Federal Communications Commission DA 09-1958
Before the
Federal Communications Commission
Washington, D.C. 20554
In the Matter of
Opp Educational Broadcasting Foundation
FM Broadcast Station WJIF 
Opp, Alabama  
)
)
)
)
)
)
File No. EB-08-SE-614
NAL/Acct. No. 200932100076
FRN No. 0010252856
NOTICE OF APPARENT LIABILITY FOR FORFEITURE AND ORDER 
Adopted:  August 27, 2009 Released:  August 31, 2009  
By the Chief, Spectrum Enforcement Division, Enforcement Bureau:
I. INTRODUCTION
1. In this Notice of Apparent Liability for Forfeiture and Order (“NAL”), we find Opp 
Educational Broadcasting Foundation (“Opp Ed”), licensee of FM Broadcast Station WJIF (“WJIF”) in 
Opp, Alabama,1 apparently liable for a forfeiture in the amount of nineteen thousand dollars ($19,000) for 
willfully and repeatedly violating Sections 11.35 and 11.61(a) of the Commission’s Rules (“Rules”)2 and 
for willfully and repeatedly violating Section 73.1015 of the Rules.3 The noted violations involve WJIF’s 
failure to maintain operable Emergency Alert System (“EAS”) equipment and failure to conduct required 
EAS tests and Opp Ed’s failure to respond to directives of the Enforcement Bureau’s Spectrum 
Enforcement Division (“Division”) to provide certain information and documents.  We also order Opp Ed 
to respond fully to the Division’s Follow-Up Letter of Inquiry (“LOI”) within ten (10) days of release of 
this NAL. If Opp Ed again fails to submit complete responses, it will be subject to further enforcement 
action.
II. BACKGROUND
2. On August 7, 2008, the Division received a complaint alleging that WJIF did not 
participate in the EAS and had never transmitted an EAS test.  Part 11 of the Rules4 includes FM broadcasts 
stations as EAS participants and describes the required technical standards and operational procedures for 
EAS participation.  EAS participants are required to use a common EAS protocol5 to send and receive 
  
1 File No. BRED-20040122AEE.  The Commission granted Opp Educational Broadcasting Foundation a license 
renewal for station WJIF on January 31, 2007.  The license expires on April 1, 2012. 
2 47 C.F.R. §§ 11.35 and 11.61(a).
3 47 C.F. R. § 73.1015.
4 47 C.F.R. §§  11.1 - 11.61.
5 47 C.F.R. §11.31.
Federal Communications Commission DA 09-1958
2
emergency alerts6 and to participate in EAS test transmissions.7 On November 4, 2008, the Division issued 
a Letter of Inquiry (“LOI”) to Opp Ed in order to assess WJIF’s compliance with EAS Rules.8 The LOI 
directed Opp Ed to address the allegations against WJIF by responding to specific questions and providing 
specific information and documentation.  In particular, the LOI sought information concerning whether 
WJIF has installed EAS equipment and conducts required EAS tests, and if so, the EAS equipment 
manufacturer, model and date of installation; whether WJIF announces EAS tests to its listening audience; 
and requested WJIF to identify at least two EAS sources that it monitors.  The LOI also requested a 
description or copy of the policies and procedures in place to ensure compliance with the EAS Rules and a 
copy of all station logs recording EAS test transmissions and any EAS equipment outages or repairs as 
required to be maintained under Section 73.1820 of the Rules.9 Opp Ed’s response to the LOI was due on 
December 4, 2008, 30 calendar days from the date of the LOI, and covered the period from January 31, 
2007 to the date of its response.
3. On December 30, 2008, the Division received Opp Ed’s LOI Response, dated December 
18, 2008.10 In its response to the LOI, Opp Ed failed to answer any of the inquiries set forth in the LOI, 
except to state in general terms that WJIF has “in the past, participated in the national Emergency Alert 
System” but “at present the [EAS] equipment is not operating properly and has to be repaired.”11 Opp Ed 
also made the broad assertion that it will take “the necessary steps to correct this problem as soon as 
possible.”12 Opp Ed provided no response to specific inquiries posed by the Division regarding WJIF’s 
EAS equipment, the date of installment, announcements of EAS tests, EAS sources that it monitors, and 
failed to provide a copy of WJIF’S EAS policies and procedures and all station logs.   
