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
) File No. EB-08-SE-507
In the Matter of
) NAL/Acct. No. 200932100051
Lockheed Martin Corporation
) FRN # 0015097702
notice of apparent liability for forfeiture
Adopted: March 9, 2009 Released: March 11, 2009
By the Chief, Spectrum Enforcement Division, Enforcement Bureau
I. introduction
1. In this Notice of Liability for Forfeiture ("NAL"), we find Lockheed
Martin Corporation, Inc. ("Lockheed Martin"), licensee of Fixed
Satellite Service earth stations call signs E920702 and E7541
apparently liable for a forfeiture in the amount of twenty-four
thousand eight hundred dollars ($24,800) for operating both earth
stations without Commission authorization in apparent willful and
repeated violation of Section 301 of the Communications Act of 1934,
as amended ("Act") and Section 25.102(a) of the Commission's Rules
("Rules"), and for failing to file timely renewal applications for
both earth stations in apparent willful and repeated violation of
Section 25.121(e) of the Rules.
II. background
2. On August 3, 1997, the Commission renewed Lockheed Martin's license to
operate earth station call sign E920702 for a ten year period. Under
the terms of the license, Lockheed Martin was authorized to
communicate with all U.S.-licensed satellites operating in the Ku-band
(14.0-14.5 GHz and 11.7-12.2 GHz). Lockheed Martin's authorization for
station E920702 expired on August 3, 2007. Also on August 3, 1997, the
Commission renewed Lockheed Martin's license to operate earth station
call sign E7541 using frequencies in portions of the C-band to
communicate with ALSAT Satellites for a ten-year period. Under the
terms of the license, Lockheed Martin's authorization for station
E7541 expired on August 3, 2007. Lockheed Martin did not file timely
renewal applications for either earth station E920702 or E7541.
3. On May 8, 2008, Lockheed Martin filed a request for special temporary
authority ("STA") to continue operations on earth station E920702 to
allow Lockheed Martin to communicate with the satellite formerly known
as AMC-14 on the 17.7935 GHz frequency in the transmit direction and
the 12.6985 GHz and 12.6945 GHz frequencies in the receive direction
("requested frequencies"). The requested point of communication and
the requested frequencies were not previously authorized by the
Commission for earth station E920702. In its STA request, Lockheed
Martin acknowledged that its license for earth station E920702 had
expired on August 3, 2007 without a renewal application being timely
filed. In addition, Lockheed Martin acknowledged that station E920702
was never authorized by the Commission to communicate with the AMC-14
satellite or to operate on the requested frequencies, but that
Lockheed Martin had operated station E920702 on these requested
frequencies to support the launch of the satellite formerly known as
AMC-14 since March 15, 2008. Lockheed Martin stated that it first
realized that its license for earth station E920702 had expired and
that it was operating this earth station to communicate with an
unauthorized point of communication on unauthorized frequencies on May
6, 2008. The International Bureau granted Lockheed Martin's STA
request to continue its operations on earth station E920702 on May 12,
2008.
4. On May 16, 2008, Lockheed Martin filed a Petition for Reinstatement of
Expired Licenses E920702 and E7541 ("Petition"). In its Petition,
Lockheed Martin admits that its licenses for earth stations E920702
and E7541 expired on August 3, 2007, without renewal applications
having been filed. Lockheed Martin also admits that it operated
station E920702 for twelve days in 2007 after the expiration of the
license and intermittently each day in 2008 beginning with the March
15 launch of the satellite formerly known as AMC-14. Further, Lockheed
Martin admits that, following the expiration of its license on August
3, 2007, it operated station E7541 from March 19 to March 22, 2008.
Lockheed Martin states that it learned of the expiration of the
licenses on May 6, 2008 and that its failure to timely file renewal
applications was a regrettable oversight.
5. Because it appeared that Lockheed Martin had operated earth stations
E920702 and E7541 without authorization, the International Bureau
referred this case to the Enforcement Bureau's Spectrum Enforcement
Division ("Division") for investigation and possible enforcement
action.
III. discussion
6. 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. Section 25.121(c)
of the Rules provides that the license term for an earth station is
specified in the instrument of authorization. Section 25.121(e) of the
Rules requires the licensee of an earth station to file its renewal
application "no earlier than 90 days, and no later than 30 days,
before the expiration date of the license." Absent a timely filed
renewal application, an earth station license automatically terminates
at the end of the license period.
