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                        )
                              )    
CenturyTel, Inc., CenturyTel            )    File No. EB-04-IH-
0012
of Washington, Inc., CenturyTel of      )    NAL Account No. 
200432080136
Cowiche, Inc., and CenturyTel of   )
Inter Island, Inc.            )
                              )    
Apparent Liability for Forfeiture            )    FRN No. 0004-
3651-44


                  NOTICE OF APPARENT LIABILITY 
                         FOR FORFEITURE 

     Adopted:  May 11, 2004                            Released:  
     May 13, 2004

By the Chief, Enforcement Bureau:

I.   INTRODUCTION 

     1.   In this Notice of Apparent Liability for Forfeiture 
(``NAL''), we find that CenturyTel, Inc., CenturyTel of 
Washington, Inc., CenturyTel of Cowiche, Inc., and CenturyTel of  
Inter Island, Inc. (collectively, ``CenturyTel''), during the 
period November 24, 2003 to April 14, 2004, apparently violated 
section 52.26(a) of the Commission's rules by willfully and 
repeatedly failing to route calls from CenturyTel's customers in 
Washington to wireless customers with ported numbers.1  Based on 
our review of the facts and circumstances of this case, and for 
the reasons discussed below, we find that CenturyTel is 
apparently liable for a monetary forfeiture in the amount of one 
hundred thousand dollars ($100,000).

II.  BACKGROUND

     2.   Number portability is, ``the ability of users of 
telecommunications services to retain, at the same location, 
existing telephone numbers without impairment of quality, 
reliability, or convenience when switching from one 
telecommunications carrier to another.''2  Under the 
Communications Act of 1934, as amended, (the ``Act''), all 
telecommunications carriers have a duty to provide, to the extent 
technically feasible, number portability in accordance with 
requirements prescribed by the Commission.3

     3.   In 1996, the Commission required all local exchange 
carriers (``LECs'') to begin a phased deployment of local number 
portability (``LNP'') within the 100 largest metropolitan 
statistical areas (``MSAs''). 4  The Commission explained that 
``the ability of end users to retain their telephone numbers when 
changing service providers gives customers flexibility in the 
quality, price, and variety of telecommunications services they 
can choose to purchase.''5  On reconsideration, the Commission 
clarified that LECs need only provide number portability within 
the 100 largest MSAs for switches in which another carrier made a 
specific, bona fide, number portability request.6  Additionally, 
the Commission extended the number portability requirement to 
commercial mobile radio service (``CMRS'') providers.7  CMRS 
carriers were required to have the capability to query number 
portability databases in order to deliver calls from their 
networks to ported numbers anywhere in the country by December 
31, 1998.8  Three categories of CMRS providers - cellular, 
broadband personal communications service, and covered 
specialized mobile radio providers - were directed to offer 
number portability by June 30, 1999.9  After several extensions, 
the Commission established November 24, 2003 as the deadline for 
wireless-to-wireless number portability for the top 100 MSAs.10

     4.   Regardless of the status of a carrier's obligation to 
provide number portability, all carriers have the duty to route 
calls to ported numbers.  In other words, carriers must ensure 
that their call routing procedures do not result in dropped calls 
to ported numbers.  In this regard, the Commission stated 
clearly:

     We  emphasize   that  a   carrier  operating   a   non-
     portability-capable switch  must still  properly  route 
     calls originated by customers served by that switch  to 
     ported  numbers.   When  the  switch  operated  by  the 
     carrier designated  to perform  the number  portability 
     database query is non-portability-capable, that carrier 
     could either send  it to  a portability-capable  switch 
     operated by that carrier to  do the database query,  or 
     enter into an  arrangement with another  carrier to  do 
     the query.11

     5.   Furthermore, in adopting, with some modification, 
recommendations of the North American Numbering Council 
(``NANC'') as set forth in a Working Group Report,12 the 
Commission clearly imposed requirements on the carrier 
immediately preceding the terminating carrier, designated the 
``N-1 carrier,'' to ensure that number portability databases are 
queried and thus that calls are properly routed.13  Currently, 
call routing is accomplished by use of Location Routing Numbers 
(``LRNs'').14  Under the LRN method, a unique ten-digit number is 
assigned to each central office switch.15  The routing 
information for end users who have ported their telephone numbers 
to another carrier is stored in a database, with the LRNs of the 
switches that serve the ported subscribers.  Carriers routing 
calls to customers with ported numbers query this database to 
obtain the LRN that corresponds to the dialed number.16  This 
query is performed for all calls to switches from which at least 
one number has been ported.17  In adopting the Working Group 
Report, the Commission noted that if the N-1 carrier does not 
perform the database query, but instead relies on another entity 
to perform the query, the other entity may charge the N-1 carrier 
in accordance with long-term number portability cost allocation 
and recovery guidelines.18  

