WPC3 2BJZ Courier3|j:Wx6X@`7X@HP LaserJet 5Si LPT2:l)RM 700HPLAS5SI.PRSx  @\z$^X@266 ZFKK3|jHP LaserJet 5Si LPT2:l)RM 700HPLAS5SI.PRSXj\  P6G;\z$^XP"i~'^:DPddDDDdp4D48dddddddddd88pppX|pDL|pp||D8D\dDXdXdXDdd88d8ddddDL8ddddX`(`lD4l\DDD4DDDDDDdDd8XXXXXX|X|X|X|XD8D8D8D8ddddddddddXdbdddpdXXXXXlX~|X|X|X|XdddldldD8DdDDDdplld|8|P|D|D|8dvddddDDDpLpLpLpl|T|8|\ddddddl|X|X|Xd|DdpL|Dd~4ddC$CWxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxNHxxH\dDXddddd8@d<@d<DDXXdDDxddxHxxHvppDXd<"dxtldpxxd"i~'^09CSS999S]+9+/SSSSSSSSSS//]]]Ixnnxg]xx9?xgxx]xn]gxxxxg9/9MS9ISISI9SS//S/SSSS9?/SSxSSIP!PZ9+ZM999+999999S9S/xIxIxIxIxIlnIgIgIgIgI9/9/9/9/xSxSxSxSxSxSxSxSxSxSxIxSxRxSxSxS]SxIxIxInInInZnIxigIgIgIgIxSxSxSxZxSxZxS9/9S999Su]ZZxSg/gCg9g9g/xSbxSxSxSxSxn9n9n9]?]?]?]ZgFg/gMxSxSxSxSxSxSxxZgIgIgIxSg9xS]?g9xSi+SS88WuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxN/>/>/>/x]SSSSx]x]x]x]xSxSx]SSxSxSf]xSxSxSxIxIxWxIx{nInInInISSSWS]a?/?]?9?]]WW]n/nKn9nCn/x]xx]x]SSxxIxIxI]?]?]?]WnUn9nax]x]x]x]x]x]xxWnInInIx]n9x]]?n9xSz+SS8-8WuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxN8HH"&H>XHH8HB8>HH^HH>"".2",2,2,"222N2222"&22H22,006"6."""""""""2"2H,H,H,H,H,XAB,>,>,>,>,""""H2H2H2H2H2H2H2H2H2H2H,H2H1H2H2H282H,H,H,B,B,B6B,H?>,>,>,>,H2H2H2H6H2H6H2""2"""2F866H2>>(>">">H2;H2H2H2H2XHB"B"B"8&8&8&86>*>>.H2H2H2H2H2H2^HH6>,>,>,H2>"H28&>"H2?22!!WFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxN$<<$.2",2222`2 LL2 LL2L"",,2d""\4  pG;MW!@(#,h@\  P6G;hPNH5!,),5\  P6G;,P\O5hC:,%rXh*f9 xr G;XX<~9nnn,<n6X@`7&@ <?xxx,<x6X@`7X@ ?xxx,Dx `7X}:nnn,Dn `7&\{,W80,%BZW*f9 xr G;X       `*(0&/tF^GE > /t _I ` a8DocumentgDocument Style StyleXX` `  ` a4DocumentgDocument Style Style . 2Nk]k3va6DocumentgDocument Style Style GX  a5DocumentgDocument Style Style }X(# a2DocumentgDocument Style Style<o   ?  A.  a7DocumentgDocument Style StyleyXX` ` (#` 2 t   1 BibliogrphyBibliography:X (# a1Right ParRight-Aligned Paragraph Numbers :`S@ I.  X(# a2Right ParRight-Aligned Paragraph Numbers C @` A. ` ` (#` a3DocumentgDocument Style Style B b  ?  1.  2#  ! !k"*#a3Right ParRight-Aligned Paragraph Numbers L! ` ` @P 1. ` `  (# a4Right ParRight-Aligned Paragraph Numbers Uj` `  @ a. ` (# a5Right ParRight-Aligned Paragraph Numbers_o` `  @h(1)  hh#(#h a6Right ParRight-Aligned Paragraph Numbersh` `  hh#@$(a) hh#((# 2'$$$%&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 Technicala1DocumentgDocument Style Style\s0  zN8F I. ׃  22*'V(()a5TechnicalTechnical Document Style)WD (1) . a6TechnicalTechnical Document Style)D (a) . a2TechnicalTechnical Document Style<6  ?  A.   a3TechnicalTechnical Document Style9Wg  2  1.   2,d* ++R,a4TechnicalTechnical Document Style8bv{ 2  a.   a1TechnicalTechnical Document StyleF!<  ?  I.   a7TechnicalTechnical Document Style(@D i) . a8TechnicalTechnical Document Style(D a) . 2&33 -=.eA22Doc 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:the foregoing discussion, Sainte's argument that the "Quigley's Village" announcements in  xquestion did not involve "products" within the meaning of the Commission's programlength  X%-commercial definition is without merit, and does not justify reduction of the forfeiture.   ^x12. Nor is there merit in Sainte's argument that the programlength commercial nature  xof "Quigley's Village" should be excused since the program itself is an "educational" program  xor could be broadcast on a noncommercial station. Along this vein, moreover, the "program xrelated invitations" to which Sainte refers are not the type of special nonbroadcast efforts to  xenhance the educational and informational value of children's programming sought by Congress  X- xin the Children's Television Act. In any event, television licensees are not authorized to violate  xmthe children's television commercial limitation rules and policies in the course of such  x"nonbroadcast efforts." Furthermore, the fact that the purchase of the programrelated products  xoffered in the "Quigley's Village" announcements in question may have required parental action  xdoes not, and cannot, create an exception to the children's television commercial limitation rules and policies.   x13. With regard to whether station KCVUTV had established an effective program to  xensure compliance with the children's television commercial limits, Sainte argues that it "had  xevery right to expect" that the producers of "Quigley's Village" "had proper procedures in place  xto comply" with the Commission's rule and policies limiting the amount of commercial matter  xZin children's television programs. However, the Commission has frequently and consistently held  Xr$- xthat a licensee's reliance on a program's source or producer for compliance with our children's"r$,-(-(ZZ(#"  X-television rules and policies will not excuse or mitigate violations which do occur.