Click here for Adobe Acrobat version
Click here for Microsoft Word version

******************************************************** 
                      NOTICE
********************************************************

This document was converted from Microsoft Word.

Content from the original version of the document such as
headers, footers, footnotes, endnotes, graphics, and page numbers
will not show up in this text version.

All text attributes such as bold, italic, underlining, etc. from the
original document will not show up in this text version.

Features of the original document layout such as
columns, tables, line and letter spacing, pagination, and margins
will not be preserved in the text version.

If you need the complete document, download the
Microsoft Word or Adobe Acrobat version.

*****************************************************************



                           Before the
                Federal Communications Commission
                     Washington, D.C. 20554


                                )
                                )
In the Matter of                 )
                                )
IDS TELCOM, LLC                  )    File No. EB-01-IH-0017h
OCN# 8368                        )    NAL/Acct. No. 200132080039
                                )    FRN 0006-7988-13
                                )
                                )


                        FORFEITURE ORDER

   Adopted:  June 20, 2002              Released:  June 21, 2002   

By the Chief, Enforcement Bureau:


                        I.   INTRODUCTION

In this Order, we issue a monetary forfeiture to  IDS Telcom, LLC 
(``IDS'') for willful  violation of  47 C.F.R.   52.15(f).   The 
noted violation  involves  IDS's  failure to  report  its  number 
utilization and  forecast data.   Based upon  our review  of  the 
facts and circumstances of this case, including IDS's response to 
our Notice of Apparent Liability (``NAL''),1 we conclude that IDS 
has justified a reduction of the proposed forfeiture and that  it 
is liable for a forfeiture in the amount of  $3,000.



                         II.       BACKGROUND



On April 24, 2001, the Chief, Enforcement Bureau, acting pursuant 
to delegated authority, issued a Notice of Apparent Liability for 
Forfeiture (``NAL'') to  IDS, proposing a  $6,000 forfeiture.  We 
issued the NAL because it appeared that IDS had failed to  report 
on its actual and forecast number  usage by filing FCC Form  502, 
the   North   American   Numbering   Plan   Numbering    Resource 
Utilization/Forecast (``NRUF'') Report that was due on  September 
15, 2000.2 The NAL referenced a letter of inquiry that we sent to 
IDS on January 29, 2001  concerning its apparent failure to  file 
the September 15, 2000 NRUF report. 

Carriers are required  to report for  each separate legal  entity 
represented  by  an  Operating  Company  Number  (``OCN'').3   It 
appeared that IDS  failed to  file an  NRUF report  for one  OCN, 
which was referenced  in our NAL.   We therefore determined  that 
IDS had apparently violated section 52.15(f) of the  Commission's 
rules, which requires U.S. carriers receiving numbering resources 
from the North American Numbering Plan Administrator (``NANPA''), 
a Pooling Administrator,  or another telecommunications  carrier, 
to report  semiannually  on  their  actual  and  forecast  number 
usage.4

IDS responded  to  the  NAL and  requested  cancellation  of  the 
forfeiture.  IDS  contends  that  it filed  the  NRUF  report  on 
January 25,  2001  and  subsequently  refiled  the  report  after 
receiving our letter  of inquiry.  In  addition, IDS argues  that 
the reporting  requirements  of section  52.15(f)  were  recently 
adopted, and that it has implemented procedures to ensure  timely 
compliance with the reporting requirements in the future. 

                       III.    DISCUSSION



The NAL  explicitly  states  that  the  proposed  forfeiture  was 
assessed in accordance with applicable statutory provisions,  the 
Commission's rules and the Commission's Forfeiture Guidelines.  5  
Section 503(b)  of  the Act  requires  that, in  examining  IDS's 
response, we 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.6 IDS  has 
not presented mitigating evidence that would justify cancellation 
of the forfeiture.

IDS has demonstrated that it  filed the NRUF report by  facsimile 
on January 25, 2001.  IDS also argues that  its actions were  not 
``willful.''  However,  the  NRUF  report at  issue  was  due  on 
September 15, 2000,  and, absent  a waiver, would  not have  been 
accepted  for  filing   on  January  25,   2001.7  IDS  has   not 
demonstrated that it  received a waiver  of the filing  deadline. 
Moreover, contrary to IDS's  assertion, the term ``willful,''  as 
used in section  503(b) of the  Act, does not  require a  finding 
that the rule violation was intentional or that the violator  was 
aware that it was committing a rule violation.8  In view of these 
circumstances, we find that rescission of the monetary forfeiture 
is not warranted. Additionally, IDS's pledge of future compliance 
and its implementation of procedures to ensure the timeliness  of 
future NRUF filings do not  justify reduction or cancellation  of 
the proposed forfeiture penalty.9 

Nevertheless, IDS's  submission  does demonstrate  a  good  faith 
(albeit  tardy)   attempt  to   comply  with   the  NRUF   filing 
requirement.  We  therefore  conclude  that a  reduction  of  the 
forfeiture  amount  is  warranted.10   We  have  reviewed   IDS's 
response in light of the  statutory factors set forth above,  and 
find  that  IDS  has  justified  a  reduction  of  the   proposed 
forfeiture penalty from $6,000 to $3,000. 