     6.   CenturyTel provides local exchange service in 22 states 
in rural markets and small-to-mid-sized cities.  CenturyTel also 
offers long distance service, Internet access, and data 
services.19  After receiving information that, post-
implementation of wireless-to-wireless number portability, 
CenturyTel may not have been routing calls from CenturyTel 
customers in Washington to wireless customers with ported 
numbers, the Enforcement Bureau (``Bureau'') issued a Letter of 
Inquiry to CenturyTel requesting information on this issue.20
III. DISCUSSION

     7.   Under section 503(b)(1) 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 monetary forfeiture penalty.21  In order 
to impose such a forfeiture penalty, the Commission must issue a 
notice of apparent liability, the notice must be received, and 
the person against whom the notice has been issued must have an 
opportunity to show, in writing, why no such forfeiture penalty 
should be imposed.22  The Commission will then issue a forfeiture 
if it finds by a preponderance of the evidence that the person 
has willfully or repeatedly violated the Act or a Commission 
rule.23  

     8.   We find below that CenturyTel apparently failed to 
properly route all calls to ported numbers for which CenturyTel 
was the N-1 carrier.  Based on the preponderance of evidence, we 
therefore conclude that CenturyTel is apparently liable for a 
forfeiture of one hundred thousand dollars ($100,000) for 
apparently willfully and repeatedly violating Commission orders 
and section 52.26(a) of the Commission's rules.

     A.   CenturyTel Apparently Has Willfully and Repeatedly 
       Failed to Route Calls to Wireless Customers Who Have 
       Ported Numbers 

     9.   CenturyTel concedes that ``[u]nder the Commission's 
rules, the carrier in the call routing path that immediately 
precedes the terminating carrier is responsible for ensuring that 
database queries are performed.''24  Further, CenturyTel 
correctly states that ``the N-1 carrier is responsible for 
ensuring that the database query is performed to effectuate 
number portability.''25  According to CenturyTel, ``[f]or a local 
call made by CenturyTel's customer to a wireless customer who has 
a ported telephone number, CenturyTel's LNP-capable switch 
performs the database query necessary to obtain the LRN that 
corresponds to the dialed telephone number.  Based on this 
information, CenturyTel then routes the call to the wireless 
carrier serving the ported number.''26  

     10.  During the relevant period, however, not all of 
CenturyTel's switches were LNP-capable.  CenturyTel stated that 
as of February 24, 2004, more than two months after the 
Enforcement Bureau launched its investigation, it was not LNP-
capable in 20 switches in the state of Washington.27  According 
to CenturyTel, those switches were not LNP-capable until April 
14, 2004.28  CenturyTel takes the position that in those 
instances where it was not LNP-capable, and it did not have a 
direct trunk with the porting wireless carrier, 29 it discharged 
its N-1 carrier duty by routing local calls to an incumbent LEC 
to perform the database query.30  Where CenturyTel did not have 
an LNP-capable switch and had a direct trunk with the porting 
wireless provider, however, CenturyTel routed all local and 
extended area service wireless calls to the porting wireless 
carrier.31  Then, according to CenturyTel, ``[i]f the porting 
wireless carrier does not perform a database query ... , the 
CenturyTel customer receives an outgoing message indicating that 
the wireless subscriber's number is not in service.''32  

     11.  The record is undisputed that where CenturyTel did not 
have LNP-capable switches and had a direct trunk with the porting 
wireless provider, CenturyTel default routed all local wireless 
calls to the porting wireless carrier.33  Unless this wireless 
carrier performed the database query, the CenturyTel customer's 
call was dropped.  Therefore, CenturyTel's call routing practice 
in Washington apparently violated the Commission's orders 
regarding the routing of calls to ported numbers and section 
52.26(a) of the Commission's rules.  

     12.  CenturyTel argues that if a LEC, such as CenturyTel, is 
not yet required to be LNP-capable, there is an ambiguity 
regarding its obligation to perform (or have performed) database 
queries and thus an ambiguity regarding its obligation to route 
calls.34  According to CenturyTel, ``the Commission should deem 
it unlawful for a porting wireless carrier to refuse to perform 
database queries for calls received from a non-LNP-capable 
carrier destined for a ported wireless number.''35

     13.  We disagree.  The Commission's rules are clear 
regarding the obligation to route calls and to query the number 
portability database.  Since the Second Report and Order in 1997, 
the Commission has required the N-1 carrier to ensure that the 
number portability database query is performed.36  No exception 
exists for non-LNP-capable carriers.  Our conclusion is supported 
by the NANC Local Number Portability Administration Working Group 
Report on Wireless Wireline Integration, relied on by CenturyTel 
in response to the Bureau's LOI.37  This report specifically 
states that where the N-1 carrier, either a LEC or an IXC, is not 
LNP-capable, the N-1 carrier ``should arrange with [another 
carrier] to terminate default routed calls.''38

     14.  In support of its position that the Commission's 
requirements are ambiguous, CenturyTel relies on its own prior 
requests for rule changes and third party statements made in ex 
parte letters and NANC filings describing the number portability 
requirements.  The third party statements and filings, however, 
do not support CenturyTel's position.  They also demonstrate that 
CenturyTel had knowledge of its call routing requirements.

