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

This document was converted from Microsoft Word.

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

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

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

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

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




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

                                 )
                                 )
In the Matter of                 )       File Number: EB-04-DT-295
                                 )
Source USA, Inc.                 )      NAL/Acct. No: 200532360001
                                 )
Greenville, OH                   )                FRN 0012 3089 95


             NOTICE OF APPARENT LIABILITY FOR FORFEITURE

                                               Released:  January 
                                                         14, 2005

By the District Director, Detroit Office, Northeast Region, 
Enforcement Bureau:

I.   INTRODUCTION

      1.  In this  Notice of  Apparent Liability  for  Forfeiture 
 ("NAL"),  we  find  that  Source  USA,  Inc.  (``Source'')   has 
 apparently willfully  and repeatedly  violated Sections  17.4(a) 
 and 17.51(a) of the  Commission's Rules (``the Rules'') and  has 
 apparently  willfully  and  repeatedly  failed  to  respond   to 
 Commission  correspondence.1   These  noted  violations  involve 
 Source's failure to register  its antenna structure, failure  to 
 exhibit the required  red obstruction lighting,  and failure  to 
 respond  to a  Commission  inquiry.  We  conclude,  pursuant  to 
 Section 503(b)  of the Act,2  that Source  is apparently  liable 
 for a  forfeiture in the  amount of  seventeen thousand  dollars 
 ($17,000).

II.  BACKGROUND

      2.  On June 15, 2004, the Commission's Detroit Field Office 
 (``Detroit Office'') was  notified by the Commission's  Spectrum 
 Enforcement Division  that the  Federal Aviation  Administration 
 (``FAA'') had  received a report  of an  abandoned and/or  unlit 
 antenna structure  in  Greenville, Ohio.   The location  of  the 
 tower was reported  to be at  ``N40-08/W84-35.''  Based on  this 
 information, a  Commission agent checked  the Antenna  Structure 
 Registration (ASR)  database  on June  22, 2004  and  determined 
 that there  was  no tower  registered  at those  coordinates  in 
 Greenville, Ohio.  

      3.  On June  23,  2004,  a  Commission  agent  located  and 
 inspected the antenna structure in Greenville, Ohio.  Using  GPS 
 equipment, the Commission's agent  determined that the tower  is 
 located at 40  08 57 North  Latitude, 84 36  04 West  Longitude.  
 The Commission's  ``towpub''  database indicates  that  the  FAA 
 assigned  painting  and  lighting  requirements  to  the   tower 
 located at those coordinates  on November 20, 1975, including  a 
 requirement for red obstruction lighting.3

      4.  The agent determined that the tower, which measured 340 
 feet,  was abandoned,  unlit,  and poorly  painted.   The  agent 
 spoke  to  the owner  of  the  property  on  which  the  antenna 
 structure  is  located  and  learned  that  the  owner  of   the 
 structure is Fred Clark.  The agent further determined that  the 
 electric power to  the antenna structure had  been shut off  for 
 approximately three years.  

      5.  On June 30, 2004, the  Detroit Office sent a Letter  of 
 Inquiry  (``LOI'')  to   Mr.  Clark,  requesting,  inter   alia, 
 information about  ownership of  the antenna  structure and  the 
 status of  the light  outages.  The  Detroit Office  received  a 
 response from  Mr. Clark  on July  16, 2004.   Mr. Clark  stated 
 that the  tower is  owned by  Source USA,  Inc. Mr.  Clark  also 
 stated that  the previous  managing partner  failed to  pay  the 
 electric bill  and that  Source was  not aware  that the  lights 
 were  off.  Mr.  Clark  further stated  that  arrangements  were 
 being  made to  immediately  restore  the lighting  and  that  a 
 Notice  to  Airmen  (``NOTAM'')  ``may  have  been  issued  last 
 summer.''  Because Mr. Clark stated that Source is the owner  of 
 the  antenna structure,  but  did  not indicate  that  he  is  a 
 principal of the corporation, the Detroit Office sent a  follow-
 up LOI to  Source on July  22, 2004 via  Certified Mail,  Return 
 Receipt Requested,  and  First Class  U.S. Mail.   Although  the 
 Detroit Office received  a signed receipt  indicting receipt  of 
 the LOI, Source did not submit a response.  

      6.  On September 7, 2004, a Commission agent contacted  Mr. 
 Clark by telephone.  Mr. Clark  advised the agent that he is  an 
 officer of Source,  that the tower  is an asset  of Source,  and 
 that the electricity  had been turned  on after Source  received 
 the Commission's first LOI.   On September 9, 2004, the  Detroit 
 Office  sent a  follow-up  LOI  to Source  via  Certified  Mail, 
 Return  Receipt Requested,  and  First  Class  U.S.  Mail.   The 
 September 9, 2004  LOI asked, inter alia,  whether the tower  is 
 registered with the FCC and stated that, if not registered,  the 
 tower should  be  registered immediately.   The LOI  also  asked 
 whether the FAA has provided any recommendations with regard  to 
 the antenna  structure.  The  Detroit Office  received a  signed 
 receipt  for   the   certified  letter   indicating   that   the 
 correspondence had  been  received by  Source.  Source  did  not 
 respond to the September 9, 2004 LOI.  

