Click here for Adobe Acrobat version
Click here for Microsoft Word version

******************************************************** 
                      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                            )                           
                                                                             
     COMMERCIAL RADIO SERVICE, INC.              )                           
                                                                             
     Licensee of Private Land Mobile Stations    )                           
     WNDS861, Reelsville, Indiana; WNIL729,                                  
     Paxton, Indiana; WPCJ772, West Terre        )                           
     Haute, Indiana; and WPNU312 Greencastle,        EB DOCKET NO. 06-168    
     Indiana/West Terre Haute, Indiana           )                           
                                                     File No. EB-06-IH-1362  
     Licensee of Commercial Land Mobile          )                           
     Station WNGE348, West Terre Haute,              NAL Acct. No.           
     Indiana                                     )   200632080166            
                                                                             
     TIMOTHY M. DOTY                             )                           
                                                                             
     Licensee of General Radiotelephone          )                           
     Operator License PG1814366; and Amateur                                 
     Radio Operator and Licensee of Amateur      )                           
     Radio Station WB9MDC, West Terre Haute,                                 
     Indiana                                     )                           
                                                                             
                                                 )                           
                                                                             
                                                 )                           
                                                                             
                                                 )                           
                                                                             
                                                 )                           


                              ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE

   Adopted: August 28, 2006 Released: August 30, 2006

   By the Commission:

   I. introduction

    1. By this Order to Show Cause, and pursuant to Sections 312(a) and (c)
       of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended ("Act"), the Federal
       Communications Commission ("Commission"), hereby orders Commercial
       Radio Service, Inc. ("CRS") and Timothy M. Doty to show cause in a
       hearing proceeding before an administrative law judge why their
       respective above-captioned authorizations should not be revoked. The
       information before the Commission raises substantial and material
       questions as to their basic qualifications to be and remain Commission
       licensees because of the felony convictions of Mr. Doty and apparent
       misrepresentations and/or lack of candor by CRS regarding such
       convictions in applications filed with the Commission. This proceeding
       will also determine whether forfeitures should be imposed against CRS
       for willfully and repeatedly violating Commission rules relating to
       truthful and accurate statements to the Commission and for failing to
       timely amend pending Commission applications to disclose Mr. Doty's
       convictions.

   II. background

    2. In late 2005, the Commission received information suggesting that CRS
       may not have properly disclosed information about felony convictions
       of Timothy M. Doty in applications filed with the Commission.
       Thereafter, the Enforcement Bureau sent a letter of inquiry ("LOI") to
       CRS seeking information about CRS' operations, Commission licenses,
       previous filings, and whether any principal, officer, or director of
       CRS had ever been convicted of a felony.

    3. According to its LOI response, CRS is engaged in the sales and service
       of two-way radio communications equipment. Since January 1, 1990, CRS
       has held authorizations for the above-captioned licensed radio
       systems. Over that same period, Timothy M. Doty has, at all relevant
       times, been a director and 50% shareholder of CRS. Mr. Doty also was a
       CRS officer from at least January 1, 1990 through May 9, 2006. Mr.
       Doty holds a General Radiotelephone Operator License, as well as an
       Amateur Radio License, both of which are listed in the above caption.

    4. Publicly available records reveal that, on May 31, 1991, Mr. Doty was
       found guilty in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of
       Indiana, Terre Haute Division, of violating 18 U.S.C.
       S 2512(1)(b), involving the manufacture and possession of unauthorized
       satellite TV signal descrambling devices, a felony. He was sentenced
       to three years probation and a $2,000 fine.

    5. In addition, publicly available records indicate that, on November 15,
       2001, Mr. Doty was found guilty in State of Indiana Vigo Superior
       Court, Division 5, of felony possession of a controlled substance. He
       was sentenced to 18 months in the Indiana Department of Corrections,
       which sentence was suspended except for 30 days.

    6. Subsequent to the first of Mr. Doty's felony convictions, CRS filed at
       least two license applications with the Commission in which CRS
       answered "No" to the question inquiring whether the applicant or any
       party directly or indirectly controlling the applicant had ever been
       convicted of a felony in state or federal court. As noted above, at
       the time of these filings, Mr. Doty was an officer, director, and 50%
       shareholder of CRS.

