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-08-SE-555       
                                                                        
     SES Americom, Inc.                 )   NAL/Acct. No. 200932100049  
                                                                        
     Licensee of Satcom C-3 Satellite   )   FRN 0009827494              
                                                                        
                                        )                               


                  NOTICE OF APPARENT LIABILITY FOR FORFEITURE

   Adopted: February 27, 2009 Released: March 3, 2009

   By the Chief, Spectrum Enforcement Division, Enforcement Bureau:

   I. introduction

    1. In this Notice of Apparent Liability for Forfeiture, we find SES
       Americom, Inc. ("SES"), licensee of the Satcom C-3 geostationary
       C-band satellite, call sign S2447, apparently liable for a forfeiture
       in the amount of twelve thousand eight hundred dollars ($12,800) for
       operating the Satcom C-3 satellite without Commission authority, in
       apparent willful and repeated violation of Section 301 of the
       Communications Act of 1934, as amended ("Act") and Section 25.102 of
       the Commission's Rules ("Rules"), and for its willful violation in
       failing to timely file the required modification application to extend
       the term of the license pursuant to Section 25.117 of the Rules.

   II. background

    2. On August 25, 1989, SES was granted a license to operate the Satcom
       C-3 satellite. Under the terms of its license, SES's authorization for
       the satellite expired on December 16, 2007. Thereafter, on March 10,
       2008, SES became aware that it had failed to file a modification to
       extend the terms of its license for the Satcom C-3 satellite and that
       its license had expired. On March 11, 2008, SES filed an application
       with the International Bureau requesting special temporary authority
       ("STA") to operate the Satcom C-3 satellite beyond its license
       expiration, and followed that request by filing, on March 18, 2008, a
       modification application which, among other things, would extend the
       station authorization until December 31, 2010. The modification
       application was granted by the International Bureau on June 11, 2008.

    3. Because it appeared that SES may have operated the Satcom C-3
       satellite after the expiration of its license, the International
       Bureau referred this case to the Enforcement Bureau for investigation
       and possible enforcement action. On August 4, 2008, the Enforcement
       Bureau's Spectrum Enforcement Division ("Division") issued SES a
       letter of inquiry ("LOI") to further investigate whether SES operated
       the Satcom C-3 satellite beyond expiration of its license.

    4. In its September 3, 2008 response to the LOI, SES admitted that it did
       not file the necessary modification to extend the term of its Satcom
       C-3 satellite license and continued to operate the satellite without
       Commission authority through March 11, 2008, the date of its STA
       request, because it was unaware that its license had expired. SES
       stated that it first became aware that its license had expired on
       March 10, 2008, at which time it took immediate steps to request an
       STA to operate the satellite, pending the submission and grant of an
       application to modify the expiration date contained in the expired
       authorization. SES states that between the dates of December 16, 2007
       and March 18, 2008, it only communicated with the space station for
       purposes of Telemetry, Tracking, and Command (TT&C), which, it states,
       are administrative communications for the purpose of preventing the
       satellite from drifting and thereby creating a risk of interference or
       other technical harm to nearby spacecraft or the public.

   III. discussion

    1. 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 a satellite station except under and in
       accordance with a Commission granted authorization. In order for an
       operator to extend the terms of its space station license, it must
       file an application for modification under Section 25.117 of the
       Rules. Absent a timely filed application to extend the authorization,
       a satellite station license automatically terminates at the end of the
       license period.

    5. Under the terms of its licenses, SES's authorization to operate the
       Satcom C-3 expired on December 16, 2007. As a Commission licensee, SES
       is charged with the responsibility of knowing and complying with the
       terms of its authorizations, the Act and the Rules. SES admitted that
       it failed to file an application to extend the satellite's license
       prior to its expiration date. Moreover, SES admitted that it continued
       to operate the Satcom C-3 satellite after the expiration of its
       license, a situation that SES did not seek to remedy until March 11,
       2008, when SES filed its request for STA. Thus, it appears that SES
       apparently violated Section 301 of the Act and Section 25.102(a) of
       the Rules by operating the Satcom C-3 satellite without Commission
       authority, and that SES apparently violated the requirement to file a
       modification application to extend the license pursuant to Section
       25.117 of the Rules.

    6. 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 "repeated" means more than once. Based on the record before
       us, it appears that SES's violation of Section 301 of the Act and
       Sections 25.102(a) of the Rules was willful and repeated, and its
       violation for the failure to timely file the required modification
       application to extend the license pursuant to Section 25.117 was
       willful.

    7. 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 $16,000.

