Federal Communications Commission FCC 08-112
Before the
Federal Communications Commission
Washington, D.C. 20554
In the Matter of
Precor Incorporated 
)
)
)
)
)
)
File No. EB-07-SE-235
NAL/Acct. No. 200832100033
FRN #  0012740635
NOTICE OF APPARENT LIABILITY FOR FORFEITURE
Adopted:  April 9, 2008 Released:  April 10, 2008
By the Commission:  
I. INTRODUCTION
1. In this Notice of Apparent Liability for Forfeiture (“NAL”), we find Precor Incorporated 
(“Precor”) apparently liable for a forfeiture in the amount of $357,900 for its willful and repeated 
violations of Section 15.117(i)(1)(iii) of the Commission’s Rules (“Rules”).1 The apparent violations 
involve Precor’s importation and interstate shipment after March 1, 2007 of television receivers that do 
not comply with the Commission’s rules regarding digital television (“DTV”) reception capability.
II. BACKGROUND
2. The Commission adopted the DTV reception capability requirement in 2002.2 The DTV 
reception requirement, which also is often termed the “DTV tuner requirement,”3 requires that all new 
television broadcast receivers that are imported into the United States or shipped in interstate commerce 
be capable of receiving the signals of DTV broadcast stations over-the-air.4 The DTV tuner requirement 
was intended to facilitate the transition to digital television by promoting the availability of DTV 
reception equipment and to protect consumers by ensuring that their television receivers will provide off-
the-air television reception of digital signals just as they have provided off-the-air television reception of 
analog signals.5  
  
1 47 C.F.R. § 15.117(i)(1)(iii).
2 Review of the Commission’s Rules and Policies Affecting the Conversion to Digital Television, Second Report and 
Order and Second Memorandum Opinion and Order, 17 FCC Rcd 15978, 15996 (2002) (“DTV Review Second 
Report and Order”).  
3 DTV reception capability involves more circuitry than just a tuner.  To provide this capability requires a tuner to 
receive the digital signal, an MPEG decoder/formatter, and associated processing capability and memory.  See 
Requirements for Digital Television Receiving Capability, Report and Order and Further Notice of Proposed 
Rulemaking, 20 FCC Rcd 11196 n. 2 (2005) (“DTV Tuner Report and Order”).
4 DTV Review Second Report and Order, 17 FCC Rcd at 15996.  The DTV tuner requirement also applies to other
devices such as television interface devices that do not include a viewing screen, e.g., devices such as VCRs and 
DVD players that are intended to provide audio-video signals to a video monitor with an antenna or antenna 
terminals that can be used for off-the-air television reception.  See 47 C.F.R. § 15.117(i)(1)(i).
5 Id. at 15979.  In this latter regard, the DTV tuner requirement ensures that the intent of the All Channel Receiver 
Act of 1962 (“ACRA”), P.L. No. 87-529, 76 Stat. 150, is fulfilled.  The ACRA, which is codified at 47 U.S.C. § 
(continued …)
Federal Communications Commission FCC 08-112
2
3. In order to minimize the impact of the DTV tuner requirement on both manufacturers and 
consumers, the Commission adopted a phase-in schedule that applied the requirement first to receivers 
with the largest screens and then to progressively smaller screen receivers and other television receiving 
devices that do not include a viewing screen, i.e., VCRs and DVD players.6 This phase-in plan was 
intended to allow increasing economies of scale with production volume to be realized so that DTV tuner 
costs would be lower when they are required to be included in smaller sets and other television receiving 
devices.7 As modified by the Commission in 2005,8 this phase-in schedule is as follows:  
Receivers with screen sizes 36” and above -- 50% of units imported or shipped 
interstate by responsible parties9 were required to include DTV tuners effective July 
1, 2004; 100% of such units were required to include DTV tuners effective July 1, 
2005;
Receivers with screen sizes 25” to 35” -- 50% of units imported or shipped interstate 
by responsible parties were required to include DTV tuners effective July 1, 2005; 
100% of such units were required to include DTV tuners effective March 1, 2006; 
Receivers with screen sizes less than 25” - 100% of units imported or shipped 
interstate by responsible parties were required to include DTV tuners effective March 
1, 2007; and 
Other video devices (videocassette recorders (VCRs), digital video recorders such as 
hard drive and DVD recorders, etc.) that receive television signals - 100% of units 
imported or shipped interstate by responsible parties were required to include DTV 
tuners effective March 1, 2007.
