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                 )
                                )
Waterman Broadcasting Corp. of   )    File No. EB-04-TC-145
Florida, Inc.                    )    Facility ID No. 71085
Licensee of WBBH-TV              )    NAL/Acct. No. 200532170013
Fort Myers-Naples, FL            )    FRN: 0001807965
                                )
                                )    File No. EB-04-TC-150
Montclair Communications, Inc.   )    Facility ID No. 19183
Licensee of WZVN-TV              )    NAL/Acct. No. 200532170014
Fort Myers-Naples, FL            )    FRN: 0001733518


Apparent Liability for 
Forfeiture

               NOTICE OF APPARENT LIABILITY FOR FORFEITURE

Adopted:  August 8, 2005                                     
Released:  August 9, 2005

By the Acting Chief, Enforcement Bureau:

I.     INTRODUCTION

     1.     In this Notice of Apparent Liability for Forfeiture 
(``NAL''),1 we find that Waterman Broadcasting Corp. 
(``Waterman'') and Montclair Communications, Inc. 
(``Montclair'') apparently willfully or repeatedly violated 
section 713 of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended (the 
``Act''),2 and section 79.2(b)(1)(i) of the Commission's rules.3  
Waterman and Montclair4 apparently violated the Act and the 
Commission's rules by failing in a timely manner to make 
accessible to persons with hearing disabilities emergency 
information that they provided aurally in their programming for 
WBBH-TV and WZVN-TV during the Hurricane Charley emergency in 
the Fort Myers-Naples, Florida area on August 12 and August 13, 
2004.  Based upon our review of the facts and circumstances, we 
find that each of the stations is apparently liable for a 
forfeiture in the amount of $24,000. 

II.  BACKGROUND

     2.     Approximately one in ten Americans - 28 million - has 
some level of hearing loss; in the population of people over 65 
years of age that number increases to one in three.5  As the 
median age of the population continues to rise, the proportion of 
Americans with hearing loss will likely increase.6  According to 
the American Speech-Language-Hearing Association, ``[t]he number 
of Americans with a hearing loss has evidentially doubled during 
the past 30 years.  Data gleaned from Federal surveys illustrate 
the following trend of prevalence [of hearing loss] for 
individuals aged three years or older: 13.2 million (1971), 14.2 
million (1977), 20.3 million (1991), and 24.2 million (1993).''7  
Access to television information in an emergency is critical for 
all Americans, including this important and growing segment of 
our population. 

     A.  Requirements for Accessibility of Emergency Information

     3.     Congress recognized how important visual access to 
televised information is to individuals with hearing 
disabilities, and required the Commission, pursuant to section 
713 of the Act,8 to prescribe rules regarding Video Programming 
Accessibility.  Pursuant to this direction, and out of a concern 
that critical emergency information be available to every 
television viewer, including persons with hearing disabilities, 
the Commission adopted section 79.2 of the rules.9  Section 
79.2(b)(1)(i) requires video programming distributors providing 
emergency information in the audio portion of programming to 
provide persons with hearing disabilities the same access to such 
information, either through a method of closed captioning or 
another method of visual presentation.10  

 4.     As noted, the Commission's rules do not mandate closed 
captioning,11 but instead allow for any number of means of visual 
presentation, including, but not limited to, open captioning, 
crawls, or scrolls.12  The Commission stated that it was 
permitting these alternatives because it was concerned about the 
limited ``real-time'' captioning resources available and their 
current costs.13  The Commission made clear, however, that 
regardless of the method of visual presentation used, video 
programming distributors must ``use [a] method of visual 
presentation [that] ensure[s] the same accessibility [to 
emergency information] for persons with hearing disabilities as 
for any other viewer, as required by the rule.''14  Methods could 
include already prepared signs, charts, or handwritten 
information contained on a white board.15  

     5.     The Commission mandated equal accessibility because 
emergency information is of ``equal or greater importance to 
persons with hearing disabilities, and television plays a 
critical role in its dissemination.''16  Further, it is clear 
from the Commission's definition of emergency information, i.e., 
information about a ``current'' emergency that provides critical 
details concerning ``how to respond to the emergency,''17 that 
the Commission required video programming distributors to display 
emergency information in a timely manner so that viewers can 
respond to a current emergency without endangering their safety.  
The Commission long ago recognized the importance of timeliness 
of providing emergency information, noting that ``if visual 
notification is delayed, it should not be unreasonably delayed so 
that a hearing impaired person would not have time to take 
reasonable and constructive precautions with regard to the 
emergency.''18  

