Federal Communications Commission DA 17-1169
Before the
Federal Communications Commission
Washington, D.C. 20554
In re Application of
TEA-VISZ, Inc.
For Consent for the Renewal of License for
W272AY, Park Falls, Wisconsin
)
)
)
)
)
)
)   
  
              
NAL/Acct. No. MB-201741410012
FRN: 0009578824
Facility ID. No. 86507
File No. BRFT-20120712ABR
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
AND
NOTICE OF APPARENT LIABILITY FOR FORFEITURE
Adopted:  December 5, 2017 Released:  December 5, 2017
By the Chief, Audio Division:
I. INTRODUCTION
1. We have before us the application (Application) of TEA-VISZ, Inc. (TEA) for Commission 
consent for the renewal of the license for FM translator station W272AY, Park Falls, Wisconsin (Station).  
We also have before us a Petition to Deny (Petition), filed September 24, 2012, by Heartland 
Communications Group, LLC and Heartland Comm. License, LLC (Heartland), as well as related 
pleadings.
1
  
2. In this Memorandum Opinion and Order and Notice of Apparent Liability for Forfeiture 
(NAL),
2
we find that TEA willfully and repeatedly violated Section 74.1231(b) of the Commission’s 
Rules (Rules)
3
by originating its own programming.  Based upon our review of the record before us, we 
conclude that TEA is apparently liable for a monetary forfeiture in the amount of four thousand dollars 
($4,000). Finally, for the reasons set forth below, we deny the Petition. 
                                                     
1
TEA filed a Motion for Extension of Time on October 11, 2012, and an Opposition to Petition to Deny 
(Opposition) on November 16, 2012.  In response, Heartland filed: (1) Opposition to TEA’s Motion for Extension of 
Time, dated October 19, 2012; (2) Reply, dated December 6, 2012; (3) Request for Leave to Amend Reply, dated 
December 11, 2012; and (4) Letter, dated May 2, 2014.  Finally, in response to these pleadings, TEA filed: (1) 
Opposition to Heartland’s Request for Leave to Amend its Reply, dated December 27, 2012; and (2) Motion for 
Leave to File Response to Heartland’s Letter and Response, each dated May 5, 2014.  We grant TEA’s Motion for 
Extension of Time, and therefore, consider its Opposition in order to have a complete record.  Heartland’s Request 
for Leave to Amend Reply, as well as all the subsequent filings, are unauthorized pleadings and will not be 
considered here.  See 47 CFR § 1.45; see also New Life Broadcasting, Letter, 25 FCC Rcd 7293, 7294, n.5 (MB 
2010) (declining to consider unauthorized pleadings pursuant to Section 1.45 of the Rules).
2
This NAL is issued pursuant to Sections 309(k) and 503(b) of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended (Act), 
and Section 1.80 of the Commission’s Rules.  47 U.S.C. §§ 309(k), 503(b); 47 CFR § 1.80.  The Bureau has 
delegated authority to issue the NAL under Section 0.283 of the Rules.  47 CFR § 0.283.  
3
47 CFR § 74.1231(b). 
Federal Communications Commission DA 17-1169
2
II. BACKGROUND
3. TEA filed the subject renewal application on July 12, 2012.  Heartland subsequently filed a 
Petition to Deny the Application, alleging that TEA violated multiple Commission Rules regarding the 
ownership and operation of an FM translator station.  Specifically, Heartland contends that TEA: (1) 
originated “countless hours of its own programming”
4
in violation of Section 74.1231 of the Rules;
5
(2) 
failed to notify the Commission on several occasions when the Station went silent for over a month;
6
(3) 
neglected to notify the Commission that it rebroadcasts the signal of WIMI(FM), Ironwood, Michigan;
7
and (4) failed to terminate a “prohibited business association” between its President, Scott A. Reinhard 
(Reinhard), and Gerald Hackman (Hackman), a principal of J&J Broadcasting, Inc. (J&J), the licensee of 
the Station’s primary station, WIMI(FM).
8
  Heartland asserts that TEA knowingly and  willfully violates 
the FCC’s Rules on a regular basis, and therefore, is not qualified to be a Commission licensee.  
Accordingly, Heartland urges us to dismiss or deny the Application.
9
III. DISCUSSION
4. Petition to Deny.  A petition to deny a renewal application must, pursuant to Section 309(d) 
of the Act,
10
provide properly supported allegations of fact that, if true, would establish a substantial and 
material question of fact that grant of the application would be prima facie inconsistent with Section 
309(k) of the Act,
11
which governs our evaluation of an application for license renewal.  Specifically, 
Section 309(k)(1) provides that we are to grant the renewal application if, upon consideration of the 
application and pleadings, we find that (1) the station has served the public interest, convenience, and 
necessity; (2) there have been no serious violations by the licensee of the Act or the Rules; and (3) there 
have been no other violations by the licensee that, taken together, constitute a pattern of abuse.
12
  If, 
however, the licensee fails to meet that standard, the Commission may deny the application, after notice 
and opportunity for a hearing under Section 309(d) of the Act, or grant the application “on terms and
                                                     
