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

This document was converted from Microsoft Word.

Content from the original version of the document such as
headers, footers, footnotes, endnotes, graphics, and page numbers
will not show up in this text version.

All text attributes such as bold, italic, underlining, etc. from the
original document will not show up in this text version.

Features of the original document layout such as
columns, tables, line and letter spacing, pagination, and margins
will not be preserved in the text version.

If you need the complete document, download the
Microsoft Word or Adobe Acrobat version.

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




                              Before the
                   Federal Communications Commission
                        Washington, D.C. 20554


In the Matter of                  )
James Cable Partners, LP          )
d/b/a CommuniComm Services        )   NAL/Acct. No. 20013280-0002
                                 )   EB-00-DV-267
Physical System ID 006437         )
Akron, Colorado                   )



              NOTICE OF APPARENT LIABILITY FOR FORFEITURE

            1.                                 Released:  June 1, 2001  

By the District Director, Denver Office, Enforcement Bureau:


                           I.   INTRODUCTION

In this  Notice of Apparent  Liability for Forfeiture ("NAL")  we find 
that   James   Cable   Partners,  LP,   d/b/a   CommuniComm   Services 
("CommuniComm")  has apparently  violated  Sections 76.605(a)(12)  and 
76.611(a)  of the  Commission's  Rules (the  "Rules")  for failure  to 
comply with  signal leakage standards.   We conclude that  James Cable 
Partners, LP,  d/b/a CommuniComm Services  is apparently liable  for a 
forfeiture in the amount of eight thousand dollars ($8,000).



                            II.  BACKGROUND

The Commission has  established cable signal leakage  rules to control 
emissions that  could cause interference to  aviation frequencies from 
cable systems.  Protecting the  aeronautical frequencies1 from harmful 
interference is of paramount importance.2  To this end, the Commission 
established basic signal  leakage standards. 3 We  have determined the 
tolerable levels  of unwanted signals on  the aeronautical frequencies 
in two ways.   Signal leakage levels that exceed  these thresholds are 
considered harmful  interference.  First,  leakage at any  given point 
must  not  exceed 20  V/m.4   Second,  we  set basic  signal  leakage 
performance criteria for the system as a prerequisite for operation on 
aeronautical  frequencies.  This  is the  system's Cumulative  Leakage 
Index (CLI).   We require annual  measurement of each system's  CLI to 
demonstrate safe levels of signal  leakage,5 the results of which must 
be reported to us.6  We also  require routine monitoring of the system 
to  detect leaks.7   Whenever harmful  interference occurs,  the cable 
system  operator  must eliminate  it.8   Further,  should the  harmful 
interference  not  be  eliminated,   we  will  intervene  and  require 
cessation  of operation  of  the  portion of  the  system involved  or 
reduction of  power9 below the  levels specified in Section  76.610 of 
the Commission's Rules.10  Because we  cannot insure that leakage will 
not  occur, we  have also  retained  the requirement  that the  signal 
carriers of cable systems must be  offset from the frequencies used by 
aeronautical services.11



                         III.      DISCUSSION

On June  6, 2000, Agents  from the  Denver Office conducted  a routine 
inspection of the  system cable plant to identify  leaks and determine 
compliance with  the basic  signal leakage  criteria. Nine  leaks were 
identified and  measured, which  ranged from 104  mV/m to  2,723 mV/m.  
The system CLI was found to have  a CLI (10 log I) in excess of 64.12   
At the inspection,  by direction of the Denver  District Director, the 
Agents orally  instructed the General  Manager of the system  to cease 
operation  on  aeronautical  band  frequencies until  the  leaks  were 
repaired  and  the  system  complied with  the  basic  signal  leakage 
criteria.  On June  7, 2000, the oral order was  followed by a written 
order delivered by fax at 9:10 am.  

CommuniComm advised the Denver District Director on June 7, 2000, that 
the  system  was  in  compliance with  the  leakage  restrictions  and 
requested  permission to  resume  normal  operations.  Permission  was 
granted.   An  Agent from  the  Denver  Office conducted  a  follow-up 
inspection of  the system on June  7, 2000, and identified  two leaks.  
The system did have, however, a CLI less than 64 at that time.

