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                                                 
     World Media Broadcast Company       File No: EB-10-NF-0003       
     Licensee of Station WCLM(AM)        NAL/Acct. No.: 201032640002  
     Highland Springs, Virginia          FRN: 5016308                 
     Facility ID # 73728                                              

                                FORFEITURE ORDER

   Adopted: May 17, 2011 Released: May 17, 2011

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


    1. In this Forfeiture Order ("Order"), we issue a monetary forfeiture in
       the amount of five thousand five hundred dollars ($5,500) to World
       Media Broadcast Company, ("World Media"), licensee of Station
       WCLM(AM), in Highland Springs, Virginia for willful and repeated
       violation of sections 11.35(a), 73.1400(a)(1)(ii) and 73.3526 of the
       Commission's Rules ("Rules"). The noted violations involve World
       Media's failure to maintain: (1) functioning Emergency Alert System
       ("EAS") equipment; (2) functioning transmission system remote control
       equipment; and (3) a public inspection file at its main studio, and
       make that file available upon request.


    2. As discussed in detail in the Notice of Apparent Liability  ("NAL") in
       this case, on January 26, 2010, during an inspection of the main
       studio and transmitter site for Station WCLM in Richmond, Virginia, an
       agent of the Enforcement Bureau's Norfolk Office ("Norfolk Office")
       observed that the station's EAS encoder/decoder unit installed at the
       main studio was not operational. Both the station manager and the
       "technical representative" for the station admitted that neither of
       them knew if an EAS Encoder/Decoder unit was installed at the main
       studio or when the last EAS test was sent. In addition, World Media
       was unable to produce any evidence that required EAS weekly or monthly
       tests had ever been sent or received.

    3. In response to a request to inspect Station WCLM's public inspection
       file during regular business hours, the station manager was unable to
       make the public inspection file or any of the required contents of the
       file available for inspection. The station manager stated that Station
       WCLM's public inspection file was maintained at World Media's
       headquarters in Washington, DC. The agent also observed that the
       installed transmitter dial-up remote control system at the Station
       WCLM transmitter site was inoperative. According to the station
       manager and "technical representative," the transmitter remote control
       unit was "hit by lightning" sometime in November 2009 and had not been
       repaired or replaced.

    4. In view of the record evidence, including World Media's admissions,
       the NAL proposed a forfeiture of $21,000 against the licensee for
       violation of sections 11.35(a), 73.1400(a)(1)(ii), and 73.3526 of the
       Rules. World Media submitted a response to the NAL requesting
       reduction or cancellation of the proposed forfeiture based on its
       history of compliance with the Rules, its prompt action to repair its
       EAS equipment, and its inability to pay the forfeiture. World Media's
       response does not dispute the violations identified in the NAL.


    5. The proposed forfeiture amount in this case was assessed in accordance
       with section 503(b) of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended
       ("Act"), section 1.80 of the Rules, and the Forfeiture Policy
       Statement. In examining World Media'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. As discussed below, we have considered World Media's response
       in light of these statutory factors and reduce the proposed forfeiture
       to $5,500, based on its documented inability to pay.

    6. Section 11.35(a) 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 EAS monitoring and transmitting functions are available when
       a station is in operation. Section 73.1400(a)(1)(ii) of the Rules
       states that if a remote control system of the transmission system is
       used, the "remote control system must provide sufficient transmission
       system monitoring and control capability so as to ensure compliance
       with S:73.1350." 

    7. Section 73.3526(a)(2) of the Rules states that "[e]very permittee or
       licensee of an AM, FM, TV or a Class A station in the commercial
       broadcast services shall maintain a public inspection file containing
       the material" set forth in this section.  The public inspection file
       must be maintained at the main studio of the station, and must be
       available for public inspection at any time during regular business

    8. World Media does not deny any of facts stated in the NAL and
       "appreciates the seriousness of the violations in this matter." We
       agree that its violations are serious, particularly with respect to
       the EAS violations. Thus, based on the evidence before us, we find
       that World Media willfully and repeatedly violated sections 11.35(a),
       73.1400(a)(1)(ii), and 73.3526 of the Rules by failing to: (1)
       maintain functioning EAS equipment; (2) provide functioning
       transmission system remote control equipment from November 2009 until
       January 26, 2010; and (3) maintain a public inspection file at its
       main studio. We also find that World Media willfully failed to make
       available a public inspection file on January 26, 2010.

    9. World Media asserts that its prompt action to correct the violations
       and its record of compliance with the Commission's rules warrants
       mitigation of the forfeiture. The Commission has long held that
       post-notification corrective action taken to come into compliance with
       the Rules is expected, however, and such corrective action does not
       nullify or mitigate any prior forfeitures or violations. Moreover, the
       Commission may take into account the duration of a violation in
       considering whether a licensee has a history of overall compliance.
       Here, station management was unaware that EAS equipment was even
       located in the main studio, and there is no evidence that World
       Media's EAS equipment was ever operational. Given the duration and
       seriousness of the violation, we do not believe that World Media has
       demonstrated a history of overall compliance with the Commission's
       Rules and therefore find that no reduction of the forfeiture based on
       this factor is warranted.

   10. Finally, World Media asserts that the forfeiture would pose a
       financial hardship and requests reduction or cancellation of the
       forfeiture on this basis. With regard to an individual's or entity's
       inability to pay, the Commission has determined that, in general,
       gross revenues are the best indicator of an ability to pay a
       forfeiture. We have reviewed our records and World Media's submitted
       documentation and conclude that the forfeiture should be reduced to
       $5,500, based on its documented inability to pay the forfeiture amount
       proposed in the NAL.


