Federal Communications Commission
Before the
Federal Communications Commission
Washington, D.C. 20554
In the Matter of
Visionary Related Entertainment, L.L.C.
Licensee of FM Broadcast Station KNUQ
Paauilo, Hawaii
Facility ID #15969
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
File Number: EB-08-HL-0096
NAL/Acct. No. 200832860002
FRN: 0005410295
NOTICE OF APPARENT LIABILITY FOR FORFEITURE
Released:  June 20, 2008
By the Resident Agent, Honolulu Resident Agent Office, Western Region, Enforcement Bureau:
I. INTRODUCTION
1.  In this Notice of Apparent Liability for Forfeiture ("NAL"), we find that Visionary Related 
Entertainment, L.L.C. (“Visionary”), licensee of FM Broadcast station KNUQ(FM), in Paauilo, Hawaii, 
apparently willfully and repeatedly violated Section 1.1310 of the Commission’s Rules (“Rules”)1 by 
failing to comply with radio frequency radiation (“RFR”) maximum permissible exposure limits 
applicable to facilities, operations, or transmitters. We conclude, pursuant to Section 503(b) of the 
Communications Act of 1934, as amended ("Act"),2 that Visionary is apparently liable for a forfeiture in the 
amount of ten thousand dollars ($10,000).
II. BACKGROUND
2.  The RFR Rules.  Section 1.1310 of the Rules defines the  maximum permissible 
exposure (“MPE”) limits for electric and magnetic field strength and power density for transmitters 
operating on towers at frequencies from 300 kHz to 100 GHz.3 These MPE limits include limits for 
“occupational/controlled” exposure and limits for “general population/uncontrolled” exposure.  The 
  
1 47 C.F.R. § 1.1310.  See also Guidelines for Evaluating the Environmental Effects of Radiofrequency Radiation, 
Report and Order, ET Docket No. 93-62, 11 FCC Rcd 15123 (1996), recon. granted in part, First Memorandum 
Opinion and Order, 11 FCC Rcd 17512 (1996), recon. granted in part, Second Memorandum Opinion and Order 
and Notice of Proposed Rulemaking, 12 FCC Rcd 13494 (1997) (“Guidelines”).
2 47 U.S.C. § 503(b).  
3 See 47 C.F.R. § 1.1310, Table 1.  The MPE limits are generally based on recommended exposure guidelines 
published by the National Council on Radiation Protection and Measurements (“NCRP”) in “Biological Effects and 
Exposure Criteria for Radiofrequency Electromagnetic Fields,” NCRP Report No. 86, Sections 17.4.1, 17.4.1.1., 
17.4.2, and 17.4.3 (1986).  In the frequency range from 100 MHz to 1500 MHz, the MPE limits are also generally 
based on guidelines contained in the RF safety standard developed by the Institute of Electrical and Electronics 
Engineers, Inc. (“IEEE”) and adopted by the American National Standards Institute (“ANSI”) in Section 4.1 of 
“IEEE Standard for Safety Levels with Respect to Human Exposure to Radio Frequency Electromagnetic Fields, 3 
kHz to 300 GHz,” ANSI/IEEE C95.1-1992 (1992).
