TWO CBers slapped with $10,000 fines! Are truckers NEXT?

[RadioRay]

People just refuse to believe that FCC is BACK in business! :shock: Two CB operators have recently slapped with $10,000 FINES and FCC is NOT sympathetic to pleas to reduce the fines these days! According to my sources, it is just a matter of time before DRIVERS who operate out-of-band and use "leenyars" will feel the same sting! If you recall, there have been numerous warnings and letters to trucking companies warning them to STOP their drivers from operating outside the CB band! Remember, fellas, you have FORTY channels within which to conduct your business! Any OTHER use can subject you, and/or your company to fines of the same $10,000 amounts. These fines also apply to the now-common usage of what drivers call "the low channels", the most popular being 26.735 in the AM mode. The "10 meter" frequencies are assigned to the Amateur Radio Service and requires an issued paper license, and
the 26 MHZ frequencies are assigned to the US military--requiring authorization from the military agency for their use.

Here are the FCC actions from: www.fcc.gov/eb If you doubt these actions, it doesn't mean they aren't THERE[/i}!

************************************************** ***********

Click here for Adobe Acrobat version
Click here for Microsoft Word version

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

This document was converted from Microsoft Word.

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
Microsoft Word or Adobe Acrobat version.

************************************************** ***************




Before the

Federal Communications Commission

Washington, D.C. 20554


)

)
In the Matter of File Number: EB-06-AT-057
)
Larry J. Duckworth NAL/Acct.No.: 200732480002
)
Cordele, Georgia FRN: 0015847296
)

))


NOTICE OF APPARENT LIABILITY FOR FORFEITURE

Released: December 15, 2006

By the District Director, Atlanta Field Office, South Central Region,
Enforcement Bureau:

I. INTRODUCTION

1. In this Notice of Apparent Liability for Forfeiture ("NAL"), we find
that Larry J. Duckworth apparently willfully and repeatedly violated
Section 301 of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended ("Act') by
operating a radio transmitter without an authorization from the
Commission. We conclude, pursuant to Section 503(b) of the Act, that Mr.
Duckworth is apparently liable for a forfeiture in the amount of ten
thousand dollars ($10,000).

II. BACKGROUND

2. In response to a complaint, on July 18, 2006, agents from the
Commission's Atlanta Office of the Enforcement Bureau ("Atlanta
Office") conducted an inspection of Mr. Duckworth's CB radio station
located inside his residence. The agents observed a coaxial cable
connecting a linear amplifier to his CB transmitter. The power of the
station as installed measured at 106 watts. Mr. Duckworth admitted to
the agents that he had been operating the station with the attached
linear amplifier. The agents informed him that he was in violation of
the Commission's Rules ("Rules") and that use of a linear amplifier
voided his authority to operate his station. Mr. Duckworth voluntarily
surrendered his linear amplifier.

3. In response to another complaint, on September 28, 2006, agents from
the Atlanta Office re-inspected the CB station in Mr. Duckworth's
residence. The agents observed a coaxial cable connecting two linear
amplifiers to his CB transmitter. The power of the station as
installed measured at 2500 watts. The CB transmitter at his station
was a non-certificated CB transmitter, Galaxy model DX99V. Mr.
Duckworth admitted he used his station as configured.

III. DISCUSSION

4. 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. The term "repeated" means the commission or omission of
such act more than once or for more than one day.

5. Section 301 of the Act requires that no person shall use or operate
any apparatus for the transmission of energy or communications or
signals by radio within the United States except under and in
accordance with the Act and with a license. Section 95.404 of the
Rules states that CB operators do not require an individual license to
operate a CB station because they are authorized by this rule to
operate in accordance with the rules in this subpart.

6. Section 95.409(a) of the Rules requires that CB operators use an FCC
certificated CB transmitter at their CB stations. Section 95.409 of
the Rules also states that use of a non-certificated transmitter voids
your authority to operate your station. On September 28, 2006, agents
from the Atlanta Office observed a non-certificated CB transmitter, a
Galaxy DX99V, installed at his Mr. Duckworth's CB station. Mr.
Duckworth admitted using a non-certificated CB transmitter.

