Click here for Adobe Acrobat version
Click here for Microsoft Word version
******************************************************** 
                      NOTICE
********************************************************

This document was converted from Microsoft Word.

Content from the original version of the document such as
headers, footers, footnotes, endnotes, graphics, and page numbers
will not show up in this text version.

All text attributes such as bold, italic, underlining, etc. from the
original document will not show up in this text version.

Features of the original document layout such as
columns, tables, line and letter spacing, pagination, and margins
will not be preserved in the text version.

If you need the complete document, download the
Microsoft Word or Adobe Acrobat version.

*****************************************************************




                           Before the
                Federal Communications Commission
                     Washington, D.C. 20554
In the Matter of                 )
                                )
KGGF-KUSN, Inc.                  )       File Number EB-02-KC-395
Licensee of Radio Stations:      )
KGGF(AM), KKRK(FM), and          )       NAL/Acct.No.200232560012
KUSN(FM); and                    )
Owner of Antenna Structure       )               FRN 0002-5340-55
Registrations:                   )
#1033307,#1033308,#1033309,and 
#1033310
Coffeyville, Kansas
Springfield, Missouri




           NOTICE OF APPARENT LIABILITY FOR FORFEITURE

                                         Released:  June 28, 2002

By the Enforcement Bureau, Kansas City Office:

                        I.  INTRODUCTION

     1.   In this Notice of Apparent Liability for Forfeiture, we 
find that KGGF-KUSN, Inc.,  licensee of radio stations  KGGF(AM), 
KKRK(FM), and KUSN(FM),  and owner of  antenna structure  numbers 
1033307, 1033308, 1033309, and 1033310, willfully and  repeatedly 
violated Sections 11.35(a), 17.47(a)(1),  17.50 and 73.49 of  the 
Commission's Rules  (``Rules''),1 by:  failing to  determine  the 
cause  of  Emergency  Alert  System  (``EAS'')  transmitting  and 
monitoring  failures;  failing   to  inspect  antenna   structure 
lighting;  failing  to  clean   and  repaint  its  four   antenna 
structures as often as necessary to maintain good visibility; and 
failing to maintain  an effective  locked fence  around its  four 
antenna structures which  have radio frequency  potential at  the 
base.   We conclude that KGGF-KUSN, Inc. is apparently liable for 
a forfeiture  in  the amount  of  twenty three  thousand  dollars 
($23,000).

                         II.  BACKGROUND

     2.   On May 1,  1998, an  agent of  the Commission's  Kansas 
City Field Office (``Kansas City Office'') inspected AM broadcast 
station KGGF, Coffeyville, Kansas,  licensed to KGGF-KUSN,  Inc., 
and the associated  antenna structures owned  by KGGF-KUSN,  Inc.  
That inspection found faded paint on all four antenna  structures 
associated with the KGGF directional operation.  In addition, the 
station was not receiving EAS tests from one monitoring source.

     3.   On May 7, 1998, the Kansas City Office issued a  Notice 
of Violation (``NOV'') to KGGF-KUSN, Inc. for violations detected 
during the May 1, 1998 inspection of KGGF.  The NOV  specifically 
cited 47  C.F.R.    11.17,  11.35(a),  73.1225(c),  73.1350(c), 
73.1350(d), 73.1560(a) and 73.1870(c)(3).



     4.   On May 18, 1998, a reply  was received to the NOV  from 
KGGF-KUSN, Inc. President, John B. Mahaffey.  In that reply,  Mr. 
Mahaffey stated  that station  personnel  were unaware  that  the 
station was required  to receive  two EAS weekly  tests and  that 
they would follow up with each of the monitoring sources if  they 
do not receive a weekly EAS test to ascertain if a test was sent.

     5.   On May 28,  2002, agents  from the  Kansas City  Office 
inspected co-owned and co-located stations KGGF(AM) and KKRK(FM), 
Coffeyville, Kansas, and  KUSN(FM), Dearing,  Kansas.  All  three 
stations  are  licensed  to  KGGF-KUSN,  Inc.   The  agents  also 
inspected KGGF-KUSN,  Inc.'s antenna  structures associated  with 
radio station  KGGF.   The  inspection  was  conducted  with  the 
station manager, Mr. John Leonard.  This inspection revealed  the 
following violations:

