******************************************************** 
                      NOTICE
********************************************************

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 Number: EB-04-LA-072
Jose A. Mollinedo                )
                                 )      NAL/Acct. No. 200532900004
Victorville, CA                  )                  FRN 0012227534
                                 )


                        FORFEITURE ORDER

Adopted: January 11, 2006                               Released: 
January 13, 2006 

By the Regional Director, Western Region, Enforcement Bureau:

I.  INTRODUCTION

     1.    In this Forfeiture Order (``Order''), we issue a 
monetary forfeiture in the amount of ten thousand dollars 
($10,000) to Jose A. Mollinedo (``Mollinedo''), for willful and 
repeated violation of Section 301 of the Communications Act of 
1934, as amended (``Act'').1  On January 31, 2005, the 
Enforcement Bureau's Los Angeles Office issued a Notice of 
Apparent Liability for Forfeiture (``NAL'') in the amount of 
$10,000 to Mollinedo for operating an unlicensed radio 
transmitter on 90.9 MHz in Victorville, California.2   In this 
Order, we consider Mollinedo's arguments that he received bad 
advice from an associate regarding the need for a license to 
operate, and that since he received the NAL, he no longer 
operates the radio equipment and has destroyed it.  

II. BACKGROUND

     2.   On March 8, 2004, the Enforcement Bureau's Los Angeles 
Office received information concerning an unauthorized broadcast 
station operating on 90.9 MHz in Victorville, California.  That 
same day, agents from the Los Angeles office used mobile 
direction finding techniques to locate broadcast transmissions on 
90.9 MHz emanating from a private residence at 12650 Cobalt Road, 
in Victorville, California.  The agents took field strength 
measurements and determined that the signals being broadcast 
exceeded the limits for operation under Part 15 of the 
Commission's Rules (``Rules'')3 and therefore required a license.  
When agents knocked at the residence door, they received no 
answer.  The agents left a Notice of Unauthorized Operation 
(``Notice'') at the door of the residence.

     3.   On March 12, 2004, Los Angeles agents monitored 90.9 
MHz in the Victorville, California area and used mobile direction 
finding techniques to locate broadcast transmissions on 90.9 MHz 
emanating from the private residence at 12650 Cobalt Road, in 
Victorville, California.  The agents approached the house and 
identified themselves to the owner of the residence, Jose A. 
Mollinedo.  The agents then requested an inspection.  Mollinedo 
allowed the inspection and admitted ownership and operation of 
the station.  He also acknowledged receiving the Notice that the 
agents had left at the residence four days earlier.4  

     4.   On March 30, 2004, the Los Angeles Office sent 
Mollinedo a detailed Notice of Unlicensed Operation, which gave 
Mollinedo an opportunity to reply.  The Los Angeles Office 
received a receipt from the Post Office indicating that the 
Notice of Unlicensed Operation had been received, but no reply 
was received.  In May and June of 2004, Los Angeles agents 
monitored 90.9 MHz in the Victorville, California area on several 
occasions and found that the station was not broadcasting. 

     5.   In June and July of 2004, the Los Angeles Office 
received information that an unauthorized radio station on 90.9 
MHz in Victorville, California had resumed broadcasting.  On 
September 20, 2004, agents from the Los Angeles Office again 
monitored and used mobile direction finding techniques to locate 
broadcast transmissions on 90.9 MHz emanating from the private 
residence at 12650 Cobalt Road, in Victorville, California.  The 
agents made field strength measurements and determined that the 
signals being broadcast were essentially unchanged from their 
previous measurements.  The measurements indicated that the 
station still exceeded the limits for operation under Part 15 of 
the Rules and, therefore, still required a license.5  When agents 
knocked at the residence door, they received no answer.     

     6.   On September 27, 2004, the Los Angeles Office sent 
Mollinedo another Notice of Unlicensed Operation, which again 
gave Mollinedo an opportunity to reply.  The copy of the Notice 
sent via Certified Mail was returned by the Post Office after 
multiple delivery attempts.  The copy of the Notice sent via 
regular mail was not returned.  No reply was received.  On 
November 26, 2004, agents reviewed the Commission's records and 
found that no authorization had been issued for any station to 
operate on 90.9 MHz in Victorville, California.  

     7.   On January 31, 2005, the Los Angeles Office issued a 
NAL in the amount of $10,000 to Mollinedo, finding that Mollinedo 
apparently willfully and repeatedly operated an unlicensed radio 
transmitter on 90.9 MHz in Victorville, California.  Mollinedo 
filed a response to the NAL on March 16, 2005 (``Response'').  In 
his Response, Mollinedo states that he received bad advice from 
an associate regarding the need for a license to operate and that 
since he received the NAL, he no longer operates the radio 
equipment and has destroyed it.  