7. Section 95.410(a) of the Rules states that CB station transmitter
output must not exceed 4 watts carrier power. Section 95.410(c) of the
Rules also states that use of a transmitter which has carrier power in
excess of that authorized voids your authority to operate the station.
On July 18, and September 28, 2006, Mr. Duckworth's station carrier
power was measured to be 106 watts and 2500 watts, respectively.

8. Section 95.411(a)(1) of the Rules prohibits attaching an external
radio frequency (RF) power amplifier, sometimes called a linear
amplifier, to a CB transmitter in any way. Section 95.411(b) of the
Rules states that there are no exceptions to this rule and use of a
power amplifier voids your authority to operate the station. On July
18 and September 28, 2006, agents observed linear amplifiers attached
to Mr. Duckworth's CB transmitter. On both dates, Mr. Duckworth
admitted using the linear amplifiers attached to his transmitter.

9. Because Mr. Duckworth violated the CB Rules by using a
non-certificated CB transmitter, attaching linear amplifiers to his CB
transmitter, and operating overpower, he voided his authority to
operate his CB station pursuant to Section 95.404 of the Rules. On
July 18, 2006, Mr. Duckworth was warned that such action voided his
authority to operate his CB Station. Based on the evidence before us,
we find that on July 18 and September 28, 2006, Mr. Duckworth
willfully and repeatedly violated Section 301 of the Act by operating
a radio transmitter, his CB station, without authorization from the
Commission.

10. Pursuant to The Commission's Forfeiture Policy Statement and Amendment
of Section 1.80 of the Rules to Incorporate the Forfeiture Guidelines,
("Forfeiture Policy Statement") and Section 1.80 of the Rules, the
base forfeiture amount for operation without an instrument of
authorization is $10,000. In assessing the monetary forfeiture amount,
we must also take into account the statutory factors set forth in
Section 503(b)(2)(D) of the Act, which include 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 other such matters as justice may
require. Applying the Forfeiture Policy Statement, Section 1.80, and
the statutory factors to the instant case, we conclude that Mr.
Duckworth is apparently liable for a $10,000 forfeiture.

IV. ORDERING CLAUSES

11. 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, Larry J. Duckworth is hereby
NOTIFIED of this APPARENT LIABILITY FOR A FORFEITURE in the amount of
ten thousand dollars ($10,000) for violation of Section 301 of the
Act.

12. 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, Larry J. Duckworth SHALL PAY the full
amount of the proposed forfeiture or SHALL FILE a written statement
seeking reduction or cancellation of the proposed forfeiture.

13. 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/Acct. No. and FRN No. referenced above.
Payment by check or money order may be mailed to Federal
Communications Commission, P.O. Box 358340, Pittsburgh, PA
15251-8340. Payment by overnight mail may be sent to Mellon
Bank /LB 358340, 500 Ross Street, Room 1540670, Pittsburgh, PA
15251. Payment by wire transfer may be made to ABA Number 043000261,
receiving bank Mellon Bank, and account number 911-6106.

14. The response, if any, must be mailed to Federal Communications
Commission, Enforcement Bureau, South Central Region, Atlanta Office,
3575 Koger Blvd., Duluth, GA 30096 and must include the NAL/Acct. No.
referenced in the caption.

15. 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.

16. Requests for payment of the full amount of this Notice of Apparent
Liability under an installment plan should be sent to: Associate
Managing Director - Financial Operations, 445 12^th Street, S.W., Room
1A625, Washington, D.C. 20554.

17. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that a copy of this NOTICE OF APPARENT LIABILITY
shall be sent by Certified Mail Return Receipt Requested to Larry J.
Duckworth at his address of record.

FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION

Douglas G. Miller

District Director, Atlanta Office

Enforcement Bureau

47 U.S.C. S 301.

47 U.S.C. S 503(b).

Section 312(f)(1) of the Act, 47 U.S.C. S 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).

Section 312(f)(2) of the Act, 47 U.S.C. S 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."