7. As a Commission licensee, Lockheed Martin was required to maintain its
authorizations in order to operate its earth stations, E920702 and
E7541. Lockheed Martin admits that, following the license expiration
date of August 3, 2007, it operated earth station E920702 without
Commission authority for twelve days in 2007. In addition, from March
15, 2008 through May 8, 2008, the date Lockheed Martin filed its STA
request, Lockheed Martin admits it operated station E920702 without
Commission authorization, using frequencies and communicating with a
point of communication that had not been authorized by the Commission
for this earth station. Lockheed Martin also admits that it operated
earth station E7541, after its license expiration date, from March 19,
2008 to March 22, 2008. By operating earth station E920702 and earth
station E7541 without Commission authorization, Lockheed Martin
apparently violated Section 301 of the Act and Section 25.102(a) of
the Rules. Lockheed Martin also acted in apparent violation of Section
25.121(e) of the Rules by failing to file timely renewal applications
for the earth stations.
IV. PROPOSED FORFEITURE
8. 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 Lockheed Martin's violations of Section 301 of the
Act and Sections 25.102(a) and 25.121(e) of the Rules were willful and
repeated.
9. 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."
10. Section 503(b)(6) of the Act bars the Commission from proposing a
forfeiture for violations that occurred more than a year prior to the
issuance of an NAL. Section 503(b)(6) does not, however, bar the
Commission from assessing whether Lockheed Martin's conduct prior to
that time period apparently violated the provisions of the Act and
Rules and from considering such conduct in determining the appropriate
forfeiture amount for violations that occurred within the one-year
statutory period. Thus, while we may consider the fact that Lockheed
Martin's conduct has continued over a period that began in 2007, the
forfeiture amount we propose herein relates only to Lockheed Martin's
apparent violations that have occurred within the past year.
11. 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 a renewal application constitute separate
violations of the Act and the Rules and warrant the assessment of
separate forfeitures. Accordingly, we herein propose separate
forfeiture amounts for Lockheed Martin's separate violations.
12. Consistent with recent precedent, we propose the full base forfeiture
amount of $6,000 ($3,000 for each station) for Lockheed Martin's
failure to timely file renewal applications for earth stations E920702
and E7541 within the time period specified in Section 25.121(e) of the
Rules. Additionally, we propose a forfeiture in the amount of $5,000
for Lockheed Martin's unauthorized operation of earth station E7541
after its license had expired on August 3, 2007. In proposing a
forfeiture of $5,000 for the unauthorized operation of station E7541,
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. For Lockheed Martin's
unauthorized operations of station E920702, however, we propose the
full base forfeiture amount of $10,000. Unlike station E7541, we do
not find that a downward adjustment to the proposed forfeiture amount
for unauthorized operation of station E920702 is appropriate. Lockheed
Martin's unauthorized operation of station E920702 in its support of
the launch of the satellite formerly known as AMC-14 was undertaken
without any previous Commission authorization (using frequencies and
communicating with a point of communication that had not been
authorized under its expired license) in violation of the Act and
Commission Rules. Thus, we propose an aggregate forfeiture of $21,000
($6,000 for failure to timely file renewal applications for earth
stations E920702 and E7541, $5,000 for unauthorized operation of earth
station E7541, and $10,000 for unauthorized operation of earth station
E920702).
13. This $21,000 base forfeiture amount is subject to adjustment, however.
In this regard, we consider Lockheed Martin'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 Lockheed Martin,
could expect the assessment of higher forfeitures for violations.
Given Lockheed Martin's size and ability to pay a forfeiture, we
conclude that an upward adjustment of the base forfeiture amount to
$31,000 is appropriate.
14. Lockheed Martin asserts that its failure to timely file renewal
applications was a regrettable oversight. Such administrative
oversight or inadvertence does not, however, mitigate its violations.
As a Commission licensee, Lockheed Martin is charged with the
responsibility of knowing and complying with the terms of its
authorizations, the Act and the Rules. We do find, however, that a
downward adjustment of the proposed forfeiture from $31,000 to $24,800
is warranted due to Lockheed Martin's voluntary disclosure of the
violations. The Commission has considered voluntary disclosure to be a
mitigating factor where the licensee brings a violation to the
attention of the Commission immediately upon its discovery and before
any Commission action is taken.
