Federal Communications Commission DA 11-824
 
Before the
Federal Communications Commission
Washington, D.C. 20554
In the Matter of 
Daniel D. Smith
Licensee of Station KANR
Belle Plaine, Kansas
Facility ID #15410
Owner of Antenna Structure #1033278
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
File No.:  EB-10-KC-0021
NAL/Acct. No. 201132560001
FRN: 0002288728
FORFEITURE ORDER
Adopted:  May 4, 2011 Released:  May 5, 2011
By the Regional Director, South Central Region, Enforcement Bureau:
I. INTRODUCTION
1. In this Forfeiture Order (“Order”), we issue a monetary forfeiture in the amount of 
eleven thousand five hundred dollars ($11,500) to Daniel D. Smith, licensee of Station KANR and owner 
of antenna structure number 1033278 in Belle Plaine, Kansas (“Mr. Smith”), for willful and repeated 
violation of sections 11.35(a), 17.47, 17.50, and 73.3526 of the Commission’s Rules (“Rules”).1 The noted 
violations involve Mr. Smith’s failure to: (1) maintain operational emergency alert system (“EAS”) 
equipment; (2) make an observation of antenna structure lighting at least once each 24-hour period; (3) 
repaint the antenna structure as necessary to maintain good visibility; and (4) maintain and make available a 
complete public inspection file.   
II.  BACKGROUND
2. As discussed in detail in the Notice of Apparent Liability for Forfeiture (“NAL”) in this 
case,2 on March 31, 2010, during an inspection of the main studio for Station KANR and antenna structure 
number 1033278, agents from the Enforcement Bureau’s Kansas City Office (“Kansas City Office”) 
observed that: (1) Station KANR’s EAS equipment was inoperable; (2) the station’s public inspection file 
was missing quarterly issues/programs lists after the fourth quarter of 2008; and (3) the paint on Station 
KANR’s tower was severely faded and chipped in many places.  During the inspection, Mr. Smith admitted 
that: (1) an operational EAS encoder/decoder unit had not been operational since sometime between 2000 
and 2006; (2) no issues/programs lists had been filed in the public inspection file since the fourth quarter 
of 2008; (3) the station did not have any automated equipment to monitor the structure’s lighting; (4) station 
personnel were not visually monitoring the lighting on the structure every 24 hours; and (4) Station KANR’s 
tower was last painted in 1996.  Mr. Smith also stated that he had last observed the tower several days 
before the inspection.3 Mr. Smith had no logs or records documenting his observations or any failures in 
the lights.
  
1 47 C.F.R. §§ 11.35(a), 17.47, 17.50, 73.3526.
2 Daniel D. Smith, Notice of Apparent Liability for Forfeiture, 25 FCC Rcd 15874 (Enf. Bur., 2010).
3 During the inspection, Mr. Smith stated that he had observed the tower on March 29, 2010 during the daytime, 
(continued…)
Federal Communications Commission DA 11-824
2
3. In view of the record evidence, including Mr. Smith’s admissions, the NAL proposed a
forfeiture of $25,000 against the licensee for violation of sections 11.35(a), 17.47, 17.50, and 73.3526 of 
the Rules.  Mr. Smith submitted responses to the NAL requesting reduction or cancellation of the proposed 
forfeiture based on his inability to pay the forfeiture, his prompt actions to remedy the violations, and his 
remorse.4  
III. 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 
Forfeiture Policy Statement.7 In examining Mr. Smith’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 As discussed below, we have considered Mr. Smith’s response in 
light of these statutory factors and reduce the proposed forfeiture to $11,500, based on his documented 
inability to pay.
5. 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.9 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 
Act10 and the Commission has so interpreted the term in the section 503(b) context.11 The Commission 
     
(… continued from previous page)
when the lights were not exhibited, so he was unable to assess whether the lights were operating properly.  Mr. 
Smith said that he observed the exhibited lights on the tower sometime before March 29, 2010, but he could not 
recall the precise day.   See NAL at note 4.  