      7.  On October 5,  2004 the Detroit  Office sent a  Warning 
 Letter to Source  via Certified Mail,  Return Receipt  Requested 
 and First Class  U.S. Mail, stating that  a response to the  LOI 
 must be  received  within ten  days  and notifying  Source  that 
 failure  to  respond  to  the  LOI  is  punishable  by  monetary 
 forfeiture.  Source did  not reply to  the Warning Letter.   The 
 Detroit  Office received  a  signed receipt  for  the  certified 
 letter indicating that  Source received the correspondence.   To 
 date,  the Detroit  Office  has  not received  a  response  from 
 Source. 

      8.  On December  2, 2004,  a Commission  agent conducted  a 
 search of the ASR database  and determined that the tower  still 
 was not registered.

III.      DISCUSSION

      9.  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) of  the Act has  been interpreted  to 
 mean  simply   that  the   acts  or   omissions  are   committed 
 knowingly.4   The term  ``repeated''  means  the  commission  or 
 omission of such act more than once or for more than one day.5 

      10.                       Section  17.4(a)  of  the   Rules 
 requires provides that ``the  owner of any proposed or  existing 
 antenna structure that requires notice of proposed  construction 
 to  the  Federal  Aviation  Administration  must  register   the 
 structure with  the Commission.''6   Section 17.4(a)(2)  of  the 
 Rules requires the  owners of existing  antenna structures  that 
 were assigned painting or  lighting requirements before July  1, 
 1996, to register those  antenna structures with the  Commission 
 no later than  July 1, 1998.7    Source's antenna structure  was 
 assigned painting and lighting requirements by the FAA in  1975, 
 so  registration  was  required   by  1998.   Searches  of   the 
 Commission's ASR database  on June 22, 2004  and on December  2, 
 2004 found no evidence of a registration for the tower at  issue 
 here.  We therefore  find that Source  apparently willfully  and 
 repeatedly violated Section 17.4(a) of the Rules.

      11.                       Section   17.21   provides   that 
 antenna structures above 200 feet shall be painted and  lighted.  
 As noted above,  Source's antenna structure  is above 200  feet.  
 Section  17.51  of   the  Rules  requires   that  (a)  all   red 
 obstruction lighting shall be  exhibited from sunset to  sunrise 
 unless  otherwise specified  and  (b)  all  high  intensity  and 
 medium  intensity  obstruction   lighting  shall  be   exhibited 
 continuously unless otherwise specified.8   On June 23, 2004,  a 
 Commission agent determined that the antenna structure owned  by 
 Source was  not  lit.9  Source  states in  its response  to  the 
 Detroit Office's June 30, 2004 LOI that ``the previous  managing 
 partner failed  to pay the  electric bill and  Source USA,  Inc. 
 was unaware the lights were off.''  Source, as the owner of  the 
 tower, is responsible  for the tower being  lit and its  failure 
 to pay its electric bills  for the past three years resulted  in 
 the  tower  being   unlit.   We  therefore   find  that   Source 
 apparently willfully  and repeatedly violated  Section 17.51  of 
 the Rules.

      12.      We also find that Source willfully and  repeatedly 
 failed to  respond to  inquiries from  the Detroit  Office.   On 
 July  22, 2004,  the  Detroit  Office sent  Source  an  LOI  via 
 Certified Mail, Return Receipt  Requested, and First Class  U.S. 
 Mail.   Although the  Detroit Office received  a signed  receipt 
 indicting receipt of the LOI, Source did not submit a  response.   
 On September 9,  2004, the Detroit Office  sent a follow-up  LOI 
 to Source  via  Certified Mail,  Return Receipt  Requested,  and 
 First Class  U.S. Mail.  Again,  the Detroit  Office received  a 
 signed receipt  for  the certified  letter indicating  that  the 
 correspondence had been received  by Source, but Source did  not 
 respond.  Finally, on October  5, 2004, the Detroit Office  sent 
 a Warning Letter  to Source directing Source  to respond to  the 
 September 9, 2004 LOI within ten days and reminding Source  that 
 it  could  face  monetary  penalties  for  failure  to  respond.  
 Source  did not  submit  a  response.  We  therefore  find  that 
 Source apparently willfully and repeatedly failed to respond  to 
 Commission correspondence.

      13.      Based on  the evidence  before  us, we  find  that 
 Source willfully and  repeatedly violated the  Rules by  failing 
 to register its antenna and by failing to maintain the  lighting 
 of its antenna structure.  We  also find, based on the  evidence 
 before  us,  that  Source  willfully and  repeatedly  failed  to 
 respond   to  Commission   correspondence.    The   Commission's 
 Forfeiture Policy  Statement and  Amendment of  Section 1.80  of 
 the Rules to Incorporate the Forfeiture Guidelines  ("Forfeiture 
 Policy Statement"),10  and Section 1.80  of the  Rules sets  the 
 base forfeiture amount  at three thousand  dollars ($3,000)  for 
 failure to  file  required forms  or information;  ten  thousand 
 dollars  ($10,000)  for   failure  to  comply  with   prescribed 
 lighting and/or marking; and four thousand dollars ($4,000)  for 
 failure to respond  to Commission communications.  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.11  Applying  the Forfeiture  Policy Statement,  Section 
 1.80, and  the statutory  factors, a  seventeen thousand  dollar 
 ($17,000) forfeiture is warranted.
  
