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                   )     File Number EB-02-KC-561
AAT Communications Corporation     )    NAL/Acct. No.200232560025
Owner of Antenna Structure         )
#1007507                           )             FRN 0003-4776-76
located near Joplin, Missouri      )
Iselin, New Jersey


                                        Released: August 13, 2002

By the Enforcement Bureau, Kansas City Office:

                        I.  INTRODUCTION

     1.   In this  Notice of  Apparent Liability  for  Forfeiture 
(``NAL''), we  find  AAT  Communications  Corporation  (``AAT''), 
owner of  antenna structure  #1007507,  apparently liable  for  a 
forfeiture in the  amount of  two thousand  dollars ($2,000)  for 
willful  and  repeated  violation  of  Section  17.47(a)  of  the 
Commission's  Rules  (``Rules'').1   Specifically,  we  find  AAT 
Communications  Corporation  apparently  liable  for  failure  to 
monitor the status of its antenna structure lighting.

                         II.  BACKGROUND

     2.   On July 16,  2002, the Commission's  Kansas City  Field 
Office (``Kansas City  Office'') received information  concerning 
an antenna  structure with  an  inoperable top  flashing  beacon.  
According to the  complaint, the beacon  had been inoperable  for 
approximately two  months  on  the  400  foot  tower.   Based  on 
information provided by  the complainant, the  agent checked  the 
Commission's  Antenna   Structure   Registration   database   and 
determined the  antenna structure  was #1007507,  located at  the 
latitude-longitude  coordinates  N36-58-54,  W094-28-37  with   a 
listed height of 122.8 meters  (403 feet).  The registered  owner 
of the structure was AAT.

     3.   Also on  July  16,  2002,  the  agent  interviewed  via 
telephone AAT representative John Stracko concerning the  outage.  
During the  interview,  Mr.  Stracko stated  that  AAT  does  not 
maintain any automatic equipment to  monitor the lighting on  the 
structure and does not conduct regular visual inspections of  the 
tower.  Instead, the owner relies  on reports from tenants,  such 
as the Newton County Sheriff's department to contact them if they 
observe a light outage on the structure.  The AAT  representative 
had not  received  any  reports  of  lights  being  out  on  this 
structure, and could not provide the duration that the beacon had 
been inoperable,  but  he did  file  a report  with  the  Federal 
Aviation Administration  (``FAA'')  upon being  notified  of  the 
outage by the agent.  The AAT representative further stated  that 
a repair order had  been placed to their  contractor to check  on 
the outage.

     4.   On July  19, 2002,  the  agent contacted  Lt.  Leavens, 
Newton County Sheriff's  Department, concerning  the lighting  on 
the  structure.   According  to  Lt.  Leavens,  he  is  the  only 
Sheriff's Department member residing in the vicinity of the tower 
and he  personally  had no  knowledge  of the  condition  of  the 
lighting  on   that  tower   during  the   past  several   weeks.  
Furthermore, Lt. Leavens  stated that to  his knowledge no  other 
department employee was  making observations of  the lighting  on 
that tower.   

     5.   Also on July 19, 2002, AAT representative John  Stracko 
contacted the Kansas City Office by telephone and stated that the 
beacon was discovered  inoperative and was  repaired on July  18, 
2002, and that  an order was to  be placed the  next week for  an 
automatic remote  system to  monitor the  lighting.  Mr.  Stracko 
stated that  no  person  was assigned  to  monitor  the  lighting 
visually during the interim period  prior to installation of  the 
remote system.

