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 ) File No. EB-05-IH-2569
Birach Broadcasting Corporation ) NAL Account No. 201032080019
Licensee of Station WMJH(AM) ) FRN No. 0003766847
Rockford, Michigan ) Facility ID No. 55300
))))
NOTICE OF APPARENT LIABILITY FOR FORFEITURE AND ORDER
Adopted: March 18, 2010 Released: March 18, 2010
By the Chief, Enforcement Bureau:
I. INTRODUCTION
1. In this Notice of Apparent Liability for Forfeiture and Order ("NAL"),
we find that Birach Broadcasting Corporation ("Birach"), licensee of
Station WMJH(AM), Rockford, Michigan (the "Station"), apparently
willfully violated Section 310(d) of the Communications Act of 1934,
as amended (the "Act"), by engaging in an unauthorized transfer of
control of the Station that occurred in the context of a time
brokerage agreement. We further find that Birach apparently violated
Section 73.1125 of the Commission's rules by failing to staff the
main studio of the Station with a managerial employee and staff level
employee of its own while the Station was being operated by time
brokers. We conclude, pursuant to Section 503(b) of the Act, that
Birach is apparently liable for a forfeiture in the amount of $15,000.
We also order Birach, within 60 days of this NAL, to update the
Commission on its steps to remedy these apparent violations. We
emphasize that Birach is subject to further enforcement action if it
fails to come into compliance.
II. BACKGROUND
2. In April 2005, the Enforcement Bureau's Detroit Field Office inspected
Birach station WMJH(AM), and found that no employees of Birach were
present at the station's main studio. As a result of the concerns
raised by the on-site inspections, the Enforcement Bureau directed a
letter of inquiry (the "LOI") to Birach on March 5, 2007. The LOI
requested information about the licensee's time brokerage agreements
with other parties, and specifically requested any written time
brokerage agreements into which the station had entered. In the
response to the LOI (the "Response"), dated April 4, 2007, Sima
Birach, sole owner and general manager of Station WMJH(AM), states
that he is ultimately responsible for the programming, employment,
marketing, and finances of Station WMJH(AM), and that he has entered
into an agreement with time brokers to that end. According to the
Response, Efrin Cano and Reynaldo Mayans are the time brokers for
Station WMJH(AM). The Response does not include a copy of any written
time brokerage agreement between Birach and Efrin Cano/Reynaldo
Mayans. Instead, Birach provides an invoice for the monies owed for
use of the Station. The invoice for Station WMJH(AM) is dated August
30, 2004, approximately eight months prior to the inspections.
3. In the Response, Birach states that time brokers were responsible for
the operation of Station WMJH(AM) and for providing programming for
the station. Moreover, the Response states that, while Birach did not
have an employee present at either station, Birach has since (as of
the date of the Bureau's LOI) hired a managerial level employee to
work at WMJH(AM) and another Birach-owned station, WMFN(AM), half-time
at each station. The Response states that, up until that date, Sima
Birach was responsible for the operation of the Station. According to
our licensing records, Birach's business address is located in
Southfield, Michigan, approximately two hours away from Rockford,
Michigan (where Station WMJH(AM) is located). Birach's counsel asserts
that, given the state of technology, it was possible to supervise the
operation of the Station remotely.
III. DISCUSSION
4. Under Section 503(b)(1) of 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 forfeiture
penalty. 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. 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, and the
Commission has so interpreted the term in the Section 503(b) context.
The Commission may also assess a forfeiture for violations that are
merely repeated, and not willful. "Repeated" means that the act was
committed or omitted more than once, or lasts more than one day. In
order to impose such a 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 penalty should be imposed. The
Commission will then issue a forfeiture if it finds, by a
preponderance of the evidence, that the person has willfully or
repeatedly violated the Act or a Commission rule. As described in
greater detail below, we conclude under this procedure that Birach is
apparently liable for a forfeiture in the amount of $15,000 for its
apparent willful and repeated violation of Section 310(d) of the Act
by transferring de facto control of Station WMJH(AM) to time brokers
without prior Commission approval, and of Section 73.1125 of the
Commission's rules by failing to maintain a meaningful presence at the
Station's main studio.
