*Pages 1--1 from  Microsoft Word - 40227*
 Federal  Communications  Commission  FCC  04-  119 
 JOINT  STATEMENT  OF  COMMISSIONERS  MICHAEL  J.  COPPS  AND  JONATHAN  S.  ADELSTEIN 
 CONCURRING 
 Re:  Green  Valley  Broadcasters,  Inc.,  For  a  New  AM  Broadcast  Station  at  Sahuarita,  Arizona  et  al.,  Memorandum  Opinion  and  Order;  Nelson  Enterprises,  Inc.,  For  a  New  AM 
 Broadcast  Station  at  Plano,  Illinois  et  al.,  Memorandum  Opinion  and  Order;  and  Robert  E.  Combs,  For  a  Construction  Permit  for  a  New  AM  Station  at  Boise,  Idaho, 
 Memorandum  Opinion  and  Order 


 Section  307(  b)  directs  the  Commission  to  distribute  licenses  across  the  nation  to  ensure  the  “fair,  efficient,  and  equitable  distribution  of  radio  service.”  In  circumstances  of  mutually  exclusive  AM  or  FM 
 applications,  the  Commission  uses  assignment  priorities  established  in  1982  to  effectuate  Section  307(  b)  ’s  objectives.  While  the  first  three  priorities  are  more  straightforward,  the  fourth  priority  embodies  a  catch-all 
 “other  public  interest  matters.” 
 We  are  concerned  that  in  practice  this  priority  has  devolved  into  a  raw  population  comparison  where  the  applicant  seeking  to  serve  the  larger,  more  urban  area  nearly  always  wins  irrespective  of  the 
 number  of  stations  already  serving  each  community.  While  service  to  a  greater  population  is  an  important  criterion  under  our  public  interest  examination,  we  have  concerns  when  it  becomes  the  sole  criterion.  As 
 a  general  public  interest  priority,  an  applicant  should  have  a  chance  to  convince  us  that  there  are  other  compelling  reasons  –  beyond  mere  population  –  to  award  its  proposal  a  dispositive  preference.  In  a 
 handful  of  cases  the  Commission  has  entertained  other  showings  to  discount  the  raw  population  totals,  yet  that  process  requires  applicants  to  undertake  complicated  and  costly  engineering  calculations,  straining 
 the  resources  of  both  applicants  and  the  Commission. 
 We  believe  there  are  ways  to  simplify  the  process  and  ensure  rural  applicants  an  opportunity  to  compete  on  a  more  even  footing.  We  urge  that  in  the  near  future  the  Commission  will  give  some  thought 
 to  reevaluating  its  allocation  policies,  and  in  particular  its  treatment  of  the  public  interest  assignment  priority.  It  is  vital  that  the  Commission  provide  all  applicants  –  whether  seeking  to  serve  rural  or  urban 
 America  –  an  effective  process  to  achieve  the  distribution  goals  set  forth  by  Congress. 
1