********************************************************    
                         NOTICE
********************************************************

This document was converted from
WordPerfect or Word to ASCII Text format.

Content from the original version of the document such as
headers, footers, footnotes, endnotes, graphics, and page numbers
will not show up in this text version.

All text attributes such as bold, italic, underlining, etc. from the
original document will not show up in this text version.

Features of the original document layout such as
columns, tables, line and letter spacing, pagination, and margins
will not be preserved in the text version.

If you need the complete document, download the
WordPerfect version or Adobe Acrobat version, if available.

*****************************************************************
Before the
               Federal Communications Commission
                     Washington, D.C. 20554



In re Application of

Tabback Broadcasting Company
for Renewal of License of 
Station KAZM(AM), Sedona, Arizona 
)
)
)
)
)
)



File No. BR-970508YB



                  MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER

   Adopted:  June 23, 2000              Released:   June 30, 2000

By the Commission:

1.     The Commission has before it an April 9, 1999, Application for Review filed by Fairness in
Radio Broadcasting Committee ("FRBC") and related responsive pleadings.  FRBC seeks review of a March
10, 1999, letter ruling by the Chief, Audio Services Division, Mass Media Bureau.  Letter to Tabback
Broadcasting Co., Ref. No. 1800B3-JR (Audio Services Division, March 10, 1999) ("letter ruling").  The
letter ruling treated FRBC's Petition to Deny Tabback Broadcasting Company's ("TBC") above captioned
application for the renewal of license of station KAZM(AM), Sedona, Arizona, as an informal objection for
lack of standing, denied the informal objection, and granted the renewal.  The letter ruling also admonished
TBC for denying unrestricted access to the local public inspection file on two occasions in violation of 47
C.F.R.  73.3526(c), for failing to file annual ownership reports with the Commission in violation of 47
C.F.R.  73.3615(a), and for failing to maintain copies of those records in the local public inspection file in
violation of  47 C.F.R.  73.3526.

2.     FRBC argues that the staff, which treated FRBC's filing as an informal objection because FRBC
did not claim to represent actual listeners of the station, erred in finding that FRBC lacked standing to file a
petition to deny.  FRBC charges that this alleged procedural error permitted the staff to disregard the pleading
cycle limitations associated with the petition to deny process and "led directly to the denial of [FRBC's] . . .
Motion to Strike [supplementary material filed by TBC outside of the time limits and pleading restrictions set
forth in 47 C.F.R.   73.3584 and 1.45]."  FRBC believes that consideration of that material was prejudicial. 


3.     Substantively, FRBC repeats essentially the same arguments here as it raised in the informal objection,
alleging misrepresentation in reporting employment statistics, discrimination in hiring, broadcasting of allegedly
racist views, and violation of the personal attack rule.  FRBC argues that the staff did not adequately consider the
evidence and erred in its findings.  Additionally, FRBC repeats its arguments concerning the public file violations
and asserts that the admonishments for these violations were insufficient.  FRBC also reiterates TBC's alleged
misrepresentation in certifying to the Commission that the public file was complete.  Lastly, FRBC asserts that each
of the issues raised warrants a hearing or alternatively the issuance of a monetary forfeiture. 

4.     We affirm the staff's determination that FRBC, under then applicable precedent, lacked standing to file
a petition to deny where it failed to affirmatively state in an affidavit that at least one of its members was a resident
of the station's primary service area and an actual listener of the station.  The staff found that FRBC lacked
standing because it only asserted residency and not actual listener status.  The staff correctly treated FRBC's
pleading as an informal objection.  As the limitations on the number and timing of pleadings filed in response to
petitions to deny are inapplicable to informal objections, the staff's consideration of TBC's supplement to its
opposition was neither improper nor prejudicial.  See 47 C.F.R.  73.3587 (concerning informal objections). 
However, we note that even in proceedings where the strict time limitations associated with the petition to deny
process apply, the Commission has the discretion to request or authorize the filing of additional material, such as
material it believes relevant to making a public interest determination.  See 47 C.F.R.  1.45(e). Since TBS's
supplement, consisting of letters of support from the station's listeners concerned KAZM's license renewal, we
might have properly exercised such discretion even had the limitations of 47 C.F.R.  73.3584, concerning petitions
to deny, been relevant here. 

5.     On substantive matters, we find that FRBC's arguments were thoroughly considered and properly
resolved by the staff, and we uphold the staff decision for the reasons stated therein, including the staff's
finding that there was no intent to deceive, necessary to establish misrepresentation.  There is no reason to
disturb it.  See, e.g., WAMC, Inc., 10 FCC Rcd 12219 (1995) (denying application for review raising
essentially the same arguments as in petition for reconsideration).  We concur that there were no substantial
and material questions of fact as to TBC's qualifications to remain a Commission licensee, and therefore that
a hearing on TBC's license renewal application is not warranted. 47 U.S.C.  309(d), (e).  Regarding the
specific issue as to whether TBC's refusal on two occasions to permit unrestricted access to its public file and
omission of annual ownership reports from the file warranted a forfeiture rather than an admonishment, we
find that the staff appropriately exercised its discretion in admonishing TBC.  See, e.g. EZ New Orleans, Inc.,
FCC 99-259 (rel. Oct. 1, 1999) (licensee admonished where it conceded that, on at least one occasion, it had
not fully complied with 47 C.F.R.  73.3526); Sarkes Tarzian, Inc., 65 FCC 2d 127 (1977) (licensee
admonished for isolated and inadvertent public file rule violations where errors "freely conceded and
corrected").  Compare KLDT-TV 55, Inc., 10 FCC Rcd 3198, 3200 (1995) (forfeiture assessed for missing
three entire categories of documents in the public file).
6.     Accordingly, IT IS ORDERED that the Application for Review filed by Fairness in Radio
Broadcasting Committee, IS HEREBY DENIED.  



                              FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION

     
     

                              Magalie Roman Salas
                              Secretary