4. On March 4, 2009, the Division issued a Follow-Up LOI13 to Opp Ed, notifying it that it 
had not provided all the information required by the LOI and that the information that it did provide had 
raised additional questions.  The Follow-Up LOI directed Opp Ed to provide the requested WJIF EAS 
station log documentation, to confirm its compliance with Section 11.35(c) of the Rules, and to address the 
status, including dates, of its EAS equipment inoperability, repair or replacement.  The Follow-Up LOI 
explicitly warned Opp Ed that failure to respond appropriately to the Follow-Up LOI may result in 
enforcement action.  The Follow-Up LOI was sent by certified mail return receipt requested, first class 
mail, and facsimile to the Commission address and facsimile number of record used for the November 4, 
2008 LOI.  The certified mail return receipt confirms delivery of the Follow-Up LOI on March 9, 2009.  
  
6 47 C.F.R. §11.11(a).
7 47 C.F.R. § 11.61(a).
8 See Letter from Kathryn S. Berthot, Chief, Spectrum Enforcement Division, Enforcement Bureau, Federal 
Communications Commission to Mr. Haywood F. Nawlin, Administrator, Opp Educational Broadcasting 
Foundation, Licensee of Radio Station WJIF (November 4, 2008).
9 47 C.F.R. § 73.1820.
10 See Letter from Haywood F. Nawlins, WJIF Radio to Kathryn S. Berthot Chief, Spectrum Enforcement Division, 
Enforcement Bureau, Federal Communications Commission (dated December 18, 2008) (“LOI Response”).
11 Id.
12 Id. 
13 See Letter from Kathryn S. Berthot, Chief, Spectrum Enforcement Division, Enforcement Bureau, Federal 
Communications Commission to Mr. Haywood F. Nawlin, Administrator, Opp Educational Broadcasting 
Foundation, Licensee of Radio Station WJIF (March 4, 2009) (“Follow-Up LOI”).
Federal Communications Commission DA 09-1958
3
The facsimile transmittal receipt confirms satisfactory transmission of the Follow-Up LOI on March 4, 
2009.  To date, Opp Ed has not responded to the Follow-Up LOI.
III. DISCUSSION
5. Section 503(b) of the Act,14 and Section 1.80(a) of the Rules,15 provides that any person 
who willfully or repeatedly fails to comply with the provisions of the Act or the Rules shall be liable for a 
forfeiture penalty.  For purposes of Section 503(b) of the Act, the term “willful” means that the violator 
knew that it was taking the action in question, irrespective of any intent to violate the Commission’s Rules 
and “repeated” means more than once.16  
A.  Failure to Comply With EAS Requirements 
6. As a Commission licensee, Opp Ed is charged with the responsibility of knowing and 
complying with the terms of its authorization and the Act and the Rules.  The EAS system, as the nation’s 
emergency warning system, is critical to public safety.17 Section 11.11(a) specifies that FM broadcast 
stations are classified as EAS Participants and “[a]t a minimum … must use common EAS protocol … to 
send and receive emergency alerts.”18 The Rules also require EAS Participants to conduct tests at regular 
intervals in accordance with Section 11.61(a) and the EAS Operating Handbook.19 In addition, Section 
11.35 of the Rules sets forth the requirements for EAS Participants to ensure EAS equipment “operation 
readiness” and to repair or replace EAS equipment that is not working.20 Failing to participate in the EAS 
compromises the integrity of the national EAS system.  
7. In its LOI Response, which was dated December 18, 2009, Opp Ed states that WJIF has, in 
the past, participated in the EAS.  Opp Ed admits, however, that WJIF’s EAS equipment was “at present” 
not operating properly and was in need of repair.  Although Opp Ed states it would be taking necessary 
steps to “correct this problem as soon as possible,” it made no representation as to what steps it would take 
to ensure proper working EAS equipment and made no attempt to provide a time frame as to when repair or 
replacement of the EAS equipment would be made.  Section 11.35(c) of the Rules requires an EAS 
participant who has not repaired or replaced defective equipment after 60 days to submit an informal 
request for additional time to repair its defective equipment to the District Director of the FCC Field Office 
  
14 47 U.S.C. § 503(b).
15 47 C.F.R. § 1.80(a).
16 The term “willful,” as used in Section 503(b) of the Act, means the conscious and deliberate commission or 
omission of such act, irrespective of any intent to violate the Commission’s Rules.  47 U.S.C. § 312(f)(1).  A 
violation is “repeated” within the meaning of Section 503(b) of the Act if it occurs more than once or continues for 
more than one day.  47 U.S.C. § 312(f)(2).  See Southern California Broadcasting Co., Memorandum Opinion and 
Order, 6 FCC Rcd 4387, 4388 (1991).
17 The Commission rules provide that every AM and FM broadcast station is part of the nationwide EAS network 
and is categorized as a participating national EAS source (“EAS Participant”) unless the station affirmatively 
requests authority to not participate.  47 C.F.R. §§ 11.11 and 11.41.
