Federal Communications Commission DA 08-2449 
 
Before the
Federal Communications Commission
Washington, D.C. 20554
In the Matter of
John Doe
Jamaica Plain, MA
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
File Number: EB-07-BS-164 
NAL/Acct. No: 200832260001
 FRN: 0007823198
ORDER
Adopted:  October 31, 2008 Released:  November 4, 2008
By the Regional Director, Northeast Region, Enforcement Bureau:
I. INTRODUCTION 
1. In this Order (“Order”), we cancel the proposed forfeiture and admonish John Doe 
(“Doe”)1 for willfully and repeatedly violating Section 301 of the Communications Act of 1934, as 
amended (“Act”),2 by operating radio transmission equipment in Jamaica Plain, Massachusetts, on land 
mobile channels reserved exclusively for use by public safety entities. 
II. BACKGROUND
2. On October 22, 2007, the Boston Police Department reported by telephone to the Boston 
Office of the FCC’s Enforcement Bureau that it was receiving interference to its radio communications 
system.  Because the interference was intermittent, the Telecommunications Director advised the Boston 
Office that he would provide additional information so that agents would know the best time of day to try to 
locate the interfering signal with FCC direction finding equipment. 
3. On October 25, 2007, the Telecommunications Director contacted the Boston Office and 
reported that, on October 24, 2007, police officers had arrested Doe, who admitted to operating on police 
radio channels.3 According to the police reports submitted to the Boston Office, Doe admitted at the time 
of his arrest on October 24, 2007, to purchasing the radios in April 2007 and providing the radio vendors 
with Boston Police radio codes so that the radios could be programmed with those channels.4 Doe stated 
  
1 Name redacted due to age of individual.
2 47 U.S.C. § 301.
3 Doe was arrested on charges unrelated to his operation on police radio channels.
4 The police report submitted to the Boston Office is in the form of a memorandum from Sergeant Detective Robert 
Kjersgard, #11621, to Captain Christine Michalosky, Area E-13 Commander, dated October 29, 2007 (CC # 
070598288).  The police report also indicated that another individual interviewed by police officers admitted to 
being with Doe on October 24, 2007, and observed Doe communicating on a hand-held radio with a Boston Police 
dispatcher.
Federal Communications Commission DA 08-2449 
2
to police on October 24, 2007, that he had discovered that his transmissions were disrupting police radio 
communications three days prior, i.e., beginning on October 21, 2007. At the time of the arrest, police 
confiscated two radios, a Yaesu radio transceiver and a Motorola two-way handheld radio transceiver.
4. On October 25, 2007, an agent with the FCC’s Boston Office met with Boston police and 
examined the radios confiscated from Doe.  The agent confirmed that the radios were programmed with 
Boston Police radio Channel 4, as well as Channel 1.5 The agent also determined that the Yaesu 
transceiver was capable of emitting a tone that measures approximately 1740 Hz. This type of tone is not 
typically found on public safety radios and can be easily identified when monitoring radio transmissions. 
5. On November 20, 2007, the Boston Police Department submitted a log showing the dates 
and times the police radio system received interference from a radio transceiver that was emitting a tone 
similar to the tone that Doe's Yaesu transmitter emits.  Specifically, the log shows that, during the three 
day period during which Die admits to knowingly operating on police Channel 4, i.e., October 21, 2007 to 
October 24, 2007, there were seven instances in which normal police transmissions were interrupted by a 
tone similar to the tone the Yaesu transmitter emits. 
6. On November 27, 2007, the Boston Field Office issued a Notice of Apparent Liability for 
Forfeiture (“NAL”) to Doe in the amount of $10,000 for operating radio transmitting equipment on land 
mobile channels reserved exclusively for use by public safety entities.6 In his response to the NAL, Doe 
does not dispute the findings, but requests a cancellation of the forfeiture based on his inability to pay.
III. DISCUSSION
7. The proposed forfeiture amount in this case was assessed in accordance with Section 503(b) 
of the Act,7 Section 1.80 of the Rules,8 and The Commission’s Forfeiture Policy Statement and 
Amendment of Section 1.80 of the Rules to Incorporate the Forfeiture Guidelines (“Forfeiture Policy 
Statement”).9 In examining Doe’s response to the NAL and his statement of income,10 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.11  
8. After examining the financial documentation submitted by Doe, we conclude that 
cancellation of the forfeiture is warranted, based solely on his lack of income. Because of the seriousness 
of the violation, however, we admonish Doe for his willful and repeated violation of Section 301 of the 
Act.
  
5 The agent also observed that the radios were programmed with many other channels that are not authorized for 
private use, e.g., police detective channels, fire department channels, and housing authority channels. 
6 Notice of Apparent Liability for Forfeiture, NAL/Acct. No. 200832260001 (Enf. Bur., Boston Office, rel. 
November 27, 2007).
7 47 U.S.C. § 503(b).
8 47 C.F.R. § 1.80.
9 12 FCC Rcd 17087 (1997), recon. denied, 15 FCC Rcd 303 (1999).
10 Because Doe has not filed federal income tax returns, Bureau staff requested that Doe submit a signed statement 
of income.
11 47 U.S.C. § 503(b)(2)(E).
Federal Communications Commission DA 08-2449 
3
IV. ORDERING CLAUSES
9. 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(f)(4) of the Commission’s Rules, that the 
Notice of Apparent Liability for Forfeiture issued to John Doe for violation of Section 301 of the Act IS 
HEREBY CANCELLED.12
10. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that John Doe IS ADMONISHED for his violation of 
Section 301 of the Act.
11. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that a copy of this Order shall be sent by First Class and 
Certified Mail Return Receipt Requested to John Doe at his address of record.  
FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION
G. Michael Moffitt
Regional Director, Northeast Region
Enforcement Bureau
  
12 47 U.S.C. § 503(b); 47 C.F.R. §§ 0.111, 0.311, 1.80(f)(4); 47 U.S.C. § 301.