FCC Fines Firms for Unlawful Operation on GMRS Frequencies

[ARRL]

The FCC has assessed Remel Inc and its parent company Thermo Fisher Scientific Company Inc $30,000 for “willful and repeated” unlawful radio operations on a General Mobile Radio Service (GMRS) frequency for more than 9 years. The Commission issued the Notice of Apparent Liability and Forfeiture (NAL) on June 13. According to the FCC, GMRS is a land mobile radio service available to individuals...





More...

 

[Onthecoast]

Ouch. But the story is unclear. It says they notified them in 2012, so did they continue to use them after the warning or were the fined anyway even after they stopped?

 

[Shioda]

Ouch. But the story /is unclear. It says they notified them in 2012, so did they continue to use them after the warning or were the fined anyway even after they stopped?

Looks like the FCC didn't know about the unauthorized use until the guys told them about it during the licensing process. No warning letter is necessary if the party engages in conduct for which a license is required, and the company doesn't have a license.

However, I think the FCC is stretching it in basing the fine on conduct that occurred more than one year prior to the NAL. The law is clear the NAL must be issued within one year of the date of the violation. Since the FCC couldn't fine them for any conduct other than for one day (the NAL was sent exactly one day before one year after the company stopped using the radios), how can the FCC properly include these violations in determining to increase the fine? Court would probably say no way. So I would tell them to ignore it and fight it in court.

 

[Zagadka]

However, I think the FCC is stretching it in basing the fine on conduct that occurred more than one year prior to the NAL.

What you want to bet that Thermo Fisher Scientific Company Inc is a non-union shop?

 

[Mudfoot]

What's the union reference about?

 

[TonyV225]

op:

 

[Zagadka]

The administration has a penchant for making life difficult for non-ubionized businesses. Two current examples are the Justice dept. suits against Dollar General and BMW in South Carolina. They are both being sued for the "discriminating" by requiring pre-employment criminal background checks. Both are non-union (or so I've read). Remember too the hassle Boeing got when it tried to move some operations to SC.

Shioda's comments just stirred the thought. I could of course be way off base but it also could explain why the big fine went out at the last minute like it did.

/tinfoil

 

[Shioda]

Could be non-union. But I bet since sequester, there has been pressure on the agency to assess higher fines and collect more money. Happened a few years ago when there were several lawsuits against dealers trying to collect fines.