|
So I just got ths here BIG radio
What channel does radio ray talk on?? i feel like being aggravating today. HEheh
|
Re: So I just got ths here BIG radio
Originally Posted by jedfxg
What channel does radio ray talk on?? i feel like being aggravating today. HEheh
any channel on the 10 meter band will be fine |
Git 'er dun!
|
Ugghh!
|
Won't bother me "a-tall" (sic)! Like The FCC Special Counsel for Amateur Enforcement told me, (quote) "You can't regulate STOOPID!" If people decide to do something, they'll do it! (That's why there are people who think they can jump the grand canyon!) :D And its why there are people who think that, once they have a mike in their hand, they are all-powerful! :D It's why people who think they are "big and bad" end up like these! Yeah, they're just so "big and bad" wid dem thar extree channels! :D
************************************************** ********** FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION ENFORCEMENT BUREAU Northeast Region Chicago Office 1550 North Northwest Highway, Room 306 Park Ridge, IL 60068 March 21, 2007 CERTIFIED MAIL NO: 7001 1940 0006 2993 3325 RETURN RECEIPT REQUESTED AND FIRST CLASS U.S. MAIL Mr. Bruce Heimes Clinton, IN 47842 NOTICE OF UNLICENSED OPERATION Case Number: EB-07-CG-152 Document Number: W20073232001 The Chicago Office received information that your Citizens Band Radio Service radio station was being operated illegally and causing interference to Clinton Township Volunteer Fire Department's radio communications. On February 28, 2007, agents from this office inspected the radio station at your location and confirmed that you were operating a Yaesu FT-757, Galaxy DX 99V, Galaxy DX 44V, and General AP Hill DX 2517 which are non-certified CB transceivers. Your transceivers were also connected to RF power amplifiers. By using non-certified equipment, you voided your authority to operate this station. Radio stations must be licensed by the FCC pursuant to 47 U.S.C. S 301. You are hereby warned that operation of radio transmitting equipment without a valid radio station authorization constitutes a violation of the Federal laws cited above and could subject the operator to severe penalties, including, but not limited to, substantial monetary fines, in rem arrest action against the offending radio equipment, and criminal sanctions including imprisonment. (see 47 U.S.C. SS 401, 501, 503 and 510). UNLICENSED OPERATION OF THIS RADIO STATION MUST BE DISCONTINUED IMMEDIATELY. You have ten (10) days from the date of this notice to respond with any evidence that you have authority to operate granted by the FCC. Your response should be sent to the address in the letterhead and reference the listed case and document number. Under the Privacy Act of 1974, 5 U.S.C. S 552a(e)(3), we are informing you that the Commission's staff will use all relevant material information before it to determine what, if any, enforcement action is required to ensure your compliance with FCC Rules. This will include any information that you disclose in your reply. You may contact this office if you have any questions. James M. Roop Acting District Director Chicago Office Attachments: Excerpts from the Communications Act of 1934, As Amended Enforcement Bureau, "Inspection Fact Sheet", July 2003 ("big, bad reddio, indeed" HA!) All he has to now do is SNEEZE, and he'll get the fine he richly deserves! ************************************************** *********** This one is even better :twisted: 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. 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 4 Federal Communications Commission. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Now, if you feel "lucky.........punk" (quoting from Dirty Harry) go right ahead! :D :D You "might" even get away with it................for awhile! But, then..........................................ya just never know. Might be that little car with an odd antenna on it that just got you soooooo curious you can't STAND it is riding beside you in the left lane. You are talking to a buddy just ahead describing this unusual antenna. The little car is using one of those little keyring recorder thingys to record your info to turn in to the Feds. Ya just never know. Then the boss calls you into the office to explain why he has a letter from FCC........................... Yeah, it's a crap shoot. Question is, is it WORTH that ONE shot to prove a CB op is "big and bad" and has this BIG radio? REALLY? Is it worth having to jerk that "big" radio OUT of your truck Only YOU can decide that. And only *I* can laugh at the drivers who get caught because I know what the company does when they get these letters! It is really up to only YOU! Now you could just give the 10 thou to ME, and I promise I will use it wisely! :D RR |
Ray, These guys are goating you! They have no better thrill in life to aggrevate law abiding people.