A. Unauthorized Transfer of Control
5. Section 310(d) of the Act prohibits the transfer of control of a
station license, and any rights thereunder, without prior Commission
consent. There is no exact formula by which control of a broadcast
station can be determined. In ascertaining whether a transfer or
reversion of control has occurred, the Commission traditionally looks
beyond the legal title to whether a new entity or individual has
obtained the right to determine the basic operating policies of the
station. Specifically, the Commission looks to three essential areas
of station operation: programming, personnel, and finances.
6. The Commission has consistently held that a licensee's participation
in a time brokerage agreement ("TBA"), also known as a local marketing
agreement ("LMA"), does not per se constitute an unauthorized transfer
of control or a violation of the Act or any Commission rules or
policies. As with any allegation of unauthorized transfer or reversion
of control, without regard to whether a TBA exists, we look to whether
a licensee continues to have ultimate control over the station,
including its programming, personnel, and finances. Licensees are
permitted under Section 310(d) of the Act to delegate day-to-day
operations relating to those three areas, as long as they continue to
set the policies guiding those operations. Thus, in making a
determination, the Commission looks not only to who executes the
programming, personnel, and finance responsibilities, but also to who
establishes the policies governing those three areas. The Commission
has directed that, "Licensees engaged in [TBAs] . . . must operate . .
. as a stand-alone entity discrete from the [TBA operator]. Thus, we
require that licensees must maintain their own bank accounts, pay the
salaries of their own employees, and remain responsible for their own
obligations to programmers, utility companies, and other operational
matters. In other words, the licensee should be ready and able to
operate independently from the [TBA operator] at any time it believes
the arrangement does not fulfill its public interest
responsibilities."
7. The LOI specifically asked Birach questions relating to who controls
the programming aired on Station WMJH(AM), who handles the finances,
and who makes personnel decisions. In the Response, Birach admits
that, prior to the LOI, the time brokers provided the programming
aired on the Station, paid the salaries and wages of the personnel who
operated the Station, and handled the marketing and finances at the
Station, except that Birach was responsible for the maintenance of the
physical plant of the Station. Birach's Response also makes it clear
that the time brokers were solely responsible for ensuring compliance
with various FCC requirements, such as the maintenance of the
Station's public inspection files and performance of Emergency Alert
System ("EAS") testing. In response to a question regarding whether
the EAS tests were performed properly, Birach responded, "I have been
assured that the EAS regulations have been fully complied with." With
respect to public inspection file compliance, Birach stated, ". . . I
have been advised that the local public inspection files have been
kept and made available to the public if requested." This reflects
that Birach only has a second-hand understanding from the time brokers
as to whether the Station licensed to him was in full compliance with
the Commission's rules. By his own admissions, we find that Birach
effectively abdicated control of the Station.
8. The purported TBA submitted by Birach with its LOI Response consists
merely of an invoice for monies owed, and does not reflect any formal
agreement as to the respective responsibilities of each party. While
the Commission allows licensees to broker time on stations, the
agreements are required to be in writing and kept in the station's
public inspection file. In addition, the agreements must include a
certification that the licensee has ultimate authority over the
operation of the station. Birach's failure to execute, and maintain in
its public file, a written TBA undercuts any assertions that Birach
has made to demonstrate that there was not a de facto transfer of
control of the Station without Commission consent. The Commission
requires that there not be ambiguity as to who ultimately controls the
station; the licensee is required to maintain a written record
explicitly delineating that it has retained ultimate control over
station operations. Following receipt of the LOI, Birach attempted to
exert licensee control of the Station by hiring a managerial employee
to oversee operations half-time at WMFN(AM), and half-time at
WMJH(AM), which he contends is sufficient to address any concerns the
Commission might have about the lack of any licensee presence at the
station. We agree that this is a necessary step toward reasserting
control over the stations, but as discussed below in Paragraph 11, it
is a subsequent remedial measure that will not shield Birach from
liability. Also, as discussed in Section III.B, infra, because Birach
did not hire enough employees, this eleventh hour effort still fails
to comport with the Commission's main studio staffing requirements.
9. We conclude that the record in this case, which includes certain
concessions from the licensee, demonstrates that an unauthorized
transfer of control occurred. We find that Birach improperly abdicated
control of the Station to the time brokers by failing to retain an
independent operating presence at the Station and by failing to
exercise the required level of control over programming, personnel,
and finances. The record in this case confirms that Birach failed to
operate as a stand-alone entity with an operational presence ready to
take over operations if necessary.
