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                                                        
                                             )   File No. EB-06-SE-323       
     Mitchell Electric Membership                                            
     Cooperative                             )   NAL/Acct. No. 200732100018  
                                                                             
     Camilla, Georgia                        )   FRN # 0006348742            
                                                                             
                                             )                               


                  NOTICE OF APPARENT LIABILITY FOR FORFEITURE

   Adopted: March 27, 2007 Released: March 29, 2007

   By the Chief, Spectrum Enforcement Division, Enforcement Bureau:

   I.  introduction

    1. In this Notice of Apparent Liability for Forfeiture, we find Mitchell
       Electric Membership Cooperative ("Mitchell Electric"), former licensee
       of Private Land Mobile Radio Service ("PLMRS") station WNWZ353 in
       Camilla, Georgia, apparently liable for a forfeiture in the amount of
       seven thousand five hundred dollars  ($7,500) for operating its PLMRS
       station without Commission authority and for failing to file a timely
       renewal application for the station. Mitchell Electric acted in
       apparent willful and repeated violation of Section 301 of the
       Communications Act of 1934, as amended, ("Act") and Sections 1.903(a)
       and 1.949(a) of the Commission's Rules ("Rules").

   II.  background

    2. On June 26, 2006, Mitchell Electric filed a request for Special
       Temporary Authority ("STA") to continue operating its PLMRS station
       WNWZ353 because the station license had expired on August 6, 2001. The
       Wireless Telecommunications Bureau granted Mitchell Electric STA to
       continue operating the station under call sign WQFH332 on July 14,
       2006. On August 28, 2006, Mitchell Electric filed an application for a
       permanent license for its PLMRS station. The new license was granted
       on September 13, 2006, and the station was assigned call sign WQFQ938.

    3. Because it appeared that Mitchell Electric may have operated the PLMRS
       station after the expiration of its license under call sign WNWZ353,
       the Wireless Telecommunications Bureau referred this case to the
       Enforcement Bureau for investigation and possible enforcement action.
       On November 3, 2006, the Enforcement Bureau's Spectrum Enforcement
       Division issued a letter of inquiry ("LOI") to Mitchell Electric
       seeking information regarding its failure to renew the station
       license, and its operation of the station beyond the license
       expiration date.

    4. In its December 11, 2006 response to the LOI, Mitchell Electric stated
       that it first became aware that its license under call sign WNWZ353
       had expired on or about December 10, 2005. Mitchell cited inadvertence
       and administrative oversight as the basis for its failure to timely
       renew its license. Mitchell Electric admitted that it continued to
       operate the station without Commission authorization because of the
       nature of the work performed by it, and the concern for personnel and
       public safety, on a daily basis from August 6, 2001 through July 14,
       2006. Mitchell Electric also stated that it took measures to reinstate
       the license as soon as possible.

   III.   discussion

    5. Section 301 of the Act and Section 1.903(a) of the Rules prohibit the
       use or operation of any apparatus for the transmission of energy or
       communications or signals by a wireless radio station except under,
       and in accordance with, a Commission granted authorization.
       Additionally, Section 1.949(a) of the Rules requires that licensees
       file renewal applications for wireless radio stations, "no later than
       the expiration date of the authorization for which renewal is sought,
       and no sooner than 90 days prior to expiration." Absent a timely filed
       renewal application, a wireless radio station license automatically
       terminates.

    6. As a Commission licensee, Mitchell Electric was required to maintain
       its authorization in order to operate its PLMRS station. Mitchell
       Electric admitted that it operated the PLMRS station without
       Commission authority on a daily basis from the station's license
       expiration date of August 6, 2001 until July 14, 2006. By operating
       its PLMRS station for approximately 5 years without an instrument of
       authorization, Mitchell Electric apparently violated Section 301 of
       the Act and Section 1.903(a) of the Rules. Mitchell Electric also
       acted in apparent violation of Section 1.949(a) of the Rules by
       failing to file a timely renewal application for the station.

