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                   )         
                                   )         
                                   )
                                   )
Rifkin Acquisition Partners LLC                   )         File 

No. EB-01-CG-204
St. Louis, Missouri                     )         NAL/Acct. 

200232320003
                                   )         FRN 0001-6054-92    

)         
Bresnan Telecommunications Company LLC       )         File No. 

EB-01-PL-090
White Plains, New York                       )         NAL/Acct. 

No. 200232320004
                                   )         FRN 0001-6097-34
                                   )
Interlink Communications Partners LLC             )         File 

No. EB-01-DV-420
St. Louis, Missouri                     )         NAL/Acct. No. 

200232320005
                                   )         FRN 0001-6219-29
Subsidiaries of Charter Communications            )
St. Louis, Missouri                     )


           NOTICE OF APPARENT LIABILITY FOR FORFEITURE

     Adopted:  April 23, 2002                     Released: April 
     25, 2002

By the Chief, Enforcement Bureau:

                        I.  INTRODUCTION

     1.  In  this Notice  of  Apparent Liability  for  Forfeiture 
(``NAL''),  we  find  the   captioned  subsidiaries  of   Charter 
Communications (``Charter'')  apparently liable  for  forfeitures 
totaling ten thousand dollars ($10,000) for repeated and  willful 
violations of  Part  17  of the  Commission's  Rules  (``Rules'') 
relating  to   antenna   structure  construction,   marking   and 
lighting.1

     2.  We  find that  during the  period from  April 24,  2001, 
through January  18,  2002, the  captioned  Charter  subsidiaries 
apparently failed to  comply with Part  17 requirements in  three 
locations.  In  particular, we  find that  the captioned  Charter 
subsidiaries are apparently liable for:  two failures to post the 
Antenna Structure Registration (``ASR'') number in a  conspicuous 
location so  that it  is visible  near the  base of  the  antenna 
structure (Section  17.4(g));  and  two failures  to  notify  the 
Commission of a change in the ASR ownership information  (Section 
17.57).2 

                         II.  BACKGROUND

     3.  The Commission's antenna structure construction, marking 
and lighting requirements operate in concert with FAA regulations 
to ensure that antenna structures  do not present hazards to  air 
navigation.  Generally,  the  Commission's  rules  require   that 
antenna structures located close to airports or that are  greater 
than 200  feet  in  height  comply  with  painting  and  lighting 
specifications designed to  ensure air safety.3   The  Commission 
requires antenna structure owners to register antenna  structures 
with the Commission and post ASR  numbers at the base of  antenna 
structures to allow  for easy  contact if  problems arise.4   The 
rules requiring antenna  structure registration  for all  antenna 
structures that may pose a hazard to air navigation have been  in 
effect since 1996.5 The Commission and the staff have  repeatedly 
advised antenna structure owners that all existing,  unregistered 
antenna structures  subject  to  our  rules  must  be  registered 
immediately or the  owners face  a monetary  forfeiture or  other 
enforcement action.  

     4.   Because  of  the   substantial  public  safety   issues 
involved,  the  Commission  further  requires  antenna  structure 
owners to monitor lights daily or install automatic alarm systems 
to ensure lights  function properly.6   Antenna structure  owners 
are required to maintain lighting equipment and replace or repair 
inoperative lights, indicators and  control and alarm systems  as 
soon as practicable.7  Additionally, antenna structure owners are 
required  immediately  to  notify  the  FAA  when  major  antenna 
structure lights are inoperative and cannot be repaired within 30 
minutes.8  The FAA then issues a Notice to Airmen (``NOTAM'') for 
a period of 15  days advising aircraft that  there is an  antenna 
structure at a specific location with a temporary light outage.