IV. ORDERING CLAUSES
15. 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, Lockheed Martin
Corporation IS hereby NOTIFIED of its APPARENT LIABILITY FOR A
FORFEITURE in the amount of twenty-four thousand eight hundred dollars
($24,800) for the willful and repeated violation of Section 301 of the
Act and Sections 25.102(a) and 25.121(e) of the Rules.
16. 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, Lockheed Martin Corporation SHALL PAY the
full amount of the proposed forfeiture or SHALL FILE a written
statement seeking reduction or cancellation of the proposed
forfeiture.
17. 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. Lockheed Martin will also send
electronic notification on the date said payment is made to
Jackie.Ellington@fcc.gov and JoAnn.Lucanik@fcc.gov.
18. The response, if any, must be mailed to the Office of the Secretary,
Federal Communications Commission, 445 12th Street, SW, Washington, DC
20554, ATTN: Enforcement Bureau - Spectrum Enforcement Division, and
must include the NAL/Acct. No. referenced in the caption.
19. 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.
20. 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 Stephen D. Baruch, Esq., counsel for
Lockheed Martin Corporation, Leventhal Senter & Lerman PLLC, 2000 K
Street, NW, Suite 600, Washington, DC 20006-1809.
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(a)
47 C.F.R. S: 25.121(e).
See SES-RWL-19970808-01083.
Originally, this earth station was authorized to communicate with ALSAT,
which at the time meant "all authorized U.S. Domestic satellites."
However, in the DISCO I Order, the Commission adopted a single regulatory
regime for domestic and international satellite communications, and
authorized all ALSAT earth stations to engage in both domestic and
international communications. Amendment to the Commission's Regulatory
Policies Governing Domestic Fixed Satellites and Separate International
Satellite Systems, Report and Order, IB Docket No. 95-41, 11 FCC Rcd 2429
(1996) (DISCO I Order). Later, in 1999, the Commission expanded "ALSAT"
again to include certain non-U.S.-licensed satellites listed on a
Permitted List on the Commission's web site. Amendment of the Commission's
Regulatory Policies to Allow Non-U.S.-Licensed Space Stations to Provide
Domestic and International Satellite Service in the United States, First
Order on Reconsideration, IB Docket No. 96-111, 15 FCC Rcd 7207 (1999)
(DISCO II First Reconsideration Order). However, neither of these
Commission Orders expanded the authority of Lockheed Martin's E920702
earth station to communicate with any satellite outside of the Ku-band.
SES-RWL-19970808-01083.
See SES-RWL-19970808-01082.
Id.
See SES-STA-20080508-00569 ("May 8, 2008 STA Request").
The satellite formerly known as AMC-14 is not an ALSAT Satellite.
May 8, 2008 STA Request, Narrative Exhibit at 1.
Id.
See Public Notice, Satellite Communications Services Information, Re:
Actions Taken, Report No. SES-01033 (May 14, 2008). IB granted additional
STA requests for Lockheed Martin's continued operation of station E920702
on July 7, 2008 and September 9, 2008.
See Letter from Stephen D. Baruch, Esq., Counsel for Lockheed Martin
Corporation, to Marlene H. Dortch, Secretary, Federal Communications
Commission (May 16, 2008) ("Petition").
Petition at 1.
Id. According to Lockheed Martin, the specific dates it operated the
station in 2007 were August 9, 15-18, and 28; and November 18, 20-21, and
23-25).
Id. at 1-2.
Id. at 2. According to Lockheed Martin, station E7541 no longer transmits
in any capacity.
Id. at 1. On November 3, 2008, Lockheed Martin filed an application to
re-license both earth stations under a single call sign. See
SES-LIC-20081103-01443, SES-AMD-20081130-01518, and
SES-AMD-20081219-01664. The application was accepted for filing and placed
on public notice on February 11, 2009. See Public Notice, Satellite
Communications Services, Re: Satellite Radio Applications Accepted for
Filing, Report No. SES-01111 (Feb. 11, 2009).
47 U.S.C. S: 301; 47 C.F.R. S: 25.102(a).
47 C.F.R. S: 25.121(c).
47 C.F.R. S: 25.121(e).
47 C.F.R. S: 25.161.
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) ("Southern California").
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, 15 FCC Rcd 303
(1999)("Forfeiture Policy Statement").
