Click here for Adobe Acrobat version
Click here for Microsoft Word version


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                                                        
     Jerry Russell dba The Russell                                           
     Company                                )     File Number: EB-06-DL-095  
     Licensee of Station KWRD               )   NAL/Acct. No.: 200732500002  
     Henderson, Texas                       )               FRN: 0009607078  
     Facility ID # 71519                    )                                

                                FORFEITURE ORDER

   Adopted:  January 3, 2007  Released:  January 5, 2007

   By the Regional Director, South Central Region, Enforcement Bureau:


    1. In this Forfeiture Order ("Order"), we issue a monetary forfeiture in
       the amount of eight thousand dollars ($8,000) to Jerry Russell dba The
       Russell Company ("Russell"), licensee of AM Broadcast Radio station
       KWRD, in Henderson, Texas for willful and repeated violation of
       Section 11.35(a) of the Commission's Rules ("Rules"). The noted
       violation involves Russell's failure to ensure the operational
       readiness of station KWRD's Emergency Alert System ("EAS").


    2. On June 7, 2006, an agent from the Commission's Dallas Office of the
       Enforcement Bureau ("Dallas Office") conducted an inspection at the
       main studio of station KWRD located in Henderson, Texas. No employees
       of Russell were present at the station. On January 31, 2006, Russell
       signed a Time Brokerage and Option Agreement ("Agreement") with a
       third party ("Broker"). The Agreement allowed Broker to use the
       station's facilities to broadcast programming at the station for up to
       24 hours a day, seven days a week, but reserved two hours of
       programming each week for Russell. Broker and Broker's staff were
       present during the inspection. Broker stated that the EAS equipment
       had not been operational for "quite awhile." He further clarified that
       the EAS system had not been functional since he had been at the
       station; over three months. The agent observed that a red fault light
       was illuminated on the front panel of the EAS encoder/decoder.
       Additionally, the most recent station EAS log entry dated "6/23/05"
       simply stated "E.B.S. OK." No entries were made in the log by Russell
       or Broker staff to identify the date or cause of the EAS system
       failure, or the steps taken to remedy any failures.

    3. On November 14, 2006, the Dallas Office issued a Notice of Apparent
       Liability for Forfeiture to Russell the amount of eight thousand
       dollars ($8,000) for the apparent willful and repeated violation of
       Section 11.35(a) of the Rules. On December 15, 2006, Russell submitted
       a response to the NAL requesting a reduction or cancellation of the
       proposed forfeiture.


    4. The proposed forfeiture amount in this case was assessed in accordance
       with Section 503(b) of the Act, Section 1.80 of the Rules, 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) ("Forfeiture Policy
       Statement"). In examining Russell'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

    5. Section 11.35 of the Rules requires all broadcast stations to ensure
       that EAS encoders, EAS decoders and Attention Signal generating and
       receiving equipment are installed and operational so that the
       monitoring and transmitting functions are available during the times
       the station is in operation. Broadcast stations must also determine
       the cause of any failure to receive required monthly and weekly EAS
       tests, and must indicate in the station's log why any required tests
       were not received and when defective equipment is removed and restored
       to service. On June 7, 2006, station KWRD's EAS encoder/decoder was
       not operational when the station was in operation. A red fault light
       was illuminated on the front panel of the EAS encoder/decoder. Broker,
       who was in charge of the station during the inspection, admitted that
       the EAS equipment had not worked since he arrived at the station.
       Broker did not know when the EAS equipment first became defective, but
       he did observe that it had been defective for over 90 days. The most
       recent EAS log entry for the station was dated 6/23/05, and there was
       no evidence that the equipment was operational after that date or that
       any required weekly or monthly EAS tests had been conducted after that
       date. There were also no log entries describing when the EAS equipment
       first became defective.

    6. In its response, Russell argues that the violation was inadvertent and
       not willful. Russell does not dispute that its violation was repeated.
       Russell states the EAS system was operational and the EAS logs up to
       date on December 30, 2005, right before the Agreement went into
       effect. Russell asserts former employees had access to the station for
       three days as the Agreement was completed and states they may have
       removed equipment and materials, unbeknownst to it. Russell states it
       was not aware that the EAS unit was damaged until October 2006,
       because its employees and Broker failed to alert it of that fact.
       Russell does not present any facts that would warrant a reduction or
       cancellation of the forfeiture. The "Commission has long held that
       licensees and other Commission regulatees are responsible for the acts
       and omissions of their employees and independent contractors," and the
       Commission has "consistently refused to excuse licensees from
       forfeiture penalties where actions of employees or independent
       contractors have resulted in violations."  Pursuant to the Agreement,
       Broker's personnel were subject to the supervision of Russell's
       management personnel. Russell, as the licensee, is responsible for
       ensuring compliance with the Rules, and consciously allowed its
       employees and Broker to operate its radio station. Russell cannot
       absolve itself of liability by claiming it was unaware of the actions
       and inactions of those employees and Broker.

