Federal Communications Commission FCC 16-56
Before the
Federal Communications Commission
Washington, D.C. 20554
In the Matter of
WKMJ Radio Live The People Station, Inc.
Application for a Construction Permit for a new 
LPFM Station at Pinellas Park, Florida 
)
)
)
)
)
)
File No. BNPL-20131107AAI
Facility ID No. 194483
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
Adopted:  April 27, 2016 Released: April 28, 2016
By the Commission:
1. We have before us a December 18, 2015 Petition for Reconsideration
1
filed by WKMJ 
Radio Live The People Station, Inc. (WKMJ) in response to the Commission’s denial of its Application 
for Review.
2
  The Commission affirmed a Media Bureau (Bureau) finding that WKMJ is, by statute, 
ineligible to hold a Low Power FM (LPFM) authorization because WKMJ’s Chief Executive Officer 
operated an unauthorized radio station from WKMJ’s address, in violation of Section 301 of the 
Communications Act of 1934, as amended.
3
  The Commission, therefore, upheld the Bureau’s dismissal 
of WKMJ’s above-referenced application to construct a new LPFM station.  For the reasons discussed 
below, we dismiss the Petition as repetitious.
2. Where the Commission has denied an application for review, it will entertain a petition 
for reconsideration only if the petition relies on (1) events which have occurred or circumstances which 
have changed since the last opportunity to present such matters; or (2) facts or arguments previously 
unknown, of which the petitioner could not have learned through ordinary diligence.
4
  It is well settled 
that a petition for reconsideration is not to be used to reargue points to which the agency has already 
spoken or to raise new arguments that could have been made previously.
5
  Accordingly, the Commission 
will dismiss a petition as repetitious if it fails to introduce relevant new facts or changed circumstances.
6
  
WKMJ states that it could not have anticipated the Decision’s allegedly incorrect statement that WKMJ 
did not contest the underlying facts.
7
  WKMJ also argues that, after its last opportunity to present 
                                                     
1
See WKMJ Radio Live the People Station, Inc. Petition for Reconsideration (filed Dec. 18, 2015) (Petition).
2
See WKMJ Radio Live the People Station, Inc., Memorandum Opinion and Order, 30 FCC Rcd 13779 (2015) 
(Decision).  
3
Id., 30 FCC Rcd at 13779-80, paras. 1 and 3, citing LPFM MX Group 108, Letter Order, Ref. No. 1800B3-ATS 
(MB Mar. 16, 2015), 47 U.S.C. § 301, 47 CFR § 73.854, Making Appropriations for the Government of the District 
of Columbia for Fiscal Year 2001 Act, Pub. L. No. 106-553, 114 Stat. 2762, Section 632(a)(1)(B) (2000), and 
Creation of a Low Power Radio Service, Second Report and Order, 16 FCC Rcd 8026, 8030 (2001).  
4
See 47 CFR § 1.106(b)(2).
5
See Knoxville Broad. Corp., Memorandum Opinion and Order, 87 FCC 2d 1103, 1107, para. 11 (1981).
6
See 47 CFR § 1.106(b)(3); see, e.g., California Ass’n for Research and Education, Inc., Order on Recon., 30 FCC 
Rcd 14914, 14915-16, para. 4 (2015).
7
See Petition at 2-3, citing Decision, 30 FCC Rcd at 13779, para. 2.  WKMJ had argued that the Bureau: (1) erred 
by relying on unsworn documents; (2) denied WKMJ due process; and (3) impermissibly disqualified WKMJ 
without any formal adjudication by a court or administrative tribunal.  The Commission viewed those arguments as 
procedural and found them to be meritless.  See Decision, 30 FCC Rcd at 13779-80, paras. 2-3.  In particular, the 
(continued….)
Federal Communications Commission FCC 16-56
2
arguments, it learned of a Bureau action which allegedly demonstrates that the Bureau acts in an 
inconsistent and discriminatory manner by giving non-minority applicants opportunities to respond while 
denying such opportunities to minority-owned entities like WKMJ.
8
3. Although WKMJ claims to raise new matters previously unknown, it does no more than 
repeat, re-characterize, or expand arguments already made, considered, and rejected.  WKMJ’s alleged 
“factual” dispute is merely a reframed presentation of its unsuccessful procedural arguments, i.e., that the 
evidence leading to WKMJ’s disqualification was unsworn and outside of any formal adjudication.
9
  