    1. Section 503(b) of the Act, and Section 1.80(a) of the Rules, provide
       that any person who willfully or repeatedly fails to comply with the
       provisions of the Act or the Rules shall be liable for a forfeiture
       penalty. For purposes of Section 503(b) of the Act, the term "willful"
       means that the violator knew that it was taking the action in
       question, irrespective of any intent to violate the Commission's
       rules, and "repeatedly" means more than once. Based upon the record
       before us, it appears that Mitchell Electric's violations of Section
       301 of the Act and Sections 1.903(a) and 1.949(a) of the Rules were
       willful and repeated.

    2. In determining the appropriate forfeiture amount, Section 503(b)(2)(E)
       of the Act directs us to consider factors, such as "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." Having considered the statutory factors, as explained below,
       we propose a total forfeiture of $7,500.

    3. Section 1.80(b) of the Rules sets a base forfeiture amount of three
       thousand dollars ($3,000) for failure to file required forms or
       information and ten thousand dollars ($10,000) for operation of a
       station without Commission authority. The Commission has recently held
       that a licensee's failure to timely file a renewal application and its
       continued operations without authorization constitute separate
       violations of the Act and the Rules, and warrant the assessment of
       separate forfeitures. Accordingly, we herein propose separate
       forfeiture amounts for Mitchell Electric's separate violations.

    4. We propose a forfeiture of $6,000 for Mitchell Electric's continued
       operation of station WNWZ353 beyond August 6, 2001. In proposing
       $6,000 for the station's unauthorized operations we recognize that the
       Commission considers a licensee who operates a station with an expired
       license in better stead than a pirate broadcaster who lacks prior
       authority, and thus downwardly adjust the $10,000 base forfeiture
       amount accordingly. Consistent with recent precedent, the proposed
       $6,000 forfeiture amount takes into account the fact that Mitchell
       Electric's unauthorized operations spanned almost five years - from
       August 6, 2001 through July 13, 2006. The $6,000 forfeiture relates to
       Mitchell Electric's apparent violations that occurred within the past
       year, but takes into account that those apparent violations were
       continuous in nature. Additionally, consistent with precedent, we
       propose a $1,500 forfeiture for Mitchell Electric's failure to file a
       renewal application for its station within the time period specified
       in Section 1.949(a) of the Rules. Thus, we propose an aggregate
       forfeiture of $7,500 ($6,000 for unauthorized operations and $1,500
       for failure to timely file a renewal application).

    5. We find that Mitchell Electric's voluntary disclosures to Commission
       staff and its efforts to come into compliance with Commission
       requirements do not entitle the company to any downward adjustment of
       the proposed $7,500 forfeiture. Although Mitchell Electric's
       disclosures and compliance efforts preceded any Commission
       investigation or initiation of enforcement action, we find the
       company's actions were dilatory. As Mitchell Electric acknowledged, it
       learned of its violation in December 2005, but waited until June 2006
       - approximately six months - to notify Commission staff and seek
       authority to operate the station. Under the circumstances, and
       consistent with precedent, we find that no reduction of the proposed
       forfeiture for voluntary disclosure or good faith efforts to comply is
       warranted.

   IV.  ORDERING CLAUSES

    7. Accordingly, IT IS ORDERED that, pursuant to Section 503(b) of the Act
       and Sections 0.111, 0.311 and 1.80 of the Rules, Mitchell Electric IS
       hereby NOTIFIED of its APPARENT LIABILITY FOR A FORFEITURE in the
       amount of seven thousand five hundred dollars ($7,500) for the willful
       and repeated violation of Section 301 of the Act and Sections 1.903(a)
       and 1.949(a) of the Rules.

    8. 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 for Forfeiture, Mitchell Electric SHALL PAY the full amount
       of the proposed forfeiture or SHALL FILE a written statement seeking
       reduction or cancellation of the proposed forfeiture.

    9. 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. A request for full payment under an
       installment plan should be sent to: Associate Managing
       Director-Financial Operations, 445 12^th Street, S.W., Room 1-A625,
       Washington, D.C. 20554.

   10. The response, if any, must be mailed to the Office of the Secretary,
       Federal Communications Commission, 445 12th Street, S.W., Washington,
       D.C. 20554, ATTN: Enforcement Bureau - Spectrum Enforcement Division,
       and must include the NAL/Acct. No. referenced in the caption.

   11. 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; 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.

