSR  and  the  population  within  that  contour. 
 Section  1.429(  b)  of  the  Rules  provides  that  petitions  for  reconsideration  relying  upon  facts  not  previously 
 submitted  will  be  granted  only  under  three  limited  circumstances.  First,  the  facts  relate  to  events  which 
 have  changed  since  the  last  opportunity  to  present  these  facts  to  the  Commission.  Second,  the  facts  were 
 unknown  to  the  petitioner  and  could  not  have  been  timely  ascertained  through  the  exercise  of  ordinary 
 diligence.  Third,  the  Commission  determines  that  the  consideration  of  these  facts  is  required  by  the  public 
 interest.  Galesburg  Broadcasting  has  not  provided  a  basis  to  consider  new  information  in  this  proceeding. 
 Assuming  that  Station  WSLR  would  operate  at  maximum  facilities,  the  fact  that  Station  WLSR  could 
 provide  service  to  its  57  dBu  contour  is  a  matter  that  could  have  been  timely  submitted  through  the  exercise 
 of  ordinary  diligence.  In  fact,  Galesburg  Broadcasting  submitted  Comments  contradicting  this  statement 
 and  indicating  that  its  proposed  upgrade  would  provide  service  to  only  the  60  dBu  contour.  3  We  also  do 
 not  believe  that  consideration  of  this  new  material  is  required  by  the  public  interest.  Galesburg  will 
 continue  to  have  local  service  from  Station  WSLR  and  the  population  and  area  that  would  have  been  served 
 by  a  Class  B1  upgrade  will  continue  to  receive  at  least  five  aural  services.  4  In  this  situation,  we  also  believe 
 that  it  would  not  be  in  the  public  interest  to  allow  a  party  to  sit  back  and  hope  a  decision  will  be  in  its 
 favor,  and  when  not,  to  parry  with  additional  submissions.  No  Commission  process  could  operate 


 2  In  its  Comments,  Galesburg  Broadcasting  states  that  the  Station  WLSR  upgrade  would  bring  service  to  an 
 additional  38,553  persons  in  an  area  of  2,361  square  kilometers  with  1,993  persons  in  an  area  of  282  square 
 kilometers  losing  service.  According  to  Galesburg  Broadcasting,  there  would  be  a  net  gain  in  service  to  36,  560 
 persons. 


 3  In  this  regard,  we  note  that  the  Commission  has  determined  that  the  60  dBu  (1  mv/  m)  contour  is  the  exclusive 


 standard  for  comparing  stations  areas  of  service.  Greenup,  Kentucky  and  Athens,  Ohio,  4  FCC  Rcd  3843  (1989), 
 rev.  6  FCC  Rcd  1493  (1991). 


 4  The  Commission  has  determined  five  reception  services  to  be  abundant  service.  See  Family  Broadcasting 


 Group,  53  RR2d  662,  669  (Rev.  Bd.  1983),  rev.  denied,  FCC  83-  559  (Commn  Nov.  29,  1983);  see  also 
 LaGrange  and  Rollingwood,  Texas,  10  FCC  Rcd  3337  (1995). 
2
 Federal  Communications  Commission  DA  00-  2423 
 3 
 efficiently  or  expeditiously  if  such  a  procedure  were  allowed.  Cf.  Colorado  Radio  Corp.  v.  Federal 
 Communications  Commission,  118  F2d  24  (D.  C.  Cir.  1941). 
 6.  Accordingly,  IT  IS  ORDERED,  That  the  aforementioned  Petition  for  Reconsideration  filed  by 
 Galesburg  Broadcasting  Company  IS  DENIED. 


 7.  IT  IS  FURTHER  ORDERED,  That  this  proceeding  IS  TERMINATED. 
 8.  For  further  information  concerning  this  proceeding,  contact  Robert  Hayne,  Mass  Media 
 Bureau,  (202)  418-  2177. 


 FEDERAL  COMMUNICATIONS  COMMISSION 
 John  A.  Karousos 
 Chief,  Allocations  Branch 
 Policy  and  Rules  Division 
 Mass  Media  Bureau 
3