(Continued from previous page)    
303(s), states that the Commission shall “[h]ave authority to require that apparatus designed to receive television 
pictures broadcast simultaneously with sound be capable of adequately receiving all frequencies allocated by the 
Commission to television broadcasting ....”  See DTV Review Second Report and Order, 17 FCC Rcd at 15589-91.
6 Id. at 15998-99.
7 Id.
8 In June 2005, the Commission modified the rules to advance the date on which 100% of new television receivers
with screen sizes 25-36” that are imported or shipped interstate must include DTV tuners from July 1, 2006 to 
March 1, 2006.  DTV Tuner Report and Order, 20 FCC Rcd at 11203.  Subsequently, in November 2005, the 
Commission modified the rules to advance the date on which 100% of new television receivers with screen sizes 13-
24” and certain other television receiving devices such as VCRs and digital video recorders that are imported or 
shipped interstate must include DTV tuners from July 1, 2007 to March 1, 2007.  See Requirements for Digital 
Television Receiving Capability, Second Report and Order, 20 FCC Rcd 18607, 18614-16 (2005) (“DTV Tuner 
Second Report and Order”).  The Commission also amended the rules to apply the DTV tuner requirement to new 
receivers with screen sizes smaller than 13” on this same schedule.  Id. Although the Commission adopted this 
requirement for receivers with screen sizes smaller than 13” through the appropriate notice and comment 
procedures, and modified the rules to show March 1, 2007, as the accelerated deadline, we inadvertently omitted to 
delete the exception created by Section 15.117(i)(2) for “units with integrated tuners/displays that have screen sizes 
measuring less than 7.8 inches vertically, i.e., the vertical measurement of a screen in the 4:3 aspect ratio that 
measures 13’ [sic] diagonally across the picture viewing area.”  The Commission recently corrected Section 
15.117(i)(2) by striking the inappropriate language.  See Third Periodic Review of the Commission’s Rules and 
Policies Affecting the Conversion to Digital Television, Report and Order, FCC 07-228 ¶ 190 (rel. Dec. 31, 2007).
9 The DTV tuner requirement applies to “responsible parties,” as defined in Section 2.909 of the Rules, 47 C.F.R. § 
2.909.  Under Section 2.909, the party responsible for equipment such as television receivers that are subject to our 
“verification” equipment authorization procedure is the manufacturer or, in the case of imported equipment, the 
importer.  If subsequent to manufacture and importation, the equipment is modified by any party not working under 
the authority of the responsible party, the party performing the modification becomes the new responsible party.
Federal Communications Commission FCC 08-112
3
4. In July 2007, the Enforcement Bureau received a complaint alleging that Precor, through 
its Cardio Theater division, was importing and shipping in interstate commerce television receivers that 
do not comply with the DTV tuner requirements.  The Enforcement Bureau issued a letter of inquiry 
(“LOI”) to Precor on September 12, 2007.10 On November 9, 2007, Precor filed a response to the LOI.11  
Precor filed supplemental responses on December 10, 2007, December 21, 2007, January 15, 2008, and 
March 31, 2008.12  
5. Precor is a manufacturer of commercial and consumer exercise equipment and accessories 
for the domestic and international market.13 According to Precor’s LOI Response, the company’s 
commercial fitness equipment is sold to fitness facilities directly by Precor or by its dealers, with Precor 
selling roughly 90% of the commercial products directly.14 In addition to health clubs, Precor’s 
commercial customers include institutions such as resorts, gyms established by major corporations for 
their employees, colleges and universities, hospitals and health spas (collectively, “health clubs”).15  
Precor states that it imports and ships interstate television receivers, which it refers to as “personal 
viewing screen” (“PVS”) units, in connection with, and as an accessory product to, certain of its 
commercial fitness equipment, including ellipticals, treadmills and adaptive movement products.16 The 
PVS units are sold either on an integrated basis, attachable directly to the fitness equipment, or on a 
standalone basis, with their own Precor-provided stands that are positioned in front of the fitness 
equipment.17 Precor asserts that the PVS units are not sold in connection with fitness equipment sold to 
consumers, nor are the PVS units sold separately to consumers.18 Precor further asserts that the retail 
prices for the PVS units exceed $1,000, well above the prices that consumers would pay at retail outlets 
for televisions providing similar quality and resolution and the same size viewing screens.19
6. Precor explains that Precor-certified technicians install the PVS units in health clubs as 
part of the company’s integrated closed circuit video entertainment systems provided to health clubs.20  
Health clubs utilize a central cable box or satellite receiver that terminates that cable system feed or 
satellite feed at the health clubs.21 Either device is then connected to a Precor-supplied server located on 
  
