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-03-SD-007
Global Radio, Inc.               )    NAL/Acct. No. 200332940003
1275 First Avenue, No. 125       )
New York, New York 10021         )    FRN No.  000-869-2170

                        FORFEITURE ORDER

Adopted:  September 20, 2004            Released:  September 22, 

By the Chief, Enforcement Bureau:


     1.   In  this  Forfeiture  Order  (``Order''),  we  issue  a 
monetary forfeiture in  the amount of ten thousand eight  hundred 
dollars ($10,800) to Global Radio, Inc. (``Global'') for  willful 
violations of Section  301 of the Communications Act of 1934,  as 
amended,  (``Act''),1 and Section  74.103(c) of the  Commission's 
Rules  (``Rules'').2   The  noted  violations  involve   Global's 
operation  of radio  transmitting equipment  on the  unauthorized 
frequencies 88.98 MHz, 104.1 MHz, and 106.9 MHz.  

     2.   On  March  8,   2003,  the   Commission's  San   Diego, 
California  District  Office  (``San  Diego  Office'')  issued  a 
Notice of Apparent  Liability for Forfeiture (``NAL'') to  Global 
for  a  forfeiture  in the  amount  of  twelve  thousand  dollars 
($12,000).3  Global filed a response to the NAL on May 8, 2003.


     3.   On January 10, 2003,  Global filed an application  with 
the Media  Bureau proposing to conduct  tests of a special  event 
broadcasting  station in conjunction  with the National  Football 
League's  Super Bowl  XXXVII in  San Diego,  California.   Global 
requested use of  six frequencies: 89.1 MHz, 92.9 MHz, 93.7  MHz, 
96.9 MHz, 104.1 MHz, and 106.9 MHz.

     4.   On January 23,  2003, Global  received an  experimental 
license  from  the  Media Bureau  authorizing  operation  on  two 
frequencies, 93.7  MHz and 96.9 MHz,  under the call sign  WN3XFL 
for a limited time from Qualcomm Stadium, the site of Super  Bowl 
XXXVII.   The Media  Bureau, at  that time,  specifically  denied 
Global's  request for permission  to operate  on four  additional 
channels, 89.1  MHz, 92.9 MHz, 104.1 MHz,  and 106.9 MHz, due  to 
the  possibility that  such  operation could  cause  interference 
with  existing  broadcast  stations  in  Mexico  and  the  United 
States. 4

     5.   On January 26, 2003, an agent from the San Diego Office 
observed that special  event broadcast station WN3XFL was  active 
and operating, without  license, on frequencies 88.98 MHz,  104.1 
MHz, and 106.9 MHz, in addition to its operation pursuant to  its 
experimental license on  frequencies 93.7 MHz and 96.9 MHz.   The 
agent used direction finding techniques, and determined that  the 
signals originated at  Qualcomm Stadium.  A subsequent search  of 
Commission  records revealed  no authority  issued by  the  Media 
Bureau  to  Global  approving  operation  on  any  additional  FM 
broadcast radio frequencies. 

     6.    On March  28, 2003,  the San Diego  Office issued  the 
subject  NAL  to  Global  for  operation  of  radio  transmitting 
equipment on the  unauthorized frequencies 88.98 MHz, 104.1  MHz, 
and  106.9  MHz  in  apparent  willful  violation  of  the  noted 
sections  of the  Act and  the Rules.   On May  8, 2003,  Global, 
after  obtaining an extension,  responded to  the NAL  requesting 
cancellation  of the  forfeiture,  citing a  history  of  overall 
compliance  and an  inability to  pay.  In  its response,  Global 
acknowledged its unauthorized operation on 89.1 MHz,5 104.1  MHz, 
and  106.9  MHz.6   Global characterized  its  operation  on  the 
additional channels  as an experiment  intended to ``explore  the 
role of Part  15'' and ``provide the FCC with reliable data''  as 
further justification for cancellation. 


     7.   The  proposed  forfeiture  amount  in  this  case   was 
assessed in accordance with Section 503(b) of the  Communications 
Act of 1934, as amended, (``Act''),7 Section 1.80 of the  Rules,8 
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   Global's 
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.9

     8.   Section 301  of the  Act  mandates that  ``[n]o  person 
shall  use  or operate  any  apparatus for  the  transmission  of 
energy or communications or signals by radio'' within the  United 
States ``except under and in accordance with this Act and with  a 
license  in that  behalf  granted under  the provisions  of  this 
Act.''10  Part 74 of the Rules describes the circumstances  under 
which  the   Commission  may  grant  an  experimental   broadcast 
license.11   An experimental  broadcast station  is a  particular 
type   of  station   licensed  specifically   for   developmental 
transmission  of telecommunication  services.12   The  Commission 
licenses  experimental stations to  encourage the development  of 
new  broadcast  technology.13  Section  74.103(c)  of  the  Rules 
states:  ``[f]requencies  best  suited  to  the  purpose  of  the 
experimentation  and  on which  there  appears to  be  the  least 
likelihood  of  interference to  established  stations  shall  be 