^V {Oy- xЍ See, e.g., Max Television of Syracuse, L.P. (WSYT(TV)), 10 FCC Rcd 8905 (1995); Mt. Mansfield Television,  {OC- xInc. (WCAXTV), 10 FCC Rcd 8797 (1995); Boston Celtics Broadcasting Limited Partnership (WFXT(TV)), 10 FCC  {O -Rcd 6686 (1995); Le Sea Broadcasting Corp. (WHKE(TV)), 10 FCC Rcd 4977 (1995).   X-  X-  x14. Turning to Sainte's assertion that Sainte NAL must be set aside because it follows  X- xForfeiture Policy Statement, Sainte NAL specifically recognized that United States Telephone had  X- xset aside Forfeiture Policy Statement, and stated that the $10,000 forfeiture amount "was reached  X- xafter consideration of the factors set forth in  503(b)(2) of the Communications Act, and in  xkparticular, the following criteria: (1) the number of instances of commercial overages; (2) the  xzlength of each such overage; (3) the period of time over which such overages occurred;  x(4) whether or not the licensee established an effective program to ensure compliance; and (5)  X9- xthe specific reasons that the licensee gave for the overages." (Emphasis added.) Sainte NAL  x?stated that, although these criteria had been developed in previous children's television  X - xcommercial limitation cases decided under Forfeiture Policy Statement, the criteria were not  X - xinherently tied to Forfeiture Policy Statement; and that, "[w]ithout regard to" Forfeiture Policy  X - xStatement, the specified criteria were appropriate in analyzing violations of the children's  xltelevision commercial limits. The Commission continues to believe that these criteria are  xappropriate in analyzing violations of the commercial limits during children's programming  X- xbecause they take into account, inter alia, "the nature, circumstances, extent, and gravity of the  xviolation, and, with respect to the violator, the degree of culpability," as required under   Xt- x503(b)(2)(D) of the Communications Act.tV {O- xЍ See Clear Channel Television, Inc. (KTTU(TV)), 10 FCC Rcd 3773, 3774 (1995); Northstar Television of Erie,  {O- xInc. (WSEETV), 10 FCC Rcd 3779, 3780 (1995); Boston Celtics Broadcasting Limited Partnership (WFXT(TV)),  {O- xM10 FCC Rcd 6686 (1995) (Boston Celtics Broadcasting); WPIX, Inc., 10 FCC Rcd 8911 (1995); Stainless  {Oq- xBroadcasting Co. (WICZTV), 10 FCC Rcd 9961 (1995); UTV of San Francisco, Inc. (KBHKTV), 10 FCC Rcd 10986, 10988 (1995).  Accordingly, Sainte's assertion that Sainte NAL must  X_-be set aside because it follows Forfeiture Policy Statement is without merit.  X3-  x16. Further, Sainte's assertion that Sainte NAL must be set aside because it cites Scripps  X- xHoward NAL, 9 FCC Rcd 2547(1994) (Scripps Howard NAL), which "was decided with reference  X - x.to" Forfeiture Policy Statement and, therefore, "cannot be used as guidance in this matter" is  X- xincorrect. Scripps Howard NAL was cited to demonstrate that the $10,000 forfeiture assessed  X- xagainst KCVUTV was consistent with forfeitures assessed against stations for children's  X- xtelevision commercial limit violations of generally similar nature and magnitude.V {O"- x[Ѝ In Scripps Howard NAL, the licensee was fined $10,000 for broadcasting five children's programlength commercials. Scripps  X- xHoward NAL noted that the appeal of Forfeiture Policy Statement was pending, and stated that  X- xthe forfeiture amount was reached after consideration of both Forfeiture Policy Statement and "the  X- xfactors set forth in  503(b)(2) of the Communications Act." (Emphasis added.) Scripps Howard  Xt- xNAL, 9 FCC Rcd at 2547. The $10,000 forfeiture assessed against station KCVUTV is"t ,-(-(ZZ"  xconsistent with forfeitures for children's television commercial limit violations of generally  xsimilar nature and magnitude which were assessed solely on the basis of the criteria set forth in  X- x= 503(b)(2) of the Communications Act, without reference to Forfeiture Policy Statement. For  X- x0instance, in Boston Celtics Broadcasting, a forfeiture of $10,000 was assessed for eight  X- x]commercial overages, seven of which were programlength commercials; in WPIX, Inc., a  xforfeiture of $10,000 was assessed for nine commercial overages, five of which were program X|- xlength commercials. Accordingly, Sainte's assertion that Sainte NAL must be set aside because  Xg-it cites Scripps Howard NAL is without merit.   