******************************************************** NOTICE ******************************************************** This document was converted from WordPerfect to ASCII Text format. 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 WordPerfect version or Adobe Acrobat version, if available. ***************************************************************** Before the Federal Communications Commission Washington, D.C. 20554 ) ) In the Matter of ) ) Domingo Del Valle ) NAL/Acct. No. 815TP0006 Tampa, Florida 33619 ) ) FORFEITURE ORDER Adopted: February 18, 1999 Released: February 19, 1999 By the Director, Legal Services Group, Compliance and Information Bureau: 1. Before the Compliance and Information Bureau ("the Bureau") is a Notice of Apparent Liability ("NAL"), issued on August 26, 1998, to Domingo Del Valle of Tampa, Florida, and the September 3, 1998, response thereto filed by Mr. Del Valle. The NAL proposed imposition of a forfeiture against Mr. Del Valle in the amount of $6,000 pursuant to Section 503(b) of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended ("the Act"), 47 U.S.C.  503(b), and Section 1.80 of the Commission's Rules ("the Rules"), 47 C.F.R.  1.80, for willful violation of Section 301 of the Act, 47 U.S.C.  301. For the reasons stated below, we affirm the monetary forfeiture issued in the amount of $6,000. BACKGROUND 2. On August 2, 1998, FCC agents from the Bureau's Tampa, Florida Field Office were investigating unlicensed signals on the frequency of 102.1 MHz. The agents used close-in direction finding techniques to trace the signals to church facilities located at 3402 Maydell Drive, Tampa, Florida 33619. The agents inspected the station and were met by Mr. Del Valle, the owner of the station. Mr. Del Valle was unable to produce any type of FCC authorization and admitted that he had been operating the unlicensed station for the previous two months. Mr. Del Valle also informed the agents that he had purchased the transmitter from an individual who had told him that he would receive a warning for his unlicensed operation before having to shut down the station. Measurements taken by the agents determined that the output power of the transmitter measured 90 watts. On August 26, 1998, the District Director of the Tampa Office issued the subject NAL to Mr. Del Valle in the amount of $6,000 for the willful violation of the provisions of Section 301 of the Act which prohibit unlicensed operation. DISCUSSION 3. A written response to the NAL, dated September 3, 1998, was received by the Bureau on September 8, 1998. In the response Mr. Del Valle states that he was operating an unlicensed radio station on 102.1 MHz, but that he had no intention "of violating any rule or regulation." Furthermore, Mr. Del Valle states that he immediately ceased all operation of the station after the August 2, 1998 visit by the agents of the Tampa Field Office. However, at the time of the inspection, Mr. Del Valle informed the agents that he expected to receive a letter from the FCC before he would have to cease operation of the unlicensed station. 4. It is clear from Mr. Del Valle's unlicensed operation during the two month period prior to the inspection, that his continued violation of Section 301 of the Act was willful because the violation was not caused by accident or mistake. Moreover, when examining Mr. Del Valle's violation in conjunction with his statement that he had planned to continue operation of the station until he received a warning letter from the FCC, arguably we could also conclude that he knowingly violated the provisions of Section 301 of the Act as well. See 47 U.S.C.  501 and 502. Based on the above, it is clear that Mr. Del Valle did, in fact, intend to violate an FCC "rule or regulation" for as long as he could until the Commission became aware of his unlicensed operation and sent him a warning letter. The fact that Mr. Del Valle ceased operation after the inspection is commendable, however, such remedial action correcting a violation within itself does not nullify a forfeiture penalty. See KGVL, Inc., 42 FCC 2d 258, 259 (1993). 5. The Tampa Field Office issued the forfeiture pursuant to Section 503 of the Act and Section 1.80 of the Rules. In assessing the forfeiture amount, the Tampa Field Office followed the forfeiture standards established in Section 503 of the Act and The Commission's Forfeiture Policy Statement and Amendment of Section 1.80 of the Rules to Incorporate Guidelines, 12 FCC Rcd 17087 (1997), recon. pending ("Policy Statement"). 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. 47 U.S.C. 503(b)(2)(D). Applying the Policy Statement and statutory factors to the instant case, as well as the factors examined above, we affirm the forfeiture amount of $6,000. 6. ACCORDINGLY, IT IS ORDERED that, pursuant to Section 503(b) of the Act and Section 1.80 of the Rules, Domingo Del Valle IS LIABLE FOR A MONETARY FORFEITURE in the amount of $6,000 for willful violation of Section 301 of the Act. 7. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that, pursuant to Section 1.80(f) of the Rules, 47 C.F.R.  1.80(f), Domingo Del Valle shall, within thirty (30) days of the release of this Forfeiture Order, pay the amount of six thousand dollars ($6,000). Forfeitures shall be paid by check, money order or credit card, with the appropriate documentation, made payable to the Federal Communications Commission. The remittance should be marked NAL/Acct. No. 815TP0006, and mailed to the following address: Federal Communications Commission Post Office Box 73482 Chicago, IL 60673-7482 Petitions for reconsideration pursuant to Section 1.106 of the Rules, 47 C.F.R. 1.106, or applications for review pursuant to Section 1.115 of the Rules, 47 C.F.R. 1.115, should be sent to: Office of the Secretary Federal Communications Commission 445 12th Street, S.W. Washington, D.C. 20554 ATTN: Mail Stop 1500E3-SLC Compliance and Information Bureau Forfeiture penalties not paid within 30 days will be referred to the U.S. Attorney for recovery in a civil suit. 47 U.S.C.  504(a). 8. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that a copy of this Order shall be sent certified mail, return receipt requested, to Domingo Del Valle at 3402 Maydell Drive, Tampa, Florida 33619 FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION Ricardo M. Durham Director, Legal Services Group Compliance Division Compliance and Information Bureau