Yes, there is still a chance for applicants in an MX (Mutually Exclusive) group who do not have the highest score. While scoring is a significant factor in the MX selection process, other factors such as settlement agreements, time-sharing arrangements, and unique circumstances can also influence the outcome.
During the 90-day settlement window, a 5-point applicant can reach an agreement with a 4-point applicant. In fact, any combination of applicants can reach a settlement agreement during this window, regardless of their point totals. The key is to come to an agreement that resolves the mutual exclusivity (MX) issue for that particular channel. Points may help determine who gets priority in selecting hours in a time-share agreement, but they don’t restrict who can negotiate a settlement.
No, that’s not accurate. In an MX (mutually exclusive) group, all equally qualified applicants will be considered tentative selectees. The local community presence dates will only come into play as a tiebreaker if the group defaults and a settlement or time-sharing agreement cannot be reached. In other words, the FCC will generally select all equally qualified applicants as tentative selectees to promote fairness and inclusivity in the process.
If an applicant asserts a point they are not eligible for, such as claiming local presence when their duration is less than two years, their application may face dismissal or denial by the FCC. The FCC routinely evaluates applications to ensure they adhere to the eligibility criteria. If it’s determined that an applicant has furnished inaccurate or false information regarding their qualifications for a point, the application could be declined, or the applicant may encounter other penalties. It’s of utmost importance for applicants to faithfully represent their qualifications and fulfill the eligibility requirements for the points they assert to prevent potential complications during the application process.
No, under FCC rules, applicants are prohibited from directly or indirectly receiving payment in exchange for dismissing their application or agreeing not to compete in the LPFM filing window. Such agreements would be considered collusive and could result in the dismissal of the involved applications and potential penalties. Settlement agreements should focus on resolving mutually exclusive issues through means other than financial compensation.
Yes, you can compensate the MX applicant for their engineering services required to specify a new channel if they agree to change their channel to accommodate your full-time operation on your chosen channel.
No, in this scenario, the 4-point applicants cannot automatically win the channel by forming a time-share agreement. Since the 5-point applicant has a higher score, they cannot aggregate points with the 4-point applicants.
The concept of “community presence dates” comes into play when determining an organization’s eligibility for certain points in the LPFM application process. These dates are significant during the LPFM filing window and are used to establish an organization’s local connection and commitment to the community it seeks to serve.
Approximately a month following the closure of the application window, assuming no objections have been filed against any group members, the FCC will send out letters to all tentative grantees. In these letters, the FCC will request confidential responses within 30 days regarding your preferred time slot. Additionally, this communication provides a 30-day window for potential universal settlement negotiations with the other tentative grantee(s).
No, major modifications will have limitations during the settlement window. They will only be available for stations identified as mutually exclusive (MX) in the public notice announcing the window. Major modifications in this context should solely serve the purpose of resolving mutual exclusivity issues.