**Before the**

**Federal Communications Commission**

**Washington, D.C. 20554**

+----------------------------------+---+---------------------------------+
| In the Matter of                 | ) | File Number: EB-08-PO-0198      |
|                                  |   |                                 |
| Mapleton License of Medford, LLC | ) | NAL/Acct. No. 200932920001      |
|                                  |   |                                 |
| Licensee of FM Broadcast Station | ) | FRN: 0005023445                 |
| KTMT-FM                          |   |                                 |
|                                  | ) |                                 |
| Medford, Oregon                  |   |                                 |
|                                  | ) |                                 |
| Facility ID \# 60313             |   |                                 |
|                                  | ) |                                 |
|                                  |   |                                 |
|                                  | ) |                                 |
+----------------------------------+---+---------------------------------+

## NOTICE OF APPARENT LIABILITY FOR FORFEITURE {#notice-of-apparent-liability-for-forfeiture .unnumbered}

> Released: December 22, 2008

By the Resident Agent, Portland Resident Agent Office, Western Region,
Enforcement Bureau:

# INTRODUCTION

1\. In this Notice of Apparent Liability for Forfeiture (\"NAL\"), we
find that Mapleton License of Medford, LLC ("Mapleton"), licensee of FM
Broadcast station KTMT-FM, in Medford, Oregon, 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 Mapleton
is apparently liable for a forfeiture in the amount of ten thousand
dollars (\$10,000).

# 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 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]  {#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.-these-mpe-limits-include-limits-for-occupationalcontrolled-exposure-and-limits-for-general-populationuncontrolled-exposure.-the-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.-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.-licensees-can-demonstrate-compliance-by-restricting-public-access-to-areas-where-rfr-exceeds-the-public-mpe-limits. .unnumbered}

# 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/cm^2^.[^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] {#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.-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-mwcm2.-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.-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. .unnumbered}

4\. **KTMT-FM Renewal Application.** In its most recent application for
renewal of the KTMT-FM license, in Section III, Question 6, titled
"Environmental Effects," Mapleton was unable to certify that KTMT-FM
complied with the maximum permissible radio frequency electromagnetic
exposure limits for controlled and uncontrolled environments and
included an exhibit to explain why it did not comply with the RFR levels
at and around the KTMT-FM transmitter site.[^11] In *Exhibit 13*,
Mapleton stated:

> Mapleton Communications, L.L.C. cannot at this time certify that
> KTMT-FM complies with the maximum permissible radiofrequency exposure
> limits for controlled and uncontrolled environments. In preparation
> for the license renewal application, Mapleton engaged a consulting
> engineering firm to evaluate KTMT-FM's compliance with radiofrequency
> exposure limits. The engineer visited the tower site of KTMT-FM and
> discovered a single, small area of concern. Mapleton continues to work
> with the site owner to rectify the situation, and it anticipates that
> all required work will be completed shortly. Mapleton will amend this
> application at that time to report the resolution of this issue."[^12]

A review of Commission databases did not reveal the submission of that
amendment.

5\. **The KTMT-FM Inspection**. The KTMT-FM transmitter site is located
near the top of Mount Ashland, Oregon. KTMT-FM is licensed to operate at
31 kW ERP with Beam Tilt. The KTMT-FM antenna system is a four bay model
Shively 6810-4-XXLR, circularly polarized, omni-directional, and
side-mounted in the middle of a guyed tower owned by Freedom
Broadcasting of Oregon Licensee, LCC ("Freedom Broadcasting"), licensee
of television stations KTVL and KTVL-DT, serving Medford, Oregon. The
center radiation of KTMT-FM's antenna is approximately 24 meters above
ground level. At the time of the investigation, there were three
broadcast stations operating on the guyed tower: KTVL (Channel 10);
KTVL-DT (Channel 35); and KTMT-FM (93.7 MHz). Although vehicular access
to the transmitter site is restricted by means of a locked, single
strand of chain link across the road with a single RF warning sign,
pedestrian access is not restricted, as there is no fence attached to
the chain link gate. There is also no fence or barrier restricting
pedestrian access to the transmitter site or the transmitter building.
Five RF radiation signs are posted: two caution signs on the front of
the building, two caution signs in the back of the building, and one
warning sign on the tower itself.