   11. Accordingly, IT IS ORDERED that, pursuant to section 503(b) of the
       Communications Act of 1934, as amended, and sections 0.111, 0.204,
       0.311 and 1.80(f)(4) of the Commission's Rules, World Media Broadcast
       Company IS LIABLE FOR A MONETARY FORFEITURE in the amount of five
       thousand five hundred dollars ($5,500) for violations of section
       11.35(a), 73.1400(a)(1)(ii), and 73.3526 of the Rules.

   12. 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/Account
       Number and FRN Number referenced above. Payment by check or money
       order may be mailed to Federal Communications Commission, P.O. Box
       979088, St. Louis, MO 63197-9000. Payment by overnight mail may be
       sent to U.S. Bank - Government Lockbox #979088, SL-MO-C2-GL, 1005
       Convention Plaza, St. Louis, MO 63101. Payment by wire transfer may be
       made to ABA Number 021030004, receiving bank TREAS/NYC, and account
       number 27000001. For payment by credit card, an FCC Form 159
       (Remittance Advice) must be submitted.  When completing the FCC Form
       159, enter the NAL/Account number in block number 23A (call sign/other
       ID), and enter the letters "FORF" in block number 24A (payment type
       code). Requests for full payment under an installment plan should be
       sent to:  Chief Financial Officer -- Financial Operations, 445 12th
       Street, S.W., Room 1-A625, Washington, D.C.  20554.   Please contact
       the Financial Operations Group Help Desk at 1-877-480-3201 or Email:  with any questions regarding payment procedures.
       World Media will also send electronic notification on the date said
       payment is made to

   13. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that a copy of this Order shall be sent by First
       Class and Certified Mail Return Receipt Requested to World Media at
       3165 Hull St., Richmond, VA 23224.


   Dennis P. Carlton

   Regional Director, South Central Region

   Enforcement Bureau

   47 C.F.R. S:S: 11.35(a), 73.1400(a)(1)(ii), 73.3526.

   World Media Broadcast Company, Notice of Apparent Liability for
   Forfeiture, 25 FCC Rcd 4758 (Enf. Bur., 2010).

   See Letter from George C. Lacey, President, World Media Broadcast Company,
   to Norfolk Office, Enforcement Bureau (June 3, 2010) ("NAL Response").

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

   47 C.F.R. S: 1.80.

   The Commission's Forfeiture Policy Statement and Amendment of Section 1.80
   of the Rules to Incorporate the Forfeiture Guidelines, Report and Order,
   12 FCC Rcd 17087 (1997), recon. denied, 15 FCC Rcd 303 (1999) ("Forfeiture
   Policy Statement").

   47 U.S.C. S: 503(b)(2)(E).

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

   47 C.F.R. S: 73.1400(a)(1)(ii).

   47 C.F.R. S: 73.3526(a)(2).

   47 C.F.R. S: 73.3526(b).

   47 C.F.R. S: 73.3526(c).

   NAL Response at 1.

   As the nation's emergency warning system, the EAS is critical to public
   safety, and broadcasters play a vital role in ensuring the success of the
   EAS. The Commission takes seriously any violations of the Rules
   implementing the EAS and expects full compliance from its licensees.

   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', 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 or any rule or regulation of the Commission
   authorized by this Act...." See Southern California Broadcasting Co.,
   Memorandum Opinion and Order, 6 FCC Rcd 4387 (1991), recon. denied, 7 FCC
   Rcd 3454 (1992).

   As provided by 47 U.S.C. S: 312(f)(2), a 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).

   See International Broadcasting Corporation, Order on Review, 25 FCC Rcd
   1538, 1540, para. 6 (2010); Seawest Yacht Brokers, Forfeiture Order, 9 FCC
   Rcd 6099 (1994); Rama Communications, Inc., Memorandum Opinion and Order,
   24 FCC Rcd 4981 (Enf. Bur. 2009); Bethune-Cookman College, Inc..
   Forfeiture Order, 24 FCC Rcd 4513 (South Central Region 2009).

   See Commercial Radio Service Corp., Forfeiture Order, 16 FCC Rcd 3543,
   3545 (Enf. Bur. Tech. & Pub. Safety Div., 2001) (denying a reduction for a
   history of overall compliance where the licensee operated eleven
   specialized mobile radio stations without authorization for five months).

   See TV 45 Productions, Inc., Forfeiture Order, 17 FCC Rcd 11259 (Enf. Bur.
   2002) (denying a reduction for a history of overall compliance where the
   licensee operated without operational EAS for one year).

   See PJB Communications of Virginia, Inc., Forfeiture Order, 7 FCC Rcd
   2088, 2089 (1992) (forfeiture not deemed excessive where it represented
   approximately 2.02 percent of the violator's gross revenues); Local Long
   Distance, Inc., Forfeiture Order, 16 FCC Rcd 24385 (2000) (forfeiture not
   deemed excessive where it represented approximately 7.9 percent of the
   violator's gross revenues); Hoosier Broadcasting Corporation, Forfeiture
   Order, 15 FCC Rcd 8640 (2002) (forfeiture not deemed excessive where it
   represented approximately 7.6 percent of the violator's gross revenues).

   47 U.S.C. S: 503(b); 47 C.F.R. S:S:S: 0.111, 0.204, 0.311, 1.80(f)(4),
   11.35(a), 73.1400(a)(1)(ii), 73.3526.

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

   Federal Communications Commission DA 11-890


   Federal Communications Commission DA 11-890