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                )
                                )
Westshore Broadcasting, Inc.    )    File No. EB-02-TP-331
Licensee of AM Radio Station WOCA in Ocala,  )
Florida, and Owner of Antenna Structure #1027385  )    NAL/Acct. 
No. 200332700005
St. Petersburg, Florida         )
                                )    FRN 0003-7580-00       

                        FORFEITURE ORDER 

Adopted:   April 1, 2004                Released:  April 5, 2004

By the Chief, Enforcement Bureau:

                        I.  INTRODUCTION

     1.   In  this  Forfeiture  Order  (``Order''),  we  issue  a 
        monetary forfeiture  in  the amount  of  twelve  thousand 
        dollars  ($12,000)   to  Westshore   Broadcasting,   Inc. 
        (``Westshore''), licensee of AM station WOCA for  willful 
        and  repeated violation  of  Sections  17.51,  17.57  and 
        73.49 of the Commission's Rules (``Rules'').1  The  noted 
        violations  involve  Westshore's  failure  to  light  the 
        antenna  structure  for  station  WOCA,  to  notify   the 
        Commission  of  a  change  in  the  antenna   structure's 
        ownership information,  and  to  enclose  WOCA's  antenna 
        structure within an effective locked fence.

     2.   On November 1, 2002,  the Commission's Tampa,  Florida, 
        Field  Office  (``Tampa  Office'')  issued  a  Notice  of 
        Apparent Liability for Forfeiture (``NAL'') to  Westshore 
        for  a  forfeiture  in  the  amount  of  twenty  thousand 
        dollars ($20,000).2  Westshore  responded to  the NAL  on 
        December 3, 2002.

                         II.  BACKGROUND

     3.   On July 1, 2002, the Tampa Office received a  complaint 
        indicating that the  lights on  WOCA's antenna  structure 
        (#1027385), which Westshore owned,  had been dark for  at 
        least six  months.   After receiving  the  complaint,  an 
        agent at  the Tampa  Office phoned  the Federal  Aviation 
        Administration (``FAA'')  and  found that  there  was  no 
        Notice  to Airmen  (``NOTAM'')  3  on  file  for  antenna 
        structure #1027385.4  Later on the same day, agents  from 
        the   Tampa   Office   inspected   WOCA's    transmitting 
        facilities.   During   their   inspection,   the   agents 
        observed that the gate  to the fence surrounding  antenna 
        structure  #1027385  was   unlocked.   When  the   agents 
        covered the tower lights'  photocell, they observed  that 
        the tower lights did not illuminate.

     4.   On July 2,  2002, agents  from the  Tampa Office  again 
        inspected  station  WOCA's  transmitting  facilities  and 
        again observed  that the  gate to  the fence  surrounding 
        antenna structure  #1027385  was unlocked.   The  station 
        manager  stated  that  the  antenna  structure   lighting 
        failed on or about September  26, 2001, and had not  been 
        repaired because Westshore's  service company refused  to 
        climb the tower due to its poor structural integrity.

     5.   An agent from the Tampa office subsequently checked the 
        FCC's Antenna Structure Registration (``ASR'') data  base 
        and  found that  antenna  structure  #1027385  was  still 
        registered in the name of a previous owner.

     6.   On November 1, 2002, the Tampa Office issued a NAL  for 
        a forfeiture in  the amount of  $20,000 to Westshore  for 
        willful and repeated violation  of Sections 17.51,  17.57 
        and 73.49 of the Rules.  In its response, filed  December 
        3, 2002, Westshore  admits that its  tower lights  failed 
        on September 26, 2001; that the gate to the fence  around 
        its tower was unlocked at the time of the FCC  inspection 
        on  July  2,  2002;  and  that  its  tower   registration 
        information  was  not   current  at  the   time  of   the 
        inspection.   Westshore,  however,  seeks  reduction   or 
        cancellation  of   the  proposed   monetary   forfeiture.  
        Westshore contends  that it  timely notified  the FAA  of 
        the  lighting  outage,  that  its  tower  could  not   be 
        relighted because  it was  unsafe to  climb and  that  it 
        ``has been working  in good faith  to correct the  outage 
        and bring  the  facility  into  compliance.''   Westshore 
        states  that   it  was   unaware  of   the  fencing   and 
        registration violations.  Westshore also argues that,  if 
        the proposed  forfeiture  is  imposed, it  will  place  a 
        serious financial  burden  on the  company  and  provides 
        copies of its  2000 and 2001  federal income tax  returns 
        to support this claim.

