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                            FRN 0002749406              
     Saga  Communications of New England,        NAL/Acct. No. 200732080018  
     L.L.C.                                  )                               
                                                 Facility ID No. 58551       
     Licensee of Station WAQY(FM),           )                               
     Springfield, Massachusetts                  File No. EB-06-IH-0825      


   Adopted: March 2, 2007 Released: March 2,  2007

   By the Chief, Investigations and Hearings Division:


   1. In this Notice of Apparent Liability for Forfeiture ("NAL"), we find
   Saga Communications of New England, L.L.C. ("Saga"), licensee of Station
   WAQY(FM), Springfield, Massachusetts, apparently liable for a monetary
   forfeiture in the amount of $4,000 for violation of Section 73.1216 of the
   Commission's rules. That rule requires a broadcast licensee to "fully and
   accurately disclose the material terms of the contest . . . and conduct
   the contest substantially as announced or advertised." As discussed below,
   we find that Saga failed to conduct its contest substantially as
   announced, in apparent violation of the Commission's rule.


   2. The Commission received a complaint from Mr. Robert Naginewicz alleging
   that Saga failed to conduct its contest involving the musical group
   Aerosmith, which was broadcast by the station during the June through July
   2005 period, according to that contest's advertised rules. According to
   Mr. Naginewicz, on July 17, 2005, he won the contest's "Grand Prize
   Giveaway," the prizes for which included a free two-year lease on a 2005
   Buick LaCrosse automobile, or its cash equivalent, from the co-sponsor,
   Bob Pion Pontiac, and a "trunk load full" of Aerosmith memorabilia. Mr.
   Naginewicz alleges that although he was assured by the station's staff
   that all of his prizes would be delivered to him by July 22, 2005, he did
   not receive the monetary portion until August 18, 2005, and that, despite
   numerous queries made of the station's staff, he was still awaiting
   delivery of the memorabilia portion as of December 31, 2005, almost a half
   year after the contest had concluded.

   3. Following Mr. Naginewicz's complaint, the Enforcement Bureau
   ("Bureau"), by letter dated January 24, 2006, inquired of Saga concerning
   these allegations. Saga responded on March 2, 2006, contending that its
   one-month delay in delivering the monetary portion of the prize, although
   less than ideal, was "within the zone of reasonableness." It acknowledges,
   however, that its failure to fulfill the memorabilia portion until after
   Mr. Naginewicz had contacted the Commission, represents a station
   "problem" that it claims it has since addressed and resolved. Saga
   indicates that, because of its delay in fulfilling its promise to Mr.
   Naginewicz, it enhanced the award made to him by contributing additional
   prizes. We note that the complainant did not submit any reply or further
   comment in this matter.


   4. Under Section 73.1216 of the Commission's rules, a broadcast licensee
   must conduct station-sponsored contests "substantially as announced or
   advertised," and must disclose fully and accurately the "material terms"
   of such contests. Material terms, among other things, include any
   eligibility restrictions, means of selection of winners, instructions
   regarding entry and participation, when prizes can be won and the extent,
   nature and value of prizes.

   5. It appears that Saga violated Section 73.1216 of the Commission's rules
   by failing to conduct the contest substantially as announced. In this
   case, there was significant delay between the time that the contest
   concluded and Saga awarded the memorabilia prize - more than six months
   according to Saga's own submission. Moreover, this prize was not awarded
   until after the complainant had filed his complaint with the Commission
   and the Commission had initiated an investigation by issuing a Letter of
   Inquiry to the licensee.

   6. Although the contest-specific rules in this case are silent on the
   issue of when the prizes will be delivered, we believe that licensees are
   obligated to provide all promised prizes in a reasonably prompt manner in
   such circumstances, consistent with their overall duty to conduct
   broadcast contests fairly and without deception. Timely fulfillment is an
   implied term of any contest in which prizes are advertised, unless contest
   rules expressly state to the contrary, and no such contrary provision is
   present here. Saga's six-month delay in awarding the memorabilia prize
   constitutes a failure to comply with that term. We find, therefore, that
   Saga failed to conduct its contest substantially as announced and thus
   violated Section 73.1216 of our rules. That the lapses in this case may
   have been due to either negligence or inadvertence does not absolve Saga
   of liability because licensees are responsible for the acts of their
   employees. Finally, even if Saga has since taken steps to improve its
   contest award procedures, and provided additional compensation to the
   contest winner for the inconvenience he experienced, neither factor
   excuses the licensee's apparent rule violation.

   7. Under Section 503(b)(1) of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended
   (the "Act"), any person who is determined by the Commission to have
   willfully or repeatedly failed to comply with any provision of the Act or
   any rule, regulation, or order issued by the Commission shall be liable to
   the United States for a monetary forfeiture penalty. In order to impose
   such a forfeiture penalty, the Commission must issue a notice of apparent
   liability, the notice must be received, and the person against whom the
   notice has been issued must have an opportunity to show, in writing, why
   no such forfeiture penalty should be imposed. The Commission will then
   issue a forfeiture if it finds by a preponderance of the evidence that the
   person has violated the Act or a Commission rule.

