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                )
                                )
Oberlin College Student Network, Inc.)  File No. EB-02-DT-151
                                )    NAL/Acct. No. 200232360005
Licensee of Station WOBC-FM     )    FRN 0005-0115-72
Oberlin, Ohio                   )    
                                   

                        FORFEITURE ORDER 

Adopted:  November 5, 2002              Released:   November   7, 
2002

By the Chief, Enforcement Bureau:

                        I.  INTRODUCTION

1.        In  this  Forfeiture  Order  (``Order''),  we  issue  a 
  monetary  forfeiture in  the  amount of  one  thousand  dollars 
  ($1,000)   to    Oberlin   College   Student   Network,    Inc. 
  (``Oberlin''), licensee of Station WOBC-FM, Oberlin, Ohio,  for 
  willful  and repeated  violation  of Section  11.35(a)  of  the 
  Commission's Rules (``Rules'').1  The noted violation  involves 
  Oberlin's  failure  to  maintain  operational  Emergency  Alert 
  System (``EAS'') equipment at Station WOBC.

2.        On May  23, 2002,  the Commission's  Detroit,  Michigan 
  Field Office (``Detroit  Office'') issued a Notice of  Apparent 
  Liability for Forfeiture (``NAL'') to Oberlin for a  forfeiture 
  in the  amount of  eight thousand  dollars ($8,000).2   Oberlin 
  filed a response to the NAL on June 24, 2002.

                         II.  BACKGROUND

3.        On March 12, 2002, an FCC agent from the Detroit Office 
  inspected Station WOBC.   At the time of the inspection,  there 
  was no  EAS equipment installed  and there were  no entries  in 
  the  station  log  indicating  that  EAS  equipment  had   been 
  installed but  had been taken out  of service for repair.   The 
  station manager  showed the agent old  EAS equipment which  was 
  not connected.   The station manager also  told the agent  that 
  the station  had not  conducted any  EAS tests  since at  least 
  January 1, 2001.

4.        On March 22, 2002, the  Detroit Office issued a  Notice 
  of  Violation (``NOV'')  to  Oberlin for  failing  to  maintain 
  operational  EAS equipment  at  WOBC in  violation  of  Section 
  11.35(a).   On April  15,  2002, the  Detroit  Office  received 
  Oberlin's  response to  the  NOV.  In  this  response,  Oberlin 
  stated  that  it was  in  consultation  with  its  professional 
  engineer  to update  its current  EAS equipment  and  projected 
  that the equipment could not be purchased until June 2002.

5.        On May 23, 2002, the  Detroit Office issued an NAL  for 
  an  $8,000  forfeiture  to  Oberlin  for  failing  to  maintain 
  operational  EAS equipment  at  WOBC in  willful  and  repeated 
  violation of  Section 11.35(a).   Oberlin filed  a response  to 
  the NAL  on June  24, 2002.   In its  response, Oberlin  admits 
  that it  did not  have operational EAS  equipment installed  at 
  WOBC at the  time of the inspection, but requests  cancellation 
  or reduction of the forfeiture amount.  Oberlin states that  it 
  has installed  EAS equipment and  has established protocols  to 
  ensure  that EAS  tests are  conducted  and logged  by  station 
  personnel.  In  addition, Oberlin asserts  that payment of  the 
  proposed $8,000  forfeiture would impose  a financial  hardship 
  on  it and  submits financial  information for  1999, 2000  and 
  2001 in support of this assertion.

                      III.      DISCUSSION

6.        The forfeiture  amount in  this  case was  assessed  in 
  accordance with  Section 503(b)  of the  Communications Act  of 
  1934, as amended,  (``Act''),3 Section 1.80 of the Rules,4  and 
  The Commission's Forfeiture  Policy Statement and Amendment  of 
  Section  1.80  of  the  Rules  to  Incorporate  the  Forfeiture 
  Guidelines, 12 FCC Rcd 17087 (1997), recon. denied, 15 FCC  Rcd 
  303  (1999)  (``Policy Statement'').   In  examining  Oberlin's 
  response,  Section  503(b)   of  the  Act  requires  that   the 
  Commission 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.5