    8. Section 1.80(b) of the Rules sets a base forfeiture amount of $10,000
       for operation of a station without Commission authority and $3,000 for
       failure to file required forms or information. As the Commission has
       held, a licensee's continued operations without authorization and its
       failure to timely file for authority to extend its operations
       constitute separate violations of the Act and the rules and warrant
       the assessment of separate forfeitures. Accordingly, we herein propose
       separate forfeiture amounts for SES's separate violations.

    2. Consistent with recent precedent, we propose the full base forfeiture
       amount of $3,000 for SES's failure to timely file the required
       modification application pursuant to Section 25.117 to extend the
       license for the Satcom C-3 satellite. Additionally, we propose a
       forfeiture in the amount of $5,000 for SES's unauthorized operation of
       the Satcom C-3 satellite for the three-month period between December
       16, 2007, the license's expiration, and March 17, 2008, the date of
       the STA request. In proposing a forfeiture of $5,000 for the
       unauthorized operation, 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 adjusts the $10,000 base forfeiture amount accordingly. The
       aggregate $8,000 base forfeiture amount is subject to adjustment,
       however. In this regard, we consider SES'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 SES, could expect
       the assessment of higher forfeitures for violations. Given SES's size
       and ability to pay a forfeiture, we conclude that a significant upward
       adjustment of the aggregate base forfeiture amount to $16,000 is
       appropriate. Thus, we propose an aggregate forfeiture of $16,000.

    9. We further find, however, that a downward adjustment of the proposed
       forfeiture from $16,000 to $12,800 is warranted because SES made
       voluntary disclosures to Commission staff and undertook corrective
       measures after learning of its violations prior to any Commission
       inquiry or initiation of enforcement action.

   IV. ORDERING CLAUSES

   10. 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, SES Americom, Inc. IS
       hereby NOTIFIED of its APPARENT LIABILITY FOR A FORFEITURE in the
       amount of twelve thousand eight hundred dollars ($12,800) for the
       willful and repeated violation of Section 301 of the Act and Section
       25.102(a) of the Rules and for the willful violation of the
       requirement to timely file a modification application to extend the
       terms of its license pursuant to Section 25.117 of the Rules.

   11. 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, SES Americom, Inc. SHALL PAY the full amount
       of the proposed forfeiture or SHALL FILE a written statement seeking
       reduction or cancellation of the proposed forfeiture.

   12. 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. SES will also send electronic
       notification on the date said payment is made to
       Ricardo.Durham@fcc.gov and Susan.Stickley@fcc.gov.

   13. 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.

   14. 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.

    3. 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 Ms. Nancy J.

   Eskenazi, Vice President and Associate General Counsel, SES Americom,
   Inc., Four Research Way, Princeton, New Jersey 08540, and a copy to its
   counsel, Karis A. Hastings, Esq., Hogan & Hartson L.L.P., Washington, D.C.
   2004-1109.

   FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION

   Kathryn S. Berthot

   Chief, Spectrum Enforcement Division

   Enforcement Bureau

   47 U.S.C. S: 301; 47 C.F.R. S: 25.102.

   47 C.F.R. S: 25.117.

   See File No. SAT-LOA-19880930-00038.

   SAT-STA-20080311-00062; application dismissed as moot June 11, 2008.

   See Application of SES Americom, Inc., filed March 18, 2008 (File No.
   SAT-MOD-20080318-00073).

   Letter from Kathryn S. Berthot, Chief, Spectrum Enforcement Division,
   Enforcement Bureau, Federal Communications Commission to Nancy J.
   Eskenazi, Vice President and Associate General Counsel (August 4, 2008).

   Letter from Ms. Nancy J. Eskenazi, Vice President and Associate General
   Counsel, SES Americom, Inc., to Susan M. Stickley, Esq., Spectrum
   Enforcement Division, Enforcement Bureau, Federal Communications
   Commission (September 3, 2008).

   Id at 1.

   Id at 1-2.

   Id at 1.

   Id at 2.

   47 U.S.C. S: 301; 47 C.F.R. S: 25.102(a).

   47 C.F.R. S: 25.117.

   47 C.F.R. S: 25.161.

   See Discussion Radio, Inc., Memorandum Opinion and Order and Notice of
   Apparent Liability, 19 FCC Rcd 7433, 7437 (2004) ("Discussion Radio"). See
   also Side By Side, Inc., Notice of Apparent Liability for Forfeiture, 23
   FCC Rcd 898, 901 (Enf. Bur., Spectrum Enf. Div. 2008) ("Side By Side"); La
   Carpa Corp., Notice of Apparent Liability for Forfeiture, 22 FCC Rcd 2744,
   2746 (Enf. Bur., Spectrum Enf. Div. 2007) (forfeiture paid) ("La Carpa");
   Shared Data Networks, LLC, Notice of Apparent Liability for Forfeiture, 20
   FCC Rcd 18184, 18187 (Enf. Bur., Spectrum Enf. Div. 2005) (forfeiture
   paid) ("Shared Data Networks").

