Frontier Media, LLC

Federal Communications Commission DA 17-190

Before the

Federal Communications Commission

Washington, D.C. 20554

In the Matter of

Frontier Media, LLC

Applications for Consent to Transfer Control of

Licenses

and

Petition for Declaratory Ruling Under Section

310(b)(4) of the Communications Act of 1934, as

Amended

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

KGTW(FM), Ketchikan, AK

Facility ID No. 789

File Nos. BTCH-20160603ABQ et seq.

KINY(AM), Juneau, AK

Facility ID No. 823

File Nos. BTC-20160603ACC et seq.

KCMC(AM), Texarkana, TX

Facility ID No. 33542

File Nos. BTC-20160603ACO et seq.

KTOY(FM), Texarkana, AR

Facility ID No. 31348

File Nos. BTC-20160603ACX

MB Docket 16-212

MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER AND DECLARATORY RULING

Adopted: February 23, 2017 Released: February 23, 2017

By the Chief, Media Bureau:

I. INTRODUCTION

1. In this Memorandum Opinion and Order and Declaratory Ruling,

1

the Media Bureau

(Bureau) addresses a petition for declaratory ruling (Petition) filed by Frontier Media, LLC (Frontier) on

June 3, 2016. The Petition is filed in connection with the four above-captioned applications

2

to transfer to

Frontier control of 29 licenses (7 AMs, 8 FMs, 13 FM translators, and 1 UHF translator) currently held by

broadcast licensees Alaska Broadcast Communications, Inc. (Alaska Broadcast), Juneau Alaska

Communications, LLC (Juneau Alaska), Texarkana Radio Center Licenses, LLC (Texarkana), and Jo-Al

1

Hereinafter referred to as Declaratory Ruling.

2

File No. BTCH-20160603ABQ proposes the transfer of control of ten licenses held by Alaska Broadcast,

specifically: KGTW(FM), Ketchikan, AK; KTKN(AM), Ketchikan, AK; KJNO(AM), Juneau, AK; KTKU(FM),

Juneau, AK; KIFW(AM), Sitka, AK; KSBZ(FM), Sitka, AK; K248AI, Craig, AK; K258AD, Craig, AK; K257CN,

Juneau, AK; and K252EJ, Wrangell, AK. File No

ereinafter referred to as Declaratory Ruling.

2

File No. BTCH-20160603ABQ proposes the transfer of control of ten licenses held by Alaska Broadcast,

specifically: KGTW(FM), Ketchikan, AK; KTKN(AM), Ketchikan, AK; KJNO(AM), Juneau, AK; KTKU(FM),

Juneau, AK; KIFW(AM), Sitka, AK; KSBZ(FM), Sitka, AK; K248AI, Craig, AK; K258AD, Craig, AK; K257CN,

Juneau, AK; and K252EJ, Wrangell, AK. File No. BTC-20160603ACC proposes the transfer of control of ten licenses

held by Juneau Alaska, specifically: KINY(AM), Juneau, AK; KSUP(FM), Juneau, AK; KCBJ-LP, Juneau, AK;

KXXJ(AM), Juneau, AK; K278CO, Juneau, AK; K280DX, Angoon, AK; K300AB, Juneau, AK; K278AC, Kake, AK;

K279AF, Haines & Skagway, AK; and K284AM, Skagway, AK. File No. BTC-20160603ACO proposes the transfer

of control of eight licenses held by Texarkana, specifically: KCMC(AM), Texarkana, TX; KTFS(AM), Texarkana, TX;

KTFS-FM, Texarkana, AR; KBYB(FM), Hope, AR; KTTY(FM), New Boston, TX; K288FI, Texarkana, TX;

K255CU, Texarkana, TX; and K257FY, Texarkana, TX. File No. BTCH-20160603ACX proposes the transfer of

control of one license held by Jo-Al, specifically, KTOY(FM), Texarkana, AK (collectively, Applications).

Federal Communications Commission DA 17-190

2

Broadcasting, Inc. (Jo-Al) (collectively, Licensees).

