Click here for Adobe Acrobat version
Click here for Microsoft Word version
This document was converted from Microsoft Word.
Content from the original version of the document such as
headers, footers, footnotes, endnotes, graphics, and page numbers
will not show up in this text version.
All text attributes such as bold, italic, underlining, etc. from the
original document will not show up in this text version.
Features of the original document layout such as
columns, tables, line and letter spacing, pagination, and margins
will not be preserved in the text version.
If you need the complete document, download the
Microsoft Word or Adobe Acrobat version.
Federal Communications Commission
Washington, D.C. 20554
In the Matter of )
) File No. EB-01-MA-014
CTI of Miami, Inc. )
Miami, Florida ) NAL/Acct. No.
) FRN Number: 0006-
NOTICE OF APPARENT LIABILITY FOR FORFEITURE
By the Enforcement Bureau, Miami Office:
1. In this Notice of Apparent Liability for
Forfeiture, we find that CTI of Miami, Inc. (``CTI'')
apparently violated Sections 301 and 302(b) of the
Communications Act of 1934, as amended (``Act''),1 and
Section 2.803(a)(1) of the Commission's Rules,2 by operating
an unauthorized high-power cordless telephone without FCC
authorization and by marketing an unauthorized high-power
cordless telephone (``Senao, SN258-Plus''). We conclude
that CTI is apparently liable for a forfeiture in the amount
of seventeen thousand dollars ($17,000).
2. On February 26, 2001 the FCC, Miami Office
received a complaint from the Federal Aviation
Administration (``FAA'') about sporadic interference
affecting the frequency 133.85 MHz in the vicinity of the
Miami, Florida international airport. This frequency is
authorized and used in the Miami area for air traffic
3. On March 7, 2001, the Miami Office resident
agents, using direction finding techniques positively
located the source of the sporadic interference to the FAA
on 133.85 MHz. The interfering signal emanated from an
antenna located on the roof of a two-story building at 4855
NW 72nd Ave., in Miami, FL 33166. Further investigation
revealed that the source of the transmissions on 133.85 MHz
was a Senao, Mod-SN258-Plus cordless telephone, operated by
CTI at that address. The FCC agents hand delivered a
written warning of unlicensed radio operation to Mr. Hillel
Bronstein of CTI. The interfering transmissions ceased
4. On March 26, 2001, the Miami Office issued, via
regular and certified mail, a Citation letter to CTI for
violation of Sections 301 and 302(b) of the Act, and
Section 2.803(a)(1) of the Commission's Rules. The Citation
letter notified CTI of the specific violations, warned CTI
of the potential penalties resulting from any further
violations, and offered the opportunity for a personal
interview with the FCC. The FCC Miami Office received a
Postal Service Return Receipt signed on March 28, 2001,
evidencing delivery of the Citation to CTI.
5. On April 5, 2001, Mr. Hillel Bronstein responded
to the Citation letter by telephone call to the FCC Miami
Office and requested an appointment to meet with the FCC
agents. Subsequently, on a letter received at the Miami
Office on April 11, 2001, Mr. Hillel Bronstein requested a
30 day extension to schedule a new appointment to meet with
the FCC agents. The request for the extension of time to
respond was granted.
6. On April 18, 2001, agents from the FCC Miami
Office visited CTI and observed that the store still had
five unauthorized long-range cordless telephones on display.
7. On May 15, 2001 the Miami Office received a letter
of response from CTI dated May 7, 2001. That letter
indicates that CTI regrets the interference caused to FAA
and assures that they ``[n]o longer have telephones that
operate on US FAA frequency.''
8. On July 26, 2001, an agent from the FCC Tampa
Office visited CTI and observed that the store still had on
display several unauthorized long-range cordless telephones.
9. On November 28, 2001, the Miami Office received a
copy of an invoice dated June 1, 2001, sent to New Image
Electronics from CTI Miami. The invoice indicated that New
Image Electronics purchased from CTI Miami three CT-600 CID
long-range cordless telephones for a total of $ 735.00, and
three OP-8810 CID-Optima long-range cordless telephones for
a total of $795.00.