    7. Subsequent to the second of Mr. Doty's felony convictions, CRS filed
       at least five license renewal-only applications. Renewal-only
       applications are streamlined applications for licensees that seek to
       renew their authorizations and do not need to update any information
       previously provided relating to, among other things, basic qualifying
       information, including felony convictions. If updates are required,
       renewal applicants must indicate as much and file renewal/modification
       applications instead. Under the Commission's Universal Licensing
       System, renewal-only applications do not require licensees to provide
       information relating to felony convictions. Renewal/modification
       applications, by contrast, do require licensees to provide information
       about felony convictions. By filing renewal-only applications rather
       than renewal/modification applications, CRS failed to provide
       information to the Commission about Mr. Doty's felony convictions that
       it was otherwise required to disclose.

    8. In each of the applications discussed above, CRS certified that all of
       the statements therein were true, complete, correct, and made in good
       faith.

   III. discussion

    9. Section 312(a)(2) of the Act provides that the Commission may revoke
       any license or construction permit "because of conditions coming to
       the attention of the Commission which would warrant it in refusing to
       grant a license or permit on an original application." The character
       of the applicant is among those factors that the Commission considers
       in its review of applications to determine whether the applicant has
       the requisite qualifications to be a Commission licensee.

   10. Felony Convictions. In assessing character qualifications, the
       Commission considers, as relevant, "evidence of any conviction for
       misconduct constituting a felony." The Commission has found that
       "[b]ecause all felonies are serious crimes, any conviction provides an
       indication of an applicant's or licensee's propensity to obey the law"
       and to conform to provisions of both the Act and the agency's rules
       and policies. Thus, felony convictions raise potential questions
       regarding a licensee's qualifications.

   11. Timothy M. Doty, who at all relevant times has been a director and 50%
       shareholder of CRS, has twice been convicted of felonies in state and
       federal courts. Mr. Doty's felony convictions raise serious questions
       as to whether he possesses the requisite character qualifications to
       be and remain a Commission licensee. Similarly, because of the extent
       of his ownership and control of CRS, Mr. Doty's felony convictions
       also raise serious questions about the character qualifications of CRS
       to be and remain a Commission license. Consequently, we will designate
       appropriate issues for hearing to determine the effect, if any, of Mr.
       Doty's felony convictions on his basic character qualifications as
       well as those of CRS.

   12. False Certification/Misrepresentation/Lack of Candor. The courts have
       recognized that "[t]he FCC relies heavily on the honesty and probity
       of its licensees in a regulatory system that is largely
       self-policing." Misrepresentation and lack of candor raise immediate
       concerns as to whether a licensee will be truthful in future dealings
       with the Commission. Misrepresentation is a false statement of fact
       made with intent to deceive. Lack of candor is concealment, evasion,
       or other failure to be fully informative, accompanied by intent to
       deceive. Intent can be shown in many ways. If a licensee knowingly
       makes a false statement, that is sufficient proof of intent to
       deceive. Intent to deceive can also be inferred when one has a clear
       motive to deceive. Moreover, intent can be found when the surrounding
       circumstances clearly show the existence of intent to deceive, even if
       there is no direct evidence of a motive. The Commission may revoke the
       license of a licensee who deliberately makes misrepresentations or
       lacks candor in dealing with the agency because he or she lacks the
       basic character qualifications to hold the license.

   13. CRS' failure to disclose the felony conviction of one of its
       principals raises a substantial and material question of fact as to
       whether CRS made false certifications, misrepresented facts to the
       Commission, and/or demonstrated a lack of candor. The mere existence
       of an inaccuracy in any application, without any indication that there
       was intentional deception, is insufficient to justify consideration of
       a misrepresentation issue in an evidentiary hearing. In this case,
       however, CRS had a motive for not revealing Timothy M. Doty's felony
       convictions to the Commission -- to conceal information that would
       potentially disqualify both CRS and Mr. Doty as Commission licensees.

   14. CRS should have revealed the existence of Mr. Doty's felony
       convictions in applications that it filed with the Commission.
       Instead, CRS affirmatively represented otherwise in at least two
       license applications, and failed to disclose the convictions in at
       least five renewal applications. In each application, CRS also
       certified that all of the statements therein were true, complete,
       correct, and made in good faith even though its filings appear to have
       satisfied none of these standards. Under the circumstances presented
       here, we determine that a hearing is warranted under Section 312 of
       the Act to determine whether CRS and Timothy M. Doty's licenses should
       be revoked because they lack the requisite character to be or remain
       Commission licensees.