10. Although it appears that Birach took steps to remedy the situation
after receiving our LOI, we have consistently held that subsequent
remedial measures do not shield a licensee from liability for
violations of the Act or the Commission's rules. Furthermore, Birach
must take additional steps, including hiring more employees to
establish a meaningful presence at the Station, taking a more active
role in the Station's operations, maintaining a written TBA at the
Station so that it can be made readily available for public
inspection, actively assuring that the Station continues to fulfill
its public interest and programming obligations to the community it
serves, and confirming, first-hand, continued compliance with the
Commission's rules. If Birach fails to fully reassert control over the
Station, we may impose further sanctions, including possible license
revocation or non-renewal.
B. Section 73.1125 - Main Studio Rule
11. The Commission has interpreted Section 73.1125 (also known as the
"Main Studio Rule") to require, among other things, that a licensee
maintain a "meaningful management and staff presence" at its main
studio. Specifically, the Commission has found that a main studio
"must, at a minimum, maintain full-time managerial and full-time staff
personnel." Prior to the LOI, Birach had no employees who worked at
the Station. Following the LOI, Birach hired a single managerial
employee to work at Station WMJH(AM) and at another Birach-owned
station, WMFN(AM), half-time at each station. Thus, Birach needs to
hire three more employees to come into compliance with the rule. We
find that Birach was in flagrant violation of the Main Studio Rule
both prior to the LOI and following the LOI.
12. In a letter submitted the day after Birach's Response, Birach's
counsel asserts that the "meaningful presence" requirement is
outdated, and that, given today's technology, Birach can meaningfully
supervise both stations' activities from Southfield, Michigan. We
disagree. As discussed above, while the Commission allows licensees to
delegate day-to-day operations, the Commission requires that licensees
retain a presence capable of taking over station operation if
necessary. The remote supervision described in the Response is
insufficient to meet Birach's obligations as a Commission licensee. It
is also readily apparent from Birach's Response that Birach had only
secondhand knowledge of whether the Station was complying with the
Commission's rules. In this regard, Birach can only relay assurances
he has received from the time brokers that the Station's EAS tests
were performed regularly and that the Station's public inspection
files were properly maintained and provided to the public upon
request.
C. Forfeiture Amount
13. Pursuant to the Forfeiture Policy Statement and Section 1.80 of the
Commission's Rules, the base forfeiture amount for an unauthorized
transfer of control is $8,000. The Commission's rules provide that
base forfeitures may be adjusted based upon consideration of the
factors enumerated in Section 503(b)(2)(E) of the Act and Section
1.80(a)(4) of the Commission's rules, which include "the nature,
circumstances, extent, and gravity of the violation . . . and the
degree of culpability, any history of prior offenses, ability to pay,
and such other matters as justice may require." Here, considering the
circumstances of this case, we find that there was an unauthorized
transfer of control at Station WMJH(AM) and that the base forfeiture
is an appropriate penalty for the violation in this case. Therefore,
we find that Birach is apparently liable in the amount of $8,000 for
violating Section 310(d) of the Act.
14. In addition to the unauthorized transfer of control, as discussed
above, we find that Birach also violated Section 73.1125 of the
Commission's rules (the main studio rule) by failing to staff the main
studio of the Station with a managerial employee and staff level
employee of its own while the Station was being operated by time
brokers. Pursuant to the Forfeiture Policy Statement and Section 1.80
of the Commission's Rules, the base forfeiture amount for violations
of the main studio rule is $7,000. Having considered the factors
described above, we find that the base forfeiture is an appropriate
penalty for the violation in this case, and therefore, we find that
Birach is apparently liable for a forfeiture in the amount of $7,000
for a violation of Section 73.1125 of the Commission's rules.
IV. ORDERING CLAUSES
15. Accordingly, IT IS ORDERED that, pursuant to Section 503(b) of the
Communications Act of 1934, as amended, and Sections 0.111, 0.311,
0.314 and 1.80 of the Commission's Rules, Birach Broadcasting
Corporation is hereby NOTIFIED of its APPARENT LIABILITY FOR A
FORFEITURE in the amount of fifteen thousand dollars ($15,000) for
violations of Section 310(d) of the Act and Section 73.1125 of the
Commission's Rules.
16. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that, pursuant to Section 1.80 of the
Commission's Rules, that within thirty (30) days of the release date
of this Notice, Birach Broadcasting Corporation SHALL PAY the full
amount of the proposed forfeiture or SHALL FILE a written statement
seeking reduction or cancellation of the proposed forfeiture.
17. Payment of the forfeiture must be made by check or similar instrument,
payable to the order of the Federal Communications Commission. The
payment must include the NAL/Account Number and FRN Number referenced
above. Payment by check or money order may be mailed to Federal
Communications Commission, P.O. Box 979088, St. Louis, MO 63197-9000.
Payment by overnight mail may be sent to U.S. Bank - Government
Lockbox #979088, SL-MO-C2-GL, 1005 Convention Plaza, St. Louis, MO
63101. Payment by wire transfer may be made to ABA Number 021030004,
receiving bank TREAS/NYC, and account number 27000001. For payment by
credit card, an FCC Form 159 (Remittance Advice) must be submitted.
When completing the FCC Form 159, enter the NAL/Account number in
block number 23A (call sign/other ID), and enter the letters "FORF" in
block number 24A (payment type code). Requests for full payment under
an installment plan should be sent to: Chief Financial Officer --
Financial Operations, 445 12th Street, S.W., Room 1-A625, Washington,
D.C. 20554. Please contact the Financial Operations Group Help Desk
at 1-877-480-3201 or Email: ARINQUIRIES@fcc.gov with any questions
regarding payment procedures. Birach will also send electronic
notification on the date said payment is made to
Hillary.DeNigro@fcc.gov, Ben.Bartolome@fcc.gov, Anjali.Singh@fcc.gov
and William.Knowles-Kellett@fcc.gov.
18. The response, if any, shall be mailed to Hillary S. DeNigro, Chief,
Investigations and Hearings Division, Enforcement Bureau, Federal
Communications Commission, 445 12th Street, S.W, Room 4-C330,
Washington D.C. 20554, and SHALL INCLUDE the NAL/Acct. No. referenced
above. The licensee shall also, to the extent practicable, transmit a
copy of the response via email to Hillary.DeNigro@fcc.gov,
Ben.Bartolome@fcc.gov, Anjali.Singh @fcc.gov and
William.Knowles-Kellett@fcc.gov.
19. The Commission shall 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.
20. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that within sixty days of the release of this
NAL that Birach Broadcasting Corporation SHALL FILE a written
statement concerning the steps that it has taken to reassert control
over Station WMJH(AM) Rockford, Michigan, and to comply with the FCC
staffing requirements for Station WMJH(AM)'s main studio. Such
statement must be submitted in the form of an affidavit or declaration
in accordance with Section 1.16 of the Commission's rules, must be
mailed to the Office of the Secretary, Federal Communications
Commission, 445 12th Street, S.W., Washington, D.C. 20554, to the
attention of: Hillary S. DeNigro, Chief, Investigations and Hearings
Division, Enforcement Bureau, Room 4-C330, and must include the File
number and NAL/Acct. No. referenced above. Birach Broadcasting
Corporation shall also transmit a copy of the statement via email to
Hillary.DeNigro@fcc.gov, Ben.Bartolome@fcc.gov, Anjali.Singh @fcc.gov
and William.Knowles-Kellett@fcc.gov.
21. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that a copy of this Notice of Apparent Liability
for Forfeiture shall be sent by Certified Mail, Return Receipt
Requested, and regular mail, to Birach Broadcasting Corporation at its
address of record; and to Lauren A. Colby, Esq., 10 East 4th Street,
Frederick, MD 21705-0113.
FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION
P. Michele Ellison
Chief, Enforcement Bureau
A "time brokerage," also referred to as "local marketing," refers to the
sale by a licensee of a discrete block of time to a third-party, a
"broker," that supplies programming to fill the time and sells commercial
announcements in it. See 47 C.F.R. S: 73.3555, Note 2 (j); see also WGPR,
Inc., Memorandum Opinion and Order, 10 FCC Rcd 8140, 8141 P: 10 (1995),
vacated in part on other grounds sub nom. Serafyn v. FCC, 149 F.3d 1213
(D.C. Cir. 1998).
See 47 C.F.R. S: 73.1206.
See 47 U.S.C. S: 503(b).