                    IV.     ORDERING CLAUSES


Accordingly, IT IS ORDERED, pursuant  to 47 U.S.C.  503(b),  and 
47 C.F.R.  0.111, 0.311 and  1.80, that IDS Telcom, LLC  FORFEIT 
to the United States the  sum of three thousand dollars  ($3,000) 
for willfully violating the Commission's rules that require  U.S. 
carriers to report actual and forecast number usage.

Payment of the forfeiture may be made by mailing a check or money 
order,  payable  to  the  order  of  the  Federal  Communications 
Commission, to the Forfeiture Collection Section, Finance Branch, 
Federal  Communications  Commission,  P.O.  Box  73482,  Chicago, 
Illinois 60673-7482,  within  30  days of  the  release  of  this 
Forfeiture  Order.11    The   payment  MUST   INCLUDE   the   FCC 
Registration Number (FRN) referenced  above and also should  note 
the NAL/Acct. No.  referenced above.   If the  forfeiture is  not 
paid within the period specified, the case may be referred to the 
Department of Justice for collection pursuant to 47 U.S.C.  504.  
A request for payment of the full amount of this Forfeiture Order 
under an installment plan should  be sent to: Chief, Revenue  and 
Receivables Operations Group, 445 12th Street, S.W.,  Washington, 
D.C. 20554.12
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that a copy of this Forfeiture Order  shall 
be sent by Certified Mail/Return Receipt Requested, to Miyoshi D. 
Smith, IDS Telcom, LLC, 1525 N.W. 167th Street, 2nd Floor, Miami, 
FL  33169.  


                         FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION
                    

     

                         David H. Solomon
                         Chief, Enforcement Bureau
_________________________

1  See  IDS Long  Distance, 16  FCC Rcd  8620 (EB  2001).    IDS 
reports  that  its  name  has  been  changed  from  ``IDS   Long 
Distance'' to ``IDS Telecom, LLC.''

2 The NRUF  reports are due on  or before February  1 and on  or 
before August  1 of  each year.   See 47  C.F.R.   52.15(f)(6).  
However, we note that the deadline for filing reports due August 
1, 2000 was extended to  September 15, 2000. Numbering  Resource 
Optimization, CC Docket No. 99-200, 15 FCC Rcd 17005 (2000).

3   See 47 C.F.R.  52.15(f)(3)(ii).  

4 Numbering Resource Optimization, Report and Order and  Further 
Notice of Proposed Rulemaking  in CC Docket  No. 99-200, 15  FCC 
Rcd 7574  (2000)(``NRO  Order''); recon.  and  clarification  in 
part, Second Report  and Order, Order  on Reconsideration in  CC 
Docket 96-98 and CC Docket 99-200, and Second Further Notice  of 
Proposed Rulemaking  in  CC Docket  99-200,  16 FCC  Rcd  306  ( 
2000)(``NRO Recon. Order'').

5  47  U.S.C.   503(b);  47  C.F.R.   1.80;  The  Commission's 
Forfeiture Policy Statement and Amendment of Section 1.80 of the 
Rules to Incorporate the Forfeiture Guidelines, 12 FCC Rcd 17087 
(1997),  recon.  denied,  15  FCC  Rcd  303  (1999)(``Forfeiture 
Guidelines'')(codified at 47 C.F.R.  1.80(b)(4) Note).

6   47 U.S.C.  503(b)(2)(D).

7 In  addition, it  appears  that IDS  may not  understand  NRUF 
filing procedures. Filing  advice, and material  for filing  FCC 
Form 502,  North American  Numbering Plan  ``Numbering  Resource 
Utilization/Forecast   (NRUF)   Report''    can   be    obtained 
electronically from the North American Numbering Administrator's 
web  site   http://www.nanpa.com/nruf/index.html.    The   North 
American Number Administrator may also be contacted by telephone 
at (202) 533-2654 or 202-533-2657. Carriers may arrange to  file 
NRUF reports via  facsimile by first  contacting NANPA at  (202) 
534-2654  for  instructions  and  information  concerning   fees 
associated with facsimile filing.  See  also, NRO Order, 15  FCC 
Rcd at 7598 (2000)(directing  NANPA to establish procedures  for 
permitting small  carriers  to  use  facsimile  transmission  of 
numbering data).

8  See, e.g., Valley Page, 12 FCC Rcd 3087, 3088-89 (WTB 1997).     

9  See Station KGVL, Inc., 42 FCC 2d 258, 259 (1973).  See  also 
Coleman Enterprises, Inc.,  16 FCC Rcd  10016, 10020-21  (2001), 
citing Long  Distance  Services,  Inc., 13  FCC  Rcd  4444  (CCB 
1998)(all common  carriers  are  required  to  comply  with  the 
Commission's  rules,  regardless  of  size  or  resources,   and 
remedial efforts  do not  alter  the  fact that  violations  had 
taken place or justify mitigation). 

10  See, e.g., Data Investments, Inc.,16 FCC Rcd 7905 (EB 2001).  

11  See  47 C.F.R.  1.80(h).  

12  See 47 C.F.R.  1.1914.