10 See Letter from Kathryn S. Berthot, Chief, Spectrum Enforcement Division, Enforcement Bureau to Paul J. 
Byrne, President, Precor, Inc. (September 12, 2007). 
11 See Letter from C. Douglas Jarrett, Esq. Counsel for Precor, Inc. to Linda Nagel, Spectrum Enforcement Division, 
Enforcement Bureau (November 9, 2007) (“LOI Response”).
12 See Letter from C. Douglas Jarrett, Esq. Counsel for Precor, Inc. to Linda Nagel, Spectrum Enforcement 
Division,Enforcement Bureau (December 10, 2007); Letter from C. Douglas Jarrett, Esq. Counsel for Precor, Inc. to 
Linda Nagel, Spectrum Enforcement Division, Enforcement Bureau (December 21, 2007); Letter from C. Douglas 
Jarrett, Esq. Counsel for Precor, Inc. to Linda Nagel, Spectrum Enforcement Division, Enforcement Bureau (January 
15, 2008); Letter from C. Douglas Jarrett, Esq. Counsel for Precor, Inc. to Linda Nagel, Spectrum Enforcement 
Division, Enforcement Bureau (March 31, 2008).  
13 LOI Response at 1.
14 Id.
15 Id.
16 Id.
17 Id. at 1-2.
18 Id. at 1.
19 Id.
20 Id. at 2.
21 Id.
Federal Communications Commission FCC 08-112
4
the health club’s premises, which is attached to a coaxial cable network extending to the PVS units 
installed or placed directly in front of the commercial fitness equipment throughout the facility.22 The 
server, Precor states, allows users to select the channels of their choice on their PVS units during their 
workouts.23 Precor also states that it operates its own content distribution network that delivers video 
content via satellite to health clubs.24 The server enables users to select at least eight music video streams 
provided by Precor’s satellite network, programming and text messages determined by the health club, 
and generally available satellite or cable programming.25  
7. Precor acknowledges that, after March 1, 2007, it imported and shipped interstate units of 
one model of a 15” PVS unit that contain an analog tuner, but do not contain a digital tuner.26 Precor 
further admits that the importation of analog-only reception devices is not permitted under the 
Commission’s rules.27 Precor maintains, however, that it may legally ship PVS units interstate within the 
U.S.28 Precor asserts, in this regard, that in adopting the importation and interstate shipping restrictions, 
the Commission stated 
[c]onsistent with the DTV transition plan that Congress established in Section 309(j) of 
the Communications Act of 1934, and pursuant to our authority under the ACRA, our 
objective in establishing a DTV tuner requirement is [to ensure that television receiving 
equipment] manufactured or imported after a specified date be able to receive over the air 
signals.29
Thus, according to Precor, the Commission clearly intends to exercise its jurisdiction by regulating 
interstate shipping only by U.S. manufacturers of DTV receivers.30 Precor claims that because it imports 
the PVS units from overseas and does not manufacture the units in the U.S., it is subject only to the 
Commission’s import restrictions and not to any restrictions on interstate shipments of those imports.31
8. Moreover, Precor submits that strict enforcement of the DTV tuner requirement would not 
support either the purpose or intent of the DTV tuner requirement.32 In support of this argument, it asserts 
that the PVS units are not intended for and are not sold to consumers for personal use; that, although 
technically capable, the units do not, as installed, receive over-the-air broadcast signals; that the PVS 
units are sold as elements of integrated closed circuit video entertainment systems designed to meet the 
needs of the health club industry; and the PVS units are priced well above the price of similar television 
sets that are ubiquitously available in the marketplace.33  
  
22 Id.
23 Id.
24 Id.
25 Id.
26 Id. at 2, 4.
27 Id. at 4.
28 Id.
29 Id. (quoting DTV Review Second Report and Order, 17 FCC Rcd at 15994 (emphasis added)).
30 Id.
31 Id.
32 Id.
33 Id.
Federal Communications Commission FCC 08-112
5
9. Precor requested confidentiality of certain information in its LOI response and 
supplemental responses, including the specific number of units imported and shipped interstate, and that 
request remains pending.  Accordingly, portions of Precor’s LOI response and supplemental responses are 
discussed in an Appendix hereto, and we are treating the Appendix as confidential at this time.