47 C.F.R. S 95.404.

47 C.F.R. S 95.409(a).

47 C.F.R. S 95.410(a).

47 C.F.R. S 95.410(c).

47 C.F.R. S 95.411(a)(1).

47 C.F.R. S 95.411(b).

12 FCC Rcd 17087 (1997), recon. denied, 15 FCC Rcd 303 (1999); 47 C.F.R.
S1.80.

47 U.S.C. S 503(b)(2)(D).

47 U.S.C. SS 301, 503(b); 47 C.F.R. SS 0.111, 0.311, 1.80.

AND

************************************************** ********

Before the Federal Communications Commission Washington, D.C. 20554 ) ) In the Matter of ) File Number: EB-05-HU-045 Marcus A. Roberts ) NAL/Acct. No.: 200732540001 Houston, Texas ) FRN: 0004307195 ) ) NOTICE OF APPARENT LIABILITY FOR FORFEITURE Released: January 3, 2007 By the Resident Agent, Houston Office, South Central Region, Enforcement Bureau: I. INTRODUCTION 1. In this Notice of Apparent Liability for Forfeiture ("NAL"), we find that Marcus A. Roberts apparently willfully violated Section 301 of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended ("Act"), by operating an unlicensed radio transmitter. We conclude, pursuant to Section 503(b) of the Act, that Mr. Roberts is apparently liable for a forfeiture in the amount of ten thousand dollars ($10,000). II. BACKGROUND 2. In response to a complaint of interference to household electronic equipment, on April 28, 2006, the Commission's Houston Office of the Enforcement Bureau ("Houston Office") issued Mr. Roberts a warning letter advising him that operation of Citizens Band ("CB") radio equipment with greater power than authorized in the Commission's Rules ("Rules") voids the authority to operate the station and is therefore considered unlicensed operation. The letter further advised that unlicensed operation is a violation of Section 301 of the Act, and could subject the operator to penalties including monetary fines. 3. On September 28, 2006, in response to another complaint of interference, agents from the Houston Office inspected the CB station located at Mr. Roberts' residence. During testing of Mr. Roberts' equipment, the agents determined that his CB station was producing the maximum power authorized in the Rules for CB radio stations. The agents verbally warned Mr. Roberts that any operation of his CB radio station with more power than observed during this inspection would be a violation of the Rules. The agents then inspected a CB radio station installed in Mr. Roberts' vehicle. The CB radio station in the vehicle included a CB transmitter and two linear amplifiers. The linear amplifiers observed had the capability to boost the power of the station to several hundred times the authorized power level. Mr. Roberts admitted to operating the amplifiers and exceeding the authorized power limit; but claimed that he only used this equipment outside the neighborhood. The agents again verbally warned Mr. Roberts that the use of linear amplifiers or any device that creates a power greater than the authorized limit is strictly prohibited by the Rules and voids the authority to operate the CB station. 4. On November 8, 2006, an agent with the Houston Office located the source of a strong signal on a CB radio channel using direction finding methods to Mr. Roberts' residence. The agent recognized the voice of the transmissions to be that of Mr. Roberts. The complainant contacted the agent by telephone to report that Mr. Roberts' transmissions were currently causing interference to her home electronic entertainment equipment. Mr. Roberts' voice was simultaneously observed on the vehicle receiver and on the telephone while talking with the complainant. The agent measured the signal strength of the radio transmissions from Mr. Roberts' radio station with a spectrum analyzer. Agents from the Houston Office then conducted an inspection of Mr. Roberts' CB station. Mr. Roberts admitted he had been operating the radio station prior to the start of this inspection. A wattmeter determined the power of Mr. Roberts' transmitter during the inspection to be four watts, the maximum authorized under the Rules. The complainant was contacted and was not receiving any interference from Mr. Roberts' transmitter while the agents tested the equipment. Without adjusting the output power of the transmitter, the agents conducted a second signal strength measurement, and this second measurement showed a reduction in power from the first measurement by a factor of 10. When asked about the obvious change in power levels, Mr. Roberts offered no explanation. III. DISCUSSION 5. 