Penalty Imposition and Inability to Pay Reduction
On June 30, 2015, the Federal Communications Commission Enforcement Bureau released a Forfeiture Order (DA 15-771) imposing a $4,800 monetary penalty against Custom Computers d.b.a. Winchester Wireless. The order addresses willful violations of Section 301 of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended, and Section 15.1(b) of the Commission's rules for operating wireless internet transmitter sites with uncertified external radiofrequency amplifiers.
The Enforcement Bureau originally proposed a $25,000 forfeiture in a Notice of Apparent Liability for Forfeiture (NAL) issued on March 11, 2014. In response, Winchester Wireless submitted federal tax returns demonstrating an inability to pay the full amount. Upon review of the operator's financial records, the Bureau concluded that reducing the forfeiture to $4,800 was consistent with Commission precedent regarding ability to pay.
Investigation History Across Transmitter Sites
The enforcement action stems from multiple field inspections conducted by agents from the Enforcement Bureau's Columbia Office in Winchester, Virginia:
Following the 2013 inspection, the Columbia Office issued a Notice of Unlicensed Operation on July 29, 2013, warning of significant penalties for continued unauthorized operations. The Bureau subsequently issued the NAL on March 11, 2014.
- May 10, 2011: An agent inspected a Motorola Canopy System transmitter operated by Winchester Wireless at Wardensville Grade and found two external RF Linx 900 MHz amplifiers attached, which were not certified for use with that system. A Notice of Unlicensed Operation was issued on August 11, 2011, after which the owner stated the amplifiers were removed.
- May 29, 2013: Acting on further complaints, an agent inspected transmitter sites on Pepper Lane and Shawnee Trail, detecting 900 MHz signals emanating from Motorola Canopy System transmitters connected to RF Linx amplifiers.
Rejection of Operational Control Defenses
In its response to the NAL, Winchester Wireless argued that the Bureau failed to prove the equipment was actively operating during the inspection, claimed the Bureau had not shown working control over the equipment, and suggested local residents might have attached the external amplifiers.
The Enforcement Bureau rejected these arguments, establishing liability on multiple grounds:
- Spectrum evidence: The agent utilized a spectrum analyzer and directional antenna to trace 900 MHz signals directly to the Pepper Lane and Shawnee Trail sites, gathered spectrum snapshots, and photographed the physical connections between the amplifiers and transmitters.
- Operational control: Winchester Wireless exercised management and control over the sites, having acknowledged it would investigate and access the sites following the 2013 notice.
- Third-party claims: The Commission noted that even if third parties had attached the amplifiers, licensees remain strictly responsible for ensuring their transmitting equipment operates within authorized parameters.
Payment Terms and Compliance Warning
Winchester Wireless was ordered to pay the $4,800 forfeiture within 30 calendar days of June 30, 2015. The Bureau specified standard payment methods including check, wire transfer, or credit card accompanied by FCC Form 159, with an option to request an installment plan through the Chief Financial Officer.
The Bureau cautioned the operator that inability to pay is not dispositive in all circumstances and warned that significantly higher penalties could be imposed for future violations demonstrating deliberate disregard for Commission regulations.