WPCg 2B?T 3|P )Times New Roman (TT)Arial (TT)Times New Roman (Bold) (TT)Times New Roman (TT)2 LPT1nal)HPLAS4.WRSSx  @,,<$X@24@ ZPv3|P HP LaserJet 4/4Mom 302 LPT1nal)HPLAS4.WRSSC\  P6Q,,<$P X-   I. A. 1. a.(1)(a) i) a) 1. 1. 1. a.(1)(a) i) a)#X}xP7aXP##XP\  P6Q DXP#a8DocumentgDocument Style StyleXX` `  ` 2QpfkkAa4DocumentgDocument Style Style . a6DocumentgDocument Style Style GX  a5DocumentgDocument Style Style }X(# a2DocumentgDocument Style Style<o   ?  A.  2vtm a7DocumentgDocument Style StyleyXX` ` (#` BibliogrphyBibliography:X (# a1Right ParRight-Aligned Paragraph Numbers:`S@ I.  X(# a2Right ParRight-Aligned Paragraph Numbers C @` A. ` ` (#` 2   /  a3DocumentgDocument Style Style B b  ?  1.  a3Right ParRight-Aligned Paragraph Numbers L! ` ` @P 1. ` `  (# a4Right ParRight-Aligned Paragraph Numbers Uj` `  @ a. ` (# a5Right ParRight-Aligned Paragraph Numbers _o` `  @h(1)  hh#(#h 2F  m F a6Right ParRight-Aligned Paragraph Numbersh` `  hh#@$(a) hh#((# a7Right ParRight-Aligned Paragraph NumberspfJ` `  hh#(@*i) (h-(# a8Right ParRight-Aligned Paragraph NumbersyW"3!` `  hh#(-@p/a) -pp2(#p Tech InitInitialize Technical Style. k I. A. 1. a.(1)(a) i) a) 1 .1 .1 .1 .1 .1 .1 .1 Technical2xHVa1DocumentgDocument Style Style\s0  zN8F I. ׃  a5TechnicalTechnical Document Style)WD (1) . a6TechnicalTechnical Document Style)D (a) . a2TechnicalTechnical Document Style<6  ?  A.   26Ea3TechnicalTechnical Document Style9Wg  2  1.   a4TechnicalTechnical Document Style8bv{ 2  a.   a1TechnicalTechnical Document StyleF!<  ?  I.   a7TechnicalTechnical Document Style(@D i) . 23ea8TechnicalTechnical Document Style(D a) . Doc InitInitialize Document Stylez   0*0*0*  I. A. 1. a.(1)(a) i) a) I. 1. A. a.(1)(a) i) a)DocumentgPleadingHeader for Numbered Pleading PaperE!n    X X` hp x (#%'0*,.8135@8:2922032!342S5527toc 8\D4@6 toc 8lE! =(!^D4*!')\D.E2?@!(#` hp x (#toc 9\D5@6 toc 9lE! =(!^D5*!')\D.E3AB!(#B` hp x (#index 1D6@6 index 1lE! =(!^D6*!')\D.E4CD` !(# ` hp x (#index 2D7@6 index 2lE! =(!^D7*!')\D.E5EF` !(#B` hp x (#2{>6297<8<9=toa heading@6 toa heading! =(!^D8*!')\D.E6GH!(# ` hp x (#captionD9@6 captionlE! =(!^D9*!')\D.E7EI;J#x6X@KX@##b6X@C@#_Equation Ca@6 _Equation Caption!^D:*!')\D.E8;K;L#x6X@KX@##b6X@C@#Default Paragraph FoDefault Paragraph Font911#Xv6X@CX@##b6X@C@#2iF:>"g?@?@)C_Equation Caption_Equation Caption:11#Xv6X@CX@##b6X@C@#Times New Roman (TT)Arial (TT)Times New Roman (Bold) (TT)Times New Roman (Italic) (TT)Times New Roman (Bold Italic) (TT)"5@^*7DSS77S^*7*.SSSSSSSSSS..^^^Jxooxf]xx7Axfxx]xo]fxxxxf7.7NS7JSJSJ7SS..S.SSSS7A.SSxSSJP!PZ*7777CE7SSxJxJxJxJxJooJfJfJfJfJ7.7.7.7.xSxSxSxSxSxSxSxSxSxSxJxSxSxSxSxS]SxSxJxJoJoJoJfJfJfJxSxSxxSxSxSxSCS7S777SAxSf.fExSxSxSxo7oE]A]AN:*LS7JSSSSS.4}}S2S}277JJS77SS7J72t7[[[[^ee*C`^.wRSSn[Cfx`xWlRx[][ceIfIs`Wx[rriwge*7DSS77S^*7*.SSSSSSSSSS..^^^Jxooxf]xx7Axfxx]xo]fxxxxf7.7NS7JSJSJ7SS..S.SSSS7A.SSxSSJP!PZ7SJSS7]777JJ:S7A7xx*7SSSS!S7.S^7SC[227`L*724S}}}Jxxxxxxoffff7777xxxxxxx^xxxxxx]SJJJJJJoJJJJJ....SSSSSSS[SSSSSSS"5@^77Goo&BBNu7B77oooooooooo77uuuoˆz7dozz777^oBoodoo7oo,,d,ooooBd7oddddC4Cu7BB!BBPRBozoooooȲdoooo77777777ooooooooodoozodooooodddoooooooooPzBzBB7zddo,oRoooȽBRddNF7loBzoooooJIoBoB,,BBoBBoo,BBBtBnnnnuyy2Psu7coonCzshcnonvyXzXshn~|y77Goo&BBNu7B77oooooooooo77uuuoˆz7dozz777^oBoodoo7oo,,d,ooooBd7oddddC4Cu,oBooBȆBȖ,,BBFoBdB7Boooo4oBJouBoPnBBBsl7BBIozȑ7777uzoooooodoooo7777ooooooonzoooodo2S^F@I@M@[PTimes New Roman (TT)Arial (TT)Times New Roman (Bold) (TT)Times New Roman (Italic) (TT)XC7XaXX2PQXP,7PC2X DXP\  P6QXP.7UC2X"xXU4  pQXCCddCYCdYzzzzCCCCqodYYYYYYYYYYY8888dddddddnddddddd"5@^2CRdd$CCdq2C28dddddddddd88qqqYzoCNzoozzC8C^dCYdYdYCdd88d8ddddCN8ddddY`(`l2CC!CCPRCddYYYYYYzYzYzYzYC8C8C8C8ddddddddddYdddddoddYYYYYzYzYzYddddddPdCdCCCdNdz8zRdddCRoNoNNF2[dCYddddd7>d<d<CCYYdCCddCYCdYzzzzCCCCqodYYYYYYYYYYY8888dddddddnddddddd"5@^2Coddȧ8CCdr2C28ddddddddddCCrrrdzNdzoȐC8CtdCdoYoYCdo8Co8odooYNCodddYO,Oh2CC!CCPRCdodddddȐYYYYYN8N8N8N8oddddooooddoddddzodddYYYYYYddddooPoNoNCNodo8RoodȐYYoNoNNF2ldCddddddd<d<CCoodCCddCoCddzzzzzzzzzzCCCCozdddddddYYYYY8888dddddddndddddYd2g\aOT@wdR*y.C8*XC\  P6QP+1XC7XaXX2PQXP,7PC2X DXP\  P6QXP.