               a.   KGGF-KUSN, Inc.'s EAS equipment is shared  by 
          all three  of its  co-located radio  stations.2   KGGF-
          KUSN, Inc. failed to receive and initiate required  EAS 
          tests and failed  to determine and  log the causes  for 
          these  failures.     No  required   weekly  EAS   tests 
          (``RWT'') had been received from the primary monitoring 
          source WIBW during  the period April  25, 2002  through 
          May 28, 2002.   Also, no RWTs  and no required  monthly 
          tests  (``RMT'')   had  been   received  from   KIND-FM 
          according to the  station logs.  In  addition, none  of 
          the three  stations had  initiated  an RWT  during  the 
          period of March 1, 2002 until May 28, 2002 when the FCC 
          inspection began.  No logs  documented the reasons  why 
          tests were not being received or sent.

          b.   None  of  the  four  towers  associated  with  the 
KGGF(AM) directional operation 
          had effective fencing.  Most of the previous fence  was 
laying on the ground or missing 
          entirely.  The manager had contracted with one  fencing 
contractor some time after a 
          major storm hit the area  on May 9, 2002, and  obtained 
an estimate for the fencing repairs 
          dated May 16, 2002.   The dilapidated condition of  the 
fencing observed during the 
          inspection  and  statements   made  by  the   stations' 
contract engineer indicated that the 
          tower fencing had been in a state of disrepair for some 
time prior to the May 9, 2002 
          storm.  At the time of inspection, no repairs had  been 
started and no other contractor had 
          been  contacted  in  an  effort  to  get  the   repairs 
completed at an earlier date.

          c.   All four towers owned by, and registered to, KGGF-
KUSN, Inc. under 
          registration  numbers  1033307,  1033308,  1033309  and 
1033310, required painting.  All 
          four towers had severely  faded paint and rust  clearly 
shown in the white bands.  After the 
          inspection  station  management   asked  the   contract 
engineer to begin soliciting for bids to 
          have the towers repainted.          d.   Three of the four towers did not have  operational 
lighting.  Only tower #1 
          (1033307) had  working lights.   Further  investigation 
found that KGGF-KUSN, Inc.  
          relied on remote indications to determine the  lighting 
status of all four towers.  
          However, the remote indications provided on-off  status 
only, with no means of 
          monitoring  individual  light   status.   The   station 
contract engineer stated that he had 
          previously notified the licensee that the remote system 
did not provide sufficient 
          indications and that visual inspections were  necessary 
to maintain compliance.  The most 
          recent visual inspection of the structure lighting  was 
made on May 8, 2002 (20 days prior 
          to inspection) by the chief operator, Kevin Jones,  who 
reported that, at that time, the 
          lighting for all towers was fully  operational.   KGGF-
KUSN, Inc. personnel did not know 
          when the  lighting  for  towers  #2,  3  and  4  became 
inoperable.  The agents observed that 
          towers #2 and #3 had steady burning top lights  instead 
of flashing beacons, as required 
          by the registrations for those structures.  The  towers 
were lighted in accordance with the 
          KGGF  station   authorization   and   not   the   tower 
registrations.  The licensee was not 
          conducting  quarterly  tower  inspections  and  it  was 
unknown when the tower lighting 
          systems had been inspected.


                        III.  DISCUSSION

     6.   Section 11.35(a)  states  that broadcast  stations  are 
responsible for  ensuring that  EAS  Encoders, EAS  Decoders  and 
Attention Signal generating equipment used as part of the EAS are 
installed so that the  monitoring and transmitting functions  are 
available during  the  times  the stations  and  systems  are  in 
operation.  Additionally, broadcast  stations must determine  the 
cause of any failure to receive the required tests or activations 
specified in  11.61(a)(1) and (2).  Appropriate entries must be 
made in  the broadcast  station log  indicating reasons  why  any 
tests were not received.  KGGF-KUSN, Inc. stated it had  problems 
receiving EAS activations  at the  time of inspection  on May  1, 
1998.  Four years later, the station continued to fail to receive 
RWTs and RMTs.  The station  was not initiating RWTs as  required 
during the three month  period of March 1,  2002 through May  28, 
2002 to ensure their encoder  was in operational condition  until 
after the  FCC arrived  to conduct  an inspection.   The  station 
failed to log any reasons why tests were not being received.  The 
EAS violations were noted at all three stations.


