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 Number: EB-10-SF-0187   
                                                           
     Ira Jones            )   NAL/Acct. No.: 201132960001  
                                                           
     Merced, California   )   FRN: 0020643425              
                                                           
                          )                                


                  NOTICE OF APPARENT LIABILITY FOR FORFEITURE

   Adopted: March 8, 2011 Released: March 10, 2011

   By the District Director, San Francisco Office, Western Region,
   Enforcement Bureau:

   I. INTRODUCTION

    1. In this Notice of Apparent Liability for Forfeiture ("NAL"), we find
       that Ira Jones ("Jones"), owner and operator of a Citizens Band ("CB")
       radio station in Merced, California, apparently willfully and
       repeatedly violated section 303(n) of the Communications Act of 1934,
       as amended ("Act"), and section 95.426(a) of the Commission's rules
       ("Rules") by failing to permit inspection of the CB radio station. We
       conclude, pursuant to section 503(b) of the Act, that Jones is
       apparently liable for a forfeiture in the amount of seven  thousand
       dollars ($7,000).

   II. BACKGROUND

    2. On March 19, 2010, agents from the Enforcement Bureau's San Francisco
       Office ("San Francisco Office") responded to a complaint regarding
       radio frequency interference within the radio communication system
       equipment of the Merced County Fire Department. The agents observed
       that transmissions on CB radio station frequency 27.165 MHz appeared
       to match the audio distortion received on frequency 154.4 MHz within
       the Merced County Fire Department's audio receiver and speaker system
       in what appeared to be audio rectification interference within the
       department's receiver and speaker system. The agents then monitored
       the radio transmissions on frequency 27.165 MHz and used radio
       direction finding techniques to locate the source of the signal
       associated with the interference to a CB radio station operating from
       Jones's residence in Merced, California.

    3. On March 26, 2010, agents from the San Francisco Office again
       monitored frequency 27.165 MHz and used radio direction finding
       techniques to locate the source of the signal creating the audio
       rectification interference to a CB radio station operating from
       Jones's residence in Merced, California. Later the same day, the
       agents approached Jones's residence, knocked on his door, identified
       themselves as agents of the FCC and presented their official badges
       and credentials. The individual identified himself as Jones. The
       agents told Jones about the radio frequency interference complaint
       from the nearby Merced County Fire Department and asked him if he was
       the owner or operator of the CB radio station. Jones acknowledged that
       he was the operator of the CB radio station but denied causing any
       interference to the Merced County Fire Department. The agents then
       requested that they be allowed to inspect the CB radio station to
       determine the cause of the interference. Jones denied the agents'
       request to inspect the CB radio station. The agents warned Jones that
       refusing to allow an inspection of a CB radio station is a violation
       of section 95.426(a) of the Rules and section 303(n) of the Act,
       explaining that these rules require CB operators to make their
       stations available to authorized FCC representatives for inspection.
       Jones again denied the request and asserted that the FCC must have a
       search warrant to inspect his CB station. The agents advised Jones
       that he was required to take necessary precautions to avoid causing
       radio interference by operating at power levels that do not exceed
       legal limits and by refraining from using a radio frequency power
       amplifier.

    4. Prior to leaving the premises, the agents issued an on-scene "Notice
       of Unlicensed Operation" ("First Notice") to Jones. The First Notice
       expressly warned that Jones's refusal to allow inspection of his radio
       equipment violated section 303(n) of the Act and included the full
       text of section 303(n). Jones refused to accept a copy of the First
       Notice and the agents left the document on a chair near the front door
       of the house. The agents then left the premises, but continued to
       monitor 27.165 MHz and heard Jones describe the agents' attempted
       inspection. Later on March 26, 2010, the agents again monitored
       frequency 27.165 MHz and noted that Jones was operating his CB radio
       station without causing interference to the Merced County Fire
       Department radio communication equipment. Subsequently, the Merced
       County Fire Department reported that the interference ceased.

    5. On August 25, 2010, the San Francisco Office received another
       complaint from the Merced County Fire Department that the interference
       to its radio communication equipment had resumed over the prior two
       weeks and appeared to again be caused by a CB radio station operated
       by Jones. According to the complainant, the interference lasted from
       10 minutes to 45 minutes at a time and Jones's CB radio station could
       be clearly heard on the radio communication equipment at the Merced
       County fire station during these times.

