Click here for Microsoft Word Version
******************************************************** 
                      NOTICE
********************************************************

This document was converted from
WordPerfect or Word to ASCII Text format.

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
Word or WordPerfect version or Adobe Acrobat version (above).

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



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


In the Matter of              )    EB DOCKET NO.  01-61
                              )
LESLIE D. BREWER                   )    Acct. No. 
200132080023   
                              )
Licensee of Amateur Radio Station and        )
General Class Operator License KC4HAZ   )
                              )
Licensee of Station KAE1170 in the           )
General Mobile Radio Service            )

          
            ORDER OF REVOCATION AND OF FORFEITURE


     Adopted:  June 21, 2001                 Released:  June 
26, 2001

By the Chief, Enforcement Bureau:

                      I.  INTRODUCTION

1.   By this  Order, we  revoke the  above-captioned Amateur 
Radio and  General Mobile  Radio Service  (``GMRS'') station 
licenses held  by Leslie  D. Brewer, and  impose upon  him a 
forfeiture  in  the  amount  of $11,000  for  willfully  and 
repeatedly violating  Section 301 of the  Communications Act 
of 1934,  as amended.  We  conclude, based upon  evidence of 
Mr. Brewer's ``pirate radio'' and other unlawful activities, 
that he lacks  the basic character qualifications  to be and 
remain a Commission licensee. 

                          II. BACKGROUND

2.   By Order to Show Cause,  Notice of Order of Suspension, 
Notice of  Opportunity for  Hearing, and Notice  of Apparent 
Liability  for a  Forfeiture, FCC  01-74, released  March 5, 
2001  (``OSC''), the  Commission  designated  this case  for 
hearing.  The OSC, at  17, specified the following issues:
 
     (a)  To determine whether Leslie D. Brewer 
     willfully and/or repeatedly violated Section 301 
     of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended, by 
     operating unlicensed (i.e., ``pirate'') broadcast 
     facilities in 1996, 1997, 1999 and/or 2000, and, 
     if so, the effect thereof on his basic 
     qualifications to be and remain a Commission 
     licensee.

     (b) To determine whether Leslie D. Brewer 
     willfully and/or repeatedly violated Section 301 
     of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended, by 
     operating an unlicensed Studio-to-Transmitter Link 
     in 1999 and/or 2000, and, if so, the effect 
     thereof on his basic qualifications to be and 
     remain a Commission licensee.

     (c) To determine whether Leslie D. Brewer 
     willfully and/or repeatedly violated Sections 
     2.803(a)(1) and/or 15.201(b) of the Commission's 
     rules by marketing and/or selling an unauthorized 
     radio frequency device or devices, and, if so, the 
     effect thereof on his basic qualifications to be 
     and remain a Commission licensee.

     (d) To determine whether, in light of the evidence 
     adduced pursuant  to the foregoing  issues, Leslie 
     D.  Brewer  is  qualified   to  be  and  remain  a 
     Commission licensee.

     (e)  To determine  whether  the captioned  Amateur 
     radio station license and/or  General Mobile Radio 
     Service license held by Leslie D. Brewer should be 
     revoked.

3.   The OSC,  at   19, also  ordered the  Presiding Judge, 
notwithstanding the  resolution of the foregoing  issues, to 
determine whether  an Order  of Forfeiture should  be issued 
against Mr.  Brewer for  having willfully  and/or repeatedly 
violated Section 301  of the Communications Act  of 1934, as 
amended,1  on  March 11,  2000.   The  OSC set  the  maximum 
forfeiture amount at $11,000.

4.   The  OSC, at    21, ordered  Mr.  Brewer, pursuant  to 
Section  1.91(c)  of  the  Commission's rules,2  to  file  a 
written notice  of appearance in  order to avail  himself of 
the opportunity to be heard.   The OSC explained that if Mr. 
Brewer failed to file a timely written notice of appearance, 
his  right to  a  hearing  on the  matter  of his  captioned 
station licenses would be  deemed waived, and the proceeding 
thereafter  would be  conducted in  accordance with  Section 
1.92 of the Commission's rules.

