******************************************************** 
                      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	)
	)
Mirage Media 2, LLC	)	File No.:  EB-FIELDWR-12-00000455
Licensee of Station KOTR-LP	)
	)	NOV No.:  V201432960011
Santa Cruz, CA	)
	)	Facility ID No: 2871


NOTICE OF VIOLATION

	Released: March 27, 2014

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

* This is a Notice of Violation (Notice) issued pursuant to Section 1.89 of the Commission's rules (Rules) to Mirage Media 2, LLC (Mirage), licensee of station KOTR-LP, in Santa Cruz, California.  Pursuant to Section 1.89(a) of the Rules, issuance of this Notice does not preclude the Enforcement Bureau from further action if warranted, including issuing a Notice of Apparent Liability for Forfeiture for the violation(s) noted herein.  
* On February 6, 2014, the Enforcement Bureau's San Francisco Office sent Mirage a Letter of Inquiry (LOI) requesting information on the station's official mailing address, Emergency Alert (EAS) logs, and EAS tests, among other things.  This was the second of two LOIs.  Based on Mirage's responses to the LOIs we have determined the following violations:

  + 47 C.F.R. § 1.5: "(a) Each licensee shall furnish the Commission with an address to be used by the Commission in serving documents or directing correspondence to that licensee.  Unless any licensee advises the Commission to the contrary, the address contained in the licensee's most recent application will be used by the Commission for this purpose.  (b) The licensee is responsible for making any arrangements which may be necessary in his particular circumstances to assure that Commission documents or correspondence delivered to this address will promptly reach him or some person authorized by him to act in his behalf."  The address listed as Mirage's official mailing address in the FCC records has remained the same since before the first LOI was issued to KOTR in August, 2013.  That address is not the address that Mirage claimed is their current mailing address.  Mail sent by the San Francisco Office to Mirage at the official address was returned to the San Francisco Office.

  + 47 C.F.R. § 11.35(a):  "EAS Participants are responsible for ensuring that EAS Encoders, EAS Decoders, Attention Signal generating and receiving equipment, and Intermediate Devices used as part of the EAS to decode and/or encode messages formatted in the EAS Protocol and/or the Common Alerting Protocol are installed so that the monitoring and transmitting functions are available during the times the stations and systems are in operation.  Additionally, EAS Participants must determine the cause of any failure to receive the required tests or activations specified in §11.61(a)(1) and (2)."  In response to the LOIs, Mirage did not include the logs and information requested concerning the activations and failures of the station's EAS equipment.   


* As the nation's emergency warning system, the Emergency Alert System is critical to public safety, and we recognize the vital role that broadcasters play in ensuring its success.  The Commission takes seriously any violations of the Rules implementing the EAS and expects full compliance from its regulatees.  We also must investigate violations of other rules that apply to broadcast licensees.

* Pursuant to Section 308(b) of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended, and Section 1.89 of the Rules, we seek additional information concerning the violations and any remedial actions taken.  Therefore, Mirage, 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.

* In accordance with Section 1.16 of the Rules, we direct Mirage ,to support its response to this Notice with an affidavit or declaration under penalty of perjury, signed and dated by an authorized officer of Mirage, with personal knowledge of the representations provided in Mirage'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.

* 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 Office
5653 Stoneridge Drive, Suite 105
Pleasanton, California 94588-8543

* This Notice shall be sent to Mirage Media 2, LLC, at its address of record.

* 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



David K. Hartshorn
District Director
San Francisco Office
Western Region
Enforcement Bureau