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. 6. Section 301 of the Act requires that no person shall use or operate any apparatus for the transmission of energy or communications or signals by radio within the United States except under and in accordance with the Act and with a license. Section 95.404 of the Rules states that CB operators do not require an individual license to operate a CB station because they are authorized by this rule to operate in accordance with the rules in this subpart. Section 95.410(a) of the Rules states that CB station transmitter output must not exceed 4 watts carrier power. Section 95.410(c) of the Rules also states that use of a transmitter which has carrier power in excess of that authorized voids your authority to operate the station. On November 8, 2006, agents from the Houston Office determined that Mr. Roberts operated his CB station with power greater than 4 watts carrier power. On April 28 and September 28, 2006, Mr. Roberts was warned that operation of his CB station in excess of 4 watts output power violated the Rules and voided his authority to operate his CB station. Because Mr. Roberts violated the CB Rules by operating overpower, he voided his authority to operate his CB station pursuant to Section 95.404 of the Rules. Based on the evidence before us, we find that on November 8, 2006, Mr. Roberts willfully violated Section 301 of the Act by operating a radio transmitter, his CB station, without authorization from the Commission. 7. Pursuant to The Commission's Forfeiture Policy Statement and Amendment of Section 1.80 of the Rules to Incorporate the Forfeiture Guidelines, ("Forfeiture Policy Statement"), and Section 1.80 of the Rules, the base forfeiture amount for operating without an instrument of authorization is $10,000. In assessing the monetary forfeiture amount, we must also take into account the statutory factors set forth in Section 503(b)(2)(D) 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. Applying the Forfeiture Policy Statement, Section 1.80, and the statutory factors to the instant case, we conclude that Mr. Roberts is apparently liable for a $10,000 forfeiture. IV. ORDERING CLAUSES 8. 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, Marcus A. Roberts is hereby NOTIFIED of this APPARENT LIABILITY FOR A FORFEITURE in the amount of ten thousand dollars ($10,000) for violation of Section 301 of the Act. 9. 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, Marcus A. Roberts SHALL PAY the full amount of the proposed forfeiture or SHALL FILE a written statement seeking reduction or cancellation of the proposed forfeiture. 10. 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/Acct. No. and FRN No. referenced above. Payment by check or money order may be mailed to Federal Communications Commission, P.O. Box 358340, Pittsburgh, PA 15251-8340. Payment by overnight mail may be sent to Mellon Bank /LB 358340, 500 Ross Street, Room 1540670, Pittsburgh, PA 15251. Payment by wire transfer may be made to ABA Number 043000261, receiving bank Mellon Bank, and account number 911-6106. 11. The response, if any, must be mailed to Federal Communications Commission, Enforcement Bureau, South Central Region, Houston Office, 9597Jones Road, #362, Houston, Texas, 77065 and must include the NAL/Acct. No. referenced in the caption. 12. 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. 13. Requests for payment of the full amount of this Notice of Apparent Liability for Forfeiture under an installment plan should be sent to: Associate Managing Director, Financial Operations, 445 12th Street, S.W., Room 1A625, Washington, D.C. 20554.^8 14. 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 Marcus A. Roberts at his address of record. FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION Stephen P. Lee Resident Agent, Houston Office South Central Region Enforcement Bureau 47 U.S.C. S 301. 47 U.S.C. S 503(b). Section 312(f)(1) of the Act, 47 U.S.C. S 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). 47 C.F.R. S 95.404. 47 C.F.R. S 95.410(a). 47 C.F.R. S 95.410(c). 12 FCC Rcd 17087 (1997), recon. denied, 15 FCC Rcd 303 (1999); 47 C.F.R. S1.80. 47 U.S.C. S 503(b)(2)(D). 47 U.S.C. SS 301, 503(b), 47 C.F.R. SS 0.111, 0.311, 0.314, 1.80. ^8 See 47 C.F.R. S 1.1914. (...continued from previous page) (continued....) Federal Communications Commission