6\. Approximately 230 meters to the east side of the guyed KTMT-FM
transmitter tower is the Mount Ashland Ski Lift Area. According to a
written statement provided by the Ashland Ranger Station of the United
States Forest Service ("USFS"), during the winter months from December
to April, there are about 90,000 skiers visiting the site each year and
approximately twenty percent of those skiers head west towards the
KTMT-FM transmitter site to access a bowl ski area. During the summer
months, the USFS estimates about 56,000 people visit Mount Ashland, with
a significant percentage also venturing towards the transmitter site.
While the USFS was unable to estimate the number of people who actually
approach the tower on the transmitter site, the USFS does state
categorically that "Mt. Ashland is not remote."

7\. On October 22, 2008, at approximately 10:00 a.m. PDT, in response to
a complaint from the USFS concerning high RFR levels at the KTMT-FM
transmitter site, a Portland agent conducted an inspection at the
KTMT-FM transmitter site accompanied by two USFS representatives. The
agent employed a personal RF monitor to identify and mark two areas of
concern, exhibiting high levels of RFR near the antenna site. The first
area of concern measured approximately 22 feet by 24 feet surrounding
the anchor of the north guy wire of the KTMT-FM transmitter tower,
approximately 80 feet from the base of the tower. The second area of
concern measured approximately 17 feet by 23 feet, near the power
transformer on the south side of the transmitters building,
approximately 27 feet east from the base of the antenna tower. The agent
then employed a spatial averaging measurement technique, using a
calibrated RFR meter and probe, where measurements in four quadrants are
averaged to give a representative reading for each location. In the
first area of concern, the agent determined that the RFR levels exceeded
the public MPE limits, with a RFR power density measurement of 1.3
mW/cm^2^ (650% of the public MPE limits). In the second area of concern,
the agent determined that RFR levels exceeded the public MPE limits,
with a RFR power density measurement of 0.72 mW/cm^2^ (360% of the
public MPE limits).[^13] The Portland agent observed no warning signs at
or around either area of concern alerting the public to the excessive
RFR levels in each area.

8\. On October 23, 2008, the Portland agent conducted a follow-up
inspection with the chief engineer representing Mapleton and the two
chief engineers representing Freedom Broadcasting at the transmitter
site. The agent again employed a personal RF monitor to identify the
same two areas of concern, as determined the day before. Again, the
Portland agent observed no warning signs at or around either area of
concern alerting the public to the excessive RFR levels in each area of
concern. With all three stations transmitting, the agent took readings
from the transmitters' meters and determined the total power output for
each station.[^14] The agent then made RFR measurements to establish an
overall power density level in the two areas of concern. The agent
employed a spatial averaging measurement technique, using a calibrated
RFR meter and probe, where measurements in four quadrants are averaged
to give a representative reading for each location. In the first area of
concern, measuring approximately 22 feet by 24 feet, surrounding the
anchor of the north guy wire of the KTMT-FM transmitter tower,
approximately 80 feet from the base of the tower, the overall power
density level measured 1.3 mW/cm^2^ (650% of the public MPE limits). In
the second area of concern, measuring approximately 17 feet by 23 feet,
near the power transformer on the south side of the transmitters
building, approximately 27 feet east from the base of the antenna tower,
the overall power density level measured 0.72 mW/cm^2^ (360% of the
public MPE limits). In coordination with all three stations, the agent
then requested that each station temporarily and sequentially power off
the transmitter. The agent made spatially averaged RFR power density
measurements while each of the transmitters were powered off in turn, to
determine the power density level produced by each transmitter and to
determine which transmitters were producing power density levels that
exceeded 5% of its individual MPE limits at the identified areas.[^15]

9\. The measurements taken by the Portland agent on October 23, 2008,
indicated that RFR levels in both areas of concern, described above,
significantly exceeded the Commission's MPE limits for the general
public. Based on the measurements and further calculations, the power
density level contributed by KTMT-FM was 1.29 mW/cm^2^ (645% of the
public MPE limits) in the first area of concern, and 0.71 mW/cm^2^ (355%
of the public MPE limits) in the second area of concern. The Portland
agent issued an oral warning to the KTMT-FM chief engineer for violation
the Commission's RFR Rules.[^16]