     6.     Emergency information is defined in section 79.2 as 
``information, about a current emergency, that is intended to 
further the protection of life, health, safety, and property, 
i.e., critical details regarding the emergency and how to respond 
to the emergency,''19 not merely the existence of an emergency.20  
The Commission further stated that critical details included, 
among other things, ``specific details regarding the areas that 
will be affected by the emergency, evacuation orders, detailed 
descriptions of areas to be evacuated, specific evacuation 
routes, approved shelters or the way to take shelter in one's 
home, instructions on how to secure personal property, road 
closures, and how to obtain relief assistance.''21  The rule 
provides the following non-exhaustive list of examples of the 
types of emergencies covered:  ``tornadoes, hurricanes, floods, 
tidal waves, earthquakes, icing conditions, heavy snows, 
widespread fires, discharge of toxic gases, widespread power 
failures, industrial explosions, civil disorders, school closings 
and changes in school bus schedules resulting from such 
conditions, and warnings and watches of impending changes in 
weather.''22  Since adoption of the rules, the Commission has 
reminded video programming distributors of their obligation to 
make emergency information accessible no fewer than five times.23  

     B.  The Investigation  

     7.     On August 13, 2004, Hurricane Charley hit Florida's 
western coast between Fort Myers and Punta Gorda causing deaths, 
injuries, and extensive damage to property and natural resources 
in
Florida.24  A Category 4 Hurricane, Hurricane Charley came ashore 
with winds of 145 miles per hour, later reaching 180 miles per 
hour and causing ten foot waves.25  Hurricane Charley is reported 
to have been the most powerful storm to hit the Fort Myers area 
since 1960.26  WBBH-TV and WZVN-TV broadcast emergency 
information regarding Hurricane Charley on August 12 and 13, 
2004.27  

     8.     During this coverage, the stations provided their 
viewers with emergency information, including the closing of 
government facilities, evacuation routes, shelters, the course of 
the storm, and the predicted time and counties that Hurricane 
Charley would hit.  Waterman and Montclair joined forces, 
pursuant to a pre-November 5, 1996 time brokerage agreement, to 
bring greater resources to bear on coverage of Hurricane 
Charley.28  Beginning at 11:30 p.m. on August 12, the stations 
began simulcasting special coverage of Hurricane Charley and 
preempted regular programming and provided 24-hour coverage of 
the storm.29  

     9.     After receiving a complaint about the stations' 
coverage,30 the Enforcement Bureau (``Bureau'') launched an 
investigation into Waterman's broadcasts on WBBH-TV and 
Montclair's broadcasts on WZVN-TV.  The Bureau sent Letters of 
Inquiry to the stations, directing the stations to provide, among 
other things, videotapes for August 12, 2004 and August 13, 2004 
of Waterman's coverage of Hurricane Charley on WBBH-TV and 
Montclair's coverage of Hurricane Charley on WZVN-TV.  The 
stations filed responses, including the requested videotapes.31  

     10.    The Bureau has reviewed the stations' videotapes of 
programming along with other material the stations provided in 
response to the Bureau's Letters of Inquiry, and identified 
several instances in which the stations aurally provided 
emergency information but failed to provide visual presentation 
of emergency information in violation of section 79.(2)(b)(1)(i) 
of our rules.  These instances, described below at paragraphs 14-
19, form the basis of the NAL. 

III.        DISCUSSION

    11.    As an initial matter, we note that the stations are 
``video programming distributors'' subject to section 79.2 of the 
Commission's rules.  Section 79.1(a)(2) defines a video 
programming distributor as ``[a]ny television broadcast station 
licensed by the Commission....''32  As broadcast licensees, the 
stations must comply with the Commission's rules regarding the 
accessibility of emergency information to individuals with 
hearing disabilities.

    12.    We now turn to an analysis of the information 
broadcast by the stations over WBBH-TV and WZVN-TV during the 
time period at issue.  We note at the outset that Hurricane 
Charley caused significant injuries to persons, loss of life, and 
extensive damage to property and natural resources in the Fort 
Myers-Naples area.33 Waterman's coverage of Hurricane Charley, 
which lasted eight days, 34 and Montclair's coverage, which 
lasted seven days, 35 illustrate the urgency and danger of the 
situation.  The stations' anchors and reporters repeated 
emergency information many times, including evacuation orders, 
up-to-date information on the path of the storm, anticipated 
times the storm would hit particular communities, and road and 
bridge closures.  The stations' personnel characterized the storm 
as a very serious threat to life and property in southwest 
Florida.36  While the stations visually presented some 
information during this period, it appears that in several 
instances the stations did not make critical information 
available to persons with hearing disabilities.  