     9.   Using Section  74.103(c)  as  a  guideline,  the  Media 
Bureau selected  frequencies 93.7 MHz and  96.9 MHz only, due  to 
the  likelihood that  operation  on other  requested  frequencies 
would   cause  harmful  interference   with  existing,   licensed 
stations.15   Global does  not dispute  that it  operated on  the 
unauthorized frequencies 88.98 MHz, 104.1 MHz, and 106.9 MHz,  or 
claim  that it  was  authorized to  operate on  those  additional 
frequencies; instead,  Global argues that it attempted  operation 
on those channels in an effort to experiment with the  boundaries 
of Part 15.16   Part 15 describes the regulations under which  an 
intentional or unintentional radiator may be operated without  an 
individual  license.17   The  operation  of  an  intentional   or 
unintentional  radiator not in  accordance with Part  15 must  be 
licensed  pursuant to the  provisions of Section  301 the  Act.18  
Section 15.239(b) of  the Rules requires that the field  strength 
of any emissions within the permitted frequencies 88 MHz  through 
108  MHz, shall not  exceed 250 microvolts/meter  at 3  meters.19  
The  unauthorized frequencies, 88.98  MHz, 104.1  MHz, and  106.9 
MHz, at which Global operated on January 26, 2003, from  Qualcomm 
Stadium,  resided  wholly within  the  FM band.   The  San  Diego 
Office agent who observed the transmissions on frequencies  88.98 
MHz, 104.1 MHz,  and 106.9 MHz near Qualcomm Stadium, on  January 
26, 2003,  from 12:30 p.m. PST until  2:00 p.m. PST, noted  that, 
based on the  distance the signals were heard and the  comparable 
signal strengths of the unauthorized stations to those that  were 
authorized, the signals  exceeded the specific limits of  Section 
15.239(b)  of the  Rules,  and were,  consequently, not  Part  15 
radio  stations.    Global's  operation  of  radio   transmitting 
equipment  on frequencies 88.98  MHz, 104.1 MHz,  and 106.9  MHz, 
therefore,  required licensing  pursuant to  Section 301  of  the 

     10.    Global's claim, that its intent was to remain  within 
the confined boundaries set out in Part 15, does not persuade  us 
that the  violation was not willful.   Global's violation of  the 
parameters of  Part 15 need not be  intentional in order to  hold 
Global  liable for  a  violation of  Section 301  of the  Act  or 
Section 74.103(c) of the Rules.20  All that is necessary is  that 
Global   intended  to  commit   the  act   that  violated   these 
provisions.21    Here,  Global   intended  to   operate  on   the 
unauthorized  frequencies 88.98 MHz,  104.1 MHz,  and 106.9  MHz; 
accordingly,  we   conclude  that  Global  willfully22   violated 
Section 301 of the Act, and Section 74.103(c) of the Rules.  

     11.  In its response, Global  requested cancellation of  the 
forfeiture,  due to  an  inability to  pay, stating  that,  ``the 
proposed  forfeiture would be  disproportionate to the  company's 
resources and  would severely hinder  the [company's] efforts  to 
work  with the  FCC.''  Global,  however, submitted  no  evidence 
that would support a cancellation or reduction of the  forfeiture 
based on an inability to pay.23

     12.    Global stated, in its response, that it used a  field 
intensity  meter  prior  to its  operation  on  the  unauthorized 
frequencies 88.98 MHz, 104.1 MHz, 106.9 MHz, and determined  that 
there  were  no  ``listenable''  radio  signals  operating   near 
Qualcomm Stadium in San Diego, California, on those  frequencies.  
By this  statement, Global appears to  imply that its  violations 
of  Section 301 of  the Act  and Section 74.103(c)  of the  Rules 
were  minor in  nature.  We  disagree.  Even  given the  probable 
lack of  interference actually caused to  other stations and  the 
relatively  short   duration  of  Global's  operation  on   these 
frequencies, we find, given the nature of the violation, and  due 
to the  fact that Global is  a Commission licensee familiar  with 
Commission  regulations,  and  because  Global  acted  in  direct 
contradiction to  a Media Bureau  order prohibiting operation  on 
frequencies  88.98 MHz,  104.1  MHz, and  106.9 MHz,  that  these 
violations were  not minor, and no  cancellation or reduction  of 
the forfeiture for minor violations is warranted.24  

     13.  Global, in its response, requested we note that it  has 
a  ``spotless'' record before  the Commission.   We have  checked 
Commission   records  concerning  Global's   performance  as   an 
experimental broadcast licensee and concur that it has a  history 
of overall  compliance.25  Accordingly, we reduce the  forfeiture 
amount to $10,800. 

     14.  We have examined Global's 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  Global  willfully violated  Section  301  of  the 
Communications Act of 1934, as amended, and Section 74.103(c)  of 
the  Rules.  We find  no basis  for rescinding  or canceling  the 
forfeiture due to an inability to pay, or for any other reason.


     15.       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,26  Global Radio, Inc.  IS LIABLE FOR  A 
MONETARY FORFEITURE in  the amount of ten thousand eight  hundred 
dollars ($10,800)  for its willful violations  of Section 301  of 
the Act and Section 74.103(c) of the Rules.  