III. DISCUSSION
A. Failure to Comply with DTV Tuner Requirement
10. We conclude that Precor apparently willfully34 and repeatedly35 imported and shipped in 
interstate commerce television receivers that do not comply with the DTV tuner requirement in violation 
of Section 15.117(i)(1)(iii) of the Rules.  As set forth in detail in the confidential Appendix, Precor admits 
that, after the March 1, 2007 deadline for small-size screen receivers, it repeatedly imported and shipped 
interstate non-DTV-compliant small-size screen receivers.  
B. Proposed Forfeiture
11. Under Section 503(b)(1)(B) of the Act, any person who is determined by the Commission 
to have willfully or repeatedly failed to comply with any provision of the Act or any rule, regulation, or 
order issued by the Commission shall be liable to the United States for a forfeiture penalty.36 To impose 
such a forfeiture penalty, the Commission must issue a notice of apparent liability and the person against 
whom such notice has been issued must have an opportunity to show, in writing, why no such forfeiture 
penalty should be imposed.37 The Commission will then issue a forfeiture if it finds by a preponderance 
of the evidence that the person has violated the Act or a Commission rule.38 Based on the analysis set 
forth below, we conclude that Precor is apparently liable for a forfeiture in the amount of $357,900 for 
willfully and repeatedly importing and shipping in interstate commerce television receivers that do not 
comply with the DTV tuner requirement in violation of Section 15.117(i)(1)(iii) of the Rules.
12. Under Section 503(b)(2)(D) of the Act,39 we may assess an entity that is neither a common 
carrier, broadcast licensee or cable operator a forfeiture of up to $11,000 for each violation or each day of 
  
34 Section 312(f)(1) of the Act defines “willful” as “the conscious and deliberate commission or omission of [any] 
act, irrespective of any intent to violate” the law. 47 U.S.C. § 312(f)(1).  The legislative history of Section 312(f)(1) 
of the Act clarifies that this definition of willful applies to both Sections 312 and 503(b) of the Act, H.R. Rep. No. 
97-765, 97th Cong. 2d Sess. 51 (1982), and the Commission has so interpreted the term in the Section 503(b) 
context.  See Southern California Broadcasting Co., Memorandum Opinion and Order, 6 FCC Rcd 4387, 4388 
(1991), recon. denied, 7 FCC Rcd 3454 (1992) (“Southern California”).  
35 Section 312(f)(2) of the Act, which also applies to forfeitures assessed pursuant to Section 503(b) of the Act, 
provides that “[t]he term ‘repeated,’ … means the commission or omission of such act more than once or, if such 
commission or omission is continuous, for more than one day.”  47 U.S.C. § 312(f)(2).  See Callais Cablevision, 
Inc., Notice of Apparent Liability for Forfeiture,16 FCC Rcd 1359, 1362 (2001); Southern California, 6 FCC Rcd at 
4388.
36 47 U.S.C. § 503(b)(1)(B); 47 C.F.R. § 1.80(a)(1).  
37 47 U.S.C. § 503(b); 47 C.F.R. § 1.80(f). 
38 See, e.g., SBC Communications, Inc., Forfeiture Order, 17 FCC Rcd 7589, 7591 (2002).  
39 47 U.S.C. § 503(b)(2)(D).  The Commission twice amended Section 1.80(b)(3) of the Rules, 47 C.F.R. § 
1.80(b)(3), to increase the maximum forfeiture amounts, in accordance with the inflation adjustment requirements 
contained in the Debt Collection Improvement Act of 1996, 28 U.S.C. § 2461.  See Amendment of Section 1.80 of 
the Commission’s Rules and Adjustment of Forfeiture Maxima to Reflect Inflation, Order, 15 FCC Rcd 18221 (2000) 
(adjusting the maximum statutory amounts from $10,000/$75,000 to $11,000/$87,500); Amendment of Section 1.80 
of the Commission’s Rules and Adjustment of Forfeiture Maxima to Reflect Inflation, Order, 19 FCC Rcd 10945 
(2004) (adjusting the maximum statutory amounts from $11,000/$87,500 to $11,000/$97,500).