Word of advice! QUIT! I like you, do not condone or participate in unlawful activities, but these guys are just CB Rambo's, that probably own nothing more than a Cobra 25. Real professionals would not participate in this stupidity. Use your talent and abilities elsewhere, and leave this guys to dream and act stupid. If the moderators would do their jobs, and not condone the activities they claim to be participating, they would be warned and/or taken from the board. But since you encourage the comedy hour, they get away with it. If you have something of value to post, then do it, but do not respond to the stupid comments after the fact. I have found myself doing that much to often. Thanks, Horseman |
Originally Posted by RadioRay
Won't bother me "a-tall" (sic)! Like The FCC Special Counsel for Amateur Enforcement told me, (quote) "You can't regulate STOOPID!" If people decide to do something, they'll do it! (That's why there are people who think they can jump the grand canyon!) :D And its why there are people who think that, once they have a mike in their hand, they are all-powerful! :D It's why people who think they are "big and bad" end up like these! Yeah, they're just so "big and bad" wid dem thar extree channels! :D
************************************************** ********** FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION ENFORCEMENT BUREAU Northeast Region Chicago Office 1550 North Northwest Highway, Room 306 Park Ridge, IL 60068 March 21, 2007 CERTIFIED MAIL NO: 7001 1940 0006 2993 3325 RETURN RECEIPT REQUESTED AND FIRST CLASS U.S. MAIL Mr. Bruce Heimes Clinton, IN 47842 NOTICE OF UNLICENSED OPERATION Case Number: EB-07-CG-152 Document Number: W20073232001 The Chicago Office received information that your Citizens Band Radio Service radio station was being operated illegally and causing interference to Clinton Township Volunteer Fire Department's radio communications. On February 28, 2007, agents from this office inspected the radio station at your location and confirmed that you were operating a Yaesu FT-757, Galaxy DX 99V, Galaxy DX 44V, and General AP Hill DX 2517 which are non-certified CB transceivers. Your transceivers were also connected to RF power amplifiers. By using non-certified equipment, you voided your authority to operate this station. Radio stations must be licensed by the FCC pursuant to 47 U.S.C. S 301. You are hereby warned that operation of radio transmitting equipment without a valid radio station authorization constitutes a violation of the Federal laws cited above and could subject the operator to severe penalties, including, but not limited to, substantial monetary fines, in rem arrest action against the offending radio equipment, and criminal sanctions including imprisonment. (see 47 U.S.C. SS 401, 501, 503 and 510). UNLICENSED OPERATION OF THIS RADIO STATION MUST BE DISCONTINUED IMMEDIATELY. You have ten (10) days from the date of this notice to respond with any evidence that you have authority to operate granted by the FCC. Your response should be sent to the address in the letterhead and reference the listed case and document number. Under the Privacy Act of 1974, 5 U.S.C. S 552a(e)(3), we are informing you that the Commission's staff will use all relevant material information before it to determine what, if any, enforcement action is required to ensure your compliance with FCC Rules. This will include any information that you disclose in your reply. You may contact this office if you have any questions. James M. Roop Acting District Director Chicago Office Attachments: Excerpts from the Communications Act of 1934, As Amended Enforcement Bureau, "Inspection Fact Sheet", July 2003 ("big, bad reddio, indeed" HA!) All he has to now do is SNEEZE, and he'll get the fine he richly deserves! ************************************************** *********** This one is even better :twisted: 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. 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 4 Federal Communications Commission. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Now, if you feel "lucky.........punk" (quoting from Dirty Harry) go right ahead! :D :D You "might" even get away with it................for awhile! But, then..........................................ya just never know. Might be that little car with an odd antenna on it that just got you soooooo curious you can't STAND it is riding beside you in the left lane. You are talking to a buddy just ahead describing this unusual antenna. The little car is using one of those little keyring recorder thingys to record your info to turn in to the Feds. Ya just never know. Then the boss calls you into the office to explain why he has a letter from FCC........................... Yeah, it's a crap shoot. Question is, is it WORTH that ONE shot to prove a CB op is "big and bad" and has this BIG radio? REALLY? Is it worth having to jerk that "big" radio OUT of your truck Only YOU can decide that. And only *I* can laugh at the drivers who get caught because I know what the company does when they get these letters! It is really up to only YOU! Now you could just give the 10 thou to ME, and I promise I will use it wisely! :D RR you sure spend a lot of time on something that dosent bother you at all |
LOL jed
|
Originally Posted by RadioRay
Won't bother me "a-tall" (sic)! Like The FCC Special Counsel for Amateur Enforcement told me, (quote) "You can't regulate STOOPID!" If people decide to do something, they'll do it! (That's why there are people who think they can jump the grand canyon!) :D And its why there are people who think that, once they have a mike in their hand, they are all-powerful! :D It's why people who think they are "big and bad" end up like these! Yeah, they're just so "big and bad" wid dem thar extree channels! :D
************************************************** ********** FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION ENFORCEMENT BUREAU Northeast Region Chicago Office 1550 North Northwest Highway, Room 306 Park Ridge, IL 60068 March 21, 2007 CERTIFIED MAIL NO: 7001 1940 0006 2993 3325 RETURN RECEIPT REQUESTED AND FIRST CLASS U.S. MAIL Mr. Bruce Heimes Clinton, IN 47842 NOTICE OF UNLICENSED OPERATION Case Number: EB-07-CG-152 Document Number: W20073232001 The Chicago Office received information that your Citizens Band Radio Service radio station was being operated illegally and causing interference to Clinton Township Volunteer Fire Department's radio communications. On February 28, 2007, agents from this office inspected the radio station at your location and confirmed that you were operating a Yaesu FT-757, Galaxy DX 99V, Galaxy DX 44V, and General AP Hill DX 2517 which are non-certified CB transceivers. Your transceivers were also connected to RF power amplifiers. By using non-certified equipment, you voided your authority to operate this station. Radio stations must be licensed by the FCC pursuant to 47 U.S.C. S 301. You are hereby warned that operation of radio transmitting equipment without a valid radio station authorization constitutes a violation of the Federal laws cited above and could subject the operator to severe penalties, including, but not limited to, substantial monetary fines, in