Skip Navigation

Federal Communications Commission

English Display Options

Commission Document

Commission Affirms WHAT(AM) Assignment to Marconi Broadcasting

Download Options

Released: March 21, 2013
Federal Communications Commission FCC 13-35

Before the

Federal Communications Commission

Washington, D.C. 20554

In the Matter of
File No. BAL-20061108AHP
Facility ID No. 33686
Application for Consent to Assignment of License
of Station WHAT(AM), Philadelphia, Pennsylvania


Adopted: March 20, 2013

Released: March 21, 2013

By the Commission:
We have before us an April 14, 2008, Application for Review (“AFR”),1 filed by Leon A.
Williams (“Williams”). In the AFR, Williams seeks review of the Media Bureau, Audio Division
(“Bureau”) March 14, 2008, decision denying Williams’s Petition for Reconsideration of the December
28, 2006, grant of an uncontested application for consent to assign the license of broadcast station
WHAT(AM), Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, from Urban Radio I, LLC, to Marconi Broadcasting Company,
LLC (“Assignment Application”).2 In the Staff Decision, the Bureau found that Commission policy
precluded consideration of potential format changes in reviewing the Assignment Application.3
Upon review of the AFR and the entire record, we conclude that Williams has failed to
demonstrate that the Bureau erred. The Bureau properly decided the matters raised, and we uphold the
Staff Decision for the reasons stated therein.

1 Marconi Broadcasting, LLC, filed an Opposition to the AFR on April 29, 2009.
2 Leon A. Williams, Esq., et al., Letter, 23 FCC Rcd 4039 (MB 2008) (“Staff Decision”).
3 Williams also alleged that Urban and Marconi failed to provide public notice of the Assignment Application under
47 C.F.R. §§ 73.3580(c) and (d)(3)(i), and charges that the Bureau ignored this allegation. On the contrary, the
Bureau cited Urban Radio and Marconi’s affidavits demonstrating that they had fully complied with the public
notice requirements. Staff Decision, 23 FCC Rcd at 4040 n.2. In his Application for Review, Williams does not
present any evidence rebutting these affidavits. In any event, we concur with the Bureau’s finding that, even had
Williams not been aware of the public notice, he took advantage of his opportunity to protest grant of the
Assignment Application under 47 C.F.R. § 1.106(b)(1), and the Bureau fully considered and rejected the substantive
arguments raised in his petition for reconsideration. Staff Decision, 23 FCC Rcd at 4040.

Federal Communications Commission FCC 13-35
ACCORDINGLY, IT IS ORDERED that, pursuant to Section 5(c)(5) of the
Communications Act of 1934, as amended,4 and Section 1.115(g) of the Commission’s rules,5 the
Application for Review IS DENIED.
Marlene H. Dortch


4 47 U.S.C. § 155(c)(5).
5 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.


You are leaving the FCC website

You are about to leave the FCC website and visit a third-party, non-governmental website that the FCC does not maintain or control. The FCC does not endorse any product or service, and is not responsible for, nor can it guarantee the validity or timeliness of the content on the page you are about to visit. Additionally, the privacy policies of this third-party page may differ from those of the FCC.