RR

[greg3564]

Ray, are you related to Dawn? Or are you just the "radio regs" version of Dawn the "HOS regs" expert?

[emerlin]

If you buy a CB how can you tell if it's "legal?" I don't want to buy anything that would help me negate a good portion of my annual income...

[RadioRay]

Actually, it is quite easy! It will have 40 distinct channels at a power of 4 watts and will have an FCC certification sticker--usually on the back of the set. ANY modifications are illegal, so no trips to Joe's CB Hack Shop and Radio Emporium to get it "tuned up". No snips, clips, modulation tranformer removals.....nothing. Leave the "linear amplifiers" on the shelf.
And, finally, go on the web and read Part 95, Title 47 US Code--the CB radio rules. I believe these can be found at www.powerhousecb.tripod.com (or you can google Powerhouse's CB page).

If the "normal" CB doesn't suit, and you want more, then explore the Amateur Radio license! Also on the web! With this, you will open a whole WORLD of radio fun and adventure a CB could never offer.

But if you stay away from those illegal "10 meter" radios with the extra channels and extra watts, you'll be fine!


Gadfly

[emerlin]

Nahhhhhhhh. I have too many other hobbies and projects I'm not going to get to enjoy to start another. :P

[mike3fan]

or you could just stop using the illeagal equipment after the first warning and therefor avoid the fines........serves them right.

[allan5oh]

You are allowed 12 watts on sideband right? Why don't more guys run sideband? It's more "secret" and the range is much better. If that doesn't suit your fancy, get your damn amateur license!

[mudawg]

I don't get it.Our gov't. can find a couple guys talking on a CB in a country this big so they can fine them :?: :!: :?: :?: Yet they can't find a 6'8" Arab in a country 1\2 the size of Cal.I'm glad my country has its priorities straight,lets keep on dumping money into the most useless branch of the gov't.
I use a 10 meter radio and do take advantage of it when I run with another driver that has one to get away from the BS on the regular 40 channels.I find most people that do use these channels are respectful,professionals that know how to behave themselves in public unlike those on ch19 {for the most part}This is where [ch 19 etc...] some sort of enforcement and fines should be done to the over modulated,over powered,over echoed,reverbed,muffled,back round noised welfare telephone drawling bucket mouths that can't finish a statement without saying come on back morons.This is where the problem is so we should naturally expect them to go after the few that try to get away from it,good job.(SARCASIM)

[fasttruck]

[yoopr]

You don't really expect someone to read all that?

[RadioRay]

I don't get it.Our gov't. can find a couple guys talking on a CB in a country this big so they can fine them :?: :!: :?: :?: Yet they can't find a 6'8" Arab in a country 1\2 the size of Cal.I'm glad my country has its priorities straight,lets keep on dumping money into the most useless branch of the gov't.
I use a 10 meter radio and do take advantage of it when I run with another driver that has one to get away from the BS on the regular 40 channels.I find most people that do use these channels are respectful,professionals that know how to behave themselves in public unlike those on ch19 {for the most part}This is where [ch 19 etc...] some sort of enforcement and fines should be done to the over modulated,over powered,over echoed,reverbed,muffled,back round noised welfare telephone drawling bucket mouths that can't finish a statement without saying come on back morons.This is where the problem is so we should naturally expect them to go after the few that try to get away from it,good job.(SARCASIM)

You have 40--COUNT 'em--channels in which to "get away from 'it'"! You do NOT have an special dispensation to "steal" frequencies that belong to other users who have followed the L A W for the use of them. Those frequencies are ASSIGNED to other users. Tell me, I respectfully ask you, what makes YOU more "special" than those LEGAL users? If EVERY single group could decide for themselves which laws they will obey or not, we would be destroyed. Laws and regulations, within reason, are what make a nation and a society function.

To those being INTERFERRED with, FCC IS doing its job, and they are to be applauded. People are SICK and TIRED of this thing about CB radio and its "outlaw" and "rebel" image that mandates that people somehow have a "right" (the user of a radio under US law is NOT a right; like driving, it is a privilege). One of the catch phrases, I believe, in the CB world is "stomping mudducks.
:?

Whether we like it or not, CB radio in the USA must, by law, have 40 channels, 4 watts of power, and the radios must be FCC-certified. Why?
It is all about interference and the ability of the most people to use CB for their own purposes by limiting power and the types of equipment that may be used. Let's face it: MOST of us are NOT radio technicians and are not capable of making the decision of which radio will meet the criteria above. We are appliance operators the same way we use a cookstove, or a refrigerator! Indeed, there seems to be some peculiar effect where when we purchase a CB radio, we suddenly become "experts" in its use (NOT)! WE think we are, but we are not. That's why those FCC agents ALL have electronics, physics, engineering, and LAW degrees while WE drive trucks! That's not an insult, just the reason we are not qualified to decide for ourselves that "I am so special, and I have a "right" to use them 'extree' channels".