4
Petition at 2.
5
See 47 CFR § 74.1231 (limiting the circumstances under which FM translators may originate programming).
6
See 47 CFR § 74.1263(c).
7
See 47 CFR § 73.1284(b).
8
See 47 CFR § 74.1232(e) (prohibiting a FM translator station whose coverage contour extends beyond the 
protected contour of the commercial primary station from receiving any support, before or after construction, either 
directly or indirectly, from the commercial primary FM radio station).
9
Heartland’s Petition repeats the allegations, which it raised for the first time in its June 25, 2010, “Complaint and 
Request for Revocation of Licenses of FM Translator Station W272AY and Primary Station WIMI.”  The 
Investigations and Hearings Division (IHD) of the Enforcement Bureau investigated these allegations.  On August 6, 
2014, IHD closed its investigation, finding that although Heartland “raises credible questions of compliance … the 
overall circumstances of this matter do not warrant further expenditure of resources.”  IHD did not sanction or fine 
TEA, but reminded TEA of its continued obligation to comply with all Part 74 FCC Rules.  See Letter from Jeff J. 
Gee, Deputy Chief, Investigations and Hearings Division, Enforcement Bureau, to TEA-VISZ, Inc. (August 6, 
2014).  
10
47 U.S.C. § 309(d).
11
47 U.S.C. § 309(k).  See, e.g., WWOR-TV, Inc., Memorandum Opinion and Order, 6 FCC Rcd 193, 197 n.10 
(1990), aff'd sub nom. Garden State Broadcasting L.P. v. FCC, 996 F.2d 386 (D.C. Cir. 1993), reh'g denied (D.C. 
Cir. Sept. 10, 1993).
12
47 U.S.C. § 309(k)(1). 
Federal Communications Commission DA 17-1169
3
conditions that are appropriate, including a renewal for a term less than the maximum otherwise 
permitted.”
13
5. Program Origination.  Section 74.1231(b) of the Rules prohibits FM translator stations from 
originating programming, except under limited circumstances.
14
  Heartland alleges that TEA regularly 
originates its own programming in violation of Section 74.1231 of the Rules.  To support its allegation, 
Heartland provides evidence of five separate days, between August 23, 2012, and September 10, 2012, 
when the Station originated its own programming.  Specifically, Heartland submits over a dozen sworn 
listener declarations, stating that each listener heard W272AY broadcasting its own music while the 
Station’s primary station, WIMI(FM), broadcast a Green Bay Packers game.
15
  
6. TEA does not deny that the Station broadcasts music separately from the primary station’s 
programming.  It, however, asserts that “in truth, this happened only a very few times”
16
and that this 
isolated transgression was due to its engineer’s “error in connecting the remote control switch.”
17
  
Specifically, TEA explains that the Station is unable to rebroadcast WIMI when Green Bay Packers 
games are on the air because of territorial restrictions.  According to TEA, its engineer wanted the Station 
to be capable of airing emergency announcements during this time.  The engineer, therefore, “without the 
prior knowledge of TEA-VISZ improperly wired [the Station] to air music rather than be silent.”
18
  TEA 
submits a statement from its engineer, under penalty of perjury, declaring that “once I realized my error, I 
immediately disconnected this hookup, and the translator remains silent until the football game is over 
and it is again able to rebroadcast WIMI-FM.”
19
     
