*Pages 1--2 from  Microsoft Word - 23968.doc*
 Federal  Communications  Commission  DA  02-  3566 
 Before  the  Federal  Communications  Commission 


 Washington,  D.  C.  20554 
 In  the  Matter  of  )  )  File  No.  EB-  01-  DT-  523 
 Thomas  A.  Brothers  )  NAL/  Acct.  No.  200232360004  Berkley,  Michigan  )  FRN:  0006-  1077-  26 


 MEMORANDUM  OPINION  AND  ORDER 
 Adopted:  December  20,  2002  Released:  December  24,  2002 
 By  the  Chief,  Enforcement  Bureau: 


 1.  In  this  Memorandum  Opinion  and  Order  (“  Order”),  we  grant,  to  the  extent  noted,  Thomas  A.  Brothers’s  (“  Mr.  Brothers”)  petition  for  reconsideration  of  a  Forfeiture  Order  1 
 we  issued  imposing  a  $10,000  forfeiture  assessment  against  him  for  willfully  and  repeatedly  violating  Section  301  of  the  Communications  Act  of  1934,  as  amended  (“  Act”).  2  The  noted 
 violations  involve  Mr.  Brothers’s  operation  of  an  FM  station  on  88.3  MHz  without  a  license.  As  explained  below,  we  cancel  the  $10,000  forfeiture  based  on  Mr.  Brothers’s  demonstrated  inability 
 to  pay. 
 2.  On  January  14,  2002,  the  District  Director  of  the  Enforcement  Bureau’s  Detroit,  Michigan  Office  issued  a  Notice  of  Apparent  Liability  for  Forfeiture  (“  NAL”)  to  Mr.  Brothers  for 
 willfully  and  repeatedly  violating  Section  301  of  the  Act  by  operating  an  FM  station  without  a  license.  3  On  June  6,  2002,  we  issued  a  Forfeiture  Order  affirming  the  $10,000  forfeiture 
 proposed  by  the  NAL.  We  noted  in  the  Forfeiture  Order  that  Mr.  Brothers  had  not  filed  a  response  to  the  NAL,  and  affirmed  the  Forfeiture  Order  based  on  the  information  before  us.  On 
 July  3,  2002,  Mr.  Brothers  filed  what  he  styled  as  a  “response”  to  the  NAL,  which  we  are  treating  as  a  petition  for  reconsideration  of  our  Forfeiture  Order  pursuant  to  Sections  1.80(  i)  and  1.106  of 
 the  Commission’s  Rules  (“  Rules”).  4 
 3.  In  his  petition  for  reconsideration,  Mr.  Brothers  does  not  dispute  that  he  willfully  and  repeatedly  violated  Section  301  of  the  Act.  However,  he  asks  that  we  cancel  the  $10,000 
 forfeiture  because  of,  among  other  things,  his  inability  to  pay.  The  financial  documentation  that  he  provides  demonstrates  his  inability  to  pay  and  leads  us  to  conclude  that  cancellation  of  the 
 $10,000  forfeiture  assessment  is  warranted  in  this  case. 


 1  Thomas  A.  Brothers.,  17  FCC  Rcd  10,  550  (Enf.  Bur.  2002). 
 2  47  U.  S.  C.  §  301. 
 3  Notice  of  Apparent  Liability  for  Forfeiture,  NAL/  Acct.  No.  200232360004  (Enf.  Bur.,  Detroit  Office  rel. 
 Jan.  14,  2002),  erratum,  NAL/  Acct.  No.  200232360004  (Enf.  Bur.,  Detroit  Office  rel.  Jan.  28,  2002). 
 4  See  47  C.  F.  R.  §§  1.80(  i),  1.  106. 
1
 Federal  Communications  Commission  DA  02-  3566 
 2 
 5.  Accordingly,  IT  IS  ORDERED  that,  pursuant  to  Sections  405,  503(  b)(  2)(  D),  and  504(  b)  of  the  Act  and  Sections  1.80(  i)  and  1.106  of  the  Rules,  5  Mr.  Brothers’s  petition  for 
 reconsideration  IS  GRANTED  TO  THE  EXTENT  NOTED  HEREIN. 
 6.  IT  IS  FURTHER  ORDERED  that  a  copy  of  this  Order  shall  be  sent  by  first  class  mail  and  certified  mail,  return  receipt  requested,  to  Thomas  A.  Brothers,  6808  Norborne 
 Avenue,  Dearborn  Heights,  Michigan  48127. 


 FEDERAL  COMMUNICATIONS  COMMISSION 
 David  H.  Solomon  Chief,  Enforcement  Bureau 


 5  47  U.  S.  C.  §§  405,  503(  b)(  2)(  D),  504(  b);  47  C.  F.  R.  §§  1.  80(  i),  1.  106. 
2