IV.  ORDERING CLAUSES

      14.      Accordingly,  IT  IS  ORDERED  that,  pursuant  to 
 Sections 4(i),  4(j), and 503(b)  of the  Communications Act  of 
 1934, as  amended, and  Sections 0.111,  0.311 and  1.80 of  the 
 Commission's  Rules,12  Source   is  hereby  NOTIFIED  of   this 
 APPARENT LIABILITY FOR A  FORFEITURE in the amount of  seventeen 
 thousand dollars ($17,000)  for willful and repeated  violations 
 of Sections 17.4(a), 17.51(a) of  the Rules and for willful  and 
 repeated failure to respond to a Commission order.

      15.      IT IS FURTHER  ORDERED that,  pursuant to  Section 
 1.80 of the Commission's Rules,  within thirty (30) days of  the 
 release  date  of   this  Notice  of   Apparent  Liability   for 
 Forfeiture, Source  SHALL PAY the  full amount  of the  proposed 
 forfeiture or SHALL FILE  a written statement seeking  reduction 
 or cancellation of the proposed forfeiture.

      16.      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 Forfeiture Collection  Section, 
 Finance  Branch, Federal  Communications  Commission,  P.O.  Box 
 73482, Chicago, Illinois 60673-7482.  Payment by overnight  mail 
 may be sent  to Bank One/LB  73482, 525 West  Monroe, 8th  Floor 
 Mailroom, Chicago, IL  60661.  Payment by  wire transfer may  be 
 made to  ABA  Number 071000013,  receiving  bank Bank  One,  and 
 account number 1165259.

      17.      The response, if  any, must be  mailed to  Federal 
 Communications   Commission,   Enforcement   Bureau,   Northeast 
 Region,  Detroit  Office,  24897  Hathaway  Street,   Farmington 
 Hills, MI 48335, within thirty  (30) days from the release  date 
 of this  Notice of Apparent  Liability for  Forfeiture and  must 
 include the NAL/Acct. No. referenced in the caption.  

      18.      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.  

      19.      Requests for payment  of the full  amount of  this 
 Notice  of   Apparent   Liability  for   Forfeiture   under   an 
 installment  plan  should  be   sent  to:  Chief,  Revenue   and 
 Receivables   Operations   Group,   445   12th   Street,   S.W., 
 Washington, D.C. 20554.13
      20.      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  Source 
 USA, Inc. 1404 Whitfield Avenue, Sarasota, FL 34243.

                              FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION



                              
                              James A. Bridgewater
                              District Director 
                              Detroit Office
                              Northeast Region
                              Enforcement Bureau


_________________________

147 C.F.R.  17.4(a) and 17.51(a).
247 U.S.C.  503(b).  
3The  ``towpub''  database  contains  information  about  antenna 
structures that were assigned painting and lighting  requirements 
before   the   Commission's   antenna   structure    registration 
requirement went into effect on July 1, 1996.
4Section 312(f)(1) of the Act, 47 U.S.C.  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).
5Section 312(f)(2) of the Act, 47 U.S.C.  312(f)(2), which also 
applies to violations for which forfeitures are assessed under 
Section 503(b) of the Act, provides that "[t]he term 'repeated', 
when used with reference to the commission or omission of any 
act, means the commission or omission of such act more than once 
or, if such commission or omission is continuous, for more than 
one day.'' 
647 C.F.R.  17.4(a).
747 C.F.R.  17.4(a)(2).
847 C.F.R.  17.51(a) and (b).  
9We note that  we do not  have a determination  of ``no  hazard'' 
from the FAA, which is the document that sets out the FAA's paint 
and  lighting  recommendations  for  antenna  structures.   As  a 
result, we do  not know whether  Source is required  to have  red 
obstruction lighting,  high  intensity obstruction  lighting,  or 
medium intensity  obstruction  lighting.  We  do,  however,  have 
information from the  ``towpub'' database,  which indicates  that 
when the painting and lighting requirements were assigned to  the 
tower in 1975,  red obstruction lighting  was recommended by  the 
FAA.  In any event, because Source's  tower is over 200 feet  and 
had no  working  lights on  its  antenna structure  when  it  was 
inspected by  the Commission  agent, Source  is in  violation  of 
Section 17.51 of the Rules,  regardless of its specific  lighting 
requirements.
1047 C.F.R.  1.80.
1147 U.S.C.  503(b)(2)(D).
1247 U.S.C.   4(i), 4(j),  503(b); 47 C.F.R.   0.111,  0.311, 
1.80.
1347 C.F.R.  1.1914.