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              
                                                           
                          )                                
                                                           
                          )                                


                                FORFEITURE ORDER

   Adopted: July 26, 2012 Released: July 27, 2012

   By the Regional Director, Western Region, Enforcement Bureau:

   I. INTRODUCTION

    1. In this Forfeiture Order, we issue a monetary forfeiture in the amount
       of seven thousand dollars ($7,000) to Ira Jones, owner and operator of
       a Citizens Band (CB) radio station in Merced, California, for
       willfully and repeatedly violating 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 an inspection of
       his CB radio station by an authorized FCC representative. The noted
       violations involved Mr. Jones' refusal to allow an inspection of his
       CB radio station despite multiple requests.

   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 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 Mr. Jones'
       residence in Merced, California. The San Francisco agents monitored
       frequency 27.165 MHz again on March 26, 2010, and located the
       interference to a CB radio station operating from Mr. Jones's
       residence in Merced, California.  Later the same day, the agents
       approached Mr. Jones' residence, knocked on his door, identified
       themselves as agents of the FCC and presented their official badges
       and credentials. The individual answering the door identified himself
       as Mr. Jones. The agents told him about the radio frequency
       interference complaint and asked him if he was the owner or operator
       of the CB radio station. Mr. 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. Mr. Jones denied the agents' request. The agents
       warned Mr. 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. Mr. Jones again denied the request and asserted that the
       FCC must have a search warrant to inspect his CB station. The agents
       advised Mr. 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.

    3. Prior to leaving the premises, the agents issued an on-scene Notice of
       Unlicensed Operation to Mr. Jones.  The First Notice expressly warned
       that Mr. 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). Mr. 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 Mr. Jones describe the agents' attempted
       inspection.

    4. On August 27, 2010, in response to a subsequent complaint from the
       Merced County Fire Department that the interference to its radio
       communication equipment had resumed, San Francisco agents again
       monitored frequency 27.165 MHz and located the source of the
       interfering signal to a CB radio station operating from Mr. Jones's
       residence in Merced, California. Later the same day, the agents, along
       with two Merced City police officers, approached Mr. Jones at his
       front yard, identified themselves as FCC agents, and presented their
       official badges and credentials. The two Merced City police officers
       identified the man as Mr. Jones. The agents told Mr. 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. Mr. Jones denied the request. Mr. 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. The agents explained to Mr. Jones that refusal to allow an
       inspection could result in a $7,000 forfeiture assessment, and Mr.
       Jones said that he understood. After further conversation with the
       agents and the police officers, Mr. 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 Mr.
       Jones's refusal to allow an inspection of a CB radio station was a
       violation of Section 95.426(a) of the Rules and Section 303(n) of the
       Act and subject to a forfeiture. Mr. Jones again denied the inspection
       request. The agents then gave Mr. Jones an oral warning and issued a
       second on-scene Notice of Unlicensed Operation to him.  Mr. Jones
       again 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.

    5. On March 10, 2011, the San Francisco Office issued a Notice of
       Apparent Liability for Forfeiture (NAL) in the amount of $7,000 to Mr.
       Jones for failing to allow authorized FCC personnel to inspect his CB
       radio station. Mr. Jones responded to the NAL on March 30, 2011. In
       his Response, Mr. Jones argues that he has not seen the complaints
       that alleged the interference, that he did not receive the described
       warnings from the San Francisco agents, and that the agents did not
       produce valid identification cards.

   III. DISCUSSION

    6. The proposed forfeiture amount in this case was assessed in accordance
       with Section 503(b) of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended
       (Act), Section 1.80 of the Rules, and the Commission's Forfeiture
       Policy Statement. In examining Mr. Jones' 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. We consider Mr. Jones' response to the NAL in light of these
       statutory factors and find that no reduction of the forfeiture is
       warranted.

    7. 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."

    8. On March 26, 2010 and August 27, 2010, San Francisco Office agents
       located the source of the signal on 27.165 MHz to Mr. Jones's
       residence in Merced, California. On both dates, in an effort to
       determine the cause of and resolve the reported interference created
       to the Merced County Fire Department radio communication equipment,
       the agents requested an inspection of Mr. Jones's CB radio station. As
       described above, Mr. Jones denied both requests, despite the fact that
       at both inspections the San Francisco agents explained the relevant
       FCC requirements and provided him verbal and written on-scene warnings
       of the consequences of refusing to allow an inspection of a radio
       station.

