In re Applications of
WTCN TELEVISION, INC. (WTCN-TV), MINNEAPOLIS,
MINN.; MIDWEST RADIO-TELEVISION, INC. (WCCO-TV), MINNEAPOLIS, MINN.; UNITED
TELEVISION, INC. (KMSP-TV), MINNEAPOLIS, MINN.; TWIN CITY AREA EDUCATIONAL
TELEVISION CORP. (KTCA-TV), ST. PAUL, MINN.; TWIN CITY AREA EDUCATIONAL
TELEVISION CORP. (KTCI-TV), ST. PAUL, MINN. For Construction Permits
No. 15841 File No. BPCT-2850; Docket No. 15842 File No. BPCT-3292;
Docket No. 15843 File No. BPCT-3293; Docket No. 16782 File No. BPET-249; Docket
No. 16783 File No. BPET-250
6 F.C.C.2d 828 (1966), 8 Rad. Reg. 2d (P & F) 1041 (1966)
RELEASE NUMBER: FCC 66-949
(November 2, 1966 Adopted)
BY THE COMMISSION: COMMISSIONER COX CONCURRING AND ISSUING A STATEMENT; COMMISSIONER LOEVINGER ISSUING A SEPARATE STATEMENT; COMMISSIONER WADSWORTH ABSENT; COMMISSIONER JOHNSON CONCURRING AND ISSUING A STATEMENT IN WHICH COMMISSIONER BARTLEY JOINS. At a session of the Federal Communications Commission held at its offices in Washington, D.C., on the 2d day of November 1966;
1. The Commission has under consideration: (a) A petition for review of the Review Board's memorandum opinion and order herein (FCC 66R-336, released Sept. 6, 1966), filed September 14, 1966, by Twin City Area Educational Television Corp. (KTCA-TV and KTCI-TV) and Midwest Radio-Television, Inc. (WCCO-TV); (b) an opposition, filed September 26, 1966, by the Chief, Broadcast Bureau; and (c) a reply, filed September 30, 1966, by Twin City and Midwest.
2. It is ordered, That the above-referenced petition for review Is denied.
FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION, BEN F. WAPLE, Secretary.
CONCURRING STATEMENT OF COMMISSIONER KENNETH A. COX
I agree that the Broadcast Bureau, where it intends to participate fully in an adjudicatory proceeding, should disclose its position and file its exhibits at as early a point in the proceeding as is possible. However, due to limitations of staff it has been necessary for the Bureau to restrict its participation in certain classes of cases. In its opposition to petition for review in this case, the Bureau states:
15. The Bureau, in this proceeding, only seeks to introduce rebuttal matters if relevant matters are not fully covered by other parties to the proceeding. This can only reasonably be determined after the direct cases have been received in evidence. This differs from the posture of AMST and the Department of Aeronautics which have more definitive positions that can more easily be reduced to writing at an earlier stage of the proceedings.
Since this seems to me to be a reasonable position under the circumstances of this case and the Bureau's participation in it and since I agree that the record does not disclose an agreement by the Bureau to exchange rebuttal exhibits at the same time as the other parties, I concur in the denial of review.
SEPARATE STATEMENT OF COMMISSIONER LEE LOEVINGER
(IN RE APPLICATIONS OF WTCN TELEVISION ET AL.)
This matter comes before the Commission now on the issue whether the Broadcast Bureau shall be required to exchange exhibits with the other parties in advance of the hearing. The merits of this proceeding are not now before the Commission. Applicants herein have agreed to exchange exhibits prior to the hearing. There is dispute among the parties as to whether or not the Broadcast Bureau made a similar agreement. It denies such a stipulation and the examiner and Review Board have found in its favor on this issue. However, I do not think that this should be determinative. As a matter of policy the Commission should favor both candor and disclosure at the earliest possible stage in the proceedings and should require those subject to its supervision to comply with this policy. Cf. Dennis v. United States (U.S. Supreme Court, June 20, 1966), 16 L. Ed. 2d 973.
We concur in the result.
We share the expression of concern by Commissioner Loevinger in this case and, where applicable, would vote accordingly.
In the circumstances of this case, however, we concur for the reasons expressed by Commissioner Cox.