    13.    Hurricane Charley was an emergency covered by the 
Commission's emergency visual access rules.  Further, the record 
shows that on August 13, 2004 the stations aurally provided 
critical emergency information on road and bridge closures, and 
evacuation details, but failed to provide visual presentation of 
this information.  Below we describe each of the three apparent 
violations that form the basis of this NAL, and we address each 
of the stations' defenses.  At the outset, we note that Hurricane 
Charley's destructive force and rapidly changing course made it 
vital that the stations provide emergency information visually to 
avoid serious bodily harm or loss of life for persons with 
hearing disabilities.  

    14.    With respect to the first apparent violation, on 
August 13 at 1:58 p.m., newscaster Heather Turco stated that 
``[t]he biggest news, the Sanibel Causeway is shut down, you will 
not be able to get on it.  They tell us, the only way to get off 
the island is to swim off.''37  Similarly, at 2:24 p.m., Ms. 
Turco announced that ``[t]he Sanibel Causeway is shut down'' and 
after ``3:45 or 4:00 it is no longer safe to go to shelters, if 
you want to go, go now after 4:00 no longer safe.''38  Based on 
our review of the videotapes and the stations' written material, 
we find that the stations did not provide visual access to this 
emergency information.  

    15.    The stations do not deny that they failed to present 
this information visually.  Instead they argue that (i) while the 
information may have been ``useful'' to viewers, the most 
critical information during this period was the ``take shelter 
ASAP warnings'' the stations presented in the crawls; and (ii) 
the shelter information was not a critical detail about the 
emergency situation.39  We disagree on both counts.  First, the 
warnings regarding the Sanibel Causeway clearly constitute ``road 
closure'' information covered by the rule.40  The Sanibel 
Causeway is a particularly important road as it is the only means 
on and off Sanibel Island; without this information, persons with 
hearing disabilities had no way of knowing that they would not be 
allowed to cross the Causeway, placing them in a potentially 
dangerous situation.  Second, the information that it was no 
longer safe to go to a shelter clearly is information to 
``further the protection of life, health, safety and 
property....''41  Failure to provide this information visually 
left viewers with hearing disabilities in the potentially 
dangerous situation of trying to reach shelter when it was 
clearly too late for any such attempts.  We find the stations' 
failure to provide visual access to this emergency information an 
apparent violation of section 79.2(b)(1)(i).

    16.    The second apparent violation occurred on August 13 at 
2:21, when newscaster Robert Van Winkle announced ``warning now 
to Glades County residences, there's a mandatory evacuation, 
effective immediately for people in manufactured homes and low 
lying areas are required to leave and seek shelter.''42  Based on 
our review of the videotapes and the stations' written material, 
we find that the stations did not provide visual access to this 
emergency information.  

    17.    As with the first apparent violation, the stations do 
not deny that they failed to provide this information visually.  
Instead, the stations assert that while this information may have 
been ``useful'' to viewers, in the stations' good faith judgment 
the radar graphic provided the necessary details to indicate the 
severity and location of the storm.''43  We disagree.  The 
Commission provided evacuation orders as a specific example of 
emergency information that must be visually provided.44  The 
stations' radar graphic did not convey the critical information 
that Glades County was under a mandatory evacuation.  Without 
visual presentation of the evacuation order, viewers with hearing 
disabilities in Glades County had no way to learn of the 
mandatory evacuation order.  We find the stations' failure to 
provide visual access to this critical emergency information an 
apparent violation of section 79.2(b)(1)(i).

    18.    The third apparent violation occurred on August 13 at 
2:26 p.m., when newscaster Jim Reif announced that ``[w]e just 
got [an] urgent request from Emergency Management Office 
Charlotte County, urging residents at this point, do not 
evacuate, it's too dangerous, stay where you are hunker down as 
best you can.  Residents of Charlotte County, Punta Gorda, Port 
Charlotte and all around Charlotte Harbor, stay where you 
are.''45  Based on our review of the videotapes and the stations' 
written material, we find that the stations did not provide 
visual access to this emergency information.  

    19.    Again, the stations do not deny that they failed to 
provide visual access to the information that residents of these 
specific areas should no longer evacuate.  Instead, the stations 
argue that sufficient information was provided visually in crawls 
at 2:33 p.m. and 3:37 p.m.46  Again, we disagree.  The stations' 
crawls at these times provided only generic warnings that 
``Charley was CAT4 storm and viewers should seek shelter 
immediately.''47  The aural location-specific information is 
clearly information ``intended to further the protection of life, 
health, safety...'' and ``specific details regarding the areas 
that will be affected by the emergency.48  Without visual 
presentation of the Charlotte County Emergency Management Office 
warning, hearing impaired residents of Charlotte County had no 
way of knowing the generic warning meant to stay where they were 
and not to seek other shelter.  We find the stations' failure to 
provide visual access to this emergency information an apparent 
violation of section 79.2(b)(1)(i).