3

The Petition asks the Commission to exercise its

discretion to permit Frontier, as the prospective parent company of the Licensees, to exceed the 25

percent foreign indirect ownership benchmark set out in Section 310(b)(4) of the Communications Act of

1934, as amended, (the Act),

4

pursuant to Section 310(b)(4) and the Commission�s decision in its 2013

Broadcast Clarification Ruling.

5

The Petition is unopposed. As discussed below, we find that it will

serve the public interest to grant the Petition and Applications, subject to the conditions specified below.

II. BACKGROUND

2

set out in Section 310(b)(4) of the Communications Act of

1934, as amended, (the Act),

4

pursuant to Section 310(b)(4) and the Commission�s decision in its 2013

Broadcast Clarification Ruling.

5

The Petition is unopposed. As discussed below, we find that it will

serve the public interest to grant the Petition and Applications, subject to the conditions specified below.

II. BACKGROUND

2. Frontier is a limited liability company organized in Alaska, with two 50 percent members:

Richard Burns (managing member) and Sharon Burns (collectively, the Burnses). According to the

Petition, the Burnses are Australian citizens who have lived and worked in the United States under an E-3

specialty occupation visa since 2006. As private individuals, the Burnses each currently own 10 percent

direct interests in the Licensees, for a total of 20 percent foreign ownership.

6

By the proposed transaction,

the Burnses, as the owners of transferee Frontier, would acquire the remaining 80 percent of the

ownership interests in the Licensees, which are currently held by E. Roy Paschal and Jason Paschal.

Therefore, after the proposed transaction, the Burnses, would hold 100 percent of the ownership interests

in Frontier, the parent of all four Licensees, and, through Frontier, would indirectly own 100 percent of

the interests in the Licensees. Specifically, Frontier would hold 100 percent of the voting and equity

interests in licensees Alaska Broadcast and Juneau Alaska and would be the sole member of Texarkana

Radio Center, LLC, which is the sole member of Texarkana, which in turn holds 100 percent of the equity

and voting interests in Jo-Al. After the proposed transaction, the Burnses would not hold any direct

interest in the Licensees.

3

Frontier would hold 100 percent of the voting and equity

interests in licensees Alaska Broadcast and Juneau Alaska and would be the sole member of Texarkana

Radio Center, LLC, which is the sole member of Texarkana, which in turn holds 100 percent of the equity

and voting interests in Jo-Al. After the proposed transaction, the Burnses would not hold any direct

interest in the Licensees.

3. Frontier asserts that grant of the Petition would further the public interest goals set out in the

2013 Broadcast Clarification Ruling, namely, strengthening investment in broadcasting (in Alaska in

particular) and ensuring continued service in the affected communities.

7

In addition, the Petition sets out

the Burnses� personal bona fides, including their long involvement in civic and commercial activities in

the city of Juneau, Alaska, and Richard Burns� management of the Alaska stations as CEO since 2006 and

the Texarkana stations since 2013. Frontier states that no national security concerns are implicated by the

Petition.

3

On November 30, 2016, Juneau Alaska filed an application to assign the license of Station KCBJ-LP to Gray

Television Licensee, LLC. File No. BALTT-20161130ADC.

4

47 U.S.C. � 310(b)(4) (Section 310(b)(4)).

5

Commission Policies and Procedures under Section 310(b)(4) of the Communications Act, Foreign Investment in

Broadcast Licensees, Declaratory Ruling, 28 FCC Rcd 16244 (2013) (2013 Broadcast Clarification Ruling).

6

These interests are subject to the 20 percent limitation on foreign ownership established in Section 310(b)(3), 47

U.S.C

1130ADC.

4

47 U.S.C. � 310(b)(4) (Section 310(b)(4)).

5

Commission Policies and Procedures under Section 310(b)(4) of the Communications Act, Foreign Investment in

Broadcast Licensees, Declaratory Ruling, 28 FCC Rcd 16244 (2013) (2013 Broadcast Clarification Ruling).