5.   By Memorandum  Opinion and Order, FCC  01M-11, released 
May 4, 2001, the Presiding  Judge determined that Mr. Brewer 
had received a copy of the OSC, but failed to file a written 
(or any other) notice of appearance seeking to avail himself 
of the  opportunity to be heard.  Accordingly, the Presiding 
Judge concluded that the  hearing was waived.  The Presiding 
Judge terminated  the proceeding  and certified the  case to 
the Commission  for disposition  in accordance  with Section 
1.92(c) of the Commission's rules. 3  

                    III.  FINDINGS OF FACT

6.   The facts contained in  the OSC are uncontested.  Based 
on that  information and  other Commission records,  we make 
the following specific findings.  

7.   Mr. Brewer  is the  licensee for Amateur  radio station 
and General class  operator license KC4HAZ.  He  also is the 
licensee  of Station  KAE1170  in the  General Mobile  Radio 
Service (``GMRS'').  Mr. Brewer  owns an electronics shop in 
Tampa, Florida, d/b/a L.D.  Brewer 2-Way Radio.  L.D. Brewer 
2-Way Radio sells and assembles radio equipment.
 
8.   In response to  an anonymous inquiry about  a pirate FM 
station  broadcasting  on  102.1  MHz  in  the  Tampa  area, 
Commission personnel  monitored the  station on  January 11, 
1996,  and  traced  the   unlicensed  transmissions  to  Mr. 
Brewer's residence  at 6122 Liberty Avenue,  Tampa, Florida.  
On January 12, 1996,  Commission personnel warned Mr. Brewer 
that, except when operating certain low power devices, it is 
a violation  of Section  301 of  the Communications  Act4 to 
transmit on  the FM  band without a  license.5  In  a letter 
directed to Mr. Brewer on January 17, 1996, Commission staff 
repeated  its  warning   about  unlicensed  operations.   On 
January 19, 1996, Mr. Brewer responded in writing and stated 
that  ``[a]ny further  operation  of [the]  station will  be 
within the  guidelines for  low-power operation, set  out in 
part 15.'' 6 

9.   Thereafter, on February  16, 1996, Commission personnel 
conducted   a  follow-up   investigation  of   Mr.  Brewer's 
transmissions.  The monitoring revealed  that Mr. Brewer was 
again operating his unlicensed FM  station.  As a result, on 
April 3, 1996, Commission staff  issued a Notice of Apparent 
Liability  to  Mr.  Brewer  in  the  amount  of  $1,000  for 
broadcasting   without  a   license,  in   apparent  willful 
violation  of Section  301 of  the Act.7   In response,  Mr. 
Brewer challenged, among other things, the accuracy of field 
strength  measurements taken  of his  transmissions and  the 
competency  of Commission  engineers who  had conducted  the 
measurements.  On June 19, 1996, Commission staff released a 
Forfeiture  Order.    The  Forfeiture  Order   rejected  Mr. 
Brewer's claims,  concluded that  Mr. Brewer had  engaged in 
the  unauthorized operation  of an  FM broadcast  station in 
violation of Section 301 of the Act, and directed Mr. Brewer 
to forfeit  the sum of $1,000.   The Commission subsequently 
denied Mr. Brewer's application for review of the Forfeiture 
Order. 8