     5.   Commission  field  agents  regularly  inspect   antenna 
structures to  determine compliance  with the  antenna  structure 
construction, marking and lighting requirements.  During  routine 
inspections of antenna  structures on August  2 and November  21, 
2001, Commission field agents discovered that antenna  structures 
owned by  Charter subsidiaries  Bresnan Telecommunications  Group 
LLC  (``Bresnan'')  and  Interlink  Communications  Partners  LLC 
(``Interlink LLC'')  did  not  have the  ASR  numbers  posted  as 
required.  On April  24, 2001, and  January 16, 2002,  Commission 
field agents discovered that the ownership information for towers 
owned by  Charter  subsidiaries Rifkin  Acquistion  Partners  LLC 
(``Rifkin'')  and  Interlink  LLC  was  not  current.   A   brief 
description of these safety-related violations follows:

Mount Vernon, Illinois - File No. EB-01-CG-204

     6. On April 24, 2001, an agent of the Commission's  Chicago, 
Illinois, Field Office (``Chicago Office'') received a  telephone 
call concerning  an expired NOTAM at an antenna structure located 
at 3000 Caroline, Mount Vernon, Illinois (ASR number 1062266).  A 
search of  Commission records  revealed  that the  structure  was 
registered to Cablevision Communications, an entity not owned  by 
or  affiliated  with   Charter.    During   a  second   telephone 
conversation on the same day, the agent was told that Cablevision 
Communications had  sold  the  antenna structure  to  Charter  in 
October 1999.  On April  24, 2001, the  Chicago Office issued  an 
NOV to Charter citing its failure  to notify the Commission of  a 
change in the ASR ownership information, in violation of  Section 
17.57 of  the Rules.   In its  May  3, 2001,  reply to  the  NOV, 
Charter indicated that,  on May 3,  2001, it filed  FCC Form  854 
changing the  ASR ownership  information  for the  Mount  Vernon, 
Illinois, tower  from  Cablevision Communications  to  Rifkin,  a 
Charter subsidiary.

Ely, Minnesota - File No. EB-01-PL-090

     7. On August  2, 2001,  an agent from  the Commission's  St. 
Paul, Minnesota,  Resident  Agent Office  (``St.  Paul  Office'') 
inspected an  antenna structure  located 1.8  miles northeast  of 
Ely, Minnesota.  The agent observed  no ASR number posted at  the 
site.  A search of Commission records revealed that the structure 
was  registered  to  Bresnan,  a  Charter  subsidiary  (ASR   No. 
1024436).  On September 28, 2001,  the St. Paul Office issued  an 
NOV to Bresnan citing failure to post the antenna structure's ASR 
number, in violation  of Section  17.4(g) of the  Rules.  In  its 
October 3, 2001 response to  the NOV, Charter replied, on  behalf 
of Bresnan, that it had posted  a temporary sign at the site  and 
had ordered a permanent ASR number sign.

Carrizozo, New Mexico - File No. EB-01-DV-420

     8.  On  November 15,  2001, agents  from the  Denver  Office 
inspected an  antenna structure  located at  1406 South  Central, 
Carrizozo, New Mexico.  The agents observed no ASR number  posted 
at the site.  A  search of Commission  records revealed that  the 
structure  (ASR  number  1002769)  was  registered  to  Interlink 
Communications Partners, LLP (``Interlink  LLP''), an entity  not 
owned by or affiliated with  Charter.  On December 18, 2001,  the 
Denver Office issued an NOV to  Interlink LLP for its failure  to 
post the antenna structure's ASR number, in violation of  Section 
17.4(g) of the Rules.  Because the Denver Office had received  no 
response to the NOV, an agent made a telephone call on January 4, 
2002,  to  the  number  listed  for  Interlink  LLP  in  the  ASR 
information and left a message; the person who returned the  call 
told the agent that Interlink LLP  had been sold to Charter,  and 
that she had forwarded  the NOV to Charter.   In its January  16, 
2002, response to the NOV, Charter  replied that it had posted  a 
sign indicating the ASR number and  that it would change the  ASR 
ownership information.   The  January  16,  2002,  response  also 
indicated that Charter owned  the Carrizozo, New Mexico,  antenna 
structure as  of November  15, 2001.   On January  16, 2002,  the 
Denver Office  issued an  NOV to  Charter citing  its failure  to 
notify  the  Commission  of  a   change  in  the  ASR   ownership 
information, in violation of Section 17.57 of the Rules.  In  its 
March 15,  2002, reply  to the  NOV, Charter  indicated that,  on 
January 18,  2002,  it  filed  FCC  Form  854  changing  the  ASR 
ownership information for the  Carrizozo, New Mexico, tower  from 
Interlink LLP, an entity not owned by Charter, to Interlink  LLC, 
a Charter subsidiary.