6

These interests are subject to the 20 percent limitation on foreign ownership established in Section 310(b)(3), 47

U.S.C. � 310(b)(3) (prohibiting grant of a broadcast, common carrier, aeronautical en route and aeronautical fixed

radio license to �[A]ny corporation of which more than one-fifth of the capital stock is owned of record or voted by

aliens or their representatives or by a foreign government or representative thereof or by any corporation organized

under the laws of a foreign country��). Unlike Section 310(b)(4), Section 310(b)(3) does not afford the

Commission discretion to approve foreign investment in broadcast licensees in excess of the limitations contained

therein. See also 2013 Broadcast Clarification Order, 28 FCC Rcd at 5752, para. 15, n.49 (stating that the

Commission will not entertain petitions to exceed the foreign ownership limits of Section 310(b)(3) for foreign

investment in broadcast licensees.). Because the Burnses are divesting their direct interest in the Licensees, and the

Licensees will be wholly owned by Frontier, we are not presented with the question of whether the proposed foreign

ownership structure implicates Section 310(b)(3).

7

Petition at 2 (�[T]here are no other potential buyers reasonably identifiable�); id. at 5 (�[T]here is no more logical

person or persons to buy [the stations] than the Burns, since Richard Burns is the CEO of these stations and since

Richard and Sharon Burns are both current part owners of the station. . . .[F]inding any other bona fide purchasers

for these stations would be difficult at best.�); id. at 8-9 (Frontier �is the only feasible party who would likely be

interested in acquiring the existing owner�s interests in the Licensees�)

stations] than the Burns, since Richard Burns is the CEO of these stations and since

Richard and Sharon Burns are both current part owners of the station. . . .[F]inding any other bona fide purchasers

for these stations would be difficult at best.�); id. at 8-9 (Frontier �is the only feasible party who would likely be

interested in acquiring the existing owner�s interests in the Licensees�).

Federal Communications Commission DA 17-190

3

III. DISCUSSION

4. Section 310(b)(4) standard. We review the foreign ownership of Frontier under Section

310(b)(4) of the Act, which states that �[n]o broadcast � license shall be granted to or held by � any

corporation directly or indirectly controlled by any other corporation of which more than one-fourth of

the capital stock is owned of record or voted by aliens, their representatives, or by a foreign government

or representative thereof, or by any corporation organized under the laws of a foreign country, if the

Commission finds that the public interest will be served by the refusal or revocation of such license.�

8

In

the 2013 Broadcast Clarification Ruling, the Commission clarified the policies and procedures for

evaluating potential foreign investment in broadcast licensees under Section 310(b)(4) of the Act to

remove apparent uncertainty. The Commission reiterated its position that, in the context of Section

310(b)(4) review for broadcast licensees, the 25 percent benchmark �is only a trigger for the exercise of

our discretion, which we then exercise based upon a more searching analysis of the circumstances of each

case.�

9

The Commission recognized that �changes have occurred in the media landscape and marketplace

since the foreign ownership restriction was enacted and that limited access to capital is a concern in the

broadcast industry, especially for small business entities and new entrants, including minorities and

women.�

10

To exercise in a meaningful way the discretion conferred by statute, the Commission must

rec

recognized that �changes have occurred in the media landscape and marketplace

since the foreign ownership restriction was enacted and that limited access to capital is a concern in the

broadcast industry, especially for small business entities and new entrants, including minorities and

women.�

10

To exercise in a meaningful way the discretion conferred by statute, the Commission must

receive from the applicant detailed information sufficient for the agency to make the public interest

finding the statute requires.

11

5. In the 2013 Broadcast Clarification Ruling, the Commission declined to adopt a standardized

review process and clarified that it would continue to follow a case-by-case approach to reviewing

petitions for declaratory ruling to exceed the 310(b)(4) benchmark, stating that �[b]y their nature, these

case-by-case reviews will lead to distinct, factually driven results.�

12

The Commission also established

that in evaluating petitions relating to foreign ownership, it would afford appropriate deference to the

expertise of the Executive Branch agencies on issues related to national security, law enforcement,

foreign policy, and trade policy.

