
Originally Posted by
RadioRay
OK, here it IS!
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 ) ) FORFEITURE ORDER Adopted: February 14, 2007 Released: February 16, 2007 By the Regional Director, South Central Region, Enforcement Bureau:
I. INTRODUCTION
1. In this Forfeiture Order ("Order"), we issue a monetary forfeiture in the amount of two thousand five hundred dollars ($2,500) to Larry J. Duckworth for willful and repeated violation of Section 301 of the Commission's Act of 1934, as amended ("Act").
The noted violation involves Mr. Duckworth's operation of an unlicensed radio transmitter.
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.
2. On December 15, 2006, the Atlanta Office issued a Notice of Apparent Liability for Forfeiture to Mr. Duckworth in the amount of ten thousand dollars ($10,000) for the apparent willful and repeated violation of Section 301 of the Act.
Mr. Duckworth submitted a response to the NAL requesting a reduction or cancellation of the proposed forfeiture based on his inability to pay.
III. DISCUSSION 3. The proposed forfeiture amount in this case was assessed in accordance with Section 503(b) of the Act, Section 1.80 of the Rules, and The Commission's Forfeiture Policy Statement and Amendment of Section 1.80 of the Rules to Incorporate the Forfeiture Guidelines, 12 FCC Rcd 17087 (1997), recon. denied, 15 FCC Rcd 303 (1999) ("Forfeiture Policy Statement").
In examining Mr. Duckworth's response, Section 503(b) of the Act requires that the Commission take into account the nature, circumstances, extent and gravity of the violation and, with respect to the violator, the degree of culpability, any history of prior offenses, ability to pay, and other such matters as justice may require.
4. 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.
5. 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.
6. 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.
4. 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.
5. 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. Thus, based on the evidence, we find that Mr. Duckworth willfully and repeatedly violated Section 301 of the Act by operating a radio transmitter, his CB transmitter, without the required authorization from the Commission.
6. In his response to the NAL, Mr. Duckworth asserts that a $10,000 forfeiture would produce a financial hardship and requests that the forfeiture be cancelled or significantly reduced. The Commission has determined that, in general, an entity's gross revenues are the best indicator of its ability to pay a forfeiture.
After reviewing Mr. Duckworth's financial documentation, we conclude that a reduction of the forfeiture to $2,500 would be appropriate.
7. We have examined Mr. Duckworth's response to the NAL pursuant to the statutory factors above, and in conjunction with the Forfeiture Policy Statement. As a result of our review, we conclude that Mr. Duckworth willfully and repeatedly violated Section 301 of the Act. Although cancellation of the proposed monetary forfeiture is not warranted, reduction of the forfeiture amount to $2,500 is appropriate based on Mr. Duckworth's demonstrated inability to pay.
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 and 1.80(f)(4) of the Commission's Rules, Larry J. Duckworth IS LIABLE FOR A MONETARY FORFEITURE in the amount of two thousand five hundred dollars ($2,500) for violation of Section 301 of the Act.
While this particular one does not refer to 10 Meters directly, there ARE others that do. If you think you CAN'T get fined, keep thinking that............!
RR