-7UC2X"xXU4  pQX.W!0(X h0\  P6QhP/I(!XI,(\  P6Q,P0{,C8*X?,C*f9 xQX15PC2X?EXP*f9 xQXXl6RC2X^>BXR9 xyQX` !(#"5@^2Nodd8CCdr2C28ddddddddddCCrrrdNdzzozzzC8CrdCddYdYCdo88d8odddNN8oYdYNF,Fr2CC!CCPRCdddddddYYYYYN8N8N8N8oddddoooozYddddzYdzddddYYYYYYddddooPdNdNCNdddz8zRoodNRoNoNNF2ddNdddddd5family members of the original station owners; and (2) WCNR is a "failing" station. For the following reasons, we grant Community's request for a permanent waiver." ,))ZZ"Ԍ X-ԙ5! Waiver Request ă x   x4. Community asserts that the facts of this case are similar to the facts of the only two  X- x>cases where the Commission has granted permanent waivers of the daily newspaper cross x-ownership rule, both involving combined ownership of television stations and daily newspapers.  X- xLSee Fox Television Stations, Inc., 8 FCC Rcd 5341 (1993) aff'd sub nom. Metropolitan Council  Xx- xof NAACP Branches v. FCC, 46 F.3d 1154 (D.C. Cir. 1995) ("Fox") (allowing Rupert Murdoch  x\to continue to control the licensee of WNYW, New York, New York, after acquisition of the  XL- xfailing New York Post); Field Communications Corp., 65 FCC 2d 959 (1977) ("Field") (giving  xconsent to Field Enterprises, Inc., publisher of two daily newspapers in Chicago, to reacquire  xMcontrol of WFLDTV, Chicago). Community points out that in each of these cases, a media property was being reacquired by a former owner.   nx5. In this case, Press was founded by Paul R. Eyerly in 1902. It is now owned and  xoperated by Paul R. Eyerly III, whose two sons, Paul R. Eyerly IV and Brandon R. Eyerly, are  xnonvoting shareholders. Paul R. Eyerly, Jr., and other members of the Eyerly family were the  xoriginal owners of WCNR when it went on the air in 1947. The Eyerly family owners assigned  xthe license of WCNR in 1966 to a predecessor corporation of the present licensee, Columbia,  Xh- xwhich has continuously operated the station since that time. hM6 yO-  ԍxWCNR has been operated by only two licensees in its 50year history. The Eyerlys sold the station to the  xpredecessor of Columbia, which was owned by C. Edwin and Janice Darlington. C. Edwin Darlington was the  xstation's general manager at that time, and had been employed at the station since it first went on the air in 1947. Columbia is now owned by Janice Darlington and other members of the Darlington family. The abovecaptioned application  xMproposes a transfer from Columbia to a subsidiary of Press, which is owned by the son and  xgrandsons of Paul R. Eyerly, Jr., one of the original owners of WCNR. Community makes the  xargument that reacquisition of the license of WCNR by members of the Eyerly family thus "does not present a new ownership pattern in Bloomsburg." x   x6. Community also requests a waiver of the newspaper/radio crossownership rule on the  xygrounds that WCNR is a "failing" station and that Community is the station's only prospective  xNpurchaser. Community asserts that its own strong financial condition will help, through  xcombined ownership, to insure the survival of this "small market" AM station, which is  xy"financially strapped." Community further asserts that combined ownership of WCNR and the  Xk- xPressEnterprise will not significantly impact the diversification of radio and newspapers in the  XV-market.  X(-  _x7. Financial Losses.  According to copies of tax returns provided by Community,  X- xColumbia reported operating losses of $22,864 in 1996;M6 yOt$-  =ԍx Columbia's 1996 tax return reflects approximately $133,000 in income from the sale of the building where WCNR is located. $79,580 in 1995; and $64,762 in 1994. ",-(-(ZZ"  X-Community adds that Columbia's return for the 1993 tax year reported a loss of $43,601.M6 yOy-  ԍxThe net operating loss "carry forward" on Columbia's tax returns was $275,754 in 1994 (indicating a period of losses prior to 1993, according to Community), $340,516 in 1995, and $420,096 in 1996. The  $\N   X- xstation's net sales revenues have steadily dropped from $159,529 in 1994, to $132,501 in 1995,  xto $90,687 in 1996. Community reports that Columbia's liabilities exceeded assets by $55,343  X- x/in 1995; $48,571 in 1994; and $17,131 in 1993. Community states that, although the licensee  x-has not gone bankrupt, "it can no longer sustain these losses and is forced to sell its assets back to the Eyerly family."   {x8. Columbia's President, Joseph Darlington, states that WCNR has experienced "serious  xyfinancial problems" for the past 15 years, but has survived due to the personal commitments of  x\the Darlington family, whose members have sold their assets, mortgaged their personal and  xbusiness real estate and loaned funds to Columbia that have not been repaid. Darlington provides  xcopies of checks and minutes from shareholder meetings between 1987 and the present, indicating  x!that Darlington family members loaned funds to Columbia and forgave interest at times.  xDarlington also provides numerous copies of mortgage and loan agreements involving Columbia  xthat were executed between 1983 and 1997. Community notes that there has been no appreciable  X - x-compensation paid to any stockholder by Columbia,C M6 yOx-  ԍxDarlington states that he is the only stockholder who earns a salary from Columbia. He has demonstrated,  xby providing W2 income tax statements, that his salary as president was only $3900 annually ($75. per week) in  x1994, 1995 and 1996. Darlington adds that he earns no commission for handling most of the station's sales accounts.  xFurthermore, he states that Columbia's Secretary/Treasurer, Janice L. Darlington, has received no compensation since 1982.C and that it was only through the recent sale  xof the corporation's real estate that Columbia has been able to keep from going bankrupt.  x[Darlington states that the real estate was sold "to obtain operating funds to keep the business solvent."  XK-  X4-  0 x9. Efforts to Sell Station. Community avers that the proposed sale of station assets for  xk$130,000 is at a "depressed price" since Community is the only interested party. Darlington  xzstates that shareholders of Columbia first decided to try to sell WCNR in the spring of 1995.  X- xxDarlington says that he answered an advertisement in Broadcasting and Cable, an industry trade  xKpublication, that was placed by a prospective purchaser who was looking to buy a station in New  x/Jersey or Pennsylvania. Darlington states that he met and negotiated with the prospective  xpurchaser throughout the summer and early fall of 1995, and that despite entering into an agreement for the sale of WCNR, the purchaser failed to pursue the sale.   Nx 10. In January 1997, Columbia was presented with two offers for WCNR that Darlington  x=characterizes as "serious." One was Community's offer of $130,000 cash at closing. The other  xwas an offer from Red Rose Broadcasting, Inc., which called for a total of $150,000 to be paid  xin installments over 37 and onehalf months. Darlington states that Columbia's stockholders did  x.not consider the offer from Red Rose to be a viable offer for several reasons. The first reason,  xaccording to Darlington, was that the proposed agreement of sale provided for Red Rose",-(-(ZZ"  xmanagement and staff to immediately "take over" the daytoday operation of WCNR, but the  x<agreement did not provide for assignment of WCNR's license to Red Rose for another 18 months.  xAccording to Darlington, Columbia's stockholders were concerned that the transfer as outlined  X- xby Red Rose might be construed as an unauthorized transfer of control.M6 {O4-  ԍxSee 47 U.S.C. Section 310(d) (prohibiting the assignment or tranfer of control of a broadcast permit or  {O-license without prior Commission consent); see also 47 C.F.R. Section 73.3540(a). The second reason the  xRed Rose offer was rejected was that Columbia's stockholders were not given any indication or  xfinancial statements to assure them of Red Rose's ability to fulfill the terms of the proposed sale  x>agreement. Red Rose offered a deposit of only $4,000 (less than 3% of the purchase price),  xwhich Darlington characterizes as "minimal." He adds that neither Red Rose nor its president  xoffered "any collateral, security, or any personal guarantee of payment," leading Columbia's  xLstockholders to conclude that Red Rose intended to make its monthly installment payments of  x$4,000 from the operation of WCNR. The third reason that the Red Rose offer was rejected was  xthat Darlington believed that the president of Red Rose "ran a relatively small skeletal operation"  x.at another radio station in Pennsylvania, and that his associate, who would be involved in the  x.operation of WCNR, had previously taken a station off the air because of financial difficulties.  