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.
Federal Communications Commission
Washington, D.C. 20554
In the Matter of Media Mining Group, LLC Licensee of Station KRDD(AM)
Roswell, New Mexico ) ) ) ) ) ) File No.: EB-11-SD-0124 NAL/Acct. No.:
201232940001 FRN: 0010036804 Facility ID No.: 68131
Adopted: January 22, 2014 Released: January 22, 2014
By the Regional Director, Western Region, Enforcement Bureau:
1. In this Forfeiture Order (Order), we issue a monetary forfeiture in
the amount of six thousand, four hundred dollars ($6,400) to Media
Mining Group, LLC, (MMG), licensee of Station KRDD(AM), in Roswell,
New Mexico, for willfully and repeatedly violating Section 11.35 of
the Commission's rules (Rules).^ The noted violation involved MMG's
failure to ensure the operational readiness of the Station KRDD(AM)
Emergency Alert System (EAS) equipment.
2. On December 7, 2011, the Enforcement Bureau's San Diego Office (San
Diego Office) issued a Notice of Apparent Liability for Forfeiture and
Order (NAL) ^ for eight thousand dollars ($8,000) to MMG for failing
to ensure the operational readiness of the Station KRDD(AM) EAS
equipment.^ In response to the NAL, MMG does not deny the violations,
but requests cancellation or reduction based on its history of
compliance with the Rules, its ability to pay the forfeiture, the
nature and circumstances surrounding the violation, and any other
matters as justice requires.^
3. 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 MMG's response, Section 503(b)(2)(E) 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
4. We affirm the NAL's finding that MMG violated Section 11.35 of the
Rules.^ 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.^ As reflected in the NAL, on June 21,
2011, an agent from the San Diego Office conducted an inspection at
Station KRDD(AM) and determined that although Station KRDD(AM) had EAS
equipment installed, the equipment was not operational.^ In
particular, the EAS equipment was unable to receive the required tests
and Station KRDD(AM) personnel were unable to produce documentation,
logs, or records concerning EAS tests successfully or unsuccessfully
received or sent.^ Based on the undisputed evidence, we conclude that
MMG willfully and repeatedly violated Section 11.35 of the Rules by
failing to ensure the operational readiness of the Station KRDD(AM)
5. In response to the NAL, MMG nonetheless requests cancellation or
reduction of the $8,000 forfeiture, first arguing that the San Diego
Office erred by not taking a "hard look" at the "nature, extent and
circumstances" of the violation.^ We disagree. The "hard look"
doctrine that is proposed by MMG is the standard the Commission is
required to use when reviewing "meritorious applications for waiver .
. . and [the Commission] must consider all relevant factors."^ While
the "hard look" standard is not relevant to this inquiry, we find that
the San Diego Office appropriately reviewed all the relevant factors
when proposing the forfeiture to MMG.^ The Commission has already
determined that the "adjustment criteria listed in . . . the
guidelines reflect the factors outlined in the statute."^ For
forfeitures proposed and assessed under Section 503(b) of the Act, as
this one is, the adjustment factors included by the Commission in its
downward adjustment criteria, in Section 1.80, are: (1) minor
violation; (2) good faith or voluntary disclosure; (3) history of
compliance; and (4) inability to pay.^
6. We find that the San Diego Office properly considered the downward
adjustment criteria and concluded that MMG's violation, which
consisted of its failure to ensure the operational readiness of the
Station KRDD(AM) EAS equipment from December 2010 through June 2011,
was not a minor violation. MMG has produced no evidence that it was
entitled to a reduction based on good faith or voluntary disclosure to
the Commission. MMG has also produced no information concerning its
ability to pay the forfeiture and we decline to reduce the forfeiture
based solely on MMG's arguments that we must rely on information other
than gross revenues and that other entities have received large
reductions.^ MMG further argues that it has a history of compliance
with the Rules and, after reviewing the Commission's records, we
agree. We find that reduction of the forfeiture based on MMG's history
of compliance with the Rules is warranted and reduce the forfeiture by
7. MMG also asserts that the San Diego Office failed to take into account
other matters as justice may require, including the local nature of
the broadcast service it provides, along with the value of the service
it provides to the Hispanic community of Eastern New Mexico. While we
applaud MMG's efforts, we find that they do not support a reduction in
the forfeiture amount. The Commission has consistently held that
"licensees are expected to comply with the Rules as well as to make
continued efforts to serve the community to which they are licensed
and will not be relived of liability for violations of the Rules by
the fact they have fulfilled their responsibility to serve their
communities."^ Additionally, "a licensee is not relieved of
responsibility for complying with applicable statutes and rules by the
fact that it has performed an outstanding public service to the
community."^ Therefore, after consideration of the entire record and
the factors listed above, we find that a forfeiture in the amount of
$6,400 is warranted.