                      III.      DISCUSSION

     9.  Based on the evidence  before us, we find that:   Rifkin 
has apparently failed to notify the Commission of a change in the 
antenna structure ownership information, in willful violation  of 
Section 17.57;  Bresnan  has apparently  failed  to post  an  ASR 
number in a conspicuous  location so that  it is readily  visible 
near the base of the  antenna structure, in willful violation  of 
Section 17.4(g); and Interlink LLC has apparently failed to  post 
an ASR number  in a conspicuous  location so that  it is  readily 
visible near  the  base  of the  antenna  structure,  in  willful 
violation of  Section  17.4(g),  and has  failed  to  notify  the 
Commission  of  a  change  in  the  antenna  structure  ownership 
information, in willful  violation of Section  17.57.9   We  note 
that these violations were continuing and thus also repeated.10

     10.  Section 503(b) of the Act,11 authorizes the  Commission 
to assess a forfeiture for each willful or repeated violation  of 
the Act  or of  any  rule, regulation,  or  order issued  by  the 
Commission under the Act.  In  exercising such authority, we  are 
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 such other matters as justice may require.''12

     11.   Pursuant   to  The   Commission's  Forfeiture   Policy 
Statement  and  Amendment  of  Section  1.80  of  the  Rules   to 
Incorporate  the  Forfeiture   Guidelines  (``Forfeiture   Policy 
Statement'')13  and  Section  1.80  of  the  Rules,14  the   base 
forfeiture  amount  for  failure   to  file  required  forms   or 
information (e.g., failure to  file an antenna registration  form 
when there  is  a  change  in  the  antenna  structure  ownership 
information) is $3,000.15
The  Forfeiture  Policy  Statement  does  not  establish  a  base 
forfeiture amount  for  failure  to post  the  antenna  structure 
registration number.16  The  Commission has determined,  however, 
that an appropriate  base forfeiture amount  for failure to  post 
the ASR number is $2,000 per violation.17 

     12.  Application  of  the  base  amounts  to  the  captioned 
Charter  subsidiaries'  violations  results  in  base  forfeiture 
amounts of :  Rifkin, $3,000 for failure to notify the Commission 
of change in the ASR  ownership information; Bresnan, $2,000  for 
failure to post ASR number; and Interlink LLC, $5,000 for failure 
to post ASR number and failure to notify the Commission of change 
in the  ASR ownership  information.   The total  base  forfeiture 
amount for violations  by the captioned  Charter subsidiaries  is 
$10,000.

     13. Taking  the factors  specified  by Section  503(b)  into 
account and the Forfeiture Policy Statement as well, we find  the 
following Charter  subsidiaries  apparently  liable  as  follows:  
Rifkin for a forfeiture  in the amount of  $3,000; Bresnan for  a 
forfeiture in  the amount  of  $2,000; and  Interlink LLC  for  a 
forfeiture in the amount  of $5,000.  The  total amount of  these 
proposed  monetary   forfeitures   to   the   captioned   Charter 
subsidiaries is $10,000.

                      IV.  ORDERING CLAUSES

     14.  Accordingly, IT  IS ORDERED THAT,  pursuant to  Section 
503(b) of the  Act, and Section  1.80 of the  Rules, each of  the 
captioned  subsidiaries  is  hereby  NOTIFIED  of  its   APPARENT 
LIABILITY FOR A FORFEITURE as follows:

     (a) Rifkin Acquisition Partners LLC  in the amount of  three 
thousand dollars ($3,000) for willfully and repeatedly  violating 
Section 17.57 of the Rules;

     (b) Bresnan Telecommunications Company in the amount of  two 
thousand dollars ($2,000) for willfully and repeatedly  violating 
Section 17.4(g) of the Rules; and

     (c) Interlink Communications Partners  LLC in the amount  of 
five thousand  dollars  ($5,000)  for  willfully  and  repeatedly 
violating Sections 17.4(g) and 17.57 of the Rules.