4 See Letter from Daniel D. Smith, licensee of Station KANR, to Kansas City Office, Enforcement Bureau, dated 
December 10, 2010 (“NAL Response”); Letter from Daniel D. Smith, licensee of Station KANR, to Kansas City 
Office, Enforcement Bureau, dated December 10, 2010 (“Request for Reduction”). 
5 47 U.S.C. § 503(b).
6 47 C.F.R. § 1.80.
7 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 (1997), recon. denied, 15 FCC Rcd 303 (1999) 
(“Forfeiture Policy Statement”).  
8 47 U.S.C. § 503(b)(2)(E).
9 47 U.S.C. § 312(f)(1).
10 H.R. Conf. Rep. No. 97-765, at 51 (1982) (“This provision [inserted in section 312] defines the terms ‘willful’ and 
‘repeated’ for purposes of section 312, and for any other relevant section of the act (e.g., section 503) . . . .  As 
defined[,] . . . ‘willful’ means that the licensee knew that he was doing the act in question, regardless of whether 
there was an intent to violate the law.  ‘Repeated’ means more than once, or where the act is continuous, for more 
than one day.  Whether an act is considered to be ‘continuous’ would depend upon the circumstances in each case.  
The definitions are intended primarily to clarify the language in sections 312 and 503, and are consistent with the 
Commission’s application of those terms . . . .”).
11 See, e.g., Southern California Broadcasting Co., Memorandum Opinion and Order, 6 FCC Rcd 4387, 4388 
(1991), recon. denied, 7 FCC Rcd 3454 (1992) (“Southern California Broadcasting Co.”).
Federal Communications Commission DA 11-824
3
may also assess a forfeiture for violations that are merely repeated, and not willful.12 “Repeated” means 
that the act was committed or omitted more than once, or lasts more than one day.13  
6. Every broadcast station is part of the nationwide EAS network and is categorized as a 
participating national EAS source unless the station affirmatively requests authority to refrain from 
participation, and that request is approved by the Commission.14 The EAS enables the President and state 
and local governments to provide immediate and emergency communications and information to the 
general public.15 State and local area plans identify local primary sources responsible for coordinating 
carriage of common emergency messages from sources such as the National Weather Service or local 
emergency management officials.16 Required monthly and weekly tests originate from EAS Local or 
State Primary sources and must be retransmitted by the participating station.  As the nation’s emergency 
warning system, the Emergency Alert System is critical to public safety, and we recognize the vital role 
that broadcasters play in ensuring its success.  The Commission takes seriously any violations of the 
Rules implementing the EAS and expects full compliance from its licensees.
7. Section 11.35(a) of the Rules requires all broadcast stations to ensure that EAS encoders, 
EAS decoders, and attention signal generating and receiving equipment are installed and operational so that 
the EAS monitoring and transmitting functions are available during the times a station is in operation.17 Mr. 
Smith does not deny any of the facts stated in the NAL concerning the station’s EAS equipment18 and admits 
that the station’s EAS equipment was not functioning from at least 2006 through the time of the March 31, 
2010 inspection.19  Thus, based on the evidence before us, we find that Mr. Smith willfully and repeatedly 
violated section 11.35(a) of the Rules by failing to maintain operational EAS equipment.  
8. Section 17.47(a) of the Rules states that the owner of any antenna structure that is 
registered with the Commission and has been assigned lighting specifications “(1) [s]hall make an 
observation of the antenna structure’s lights at least once each 24 hours either visually or by observing an 
automatic properly maintained indicator designed to register any failure of such lights, to insure that all such 
lights are functioning properly as required; or alternatively, (2) [s]hall provide and properly maintain an 
automatic alarm system designed to detect any failure of such lights and to provide indication of such failure 
to the owner.”20 Station KANR’s antenna structure is 151 meters above ground in height and must be 
  
12 See, e.g., Callais Cablevision, Inc., Notice of Apparent Liability for Monetary Forfeiture, 16 FCC Rcd 1359, 1362 
¶ 10 (2001) (“Callais Cablevision, Inc.”) (proposing a forfeiture for, inter alia, a cable television operator’s repeated 
signal leakage). 
13 Southern California Broadcasting Co., 6 FCC Rcd at 4388, ¶ 5; Callais Cablevision, Inc., 16 FCC Rcd at 1362, ¶ 
9.