See FCC Broadcast Inspection Summary Report Station WMJH(AM), dated April
12, 2005, at 2. The previous day, FCC field agents had inspected another
Birach station located in a nearby community and found that the station
was being operated by a different time broker. FCC Broadcast Inspection
Summary Report Station WMFN(AM), dated April 11, 2005, at 1. The
Enforcement Bureau investigated apparent violations at the two stations
jointly.
See Letter from Jennifer Lewis, Assistant Chief, Investigations and
Hearings Division, Enforcement Bureau, Federal Communications Commission
("FCC"), to Birach Broadcasting Corporation, dated March 6, 2007 (the
"LOI").
See id.
See Letter from Lauren A. Colby, Esq., counsel for Birach Broadcasting
Corporation, to Marlene H. Dortch, Secretary, FCC, dated April 4, 2007, at
3-4 (transmitting Answers to Inquiries prepared by Sima Birach, President
and Sole shareholder of Birach Broadcasting Corporation).
See id..
See id. at attachment to Answers to Inquiries. The invoice, signed by the
brokers and Mr. Birach, provides terms for payment, and cancellation. See
id.
See id.
See id. at 3-4.
See id.
See id. at 3.
See Letter from Lauren A. Colby, Esq., counsel for Birach Broadcasting
Corporation, to Marlene H. Dortch, Secretary, FCC dated April 5, 2007, at
1.
See 47 U.S.C. S: 503(b)(1)(B); 47 C.F.R. S: 1.80(a)(1).
47 U.S.C. S: 312(f)(1).
See H.R. Rep. No. 97-765, 97th Cong. 2d Sess. 51 (1982).
See, e.g., Southern California Broadcasting Co., Memorandum Opinion and
Order, 6 FCC Rcd 4387, 4388 (1991).
See, e.g., Callais Cablevision, Inc., Grand Isle, Louisiana, Notice of
Apparent Liability for Monetary Forfeiture, 16 FCC Rcd 1359, 1362, P: 10
(2001) ("Callais Cablevision") (issuing a Notice of Apparent Liability
for, inter alia, a cable television operator's repeated signal leakage).
Southern California Broadcasting Co., 6 FCC Rcd at 4388, P: 5; Callais
Cablevision, Inc., 16 FCC Rcd at 1362, P: 9.
47 U.S.C. S: 503(b); 47 C.F.R. S: 1.80(f).
See, e.g., SBC Communications, Inc., Forfeiture Order, 17 FCC Rcd 7589,
7591 P: 4 (2002) (forfeiture paid).
Section 310(d) of the Act, 47 U.S.C. S: 310(d), provides in pertinent
part:
No construction permit or station license, or any rights thereunder, shall
be transferred, assigned or disposed of in any manner, voluntarily or
involuntarily, directly or indirectly, or by transfer of control of any
corporation holding such permit or license, to any person except upon
application to the Commission and upon finding by the Commission that the
public interest, convenience and necessity will be served thereby.
See WHDH, Inc., Memorandum Opinion and Order, 17 FCC 2d 856 (1969), aff'd
sub nom. Greater Boston Television Corp. v. FCC, 444 F.2d 841 (D.C. Cir.
1970), cert. denied, 403 U.S. 923 (1971).
See, e.g., Stereo Broadcasters, Inc., Decision, 87 FCC 2d 87 (1981),
recons. denied, 50 R.R.2d 1346 (1982).
See, e.g., WGPR, Inc., 10 FCC Rcd at 8141 P: 10; Roy R. Russo, Esquire,
Letter decision, 5 FCC Rcd 7586 (MMB 1990); Joseph A. Belisle, Esquire,
Letter decision, 5 FCC Rcd 7585 (MMB 1990).
See Southwest Texas Public Broadcasting Council, Order, 85 FCC 2d 713, 715
(1981); The Alabama Educational Television Commission, Memorandum Opinion
and Order, 33 FCC 2d 495, 508 (1972).
See WGPR, Inc., 10 FCC Rcd at 8142.
See WGPR, Inc., 10 FCC Rcd at 8145.
See LOI at 4-5.
See Response at 3-4.
See id.
See id. at 4.
See id.
See Review of the Commission's Regulations Governing Attribution of
Broadcast and Cable/MDS Interest, 14 FCC Rcd 12559, 12601 (1999)
(reviewing the requirements relating to time brokerage agreements and
amending Section 73.3613(d) relating to the filing of agreements with the
Commission).