10.  Further  monitoring on  October 25,  1996, January  31, 
1997, May 15, 1997, and  October 14, 1997, revealed that Mr. 
Brewer continued  his pirate operations throughout  1996 and 
into  1997.  During  this  period,  the Commission  received 
written complaints of interference from Paxson Tampa License 
Limited  Partnership   (``Paxson''),  licensee   of  Station 
WHPT(FM), 102.5  MHz, Sarasota, Florida.  On  June 19, 1997, 
the  Chief,  Audio  Services Division,  Mass  Media  Bureau, 
issued  a letter  denying a  May  10, 1996,  request by  Mr. 
Brewer  for Special  Temporary  Authority to  operate an  FM 
broadcast  station  on 102.1  MHz  in  the Tampa  area,  and 
returning as unacceptable a November 8, 1996, application by 
Mr.  Brewer for  a construction  permit  for a  new Class  A 
noncommercial educational broadcast station  on 102.1 MHz in 
the Tampa area.9  Notwithstanding  these actions, Mr. Brewer 
continued to operate his FM station without authority.  As a 
consequence,  on November  19,  1997, Commission  personnel, 
with  the  assistance of  Deputies  from  the U.S.  Marshals 
Service, served and executed an  in rem seizure warrant upon 
Mr. Brewer and confiscated his FM transmission equipment.10  

11.  For two  years following the  in rem seizure of  his FM 
transmitting equipment, Mr. Brewer apparently refrained from 
engaging in further pirate operations.  During this time, on 
September 14, 1998,  Mr. Brewer filed an  application for an 
experimental  FM station  with  the  Commission's Office  of 
Engineering  and  Technology.11   The  staff  dismissed  the 
application on  September 25, 1998,  and returned it  to Mr. 
Brewer because it had been filed on an incorrect form. 

12.  On November 8, 1999, Mr. Brewer again requested Special 
Temporary Authority  to operate  an FM broadcast  station on 
102.1 MHz in the Tampa area, either as part of the ``regular 
broadcast  service''  or   as  an  ``experimental  broadcast 
service.''   While this  request was  pending,12 and  on the 
second  anniversary  of the  in  rem  seizure (November  19, 
1999), Mr. Brewer resumed his pirate broadcasts on 102.1 MHz 
in willful and repeated violation of Section 301 of the Act.   

13.  Based on  monitoring conducted  on November 19  and 23, 
1999,  Commission personnel  confirmed  that  the source  of 
unlicensed  transmissions  on  102.1  MHz  was  a  warehouse 
located  in a  commercial shopping  mall at  the Shady  Oaks 
Plaza, 14920  N. Florida  Avenue, Tampa, Florida.   A tenant 
list provided by Ross Realty Group, the owners of Shady Oaks 
Plaza,  indicated  that  the  warehouse  was  leased  to  an 
individual by  the name of  Karen Walsh.  Ross  Realty Group 
provided copies of cancelled  checks showing that Mr. Brewer 
had paid for the warehouse  space leased by Karen Walsh, and 
from which the unlicensed broadcasts were emanating.

14.  Subsequently, on December 2, 1999, Commission personnel 
again monitored  the unlicensed transmissions from  the same 
warehouse.    On  that   same  date,   Commission  personnel 
confirmed  that  Mr.  Brewer  was  employing  an  unlicensed 
studio-to-transmitter link (``STL'') on 950.0925 MHz to send 
audio programming and/or control  signals from his residence 
at 6122 Liberty Avenue, Tampa, Florida, to the warehouse, in 
apparent  violation  of Section  301  of  the Act.   Further 
monitoring by  Commission personnel  on December 3,  10, and 
15,  1999,  confirmed  continuing   operation  of  both  the 
unlicensed FM station on 102.1 MHz from the Shady Oaks Plaza 
warehouse and  the unlicensed STL  on 950.0925 MHz  from Mr. 
Brewer's Liberty Avenue residence.13    

