*Pages 1--2 from  Microsoft Word - 29535*
 Federal  Communications  Commission  FCC  03-  159 
 Before  the  Federal  Communications  Commission 
 Washington,  D.  C.  20554 


 In  re  Applications  of 
 KT  BROADCASTING,  INC. 


 MARCIA  T.  TURNER  d/  b/  a  TURNER  ENTERPRISES 
 For  Authority  to  Construct  New  Commercial  Television  Station  on  Channel  *46  at  Gosnell, 
 Arkansas 


 )  ) 
 )  ) 
 )  ) 
 )  ) 
 )  ) 
 ) 


 MEMORANDUM  OPINION  AND  ORDER 
 Adopted:  July  1,  2003  Released:  July  17,  2003 
 By  the  Commission: 
 1.  The  Commission  has  before  it  timely  applications  for  review  filed  by  filed  by  KT  Broadcasting,  Inc.(“  KT”)  and  Marcia  T.  Turner  d/  b/  a  Turner  Enterprises  (“  Turner”),  seeking 
 review  of  a  September  14,  2000,  letter  ruling  by  the  Chief,  Video  Division,  Media  Bureau,  which  dismissed  their  petitions  for  reconsideration  of  the  dismissal  of  their  applications  for  a  new 
 commercial  television  service  to  operate  on  Channel  *46,  Gosnell,  Arkansas. 
 2.  KT  and  Turner  were  among  seven  applicants  for  a  construction  permit  to  operate  a  commercial  television  station  on  Channel  *46  at  Gosnell.  Although  the  reservation  of  Channel 
 *46  for  noncommercial  use  was  published  in  the  Federal  Register  in  1989,  the  asterisk  that  reflects  the  noncommercial  status  of  the  channel  was  inadvertently  omitted  from  the  published 
 amendment  of  the  TV  Table  of  Allotments  contained  in  Section  73.606  of  the  Commission’s  Rules.  In  1996,  an  application  was  filed  proposing  a  new  commercial  television  service  on  that 
 channel.  A  subsequently  issued  Public  Notice,  establishing  a  cut-  off  date  for  competing  applications  did  not  indicate  that  Channel  *46  was  reserved  for  noncommercial  use.  Competing 
 applications  were  filed  by,  among  others,  KT  and  Turner.  Because  the  Commission  had  reserved  the  channel  for  noncommercial  educational  use,  the  applications  proposing  commercial  services 
 on  that  channel  were  returned  as  unacceptable  for  filing,  and  the  application  fees  returned. 
 3.  Four  of  the  seven  commercial  applicants  filed  petitions  for  reconsideration  of  that  decision.  They  argued  that  the  omission  of  the  asterisk  designating  the  channel’s  reserved  status 
 in  both  Section  73.606  of  the  Rules  and  the  Public  Notice  misled  the  applicants,  and  equities  demanded  the  reinstatement  of  their  applications.  They  maintained  that  the  Commission  should 
1
 Federal  Communications  Commission  FCC  03-  159 
 2 
 “void”  its  action  reserving  Channel  46  for  noncommercial,  educational  use  and  reinstate  their  applications  for  commercial  service;  waive  Section  73.606  of  the  rules  to  permit  the  processing 
 of  applications  proposing  commercial  service  on  this  reserved  channel;  or  permit  parties  to  submit  “curative”  amendments  converting  their  earlier-  filed  applications  to  proposals  for 
 authority  to  construct  a  new  noncommercial  station.  In  its  letter  ruling,  the  Division  determined  that  an  inadvertent  administrative  error  does  not  create  any  right  for  these  applicants  to  propose  a 
 commercial  television  service  on  a  channel  reserved  for  noncommercial  use,  and  that  no  basis  exists  to  ignore  or  waive  the  Commission’s  rules  and  procedures  to  permit  them  to  do  so. 


 4.  In  its  application  for  review,  KT  alleges  that  the  Division  did  not  adequately  consider  its  request  to  waive  the  rules  to  permit  it  to  apply  for  a  commercial  station  on  a  reserved  channel. 
 Turner  asserts,  as  argued  in  its  petition  for  reconsideration,  that  because  the  Commission  “affirmatively  misled”  the  applicants  by  erroneously  listing  the  channel  as  available  for 
 commercial  use  in  the  TV  Table  of  Allotments,  Section  73.606  of  the  rules,  equity  requires  that  its  application  be  reinstated. 


 5.  We  have  reviewed  the  Division’s  disposition  of  the  petitions  for  reconsideration  and  find  that  its  ruling  was  correct  and  that  no  basis  exists  to  warrant  reversal.  See,  e.  g.,  WAMC, 
 Inc.,  10  FCC  Rcd  12219  (1995).  Further,  as  pointed  out  by  the  Division,  the  applicants  could  seek  to  amend  the  DTV  Table  of  Allotments  if  they  wish  to  pursue  a  commercial  or 
 noncommercial  educational  operation  for  Gosnell.  1 
 6.  Accordingly,  IT  IS  ORDERED,  That  the  applications  for  review  filed  by  KT  Broadcasting,  Inc.  and  Marcia  T.  Turner  d/  b/  a  Turner  Enterprises  ARE  HEREBY  DENIED. 


 FEDERAL  COMMUNICATIONS  COMMISSION 
 Marlene  H.  Dortch  Secretary 


 1  We  have  not  amended  the  Table  of  Allotments  to  reflect  the  noncommercial,  educational  status  of  Channel  46  at 
 Gosnell  because  this  allotment  was  deleted  pursuant  to  our  DTV  Orders.  See  Sixth  Report  and  Order,  Advanced  Television  Systems  and  Their  Impact  upon  the  Existing  Television  Broadcast  Service,  12  FCC  Rcd  14588,  14639 


 (1997). 
2