Federal Communications Commission FCC 08-112
6
a continuing violation, up to a statutory maximum forfeiture of $97,500 for any single continuing 
violation.  In exercising such authority, we are required to 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 such other matters as justice may require.”40
13. The Commission’s Forfeiture Policy Statement41 and Section 1.80 of the Rules do not 
establish a specific base forfeiture for violation of the DTV tuner requirement.  The Commission has 
substantial discretion, however, in proposing forfeitures.42 We may apply the base forfeiture amounts 
described in the Forfeiture Policy Statement and our rules, or we may depart from them altogether as the 
circumstances demand.43  
14. The DTV tuner requirement promotes the important public policy goal of helping to speed 
the transition to digital television, and we therefore have found violations of this requirement to be more 
egregious, in general, than many other types of equipment marketing cases that come before us.44 DTV 
receivers are a necessary element of digital broadcast television service.  Consumers must have the 
capability to receive DTV signals for the DTV transition to move forward to successful completion.45  
The DTV tuner requirement is intended to protect consumers by ensuring that their TV receivers will 
provide off-the-air TV reception of digital signals when analog TV operation ceases.46 Thus, we have 
concluded that applying a proposed forfeiture on a per model basis, as we have in other more routine 
equipment marketing cases, would result in forfeiture amounts that are not commensurate with the 
seriousness of the violation.47  
15. In the Regent NAL and the Syntax-Brillian NAL, we determined that, in cases involving the 
interstate shipping or importation of television receivers that did not comply with the DTV tuner 
requirements, we will propose a forfeiture based on each unit shipped or imported within the statute of 
limitations, regardless of the number of models shipped or imported.48 This approach, we noted, “gets to 
  
40 47 U.S.C. § 503(b)(2)(E).  See also 47 C.F.R. § 1.80(b)(4), Note to paragraph (b)(4): Section II. Adjustment 
Criteria for Section 503 Forfeitures.
41 See The Commission’s Forfeiture Policy Statement and Amendment of Section 1.80 of the Rules to Incorporate 
the Forfeiture Guidelines, Report and Order, 12 FCC Rcd 17087, 17115 (1997), recon. denied, 15 FCC Rcd 303 
(1999) (“Forfeiture Policy Statement”).
42 See, e.g., InPhonic, Inc., Order of Forfeiture and Further Notice of Apparent Liability, 22 FCC Rcd 8689, 8699 
(2007); Globcom, Inc. d/b/a Globom Global Commun., Order of Forfeiture, 21 FCC Rcd 4710, 4723-24 (2006).  
43 See 47 C.F.R. §1.80(b)(4) (“The Commission and its staff may use these guidelines in particular cases [, and] 
retain the discretion to issue a higher or lower forfeiture than provided in the guidelines, to issue no forfeiture at all, 
or to apply alternative or additional sanctions as permitted by the statute.”) (emphasis added).  
44 Syntax-Brillian Corporation, Notice of Apparent Liability for Forfeiture, 22 FCC Rcd 10530, 10535 (2007), 
response pending (“Syntax-Brillian NAL”); Regent U.S.A., Inc., Notice of Apparent Liability for Forfeiture, 22 FCC 
Rcd 10520, 10525 (2007) (forfeiture paid) (“Regent NAL”).
45 See DTV Tuner Report and Order, 20 FCC Rcd at 11199; DTV Tuner Second Report and Order, 20 FCC Rcd at 
18608.
46 See id.
47 Syntax-Brillian NAL, 22 FCC Rcd at 10535-36 (concluding that applying a proposed forfeiture on a per-model 
basis for shipment of television receivers that were not compliant with the DTV tuner mandate would result in 
forfeiture amounts incommensurate with the seriousness of the violations); Regent NAL, 22 FCC Rcd at 10525-26 
(same).