     15.  First, CenturyTel's reliance on ex parte letters it 
filed with the Commission last year in the Telephone Number 
Portability docket to support its contention of ambiguity is 
misplaced.39  In these ex parte letters, CenturyTel asked the 
Commission to require a wireless customer's former wireless 
service provider to perform the LNP database query and transit 
the call to the new wireless service provider, without charge to 
the LEC. 40  Notably, CenturyTel did not therein contend that the 
rule was ambiguous.  CenturyTel merely asked the Commission to 
change the current rule to require the former ``N'' carrier, 
instead of the N-1 carrier, to bear responsibility for the 
database query in this particular situation.  A request for a 
change in the Commission's rules does not release CenturyTel from 
complying with our rules.  On the contrary, the letters 
demonstrate that CenturyTel was aware that our rules require the 
N-1 carrier either to perform the database query or to make 
arrangements with another carrier to do so.

     16.  Similarly, we reject CenturyTel's argument that a 
request for clarification filed by Alltel with NANC supports the 
conclusion that our rules are ambiguous. 41  CenturyTel asserts 
that Alltel ``raised with the [NANC] the issue of whether 
wireless carriers should be obligated to perform default number 
portability queries when the N-1 carrier fails to perform the 
query.''42  CenturyTel misses the point of Alltel's filing.  
Therein, Alltel explained that in many cases N-1 carriers fail to 
perform the database query, misrouting calls to the ported 
customer's original carrier where the call fails if the original 
carrier does not perform the query.  Importantly, Alltel 
contended that default queries by the original carrier are not a 
``long term solution'' and that ``[t]hese misrouted calls utilize 
facilities of the [original carrier] needlessly at a cost that 
will far exceed dip charges that can be billed back to the N-1 
carrier who failed to perform the [number portability] query.''43  
The Alltel request for clarification does not alter CenturyTel's 
number portability or call routing obligations.

     17.  CenturyTel also argues that compliance with the rule is 
infeasible because it would require traffic to be routed to a 
third party tandem access provider to perform a database query 
and that such routing violates the terms of CenturyTel's 
interconnection agreements with wireless carriers.44  
CenturyTel's feasibility argument is flawed because our rules do 
not require CenturyTel to route traffic to third party tandem 
access providers.  Instead, CenturyTel is permitted to arrange 
for the default wireless carrier that originally serviced the 
ported telephone number to perform the query.  Documents produced 
by CenturyTel indicate that it has performed such database 
queries when another carrier routed calls to a CenturyTel switch 
by default.  Specifically, CenturyTel's documents describe a 
situation where a non-LNP-capable N-1 carrier in Missouri failed 
to perform LNP queries for ported lines and instead routed calls 
by default to CenturyTel's switch.45  CenturyTel performed the 
database queries and properly routed these calls.46  According to 
CenturyTel's document, the N-1 carrier was ``obligated to do'' 
these queries and CenturyTel intended to bill the N-1 carrier for 
them.47  We find that CenturyTel's own practices demonstrate that 
it is feasible to comply with the rule.48  

     18.  CenturyTel contends that it is not ``technically 
possible'' to perform the database query if the CenturyTel switch 
is not LNP-capable49 and that it is not obligated as an N-1 
carrier to negotiate new business arrangements with the tandem 
provider.50  This position is unpersuasive.  As stated above, our 
rules expressly permit the N-1 carrier whose switches are not 
LNP-capable to arrange for another carrier to perform the 
database query.  Moreover, nothing in our rules requires routing 
to a tandem provider.  Finally, during the pre-implementation 
period as a result of the Commission's many specific 
pronouncements regarding the requirements of local number 
portability, CenturyTel had sufficient time and warning to 
negotiate any necessary business arrangements in order to fulfill 
its obligations.

     19.  The Commission has consistently held that the N-1 
carrier has the obligation to ensure that the call routing query 
is performed, that carriers are required to route calls to ported 
numbers, and that compliance with this rule is technically 
feasible for CenturyTel.  Based on the record, we conclude that 
CenturyTel has apparently willfully and repeatedly violated 
Commission orders and section 52.26(a) of the Commission's rules 
by failing to properly route calls to ported wireless numbers by 
either performing the number portability database query or making 
arrangements with another carrier to do so.

  B.   Proposed Forfeiture Amount

     20.  Section 503(b)(2)(B) of the Act authorizes the 
Commission to assess a forfeiture of up to $120,000 for each 
violation or each day of a continuing violation, up to a 
statutory maximum of $1,200,000 for a single act or failure to 
act.51  In determining the appropriate forfeiture amount, we 
consider the factors enumerated in section 503(b)(2)(D) of the 
Act, including ``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.''