Federal Communications Commission
2
occupational exposure limits apply in situations in which persons are exposed as a consequence of their 
employment provided those persons are fully aware of the potential for exposure and can exercise control 
over their exposure.4 The limits of occupational exposure also apply in situations where an individual is 
transient through a location where the occupational limits apply, provided that he or she is made aware of 
the potential for exposure.  The more stringent general population or public exposure limits apply in 
situations in which the general public may be exposed, or in which persons that are exposed as a 
consequence of their employment may not be fully aware of the potential for exposure or cannot exercise 
control over their exposure.5  Licensees can demonstrate compliance by restricting public access to areas 
where RFR exceeds the public MPE limits.6
3.  The MPE limits specified in Table 1 of Section 1.1310 are used to evaluate the 
environmental impact of human exposure to RFR and apply to “…all facilities, operations and 
transmitters regulated by the Commission.”7 Table 1 provides that the general population RFR maximum 
permissible exposure limit for a station operating in the frequency range of 30 MHz to 300 MHz is 0.200 
mW/cm2.8 Broadcast stations that filed applications after October 15, 1997, for an initial construction 
permit, license, renewal or modification of an existing license were required to demonstrate compliance 
with the new RFR MPE limits, or to file an Environmental Assessment and undergo environmental 
review by Commission staff.9 In addition, all existing licensees were required to come into compliance 
with the new RFR MPE limits by September 1, 2000, or to file an Environmental Assessment.10
4.  KNUQ(FM) Renewal Application. In its most recent application for renewal of the 
KNUQ(FM) license, Visionary included an Engineering Statement concerning the RFR levels at and 
around the KNUQ(FM) transmitter site.11 In the Engineering Statement, Visionary acknowledged that at 
100kW ERP, the KNUQ(FM) antenna will produce a calculated maximum field intensity level of 1934.47 
microwatts per square centimeter [(1.934 mW/cm2)] at a distance of 5 meters [16.4 feet] from the base of 
the tower . . . , 969.85 microwatts per squared centimeter [(0.969 mW/cm2)] at 8.3 meters [27.22 feet] 
from the base of the tower . . . [and] 187.79 microwatts per squared centimeter [(0.187 mW/cm2)] at 10.1 
meters [33.12 feet] from the base of the tower.”12 Visionary also states that “[p]recautions and procedures 
have been formulated to deal with workers involved in tower and antenna maintenance. . . . The site is 
  
4 47 C.F.R. § 1.1310, Note 1 to Table 1.  
5 47 C.F.R. § 1.1310, Note 2 to Table 1.
6 See, for example, OET Bulletin 65.
7 See 47 C.F.R. §§ 1.1307(b), 1.1307(b)(1), 1.1310.
8 47 C.F.R. § 1.1310.
9 Guidelines, Second Memorandum Opinion and Order and Notice of Proposed Rulemaking, 12 FCC Rcd at 13538; 
47 C.F.R. § 1.1307(b). 
10 Guidelines, Second Memorandum Opinion and Order and Notice of Proposed Rulemaking, 12 FCC Rcd at 13540; 
47 C.F.R. § 1.1307(b)(5).   See also, Public Notice, Year 2000 Deadline for Compliance with Commission’s 
Regulations Regarding Human Exposure to Radiofrequency Emissions (released Feb. 25, 2000); Public Notice, 
Erratum to February 25, 2000 Public Notice, 15 FCC Rcd 13600 (released April 27, 2000); Public Notice, Reminder 
of September 1, 2000, Deadline for Compliance with Regulations for Human Exposure to Radiofrequency 
Emissions, 15 FCC Rcd 18900 (released Aug. 24, 2000).
11 File No. BRH-20051003CFD, Engineering Statement (“Engineering Statement”).
12 Engineering Statement at 1.
Federal Communications Commission
3
isolated and remote, and not accessible by the general public. . .  . A secure fence further restricts access 
to areas above the public and occupied limits.”13
5. The KNUQ(FM) Inspection. The KNUQ(FM) transmitter site is located at the 
Uluapalakua Ranch, in Maui, Hawaii. KNUQ(FM) is licensed to operate at 100 kW ERP.  The 
KNUQ(FM) antenna system is a seven bay Jampro JHCP-7, circularly polarized, and side mounted on a 
self-supporting steel tower.  Although vehicular access to the transmitter site is restricted by means of a 
locked gate, pedestrian access is not restricted, and there are private residences past the locked gate. The 
property is fenced throughout to contain cattle, and ranch and winery storage buildings are adjacent to the 
site.  There is a residence down a steep hillside, some 1000 yards from the antenna, and the main road 
continues up the hill to an arboretum and other residences. The antenna is enclosed by irregular fencing, 
as close as 15 feet from the antenna structure on the south and west sides. Three RF radiation warning 
signs are posted on the fence. 
