**Before the**

**Federal Communications Commission**

**Washington, D.C. 20554**

+----------------------------------+---+---------------------------------+
| In the Matter of                 | ) | File No. EB-04-NY-240           |
|                                  |   |                                 |
| Bee Taxi Corporation             | ) | NAL/Acct. No. 200532380004      |
|                                  |   |                                 |
| New Rochelle, NY                 | ) | FRN 00011 6328 90               |
|                                  |   |                                 |
|                                  | ) |                                 |
|                                  |   |                                 |
|                                  | ) |                                 |
|                                  |   |                                 |
|                                  | ) |                                 |
|                                  |   |                                 |
|                                  | ) |                                 |
+----------------------------------+---+---------------------------------+

## NOTICE OF APPARENT LIABILITY FOR FORFEITURE {#notice-of-apparent-liability-for-forfeiture .unnumbered}

> Released: April 19, 2005

By the District Director, New York Office, Northeast Region, Enforcement
Bureau:

# INTRODUCTION

1.  In this Notice of Apparent Liability for Forfeiture (\"NAL\"), we
    find that Bee Taxi Corporation ("Bee Taxi") in New Rochelle, NY,
    apparently willfully and repeatedly violated Section 301 of the
    Communications Act of 1934, as amended (\"Act\"),[^1] by operating
    unlicensed radio transmitting equipment on the frequencies 155.970
    MHz and 155.190 MHz. We conclude, pursuant to Section 503(b) of the
    Act,[^2] that Bee Taxi is apparently liable for a forfeiture in the
    amount of ten thousand dollars (\$10,000).

# BACKGROUND

1.  On September 7, 2004, the FCC New York Office received a complaint
    from a FCC licensed user in the Public Safety Radio Pool regarding
    interference to its assigned operating frequency of 155.970 MHz. The
    licensed user stated in the complaint that a taxi company operating
    in the vicinity of Spring Valley, NY had been causing interference
    over the past several months.

2.  On September 15, 2004, a Commission agent, using a mobile
    direction-finding vehicle, monitored the frequency 155.970 MHz in
    Westchester County, New York, and positively located the source of
    the transmissions to Bee Taxi, 304 Huguenot Street, New Rochelle,
    NY 10801. The agent observed transmissions on the frequency 155.970
    MHz from Bee Taxi's base station. The agent also observed
    transmissions on the frequency 155.190 MHz from mobile transmitters
    used by Bee Taxi's drivers.

3.  The agent conducted an inspection with Bee Taxi's owner, Domingo
    Vazquez, and confirmed that Bee Taxi was operating a base station
    and mobile units on frequencies 155.970 MHz and 155.190 MHz. There
    was no evidence in FCC databases of a Commission authorization for
    this operation in New Rochelle, NY.

4.  On September 16, 2004, the New York Office sent a Warning Letter,
    First Class Mail, and Certified Mail Return Receipt Requested, to
    Bee Taxi for unlicensed operation on the frequencies 155.970 MHz and
    155.190 MHz. On September 22, 2004, the U.S. Postal Service returned
    the Certified Mail Return Receipt to the New York Office, which
    showed that Bee Taxi signed for the Warning Letter on September 20,
    2004.

5.  On September 23, 2004, a Commission agent, using a mobile
    direction-finding vehicle monitored the frequency 155.970 MHz in New
    Rochelle, NY and positively located the source of the transmissions
    to Bee Taxi, 304 Huguenot Street, New Rochelle, NY 10801. The agent
    observed transmissions on the frequency 155.970 MHz from Bee Taxi's
    base station. The agent also observed transmissions on the frequency
    155.190 MHz from mobile transmitters used by Bee Taxi's drivers.
    There was no evidence in FCC databases of a Commission authorization
    for this operation in New Rochelle, NY.

6.  On October 4, 2004 the New York Office received a letter from Empire
    Communications 2 Way Radio Service, 235 Willow Street, Yonkers, NY
    10701, stating that Bee Taxi relinquished use of the frequencies
    155.970 MHz and 155.190 MHz.

