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 )
Jack Gerritsen ) File No. EB-03-LA-286
) NAL/Acct. No.
) FRN 0005240072
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
Adopted: March 2, 2005 Released: March 4, 2005
By the Chief, Enforcement Bureau:
1. In this Memorandum Opinion and Order, issued pursuant
to Section 405 of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended
(``Act''),1 and Section 1.106 of the Commission's rules,2 we deny
a Petition for Reconsideration (``Petition'') filed on November
2, 2004, by Jack Gerritsen (``Gerritsen'')3 of a Forfeiture
Order4 imposing a Ten Thousand Dollar ($10,000) monetary
forfeiture penalty against him for willful and repeated
violations of Section 301 of the Communications Act of 1934, as
amended (``Act'').5 Specifically, in the Forfeiture Order, we
found that Gerritsen operated a radio station in the Amateur
Radio Services without authorization from the Federal
Communications Commission (``Commission'').
2. Reconsideration is appropriate only where the
petitioner either demonstrates a material error or omission in
the underlying order or raises additional facts not known or not
existing until after the petitioner's last opportunity to present
such matters.6 A petition for reconsideration that reiterates
arguments that were previously considered and rejected will be
denied.7 Gerritsen raises one argument that has been thoroughly
considered and rejected, and thus does not support
reconsideration of our Forfeiture Order.8
3. Gerritsen also raises new arguments that we have
not previously addressed. Gerritsen argues that the Forfeiture
Order illustrates the fact that ``Federal Authorities [are]
attempting to deprive me of the most fundamental human right in
the First Amend. [sic] to the U.S. Constitution, the right to
communicate by way of the spoken word over radio, criticism of
the President and his obscene war.'' Additionally, Gerritsen
states that the Commission must ``rely upon written rules that do
not allow authorities to use subjective discretion in the denial
or granting of any required license to speak, or enforcement of
any such denial.'' It is well established that the right to free
speech does not include the right to use radio facilities without
a license and that the licensing system established by Congress
in the Act was a proper exercise of its power over commerce.9
Consequently, we find these arguments to be without merit.
4. Gerritsen also objects to the Forfeiture Order
arguing it afforded him none of the ``requirements of due process
of law.'' The Forfeiture Order and the Notice of Apparent
Liability which preceded it were issued pursuant to the procedure
set forth in Section 503(b) of the Act.10 Sections 503 and 504
of the Act provide safeguards which satisfy Due Process
requirements.11 Consequently, we find that Gerritsen's right to
procedural due process was not abridged.
5. Gerritsen's new arguments do not demonstrate that
the Forfeiture Order contains material errors or omissions, and
we have already considered and rejected his other argument.
Therefore, we deny Gerritsen's Petition.
6. Despite repeated warnings that he holds no valid
Commission authorization,12 investigations by field agents in the
Bureau's Western Region reveal that Gerritsen persists in his
unauthorized operations in the Amateur service. Because of
Gerritsen's ongoing illegal activity, we direct the Western
Region to continue to coordinate with the United States Attorney
for the Central District of California in pursuing possible
additional sanctions against Gerritsen.13
7. Accordingly, IT IS ORDERED THAT, pursuant to Section
405 of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended, and Section
1.106 of the Commission's rules, Jack Gerritsen's Petition for
Reconsideration, filed November 2, 2004, IS HEREBY DENIED.
8. 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 Memorandum Opinion and 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.14 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. 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.
9. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED THAT a copy of this
Memorandum Opinion and Order shall be sent by Certified Mail
Return Receipt Requested and by First Class Mail to Jack
Gerritsen, 6217 ½ Palm Avenue, Bell, California, 90201.
FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION
David H. Solomon
Chief, Enforcement Bureau
147 U.S.C. § 405.
247 C.F.R. § 1.106.
3Gerritsen's filing is not captioned as a petition for
reconsideration and is in letter form. However, we are treating
it as a petition for reconsideration of the Forfeiture Order
pursuant to 47 U.S.C. § 405 and 47 C.F.R. § 1.106.
4Jack Gerritsen, 19 FCC Rcd 19520 (2004) (``Forfeiture Order'').
547 U.S.C. § 301.
6See 47 C.F.R. § 1.106(c); EZ Sacramento, Inc., 15 FCC Rcd 18257,
¶ 2 (EB 2000), citing WWIZ, Inc., 37 FCC 685, 686 (1964), aff'd
sub. nom. Lorain Journal Co. v. FCC, 351 F.2d 824 (D.C. Cir.
1965), cert. denied, 383 U.S. 967 (1966).
7EZ Sacramento, Inc., 15 FCC Rcd at 18257, ¶ 2.
8Specifically, Gerritsen argues that his amateur license, call
sign KG6IRO, has not been set aside.
9National Broadcasting Company v. U.S., 319 U.S. 190, 227 (1943).
10Section 503(b)(4) provides:
Except as provided in paragraph (3) of this subsection, no
forfeiture penalty shall be imposed under this subsection against
any person unless and until--
(A) the Commission issues a notice of apparent liability, in
writing, with respect to such person;
(B) such notice has been received by such person, or until the
Commission has sent such notice to the last known address of
such person, by registered or certified mail; and
(C) such person is granted an opportunity to show, in writing,
within such reasonable period of time as the Commission
prescribes by rule or regulation, why no such forfeiture
penalty should be imposed.
Such a notice shall (i) identify each specific provision, term,
and condition of any Act, rule, regulation, order, treaty,
convention, or other agreement, license, permit, certificate,
instrument, or authorization which such person apparently
violated or with which such person apparently failed to comply;
(ii) set forth the nature of the act or omission charged against
such person and the facts upon which such charge is based; and
(iii) state the date on which such conduct occurred. Any
forfeiture penalty determined under this paragraph shall be
recoverable pursuant to section 504(a) of this title.
47 U.S.C. § 503(b)(4).
11Leonard D. Martin, 15 FCC Rcd 22004 (2000).
12Forfeiture Order, 19 FCC Rcd at 19521.
13See, e.g., 47 U.S.C. §§ 401(a), 501.
1447 U.S.C. § 504(a).