6.  On April 9, 2008, Honolulu agents conducted an inspection at the KNUQ(FM) 
transmitter site with the KNUQ(FM) Chief Engineer.  At the time of inspection, the transmitter power 
output (TPO) was 18,200 watts.  Using an antenna power gain of 3.8, as specified in the KNUQ(FM) 
License Application Engineering Data, and assuming a transmission line loss of 1 kW, the station’s 
effective radiated power (“ERP”) was 68.16 kW, well below the authorized power of 100 kW ERP.  The 
agents employed a personal RF monitor to identify and mark an “L” shaped area of high RFR outside the 
fence which enclosed the KNUQ(FM) transmitter site.  In this “L” shaped area, the fence enclosing the 
transmitter site is less than 15 feet from the tower.   The “L” shaped area with potential high RFR levels 
extended approximately 36 feet along the western face of the fence, and 54 feet along the southern face of 
the fence.14 Measurements were conducted at four locations throughout this area, ranging from 20 to 40 
feet from the tower, and from 5 to 25 feet from the fence, using a calibrated RFR meter.  The agents
employed a spatial averaging measurement technique, where measurements in four quadrants are 
averaged to give a representative reading for each location.15 Public and occupational RFR MPE levels 
were exceeded throughout this area of approximately 1100 square feet, ranging from 0.9 mW/cm 2 to 1.95 
mW/cm 2 (90 to 195% of the occupational MPE limits, and 450 to 975% of the public MPE limits).  The 
agents informed the KNUQ(FM) Chief Engineer that KNUQ(FM) had exceeded the RFR limits in the 
area of concern.
7. On May 13, 2008, Honolulu agents conducted a follow-up inspection at the KNUQ(FM) 
transmitter site.  Again, the agents employed a personal RF monitor to identify the same general “L” 
shaped area of concern, of approximately 1100 square feet, outside the fence which enclosed the 
KNUQ(FM) transmitter site where high levels of RFR were previously detected.  The area of concern 
extended approximately 40 feet along the western face of the fence, and 50 feet along the southern face of 
the fence with potential high RFR levels.16 In this area of concern, the fence enclosing the transmitter site 
is less than 15 feet from the tower.  Measurements were conducted at four locations throughout this area, 
each approximately 30 feet from the tower, using a calibrated RFR meter.  The agents employed a spatial 
averaging measurement technique, where measurements in four quadrants are averaged to give a 
representative reading for each location.17 Again, both public and occupational RFR MPE levels were 
  
13 Engineering Statement at 1 – 2.
14 The personal RF monitor LED lit continually throughout this area, and the unit emitted an audible warning, 
indicating the RFR in the area likely exceeded the public RFR MPE.  
15 The result was then multiplied by a probe calibration factor of 1.6 for measurements in the 100 MHz FM band. 
16 The personal RF monitor LED lit continually throughout this area, and the unit emitted an audible warning, 
indicating the RFR in the area likely exceeded the public RFR MPE.  
17 The result was then multiplied by a probe calibration factor of 1.6 for measurements in the 100 MHz FM band. 
Federal Communications Commission
4
exceeded in this area of concern, ranging from 1.36 mW/cm 2 to 2.3 mW/cm2 (136 to 230% of the 
occupational MPE limits, and 680 to 1150% of the public MPE limits).
8. During the May 13, 2008, inspection, the agents noted ranch workers in a fenced area 
adjacent to the KNUQ(FM) transmitter, and interviewed Ulupalakua Ranch personnel to confirm that the 
Ulupalakua Winery was still using the storage building next to the KNUQ(FM) site.  There is no fence 
prohibiting free access to the high level RFR areas of concern by ranch workers, winery employees, 
arboretum visitors, residents, or other members of the public.