xIn summary, Darlington states that Columbia's board felt that the offer from Red Rose was "very high risk and had a large potential for failure."   x 11. Darlington states that Columbia's board of directors preferred to pursue Community's  xzoffer of full payment in cash at closing. He states that the board was certain of the financial  xsoundness of Community, which was a wellestablished local business, which had been in  xoperation for four generations, and with which Columbia had a relationship dating back 50 years.  xDarlington adds that, after its experience with the previous prospective purchaser, the board was  xmore wary of entering into an agreement for an installment purchase with a lesser known entity, where payments may have been dependent upon the earnings from WCNR.   Ox 12. Community submits a statement from Michael E. Hamilton, a broker with the Lutz  xyReal Estate Agency, indicating that he was retained by Columbia to find a buyer for the station  xin October 1996. Hamilton states that in late 1996 and 1997, he undertook a mailing campaign  xto more than 500 radio stations throughout Pennsylvania in an effort to find an interested buyer  xfor WCNR. Additionally, Hamilton states that he contacted several local investors, sent packages  XN- xto media brokers in Pennsylvania, and placed classified advertisements in Broadcasting and  X9- xCable. Hamilton reports that his efforts resulted in approximately 10 showings of the property,  xbut that Community's was the only "legitimate" or "serious" offer. Community also submits a  xstatement from Ray H. Rosenblum, a media broker and consultant, who states that he worked in  xtandem with Hamilton to find a buyer for WCNR, which was originally listed for $165,000.  xAccording to Mr. Rosenblum, no potential buyer would commit to a price as high as $120,000  x/because the station is a small and failing AM station in a county with five local commercial  xstations. Rosenblum adds that the alternative to the sale of WCNR to Community would probably be for the station to go off the air. "#$,-(-(ZZe""Ԍ X-  |x 13. Effect of Waiver on Competition and Diversity. Community provides an analysis  xKprepared by its consultant to establish that media diversity and competition would not be harmed  X- xjby the common ownership of WCNR and the Press Enterprise in Bloomsburg. The consultant  X- x.concludes that Columbia County,kM6 yO8-ԍx1990 U.S. Census population for Columbia County is 63,200.k Pennsylvania, where Bloomsburg is located, and where the  X- xPress Enterprise is circulated, is wellserved by 35 radio stations, seven television stations and  xlcable television with 75% penetration, as well as multiple local and national newspapers.  xColumbia County is included in the WilkesBarre/Scranton, Pennsylvania DMA, the 49th largest,  xwith approximately 550,000 television households (23,500 in Columbia County). Columbia  xCounty is also included in the WilkesBarre/Scranton Radio Metro Market, the 62nd largest.  xColumbia County is served by two cable systems: Service Electric in Bloomsburg, and Cable  xTV, Inc. in Berwick. Community also notes that Penn Advertising of Williamsport, Pennsylvania provides billboard advertising along the highways in Columbia County.   