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-11-SE-109
Union Oil Company of California, ) NAL/Acct. No.: 201332100002
a subsidiary of Chevron Corporation ) FRN: 0001535541
)
NOTICE OF APPARENT LIABILITY FOR FORFEITURE
Adopted: November 2, 2012 Released: November 2, 2012
By the Commission: Commissioner Pai approving in part and concurring in
part.
I. introduction
1. In this Notice of Apparent Liability for Forfeiture, we find Union Oil
Company of California (UOCC), former licensee of Private Land Mobile
Radio Service (PLMRS) station WPHA630, Nikiski, Alaska, and
Aeronautical and Fixed Advisory (UNICOM) station WAL7, Cook Inlet,
Alaska, apparently liable for a forfeiture in the amount of ninety-six
thousand two hundred dollars ($96,200) for its apparent willful and
repeated violation of Section 301 of the Communications Act of 1934,
as amended (Act), Section 1.903(a) of the Commission's rules (Rules),
and the associated Commission orders requiring licensees to seek
authority for any continued operations after license expiration. The
apparent violations involve UOCC's operation of PLMRS station WPHA630
and UNICOM station WAL7 without the necessary Commission authority for
more than six and eight years, respectively, as well as UOCC's
associated failure to timely file applications for authority to
continue operation of the stations.
II. background
2. UOCC engages in oil and gas exploration and production activities in
Alaska's Cook Inlet Basin. UOCC is an indirect, wholly-owned
subsidiary of Chevron Corporation (Chevron), a global energy company
with substantial business activities in more than 30 countries. On
August 15, 2000, UOCC was granted a license to operate PLMRS station
WPHA630 for five years through August 15, 2005. On May 23, 2005, the
Commission's Wireless Telecommunications Bureau (Wireless Bureau) sent
UOCC a courtesy "renewal reminder" notice for station WPHA630,
alerting UOCC that it was required to file a renewal application for
the station prior to the expiration of the station's license if it
planned to continue operation. UOCC failed to file a renewal
application for station WPHA630 prior to the license expiration date.
3. On January 21, 1999, UOCC was granted a license to operate UNICOM
station WAL7 for five years through January 21, 2004. On October 27,
2003, the Wireless Bureau sent UOCC a courtesy "renewal reminder"
notice for station WAL7, alerting UOCC that it was required to file a
renewal application for the station prior to the expiration of the
station's license if it planned to continue operation. UOCC also
failed to file a renewal application for station WAL7 prior to the
license expiration date.
4. In the absence of timely filed renewal applications, UOCC's licenses
for stations WPHA630 and WAL7 automatically terminated on their
respective expiration dates. On November 3, 2011, more than six years
after the license for WPHA630 expired and nearly eight years after the
license for WAL7 expired, UOCC filed with the Wireless Bureau requests
for Special Temporary Authority (STA), stating that the licenses for
stations WPHA630 and WAL7 "were inadvertently permitted to expire" and
that the STAs were necessary to "permit the prompt restoration of
authority to operate these internal communications systems." On
November 4, 2011, the Wireless Bureau granted the STA for station
WPHA630 until May 2, 2012 under call sign WQOL356. On November 7,
2011, the Wireless Bureau granted the STA for station WAL7 until May
5, 2012 under call sign WQOL455.
5. Because it appeared that UOCC operated stations WPHA630 and WAL7 after
the expiration of their station licenses, the Wireless Bureau referred
this matter to the Enforcement Bureau (Bureau) for investigation and
possible enforcement action. On March 28, 2012, the Bureau's Spectrum
Enforcement Division issued a letter of inquiry (LOI) to UOCC,
directing the company to submit a sworn written response to a series
of questions relating to its failure to file applications for renewal
of the WPHA630 and WAL7 licenses and its unauthorized operation of the
stations. UOCC responded to the LOI on June 8, 2012. In its LOI
Response, UOCC admits that it continued to operate stations WPHA630
and WAL7 after the expiration date of the station licenses. According
to UOCC, Chevron personnel discovered the expired licenses on
September 27, 2011, during the course of due diligence performed in
connection with the sale of UOCC assets in Alaska. UOCC explains that
the license for station WPHA630 expired five days after Chevron's
August 10, 2005 acquisition of UOCC, at a time when UOCC was
transitioning responsibility for the management of the company's FCC
licensing to a new individual. UOCC asserts that the license for
station WAL7 expired 18 months prior to Chevron's acquisition of UOCC
and consequently was not added to Chevron's internal FCC license
tracking database.