13

Following the issuance of the 2013 Broadcast Clarification Ruling, the

Commission granted a petition for declaratory ruling filed by Pandora Radio LLC (Pandora), a publicly

traded company, to exceed the 25 percent foreign ownership benchmark set out in Section 310(b)(4), in

connection with an application for consent to assignment of license of KXMZ(FM), Box Elder, South

Dakota

policy.

13

Following the issuance of the 2013 Broadcast Clarification Ruling, the

Commission granted a petition for declaratory ruling filed by Pandora Radio LLC (Pandora), a publicly

traded company, to exceed the 25 percent foreign ownership benchmark set out in Section 310(b)(4), in

connection with an application for consent to assignment of license of KXMZ(FM), Box Elder, South

Dakota.

14

Based on the facts specific to that case and in view of existing broadcast foreign ownership

policies, the Commission approved the request to exceed the 25 percent benchmark under Section

310(b)(4) provided that Pandora obtain prior Commission approval for (1) aggregate foreign equity

and/or foreign voting interests in Pandora Media exceeding 49.99 percent; (2) any change in the Pandora

Media Board of Directors that would result in a majority of foreign members; or (3) any individual

foreign investor or �group� acquiring a greater than 5 percent voting or equity interest (or greater than 10

percent for certain institutional investors) in Pandora Media.

15

Subsequently, the Media Bureau granted

8

47 U.S.C. � 310(b)(4).

9

2013 Broadcast Clarification Order, 28 FCC Rcd at 16249-50, para. 11.

10

Id. at 16249, para. 10.

11

Id. at 16250.

12

2013 Broadcast Clarification Ruling, 28 FCC Rcd at 16252.

13

Id. at 16251.

14

Pandora Radio LLC Petition for Declaratory Ruling Under Section 310(b)(4) of the Communications Act of 1934,

as Amended, MB Docket No. 14-109, Declaratory Ruling, 30 FCC Rcd 5094, 5095-96, para. 4 (2015) (2015

Pandora Declaratory Ruling), recon denied, 30 FCC Rcd 10570 (2015).

15

Id. at 5101, para. 19

0.

12

2013 Broadcast Clarification Ruling, 28 FCC Rcd at 16252.

13

Id. at 16251.

14

Pandora Radio LLC Petition for Declaratory Ruling Under Section 310(b)(4) of the Communications Act of 1934,

as Amended, MB Docket No. 14-109, Declaratory Ruling, 30 FCC Rcd 5094, 5095-96, para. 4 (2015) (2015

Pandora Declaratory Ruling), recon denied, 30 FCC Rcd 10570 (2015).

15

Id. at 5101, para. 19. The Commission required Pandora Media to modify its organizational documents to ensure

that its Board of Directors has all necessary powers to maintain compliance with Section 310(b)(4), including the

right to request and obtain information regarding citizenship of Pandora Media�s interest holders, and the necessary

(continued�.)

Federal Communications Commission DA 17-190

4

two petitions for declaratory ruling allowing aggregate foreign investment in broadcast licensees of 49

percent in one case and 49.99 percent in the other case, and granting specific approval for named

investors to acquire interests of 40 percent, 49 percent, and 49.99 percent.

16

In this case, the petitioner

seeks authority for 100 percent foreign ownership of the parent of the licensee as well as specific approval

for named individuals to each own 50 percent of the parent of the licensee. Following the procedure

outlined in the 2013 Broadcast Clarification Ruling and applied in the Pandora, Univision, and

Hemisphere Declaratory Rulings, we have consulted with the relevant Executive Branch agencies with

expertise on issues related to national security, law enforcement, foreign policy, and trade policy.

17

These

Executive Branch agencies have not raised any objections to the Burnses� proposed ownership of the

Stations, and the Applications are unopposed.

6

n the Pandora, Univision, and

Hemisphere Declaratory Rulings, we have consulted with the relevant Executive Branch agencies with

expertise on issues related to national security, law enforcement, foreign policy, and trade policy.

17

These

Executive Branch agencies have not raised any objections to the Burnses� proposed ownership of the

Stations, and the Applications are unopposed.

