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-07-SE-136       
                                                               
     Five Star Parking d/b/a   )   NAL/Acct. No. 200832100002  
                                                               
     Five Star Taxi Dispatch   )   FRN # 0005954508            
                                                               
                               )                               


                                FORFEITURE ORDER

   Adopted: February 19, 2008 Released: February 21, 2008

   By the Chief, Spectrum Enforcement Division, Enforcement Bureau:

   I. introduction

    1. In this Forfeiture Order ("Order"), we issue a monetary forfeiture in
       the amount of six thousand five hundred dollars ($6,500) against Five
       Star Parking d/b/a Five Star Taxi Dispatch ("Five Star") for willful
       and repeated violations 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"). The noted violations involve Five Star's
       operation of Private Land Mobile Radio Service ("PLMRS") station
       WPNS752 without Commission authority and failure to file a timely
       renewal application for the station.

   II. background

    2. 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. Section
       1.949(a) of the Rules requires licensees to 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 on the
       specified expiration date.

    3. On October 25, 2007, the Enforcement Bureau's Spectrum Enforcement
       Division ("Division") released a Notice of Apparent Liability for
       Forfeiture ("NAL")  finding that Five Star operated station WPNS752
       without Commission authority after the expiration of its license and
       failed to timely file a renewal application for the station by the
       date of expiration. Specifically, the NAL found that Five Star
       operated station WPNS752 without Commission authority after its
       authorization expired on May 28, 2004 until it ceased operation on
       October 31, 2006. The NAL also found that Five Star failed to file a
       timely renewal application for station WPNS752. These findings were
       based on Five Star's response to the Division's Letter of Inquiry
       wherein Five Star admitted to operating station WPNS752 after the
       expiration of its license and acknowledged that its failure to
       understand the renewal process led to the renewal of another PLRMS
       station license held by Five Star instead of station WPNS752. Thus,
       the Division proposed a forfeiture in the amount of $6,500 for the
       apparent willful and repeated violations of Section 301 of the Act and
       Sections 1.903(a) and 1.949(a) of the Rules.

    4. In its November 7, 2007 response to the NAL, Five Star seeks
       cancellation of the forfeiture, claiming that its operation of station
       WPNS752 without obtaining or renewing the license was unintentional as
       it mistakenly believed that its vendor had submitted a renewal
       application for this station. Five Star explains that its vendor had
       mixed up Five Star's renewal application for its taxi dispatch service
       license (WPNS752) with the renewal application for another license
       held by Five Star. Due to its lack of knowledge about the renewal
       process, Five Star states that it was under the impression that the
       renewal application submitted by the vendor was for its taxi dispatch
       service license. Five Star further asserts that it has fully
       cooperated in the Commission's investigation. Based on these facts,
       Five Star requests cancellation of the proposed forfeiture.

   III. DISCUSSION

    5. The forfeiture amount proposed in this case was assessed in accordance
       with Section 503(b) of the Act, Section 1.80 of the Rules, and the
       Commission's Forfeiture Policy Statement. In assessing forfeitures,
       Section 503(b)(2)(E) of the Act requires that we 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 such other matters as justice may
       require. We have considered Five Star's response to the NAL in light
       of the above statutory factors, our Rules, and the Forfeiture Policy
       Statement. We conclude that Five Star willfully and repeatedly
       violated Section 301 of the Act and Sections 1.903(a) and 1.949(a) of
       the Rules and that no mitigating circumstances warrant cancellation or
       further reduction of the proposed forfeiture amount.