III. DISCUSSION
9. Section 503(b) of the Act provides that any person who willfully or repeatedly fails to 
comply substantially with the terms and conditions of any license, or willfully or repeatedly fails to 
comply with any of the provisions of the Act or of any rule, regulation or order issued by the Commission 
thereunder, shall be liable for a forfeiture penalty.  The term "willful" as used in Section 503(b) has been 
interpreted to mean simply that the acts or omissions are committed knowingly.18 The term “repeated” 
means the commission or omission of such act more than once or for more than one day.19
10. Section 1.1310 of the Rules requires licensees to comply with RFR exposure limits.20
Table 1 in Section 1.1310 of the Rules provides that the general population RFR maximum permissible 
exposure limit for a station operating in the frequency range of 30 MHz to 300 MHz is 0.200 mW/cm2.
11. Although vehicular access to the site is restricted by means of a locked gate, pedestrian 
access is relatively unrestricted, and there are private residences past the locked gate.  In addition, 
employees of Ulupalakua Ranch and Ulupalakua Winery, D.T. Fleming Arboretum visitors, and 
maintenance personnel can access the area.  As indicated above, the general population or public 
exposure limits apply in situation where the general public may be exposed, or in which persons that are 
exposed as a consequence of their employment may not be fully aware of the potential for exposure or 
cannot exercise control over their exposure.21 Given the statements made by Visionary in its Engineering 
Statement, we find that Visionary was aware of the levels of RFR in the area of concern surrounding the 
transmitter site. While it appears that Visionary made its workers and those maintaining its transmitter 
aware of the RFR exposure potential, and gave them the ability to control their exposure, we find no 
evidence that Visionary made other workers who could access the area of concern, or the general public, 
aware of the potential for exposure in the 1100 square foot area of concern outside the fence enclosing the 
KNUQ(FM) transmitter site.  We also find that Visionary did not restrict access to an area of concern 
where RFR exceeded both the public and occupational MPE limits on April 9 and May 13, 2008.  
Visionary bears the responsibility to restrict access to areas that exceed the RFR limits or to modify the 
facility and operation so as to bring the station’s operation within the RFR exposure limits prior to public 
  
18 Section 312(f)(1) of the Act, 47 U.S.C. § 312(f)(1), which applies to violations for which forfeitures are assessed 
under Section 503(b) of the Act, provides that "[t]he term 'willful', when used with reference to the commission or 
omission of any act, means the conscious and deliberate commission or omission of such act, irrespective of any 
intent to violate any provision of this Act or any rule or regulation of the Commission authorized by this Act…."  
See Southern California Broadcasting Co., 6 FCC Rcd 4387 (1991).
19 Section 312(f)(2) of the Act, 47 U.S.C. § 312(f)(2), which also applies to violations for which forfeitures are 
assessed under Section 503(b) of the Act, provides that "[t]he term 'repeated', when used with reference to the 
commission or omission of any act, means the commission or omission of such act more than once or, if such 
commission or omission is continuous, for more than one day.”
20 47 C.F.R. § 1.1310.
21 47 C.F.R. § 1.1310.  See Entravision Holdings, LLC, 22 FCC Rcd 21718 (EB 2007).
Federal Communications Commission
5
or worker access to the impacted area.22 As Visionary was aware of the KNUQ(FM) RFR exposure 
issues and failed to take subsequent corrective action even after the Honolulu agents’ initial inspection on 
April 9, 2008, Visionary’s violation is willful.  The violation occurred on more than one day, and is 
therefore repeated.
12. Based on the evidence before us, we find that Visionary apparently willfully and 
repeatedly violated Section 1.1310 of the Rules23 by exceeding the public RFR MPE limits in an area 
accessible by the public or by workers who were not fully aware of the potential for exposure, and by 
failing to adequately take measures to prevent access to an area that exceeded the RFR exposure limits.  