6. In considering the Petition, we are cognizant of the Commission�s recent decision in the 2016

Foreign Ownership Order, which modified the broadcast licensee foreign ownership review process by

extending the streamlined rules and procedures developed for review of foreign ownership of common

carrier and certain aeronautical licensees under Section 310(b)(4) to the broadcast context, with certain

limited exceptions.

18

Because the rules adopted in the 2016 Foreign Ownership Order have not yet taken

effect, our foreign ownership review process is still governed by the 2013 Broadcast Clarification

Ruling.

19

However, we note that our action taken herein is consistent with the policies and procedures set

out in both the 2016 Foreign Ownership Order and the 2013 Broadcast Clarification Ruling. In

particular, we note that although the 2016 Foreign Ownership Order expressly provides for processing of

petitions involving 100 percent foreign ownership of a broadcast licensee�s parent,

20

as here, such

petitions are also consistent with the guidance set out in the 2013 Clarification Ruling, which did not set

an upper limit on petitions for declaratory ruling but committed to a case-by-case review of �proposals for

(Continued from previous page)

powers to cure noncompliance, specifically: (1) the right to restrict the transfer of shares to aliens; (2) the right to

require disclosure when an alien acquires an equity and/or voting interest; and (3) the right to compel the redemption

of shares held by aliens. Id. at 5101, para. 20

roposals for

(Continued from previous page)

powers to cure noncompliance, specifically: (1) the right to restrict the transfer of shares to aliens; (2) the right to

require disclosure when an alien acquires an equity and/or voting interest; and (3) the right to compel the redemption

of shares held by aliens. Id. at 5101, para. 20.

16

Univision Holdings, Inc., Declaratory Ruling, DA 17-4, 2017 WL 29414 (MB Jan. 3, 2017) (Univision

Declaratory Ruling) (permitting aggregate foreign ownership of 49 percent voting and equity and granting specific

approval for named entities to hold 40 percent of the voting shares and 49 percent equity); Hemisphere Media

Group, Inc., Declaratory Ruling, DA 17-79, 2017 WL 239074 (MB Jan. 18, 2017) (Hemisphere Declaratory Ruling)

(permitting up to 49.99 percent aggregate foreign ownership and granting specific approval to named entities and

individuals to hold interests up to that level). The Commission conditioned these rulings on additional requirements,

including monitoring, reporting, and compliance requirements.

17

See Pandora Declaratory Ruling, 30 FCC Rcd at 5096, para. 5; Univision Declaratory Ruling at 8, para. 21;

Hemisphere Declaratory Ruling at 8, para. 20.

18

Review of Foreign Ownership Policies for Broadcast, Common Carrier and Aeronautical Radio Licensees under

Section 310(b)(4) of the Communications Act of 1934, as Amended, Report and Order, 31 FCC Rcd 11272 (2016)

(2016 Foreign Ownership Order). The Commission also reformed the methodology used by both common carrier

and broadcast licensees to assess compliance with the foreign ownership limits in Sections 310(b)(3), 47 U.S.C. �

310(b)(3) and 310(b)(4) of the Act, as appropriate, in recognition of the difficulty that U.S. publicly traded

companies face in attempting to ascertain their level of foreign ownership. 2016 Foreign Ownership Order, 31 FCC

Rcd at 11289-11307

odology used by both common carrier

and broadcast licensees to assess compliance with the foreign ownership limits in Sections 310(b)(3), 47 U.S.C. �

310(b)(3) and 310(b)(4) of the Act, as appropriate, in recognition of the difficulty that U.S. publicly traded

companies face in attempting to ascertain their level of foreign ownership. 2016 Foreign Ownership Order, 31 FCC

Rcd at 11289-11307.

19

A summary of the 2016 Foreign Ownership Order was published in the Federal Register on December 1, 2016.

Review of Foreign Ownership for Broadcast, Common Carrier and Aeronautical Radio Licensees, 81 Fed. Reg.