10\. Still on October 23, 2008, Freedom Broadcasting's chief engineers
advised the Portland agent that Freedom Broadcasting had retained a
professional electrical engineer in Portland, Oregon to perform RFR
measurements at the transmitter site on October 15, 2008. On November 7,
2008, the Portland agent received an Engineering Report from the
referenced professional electrical engineer retained by Freedom
Broadcasting.[^17] In the *Freedom Broadcasting RFR Report*, the
engineer stated that on October 15, 2008, he had made "measurements of
the existing levels of radio frequency power densities at outside
locations surrounding the KTVL (CH10) transmitter building and tower
located on Mt. Ashland in southern Oregon," found RFR levels that
exceeded the FCC public MPE limits, and concluded that "the primary
contributing source of the excessive RF radiation levels in the
uncontrolled public access areas are emissions from the KTMT-FM four
element antenna."[^18]

# DISCUSSION

##  11. 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.[^19] The term "repeated" means the commission or omission of such act more than once or for more than one day.[^20]  {#section-503b-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-503b-has-been-interpreted-to-mean-simply-that-the-acts-or-omissions-are-committed-knowingly.-the-term-repeated-means-the-commission-or-omission-of-such-act-more-than-once-or-for-more-than-one-day. .unnumbered}

12\. Section 1.1310 of the Rules requires licensees to comply with RFR
exposure limits.[^21] 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/cm^2^. The 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. [^22] Licensees can demonstrate compliance by
restricting public access to areas where RFR exceeds the public MPE
limits.[^23]

13\. The inspections conducted by the Portland agent on October 22 and
23, 2008, revealed two publicly accessible areas that exceeded the
public RFR MPE limit; that KTMT-FM was the sole contributor of more than
5% of the RFR exceeding the public MPE limits; and that Mapleton did not
restrict access to the areas of concern where RFR levels exceeded the
public RFR MPE limits. Although vehicular access to the KTMT-FM
transmitter site is restricted by means of a single strand chain link
locked gate and a RF warning sign, pedestrian access is relatively
unrestricted. The public Mount Ashland Ski Lift Area is approximately
230 meters on the east side of the KTMT-FM transmitter site. In
addition, the USFS has stated that the KTMT-FM transmitter site is not a
remote area. The USFS estimates that tens of thousands of people visit
the Mount Ashland site during the summer and winter, with some
percentage venturing towards the KTMT-FM transmitter site. Mapleton
bears the responsibility to restrict access to those noncompliant 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 or worker access to the impacted area.[^24] Although the Portland
agent observed four RFR caution signs on the KTMT-FM transmitter
building, and one warning sign on the KTMT-FM transmitter tower, the
agent observed no signs warning the public of the excessive RFR levels
in the easily accessible areas of concern, in which RFR levels ranged
between 350 and 650% of the public MPE limits. As the Commission has
stated in the past, "when a licensee decides to depend on RFR warning
signs rather than physical barriers to ensure that members of the public
do not access areas of RFR in excess of the MPE public limits, the
burden is on the licensee to ensure that the RFR warning signs are
plainly visible to the public from every possible direction that the
public may access the area of concern. The burden is not on the public
to attempt to find RFR warning signs."[^25]

14\. We find that Mapleton's operation of KMKT-FM exceeded the public
RFR MPE limits in publicly accessible areas and, given the statements
made by Mapleton in *Exhibit 13* of its most recent renewal application,
that Mapleton was aware of the high levels of RFR at the KTMT-FM
transmitter site since September 30, 2005, but did not take any
corrective actions to bring the site into compliance, or to restrict
public access to the site. Therefore, we find that Mapleton's violation
was willful. The violation occurred on more than one day, therefore, it
was repeated. Based on the evidence before us, we find that Mapleton
apparently willfully and repeatedly violated Section 1.1310 of the
Rules[^26] by exceeding the public RFR MPE limits in areas accessible by
the public, and by failing to adequately take measures to prevent access
to areas that exceeded the RFR exposure limits.