IV. ORDERING CLAUSES
8. 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, 0.314, and 1.80(f)(4) of the Commission's rules, Media Mining
Group, LLC, IS LIABLE FOR A MONETARY FORFEITURE in the amount of six
thousand, four hundred dollars ($6,400) for violations of Section
11.35 of the Rules.^
9. Payment of the forfeiture shall be made in the manner provided for in
Section 1.80 of the Rules within thirty (30) calendar days after the
release date of this Forfeiture Order.^ If the forfeiture is not paid
within the period specified, the case may be referred to the U.S.
Department of Justice for enforcement of the forfeiture pursuant to
Section 504(a) of the Act.^ Media Mining Group, LLC, shall send
electronic notification of payment to WR-Response@fcc.gov on the date
said payment is made. The payment must be made by check or similar
instrument, wire transfer, or credit card, and must include the
NAL/Account number and FRN referenced above. Regardless of the form of
payment, a completed FCC Form 159 (Remittance Advice) must be
submitted.^ When completing the FCC Form 159, enter the Account Number
in block number 23A (call sign/other ID) and enter the letters "FORF"
in block number 24A (payment type code). Below are additional
instructions you should follow based on the form of payment you
* Payment by check or money order must be made payable to the order of
the Federal Communications Commission. Such payments (along with the
completed Form 159) must be mailed to Federal Communications
Commission, P.O. Box 979088, St. Louis, MO 63197-9000, or sent
via overnight mail to U.S. Bank - Government Lockbox #979088,
SL-MO-C2-GL, 1005 Convention Plaza, St. Louis, MO 63101.
* Payment by wire transfer must be made to ABA Number 021030004,
receiving bank TREAS/NYC, and Account Number 27000001. To complete
the wire transfer and ensure appropriate crediting of the wired funds,
a completed Form 159 must be faxed to U.S. Bank at (314) 418-4232 on
the same business day the wire transfer is initiated.
* Payment by credit card must be made by providing the required credit
card information on FCC Form 159 and signing and dating the Form 159
to authorize the credit card payment. The completed Form 159 must then
be mailed to Federal Communications Commission, P.O. Box 979088, St.
Louis, MO 63197-9000, or sent via overnight mail to U.S. Bank -
Government Lockbox #979088, SL-MO-C2-GL, 1005 Convention Plaza, St.
Louis, MO 63101.
8. Any request for full payment over time under an installment plan should
be sent to: Chief Financial Officer--Financial Operations, Federal
Communications Commission, 445 12th Street, S.W., Room 1-A625, Washington,
D.C. 20554.^ If you have questions regarding payment procedures, please
contact the Financial Operations Group Help Desk by phone, 1-877-480-3201,
or by e-mail, ARINQUIRIES@fcc.gov.
9. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that a copy of this Order shall be sent by both
First Class and Certified Mail, Return Receipt Requested, to Media Mining
Group, LLC, 25 Central Park W., #17U, New York, NY 10023 and to its
counsel, Ernest T. Sanchez, The Sanchez Law Firm P.C., 2300 M Street, NW,
Suite 800, Washington, D.C. 20037.
FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION
Rebecca L. Dorch
Regional Director, Western Region
^ 47 C.F.R. S 11.35.
^ Media Mining Group, LLC, Notice of Apparent Liability for Forfeiture and
Order, 26 FCC Rcd 16426 (Enf. Bur. 2011) (NAL). A comprehensive recitation
of the facts and history of this case can be found in the NAL and is
incorporated herein by reference.
^ See Response of Media Mining Group, LLC, to San Diego Office, Western
Region, Enforcement Bureau (Jan. 5, 2012) (on file in EB-11-SD-0124) (NAL
^ 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), recons. denied, 15 FCC Rcd 303 (1999)
(Forfeiture Policy Statement).
^ 47 U.S.C. S 503(b)(2)(E).
^ See NAL, supra note 2.
^ 47 C.F.R. S 11.35.
^ 47 C.F.R. S 11.35(a) - (b). An EAS Participant may operate without the
defective equipment pending its repair or replacement for 60 days with out
further FCC authority. See 47 C.F.R. S 11.35(b). If the repair or
replacement of defective equipment is not completed within 60 days, an EAS
Participant shall submit an informal request to the District Director of
the local FCC field office for additional time to repair the defective
equipment. See 47 C.F.R. S 11.35(c). No such request was submitted by MMG
to the San Diego Office. NAL, 26 FCC Rcd at 16430, n 13.
^ NAL, 26 FCC Rcd at 16428, para 6.
^ Station personnel acknowledged to the San Diego agent that the Station
KRDD(AM) EAS equipment had not been operational since the station was
vandalized in December of 2010. Id.
^ As required by the NAL, MMG submitted a written statement, signed under
penalty of perjury, stating that Station KKRD(AM) is now in compliance
with Section 11.35 of the Rules. See Statement of Cholene Espinoza,
Officer, Media Mining Group, LLC, to San Diego Office, Western Region,
Enforcement Bureau (Jan 5, 2012) (on file in EB-11-SD-0124).
^ NAL Response at 2-3.
^ KSCT-TV, Inc., 699 F.2d 1185, 1191 - 1192 (D.C. Cir. 1983) (finding that
FCC acted arbitrarily in not giving "hard look" to application of local
television network affiliate for waiver of network non-duplication rules).
^ See One Mart Corporation, Memorandum Opinion and Order, 23 FCC Rcd 9910
(Enf. Bur. 2008) ("hard look" doctrine is inapplicable to forfeiture
proceedings, however, the criteria found in Section 503(b) of the Act must
^ Forfeiture Policy Statement, 12 FCC Rcd at 17100 (1997).
^ 47 C.F.R. S 1.80(b)(5), Note: Guidelines for Assessing Forfeitures,
Section II, Adjustment Criteria for Section 503 Forfeitures.
^ NAL Response at 3-4.
^ Radio Beaumont, Inc., Memorandum Opinion and Order, 50 FCC 2d 904 (1975)
($2,000 forfeiture for failure to give proper notice to the parties called
of licensee's intention to broadcast the conversations which were
instigated by station-initiated telephone calls not reduced because of
licensee's long record of public and community service).
^ Esther Blodgett, Memorandum Opinion and Order, 18 FCC 2d 6 (1969) ($500
forfeiture for failure to respond to a notice of violation not reduced for
public service to the community because a station is expected to provide a
public service for its community).
^ 47 U.S.C. S 503(b); 47 C.F.R. SS 0.111, 0.204, 0.311, 0.314, 1.80(f)(4),
^ 47 C.F.R. S 1.80.
^ 47 U.S.C. S 504(a).
^ An FCC Form 159 and detailed instructions for completing the form may be
obtained at http://www.fcc.gov/Forms/Form159/159.pdf.
^ See 47 C.F.R. S 1.1914.
Federal Communications Commission DA 14-56
Federal Communications Commission DA 14-56