86568 (Dec. 1, 2016). The order became effective on January 30, 2017, except for those sections requiring approval

by the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) under the Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA). All of the revised

rules appearing in Appendix B of the order were submitted to OMB for approval, and notice of that submission was

published on December 29, 2016. 81 Fed. Reg. 95993 (Dec. 29, 2016) (establishing a due date of February 27, 2017

for PRA comments). They will become effective after the Commission publishes a notice in the Federal Register

announcing such approval and the relevant effective date.

20

See, e.g., 2016 Foreign Ownership Order, 31 FCC Rcd at 11282.

Federal Communications Commission DA 17-190

5

foreign investment exceeding the 25 percent benchmark . . .�

21

7. Public interest analysis. In both the 2013 Broadcast Clarification Ruling and the 2016

Foreign Ownership Order, the Commission emphasized the need to encourage new sources of investment

in the broadcast industry, including foreign investment.

22

The Commission also affirmed the need to

protect important interests related to national security, law enforcement, foreign policy, trade policy, and

other public policy goals while maintaining compliance with Section 310(b).

23

In this case, we have

given the relevant Executive Branch agencies the opportunity to review the requests for approval

ustry, including foreign investment.

22

The Commission also affirmed the need to

protect important interests related to national security, law enforcement, foreign policy, trade policy, and

other public policy goals while maintaining compliance with Section 310(b).

23

In this case, we have

given the relevant Executive Branch agencies the opportunity to review the requests for approval. The

Executive Branch agencies have filed a letter with the Commission stating that they have no objection to

grant of the requests and have not requested that we impose any conditions on grant.

24

We also find no

grounds, on the facts presented, to object to the approvals requested. Moreover, we find that grant of the

Petition would: (1) increase the likelihood of continued service to small communities by authorizing

investment by individuals who are ready, willing, and able to operate the stations based on their extensive

experience operating them to date; (2) facilitate foreign investment in the U.S. broadcast radio market;

and (3) potentially encourage reciprocal investment opportunities for U.S. companies in foreign markets.

For these reasons, we find that grant of the Petition will serve the public interest.

IV. DECLARATORY RULING

8. Declaratory ruling. Upon review of the facts and circumstances set out in the Petition, and

pursuant to the policy established by the 2013 Broadcast Clarification Ruling, we find that the public

interest would not be served by prohibiting the foreign ownership of Frontier, as the ultimate controlling

U.S. parent of Alaska Broadcast, Juneau Alaska, Texarkana, and Jo-Al, in excess of the 25 percent

benchmark in Section 310(b)(4) of the Act. Specifically, this declaratory ruling permits up to 100 percent

of the equity and voting interests in Frontier to be held by Richard and Sharon Burns (50 percent each).

9. Scope of the ruling

oreign ownership of Frontier, as the ultimate controlling

U.S. parent of Alaska Broadcast, Juneau Alaska, Texarkana, and Jo-Al, in excess of the 25 percent

benchmark in Section 310(b)(4) of the Act. Specifically, this declaratory ruling permits up to 100 percent

of the equity and voting interests in Frontier to be held by Richard and Sharon Burns (50 percent each).

9. Scope of the ruling. This Declaratory Ruling covers Frontier�s U.S.-organized subsidiaries

and affiliates, whether existing or formed or acquired subsequently, that are wholly owned and controlled

by, or under 100 percent common ownership and control with, Frontier, provided that Frontier and the

subsidiary and/or affiliate remain in compliance with the terms and conditions of this Declaratory Ruling

and the Commission�s rules.

25

The flexibility granted herein reflects the reality that it is not uncommon

for companies to make changes within their corporate structure that in no way affect the operation,

management, or control of those companies. This flexibility does not detract in any way from the

requirement under the Act and our Rules to apply for and receive prior Commission consent to a

voluntary assignment of license or transfer of control or to seek a new declaratory ruling before its foreign

ownership exceeds the terms or conditions of this Declaratory Ruling.

