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-03-TP-224
Gore-Overgaard Broadcasting,      )      NAL/Acct.No. 200432700002 
Inc.                              )               FRN 0002-8427-63
Licensee of Radio Station         )
WROD(AM) in                       )
Daytona Beach, Florida
Vero Beach, Florida


                                  Released: October 14, 2003

By the Enforcement Bureau, Tampa Office:

                      I.  INTRODUCTION

     1.  In this Notice of Apparent Liability for Forfeiture 
(``NAL''), we find Gore-Overgaard Broadcasting, Inc. 
(``Gore-Overgaard''), licensee of AM radio station WROD, 
Daytona Beach, Florida, apparently liable for a forfeiture 
in the amount of two thousand dollars ($2,000) for repeated 
and willful violation of Section 11.52(d) of the 
Commission's Rules (``Rules'').1  Specifically, we find 
Gore-Overgaard apparently liable for failing to monitor the 
required Emergency Alert System (``EAS'') sources.

                       II.  BACKGROUND

     2.  On February 7, 2002, agents from the FCC 
Enforcement Bureau's Tampa Field Office (``Tampa Office'') 
inspected station WROD (AM) in Daytona Beach, Florida.  The 
agent found the station's EAS receivers not monitoring the 
assigned sources.

     3.  On February 28, 2002, the Tampa Office issued to 
Gore-Overgaard a Notice of Violation (``NOV'') citing WROD's 
failure to monitor its assigned EAS sources.  Gore-
Overgaard's response to the NOV stated that WROD now 
monitored the two assigned EAS sources, namely WDBO (580 AM) 
and WFLF (540 AM), as well as the National Weather Service.

     3.  On April 14, 2003, agents from the Tampa Office 
again inspected station WROD (AM).  The broadcast station 
log contained no entries reflecting sending or receiving any 
EAS monthly tests, no entries of EAS equipment malfunctions, 
and no entries of explanations for failure to conduct the 
monthly tests.  The station's EAS unit could receive only 
the National Weather Service source, and not the other two 
assigned EAS sources.

                      III.  DISCUSSION

     4.  Section 11.52(d) of the Rules requires broadcast 
stations to monitor two EAS sources specified in the State 
EAS Plan and FCC Mapbook.  On February 7, 2002, and on April 
14, 2003, station WROD failed to monitor its assigned EAS 

     5.  Based on the evidence before us, we find that Gove-
Overgaard repeatedly2 and willfully3 violated Section 
11.52(d) of the Rules by failing to monitor assigned EAS 

     6.  Section 1.80(b)(4) of the Rules4 sets forth the 
base forfeiture amounts for various violations of the 
Commission's Rules.  Section 1.80(b)(4) of the Rules sets 
the base forfeiture amount at $2,000 for failure to make 
required measurements or conduct required monitoring (e.g., 
failure to monitor EAS sources).  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

     7.  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 Gore-Overgaard. is hereby NOTIFIED of 
two thousand dollars ($2,000) for repeated and willful 
violation of Section 11.52(d) of the Rules by failing to 
monitor its assigned EAS sources.

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

     9.  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.  Request for payment of the full amount of this NAL 
under an installment plan should be sent to: Chief, Revenue 
and Receivable Operations Group, 445 12th Street, S.W., 
Washington, D.C.  20554.8

     10. 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.

     11. 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 
     12. Under the Small Business Paperwork Relief Act of 
2002, Pub L. No. 107-198, 116 Stat. 729 (June 28, 2002), the 
FCC is engaged in a two-year tracking process regarding the 
size of entities involved in forfeitures.  If you qualify as 
a small entity and if you wish to be treated as a small 
entity for tracking purposes, please so certify to us within 
thirty (30) days of this NAL, either in your response to the 
NAL or in a separate filing to be sent to the Technical & 
Public Safety Division.  Your certification should indicate 
whether you, including your parent entity and its 
subsidiaries, meet one of the definitions set forth in the 
list provided by the FCC's Office of Communications Business 
Opportunities (OCBO) set forth in Attachment A of this 
Notice of Apparent Liability.  This information will be used 
for tracking purposes only.  Your response or failure to 
respond to this question will have no effect on your rights 
and responsibilities pursuant to Section 503(b) of the 
Communications Act.  If you have questions regarding any of 
the information contained in Attachment A, please contact 
OCBO at (202) 418-0990.

     13. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED THAT a copy of this NAL shall 
be sent by regular mail and Certified Mail Return Receipt 
Requested to Gore-Overgaard Broadcasting, Inc., 1000 Olde 
Doubloon Drive, Vero Beach, FL, 32963.

                              FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS 

                              Ralph M. Barlow
                              District Director, Tampa 


1 47 C.F.R.  11.52(d).
32 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.  312(f)(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 (1991).
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.