                      III.      DISCUSSION

     7.   The  proposed  forfeiture  amount  in  this  case   was 
        assessed  in  accordance  with  Section  503(b)  of   the 
        Communications  Act  of  1934,  as  amended   (``Act''),5 
        Section  1.80  of  the   Rules,6  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'').   Section 
        503(b)  of the  Act  requires  that  the  Commission,  in 
        examining Westshore's  response,  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.7

     8.   According to  the ASR  data base,  at the  time of  the 
        inspection by the Tampa agents, red obstruction  lighting 
        was  required  for  WOCA's  antenna  structure.   Section 
        17.51  of  the  Rules   requires  that  red   obstruction 
        lighting be  exhibited between  sunset and  sunrise.   In 
        its December  3,  2002, response  to the  NAL,  Westshore 
        concedes that  the red  obstruction lighting  of  antenna 
        structure #1027385  had  not functioned  since  September 
        26, 2001.  We find that, by failing to relight the  tower 
        for  over   nine   months,   Westshore   willfully8   and 
        repeatedly9 violated Section 17.51 of the Rules.10

     9.   Section 17.57 of  the Rules  requires the  owner of  an 
        antenna  structure for  which  an  ASR  number  has  been 
        obtained to notify  the Commission of  any change in  the 
        ownership information.   Westshore concedes  that it  did 
        not do  so  following an  ownership  change and  that  it 
        acted only after being  notified of the violation by  the 
        Commission.11   Additionally  Westshore  claims  it   was 
        unaware  of   this   violation.   Westshore's   lack   of 
        awareness that it was violating the Rules indicates  that 
        it may not  have intended to violate  the Rules but  does 
        not  negate   the   willfulness   of   the   violation.12  
        Moreover, licensees are expected to know and comply  with 
        the  Commission's  Rules.13    We  find  that   Westshore 
        willfully and repeatedly  violated Section  17.57 of  the 
        Rules.

     10.  Section 73.49 of  the Rules  requires the  owner of  an 
        antenna  structure to  enclose  it  within  an  effective 
        locked fence.   The  FCC agents'  observations  establish 
        that the  gate in  the fence  around Westshore's  antenna 
        structure was unlocked on July 1 and 2, 2002.   Westshore 
        claims that it was  unaware of this violation and  states 
        its  belief  that  grounds  personnel  or  power  company 
        personnel  accidentally  left  the  gate  open.   Because 
        Westshore has not provided any evidence of an  inspection 
        routine for  checking the  condition of  the gate  or  to 
        determine whether  grounds  personnel  or  power  company 
        personnel  had   left   it  open,   we   find   Westshore 
        responsible for the gate's being left open on July 1  and 
        2,  2002.14    We,  accordingly,   find  that   Westshore 
        willfully and repeatedly  violated Section  73.49 of  the 
        Rules.

     11.  No mitigation is warranted on the basis of  Westshore's 
        correction of the violations.   As the Commission  stated 
        in Seawest Yacht  Brokers, 9 FCC  Rcd 6099, 6099  (1994), 
        ``corrective action taken  to come  into compliance  with 
        Commission rules  or  policy is  expected, and  does  not 
        nullify   or   mitigate   any   prior   forfeitures    or 
        violations.'' 15