rem arrest action against the offending radio equipment, and criminal sanctions including imprisonment. (see 47 U.S.C. SS 401, 501, 503 and 510). UNLICENSED OPERATION OF THIS RADIO STATION MUST BE DISCONTINUED IMMEDIATELY. You have ten (10) days from the date of this notice to respond with any evidence that you have authority to operate granted by the FCC. Your response should be sent to the address in the letterhead and reference the listed case and document number. Under the Privacy Act of 1974, 5 U.S.C. S 552a(e)(3), we are informing you that the Commission's staff will use all relevant material information before it to determine what, if any, enforcement action is required to ensure your compliance with FCC Rules. This will include any information that you disclose in your reply. You may contact this office if you have any questions. James M. Roop Acting District Director Chicago Office Attachments: Excerpts from the Communications Act of 1934, As Amended Enforcement Bureau, "Inspection Fact Sheet", July 2003 ("big, bad reddio, indeed" HA!) All he has to now do is SNEEZE, and he'll get the fine he richly deserves! ************************************************** *********** This one is even better :twisted: 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. 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 4 Federal Communications Commission. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Now, if you feel "lucky.........punk" (quoting from Dirty Harry) go right ahead! :D :D You "might" even get away with it................for awhile! But, then..........................................ya just never know. Might be that little car with an odd antenna on it that just got you soooooo curious you can't STAND it is riding beside you in the left lane. You are talking to a buddy just ahead describing this unusual antenna. The little car is using one of those little keyring recorder thingys to record your info to turn in to the Feds. Ya just never know. Then the boss calls you into the office to explain why he has a letter from FCC........................... Yeah, it's a crap shoot. Question is, is it WORTH that ONE shot to prove a CB op is "big and bad" and has this BIG radio? REALLY? Is it worth having to jerk that "big" radio OUT of your truck Only YOU can decide that. And only *I* can laugh at the drivers who get caught because I know what the company does when they get these letters! It is really up to only YOU! Now you could just give the 10 thou to ME, and I promise I will use it wisely! :D RR http://i206.photobucket.com/albums/b...b26d83aab2.jpg |
Originally Posted by RadioRay
Won't bother me "a-tall" (sic)! Like The FCC Special Counsel for Amateur Enforcement told me, (quote) "You can't regulate STOOPID!" If people decide to do something, they'll do it! (That's why there are people who think they can jump the grand canyon!) :D And its why there are people who think that, once they have a mike in their hand, they are all-powerful! :D It's why people who think they are "big and bad" end up like these! Yeah, they're just so "big and bad" wid dem thar extree channels! :D
************************************************** ********** FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION ENFORCEMENT BUREAU Northeast Region Chicago Office 1550 North Northwest Highway, Room 306 Park Ridge, IL 60068 March 21, 2007 CERTIFIED MAIL NO: 7001 1940 0006 2993 3325 RETURN RECEIPT REQUESTED AND FIRST CLASS U.S. MAIL Mr. Bruce Heimes Clinton, IN 47842 NOTICE OF UNLICENSED OPERATION Case Number: EB-07-CG-152 Document Number: W20073232001 The Chicago Office received information that your Citizens Band Radio Service radio station was being operated illegally and causing interference to Clinton Township Volunteer Fire Department's radio communications. On February 28, 2007, agents from this office inspected the radio station at your location and confirmed that you were operating a Yaesu FT-757, Galaxy DX 99V, Galaxy DX 44V, and General AP Hill DX 2517 which are non-certified CB transceivers. Your transceivers were also connected to RF power amplifiers. By using non-certified equipment, you voided your authority to operate this station. Radio stations must be licensed by the FCC pursuant to 47 U.S.C. S 301. You are hereby warned that operation of radio transmitting equipment without a valid radio station authorization constitutes a violation of the Federal laws cited above and could subject the operator to severe penalties, including, but not limited to, substantial monetary fines, in rem arrest action against the offending radio equipment, and criminal sanctions including imprisonment. (see 47 U.S.C. SS 401, 501, 503 and 510). UNLICENSED OPERATION OF THIS RADIO STATION MUST BE DISCONTINUED IMMEDIATELY. You have ten (10) days from the date of this notice to respond with any evidence that you have authority to operate granted by the FCC. Your response should be sent to the address in the letterhead and reference the listed case and document number. Under the Privacy Act of 1974, 5 U.S.C. S 552a(e)(3), we are informing you that the Commission's staff will use all relevant material information before it to determine what, if any, enforcement action is required to ensure your compliance with FCC Rules. This will include any information that you disclose in your reply. You may contact this office if you have any questions. James M. Roop Acting District Director Chicago Office Attachments: Excerpts from the Communications Act of 1934, As Amended Enforcement Bureau, "Inspection Fact Sheet", July 2003 ("big, bad reddio, indeed" HA!) All he has to now do is SNEEZE, and he'll get the fine he richly deserves! ************************************************** *********** This one is even better :twisted: 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. 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 4 Federal Communications Commission. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Now, if you feel "lucky.........punk" (quoting from Dirty Harry) go right ahead! :D :D You "might" even get away with it................for awhile! But, then..........................................ya just never know. Might be that little car with an odd antenna on it that just got you soooooo curious you can't STAND it is riding beside you in the left lane. You are talking to a buddy just ahead describing this unusual antenna. The little car is using one of those little keyring recorder thingys to record your info to turn in to the Feds. Ya just never know. Then the boss calls you into the office to explain why he has a letter from FCC........................... Yeah, it's a crap shoot. Question is, is it WORTH that ONE shot to prove a CB op is "big and bad" and has this BIG radio? REALLY? Is it worth having to jerk that "big" radio OUT of your truck Only YOU can decide that. And only *I* can laugh at the drivers who get caught because I know what the company does when they get these letters! It is really up to only YOU! Now you could just give the 10 thou to ME, and I promise I will use it wisely! :D RR |
Originally Posted by countryhorseman
Ray, These guys are goating you! They have no better thrill in life to aggrevate law abiding people.