III. discussion
6. 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 radio except under, and in accordance
with, a Commission-granted authorization. Licensees who want to
operate after the expiration of their licenses must affirmatively
request continued operating authority from the Commission. The
Universal Licensing System Orders mandate the filing of certain
applications to obtain such authority.
7. As a Commission licensee, UOCC was required to maintain its
authorizations in order to continue to operate stations WPHA630 and
WAL7. UOCC admitted that it failed to renew its license for station
WPHA630, and that it continued to operate the station without
Commission authority for more than six years, from August 15, 2005,
when the license expired, until November 4, 2011, when its request for
STA was granted. UOCC also admitted that it failed to renew its
license for station WAL7, and that it continued to operate the station
for nearly eight years, from January 21, 2004, when the license
expired, until November 7, 2011, when its request for STA was granted.
In addition, prior to seeking its STAs, UOCC failed to file any other
application for authority to continue operations. By operating
stations WPHA630 and WAL7 after the licenses had expired, UOCC
apparently violated Section 301 of the Act and Section 1.903(a) of the
Rules, and by failing to seek Commission authority for its continued
operation of stations WPHA630 and WAL7, UOCC apparently violated the
Universal Licensing System Orders and associated rules.
8. Section 503(b)(1)(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 Rules,
and "repeated" means more than once or for more than one day. Based on
the record before us, UOCC's apparent violations of Section 301 of the
Act, Section 1.903(a) of the Rules, and the Universal Licensing System
Orders and associated rules are both 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." Section 1.80(b) of the Rules sets a base forfeiture amount
of $10,000 for operation of a station without Commission authority and
a base forfeiture amount of $3,000 for failure to file required forms
or information. The Commission has held that a licensee's continued
operation without authorization and its failure to timely seek
Commission authority for such operations constitute separate
violations and warrant the assessment of separate forfeitures. We note
that UOCC failed to file either a timely renewal or any other
application seeking operating authority. Accordingly, we herein
propose separate base forfeiture amounts for UOCC's violations-$10,000
each for UOCC's continued operation of stations WPHA630 and WAL7
without Commission authority, and $3,000 each for UOCC's failure to
seek Commission authority for stations WPHA630 and WAL7, for a total
base forfeiture of $26,000.
10. Given the totality of the circumstances, and consistent with the
Forfeiture Policy Statement, we conclude that a significant upward
adjustment of the base forfeiture is warranted. In this regard, we
recognize that Chevron-UOCC's parent company-is a multi-billion
dollar, global enterprise, and 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
Chevron should expect the assessment of higher forfeitures for
violations. We are also particularly mindful that UOCC's apparent
unlawful operation continued for an extended period of time-six years
in one case and nearly eight years in the other. In fact, for each
station, the period of unauthorized operation exceeded the length of
the station's initial license term. Consistent with Section 301 of
the Act, licensees who find themselves out of compliance with the
licensing requirements should immediately cease unauthorized operation
or seek temporary operating authority.
11. We also decline to downward adjust the forfeiture on the grounds that
the violations resulted from a lack of knowledge of the expired
licenses or a change in personnel. As the Commission has emphasized,
"[a]ll licensees are responsible for knowing the terms of their
licenses and for filing a timely renewal application if they seek to
operate beyond that term." In the absence of a timely renewal
application, the Commission has clarified that some request for
operating authority must be filed, noting that its "treatment of
late-filed renewal applications should take into consideration the
complete facts and circumstances involved." It is also well
established that administrative oversight or inadvertence is not a
mitigating factor. UOCC and Chevron are sophisticated licensees who,
by their own admission, were well aware of the fundamental licensing
requirements imposed by Section 301 of the Act. Any initial transition
issues related to Chevron's 2005 acquisition of UOCC do not explain
the subsequent six- and eight-year periods of unauthorized operation.