15.  Commission staff continued  monitoring transmissions on 
frequency 102.1 MHz during the  early part of the year 2000.  
On March 11, 2000,  Commission staff traced transmissions on 
frequency 950.095 MHz radiating  from Mr. Brewer's residence 
located  at  6122  East   Liberty  Avenue,  Tampa,  Florida.  
Commission staff  then monitored transmissions  on frequency 
102.1 MHz and heard programming identical to the programming 
being broadcast on frequency  950.095 MHz.  Commission staff 
determined  that the  transmissions on  frequency 102.1  MHz 
were radiating from a tower  located in the Shady Oaks Plaza 
warehouse on Florida Avenue in Tampa.  Measurements taken at 
approximately  250  meters  from   the  warehouse  tower  by 
Commission  staff  indicated  a field  strength  of  102,127 
microvolts per meter, which  exceeded the radiation emission 
limit  prescribed  by  Section 15.239  of  the  Commission's 
rules.14  Mr. Brewer  did not have authority  to transmit at 
that power level or to operate an STL facility.

16.  In addition to operating  pirate FM and STL facilities, 
Mr.  Brewer also  has engaged  in marketing  unauthorized FM 
broadcast  transmitting equipment,  in willful  violation of 
Sections  2.803(a)(1)  and  15.201(b)  of  the  Commission's 
rules,   47   C.F.R.      2.803(a)(1)   and   15.201(b).15  
Specifically,  in early  1997, it  came to  the Commission's 
attention that Mr. Brewer, through his business, L.D. Brewer 
2-Way  Radio,  was  marketing unauthorized  radio  frequency 
devices.  As  a result, on  July 18, 1997,  Commission staff 
directed a warning letter to Mr. Brewer to refrain from such 
activities.  Mr. Brewer responded  on July 21, 1997, denying 
he was engaged in any unlawful actions.  

17.  Thereafter,  on  August  6,  1998, an  agent  from  the 
Commission's Tampa field  office, posing as a  member of the 
general public,  sent an e-mail  to L.D. Brewer  2-Way Radio 
requesting   information   about    purchasing   a   20-watt 
transmitter that would  operate in the FM  band.  Mr. Brewer 
responded  via  e-mail with  a  price  and instructions  for 
purchasing such  equipment.  On  August 25, 1998,  the Tampa 
field  office  submitted a  money  order  in the  amount  of 
$560.00  for  the  equipment  to L.D.  Brewer  2-Way  Radio.  
Subsequently, on September 28,  1998, the Tampa field office 
received a fully assembled  20-watt FM broadcast transmitter 
from L.D. Brewer 2-Way Radio.   There was no indication that 
the transmitter was authorized by the Commission, and no FCC 
identifier number  was affixed to the  equipment.  On August 
5,  1999,  Commission  staff  issued a  Notice  of  Apparent 
Liability against  Mr. Brewer in  the amount of  $10,000 for 
selling an unauthorized radio  frequency device, in apparent 
violation  of  Sections  2.803(a)(1) and  15.201(b)  of  the 
Commission's   rules.    The  Chief,   Enforcement   Bureau, 
subsequently rejected the arguments  in Mr. Brewer's written 
response and issued a Forfeiture Order in the same amount.16 

                   IV.  CONCLUSIONS OF LAW
  
18.  Section 301 of the Act  provides in pertinent part that 
no person  shall operate any apparatus  for the transmission 
of communications  by radio from  one place in any  state to 
another place in the same  state without a license from this 
Commission.17   The requirement  for a  license in  order to 
broadcast has been upheld by the United States Supreme Court 
as  a  proper  exercise   of  the  constitutional  power  of 
Congress.18  

19.  The Commission's Broadcast Character Policy Statement19 
provides that  violations of  the Communications Act  or the 
Commission's  rules  are  matters which  are  predictive  of 
licensee behavior and directly  relevant to the Commission's 
regulatory activities.   The Character Policy  Statement may 
be used  as guidance  for Amateur  and other  wireless radio 
licensees.20

