Click here for Adobe Acrobat version
Click here for Microsoft Word version


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                 )
Entravision Communications       )       File Number EB-02-LA-402
Corporation                      )     NAL/Acct. No. 200332900003
Registered Owner of ASR Number   )               FRN 0006-1662-19 
1066158                          )
Newport Beach, California        )


                        FORFEITURE ORDER 

Adopted:  August  6, 2004               Released:    August   10, 

By the Chief, Enforcement Bureau:


     1.   In  this  Forfeiture  Order  (``Order''),  we  issue  a 
        monetary  forfeiture in  the  amount  of  three  thousand 
        dollars   ($3,000)    to    Entravision    Communications 
        Corporation (``Entravision''),  the registered  owner  of 
        the antenna  structure  (Antenna  Structure  Registration 
        (``ASR'') number 1066158)  of broadcast station  KSSD-FM1 
        in Newport Beach, California,  for repeated violation  of 
        Section 17.57  of  the Commission's  Rules  (``Rules'').2  
        The noted  violation  involves Entravision's  failure  to 
        notify  the  Commission  of  a  change  in  the   antenna 
        structure's ownership information.

     2.   On February  14, 2003,  the Commission's  Los  Angeles, 
        California, Field Office (``Los Angeles Office'')  issued 
        a Notice of Apparent  Liability for Forfeiture  (``NAL'') 
        to Entravision for  a forfeiture in  the amount of  three 
        thousand dollars  ($3,000).3   Entravision  responded  to 
        the NAL on March 17, 2003.


     3.   On November  26,  2002,  agents from  the  Los  Angeles 
        Office inspected  antenna structure  1066158, located  at 
        33-37-55 north latitude and  117-56-18 west longitude  in 
        Newport  Beach,   California.   At   the  time   of   the 
        inspection, the Commission's ASR database indicated  that 
        Citicasters  Co.  (``Citicasters'')  was  the  registered 
        owner of the antenna structure.

     4.   On December 19, 2002, the Los Angeles Office issued  an 
        Official Notice  of  Violation (``NOV'')  to  Citicasters 
        for violation of Section  17.6(a) of the Rules4  (antenna 
        structure's painting chipped and  faded).  On January  6, 
        2003, Citicasters informed  the Los  Angeles Office  that 
        Citicasters  had  sold   antenna  structure  1066158   to 
        Entravision several years before.   On January 13,  2003, 
        Entravision responded to the  NOV indicating that it  had 
        made arrangements  to  repaint the  tower and  had  filed 
        updated  ownership  information  for  antenna   structure 

     5.   On February  14,  2003, the  Commission's  Los  Angeles 
        Office issued a  NAL to Entravision  for a forfeiture  in 
        the  amount  of  three  thousand  dollars  ($3,000)   for 
        apparent willful and repeated violation of Section  17.57 
        of the Rules.  In  its response, Entravision admits  that 
        its tower  registration information  was not  current  at 
        the  time  of  the  inspection  but  seeks  reduction  or 
        cancellation  of   the  proposed   monetary   forfeiture.  
        Entravision argues that its failure to report the  change 
        in ownership resulted from unusual circumstances and  was 
        not willful.  Additionally,  Entravision claims that  the 
        forfeiture should be reduced or cancelled because of  its 
        ``good  faith   efforts  to   bring  the   station   into 
        compliance'' and history of overall compliance.


     6.   The  proposed  forfeiture  amount  in  this  case   was 
        assessed  in  accordance  with  Section  503(b)  of   the 
        Communications  Act  of  1934,  as  amended   (``Act''),6 
        Section  1.80  of  the   Rules,7  and  The   Commission's 
        Forfeiture Policy  Statement  and  Amendment  of  Section 
        1.80  of  the   Rules  to   Incorporate  the   Forfeiture 
        Guidelines, 12 FCC  Rcd 17087 (1997),  recon. denied,  15 
        FCC  Rcd  303  (1999)  (``Policy  Statement'').   Section 
        503(b)  of the  Act  requires  that  the  Commission,  in 
        examining Entravision's response,  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 such other matters as justice may require.8

     7.   Section 17.57 of  the Rules  requires the  owner of  an 
        antenna  structure for  which  an  ASR  number  has  been 
        obtained to notify  the Commission of  any change in  the 
        ownership information.  Entravision concedes that it  did 
        not  do so  following  its  acquisition  of  the  antenna 
        structure and that this  circumstance persisted for  more 
        than  one day.   We  find,  therefore,  that  Entravision 
        repeatedly violated Section 17.57 of the Rules. 9

     8.   Section  503(b)  of  the   Act  gives  the   Commission 
        authority to  assess  a forfeiture  penalty  against  any 
        person if the Commission  determines that the person  has 
        ``willfully or  repeatedly'' failed  to comply  with  the 
        provisions of the  Act or  with any  rule, regulation  or 
        order  issued  by  the  Commission.   In  light  of   our 
        determination that Entravision's violation was  repeated, 
        it is  not necessary  to determine  whether it  was  also 

