**Before the**

**Federal Communications Commission**

**Washington, D.C. 20554**

**In the Matter of** )

)

Shepler's, Inc. ) File No. EB-00-DT-801

Mackinaw City, Michigan )

) **NAL/Acct. No. 200132360002**

#  FORFEITURE ORDER

**Adopted: July 25, 2001** **Released: July 27, 2001**

By the Chief, Enforcement Bureau:

# I. Introduction

1\. In this Forfeiture Order ("Order"), we issue a monetary forfeiture
in the amount of \$2,200 to Shepler's, Inc. ("Shepler's") for violation
of the Great Lakes Agreement[^1] ("GLA") and Sections 80.953(a) and
80.953(b) the Commission's Rules[^2] ("Rules"). The noted violations
involve navigation of the vessels *Captain Shepler* and *Wyandot*
without the required annual inspection and certification of their marine
VHF radiotelephone equipment.

2\. On March 27, 2001, the Commission's Detroit, Michigan, District
Office ("Detroit Office") issued a Notice of Apparent Liability ("NAL")
in the amount of \$2,200 to Shepler's for the noted violations.[^3]
Shepler's responded to the NAL by letter dated April 2, 2001.

# II. Background

3\. The radiotelephone apparatus aboard vessels subject to the GLA must
be inspected at least once every 13 months and certified as compliant
with requirements of the GLA and the Bridge-to-Bridge Act.[^4] *See*
Article XII of the GLA and Sections 80.953(a) and 80.953(b) of the
Rules.

4\. Shepler's is the owner of the vessels *Captain Shepler* and
*Wyandot*, which carry passengers on the Great Lakes between Mackinac
Island, Michigan, and Mackinaw City, Michigan. Both vessels exceed 65
feet in length and are, therefore, subject to the GLA. *See* Article V
of the GLA and Section 80.951(a) of the Rules.

5\. On September 28, 2000, an FCC agent ("Agent") from the Detroit
Office observed the *Captain Shepler* returning from a voyage on the
Great Lakes. The Agent inspected[^5] the radiotelephone installation
aboard the *Captain Shepler* and determined that the vessel did not have
a current GLA safety certification. On the same date, the Agent
inspected the radiotelephone installation aboard the *Wyandot* and
determined that the *Wyandot* also did not have a current GLA safety
certification.

6\. On October 31, 2000, the Detroit Office issued an Official Notice of
Violation ("NOV") to Shepler's for violation of Section 80.953(b) of the
Rules. Shepler's provided, with its response to the NOV, copies of
radiotelephone logs indicating that an authorized inspector inspected
and certified the radio apparatus aboard the *Captain Shepler* and the
*Wyandot* as compliant on October 4, 2000.

7\. In March 2001, the Detroit Office requested that Shepler's furnish
copies of the *Captain Shepler*'s and the *Wyandot*'s radio station logs
from the period before September 28, 2000. Shepler's provided copies of
these logs. The logs indicate that the *Captain Shepler* was navigated
on September 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, and 24, 2000, and the *Wyandot* was
navigated on September 20, 22, and 24, 2000.

8\. In its response to the NAL issued March 27, 2001, Shepler's requests
remission of the monetary forfeiture.

# III. Discussion

9\. The Enforcement Bureau assessed the proposed forfeiture amount in
this case in accordance with Section 506(a) of the Act,[^6] Section 1.80
of the Rules,[^7] and *The Commission's Forfeiture Policy Statement and
Amendment of Section 1.80 of the Rules to Incorporate the Forfeiture
Guidelines*, 12 FCC Rcd 17087 (1997), *recon. denied*, 15 FCC Rcd 303
(1999) ("*Policy Statement*"). Section 1.80(b)(4) of the Commissions
Rules,[^8] requires that the Commission, in examining Shepler's's
response, 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.