                        III.  DISCUSSION

     6.    Section 17.47(a)  of the Rules  requires the owner  to 
make observation of the antenna structure's lights at least  once 
each 24  hours  either  visually or  by  observing  an  automatic 
properly  maintained  indicator,  or  by  a  properly  maintained 
automatic alarm  system.  On  July 16,  2002, the  top beacon  on 
AAT's antenna structure #1007507 was reported to be inoperable by 
a citizen living  near the tower.   The FCC notified  AAT of  the 
outage.  AAT stated it had  not been monitoring the condition  of 
the lighting  on this  tower as  required and  did not  know  the 
beacon was inoperable until notified by the FCC on July 16, 2002.  
AAT further confirmed the outage of the beacon when repairs  were 
made to that beacon on July 18,  2002.  As of July 19, 2002,  AAT 
admitted that they continued to fail to provide any monitoring of 
the lighting every 24 hours or provide an automatic alarm system.

     7.   Based on the evidence before us, we find AAT willfully2 
and repeatedly3 violated Section 17.47(a) of the Rules by failing 
to monitor the status of its antenna structure lighting.

     8.   Pursuant to Section 1.80(b)(4) of the Rules,4 the  base 
forfeiture amount  for  failing  to monitor  the  status  of  its 
antenna  structure   lighting   (failure  to   conduct   required 
monitoring) is  $2,000.   In assessing  the  monetary  forfeiture 
amount, we must also take into account the statutory factors  set 
forth in Section 503(b)(2)(D) of the Communications Act of  1934, 
as amended (``Act''),  which include  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.5  Considering the entire record and applying the factors 
listed above, this case warrants a $2,000 forfeiture.

                      IV.  ORDERING CLAUSES

     9.   Accordingly, IT IS  ORDERED THAT,  pursuant to  Section 
503(b) of the  Act,6 and Sections  0.111, 0.311 and  1.80 of  the 
Rules,7 AAT Communications Corporation is hereby NOTIFIED of this 
APPARENT LIABILITY FOR A FORFEITURE in the amount of two thousand 
dollars ($2,000) for willful violation of Section 17.47(a) of the 
Rules by failing to monitor  the status of its antenna  structure 

     10.  IT IS FURTHER ORDERED THAT, pursuant to Section 1.80 of 
the Rules, within thirty  days of the release  date of this  NAL, 
AAT Communications Corporation SHALL PAY  the full amount of  the 
proposed forfeiture  or SHALL  FILE a  written statement  seeking 
reduction or cancellation of the proposed forfeiture.

     11.  Payment of  the forfeiture  may be  made by  mailing  a 
check or similar instrument, payable to the order of the  Federal 
Communications Commission, to the Forfeiture Collection  Section, 
Finance  Branch,  Federal  Communications  Commission,  P.O.  Box 
73482, Chicago, Illinois 60673-7482.  The payment should note the 
NAL/Acct. No. and FRN referenced above.  Requests for payment  of 
the full amount of this NAL  under an installment plan should  be 
sent to:  Chief, Revenue  and Receivables  Operations Group,  445 
12th Street, S.W., Washington, D.C. 20554.8

     12.  The  response,  if  any,  must  be  mailed  to  Federal 
Communications Commission,  Office  of the  Secretary,  445  12th 
Street  SW,  Washington  DC  20554,  Attn:  Enforcement   Bureau-
Technical & Public Safety Division and MUST INCLUDE THE NAL/Acct. 
No. referenced above.  

     13.  The Commission 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 

     14.   IT IS FURTHER ORDERED THAT a copy of this NAL shall be 
sent by regular mail and Certified Mail Return Receipt  Requested 
to AAT Communications Corporation, 517 Route 1 South, Suite 5000, 
Iselin, NJ  08830.   


                         Robert C. McKinney
                         Kansas City Office, Enforcement Bureau

1 47 C.F.R.  17.47(a).

2 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', 
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 . . . .''  See Southern California Broadcasting Co., 6 
FCC Rcd 4387-88 (1991).

3 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.  

4 47 C.F.R.  1.80(b)(4).

5 47 U.S.C.  503(b)(2)(D).

6 47 U.S.C.  503(b).

7 47 C.F.R.  0.111, 0.311, 1.80.

8 See 47 C.F.R.  1.1914.