    6. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that a copy of this Notice of Apparent Liability
       for Forfeiture shall be sent by first class mail and certified mail
       return receipt requested to Jimmy Clifton, Jr., Authorized
       Representative, Mitchell Electric Membership Cooperative, 475 Cairo
       Road, Camilla, Georgia 31730.

   FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION

   Kathryn S. Berthot

   Chief, Spectrum Enforcement Division

   Enforcement Bureau

   47 U.S.C. S 301.

   47 C.F.R. SS 1.903(a) and 1.949(a).

   STA File No. 0002662466 (granted July 14, 2006). The Wireless
   Telecommunications Bureau granted the STA without prejudice to any future
   FCC enforcement action against the company in connection with unauthorized
   operation of its radio facilities.

   File No. 0002728158 (granted September 13, 2006).

   See Letter from Ricardo M. Durham, Senior Deputy Chief, Spectrum
   Enforcement Division, Enforcement Bureau, Federal Communications
   Commission to James Clifton, Mitchell Electric Membership Cooperative
   (November 3, 2006).

   See Letter from Jimmy Clifton, Jr., to Jacqueline Ellington, Esq.,
   Spectrum Enforcement Division, Enforcement Bureau, Federal Communications
   Commission (December 11, 2006) ("LOI Response").

   Id. at 1.

   See STA File No. 0002662466, Attachment 1, filed on June 26, 2006.

   Mitchell Electric is a not-for-profit consumer-owned electric cooperative
   that supplies energy to more than 25,000 residences, farms, and businesses
   in southwest Georgia.

   LOI Response at 1.

   LOI Response at 1. The measures taken are not detailed in the LOI
   Response.

   47 C.F.R. S 1.949(a).

   47 C.F.R. S 1.955(a)(1).

   LOI Response at 1.

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

   47 C.F.R. S 1.80(a).

   See Southern California Broadcasting Co., Memorandum Opinion and Order, 6
   FCC Rcd 4387 (1991); see also  WCS Communications, Inc., Notice of
   Apparent Liability for Forfeiture, 13 FCC Rcd 6691 (WTB, Enf. and Consumer
   Info. Div., 1998) (finding that a licensee's inadvertent failure to file
   timely renewal applications constitutes a repeated violation that
   continues until the date the license is renewed). See also Sections
   312(f)(1) and (2) of the Act, 47 U.S.C. S 312(f)(1) and (2), which apply
   to violations for which forfeitures are assessed under Section 503(b) of
   the Act ("[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 ..." and a continuous violation is "repeated" if it
   continues for more than one day).

   47 U.S.C. S 503(b)(2)(E). See also 47 C.F.R. S 1.80(b)(4), Note to
   paragraph (b)(4): Section II. Adjustment Criteria for Section 503
   Forfeitures; The 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, 17110 (1997), recon. denied (1999).

   47 C.F.R. 1.80(b).

   See Discussion Radio, Inc., Memorandum Opinion and Order and Notice of
   Apparent Liability for Forfeiture, 19 FCC Rcd 7433, 7438 (2004) (proposing
   forfeitures of $5,000 and $1,500 against a broadcaster who both operated
   its station for 14 months without Commission authority and failed to
   timely file its renewal application) ("Discussion Radio").

   See Discussion Radio, 19 FCC Rcd at 7438 (proposing a $5,000 forfeiture
   for operating a station for 14 months beyond the expiration of its
   license); Shared Data Networks, LLC, Notice of Apparent Liability for
   Forfeiture, 20 FCC Rcd 18184, 18186-18187 (Enf. Bur., Spectrum Enf. Div.,
   2005) ("Shared Data") (proposing an $18,000 forfeiture - $6,000 per earth
   station - for unauthorized operation over a period of 5 years); Journal
   Broadcast Corporation, Notice of Apparent Liability for Forfeiture, 20 FCC
   Rcd 18211, 18213 (Enf. Bur., Spectrum Enf. Div., 2005) ("Journal
   Broadcast") (proposing a $5,000 forfeiture for unauthorized operation for
   1 year).

   See Shared Data, 20 FCC Rcd at 18187 (proposing an aggregate forfeiture
   amount of $18,000 for operating 3 earth stations for almost 5 years
   without Commission authority ($6,000 each)).