# DISCUSSION

7.  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) of the Act has been interpreted to mean simply that
    the acts or omissions are committed knowingly.[^3] The term
    "repeated" means the commission or omission of such act more than
    once or for more than one day.[^4]

8.  Section 301 of the Act sets forth generally that no person shall use
    or operate any apparatus for the transmission of energy or
    communications or signals by radio within the United States except
    under and in accordance with the Act and with a license granted
    under the provisions of the Act. On September 15, 2004, Commission
    agents determined that Bee Taxi operated a base station on 155.970
    MHz and mobile units on 155.190 MHz in New Rochelle, NY. A review of
    the FCC's records showed no evidence of a Commission authorization
    to operate on these frequencies in New Rochelle, NY. On September
    23, 2004, notwithstanding Bee Taxi's receipt of the warning letter
    on September 20, 2004, Commission agents determined that Bee Taxi
    continued to operate a base station and mobile units without an FCC
    license.

9.  Based on the evidence before us, we find Bee Taxi apparently
    willfully and repeatedly violated Section 301 of the Act by
    operating radio transmission equipment on 155.970 MHz and 155.190
    MHz on September 15, and September 23, 2004 without a Commission
    authorization.

10. Pursuant to The Commission's Forfeiture Policy Statement and
    Amendment of Section 1.80 of the Rules to Incorporate the Forfeiture
    Guidelines (\"Forfeiture Policy Statement\"), and Section 1.80 of
    the Rules, the base forfeiture amount for operation without an
    instrument of authorization is \$10,000.[^5] In assessing the
    monetary forfeiture amount, we must also take into account the
    statutory factors set forth in Section 503(b)(2)(D) of the Act,
    which include the nature, circumstances, extent, and gravity of the
    violations, and with respect to the violator, the degree of
    culpability, and history of prior offenses, ability to pay, and
    other such matters as justice may require.[^6] Applying the
    Forfeiture Policy Statement, Section 1.80, and the statutory factors
    to the instant case, we conclude that Bee Taxi is apparently liable
    for a \$10,000 forfeiture.

# ORDERING CLAUSES

11. Accordingly, **IT IS ORDERED** that, pursuant to Section 503(b) of
    the Communications Act of 1934, as amended, and Sections 0.111,
    0.311 and 1.80 of the Commission\'s Rules, Bee Taxi Corporation, is
    hereby **NOTIFIED** of this **APPARENT LIABILITY FOR A FORFEITURE**
    in the amount of ten thousand dollars (\$10,000) for violations of
    Section 301 of the Act.[^7]

12. **IT IS FURTHER ORDERED** that, pursuant to Section 1.80 of the
    Commission\'s Rules, within thirty days of the release date of this
    Notice of Apparent Liability for Forfeiture, Bee Taxi Corporation,
    **SHALL PAY** the full amount of the proposed forfeiture or **SHALL
    FILE** a written statement seeking reduction or cancellation of the
    proposed forfeiture.

13. 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/Acct. No. and FRN No.
    referenced above. Payment by check or money order may be mailed to
    Forfeiture Collection Section, Finance Branch, Federal
    Communications Commission, P.O. Box 73482, Chicago, Illinois
    60673-7482. Payment by overnight mail may be sent to Bank One/LB
    73482, 525 West Monroe, 8^th^ Floor Mailroom, Chicago, IL 60661.
    Payment by wire transfer may be made to ABA Number 071000013,
    receiving bank Bank One, and account number 1165259.

14. The response, if any, must be mailed to Federal Communications
    Commission, New York Office, 201 Varick Street, Suite 1151, New
    York, NY 10014 and must include the NAL/Acct. No. referenced in the
    caption.

15. 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.

16. Requests for payment of the full amount of this Notice of Apparent
    Liability for Forfeiture under an installment plan should be sent
    to: Chief, Revenue and Receivables Operations Group, 445 12th
    Street, S.W., Washington, D.C. 20554.[^8]

17. **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 Bee Taxi Corporation at its
    address of record.

FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION

Daniel W. Noel

District Director

New York Office

Northeast Region

Enforcement Bureau

[^1]: 47 U.S.C. § 301.

[^2]: 47 U.S.C. § 503(b).

[^3]: Section 312(f)(1) of the Act, 47 U.S.C. § 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).

[^4]: Section 312(f)(2) of the Act, 47 U.S.C. § 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."

[^5]: 12 FCC Rcd 17087 (1997), *recon. denied*, 15 FCC Rcd 303 (1999);
    47 C.F.R. §1.80.

[^6]: 47 U.S.C. § 503(b)(2)(D).

[^7]: 47 U.S. C47 C.F.R. §§ 0.111, 0.311, 1.80.

[^8]: ^8^*See* 47 C.F.R. § 1.1914.