18 See 47 C.F.R. § 11.11(a); see also 47 C.F.R. § 11.31.
19 47 C.F.R. § 11.61(a). The Emergency Alert System 2007 AM and FM Handbook (“EAS Operating Handbook”) 
can be found at http://www.fcc.gov/pshs/services/eas/handbooks.html.
20 47 C.F.R. § 11.35.
Federal Communications Commission DA 09-1958
4
serving the participant’s area.21 To date, Opp Ed has not submitted a request or contacted the 
Commission’s Atlanta, Georgia Field Office to request additional time to repair WJIF’s EAS equipment.  
We, therefore, find Opp Ed in apparent willful and repeated violation of Sections 11.35 and 11.61(a) of the 
Rules for failure to maintain operable EAS equipment and failure to conduct required EAS tests.
B.  Failure to Respond to Commission Inquiry
8. Section 73.1015 of the Rules22 states that “the Commission or its representative may, in 
writing, require from any applicant, permittee, or licensee written statements of fact relevant to a 
determination whether an application should be granted or denied, or to a determination whether a license 
should be revoked, or to any other matter within the jurisdiction of the Commission” and that any such 
statements are subject to the provisions of Section 1.17 of the Rules.23 Section 1.17 of the Rules requires 
that any person that receives a letter of inquiry from the Commission or its staff “shall not intentionally 
provide material factual information that is incorrect or intentionally omit material information that is 
necessary to prevent any material factual statement that is made from being incorrect or misleading.”  
9. As noted above, the Division twice directed Opp Ed to provide certain information and 
documents related to WJIF’s participation in the EAS and the operational status of its EAS equipment.  
Such information was necessary to enable the Commission to perform its enforcement function and 
evaluate whether WJIF violated Commission rules.  There is no question that Opp Ed received the 
Division’s LOI and Follow-Up LOI.  Opp Ed failed to provide full and complete responses to the inquiries 
posed by the LOI, making only a broad assertion that WJIF’s EAS equipment was in need of repair and that 
it would take necessary steps to correct the problem as soon as possible.  Further, Opp Ed failed to provide 
any response to the Division’s Follow-Up LOI.  We, therefore, find Opp Ed’s failure to respond to the 
Division’s inquiries constitutes an apparent willful and repeated violation of Section 73.1015 of the Rules.24
C.  Proposed Forfeiture 
10. Section 503(b)(1) of the Act and Section 1.80(a)(1) of the Rules authorize the Commission 
to assess forfeiture for each willful or repeated violation of the Act or of any rule, regulation, or order issued 
by the Commission under the Act.25  In determining the appropriate forfeiture amount, Section 503(b)(2)(E) 
of the Act directs us to consider factors, such as “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.”26  
11. Section 1.80 of the Rules and the Commission’s Forfeiture Policy Statement establish a 
base forfeiture amount of eight thousand ($8,000) for “EAS equipment not installed or operational.”27  
  
21 47 C.F.R. § 11.35(c). 
22 47 C.F.R. § 73.1015.
23 47 C.F.R §1.17.
24 47 C.F.R. § 73.1015.
25 47 U.S.C. § 503(b)(1); 47 C.F.R. § 1.80(a)(1).  
26 47 U.S.C. § 503(b)(2)(E); see also The Commission’s Forfeiture Policy Statement and Amendment of Section 1.80 
of the Rules to Incorporate the Forfeiture Guidelines (“Forfeiture Policy Statement”), Report and Order, 12 FCC 
Rcd 17087, 17110 (1997), recon. denied, 15 FCC Rcd 303 (1999).
27 See 47 C.F.R. § 1.80(b)(4); Forfeiture Policy Statement, 12 FCC Rcd at 17113.
Federal Communications Commission DA 09-1958
5
Having considered the statutory requirements, we propose the base forfeiture amount of $8,000 for WJIF’s 
failure to have EAS equipment installed and operational.  As the nation’s emergency warning system, the 
EAS system is critical to public safety.  WJIF’s failure to have EAS equipment installed or operational 
compromises the integrity of the EAS system.  Accordingly, we conclude that Opp Ed is apparently liable
for an $8,000 forfeiture for WJIF’s willful and repeated violation of Sections 11.35 and 11.61(a) of the 
Rules for failure to maintain operable EAS equipment and failure to conduct required EAS tests. 