    6. Five Star does not dispute that it failed to file a timely renewal
       application for station WPNS752 or that its operation of this station
       was unauthorized, but states that these violations were unintentional.
       Specifically, Five Star asserts that because of its lack of knowledge
       of the renewal process, it mistakenly believed that its vendor had
       filed the correct renewal form and that its license had been renewed.
       As the Commission has held, however, violations resulting from
       inadvertent error or failure to become familiar with the FCC's
       requirements are willful violations. In the context of a forfeiture
       action, "willful" does not require a finding that the rule violation
       was intentional. Rather, the term "willful" means that the violator
       knew that it was taking the action in question, irrespective of any
       intent to violate the Rules. Moreover, the Commission has long held
       that "licensees are responsible for the acts and omission of their
       employees and independent contractors," and has consistently "refused
       to excuse licensees from forfeiture penalties where the actions of
       employees or independent contractors have resulted in violations."

    7. Finally, although Five Star has been responsive and cooperative over
       the course of this investigation, such conduct does not justify
       cancellation of the forfeiture. All parties must fully cooperate and
       act with "complete candor"during Commission investigations. Compliance
       with an ongoing Commission investigation does not nullify or mitigate
       any prior violation. Five Star has not demonstrated that a reduction
       or cancellation of the proposed forfeiture is warranted. Accordingly,
       we find that Five Star willfully and repeatedly violated Section 301
       of the Act and Sections 1.903(a) and 1.949(a) of the Rules and that a
       forfeiture in the amount of $6,500 is appropriate.

   IV. ORDERING Clauses

   8. Accordingly, IT IS ORDERED that, pursuant to Section 503(b) of the Act,
   and Sections 0.111, 0.311 and 1.80(f)(4) of the Rules, Five Star Parking
   d/b/a Five Star Taxi Dispatch IS LIABLE FOR A MONETARY FORFEITURE in the
   amount of six thousand five hundred dollars ($6,500) for willful and
   repeated violation of Section 301 of the Act and Sections 1.903(a) and
   1.949(a) of the Rules.

    1. 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/Account Number and FRN Number referenced
       above. Payment by check or money order may be mailed to Federal
       Communications Commission, P.O. Box 979088, St. Louis, MO 63197-9000.
       Payment by overnight mail may be sent to U.S. Bank - Government
       Lockbox #979088, SL-MO-C2-GL, 1005 Convention Plaza, St. Louis, MO
       63101. Payment by wire transfer may be made to ABA Number 021030004,
       receiving bank TREAS/NYC, and account number 27000001. For payment by
       credit card, an FCC Form 159 (Remittance Advice) must be submitted.
        When completing the FCC Form 159, enter the NAL/Account number in
       block number 23A (call sign/other ID), and enter the letters "FORF" in
       block number 24A (payment type code). Requests for full payment under
       an installment plan should be sent to:  Chief Financial Officer --
       Financial Operations, 445 12th Street, S.W., Room 1-A625, Washington,
       D.C.  20554.   Please contact the Financial Operations Group Help Desk
       at 1-877-480-3201 or Email: ARINQUIRIES@fcc.gov with any questions
       regarding payment procedures.

    2. 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. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that a copy of this Order shall be sent by First
   Class and Certified Mail Return Receipt Requested to Five Star Parking
   d/b/a Five Star Taxi Dispatch, JFK International Airport, Bldg. 14, East
   Wing, 1st Floor, Jamaica, New York 11430-1206, Attention: George
   Vizzacchero, and to Haroon Akhtar, Operational Manager, Five Star Parking
   d/b/a Five Star Taxi Dispatch, P.O. Box 432, LaGuardia Airport, Flushing,
   New York 11371.

   FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION

   Kathryn S. Berthot

   Chief, Spectrum Enforcement Division

   Enforcement Bureau

   47 U.S.C. S: 301.

   47 C.F.R. S: S: 1.903(a) and 1.949(a).

   47 U.S.C. S: 301; 47 C.F.R. S: 1.903(a).

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

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

   Five Star Parking d/b/a Five Star Taxi Dispatch, 22 FCC Rcd 18857 (Enf.
   Bur., Spectrum Enf. Div., 2007) ("NAL").

   Id. at 18859.