10\. Shepler's does not deny navigating the *Captain Shepler* and the
*Wyandot* on the Great Lakes without a current GLA safety inspection and
certification. On the basis of all the information available to us, we
conclude that Shepler's navigated the *Captain Shepler* on September 18,
19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, and 28, 2000, and the *Wyandot* on September 20,
22, and 24, 2000, in the Great Lakes without the required annual
inspection and certification of their marine VHF radiotelephone
equipment, in violation of the Great Lakes Agreement and Sections
80.953(a) and 80.953(b) of the Rules.

11\. In the NAL, the Detroit Office mitigated the statutory forfeiture
amount of \$6,050 to \$2,200 on the basis of Shepler's good faith and
history of overall compliance. In its response to the NAL, Shepler's
seeks remission of the proposed \$2,200 forfeiture. Shepler's argues
that its violations resulted from an "oversight" by its newly appointed
senior captain, who believed that his predecessor had obtained GLA
certifications for Shepler's entire fleet. This circumstance does not
mitigate Shepler's violations. Navigation without a valid GLA
certification increases the risk to the safety of life and, therefore,
is a significant violation. Shepler's also argues that, in 45 years of
service, it has never before violated the Commission's Rules. However,
the forfeiture amount specified by the NAL already reflects Shepler's
history of overall compliance. Thus, Shepler's arguments do not justify
remission of the proposed forfeiture or any further mitigation. We have
examined Shepler's response to the NAL in light of the factors specified
in the *Policy Statement* and in Section 1.80(b)(4) of the Rules and we
conclude that \$2,200 is the proper forfeiture amount.

## IV. Ordering Clauses

12\. **ACCORDINGLY,** **IT IS ORDERED THAT**, pursuant to Section 506(a)
of the Act,[^9] and Sections 0.111, 0.311 and 1.80(f)(4) of the
Commission\'s Rules,[^10] Shepler's **IS LIABLE FOR A MONETARY
FORFEITURE** in the amount of \$2,200 for violation of the Great Lakes
Agreement and Sections 80.953(a) and 80.953(b) the Commission's Rules.

13\. Payment of the forfeiture shall be made in the manner provided for
in Section 1.80 of the Commission's Rules[^11] within 30 days of the
release of this Order. If the forfeiture is not paid within the period
specified, the case may be referred to the Department of Justice for
collection pursuant to Section 504(a) of the Act.[^12] Payment may be
made by mailing a check or similar instrument, payable to the order of
the "Federal Communications Commission," to the Federal Communications
Commission, P.O. Box 73482, Chicago, Illinois 60673-7482. The payment
should note "NAL/Acct. No. 200132360002," referenced above. Requests for
full payment under an installment plan should be sent to: Revenue and
Receivables Operations Group, 445 12th Street, S.W., Washington, D.C.
20554.[^13]

14\. **IT IS FURTHER ORDERED** that a copy of this order shall be sent
by certified mail, return receipt requested, to Shepler's, Inc., P.O.
Box 250, Mackinaw City, Michigan 49701.

**FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION**

David H. Solomon

Chief, Enforcement Bureau

[^1]: *Agreement Between Canada and the United States for the Promotion
    of Safety on the Great Lakes by Means of Radio,* April 26, 1973,
    US.-Canada, 25 UST 935, T.I.A.S. 7837, amended 30 UST 2523, T.I.A.S.
    9352.

[^2]: 47 C.F.R. §§ 80.953(a) and (b).

[^3]: An erratum was issued April 6, 2001.

[^4]: 33 U.S.C. §§ 24.1201-1208.

[^5]: Although the required annual inspections of radio installations
    aboard vessels subject to the provisions of the Great Lakes
    Agreement have been privatized, the FCC conducts spot-check
    inspections, such as the inspection in this case, to monitor
    compliance.

[^6]: 47 U.S.C. § 506(a).

[^7]: 47 C.F.R. § 1.80.

[^8]: 47 C.F.R. § 1.80(b)(4).

[^9]: 47 U.S.C. § 506(a).

[^10]: 47 C.F.R. §§ 0.111, 0.311 and 1.80(f)(4).

[^11]: 47 C.F.R. § 1.80.

[^12]: 47 U.S.C. § 504(a).

[^13]: *See* 47 C.F.R. § 1.1914.