Click here for Adobe Acrobat version
Click here for Microsoft Word version
********************************************************
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 )
)
)
Hunt Broadcasting Group, Inc. ) File No. EB-02-KC-587
Doniphan, Missouri ) NAL/Acct. No. 200232560026
) FRN 0006-1631-09
)
FORFEITURE ORDER
Adopted: December 17, 2003 Released: December 19,
2003
By the Chief, Enforcement Bureau:
I. INTRODUCTION
1. In this Forfeiture Order (``Order''), we issue a
monetary forfeiture in the amount of three thousand dollars
($3,000) to Hunt Broadcasting Group, Inc. (``Hunt''), licensee of
radio stations KPWB(AM) and KPWB-FM, located in Piedmont,
Missouri, for willful violation of Sections 73.49, 73.1350(b)(2),
73.1350(c), 11.35(a), 73.3526(e)(5), 73.3526(e)(6), and
73.3526(e)(12) of the Commission's Rules (``Rules'').1 The noted
violations involve Hunt's failure to provide an effective locked
fence enclosing the base of station KPWB(AM)'s antenna, failure
to provide transmitter control and monitoring capabilities,
failure to maintain operational Emergency Alert System (``EAS'')
equipment, and failure to maintain all required items in the
joint public inspection file for KPWB(AM) and KPWB-FM.
II. BACKGROUND
2. On September 30, 2002, the Commission's Kansas City,
Missouri Office (``Kansas City Office'') released a Notice of
Apparent Liability for Forfeiture (``NAL'') to Hunt for a
forfeiture in the amount of nineteen thousand dollars ($19,000).2
Specifically, the NAL proposed the following forfeitures for
Hunt's apparently willful violations of the Rules: Section 73.49
($7,000 - failure to provide an effective locked fence enclosing
the base of station KPWB's AM antenna); Sections 73.1350(b)(2)
and 73.1350(c) ($3,000 - failure to provide transmitter control
and monitoring capabilities for the KPWB-FM transmitter); Section
11.35(a) ($4,0003 - failure to maintain operational Emergency
Alert System (``EAS'') equipment); and Sections 73.3526(e)(5),
73.3526(e)(6), and 73.3526(12) ($5,0004 - failure to maintain all
required items in the station's public inspection file).
3. Hunt filed its response to the NAL on October 24, 2002.
Hunt's response essentially admits the violations. However, Hunt
explains how it has corrected the violations, and seeks
cancellation of the forfeiture based upon its inability to pay.
II. DISCUSSION
4. The proposed forfeiture amount in this case was
assessed in accordance with Section 503(b) of the Communications
Act of 1934, as amended (``Act''),5 Section 1.80 of the Rules,6
and The Commission's Forfeiture Policy Statement and Amendment of
Section 1.80 of the Rules to Incorporate the Forfeiture
Guidelines.7 In examining Hunt's response, Section 503(b) of the
Act requires that the Commission take into account 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.8
5. Based on the findings of the NAL regarding Hunt's
violation of Sections 73.49, 73.1350(b)(2), 73.1350(c), 11.35(a),
73.3526(e)(5), 73.3526(e)(6), and 73.3526(e)(12) of the Rules and
Hunt's response thereto, we find that Hunt's violations were
willful.9 In support of its request for cancellation, Hunt
points out that it has taken all necessary steps to correct the
violations and submits federal income tax returns for tax years
1999, 2000, and 2001 to demonstrate its inability to pay the
monetary forfeiture. We note that remedial actions taken to
correct the violations, while commendable, are not mitigating
factors.10 However, after reviewing the financial documentation,
we conclude that reduction of the $19,000 forfeiture to $3,000 is
warranted in this case.
IV. ORDERING CLAUSES
6. Accordingly, IT IS ORDERED that, pursuant to Section
503(b) of the Act, and Sections 0.111, 0.311 and 1.80(f)(4) of
the Rules,11 Hunt Broadcasting Group, Inc. IS LIABLE FOR A
MONETARY FORFEITURE in the amount of three thousand dollars
($3,000) for its violation of Sections 73.49, 73.1350(b)(2),
73.1350(c), 11.35(a), 73.3526(e)(5), 73.3526(e)(6), and
73.3526(e)(12) of the Rules.
6. Payment of the forfeiture shall be made in the manner
provided for in Section 1.80 of the Rules within 30 days of the
release of this Order. 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.12
Payment may be made by mailing a check or similar instrument,
payable to the order of the Federal Communications Commission, to
the Federal Communications Commission, P.O. Box 73482, Chicago,
Illinois 60673-7482. The payment should reference NAL/Acct. No.
200232560026 and FRN 0006-1631-09. Requests for full payment
under an installment plan should be sent to: Chief, Revenue and
Receivables Group, 445 12th Street, S.W., Washington, D.C.
20554.13
7. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that a copy of this Order shall
be sent by First Class and Certified Mail Return Receipt
Requested to Hunt Broadcasting Group, Inc., 204 East Washington,
Doniphan, Missouri 63935.
FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION
David H. Solomon
Chief, Enforcement Bureau
_________________________
1 47 C.F.R. §§ 73.49, 73.1350(b)(2), 73.1350(c), 11.35(a),
73.3526(e)(5), 73.3526(e)(6), and 73.3526(e)(12).
2 See Notice of Apparent Liability for Forfeiture, NAL/Acct. No.
200232560026 (Enf. Bur. Kansas City Office, September 30, 2002).
3 The base forfeiture amount for this violation is $8,000. The
District Director of the Kansas City Office applied a 50%
downward adjustment because the EAS equipment was capable of
monitoring one of the required two sources.
4 The base forfeiture amount for his violation is $10,000. The
District Director of the Kansas City Office applied a 50%
downward adjustment because station KPWB maintained a portion of
the required items in the public inspection file.
5 47 U.S.C. § 503(b).
6 47 C.F.R. § 1.80.
7 12 FCC Rcd 17087 (1997), recon. denied, 15 FCC Rcd 303 (1999).
8 47 U.S.C. § 503(b)(2)(D).
9 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,'
... means the conscious and deliberate commission or omission of
such act, irrespective of any intent to violate any provision of
this Act or any rule or regulation of the Commission authorized
by this Act ....'' See Southern California Broadcasting Co., 6
FCC Rcd 4387 (1991).
10 See, e.g., AT&T Wireless Services, Inc., 17 FCC Rcd 21866,
21871 (2002); Seawest Yacht Brokers, 9 FCC Rcd 6099 (1994);
Station KGVL, Inc., 42 FCC 2d 258, 259 (1973).
11 47 C.F.R. §§ 0.111, 0.311, 1.80(f)(4).
12 47 U.S.C. § 504(a).
13 See 47 C.F.R. § 1.1914.