10. Section 301 of the Act states that ``[n]o person
shall use or operate any apparatus for the transmission of
energy or communications or signals by radio... except under
and in accordance with this Act and with a license in that
behalf granted under the provisions of this Act.''3 Section
302 of the Act authorizes the Commission to regulate
equipment capable of emitting radio frequency energy that
may cause interference to radio communications. Section
302(b) of the Act further states that ``[n]o person shall
manufacture, import, sell, offer for sale, or ship devices
or home electronic equipment and systems, or use devices,
which fail to comply with regulations promulgated pursuant
to this section.''4 Section 2.803(a)(1) of the Rules
provides that ``[n]o person shall sell or lease, or offer
for sale or lease, any radio frequency device unless: (1) In
case of a device subject to certification, such device has
been authorized by the Commission in accordance with the
rules in this chapter and is properly identified and
labeled...''5 CTI, as a marketer of the Senao, SN258-Plus
cordless telephone, is responsible for ensuring that it is
compliant with Commission rules. CTI was notified in
writing of these violations and warned about the penalties
for unlicensed operation and marketing unauthorized devices,
yet continued to market the unauthorized devices in
violation of the Act and the Rules.6
11. Based on the evidence before us, we find that CTI
willfully7 violated Section 301 of the Act,8 and willfully
and repeatedly9 violated Section 302(b) of the Act10 and
Section 2.803(a)(1) of the Commission's Rules.11 Pursuant
to Section 1.80(b)(4) of the Commission's Rules, the base
forfeiture amount for unlicensed operation is $10,000 and
the base forfeiture amount for marketing unauthorized
equipment is $7,000.12 Section 503(b)(2)(D) of the Act
requires us to 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.''13 Considering the entire
record and applying the statutory factors listed above, this
case warrants a $17,000 forfeiture.
IV ORDERING CLAUSES
12. Accordingly, IT IS ORDERED THAT, pursuant to
Section 503(b) of the Act,14 and Sections 0.111, 0.311 and
1.80 of the Commission's Rules,15 CTI, is hereby NOTIFIED
of its APPARENT LIABILITY FOR A FORFEITURE in the amount of
seventeen thousand dollars ($17,000) for violating Sections
301 and 302 of the Act16 and Section 2.803(a)(1) of the
13. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED THAT, pursuant to Section
1.80 of the Commission's Rules,18 within thirty days of the
release date of this NOTICE OF APPARENT LIABILITY, CTI,
SHALL PAY the full amount of the proposed forfeiture or
SHALL FILE a written statement seeking reduction or
cancellation of the proposed forfeiture.
14. Payment of the forfeiture may be made by mailing a
check or similar instrument, payable to the order of the
Federal Communications Commission, to the Forfeiture
Collection Section, Finance Branch, Federal Communications
Commission, P.O. Box 73482, Chicago, Illinois 60673-7482.
The payment MUST INCLUDE the FCC Registration Number (FRN)
referenced above, and also should note the NAL/Acct. No.
referenced above. .
15. The response, if any, must be mailed to Federal
Communications Commission, Office of the Secretary, 445 12th
Street, S.W. Washington, D.C. 20554, ATTN: Enforcement
Bureau - Technical & Public Safety Division, and MUST
INCLUDE the FRN and the NAL/Acct. No. referenced in the
16. 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
17. Requests for payment of the full amount of this
Notice of Apparent Liability under an installment plan
should be sent to: Federal Communications Commission, Chief,
Revenue and Receivables Operation Group, 445 12th Street,
S.W., Washington, D.C. 20554.19
18. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED THAT a copy of this NOTICE
OF APPARENT LIABILITY shall be sent by Certified Mail Return
Receipt Requested to CTI of Miami, Inc., at 4855 NW 72nd
Avenue, Miami, Florida 33166.
FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION
Ralph M. Barlow
1 47 U.S.C. §§ 301 and 302a(b)
2 47 C.F.R. § 2.803(a)(1)
3 47 U.S.C. § 301
4 47 U.S.C. § 302a(b)
5 47 C.F.R. § 2.803(a)(1)
6 Citation issued to CTI of Miami, Inc., on March 26, 2001
7 Section 312(f)(1) of the Act, 47 U.S.C. § 312(f)(1), which
applies to 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...'' See
Southern California Broadcasting Co., 6 FCC Rcd 4387 (1991).
8 47 U.S.C. § 301
9 Section 312(f)(2) of the Act, 47 U.S.C. § 312(f)(2) which
applies equally to Section 503(b) of the Act, provides that
``[t]he term `repeated,' when used with reference to the
commission or omission of any act, means the commission or
omission of such act more than once or, if such commission
or omission is continuous, for more than one day.''
10 47 U.S.C. § 302a(b)
11 47 C.F.R. § 2.803(a)(1)
12 47 C.F.R. § 1.80(b)(4)
13 47 U.S.C. § 503(b)(2)(D)
14 47 U.S.C. § 503(b).
15 47 C.F.R. §§ 0.111, 0.311, 1.80.
16 47 U.S.C. § 301 and 302a
17 47 C.F.R. § 2.803(a)(1)
18 47 C.F.R. § 1.80.
19 See 47 C.F.R. § 1.1914.