7. It is uncontroverted that the Station, at times, transmitted original programming in excess of 
that allowed by the Rules.  TEA’s attempt to minimize this mistake by emphasizing the limited 
occurrences and fact that the licensee was unaware of programming originating on the Station, does not 
absolve it of this transgression or nullify the rule violation.  A licensee is fully responsible for all 
programming broadcast over a station.  We, therefore, admonish Reinhard for his apparent lack of full 
control over Station programming.  We also conclude that TEA violated Section 73.1231(b) of the Rules 
and issue this NAL to TEA for this violation.
8. Off the Air without Notice.  Section 74.1263(c) of the Rules requires an FM translator 
licensee to notify the Commission of its intent to discontinue operations for 10 or more consecutive days,
and Commission approval is required for such discontinued operation beyond 30 days.
20
  Heartland 
claims that the Station went off the air for 30 days in 2008, but failed to notify the Commission and obtain 
                                                     
13
47 U.S.C. §§ 309(k)(2) & (3).
14
47 CFR § 74.1231(b) (“An FM translator may be used for the purpose of retransmitting the signals of a primary 
AM or FM radio broadcast station … and originating programming to the extent authorized in paragraphs (f), (g), 
and (h) of this section.”). 
15
Petition at Exhibit 1.
16
Opposition at 6.
17
Id.
18
Id.
19
Statement of Ted K. Franz (Franz), dated November 14, 2012, at 2, attached as Exhibit to Opposition. 
20
47 CFR § 74.1263(c).  Notification must be made within 10 days of the date on which the station first 
discontinues operation, and Commission approval is required for such discontinued operation beyond 30 days.   
Federal Communications Commission DA 17-1169
4
the necessary authorization, as required by the Rules.
21
  To rebut this allegation, TEA provides 
statements, under penalty of perjury, from Reinhard and Franz, the Station’s engineer, affirming that the 
Station was never silent for more than 30 days at any time during the license term.
22
   
9. A station may discontinue operation for a period not exceeding 30 days without approval and 
silent authority from the Commission.  However, a station that is silent for more than ten days, and 
intends to remain silent for 30 days or more, must still notify the Commission that it has discontinued 
operation.
23
  Accordingly, although TEA was not required to seek the Commission’s approval to remain 
silent for the one month-period in 2008, it nevertheless should have informed the Commission that the 
station was off the air.  We find that this isolated omission does not constitute a material failure to serve 
the public interest under Section 309(k)(1) of the Act or warrant a fine.  We, however, remind TEA of its 
obligation to comply with the Commission’s Rules, including the obligation to notify the Commission 
when the Station is silent for extended periods of time.
10. Notification of Primary Station.  Section 74.1284(b) of the Rules requires the licensee of an 
FM translator to obtain prior consent from the primary FM broadcast station before rebroadcasting its 
programs.
24
  In addition, the licensee must notify the Commission of the call letters of the station 
rebroadcast and certify that written consent has been received from the licensee of that station.
25
  
Heartland alleges that TEA changed its primary station to WIMI(FM) in 2009, but failed to notify the 
Commission that it was rebroadcasting WIMI(FM), in violation of the Rules.  Heartland bases its claim 
on its inability to locate a notification letter from TEA when it searched the Commission’s public files in 
June and July 2010.
26
  In response, TEA submits a statement from Reinhard, under penalty of perjury, 
affirming that he notified the Commission by letter, dated September 22, 2009, that the Station was 
rebroadcasting WIMI(FM); TEA also provides a copy of the September 2009, letter.
27
  Heartland offers 
no additional evidence to refute Reinhard’s sworn statement of compliance.  Accordingly, we find that 
Heartland fails to raise a substantial and material question of fact regarding TEA’s compliance with its 
notification obligations.       
11. Prohibited Business Relationship.  Section 74.1232(e) of the Rules prohibits a FM translator 
station, whose coverage contour extends beyond the protected contour of the commercial primary station, 
such as Station W272AY, from receiving any support, either directly or indirectly, from the commercial 
primary FM station, or from any person or entity having any interest whatsoever, or any connection with,
the primary FM station.
28
  Similarly Section 74.1232(d) of the Rules dictates that the Commission will not 
                                                     