14 47 C.F.R. §§ 11.11, 11.41.
15 47 C.F.R. §§ 11.1, 11.21.
16 47 C.F.R. § 11.18. State EAS plans contain guidelines that must be followed by broadcast and cable personnel, 
emergency officials and National Weather Service personnel to activate the EAS for state and local emergency 
alerts. The state plans include the EAS header codes and messages to be transmitted by the primary state, local and 
relay EAS sources.
17 47 C.F.R. § 11.35(a).
18 See NAL at 15874-15875.
19 NAL Response at 1. 
20 47 C.F.R. § 17.47(a). 
Federal Communications Commission DA 11-824
4
painted and lit.21 Mr. Smith admits that the station’s automatic remote control light monitoring system was 
out for repair and that the station failed to make observations of its antenna structure once every 24 hours.22  
Therefore, based on the evidence before us, we find that Mr. Smith willfully and repeatedly violated Section 
17.47 of the Rules by failing to make a visual observation of antenna structure lighting at least once each 24 
hour period on March 29 and March 30, 2010.
9. Section 17.50 of the Rules states that “[a]ntenna structures requiring painting under this 
part shall be cleaned or repainted as often as necessary to maintain good visibility.”23 Although Mr. 
Smith admits that he last painted Station KANR’s tower in 1996, he asserts that only five feet on one of 
three sides of the 20 foot base was unpainted at the time of the inspection, that the paint on the remainder 
of the tower was clearly visible, and that the condition of the paint “does not rise to the level of 
negligence to be actionable, and in the alternative, certainly does not merit a fine of $10,000.”24  
However, he also states that he does “not deny the paint on my tower has faded to the point that in the 
interest of safety should be repainted.”25 Agents’ notes and pictures from the March 31, 2010 inspection 
demonstrate, however, that the tower’s paint was severely faded and that bare metal was showing in many 
places on the structure.  Thus, based on the evidence before us, we find that Mr. Smith willfully and 
repeatedly violated section 17.50 of the Rules by failing to repaint the antenna structure as necessary to 
maintain good visibility.
10. Section 73.3526 of the Rules states that “[e]very permittee or licensee of an AM, FM, TV 
or a Class A station in the commercial broadcast services shall maintain a public inspection file 
containing the material” set forth in that section.26 The public inspection file must be maintained at the 
main studio of the station,27 and must be available for public inspection at any time during regular business 
hours.28  Section 73.3526(e)(12) of the Rules requires commercial AM and FM broadcast stations to place 
a list of programs that have provided the station’s most significant treatment of community issues during 
the preceding three month period in the station’s public inspection file.29 The issues/programs list for 
each calendar quarter is to be filed by the tenth day of the succeeding calendar quarter.  On March 31, 
2010, during normal business hours and in response to a request for inspection, agents from the Kansas 
City Office observed that the station’s public inspection file was missing all issues/programs lists after the 
fourth quarter of 2008.  Mr. Smith asserts that the station aired public affairs programming and that the 
items of importance are marked on his desk calendar, but admits that the station’s public inspection file 
was missing issues/programs lists after the fourth quarter of 2008.30 Therefore, based on the evidence 
before us, we find that Mr. Smith willfully and repeatedly violated section 73.3526(e)(12) of the Rules by 
failing to maintain all required issues/programs lists in the station’s public inspection file and willfully 
violated section 73.3526 of the Rules by failing to make available a complete public inspection file.  
  
21 Antenna structures must be painted and lighted when they exceed 60.96 meters in height above ground.  See 47 
C.F.R. § 17.21.
22 NAL Response at 1-2.
23 47 C.F.R. § 17.50.
24 NAL Response at 2-3.
25 Id.
26 47 C.F.R. § 73.3526(a)(2).
27 47 C.F.R. § 73.3526(b).
28 47 C.F.R. § 73.3526(c).
29 47 C.F.R § 73.3526(e)(12). 