The Denver  Office issued an  Official Notice of Violation  ("NOV") on 
February 12, 2001. CommuniComm responded on February 27, 2001.  In the 
reply, CommuniComm  identifies the  specific actions taken  to correct 
the violations noted  in the NOV and to preclude  their recurrence, as 
well as, a time line for completion of such actions.





The  Commission  assesses  monetary forfeitures  pursuant  to  Section 
503(b) of the  Communications Act of 1934, as  amended, (``Act'')13 as 
implemented in Section 1.80 of the Commission's Rules.14  A forfeiture 
may  be assessed against  a person  who the  Commission finds  to have 
willfully or  repeatedly failed to  comply with the provisions  of the 
Act or  the Commission's Rules.15   ``Willful'' in this  context means 
that the person knew that he was doing the act in question, regardless 
of intent  to violate the provision.16   ``Repeated'' means commission 
or omission of an act more  than once.  Forfeiture amounts are decided 
in accordance with Section 503(b)(2) of the Communications Act and the 
Commission's  forfeiture  guidelines  in  Section  1.80(b)(4)  of  the 
Commission's Rules.17

We conclude that CommuniComm  has repeatedly violated the Commission's 
cable  signal leakage rules.   As discussed  above, on  June 6  and 7, 
2000, the cable system in Akron, Colorado, had leaks that exceeded the 
maximum  allowable  field strength  of  20  mv/m  at 3m,  in  repeated 
violation of  Section 76.605(a)(12)  of the Commission's  Rules.18  On 
June 6, 2000, CommuniComm willfully  violated Section 76.611(a) of the 
Commission's  Rules19  by failing  to  comply  with the  basic  signal 
leakage performance criteria. 

Based on  the evidence before us,  we find that James  Cable Partners, 
LP,  d/b/a CommuniComm  Services violated  Sections 76.605(a)(12)  and 
76.611(a)  of  the  Commission's   Rules  by  failing  signal  leakage 
standards.  The Commission's Forfeiture Policy Statement and Amendment 
of Section 1.80 of the Rules to Incorporate the Forfeiture Guidelines, 
12 FCC  Rcd 17087, 17113 (1997),  recon. denied, 15 FCC  Rcd 303(1999) 
("Policy Statement"), sets the base forfeiture amount for violation of 
rules  relating  to distress  and  safety  frequencies is  $8,000  per 
violation; the maximum is $27,500 for  each violation or each day of a 
continuing  violation.20  Cable  signal  leakage  in the  aeronautical 
bands  constitutes   harmful  interference  to  distress   and  safety 
frequencies.  Multiple violations of the signal leakage standards were 
observed on June 6 and 7, 2000, and the system violated CLI on June 6, 
2000.   We  believe  the   appropriate  forfeiture  for  CommuniComm's 
repeated failure to comply with leakage  limits on June 6 and 7, 2000, 
and the system violated CLI on June 6, 2000, is $8,000.  



                         IV.  ORDERING CLAUSES

Accordingly,  IT  IS  ORDERED,  pursuant  to  Section  503(b)  of  the 
Communications Act of 1934, as  amended, and Sections 0.111, 0.311 and 
1.80  of  the Commission's  Rules,  James  Cable Partners,  LP,  d/b/a 
CommuniComm Services,  is hereby  NOTIFIED of this  APPARENT LIABILITY 
FOR A FORFEITURE in the amount  of eight thousand dollars ($8,000) for 
willful or  repeated violation of  76.605(a)(12) and 76.611(a)  of the 
Commission's Rules.



IT IS  FURTHER ORDERED, PURSUANT  TO Section 1.80 of  the Commission's 
Rules,  within thirty  days  of the  release date  of  this NOTICE  OF 
APPARENT  LIABILITY,  James  Cable  Partners,  LP,  d/b/a  CommuniComm 
Services,  SHALL PAY  the full  amount of  the proposed  forfeiture or 
SHALL FILE  a written statement  seeking reduction or  cancellation of 
the proposed forfeiture.