When a driver flips those "band" switches on his ILLEGAL radio to talk on 'them 'ere 10 meter channels' he is a THIEF and can become subject to the SAME $10,000 fines as those base stations who recently got hit! :shock: No ifs ands or BUTS! I don't mean to be harsh, but the RIGHTFUL users of those frequencies have been working for a long time to get something done about this. Those same people studied and tested for their privileges AND many of them spend HOURS volunteering their time and radio resources in disaster relief such as Katrina. In fact, Amateur Radio is one of the FEW radio resources that WORKED while the authorities scratched their heads over "interoperability"! Same with those
so-called 'low channels"; they are assigned to others and if you talk there, you are subjecting yourself to some of those big fines---which, I might add, users assigned these frequencies have been actively attempting to get applied more often thru efforts in Congress and appointments of officials within FCC--one of which has done a LOT to go after illegal users of the 10 Meter band.

So, if you want to "get away", go to channel 11, or 30-----or SOMEWHERE besides those frequencies that BELONG to other people via license or authorization!

RR

[/i]

I have to apologize to all for wasting oxygen and energy by reading this thread.

[ssoutlaw]

I have to apologize to all for wasting oxygen and energy by reading this thread.

looks to me like only the base stations are getting caught, so dont put your moible in your front room...lol

[greg3564]

I have to apologize to all for wasting oxygen and energy by reading this thread.

[Dispatch_This]

So let me get this straight - This guy Duckworth admits to operating a base station with an output of 106 watts and the feds confiscate it. Two months later he gets busted again, only this time he's pumping out 2500 watts! That's too funny!!

[RadioRay]

I have to apologize to all for wasting oxygen and energy by reading this thread.

looks to me like only the base stations are getting caught, so dont put your moible in your front room...lol

HAHA! .....................not quite. How 'bout this one!

FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION
Enforcement Bureau
Spectrum Enforcement Division
1270 Fairfield Road
Gettysburg, Pennsylvania 17325-7245

December 6, 2006

South Lake Transport, Inc.
1828 Two Notch Road #A
Lexington, SC 29071-6982

Subject: Warning Notice - Unlicensed Radio Operation

Case #EB-2007-2954

Dear Sir:

Information before the Commission indicates that two of your drivers have been operating radio equipment without a license on 28.085 MHz and causing interference to licensed stations in the 10 meter amateur band.

The drivers were observed operating unlicensed on September 21, 2006 at 4:45 PM in tractors displaying the numbers 2069 (hauling trailer #30877) and 2079 (hauling trailer # 30937)

Please advise your drivers that operation of radio transmitting equipment without a license is a violation of Section 301 of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended, 47 U.S.C. Section 301, and will subject them to fine or imprisonment, as well as an in rem seizure of any non-certified radio transmitting equipment, in cooperation with the United States Attorney for your jurisdiction. Monetary forfeitures normally range from $7,500 to $10,000.


You are requested to contact me at 717-338-2502 to discuss this matter.

cc: FCC South Central Regional Director

And the "request" is not one of kindness. They'd best not ignore it! This is posted at www.arrl.org as it is of interest to those LEGAL operators..you know; the ones who EARNED the privilege of using those frequencies! It is a courtesy WARNING to give the companies a chance to CORRECT the problem. IF a driver continues to filch "channels", sooner or later, he will be caught again because those legal operators will quietly follow you down the road, record your conversation (perfectly legal), document your info such as company name, location, frequency, time of day and date--even snap a photo of the truck. It then gets sent in to FCC where further action will be taken. Your company is not going to back you up with this, and, in fact, they have been VERY cooperative with FCC in dealing with "export" radios and "extree" channels in their trucks :twisted: Not a good idea to get caught AGAIN doing this.

And to "Dispatch This", the one quoted above is NOT an isolated incident. A HUGE list of trucking companies have been warned to STOP this practice such as UPS, FedEx, Dowell Express, United Van Lines, Estes, Superior Carriers, Tidewater Transit, JW Randolph, Melton Truck Lines, Covenant, Prime--a BUNCH dating back to 2001!! That doesn't include OTHER actions related to this problem such as a number of CB shops and Travel Centers being warned or fined. Pilot Travel Centers settled their NAL for $90,000! Gambler's CB shop recently got hit for $21,000.