47 U.S.C. S: 503(b)(6).
See 47 U.S.C. S: 503(b)(2)(D), 47 C.F.R. S: 1.80(b)(4); see also Behringer
USA, Inc., Notice of Apparent Liability for Forfeiture, 21 FCC Rcd 1820,
1825 (2006), forfeiture ordered, 22 FCC Rcd. 1051 (2007) (forfeiture
paid); Globcom, Inc. d/b/a Globcom Global Communications, Notice of
Apparent Liability for Forfeiture, 18 FCC Rcd 19893, 19903 (2003),
forfeiture ordered, 21 FCC Rcd 4710 (2006); Roadrunner Transportation,
Inc., Forfeiture Order, 15 FCC Rcd 9669, 9671-71 (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 (1967), recon. den.,11 FCC 2d 193 (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) (forfeiture paid).
47 C.F.R. S: 1.80(b).
See Discussion Radio, Inc., Memorandum Opinion and Order and Notice of
Apparent Liability for Forfeiture, 19 FCC Rcd 7433, 7438 (2004)
("Discussion Radio"). See also La Carpa Corp., Notice of Apparent
Liability for Forfeiture, 22 FCC Rcd 2744, 2745 (Enf. Bur., Spectrum Enf.
Div., 2007) (forfeiture paid) ("La Carpa"); Lazer Broadcasting Corp.,
Notice of Apparent Liability for Forfeiture, 21 FCC Rcd 8710, 8712 (Enf.
Bur., Spectrum Enf. Div., 2006) (forfeiture paid) ("Lazer"); Shared Data
Networks, LLC, Notice of Apparent Liability for Forfeiture, 20 FCC Rcd
18184, 18186 (Enf. Bur., Spectrum Enf. Div., 2005) (forfeiture paid).
See e.g., Discovery World Television, Inc., Notice of Apparent Liability
for Forfeiture, DA 09-538, (Enf. Bur. Spectrum Enforcement Div., rel.
March 6, 2009); 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).
See Discussion Radio, 19 FCC Rcd at 7438 (proposing a $5,000 forfeiture
for operating a broadcast station for 14 months beyond the expiration of
its license); La Carpa, 22 FCC Rcd at 2746 (proposing a $5,000 forfeiture
for operating an earth station for three years after the expiration of its
license); Lazer, 21 FCC Rcd at 8712 (proposing a $5,000 forfeiture for
operating an earth station for one year after the expiration of its
license).
See e.g., Able Infosat Communications, Inc., Notice of Apparent Liability
for Forfeiture, 23 FCC Rcd 887, 890 (Enf. Bur., Spectrum Enf. Div. 2008)
(proposing the full base forfeiture amount of $10,000 for unauthorized
operations and declining to make a downward adjustment where the
operator's unauthorized operation was undertaken without any previous
Commission authorization) (forfeiture paid); Domtar Industries, Inc.,
Notice of Apparent Liability for Forfeiture, 21 FCC Rcd. 13811 (Enf. Bur.,
Spectrum Enf. Div., 2006) (proposing the base forfeiture amount of $10,000
for operating without Commission authorization and an upward adjustment of
$4,000 for unauthorized operations that spanned over a five-year period)
(forfeiture paid).
Lockheed Martin recently reported its net sales for 2007 as $41.9 billion.
See Lockheed Martin Corporation 2007 Annual Report (February 28, 2008).
See Forfeiture Policy Statement, 12 FCC Rcd at 17099-100. See also
Walgreen Co., Notice of Apparent Liability for Forfeiture, 22 FCC Rcd
16045, 16048 (Enf. Bur., Spectrum Enf. Div. 2007).
See 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").
See Petracom of Texarkana, LLC, Forfeiture Order, 19 FCC Rcd 8096,
8097-8098 (Enf. Bur., 2004). See also Side By-Side, Inc., Notice of
Apparent Liability for Forfeiture, 23 FCC Rcd 898, 901 (Enf. Bur.,
Spectrum Enf. Div., 2008), forfeiture ordered, 23 FCC Rcd 7393 (Enf. Bur.,
Spectrum Enf. Div., 2008) (forfeiture paid); 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.
(Continued from previous page)
(continued....)
Federal Communications Commission DA 09-560
6
Federal Communications Commission DA 09-560