21
Petition at 8.  In support of its claim, Heartland submits a Declaration from Reinhard, dated July 16, 2010, 
attached as an Exhibit to TEA’s July 16, 2010, Opposition to Complaint (stating “After it stopped broadcasting 
WJJH, [the Station] went off the air for a month, until August 14, 2008, when it began rebroadcasting WUPM.”)
22
See Reinhard Statement, dated November 15, 2012, attached as Exhibit to Opposition; Franz Statement, dated 
November 4, 2012.   
23
47 CFR § 73.1263(c).
24
47 CFR § 74.1284(b).
25
Id.
26
Petition at 9.
27
See Reinhard Statement at 3.  TEA does not submit a date stamped copy of the letter, and we have not located a 
copy of this filing in the Commission's Reference Information Center.  Accordingly, we cannot consider this 
probative evidence of the filing.
28
47 CFR § 74.1232(e).  Interested and connected parties extend to group owners, corporate parents, shareholders, 
officers, directors, employees, general and limited partners, family members and business associates.  
Federal Communications Commission DA 17-1169
5
grant an authorization for such “other area” translator to persons or entities interested in, or connected 
with, the commercial primary FM station.
29
  
12. In September 2009, TEA changed its primary station to WIMI(FM), which is licensed to J&J 
Broadcasting, Inc.  Heartland asserts that TEA’s principal Reinhard has an impermissible business 
relationship with J&J’s President, Gerald J. Hackman, in violation of Section 74.1232(e) of the Rules.
30
  
To support this claim, Heartland references legal agreements, listing Reinhard as counsel for J&J, which 
were filed with the July 2009, application to assign WIMI(FM) to J&J.
31
  Further, Heartland asserts that 
on August 23, 2012, W272AY identified itself as a J&J station on the air, buttressing its claim of an 
impermissible relationship between the Station and J&J.
32
13. To rebut Heartland’s allegations, TEA submits Reinhard’s statement, under penalty of 
perjury, declaring that “the translator has no connection with WIMI or J&J Broadcasting, other than 
permission to rebroadcast its programs.”
33
  TEA also references Reinhard’s July 16, 2010, sworn 
declaration, stating “I am not Jerry Hackman’s local attorney, nor is there a business relationship between 
Mr. Hackman and myself.”
34
Further, TEA asserts that the Station does not identify itself as a J&J 
station.  Rather, TEA explains that its engineer aired one unauthorized station announcement, improperly 
identifying the translator as a J&J station, and Reinhard immediately removed the reference to J&J from 
the on-air identification.
35
      
14. We rely on TEA’s sworn statements, affirming that there has been no prohibited business 
relationship between Reinhard and primary station licensee J&J in violation of the Commission’s Rules.  
Further, we find that Heartland has failed to provide sufficient evidence to raise a substantial and material 
question of fact regarding the Station’s compliance with Section 73.1232(e) of the Rules.  We, however, 
caution TEA to remain attentive to its Section 73.1232 restrictions and obligations.   
15. Proposed Forfeiture.  Under Section 503(b)(1)(B) of the Act, a person who is found to have 
willfully or repeatedly failed to comply with any provision of the Act or any rule, regulation, or order 
issued by the Commission shall be liable to the United States for a forfeiture penalty.
36
  Section 312(f)(1) 
of the Act defines willful as “the conscious and deliberate commission or omission of [any] act, 
irrespective of any intent to violate” the law.
37
  The legislative history to Section 312(f)(1) of the Act 
                                                     
