*Pages 1--3 from Microsoft Word - 11214.doc* Federal Communications Commission DA 01- 2036 Before the Federal Communications Commission Washington, D. C. 20554 In the Matter of ) ) MEGA COMMUNICATIONS OF ST. ) File No. EB- 01- TP- 020 PETERSBURG LICENSEE, L. L. C. ) ) Antenna Structure Numbers ) NAL/ Acct. No. 200132700005 (1040050, 1040051) ) ) St. Petersburg, Florida ) FORFEITURE ORDER Adopted: August 29, 2001 Released: August 31, 2001 By the Chief, Enforcement Bureau: I. Introduction 1. In this Forfeiture Order (“ Order”), we issue a monetary forfeiture in the amount of ten thousand dollars ($ 10,000) against Mega Communications of St. Petersburg Licensee, L. L. C. (“ Mega”), for willful violation of Section 17. 51( a) of the Commission’s Rules (“ the Rules”). 1 The noted violation involves Mega’s failure to exhibit, at two antenna structures, all red obstruction lights from sunset to sunrise. 2. On April 25, 2001, the Enforcement Bureau released a Notice of Apparent Liability for Forfeiture (“ NAL”) against Mega in the amount of ten thousand dollars ($ 10,000). 2 Mega filed its response on May 24, 2001. II. Background 3. Mega is the licensee of AM radio station WMGG and owns that station’s antenna structures, located in Largo, Florida. On January 8, 2001, the Federal Aviation Administration (“ FAA”) reported lighting outages at two of those antenna structures to the Commission’s Tampa, Florida, Field Office (“ Tampa Office”). On January 9, 2001, agents from the Tampa Office inspected both antenna structures and determined that the antenna structures’ red obstruction lights could not be turned on. The employee responsible for monitoring WMGG’s antenna structures told the agents that he had been aware of one of the lighting outages and had reported it to the FAA but had not been aware of the other outage. III. Discussion 4. The Enforcement Bureau assessed the proposed forfeiture amount in this case in accordance with Section 503 of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended (“ Act”), 3 Section 1.80 of the Rules, 4 and 1 47 C. F. R. § 17.51( a). 2 Notice of Apparent Liability for Forfeiture, NAL Acct. No. 200132700005 (Enf. Bur., Tampa Office, released April 25, 2001). 3 47 U. S. C. § 503. 4 47 C. F. R. § 1.80. 1 Federal Communications Commission DA 01- 2036 2 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 5 requires that, in examining Mega’s response, 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. 6 5. Section 17. 51( a) of the Rules requires that all red obstruction lights on antenna towers be exhibited from sunset to sunrise. It is undisputed that Mega did not comply with this rule. Mega, however, contends that to the extent that any forfeiture is warranted, Mega is entitled to a substantial reduction. 6. First, Mega argues that it has a history of overall compliance with the Commission’s Rules. Mega bases this claim on the assertion that the Commission has never assessed a monetary forfeiture against Mega, its parent company Mega Communications, L. L. C, or its “sister” companies (other subsidiaries of Mega Communications, L. L. C.). A search of our records indicates that the Enforcement Bureau issued eight Notices of Violation to Mega Communications, L. L. C., and its subsidiaries between April 1, 1999, and April 25, 2001. 7 These violations by Mega’s parent and sister companies are part of Mega’s violation record. See, e. g., KGNT, Inc., 16 FCC Rcd 4656 (Enf. Bur., 2001), and Capstar TX Limited Partnership, 16 FCC Rcd 901 (Enf. Bur., 2001). Mega’s extensive record of violations precludes a determination that Mega has a history of overall compliance with the Commission’s Rules. See, e. g., Crown Communications, Inc., 15 FCC Rcd 21937 (Enf. Bur., 2000). 7. Mega also argues that its establishment of new procedures for monitoring its tower lights mitigates the monetary forfeiture. Corrective action taken by a licensee after notification of a violation, such as Mega’s new procedures for monitoring its tower lights, does not negate or mitigate the violation. See generally KGVL, Inc., 42 FCC 2d 258, 259 (1973). 8. We have examined Mega’s response to the NAL pursuant to the statutory factors set forth above, and in conjunction with the Policy Statement as well. As a result of our review, we conclude that Mega has not provided a sufficient justification for remitting or mitigating the proposed monetary forfeiture. IV. Ordering Clauses 9. 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, 8 Mega IS LIABLE FOR A MONETARY FORFEITURE in the amount of $10,000 for willful violation of the provisions of 17.51( a) of the Rules. 5 47 U. S. C. § 503( b). 6 47 U. S. C. § 503( b)( 2)( D). 7 The referenced Notices of Violation were issued for the following Enforcement Bureau file numbers: EB- 01- TP- 020 (for violation of Section 17. 51( a) of the Rules); EB- 00- CF- 572 (for violation of Section 17. 57 of the Rules); EB- 01- PA- 031 (for violation of Section 73.1201( a) of the Rules); EB- 99- CF-165 (for violation of Sections 11.35( a), 11. 61( a), 17. 50, 73.1870( a), 73.54( d) and 73. 1350( c)( 1) of the Rules); EB- 99- CF- 166 (for violation of Sections 11.61( a), 17. 47( a)( 1), 17. 4( g), 73. 1350( c)( 1) and 73. 1870( a) of the Rules); EB- 99- CF- 167 (for violation of Sections 11. 61( a), 17. 47( a)( 1), 17. 4( g), 73. 1225( b), 73.1350( c)( 1), 73.1870( a) and 73. 62( a) of the Rules); EB- 99- CF- 171 (for violation of Section 11. 61( a) of the Rules); and EB- 99- CF- 172 (for violation of Section 11. 61( a) of the Rules). 8 47 C. F. R. §§ 0.111, 0.311, 1.80( f)( 4). 2 Federal Communications Commission DA 01- 2036 3 10. 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. 9 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 note the NAL/ Acct. number referenced above. Requests for full payment under an installment plan should be sent to: Chief, Revenue and Receivables Operations Group, 445 12th Street, S. W., Washington, D. C. 20554. 10 11. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED THAT this notice shall be sent, by certified mail, return receipt requested, to Christopher G. Wood, Esq., Fleischman and Walsh, L. L. P., at 1400 16 th Street, N. W., Washington, D. C. 20036. FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION David H. Solomon Chief, Enforcement Bureau 9 47 U. S. C. § 504( a). 10 See 47 C. F. R. § 1.1914. 3