15\. The Commission's Forfeiture Policy Statement and Amendment of
Section 1.80(b) of the Rules to Incorporate the Forfeiture Guidelines
("Forfeiture Policy Statement")[^27] does not specify a base forfeiture
for violation of the RFR maximum permissible exposure limits in Section
1.1310.[^28] 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.[^29] 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.[^30] Applying the Forfeiture Policy Statement,
Section 1.80, and the statutory factors to the instant case, we conclude
that Mapleton is apparently liable for a \$10,000 forfeiture.

# ORDERING CLAUSES

16\. 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, Mapleton License of Medford,
LLC 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.[^31]

17\. **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, Mapleton License of
Medford, LLC **SHALL PAY** the full amount of the proposed forfeiture or
**SHALL FILE** a written statement seeking reduction or cancellation of
the proposed forfeiture.

18\. 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. [^32]  Please contact the Financial Operations
Group Help Desk at 1-877-480-3201 or Email: ARINQUIRIES@fcc.gov with any
questions regarding payment procedures. Mapleton License of Medford,
LLC, shall also send electronic notification on the date said payment is
made to WR-Response@fcc.gov.

19\. The response, if any, must be mailed to Federal Communications
Commission, Enforcement Bureau, Western Region, Portland Resident Agent
Office, P.O. Box 61469, Vancouver, Washington 98666-1469 and must
include the NAL/Acct. No. referenced in the caption. An electronic copy
shall be sent to WR-Response@fcc.gov.

20\. 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.

21\. **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 Mapleton License of Medford, LLC.

FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION

Binh Nguyen

Resident Agent

Portland Resident Agent Office

Western Region

Enforcement Bureau

[^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).

[^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-20050930AWU, Application for Renewal of Broadcast
    Station License, Exhibit 13, September 30, 2005 ("*Exhibit 13*").

[^12]: *Exhibit 13.*

[^13]: 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.

[^14]: The agent determined the following effective radiated power
    ("ERP") for each of the stations at the site: KTMT-FM = 31.62 kW
    ERP; KTVL (CH 10) = 132 kW ERP; and KTVL-DT (CH 35) = 1.25 kW ERP.

[^15]: Section 1.1307(b)(3) of the Rules states: "In general, when the
    guidelines specified in § 1.1310 are exceeded in an accessible area
    due to the emissions from multiple fixed transmitters, actions
    necessary to bring the area into compliance are shared
    responsibility of all licensees whose transmitters produce, at the
    area in question, power density levels that exceed 5% of the power
    density exposure limit applicable to their particular
    transmitter..." 47 C.F.R. § 1.1307(b)(3).

[^16]: 47 C.F.R. §§ 1.1307(b)(3), 1.1310.

[^17]: McClanathan and Associates, Inc.'s Engineering Report for Freedom
    Broadcasting of Oregon Licensee, LLC concerning Radio Frequency
    Field Strength and Power Density Measurements at KTVL-TV near
    Medford, Oregon, October 15, 2008 ("*Freedom Broadcasting RFR
    Report*").

[^18]: *Freedom Broadcasting RFR Report*.

[^19]: 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).

[^20]: ^?^ 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."

[^21]: 47 C.F.R. § 1.1310.

[^22]: 47 C.F.R. § 1.1310. *See Entravision Holdings, LLC*, 22 FCC Rcd
    21718 (EB 2007).

[^23]: *See, for example, OET Bulletin 65.*

[^24]: 47 C.F.R. §§ 1.1307(b)(1), 1.1307(b)(5), 1.1310. Additional
    guidance is provided in OET Bulletin 65.

[^25]: *Americom Las Vegas Limited Partnership*, 21 FCC Rcd 14286, 14290
    (2006).

[^26]: 47 C.F.R. 1.1310.

[^27]: ^?^ *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).

[^28]: ^?^ 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.*

[^29]: *A-O Broadcasting Corporation*, 17 FCC Rcd 24184 (2002).

[^30]: 47 U.S.C. § 503(b)(2)(E).

[^31]: 47 U.S.C. § 503(b), 47 C.F.R. §§ 0.111, 0.311, 0.314, 1.80,
    1.1310.

[^32]: *See* 47 C.F.R. § 1.1914.