29
47 CFR § 74.1232(d).  The underlying rationale for this prohibition is to prevent FM station licensees from using 
FM translators as a competitive means for extending their stations' service areas.  See, e.g., Amendment of Part 74 of 
the Commission’s Rules Concerning FM Translator Stations, Report and Order, 5 FCC Rcd 7212 (1990).     
30
Petition at 10. 
31
See FCC File No. BAL-20090717ABC.
32
Petition at 11.
33
Reinhard Statement at 2.
34
See July 16, 2010, Reinhard Declaration, attached as an Exhibit to TEA’s July 16, 2010, Opposition to Complaint.  
Reinhard declares that: (1) he does not represent Mr. Hackman; (2) in November 2008, he received an email from an 
attorney that included a contract that was being negotiated between Hackman and the previous owners of WIMI; (3) 
another attorney, Stephen Walker, represented J&J in the purchase of WIMI; and (4) he had no knowledge that his 
name had been inadvertently left on some of the WIMI sales documents as the attorney of record.      
35
Opposition at 8.
36
47 U.S.C. § 503(b)(1)(B).  See also 47 CFR § 1.80(a)(1).
37
47 U.S.C. § 312(f)(1).
Federal Communications Commission DA 17-1169
6
clarifies that this definition of willful applies to both Sections 312 and 503(b) of the Act,
38
and the 
Commission has so interpreted the term in the Section 503(b) context.
39
  Section 312(f)(2) 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.”
40
16. The Commission’s Forfeiture Policy Statement, Section 1.80 of the Rules, and Section 
503(b)(2)(A) of the Act establish Commission guidelines for assessing forfeitures.
41
  These guidelines, 
however, do not enumerate a base forfeiture amount for an FM translator's originating programming in 
excess of the limits prescribed in Section 74.1231 of the Rules.  They do, however, set a base forfeiture 
amount of $4,000 for “unauthorized emissions.”
42
As noted above, it is uncontested that unauthorized 
programming originated on the Station over several days, apparently without Reinhard's knowledge or 
control.
43
Taking into consideration these facts and the factors required by Section 503(b)(2)(D) of the 
Act and the Forfeiture Policy Statement, we propose a forfeiture in the amount of $4,000.
44
17. License Renewal Application.  We have evaluated the Application pursuant to Section 309(k) 
of the Act, and we find that the TEA’s apparent violation of Section 74.1231(b) of the Rules
45
does not 
constitute a “serious violation” warranting designation for evidentiary hearing.  Moreover, we find no 
evidence of violations that, when considered together, constitute a pattern of abuse.
46
  Further, based on 
our review of the license renewal application, we find that the Station served the public interest, 
convenience, and necessity during the subject license term.  We will therefore grant the license renewal 
application by separate action upon the conclusion of this forfeiture proceeding if there are no issues other 
than the apparent violation that would preclude grant of the application.   
IV. ORDERING CLAUSES
18. Accordingly, IT IS ORDERED, that pursuant to Section 503(b) of the Communications Act 
of 1934, as amended, and Section 1.80 of the Commission’s Rules, that TEA-VISZ, Inc. is hereby 
                                                     