     15.  IT IS FURTHER ORDERED THAT, pursuant to Section 1.80 of 
the Rules, within thirty  days of the release  date of this  NAL, 
each of the listed subsidiaries SHALL PAY the full amount of  its 
proposed forfeiture  or SHALL  FILE a  written statement  seeking 
reduction or cancellation of its proposed forfeiture.18
     16.  Payment of the forfeitures  may be made by mailing  (a) 
check(s) or similar  instrument(s), 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(s)  should 
note the following:
      
     (a) Rifkin -- NAL/Acct. No. 200232320003 and FRN  0001-6054-
92;

     (b) Bresnan -- NAL/Acct. No. 200232320004 and FRN 0001-6097-
     34; and

     (c) Interlink  LLC --  NAL/Acct.  No. 200232320005  and  FRN 
0001-6219-29.

A request for payment of the amounts related to the NAL under  an 
installment  plan  should  be  sent  to:  Federal  Communications 
Commission, Chief, Revenue and Receivables Operations Group,  445 
12th Street, S.W., Washington, DC 20554.19

     17.  The response(s), if  any, must be  mailed to Office  of 
the  Secretary,  Federal  Communications  Commission,  445   12th 
Street, S.W., Washington,  DC 20554, ATTN:  Enforcement Bureau  - 
Technical and  Public  Safety  Division.   The  response(s)  must 
include the NAL/Acct. Nos. and FRN numbers specified in Paragraph 
16, above.

     18.  The Commission will not consider reducing or  canceling 
a forfeiture in response  to a claim of  inability to pay  unless 
the respondent  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.

     19.  IT IS FURTHER ORDERED THAT copies of this NAL shall  be 
sent by  Certified Mail,  Return  Receipt Requested,  to  Charter 
Communications, Interlink Communications Partners LLC, and Rifkin 
Acquisition Partners LLC  at 12444 Powerscout  Drive, Suite  100, 
St. Louis,  Missouri  63131; and  to  Bresnan  Telecommunications 
Company LLC  at 12444  Powerscout Drive,  Suite 100,  St.  Louis, 
Missouri 63131 and at 709  Westchester Avenue, White Plains,  New 
York 10604.

                              FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION



                              David H. Solomon
                              Chief, Enforcement Bureau
_________________________

1 47 C.F.R.  17.1 et seq.

2 47 C.F.R.  17.4(g) and 17.57.

3 47 C.F.R.  17.21.

4 47 C.F.R.  17.4.

5 Antenna  structure owners  were required  to register  existing 
antenna structures during a  two-year filing period between  July 
1, 1996 and June 30, 1998, and to register new antenna structures 
prior to  construction.   Streamlining the  Commission's  Antenna 
Structure Clearance Procedure, 11 FCC Rcd 4272 (1995).

6 47 C.F.R.  17.47.

7 47 C.F.R.  17.56.

8 47 C.F.R.  17.48.

9 Section  312(f)(1) of  the Act,  47 U.S.C.   312(f)(1),  which 
applies to violations  for which forfeitures  are assessed  under 
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, 4387-4388 (1991).

10  See id.at 4388; as defined in the Act, the 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.''  47 U.S.C.  312(f)(2). 

11 47 U.S.C.  503(b).

12 47 U.S.C.  503(b)(2)(D).

13 12 FCC Rcd 17087 (1997), recon. denied 15 FCC Rcd 303 (1999).

14 47 C.F.R.  1.80.

15 American Tower Corp., 16 FCC Rcd 1282, 1284 (2001) (``American 
Tower'').

16 The fact that the Forfeiture Policy Statement does not specify 
a base  amount does  not indicate  that no  forfeiture should  be 
imposed.  The  Forfeiture  Policy  Statement  states  that  ``any 
omission of  a  specific  rule  violation  from  the  [forfeiture 
guidelines] . . . should not signal that the Commission considers 
any  unlisted   violation   as  nonexistent   or   unimportant.''  
Forfeiture Policy Statement, 12 FCC Rcd at 17099.  The Commission 
retains the discretion, moreover,  to depart from the  Forfeiture 
Policy Statement and issue  forfeitures on a case?by?case  basis, 
under its general forfeiture  authority contained in Section  503 
of the Act.  Id.

17 See American Tower at 1284-85.

18 Alternatively, Charter may pay the full amount of the 
captioned subsidiaries' proposed forfeitures or file a written 
statement on behalf of the captioned subsidiaries seeking 
reduction or cancellation of the proposed forfeitures.

19 See 47 C.F.R.  1.1914.