FCC Record, Volume 26, No. 7, Pages 4843 to 5761, March 28 - April 08, 2011 Page: 5,061
The following text was automatically extracted from the image on this page using optical character recognition software:
control are examined on a case-by-case basis to determine who has operational control over an applicant's
or licensee's basic policies on programming, personnel, and finances.2?
In this proceeding, we find that Roane has not established that Morris Council is a real party in
interest with regard to the CSC Application. First, the relationship between the Morris Council and CSC
was disclosed in the CSC Application.22 Therein, CSC explained that "[t]he Applicant is an independent
corporation with a governing Board elected by members of the Knights of Columbus residing in the
community."23 Second, CSC provides a legitimate reason for creating another entity to apply for an NCE
FM station at Cookeville. As explained by CSC, the unincorporated Morris Council is not permitted to
own real property or businesses and must create a "home corporation" to engage in such activities. An
affiliated applicant such as CSC may hold an NCE license provided that it is otherwise qualified, and we
have granted similar applications for new NCE stations where the applicant is affiliated with a university
or other nonprofit entity that is not the actual applicant.24 Third, Roane has submitted no evidence of de
facto control by a third party. On the contrary, our review of CSC's by-laws indicates that the authority
for management of CSC and control of its financial affairs rests with the Board of Directors,2s and these
directors, as well as the officers, were identified in the CSC Application.26 While the CSC directors are
under the general supervision of the Morris Council officers, these are the same officers for both entities,
thereby negating any concerns that the CSC Board of Directors is being controlled by an undisclosed,
third party."7 Likewise, although the ability of one entity to appoint or remove directors of another has
been a factor considered in examining control,28 we do not believe that it is meaningful in this case, where
it is undisputed that the principals are the same for both entities. Fourth, Roane has not cited any
authority for the attribution of the individual members of the Morris Council to the CSC Application.
Rather, under the Commission's attribution policy for non-stock corporations such as CSC, the officers
21 See A. Wray Fitch 111, Esq., Letter, 23 FCC Red 12665, 12671 (MB 2008) ("Fitch Letter").
22 See, e.g., State of Oregon, Letter, 22 FCC Red 17634, 17644-45 (MB 2007) (finding that a real party in interest
issue against an NCE applicant was not warranted because the relationship between the applicant and a university
had been disclosed) ("Oregon Letter"): and KOWL, 49 FCC 2d at 968 22 (denying motion to add a real party in
interest issue against a mutually exclusive applicant because all pertinent information regarding present and future
principals of applicant had been revealed).
23 CSC Application, Exhibit 2, at 3.
24 See, e.g.. Oregon Letter, 22 FCC Rcd at 17644-45 (granting the NCE application of a foundation affiliated with a
university for a new NCE FM station and finding that such a relationship, as well as a short-form change of
ownership for the foundation, did not raise a real party in interest issue).
2 CSC Application, Attachment 12, Article VI, Section 5.
6 CSC Application, Section II, Question 6, at 2-5 (listing parties to the application and demonstrating their U.S.
27 Although Roane points out that CSC has only identified five out of nine possible members of the CSC Board of
Directors, we do not believe that this omission raises any concerns. First, CSC has explained that these remaining
directors were not identified because these vacancies on the Board of Directors had not been filled at the time of the
filing of the CSC Application. See CSC Opposition at 2. Second, the eventual reporting of the remaining four
members of the Board of Directors would not constitute a "major amendment" to the CSC application because it
constitutes less than a 50 percent change to the Board of Directors. Cf Moody Bible Institute of Chicago, Letter, 22
FCC Red 11116, 11117 (MB 2007) ("a fifty percent change in the governing board of an NCE applicant would
generally be considered a "major change" and would not be permissible outside of a filing window") ("Moody
28 See Fitch Letter, 23 FCC Red at 12671.
Here’s what’s next.
This book can be searched. Note: Results may vary based on the legibility of text within the document.
Tools / Downloads
Get a copy of this page or view the extracted text.
Citing and Sharing
Basic information for referencing this web page. We also provide extended guidance on usage rights, references, copying or embedding.
Reference the current page of this Book.
United States. Federal Communications Commission. FCC Record, Volume 26, No. 7, Pages 4843 to 5761, March 28 - April 08, 2011, book, April 2011; Washington D.C.. (digital.library.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metadc52169/m1/233/: accessed May 22, 2018), University of North Texas Libraries, Digital Library, digital.library.unt.edu; crediting UNT Libraries Government Documents Department.