     12.  Westshore states  that it  notified the  FAA within  30 
        minutes after discovery  of the outage  on September  26, 
        2001, and arranged  on September  27, 2001,  to have  the 
        lights repaired but  did not have  them repaired at  that 
        time because the antenna  structure was unsafe to  climb. 
        We agree with  Westshore that the  antenna structure  was 
        not safe to  climb.  However, the  antenna structure  was 
        still unilluminated on  the day of  the inspection,  more 
        than  nine months  after  the  outage  began.16   Because 
        Westshore's  unilluminated tower  was  a  hazard  to  air 
        navigation, it  was essential  for Westshore  to  correct 
        the violation within a  reasonable amount of time.17   We 
        find that the  nine months between  the discovery of  the 
        outage  and the  FCC  inspection  was  not  a  reasonable 
        period  to  leave  the  lighting  violation  uncorrected.  
        Westshore's response to the NAL indicates that, prior  to 
        the  FCC   investigation,  Westshore   had  ordered   and 
        received a new tower but  had not erected because it  was 
        unable  to  get  permission  from  the  City  of   Ocala, 
        Florida, to erect it.   While these circumstances do  not 
        excuse such a  lengthy outage, we  find that  Westshore's 
        actions  in  arranging  for   a  new  antenna   structure 
        demonstrate  good faith  and  that  the  portion  of  the 
        proposed forfeiture  imposed on  Westshore for  violation 
        of Section  17.51 of  the Rules  should be  reduced  from 
        $10,000  to  $5,000.   We  find,  thus,  that  the  total 
        forfeiture  amount should  be  reduced  from  $20,000  to 
        $15,000.

     13.  Finally,  Westshore  argues   that,  if  the   proposed 
        forfeiture is imposed, it will place a serious  financial 
        burden on  the  company.   In support  of  its  financial 
        hardship claim, Westshore submits copies of its 2000  and 
        2001 federal  income  tax returns.   The  Commission  has 
        determined that, in general, a licensee's gross  revenues 
        are  the  best  indicator   of  its  ability  to  pay   a 
        forfeiture.18   After   reviewing  the   financial   data 
        submitted, we find that the proposed monetary  forfeiture 
        should be further reduced to $12,000. 19

     14.  We  have  examined  Westshore'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   Westshore 
        willfully and repeatedly  violated Sections 17.51,  17.57 
        and 73.49 of  the Rules.   We also  conclude that,  while 
        cancellation of the proposed $20,000 monetary  forfeiture 
        is not warranted, a reduction to $12,000 is justified.

                        IV.  ORDERING CLAUSES

     15.  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,20 Westshore Broadcasting,  Inc., 
        IS LIABLE  FOR A  MONETARY FORFEITURE  in the  amount  of 
        twelve thousand dollars  ($12,000) for  failure to  light 
        its antenna  structure,  to notify  the Commission  of  a 
        change in the antenna structure's ownership  information, 
        and to enclose the antenna structure within an  effective 
        locked  fence,  in  willful  and  repeated  violation  of 
        Sections 17.51, 17.57 and 73.49 of the Rules.

     16.  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.21  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.  200332700005 and FRN  0003-7580-
        00.  Requests for full payment under an installment  plan 
        should be sent to: Chief, Revenue and Receivables  Group, 
        445 12th Street, S.W., Washington, D.C. 20554.22

     17.  IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that  a copy of this Order  shall 
        be sent by First Class and Certified Mail Return  Receipt 
        Requested to  Westshore  Broadcasting,  Inc.,  311  112th 
        Avenue, N.E., St. Petersburg, Florida 33716.

                              FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION

                         


                              David H. Solomon
                              Chief, Enforcement Bureau
_________________________

  1 47 C.F.R.  17.21(a), 17.57 and 73.49.  

  2 Notice  of Apparent Liability  for Forfeiture, NAL/Acct.  No. 
200232700005 (Enf.  Bur.,  Tampa  Office,  released  November  1, 
2002).    

  3  Section  17.48(a)  of  the  Rules,  47  C.F.R.    17.48(a), 
requires tower owners to immediately report lighting outages that 
cannot be corrected within 30 minutes  to the FAA.  When the  FAA 
receives a report  of a  lighting outage, it  issues a  ``NOTAM'' 
concerning the outage.  