0x 14. There are five radio stations licensed to Columbia County, in addition to WCNR, an  xAM station licensed to broadcast at 1 kW daytime/23 watts nighttime. These include  xWHLM(FM), Bloomsburg, a 36.5 kW Class B station coowned with WJMW(AM), Bloomsburg,  xa 1 kW station. Other stations are WKAB(FM), a 4.1 kW Class A station, Berwick,  xPennsylvania; WSQV(AM), Berwick, a station licensed to broadcast at 1 kW daytime/164 watts  xnighttime; and WKXP(FM), Benton, Pennsylvania, a 6 kW Class A station. Community also  xzproduces an engineering study which indicates that 11 commercial radio stations (including  xlWCNR) place a principal community contour over some portion of Columbia County. In  x=addition, Community asserts that 24 nonlocal radio stations have a measurable listenership in Columbia County, according to a 1996 Arbitron study.  X-  x15. With regard to newspapers, Community submits that the PressEnterprise is the only  xlocallybased daily newspaper in Columbia County, with a daily circulation there of 14,891 (58%  xyof 23,800 households) and a Sunday circulation of 13,440 (52%). Community points out that 12  xNcompeting newspapers have a combined circulation in the county of 2,510 daily (10% of  X- xhouseholds) and 5,627 Sunday (22%). Community states that the PressEnterprise's total daily  xcirculation is 22,000, but that its total Sunday circulation is only 19,000, due in large part to  xcompetition from Sunday newspapers published in nearby cities, including WilkesBarre,  xHarrisburg, Reading, Philadelphia and New York. Community notes that more than 30  x periodicals are circulated within Columbia County, totaling in excess of 50,000 copies. The  X- xKPressEnterprise owns a monthly business publication, the Northeastern Pennsylvania Business  X- xJournal, which serves the WilkesBarre/Scranton area, and is the only additional media property owned by either Community or Columbia. xpp   Ԋx16. With regard to competition, Community states that WCNR's annual gross revenue  x!was only $93,000 in 1996, which is approximately four percent of estimated radio station  xrevenues for the entire county. Community also supplies Arbitron data for Columbia County,  Xv$- xwhich indicates that WCNR is ranked seventh, with an audience share of 3.9. By contrast,"v$X,-(-(ZZF#"  xWHLM, an FM station licensed to Bloomsburg, has a countywide audience share of 18.6.  xCommunity cites estimates that commonlyowned WHLM(FM) and WJMW(AM), Bloomsburg, produce approximately $1 million in annual revenues.  X- *0Discussion ă x  Xv-  ^x17. The daily newspaper crossownership rule was instituted to promote diversity of  X_- xviewpoint and economic competition. Newspaper/Radio NOI, 11 FCC Rcd at 13004. Of these  xtwo goals, the Commission has stated that it places added emphasis on fostering diverse  X3- xviewpoints from antagonistic sources. See id. In adopting the rule, the Commission determined  xthat, as a general rule, granting a broadcast license to an entity in the same community as that  X - xin which the entity also publishes a newspaper would harm local diversity. Id. The Commission  xalso foresaw the need for waivers of the rule in certain circumstances: (1) where a licensee is  xunable to sell a station; (2) where the only sale possible would be at an artificially depressed  xLprice; (3) where separate ownership and operation of the newspaper and the broadcast station  x[could not be supported in the locality; and (4) where, for whatever reason, the purposes of the  X- xrule would be disserved by its application. Id. These waiver standards were originally designed  xto govern divestiture of combinations formed prior to implementation of the rule, but they have  Xj- xalso been applied to "new" combinations such as the one proposed here. Fox, 8 FCC Rcd at  XU-5348 & n.19; see Newspaper/Radio NOI, 11 FCC Rcd at 1300405.   x18. Community requests a permanent waiver of the Commission's rule, which entails a  X- xj"considerably heavier" burden of justification than a temporary waiver.  See Fox, 8 FCC Rcd at  X- x5348 (citing News America Publishing, Inc. v. FCC, 844 F.2d 800, 803 (D.C. Cir. 1988); Health  X- x\and Medicine Policy Research Group v. FCC, 807 F.2d 1038, 104243 (D.C. Cir. 1986)). The  xCommission has only granted permanent waivers of the rule in two instances, both involving  xtelevision stations. The Commission granted a permanent waiver to allow Field Enterprises, Inc.,  xpublisher of two daily newspapers in Chicago, to reacquire control of WFLDTV, Chicago.  