Word of advice! QUIT! I like you, do not condone or participate in unlawful activities, but these guys are just CB Rambo's, that probably own nothing more than a Cobra 25. Real professionals would not participate in this stupidity. Use your talent and abilities elsewhere, and leave this guys to dream and act stupid. If the moderators would do their jobs, and not condone the activities they claim to be participating, they would be warned and/or taken from the board. But since you encourage the comedy hour, they get away with it. If you have something of value to post, then do it, but do not respond to the stupid comments after the fact. I have found myself doing that much to often. Thanks, Horseman |
Originally Posted by greg3564
Originally Posted by RadioRay
Won't bother me "a-tall" (sic)! Like The FCC Special Counsel for Amateur Enforcement told me, (quote) "You can't regulate STOOPID!" If people decide to do something, they'll do it! (That's why there are people who think they can jump the grand canyon!) :D And its why there are people who think that, once they have a mike in their hand, they are all-powerful! :D It's why people who think they are "big and bad" end up like these! Yeah, they're just so "big and bad" wid dem thar extree channels! :D
************************************************** ********** FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION ENFORCEMENT BUREAU Northeast Region Chicago Office 1550 North Northwest Highway, Room 306 Park Ridge, IL 60068 March 21, 2007 CERTIFIED MAIL NO: 7001 1940 0006 2993 3325 RETURN RECEIPT REQUESTED AND FIRST CLASS U.S. MAIL Mr. Bruce Heimes Clinton, IN 47842 NOTICE OF UNLICENSED OPERATION Case Number: EB-07-CG-152 Document Number: W20073232001 The Chicago Office received information that your Citizens Band Radio Service radio station was being operated illegally and causing interference to Clinton Township Volunteer Fire Department's radio communications. On February 28, 2007, agents from this office inspected the radio station at your location and confirmed that you were operating a Yaesu FT-757, Galaxy DX 99V, Galaxy DX 44V, and General AP Hill DX 2517 which are non-certified CB transceivers. Your transceivers were also connected to RF power amplifiers. By using non-certified equipment, you voided your authority to operate this station. Radio stations must be licensed by the FCC pursuant to 47 U.S.C. S 301. You are hereby warned that operation of radio transmitting equipment without a valid radio station authorization constitutes a violation of the Federal laws cited above and could subject the operator to severe penalties, including, but not limited to, substantial monetary fines, in rem arrest action against the offending radio equipment, and criminal sanctions including imprisonment. (see 47 U.S.C. SS 401, 501, 503 and 510). UNLICENSED OPERATION OF THIS RADIO STATION MUST BE DISCONTINUED IMMEDIATELY. You have ten (10) days from the date of this notice to respond with any evidence that you have authority to operate granted by the FCC. Your response should be sent to the address in the letterhead and reference the listed case and document number. Under the Privacy Act of 1974, 5 U.S.C. S 552a(e)(3), we are informing you that the Commission's staff will use all relevant material information before it to determine what, if any, enforcement action is required to ensure your compliance with FCC Rules. This will include any information that you disclose in your reply. You may contact this office if you have any questions. James M. Roop Acting District Director Chicago Office Attachments: Excerpts from the Communications Act of 1934, As Amended Enforcement Bureau, "Inspection Fact Sheet", July 2003 ("big, bad reddio, indeed" HA!) All he has to now do is SNEEZE, and he'll get the fine he richly deserves! ************************************************** *********** This one is even better :twisted: 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. 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 4 Federal Communications Commission. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Now, if you feel "lucky.........punk" (quoting from Dirty Harry) go right ahead! :D :D You "might" even get away with it................for awhile! But, then..........................................ya just never know. Might be that little car with an odd antenna on it that just got you soooooo curious you can't STAND it is riding beside you in the left lane. You are talking to a buddy just ahead describing this unusual antenna. The little car is using one of those little keyring recorder thingys to record your info to turn in to the Feds. Ya just never know. Then the boss calls you into the office to explain why he has a letter from FCC........................... Yeah, it's a crap shoot. Question is, is it WORTH that ONE shot to prove a CB op is "big and bad" and has this BIG radio? REALLY? Is it worth having to jerk that "big" radio OUT of your truck Only YOU can decide that. And only *I* can laugh at the drivers who get caught because I know what the company does when they get these letters! It is really up to only YOU! Now you could just give the 10 thou to ME, and I promise I will use it wisely! :D RR http://i206.photobucket.com/albums/b...0meter.jpg.png |
Originally Posted by "Fredog
[color=red yes moderators.. whenever anyone disagrees with Ray, they should be labeled as cb rambos and banned from this forum, only people who agree with him should be allowed, what's wrong with you guys?? cant you do your job?? [/color]
|
i think i just peed myself. sometimes you gotta entertain yourself, and i just used the arrogant asses like radio ray and country horseman to do it. thank you for promptly getting on your highhorse and making me laugh. and ray the "accent" of the rednack trucker you do shows what a pompous ass you are.
|
Originally Posted by jedfxg
i think i just peed myself. sometimes you gotta entertain yourself, and i just used the arrogant asses like radio ray and country horseman to do it. thank you for promptly getting on your highhorse and making me laugh. and ray the "accent" of the rednack trucker you do shows what a pompous ass you are.
|
I'm having enough trouble getting my TNC up and running for APRS, seeing, let alone reading, all that legalese just sent me into a coma.
|
Originally Posted by countryhorseman
Originally Posted by "Fredog
[color=red yes moderators.. whenever anyone disagrees with Ray, they should be labeled as cb rambos and banned from this forum, only people who agree with him should be allowed, what's wrong with you guys?? cant you do your job?? [/color]
|
i just looked in the mirror, thanks for the advice..i almost forgot what a good looking son bitch i am. thanks again.
|
If the moderators would do their jobs, and not condone the activities they claim to be participating, they would be warned and/or taken from the board. But since you encourage the comedy hour, they get away with it. First of all, let's get something straight right off the bat. This is a trucking board - not a Ham Radio board. What we have here is a non-trucker complaining because CBer's are bleeding over into his precious 10-meters. And to date, he is still here. Imagine that. We moderate under guidelines that have been set down for us by the owner of the board and one of those big guidelines is to not over-moderate. This falls right into that bucket. As far as Ray goes, he slams on truckers all the time and they turn around and slam back. At the moment, it has never gotten to the point where we had to hand out bans. It has been mildly entertaining for both sides, apparently. But I guarantee you that if it gets to that point, Ray would be the first to go. Hope that clears things up. |
Originally Posted by Twilight Flyer
If the moderators would do their jobs, and not condone the activities they claim to be participating, they would be warned and/or taken from the board. But since you encourage the comedy hour, they get away with it. First of all, let's get something straight right off the bat. This is a trucking board - not a Ham Radio board. What we have here is a non-trucker complaining because CBer's are bleeding over into his precious 10-meters. And to date, he is still here. Imagine that. We moderate under guidelines that have been set down for us by the owner of the board and one of those big guidelines is to not over-moderate. This falls right into that bucket. As far as Ray goes, he slams on truckers all the time and they turn around and slam back. At the moment, it has never gotten to the point where we had to hand out bans. It has been mildly entertaining for both sides, apparently. But I guarantee you that if it gets to that point, Ray would be the first to go. Hope that clears things up. Well said. |
:idea: :idea: :idea: :idea: :idea: :idea: :idea: :idea: :idea: :idea:
Ahh!! The Light of Inspiration hag just gone off!! My Next Venture!! I'm going to take RR's postings, and have them printed upon toilet paper rolls!! How many of you would buy a roll?? |
i wouldn't buy any. i find myself somewhat morbidly obsessed with his cut and paste court documents that i would sit there and read the tp instead of wiping my ass.