    7. Based on the evidence before us, we find that Russell willfully and
       repeatedly violated Section 11.35(a) of the Rules by failing to
       maintain operational EAS equipment. We have examined Russell's
       response to the NAL pursuant to the statutory factors above, and in
       conjunction with the Forfeiture Policy Statement. As a result of our
       review, we find no basis to reduce the $8,000 forfeiture proposed for
       this violation.


    8. Accordingly, IT IS ORDERED that, pursuant to Section 503(b) of the
       Communications Act of 1934, as amended, and Sections 0.111, 0.311 and
       1.80(f)(4) of the Commission's Rules, Jerry Russell dba The Russell
       Company IS LIABLE FOR A MONETARY FORFEITURE in the amount of eight
       thousand dollars ($8,000) for violation of Section 11.35(a) of the

    9. 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. Payment of the forfeiture must 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 may be
       mailed to Federal Communications Commission, P.O.
       Box 358340, Pittsburgh, PA 15251-8340.  Payment by overnight mail may
       be sent to Mellon Bank /LB 358340, 500 Ross Street, Room 1540670,
       Pittsburgh, PA 15251.   Payment by wire transfer may be made to ABA
       Number 043000261, receiving bank Mellon Bank, and account
       number 911-6106. Requests for full payment under an installment plan
       should be sent to: Associate Managing Director, Financial Operations,
       445 12th Street, S.W., Room 1A625, Washington, D.C. 20554.

   10. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that a copy of this Order shall be sent by First
       Class and Certified Mail Return Receipt Requested to Jerry Russell dba
       The Russell Company at its address of record.


   Dennis P. Carlton

   Regional Director, South Central Region

   Enforcement Bureau

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

   The Emergency Broadcast System ("EBS") predates EAS.

   Notice of Apparent Liability for Forfeiture, NAL/Acct. No. 200732500002
   (Enf. Bur., Dallas Office, November 14, 2006) ("NAL").

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

   47 C.F.R. S 1.80.

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

   47 C.F.R. S 11.35(a), (b).

   Eure Family Limited Partnership, Memorandum Opinion and Order, 17 FCC Rcd
   21861, 21863,-64, para. 7 (2002); MTD, Inc., Memorandum Opinion and Order,
   6 FCC Rcd 34 (1991)(holding that a company's reliance on an independent
   contractor to construct a tower in compliance of FCC rules does not excuse
   that company from a forfeiture); Wagenvoord Broadcasting Co., Memorandum
   Opinion and Order, 35 FCC 2d 361 (1972) (holding a licensee responsible
   for violations of FCC rules despite its reliance on a consulting
   engineer); Petracom of Joplin, L.L.C., 19 FCC Rcd 6248 (Enf. Bur. 2004)
   (holding a licensee liable for its employee's failure to conduct weekly
   EAS tests and to maintain the "issues/programs" list).

   American Paging, Inc. of Virginia, Notice of Apparent Liability for
   Forfeiture, 12 FCC Rcd 10417, 10420, para. 11 (Enf. & Cons. Inf. Div.,
   Wireless Tel. Bur. 1997) (quoting Triad Broadcasting Company, 96 FCC 2d
   1235, 1244 (1984).

   Section 312(f)(1) of the Act, 47 U.S.C. S 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).

   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. S 312(f)(2).

   47 U.S.C. S 503(b); 47 C.F.R. SS 0.111, 0.311, 1.80(f)(4), 11.35(a).

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

   In its response to the NAL, Russell requested that the forfeiture be
   reduced and that it be permitted to pay the reduced forfeiture in
   installments. We do not reduce the forfeiture associated with the
   violation. Russell, however, may submit a request to pay the full amount
   of the forfeiture in installments with the Associate Managing Director.

   See 47 C.F.R. S 1.1914.

   Federal Communications Commission DA 07-04


   Federal Communications Commission DA 07-04