    20.    In addition to their incident-specific arguments, the 
stations argue generally that the Second Report and Order 
provided licensees with discretion to use good faith judgment 
regarding the details that they must make visually accessible.49  
The stations appear to contend that the Commission's statement in 
the Second Report and Order that ``[i]n determining whether 
particular details need to be made accessible, we will permit 
programmers to rely on their good faith judgments''50 gives them 
discretion to determine where and when emergency information 
should be presented visually.  This contention is wrong.  As we 
have stated in the past,51 although the rule allows programmers 
to exercise discretion as to whether to display non-critical 
details of emergency information, programmers must present basic, 
critical information about a hurricane emergency such as road 
closures, shelters, and evacuation details.  The expansive 
interpretation of the good faith exception asserted by the 
stations in this matter would swallow the rule and render it 
wholly ineffective.  
 IV.      FORFEITURE AMOUNT

    21.    For the time at issue in this case, section 
503(b)(2)(A) of the Communications Act authorized the Commission 
to assess a forfeiture of up to $27,500 for each violation of the 
Act or of any rule, regulation, or order issued by the Commission 
under the Act.52  In exercising such authority, we are required 
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.''53  Based on 
our review of the record, we conclude that Waterman and Montclair 
are apparently liable for the willful or repeated violation of 
our rules.

    22.    The Commission's forfeiture guidelines do not 
currently establish a base forfeiture amount for violations of 
section 79.2(b)(1)(i).  Enforcement of the emergency 
accessibility rules is important as lives may depend on 
compliance.  As we have in previous emergency visual access 
cases,54 we find that $8,000, the base forfeiture amount for 
violations of rules relating to distress and safety frequencies 
and for failure to install and operate Emergency Alert System 
(``EAS'') equipment is analogous and warranted for apparent 
violations of section 79.2(b)(1)(i).55   The purpose of the EAS 
and safety frequencies rules are to warn persons of emergencies, 
and the purpose of section 79.2(b)(1)(i) is the same.  Waterman 
and Montclair provided aural emergency information without 
providing visual presentation on three occasions, resulting in 
three apparent violations of the rule for which we propose a 
forfeiture.  We therefore propose a forfeiture of $24,000 for 
each station.  Waterman and Montclair will have the opportunity 
to submit further evidence and arguments in response to this NAL 
to show that no forfeiture should be imposed or that some lesser 
amount should be assessed.56 
 
V.   CONCLUSIONS AND ORDERING CLAUSES

    23.    We have determined that Waterman Broadcasting, Corp., 
and Montclair Communications, Inc., have apparently willfully or 
repeatedly violated section 713 of the Act and section 
79.2(b)(1)(i) of the Commission's rules by failing to make 
emergency information that they provided to hearing persons 
accessible to persons with hearing disabilities, resulting in a 
proposed forfeiture of $24,000 for each station.

    24.    Accordingly, IT IS ORDERED, pursuant to section 503(b) 
of Communications Act of 1934, as amended, 47 U.S.C.  503(b), 
and section 1.80 of the Commission's rules, 47 C.F.R.  1.80, 
that Waterman Broadcasting, Corp., IS HEREBY NOTIFIED of an 
Apparent Liability for Forfeiture in the amount of $24,000 for 
willful and repeated violations of section 713 of the Act, 47 
U.S.C.  613, and section 79.2(b)(1)(i) of the Commission's 
rules, 47 C.F.R.  79.2(b)(1)(i), as described in the paragraphs 
above. 

    25.    IT IS FURTHER ORDERED, pursuant to section 1.80 of the 
Commission's rules, 47 C.F.R.  1.80, that within thirty (30) 
days of the release of this Notice, Waterman Broadcasting, Corp.,  
SHALL PAY the full amount of the proposed forfeiture OR SHALL 
FILE a response showing why the proposed forfeiture should not be 
imposed or should be reduced.57  

    26.    IT IS FURTHERED ORDERED, pursuant to section 503(b) of 
Communications Act of 1934, as amended, 47 U.S.C.  503(b), and 
section 1.80 of the Commission's rules, 47 C.F.R.  1.80, that 
Montclair Communications, Inc.,  IS HEREBY NOTIFIED of an 
Apparent Liability for Forfeiture in the amount of $24,000 for 
willful and repeated violations of section 713 of the Act, 47 
U.S.C.  613, and section 79.2(b)(1)(i) of the Commission's 
rules, 47 C.F.R.  79.2(b)(1)(i), as described in the paragraphs 
above. 