     16.       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.27  Payment may  be made by  credit card through  the 
Commission's Credit and Debt Management Center at (202)  418-1995 
or  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.   Payment  by overnight  mail  may be  sent  to  Bank 
One/LB  73482, 525  West  Monroe, 8th  Floor  Mailroom,  Chicago, 
Illinois  60661. Payment  by wire  transfer may  be made  to  ABA 
Number  071000013, receiving bank  Bank One,  and account  number 
1165259.  The  payment must include  the FCC Registration  Number 
(FRN) and the NAL/Acct. No. referenced in the caption.   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. 20554.28    

     17.       IT IS FURTHER  ORDERED that a  copy of this  Order 
shall  be sent via  First Class Mail  and Certified Mail,  Return 
Receipt Requested, to Global Radio, Inc., 1275 First Avenue,  No. 
125, New York, New York, 10021.

                              FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION

                              David H. Solomon
                              Chief, Enforcement Bureau

  - Unhandled Picture -  


1 47 U.S.C.  301.
2 47 C.F.R.  74.103(c).
3 Notice  of Apparent  Liability  for Forfeiture,  NAL/Acct.  No. 
200332940003 (Enf.  Bur., San  Diego  Office, released  March  8, 
4 Letter  from  Brian  J.  Butler,  Supervisory  Engineer,  Audio 
Division  of  Commission's  Media  Bureau,  to  Gregg  Baldinger, 
President, Global Radio, Inc., at 1, dated January 23, 2002.
5 The  NAL does  not allege  that Global  operated on  89.1  MHz, 
rather, it  alleges  that  Global operated  on  the  unauthorized 
frequency 88.98 MHz. Global made no reference to the unauthorized 
operation on  88.98  MHz in  its  response  to the  NAL,  but  it 
concedes that it operated without authorization on 89.1 MHz.  For 
the purposes  of clarity  in this  Order, we  will refer  to  the 
frequency as 88.98 MHz. 
6 Global  also  admitted  unauthorized  operation  on  92.9  MHz.  
However, since  the  NAL  does  not  address  operation  on  this 
unauthorized frequency, we will not address it in this Order.  
7  47 U.S.C.  503(b).
8  47 C.F.R.  1.80.
9  47 U.S.C.  503(b)(2)(D).
10  47 U.S.C.  301.
11  47 C.F.R.  74 et. seq.
12  See 47 C.F.R.  74.101.
13  See 47 C.F.R.  74.102.
14  47 C.F.R.  74.103(c).
15 Additionally the Media Bureau  noted that its study  indicated 
that based on  interference protection ratios  in the  US-Mexican 
working agreement, Global's request  would cause interference  to 
Mexican FM stations. See fn 4, supra.
16  47 C.F.R.  15 et. seq.
17  See 47 C.F.R.  15.1(a).
18  See 47 C.F.R.  15.1(b).
19  47 C.F.R. 15.239(b).
20 See Rev. Yvon Louis, 18 FCC Rcd 16187, 16189 (Enf. Bur., 2003) 
(holding an  individual  liable  for  a  $10,000  forfeiture  for 
operating on unlicensed frequencies,  even though he believed  he 
operated his communications  equipment within  the parameters  of 
Part 15 and, as a result, required no license).
21  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 
law), recon. denied, 7 FCC Rcd 3454 (1992).
22  Id.
23 See NAL at  12 (stating that ``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.''); see also Commonwealth 
License Subsidiary, LLC, 18 FCC Rcd 20483, 20486 (2003) 
(rejecting a station's claim of inability to pay due to the radio 
station's failure to provide proper documentation); PJB 
Communications of Virginia, Inc., 7 FCC Rcd 2088, 2089 (1992) 
(finding that gross receipts are a ``very useful yardstick'' in 
analyzing a company's financial condition for forfeiture 
24 See AGM  Nevada LLC,  18 FCC  Rcd 1476,  1478-1479 (Enf.  Bur. 
2003) (concluding  that  ``the  absence of  interference  or  any 
showing of harm to the public interest does not entitle AGM to  a 
reduction of the proposed forfeiture''); see also Application  of 
Liberty  Cable  Co.,  Inc.,  16  FCC  Rcd  16105,  16112   (2001) 
(concluding  that  ``unlicensed  radio  operation  is  a  serious 
violation of  the Act'');  KNFL, Inc.,  15 FCC  Rcd 10286,  10289 
(Enf. Bur. 2000)  (concluding that  KNFL's operation  of a  radio 
station without a license after receiving a warning regarding the 
illegality of such operation was  not a minor violation),  recon. 
denied, 15 FCC Rcd 25527 (Enf. Bur. 2000).
25 See Coffee County  Broadcasting, Inc., 19  FCC Rcd 2942,  2943 
(Enf. Bur. 2004) (``Coffee  County states that  it has never  had 
any major FCC  violations, which we  interpret to be  a claim  of 
history of overall compliance'').
26 47 C.F.R.  0.111, 0.311, 1.80(f)(4).
27 47 U.S.C.  504(a).
28 See 47 C.F.R.  1.1914.