20.  Based on  the evidence before us,  the issues specified 
in the OSC  are resolved adversely to Mr.  Brewer.  As early 
as January  12, 1996, the  Commission advised Mr.  Brewer to 
refrain  from  operating  unlicensed  broadcast  facilities.  
Notwithstanding that warning, Mr. Brewer continued to engage 
in unlawful conduct.  The record amply demonstrates that Mr. 
Brewer willfully and repeatedly  violated Section 301 of the 
Act by  operating unlicensed  broadcast facilities  in 1996, 
1997,  1999   and  2000;  that  Mr.   Brewer  willfully  and 
repeatedly violated Section  301 of the Act  by operating an 
unlicensed Studio-to-Transmitter  Link in 1999 and  2000; 21 
and  that  Mr.  Brewer  willfully  and  repeatedly  violated 
Sections 2.803(a)(1) and 15.201(b) of the Commission's rules 
by marketing and/or selling  an unauthorized radio frequency 
device or devices.  

21.  We further find, as a matter of law, that Mr. Brewer is 
unqualified to be and remain  a Commission licensee and that 
the captioned  Amateur Radio and  GMRS licenses held  by him 
should  be  revoked.   Mr.  Brewer continues  to  display  a 
cavalier  disregard  toward  his  licensee  obligations,  as 
prescribed   by  the   Act  and   the  Commission's   rules, 
notwithstanding clear and repeated  notice that his behavior 
was unlawful.  Based on Mr. Brewer's flagrant and continuing 
refusal  to comply  with the  Act and  Commission rules,  we 
conclude that Mr. Brewer cannot  be relied upon to carry out 
the  responsibilities of  a  licensee and,  hence, does  not 
possess  the  basic  character   qualifications  to  hold  a 
Commission authorization.  Consequently,  we will revoke Mr. 
Brewer's Amateur Radio and GMRS station licenses. 22  

22.  As noted above at  3, the OSC (at  19) directed that, 
notwithstanding the  resolution of the specified  issues, it 
should be  determined whether  a forfeiture order  should be 
issued against Mr. Brewer in an amount not to exceed $11,000 
for willfully and/or repeatedly violating Section 301 of the 
Act on March 11, 2000.   We conclude that a forfeiture order 
should be issued  against Mr. Brewer, and that  it should be 
for the  maximum amount.  The record  evidence clearly shows 
that Mr. Brewer engaged in  unlicensed operations of both an 
FM broadcast  facility and  an unlicensed  STL on  March 11, 
2000, in  willful and repeated  violation of Section  301 of 
the Act.  

23.  Sections 503(b) of the Act and 1.80 of the Commission's 
rules  state that  any  person who  willfully or  repeatedly 
fails to comply with the Act or the Commission's rules shall 
be liable for a forfeiture penalty.  For purposes of Section 
503(b), the  term ``willful''  means that the  violator knew 
that he was  taking the action in  question, irrespective of 
any  intent   to  violate  the  Commission's   rules.23   In 
assessing  a forfeiture,  we 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  such other 
matters as justice may require.24  

24.  After  considering  all  the facts  and  circumstances, 
including  Mr. Brewer's  long history  of misconduct  before 
this agency,  we believe  that a  forfeiture in  the maximum 
amount  of  $11,000  is appropriate.   Operating  unlicensed 
radio facilities  in deliberate  and brazen defiance  of our 
rules cannot and will not be tolerated.  

                       V.  ORDERING CLAUSES

25.  ACCORDINGLY, IT IS ORDERED, pursuant to Sections 312 of 
the Communications  Act of 1934, as  amended,25 and Sections 
1.92(d) and  0.111(a)(14) of the Commission's  rules,26 that 
the captioned  Amateur Radio and GMRS  station licenses held 
by Leslie D.  Brewer ARE REVOKED, effective on  the 40th day 
after  release of  this  Order, unless  Mr.  Brewer files  a 
petition for  reconsideration within  30 days of  release of 
this  Order,  in  which  case the  effective  date  will  be 
suspended pending further order of the Commission.  
 