    27.   IT IS FURTHER ORDERED, pursuant to section 1.80 of the 
Commission's rules, 47 C.F.R.  1.80, that within thirty (30) 
days of the release of this Notice, Montclair Communications, 
Inc.,  SHALL PAY the full amount of the proposed forfeiture OR 
SHALL FILE a response showing why the proposed forfeiture should 
not be imposed or should be reduced.58  

    28.    IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that payment of the forfeiture 
amount should be made by check or similar instrument, payable to 
the order of the Federal Communications Commission.  The payment 
must include the NAL/Acct.No. and FRN No. referenced above.  
Payment by check or money order must be mailed to Forfeiture 
Collection Section, Finance Branch, Federal Communications 
Commission, P.O. Box. 73482, Chicago, IL 60673-7482.  Payment by 
overnight mail may be sent to Bank One/LB 73482, 525 West Monroe, 
8th Floor Mailroom, Chicago, IL 60661.  Payment by wire transfer 
may be made to ABA Number 071000013, receiving Bank One, and 
account number 1165259.

    29.    The Bureau 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.

    30.    Requests for payment of the full amount of this Notice 
of Apparent Liability under an installment plan should be sent 
to:  Chief, Revenue and Receivables Operations Group, 445 12th 
Street, S.W., Washington, D.C. 20554.59

    31.    IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that copies of this Notice of 
Apparent Liability for Forfeiture SHALL BE SENT by certified mail 
to Steven H. Pontius, Executive Vice President & General Manager, 
Waterman Broadcasting, Corp., WBBH-TV, 3719 Central Avenue, Fort 
Myers, Florida 33901 and Lara K. Kunkler, President & General 
Manager, Montclair Communications, Inc., WZVN-TV, 3719 Central 
Avenue, Fort Myers Florida 33091. 

