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                        )                               
                                                                             
     DirecTV Enterprises, LLC                )   File No. EB-06-SE-202       
                                                                             
     Satellite Earth Station, Call Sign      )   NAL/Acct. No. 200732100019  
     E950349                                                                 
                                             )   FRN: 0003779329             
     El Segundo, CA                                                          
                                             )                               


                  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 DirecTV
       Enterprises, LLC ("DirecTV"), licensee of satellite earth station,
       call sign E950349, El Segundo, California, apparently liable for
       forfeiture in the amount of ten thousand, four hundred dollars
       ($10,400) for operating its earth station without Commission authority
       and for failing to file a timely renewal application. DirecTV acted in
       apparent willful and repeated violation of Section 301 of the
       Communications Act of 1934, as amended, ("Act") and Sections 25.102(a)
       and 25.121(e) of the Commission's Rules ("Rules").

   II. background

    2. DirecTV's license for its Ku-band fixed satellite service earth
       station, call sign E950349, expired on October 27, 2005. On April 27,
       2006, counsel for DirecTV indicated to International Bureau staff that
       the license for the earth station was not renewed prior to its
       expiration date. On May 1, 2006, DirecTV filed a request for special
       temporary authority ("STA") to operate the earth station pending grant
       of an application for a new earth station license. The International
       Bureau granted DirecTV's STA request on May 2, 2006, but rescinded the
       grant on May 3, 2006, and dismissed the STA request as defective on
       May 5, 2006. On the same day, May 5, 2006, DirecTV filed another STA
       request, which the International Bureau granted on May 18, 2006

    3. Because it appeared that DirecTV may have operated the earth station
       without authority after expiration of its license, the International
       Bureau referred this case to the Enforcement Bureau for investigation
       and possible enforcement action. On November 9, 2006, the Enforcement
       Bureau's Spectrum Enforcement Division ("Division") issued a letter of
       inquiry ("LOI") to DirecTV.

    4. In its December 22, 2006 response to the LOI, DirecTV states that it
       first became aware "on or about April 27, 2006" that its license for
       earth station E950349 had expired. DirecTV acknowledges that it
       operated earth station E950349 without authority from October 27, 2005
       to May 2, 2006 when the International Bureau granted an STA. DirecTV
       asserted that once it realized that its license for earth station
       E950349 had expired, it initiated steps to apply for an STA to
       continue operating its earth station pending Commission action on a
       new license application. The International Bureau granted its
       application for a new license on August 25, 2006.

   III. discussion

    5. Section 301 of the Act and Section 25.102(a) of the Rules prohibit the
       use or operation of any apparatus for the transmission of energy or
       communications or signals by an earth station except under, and in
       accordance with a Commission granted authorization. Additionally,
       Section 25.121(e) of the Rules requires that licensees file renewal
       applications for earth stations "no earlier than 90 days, and no later
       than 30 days, before the expiration of the license."

    6. As a Commission licensee, DirecTV was required to timely renew its
       authorization in order to operate its earth station. DirecTV concedes
       that it has operated earth station E950349 without Commission
       authorization from October 27, 2005, to May 2, 2006. By operating its
       earth station for approximately six months without authorization,
       DirecTV apparently violated Section 301 of the Act and Section
       25.102(a) of the Rules. DirecTV also apparently violated Section
       25.121(e) of the Rules by allowing its license to lapse without
       renewal.

    7. 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 DirecTV's violations of Section 301 of the
       Act and Sections 25.102(a) and 25.121(e) of the Rules were willful and
       repeated.

    8. 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 forfeiture of $10,400.

    9. Section 1.80(b) of the Rules sets a base forfeiture amount of ten
       thousand dollars ($10,000) for operation of a station without
       Commission authority and three thousand dollars ($3,000) for failure
       to file required forms or information. As the Commission recently
       held, 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.

