Skip Navigation

Federal Communications Commission

English Display Options

Commission Document

RADIO LICENSE HOLDING CBC, LLC

Download Options

Released: July 22, 2011

Federal Communications Commission

DA 11-1228

Before the

Federal Communications Commission

Washington, D.C. 20554

In the Matter of
)
)

Facility ID Nos. 61275/58931

Radio License Holding CBC, LLC

)
NAL/Acct. Nos. MB-20041810074/75
)
FRN: 0001595214
Licensee of Stations WIBR(AM)
)
File Nos. BR-20040202AXR;
Baton Rouge; WEMX(FM)
)
BRH-20040202AYD
Kentwood, Louisiana
)

MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER

Adopted: July 22, 2011

Released: July 22, 2011

By the Chief, Audio Division, Media Bureau:

I.

INTRODUCTION

1.
We have before us a Petition for Reconsideration and Request for Rescission of
Forfeiture Order ("Petition") filed by Radio License Holding CBC, LLC ("Licensee"), licensee of
Stations WIBR(AM), Baton Rouge, Louisiana, and WEMX(FM), Kentwood, Louisiana ("Stations").
Licensee seeks reconsideration of the Media Bureau's ("Bureau") Forfeiture Order1 in the amount of
eight thousand dollars ($8,000) for Licensee's willful and repeated violation of Section 73.3526 of the
Commission's Rules ("Rules")2 by failing to retain all required documentation in the stations' public
inspection files. In this Memorandum Opinion and Order, we deny reconsideration and affirm the
forfeiture.

II.

BACKGROUND

2.
On February 2, 2004, Licensee filed the captioned applications to renew the licenses of
WIBR(AM) and WEMX(FM) (the "Applications"). Section III, Item 3, of the license renewal application
form, FCC Form 303-S, requests that the licensee certify that the documentation required by Section
73.3526 of the Rules has been placed in the station's public inspection file at the appropriate times.
Licensee responded "no" with regard to WIBR(AM). It disclosed that the station failed to timely place
the following issues/programs lists in the WIBR(AM) public file: the issues/programs lists for the four
quarters of 1999; the first three quarters of 2000; first quarter of 2001; the first quarter of 2002; and the
first three quarters of 2003. Licensee also responded "no" with regard to WEMX(FM). It disclosed that
the station failed to timely place the following issues/programs lists in the WEMX(FM) public file: the
issues/programs lists for the four quarters of 1999; the first three quarters of 2000; the third and fourth
quarters of 2001; the third and fourth quarters of 2002; and the first three quarters of 2003.3 Licensee
added that the majority of the initially absent quarterly issues and programs lists had been re-created and
placed in the respective public inspection files and that steps had been taken to assure that in the future all
quarterly lists are timely prepared and placed in the public files.4


1 Citadel Broadcasting Company, Forfeiture Order, 25 FCC Rcd 15060 (MB 2010) ("Forfeiture Order").
2 47 C.F.R. 73.3526.
3 Licensee also indicated that "the lists do not meet all of the technical requirements of 47 C.F.R. 73.3526(e)(12)."
4 See Applications at Exhibit 11.

Federal Communications Commission

DA 11-1228

3.
On August 5, 2004, the Bureau issued two Notices of Apparent Liability for Forfeiture
("NAL")5 to Licensee in the amount of nine thousand dollars ($9,000) to each Station for a total of
eighteen thousand dollars ($18,000) for willfully and repeatedly6 violating Section 73.3526 of the
Rules. Licensee filed a joint response to each NAL on September 3, 2004, requesting cancellation of each
of the proposed forfeitures, arguing that: (1) the forfeiture amounts were inconsistent with precedent
respecting similar public file violations; and (2) a number of the violations occurred before Licensee
acquired the Stations on June 26, 2001.
4.
In the Forfeiture Order, the Bureau rejected Licensee's argument regarding the
consistency of the forfeiture amounts with precedent and granted a reduction of each forfeiture amount to
four thousand dollars ($4,000) for a total of eight thousand dollars ($8,000) based on the fact that
many of the Section 73.3526 violations took place before Licensee acquired the Stations. Licensee timely
filed the subject Petition on November 24, 2010.
5.
In its Petition, Licensee argues for the first time that the Bureau must rescind the
Forfeiture Order because it is statutorily barred.

III.