So it might be "funny" to you, but I betcha it ain't funny to those guys who now must pay the price of a decent used car ($10,000) because they thought they were smarter than the average "bear" (or FCC agent)! :twisted: OR end up in JAIL!! For those drivers who think who think THEY are smarter than FCC or their company, keep doing this!!! I write these notes to let people know that there is a "bridge" out up the road! Sooner or later, if you think you have some "right" to run "them channels", it's just a matter of time! :sad: They ARE working on something to combat this and FCC attorneys are crafting their response to this so all the legal "T"'s are crossed. I would bet that, sooner or later, like radar detectors, "10 Meter" 'Amateur' (yeah, right) radios will be illegal in CMV's especially if they find that it has been modified to work OUTSIDE 10 Meters. OR they will be just flat out illegal to HAVE in a CMV! :shock:

Best course? Buy a LEGAL CB radio, follow the LAW. OR study for the Amateur ticket. It is easier than ever before. Like CB, there are LAWS to follow.................BUT!!! You will HAVE more "channels" than you will know what to DO with! :P More distance than that outdated and OUTLAWED cb ever dreamed of having--BEEG leenyar not withstanding! You can take a FIVE watt handheld that will drop in your pocket, work thru a repeater and talk for 50 miles OR SEVEN STATES depending where you are!! :shock:

So Drive Safe and LEGAL

RR

[Useless]

Has this subject been talked to death??? ... or has this subject been talked to death???

[Jackrabbit379]

Huh? :P

but,How do they know when you got a big,illegal radio? They say,"Joe Blow trucking,I need you to pull over,please". "Ten foe". "Let me have your radio." Thank ya,here's your fine" :P :| :? :P

[ssoutlaw]

Yes this subject is a dead HORSE....lol Now if we could just convince Ray to follow every law on the books, the world would be perfect...lol

[RadioRay]

Huh? :P

but,How do they know when you got a big,illegal radio? They say,"Joe Blow trucking,I need you to pull over,please". "Ten foe". "Let me have your radio." Thank ya,here's your fine" :P :| :? :P

Well, first of all, the monitors HEAR the drivers transmitting, for example, on 28 MHZ. Since THAT is illegal in itself, it obviously requires a means of getting ON those frequencies! That "means" is a modified "10 Meter
'Amateur' Radio" which has had the CB band added to it. This also allows the radio to not only operate on the 10 Meter band, it usually enables the blasted thing to operate from 24 (12 Meters) up thru 30 MHZ. The most popular "channel" is 28.085 using the AM mode. Trouble is, this area is reserved for Morse Code, teletype and other non-voice modes. Not even the licensed Amateurs are allowed to transmit VOICE between 28.000 and 28.300 MHZ. That means that the driver who is yakkin' up there sticks out like a sore thumb! :shock: If he ventures above the digital area, then the hams will notice it quick! If they haven't realized that it is a "bandit", they may ask for an Amateur Radio Callsign. Additionally, those clipped, snipped, beeped and squeaked super-modulation combined with the often "shakey" and "trucky", or echo-ey sound of a truck will give the illegal driver away. They don't HAVE to know what you have in the truck. They CAN determine via a number of ways WHICH truck is transmitting (by riding beside the truck) and all they have to do is copy down your company name, what frequency you're filching, location, direction of travel, date and time, etc. It is then sent to the Special Counsel for Amateur Enforcement in Gettysburg, PA who, in turn, sends your company a WARNING letter. They MUST reply to this official correspondence detailing what they will do to prevent it happening again. When they reply, the FCC attorney will suggest :wink: that the company simply put out a policy letter FORBIDDING non-certified, non-licensed radio equipment in their fleet and making it a FIRING offense to have it installed. :shock: GOOD MOVE!! Should a driver get caught AGAIN, or ANOTHER driver gets caught, thus disobeying the company policy, he'll cool his heels looking for another gig!

It may be boring to some of us, but this IS a serious matter. WHY? Because ALL radio services have a reasonable expectation to be able to use their OWN radio frequencies without encumbrance from illegal operators. IOW, Police systems, fire, taxis, rescue squads, TV/stereo uses, licensed hams---ALL are protected from the incursions of non-wanted and illegal radio users. Tell me, would you install a POLICE radio in your truck and try to talk to the cops? WHY not? Then WHY do those who install illegal radios and use "channels" they have no business on do it? :sad: Now, drivers have also been going BELOW the CB frequencies and filching on the military frequencies. In FCC's coming actions against illegal CB operators, this is being looked at as well!

You have F O R T Y channels on which to play! USE 'em! Leave the rest of them alone!


RR