   IV. ORDERING CLAUSES

   15. ACCORDINGLY, IT IS ORDERED that, pursuant to Sections 312(a) and (c)
       of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended, and authority delegated
       pursuant to Sections 0.111, 0.311, and 1.91(a) of the Commission's
       rules, CRS and Timothy M. Doty are hereby ORDERED TO SHOW CAUSE why
       their respective captioned authorizations SHOULD NOT BE REVOKED. CRS,
       by an officer representative, and Mr. Doty shall appear before an
       administrative law judge at a time and place to be specified in a
       subsequent order and provide evidence upon the following issues:

    1. to determine the effect of Mr. Doty's felony convictions on his
       qualifications to be and to remain a Commission licensee;

    2. to determine the effect of Mr. Doty's felony convictions on the
       qualifications of CRS to be and to remain a Commission licensee;

    3. to determine whether CRS made misrepresentations and/or lacked candor
       and/or violated Section 1.17 of the Commission's rules regarding the
       felony convictions of Mr. Doty in any applications filed with the
       Commission;

    4. to determine whether CRS failed to timely amend Commission
       applications to disclose Mr. Doty's felony convictions, in violation
       of Section 1.65 of the Commission's rules;

    5. to determine whether CRS made false certifications in any applications
       filed with the Commission;

    6. to determine, in light of the evidence adduced pursuant to the
       foregoing issues, whether Mr. Doty is qualified to be and to remain a
       Commission licensee;

    7. to determine, in light of the evidence adduced pursuant to the
       foregoing issues, whether CRS is qualified to be and to remain a
       Commission licensee;

    8. to determine, in light of the evidence adduced pursuant to the
       foregoing issues, whether the above-captioned licenses of Mr. Doty
       should be revoked;

    9. to determine, in light of the evidence adduced pursuant to the
       foregoing issues (1) through (7), whether the above-captioned licenses
       of CRS should be revoked.

   16. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that, pursuant to Section 312(c) of the
       Communications Act of 1934, as amended, and Section 1.91(c) of the
       Commission's rules, to avail the parties of the opportunity to be
       heard and the right to present evidence in the hearing in this
       proceeding, an officer representative of CRS and Timothy M. Doty, in
       person or by their respective attorneys, SHALL FILE with the
       Commission, within 30 calendar days of the release of this Order to
       Show Cause, a written appearance in triplicate stating that they will
       appear on the date fixed for hearing and present evidence on the
       issues specified herein.

   17. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that, pursuant to Section 1.92(c) of the
       Commission's rules, if either CRS or Timothy M. Doty or both fails to
       timely file a written appearance as specified in paragraph 14, above,
       or has not filed a petition to accept, for good cause shown, a written
       appearance beyond the expiration of the 30-day period, the right to a
       hearing as to CRS and/or Mr. Doty SHALL BE DEEMED TO BE WAIVED. Where
       a hearing is waived, the presiding administrative law judge shall, at
       the earliest practicable date, issue an order terminating the hearing
       proceeding and certifying the case to the Commission.

   18. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED  that, irrespective of the resolution of the
       foregoing issues, it SHALL BE DETERMINED, pursuant to Section
       503(b)(1) of the Act, whether an ORDER OF FORFEITURE in the amount not
       to exceed $11,000 for each violation or each day of a continuing
       violation, up to a total of $97,500 for any single act or failure to
       act should be issued against CRS for having failed to disclose the
       felony convictions of Timothy M. Doty in one or more of its
       applications, in willful and/or repeated violation of Sections 1.17
       and 1.65 of the Commission's rules. The forfeiture, if any, shall be
       adjusted based upon consideration of the factors enumerated in Section
       503(b)(2), such as "the nature, circumstances, extent and gravity of
       the violations 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."

   19. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the Chief, Enforcement Bureau, SHALL BE
       MADE a party to this proceeding without the need to file a notice of
       appearance.

   20. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that, pursuant to Section 312(d) of the Act, and
       Section 1.91(d) of the Commission's rules, the burden of proceeding
       with the introduction of evidence and the burden of proof with respect
       to all of the issues specified above SHALL BE on the Enforcement
       Bureau.

   21. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that a copy of each document filed in this
       proceeding subsequent to the date of adoption of this Order to Show
       Cause SHALL BE SERVED on Gary Schonman, Special Counsel,
       Investigations and Hearings Division, Enforcement Bureau, Federal
       Communications Commission, 445 12th Street, S.W., Room 4-C237,
       Washington, D.C. 20554.

   22. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that, copies of this Order to Show Cause SHALL
       BE SENT, by Certified Mail, Return Receipt Requested, to CRS and to
       Timothy M. Doty at 915 S. Prospect Street, Terre Haute, Indiana 47802,
       and to counsel for CRS: Russell D. Lukas, Esquire, Lukas, Nace,
       Gutierrez & Sachs, 1650 Tysons Boulevard, Suite 1500, McLean, Virginia
       22102.