     21.  As discussed above, the Commission has consistently 
held that the N-1 carrier has the obligation to ensure that the 
call routing query is performed and that all calls are properly 
routed to ported numbers.  The Commission specifically held in 
its Second Report and Order that number portability is essential 
to meaningful facilities-based competition in the provision of 
local exchange service.52  If carriers, such as CenturyTel, fail 
to ensure that the call routing query is performed and that calls 
are properly routed to ported numbers, the competitive benefits 
of number portability will be diminished.  The Commission has 
been implementing a phased deployment of local number portability 
since 1996 and carriers, such as CenturyTel, have been on notice 
since 1997 that, irrespective of whether their switches are LNP-
capable, they have obligations to route ported numbers.  
CenturyTel's apparent failure to ensure proper call routing to 
ported numbers is counterproductive to the Commission's pro-
competitive goals.  Due to CenturyTel's apparently willful and 
repeated violation of section 52.26(a) of the Commission's rules, 
and the Commission's requirement to route calls properly, we find 
that a proposed forfeiture is warranted.  

     22.  The Commission has not established a base forfeiture 
amount for failure to comply with section 52.26(a).  We note, 
however, that section 503(b)(2)(D)53 of the Act and the 
Forfeiture Policy Statement54 allow the Commission considerable 
flexibility in determining the appropriate forfeiture.55  
Therefore, based on the reasons discussed above, including the 
fact that the record contains evidence only of limited routing 
failures in one state, we find that CenturyTel is apparently 
liable in the amount of one hundred thousand dollars ($100,000). 

IV.  ORDERING CLAUSES

     23.  ACCORDINGLY, IT IS ORDERED THAT, pursuant to section 
503(b) of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended, 47 U.S.C.  
503(b), and sections 0.111, 0.311, and 1.80 of the Commission's 
rules, 47 C.F.R.   0.111, 0.311, and 1.80, CenturyTel, Inc., 
CenturyTel of Washington, Inc., CenturyTel of Cowiche, Inc., and 
CenturyTel of Inter Island, Inc. are hereby NOTIFIED of their 
APPARENT LIABILITY FOR FORFEITURE in the amount of one hundred 
thousand dollars ($100,000) for willfully and repeatedly 
violating Commission orders and section 52.26(a) of the 
Commission's rules, 47 C.F.R.  52.26(a).

     24.  IT IS FURTHER ORDERED THAT, pursuant to section 1.80 of 
the Commission's rules, 47 C.F.R.  1.80, within thirty days of 
the release date of this NOTICE OF APPARENT LIABILITY FOR 
FORFEITURE, CenturyTel, Inc., CenturyTel of Washington, Inc., 
CenturyTel of Cowiche, Inc., and CenturyTel of Inter Island, Inc. 
SHALL PAY the full amount of the proposed forfeiture currently 
outstanding on that date or SHALL FILE a written statement 
seeking reduction or cancellation of the proposed forfeiture.

     25.  Payment of the forfeiture may be made by check or 
similar instrument, payable to the order of the Federal 
Communications Commission.  Such remittance should be made to 
Forfeiture Collection Section, Finance Branch, Federal 
Communications Commission, P.O. Box 73482, Chicago, Illinois 
60673-7482.  The payment must include the NAL/Acct. No. and FRN 
No. referenced above.

     26.  The response, if any, to this NOTICE OF APPARENT 
LIABILITY FOR FORFEITURE must be mailed to William H. Davenport, 
Chief, Investigations and Hearings Division, Enforcement Bureau, 
Federal Communications Commission, 445 12th Street, S.W., Room 3-
B443, Washington, D.C.  20554 and e-mailed to Mr. Davenport at 
william.davenport@fcc.gov in Adobe PDF format.  The response must 
include the NAL/Acct. No. referenced above.

     27.  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 (``GAAP''); 
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.

     28.  Requests for payment of the full amount of this NOTICE 
OF APPARENT LIABILITY FOR FORFEITURE under an installment plan 
should be sent to Chief, Revenue and Receivables Operations 
Group, 445 12th Street, S.W., Washington, D.C.  20554.56

     29.  Under the Small Business Paperwork Relief Act of 2002, 
Pub.L.No. 107-198, 116 Stat. 729 (June 28, 2002), the Commission 
is engaged in a two-year tracking process regarding the size of 
entities involved in forfeitures.  If you qualify as a small 
entity and if you wish to be treated as a small entity for 
tracking purposes, please so certify to us within 30 days of this 
NAL, either in your response to the NAL or in a separate filing 
to be sent to the Investigations and Hearings Division, 
Enforcement Bureau, 445 12th Street, S.W., Washington, D.C.  
20054.  Your certification should indicate whether you, including 
your parent entity and its subsidiaries, meet one of the 
definitions set forth in the list in Attachment A of this NAL.  
This information will be used for tracking purposes only.  Your 
response or failure to respond to this question will have no 
effect on your rights and responsibilities pursuant to section 
503(b) of the Communications Act.  If you have any questions 
regarding any of the information contained in Attachment A, 
please contact the Commission's Office of Communications Business 
Opportunities at (202) 418-0990.