In addition, notwithstanding the significant resources at its
disposal, UOCC took more than five weeks (after discovery of the
expired licenses) to seek temporary authority to operate the stations,
during which time the apparent unlawful operation continued. This
additional period of noncompliance followed two license renewal
reminders several years earlier and a specific inquiry from UOCC's
parent company about the expired licenses, all of which should have
highlighted the need for immediate action. Based on all the factors
and evidence, including the extended duration of the violations and
UUOC's ability to pay, we propose an aggregate forfeiture of $96,200.
IV. ordering clauses
12. 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, Union Oil Company of
California IS hereby NOTIFIED of its APPARENT LIABILITY FOR A
FORFEITURE in the amount of ninety-six thousand two dollars ($96,200)
for willful and repeated violation of Section 301 of the Act, Section
1.903(a) of the Rules, and the Universal Licensing System Orders and
associated rules.
13. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that, pursuant to Section 1.80 of the Rules,
within thirty (30) calendar days of the release date of this Notice of
Apparent Liability for Forfeiture, Union Oil Company of California
SHALL PAY the full amount of the proposed forfeiture or SHALL FILE a
written statement seeking reduction or cancellation of the proposed
forfeiture consistent with paragraph 14 below.
14. Payment of the forfeiture must be made by check or similar instrument,
wire transfer, or credit card, and must include the NAL/Account number
and FRN referenced above. Union Oil Company of California shall send
electronic notification of payment to Josh Zeldis and Ricardo Durham
at Josh.Zeldis@fcc.gov and Ricardo.Durham@fcc.gov on the date said
payment is made. 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, SW, Room 1-A625,
Washington, DC 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. 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 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/Account Number referenced in the caption. The statement must
also be emailed to Josh Zeldis at Josh.Zeldis@fcc.gov and to Ricardo
Durham at Ricardo.Durham@fcc.gov. 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.
17. 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 Jack Richards, Esq., Counsel for Union Oil
Company of California, Keller and Heckman LLP, 1001 G Street, NW,
Suite 500 West, Washington, DC 20001.
FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION
Marlene H. Dortch
Secretary
47 U.S.C. S: 301.
47 C.F.R. S: 1.903(a).
See Biennial Regulatory Review - Amendment of Parts 0, 1, 13, 22, 24, 26,
27, 80, 87, 90, 95, 97, and 101 of the Commission's Rules to Facilitate
the Development and Use of the Universal Licensing System in the Wireless
Telecommunications Services, 13 FCC Rcd 21027, 21071, para. 96 (1998)
(Universal Licensing System Report and Order) (adopting inter alia Section
1.949 of the Rules); Memorandum Opinion and Order on Reconsideration, 14
FCC Rcd 11476, 11485-86, para. 22 (1999) (Universal Licensing System MO&O)
(collectively, Universal Licensing System Orders).
See Chevron Corporation (2012), Quarterly Report (Form 10-Q), at 23 (Aug.
2, 2012).
See Industrial/Business Pool, Conventional License - WPHA630 - Union Oil
Company of California,
https://wireless2.fcc.gov/UlsApp/UlsSearch/license.jsp?licKey=1784028.
See Automated Renewal Reminder Letter from the FCC Wireless
Telecommunications Bureau, to Union Oil Company of California, Reference
No. 3516315 (May 23, 2005).
See https://wireless2.fcc.gov/UlsApp/UlsSearch/license.jsp?licKey=1973906.
See Automated Renewal Reminder Letter from the FCC Wireless
Telecommunications Bureau, to Union Oil Company of California, Reference
No. 2366620 (Oct. 27, 2003).
See 47 C.F.R. S: 1.955(a)(1) (stating that "[a]uthorizations automatically
terminate, without specific Commission action, on the expiration date
specified therein, unless a timely application for renewal is filed.").
See File Nos. 0004938962 (WPHA630), 0004938974 (WAL7).
See File No. 0004938962. The Wireless Bureau granted the STA without
prejudice to any enforcement action related to the unauthorized operation
of station WPHA630. See id. On November 7, 2011, UOCC filed an application
for a new PLMRS station license, which was granted on January 27, 2012,
under call sign WQOT721. See File No. 0004940929.