     7.   Section 17.50 states that antenna structures  requiring 
painting under this part shall  be cleaned or repainted as  often 
as necessary to maintain  good visibility.   KGGF-KUSN, Inc.  had 
not taken  any  steps  to  have the  tower  painting  cleaned  or 
repainted as required.  The station manager for KGGF was notified 
of the faded condition of  the tower paint during the  inspection 
on May 1, 1998.  No efforts appear to have been made to have  the 
towers painted since that date.   The inspection of May 28,  2002 
found all  four towers  to  have severely  faded paint  and  rust 
showing in the white bands resulting in the blurring of the white 
and orange paint  bands on  all towers and  greatly reducing  the 
visibility of  all four  towers.  All  four towers  are owned  by 
KGGF-KUSN, Inc.  and  are required  to  be painted  by  both  the 
Federal Aviation Administration and the FCC.
     
     8.   Section  17.47(a)(1)  states  that  the  owner  of  any 
antenna structure  shall  make  an  observation  of  the  antenna 
structure's lights at least once each 24 hours either visually or 
by observing an automatic properly maintained indicator  designed 
to register any failure of such  lights, to insure that all  such 
lights are  functioning  properly.  On  May  28, 2002,  the  most 
recent visual inspection  made by station  personnel was 20  days 
prior on May  8, 2002, in  which the lights  were reported to  be 
fully operational.  On May  28, 2002, three  of the four  antenna 
structures were without any  operational lighting and no  station 
personnel was aware  of the  inoperable status  of the  lighting.  
KGGF-KUSN, Inc. relied  on remote readings  that did not  provide 
the indications of  lighting malfunctions  necessary to  maintain 
compliance.  KGGF-KUSN,  Inc.  was not  conducting  any  lighting 
system inspections and  it was unknown  when the last  inspection 
had been conducted of the lighting system.


     9.   Section 73.49 states that  antenna towers having  radio 
frequency potential at the base must be enclosed within effective 
locked fences or other enclosures.  At the time of inspection  on 
May 28,  2002,  KGGF-KUSN, Inc.  did  not have  effective  locked 
fencing around any of  the four towers  associated with the  KGGF 
operation.  The condition of the fencing and statements by  KGGF-
KUSN, Inc. personnel indicated  the fencing had been  ineffective 
for some time.  Some time  after May 9, 2002, station  management 
obtained one estimate from one fencing company, but that  company 
advised KGGF-KUSN,  Inc.  that  they  were  busy  and  could  not 
guarantee when the repairs  could be scheduled.   At the time  of 
inspection on May 28,  2002, no repairs had  been started and  no 
completion date had  been established.  KGGF-KUSN,  Inc. had  not 
attempted  to  contact  any  other  fencing  contractors  and  no 
temporary efforts had been made. 


     10.   Based on the  evidence before us,  we find that  KGGF-
KUSN, Inc. willfully3 and repeatedly4 violated Sections 11.35(a), 
17.47(a)(1),  17.50  and  73.49  of  the  Rules  by:  failing  to 
determine the  causes, and  logging  such causes,  of  continuing 
failures to  send  and  receive EAS  tests;  failing  to  conduct 
required monitoring of  the tower lighting  and lighting  systems 
associated with the four towers utilized by station KGGF; failing 
to clean  and repaint  the paint  on the  four KGGF  towers;  and 
failing to maintain  an effective  locked fence  around the  four 
KGGF towers with RF potential at their base.  . 
     11.  Pursuant to  Section  1.80(b)(4)  of  the  Commission's 
Rules, the base forfeiture amounts for the violation(s) cited  in 
this notice are:  $10,000  for failure to  clean and repaint  the 
towers, $7,000 for failure to maintain effective locked  fencing, 
$2,000 for failure to conduct required monitoring of the lighting 
and lighting system, and $2,000 for failure to determine and  log 
the cause of any failure to send and receive a required EAS  test 
(failure to conduct required monitoring).5  Section  503(b)(2)(D) 
of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended (``Act''), requires 
us to take into account ``... the nature, circumstances,  extent, 
and gravity of the violation,  and with respect to the  violator, 
the degree of culpability, any history of prior offenses, ability 
to pay,  and  other  such  matters  as  justice  may  require.''6  
Regarding the  EAS violation,  this is  a repeat  violation  that 
involves all three of  KGGF-KUSN, Inc.'s stations, therefore,  an 
upwards  adjustment  of  the  forfeiture  associated  with   this 
violation from $2,000 to  $4,000 is appropriate. Considering  the 
entire record and  applying the statutory  factors listed  above, 
this case warrants a $23,000 forfeiture.