     9.   No mitigation is warranted on the basis of a history of 
        overall  compliance.   The   Enforcement  Bureau   issued 
        Official   Notices   of   Violation   to    Entravision's 
        subsidiary,11 Entravision Holdings LLC, on the  following 
        dates:   September  6,  2000  (KUET);  November  3,  2000 
        (KMIX-FM);  February  1,  2001  (WVEN);  March  14,  2001 
        (KBNT-LP); January  7,  2002 (KZLZ-FM);  April  17,  2002 
        (KSMS-TV);  and   October   10,  2002   (KNCV-LP).    We, 
        therefore, conclude  that  Entravision does  not  have  a 
        history of overall compliance.12

     10.  Entravision provides no evidence to support any finding 
        that it acted in good faith to correct the problem  prior 
        to learning of the FCC inspection.  Accordingly, we  make 
        no reduction on this basis.

     11.  We have  examined  Entravision's response  to  the  NAL 
        pursuant  to  the   statutory  factors   above,  and   in 
        conjunction with  the  Policy Statement  as well.   As  a 
        result  of  our  review,  we  conclude  that  Entravision 
        repeatedly violated Section 17.57 of the Rules.  We  also 
        conclude that neither cancellation  nor reduction of  the 
        proposed $3,000 monetary forfeiture is warranted.


     12.  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,13  Entravision  Communications 
        Corporation, IS LIABLE FOR  A MONETARY FORFEITURE in  the 
        amount of three thousand dollars ($3,000) for failure  to 
        notify  the  Commission  of  a  change  in  the   antenna 
        structure's ownership information, in repeated  violation 
        of Section 17.57 of the Rules.

     13.  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.14  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.  200332900003 and FRN  0006-1662-
        19.  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. 20554.15

     14.  IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that  a copy of this Order  shall 
        be sent by First Class and Certified Mail Return  Receipt 
        Requested  to  Entravision  Communications   Corporation, 
        Suite 6000 West,  2425 Olympic  Boulevard, Santa  Monica, 
        CA 90404, and its  counsel, Barry A. Friedman, Esq.,  and 
        John C. Butcher, Esq., Thompson Hine LLP, 1920 N  Street, 
        N.W., Washington, D.C. 20036.

                              FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION


                              David H. Solomon
                              Chief, Enforcement Bureau

1  KSSD-FM  is  now  licensed  to  Entravision  Holdings  LLC,  a 
subsidiary of  Entravision  Communications Corporation.   At  the 
time of  the  violation, Entravision  Communications  Corporation 
owned the antenna structure but  the station was licensed to  Big 
City Radio-LA, L.L.C., under the call sign KSYY-FM.

2 47 C.F.R.  17.57.  

3 Notice  of Apparent  Liability  for Forfeiture,  NAL/Acct.  No. 
200332900003 (Enf. Bur.,  Los Angeles  Office, released  February 
14, 2003).     

4 47 C.F.R.  17.6(a).

5 The FCC ASR database  indicates that the ownership  information 
was updated on January 3, 2003.

6 47 U.S.C.  503(b).

7 47 C.F.R.  1.80.

8 47 U.S.C.  503(b)(2)(D).

9 As provided by 47 U.S.C.  312(f)(2), a continuous violation is 
``repeated'' if  it  continues  for  more  than  one  day.    The 
Conference Report for Section  312(f)(2) indicates that  Congress 
intended to apply this  definition to Section 503  of the Act  as 
well as  Section 312.   See  H.R. Rep.  97th  Cong. 2d  Sess.  51 
(1982).  See Southern California Broadcasting Company, 6 FCC  Rcd 
4387, 4388 (1991).

10 KOKE, Inc., 23 FCC 2d 191 (1970).

11 The  violations of  its  subsidiary companies  are part  of  a 
parent  company's  violation  record.   See,  e.g.,  Rio   Grande 
Transmission, Inc., 16 FCC  Rcd 17040 (Enf.  Bur. 2001) and  Mega 
Communications of  St. Petersburg  Licensee, L.L.C.,  16 FCC  Rcd 
15948 (Enf. Bur. 2001).

12 In  the cases  cited by  Entravision -  Cherokee  Broadcasting 
Company,Inc., 16 FCC Rcd 4688, 4689 (Enf. Bur. 2001) and Courtesy 
Communications, Inc., 14 FCC 4198,  4202 (1999) - the  licensees, 
unlike Entravision, did have histories of overall compliance.

13 47 C.F.R.  0.111, 0.311, 1.80(f)(4).

14 47 U.S.C.  504(a).

15 See 47 C.F.R.  1.1914.