Similarly, WKMJ’s allegation of recently discovered discriminatory Bureau practices violating WKMJ’s 
due process rights, merely builds upon its rejected due process claims by adding an irrelevant discussion 
of Bureau action in an unrelated case involving different factual issues.
10
  In conclusion, because the 
Chief Executive Officer of WKMJ illegally operated a radio station from WKMJ’s address, WKMJ is 
prohibited, by statute, from obtaining the LPFM license that it seeks. Accordingly, as we concluded in the 
Decision, the Bureau’s dismissal of its application was appropriate. 
(Continued from previous page)                                                            
Commission stated that no formal Commission determination of illegal operation is necessary to disqualify an 
LPFM applicant and that the Bureau had not erred in taking official notice of (1) Commission enforcement records 
of unlicensed operations [Kervenson Joseph, Notice of Unlicensed Operation (EB Tampa Office, rel. Dec. 19, 2013)
(NOUO)]; and (2) a police report, showing that local police working together with Commission field agents 
investigated unauthorized transmissions on 102.1 MHz; found WKMJ’s CEO, Kervenson Joseph, operating without 
a license from 6251 Park Boulevard, Pinellas Park, Florida; and seized the antenna and transmitter.  See Decision, 
30 FCC Rcd at 13779-80, paras. 2-3; Dennis Kelly, Esq., Letter Order, 30 FCC Rcd 7427, 7428 (MB 2015).  It is 
these officially noticed facts, recited in the Bureau’s Order, that WKMJ never contested. 
8
Petition at 4-5.
9
Specifically, WKMJ repeats claims that the Bureau improperly relied on information in informal objections, the 
Enforcement Bureau’s NOUO, and an unsworn police report.  See Petition at 3.  The Commission has already 
addressed each of these points.  See Decision, 30 FCC Rcd at 13779-80, paras. 2-3.
10
WKMJ previously maintained that it, a minority applicant, did not receive due process because it had no 
opportunity to respond to allegations of unlicensed operations. See Application for Review at 8-9 (filed Aug. 21, 
2015).  The Commission found this argument meritless because WKMJ and its principal had been provided 
numerous opportunities to respond, but failed to do so.  See Decision, 30 FCC Rcd at 13780, para. 3.  WKMJ now 
repeats the rejected argument but adds a claim that WKMJ was not given the opportunity to respond because it is a 
minority applicant.  The entirety of WKMJ’s support for its allegation of discrimination is its showing that the 
Bureau sent a letter of inquiry to an unrelated, allegedly non-minority, applicant in an unrelated Oregon LPFM 
proceeding, seeking information about an unrelated matter (concerning the applicant’s corporate status).  See 
Leanna McKendree, Letter of Inquiry, Ref. 1800B3-ATS (MB Jul. 21, 2015).  This new allegation completely fails 
to address, much less refute, the Decision’s statement that WKMJ was afforded multiple opportunities to respond.  
In contrast, the alleged non-minority applicant in the Oregon case cited by WKMJ was asked to respond because it 
had not previously had an opportunity to address the alleged facts. See Tylor Stone, Letter Order, DA 15-1452 (MB 
rel. Dec. 18, 2015) (subsequently dismissing the same Oregon application).   In addition, WKMJ’s argument fails to 
distinguish the numerous published decisions in which the Bureau has given known minority applicants 
opportunities to submit information in licensing cases.  See, e.g., Tango Radio, LLC, Memorandum Opinion and 
Order, 30 FCC Rcd 10564, 10565-66, para. 3 (2015) (FM applications dismissed following opportunity to provide 
information about construction); Antonio Cesar Guel, Letter Order, 29 FCC Rcd 5264 (MB 2014) (LPFM 
applications dismissed following opportunity to provide information about ownership and site availability).  Thus, 
WKMJ’s claim of disparate treatment of minorities is specious, and the proceeding cited by WKMJ is irrelevant.  
Federal Communications Commission FCC 16-56
3
4. ACCORDINGLY, IT IS ORDERED that the Petition for Reconsideration filed by 
Application for Review filed by WKMJ Radio Live The People Station, Inc., on December 18, 2015, IS 
DISMISSED, as repetitious, pursuant to Section 405 of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended,
11
and 47 CFR §§ 1.106(b)(2), (b)(3), and (j). 
FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION
Marlene H. Dortch
Secretary
                                                     
11
47 U.S.C. § 405.