                      IV.  ORDERING CLAUSES

     12.  Accordingly, IT IS  ORDERED THAT,  pursuant to  Section 
503(b) of  the  Communications  Act of  1934,  as  amended,7  and 
Sections 0.111, 0.311 and 1.80 of the Commission's Rules,8  KGGF-
KUSN, Inc. is  hereby NOTIFIED  of its APPARENT  LIABILITY FOR  A 
FORFEITURE  in  the  amount  of  twenty  three  thousand  dollars 
($23,000)  for  willful  and   repeated  violation  of   Sections 
11.35(a), 17.47(a)(1), 17.50 and 73.49 of the Rules.


     13.  IT IS FURTHER ORDERED THAT, pursuant to Section 1.80 of 
the Commission's Rules, within thirty days of the release date of 
this Notice of Apparent Liability, KGGF-KUSN, Inc. SHALL PAY  the 
full amount of the  proposed forfeiture or  SHALL FILE a  written 
statement seeking  reduction  or  cancellation  of  the  proposed 
forfeiture.


     14.  Payment of  the forfeiture  may be  made by  mailing  a 
check or similar instrument, payable to the order of the  Federal 
Communications Commission, to the Forfeiture Collection  Section, 
Finance  Branch,  Federal  Communications  Commission,  P.O.  Box 
73482, Chicago, Illinois  60673-7482.  The  payment must  include 
the FRN and NAL/Acct. No. referenced in the letterhead above.


     15.  The  response,  if  any,  must  be  mailed  to  Federal 
Communications Commission,  Office  of the  Secretary,  445  12th 
Street, SW,  Washington,  DC  20554,  Attn:  Enforcement  Bureau-
Technical  &  Public  Safety  Division,  and  MUST  INCLUDE   THE 
NAL/Acct. No. and FRN referenced in the letterhead above.


     16.  The Commission will not consider reducing or  canceling 
a forfeiture in response  to a claim of  inability to pay  unless 
the petitioner  submits: (1)  federal tax  returns for  the  most 
recent  three-year  period;  (2)  financial  statements  prepared 
according to generally accepted accounting practices  (``GAAP''); 
or (3)  some  other  reliable and  objective  documentation  that 
accurately reflects  the petitioner's  current financial  status.  
Any claim  of inability  to pay  must specifically  identify  the 
basis for the claim by  reference to the financial  documentation 
submitted. 


     17.  Requests for payment of the full amount of this  Notice 
of Apparent Liability  under an installment  plan should be  sent 
to:  Federal  Communications   Commission,  Chief,  Revenue   and 
Receivables Operations Group, 445 12th Street, S.W.,  Washington, 
D.C. 20554.9 


     18.                                                  IT   IS 
FURTHER ORDERED THAT a copy of this Notice of Apparent  Liability 
shall be sent by regular  mail and Certified Mail Return  Receipt 
Requested to KGGF-KUSN,  Inc. at P.O.  Box 4584, Springfield,  MO  
65808-4584.



                              FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION
                         



                              Robert C. McKinney
                              District  Director,   Kansas   City 
Office
                              Enforcement Bureau
_________________________

1 47 C.F.R.  11.35(a), 17.47(a)(1), 17.50 and 73.49.
2 See 47 C.F.R.  11.51(j) and 11.52(c).
3 Section 312(f)(1) of the Act, 47 U.S.C.  312(f)(1), which 
applies equally to Section 503(b) of the Act, provides that 
``[t]he term `willful,' when used with reference to the 
commission or omission of any act, means the conscious and 
deliberate commission or omission of such act, irrespective of 
any intent to violate any provision of this Act ....''  See 
Southern California Broadcasting Co., 6 FCC Rcd 4387 (1991).
4 Section 312(f)(2) of the Act, 47 U.S.C.  312(f)(2), which 
applies equally to Section 503(b) of the Act, provides that 
``[t]he term `repeated,' when used with reference to the 
commission or omission of any act, means the commission or 
omission of such act more than once or, if such commission or 
omission is continuous, for more than one day.''
5 47 C.F.R.  1.80(b)(4).
6 47 U.S.C.  503 (b)(2)(D).
7 47 U.S.C.  503(b).
8 47 C.F.R.  0.111, 0.311, 1.80.
9 See 47 C.F.R.  1.1914.