     30.  IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the Enforcement Bureau shall 
send, by certified mail/return receipt requested, a copy of this 
NOTICE OF APPARENT LIABILITY FOR FORFEITURE to Glen F. Post, III, 
Chief Executive Officer, CenturyTel, Inc., 100 CenturyTel Drive, 
Monroe, LA  71203 and to Karen Brinkmann and Tonya Rutherford, 
Latham and Watkins LLP, 555 Eleventh Street, N.W., Suite 1000, 
Washington, D.C.  20004.         


                         FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION


                         David H. Solomon
                         Chief, Enforcement Bureau                         ATTACHMENT A


                FCC List of Small Entities

   As described below, a ``small entity'' may be a small 
                       organization,
  a small governmental jurisdiction, or a small business.

(1)  Small Organization 
Any not-for-profit enterprise that is independently owned 
and operated and 
is not dominant in its field.

  
(2)  Small Governmental Jurisdiction
Governments of cities, counties, towns, townships, villages, 
school districts, or 
special districts, with a population of less than fifty 
thousand.


(3)  Small Business
Any business concern that is independently owned and 
operated and 
is not dominant in its field, and meets the pertinent size 
criterion described below.
  

      Industry Type          Description of Small Business 
                                     Size Standards
                 Cable Services or Systems
                            Special Size Standard - 
Cable Systems                Small Cable Company has 400,000 
                            Subscribers Nationwide or Fewer
Cable and Other Program 
Distribution                     $12.5 Million in Annual 
                                    Receipts or Less

Open Video Systems 
       Common Carrier Services and Related Entities
Wireline Carriers and 
Service providers 
                                1,500 Employees or Fewer
Local Exchange Carriers, 
Competitive Access 
Providers, Interexchange 
Carriers, Operator Service 
Providers, Payphone 
Providers, and Resellers


Note:  With the exception of Cable Systems, all size 
standards are expressed in either millions of dollars or 
number of employees and are generally the average annual 
receipts or the average employment of a firm.  Directions 
for calculating average annual receipts and average 
employment of a firm can be found in 
13 CFR 121.104 and 13 CFR 121.106, respectively.





                  International Services
International Broadcast 
Stations






                                $12.5 Million in Annual 
                                    Receipts or Less
International Public Fixed 
Radio (Public and Control 
Stations)
Fixed Satellite 
Transmit/Receive Earth 
Stations
Fixed Satellite Very Small 
Aperture Terminal Systems
Mobile Satellite Earth 
Stations
Radio Determination 
Satellite Earth Stations
Geostationary Space Stations
Non-Geostationary Space 
Stations
Direct Broadcast Satellites
Home Satellite Dish Service
                    Mass Media Services
Television Services

                             $12 Million in Annual Receipts 
                                        or Less
Low Power Television 
Services and Television 
Translator Stations
TV Auxiliary, Special 
Broadcast and Other Program 
Distribution Services
Radio Services
                             $6 Million in Annual Receipts 
                                        or Less
Radio Auxiliary, Special 
Broadcast and Other Program 
Distribution Services
Multipoint Distribution      Auction Special Size Standard -
Service                      Small Business is less than 
                            $40M in annual gross revenues 
                            for three preceding years
          Wireless and Commercial Mobile Services
Cellular Licensees
                                1,500 Employees or Fewer
220 MHz Radio Service - 
Phase I Licensees
220 MHz Radio Service -      Auction special size standard -
Phase II Licensees           Small Business is average gross 
                            revenues of $15M or less for 
                            the preceding three years 
                            (includes affiliates and 
                            controlling principals)
                            Very Small Business is average 
                            gross revenues of $3M or less 
                            for the preceding three years 
                            (includes affiliates and 
                            controlling principals)
700 MHZ Guard Band Licensees


Private and Common Carrier 
Paging
Broadband Personal 
Communications Services          1,500 Employees or Fewer
(Blocks A, B, D, and E)
Broadband Personal           Auction special size standard -
Communications Services      Small Business is $40M or less 
(Block C)                    in annual gross revenues for 
                            three previous calendar years
                            Very Small Business is average 
                            gross revenues of $15M or less 
                            for the preceding three 
                            calendar years (includes 
                            affiliates and persons or 
                            entities that hold interest in 
                            such entity and their 
                            affiliates)
Broadband Personal 
Communications Services 
(Block F)
Narrowband Personal 
Communications Services