   23. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that a copy of this Order to Show Cause or a
       summary thereof SHALL BE PUBLISHED in the Federal Register.

   FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION

   Marlene H. Dortch Secretary

   47 U.S.C. SS 312(a) and (c).

   See Letter from William H. Davenport, Chief, Investigations and Hearings
   Division, Enforcement Bureau, Federal Communications Commission, to
   Commercial Radio Service, Inc., dated May 23, 2006.

   See Letter from Russell D. Lukas, Esquire, Lukas, Nace, Gutierrez & Sachs,
   counsel for Commercial Radio Service, Inc., to William H. Davenport,
   Chief, Investigations and Hearings Division, Enforcement Bureau, Federal
   Communications Commission, dated June 22, 2006 ("LOI Response"). In
   addition to its LOI Response, CRS filed a request seeking confidential
   treatment of certain information provided with the response. We do not
   rule on CRS' request at this time because it is unnecessary to do so for
   purposes of this Order. Consistent with the request, however, this Order
   relies on information in the public domain and the portions of CRS' LOI
   Response for which it did not seek confidential treatment.

   See, e.g., Application for Mobile Radio Service Authorization, FCC Form
   600 (For New Station), File No. D122642, filed March 1, 1999; FCC
   Application for Wireless Telecommunications Bureau Radio Service
   Authorization, FCC Form 601 (For Modifications of Station WNGE348), File
   No. 253365, filed Sept. 29, 2000.

   See, e.g., FCC Application for Wireless Telecommunications Bureau Radio
   Service Authorization, FCC Form 601 (For Renewal-Only of Station WNIL729),
   File No. 1375615, filed July 8, 2003; FCC Application for Wireless
   Telecommunications Bureau Radio Service Authorization, FCC Form 601 (For
   Renewal-Only of Station WPCJ772), File No. 1524776, filed Nov. 24, 2003;
   FCC Application for Wireless Telecommunications Bureau Radio Service
   Authorization, FCC Form 601 (For Renewal-Only of Station WPNU312), File
   No. 1740183, filed May 18, 2004; FCC Application for Wireless
   Telecommunications Bureau Radio Service Authorization, FCC Form 601 (For
   Renewal-Only of Station WNGE348), File No. 2067489, filed March 4, 2005;
   and FCC Application for Wireless Telecommunications Bureau Radio Service
   Authorization, FCC Form 601 (For Renewal-Only of Station WNDS861), File
   No. 2316369, filed September 15, 2005.

   See FCC Form 601 - Instructions, p. 17.

   Id.

   47 U.S.C. S 312(a)(2).

   See Policy Regarding Character Qualifications in Broadcast Licensing,
   Amendment of Part 1, the Rules of Practice and Procedure, Relating to
   Written Responses to Commission Inquiries and the Making of
   Misrepresentation to the Commission by Applicants, Permittees, and
   Licensees, and the Reporting of Information Regarding Character
   Qualifications, Policy Statement and Order, 5 FCC Rcd 3252, 3252 (1990)
   ("1990 Modifications of Character Policy Statement"), recon. on other
   grounds, 6 FCC Rcd 3448 (1991), modified on other grounds, 7 FCC Rcd 6564
   (1992). The Commission has consistently applied these broadcast character
   standards to applicants and licensees in the other radio services. See,
   e.g., Schoenbohm v. FCC, 204 F.3d 243, 246-49 (D.C. Cir. 2000), cert.
   denied, 531 U.S. 968 (2000) (affirming the Commission's denial of an
   amateur radio operator's license renewal application based on the
   licensee's felony conviction for computer fraud, as well as its lack of
   candor regarding such conviction); Ronald Brasher et al., 19 FCC Rcd 18462
   (2004) (affirming Administrative Law Judge's Initial Decision revoking,
   denying, or dismissing licensees' private land mobile radio licenses and
   applications based on the licensees' misrepresentations and lack of
   candor, unauthorized transfers of control, and abuse of process).

   1990 Modifications of Character Policy Statement, 5 FCC Rcd at 3252 P 4.
   See, e.g., Contemporary Media, Inc. v. FCC, 214 F.3d 187, 193 (D.C. Cir.
   2000) (Commission properly considered any felony conviction of broadcast
   licensee's principal as a relevant factor in evaluating propensity of
   licensee to obey the law).

   1990 Modifications of Character Policy Statement, 5 FCC Rcd at 3252 P 5.
   See also 47 U.S.C. S 312(a)(1) (authorizing license revocation "for false
   statements knowingly made either in the application or in any statement of
   fact which may be required pursuant to section 308").