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 should note the NAL/Acct. No. 20013280-0002.

A response  regarding this matter, if  any, must be mailed  to Federal 
Communications  Commission, Enforcement  Bureau, Technical  and Public 
Safety Division,  445 12th Street,  S.W., Washington, D.C.  20554, and 
MUST INCLUDE THE NAL/Acct. No. 20013280-0002.

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.

Requests for  payment of the  full amount  of this Notice  of Apparent 
Liability under an installment plan  should be sent to: Chief, Revenue 
and Receivable  Operations Group,  445 12th Street,  S.W., Washington, 
D.C. 20554.21

            15.          IT  IS FURTHER  ORDERED THAT  a copy  of this 
NOTICE OF APPARENT  LIABILITY shall be sent,  by Certified Mail/Return 
Receipt Requested,  No. P 028  896 936,  to James Cable  Partners, LP, 
d/b/a  CommuniComm  Services,  38710  Woodward  Avenue  -  Suite  180, 
Bloomfield Hills, Michigan 48304.

                              FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION



                              Leo E. Cirbo
                              District Director, Denver Office
_________________________

1  The aeronautical  bands are  108-137  MHz and  225-400 MHz.   These 
frequencies  encompass both  radionavigation frequencies,  108-118 MHZ 
and 328.6-335.4  MHz, and communications frequencies,  118-137 MHz and 
225-328.6MHz and 335.4-400 MHz.   Deserving particular protection are 
the international  distress and  calling frequencies 121.5  MHz, 156.8 
MHz,  and 243  MHz.  See  47  C.F.R. 76.616.   These frequencies  are 
critical for Search  and Rescue Operations including  use by Emergency 
Locator Transmitters (ELT) on planes and Emergency Position Indicating 
Radio  Beacons (EPIRB)  on boats.  See  generally 47  C.F.R. Part  80, 
Subpart V and 47 C.F.R. 87.193-87.199.  
2 Harmful interference includes  any interference that ``endangers the 
functioning  of   a  radionavigation   service  or  of   other  safety 
services.''  See 47 C.F.R. 2.1 & 76.613(a).
3  Memorandum  Opinion  and  Order,   Amendment  of  Part  76  of  the 
Commission's  Rules  to  Add Frequency  Channelling  Requirements  and 
restrictions and to  require Monitoring for Signal  Leakage from Cable 
Television  Systems, Docket  No.  21006, 101  F.C.C.2d  117, para.  14 
(1985) [hereinafter MO&O].
4 47 C.F.R. 76.605(a)(12).
5 47 C.F.R. 76.611(a).
6 47 C.F.R. 76.615(b)(7).
7 47 C.F.R. 76.614.
8 47 C.F.R. 76.613(b).
9 47 C.F.R. 76.613(c).
10 47 C.F.R. 76.610.
11 47 C.F.R. 76.612.  MO&O, supra note 3, at para. 14.
12 The  calculated CLI  is 66.5.   A maximum  CLI of  64 is  the basic 
signal  leakage performance  criteria of  Section 76.611(a)(1)  of the 
Commission's Rules.  Leakage that exceeds this level is deemed to pose 
a serious threat to air traffic safety communications.
13 47 U.S.C. 503(b).
14 47 C.F.R. 1.80.
15 47 C.F.R. 1.80(a)(2).
16 Southern California  Broadcasting Company, 6 FCC Rcd  4387, para. 5 
(1991).
17  47  U.S.C.  503(b)(2),  47  C.F.R.  1.80(b)(4).   See  also  The 
Commission's Forfeiture Policy Statement and Amendment of Section 1.80 
of the Rules to Incorporate Forfeiture Guidelines, 12 FCC Rcd 17087.
18 47 C.F.R. 76.605(a)(12).
19 47 C.F.R. 76.611(a).
20 47 C.F.R. 1.80(b)(4).
21 See 47 C.F.R. 1.1914.