See File No. 0004938974. The Wireless Bureau granted the STA without
prejudice to any enforcement action related to the unauthorized operation
of station WAL7. See id. On November 17, 2011, UOCC filed an application
for a new UNICOM station license, which was granted on January 10, 2012,
under call sign WQOR719. See File No. 0004958393.
See Letter from John D. Poutasse, Chief, Spectrum Enforcement Division,
FCC Enforcement Bureau, to Jack Richards, Esq., Counsel for Union Oil
Company of California (Mar. 28, 2012) (on file in EB-11-SE-109).
See Letter from Jack Richards, Esq., Counsel for Union Oil Company of
California, to Susan German, Spectrum Enforcement Division, FCC
Enforcement Bureau (June 8, 2012) (on file in EB-11-SE-109) (LOI
Response). UOCC was granted extensions of time to respond to the LOI. See
e-mail from John D. Poutasse, Chief, Spectrum Enforcement Division, FCC
Enforcement Bureau, to Jack B. Richards, Counsel for Union Oil Company of
California (Apr. 27, 2012, 4:49 EDT) (on file in EB-11-SE-109); e-mail
from John D. Poutasse, Chief, Spectrum Enforcement Division, FCC
Enforcement Bureau, to Jack B. Richards, Counsel for Union Oil Company of
California (May 11, 2012, 4:42 EDT) (on file in EB-11-SE-109).
See LOI Response at 2, 4, 5.
Id. at 2, 4. UOCC states that Chevron screens for potentially affected FCC
licenses as part of its due diligence procedures for mergers,
acquisitions, and divestments. Id. at 5-6. According to UOCC, after
Chevron's discovery of the expired licenses, Chevron alerted UOCC
operational staff in Alaska, who confirmed the unauthorized operation to
Chevron on or about October 10, 2011. Id. at 2-4.
Id. at 3.
Id. at 5. According to UOCC, following Chevron's acquisition of UOCC,
Chevron engineered and developed an internal FCC license database that
integrates data from the Wireless Bureau's ULS database with Chevron's
internal license information. Id. (also claiming that some of the
company's FCC license files may have been erroneously purged or lost in
connection with an office relocation in 2002). Id. at 3, 4.
47 U.S.C. S: 301; 47 C.F.R. S: 1.903(a).
Specifically, Section 1.949(a) of the Rules requires that licensees
wishing to continue operations 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."
47 C.F.R. S: 1.949(a). If a licensee intending continued operations fails
to file a timely renewal application, the Commission nevertheless requires
such licensee to seek operating authority. See Universal Licensing System
Report and Order, 13 FCC Rcd at 21071, para. 98 (directing licensees that
fail to file timely renewal applications to submit a new application or,
if necessary, a request for special temporary operating authority);
Universal Licensing System MO&O, 14 FCC Rcd at 11485-86, para. 22
(permitting, in the alternative, the acceptance and processing of late
filed renewal applications under certain circumstances). In the Universal
Licensing System MO&O, the Commission expressly held that it could
"initiate enforcement action against the licensee both for untimely filing
and unauthorized operation between the expiration of the license and the
late renewal filing, including, if appropriate, the imposition of fines or
forfeitures for these rule violations." Id.
As noted above, the Universal Licensing System Orders and Commission
precedent make clear that if a licensee continues to operate, it has an
ongoing duty to seek Commission authority for such operations. See supra
note 20; see also Discussion Radio, Inc., Memorandum Opinion and Order
and Notice of Apparent Liability for Forfeiture, 19 FCC Rcd 7433 (2004).
See also Telrite, 23 FCC Rcd 7231, 7244, para. 30 (2008); Compass Global,
Inc., Notice of Apparent Liability for Forfeiture, 23 FCC Rcd 6125, 6138,
para. 29 (2008); VCI Company, Notice of Apparent Liability for Forfeiture
and Order, 22 FCC Rcd 15933, 15940, para. 20 (2007). We note that a
failure to seek timely operating authority inhibits the Commission's
ability to fulfill its statutory obligations under Sections 301
(maintaining control of radio transmission and use of such channels for
limited periods of time), 303 (assigning frequencies), and 307 of the Act
(ensuring the fair, efficient and equitable distribution of radio
service).