26.  IT IS FURTHER ORDERED, pursuant to Section 503(b)(3)(A) 
of the Communications  Act of 1934, as  amended, and Section 
1.80(f)(4)  of  the  Commission's rules,27  that  Leslie  D. 
Brewer SHALL FORFEIT to the  United States the sum of eleven 
thousand dollars  ($11,000) for willfully  violating Section 
301 of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended. 
 
27.  Payment of the  forfeiture shall be made  in the manner 
provided for in  Section 1.80 within 30 days  of the release 
of this Forfeiture  Order.28  If the forfeiture  is not paid 
within the period specified, the case may be referred to the 
Department of  Justice for collection pursuant  to 47 U.S.C. 
 503(b)(3)(B) and 504(a).  

28.  IT IS FURTHER  ORDERED that a copy of  this Order shall 
be sent, via  Certified Mail - Return  Receipt Requested, to 
Leslie D. Brewer, 6122 Liberty Avenue, Tampa, Florida 33617.

                      FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION


                      
                      David H. Solomon
                      Chief, Enforcement Bureau
_________________________

1  47 U.S.C.  301.

2  47 C.F.R.  1.91(c). 

3  47 C.F.R.  1.92(c).  Section 1.92(c) provides that when 
a hearing is deemed waived, the Presiding Administrative Law 
Judge shall promptly certify the case to the Commission.  
Section 1.92(d) of the Commission's rules further provides 
that the Commission will thereafter, on the basis of the 
information before it, determine whether an order of 
revocation should issue.  Pursuant to Section 0.111(a)(14), 
the Enforcement Bureau has delegated authority to ``issue or 
draft appropriate orders after a hearing has been terminated 
by an Administrative Law Judge on the basis of waiver.''  47 
C.F.R.  0.111(a)(14).  See also 47 C.F.R.  0.311.
4  47 U.S.C.  301. Section 301 of the Act provides in 
pertinent part that no person shall operate any apparatus 
for the transmission of communications by radio from one 
place in any state to another place in the same state 
without a license from this Commission. 

5  The only pertinent exception to the blanket prohibition 
on unlicensed operation is found in Section 15.239(b) of the 
Commission's rules, 47 C.F.R.  15.239(b).  This rule 
Section permits unlicensed emissions between 88 MHz and 108 
MHz, provided the field strength of such emissions does not 
exceed 250 microvolts/meter at 3 meters.  At all relevant 
times, Mr. Brewer's FM emissions have exceeded these 
parameters. 

6  Letter, dated January 19, 1996, from L. D. Brewer to 
Gerardo Daubar, Federal Communications Commission, Tampa, 
Florida.   
7
8  See Leslie D. Brewer, 12 FCC Rcd 13,490 (1997).

9  The June 19, 1997, letter denied the STA request because 
it failed to satisfy the requirements of Section  15.7(a) of 
the Commission's rules, 47 C.F.R.  15.7(a), pursuant to 
which the STA request was filed.  The June 19, 1997, letter 
returned Mr. Brewer's application as unacceptable for 
tender, pursuant to Section 73.203(a) of the Commission's 
rules, 47 C.F.R.  73.203(a), because it proposed operation 
of a new FM facility on a channel and in a location not 
included in FM Table of Allotments.  An application for 
review of the June 19, 1997, actions is pending.

10  The U.S. District Court for the Middle District of 
Florida, Tampa Division, on February 22, 2000, upheld the 
validity of the in rem seizure.

11  File No. 6271-EX-PL-1998.

12  The Commission staff ultimately denied the STA request 
on June 30, 2000, on multiple grounds.

13
14  47 C.F.R.  15.239.  See n. 5.  

15  These rule sections collectively prohibit the marketing 
and/or sale of unauthorized transmission equipment. 

16  On February 22, 2001, the Deputy Clerk for the United 
States District Court, Middle District of Florida, Tampa 
Division, entered a default against Mr. Brewer in connection 
with a consolidated action brought by the Department of 
Justice on behalf of the FCC to collect the $10,000 
forfeiture and the earlier $1,000 forfeiture (see para. 7, 
above) issued against Mr. Brewer.  See United States v. 
Leslie D. Brewer, Entry of Default, Case No. 8:01-cv-59-T-
27MAP, February 22, 2001.