48 Id.
Federal Communications Commission FCC 08-112
7
the root of the apparent violation – non-compliant televisions in the hands of American consumers.”49  
Furthermore, to reflect the increasing seriousness of the violation as the number of non-compliant units 
shipped or imported rises, we concluded that we will propose forfeitures on a tier-by-tier basis, applying 
an escalating per-unit forfeiture amount separately to each successive tier.50  
16. In Syntax Brillian and Regent, we applied the following tiers and per-unit penalties for 
violation of our DTV tuner requirements: 
0-1000 units:  $50 per unit
1001-2500 units:  $75 per unit
2501-5000 units:  $100 per unit
5001-10,000 units:  $125 per unit
10,001-20,000 units:  $150 per unit
20,001-30,000 units:  $175 per unit
30,001-40,000 units:  $200 per unit
40,001-50,000 units:  $225 per unit
50,001+ units:  $250 per unit51
Consistent with Syntax-Brillian and Regent, we will use the tier-by-tier, per-unit methodology articulated 
in those NALs to assess the forfeiture here.   
17. We reject Precor’s claim that since it imports the PVS units from overseas and does not 
manufacture the units in the U.S., it is subject only to the Commission’s import restrictions and not to the 
interstate shipment restrictions.  Section 15.117 makes clear that responsible parties may not ship in 
interstate commerce or import television receivers that do not comply with the DTV tuner requirement.52  
Under Section 2.909 of our rules, the responsible party for purposes of the DTV tuner requirement may 
be a manufacturer or an importer.53 However, neither Section 2.909 nor Section 15.117 contains language 
limiting our authority to enforce the DTV tuner rules such that we may penalize only interstate shipments 
of non-compliant DTV receivers manufactured in the United States.  The language of the DTV Review 
Second Report and Order cited by Precor that describes our overarching objective in enacting the DTV 
tuner rule cannot be read to impose such a restriction.  Therefore, Precor’s interpretation of the DTV tuner 
rule is excessively narrow and we reject it.54
18. Thus, the rule imposes two distinct prohibitions on responsible parties:  it prohibits both 
the importing and interstate shipping of television receivers that do not contain digital tuners. We find, 
however, that treating the importation and subsequent interstate shipment of the same television receiver 
as two separate violations is not warranted.  Given that the DTV tuner rule is meant to ensure that all 
television receiving devices are equipped with a digital tuner, we conclude that the purpose of the rule 
will best be served by treating the importation and subsequent interstate shipment of the same receiver as 
a single violation.  In future forfeiture actions taken for violations of the DTV tuner requirement, we will 
assess the facts of each case in determining how best to enforce the requirements of Section 15.117, under 
the interpretation articulated here.  In this case, there is insufficient information to determine which 
  
49 Syntax-Brillian NAL, 22 FCC Rcd at 10535; Regent NAL, 22 FCC Rcd at 10525.
50 Syntax-Brillian NAL, 22 FCC Rcd at 10535-36; Regent NAL, 22 FCC Rcd at 10525-26.  
51 Syntax-Brillian NAL, 22 FCC Rcd at 10535; Regent NAL, 22 FCC Rcd at 10525.
52 See 47 C.F.R. § 15.117(a). 
53 See 47 C.F.R. § 2.909(b).
54 See supra ¶ 7.
Federal Communications Commission FCC 08-112
8
receivers may have been imported by Precor, but not subsequently shipped interstate.  Therefore, we will 
propose a forfeiture only for those non-DTV-compliant units that Precor shipped in interstate commerce 
after the March 1, 2007 deadline.       
19. Finally, we disagree with Precor’s argument that strict enforcement of the DTV tuner 
requirement to the PVS units would not support either the purpose or intent of the DTV tuner 
requirement.  In a closely analogous situation, the Commission rejected a request by the manufacturer of a 
specialized video system distributed for use in the health care system that we clarify that the DTV tuner 
requirement does not apply to viewing units included in specialized video systems.55 In the PDI Order, 
the manufacturer (PDI) argued that the Commission should not consider its viewing units to be television 
receivers subject to the DTV tuner requirement because the units:  (1) received power through the same 
coaxial cable that provided the video signal to the units; (2) had no place to attach an over-the-air antenna, 
instead receiving video signals only from a central unit through the specialized coaxial cable; and (3) 
could be used only as part of a larger video system that was designed and sold exclusively for the health 
care market.56 The Commission concluded that the PDI viewing units could be used to receive off-the-air 
broadcast signals and therefore were television broadcast receivers as defined in Section 15.3(w) of the 
Rules.57 The Commission also found no merit in PDI’s argument that requiring its viewing units to 
include digital tuners would not advance the goals of the DTV tuner requirement.58 Rather, the 
Commission noted that its objective in adopting the DTV tuner requirement was to maximize the number 
of television receivers containing a digital tuner in the market, with a final goal that all new television 
receiver products include a digital tuner as quickly as possible.59 While the Commission acknowledged 
that the PDI viewing units differed from most television receivers in that they were designed to receive 
service from a separate antenna connected through a cable, rather than an attached antenna, this did not 
alter the fact that the viewing units would not be able to receive off-the-air television signals when analog 
television service ends unless they include a DTV tuner.60 The Commission concluded, moreover, that “it 
would be inconsistent with [the goals underlying the DTV tuner requirement] to establish a process that 
would provide favorable treatment of requests for waiver of the DTV tuner requirement for TV receivers 
used in specialized video systems.”61  
20. Notwithstanding Precor’s claims that its customers are commercial health clubs that will 
not use the PVS units to view over-the-air broadcasts, we find that those devices, like the viewing units at 
issue in the PDI Order, are capable of receiving over-the-air broadcast television signals and therefore are 
  
55 See Requirements for Digital Television Receiving Capability, Order, 21 FCC Rcd 9478, 9479-80 (2006) (“PDI 
Order”).
56 Id. at 9479.
57 Id. at 9479-80.  See 47 C.F.R. § 15.3(w) (defining a television broadcast receiver as “a device designed to receive 
television pictures that are broadcast simultaneously with sound on the television channels authorized under part 73 
of this chapter”).
58 Id. at 9480.
59 Id.
60 Id.
61 Id.  We note that the Commission granted PDI a limited waiver of the DTV tuner requirement to allow it 
additional time to bring its existing models into compliance, recognizing that the process for meeting the safety 
requirements for equipment used in medical facilities, coupled with PDI’s position as a smaller manufacturer, may 
pose difficulties for PDI in meeting the March 1, 2007 deadline.  Id. By contrast, Precor never sought such a 
waiver, nor does not argue that it encountered particular difficulties in bringing its PVS units into compliance with 
the DTV tuner requirement by the March 1, 2007 deadline.  To the contrary, after the Bureau initiated its 
investigation, Precor promptly began distributing PVS units with digital tuners.  
Federal Communications Commission FCC 08-112
9
television broadcast receivers subject to the DTV tuner requirement.  In the Regent NAL, Regent claimed 
that it should not be subject to forfeiture because, although its devices were subject to the DTV tuner 
requirement, most of its customers were commercial or educational organizations that used the devices as 
monitors, rather than television receivers, and the company did not emphasize the devices’ analog tuner 
capabilities in its marketing efforts.  In rejecting these arguments, we noted that the DTV tuner 
requirement does not exclude television receivers used as monitors and, notwithstanding Regent’s claims 
about its customer base and its marketing efforts, it was likely that Regent’s devices would be used as 
television receivers at some point.62 Similarly, no exception to the DTV tuner requirement exists for units 
like those at issue here.  As we noted in the Regent NAL, we will not assume that owners of these devices 
will never attempt to use them to receive over-the-air broadcasts, nor will we accept Precor’s marketing 
strategy as a mitigating factor.  In any event, our research found a thriving consumer market for used 
commercial-quality exercise equipment, including Precor’s PVS units.63 Thus, it is probable that some of 
these products will find their way to consumers, who may be unaware that Precor’s PVS units will not 
receive over the air digital broadcasts.  Therefore, for all the reasons stated above, we reject Precor’s 
arguments and find that a significant forfeiture is appropriate here.