|
Yeah, what channel does Ray use? This could be fun. No offense Ray, but come on. We run the radios we want to run. If ever I am on a channel and offend someone, I'll gladly move to another, no problem. But FCC? I aint skeert. I aint gonna be skeert. They can take my radio away and I'll have another just like it tomorrow.
|
Amateurs don't USE "channels". We are talking about the internationally assigned 10 Meter band. What I have been trying to get across (and SOME of us, like SunCom DO get it!) is that the use of the 10 Meter band requires a license issued by the Federal Government. These frequencies are not part of CB and the use of them by unlicensed people WILL get them in trouble plenty. It is the equivilent of installing a police radio in your truck and talking on their band; the law is the same. You are placing yourself in danger of large fines if you do this. Persist and you can find yourself in jail. NO joke! To you, due to the unregulated nature of CB and the undisciplined treatment of CB radios (a child's toy, really as it has not advanced in 50 years) it is funny, but there are people right now IN PRISON over this very thing. (See "Rabbit Ears" who got 8 years for his "extree channels" and harassing lawful radio operators. Also look on the FCC website for "Jack Gerritsen"--also serving time for misdeeds related to interference, unlicensed operation, and interfering with an actual rescue at sea). There were photos of Mr Rabitt Ears in shackles and chains :shock: as he appeared in court.
There is a pecular quirk amonst some people that when they get a microphone in their hand, their head swells and they become this BIG, BAD REDDIO operator. "Nobody can do anything with ME!" I'm BIG and I'm BAD, and I got this h'yar BIG reddiddo; cain't no FCC mess with ME! Funny how this peculiarity only seems to show up with CBers (and an occasional ham who migrated from CB radio). So, sure! You can go out and buy another radio just like you say! A Mr L. Duckworth did EXACTLY that. He first got cited for operating overpower. The agents seized his "linear". So what did this guy do? He goes out and buys a Galaxy 99V and a 2500 watt amp! How STOOPID can you get? Not much more! $10,000 fine later reduced to $2500 upon proof that he could not possibly pay 10 grand (tax records) ************************************************** ********** From: www.fcc.gov/eb (snipped) 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. 4. 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. 9. Payment of the forfeiture (snip) ************************************************** *********** Then again from the FCC website FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION ENFORCEMENT BUREAU NORTHEAST REGION Detroit Office 24897 Hathaway Street Farmington Hills, Michigan 48375 August 16, 2007 (Sent via Certified Return Receipt Requested and First Class U.S. Mail) Seldon Turner Batavia, Ohio NOTICE OF UNLICENSED OPERATION Case Number: EB-07-DT-140 Document Number: W20073236006 The Detroit Office received information that your Citizens Band ("CB") Radio Service station was being operated illegally and causing interference in Batavia, Ohio. On May 16, 2007, an agent from this office inspected the radio station at your residence and confirmed that you were operating a Galaxy DX88HL radio in your vehicle and a galaxy Saturn in your home, which are non-certified CB transceivers. By using these non- certified transceivers, you voided your authority to operate this station. Radio stations must be licensed by the FCC pursuant to 47 U.S.C. S: 301. You are hereby warned that operation of radio transmitting equipment without a valid radio station authorization constitutes a violation of the Federal laws cited above and could subject the operator to severe penalties, including, but not limited to, substantial monetary fines, in rem arrest action against the offending radio equipment, and criminal sanctions including imprisonment. (see 47 U.S.C. S:S: 401, 501, 503 and 510). UNLICENSED OPERATION OF THIS RADIO STATION MUST BE DISCONTINUED IMMEDIATELY. (snipped) From: www.fcc.gov/eb ************************************************** ********** The days of NO chance of getting nailed for CB outlaw-ism are gone. Sure, it's a crap shoot. You might not get caught. But, then................. with so many people just ready to drop a dime on you........................... I guess it boils down to whether you can afford to pay $2500 to $10,000 to FCC for violating the law. It could also mean your JOB if the company gets nailed for allowing illegal equipment in the truck AFTER you were told previously to get it out. Those folks above sure hated having to pay, I'd bet! Do you feel lucky?? :twisted: RR |
Originally Posted by RadioRay
Amateurs don't USE "channels". We are talking about the internationally assigned 10 Meter band. What I have been trying to get across (and SOME of us, like SunCom DO get it!) is that the use of the 10 Meter band requires a license issued by the Federal Government. These frequencies are not part of CB and the use of them by unlicensed people WILL get them in trouble plenty. It is the equivilent of installing a police radio in your truck and talking on their band; the law is the same. You are placing yourself in danger of large fines if you do this. Persist and you can find yourself in jail. NO joke! To you, due to the unregulated nature of CB and the undisciplined treatment of CB radios (a child's toy, really as it has not advanced in 50 years) it is funny, but there are people right now IN PRISON over this very thing. (See "Rabbit Ears" who got 8 years for his "extree channels" and harassing lawful radio operators. Also look on the FCC website for "Jack Gerritsen"--also serving time for misdeeds related to interference, unlicensed operation, and interfering with an actual rescue at sea). There were photos of Mr Rabitt Ears in shackles and chains :shock: as he appeared in court.