   8. Based upon the evidence before us, we find that Saga apparently
   willfully violated Section 73.1216 of the Commission's rules. The
   Commission's Forfeiture Policy Statement sets a base forfeiture amount of
   $4,000 for failure to conduct a station contest substantially as
   announced. In assessing the monetary forfeiture amount, we must take into
   account the statutory factors set forth in Section 503(b)(2)(D) of the
   Act, which include 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. We conclude that the violation here primarily
   occurred due to inadequate planning and control, and not due to a
   deliberate attempt to deceive and that the base forfeiture amount of
   $4,000 is appropriate in this case.


   9. ACCORDINGLY, IT IS ORDERED, pursuant to Section 503(b) of the
   Communications Act of 1934, as amended, and Sections 0.111, 0.311, and
   1.80 of the Commission's rules, that Saga Communications of New England,
   amount of $4,000 for willfully and repeatedly violating Section 73.1216 of
   the Commission's rules.

   10. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED, pursuant to Section 1.80 of the Commission's
   rules, that within thirty (30) days of the release of this NAL, Saga
   Communications of New England, L.L.C., SHALL PAY the full amount of the
   proposed forfeiture or SHALL FILE a written statement seeking reduction or
   cancellation of the proposed forfeiture.

   11. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED, that payment of the forfeiture shall be made by
   check or similar instrument, payable to the order of the Federal
   Communications Commission. The payment must include the NAL/Acct. No. and
   FRN No. referenced above. Payment by check or money order may be mailed to
   Federal Communications Commission, P.O. Box 358340, Pittsburgh,
   Pennsylvania 15251-8340. Payment by overnight mail may be sent to Mellon
   Bank /LB 358340, 500 Ross Street, Room 1540670, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania
   15251. Payment by wire transfer may be made to ABA Number 043000261,
   receiving bank Mellon Bank, and account number 911-6106.

   12. The response, if any, must be mailed to William H. Davenport, Chief,
   Investigations and Hearings Division, Enforcement Bureau, Federal
   Communications Commission, 445 12^th Street, S.W, Room 3-B433, Washington,
   D.C. 20554 and MUST INCLUDE the NAL/Acct. No. referenced above.

   13. The Commission will not consider reducing or canceling a forfeiture in
   response to a claim of inability to pay unless the respondent submits: (1)
   federal tax returns for the most recent three-year period; (2) financial
   statements prepared according to generally accepted accounting practices
   ("GAAP"); or (3) some other reliable and objective documentation that
   accurately reflects the respondent's current financial status. Any claim
   of inability to pay must specifically identify the basis for the claim by
   reference to the financial documentation submitted.

   14. Requests for payment of the full amount of this NAL under an
   installment plan should be sent to: Associate Managing Director --
   Financial Operations, 445 12th Street, S.W., Room 1-A625, Washington, D.C.

   15. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the complaint filed by Mr. Robert
   Naginewicz IS GRANTED to the extent indicated herein, and the complaint

   16. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that a copy of this Notice shall be sent, by
   Certified Mail/Return Receipt Requested, to Saga Communications of New
   England, L.L.C., 73 Kercheval Avenue, Grosse Pointe Farms, Michigan 48236,
   by regular mail to its counsel, Gary S. Smithwick, Esq.,

   Smithwick & Belendiuk, P.C., 5028 Wisconsin Avenue, N.W., Suite 301,
   Washington, D.C. 20016, and to the Complainant, Mr. Robert Naginewicz, 119
   Fernwood Street, Chicopee, Massachusetts 01020.


   Hillary S. DeNigro

   Chief, Investigations and Hearings Division

   47 C.F.R. S 73.1216.


   See letter from Mr. Robert Naginewicz to the FCC, dated December 31, 2005
   ("Complaint ").

   Id. at 1-2.

   Id. at 2-3.

   See letter from William D. Freedman, Deputy Chief, Investigations and
   Hearings Division, Enforcement Bureau, to Saga Communications of New
   England, L.L.C., dated January 24, 2006 ("LOI").

   See letter from Lawrence D. Goldberg, Vice President, Saga Communications
   of New England, L.L.C., to William D. Freedman, Deputy Chief,
   Investigations and Hearings Division, Enforcement Bureau, dated February
   28, 2006, and filed through its counsel on March 2, 2006 ("Response").
   Counsel for Saga sought and received a one-week extension of time in which
   to file its response.

   Id. at 4.

   See id. at 4-5.

   See id. at 3.

   47 C.F.R. S 73.1216.

   See 47 C.F.R. S 73.1216, notes 1(b) and 2. Note 1 to that rule provides in
   relevant part that the material terms of a contest include "how to enter
   or participate; eligibility restrictions; entry deadline dates; whether
   prizes can be won; when prizes can be won;" and "time and means of
   selection of winners." Note 2 to the rule states:

   In general, the time and manner of disclosure of the material terms of a
   contest are within the licensee's discretion. However, the obligation to
   disclose the material terms arises at the time the audience is first told
   how to enter or participate and continues thereafter. The material terms
   should be disclosed periodically by announcements broadcast on the station
   conducting the contest, but need not be enumerated each time an
   announcement promoting the contest is broadcast. Disclosure of material
   terms in a reasonable number of announcements is sufficient. In addition
   to the required broadcast announcements, disclosure of material terms may
   be made in a non-broadcast manner.