Rural Radiotelephone Service     1,500 Employees or Fewer
Air-Ground Radiotelephone 
Service
800 MHz Specialized Mobile   Auction special size standard -
Radio                        Small Business is $15M or less 
                            average annual gross revenues 
                            for three preceding calendar 
                            years
900 MHz Specialized Mobile 
Radio
Private Land Mobile Radio        1,500 Employees or Fewer
Amateur Radio Service                      N/A
Aviation and Marine Radio 
Service                          1,500 Employees or Fewer
Fixed Microwave Services
                            Small Business is 1,500 
Public Safety Radio Services employees or less
                            Small Government Entities has 
                            population of less than 50,000 
                            persons
Wireless Telephony and 
Paging and Messaging             1,500 Employees or Fewer
Personal Radio Services                    N/A
Offshore Radiotelephone          1,500 Employees or Fewer
Service
Wireless Communications      Small Business is $40M or less 
Services                     average annual gross revenues 
                            for three preceding years
                            Very Small Business is average 
                            gross revenues of $15M or less 
                            for the preceding three years 

39 GHz Service
                            Auction special size standard 
                            (1996) -
Multipoint Distribution      Small Business is $40M or less 
Service                      average annual gross revenues 
                            for three preceding calendar 
                            years
                            Prior to Auction -
                            Small Business has annual 
                            revenue of $12.5M or less
Multichannel Multipoint 
Distribution Service             $12.5 Million in Annual 
                                    Receipts or Less
Instructional Television 
Fixed Service
                            Auction special size standard 
                            (1998) -
Local Multipoint             Small Business is $40M or less 
Distribution Service         average annual gross revenues 
                            for three preceding years
                            Very Small Business is average 
                            gross revenues of $15M or less 
                            for the preceding three years 
                            First Auction special size 
                            standard (1994) -
                            Small Business is an entity 
                            that, together with its 
                            affiliates, has no more than a 
218-219 MHZ Service          $6M net worth and, after 
                            federal income taxes (excluding 
                            carryover losses) has no more 
                            than $2M in annual profits each 
                            year for the previous two years
                            New Standard - 
                            Small Business is average gross 
                            revenues of $15M or less for 
                            the preceding three years 
                            (includes affiliates and 
                            persons or entities that hold 
                            interest in such entity and 
                            their affiliates)
                            Very Small Business is average 
                            gross revenues of $3M or less 
                            for the preceding three years 
                            (includes affiliates and 
                            persons or entities that hold 
                            interest in such entity and 
                            their affiliates)
Satellite Master Antenna 
Television Systems               $12.5 Million in Annual 
                                    Receipts or Less
24 GHz - Incumbent Licensees     1,500 Employees or Fewer
24 GHz - Future Licensees    Small Business is average gross 
                            revenues of $15M or less for 
                            the preceding three years 
                            (includes affiliates and 
                            persons or entities that hold 
                            interest in such entity and 
                            their affiliates)
                            Very Small Business is average 
                            gross revenues of $3M or less 
                            for the preceding three years 
                            (includes affiliates and 
                            persons or entities that hold 
                            interest in such entity and 
                            their affiliates)
                       Miscellaneous
On-Line Information Services  $18 Million in Annual Receipts 
                                        or Less
Radio and Television 
Broadcasting and Wireless 
Communications Equipment          750 Employees or Fewer
Manufacturers
Audio and Video Equipment 
Manufacturers
Telephone Apparatus 
Manufacturers (Except            1,000 Employees or Fewer
Cellular)
Medical Implant Device            500 Employees or Fewer
Manufacturers
Hospitals                     $29 Million in Annual Receipts 
                                        or Less
Nursing Homes                    $11.5 Million in Annual 
                                    Receipts or Less
Hotels and Motels             $6 Million in Annual Receipts 
                                        or Less
Tower Owners                 (See Lessee's Type of Business)