There is a pecular quirk amonst some people that when they get a microphone in their hand, their head swells and they become this BIG, BAD REDDIO operator. "Nobody can do anything with ME!" I'm BIG and I'm BAD, and I got this h'yar BIG reddiddo; cain't no FCC mess with ME! Funny how this peculiarity only seems to show up with CBers (and an occasional ham who migrated from CB radio). So, sure! You can go out and buy another radio just like you say! A Mr L. Duckworth did EXACTLY that. He first got cited for operating overpower. The agents seized his "linear". So what did this guy do? He goes out and buys a Galaxy 99V and a 2500 watt amp! How STOOPID can you get? Not much more! $10,000 fine later reduced to $2500 upon proof that he could not possibly pay 10 grand (tax records) ************************************************** ********** From: www.fcc.gov/eb (snipped) 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. 4. 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. 9. Payment of the forfeiture (snip) ************************************************** *********** Then again from the FCC website FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION ENFORCEMENT BUREAU NORTHEAST REGION Detroit Office 24897 Hathaway Street Farmington Hills, Michigan 48375 August 16, 2007 (Sent via Certified Return Receipt Requested and First Class U.S. Mail) Seldon Turner Batavia, Ohio NOTICE OF UNLICENSED OPERATION Case Number: EB-07-DT-140 Document Number: W20073236006 The Detroit Office received information that your Citizens Band ("CB") Radio Service station was being operated illegally and causing interference in Batavia, Ohio. On May 16, 2007, an agent from this office inspected the radio station at your residence and confirmed that you were operating a Galaxy DX88HL radio in your vehicle and a galaxy Saturn in your home, which are non-certified CB transceivers. By using these non- certified transceivers, you voided your authority to operate this station. Radio stations must be licensed by the FCC pursuant to 47 U.S.C. S: 301. You are hereby warned that operation of radio transmitting equipment without a valid radio station authorization constitutes a violation of the Federal laws cited above and could subject the operator to severe penalties, including, but not limited to, substantial monetary fines, in rem arrest action against the offending radio equipment, and criminal sanctions including imprisonment. (see 47 U.S.C. S:S: 401, 501, 503 and 510). UNLICENSED OPERATION OF THIS RADIO STATION MUST BE DISCONTINUED IMMEDIATELY. (snipped) From: www.fcc.gov/eb ************************************************** ********** The days of NO chance of getting nailed for CB outlaw-ism are gone. Sure, it's a crap shoot. You might not get caught. But, then................. with so many people just ready to drop a dime on you........................... I guess it boils down to whether you can afford to pay $2500 to $10,000 to FCC for violating the law. It could also mean your JOB if the company gets nailed for allowing illegal equipment in the truck AFTER you were told previously to get it out. Those folks above sure hated having to pay, I'd bet! Do you feel lucky?? :twisted: RR 1. NOBODY CARES!!!!! 2. NOBODY CARES!!!!! 3. NOBODY CARES!!!!! and 4. NOBODY CARES!!!!! Go start up your own radio site and complain till your blue in the face. There are just as many non truck drivers screwing around on your beloved 10 meter radio too. Get a life, get on some meds and call Dr. Phil. |
Ok, ametures don't use channels. So, why are you so upset when someone else does "use" one? I thought some of this 10 meter band was opened up by the FCC. Free band or something of the sort. I dunno. Its just nice to be able to get off the 40 every now and then and have some intelligent conversation now and then. Not so long ago, I used to spend hours on 27.555 and in that neighborhood on the sidebands talking literally all over the world. That was a lot of fun. Never did I hear any Hams out there throwing a fit. Never have I heard one complain on the radio...ever. But, here I come to this forum and here you are, Ray. I think maybe you have a one man crusade going here. But what do I know, I's just a bigg reddio havin hi skool drop out truck drivin' son uv a gunn.
|
So, I believe what we are getting to is that if your name is Mr. Duckworth, you're toast. The rest of you carry on!
:roll: Greg is right. Nobody here really cares. You are doing nothing but giving Hams a bad name and goading people into actually doing the things you are whining about. I know, I've seen a few of the PM's. You tick off several dozen people here enough to play in your precious 10 meters just to "show you", what have you accomplished? Nothing but muck up your precious 10 meters and if you think any of them are going to get caught, you're deluding yourself. Figure it out here, Ray. The problem at this point is you. There are plenty of different ways to handle the 'problem'. Your way is akin to throwing gasoline on a fire in hopes of putting it out. :roll: |
Originally Posted by Bandit102
Ok, ametures don't use channels. So, why are you so upset when someone else does "use" one? I thought some of this 10 meter band was opened up by the FCC. Free band or something of the sort. I dunno. Its just nice to be able to get off the 40 every now and then and have some intelligent conversation now and then. Not so long ago, I used to spend hours on 27.555 and in that neighborhood on the sidebands talking literally all over the world. That was a lot of fun. Never did I hear any Hams out there throwing a fit. Never have I heard one complain on the radio...ever. But, here I come to this forum and here you are, Ray. I think maybe you have a one man crusade going here. But what do I know, I's just a bigg reddio havin hi skool drop out truck drivin' son uv a gunn.