X- xField, 65 FCC 2d at 961. The Commission held that Field's reacquisition of the station did not  xLconstitute a new ownership pattern, and thus was similar to ownership patterns grandfathered  x.under the daily newspaper crossownership rule. Additionally, the Commission perceived the  xLneed for the UHF station to be maintained as part of a fivestation group of UHF stations (that  xwas being assigned to Field) in order to ensure that the entire group remained financially viable.  X- xSee id. The only other permanent waiver of the rule was granted to allow Rupert Murdoch to  xcontinue to control the licensee of WNYW, New York, New York, after acquisition of the failing  X- xlNew York Post. There was evidence that Murdoch's ownership might be "pivotal to the  X - xnewspaper's survival." Fox, 8 FCC Rcd at 5350. As in Field, Murdoch had previously  X!- xcontrolled the entity to be acquired, and had a continuing financial interest in the property. See  X"-Fox, 8 FCC Rcd at 5342; Field, 65 FCC 2d at 961. x   2x19. In examining waiver requests under the fourth category, the Commission will  x1consider any "special circumstances" advanced by a party as having bearing on the  XX&- xappropriateness of granting a waiver. Id. at 1085 & n.47. We note that Community's attempt  xkto analogize the past ownership of WCNR with the former ownership of WFLDTV by Field"C',-(-(ZZ%"  X- x{Enterprises, Inc., and the former ownership of the New York Post by Rupert Murdoch, is  xunpersuasive. In those cases, the media property was actually formerly owned by the acquiring  xparty, who had extensive and relatively recent experience in operating the property, and who had  X- xmaintained a continuing financial interest in the property. See Fox, 8 FCC Rcd at 534142  X- xM(stating that Murdoch had sold the New York Post five years before requesting a waiver to  X- xzreacquire it pursuant to a right of first refusal); Field, 65 FCC 2d at 961 (explaining that Field  x=had assigned a controlling interest in WFLDTV to Kaiser Broadcasting Co., and later decided  Xg- x]to exercise a right of first refusal in order to reacquire control). It was believed that such  XP- xexperience would prove valuable in helping to salvage a failing media voice. See Fox, 8 FCC  xRcd at 5350 & n.30 (citing evidence that Murdoch's ownership might be pivotal to the  X$ - xLnewspaper's survival because of his expertise in the newspaper business); Field, 65 FCC 2d at  xM961 (perceiving the need to maintain a Chicago UHF station as part of a group of five Field x.owned UHF stations in order to ensure the group's continued financial viability). In this case,  xCommunity is asserting that ownership of WCNR more than 30 years ago by Paul R. Eyerly, Jr.,  xthe father and grandfather of the presentday owners of Community, is a similar factual  X - xcircumstance. We do not agree that this is a similar ownership pattern to that in Fox and Field,  xbecause the former owner is not reacquiring control in this case, and the acquiring party has  xnever had a financial interest in the property. More importantly, we do not believe that past  xownership of WCNR by a family member, or the family in general, makes it more likely that the  x.station will be revived by the owners of Community, who have not demonstrated any relevant  XB-broadcast experience.   ?x20. We are persuaded, however, that unique circumstances are present in this case that  xare worthy of consideration under the fourth waiver category. We find that grant of a waiver is  xwarranted by: (1) Columbia's documentation of its unsuccessful efforts to sell WCNR; (2) the  x/financially troubled status of this small AM station; (3) the fact that the proposed common  xownership involves a newspaper and only a single AM station; (4) the relatively high level of  xymedia diversity in the market where these facilities are located; (5) the fact that the AM station  xyis not a significant competitive force in the market; and (6) our determination that the proposed  xnewspaper/small AM combination is unlikely to have an adverse effect on media competition in the market. x   /x21. We are persuaded to take the requested action based upon the combination of factors,  xa combination that does not fit squarely into any of the first three specific waiver categories.  