   See Williamsburg County Broadcasting Corporation, Order To Show Cause and
   Order Requiring Consolidation, 5 FCC Rcd 3034(1990). See also Commission
   Clarifies Policies Regarding Licensee Participation in Drug Trafficking,
   Public Notice, 4 FCC Rcd 7533 (1989) (Commission regards drug trafficking
   as a matter of the gravest concern).

   The facts of Mr. Doty's felony convictions are res judicata and will not
   be retried in this hearing.

   Contemporary Media, 214 F.3d at 193. See also 47 C.F.R. S 1.17 (requiring
   truthful and accurate statements in all statements to the Commission); 47
   C.F.R. S 1.65 (setting forth deadlines for revising or amending pending
   FCC applications if such applications are no longer substantially accurate
   or complete or there has been a substantial change as to any other matter
   of decisional significance); Policy Regarding Character Qualifications in
   Broadcast Licensing  Amendment of Rules of Broadcast Practice and
   Procedure, Relating to Written Responses to Commission Inquiries and the
   Making of Misrepresentation to the Commission by Applicants, Permittees,
   and Licensees, and the Reporting of Information Regarding Character
   Qualifications, Report, Order and Policy Statement,  102 FCC 2d 1179,
   1210-11, P 60 (1986) ("Character Policy Statement"), recon. denied, 1 FCC
   Rcd 421 (1986), appeal dismissed sub nom. National Ass'n for Better
   Broadcasting v. FCC, No. 86-1179 (D.C. Cir. June 11, 1987).

   Character Policy Statement, 102 FCC 2d at 1210-11 P 60.  A false
   certification may also constitute a misrepresentation. See, e.g., San
   Francisco Unified School District, Hearing Designation Order and Notice of
   Apparent Liability for Forfeiture, 19 FCC Rcd 13326, 13334, P 19 n. 40-41
   (2004), Initial Decision, FCC 06D-01 (ALJ April 7, 2006).

   See Fox River Broadcasting, Inc., Order, 93 FCC 2d 127, 129 (1983).

   Id.

   "[T]he fact of misrepresentation coupled with proof that the party making
   it had knowledge of its falsity [is] enough to justify a conclusion that
   there was fraudulent intent." Leflore Broadcasting Co., Inc. v. FCC, 636
   F.2d 454. 462 (D.C. Cir. 1980).

   See, e.g., RKO General, Inc., Decision, 4 FCC Rcd 4679, 4684, P 29 (Rev.
   Bd. 1989).

   American International Development, Inc., Memorandum Opinion and Order, 86
   FCC 2d 808, 816 n. 39 (1981), aff'd sub nom. KXIV, Inc. v. FCC, 704 F.2d
   1294 (D.C. Cir. 1983) (Commission stated that "the absence of direct
   evidence of motive is not significant where the record otherwise clearly
   establishes that deceptive conduct has occurred.").

   Contemporary Media, 214 F.3d at 196 ("It is well recognized that the
   Commission may disqualify an applicant who deliberately makes
   misrepresentations or lacks candor in dealing with the agency) (citing
   Schoenbohm, 204 F.3d at 247. See also FCC v. WOKO, Inc., 329 U.S. 223,
   225-27 (1946); Swan Creek Communications, Inc. v. FCC, 39 F.3d 1217,
   1221-24 (D.C. Cir. 1994); Garden State Broadcasting Ltd. v. FCC, 996 F.2d
   386, 393-94 (D.C. Cir. 1993).

   See, e.g., Greater Muskegon Broadcasters, Inc., Memorandum Opinion and
   Order, 11 FCC Rcd 15464, 15472-73, PP 22-23 (1996).

   47 U.S.C. SS 312(a) and (c).

   47 C.F.R. SS 0.111, 0.311 and 1.91(a).

   47 C.F.R. S 1.91(c).

   47 C.F.R. S 1.92(c).

   47 U.S.C. S 503(b)(1).

   47 C.F.R. SS 1.17, 1.65.

   See Commission's Forfeiture Policy Statement and Amendment of Section 1.80
   of the Rules to Incorporate the Forfeiture Guidelines, Report and Order,
   12 FCC Rcd 17087, 17100-01, P 27, 17112 Appendix A (1997), recon. denied,
   15 FCC Rcd 303 (1999). See also 47 C.F.R. S 1.80(b).

   47 U.S.C. S 312(d).

   47 C.F.R. S 1.91(d).

   (...continued from previous page)

                                                              (continued....)

   Federal Communications Commission FCC 06-128

                                       2

   Federal Communications Commission FCC 06-128