               
                         FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION



                         Kris A. Monteith
                         Acting Chief, Enforcement Bureau


_________________________

1See 47 U.S.C.  503(b)(4)(A).  The Commission has authority 
under this section of the Act to assess a forfeiture penalty 
against a broadcast licensee if the Commission determines that 
the licensee has "willfully or repeatedly" failed to comply with 
the provisions of the Act or with any rule, regulation, or order 
issued by the Commission under the Act.  For a violation to be 
willful, it need not be intentional.  Southern California 
Broadcasting Co., 6 FCC Rcd 4387 (1991).
247 U.S.C.  613.
347 C.F.R.  79.2(b)(1)(i).
4Waterman Broadcasting Corp. and Montclair Communications, Inc. 
hereinafter referred to jointly as ``the stations.''
5See Section 68.4(a) of the Commission's Rules Governing Hearing 
Aid-Compatible Telephones, WT Docket No. 01-309, Report and 
Order, 18 FCC Rcd 16753, at para. 5 (2003) (HAC Report and 
Order); Erratum, WT Docket No. 01-309, 18 FCC Rcd 18047 (2003) 
(citations omitted).
6See HAC Report and Order, 18 FCC Rcd 16753, at para. 5.
7http://www.asha.org/public/hearing/disorders/prevalence_adults.-
htm  (visited May 24, 2005) (citations omitted).
847 U.S.C  613.
9Closed Captioning and Video Description of Video Programming, 
Implementation of Section 305 of the Telecommunications Act of 
1996, and Accessibility of Emergency Programming, Second Report 
and Order, 15 FCC Rcd 6615, 6621-22, para. 12 (2000) (``Second 
Report and Order'').
1047 C.F.R.  79.2(b)(1)(i).
11Second Report and Order, 15 FCC Rcd at 6620, para. 11.
12Id. at 6618, para. 8.  
13Id. at 6621, para. 11.
14Id. at 6623-24, para. 16.
15See generally, Amendment of Part 73 of the Rules to Establish 
Requirements for Captioning of Emergency Messages on Television, 
Report and Order, Docket No. 20659, 61 FCC2d 18 (1976) (1976 
Order), at paras. 9, 11 and Appendix B (relating to prior visual 
presentation requirements and noting potential use of slides and 
hand printed messages).
16Second Report and Order, 15 FCC Rcd at 6619-20, paras. 9, 10 
(citing examples of the importance of timely visual emergency 
information including an inaccessible tornado warning that caused 
delay in evacuation of children and an inaccessible water 
contamination warning that caused persons with hearing 
disabilities to needlessly incur health risks of which they were 
not initially aware).  In attempting to determine the scope of 
this rule, the Commission expressed concern that the disabilities 
community have available ``sufficient information'' with the 
``same immediacy'' as other viewers.  Closed Captioning and Video 
Description of Video Programming, Implementation of Section 305 
of the Telecommunications Act of 1996, and Accessibility of 
Emergency Programming, Further Notice of Proposed Rulemaking, 13 
FCC Rcd 5627, 5631 (1998).  In addition to the plain meaning of 
the ``emergency information,'' the nature of the critical details 
described in section 79.2(a)(2) makes clear that timely visual 
presentation is required. 
1747 C.F.R.  79.2(a)(2).
181976 Order, 61 FCC2d 18, at para. 11.
1947 C.F.R.  79.2(a)(2).
20Second Report and Order, 15 FCC Rcd at 6617, para. 5.
21Note to 47 C.F.R.  79.2(a)(2) (emphasis added).
2247 C.F.R.  79.2(a)(2) (emphasis added).
23See, e.g., Public Notice, ``Reminder to Video Programming 
Distributors of Obligation to Make Emergency Information 
Accessible to Persons with Hearing Disabilities,'' DA 01-1930, 16 
FCC Rcd 15348 (2001); Public Notice, ``Reminder to Video 
Programming Distributors of Obligation to Make Emergency 
Information Accessible to Persons with Hearing or Vision 
Disabilities,'' 17 FCC Rcd 14614 (2002); Public Notice, 
``Reminder to Video Programming Distributors of Obligation to 
Make Emergency Information Accessible to Persons with Hearing or 
Vision Disabilities,'' 18 FCC Rcd 14670 (2003); Public Notice, 
``Reminder to Video Programming Distributors of Obligations to 
Make Emergency Information Accessible to Persons with Hearing or 
Vision Disabilities,'' 19 FCC Rcd 9882 (2004); Public Notice, 
``Reminder to Video Programming Distributors of Obligation to 
Make Emergency Information Accessible to Persons with Hearing 
Disabilities,'' 20 FCC Rcd 5918, (2005).
24See 
http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2004/08/14/national/main636019.sh-
tml, Hurricane Charley Comes Ashore, August 14, 2004 (visited 
April 18, 2005).
25Id.  Hurricane Charley was classified as a Tropical Storm on 
August 11, but was upgraded to a Category 2 Hurricane by 2:00 
p.m. on August 12.  Hurricane Charley developed into a Category 3 
Hurricane by 11:00 a.m. on August 13, and a Category 4 Hurricane 
by 2:00 p.m. on August 13.  Letter from Steven H. Pontius, 
Executive Vice President & General Manager, WBBH-TV, Division of 
Waterman Broadcasting, to Janet Sievert, Attorney, 
Telecommunications Consumer Division, Enforcement Bureau, FCC, at 
n.2 (January 17, 2005) (``Waterman Response Letter'').  
26http://www.cnn.com/2004/WEATHER/08/14/storms/+hurricane+Charle-
y, Weather Charley Death Toll at 13, August 15, 2004 (visited 
April 18, 2005).
27Waterman provided coverage of Hurricane Charley from August 12 
through 20, 2004, while Montclair provided coverage of Hurricane 
Charley from August 11 through 19, 2004.  Because Waterman's and 
Montclair's coverage on August 12 and 13 was during the height of 
the emergency, as reflected in the informal complaint, and 
Waterman's coverage August 14 through 20 and Montclair's coverage 
August 14 through 19 generally dealt with the aftermath of the 
hurricane, the Bureau focused its investigation on August 12 and 
13.  See Waterman Response Letter at 5;  Letter from Lara K. 
Kunkler, President of Montclair Communications, Inc & General 
Manager, WZVN-TV, to Janet Sievert, Attorney, Telecommunications 
Consumer Division, Enforcement Bureau, FCC (January 18, 2005 
(``Montclair Response Letter''.)  See also Informal Complaint, 
File No. 04-N93233, filed September 7, 2004 (``Informal 
Complaint'')
28See Waterman Response Letter at 2; Montclair Response Letter at 
1.  Waterman provides programming, advertising and certain other 
services to Montclair pursuant to the pre-November 5, 1996 time 