    6. On August 27, 2010, agents from the San Francisco Office again
       monitored frequency 27.165 MHz and used radio direction finding
       techniques to locate the source of the interfering signal to a CB
       radio station operating from Jones's residence in Merced, California.
       Later the same day, the agents, along with two Merced City police
       officers, approached Jones at his front yard, identified themselves as
       agents of the FCC and presented their official badges and credentials.
       The two Merced City police officers identified the man as Jones. The
       agents told Jones about the radio frequency interference complaint and
       requested that they be allowed to inspect the CB radio station to
       determine the cause of the interference. Jones denied the request.
       Jones again admitted that he was the owner and operator of the CB
       radio station, but stated that he was not the owner of the house and
       that he had to refuse the inspection. Jones understood that refusal to
       allow an inspection could result in a $7,000 forfeiture assessment.
       After further conversation with the agents and the police officers,
       Jones subsequently admitted to being the owner of the house. The
       agents again requested that they be allowed to inspect the CB radio
       station and reiterated that Jones's refusal to allow an inspection of
       a CB radio station is a violation of section 95.426(a) of the Rules
       and section 303(n) of the Act and is subject to a forfeiture. Jones
       again denied the request to inspect his CB station. The agents then
       gave Jones an oral warning and issued a second on-scene "Notice of
       Unlicensed Operation" ("Second Notice") to Jones. The Second Notice
       expressly warned that Jones's refusal to allow inspection of his radio
       equipment violated section 303(n) of the Act and included the full
       text of section 303(n). Jones refused to accept a copy of the Second
       Notice and the agents left the document on a wooden yard border. The
       agents then left the premises.

    7. On September 1, 2010, the San Francisco Office received another
       complaint from the Merced County Fire Department stating that Jones
       had resumed CB radio station operation at approximately 5:30 p.m., and
       interference within the Merced County Fire Department radio
       communication system equipment had also resumed.

   III. DISCUSSION

    8. Section 503(b) of the Act provides that any person who willfully or
       repeatedly fails to comply substantially with the terms and conditions
       of any license, or willfully or repeatedly fails to comply with any of
       the provisions of the Act or of any rule, regulation or order issued
       by the Commission thereunder, shall be liable for a forfeiture
       penalty. The term "willful" as used in section 503(b) has been
       interpreted to mean simply that the acts or omissions are committed
       knowingly. The term "repeated" means the commission or omission of
       such act more than once or for more than one day.  

    9. Section 303(n) of the Act states that the Commission has the
       "authority to inspect all radio installations associated with stations
       required to be licensed by any Act, or which the Commission by rule
       has authorized to operate without a license under section 307(e)(1)."
       Section 307(e)(1) expressly includes "the citizen band radio service."
       Additionally, section 95.426(a) of the Rules (CB Rule 26) states "[i]f
       an authorized FCC representative requests to inspect your CB station,
       you must make your CB station and records available for inspection."
       The Commission has no requirement that an agent obtain a warrant prior
       to conducting such an inspection.

   10. On March 26, 2010 and August 27, 2010, agents from the San Francisco
       Office located the source of the signal on 27.165 MHz to Jones's
       residence in Merced, California. On each of these dates, in an effort
       to determine the cause of the reported interference created within the
       Merced County Fire Department radio communication equipment and to
       resolve it, the agents requested an inspection of Jones's CB radio
       station. Jones denied both requests, despite the fact that at both
       inspections, the San Francisco agents explained section 95.426(a) of
       the Rules (CB Rule 26) and section 303(n) of the Act to Jones, and
       provided Jones repeated verbal and written on-scene warnings by the
       agents of the consequences of refusing to allow an inspection of a
       radio station. Based on the record evidence, we find that Ira Jones 
       apparently willfully and repeatedly violated section 303(n) of the Act
       and section 95.426(a) of the Rules by failing to permit inspection of
       his CB radio station.

   IV. CONCLUSION

   11. Pursuant to the Commission's Forfeiture Policy Statement and section
       1.80 of the Rules, the base forfeiture amount for failing to permit
       inspection is $7,000. In assessing the monetary forfeiture amount, we
       must also take into account the statutory factors set forth in section
       503(b)(2)(E) of the Act, which include the nature, circumstances,
       extent, and gravity of the violations, 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. 
       Considering the entire record and applying the Forfeiture Policy
       Statement, section 1.80, and the statutory factors to the instant
       case, we conclude that Ira Jones is apparently liable for a $7,000
       forfeiture.

   12. We also warn Jones that operation of his CB radio station with more
       power than authorized (AM (A3) - 4 watts (carrier power) SSB - 12
       watts (peak envelope power)) is a violation of section 95.410 of the
       Rules. Use of a transmitter which has carrier or peak envelope power
       in excess of that authorized will void Jones's authority to operate
       the station. We further warn Jones, pursuant to section 95.423 of the
       Rules,  that overpowered operation of his CB radio station appears to
       be creating the interference within the Merced Fire County Department
       radio communications system. Mr. Jones must operate his CB station in
       compliance with the FCC's Rules and at the power limit indicated
       above. Failure to abide by these rules may result in additional
       sanctions and monetary forfeitures.

