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 Number: EB-05-HU-045    
     Marcus A. Roberts       NAL/Acct. No.: 200732540001  
     Houston, Texas          FRN: 0004307195              

                                FORFEITURE ORDER

   Adopted:  May 2, 2007  Released:  May 4, 2007

   By the Regional Director, South Central Region, Enforcement Bureau:


    1. In this Forfeiture Order ("Order"), we issue a monetary forfeiture in
       the amount of ten thousand dollars ($10,000) to Marcus A. Roberts for
       willful violation of Section 301 of the Communications Act of 1934, as
       amended ("Act"). The noted violation involves Mr. Roberts' operation
       of an unlicensed radio transmitter.


    2. In response to a complaint of interference to household electronic
       equipment, on April 28, 2006, the Commission's Houston Office of the
       Enforcement Bureau ("Houston Office") issued Mr. Roberts a warning
       letter advising him that operation of Citizens Band ("CB") radio
       equipment with greater power than authorized in the Commission's Rules
       ("Rules") voids the authority to operate the station and is therefore
       considered unlicensed operation. The letter further advised that
       unlicensed operation is a violation of Section 301 of the Act, and
       could subject the operator to penalties including monetary fines.

    3. On September 28, 2006, in response to another complaint of
       interference, agents from the Houston Office inspected the CB station
       located at Mr. Roberts' residence. During testing of Mr. Roberts'
       equipment, the agents determined that his CB station was producing the
       maximum power authorized in the Rules for CB radio stations. The
       agents verbally warned Mr. Roberts that any operation of his CB radio
       station with more power than observed during this inspection would be
       a violation of the Rules. The agents then inspected a CB radio station
       installed in Mr. Roberts' vehicle. The CB radio station in the vehicle
       included a CB transmitter and two linear amplifiers. The linear
       amplifiers observed had the capability to boost the power of the
       station to several hundred times the authorized power level. Mr.
       Roberts admitted to operating the amplifiers and exceeding the
       authorized power limit; but claimed that he only used this equipment
       outside the neighborhood. The agents again verbally warned Mr. Roberts
       that the use of linear amplifiers or any device that creates a power
       greater than the authorized limit is strictly prohibited by the Rules
       and voids the authority to operate the CB station.

    4. On November 8, 2006, an agent with the Houston Office located the
       source of a strong signal on a CB radio channel using direction
       finding methods to Mr. Roberts' residence. The agent recognized the
       voice of the transmissions to be that of Mr. Roberts. The complainant
       contacted the agent by telephone to report that Mr. Roberts'
       transmissions were currently causing interference to her home
       electronic entertainment equipment. Mr. Roberts' voice was
       simultaneously observed on the vehicle receiver and on the telephone
       while talking with the complainant. The agent measured the signal
       strength of the radio transmissions from Mr. Roberts' radio station
       with a spectrum analyzer. Agents from the Houston Office then
       conducted an inspection of Mr. Roberts' CB station. Mr. Roberts
       admitted he had been operating the radio station prior to the start of
       this inspection. A wattmeter determined the power of Mr. Roberts'
       transmitter during the inspection to be four watts, the maximum
       authorized under the Rules. The complainant was contacted and was not
       receiving any interference from Mr. Roberts' transmitter while the
       agents tested the equipment. Without adjusting the output power of the
       transmitter, the agents conducted a second signal strength
       measurement, and this second measurement showed a reduction in power
       from the first measurement by a factor of 10. When asked about the
       obvious change in power levels, Mr. Roberts offered no explanation.

    5. On January 3, 2007, the Houston Office issued a Notice of Apparent
       Liability for Forfeiture to Mr. Roberts in the amount of ten thousand
       dollars ($10,000), for the apparent willful violation of Section 301
       of the Act. Mr. Roberts submitted a response to the NAL requesting a
       reduction or cancellation of the proposed forfeiture.


    6. The proposed forfeiture amounts in this case was assessed in
       accordance with Section 503(b) of the Communications Act of 1934, as
       amended, Section 1.80 of the Rules, 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) ("Forfeiture Policy Statement"). In
       examining Mr. Roberts' 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.

    7. 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. Section 95.404 of the
       Rules states that CB operators do not require an individual license to
       operate a CB station because they are authorized by this rule to
       operate in accordance with the rules in this subpart. Section
       95.410(a) of the Rules states that CB station transmitter output must
       not exceed 4 watts carrier power. Section 95.410(c) of the Rules also
       states that use of a transmitter which has carrier power in excess of
       that authorized voids your authority to operate the station. On
       November 8, 2006, agents from the Houston Office determined that Mr.
       Roberts operated his CB station with power greater than 4 watts
       carrier power. On April 28 and September 28, 2006, Mr. Roberts was
       warned that operation of his CB station in excess of 4 watts output
       power violated the Rules and voided his authority to operate his CB
       station. Because Mr. Roberts violated the CB Rules by operating
       overpower, he voided his authority to operate his CB station pursuant
       to Section 95.404 of the Rules. Based on the evidence before us, we
       find that on November 8, 2006, Mr. Roberts willfully violated Section
       301 of the Act by operating a radio transmitter, his CB station,
       without authorization from the Commission.

    8. In response to the NAL, Mr. Roberts asserts that he did not willfully
       operate overpower. Mr. Roberts claims that after the inspection he
       took his CB transmitter to a radio shop, which informed him that his
       voltage regulator was defective. Mr. Roberts claims that this
       malfunction caused a power fluctuation, which caused the overpower
       operation, and that he was unaware of the malfunction until after the

    9. However, during the inspection, the agent observed no evidence that
       Mr. Roberts' CB transmitter was malfunctioning. The CB transmitter
       operated smoothly, with no fluctuations in power. We find it unlikely
       that his transmitter would function properly only during an
       inspection. Given the results of the inspection, Mr. Roberts' history
       of warnings, and his failure to provide corroboration of the equipment
       malfunction, we do not rely upon Mr. Roberts' assertion that his
       voltage regulator was faulty. Moreover, Mr. Roberts had been warned on
       more than one occasion against overpower operation and consciously
       operated his CB transmitter, which on November 8, 2006 transmitted
       overpower. Thus, we find his actions to be willful.

   10. We have examined Mr. Roberts' 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 no reduction of
       the proposed $10,000 forfeiture is warranted.


   11. Accordingly, IT IS ORDERED that, pursuant to Section 503(b) of the
       Communications Act of 1934, as amended, and Sections 0.111, 0.311 and
       1.80(f)(4) of the Commission's Rules, Marcus A. Roberts IS LIABLE FOR
       A MONETARY FORFEITURE in the amount of ten thousand dollars ($10,000)
       for violation of Section 301 of the Act.

   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. 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,
       445 12th Street, S.W., Room 1A625, Washington, D.C. 20554.

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


   Dennis P. Carlton

   Regional Director, South Central Region

   Enforcement Bureau

   47 U.S.C. S 301.

   Notice of Apparent Liability for Forfeiture, NAL/Acct. No. 200732540001
   (Enf. Bur., Houston Office, January 3, 2007) ("NAL").

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

   47 C.F.R. S 1.80.

   47 U.S.C. S 503(b)(2)(E).

   47 C.F.R. S 95.404.

   47 C.F.R. S 95.410(a).

   47 C.F.R. S 95.410(c).

   47 U.S.C. SS 301, 503(b); 47 C.F.R. SSS 0.111, 0.311, 1.80(f)(4).

   47 U.S.C. S 504(a).

   See 47 C.F.R. S 1.1914.

   Federal Communications Commission DA 07-1979


   Federal Communications Commission DA 07-1979