******************************************************** 
                      NOTICE
********************************************************

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 )

   )

   CALNEVA Broadband, LLC ) File No. EB-11-SF-0186

   Cable System Operator )

   Community Unit ID: CA0008 )

   Westwood, California ) NOV No. V201232960017

   )

                              NOTICE OF VIOLATION

   Released: December 23, 2011

   By the District Director, San Francisco Office, Western Region,
   Enforcement Bureau:

    1. This is a Notice of Violation ("Notice") issued pursuant to Section
       1.89 of the Commission's Rules, to CALNEVA Broadband, LLC ("CALNEVA"),
       operator of a cable system in Westwood, California. This Notice may be
       combined with a further action, if further action is warranted.

    2. On August 25, 2011, an agent of the Enforcement Bureau's San Francisco
       Office inspected a cable system located at Westwood, California, and
       observed the following violation(s):

     a. 47 C.F.R. S: 11.52(d): "EAS participants must monitor two EAS
        sources. The monitoring assignments of each broadcast station and
        cable system and wireless cable system are specified in the State EAS
        Plan..." The State Plan specifies the LP-1 assignment as KKOH-AM,
        Reno, NV, which was not being monitored by the cable system.

     b. 47 C.F.R. S: 11.61(a): "EAS Participants shall conduct tests at
        regular intervals, as specified in paragraphs (a)(1) and (a)(2) of
        this section. Additional tests may be performed anytime. EAS
        activations and special tests may be performed in lieu of required
        tests as specified in paragraph (a)(4) of this section. All tests
        will conform with the procedures in the EAS Operating Handbook."
        CALNEVA failed to properly identify and log all required entries from
        the two required EAS sources for the three month period prior to the
        inspection.

     c. 47 C.F.R. S: 11.35(a): "EAS Participants must determine the cause of
        any failure to receive the required tests or activations specified in
        Sections 11.61(a)(1) and (a)(2). Appropriate entries indicating
        reasons why any tests were not received must be made in the . . .
        cable system records as specified in Sections 76.1700, 76.1708 and
        76.1711 of this chapter." At the time of the inspection, there were
        no entries in CALNEVA's logs indicating why the required monthly
        tests (RMTs) had not been logged over the three months prior to the
        inspection.

    3. As the nation's emergency warning system, the Emergency Alert System
       is critical to public safety, and we recognize the vital role that
       cable operators play in ensuring its success. The Commission takes
       seriously any violations of the Rules implementing the EAS and expects
       full compliance from its regulatees. Pursuant to Section 403 of the
       Communications Act of 1934, as amended, and Section 1.89 of the
       Commission's Rules, we seek additional information concerning the
       violations and any remedial actions the station may have taken. 
       Therefore, CALNEVA must submit a written statement concerning this
       matter within twenty (20) days of release of this Notice. The response
       (i) must fully explain each violation, including all relevant
       surrounding facts and circumstances, (ii) must contain a statement of
       the specific action(s) taken to correct each violation and preclude
       recurrence, and (iii) must include a time line for completion of any
       pending corrective action(s). The response must be complete in itself
       and must not be abbreviated by reference to other communications or
       answers to other notices.

    4. In accordance with Section 1.16 of the Commission's Rules, we direct
       CALNEVA to support its response to this Notice with an affidavit or
       declaration under penalty of perjury, signed and dated by an
       authorized officer of CALNEVA with personal knowledge of the
       representations provided in CALNEVA's response, verifying the truth
       and accuracy of the information therein, and confirming that all of
       the information requested by this Notice which is in the licensee's
       possession, custody, control, or knowledge has been produced. To
       knowingly and willfully make any false statement or conceal any
       material fact in reply to this Notice is punishable by fine or
       imprisonment under Title 18 of the U.S. Code.

    5. All replies and documentation sent in response to this Notice should
       be marked with the File No. and NOV No. specified above, and mailed to
       the following address:

   Federal Communications Commission

   San Francisco District Office

   5653 Stoneridge Drive, Suite 105

   Pleasanton, California 94588

    6. This Notice shall be sent to CALNEVA Broadband, LLC at its address of
       record.

    7. The Privacy Act of 1974 requires that we advise you that the
       Commission will use all relevant material information before it,
       including any information disclosed in your reply, to determine what,
       if any, enforcement action is required to ensure compliance.

   FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION

   Thomas N. VanStavern

   District Director

   San Francisco District Office

   Western Region

   Enforcement Bureau

   47 C.F.R. S: 1.89.

   47 C.F.R. S: 1.89(a).

   47 U.S.C. S: 403.

   47 C.F.R. S: 1.89(c).

   Section 1.16 of the Commission's Rules provides that "[a]ny document to be
   filed with the Federal Communications Commission and which is required by
   any law, rule or other regulation of the United States to be supported,
   evidenced, established or proved by a written sworn declaration,
   verification, certificate, statement, oath or affidavit by the person
   making the same, may be supported, evidenced, established or proved by the
   unsworn declaration, certification, verification, or statement in writing
   of such person . . . . Such declaration shall be subscribed by the
   declarant as true under penalty of perjury, and dated, in substantially
   the following form . . . : `I declare (or certify, verify, or state) under
   penalty of perjury that the foregoing is true and correct. Executed on
   (date). (Signature)'." 47 C.F.R. S: 1.16.

   18 U.S.C. S: 1001 et seq. See also 47 C.F.R. S: 1.17.

   P.L. 93-579, 5 U.S.C. S: 552a(e)(3).

   Federal Communications Commission

   3

                       Federal Communications Commission