********************************************************    
                         NOTICE
********************************************************

This document was converted from
WordPerfect or Word to ASCII Text format.

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
WordPerfect version or Adobe Acrobat version, if available.

*****************************************************************
Before the
               Federal Communications Commission
                     Washington, D.C. 20554



In the Matter of

NASSAU BROADCASTING
PARTNERS, INC.

Licensee of Station WJLK-FM
Asbury Park, New Jersey
)
)
)
)
)
)
)



Control No. 99040217



          NOTICE OF APPARENT LIABILITY FOR FORFEITURE

   Adopted:  December 16, 1999          Released:  December 17, 1999  
                                          

By the Chief, Enforcement Bureau:

                      I.Introduction
1.     This is a Notice of Apparent Liability for a Forfeiture pursuant to Section 503(b) of the
Communications Act of 1934, as amended (the "Communications Act"), and Section 1.80 of the
Commission's Rules, against Nassau Broadcasting Partners, Inc. ("Nassau"), licensee of Station WJLK-
FM, Asbury Park, NJ.  We find that Nassau recorded and broadcast two telephone conversations without
first informing the parties to the conversations of its intention to do so, in apparent violation of Section
73.1206 of the Commission's Rules.  For the reasons discussed below, we conclude that Nassau is
apparently liable for a forfeiture in the amount of $4,000.
                       II.Background
3.     The Commission received a complaint from Leonard G. Schnappauf, Superintendent/Principal
of Shore Regional High School District, alleging that Station WJLK-FM recorded and broadcast two
telephone conversations without first informing the parties of the station's intent to do so.  Specifically, Mr.
Schnappauf asserts that on March 30, 1999, at approximately 6:30 a.m., the station contacted his wife in
an attempt to reach him.  He alleges that the station recorded and broadcast the ensuing conversation
without informing his wife of the station's intent to do so.  In addition, Mr. Schnappauf states that at
approximately 8:10 a.m. on that same day, Station WJLK-FM contacted his office and spoke to his
secretary.  He asserts that the conversation with his secretary was also recorded and broadcast without his
secretary's knowledge.  He provides transcripts of both conversations, apparently based on the recollection
of his wife and secretary.
4.     The Commission staff sent Nassau a letter of inquiry on July 29, 1999, regarding Mr.
Schnappauf's complaint.  Nassau responded by letter dated September 10, 1999.  Nassau admits that it
recorded and subsequently broadcast telephone conversations with Mr. Schnappauf's wife and secretary on
March 30, 1999.  The station no longer has a tape of the broadcasts in question, but asserts that soon after
the parties answered their telephone, the station radio personalities identified themselves by saying "Hi, it's
the Point Wake-Up Crew, you're on the air."  Nassau contends that informing a party to a telephone call
that she is "on-the-air" is sufficient notice of intention to broadcast a conversation even if such notice takes
place after the recording or broadcast begins.
                       V.Discussion
6.     Section 73.1206 of the Commission's Rules provides, in pertinent part, that before recording a
telephone conversation for broadcast or broadcasting such a conversation simultaneously with its
occurrence, a licensee shall inform any party to the call of its intention to broadcast the conversation,
except where such party is aware, or may be presumed to be aware from the circumstances of the
conversation, that it is being or likely will be broadcast.
7.     Complainant and Nassau disagree as to whether or not Station WJLK-FM informed the parties
to the calls that they were "on-the-air" and, absent a tape of the conversations, it is impossible to determine
exactly what occurred.  However, it is undisputed that at the time Mr. Schnappauf's wife and secretary
answered their phones, the station was already taping the conversations for broadcast.  Section 73.1206 of
the Commission's Rules specifically requires that notice be provided before recording or taping a
conversation.  The Commission has specifically stated that "it is reasonable and desirable to retain for
individuals the right to answer the telephone without having their voices or statements transmitted to the
public" in the absence of prior notice.  Amendment of Section 73.1206: Broadcast of Telephone
Conversations (Report and Order), 3 FCC Rcd 5461, 5463 (1988).  Thus, to ensure such privacy rights,
the Commission has determined that it is not sufficient for a station to give notice that a conversation is
being recorded or broadcast at the beginning of a telephone call, if the conversation is already being taped
or broadcast.  Rather, "notice of intent to broadcast a conversation [must] actually precede the recording or
transmission of the telephone call."  Id.  
8.     Section 503(b) of the Communications Act and Section 1.80(a) of the Commission's Rules
both state that any person who willfully or repeatedly fails to comply with the provisions of the
Communications Act or the Rules shall be liable for a forfeiture penalty. For purposes of Section 503(b) of
the Communications Act, the term "willful" means that the violator knew it was taking the action in
question, irrespective of any intent to violate the Commission's rules.  For purposes of computing a
forfeiture under Section 503(b)(1) of the Communications Act, a violation is repeated if it occurs more than
once.
9.     Based on the evidence before us, we find that Nassau recorded and broadcast two telephone
conversations on March 30, 1999, in apparent willful and repeated violation of Section 73.1206 of the
Commission's Rules.  Even if Nassau did provide notice that the conversations would be broadcast, such
notice was given after the recording commenced in violation of the rule.  The Commission's Forfeiture
Policy Statement, which became effective October 14, 1997, sets a base forfeiture amount of $4,000 for the
unauthorized broadcast of a telephone conversation.  While there were two violations here, they were
related to the same sequence of events and occurred on the same day within a two hour period. 
Accordingly, we believe that a $4,000 forfeiture is appropriate for the two violations in this case.
                    X.Ordering clauses
11.    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 Nassau
Broadcasting Partners, Inc. is hereby NOTIFIED of its APPARENT LIABILITY FOR FORFEITURE in
the amount of four thousand dollars ($4,000) for willfully and repeatedly violating Section 73.1206 of the
Commission's Rules.
12.    IT IS FURTHER ORDERED, pursuant to Section 1.80 of the Commission's Rules, that
within thirty days of the release of this Notice, Nassau SHALL PAY to the United States the full amount
of the proposed forfeiture or SHALL FILE a written statement seeking reduction or cancellation of the
proposed forfeiture.
13.    IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that a copy of this Notice shall be sent, by Certified
Mail/Return Receipt Requested, to Nassau's counsel, Cary S. Tepper, Esq., Booth, Freret, Imlay &
Tepper, P.C., 5101 Wisconsin Avenue, N.W., Suite 307, Washington, D.C. 20016-4120.

                              FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION



                              David H. Solomon
                              Chief, Enforcement Bureau