xkFurthermore, we find that the twin purposes of the newspaper/radio crossownership rule  x\promoting media diversity and competition would be disserved by denial of Community's  xLwaiver request. The record suggests that failure to grant a waiver in this instance would likely  x.lead to a diminution in the level of competition and diversity among media outlets in Columbia  X"- x County. We are cognizant that the PressEnterprise is the leading newspaper in Columbia  xxCounty, and that granting a waiver necessarily decreases the count of media voices by one in this  xymarket. However, the evidence in this case indicates that denial of the requested waiver would  xlikely lead to the failure of WCNR and thus the loss of an AM radio station providing service  xMto its local community. We note that a 1 kW AM station in Columbia County with facilities"J&,-(-(ZZ$"  X- x.similar to WCNR WSQV(AM), Berwick, Pennsylvania has recently gone silent.LXM yOy-  =ԍxAccording to an August 13, 1997 request for special temporary authority to remain off the air, the attorney  xjfor Heritage Broadcasting Co., licensee of WSQV, stated that the station went off the air in June 1997 due to "extreme financial difficulties."L See, e.g.,  X- xNNos, Inc., 12 FCC Rcd 4620 (1997) (granting waiver of "onetoamarket" radioTV cross xownership rule where viability of standalone AM station was threatened by aggregate revenue  X- xlosses of $121,113 in one year and $43,000 during first six months of the following year); Burt  X- xH. Oliphant, 10 FCC Rcd 2708 (granting onetoamarket waiver where FM station was in a  x"precarious financial position" and AM station had sustained losses of more than $50,000 over 11 months).   x22. Community has demonstrated that WCNR has been struggling financially in recent  xyears. Columbia's tax returns for the years 1994 through 1996 indicate that the station has  xconsistently lost money. WCNR's sales revenues have steadily declined in recent years, at the  xsame time that the licensee's operating losses have grown, except for 1996, when the corporation  xsold off the station's real estate "to obtain operating funds to keep the business solvent."  x/Columbia's net operating loss "carry forward" stood at $420,096 in its 1996 tax return, while  x1996 station gross revenues totaled $93,000. Columbia's President has stated for the record that  xno appreciable compensation has been paid to any Columbia stockholder in recent years, either  xas a stockholder or an employee. Furthermore, it is evident that the family members who own  xKthe licensee are no longer willing to provide financial support for the station, and that reasonable,  xbut unsuccessful efforts have been made to find a buyer for the station over a period of several  xyears, with the help of more than one broker. In this regard, we have carefully considered the  xfact that Columbia was presented with an offer to purchase the station from an entity other than  xCommunity an entity that would not have encountered the newspaper/broadcast cross xownership conflict Community presents. Ordinarily such an alternative offer would strongly  x/undermine any contention that waiver of the newspaper/broadcast crossownership rule is  xxwarranted to permit sale of that station to a party with a conflicting newspaper ownership interest.  