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-03-PA-003
Dominic DeNaples ) NAL/Acct. No. 200332400009
400 Mill Street )
Dunmore, Pennsylvania 18512 ) FRN No. 0008-27-4771
Adopted: July 2, 2004 Released: July 7, 2004
By the Chief, Enforcement Bureau:
1. In this Forfeiture Order (``Order''), we issue a
monetary forfeiture in the amount of four thousand dollars
($4,000) to Dominic DeNaples for willful violation of Section
1.903(a) of the Commission's Rules (``Rules'').1 The noted
violation involves Mr. DeNaples' operation of radio
communications equipment on the unauthorized frequency 154.515
2. On March 27, 2003, the Commission's Philadelphia
District Office (``Philadelphia Office'') issued a Notice of
Apparent Liability for Forfeiture (``NAL'') to Dominic DeNaples
for a forfeiture in the amount of four thousand dollars
($4,000).2 Mr. DeNaples filed a response to the NAL on April
22, 2003. In his response, Mr. DeNaples requested that the
Commission rescind the forfeiture.3
3. On January 14, 2003, in response to a complaint
received by the Philadelphia Office alleging harmful co-channel
interference caused by an unidentified auto parts dealer on
frequency 154.515 MHz near Nescopeck, Pennsylvania, an agent
from the Philadelphia Office used direction-finding techniques
to locate the source of the transmissions at DeNaples Auto Parts
at 400 Mill Street in Dunmore, Pennsylvania 18512. After
observing and recording the transmissions on frequency 154.515
MHz from 2:30 p.m. until 3:15 p.m. on January 14, 2003, the
agent visited DeNaples Auto Parts to inspect the radio
4. Dominic DeNaples, owner of DeNaples Auto Parts,
acknowledged that he owned the radio communications equipment,
and was responsible for its operation. When asked to produce a
license to operate on frequency 154.515 MHz, Mr. DeNaples
produced a copy of the license for station WNKK817. The license
for WNKK817, however, only authorized operation of radio
communications equipment on frequencies 452.1750 MHz and
457.1750 MHz at 400 Mill Street, Dunmore, Pennsylvania 18512.
Mr. DeNaples, when asked, could produce no license authorizing
operation on frequency 154.515 MHz, though he admitted to
operating on that frequency for several years. A subsequent
search of Commission records revealed no authorization for
Dominic DeNaples to operate radio communications equipment on
the frequency 154.515 MHz.
5. On March 27, 2003, the Philadelphia Office issued an
NAL to Dominic DeNaples in the amount of four thousand dollars
($4,000) for operating radio communications equipment on an
unauthorized frequency in violation of Section 1.903(a) of the
Rules.4 Mr. DeNaples responded to the NAL on April 22, 2003.
In his response, Mr. DeNaples conceded that he operated on
frequency 154.515 MHz, but argued that he applied for and was
issued a license for that frequency more than thirty years ago.5
6. The proposed forfeiture amount in this case was
assessed in accordance with Section 503(b) of the Communications
Act of 1934, as amended, (``Act''),6 Section 1.80 of the Rules,7
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) (``Policy Statement''). In examining Dominic
DeNaples' 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 such other matters as justice may require.8
7. Section 1.903(a) of the Rules requires that,
``[s]tations in the Wireless Radio Services must be used and
operated only in accordance with the rules applicable to their
particular service as set forth in this title and with a valid
authorization granted by the Commission under the provisions of
this part.''9 Dominic DeNaples, on January 14, 2003, operated
radio communications equipment on frequency 154.515 MHz without
Commission authorization and, thus, in violation of Section
1.903(a) of the Rules.
8. In his response, Mr. DeNaples claimed that he did not
operate on frequency 154.515 MHz illegally; instead, he submits
that he held the appropriate Commission authorization for such
operation. Mr. DeNaples, however, provided no proof of any such
authorization either during the agent's inspection or in his
response letter. The only proof of any authorization to operate
on the frequency 154.515 MHz offered by Mr. DeNaples is a copy
of a license he submitted with his response. That license,
however, became effective on March 31, 2003, well after the
agent inspected Mr. DeNaples' radio communications equipment.
Further, Commission records indicated that Mr. DeNaples did not
have a license to operate on the frequency 154.515 MHz prior to
the inspection date, and did not file the license application
requesting authority to operate on frequency 154.515 MHz until
January 22, 2003, more than one week after the inspection of his
radio communications equipment. Therefore, Mr. DeNaples had no
authority to operate on the frequency 154.515 MHz on January 14,
9. We have examined Dominic DeNaples' response to the NAL
pursuant to the statutory factors above, and in conjunction with
the Policy Statement as well. As a result of our review, we
conclude that Mr. DeNaples willfully violated Section 1.903(a)
of the Commissions Rules,10 and we find no basis for rescinding
or reducing the $4,000 forfeiture for this violation.
IV. ORDERING CLAUSES
10. Accordingly, IT IS ORDERED that, pursuant to
Section 503(b) of the Act, and Sections 0.111, 0.311 and
1.80(f)(4) of the Rules,11 Dominic DeNaples IS LIABLE FOR A
MONETARY FORFEITURE in the amount of four thousand dollars
($4,000) for violating Section 1.903(a) of the Commission's
11. Payment of the forfeiture shall be made in the
manner provided for in Section 1.80 of the Rules within 30 days
of the release of this Order. If the forfeiture is not paid
within the period specified, the case may be referred to the
Department of Justice for collection pursuant to Section 504(a)
of the Act.12 Payment may be made by mailing a check or similar
instrument, payable to the order of the Federal Communications
Commission, to the Federal Communications Commission, P.O. Box
73482, Chicago, Illinois 60673-7482. The payment should
reference NAL/Acct. No. 200332400009 and FRN 0008-27-4771.
Requests for full payment under an installment plan should be
sent to: Chief, Revenue and Receivables Group, 445 12th Street,
S.W., Washington, D.C. 20554.13
12. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that a copy of this Order
shall be sent by First Class Mail and Certified Mail, Return
Receipt Requested, to Dominic DeNaples, 400 Mill Street,
Dunmore, Pennsylvania 18512.
FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION
David H. Solomon
Chief, Enforcement Bureau
1 47 C.F.R. § 1.903(a).
2 Notice of Apparent Liability for Forfeiture, File No. EB-03-PA-
003, NAL/Acct. No. 200332400009 (Enf. Bureau, Philadelphia
Office, released March 27, 2003).
3 DeNaple's Response at page 1.
4 NAL at ¶ 1.
5 DeNaples' Response at page 1. Attached to his response, Mr.
DeNaples sent a copy of a license for station WPXG564 authorizing
operation on frequency 154.515 MHz with an effective date of
March 31, 2003.
6 47 U.S.C. § 503(b).
7 47 C.F.R. § 1.80.
8 47 U.S.C. § 503(b)(2)(D).
9 47 C.F.R. 1.903(a).
10 Section 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,'
... 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, 4388 (1991) (forfeiture to an AM radio station for
willful violation of sponsorship identification, even though the
AM radio station did not know its actions violated any rule or
11 47 C.F.R. §§ 0.111, 0.311, 1.80(f)(4).
12 47 U.S.C. § 504(a).
13 See 47 C.F.R. § 1.1914.