brokerage agreement.
29Montclair incorporates by reference Waterman's submission 
concerning policies that are implemented jointly by Waterman and 
Montclair, videotapes and Attachment 2, for August 13, detailing 
the programming carried by both stations.  See Montclair Response 
Letter at 1 and 3.  
30See Informal Complaint.
31Letter from Colleen K. Heitkamp, Chief, Telecommunications 
Consumers Division, Enforcement Bureau, FCC, to Steven H. 
Pontius, Vice President & General Manager, Waterman Broadcasting 
Corp., of Florida (November 17, 2004) (``Waterman Letter of 
Inquiry''); Letter from Colleen K. Heitkamp, Chief, 
Telecommunications Consumers Division, Enforcement Bureau, FCC, 
to Lara K. Kunkler, President, Montclair Communications, Inc. 
(November 17, 2004)(``Montclair Letter of Inquiry'').
3247 C.F.R.  79.1(a)(2).
33See, e.g., WBBH-TV Videotapes; 
http://www.cnn.com/2004/WEATHER/08/14/storms/index.html, Weather 
- Charley Death Toll at 13, August 15, 2004 (visited April 18, 
2005).
34See Waterman Response Letter at 5-6.  On August 12, Waterman 
provided hurricane information during its regularly scheduled 
newscasts, newsbreaks throughout the day, one-hour special, and 
crawls.  Waterman's regularly scheduled newscast aired from 5:00 
a.m. to 7:00 a.m., 12:00 p.m. to 1:00 p.m., 4:00 p.m. to 6:30 
p.m., and 11:00 p.m. to 11:30 p.m.; regularly scheduled 
newsbreaks aired at approximately 8, 26, and 56 minutes after the 
hours of 7:00 a.m., 8:00 a.m. and 9:00 a.m.; two to three minute 
updates of Hurricane Charley aired during breaks at 11:30 a.m., 
1:29 p.m., 2:00 p.m., 2:30 p.m., 3:00 p.m., 7:00 p.m., 7:30 p.m., 
9:28 p.m., and 9:59 p.m.; the one-hour hurricane special aired 
from 8:00 to 9:00 p.m.; the brief information crawls aired at 
10:15 a.m., 10:44 a.m., and 11:16 a.m.; the continuous crawl 
containing safety and preparedness information began at 11:23 
a.m. 
35See Montclair Response Letter at 3-4.  On August 12, Montclair 
provided hurricane information during its regularly scheduled 
newscasts, newsbreaks throughout the day, one-hour special, and 
crawls.  Montclair's regularly scheduled newscast aired from 5:00 
a.m. to 7:00 a.m., 6:00 p.m. to 6:30 p.m., and 11:00 p.m. to 
11:30 p.m.; regularly scheduled newsbreaks aired at approximately 
7:08 a.m., 7:23 a.m., 7:38 a.m., 7:56 a.m., 8:08 a.m., 8:26 a.m., 
8:34 a.m., 8:37 a.m.; six minute news interruptions at 9:26 a.m., 
10:00 a.m., 11:00 a.m., 11:34 a.m., 1:00 p.m., 1:34 p.m., 2:34 
p.m., 3:00 p.m., 4:00 p.m., 4:30 p.m., 4:59 p.m., 5:29 p.m., 7:00 
p.m., 7:30 p.m., 8:00 p.m., and 10:30 p.m.; the one-hour 
hurricane special aired from 9:00 p.m. to 10:00 p.m.; the brief 
information crawls aired at 10:15 a.m., 10:44 a.m., and 11:16 
a.m.; the continuous crawl containing safety and preparedness 
information started at 12:01 a.m., and aired continuously 
throughout the day starting at 11:00 a.m.; 45 promotional 
announcements aired throughout the day regarding safety and 
preparedness techniques and announcing the planned simulcast with 
WBBH-TV; and 31 four-second identifiers providing coordinates and 
projected track of the hurricane.  
36See Waterman Response Letter, VHS Tape #4, 1:21 p.m. August 13, 
2004.  See also Waterman Response Letter, Attachment 2-e at 19.  
We note that Waterman's Response Letter states that this occurred 
at 1:24 p.m.; see also Montclair Response Letter, VHS Tape #4, 
1:21 p.m. August 13, 2004.  See also Montclair Response Letter, 
Attachment 2-e at 19.  
37Waterman Response  Letter,  Attachment  2-f  at  23;  Montclair 
Response Letter, Attachment 2-f at 2.
38Waterman Response  Letter,  Attachment  2-f  at  36;  Montclair 
Response Letter, Attachment 2-f at 36.
39Waterman Response  Letter,  Attachment  2-f  at  23;  Montclair 
Response Letter, Attachment 2-f at 23.
4047 C.F.R.  79.2(a)(2).
4147C.F.R. 79.2(a)(2).
42Waterman Response  Letter,  Attachment 2-f  at  34;  Montclair; 
Response Letter, Attachment 2-f at 34
43Waterman Response Letter,  Attachment 2-f  at 34-35;  Montclair 
Response Letter, Attachment 2-f at 34-35.
44Note to 47 C.F.R.   79.2(a)(2).
45Waterman Response  Letter,  Attachment  2-f  at  38;  Montclair 
Response Letter, Attachment 2-f at 38.
46Waterman Response  Letter,  Attachment  2-f  at  38;  Montclair 
Response Letter, Attachment 2-f at 38.
47Waterman Response  Letter, Attachment  2-g at  2, 3;  Montclair 
Response Letter, Attachment 2-g at 2.
4879.2(a)(2).
49Waterman Response Letter at 2, 9, 12, Exhibit 2; see also 
Montclair Response Letter at 5 -6.
50Second Report and Order, 15 FCC Rcd at 6617, para. 5 (emphasis 
added).  For example, if the station reported aurally that an 
evacuation order was announced at 1:00 p.m., it could reasonably 
exercise its discretion to omit the time the order was announced 
as long as the station visually presented the existence of the 
evacuation order.
51See NBC Telemundo License  Co., Licensee of WRC-TV  Washington, 
D.C., File  No. EB-04-TC-101,  Notice  of Apparent  Liability  of 
Forfeiture, DA 05-1512, at para. 13 (May 2005) (``WRC NAL'').
52Specifically, section 503(b)(2)(A) provides for forfeitures up 
to $25,000 for each violation or a maximum of $250,000 for each 
continuing violation by (i) a broadcast station licensee or 
permittee, (ii) a cable television operator, or (iii) an 
applicant for any broadcast or cable television operator license, 
permit, certificate or similar instrument.  47 U.S.C.  
503(b)(2)(A).  The Commission amended its rules by adding a new 
subsection to its monetary forfeiture provisions that 
incorporates by reference the inflation adjustment requirements 
contained in the Debt Collection Improvement Act of 1996 (DCIA), 
Pub L. No. 104-134,  31001, 110 Stat. 1321 (1996).  Thus, the 
maximum statutory forfeiture per violation pursuant to section 
503(b)(2)(A) increased from $25,000 to $27,500.  See Amendment of 
Section 1.80(b) of the Commission's Rules and Adjustment of 
Forfeiture Maxima to Reflect Inflation, 15 FCC Rcd. 18,221 
(2000).  We note that the Commission recently increased the per 
violation amount again to $32,500.  See Amendment of Section 
1.80(b) of the Commission's Rules and Adjustment of Forfeiture 
Maxima to Reflect Inflation, 19 FCC Rcd 10945 (2004); 
(establishing an effective date of September 7, 2004).