10. Terms and conditions. The terms and conditions of this Declaratory Ruling are case-specific

and based on the facts on record, the policies set out in the 2013 Broadcast Clarification Ruling and the

2016 Foreign Ownership Order, and the precedent established by the Pandora, Univision, and

21

2013 Broadcast Clarification Ruling, 28 FCC Rcd at 16249; see also id., Statement of Commissioner Michael

O�Rielly (��U.S

case-specific

and based on the facts on record, the policies set out in the 2013 Broadcast Clarification Ruling and the

2016 Foreign Ownership Order, and the precedent established by the Pandora, Univision, and

21

2013 Broadcast Clarification Ruling, 28 FCC Rcd at 16249; see also id., Statement of Commissioner Michael

O�Rielly (��U.S. broadcasters and foreign investors should know that this Commission is now open to considering

foreign entities holding capital stock of companies that control broadcast licenses exceeding 25 percent, perhaps up

to a high of 100 percent.�).

22

2013 Broadcast Clarification Ruling, 28 FCC Rcd at 16249; 2016 Foreign Ownership Order, 31 FCC Rcd at

11273.

23

2013 Broadcast Clarification Ruling, 28 FCC Fcd at 16251; 2016 Foreign Ownership Order, 31 FCC Rcd at

11273.

24

Letter from Richard C. Sofield, Director, Foreign Investment Review Staff, National Security Division, U.S.

Department of Justice, to Marlene H. Dortch, Secretary, FCC (Sep. 8, 2016) (on file in MB Docket No. 16-212).

25

See generally, Pandora Radio LLC, Declaratory Ruling, 30 FCC Rcd 5094 (2015) (Pandora Declaratory Ruling).

Federal Communications Commission DA 17-190

6

Hemisphere Declaratory Rulings.

26

Specifically, we require Frontier to obtain prior Commission

approval for any change in its ownership before any individual foreign investor or �group� that is not

specifically approved by this Declaratory Ruling acquires a direct or indirect voting or equity interest in

Frontier, whether or not the interest is insulated.

27

Because Frontier is not a publicly held company, we

find that there is no need to require changes to its organizational documents to provide greater control

over and information regarding the transfer of shares to aliens

not

specifically approved by this Declaratory Ruling acquires a direct or indirect voting or equity interest in

Frontier, whether or not the interest is insulated.

27

Because Frontier is not a publicly held company, we

find that there is no need to require changes to its organizational documents to provide greater control

over and information regarding the transfer of shares to aliens. Likewise, because Frontier is a limited

liability company with only two members, it faces no difficulty in calculating its foreign ownership (in

contrast with publicly held companies), and we therefore find it unnecessary to require periodic

certification of compliance.

28

If, at any time, Frontier knows, or has reason to know, that it is no longer in

compliance with this Declaratory Ruling, Section 310(b) of the Act, or the Commission�s foreign

ownership rules then in effect, it shall file a statement with the Commission explaining the circumstances

within 30 days of the date that it knew or had reason to know that it was no longer in compliance and how

it intends to correct the overage, either by filing a new petition for declaratory ruling or by reducing the

foreign interest.

29

11. Grantability of the Applications. Following our routine processing procedures, we have

reviewed the subject Applications for compliance with the various statutory and regulatory requirements

relating to transfer of control applications. Other than the foreign ownership issue addressed herein, the

record does not raise any issues that might preclude grant, and the Applications are unopposed. With the

foreign ownership issue resolved by the ruling herein, we conclude that grant of the Applications is

otherwise consistent with the public interest, convenience, and necessity under Section 310(d) of the

Act.

30

V. ORDERING CLAUSES

12. Accordingly, IT IS ORDERED that, pursuant to Section 310(b)(4) of the Communications

Act of 1934, as amended, 47 U.S.C

plications are unopposed. With the

foreign ownership issue resolved by the ruling herein, we conclude that grant of the Applications is

otherwise consistent with the public interest, convenience, and necessity under Section 310(d) of the

Act.