17  As noted above at n. 5, Section 15.239(b) of the 
Commission's rules permits unlicensed transmissions in the 
FM broadcast band, provided the transmissions are below 
certain specified field strength levels. The record before 
us indicates that Mr. Brewer's transmissions on the FM band 
have, at all relevant times, exceeded these levels and, 
thus, required a license. 
 
18 National Broadcasting Co. v. United States, 319 U.S. 190, 
227 (1943); see also United States v. Dunifer, 997 F. Supp. 
1235, 1241 (N.D. Cal. 1998).  

19  Policy Regarding Character Qualifications in Broadcast 
Licensing, 102 FCC 2d 1179 (1986), on reconsideration, 1 FCC 
Rcd 421 (1986), appeal dismissed sub nom. National 
Association for Better Broadcasting v. FCC, No. 86-1179 
(D.C.  Cir., June 11, 1987).  See also Policy Regarding 
Character Qualifications in Broadcast Licensing, 5 FCC Rcd 
3252 (1990), on reconsideration, 6 FCC Rcd 3448 (1991), 
modified, 7 FCC Rcd 6564 (1992).

20  See, e.g., Herbert L. Schoenbohm, 13 FCC Rcd 15,026 
(1998) (denying renewal of amateur license based on felony 
conviction and lack of candor), recon. denied 13 FCC Rcd 
23774 (1998), appeal dismissed, 204 F.3d 234 (D.C. Cir. 
2000), cert. denied, 121 S.Ct. 405 (2000).

21  The evidence establishes that Mr. Brewer has operated 
unlicensed broadcast and/or STL facilities on at least the 
following dates:  January 11, 1996; February 16, 1996; 
October 25, 1996; January 31, 1997; May 15, 1997; October 
14, 1997; November 19 and 23, 1997; December 3, 10, and 15, 
1997; and March 11, 2000.

22   The OCS, at  16, ordered the suspension of Mr. 
Brewer's Amateur Radio operator license for the remainder of 
its term, effective 15 days after Mr. Brewer's receipt of 
the OCS, unless, within that time, Mr. Brewer requested in 
writing a hearing to challenge the suspension.  The record 
reveals that at no time did Mr. Brewer request a hearing on 
the matter of the suspension of his Amateur Radio operator 
license.  Accordingly, the suspension of his Amateur Radio 
operator license has already become effective by operation 
of the OCS and the matter of such suspension need not be 
considered in the instant Order. 

23  See Jerry Szoka, 14 FCC Rcd 9857, 9865 (1999) recon. 
denied, 14 FCC Rcd 20147 (1999) petition for review pending 
sub nom. Grid Radio and Jerry Szoka v. FCC, No. 99-1463 
(D.C. Cir. November 17, 1999); Southern California 
Broadcasting Co., 6 FCC Rcd 4387 (1991). 

24  47 U.S.C.  503(b)(2)(D).  See also The Commission's 
Forfeiture Policy Statement and Amendment of Section 1.80 of 
the Rules to Incorporate the Forfeiture Guidelines, 12 FCC 
Rcd 17087, 17100-01 (1997), recon. denied, 15 FCC Rcd 303 
(1999) (``Forfeiture Guidelines''). 

25  47 U.S.C.  312.

26  47 C.F.R.  1.92(d), 0.111(a)(14).

27  47 U.S.C.  503(b)(3)(A), 47 C.F.R.  1.80(f)(4).

28 47 C.F.R.  1.80.  Payment 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 reference the Acct. No. identified above.  Requests for 
full payment under an installment plan should be sent to: 
Chief, Credit and Debt Management Center, 445 12th Street 
S.W., Washington, D.C. 20554.  See 47 C.F.R.  1.1914.