Commission Upholds Palouse Country Assignment to Inland Northwest
Federal Communications Commission
Washington, D.C. 20554In the Matter of
Palouse Country, Inc., Assignor
Inland Northwest Broadcasting, LLC, Assignee
Application for Assignment of License for:
Station KZZL-FM, Pullman, Washington
File No. BALH-20040806ABA
Facility ID No. 26412
Station KRAO-FM, Colfax, Washington
File No. BALH-20040806ABB
Facility ID No. 15269
Station KCLX(AM), Colfax, Washington
File No. BAL-20040806ABC
Facility ID No. 15270
Station KMAX(AM), Colfax, Washington
File No. BAL-20040806ABD
Facility ID No. 13569
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
Adopted: May 13, 2013Released: May 14, 2013
By the Commission: Commissioner McDowell not participating.
The Commission has before it an Application for Review filed by Radio Palouse, Inc.
(“RPI”). RPI seeks review of the December 11, 2007, action by the Media Bureau denying RPI’s Petition
for Reconsideration and granting the above-captioned applications (“Assignment Applications”) filed by
Palouse Country, Inc. (“PCI”) for Commission consent to assign four radio stations to Inland Northwest
Broadcasting, LLC (“Inland”).1 In granting the Assignment Applications, Bureau staff used the contour-
overlap analysis methodology to determine Inland’s compliance with the local radio ownership rule, as is
required whenever the stations at issue are located outside any Arbitron Metro radio market.2 In its
Petition for Reconsideration, RPI argued that the Bureau should have used an alternative market
definition devised by RPI for this particular local radio market, comprised of only those stations licensed
to three specific local communities. In the Reconsideration Letter, the Bureau found that such departure
from the rules was not justified based on RPI’s factual showing, which it characterized as “opinion and
estimates” unsupported by objective market data. The Bureau also observed that the Commission
expressly rejected the type of case-by-case market analysis advocated by RPI when it revised the multiple
ownership rules in the 2003 Ownership Order, for reasons of transparency, regulatory certainty, and
1 David Tillotson, Esq., Letter, 22 FCC Rcd 21458 (MB 2007) (“Reconsideration Letter”).
2 47 C.F.R. § 73.3555(a)(1); 2002 Biennial Regulatory Review – Review of the Commission’s Broadcast Ownership
Rules and Other Rules, Report and Order and Notice of Proposed Rulemaking, 18 FCC Rcd 13620, 13729-30 and
13870-73 (2003) (“Ownership Order”) (subsequent history omitted).
Federal Communications Commission FCC 13-71
administrative efficiency. The Reconsideration Letter accordingly upheld the Bureau’s earlier decision to
grant the Assignment Applications and denied RPI’s Petition for Reconsideration.
Upon review of the Application for Review and the entire record, we conclude RPI has
not demonstrated that the Bureau erred. The Bureau, in the Reconsideration Letter, properly decided the
matters raised, and we uphold its decision for the reasons stated therein.
ACCORDINGLY, IT IS ORDERED that, pursuant to Section 5(c)(5) of the
Communications Act of 1934, as amended,3 and Section 1.115(g) of the Commission’s rules,4 the
Application for Review IS DENIED.
FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION
Marlene H. Dortch
3 47 U.S.C. § 155(c)(5).
4 47 C.F.R. § 1.115(g).
Note: We are currently transitioning our documents into web compatible formats for easier reading. We have done our best to supply this content to you in a presentable form, but there may be some formatting issues while we improve the technology. The original version of the document is available as a PDF, Word Document, or as plain text.