III.  DISCUSSION

     8.        The proposed forfeiture amount in this case was 
assessed in accordance with Section 503(b) of the 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.8  In examining Mollinedo'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 
other such matters as justice may require.9

     9.        Section 301 of the Act requires that no 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 the Act and with a license.  
Mollinedo does not deny operating radio transmitting equipment 
without a license, nor does he deny that he received at least one 
of the Los Angeles Office Notices prior to receiving the NAL.  
Instead, Mollinedo argues that after receiving the Notice, an 
associate told him that he apparently did not need a license if 
he only played music but did not play advertisements.  The advice 
Mollinedo received from an associate is irrelevant here. 
Mollinedo was warned orally and in writing by Los Angeles agents 
in March, 2004 that he needed a license and to discontinue 
operation of his radio transmitting equipment, yet, despite these 
warnings, Mollinedo resumed operation of his radio transmitting 
equipment without Commission authorization in September, 2004.  
Mollinedo also states that since he received the NAL, he no 
longer broadcasts and has destroyed his radio transmitting 
equipment.  Consistent with Commission precedent, we find that 
Mollinedo's assertion that, since receipt of the NAL, he no 
longer broadcasts and has destroyed his equipment does not 
provide a basis for reduction or cancellation of the 
forfeiture.10  

     10.       We have examined Mollinedo's response to the NAL 
pursuant to the statutory factors above, and in conjunction with 
the Forfeiture Policy Statement.  As a result of our review, we 
conclude that Jose A. Mollinedo willfully and repeated violated 
Section 301 of the Act.  Considering the entire record and the 
factors listed above, we find that neither reduction nor 
cancellation of the proposed $10,000 forfeiture is warranted.


IV.  ORDERING CLAUSES

     11.       ACCORDINGLY, IT IS ORDERED that, pursuant to 
Section 503(b) of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended 
(``Act''), and Sections 0.111, 0.311 and 1.80(f)(4) of the 
Commission's Rules, Jose A. Mollinedo IS LIABLE FOR A MONETARY 
FORFEITURE in the amount of $10,000 for willfully and repeatedly 
violating Section 301 of the Act.11

     12.       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 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 Federal Communications Commission, 
P.O. Box 358340, Pittsburgh, PA 15251-8340.  Payment by overnight 
mail may be sent to Mellon Bank /LB 358340, 500 Ross Street, Room 
1540670, Pittsburgh, PA 15251.   Payment by wire transfer may be 
made to ABA Number 043000261, receiving bank Mellon Bank, and 
account number 911- 6106.  Requests for full payment under an 
installment plan should be sent to: Associate Managing Director - 
Financial Operations, Room 1A625, 445 12th Street, S.W., 
Washington, D.C. 20554.13



     13.       IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that a copy of this Order 
shall be sent by First Class Mail and Certified Mail Return 
Receipt Requested to Jose A. Mollinedo at his address of record.





                              FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION




                              Rebecca L. Dorch
                              Regional Director, Western Region
                              Enforcement Bureau







_________________________

1 47 U.S.C. § 301.

2 Notice of Apparent Liability for Forfeiture, NAL/Acct. No. 
200532900004 (Enf. Bur., Western Region, Los Angeles Office, 
released January 31, 2005). 

3 Section 15.239 of the Rules provides that non-licensed 
broadcasting in the 88-108 MHz band is permitted only if the 
field strength of the transmission does not exceed 250 ?V/m at 
three meters. 47 C.F.R. § 15.239.  On March 8, 2004, the 
measurements indicated that the signal was 4900 times greater 
than the maximum permissible level for a non-licensed Part 15 
transmitter.  

4 The Los Angeles agents issued another Notice of Unlicensed 
Operation to Mollinedo immediately after the inspection on March 
12, 2004.  Mollinedo signed the Notice to acknowledge receipt. 

5 The measurements made on September 20, 2004, indicated that the 
signal was 5000 times greater than the maximum permissible level 
for a non-licensed Part 15 transmitter.
    
6 47 U.S.C. § 503(b).

7 47 C.F.R. § 1.80.

8 12 FCC Rcd 17087 (1997), recon. denied, 15 FCC Rcd 303 (1999).

9 47 U.S.C. § 503(b)(2)(D).

10 See, e.g., Rony Richard Louis, 19 FCC Rcd 23629 (EB 2004); 
Seawest Yacht Brokers, 9 FCC Rcd 6099 (1994). 

11 47 U.S.C. §§ 301, 503(b), 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.