   Section 503(b)(6) of the Act, 47 U.S.C. S 503(b)(6) prohibits the
   assessment of a forfeiture for violations that occurred more than a year
   prior to the NAL, but does not bar us from taking into account the
   continuous nature of violations in determining the appropriate enforcement
   action and/or forfeiture amount. See, e.g., Globcom, Inc. d/b/a Globcom
   Global Communications, Notice of Apparent Liability for Forfeiture and
   Order, 18 FCC Rcd 19893, 19903 (2003), forfeiture ordered, 21 FCC Rcd
   4710; Roadrunner Transportation, Inc., Forfeiture Order, 15 FCC Rcd 9669,
   9671-72 (2000); Cate Communications Corp., Memorandum Opinion and Order,
   60 RR 2d 1386, 1388 (1986); Eastern Broadcasting Corp., Memorandum Opinion
   and Order, 10 FCC 2d 37, 37-38 (1967), recon. denied, 11 FCC 2d 193, 195
   (1967); Bureau D'Electronique Appliquee, Inc., Notice of Apparent
   Liability for Forfeiture, 20 FCC Rcd 3445, 3447-48 (Enf. Bur., Spectrum
   Enf. Div., 2005), forfeiture ordered, 20 FCC Rcd 17893 (Enf. Bur.,
   Spectrum Enf. Div., 2005).

   See Discussion Radio, 19 FCC Rcd at 7438 (proposing a $1,500 forfeiture
   for failure to timely file a renewal application for a broadcast station);
   Shared Data, 20 FCC Rcd at 18187 (proposing an aggregate forfeiture amount
   of $4,500 for failure to timely file renewal applications for 3 earth
   stations); Journal Broadcast, 20 FCC Rcd at 18213) (proposing a $1,500
   forfeiture for failure to timely file a renewal application for an earth
   station); Self Communications, Inc., 15 FCC Rcd 18661, 18664-65 (WTB,
   Public Safety and Private Wireless Div., 2000) (proposing a $1,500
   forfeiture for failure to timely file a renewal application for a 218-219
   MHz service); Vincent Communications, Inc.,15 FCC Rcd 8432 (WTB, Enf. and
   Consumer Info. Div., 1999) (proposing an aggregate $4,500 forfeiture for
   failure to timely file renewal applications for 3 paging stations),
   forfeiture ordered, 15 FCC Rcd 18263 (Enf. Bur. 2000).

   See Local Phone Services, Inc., Notice of Apparent Liability for
   Forfeiture, 21 FCC Rcd 9974 (2006) (finding that although a downward
   adjustment generally is appropriate where a violator makes voluntary
   disclosures prior to Commission investigation or enforcement action, such
   credit was unwarranted where the violator made no attempt to come into
   compliance until 12 months after disclosure); Domtar Industries, Inc.,
   Notice of Apparent Liability for Forfeiture, 21 FCC Rcd 13811, 13813 (Enf.
   Bur., Spectrum Enf. Div., 2006) (finding that although Domtar's
   disclosures and compliance efforts preceded Commission investigation or
   initiation of enforcement action, a downward adjustment was unwarranted
   because Domtar's actions were dilatory); Sutro Corporation, Notice of
   Apparent Liability for Forfeiture, 18 FCC Rcd 20529, 20531, forfeiture
   ordered 19 FCC Rcd 15274, 15275-76 (2004) (finding that a downward
   adjustment for voluntary disclosure or good faith efforts to comply was
   unwarranted where the violator's attempts to come into compliance were
   dilatory and evidenced a lack of diligence); American Paging, Inc.,
   Memorandum Opinion and Order, 12 FCC Rcd 10417, 10420 (WTB, Enf. and
   Consumer Info. Div., 1997) (finding that a downward adjustment for
   voluntary disclosure was unwarranted where the violator did not reveal its
   violation until approximately a month after having various conversations
   with Commission staff regarding an STA and that a downward adjustment for
   good faith attempts to comply was unwarranted where the violator continued
   to operate the station without authorization after its STA request was
   denied).

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

   47 C.F.R. SS 0.111, 0.311 and 1.80.

   47 C.F.R. S 1.80.

   See 47 C.F.R. S 1.1914.

   Federal Communications Commission DA 07-1433

   3

   Federal Communications Commission DA 07-1433