Opinion ID: 597788
Heading Depth: 3
Heading Rank: 2

Heading: Sharron Annette Haley

Text: 12 On March 10, 1988, Ms. Haley filed an application for a permit to construct an FM radio station in Sumter, South Carolina. Joint Appendix (J.A. (Haley)) at 8. As in P & D's case, Ms. Haley's application included a negative response to the financial certification question. See id. at 9. 13 In an HDO released on March 19, 1990, the Mass Media Bureau designated Ms. Haley's application and five other proposals for a consolidated hearing. Despite the fact that Ms. Haley had taken no action to amend the negative financial certification on her application, the HDO did not specify a financial issue against her. 14 On May 3, 1990, a competing applicant filed a motion to dismiss Ms. Haley's application on the ground that it lacked an affirmative financial certification. See J.A. (Haley) at 13. After extended discussion of the matter at a prehearing conference, see id. at 39-47, the ALJ assigned to the case denied the motion to dismiss, but did add a financial issue against Ms. Haley. See Sharron Annette Haley, FCC 90M-1475 (June 5, 1990), reprinted in J.A. (Haley) at 60. The ALJ also ordered Ms. Haley to file by June 29, 1990 an amendment under § 1.65 disclosing the status of her financial qualifications which shall include a declaration reciting all steps taken ... to obtain a financing commitment. J.A. (Haley) at 61. 15 On June 29, 1990, Ms. Haley filed a petition for leave to amend her application and an amendment recounting her efforts to obtain the financial support necessary to construct and operate her proposed station. See J.A. (Haley) at 62, 64. In her petition for leave to amend, she stated: 16 The purpose of this amendment is merely to advise the Commission and the other parties to this proceeding of Ms. Haley's efforts to obtain the evidence she plans to use to prove her financial qualifications under the issue added by the Presiding Judge.... By the attached amendment Ms. Haley does not propose any change in the financial certification contained in her application. Rather, she proposes to prove her qualifications, rather than utilize the Commission's certification process. 17 Id. at 82 (emphasis in original). The ALJ accepted Ms. Haley's amendment solely for purposes of Haley's full disclosure of the steps taken ... to obtain a reasonable assurance of financial qualification. Sharron Annette Haley, FCC 90M-2724, at 2 (Aug. 29, 1990), reprinted in J.A. (Haley) at 88, 89. The ALJ noted, however, that [t]here is no attempt in the amendment to change her certification on the application from 'No' to 'Yes.'  Id. at 89. 18 Ms. Haley was permitted to present evidence of her financial qualifications at a hearing held on September 17 and 18, 1990. Nevertheless, the ALJ subsequently dismissed her application on the grounds that (1) Haley's application ... ha[d] never been amended to show a 'Yes' certification, and (2) the evidence she presented at the hearing failed to establish a reasonable assurance that she met the financial qualifications requirement. Sharron Annette Haley, FCC 91M-246, at 3-4 (Jan. 23, 1991), reprinted in J.A. (Haley) at 107, 109-110. The Review Board affirmed, resting its decision exclusively on Ms. Haley's failure to file a good-cause financial amendment to redress the negative financial certification in her original application. See Sharron Annette Haley, 6 F.C.C.R. 1567, 1568-69 (Rev.Bd.1991). The Review Board's ruling was in turn affirmed by the Commission. See Sharon Annette Haley, 6 F.C.C.R. 4630 (Comm'n 1991). As in P & D's case, the Commission specifically rejected Ms. Haley's argument that she did not have adequate notice that a good cause post-designation amendment was required. Id. at 4630. Nor did the Commission accept her claim that her June 29 reporting amendment was sufficient to avoid dismissal. Id.