We note that if Visionary had been operating at its full authorized power, the RFR levels would be 
significantly higher.  
13. The Commission’s Forfeiture Policy Statement and Amendment of Section 1.80(b) of the 
Rules to Incorporate the Forfeiture Guidelines (“Forfeiture Policy Statement”)24 does not specify a base 
forfeiture for violation of the RFR maximum permissible exposure limits in Section 1.1310.25 However, 
the Commission has determined that an appropriate base forfeiture amount for violation of the RFR MPE 
limits is $10,000, reflecting the public safety nature of the RFR rules.26 In assessing the monetary 
forfeiture amount, we must also take into account the statutory factors set forth in Section 503(b)(2)(E) of 
the Act, which include the nature, circumstances, extent, and gravity of the violations, and with respect to 
the violator, the degree of culpability, and history of prior offenses, ability to pay, and other such matters 
as justice may require.27 Applying the Forfeiture Policy Statement, Section 1.80, and the statutory factors 
to the instant case, we conclude that Visionary is apparently liable for a $10,000 forfeiture.
IV. ORDERING CLAUSES
14. 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, Visionary 
Related Entertainment, L.L.C. is hereby NOTIFIED of this APPARENT LIABILITY FOR  A 
FORFEITURE in the amount of ten thousand dollars ($10,000) for violations of  Section 1.1310 of the 
Rules.28
15. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that, pursuant to Section 1.80 of the Commission's Rules 
within thirty days of the release date of this Notice of Apparent Liability for Forfeiture, Visionary Related 
  
22 47 C.F.R. §§ 1.1307(b)(1), 1.1307(b)(5), 1.1310.  Additional guidance is provided in OET Bulletin 65.
23 47 C.F.R. 1.1310
24 Forfeiture Policy Statement and Amendment of Section 1.80(b) of the Rules to Incorporate the Forfeiture 
Guidelines, 12 FCC Rcd 17087 (1997), recon denied, 15 FCC Rcd 303 (1999).
25 The fact that the Forfeiture Policy Statement does not specify a base amount does not indicate that no forfeiture 
should be imposed.  The Forfeiture Policy Statement states that “... any omission of a specific rule violation from the 
... [forfeiture guidelines] ... should not signal that the Commission considers any unlisted violation as nonexistent or 
unimportant.  Forfeiture Policy Statement, 12 FCC Rcd at 17099.  The Commission retains the discretion, moreover, 
to depart from the Forfeiture Policy Statement and issue forfeitures on a case-by-case basis, under its general 
forfeiture authority contained in Section 503 of the Act.  Id.
26 A-O Broadcasting Corporation, 17 FCC Rcd 24184 (2002). 
27 47 U.S.C. § 503(b)(2)(E).
2847 U.S.C. § 503(b), 47 C.F.R. §§ 0.111, 0.311, 0.314, 1.80, 1.1310.
Federal Communications Commission
6
Entertainment, 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.
16. 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. 29  Please contact the Financial Operations Group Help Desk at 1-877-480-
3201 or Email: ARINQUIRIES@fcc.gov with any questions regarding payment procedures. Visionary 
Related Entertainment, L.L.C., shall also send electronic notification on the date said payment is made to 
WR-Response@fcc.gov.
17. The response, if any, must be mailed to Federal Communications Commission, 
Enforcement Bureau, Western Region, Honolulu Resident Agent Office, P.O. Box 971030, Waipahu, HI 
96797-1030 and must include the NAL/Acct. No. referenced in the caption.  An electronic copy shall be 
sent to WR-Response@fcc.gov.
18. The Commission will not consider reducing or canceling a forfeiture in response to a claim 
of inability to pay unless the petitioner 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 petitioner’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.  
19. 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 Visionary Related 
Entertainment, L.L.C . 
FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION
John R. Raymond
Resident Agent
Honolulu Office
Western Region
Enforcement Bureau
  
29 See 47 C.F.R. § 1.1914.