12. Section 1.80 of the Rules and the Commission’s Forfeiture Policy Statement establish a 
base forfeiture amount of $4,000 for failure to respond to Commission communications.28 We find that 
Opp Ed’s failure to respond to the Division’s LOI and Follow-Up LOI in the circumstances presented here 
warrants an increase to the base forfeiture amount.  Misconduct of this type exhibits contempt for the 
Commission’s authority and threatens to compromise the agency’s ability to adequately investigate 
violations of its Rules.  Prompt and full responses to Division inquiry letters are essential to the 
Commission’s enforcement function.  In this case, Opp Ed’s apparent violations touch on an area of critical 
importance -- the integrity of the EAS system.  We therefore propose an $11,000 forfeiture against Opp Ed 
for twice failing to respond to Commission communications.  This forfeiture amount is consistent with 
precedent in similar cases, where companies failed to provide responses to Bureau inquiries concerning 
compliance with the Commission’s rules despite evidence that the LOIs had been received.29  
13. We also direct Opp Ed to respond fully to the Follow-up LOI within ten (10) days of the 
release of this Notice of Apparent Liability for Forfeiture and Order.  Failure to do so may constitute an 
additional violation subjecting WJIF to further penalties, including potentially higher monetary forfeitures.
14. Accordingly, based on the facts, we find Opp Ed apparently liable for a combined 
forfeiture of $19,000 for WJIF’s apparent willful and repeated violation of Sections 11.35, 11.61(a) and 
73.1015 of the Rules.  
IV. ORDERING CLAUSES
15. Accordingly, IT IS ORDERED that, pursuant to Section 503(b) of the Act30 and Sections 
0.111, 0.311 and 1.80 of the Rules,31 Opp Educational Broadcasting Foundation, Licensee of FM Radio 
Station WJIF, IS hereby NOTIFIED of its APPARENT LIABILITY FOR FORFEITURE in the 
amount of nineteen thousand dollars ($19,000) for willful and repeated violation of Sections 11.35, 
11.61(a) and 73.1015 of the Rules.
16. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that, pursuant to Section 1.80 of the Rules,32 within thirty 
days of the release date of this Notice of Apparent Liability for Forfeiture and Order, Opp Educational 
  
28 See 47 C.F.R. § 1.80(b)(4); Forfeiture Policy Statement, 12 FCC Rcd at 17114.
29 See, e.g., Charter Communications, Inc., Notice of Apparent Liability for Forfeiture and Order, 24 FCC Rcd 917, 
921 (Enf. Bur. 2009) (proposing $25,000 forfeiture for failing to fully respond to LOI); Digital Antenna, Inc., Notice 
of Apparent Liability for Forfeiture and Order, 23 FCC Rcd 7600, 7602 (Enf. Bur., Spectrum Enf. Div. 2008) 
(proposing $11,000 forfeiture for failing to fully respond to LOI); Hauppauge Computer Works, Inc., Notice of 
Apparent Liability for Forfeiture and Order, 23 FCC Rcd 3684, 3686 (Enf. Bur., Spectrum Enf. Div. 2008) 
(proposing $11,000 forfeiture for failing to fully respond to LOI).
30 47 U.S.C. § 503(b). 
31 47 C.F.R. §§ 0.111, 0.311 and 1.80.
32 47 C.F.R. § 1.80.
Federal Communications Commission DA 09-1958
6
Broadcasting Foundation, Licensee of FM Radio Station WJIF, SHALL PAY the full amount of the 
proposed forfeiture or SHALL FILE a written statement seeking reduction or cancellation of the proposed 
forfeiture.
17. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Opp Educational Broadcasting Foundation, Licensee 
of FM Radio Station WJIF, shall fully respond to the March 4, 2009 Follow-Up Letter of Inquiry sent by 
the Enforcement Bureau in the manner described in the Letter of Inquiry and the Follow-Up Letter of 
Inquiry within ten (10) days of the release of this Notice of Apparent Liability for Forfeiture and Order.
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.  Please contact the 
Financial Operations Group Help Desk at 1-877-480-3201 or Email: ARINQUIRIES@fcc.gov with any 
questions regarding payment procedures.  Opp Educational Broadcasting Foundation, Licensee of FM 
Radio Station WJIF, will also send electronic notification on the date said payment is made to 
Jacqui.Johnson@fcc.gov and JoAnn.Lucanik@fcc.gov.
19. The response, if any, must be mailed to the Office of the Secretary, Federal 
Communications Commission, 445 12th Street, S.W., Washington, D.C. 20554, ATTN: Enforcement 
Bureau – Spectrum Enforcement Division, and must include the NAL/Acct. No. referenced in the caption.
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; 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 and Order shall be sent by first class mail and certified mail return receipt requested to Mr. 
Haywood F. Nawlin, Administrator, Opp Educational Broadcasting Foundation, Licensee of FM Radio 
Station WJIF, 104 Folsom Street, Opp, Alabama  36467.
FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION
Kathryn S. Berthot
Chief, Spectrum Enforcement Division
Enforcement Bureau