7.        Section  11.35(a)  of  the  Rules  requires   broadcast 
  stations to install  and maintain operational EAS equipment  so 
  that  monitoring  and  transmitting  functions  are   available 
  during the  times when  the station is  in operation.   Oberlin 
  admits in  its response  to the NAL  that it did  not have  EAS 
  equipment  installed at  the time  of the  inspection and  that 
  such  equipment was  not  installed until  sometime  after  the 
  inspection.  Accordingly, based  on the available evidence,  we 
  conclude  that   Oberlin  willfully  and  repeatedly   violated 
  Section 11.35(a) of the Rules.

8.        Although Oberlin indicates  that it  has installed  EAS 
  equipment  and has  established protocols  to ensure  that  EAS 
  tests  are  conducted and  logged  by  station  personnel,  the 
  Commission has stated that remedial actions taken to correct  a 
  violation are not mitigating factors warranting reduction of  a 
  forfeiture.6   However, based  on the  financial  documentation 
  provided by Oberlin,  we conclude that payment of the  proposed 
  $8,000  forfeiture  would   impose  a  financial  hardship   on 
  Oberlin.  Therefore, we will reduce the forfeiture from  $8,000 
  to $1,000.

9.        We have examined Oberlin's response to the NAL pursuant 
  to the  statutory factors  above, and in  conjunction with  the 
  Policy  Statement as  well.   As a  result  of our  review,  we 
  conclude  that   Oberlin  willfully  and  repeatedly   violated 
  Section 11.35(a)  of the  Rules, but we  reduce the  forfeiture 
  amount from $8,000 to $1,000 based on its inability to pay  the 
  forfeiture.



                      IV.  ORDERING CLAUSES

10.       Accordingly, IT IS  ORDERED that,  pursuant to  Section 
  503 of  the Act, and  Sections 0.111, 0.311  and 1.80(f)(4)  of 
  the Rules,7  Oberlin College  Student Network,  Inc. IS  LIABLE 
  FOR  A  MONETARY  FORFEITURE in  the  amount  of  one  thousand 
  dollars ($1,000) for willful and repeated violation of  Section 
  11.35(a) of the Rules.

11.       Payment of the forfeiture shall  be made in the  manner 
  provided for  in Section 1.80  of the Rules  within 30 days  of 
  the  release of  this Order.   If the  forfeiture is  not  paid 
  within the  period specified, the case  may be referred to  the 
  Department  of  Justice  for  collection  pursuant  to  Section 
  504(a) of the Act.8  Payment may be made by mailing a check  or 
  similar  instrument,  payable  to  the  order  of  the  Federal 
  Communications  Commission,   to  the  Federal   Communications 
  Commission, P.O. Box 73482, Chicago, Illinois 60673-7482.   The 
  payment  should reference  NAL/Acct. No.  200232360005 and  FRN 
  0005-0115-72.  Requests for  full payment under an  installment 
  plan  should  be  sent  to:   Chief,  Revenue  and  Receivables 
  Operations  Group,  445 12th  Street,  S.W.,  Washington,  D.C. 
  20554.9

12.       IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that  a copy of this Order  shall 
  be sent by first  class mail and certified mail return  receipt 
  requested to  Oberlin College Student  Network, Inc., 135  West 
  Lorain Street, Oberlin, Ohio 44074.

                         FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION
                         


                         David H. Solomon
                         Chief, Enforcement Bureau
_________________________

  1 47 C.F.R.  11.35(a).  

  2 Notice  of Apparent Liability  for Forfeiture, NAL/Acct.  No. 
200232360005 (Enf. Bur., Detroit Office, released May 23, 2002). 

  3 47 U.S.C.  503(b).

  4 47 C.F.R.  1.80.

  5 47 U.S.C.  503(b)(2)(D).

  6 See Station KGVL, Inc., 42 FCC 2d 258, 259 (1973).

  7 47 C.F.R.  0.111, 0.311, 1.80(f)(4).

  8 47 U.S.C.  504(a).

  9 See 47 C.F.R.  1.1914.