lx17. Sainte also argues that, under the First Amendment, the Commission "must evaluate  x.the motives of a broadcaster and program producer before classifying . . . a children's program  X - xLas a programlength commercial." In Children's Television Programming,  6 FCC Rcd at 2117 xk18, the Commission specifically declined to adopt a definition of, or test for, programlength  xcommercials based on the intent of the program producer or broadcaster. Some parties  xLcommenting in that proceeding urged the adoption of an intentbased standard. However, the  xyCommission agreed with other commenting parties that a "test based on [the] producer's intent  X- xwould be impermissibly vague and would tend to chill the creative process." Id. 6 FCC Rcd at 211718 & 2126 n.141. In contrast, the Commission stated that:  XY-Xx[t]he definition of children's programlength commercial that we are now adopting(# x a program associated with a product, in which commercials for that product are xaired is clear, easy to understand and apply, and narrowly tailored. It directly xaddresses a fundamental regulatory concern, that children who have difficulty xenough distinguishing program content from unrelated commercial matter, not be xall the more confused by a show that interweaves program content and commercial xmatter. Removal of related commercial matter should help alleviate this confusion.  X-Id. at 2118.  Xu-  mx18. From the information contained in station KCVUTV's renewal application and its  xJuly 20, 1994 letter, it was apparent that the "Quigley's Village" programs in question contained  xcommercial advertisements for products related to the program and, therefore, constituted  xprogramlength commercials. Accordingly, it was unnecessary in the course of that NAL  xproceeding to review videotapes of "representative" "Quigley's Village" programs in order to  xjdetermine that a violation had occurred. However, in the context of resolving the issues raised  xin Sainte's Response and in view of the repeated requests of Sainte, the videotape of two  x"representative" "Quigley's Village" programs was reviewed by the Commission's staff. This  xreview demonstrated that, contrary to the assertions of Sainte, the "Quigley's Village" programs  X"- xLon the videotape contain precisely the kind of "intermixture of related program and commercial  xmaterial" that the programlength commercial policy is intended to prohibit. Both the Kids Club  Xx$- xsolicitation and the multiple videotape offer consist of various "Quigley's Village" characters  xurging viewers to purchase products obviously related to the program. While these taped  x<programs may not be precisely the same as those reported in connection with station KCVUTV's  xZrenewal application, they have been submitted and described by Sainte as "representative" of the"3',-(-(ZZ%"  xprogram. The format and content of the announcements in these "representative" "Quigley's  x[Village" programs demonstrate that Sainte is incorrect in asserting that "[t]he Quigley's Village material is clearly not the `commercial matter' that Congress sought to prohibit."   x19. In view of the foregoing discussion, the arguments and assertions contained in  X- x\Sainte's Response to Sainte NAL do not justify or necessitate reduction or remission of the assessed forfeiture amount.  XJ-  !x20. Accordingly, IT IS ORDERED THAT the Response to Sainte Limited (KCVUTV),   x\Chief, MMB NAL 1800E dated November 25, 1994, IS DENIED. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED  xTHAT, pursuant to Section 503(b) of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended, 47 U.S.C.  x> 503(b), Sainte Limited, licensee of station KCVUTV, Paradise, California, FORFEIT to the  xUnited States the sum of ten thousand dollars ($10,000) for willful and repeated violations of  x/Section 73.670 of the Commission's Rules, 47 C.F.R. 73.670. Payment of the forfeiture may  xbe made by mailing to the Commission a check or similar instrument payable to the Federal  xCommunications Commission. With regard to this forfeiture proceeding, Sainte Limited may take  xany of the actions set forth in Section 1.80 of the Commission's Rules, 47 C.F.R.  1.80, as summarized in the attachment to this Memorandum Opinion and Order.  h FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION Roy J. Stewart Chief, Mass Media Bureau  h  ";,-(-(ZZ?" kcvu.rd Sainte Limited Licensee, KCVUTV P.O. Box 4159 Modesto, CA 953524159 Richard E. Hildreth, Esq. Fletcher, Heald & Hildreth 11th Floor 1300 North 17th Street Rosslyn, VA 22209  Xy-  X- $// SAINTE LIMITED, KCVUTV (PARADISE, CA) DA 981670 %YN //$ $/ 300.503(b) FORFEITURES (NAL) /$ $/ 73.670 COMMERCIAL LIMITS ON CHILDREN'S PROGRAMS /$  ?< #x6X@`7X@#