   V. ORDERING CLAUSES

   13. Accordingly, IT IS ORDERED that, pursuant to section 503(b) of the
       Communications Act of 1934, as amended, and sections 0.111, 0.311,
       0.314 and 1.80 of the Rules, Ira Jones is hereby NOTIFIED of this
       APPARENT LIABILITY FOR A FORFEITURE in the amount of seven thousand
       dollars ($7,000) for violations of section 303(n)  of the Act and
       section 95.426(a) 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, Ira Jones 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/Account Number and FRN 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. Ira Jones  shall also send
       electronic notification on the date said payment is made to
       WR-Response@fcc.gov.

   16. The written statement seeking reduction or cancellation of the
       proposed forfeiture, if any, must include a detailed factual statement
       supported by appropriate documentation and affidavits pursuant to
       Sections 1.80(f)(3) and 1.16 of the Rules. The written statement must
       be mailed to Federal Communications Commission, Enforcement Bureau,
       Western Region, San Francisco Office, 5653 Stoneridge Drive,
       Pleasanton, California, 94588-8543, and must include the NAL/Acct. No.
       referenced in the caption. An electronic copy shall also be emailed to
       WR-Response@fcc.gov.

   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 ("GAAP"); 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 Certified Mail, Return Receipt
       Requested, and regular mail, to Ira Jones at his address of record.

   FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION

   Thomas N. Van Stavern

   District Director

   San Francisco District Office

   Western Region

   Enforcement Bureau

   47 U.S.C. S: 303(n).

   47 C.F.R. S: 95.426(a), (CB Rule 26).

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

   Audio rectification interference occurs when an electronic circuit
   (usually an amplifier), which ideally should respond only to audio
   frequency signals, responds to external radio frequency (RF) signals.
   Typically, the circuit picks up signals from a nearby radio transmitter in
   addition to the sound the listener wants to hear. The unwanted signal may
   be constant or intermittent, faint or uncontrollably loud.

   47 C.F.R. S: 95.426(a), (CB Rule 26).

   47 U.S.C. S: 303(n).

   Section 312(f)(1) of the Act, 47 U.S.C. S: 312(f)(1), which applies to
   violations for which forfeitures are assessed under section 503(b) of the
   Act, provides that "[t]he term `willful', when used with reference to the
   commission or omission of any act, means the conscious and deliberate
   commission or omission of such act, irrespective of any intent to violate
   any provision of this Act or any rule or regulation of the Commission
   authorized by this Act...." See Southern California Broadcasting Co., 6
   FCC Rcd 4387 (1991), recon. denied, 7 FCC Rcd 3454 (1992).

   Section 312(f)(2) of the Act, 47 U.S.C. S: 312(f)(2), which also applies
   to violations for which forfeitures are assessed under Section 503(b) of
   the Act, provides that "[t]he term `repeated', when used with reference to
   the commission or omission of any act, means the commission or omission of
   such act more than once or, if such commission or omission is continuous,
   for more than one day."

   47 U.S.C. S: 303(n) (The Commission shall "[h]ave authority to inspect all
   radio installations associated with stations required to be licensed by
   any Act, or which the Commission by rule has authorized to operate without
   a license under section 307 (e)(1) of this title, or which are subject to
   the provisions of any Act, treaty, or convention binding on the United
   States, to ascertain whether in construction, installation, and operation
   they conform to the requirements of the rules and regulations of the
   Commission, the provisions of any Act, the terms of any treaty or
   convention binding on the United States, and the conditions of the license
   or other instrument of authorization under which they are constructed,
   installed, or operated.").

   47 U.S.C. S: 307(e)(1) ("[T]he Commission may by rule authorize the
   operation of radio stations without individual licenses in the . . .
   citizens band radio service. . . . ").

   47 C.F.R. S: 95.426(a).

   See Norfolk Southern Railway Company, 11 FCC Rcd 519 (CIB 1996) (The right
   to inspect a station is one of the cornerstones of the FCC's ability to
   ensure compliance with the Communications Act and the FCC regulations).
   See also, Randall R. Gaines, 72 FCC 2d 871, P:13 (Rev. Board 1979) (A
   search warrant is not required for an inspection of a CB radio station).

   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) ("Forfeiture Policy Statement"), recon. denied, 15
   FCC Rcd 303 (1999); 47 C.F.R. S: 1.80.

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

   47 C.F.R. S: 95.410, (CB Rule 10).

   47 C.F.R. S: 95.410(c), (CB Rule 10).

   47 C.F.R. S: 95.423, (CB Rule 23).

   47 U.S.C. S:S: 503(b), 303(n); 47 C.F.R. S:S: 0.111, 0.311, 0.314, 1.80,
   95.426(a).

   See 47 C.F.R. S: 1.1914.

   (...continued from previous page)

                                                              (continued....)

                                  Federal Communications Commission DA 11-457

                                       3

   Federal Communications Commission DA 11-457