   10. We propose a forfeiture in the amount of $5,000 for DirecTV's
       unauthorized operation of its earth station E950349 after October 27,
       2005. In proposing this forfeiture amount, we recognize that the
       Commission considers a licensee who operates a station with an expired
       authorization in better stead than a pirate broadcaster who lacks
       prior authority, and thus downwardly adjust the $10,000 base
       forfeiture amount accordingly. Consistent with precedent, we also
       propose a forfeiture in the amount of $1,500 for DirecTV's failure to
       file a renewal application for its earth station within the time
       period specified in Section 25.121(e) of the Rules. Thus, we propose
       an aggregate forfeiture amount of $6,500 ($5,000 for unauthorized
       operation and $1,500 for failure to file a timely renewal
       application).

   11. The $6,500 base forfeiture amount is subject to adjustment, however.
       In this regard, we consider DirecTV's size and ability to pay a
       forfeiture. To ensure that forfeiture liability is a deterrent, and
       not simply a cost of doing business, the Commission has determined
       that large or highly profitable companies, such as DirecTV, could
       expect the assessment of higher forfeitures for violations. Given
       DirecTV's size and ability to pay a forfeiture, we conclude that an
       upward adjustment of the base amount to $13,000 is appropriate.

   12. DirecTV claims that renewal of its earth station was the
       responsibility of its Latin America operations and was "managed by a
       separate arm of the company." Thus, DirecTV explains, timely renewal
       of earth station E950349 "slipped through the cracks." As a Commission
       licensee, DirecTV is charged with the responsibility of knowing and
       complying with the terms of its authorizations, the Act and the Rules,
       including the requirement to timely renew the authorization for its
       earth station. DirecTV also states that no interference occurred
       during its operation of its earth station. It is well established that
       the absence of public harm is not considered a mitigating factor for a
       rule violation. We do find, however, that a downward adjustment of the
       proposed forfeiture from $13,000 to $10,400 is warranted because
       DirecTV made voluntary disclosures to Commission staff and undertook
       corrective measures after learning of its violations, but prior to any
       Commission inquiry or initiation of enforcement action.

   IV. ordering clauses

   13. 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, DirecTV IS hereby
       NOTIFIED of its APPARENT LIABILITY FOR FORFEITURE in the amount of ten
       thousand, four hundred dollars ($10,400) for the willful and repeated
       violation of Section 301 of the Act and Sections 25.102(a) and
       25.121(e) of the Rules.

   14.  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, DirecTV SHALL PAY the full amount of the
       proposed forfeiture or SHALL FILE a written statement seeking
       reduction or cancellation of the proposed forfeiture.

   15. 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. Request for full payment of the NAL
       amount 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.

   16. 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.

   17. 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.

   18.  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 William M. Wiltshire, Esq.,
       Counsel for DirecTV Enterprises, Harris, Wiltshire & Gannis, LLP, 1200
       Eighteenth Street, NW, Washington, DC 20036 and Mr. Jack Wengrynuik,
       DirecTV Enterprises, LLC, 2230 E. Imperial Hwy, El Segundo, CA 90245.

   FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION

   Kathryn S. Berthot

   Chief, Spectrum Enforcement Division

   Enforcement Bureau

   47 U.S.C. S 301.

   47 C.F.R. SS 25.102(a) and 25.121(e).

   See File SES-STA-20060501-00734; see also Letter from Scott A. Kotler,
   Chief, Systems Analysis Branch, Satellite Division, International Bureau
   to William M. Wiltshire, Esq., DA 06-990, released May 5, 2006

   See File SES-STA-20060508-00756. The STA was granted for 30 days without
   prejudice to any future enforcement action against DirecTV in connection
   with unauthorized operation of its radio facilities. On June 9, 2006,
   DirecTV filed for a 60-day extension of the STA. See File No. SES-STA
   20060609-00958. The STA was extended for 60 days on June 12, 2006 without
   prejudice to any future enforcement action against DirecTV in connection
   with unauthorized operation of its radio facilities.

   Letter from Ricardo Durham, Senior Deputy Chief, Spectrum Enforcement
   Division, Enforcement Bureau, Federal Communications Commission, to Jack
   Wengrynuik, DirecTV (November 9, 2006).