30 NAL Response at 1.
Federal Communications Commission DA 11-824
5
11. In the NAL Response, Mr. Smith states that, following the inspection, he promptly 
corrected the EAS and public inspection file violations, installed a working automatic light monitoring 
system, and hired a painting contractor to repaint the tower as soon as possible,31 and that he will “never 
again place myself in such an unfortunate and embarrassing situation.” 32  The Commission has long held, 
however, that post-inspection corrective action taken to come into compliance with the Rules is expected, 
and such corrective action does not nullify or mitigate any prior forfeitures or violations.33 We therefore 
conclude that a reduction or cancellation of the forfeiture is unwarranted in this case.  
12. Finally, Mr. Smith asserts that the forfeiture would pose a financial hardship and requests 
reduction or cancellation of the forfeiture on this basis.34 With regard to an individual’s or entity’s 
inability to pay, the Commission has determined that, in general, gross revenues are the best indicator of 
an ability to pay a forfeiture.35  We have reviewed Mr. Smith’s submitted documentation and conclude 
that a reduction of the forfeiture based on the licensee’s inability to pay is warranted.  Thus, we conclude 
that Mr. Smith is liable for a forfeiture in the amount of $11,500, an amount equal to 7.7 percent of 
Station KANR’s average gross revenues.        
IV. ORDERING CLAUSES
13. Accordingly, IT IS ORDERED that, pursuant to section 503(b) of the Communications 
Act of 1934, as amended, and sections 0.111, 0.204, 0.311, 0.314, and 1.80(f)(4) of the Commission’s 
Rules, Daniel D. Smith IS LIABLE FOR A MONETARY FORFEITURE in the amount of eleven 
thousand five hundred dollars ($11,500) for violations of section 11.35(a), 17.47, 17.50, and 73.3526 of 
the Rules.36
14. 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.37 Payment of the forfeiture must be made by check or similar instrument, payable to the order of the 
  
31 NAL Response at 1-3.
32 Request for Reduction at 1.
33 See Seawest Yacht Brokers, Forfeiture Order, 9 FCC Rcd 6099 (1994) (finding attempts to comply with licensing 
requirements following initial violation are expected and do not warrant reduction or cancellation of forfeiture); 
Rama Communications, Inc., Memorandum Opinion and Order, 24 FCC Rcd 4981 (Enf. Bur. 2009) (finding post-
inspection correction of tower painting, tower fencing, public inspection file and overpower operation violations is 
expected and does not warrant reduction or cancellation of forfeiture); Bethune-Cookman College, Inc.¸ Forfeiture 
Order, 24 FCC Rcd 4513 (South Central Region 2009) (finding installation of required EAS decoder after an 
inspection is expected and does not warrant reduction or cancellation of forfeiture); International Broadcasting 
Corporation, Order on Review 25 FCC Rcd 1538 (2010) (finding post-inspection attempts to paint and register 
antenna structure are expected and do not warrant reduction or cancellation of forfeiture). 
34 Request for Reduction at 1-2.
35 See PJB Communications of Virginia, Inc., Forfeiture Order, 7 FCC Rcd 2088, 2089 (1992) (forfeiture not 
deemed excessive where it represented approximately 2.02 percent of the violator’s gross revenues); Local Long 
Distance, Inc., Forfeiture Order, 16 FCC Rcd 24385 (2000) (forfeiture not deemed excessive where it represented 
approximately 7.9 percent of the violator’s gross revenues); Hoosier Broadcasting Corporation, Forfeiture Order, 
15 FCC Rcd 8640 (2002) (forfeiture not deemed excessive where it represented approximately 7.6 percent of the 
violator’s gross revenues).
36 47 U.S.C. § 503(b); 47 C.F.R. §§ 0.111, 0.204, 0.311, 0.314, 1.80(f)(4), 11.35(a), 17.47, 17.50, 73.3526.
37 47 U.S.C. § 504(a). 
Federal Communications Commission DA 11-824
6
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.  Mr. Smith shall also send 
electronic notification on the date said payment is made to SCR-Response@fcc.gov.
15. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that a copy of this Order shall be sent by both First Class 
and Certified Mail Return Receipt Requested to Daniel D. Smith at his address of record.  
FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION
Dennis P. Carlton
Regional Director, South Central Region
Enforcement Bureau