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.


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

In the Matter of                )
                                )       File No. EB-02-DT-610
Frank Kluz                      )       
Lancaster, Ohio                 )       NAL/Acct.             No. 
                                )       FRN: 0007-4207-22


                                             Released:  July 23, 

By the District Director, Detroit Office, Enforcement Bureau:

                        I.  INTRODUCTION

     1.   In this  Notice of  Apparent Liability  for  Forfeiture 
("NAL"), we find that Frank Kluz, Lancaster, Ohio, has apparently 
violated Section 95.411 of the Commission's Rules (``Rules'')1 by 
using an  external  radio  frequency  power  amplifier  (``linear 
amplifier'') as part of his Citizens Band Radio (``CB'') station.  
We conclude that Frank Kluz is apparently liable for a forfeiture 
in the amount of five thousand dollars ($5,000).

                         II.  BACKGROUND

     2.   On June 22, 2001, the  City of Lancaster, Ohio,  Office 
of the Law Director and City Prosecutor Office, sent a  complaint 
letter to  the  FCC  Enforcement Bureau's  Detroit  Office.   The 
complaint concerned interference to neighborhood home  electronic 
entertainment devices  caused  by the  operation  of a  CB  radio 
station operated by Mr. Kluz.

     3.   On July 19, 2001, the Detroit Office sent a Quiet Hours 
letter to Mr. Kluz.  The letter directed him, his family, and any 
guests visiting  him, not  to operate  any base  or mobile  radio 
transmitter from his property or adjacent roadways from the  time 
the letter was received.  The letter also directed him to contact 
the Detroit Office to make arrangements for an inspection of  his 
radio facility.

     4.   On October  16,  2001,  the City  of  Lancaster,  Ohio, 
Office of  the Law  Director and  City Prosecutor  Office sent  a 
second complaint letter  to the FCC Enforcement Bureau's  Detroit 
Office.   The  complaint  indicated  that  Mr.  Kluz's  CB  radio 
transmissions continued  to  cause interference  to  neighborhood 
telephones, radios and  television sets,  thereby, violating  the 
Quiet Hours letter. 

     5.   On October 31, 2001, an  agent from the Detroit  Office 
monitored for transmissions from Mr.  Kluz's CB station but  none 
were observed.  The agent went to 245 Talmadge Avenue, Lancaster, 
Ohio,  the  address  stated  in  the  complaints  as  Mr.  Kluz's 
residence.  The agent inspected Mr.  Kluz's CB station and  found 
it to be in compliance with  FCC CB rules and regulations.  As  a 
result, the Detroit  Office sent  a letter on  November 14,  2001 
releasing him from the conditions that had been imposed on his CB 
station by the Quiet Hours letter.

     6.   On January 21, 2002, the Office of Congressman David L. 
Hobson referred  a  complaint  from  his  constituents  regarding 
interference to telephones and  home electronic equipment  caused 
by  Mr.  Kluz's  CB  radio  station.   This  correspondence   was 
forwarded to  the Enforcement  Bureau headquarters  for  tracking 
purposes and official response.

     7.   On June 10, 2002, the FCC Enforcement Bureau's  Detroit 
Office received a complaint letter from a resident in  Lancaster, 
Ohio.  The complaint  alleged interference  to neighborhood  home 
electronic  entertainment  devices  from  Mr.  Kluz's  CB   radio 

     8.   On June  25,  2002,  agents  from  the  Detroit  Office 
monitored CB  transmissions on  27.185 MHz  (CB Channel  19)  and 
positively identified  the source  of the  transmissions at  8:26 
p.m. as  emanating from  245  Talmadge, Lancaster,  Ohio.   After 
identifying the  source of  the  transmissions, the  agents  then 
proceeded to  the  residence  and  spoke  with  Mr.  Kluz.   Upon 
inspection of his CB radio station, the agents observed a Palomar 
TX-200B linear  amplifier attached  to his  CB transceiver.   Mr. 
Kluz indicated that he had obtained the linear amplifier, from  a 
friend, two days earlier and was checking it out for his  friend.  
Measurements taken  by  the  agents  indicated  that  the  linear 
amplifier had an output power that  ranged from 12.5 watts to  75 