OK, I'm gonna answer THIS one and quit. The 10 Meter band is an internationally assigned, treaty-governed allocation. It is allocated to LICENSED amateur radio operators. The FCC cannot, and WILL not "open up" 10 Meters; they do not have the authority so long as the USA is a signatory to those treaties. Just as info, the 10 Meter band is 28.000 thru 29.700 MHZ. That 27.555 thing is a part of the mythical "freeband" that untrained CBers have convinced themselves they have a 'right' to operate on. That's another issue. The hams are not worried about 27 MHZ, but 10 Meters IS their "turf". Play around on 10 Meters and you will eventually be sorry. Read that letter to Mr Duckworth. The Feds gave him a chance and seized his amplifier. Obviously, the man thought his sh-- didn't stink, so he went out and bought TWO amplifiers and a Galaxy 99V to boost his power to 2500 watts (the "Ah'm this h'yar BIG, BAD reddio operator thar, tan-fer thar?" syndrome) It caused a $10,000 forfeiture (later reduced to $2500 upon proof of inability to pay 10 grand). If he does it again, he WILL find himself in court facing up to 10 years in prison. There are PLENTY of warnings and notices to CB operators as well as truckers over the 10 Meter issue. They appear at www.arrl.org and on the FCC website. There's enough of them to convince a sane person that playing around on licensed spectrum isn't a good idea. Liking or hating RadioRay doesn't change the facts of the matter, nor will it make your chances of getting in trouble over this any less. Going onto 10 Meters is a BAD idea! For many years, truckers have complained on various websites about being like Rodney Dangerfield----not getting any respect. I remember a time when truckers WERE members of a respected profession. Then the "cowboy" image, the "bad boy" genre. and the "BIG BAD REDDIO operator" with this idea that because he has a large vehicle he has a right to push around other vehicles thru intimidation, additionally that large truck gives them the right to break the law regards radio; radio that is assigned to other users for their exclusive use. While most drivers ARE professional and clean, the image is tarnished by a "seedy", rough-hewn bunch who feel they should be looked up to no matter WHAT they do. It is these few that cause trouble for the REST of the profession. They think they are "cowboys" riding the trail in white hats and nothing they do can be suspect. Then the entire profession wonders why they DON'T get respect. :? Respecting the law of the land is part of earning respect and trust. When a group of people is being aggrieved by a bunch of unlicensed CBers who DEMAND, PUSH, GRAB radio space and STEAL something that they have NO right to, how can you expect to be "respected"? The hams (most of them, of course, who have never posted here) EARNED the privilege of using blocks of radio spectrum NOT by GRABBING SOMETHING THAT DOESN'T BELONG TO THEM, BUT BY FOLLOWING THE LAW, STUDYING THE MATERIAL, THEN TESTING TO MEET THE MIMIMUM REQUIREMENTS PRESCRIBED BY LAW. Outlaw CBers, OTH, simply STEAL that which doesn't belong to them like the common thief they are, then wonder why "Ah jist don' git no respect"! Respect is earned, and RETURNED in the measure it is due! Your image as a profession is being tarnished by this small (?) group of people who feel that THEY are just SOOOOOO important that they can brush others aside and walk right into some else's "house" without invitation (in this case, license). CB radio as a whole, while a useful tool (sometimes) has a negative image among the public who has migrated from that to computers, cellphones and fax. That image is one of trailer parks, interference to TV and entertainment devices, outlaw-ism, disregard for rules, low income, bad attitudes, and a certain low classness. Yes, that sounds bad---and it is, but it is THERE, and not because I say so. CB has never shaken the "Smokey and the Bandit", car chases, ten-four goody buddy image, and all the public knows is, his TV is on the fritz because of this CBer down the street who insists on using that "leenyar". Drivers who filch 10 Meters have this same image among those hams who EARNED their privileges. Yes, you can place all your anger on ME since I'm the one who posts here. If you think that I am the only one who DISRESPECTS outlaws because *they* aren't posting here, you are delusional. (Google "truckers and 10 Meters" ifyou don't believe me). Google "Hammies want us off 10 Meters"----DAMN straight we do; it BELONGS to US! :evil: It isn't JUST me that RESENTS those of you show up on 28 MHZ! Read www.qrz.com for some of the archives on this subject and you will see some REAL hatred for the outlaws! Even a disdain for CB radio as a whole! Nope it isn't "them elitist hams thinkin' they's better than us"! It isn't about being "stuck up"! CB radio has EARNED its reputation (dis)honestly and gets exactly the reputation it deserves ranging from mild disdain to a full hatred for all things CB! :shock: It's about earning respect for your fellow man! You don't do it by thieving something from the other guy! And while you laugh, remember the things that are being done behind the scenes to stop your theft! (those who think they are radio Gods who are exempt from the law. Just because you aren't reading it doesn't mean things are being done. Want respect? Then EARN it with dignity by giving respect to those you want it from. Follow the law. Keep your CB radio on the 40 channels; most of the time, the majority of them are quiet. The going outside of them is mostly a way to feel "important" ("I gots dem extree channels an' you ain't got none" like a 5th grader. I've said my piece, this thread is now worn tired. I'm done for now. ZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZ Z RR |
OK, I'm gonna answer THIS one and quit. Thank God!!!! :roll: |
Google "Hammies want us off 10 Meters"----DAMN straight we do; it BELONGS to US! :roll: No one here cares, Ray. And if anyone here is in the 10 meter band, no one here is afraid of getting caught. You aren't the only Ham on this board. But you are alone on your own little island. There's not a lot of respect out there for you. :roll: |
ray shows his ass because of joke. and i did not realize how hated my cb"reddidio" was hated. why does ray feel the need to insult, maybe that is why we all think he is an ass, and try to aggravate him. sometimes kindness, and the willingness to work things out peacefully gets a hell of alot more accomplished. 10-4.
|
sometimes kindness, and the willingness to work things out peacefully gets a hell of alot more accomplished. |
He makes me want to dig out my old Galaxy 99 and my 5K watts of Linears hook them up tune to what ever freq he is on and then ROGER BEEP him non stop for about 3 hours then switch over to the Tarzan yell then go over to my Shut Up Stupid for the last bit of time. Sorry to the other Hammies out there but he just makes me mad.
|
Originally Posted by RadioRay
Google "Hammies want us off 10 Meters"----DAMN straight we do; it BELONGS to US! :evil:
|
Originally Posted by greg3564
Originally Posted by RadioRay
Google "Hammies want us off 10 Meters"----DAMN straight we do; i
t BELONGS to US! That's why they call it a RAY-dio |
Originally Posted by Fredog
That's why they call it a RAY-dio |
Originally Posted by Fredog
That's why they call it a RAY-dio
Or Ray-DILDO?? |
The BIG, the BAD............................................
The BIG, The BAD.............................................
