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                        )         File No.: EB-
01-AT-464      
                              )         
Wilson Broadcasting Co., Inc.                )         NAL/Acct. 
No. 200232480005
Licensee, Station WAGF(AM)              )    
Dothan, Alabama                                   )         FRN 
0004-3330-19   
                              

                        FORFEITURE ORDER

     Adopted:  March 12, 2003           Released:  March 17, 2003   

By the Chief, Enforcement Bureau:

                        I.   INTRODUCTION

     1.   In  this  Forfeiture  Order  (``Order''),  we  issue  a 
          monetary  forfeiture in  the amount  of seven  thousand 
          dollars  ($7,000)  to  Wilson  Broadcasting  Co.,  Inc. 
          (``Wilson''),  licensee of  Station  WAGF(AM),  Dothan, 
          Alabama, for willful and repeated violation of  Section 
          73.49 of the Commission's Rules (``the Rules'').1   The 
          noted violation  involves Wilson's  failure to  provide 
          an effective locked  fence enclosure for the  station's 
          antenna structure.  

     2.   On  June  10,  2002,  the  District  Director  of   the 
Commission's Atlanta, Georgia  Field Office (``Atlanta  Office'') 
issued a Notice of  Apparent Liability for Forfeiture  (``NAL'')2 
in the amount of $7,000  to Wilson.  Wilson submitted a  response 
on August 2, 2002.3 

                         II.  BACKGROUND

     3.   On April 23, 2002, a Commission agent from the  Atlanta 
Field Office conducted an inspection of the WAGF(AM)  transmitter 
site and antenna structure.  The antenna structure with a  folded 
unipole  AM  broadcast  antenna  attached  was  not  enclosed  by 
fencing.  Also, the feed wire from the tuning box to the  antenna 
was not protected  by fencing.  The  antenna had radio  frequency 
potential at the base of the antenna structure.

     4.   On April 24, 2002, a Commission agent from the  Atlanta 
field office inspected station WAGF(AM).  Again, the agent  noted 
that the station's antenna structure was not enclosed by fencing.  
The station owner, Mr. J.R.  Wilson, stated that the station  had 
been operating for about one month  and that the fencing had  not 
yet been installed.  On June  10, 2002, the District Director  of 
the Atlanta  Office  issued a  NAL  to Wilson  for  violation  of 
Section 73.49 of the Rules.
     5.   On August 2, 2002, Wilson  submitted a response to  the 
NAL.  In  its response,  Wilson claims  that the  forfeiture  was 
proposed in  error and  the  NAL must  be rescinded  because  the 
antenna structure was surrounded by a protective property  fence, 
and therefore was not accessible to the general public.

                         III. DISCUSSION

          6.   The  forfeiture  amount  in  this  case  is  being 
assessed in accordance with Section 503(b) of the  Communications 
Act of 1934, as amended  (``Act''),4 Section 1.80 of the  Rules,5 
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).  In  examining Wilson'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.6

     7.   Section 73.49 of the Rules provides that antenna towers 
having radio frequency potential at the base  (series fed, folded 
unipole, and  insulated base  antennas) must  be enclosed  within 
effective locked fences or other enclosures.  Section 73.49  also 
provides that individual  tower fences need  not be installed  if 
the towers  are contained  within  a protective  property  fence.  
Wilson claims that at the time  of the inspection the WAGF  tower 
was surrounded by a protective  property fence and the tower  was 
therefore not  accessible by  the general  public.  Although  the 
property was  surrounded  by  a fence,  the  investigating  agent 
observed breaks in  the fence and  there was an  open gap in  the 
fence at  the  driveway.   On  April 23,  2002,  when  the  agent 
inspected the transmitter site  and on April  24, 2002, when  the 
agent inspected the  property with  Mr. Wilson,  the agent  drove 
directly onto the property without complete restriction from  the 
property fence  and  walked right  up  to the  unenclosed  tower.  
Although Wilson indicates that construction on a second tower was 
on-going at  the time  of the  inspection and  that  construction 
required portions  of  the  property fence  to  be  removed,  the 
existing tower  was still  radiating and  unenclosed during  such 
construction, presenting  a  possible  safety  hazard.   Further, 
Wilson indicates that the fence surrounding the antenna structure 
was  taken  down  on  April  20,  2002,  to  facilitate  the  new 
construction, and the new fence surrounding the antenna structure 
was constructed ``on or about April 26, 2002.''  However,  Wilson 
does not indicate what measures were taken during construction to 
protect individuals from the radiating tower in the interim.  

     8.   Wilson also  claims that  the  fact that  Mr.  Wilson's 
brother resided  on  the  property  at  the  time  of  the  tower 
construction helped to prevent  intrusion onto the site.   Wilson 
further contends  that  a portion  of  the land  surrounding  the 
property is swampland which also  added a ``further barrier  that 
precluded casual or inadvertent  access to the site.''   However, 
the rules require  that the  type of antenna  structure at  issue 
here be surrounded either by  an effective locked fence or  other 
enclosure or  be contained  within a  protective property  fence.  
The fact that a portion of  the property abuts swampland or  that 
someone lives on the property to provide security does not excuse 
Wilson from  complying with  the requirements  of Section  73.49.  
Further, the  fact  that  the investigating  agent  could  drive, 
unimpeded, onto  the  property,  walk right  up  to  the  antenna 
structure and touch it at a time when it was radiating means that 
Wilson had neither  an effective  locked fence  enclosure nor  an 
effective protective property  fence.  Therefore,  Wilson was  in 
violation of  Section  73.49  of the  Rules.   Finally,  although 
Wilson also claims that  the front gate was  locked at all  times 
when the site was unoccupied, the agent has stated that there was 
no gate  on the  property  fence at  the  time he  conducted  the 
inspection and a section of  the property fence had been  removed 
to facilitate the construction of the tower.  

     9.   ACCORDINGLY, IT IS  ORDERED THAT,  pursuant to  Section 
503(b) of the Act and Sections 0.111, 0.311 and 1.80(f)(4) of the 
Rules,7 Wilson Broadcasting  Co., Inc. IS  LIABLE FOR A  MONETARY 
FORFEITURE in the amount of  $7,000 for willfully and  repeatedly 
violating Section 73.49 of the Rules.

     10.  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 shall 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  note 
NAL/Acct. No. 20023480005,  and FRN  0004-3330-19.  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
     
     11.       IT IS  FURTHER ORDERED  THAT this  Order shall  be 
sent by  regular  mail  and by  certified  mail,  return  receipt 
requested,  to  Wilson  Broadcasting  Co.,  Inc.,  Radio  Station 
WAGF(AM), 808 N. Oates St., Dothan, Alabama 36303. 

                         FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION
                         


                         David H. Solomon
                         Chief, Enforcement Bureau
_________________________

     1  47 C.F.R.  73.49.

     2 Notice of Apparent Liability for Forfeiture, NAL/Acct. No. 
20023480005 (Enf. Bur., Atlanta  Field Office, released June  10, 
2002).

     3 A response to a Commission  NAL should be filed within  30 
days of the issuance of the  NAL.  See Section 1.80(f)(3) of  the 
Rules.  Although Wilson's  response was filed  more than 30  days 
from the issuance of the NAL,  we will still consider it in  this 
proceeding to ensure that we have a complete record.  



     4 47 U.S.C.  503(b).

     5 47 C.F.R.  1.80.

     6 47 U.S.C.  503(b)(2)(D).

     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.