  4 According to  records provided by Westshore, the most  recent 
NOTAM was issued on May 8, 2002.

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

  6 47 C.F.R.  1.80.

  7 47 U.S.C.  503(b)(2)(D).

  8 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,' 
... means the conscious and deliberate commission or omission  of 
such act, irrespective of any intent to violate any provision  of 
this Act or any rule  or regulation of the Commission  authorized 
by this Act ....''  See  Southern California Broadcasting Co.,  6 
FCC Rcd 4387 (1991).  

  9 As provided by 47 U.S.C.  312(f)(2), a continuous  violation 
is ``repeated''  if it  continues for  more than  one day.    The 
Conference Report for Section  312(f)(2) indicates that  Congress 
intended to apply this  definition to Section 503  of the Act  as 
well as  Section 312.   See  H.R. Rep.  97th  Cong. 2d  Sess.  51 
(1982).  See Southern California Broadcasting Company, 6 FCC  Rcd 
4387, 4388 (1991)  and Western Wireless  Corporation, 18 FCC  Rcd 
10319 at fn. 56 (2003).

  10 See, e.g., Media Broadcasting Corporation, 17 FCC Rcd  24583 
(Enf. Bur. 2002).

  11  A check  of  the ASR  data  base indicates  that  Westshore 
updated the ownership information on March 14, 2003.

  12 See Southern California Broadcasting Co., supra.

  13 Sitka Broadcasting Co., Inc., 70 FCC 2d 2375, 2378 (1979).

  14 See, e.g., Tidewater Communications, Inc., 17 FCC Rcd  8586, 
8588  (Enf.  Bur.  2002)  (failure  of  automated  alarm   system 
inadequate to overcome finding  of willfulness of tower  lighting 
violation where  there  is  no evidence  that  tower  owner  ever 
monitored alarm system or tower lighting); recon. granted, 18 FCC 
5524 (Enf.  Bur. 2003)  (forfeiture cancelled  where tower  owner 
produced evidence that it monitored tower lighting two days prior 
to the light outage);  and AT&T Wireless  Services, Inc., 17  FCC 
Rcd 21866, 21873 (2002) (forfeiture imposed for willful violation 
where there is no evidence of original compliance or of  periodic 
inspections to learn of noncompliance).  Cf. Vernon Broadcasting, 
60 RR 2d 1275 (1986) (forfeiture reduced where licensee regularly 
inspected tower fencing and found it to be in good condition just 
prior to FCC inspection).

  15 See also Callais Cablevision, Inc., 17 FCC Rcd 22626,  22629 
(2002); Radio Station KGVL, Inc., 42 FCC 2d 258, 259 (1973);  and 
Executive Broadcasting Corp., 3 FCC 2d 699, 700 (1966).

  16 Westshore  actually did not correct  the violation until  19 
months after  the  discovery of  the  outage.  According  to  the 
Commission's  ASR  data  base,  antenna  structure  #1027385  was 
dismantled on or  about May 20,  2003.  The Commission's  records 
also indicate that station  WOCA is now  transmitting from a  new 
190  foot  tower  that  is  not  required  to  be  registered  or 
illuminated.

  17 See 47 C.F.R   17.56.

  18  See PJB Communications  of Virginia, Inc., 7 FCC Rcd  2088, 
2089 (1992). 

  19  Id. at  2089  (forfeiture  not deemed  excessive  where  it 
represented approximately 2.02  percent of  the violator's  gross 
revenues); Hoosier  Broadcasting Corporation,  15 FCC  Rcd  8640, 
8641 (Enf. Bur. 2002) (forfeiture  not deemed excessive where  it 
represented approximately  7.6 percent  of the  violator's  gross 
revenues); Afton Communications Corp., 7 FCC Rcd 6741 (Com.  Car. 
Bur. 1992) (forfeiture not deemed excessive where it  represented 
approximately 3.9 percent of the violator's gross revenues).

  20 47 C.F.R.  0.111, 0.311, 1.80(f)(4).

  21 47 U.S.C.  504(a).

  22 See 47 C.F.R.  1.1914.