   See Letter from Haroon Akhtar, Operational Manager, Five Star Parking to
   Natasha O'Dell, Spectrum Enf. Div., Enf. Bur., FCC (rec'd Aug. 14, 2007)
   ("LOI Response").

   See Letter from Kathryn S. Berthot, Chief, Spectrum Enf. Div., Enf. Bur.,
   FCC to George Vizzachero, Five Star Taxi Dispatch (July 3, 2007).

   NAL, 22 FCC Rcd at 18859. According to Five Star, the vendor responsible
   for filing its renewal application filed a renewal application for PLMRS
   station WPRK427, another license held by Five Star, which Five Star
   mistakenly believed was for the renewal of its taxi dispatch service
   license (WPNS752).

   Id. at 18860.

   NAL Response  at 1.

   Id.

   Id.

   Id.

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

   47 C.F.R. S: 1.80.

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

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

   Section 312(f)(1) of the Act defines "willful" as "the conscious and
   deliberate commission or omission of [any] act, irrespective of any intent
   to violate" the law. 47 U.S.C. S: 312(f)(1). The legislative history of
   Section 312(f)(1) of the Act clarifies that this definition of willful
   applies to Sections 312 and 503(b) of the Act, H.R. REP. No. 97-765, 51
   (Conf. Rep.), and the Commission has so interpreted the terms in the
   Section 503(b) context. See Southern California Broadcasting Co.,
   Memorandum Opinion and Order, 6 FCC Rcd 4387, 4387-88 (1991), recon.
   denied, 7 FCC Rcd 3454 (1992) ("Southern California").

   Section 312(f)(1) of the Act defines "repeated" as "the commission or
   omission of [any] act more than once or, if such commission or omission is
   continuous, for more than one day." 47 U.S.C. S: 312(f)(1). See also
   Southern California, 6 FCC Rcd at 4388 (applying this definition of
   repeated to Sections 312 and 503(b) of the Act).

   PJB Communications of Virginia, Inc., Memorandum Opinion and Order, 7 FCC
   Rcd 2088 (1992); Southern California, 6 FCC Rcd at 4387 (stating that
   "inadvertence ... is at best, ignorance of the law, which the Commission
   does not consider a mitigating circumstance"); Standard Communications
   Corp., Memorandum Opinion and Order, 1 FCC Rcd 358 (1986) (stating that
   "employee acts or omissions, such as clerical errors in failing to file
   required forms, do not excuse violations").

   See Southern California, 6 FCC Rcd at 4387. See also Domtar Industries,
   Inc., Notice of Apparent Liability for Forfeiture,  21 FCC Rcd 13811,
   13815 (Enf. Bur., Spectrum Enf. Div., 2006); National Weather Networks,
   Inc., Notice of Apparent Liability for Forfeiture, 21 FCC Rcd 3922, 3925
   (Enf. Bur., Spectrum Enf. Div., 2006).

   Eure Family Limited Partnership, Memorandum Opinion and Order, 17 FCC Rcd
   21861, 21863-64 (2002) ("Eure"); MTD, Inc., Memorandum Opinion and Order,
   6 FCC Rcd 34, 35 (1991); Wagenvoord Broadcasting Co., Memorandum Opinion
   and Order, 35 FCC 2d 361 (1972).

   See Eure, 17 FCC Rcd at 21863-64; Triad Broadcasting Company, Inc.,
   Memorandum Opinion and Order, 96 FCC 2d 1235, 1244 (1984).

   See 47 C.F.R. S:1.17.

   See Southern California, 7 FCC Rcd at 3455 (a licensee's "frank" response
   to a letter of inquiry did not warrant a downward adjustment as "complete
   candor" is required).

   47 C.F.R. S:S: 0.111, 0.311, 1.80(f)(4).

   (Continued from previous page)

   (continued....)

   Federal Communications Commission DA 08-410

   4

   Federal Communications Commission DA 08-410