_________________________

1 47 C.F.R.  52.26(a), incorporating by reference the North 
American Numbering Council, Local Number Portability 
Administration Selection Working Group Report (Apr. 25, 1997).  
Call routing is discussed in Appendix D, ``Architecture & 
Administrative Plan for Local Number Portability,''  7.8, N-1 
Call Routing.  This report is located at 
www.fcc.gov/wcb/tapd/Nanc/wknggrp.doc.
2 47 U.S.C.  153(30); 47 C.F.R.  52.21(l).
3 47 U.S.C.  251(a)(2).
4 Telephone Number Portability, First Report and Order and 
Further Notice of Proposed Rulemaking, 11 FCC Rcd 8352 (1996) 
(``First Report and Order'').  MSAs, designated by the Bureau of 
Census, follow geographic borders and are defined using 
statistics that are widely recognized as indicative of 
metropolitan character.  See Policy and Rules Concerning Rates 
for Dominant Carriers, Memorandum Opinion and Order, 12 FCC Rcd 
8115, 8122,  17 n.26 (1997). 
5 First Report and Order, 11 FCC Rcd 8368,  30.
6 Telephone Number Portability, First Memorandum Opinion and 
Order on Reconsideration, 12 FCC Rcd 7236, 7273,  60 (1997) 
(``First Reconsideration Order'').
7 See First Report and Order, 11 FCC Rcd at 8431-32,  152-53.  
8 Id. at 8439,  165.
9 Id. at 8440,  166.  
10   See Verizon Wireless`s Petition for Partial Forbearance from 
the Commercial Mobile Radio Services Number Portability 
Obligation, Memorandum Opinion and Order, 17 FCC Rcd 14972, 
14981,  23 (2002).  The Commission subsequently waived, until 
May 24, 2004, the requirement that wireline carriers operating 
outside the top 100 MSAs port numbers to wireless carriers that 
do not have a point of interconnection or numbering resources in 
the rate center where the customer's wireline number is 
provisioned.  See Telephone Number Portability, CTIA Petitions 
for Declaratory Ruling on Wireline-Wireless Porting Issues, 
Memorandum Opinion and Order and Further Notice of Proposed 
Rulemaking, 18 FCC Rcd 23697, 23709,  29 (2004) (``Intermodal 
Order'').  The Commission also granted a waiver of the wireline-
to-wireless porting requirement, until May 24, 2004, for ``two 
percent carriers'' that operate in the top 100 MSAs.  Telephone 
Number Portability, Order, 19 FCC Rcd 875 (2004).
11   First Reconsideration Order, 12 FCC Rcd at 7277,  69.  The 
issue of dropped calls to ported numbers was more recently raised 
in a slightly different context in the Intermodal Order.  There 
the Commission observed, in response to comments filed by 
CenturyTel, that the calls to a customer with a number ported 
from a LEC to a CMRS carrier should not be dropped ``because the 
Commission's rules require carriers to correctly route calls to 
ported numbers.'' Intermodal Order, 18 FCC Rcd at 23711-12 n.92.
12   Telephone Number Portability, Second Report and Order, 12 
FCC Rcd 12281, 12283-84,  3 (1997) (``Second Report and 
Order'').  In its First Report and Order, the Commission had 
directed the NANC to make recommendations regarding specific 
aspects of number portability implementation.  First Report and 
Order, 11 FCC Rcd at 8401,  93.  The NANC Working Group Report 
was incorporated by reference in section 52.26(a) of the 
Commission's rules.  See 47 C.F.R.  52.26(a) (stating that the 
``[l]ocal number portability administration shall comply with the 
recommendations of the North American Numbering Council (NANC) as 
set forth in the report to the Commission prepared by the NANC's 
Local Number Portability Administration Selection Working Group, 
dated April 25, 1997 (Working Group Report) and its appendices, 
which are incorporated by reference pursuant to 5 U.S.C.  552(a) 
and 1 C.F.R. part 51.'').
13   Second Report and Order, 12 FCC Rcd at 12323-24,  73-74.    
14   Id., 12 FCC Rcd at 12324,  75.  
15   See id., 12 FCC Rcd at 12287-88,  8.
16   Id.
17   Id.
18   Id., 12 FCC Rcd at 12324,  75.  The Commission permitted 
incumbent LECs to recover their costs of providing LNP through a 
tariffed five-year, levelized monthly end-user charge.  See 
Telephone Number Portability, Third Report and Order, 13 FCC Rcd 
11701, 11776-79,  142-47 (1998) (``Third Report and Order''), 
affirmed, Memorandum Opinion and Order on Reconsideration and 
Order on Application for Review, 17 FCC Rcd 2578 (2002).  See 
also Telephone Number Portability, BellSouth Corporation Petition 
for Declaratory Ruling and/or Waiver, Order, FCC 04-91 (rel. Apr. 
13, 2004).  
19   See www.centurytel.com.  
20   See Letter of Inquiry from Hillary S. DeNigro, Deputy Chief, 
Investigations and Hearings Division, Enforcement Bureau, FCC to 
Glen F. Post, III, Chief Executive Officer, CenturyTel, Inc. 
(Feb. 4, 2004) (``LOI'').
2147 U.S.C.  503(b)(1)(B); 47 C.F.R.  1.80(a)(1); see also 47 
U.S.C.  503(b)(1)(D) (forfeitures for violation of 14 U.S.C.  
1464).  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 to section 312(f)(1) of the 
Act indicates 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, e.g., Application 
for Review of Southern California Broadcasting Co., Memorandum 