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

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

   See 47 U.S.C. S: 312(f)(1) & (2). See also Southern California
   Broadcasting Co., Memorandum Opinion and Order, 6 FCC Rcd 4387 (1991),
   recon. denied, 7 FCC Rcd 3454 (1992) (the definitions of willful and
   repeated contained in the Act apply to violations for which forfeitures
   are assessed under Section 503(b) of the Act.)

   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; Forfeiture Policy Statement, Report and Order, 12 FCC Rcd
   17087, 17110 91997), recon. denied, 15 FCC Rcd 303 (1999) ("Forfeiture
   Policy Statement").

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

   See Discussion Radio, 19 FCC Rcd at 7438. See also Side By Side, 23 FCC
   Rcd at 898; La Carpa, 22 FCC Rcd at 2745; Lazer Broadcasting Corp., Notice
   of Apparent Liability for Forfeiture, 21 FCC Rcd 8710, 8712 (Enf. Bur.,
   Spectrum Enf. Div. 2005) (forfeiture paid) ("Lazer"); Shared Data
   Networks, 20 FCC Rcd at 18186.

   See e.g., Bloomsburg University of Pennsylvania, Memorandum Opinion and
   Order and Notice of Apparent Liability for Forfeiture, 23 FCC Rcd 9357,
   9359 (Media Bur., Audio Div. 2008); Sunflower Communications, Inc.,
   Memorandum Opinion and Order and Notice of Apparent Liability for
   Forfeiture, 23 FCC Rcd 7657, 7659 (Media Bur., Audio Div. 2008); Santa
   Cruz Educational Broadcasting Foundation, Memorandum Opinion and Order and
   Notice of Apparent Liability for Forfeiture, 22 FCC 21033, 21035 (Media
   Bur., Audio Div. 2007) (all proposing the full base forfeiture amount of
   $3,000 against broadcast station licensees for failure to file timely
   renewal applications).

   Section 503(b)(6) of the Act, 47 U.S.C. S: 503(b)(6), prohibits assessment
   of a forfeiture for a violation that occurred more than one year before
   the issuance of a NAL, but this section does not bar consideration of
   prior conduct in determining the appropriate forfeiture amount for
   violations that occurred within the one-year statutory period. See
   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 (2006); Roadrunner Transportation,
   Inc., Forfeiture Order, 15 FCC Rcd 9669, 9671-72 (2000).

   See Discussion Radio, 19 FCC Rcd at 7438 (proposing a $5,000 forfeiture
   against a broadcaster for operating its broadcast station beyond the
   expiration of its license); Side by Side, 23 FCC Rcd at 900 (proposing a
   $5,000 forfeiture against an earth station operator for operating beyond
   the expiration of its license); La Carpa, 22 FCC Rcd at 2746 (proposing a
   $5,000 forfeiture against an earth station operator for operating beyond
   the expiration of its license); Lazer, 21 FCC Rcd at 8712 (proposing a
   $5,000 forfeiture against an earth station operator for operating beyond
   the expiration of its license).

   SES recently reported that its recurring revenue rose six percent in 2008
   to $2.1 billion. See International Telecom, Communications Daily, February
   17, 2009, at 8.

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

   See Walgreen Co., Notice of Apparent Liability for Forfeiture, 22 FCC Rcd
   16,045, 16,048 (Enf. Bur., Spectrum Enf. Div. 2007) (forfeiture paid).

   See Petracom of Texarkana, LLC, Forfeiture Order, 19 FCC Rcd 8096,
   8097-8098 (Enf. Bur. 2004). See also Side By Side, 23 FCC Rcd at 901;
   Lazer, 21 FCC Rcd at 8712; Journal Broadcasting Corp., Notice of Apparent
   Liability for Forfeiture, 20 FCC Rcd 18211, 18214 (Enf. Bur., Spectrum
   Enf. Div. 2005) (forfeiture paid).

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

   47 C.F.R. S:S: 0.111, 0.311 and 1.80.

   47 C.F.R. S: 1.80.

   Federal Communications Commission DA 09-479

   2

   Federal Communications Commission DA 09-479