Click here for Microsoft Word Version

This document was converted from
WordPerfect or Word to ASCII Text format.

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
Word or WordPerfect version or Adobe Acrobat version (above).


                           Before the 
                Federal Communications Commission
                     Washington, D.C. 20554

In the Matter of                )
KASA Radio Hogar, Inc.          )    File No. EB-00-SD-295
Licensee of Station KDAP(AM)   )     NAL/Acct. No. 200132940002
Phoenix, Arizona               ) 


     Adopted:  August 30, 2001               Released:  September 
4, 2001 

By the Chief, Enforcement Bureau:

     1.   In  this  Memorandum  Opinion  and  Order,  we  deny  a 
Petition for  Reconsideration filed  by  KASA Radio  Hogar,  Inc. 
(``KASA Radio''), licensee of radio station KDAP(AM).  On June 7, 
2001, the Enforcement Bureau issued a Forfeiture Order1 assessing 
a $15,000  forfeiture against KASA Radio for willful violation of 
the following  sections of  the Commission's  Rules  (``Rules''): 
73.54(d) (failure  to provide  a copy  of the  station's  antenna 
resistance and  reactance  measurements  during  an  inspection); 
73.1350(c)(1) (failure to  have the  proper monitoring  equipment 
installed at the duty operator position); 73.1590(a)(6)  (failure 
to  conduct  annual  equipment  performance  measurements);   and 
73.3526(a)(2) (failure to  maintain a  public inspection  file).2  
In  the  Forfeiture  Order,  the  Bureau  rejected  KASA  Radio's 
inability to  pay claim  because KASA  Radio submitted  financial 
information only for KDAP(AM), not for the licensee, KASA Radio.  

     2.   On July  6,  2001,  KASA Radio  filed  a  Petition  for 
Reconsideration in which it does not dispute the violations,  but 
contends that  the Bureau  should have  considered the  financial 
information for radio station KDAP(AM) only.  KASA Radio contends 
that neither the statute under which the forfeiture was assessed, 
nor the Commission's  Rules, require  that financial  information 
from all of a licensee's  operations be evaluated in  determining 
whether a  proposed forfeiture  should be  reduced because  of  a 
licensee's ability to  pay.  KASA Radio  also asserts that  under 
precedent for determining an  ability to pay, entire  enterprises 
are generally  evaluated  only  where violations  are  common  to 
various  sections  of  the   enterprise.   In  support  of   this 
assertion, KASA  Radio cites  to Hill  Country Radio,  Inc.,3  in 
which four separate Notices of Apparent Liability were issued  to 
Hill Country  Radio for  engaging  in unauthorized  transfers  of 
control of the four  radio stations licensed  to it.  KASA  Radio 
contends that it  was appropriate  for the Mass  Media Bureau  to 
consider the  financial circumstances  of Hill  Country Radio  in 
determining whether to reduce a forfeiture based on inability  to 
pay  because  the  transfer  of  control  had  occurred  for  the 
licensee, not for any individual station.   
     3.   In  determining  an   appropriate  forfeiture   amount, 
Section 503(b)(2)(D)  of  the  Communications  Act  of  1934,  as 
amended  (``Act''),4  requires  the  Commission  to  consider   a 
violator's ability to pay.  The Commission has determined that  a 
company's gross receipts are generally the best indicator of  its 
ability to  pay a  forfeiture.  PJB  Communications of  Virginia, 
Inc., 7  FCC Rcd  2088,  2089 (1992).   The Commission  has  also 
concluded that it  is appropriate to  take into account  ``income 
derived  from  other  affiliated  operations,  as  well  as   the 
financial  status  of  the   station(s)  in  question.''    Emery 
Telephone, 13 FCC Rcd 23854,  23859-60 (1998), recon. denied,  15 
FCC Rcd  7181 (1999)  (emphasis added).   As the  Common  Carrier 
Bureau stated in Hinton Telephone Company of Hinton, Oklahoma:

     reviewing the data  for consolidated operations  rather 
     than financial  data  limited  to  just  [one  station] 
     accurately  portrays  whether  a  licensee  can  pay  a 
     proposed forfeiture.  Our determination of a licensee's 
     ability to pay should  reflect whether the licensee  in 
     general is financially capable of paying a  forfeiture, 
     not whether financial  data from a  limited portion  of 
     its operations can sustain a forfeiture. 

7 FCC Rcd 6643,  6644 (CCB 1992), review  denied, 8 FCC Rcd  5176 
(1993).   Thus,  it  is  the  Commission's  general  practice  to 
consider the  financial condition  of a  licensee's  consolidated 
operations, not  just the  financial condition  of an  individual 
station or a limited portion of its operations.

     4.   KASA Radio's reliance  on Hill Country  Radio, Inc.  is 
misplaced.  Nothing in  Hill Country Radio,  Inc. indicates  that 
the Mass Media  Bureau would  not have  considered the  financial 
condition  of  the  licensee's  consolidated  operations  if  the 
unauthorized transfers of  control had not  involved all four  of 
its licenses.  Furthermore, in KTBB  Radio, Inc., the Mass  Media 
Bureau rejected the inability  to pay claim  of a licensee  cited 
for unauthorized  broadcast of  a  telephone conversation  at  an 
individual station because the licensee failed to provide  profit 
and loss statements for  other stations under common  ownership.5  
Therefore, Commission  precedent does  not support  KASA  Radio's 
contention that the Commission evaluates entire enterprises  only 
where  violations  are   common  to  various   sections  of   the 
enterprise.  Consequently,  we  deny KASA  Radio's  Petition  for 
Reconsideration  and  reject  its   request  for  rescission   or 
reduction of the forfeiture based  on its purported inability  to 
     5.   Accordingly, IT IS  ORDERED THAT,  pursuant to  Section 
405 of the Act6 and Section 1.106 of the Rules,7 the Petition for 
Reconsideration of  the Forfeiture  Order in  this proceeding  IS 
hereby DENIED. 

     6.   IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that, pursuant to Section  503(b) 
of the Act8  and Section 1.80  of the Rules,9  KASA Radio  Hogar, 
Inc. shall pay the amount  of fifteen thousand dollars  ($15,000) 
for the above-stated  violations within  30 days  of the  release 
date of this Order.  Payment may be made by check or money order, 
drawn on a  U.S. financial  institution, payable  to the  Federal 
Communications  Commission.   The  remittance  should  be  marked 
``NAL/Acct.  No.  200132940002''  and   mailed  to  the   Federal 
Communications Commission,  P.O.  Box  73482,  Chicago,  Illinois 
60673-7482.  If  the forfeiture  is not  paid within  the  period 
specified, the case may be referred to the Department of  Justice 
for collection pursuant to Section 504(a) of the Act.10  Requests 
for full payment  under an  installment plan should  be sent  to: 
Chief, Revenue and Receivables  Group, 445 Twelfth Street,  S.W., 
Washington, D.C. 20554.11 

     7.   IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that,  a copy of this  Memorandum 
Opinion and Order shall be sent by Certified Mail Return  Receipt 
Requested to Paul Brown, Esq.,  counsel for KASA Radio of  Hogar, 
Inc.,  at  Wood,  Maines  &  Brown,  1827  Jefferson  Place,  NW, 
Washington, DC 20036.


                         David H. Solomon
Chief, Enforcement Bureau


  1    KASA Radio Hogar, Inc., 16 FCC Rcd 11934 (EB 2001).

  2     47  C.F.R.    73.54(d),  73.1350(c)(1),  73.1590(a)(6), 

  3    14 FCC Rcd 17708 (MMB 1999). 

  4    47 U.S.C.  503(b)(2)(D).

  5    10 FCC Rcd 13046 (MMB 1995). 

  6    47 U.S.C. ' 405. 

  7    47 C.F.R.  1.106.

  8    47 U.S.C.  503(b).

  9    47 C.F.R.  1.80. 

  10  47 U.S.C. ' 504(a).

  11  47 C.F.R. ' 1.1914.