   Letter from William M. Wiltshire, Esq., Counsel for DirecTV Enterprises,
   LLC, to Peter Waltonen, Esq., Spectrum Enforcement Division, Enforcement
   Bureau, Federal Communications Commission (December 22, 2006).

   See File No. SES-LIC-20060608-00945.

   47 C.F.R. S 25.121(e).

   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), recon. denied, 7 FCC Rcd 3454  (1992); 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).

   47 U.S.C. S 503(b)(2)(E). See also Forfeiture Policy Statement, Report and
   Order, 12 FCC Rcd 17087, 17110 (1997), recon. denied, 15 FCC Rcd 303
   (1999).

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

   See Discussion Radio, Inc., Memorandum Opinion and Order and Notice of
   Apparent Liability, 19 FCC Rcd 7433, 7438 (2004) (proposing forfeitures of
   $5,000 and $1,500 against a broadcaster who 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); see also Lazer Broadcasting Corporation, Notice of Apparent
   Liability for Forfeiture, 21 FCC Rcd 8710 (Enf. Bur., Spectrum Enf. Div.,
   2006) ("Lazer Broadcasting");  Criswell College,  Notice of Apparent
   Liability for Forfeiture, 21 FCC Rcd 5106, 5109 (Enf. Bur., Spectrum Enf.
   Div., 2006) ("Criswell"); National Weather Networks, Inc. Notice of
   Apparent Liability for Forfeiture, 21 FCC Rcd 3922, 3925 (Enf. Bur.,
   Spectrum Enf. Div., 2006)("NWN"); Journal Broadcast Corporation, Notice of
   Apparent Liability for Forfeiture, 20 FCC Rcd 18211, 18213 (Enf. Bur.,
   Spectrum Enf. Div., 2005) ("Journal Broadcast"); Shared Data Networks,
   Notice of Apparent Liability for Forfeiture, 20 FCC Rcd 18184, 18187 (Enf.
   Bur., Spectrum Enf. Div., 2005) ("SDN").

   See Discussion Radio,19 FCC Rcd at 7438 (proposing a $1,500 forfeiture for
   failure to file a timely renewal application for a broadcast station); see
   also Lazer Broadcasting,  21 FCC Rcd at 8712; Criswell College, 21 FCC Rcd
   at 5109; NWN, 21 FCC Rcd at 3925; Journal Broadcast, 20 FCC Rcd at 18213;
   SDN, 20 FCC Rcd at 18187.

   DirecTV reported revenues of approximately $14.7 billion in its annual
   report for 2006.

   See Forfeiture Policy Statement, 12 FCC Rcd at 17099-100.

   See Discussion Radio, 19 FCC Rcd at 7437.

   Pacific Western Broadcasters, Inc., Memorandum Opinion and Order, 50 FCC
   2d 819 (1975) (rejecting a broadcaster's claim that the forfeiture should
   be downwardly adjusted because its operations at excessive power levels
   did not cause public harm or complaint, stating that "[t]he Commission not
   only is concerned with actual interference, but is concerned with the
   potential for interference"); NWN, 21 FCC Rcd at 3927 (rejecting a
   licensee's claim that the forfeiture should be downwardly adjusted because
   its operation of an unauthorized earth station did not cause interference
   or disrupt other users); AGM-Nevada, LLC, Forfeiture Order, 18 FCC Rcd
   1476, 1478-79 (Enf. Bur. 2003) (rejecting a licensee's claim that the
   forfeiture should be downwardly adjusted because even though it operated
   booster stations at unauthorized sites with excessive power levels, its
   operations did not result in interference).

   See Petracom of Texarkana, LLC, Forfeiture Order, 19 FCC Rcd 8096,
   8097-8098 (Enf. Bur. 2004).

   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.

   (...continued from previous page)

                                                              (continued....)

   Federal Communications Commission DA  07-1451

                                       3

   Federal Communications Commission DA  07-1451