47 U.S.C. S: 503(b)(1)(B).
47 C.F.R. S: 1.80(a).
See 47 U.S.C. S: 312(f)(1), (2). See also Southern California Broad. Co.,
Memorandum Opinion and Order, 6 FCC Rcd 4387-88, para. 5 (1991), recon.
denied, 7 FCC Rcd 3454 (1992) (Southern California) (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)(6), Note to
paragraph (b)(6): Guidelines for Assessing Forfeitures; Forfeiture Policy
Statement, Report and Order, 12 FCC Rcd 17087, 17100, para. 27 (1997),
recon. denied, 15 FCC Rcd 303 (1999) (Forfeiture Policy Statement).
47 C.F.R. S: 1.80(b). See also Forfeiture Policy Statement, 12 FCC Rcd at
17098-99, para. 22 (noting that "[a]lthough we have adopted the base
forfeiture amounts as guidelines to provide a measure of predictability to
the forfeiture process, we retain our discretion to depart from the
guidelines and issue forfeitures on a case-by-case basis, under our
general forfeiture authority contained in Section 503 of the Act").
See Discussion Radio, 19 FCC Rcd at 7438, para. 15.
Chevron-one of the world's six major oil companies-is a U.S. multinational
energy corporation and does business worldwide. Chevron's 2011 annual
report filed with the Security and Exchange Commission reported gross
revenues of $244.4 billion. See Chevron Corporation (2012), Annual Report,
at 2 (Feb. 23, 2012).
It is well-established Commission policy to consider the revenues of a
violator's parent company. See, e.g. SM Radio, Inc., Order on Review, 23
FCC Rcd 2429, 2433, para. 12 (2008) (citations omitted); Tesla
Exploration, Inc., Notice of Apparent Liability for Forfeiture, 27 FCC Rcd
9808, 9811, para. 10 & n.20 (2012). See also Forfeiture Policy Statement,
12 FCC Rcd at 17099-100, paras. 23-24 (cautioning all entities and
individuals that, independent from the uniform base forfeiture amounts,
the Commission will take into account the subject violator's ability to
pay in determining the amount of a forfeiture to guarantee that
forfeitures issued against large or highly profitable entities are not
considered merely an affordable cost of doing business, and noting that
such large or highly profitable entities should expect that the forfeiture
amount set out in a Notice of Apparent Liability against them may in many
cases be above, or even well above, the relevant base amount). See also
America Movil, S.A.B. de C.V., Parent of Puerto Rico Telephone Company,
Inc., Notice of Apparent Liability for Forfeiture, 26 FCC Rcd 8672 (Enf.
Bur. 2011) (doubling the base forfeiture due to the company's size and
gross revenues); Fox Television Stations Inc., Notice of Apparent
Liability for Forfeiture, 25 FCC Rcd 7074 (Enf. Bur. 2010) (upwardly
adjusting the base forfeiture based on the egregiousness of the violation
and the company's substantial revenues); Google Inc., Notice of Apparent
Liability for Forfeiture, 27 FCC Rcd 4012 (Enf. Bur. 2012) (upwardly
adjusting the base forfeiture due to the deliberate nature of the
violation and the company's gross revenues).
Specifically, UOCC operated station WPHA630 without authority for more
than six years-from August 15, 2005, the date that the license expired,
until November 4, 2011, the date that UOCC's STA for station WPHA630 was
granted. The apparent unauthorized operation of station WAL7 continued for
nearly eight years, from January 21, 2004, the date that the license
expired, until November 7, 2011, the date that UOCC's STA for station WAL7
was granted.
In the past, the Bureau on delegated authority has upwardly adjusted the
base forfeiture in cases where the unauthorized operation continued for an
extended period of time, in order to avoid creating perverse incentives
and to encourage PLMRS and other licensees to monitor their license
expiration dates and to timely seek renewal or otherwise take appropriate
steps to quickly come into compliance with FCC rules. See Emigrant
Storage, 27 FCC Rcd 8917, 8920-21, para. 9 (more than nine years of
unauthorized operation); BASF Corporation at 17303-04, para. 11 (five
years of unauthorized operation); Shubat Transportation at 3786, para. 13
(six years of unauthorized operation); Call Mobile, Notice of Apparent
Liability for Forfeiture, 26 FCC Rcd 74, 77, para. 12 (Enf. Bur. 2011)
(response pending) (Call Mobile) (two and one-half years of unauthorized
operation).