   The contest winners were picked at a drawing on July 17, 2005, and the
   memorabilia were delivered to the complainant on February 8, 2006. See
   Response at 3-4.

   See  supra note 6.

   See Response at 2, Attachment 4, unnumbered pages 1-2.

   If anything, the rules applicable to this contest suggest that prizes
   would be awarded no more than 30 days from the drawing. The generic
   contest rules submitted by Saga, which it asserts applied to this contest
   (see Response at 2), provide that "[w]inners will be expected to claim
   prize . . . within 30 days of being notified that they are winners, unless
   there is an expiration date on prize which will be specifically stated."
   Response at Attachment 4, unnumbered pages 3-4 (item no. 9).

   Where a licensee fails to complete award of a promised prize until after a
   complaint is filed with the Commission, the Commission has found that a
   contest rule violation has occurred. See, e.g., Lesnick Communications,
   Inc., Notice of Apparent Liability, 13 FCC Rcd 23696 (Mass Med. Bur.

   In the circumstances of this case, we need not reach whether the one-month
   delay in delivering the car-lease or cash-equivalent prize was

   See Nationwide Communications Inc., Notice of Apparent Liability, 9 FCC
   Rcd 175 (Mass Med. Bur. 1994) (forfeiture for violating contest rules
   imposed, notwithstanding licensee's contention that its failure to conduct
   a contest substantially as announced was due to "inadvertence"),
   forfeiture reduced, Memorandum Opinion and Order, 9 FCC Rcd 2054 (Mass
   Med. Bur. 1994) (licensee's history of compliance with Commission rules
   warranted forfeiture reduction, whereas licensee's general good faith
   efforts, "awarding the contest prize as announced, and receiving no
   benefit from its error" did not).

   See, e.g., Capstar TX Limited Partnership (WKSS(FM)), Notice of Apparent
   Liability, 20 FCC Rcd 10636 (Enf. Bur. 2005) (forfeiture paid)
   (licensees's remedial efforts undertaken after complaint lodged not
   mitigating) citing AT&T Wireless Services, Inc., Notice of Apparent
   Liability, 17 FCC Rcd 21866, 21871 (2002) and KVGL, Inc., Memorandum
   Opinion and Order, 42 FCC 2d 258, 259 (1973).

   Section 312(f)(1) of the Act defines willful as "the conscious and
   deliberate commission or omission of [any] act, irrespective of any intent
   to violate" the law. 47 U.S.C. S 312(f)(1). The legislative history to
   Section 312(f)(1) of the Act clarifies that this definition of willful
   applies to both Sections 312 and 503(b) of the Act, H.R. Rep. No. 97-765,
   97^th Cong. 2d Sess. 51 (1982), and the Commission has so interpreted the
   term in the Section 503(b) context. See Application for Review of Southern
   California Broadcasting Co., Memorandum Opinion and Order, 6 FCC Rcd 4387
   (1991) ("Southern California Broadcasting Co."). The Commission may also
   assess a forfeiture for violations that are merely repeated, and not
   willful. See, e.g., Callais Cablevision, Inc., Grand Isle, Louisiana,
   Notice of Apparent Liability, 16 FCC Rcd 1359 (2001) ("Callais
   Cablevision, Inc.") (issuing a Notice of Apparent Liability for, inter
   alia, a cable television operator's repeated signal leakage).  "Repeated"
   merely means that the act was committed or omitted more than once, or
   lasts more than one day. Southern California Broadcasting Co., 6 FCC Rcd
   at 4388, P 5; Callais Cablevision, Inc., 16 FCC Rcd at 1362, P 9.

   See 47 U.S.C. S 503(b)(1)(B); see also 47 C.F.R. S 1.80(a)(1).

   See 47 U.S.C. S 503(b); 47 C.F.R. S 1.80(f).

   See 47 U.S.C. S 503(b)(4); 47 C.F.R. S 1.80(f).

   See The Commission's Forfeiture Policy Statement and Amendment of Section
   1.80 of the Rules to Incorporate the Forfeiture Guidelines, Report and
   Order, 12 FCC Rcd 17087, 17113 (1997), recons. denied, 15 FCC Rcd 303
   (1999) ("Forfeiture Policy Statement"); 47 C.F.R. S 1.80(b).

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

   See, e.g., New Northwest Broadcasters, L.L.C. , Notice of Apparent
   Liability, 19 FCC Rcd 9352 (Enf. Bur. 2004) (forfeiture paid) (base
   forfeiture amount imposed where contest not conducted substantially as
   announced and no other compounding factors were present).

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

   See 47 C.F.R. SS 0.111, 0.311 and 1.80.

   See 47 C.F.R. S 1.1914.

   For purposes of the forfeiture proceeding initiated by this NAL, Saga
   Communications of New England, L.L.C., shall be the only party to this

   (Continued from previous page)


   Federal Communications Commission DA 07-957



   Federal Communications Commission DA-07-957