30

V. ORDERING CLAUSES

12. Accordingly, IT IS ORDERED that, pursuant to Section 310(b)(4) of the Communications

Act of 1934, as amended, 47 U.S.C. � 310(b)(4), and pursuant to authority delegated to the Media Bureau

in section 0.283 of the Commission�s rules, 47 CFR � 0.283, the Petition for Declaratory Ruling filed by

Frontier IS GRANTED to the extent specified in this Declaratory Ruling and subject to the conditions

specified herein.

26

See generally, 2013 Broadcast Clarification Ruling, 28 FCC Rcd at 16252 (�By their nature, these case-by-case

reviews will lead to distinct, factually driven results. Each application or petition will be assessed on its own merits,

and we will determine, given the particular circumstances presented in a particular case, whether the public interest

would be served by permitting the requested foreign ownership.�). Acknowledging that some of the definitions,

terms, and conditions contained herein are similar to provisions recently adopted (but not yet effective) in the 2016

Foreign Ownership Order, 31 FCC Rcd 11272, we emphasize that this Declaratory Ruling is based solely on our

conclusion that these conditions are appropriate under the facts and circumstances of this case and pursuant to the

policies and precedent discussed above, rather than on sections 1.5001(i) and 1.5004(b) of the new rules. See 47

CFR � 1.5001(i), 1.5004(b) (not yet effective).

27

See Pandora Declaratory Ruling, 30 FCC Rcd at 5101; Univision Declaratory Ruling, 2017 WL 29414 at para.

22; 47 CFR � 1.991(i)(1), Note to paragraphs (i)(1),(2) (defining the term �group�).

ces of this case and pursuant to the

policies and precedent discussed above, rather than on sections 1.5001(i) and 1.5004(b) of the new rules. See 47

CFR � 1.5001(i), 1.5004(b) (not yet effective).

27

See Pandora Declaratory Ruling, 30 FCC Rcd at 5101; Univision Declaratory Ruling, 2017 WL 29414 at para.

22; 47 CFR � 1.991(i)(1), Note to paragraphs (i)(1),(2) (defining the term �group�)..

28

In fact, Frontier could not violate the terms and conditions of this Declaratory Ruling without deliberate,

affirmative action by the Burnses, in contrast with publicly held companies with shares traded on a public stock

exchange. See Pandora Declaratory Ruling, 30 FCC Rcd at 5101-02. As is the case for all licensees, Frontier must

exercise due diligence to remain in compliance with Commission rules and orders.

29

See Pandora Declaratory Ruling, 30 FCC Rcd at 5103, para.23; Univision Declaratory Ruling at 8, para. 24;

Hemisphere Declaratory Ruling at 7, para. 22. Subsequent actions taken by or on behalf of the Frontier or the

Licensees to remedy non-compliance shall not relieve any such entity of the obligation to notify the Commission of

the circumstances (including duration) of non-compliance. Any such non-compliance may result in enforcement

action by the Commission for such non-compliance, including an order requiring divestiture of the investor's direct

and/or indirect interests in such entities.

30

47 U.S.C. � 310(d).

Federal Communications Commission DA 17-190

7

13. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that, pursuant to Section 310(d) of the Communications Act of

1934, as amended, 47 U.S.C. � 310(d), and pursuant to authority delegated to the Media Bureau in section

0.283 of the Commission�s rules, 47 CFR � 0.283, the transfer of control applications filed by Frontier on

June 3, 2016 (File Nos. BTCH-20160603ABQ et seq.; BTC-20160603ACC et seq.; BTC-20160603ACO

et seq.; and BTC-20160603ACX) ARE GRANTED.

14

Section 310(d) of the Communications Act of

1934, as amended, 47 U.S.C. � 310(d), and pursuant to authority delegated to the Media Bureau in section

0.283 of the Commission�s rules, 47 CFR � 0.283, the transfer of control applications filed by Frontier on

June 3, 2016 (File Nos. BTCH-20160603ABQ et seq.; BTC-20160603ACC et seq.; BTC-20160603ACO

et seq.; and BTC-20160603ACX) ARE GRANTED.

14. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that this Memorandum Opinion and Order and Declaratory

Ruling SHALL BE EFFECTIVE upon release.

FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION

Michelle Carey

Acting Chief, Media Bureau