Opinion and Order, 6 FCC Rcd 4387, 4388,  5 (1991) (``Southern 
California Broadcasting'').  The Commission may also assess a 
forfeiture for violations that are merely repeated, and not 
willful.  See, e.g., Callais Cablevision, Inc., Grand Isle, 
Louisiana, Notice of Apparent Liability for Monetary Forfeiture, 
16 FCC Rcd 1359 (2001) (``Callais Cablevision'') (issuing a 
Notice of Apparent Liability for, inter alia, a cable television 
operator's repeated signal leakage).  ``Repeated'' means that the 
act was committed or omitted more than once, or lasts more than 
one day.  Southern California Broadcasting, 6 FCC Rcd at 4388,  
5; Callais Cablevision., 16 FCC Rcd at 1362,  9.
2247 U.S.C.  503(b); 47 C.F.R.  1.80(f).
23See, e.g., SBC Communications, Inc., Apparent Liability for 
Forfeiture, Forfeiture Order, 17 FCC Rcd 7589, 7591,  4 (2002).
24   See Letter from Karen Brinkmann and Tonya Rutherford, Latham 
and Watkins LLP, counsel for CenturyTel to Mika Savir, 
Investigations and Hearings Division, Enforcement Bureau, FCC, at 
2 (Feb. 24, 2004) (``LOI Response'').
25   Id.
26   Id.
27   Id. at 4.  
28   See Letter from Karen Brinkmann and Tonya Rutherford, Latham 
and Watkins LLP, counsel for CenturyTel to Mika Savir, 
Investigations and Hearings Division, Enforcement Bureau, FCC, at 
1 (Apr. 14, 2004) (``April 14 LOI Response'').
29   The porting wireless carrier is the wireless carrier that 
ported the number of one of its subscribers to another carrier 
when that subscriber changed carriers.
30   LOI Response at 5.  CenturyTel also routed wireless extended 
area service calls to Qwest's tandem, if it did not have a direct 
trunk to the wireless carrier.  Id. at 4.  For interLATA calls, 
the N-1 carrier would generally be the calling party's 
interexchange carrier (``IXC'').
31   LOI Response at 6.  
32   Id.
33   Default routing occurs when the N-1 carrier or its 
contracted entity fails to perform the LNP query and the call is 
routed by default to the carrier that originally serviced the 
telephone number.  Second Report and Order, 12 FCC Rcd at 12324-
25,  76.
34   LOI Response at 6. 
35   Id. at 7.
36   Second Report and Order, 12 FCC Rcd at 12324,  74.
37   Documents CT 0000010-32, CT 0000058.  These documents were 
provided in response to the request for CenturyTel's policies and 
procedures for ensuring that CenturyTel's customers' calls can be 
routed to ported numbers.  See LOI Response at 7.
38   Document CT 0000030.
39   LOI Response at 6-7.  
40   See, e.g., Letter from Gerard J. Duffy, Blooston, 
Mordkofsky, Dickens, Duffy, and Prendergast, to Marlene F. 
Dortch, Secretary, FCC, CC Docket No. 95-116 (filed Oct. 20, 
2003) (``CenturyTel Oct. 20 Ex Parte Letter''); Letter from Mary 
J. Sisak, Blooston, Mordkofsky, Dickens, Duffy, and Prendergast, 
to Marlene H. Dortch, Secretary, FCC, CC Docket No. 95-116 (filed 
Oct. 23, 2003); Letter from Michael T. McMenamin, Associate 
Counsel, USTA, to Marlene F. Dortch, Secretary, FCC, CC Docket 
No. 95-116 (filed Oct. 23, 2003); Letter from Michael T. 
McMenamin, Associate Counsel, USTA, to Marlene Dortch, Secretary, 
FCC, CC Docket No. 95-116 (filed Oct. 31, 2003). The CenturyTel 
Oct. 20 Ex Parte Letter and attachments were included in the LOI 
Response.  See Documents CT 0000148-156.  CenturyTel's request 
was as follows: 
     When a Wireless Service  Provider (WSP) ports a  number 
     to another WSP  within a CenturyTel  Local rate  center 
     and CenturyTel  has direct  connection to  the  porting 
     WSP, then the FCC must  require the WSP to perform  the 
     LNP database query  and transiting  to the  alternative 
     WSP.  
     The costs  associated  with LNP  query  and  transiting 
     should be the responsibility of the porting WSP.  
     This obligation  must be  required of  the porting  WSP 
     until such time that CenturyTel is required to  provide 
     LNP in CenturyTel's central office switch.
See, e.g., CenturyTel Oct. 20 Ex Parte Letter at Attachment.  See 
also Document CT 0000153.
41   LOI Response at 6; Documents CT 0000165-66.
42   LOI Response at 6.
43   Documents CT 0000165-66 (Problem Identification and 
Description form submitted by Alltel to NANC-LNPA Working Group 
(Jan. 23, 2004)).  
44   See April 14 LOI Response at 2.
45   See Document CT 0000158.  
46   Id.
47   Id. (emphasis added).
48   We note that billing for database queries on default routed 
calls is discussed in the Second Report and Order, 12 FCC Rcd at 
12326,  78.
49   April 14 LOI Response at 2.
50   Id. at 3.
5147 U.S.C.  503(b)(2)(B); see also 47 C.F.R.  1.80(b)(2); see 
also Amendment of Section 1.80(b) of the Commission's Rules, 
Adjustment of Forfeiture Maxima to Reflect Inflation, Order, 15 
FCC Rcd 18221 (2000).
52   Second Report and Order, 12 FCC Rcd at 12285,  4.
53   47 U.S.C.  503(b)(2)(D).
54   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).
55   47 U.S.C.  503(b)(2)(D); see also Forfeiture Policy 
Statement, 12 FCC Rcd at 17100-01,  27; 47 C.F.R. 1.80(b)(4).
56See 47 C.F.R.  1.1914.