The BUSTED!!!!! :D :D :D :D :D www.fcc.gov/eb (See most recent actions) Before the Federal Communications Commission Washington, D.C. 20554 In the Matter of ) ) Sammy Zeigler ) File No. EB-07-AT-176 ) Coosada, Alabama ) NOV No. V20073248010 ) ) NOTICE OF VIOLATION Released: September 28, 2007 By the District Director, Atlanta Office, South Central Region, Enforcement Bureau: 1. This is a Notice of Violation ("Notice") issued pursuant to Section 1.89 of the Commission's Rules to Sammy Zeigler, operator of a Citizen's Band ("CB") radio station in Coosada, Alabama. 2. On August 29, 2007, agents of the Commission's Atlanta Office of the Enforcement Bureau inspected the CB radio station located in your residence in Coosada, Alabama. The FCC agents observed the following violation(s): 47 C.F.R. S: 95.409: You must use an FCC certificated CB transmitter at your CB station. The agents observed two non-certificated Amateur Radio Service transmitters that had been modified to operate on CB frequencies and were capable of operating with 90 watts carrier power installed in your CB radio station. 3. Pursuant to Section 308(b) of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended,3 and Section 1.89 of the Commission's Rules, you must submit a written statement concerning this matter within twenty (20) days of release of this Notice. The response must fully explain each violation, must contain a statement of the specific action(s) taken to correct each violation and preclude recurrence, and should include a time line for completion of pending corrective action(s). The response must be complete in itself and signed by you. All replies and documentation sent in response to this Notice should be marked with the File No. and NOV No. specified above, and mailed to the following address: Federal Communications Commission Atlanta Office 3575 Koger Blvd, Suite 320 Duluth, GA 30096 4. This Notice shall be sent to your address of record. 5. The Privacy Act of 19744 requires that we advise you that the Commission will use all relevant material information before it, including any information disclosed in your reply, to determine what, if any, enforcement action is required to ensure compliance. Any false statement made knowingly and willfully in reply to this Notice is punishable by fine or imprisonment under Title 18 of the U.S. Code. FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION Douglas G. Miller District Director, Atlanta District Office South Central Region Enforcement Bureau 5 47 C.F.R. S: 1.89. Section 95.410 of the Commission's Rules states that CB station transmitter output power must not exceed 4 watts carrier power. 47 C.F.R. S: 95.410. 3 47 U.S.C. S: 308(b). 4 P.L. 93-579, 5 U.S.C. S: 552a(e)(3). 5 18 U.S.C. S: 1001 et seq. Federal Communications Commission 2 Federal Communications Commission |
:roll: :roll: :roll: :roll: :roll: :roll: :roll: :roll: :roll: :roll: :roll: :roll:
BFD!!! YYaawwwwwwnnnnnnn!! |
!
Originally Posted by RadioRay
The BIG, The BAD.............................................
The BUSTED!!!!! :D :D :D :D :D www.fcc.gov/eb (See most recent actions) Before the Federal Communications Commission Washington, D.C. 20554 In the Matter of ) ) Sammy Zeigler ) File No. EB-07-AT-176 ) Coosada, Alabama ) NOV No. V20073248010 ) ) NOTICE OF VIOLATION Released: September 28, 2007 By the District Director, Atlanta Office, South Central Region, Enforcement Bureau: 1. This is a Notice of Violation ("Notice") issued pursuant to Section 1.89 of the Commission's Rules to Sammy Zeigler, operator of a Citizen's Band ("CB") radio station in Coosada, Alabama. 2. On August 29, 2007, agents of the Commission's Atlanta Office of the Enforcement Bureau inspected the CB radio station located in your residence in Coosada, Alabama. The FCC agents observed the following violation(s): 47 C.F.R. S: 95.409: You must use an FCC certificated CB transmitter at your CB station. The agents observed two non-certificated Amateur Radio Service transmitters that had been modified to operate on CB frequencies and were capable of operating with 90 watts carrier power installed in your CB radio station. 3. Pursuant to Section 308(b) of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended,3 and Section 1.89 of the Commission's Rules, you must submit a written statement concerning this matter within twenty (20) days of release of this Notice. The response must fully explain each violation, must contain a statement of the specific action(s) taken to correct each violation and preclude recurrence, and should include a time line for completion of pending corrective action(s). The response must be complete in itself and signed by you. All replies and documentation sent in response to this Notice should be marked with the File No. and NOV No. specified above, and mailed to the following address: Federal Communications Commission Atlanta Office 3575 Koger Blvd, Suite 320 Duluth, GA 30096 4. This Notice shall be sent to your address of record. 5. The Privacy Act of 19744 requires that we advise you that the Commission will use all relevant material information before it, including any information disclosed in your reply, to determine what, if any, enforcement action is required to ensure compliance. Any false statement made knowingly and willfully in reply to this Notice is punishable by fine or imprisonment under Title 18 of the U.S. Code. FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION Douglas G. Miller District Director, Atlanta District Office South Central Region Enforcement Bureau 5 47 C.F.R. S: 1.89. Section 95.410 of the Commission's Rules states that CB station transmitter output power must not exceed 4 watts carrier power. 47 C.F.R. S: 95.410. 3 47 U.S.C. S: 308(b). 4 P.L. 93-579, 5 U.S.C. S: 552a(e)(3). 5 18 U.S.C. S: 1001 et seq. Federal Communications Commission 2 Federal Communications Commission Ray, why don't you go do your true calling as a snitch and go for for the FCC? And then, when after staking out a home for several days like a real cop, you bust in the doors of the trailer home and yell "HEY THOSE FREQUENCIES BELONG TO ME BUCKO!" Then, the FCC will send a form letter to those bastards and really show them a thing or two. YEAH!!!!!!! :twisted: FCC Special Agent Ray will be a force to be reckoned with and will strike fear in the hearts of all unsuspecting white trash and truck drivers across the land. |
| All times are GMT -12. The time now is 04:05 AM. |
Copyright © 2026 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved