Click here for Microsoft Word Version
********************************************************
NOTICE
********************************************************
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 )
) File No. 99TP016
Joy Public Broadcasting Corporation ) NAL/Acct. No.
915TP0004
Radio Station WJTF-FM )
Panama City, Florida )
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
Adopted: April 12, 2001 Released: April 16, 2001
By the Chief, Enforcement Bureau:
1. In this Memorandum Opinion and Order (``Order''), we
deny a petition for reconsideration filed by Joy Public
Broadcasting Corporation (``Joy''), licensee of Station WJTF-
FM, Panama City, Florida, of a Memorandum Opinion and Order
issued in this proceeding on January 29, 2001.1 This is the
fourth petition for reconsideration filed by Joy in connection
with a Forfeiture Order2 which issued a $3,000 forfeiture
against Joy for violations of Sections 73.1350(c)(2),
73.1590(a)(1), and 73.1870(b)(3) of the Commission's Rules
(``Rules'').3 The noted violations involved Joy's failure to
make periodic calibrations of the station's monitoring
equipment, to make equipment performance measurements upon the
initial installation of a new transmitter, and to designate
the station's chief operator in writing and post a copy of the
designation with the station license.
2. In its fourth petition for reconsideration, Joy again
challenges the statement in the Forfeiture Order that the
November 17, 1998, inspection of WJTF-FM by the FCC's Tampa,
Florida Field Office (``Tampa Field Office'') revealed a
violation of Section 73.317(d) of the Rules, which provides
that any emissions appearing on a frequency removed from the
carrier by more than 600 kHz must be attenuated at least 43 +
10 Log10 (Power, in watts) dB below the level of the
unmodulated carrier, or 80 dB, whichever is the lesser
attenuation.4 Measurements taken by agents from the Tampa
Field Office during the November 17, 1998, inspection
indicated that WJTF-FM's second and third harmonics were not
attenuated to 80 dB below the fundamental frequency as
required by Section 73.317(d) of the Rules, and the Tampa
Field Office included this violation in a Notice of Violation
issued to Joy on December 4, 1998. However, the Tampa Field
Office did not include this violation in the Notice of
Apparent Liability for a Forfeiture (``NAL'')5 issued to Joy
on February 4, 1999, because measurements of the station's
signal taken by FCC agents on January 20, 1999, showed no
violation of Section 73.317(d). In the January 29, 2001,
Memorandum Opinion and Order, we granted Joy's third petition
for reconsideration for the limited purpose of ruling that the
Tampa Field Office's finding of a violation of Section
73.317(d) during the November 17, 1998, inspection will not be
used against Joy in any future proceeding. In light of this
ruling, we concluded that Joy's argument that there was no
violation of Section 73.317(d) was moot and required no
further consideration. In its instant petition for
reconsideration, Joy argues that the Bureau must delete the
indication that WJTF-FM violated Section 73.317(d) because
there is no support in the record for that finding.
3. We deny Joy's petition for reconsideration. The
violation of Section 73.317(d) cited in the NOV issued to Joy
was not included in the NAL. Furthermore, we made clear in
our January 29, 2001, Memorandum Opinion and Order that this
violation will not be used against Joy in any future
proceeding. Joy's argument that there was no violation of
Section 73.317(d) is beyond the scope of this proceeding.
This proceeding is not the proper vehicle for challenging a
violation that was not included in the NAL.
4. ACCORDINGLY, IT IS ORDERED that, pursuant to Section
405 of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended (``Act''),6
and Section 1.106 of the Rules,7 Joy Public Broadcasting
Corporation's petition for reconsideration of the January 29,
2001, Memorandum Opinion and Order IS DENIED.
5. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that a copy of this Order shall
be sent by Certified Mail Return Receipt Requested to Joy
Public Broadcasting Corporation, 341 S. Washington, Lancaster,
Wisconsin 53813, and to its counsel, Timothy E. Welch, Esq.,
Hill & Welch, 1330 New Hampshire Avenue N.W., Suite 113,
Washington, D.C. 20036.
FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION
David H. Solomon
Chief, Enforcement Bureau
_________________________
1 Joy Public Broadcasting Corporation, Inc., DA 01-184 (Enf.
Bur., released January 29, 2001).
2 14 FCC Rcd 856 (Compl. & Inf. Bur., 1999), recon. denied,
15 FCC Rcd 8575 (Enf. Bur., 2000), recon. denied, 15 FCC Rcd
18255 (Enf. Bur., 2000), recon. granted in part, DA 01-184 (Enf.
Bur., released January 29, 2001).
3 47 C.F.R. §§ 73.1350(c)(2), 73.1590(a)(1) and
73.1870(b)(3).
4 47 C.F.R. § 73.317(d).
5 Notice of Apparent Liability for a Forfeiture, NAL/Acct.
No. 915TP00004 (Compl. & Inf. Bur., Tampa, Florida Field Office,
released February 4, 1999).
6 47 U.S.C. § 405
7 47 C.F.R. § 1.106.