                        III.  DISCUSSION

     9.   Section 95.411 of the Rules prohibits attaching a power 
amplifier to a CB transmitter in any way.  Furthermore,  pursuant 
to Section 95.411(c) of the Rules2, there is a presumption that a 
linear or other external RF power  amplifier has been used if  it 
is found in  the possession  of, or on  the premises  of, the  CB 
radio station and there is other evidence that the CB station was 
operated with  more power  than allowed  by the  Rules.  In  this 
case, Mr.  Kluz's  CB  radio station  was  positively  identified 
operating immediately prior to the inspection and the  inspection 
revealed that his station consisted  of a CB transceiver with  an 
attached linear  amplifier  and  power  indicator  meter.   Other 
evidence  of   overpower   operation   includes   complaints   of 
interference  to  neighborhood  electronic  devices  the  Detroit 
Office received  regarding his  CB operation,  and his  admission 
that he operated his CB radio with the linear amplifier attached. 

     10.  Based on the  evidence before  us, we  find that  Frank 
Kluz willfully3  violated  Section  95.411  by  having  a  linear 
amplifier in line at his CB station.  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) (``Forfeiture  Policy 
Statement'')4, sets the base forfeiture amount at $5,000 for  the 
use  of  unauthorized  equipment.   In  assessing  the   monetary 
forfeiture amount,  we  must  take  into  account  the  statutory 
factors set forth in  Section 503(b)(2)(D) of the  Communications 
Act of 1934,5  as amended, (``Act''),  which include 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 other  such matters  as 
justice may require.  Considering the entire record, applying the 
Forfeiture Policy  Statement and  the  statutory factors  to  the 
instant case and applying  the inflation adjustments, we  believe 
that a  five  thousand  dollar ($5,000)  monetary  forfeiture  is 

                      IV.  ORDERING CLAUSES

     11.  Accordingly, IT IS  ORDERED THAT,  pursuant to  Section 
503(b) of the  Act6 and  Sections 0.111,  0.311 and  1.80 of  the 
Rules7, Frank Kluz is hereby  NOTIFIED of his APPARENT  LIABILITY 
FOR A FORFEITURE in the amount of five thousand dollars  ($5,000) 
for willful violation of Section 95.411 of the Rules.

     12.  IT IS FURTHER ORDERED THAT, pursuant to Section 1.80 of 
the Rules, within thirty days of the release date of this  NOTICE 
OF APPARENT LIABILITY, Frank  Kluz SHALL PAY  the full amount  of 
the proposed forfeiture or SHALL FILE a written statement seeking 
reduction or cancellation of the proposed forfeiture.

     13.  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. 200232360008, FRN: 0007-4207-22.

     14.  The  response,  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. 200232360008, FRN: 0007-

     15.  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 

     16.  Requests for payment of the full amount of this  Notice 
of Apparent Liability  under an installment  plan should be  sent 
to:  Federal  Communications   Commission,  Chief,  Revenue   and 
Receivables Operations Group, 445 12th Street, S.W.,  Washington, 
D.C. 20554.8

LIABILITY  shall  be  sent  by  Certified  Mail,  Return  Receipt 
Requested, to  Mr. Frank  Kluz, 245  Talmadge Avenue,  Lancaster, 
Ohio 43130.

                                FEDERAL            COMMUNICATIONS 

                                James A. Bridgewater
                                District Director
                                Detroit    Office,    Enforcement 

1 47 C.F.R.  95.411 [CB Rule 11].
2 47 C.F.R  95.411(c) [CB Rule 11].
 Section 312(f)(1) of the Act, 47 U.S.C.  312(f)(1), which 
applies to 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 ....''  See Southern California 
Broadcasting Co., 6 FCC Rcd 4387 (1991).

447 C.F.R.  1.80.

5 47 U.S.C.  503(b)(2)(D).

6 47 U.S.C.  503(b).

7 47 C.F.R.  0.111, and 0.311.

8 See 47 C.F.R.  1.1914.