See id. at 12636-38 (amending Section 73.3555 to include Note 2(j), which
explains that time brokerage agreements "shall be undertaken only pursuant
to a signed written agreement that shall contain a certification by the
licensee or permittee of the brokered station verifying that it maintains
ultimate control over the station's facilities, including specifically
control over station finances, personnel and programming . . ."); 47
C.F.R. S: 73.3555.
See Response at 3.
See, e.g., AT&T Wireless Services, Inc., Forfeiture Order, 17 FCC Rcd
21866, 21870-71 (2002) (finding that remedial actions taken subsequent to
a notice of violation to correct the violation at issue were not a
mitigating factor when assessing the forfeiture amount); Seawest Yacht
Brokers, Forfeiture Order, 9 FCC Rcd 6099, 6099 (1994) (finding that a
downward adjustment of a forfeiture was not warranted where a public coast
station operator discontinued unauthorized operations after the NAL was
issued).
See Radio Moultrie, Inc., Order of Revocation, 18 FCC Rcd 22950, 22957
(Enf. Bur. 2003) (revoking license for violating Section 310(d) by
engaging in an unauthorized transfer of control and failure to comply with
Commission directives).
Amendment of Sections 73.1125 and 73.1130 of the Commission's Rules, the
Main Studio and Program Origination Rules for Radio and Television
Broadcast Stations, Memorandum Opinion and Order, 3 F.C.C.R. 5024, 5026
(1988), erratum issued, 3 FCC Rcd 5717 (1988) (correcting language in
n.29).
See Jones Eastern of the Outer Banks, Inc., Memorandum Opinion and Order,
6 FCC Rcd 3615, 3616 (1991) ("Jones Eastern"), (noting that, "This is not
to say that the same staff person and manager must be assigned full-time
to the main studio. Rather, there must be management and staff presence on
a full-time basis during normal business hours to be considered
`meaningful.'"), clarified, 7 FCC Rcd 6800 (1992) ("Jones Eastern II").
See Turro, Decision, 15 FCC Rcd 14649, 14668 (2000) (finding that
meaningful presence of the licensee at the station is necessary to
identify community needs and meet public interest obligations); see also
Salem Broadcasting, Letter, 6 FCC Rcd 4172 (Med. Bur. 1991) (notice of
apparent liability proposing a forfeiture for an apparent violation of
Section 310(d) and the Main Studio rule).
See Letter from Lauren A. Colby, Esq., counsel for Birach Broadcasting
Corporation, to Marlene H. Dortch, Secretary, FCC dated April 5, 2007, at
1.
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, 17115 (1997), recons. denied, 15 FCC Rcd 303
(1999) ("Forfeiture Policy Statement"); 47 C.F.R. S: 1.80.
47 U.S.C. S: 503(b)(2)(E).
47 C.F.R. S: 1.80(a)(4).
See Edwards, Memorandum Opinion and Order and Notice of Apparent
Liability, 16 FCC Rcd 22236, 22251 (2001) reh'g denied sub. nom. Rainbow
Push Coalition v. FCC, 330 F.3d 339 (2003) (assessing a $40,000 forfeiture
for violating Section 310(d) with respect to five stations over more than
one day); see also Danville Television Partnership, Memorandum Opinion and
Order, 16 FCC Rcd 9314 (Media Bur. 2001) (assessing a $10,000 forfeiture
for engaging in an unauthorized transfer of control).
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, 17115 (1997), recons. denied 15 FCC Rcd 303
(1999) ("Forfeiture Policy Statement"); 47 C.F.R. S:1.80 (2005).
See WJZD, Inc., Golden Gulf Coast Broadcasting, Inc., Capstar TX Ltd.
Partnership and Mr. Douglas A. Hutcheson, Letter decision, 20 FCC Rcd
9941, 9947-48 (Media Bur. 2005), recons. denied, Mr. Lawrence E. Steelman,
Capstar TX Ltd. Partnership, Mr. Stanley Daniels, Letter decision, 22 FCC
Rcd 4866 (Media Bur. 2007).
See 47 U.S.C. S:S: 310(d), 503(b); 47 C.F.R. S:S: 0.111, 0.311, 0.314,
1.80, 73.1125.
See 47 C.F.R. S: 1.16.
(...continued from previous page)
(continued....)
Federal Communications Commission DA-10-456
2
Federal Communications Commission DA-10-456