DISCUSSION

6.
The Commission will consider a Petition for Reconsideration only when petitioner shows
either a material error in the Commission's original order or raises changed circumstances or unknown
additional facts not known or existing at the time of petitioner's last opportunity to present such matters.7
Licensee has failed to meet this burden.
7.
The forfeiture amount for the violation was assessed in accordance with Section 503(b)
of the Act,8 Section 1.80 of the Rules,9 and the Commission's Forfeiture Policy Statement.10 In assessing
forfeitures, Section 503(b)(2)(E) of the Act requires that we 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 such other matters as justice may require.11
8.
Licensee contends that the general five-year statute of limitations on government
enforcement of forfeitures, codified at 28 U.S.C. 2462, requires cancellation of the Forfeiture Order.12
We disagree. Section 2462 governs only the initiation of collection actions by the United States


5 See Letters to Nancy A. Ory, Esq., Ref. 1800B3-SS (MB Aug. 5, 2004). The Bureau granted the captioned renewal
applications on August 5, 2004.
6 For purposes of Section 503(b) of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended ("Act"), the term "willful" means
that the violator knew it was taking the action or failing to take the required action, irrespective of any intent to
violate the Rules. A continuing violation is "repeated" if it lasts for more than one day. See Southern California
Broadcasting Co.
, Memorandum Opinion and Order, 6 FCC Rcd 4387, 4388 (1991).
7 See 47 C.F.R. 1.106(c); WWIZ, Inc., Memorandum Opinion and Order, 37 FCC 685, 686 (1964), aff'd sub nom.
Lorain Journal Co. v. FCC
, 351 F.2d 824 (D.C. Cir. 1965), cert. denied, 387 U.S. 967 (1966); National Association
of Broadcasters
, Memorandum Opinion and Order, 18 FCC Rcd 24414, 24415 (2003).
8 47 U.S.C. 503(b).
9 47 C.F.R. 1.80.
10 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).
11 47 U.S.C. 503(b)(2)(E).
12 See Petition at 2. Licensee reasons that, because the violations ended in 2002 and the Forfeiture Order issued in
2010, the Commission is time-barred from enforcing the Forfeiture Order under Section 2462.
2

Federal Communications Commission

DA 11-1228

Department of Justice, not the Commission's issuance of NALs and Forfeiture Orders.13 The relevant
statute of limitations for a Commission forfeiture proceeding is Section 503(b)(6) of the Act.14 Section
503(b)(6) prohibits the Commission from issuing a forfeiture for violations of its rules that occurred
"prior to the date of commencement of the current term of such license"15 or, if a new term has
commenced, "more than 1 year prior to the date of issuance"16 of the NAL. Here, the Bureau issued the
NALs and granted the license renewal applications on August 5, 2004. As such, no new license term
commenced until that date, and the statute of limitations provisions of Section 503(b)(6) were not
triggered.17 Because the NALs addressed conduct during the license term under review, we find no
grounds for cancellation of the Forfeiture Order.
9.
We have considered Licensee's Petition in light of the above statutory factors, our Rules,
and the Forfeiture Policy Statement. We conclude that Radio License Holding CBC, LLC, willfully and
repeatedly violated Section 73.3526 of the Rules, and we find no other mitigating circumstances that
warrant cancellation or further reduction of the forfeiture. We find that the Forfeiture Order issued to
Radio License Holding CBC, LLC is reasonable and consistent with precedent.

IV.

ORDERING CLAUSES

10.
Accordingly, IT IS ORDERED, that the Petition for Reconsideration filed by Radio
License Holding CBC, LLC, on October 20, 2010, IS DENIED.
11.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED, that a copy of this Memorandum Opinion and Order shall
be sent by Certified Mail Return, Receipt Requested, and by First-Class Mail, to: Radio License Holding
CBC, LLC, c/o Hillary E. Glassman, 261 Madison Avenue, 3rd Floor, New York, NY 10016, and to its
counsel, Nancy A. Ory, Lerman Senter PLLC, 2000 K Street N.W., Suite 600, Washington, DC 20006.
FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION
Peter H. Doyle
Chief, Audio Division
Media Bureau


13 See Evergreen Media Corporation of Chicago AM, Memorandum Opinion and Order, 6 FCC Rcd 5950, 5950, fn.
9 (MB 1991) (finding that Section 503(b)(6) covers Commission forfeiture proceedings, while Section 2462 is
relevant only to "whether the forfeiture is ultimately collectible in a suit brought in the District Court by the
Department of Justice").
14 47 U.S.C. 503(b)(6).
15 47 U.S.C. 503(b)(6)(A)(ii).
16 47 U.S.C. 503(b)(6)(A)(i).
17 See Emmis Broadcasting Corporation of Boston, Memorandum Opinion and Order and Forfeiture Order, 11 FCC
Rcd 8541 (1996). There, the Commission held that the simultaneous issuance of an NAL and the grant of a renewal
application in a single document would not trigger the restrictive one-year statute of limitations provisions, and the
NAL could properly address conduct during the license term under review.
3

Note: We are currently transitioning our documents into web compatible formats for easier reading. We have done our best to supply this content to you in a presentable form, but there may be some formatting issues while we improve the technology. The original version of the document is available as a PDF, Word Document, or as plain text.

close
FCC

You are leaving the FCC website

You are about to leave the FCC website and visit a third-party, non-governmental website that the FCC does not maintain or control. The FCC does not endorse any product or service, and is not responsible for, nor can it guarantee the validity or timeliness of the content on the page you are about to visit. Additionally, the privacy policies of this third-party page may differ from those of the FCC.