The filing process for two stations in Laramie county (one of which is Radio 74 International, and the other being Cheyenne Broadcasting Foundation) have been rather stale and boring lately, but no more. *grabs popcorn*. Kristopher Michael of CBF has now filed an informal objection against R74I for the lack of tower, as well as site assurance, on February 23rd, 2022. It will be interesting to see how R74I responds to these allegations, and if they will file their own objection. They are both fighting for 89.1 FM, which currently holds K206EO (Air1), and it's so hard to tell if any of these groups will be on the air (or "win out") by mid-2025, or if we'll stick with Air1.
-
Get involved.
We want your input!
Apply for Membership and join the conversations about everything related to broadcasting.
After we receive your registration, a moderator will review it. After your registration is approved, you will be permitted to post.
If you use a disposable or false email address, your registration will be rejected.
After your membership is approved, please take a minute to tell us a little bit about yourself.
https://www.radiodiscussions.com/forums/introduce-yourself.1088/
Thanks in advance and have fun!
RadioDiscussions Administrators
Let the shenanigans begin! (Pleadings for NCE)
- Thread starter ZantennaG1
- Start date
We should have a conclusion of this saga on March 7th, 2022 (this upcoming Monday), according to @Michi 's website. At this time, it would appear that the permit would be awarded to Cheyenne Broadcasting Foundation. It's weird that Radio 74 has not filed a counter pleading to CBF's objection, but even if they did, it's hard to tell if that would earn them any points. Also, we shall soon see if K206EO will be displaced or not, as CBF's proposed contour only fringes into Cheyenne, as does the current K206EO contour (although I can receive it strongly while driving around town). In a way, if CBF wins, I hope they plan to move their transmitter closer to town, otherwise they'll be stuck trying to find a translator like KYOY has in K296FZ. Not to mention, there would be massive interference to at least the 50 dbu contour of KDAI, and even some to the 60dbu
Last edited:
The first Fair Distribution analysis came out for MX group 131, which was for tribal priority. I am aware of at least one more MX group (141) that is also predicted to win on tribal priority. This is the first filing window in which the tribal priority and first aural transmission service priorities appear, so how the FCC is going to handle these is still pretty much uncharted waters. I am guessing they will get those done first before going on to the rest of the fair distribution analysis (first & second NCE service, which existed in 2007). Unless the FCC surprises us this month, I do not expect the first Fair Distribution analysis to come out until around April. I am aware of at least one group that has asked for another 7 days to finalize their settlement agreement. I am not sure if the FCC is going to budge, but I can only assume that someone is working on the first full Fair Distribution analysis Order with the MX groups that did not request an extension. So, we may get one later this month, who knows? Those Orders are definitely a lot of work. Look at the 2007 Window activity in the NCE Window Tracker and you can see how those will work.
This MX group does not involve Fair Distribution priority, so it will go to a full Commission comparative review (which will be done after the FCC makes decisions on all of the Fair Distribution MX groups, probably in the latter part of this year). The group has two applicants, R.74 Internationale and Cheyenne Bc. REC rejected R.74's diversity claim and will not accept their 2 point claim. While R.74 listed their other holdings, they fail to provide a contour map to show where those other holdings are located compared to the proposal. In the alternate, they did not include any statement on their original application that they have no other broadcast holdings near the proposal. R.74 does get two points for having more than 125% land area and population over Cheyenne. Cheyenne has filed an Informal Objection against R.74 citing site assurance. What happens next is based on whether the FCC also rejects the 2 points for diversity.
IF THEY DO NOT REJECT THE DIVERSITY POINTS:
R.74 will be declared the tentative selectee as they would win, 4 points to 2. At that time, Cheyenne's Informal Objection will then be considered. If the FCC finds that Cheyenne's objection has merit, the FCC will dismiss R.74 and grant Cheyenne. If not, R.74 will get the grant and Cheyenne will be dismissed.
IF THEY REJECT THE DIVERSITY POINTS:
Both applicants will have two points and it will go to the first tie breaker. Cheyenne has fewer current authorizations than R.74 and will be declared the tentative selectee. Because Cheyenne is the tentative selectee, their informal objection against R.74 will not be considered as the issue is moot.
I don't know how I didn't notice your reply until today, but thank you for your response. It definitely helps clarify the mess those two are going through.
- Status