    9. Mr. Jones argues that he should not be subject to forfeiture because
       he has not seen a complaint from the Merced Fire department naming him
       as the source of the interference on frequency 27.165 MHz. This
       argument is irrelevant to the investigation of Mr. Jones' violation of
       the Commission's requirement that he make his CB station available to
       FCC representatives for inspection. Neither Section 303(n) of the Act
       nor Section 95.426(c) of the Rules requires that a complaint be filed
       as a prerequisite for FCC representatives to inspect a CB station.
       There is no question that Mr. Jones' CB equipment was the source of
       the complained-about interference. The agents used direction finding
       techniques to determine that the source of the signal associated with
       the interference to the Merced County Fire Department came from Mr.
       Jones' residence. Mr. Jones does not dispute that the San Francisco
       agents located the source of the interference to his house on three
       separate occasions.

   10. Mr. Jones also alleges that the agents neither presented appropriate
       identification and nor gave him oral or written warnings. We find Mr.
       Jones' allegations unpersuasive. As discussed above, consistent with
       practice, the San Francisco agents approached Mr. Jones' house,
       presented their government-issued identification to him, and requested
       to conduct an inspection to determine if Mr. Jones' CB radio equipment
       was the source of the interference on frequency 27.165 MHz. With
       respect to whether Mr. Jones received any warnings, the Response
       itself includes copies of the two Notices left by the agents. Both
       Notices clearly state "agents of the Federal Communications Commission
       ("FCC") noted the following condition regarding the Citizen Band (CB)
       radio station located at [Mr. Jones' address]: Your refusal to allow a
       inspection of your radio equipment in violation of Section 303(n) of
       the Communications Act of 1934, as amended . . . . You are hereby
       warned that . . . refusal to allow inspection of your radio station
       constitutes violation of the Federal laws cited above and could
       subject the owner of this illegal operation to the severe penalties
       provide, including, but not limited to, substantial civil forfeitures,
       a maximum criminal fine of $11,000 and/or one year imprisonment, or
       arrest of the equipment for the first offense."

   11. Finally, Mr. Jones also appears to allege that when the San Francisco
       agents requested an inspection on August 27, 2010 with two Merced City
       police officers, one of the police officers suggested that a warrant
       may be necessary. Mr. Jones provides no information to support this
       claim and we reiterate what the San Francisco Office stated in the
       NAL: Commission agents are not required to obtain a warrant prior to
       conducting a radio station inspection. Accordingly, as a result of our
       review of Mr. Jones' Response, pursuant to the statutory factors
       above, and in conjunction with the Forfeiture Policy Statement, we
       conclude that he willfully and repeatedly violated Section 303(n) of
       the Act and Section 95.426(a) of the Rules, and we find that a
       forfeiture in the amount of $7,000 is warranted.

   IV. ORDERING CLAUSES

   12. ACCORDINGLY, IT IS ORDERED that, pursuant to Section 503(b) of the
       Communications Act of 1934, as amended, and Sections 0.111, 0.204,
       0.311, 0.314, and 1.80(f)(4) of the Commission's Rules, Ira Jones IS
       LIABLE FOR A MONETARY FORFEITURE in the amount of seven thousand
       dollars ($7,000) for willfully and repeatedly violating Section 303(n)
       of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended, and Section 95.426(a)
       of the Commission's rules.

   13. Payment of the forfeiture shall be made in the manner provided for in
       Section 1.80 of the Rules within thirty (30) calendar days after the
       release date of this Forfeiture Order.  If the forfeiture is not paid
       within the period specified, the case may be referred to the U.S.
       Department of Justice for enforcement of the forfeiture pursuant to
       Section 504(a) of the Act.  Ira Jones shall send electronic
       notification of payment to WR-Response@fcc.gov on the date said
       payment is made.