53See 47 U.S.C.  503(b)(2)(D); see also The Commission's 
Forfeiture Policy Statement and Amendment of Section 1.80 of the 
Commission's Rules, 12 FCC Rcd 17,087 (1997); recon. denied, 15 
FCC Rcd 303 (1999).

54See ACC Licensee, Inc., Licensee of WJLA-TV Washington, D.C., 
File No. EB-04-TC-100, Notice of Apparent Liability of 
Forfeiture, DA 05-1511 (May 2005); WRC NAL; Fox Television 
Stations, Inc. Licensee of WTTG(TV) Washington, D.C., File No. 
EB-04-TC-104, Notice of Apparent Liability of Forfeiture, DA 05-
1513 (May 2005).
55See  47 C.F.R.  1.80(b)(4).
56See 47 U.S.C.  503(b)(4)(C); 47 C.F.R.  1.80(f)(3).

57If Waterman chooses to respond, it should mail its response to 
Colleen Heitkamp, Chief, Telecommunications Consumers Division, 
Enforcement Bureau, Federal Communications Commission, 445 12th 
Street, S.W. Room-4C224, Washington, D.C. 20554, and must include 
the file number listed above.  It should also send an electronic 
copy of its response to Mark Stone, Deputy Chief, 
Telecommunications Consumers Division, at mark.stone@fcc.gov and 
Janet Sievert, Senior Attorney, Telecommunications Consumers 
Division, at janet.sivert@fcc.gov.
58If Montclair chooses to respond, it should mail its response to 
Colleen Heitkamp, Chief, Telecommunications Consumers Division, 
Enforcement Bureau, Federal Communications Commission, 445 12th 
Street, S.W. Room-4C224, Washington, D.C. 20554, and must include 
the file number listed above.  It should also send an electronic 
copy of its response to Mark Stone, Deputy Chief, 
Telecommunications Consumers Division, at mark.stone@fcc.gov and 
Janet Sievert, Senior Attorney, Telecommunications Consumers 
Division, at janet.sivert@fcc.gov.
597 C.F.R.  1.1914.