While Section 503(b)(6) of the Act generally bars the Commission from
proposing a forfeiture for violations that occurred more than a year prior
to the issuance of an NAL, we may consider the fact that UOCC's misconduct
occurred over an extended period (during the more than six year period
between 2004 and 2011) to place "the violations in context, thus
establishing the licensee's degree of culpability and the continuing
nature of the violations." Roadrunner Transportation Inc., Forfeiture
Order, 15 FCC Rcd 9669, 9671-72, para. 8 (2000); see also BASF
Corporation, 25 FCC Rcd at 17302, para 9; Call Mobile, 26 FCC Rcd at 76,
para 10. The apparent unlawful operation in this case continued from April
15, 2005 (the WPHA630 license expiration date) through November 7, 2011
(the date of the STA grant) and from January 21, 2004 (the WAL7 license
expiration date) through November 17, 2011 (the date of the STA grant).
Therefore, the forfeiture amount we propose herein relates to UOCC's
apparent continuing violations that ceased during the past year.
See LOI Response at 2-3, 4 (stating that Chevron was not aware that UOCC
had continued operating stations WPHA630 and WAL7 until such operations
were confirmed by UOCC on or about October 10, 2011).
Universal Licensing Report and Order, 13 FCC Rcd at 21071, para 96; see 47
C.F.R. S: 1.949(a). See also Emigrant Storage, 27 FCC Rcd at 8920-21,
para. 9 (claiming that it failed to renew the license for PLMRS station
WPKM212 and stating that the violation resulted from oversight and a
change in personnel); Profit Enterprises, Inc., Forfeiture Order, 8 FCC
Rcd 2846, 2846, para. 5 (1993) (denying the mitigation claim of a
manufacturer/distributor who thought that the equipment certification and
marketing requirements were inapplicable, stating that its "prior
knowledge or understanding of the law is unnecessary to a determination of
whether a violation existed ... ignorance of the law [is not] a mitigating
factor"); Lakewood Broad. Serv., Inc., Memorandum Opinion and Order, 37
FCC 2d 437, 438, para. 6 (1972) (denying a mitigation claim of a broadcast
licensee who asserted an unfamiliarity with the station identification
requirements, stating that licensees are expected "to know and conform
their conduct to the requirements of our Rules"); Kenneth Paul Harris,
Sr., Notice of Apparent Liability for Forfeiture, 15 FCC Rcd 12933,
12935-36, para. 7 (Enf. Bur. 2000) (denying a mitigation claim of a
broadcast licensee, stating that its ignorance of the law did not excuse
the unauthorized transfer of the station); Maxwell Broad. Group, Inc.,
Memorandum Opinion and Order, 8 FCC Rcd 784, 784, para. 2 (Mass Med. Bur.
1993) (denying a mitigation claim of a noncommercial broadcast licensee,
stating that the excuse of "inadverten[ce], due to inexperience and
ignorance of the rules ... are not reasons to mitigate a forfeiture" for
violation of the advertisement restrictions).
See Universal Licensing System MO&O, 14 FCC Rcd at 11485, para 22.
See Southern California, 6 FCC Rcd at 4387, para. 3 (stating that
"`inadvertence' ... is at best, ignorance of the law, which the Commission
does not consider a mitigating circumstance").
See 47 U.S.C. S: 301.
47 U.S.C. S: 503(b).
47 C.F.R. S:S: 0.111, 0.311, 1.80.
47 U.S.C. S: 301.
47 C.F.R. S: 1.903(a).
See supra note 3.
Id. S: 1.80.
An FCC Form 159 and detailed instructions for completing the form may be
obtained at http://www.fcc.gov/Forms/Form159/159.pdf.
47 C.F.R. S:S: 1.80(f)(3), 1.16.
(...continued from previous page)
(continued....)
Federal Communications Commission FCC 12-136
8
Federal Communications Commission FCC 12-136