38
See H.R. Rep. No. 97-765, 97
th
Cong. 2d Sess. 51 (1982).
39
See Southern California Broad. Co., Memorandum Opinion and Order, 6 FCC Rcd 4387, 4388, para. 5 (1991) 
recon denied, 7 FCC Rcd 3454 (1992).
40
47 U.S.C. § 312(f)(2). 
41
See Forfeiture Policy Statement and Amendment of Section 1.80(b) of the Rules to Incorporate Forfeiture 
Guidelines, Report and Order, 12 FCC Rcd 17087, 17113-15 (1997) (Forfeiture Policy Statement), recon denied, 
Memorandum Opinion and Order, 15 FCC Rcd 303 (1999); 47 CFR § 1.80.  
42
47 CFR 1.80(b)(6).
43
As discussed above, we do not find that any of the other alleged violations rise to the level of proposing a 
forfeiture.
44
See, e.g., Juan Alberto Ayala, 27 FCC Rcd 16033 (2012) (proposing a $4,000 forfeiture to an FM translator 
station for originating programming in excess of that allowed by the Rules).  
45
47 CFR § 74.1231(b).
46
For example, we do not find that TEA’s operation “was conducted in an exceedingly careless, inept, and negligent 
manner and that the licensee is either incapable of correcting or unwilling to correct the operation deficiencies.”  See 
Heart of the Black Hills Station, Decision, 32 FCC 2d 196, 198, para. 6 (1971).  Further, nor do we find on the 
record here that “the number, nature and extent” of the violations indicate that “the licensee cannot be relied upon to 
operate [the station] in the future in accordance with the requirements of its licenses and the Commission’s Rules.”  
Id. at 200, para. 11.  See also Center for Study and Application of Black Econ. Dev., Hearing Designation Order, 6 
FCC Rcd 4622 (1991); Calvary Educ. Broad. Network, Inc., Hearing Designation Order, 7 FCC Rcd 4037 (1992).  
Federal Communications Commission DA 17-1169
7
NOTIFIED of its APPARENT LIABILITY FOR FORFEITURE in the amount of four thousand dollars 
($4,000) for its apparent willful and repeated violation of Section 74.1231(b) of the Commission’s Rules. 
19. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED, pursuant to Section 1.80 of the FCC’s rules, that, within thirty 
(30) days of the release date of this NAL, TEA-VISZ, Inc. SHALL PAY the full amount of the proposed 
forfeiture or SHALL FILE a written statement seeking reduction or cancellation of the proposed 
forfeiture.
20. Payment of the proposed forfeiture must be made by check or similar instrument, wire 
transfer or credit card, and must include the NAL/Acct. No. and FRN No. referenced herein. Regardless 
of the form of payment, a completed FCC Form 159 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).  Licensee will also send electronic notification on the 
date said payment is made to Karen.Workeman@fcc.gov and Parul.Desai@fcc.gov.
21. Below are additional instructions that should be followed based on the form of payment 
selected: 
? Payment by check or money order must be made payable to the order of the 
Federal Communications Commission. Such payments (along with the completed Form
159) must be mailed to Federal Communications Commission, P.O. Box 979088, St.
Louis, MO 63197-9000, or sent via overnight mail to U.S. Bank – Government
Lockbox #979088, SL-MO-C2- GL, 1005 Convention Plaza, St. Louis, MO 63101.
? Payment by wire transfer must be made to ABA Number 021030004, receiving 
bank TREAS/NYC, and Account Number 27000001. To complete the wire transfer and
ensure appropriate crediting of the wired funds, a completed Form 159 must be faxed to
U.S. Bank at (314) 418-4232 on the same business day the wire transfer is initiated.
? Payment by credit card must be made by providing the required credit card
information on FCC Form 159 and signing and dating the Form 159 to authorize the
credit card payment. The completed Form 159 must then be mailed to Federal
Communications Commission, P.O. Box 979088, St. Louis, MO 63197-9000, or sent via
overnight mail to U.S. Bank – Government Lockbox #979088, SL-MO-C2-GL, 1005 
Convention Plaza, St. Louis, MO 63101.
22. The response, if any, must be mailed to Office of the Secretary, Federal Communications 
Commission, 445 12
th
Street, S.W., Washington DC 20554, ATTN:  Peter H. Doyle, Chief, Audio 
Division, Media Bureau, and MUST INCLUDE the NAL/Acct. No. referenced above.
23. The Commission will not consider reducing or canceling a forfeiture in response to a claim of 
inability to pay unless the respondent 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 respondent’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. 
24. Requests for full payment of the forfeiture proposed in this NAL under the installment plan 
should be sent to:  Associate Managing Director-Financial Operations, 445 12th Street, S.W., Room 1-
A625, Washington, DC 20554.
47
25. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the Petition to Deny filed by Heartland Communications 
                                                     
47
47 CFR § 1.1914.
Federal Communications Commission DA 17-1169
8
Group, LLC and Heartland Comm. License, LLC on September 24, 2012, IS DENIED.
Federal Communications Commission DA 17-1169
9
26. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that copies of this NAL shall be sent, by First Class and 
Certified Mail, Return Receipt Requested, to TEA-VISZ, Inc., 170 North 4
th
Avenue, Park Falls, WI 
54552, and to its counsel, Jerrold Miller, Esq., Miller and Neely, P.C., 6900 Wisconsin Avenue, Suite 
704, Bethesda, MD 20815, and to counsel for Heartland Communications Group, LLC, Kevin M. Walsh, 
Esq., Law Office of Kevin M. Walsh, PLLC, 603 Davis Street, Suite 1009, Austin, TX 78701.
FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION
Peter H. Doyle
Chief, Audio Division
Media Bureau