21. Due to Precor’s confidentiality request, we will not specify in this NAL the precise number 
of non-compliant units that Precor shipped interstate in apparent violation of our rules.  Based on the 
record in this case, however, Precor’s violations merit a large proposed forfeiture.  The regulatory 
deadlines at issue have been in place for some time – manufacturers and importers have known about the 
DTV tuner requirement since 2002.  Precor nevertheless continued to ship interstate small-size screen 
receivers that do not comply with the DTV tuner requirement until September 18, 2007, more than six 
months after the March 1, 2007 deadline.  These unlawful interstate shipments were substantial in terms 
of the number non-DTV compliant units.  For these reasons, and based on the tiered, per unit approach 
described above, we propose a forfeiture of $357,900 for Precor’s willful and repeated interstate shipment 
of television receivers that do not comply with the DTV tuner requirement in violation of Section 
15.117(i)(1)(iii) of the Rules.
III. ORDERING CLAUSES
22. Accordingly, IT IS ORDERED that, pursuant to Section 503(b) of the Act, and Section 
1.80 of the Rules, Precor Incorporated is NOTIFIED of its APPARENT LIABILITY FOR A 
FORFEITURE in the amount of three hundred fifty-seven thousand, nine hundred dollars ($357,900) for 
willful and repeated violations of Section 15.117(i)(1)(iii).
23. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that, pursuant to Section 1.80 of the Rules, within thirty 
days of the release date of this Notice of Apparent Liability for Forfeiture, Precor Incorporated SHALL 
PAY the full amount of the proposed forfeiture or SHALL FILE a written statement seeking reduction or 
cancellation of the proposed forfeiture.
  
62 Regent NAL, 22 FCC Rcd at 10526.  Indeed, we noted that Regent’s devices were sold to consumers by retailers 
like Costco and Best Buy.  Regent NAL, 22 FCC Rcd at 10526.  
63 Although Precor claims that its new PVS units are sold exclusively to commercial users rather than consumers, 
we found several used units and related equipment available for sale online to individuals.  See, e.g., 
http://www.globalfitness.com/detail_elliptical_training_machine.asp?id=357 (offering a “remanufactured” Precor 
treadmill and 17’’ “flat screen tv”); http://www.usedgymequipment.com/precor/precor_966i.htm (offering a used 
treadmill with PVS unit); http://sporting-goods.pricegrabber.com/treadmills/m/44277469/ (showing four merchants 
selling used treadmills with PVS units); 
http://www.treadmillsrus.com/component/page,shop.product_details/flypage,shop.flypage/product_id,21/category_i
d,14/manufacturer_id,0/option,com_virtuemart/Itemid,1/vmcchk,1/ (offering a used 12’’ PVS unit).  
Federal Communications Commission FCC 08-112
10
24. 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/Account 
Number and FRN Number referenced above.  Payment by check or money order may be mailed to 
Federal Communications Commission, P.O. Box 979088, St. Louis, MO 63197-9000.  Payment by 
overnight mail may be sent to U.S. Bank – Government Lockbox #979088, SL-MO-C2-GL, 1005 
Convention Plaza, St. Louis, MO 63101.  Payment by wire transfer may be made to ABA Number 
021030004, receiving bank TREAS/NYC, and account number 27000001.  For payment by credit card, 
an FCC Form 159 (Remittance Advice) must be submitted.  When completing the FCC Form 159, enter 
the NAL/Account number in block number 23A (call sign/other ID), and enter the letters “FORF” in 
block number 24A (payment type code).  Requests for full payment under an installment plan should be 
sent to:  Chief Financial Officer -- Financial Operations, 445 12th Street, S.W., Room 1-A625, 
Washington, D.C. 20554.  Please contact the Financial Operations Group Help Desk at 1-877-480-3201 
or Email: ARINQUIRIES@fcc.gov with any questions regarding payment procedures.
25. The response, if any, must be mailed to the Office of the Secretary, Federal 
Communications Commission, 445 12th Street, S.W., Washington, D.C. 20554, ATTN: Enforcement 
Bureau – Spectrum Enforcement Division, and must include the NAL/Acct. No. referenced in the caption.
26. 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; 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.
27. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that a copy of this Notice of Apparent Liability for 
Forfeiture shall be sent by first class mail and certified mail return receipt requested to counsel for Precor 
Incorporated, C. Douglas Jarrett, Esq., Keller and Heckman LLP, 1001 G Street, N.W., Suite 500 West, 
Washington, DC 20001.
FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION
Marlene H. Dortch
Secretary