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


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

Indigo Wireless, Inc.








File No.: EB-SED-13-00009306

NAL/Acct. No.: 201132100018

FRN: 0009120999

Memorandum Opinion and ORDER

Adopted: November 5, 2014 Released: November 6, 2014

By the Commission:

We deny the Application for Review filed by Indigo Wireless, Inc. (Indigo Wireless) challenging the Enforcement Bureau's assessment of a $39,000 forfeiture for Indigo Wireless's failure to offer consumers the required number or percentage of digital wireless handset models that met or exceeded the radio frequency interference standards for hearing aid compatibility in 2009. The Commission adopted the hearing aid compatibility rules to enhance the ability of consumers with hearing loss to access digital wireless telecommunications. Those rules recognized the immediate need for such access and determined that individuals with hearing loss should not be denied the public safety and convenience benefits of digital wireless telephones.

On June 20, 2014, the Enforcement Bureau (Bureau) issued a Forfeiture Order against Indigo Wireless assessing a $39,000 forfeiture for its apparent willful and repeated violation of Section 20.19(c)(3)(ii) of the Commission's rules (Rules) by failing to offer the required number or percentage of hearing aid-compatible handset models that met or exceeded the M3 rating for nine months during the 2009 reporting period. The Bureau concluded that Indigo Wireless failed to meet the applicable handset model deployment benchmark by two handset models and that the proposed upward forfeiture adjustment based on the duration of the violation was appropriate.

On July 21, 2014, Indigo Wireless filed an Application for Review challenging the Bureau's assessment of the $39,000 forfeiture. Indigo Wireless argues that the Bureau erred by "discount[ing] the diligent, good-faith efforts of a small service provider to faithfully comply with the Commission's HAC rules in the absence of adequate official resources...." Indigo Wireless also argues that the Bureau "erroneously discounted" Indigo Wireless's assertion that several contemporaneous Notices of Apparent Liability for Forfeiture with "very similar HAC-related fact situations" had proposed lesser forfeitures. Finally, Indigo Wireless generally references the company's "annual residential subscriber revenue" that it reported in its 2011 FCC Form 499-A Telecommunications Reporting Worksheet in an apparent effort to demonstrate an inability to pay the assessed forfeiture.

Upon review of the Application for Review and the entire record, and finding no basis in the Application for Review to modify the Bureau's decisions, we conclude that Indigo Wireless has failed to demonstrate that the Bureau erred. We uphold the forfeiture amount for the reasons set forth in the Forfeiture Order.

ACCORDINGLY, IT IS ORDERED that, pursuant to Section 4(i) and 5(c)(5) of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended, and Section 1.115 of the Rules, the Application for Review filed by the Indigo Wireless, Inc. on July 21, 2014, IS DENIED, and the Forfeiture Order IS AFFIRMED.


Marlene H. Dortch