   14. The payment must be made by check or similar instrument, wire
       transfer, or credit card, and must include the NAL/Account number and
       FRN referenced above. Regardless of the form of payment, a completed
       FCC Form 159 (Remittance Advice) must be submitted. When completing
       the FCC Form 159, enter the Account Number in block number 23A (call
       sign/other ID) and enter the letters "FORF" in block number 24A
       (payment type code).   Below are additional instructions you should
       follow based on the form of payment you select:

     * Payment by check or money order must be made payable to the order of
       the Federal Communications Commission.  Such payments (along with the
       completed Form 159) must be mailed to Federal Communications
       Commission, P.O. Box 979088, St. Louis, MO 63197-9000, or sent
       via overnight mail to U.S. Bank - Government Lockbox #979088,
       SL-MO-C2-GL, 1005 Convention Plaza, St. Louis, MO 63101. 

     * Payment by wire transfer must be made to ABA Number 021030004,
       receiving bank TREAS/NYC, and Account Number 27000001.  To complete
       the wire transfer and ensure appropriate crediting of the wired funds,
       a completed Form 159 must be faxed to U.S. Bank at (314) 418-4232 on
       the same business day the wire transfer is initiated. 

     * Payment by credit card must be made by providing the required credit
       card information on FCC Form 159 and signing and dating the Form 159
       to authorize the credit card payment. The completed Form 159 must then
       be mailed to Federal Communications Commission, P.O. Box 979088, St.
       Louis, MO 63197-9000, or sent via overnight mail to U.S. Bank -
       Government Lockbox #979088, SL-MO-C2-GL, 1005 Convention Plaza, St.
       Louis, MO 63101. 

   15. Any request for full payment under an installment plan should be sent
       to:  Chief Financial Officer-Financial Operations, Federal
       Communications Commission, 445 12th Street, S.W., Room 1-A625,
       Washington, D.C.  20554.  If you have questions regarding payment
       procedures, please contact the Financial Operations Group Help Desk by
       phone, 1-877-480-3201, or by e-mail, ARINQUIRIES@fcc.gov.

   16. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that a copy of this Forfeiture Order shall be
       sent by both First Class Mail and Certified Mail, Return Receipt
       Requested, to Ira Jones at his address of record.

   FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION

   Rebecca L. Dorch

   Regional Director, Western Region

   Enforcement Bureau

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

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

   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. 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).

   Ira Jones, On-Scene Notice of Unlicensed Operation (Enf. Bur. San
   Francisco Office, issued on-scene March 26, 2010) (First Notice).

   Later on March 26, 2010, the agents again monitored frequency 27.165 MHz
   and noted that Mr. 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.

   Ira Jones, On-Scene Notice of Unlicensed Operation (Enf. Bur. San
   Francisco Office, issued on-scene August 27, 2010) (Second Notice). The
   Second Notice also expressly warned that Mr. 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).

   On September 1, 2010, the San Francisco Office received another complaint
   from the Merced County Fire Department stating that Mr. 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.

   Ira Jones, Notice of Apparent Liability for Forfeiture, 26 FCC Rcd 3698
   (Enf. Bur. 2011) (NAL).

   See Response of Ira Jones (filed March 30, 2011) (Response) (on file in
   EB-10-SF-0187).

   See id. at 1-2.

   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), recons. denied, 15 FCC Rcd 303 (1999) (Forfeiture
   Policy Statement).

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

   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 First Notice at 1; Second Notice at 1.

   See Norfolk Southern Railway Company, Memorandum Opinion and Order, 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,
   Revocation Order, 72 FCC 2d 871, 878 P:13 (Rev. Board 1979) (search
   warrant is not required for an inspection of a CB radio station). See also
   NAL, 26 FCC Rcd at 3700 & n.12.

   47 U.S.C. S:S: 303(n), 503(b); 47 C.F.R. S:S: 0.111, 0.204, 0.311, 0.314,
   1.80(f)(4), 95.426(a).

   47 C.F.R. S: 1.80.

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

   An FCC Form 159 and detailed instructions for completing the form may be
   obtained at http://www.fcc.gov/Forms/Form159/159.pdf.

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

   Federal Communications Commission DA 12-1195

   1

   6

   Federal Communications Commission DA 12-1195