Click here for Microsoft Word Version
********************************************************
NOTICE
********************************************************
This document was converted from
WordPerfect or Word to ASCII Text format.
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
Word or WordPerfect version or Adobe Acrobat version (above).
*****************************************************************
Before the
Federal Communications Commission
Washington, D.C. 20554
In the Matter of ) File No. EB -00-IH-0057
)
Matrix Telecom, Inc. ) NAL/Acct. No. X32080022
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
Adopted: September 24, 2001 Released: September
28, 2001
By the Commission:
1. In this Order, we dismiss as untimely the Petition
for Reconsideration filed by Matrix Telecom, Inc.
(``Matrix'') on March 23, 2001 of the Commission's
Forfeiture Order1 in the above captioned matter. We also
address a Motion for Stay of Enforcement and Request for
Installment Plan filed by Matrix the same day.
2. Section 405 of the Communications Act of 1934, as
amended, 47 U.S.C. § 405, requires that a petition for
reconsideration be filed within 30 days from the date upon
which public notice of the action complained of is given.2
In this case, public notice of the action was given February
20, 2001, the date the Forfeiture Order was released.3
Therefore, a petition for reconsideration of the Forfeiture
Order had to be filed with the Commission by March 22, 2001,
in order to be considered timely. As noted, Matrix filed
its petition for reconsideration on March 23, 2001.
Consequently, its petition was not timely filed. The
deadline for filing petitions for reconsideration is
statutory and cannot be waived by the Commission except
where the Commission fails to provide notice of its decision
to parties as required by its rules. See Reuters Ltd. V.
FCC, 781 F. 2d 946, 952 (D.C. Cir. 1986) (Commission acted
beyond its lawful authority when it entertained the belated
petition for reconsideration); Heritage Cablevision
Associates of Dallas, L.P. and Texas Cable TV Association,
Complainants v. Texas Utilities Electric Company,
Respondent, 7 FCC Rcd 4192, 4193 (1992). We therefore
dismiss Matrix's petition.
3. On March 23, 2001, Matrix also filed a Motion for
Stay of Enforcement and Request for Installment Plan.
Matrix seeks to stay the effect of the Forfeiture Order
pending resolution of its Petition for Reconsideration and
requests that it be permitted to pay the forfeiture in
installments if the forfeiture order is affirmed. In light
of the dismissal of the Petition for Reconsideration, we
dismiss the request for a stay of enforcement as moot.
Matrix's request for an installment plan will be referred to
the Chief, Revenue and Receivables Operations Group in
accordance with our rules for dealing with requests for full
payment by installment. See 47 C.F.R. § 1.1914; Forfeiture
Order, p. 3 at ¶ 9.
4. Accordingly, IT IS ORDERED THAT, pursuant to
Section 405 of the Act,4 and Section 1.106 of the
Commission's rules,5 the Petition for Reconsideration filed
by Matrix Telecom, Inc. is HEREBY DISMISSED.
5. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED THAT Matrix's Motion for
Stay of Enforcement IS DISMISSED as moot, and its Request
for Installment Plan IS REFERRED to the Chief, Revenue and
Receivables Operations Group for consideration.6
FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION
Magalie Roman Salas
Secretary
_________________________
1 Matrix Telecom, Inc., Forfeiture Order, 16 FCC Rcd 10553
(2001).
2 See also 47 C.F.R. §§ 1.4(b) and 1.106(f).
3 See 47 C.F.R. § 1.4(b)(2).
4 47 U.S.C. § 405.
5 47 C.F.R. § 1.106.
6 See also 47 C.F.R. § 1.1914.