xGiven the totality of the circumstances, however, we are persuaded by Columbia's argument that  xthe alternative offer was not truly viable and that Community's offer was, in fact, the only  xrealistic means by which WCNR might be sold and thus might survive. We base this conclusion  xon several considerations, including the facts that the prospective purchaser failed to provide a  xsufficient escrow deposit, did not provide information to demonstrate that it had the financial  xability to purchase the station, and did not offer any collateral, security or personal guarantee of  xpayment from any of its principals. We also note Columbia's assertion that it had received what  xNit considered reliable information with respect to financial difficulties experienced by the  xZprospective purchaser's principals in operating another broadcast station and that this factor also  xraised concerns regarding that entity's ability to sucessfully complete the proposed purchase of WCNR. xpp   x23. The Commission has previously determined, in cases involving requests for waiver  X"- xLof the newspaper/radio crossownership rule, that the relevant market for analyzing the effects"",-(-(ZZ!"  x=of a waiver on diversity and competition is the common area served by the newspaper and the  X- x2 mV/m contour of an AM station (or the 1 mV/m contour of an FM station). See  X- x[Newspaper/Radio NOI, 11 FCC Rcd at 13011; Capital Cities/ABC, Inc., 11 FCC Rcd 5841, 5890  X- x(1996); Hopkins Hall Broadcasting, Inc., 10 FCC Rcd 9764, 9766 (1995); Kargo Broadcasting,  X- xjInc., 5 FCC Rcd 3442, 3442 (1990). Community's waiver request assumes that Columbia County  xis the relevant market in this case. We will accept Community's showing because the boundaries  xof Columbia County approximate the common area served by the newspaper and the 2 mV/m contour of the AM station in this case. x   x24. Considering the impact of the proposed combination on local diversity, our  xindependent analysis indicates that the relevant market is served by a wide variety of media,  x<including broadcast outlets. There are four independentlyowned commercial television stations,  xall network affiliates, and one noncommercial television station licensed to communities in the  x0WilkesBarre/Scranton DMA, where Columbia County is located. All of the commercial  xjtelevision stations place a Grade A signal over Columbia County. There are 49 commercial and  xnoncommercial radio stations licensed to 28 additional broadcast owners in communities located  xin (or with a reportable audience share in) the WilkesBarre/Scranton Radio Metro Market, which  xincludes Columbia County. Community has demonstrated that 11 of these stations (including  xWCNR) place a principal community contour over at least a portion of Columbia County. In  xyaddition, cable television penetration throughout the WilkesBarre/Scranton DMA is 75%, and  X<- xthere are two cable television systems that serve Columbia County. Community has also shown  X%- xthat 12 daily newspapers and more than 30 periodicals published outside of Columbia County are circulated within the county on a regular basis.  X-  x25. Considering the effect of the proposed waiver on local media competition, we note  x=that Community is the leading newspaper in Columbia County, with circulation far in excess of  xits nearest competitor. However, WCNR's 1996 revenues totaled only $93,000, which constitutes  xless than 0.4 percent of total radio station revenues ($23.5 million) in the WilkesBarre/Scranton  X- x[Radio Metro Market,b M yO-ԍxBIA Publications' Radio Analyzer database (1997).b and only four percent of estimated radio revenues for Columbia County.  xWe find it unlikely, given the large number of media outlets, that the addition of this station's  XV- x<revenues/resources to those of the PressEnterprise would have a significant negative impact on local media competition. xpppppp    x26. Accordingly, IT IS ORDERED, That a permanent waiver of the newspaper/radio  xzcrossownership rule, 47 C.F.R. Section 73.3555(d)(2), IS HEREBY GRANTED to Community  xCommunications, Inc., to permit common ownership of WCNR(AM), Bloomsburg, Pennsylvania,  X -and the PressEnterprise.   _x27. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED, That, having found the parties fully qualified, the  xapplication to assign the license of WCNR(AM), Bloomsburg, Pennsylvania, from Columbia  xLMontour Broadcasting Co., Inc. to Community Communications, Inc., IS HEREBY GRANTED.,"t$ X ,-(-(ZZF#"  xLsubject to the condition that the transaction may not be consummated prior to the grant of the pending license renewal application (BR980401X5) for WCNR(AM). pX` hp x (#%'0*,.8135@8: