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 ) File No. EB-04-IH-0656
)
)
Telecom House, Inc. ) NAL/Acct. No. 200532080144
)
)
Apparent Liability for ) FRN No. 0011-3826-03
Forfeiture )
NOTICE OF APPARENT LIABILITY
FOR FORFEITURE AND ORDER
Adopted: September 13, 2005 Released:
September 13, 2005
By the Commission:
I. INTRODUCTION
1. In this Notice of Apparent Liability for Forfeiture
(``NAL''), we find that a telecommunications provider, operating
since 2000 and at least indirectly benefiting from the federal
programs supporting the telecommunications industry since that
time, apparently failed to meet its statutory and regulatory
obligations relating to those programs. Based upon the facts and
circumstances surrounding this matter, we conclude that this
company is apparently liable for a total forfeiture of $529,300.
2. We specifically find that Telecom House, Inc.
(``Telecom House'') has apparently violated section 64.1195 of
the Commission's rules by willfully and repeatedly failing to
register with the Commission until September 2004.1 We also find
that Telecom House has apparently violated sections 54.711(a) and
64.604(c)(5)(iii)(B) of the Commission's rules by failing to
submit certain Telecommunications Reporting Worksheets
(``Worksheets'') from 2001 to 2005.2 Finally, we find that
Telecom House has apparently violated section 254(d) of the
Communications Act of 1934, as amended (the ``Act''),3 and
sections 54.706(a) and 64.604(c)(5)(iii)(A) of the Commission's
rules by willfully and repeatedly failing to contribute to the
Universal Service Fund (``USF'') and Telecommunications Relay
Service (``TRS'') Fund on a timely basis.4
3. We are resolved to ensure a level playing field for all
companies that are required to contribute to the maintenance of
our various Congressionally mandated programs, including the
federal universal service program. The failure of a carrier to
fulfill its obligation to contribute to these programs has a
direct and significant detrimental impact on the programs and on
other industry participants because that failure removes from the
base of contributions telecommunications revenues that otherwise
should be included, thereby forcing other telecommunications
carriers to shoulder additional costs associated with the
programs. Thus, this NAL and others like it represent one
element in a comprehensive approach to improving the efficacy and
fairness of the universal service program as well as reducing
waste, fraud and abuse in the program.
4. We order Telecom House to submit within thirty days,
either as part of its response to this NAL or separately, a
report, supported by a sworn statement or declaration under
penalty of perjury of a corporate officer, setting forth in
detail its plan to come into compliance with the relevant payment
and reporting rules discussed herein. We further order Telecom
House to file with the Universal Service Administrative Company
(``USAC'') within thirty days all annual Telecommunications
Reporting Worksheets and amended Worksheets required under the
Commission's rules from the date that Telecom House commenced
providing telecommunications services in the United States to the
date of this NAL.5
II. BACKGROUND
5. The Commission is charged by Congress with regulating
interstate and international telecommunications and ensuring that
providers of such telecommunications comply with the requirements
imposed on them by the Act and our rules.6 The Commission also
has been charged by Congress to establish, administer and
maintain various telecommunications regulatory programs, and to
fund these programs through assessments on the telecommunications
providers that benefit from them. In order to accomplish these
goals, the Commission established ``a central repository of key
facts about carriers'' through which it could monitor the entry
and operation of interstate telecommunications providers to
ensure, among other things, that they are qualified, do not
engage in fraud, and do not evade oversight.7 Commission rules
require that, upon entry or anticipated entry into interstate
telecommunications markets, telecommunications carriers register
by submitting information on FCC Form 499-A, also known as the
annual Telecommunications Reporting Worksheet.8 The Commission
also requires telecommunications providers to submit financial
information on annual and, with some exceptions not applicable to
Telecom House since 2003,9 quarterly short-form Worksheets to
enable the Commission to determine and collect the statutorily
mandated program assessments.10
6. The Telecommunications Act of 1996 codified Congress'
historical commitment to promote universal service to ensure that
consumers in all regions of the nation have access to affordable,
quality telecommunications services.11 In particular, section
254(d) of the Act requires, among other things, that ``[e]very
telecommunications carrier [providing] interstate
telecommunications services . . . contribute, on an equitable and
nondiscriminatory basis, to the specific, predictable, and
sufficient mechanisms established by the Commission to preserve
and advance universal service.''12 In implementing this
Congressional mandate, the Commission directed all
telecommunications carriers providing interstate
telecommunications services and certain other providers of
interstate telecommunications to contribute to the Universal
Service Fund based upon their interstate and international end-
user telecommunications revenues.13 Failure by some providers to
pay their share into the Fund skews the playing field by giving
non-paying providers an economic advantage over their competitors
who must shoulder more than their fair share of the costs of the
Fund.
7. Section 225(b)(1) of the Act, which codifies Title IV
of the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990, directs the
Commission to ``ensure that interstate and intrastate
telecommunications relay services are available, to the extent
possible and in the most efficient manner, to hearing-impaired
and speech-impaired individuals in the United States.''14 To
that end, the Commission established the TRS Fund to reimburse
TRS providers for the costs of providing interstate
telecommunications relay services.15 Pursuant to section
64.604(c)(5)(iii)(A) of the Commission's rules, every carrier
that provides interstate telecommunications services must
contribute to the TRS Fund based upon its interstate end-user
revenues.16
8. The Commission has established specific procedures to
administer the programs for the universal service and other
regulatory programs. A carrier must file Worksheets for the
purpose of determining its USF and other regulatory fee program
payments.17 These periodic filings trigger a determination of
liability, if any, and subsequent billing and collection by the
entities that administer the regulatory programs. USAC uses the
revenue projections submitted on the quarterly filings to
determine each carrier's universal service contribution amount.18
Carriers are required to pay their monthly USF contribution by
the date shown on their invoice.19 The Commission's rules
explicitly warn contributors that failure to file their forms or
submit their payments potentially subjects them to enforcement
action.20 Further, under the Commission's ``red light rule,''
action will be withheld on any application to the Commission or
request for authorization made by any entity that has failed to
pay when due its regulatory program payments, such as USF
contributions, and if payment or payment arrangements are not
made within 30 days from notice to the applicant, such
applications or requests will be dismissed.21
9. Telecom House began providing telecommunications
service in the United States in 2000.22 Telecom House provides
``1-800 Access for International Calling[,] Prepaid Phone Cards
[and] Long Distance Telephone Service.''23
10. In 2004, the Enforcement Bureau (``Bureau'') audit
staff sought to identify resellers of telecommunications service
that failed to register as telecommunications service providers
with the Commission, and, thus, may also have failed to satisfy
various Commission program requirements.24 In order to identify
such resellers, the Bureau audit staff compared lists of
resellers provided by wholesale service providers against the
Commission's central repository of registered telecommunications
service providers with filer identification numbers. If a
reseller did not appear to have an identification number, the
audit staff sent an inquiry to that reseller. On August 9, 2004,
the Bureau's audit staff sent a letter to Telecom House
requesting information pertaining to Telecom House's compliance
with section 64.1195 of the Commission's rules.25 Thereafter, on
September 14, 2004, Telecom House registered pursuant to section
64.1195 of the Commission's rules,26 several years after it began
providing service.
11. On January 26, 2005, the Bureau issued a letter of
inquiry to Telecom House.27 The January 26, 2005 LOI directed
Telecom House, among other things, to submit a sworn written
response to a series of questions relating to Telecom House's
apparent failure to register and file Telecommunications
Reporting Worksheets and to make mandated federal
telecommunications regulatory program payments. Telecom House
responded to the January 26, 2005 LOI on March 17, 2005.28
12. On March 10, 2005, approximately six months after it
registered, and approximately seven months after the Bureau's
August 9, 2004 Audit Letter, Telecom House untimely attempted to
file its annual Worksheets for 2002, 2003 and 2004, which
(improperly) reported 2002, 2003, and 2004 revenue,
respectively.29 Because Telecom House had used the wrong forms
with its March 10, 2005 filing, however, on March 31, 2005,
Telecom House reported its 2002, 2003 and 2004 revenue, using the
annual Worksheets for 2003, 2004 and 2005, respectively.30
Telecom House filed its quarterly Worksheet for May 2005 on April
28, 2005.31 Although Telecom House has been providing
telecommunication services since 2000, it still has apparently
not filed annual Worksheets for 2001 or 2002, which would report
2000 and 2001 revenue, respectively.
13. On July 13, 2005, the Bureau issued a follow-up letter
of inquiry to Telecom House.32 Telecom House responded on August
5, 2005, and provided to the Bureau corrected annual Worksheets
for 2003, 2004 and 2005, which it previously filed on March 31,
2005, and its quarterly Worksheet for May 2005, which it
previously filed on April 28, 2005.33 As a result of these
filings, USAC calculated that Telecom House owed $23,777.44 to
the USF for 2003 and 2004, and would owe $1,810.14 for each month
in the third quarter of 2005 (corresponding to the quarterly
Worksheet the company filed on April 28, 2005). Telecom House
did not provide with its August 5, 2005 LOI Response a quarterly
Worksheet that was due August 1, 2005, and USAC records do not
indicate that an August 2005 quarterly Worksheet has been filed
by Telecom House. Within the past year, Telecom House also
failed to file its quarterly Worksheets due in November 2004 and
February 2005. As a result, USAC has not calculated exactly how
much the company owes for first and second quarters of 2005. On
August 24, 2005, USAC received the first payment of Telecom
House.
III. DISCUSSION
14. Under section 503(b)(1)(B) 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 forfeiture penalty.34 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.35 The legislative history to section
312(f)(1) of the Act clarifies that this definition of willful
applies to both sections 312 and 503(b) of the Act,36 and the
Commission has so interpreted the term in the section 503(b)
context.37 The Commission may also assess a forfeiture for
violations that are merely repeated, and not willful.38
``Repeated'' means that the act was committed or omitted more
than once, or lasts more than one day.39 To impose such a
forfeiture penalty, the Commission must issue a notice of
apparent liability 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.40 The Commission will
then issue a forfeiture if it finds by a preponderance of the
evidence that the person has violated the Act or a Commission
rule.41 As set forth below, we conclude under this standard that
Telecom House is apparently liable for a forfeiture for its
apparent willful and repeated violations of section 254(d) of the
Act42 and sections 54.706(a), 54.711(a), and 64.604(c)(5)(iii),
and 64.1195 of the Commission's rules.43
15. The fundamental issues in this case are whether Telecom
House apparently violated the Act and the Commission's rules by:
(1) willfully or repeatedly failing to register pursuant to
section 64.1195 of the Commission's rules;44 (2) willfully or
repeatedly failing to file Telecommunications Reporting
Worksheets; and (3) willfully or repeatedly failing to make
requisite contributions toward the Universal Service and TRS
Funds when due. We answer these questions affirmatively. Based
on a preponderance of the evidence, we conclude that Telecom
House is apparently liable for a forfeiture of $529,300 for
apparently willfully and repeatedly violating section 254(d) of
the Act,45 and sections 54.706(a), 54.711(a), 64.604(c)(5)(iii),
and 64.1195 of the Commission's rules.46
16. Specifically, we propose the following forfeitures for
apparent violations within the last year: (1) $100,000 for
failure to register pursuant to section 64.1195 of the
Commission's rules;47 (2) $150,000 for failure to file three
Telecommunications Reporting Worksheets; (3) $258,224 for failure
to make twelve monthly USF contributions on a timely basis; and
(4) $21,076 for failure to make its 2005 TRS Fund contribution on
a timely basis. Although we propose forfeitures only for
apparent violations within the last year, we discuss below the
history of Telecom House's noncompliance in prior years as useful
background and to demonstrate the scope of Telecom House's
misconduct and the context of the misconduct that is within the
statute of limitations period and thus covered by this NAL.
III.A. Registration with the Commission
17. We conclude that Telecom House has apparently violated
section 64.1195(a) of the Commission's rules by failing to
register with the Commission from 2001 until September 14,
2004.48 Telecom House's failure to register constitutes a clear
violation of a vital Commission rule. Section 64.1195(a) of the
Commission's rules unambiguously requires that all carriers that
provide, or plan to provide, interstate telecommunications
services register with the Commission by submitting specified
information.49 Although Telecom House has been providing
interstate telecommunications services since 2000, it failed to
register in accordance with section 64.1195(a) until September
14, 2004, approximately one month after it received the Bureau's
August 9, 2004 Audit Letter. As a result of its misconduct,
Telecom House operated for over four years without participation
in any of the programs tied to registration. As an interstate
telecommunications carrier, Telecom House had a clear and
affirmative duty to apprise itself of, and satisfy, its federal
obligations.50
18. We view Telecom House's apparent failure to register
for over four years as a serious dereliction of its
responsibilities under the Act and our rules. A carrier's
compliance with the Commission's registration requirement is
critical to the administration of the USF and TRS programs, and
to fulfilling Congress' objectives in sections 254(d) and
225(b)(1) of the Act. As we noted above, a carrier's duty to
register upon entry, or anticipated entry, into interstate
telecommunications markets is essential to the fulfillment of the
USF, TRS, and other regulatory program missions because it
identifies the company to the various program administrators and
brings the company within the purview and oversight of those
administrators. If a carrier never identifies itself as a
telecommunications provider by properly registering under the
Commission's rules, then neither the Commission nor the various
program administrators can ascertain whether that carrier has
fulfilled other regulatory obligations, including the requirement
that carriers file Worksheets and contribute to USF, TRS, and
other regulatory programs. Moreover, the program administrators
have no basis upon which to invoice the carrier for
contributions. A telecommunications carrier that fails to
register thus can operate outside of the Commission's oversight
and evade its federal obligations to contribute toward the vital
programs linked to registration.
19. The impact of a carrier's failure to register is no
less severe where, as here, that carrier ultimately registers
with the Commission. Although Telecom House registered on
September 14, 2004, and has apparently filed some of the required
Worksheets in the last few months, Telecom House delayed its
registration for an extended period of time and took no action
until after receiving a letter from the Bureau.51 The Commission
has repeatedly stated that subsequent corrective measures to
address a violation do not eliminate a licensee's responsibility
for the period during which the violation occurred.52 Telecom
House's substantial delay in registering after receiving the
Bureau's letter raises serious questions about its intention to
do so absent threat of Commission action. Based on a
preponderance of the evidence, therefore, we find that Telecom
House apparently has violated section 64.1195(a) of the
Commission's rules by willfully and repeatedly failing to
register from 2001 until September 14, 2004.53
III.B. Submission of Telecommunications Reporting
Worksheets
20. We conclude that Telecom House apparently has violated
sections 54.711(a) and 64.604(c)(5)(iii)(B) of the Commission's
rules by willfully and repeatedly failing to file certain
Telecommunications Reporting Worksheets, on a timely basis, from
2001 through March 2005.54 On March 31, 2005, Telecom House
reported its 2002, 2003 and 2004 revenue. While Telecom House
reported its 2004 revenue on time, i.e., before April 1, 2005, it
untimely reported its 2002 and 2003 revenue, which was due April
1, 2003 and April 1, 2004, respectively. Telecom House filed its
quarterly Worksheet for May 2005 on April 28, 2005. Although
Telecom House has been providing telecommunication services since
2000, it has not filed Annual Worksheets for 2001 or 2002, which
is used to report 2000 and 2001 revenue, respectively. Within
the past year, while Telecom House did file its quarterly
Worksheet due May 1, 2005, it failed to file the quarterly
Worksheets due November 1, 2004 and February 1 and August 1,
2005.
21. Section 54.711(a) and 64.605(c)(5)(iii)(B) of the
Commission's rules clearly establish a carrier's obligation to
file periodic Telecommunications Reporting Worksheets.55 A
carrier's failure to file these Worksheets as required has
serious implications for the USF and TRS programs. As discussed
above, the filing of a Telecommunications Reporting Worksheet
prompts a determination of liability for, and subsequent billing
and collection of, payments by the administrators of the
Universal Service and TRS Funds. With regard to the federal
universal service program in particular, the failure of a carrier
such as Telecom House to abide by its federal filing obligation
has a direct and profound detrimental impact by removing from the
base of USF contributions telecommunications revenues that
otherwise should be included, thereby shifting to compliant
carriers additional economic burdens associated with the federal
universal service program.56 Consequently, a carrier's failure
to file required Worksheets thwarts the very purpose for which
Congress enacted section 254(d) - to ensure that every interstate
carrier ``contribute, on an equitable and nondiscriminatory
basis, to the specific, predictable, and sufficient mechanisms
established by the Commission to preserve and advance universal
service.''57 Viewed in this context, the Telecommunications
Reporting Worksheet is not only an administrative tool, but a
fundamental and critical component of the Commission's Universal
Service program.
22. Based on a preponderance of the evidence, we find that
Telecom House apparently has violated section 254 of the Act58
and section 54.711 and 64.604 of the Commission's rules59 by
willfully and repeatedly failing to timely file required
information with the Commission on multiple occasions since 2001,
including failure to make three filings within the last year, the
time period covered by this NAL. The NAL proposes a forfeiture
for Telecom House's failure to file the quarterly Worksheets due
November 1, 2004, and February 1 and August 1, 2005.
III.C. Universal Service Contributions
23. We further conclude that Telecom House apparently
violated section 254(d) of the Act and section 54.706 of the
Commission's rules by willfully and repeatedly failing to
contribute to universal service support mechanisms on a timely
basis.60 Section 54.706(c) of the Commission's rules
unambiguously directs that ``entities [providing] interstate
telecommunications to the public . . . for a fee . . . contribute
to the universal service support programs.''61 Since 2003,
Telecom House was required, pursuant to section 54.706(b) of the
Commission's rules, to contribute to universal service mechanisms
based upon either its historical or projected revenues.62 As we
previously have stated,
[c]arrier nonpayment of universal service
contributions undermines the efficiency and
effectiveness of the universal service
support mechanisms. Moreover, delinquent
carriers may obtain a competitive advantage
over carriers complying with the Act and our
rules. We consider universal service
nonpayment to be a serious threat to a key
goal of Congress and one of the Commission's
primary responsibilities.63
Based on a preponderance of the evidence, we find that Telecom
House apparently has violated sections 254(d) of the Act and
54.706 of the Commission's rules by willfully and repeatedly
failing to timely make its monthly universal service contribution
payments for a period of years, including twelve such failures
within the past year.
III.D. Telecommunications Relay Service Contributions
24. We also find that Telecom House apparently has violated
section 64.604(c)(5)(iii)(A) of the Commission's rules by failing
to make required contributions to the interstate TRS Fund when
due.64 As an interstate telecommunications carrier, Telecom
House has been obligated to contribute to the TRS Fund on the
basis of its interstate and international end-user
telecommunications revenues.65 A carrier's contribution to the
TRS Fund is based upon its subject revenues for the prior
calendar year and a contribution factor determined annually by
the Commission.66 Subject carriers must make TRS contributions
on an annual basis, with certain exceptions that are not
applicable to Telecom House.67
25. Telecom House has not made any TRS Fund payments on a
timely basis. In its March 17, 2005 LOI response, Telecom House
expressly stated that ``[t]he Company has not previously
contributed directly to the TRS.''68 In its August 5, 2005 LOI
response, Telecom House stated that ``[t]he Company has received
one invoice for TRS contribution, for which payment is not yet
due.''69 To the contrary, the invoice Telecom House produced in
response to the LOI states on its face that ``[p]ayment must be
received by 7/26/2005.''70 Based on a preponderance of the
evidence, we therefore find that Telecom House apparently has
violated section 64.604 of the Commission's rules by willfully
and repeatedly failing to pay its TRS contributions when due,
including its failure to make on a timely basis the payment due
on July 26, 2005.
III.E. Proposed Forfeiture
26. Section 503(b)(1)(B) of the Act provides that any
person that willfully or repeatedly fails 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
forfeiture penalty.71 For the apparent violations in this case,
section 503(b)(2)(B) of the Act authorizes the Commission to
assess a forfeiture of up to $130,000 for each violation or each
day of a continuing violation, up to a statutory maximum of
$1.325 million for a single act or failure to act.72 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.''73
27. Under section 503(b)(6) of the Act, we may only propose
forfeitures for apparent violations that occurred within one year
of the date of this NAL.74 Nevertheless, section 503(b) does not
bar us from assessing whether Telecom House's conduct prior to
that time period apparently violated the Act or our rules in
determining the appropriate forfeiture amount for those
violations within the statute of limitations.75 Therefore,
although we find that Telecom House apparently violated the Act
and our rules for over four years, we propose forfeitures here
only for violations that occurred within the last year.
28. This case involves a carrier's failure both to register
and submit any Telecommunications Reporting Worksheets from the
time it commenced providing telecommunications services until
after it received a letter from the Bureau76 - in this case, a
period of over four years. We find Telecom House's failure to
discharge its federal reporting obligations to be particularly
egregious. As we stated above, the registration and filing of
Telecommunications Reporting Worksheets are fundamental to the
implementation of our central repository of carriers and to the
administration of multiple statutorily derived programs -
including the USF Fund. Where, as here, a carrier ignores its
obligations by wholly failing to register - thereby affecting the
time and manner in which these important federal programs are
funded - it undermines the programs and thwarts the purposes for
which Congress and the Commission established them.
29. Recently, we have held that a substantial forfeiture of
$100,000 is warranted for a carrier's failure to register with
the Commission.77 We explained that ``[t]his egregious behavior
strikes at the core of our ability to implement and enforce the
Act and our rules effectively, thus warranting a substantial
forfeiture.''78 This is because a carrier that fails to register
hampers ``efficient and effective Commission enforcement by
delaying detection of, and action against, its behavior . . . and
imposes a substantial burden on the Commission, which can only
identify such carriers through compliance review programs that
require significant amounts of staff time and resources.''79
Taking into account all of the factors enumerated in section
503(b)(2)(D) of the Act, we conclude that a proposed forfeiture
of $100,000 is warranted.
30. In the past, we have held that a substantial forfeiture
of $50,000 is warranted for a carrier's failure to file a
Telecommunications Reporting Worksheet for revenue reporting
purposes.80 We find that Telecom House's willful and repeated
failure to file periodic Telecommunications Reporting Worksheets
is egregious. As we noted above, a carrier's obligation to file
these Worksheets is directly linked to, and thus has serious
implications for, administration of the USF and other regulatory
programs. By ignoring its reporting obligations, Telecom House
has unilaterally shifted to compliant carriers and their
customers the economic costs associated with the universal
service and other regulatory programs. Therefore, we find that
Telecom House is apparently liable for a $150,000 forfeiture for
its failure to file three Worksheets within the last year; i.e.,
those due November 1, 2004, and February 1 and August 1, 2005.
31. Based on the facts above, it also appears that Telecom
House has failed to timely make the requisite contributions into
the Universal Service Fund for a period of over two years.
Again, nonpayment of universal service contributions is an
egregious offense that bestows on delinquent carriers an unfair
competitive advantage by shifting to compliant carriers the
economic costs and burdens associated with universal service. A
carrier's failure to make required universal service
contributions frustrates Congress' policy objective in section
254(d) of the Act to ensure the equitable and non-discriminatory
distribution of universal service costs among all
telecommunications providers.81 The Commission has established a
base forfeiture amount of $20,000 for each month in which a
carrier has failed to make required universal service
contributions.82 Consequently, we find Telecom House apparently
liable for a base forfeiture of $240,000 for its willful and
repeated failure to make twelve universal service contributions
when due within the past year.
32. In the past, we have calculated upward adjustments to
forfeitures for failure to make USF payments based on half of the
company's unpaid contributions.83 As explained above, USAC
records show that on August 15, 2005, Telecom House owed
$25,587.58 for USF contributions. In addition, although USAC has
not calculated how much Telecom House owes for the first two
quarters of 2005 because the company failed to file the quarterly
forms that correspond to these periods, we estimate that the
company owes $10,860 for this period.84 Therefore, taking into
account all of the factors enumerated in section 503(b)(2)(D) of
the Act, we propose an upward adjustment of $18,224 ($12,794 +
$5,430)85 - half the amount we estimate that Telecom House owed
for outstanding USF contributions on August 15, 2005 - for
Telecom House's apparent failure to make universal service
contributions. We thus find Telecom House liable for a total
proposed forfeiture of $258,224 for its apparent willful and
repeated failure to make timely contributions into the Universal
Service Fund.
33. We also find that Telecom House apparently has failed
to make any TRS contributions on a timely basis. Telecom House's
2005 TRS obligation was due on July 26, 2005, and it has not made
this payment. Where a carrier fails to satisfy its TRS
obligations for an extended period of time, it thwarts the
purpose for which Congress established section 225(b)(1) of the
Act and its implementing regulations - to ensure that
telecommunications relay services ``are available to the extent
possible and in the most efficient manner, to hearing-impaired
and speech-impaired individuals in the United States.''86 The
Commission has established a base forfeiture amount of $10,000
for each instance in which a carrier fails to make required TRS
contributions.87 In light of the failure of Telecom House to pay
its 2005 TRS obligation on a timely basis, we find it apparently
liable for a base forfeiture in the amount of $10,000. For the
reasons discussed above regarding Telecom House's failure to make
universal service contributions and consistent with Commission
precedent,88 we find that an upward adjustment, in an amount
approximately one-half of the carrier's unpaid 2005 TRS
contributions ($22,152),89 is appropriate for Telecom House's
apparent failure to make timely TRS contributions. Taking into
account the factors enumerated in section 503(b)(2)(D) of the
Act, we conclude that an upward adjustment of $11,076 is
reasonable. Consequently, we find Telecom House liable for a
total proposed forfeiture of $21,076 for its willful and repeated
failure to satisfy its 2005 TRS obligations.
IV. CONCLUSION
34. In light of the seriousness, duration and scope of the
apparent violations, and to ensure that a company with
substantial revenues such as Telecom House does not consider the
proposed forfeiture merely ``an affordable cost of doing
business,''90 we find that a proposed forfeiture in the amount of
$529,300 is warranted. As discussed above, this proposed
forfeiture amount includes: (1) a total proposed penalty of
$100,000 for failing to register pursuant to section 64.1195 of
the Commission's rules;91 (2) a total proposed penalty of
$150,000 for failing to file three Telecommunications Reporting
Worksheets within the past year; (3) a total proposed penalty of
$258,224 for failing to make twelve monthly universal service
contributions when due within the past year; and (4) a total
proposed penalty of $21,076 for failing to make its 2005 TRS
program contribution when due.
35. We caution that additional violations of the Act or the
Commission's rules could subject Telecom House to further
enforcement action. Such action could take the form of higher
monetary forfeitures and/or possible revocation of Telecom
House's operating authority, including disqualification of
Telecom House's principals from the provision of any interstate
common carrier services without the prior consent of the
Commission.92 In addition, we note that, to the extent Telecom
House is ever found to be delinquent on any debt owed to the
Commission (e.g., has failed to pay all of its USF
contributions), the Commission will not act on, and may dismiss,
any application or request for authorization filed by Telecom
House, in accordance with the agency's ``red light'' rules.93 We
order Telecom House to submit within thirty days, either as part
of its response to this NAL or separately, a report, supported by
a sworn statement or declaration under penalty of perjury of a
corporate officer, stating its plan to come into compliance with
the relevant payment and reporting rules discussed herein. We
further order Telecom House to file with USAC within thirty days
all Annual Telecommunications Reporting Worksheets and amended
Worksheets required under the Commission's rules from the date
that Telecom House commenced providing telecommunications
services in the United States to the date of this NAL.
V. ORDERING CLAUSES
36. ACCORDINGLY, IT IS ORDERED THAT, pursuant to section
503(b) of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended,94 and
section 1.80 of the Commission's rules,95 that Telecom House is
hereby NOTIFIED of its APPARENT LIABILITY FOR A FORFEITURE in the
amount of $529,300 for willfully and repeatedly violating the Act
and the Commission's rules.
37. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED THAT, pursuant to section 1.80 of
the Commission's Rules,96 within thirty days of the release date
of this NOTICE OF APPARENT LIABILITY, Telecom House SHALL PAY the
full amount of the proposed forfeiture or SHALL FILE a written
statement seeking reduction or cancellation of the proposed
forfeiture.
38. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED THAT, pursuant to sections 4(i),
219(b), and 254(d) of the Act,97 and sections 54.706(a) and
54.711(a) of the Commission's rules,98 within thirty days of the
release of this NOTICE OF APPARENT LIABILITY AND ORDER, Telecom
House SHALL SUBMIT a report, supported by a sworn statement or
declaration under penalty of perjury by a corporate officer,
stating its plan promptly to come into compliance with the
payment and reporting rules discussed herein. Telecom House also
SHALL SUBMIT to USAC within thirty days all Annual
Telecommunications Reporting Worksheets and amended Worksheets
required under the Commission's rules from the date that Telecom
House commenced providing telecommunications services to the date
of this NAL.
39. Payment of the forfeiture must be made by check or
similar instrument, payable to the order of the Federal
Communications Commission. The payment must include the
NAL/Acct. No. and FRN No. referenced above. Payment by check or
money order may be mailed to Federal Communications Commission,
P.O. Box 358340, Pittsburgh, PA 15251-8340. Payment by overnight
mail may be sent to Mellon Bank /LB 358340, 500 Ross Street, Room
1540670, Pittsburgh, PA 15251. Payment by wire transfer may be
made to ABA Number 043000261, receiving bank Mellon Bank, and
account number 911-6106.
40. The response, if any, to this NOTICE OF APPARENT
LIABILITY must be mailed to William H. Davenport, Chief,
Investigations and Hearings Division, Enforcement Bureau, Federal
Communications Commission, Room 4-A237, 445 12th Street, S.W.,
Washington, D.C. 20554 and must include the NAL/Acct. No.
referenced above.
41. 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.
42. Requests for payment of the full amount of this NAL
under an installment plan should be sent to Chief, Credit and
Management Center, 445 12th Street, S.W., Washington, D.C.
20554.99
43. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that a copy of this NOTICE OF
APPARENT LIABILITY AND ORDER shall be sent by certified mail,
return receipt requested, to Douglas D. Orvis II, Esq., Swidler
Berlin LLP, 3000 K Street, Suite 300, Washington, D.C. 20007-
5116; and Mr. Aaron Amid, Telecom House, Inc., 8421 Wilshire
Boulevard, Suite 300, Beverly Hills, CA 90211.
FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION
Marlene H. Dortch
Secretary
_________________________
1 47 C.F.R. § 64.1195.
2 47 C.F.R. §§ 54.711(a), 64.604(c)(5)(iii)(B).
3 47 U.S.C. § 254(d).
4 47 C.F.R. §§ 54.706(a), 64.604(c)(5)(iii)(A).
5 The Commission has appointed USAC as the administrator of
federal universal service support mechanisms and has made it
responsible for billing and collection of USF contributions. 47
C.F.R. §§ 54.701(a), 54.702(b).
6 See, e.g., 47 U.S.C. § 151.
7 See Implementation of the Subscriber Carrier Selection
Provisions of the Telecommunications Act of 1996, Third Report
and Order and Second Order on Reconsideration, 15 FCC Rcd 15996,
16024 (2000) (``Carrier Selection Order'').
8 47 C.F.R. § 64.1195.
9 Based on Telecom House's reported revenue for 2002, which it
reported through its 2003 Form 499-A, it was a de minimis carrier
in 2002, see 47 C.F.R. § 54.708, and therefore was not required
to file quarterly Worksheets in 2002.
10 See 47 U.S.C. §§ 225(d)(3); 254(d). In 1999, to streamline
the administration of the programs and to ease the burden on
regulatees, the Commission consolidated the information filing
requirements for multiple telecommunications regulatory programs
into the annual Telecommunications Reporting Worksheet. See 1998
Biennial Regulatory Review, Report and Order, 14 FCC Rcd 16602
(1999). The next year the Commission revised the
Telecommunications Reporting Worksheet slightly to collect the
additional information necessary to achieve its goal of
establishing a central repository for interstate
telecommunications providers by the least provider-burdensome
method. Carrier Selection Order, 15 FCC Rcd at 16026.
11 The Telecommunications Act of 1996 amended the Communications
Act of 1934. See Telecommunications Act of 1996, Pub. L. No.
104-104, 110 Stat. 56 (1996).
12 47 U.S.C. § 254(d).
13 47 C.F.R. § 54.706(b). Beginning April 1, 2003, carrier
contributions were based on a carrier's projected, rather than
historical, revenues. Id.
14 47 U.S.C. § 225(b)(1).
15 See Telecommunications Relay Services and the Americans with
Disabilities Act of 1990, Third Report and Order, 8 FCC Rcd 5300,
5301, ¶ 7 (1993). Telecommunications relay services enable
persons with hearing and speech disabilities to communicate by
telephone with persons who may or may not have such disabilities.
Such services provide telephone access to a significant number of
Americans who, without it, might not be able to make calls to or
receive calls from others. See Telecommunications Relay Services
and Speech-to-Speech Services for Individuals with Hearing and
Speech Disabilities, Report and Order, 15 FCC Rcd 5140, 5143, ¶ 5
(2000). The National Exchange Carriers Association (``NECA'')
currently is responsible for administering the TRS Fund.
16 47 C.F.R. § 64.604(c)(5)(iii)(A).
17 Upon submission of a Form 499-A registration, the carrier is
issued a filer identification number by USAC. The filer
identification number is then to be included on all further
filings by the company and is used by the Commission and its
administrators to track the carrier's contributions and invoices.
With certain exceptions that have not applied to Telecom House
since 2002, interstate telecommunications carriers must file FCC
Form 499-Q quarterly, reporting revenue information by February
1, May 1, August 1 and November 1 of each year, and FCC Form 499-
A annually, by April 1 of each year. See Instructions for
Completing the Worksheet for Filing Contributions to
Telecommunications Relay Service, Universal Service, Number
Administration and Local Number Portability Support Mechanisms,
FCC Form 499, April 2004, at 9.
18 Individual universal service contribution amounts that are
based upon quarterly filings are subject to an annual true-up.
See Federal-State Joint Board on Universal Service, Petition for
Reconsideration filed by AT&T, Report and Order and Order on
Reconsideration, 16 FCC Rcd 5748 (2001); 47 C.F.R. § 54.709(a).
19 See Globcom, Inc., Notice of Apparent Liability for Forfeiture
and Order, 18 FCC Rcd 19893, 19896, ¶ 5 (2003); 47 C.F.R. §
54.711(a) (``The Commission shall announce by Public Notice
published in the Federal Register and on its website the manner
of payment and the dates by which payments must be made.'').
See, e.g., ``Proposed Third Quarter 2003 Contribution Factor,''
Public Notice, 18 FCC Rcd 11442 (WCB 2003) (``Contribution
payments are due on the date shown on the [USAC] invoice.'').
The Act and our rules, however, do not condition payment on
receipt of an invoice or other notice from USAC. See 47 U.S.C. §
254(d); 47 C.F.R. § 54.706(b). A carrier that does not file may
not receive an invoice from USAC, but is nonetheless required to
contribute to the universal service fund, unless its revenues are
considered de minimis. Globcom, Inc., 18 FCC Rcd at 19896, ¶ 5 &
n.22. The instructions for the Telecommunications Reporting
Worksheet include tables for carriers to determine their annual
contributions. Telecom House has not qualified for the de
minimis exception since 2002.
20 47 C.F.R. § 54.713.
21 47 C.F.R. § 1.1910. The rule went into effect on November 1,
2004. See ``FCC Announces Brief Delay in Enforcement of Red
Light Rule,'' Public Notice, 19 FCC Rcd 19452 (2004).
22 Response to Data Requests/Request for Documents, EB-04-IH-
0656, at 4, dated March 17, 2005 (``March 17, 2005 LOI
Response'').
23 See http://www.thouse.com/about.html.
24 See 47 C.F.R. § 64.1195(a).
25 See Letter from Hugh Boyle, Chief Auditor, Investigations and
Hearings Division, Enforcement Bureau, to Telecom House dated
August 9, 2004 (``August 9, 2004 Audit Letter'').
26 47 C.F.R. § 64.1195. Telecom House did not, however,
apparently file any outstanding Worksheets on September 14, 2004.
27 Letter from Hillary S. DeNigro, Deputy Chief, Investigations
and Hearings Division, Enforcement Bureau, Federal Communications
Commission, to Aaron Amid, Chief Executive Officer, Telecom
House, Inc., dated January 26, 2005 (``January 26, 2005 LOI'').
28 See supra note 22.
29 March 17, 2005 LOI Response, Exhibits 6-3, 6-6, & 8.
Companies are required to report their previous year's revenue on
Form 499-A. Thus, Telecom House should have used the Form 499-A
for 2003, 2004, and 2005 to report revenue for 2002, 2003, and
2004, respectively.
30 Response to Supplemental Request, EB-04-IH-0656, Attachment 1,
dated August 5, 2005 (``August 5, 2005 LOI Response'').
31 Id.
32 Letter from Hillary S. DeNigro, Deputy Chief, Investigations
and Hearings Division, Enforcement Bureau, Federal Communications
Commission, to Douglas D. Orvis II, Swidler Berlin LLP, Counsel
to Telecom House Incorporated, dated July 13, 2005 (``July 13,
2005 LOI'').
33 See supra note 30.
34 47 U.S.C. § 503(b)(1)(B); 47 C.F.R. § 1.80(a)(1).
35 47 U.S.C. § 312(f)(1).
36 H.R. Rep. No. 97-765, 97th Cong. 2d Sess. 51 (1982).
37 See, e.g., Application for Review of Southern California
Broadcasting Co., Memorandum Opinion and Order, 6 FCC Rcd 4387,
4388 (1991) (``Southern California Broadcasting Co.'').
38 See, e.g., Callais Cablevision, Inc., Grand Isle, Louisiana,
Notice of Apparent Liability for Monetary Forfeiture, 16 FCC Rcd
1359 (2001) (issuing a Notice of Apparent Liability for, inter
alia, a cable television operator's repeated signal leakage).
39 Callais Cablevision, Inc., 16 FCC Rcd at 1362, ¶ 9; Southern
California Broadcasting Co., 6 FCC Rcd at 4388, ¶ 5.
40 47 U.S.C. § 503(b); 47 C.F.R. § 1.80(f).
41 See, e.g., SBC Communications, Inc., Forfeiture Order, 17 FCC
Rcd 7589, 7591, ¶ 4 (2002) (``SBC Forfeiture Order'') (forfeiture
paid).
42 47 U.S.C. § 254(d).
43 47 C.F.R. §§ 54.706(a), 54.711(a), 64.604(c)(5)(iii)(B),
64.1195.
44 47 C.F.R. § 64.1195.
45 47 U.S.C. § 254(d).
46 47 C.F.R. §§ 54.706(a), 54.711(a), 64.604(c)(5)(iii)(B),
64.1195.
47 47 C.F.R. § 64.1195.
48 47 C.F.R. § 64.1195(a); Carrier Selection Order, 15 FCC Rcd
15996, 16025 (requiring existing carriers like Telecom House to
register on the date the new registration requirement becomes
effective by means of certain information in FCC Form 499-A); 66
FR 17083 (2001) (announcing that OMB-approved information
collection requirement in section 64.1195 would take effect on
April 2, 2001).
49 Id. The Commission adopted the registration requirement in
section 64.1195(a) after finding that such a requirement would
enable it to better monitor the entry of carriers into the
interstate telecommunications market and any associated increases
in slamming activity, and, among other things, would enhance the
Commission's ability to take appropriate enforcement action
against carriers that have demonstrated a pattern or practice of
slamming. See Carrier Selection Order, 15 FCC Rcd at 16024 ¶ 62.
50 See The Commission's Forfeiture Policy Statement and Amendment
of Section 1.80 of the Commission's Rules, Report and Order, 12
FCC Rcd 17087, 17099, ¶ 22 (1997) (``Forfeiture Policy
Statement''), recon. denied, 15 FCC Rcd 303 (1999) (``The
Commission expects, and it is each licensee's obligation, to know
and comply with all of the Commission's rules.'').
51 See August 9, 2004 Audit Letter. Further, Telecom House made
no apparent efforts to pay its long overdue USF obligations, or
to file its long overdue Worksheets, until after receiving a
second letter from the Bureau in January 2005.
52 AT&T Wireless Services, Inc., Forfeiture Order, 17 FCC Rcd
21866, 21870-71, (2002); America's Tele-Network Corp., Order of
Forfeiture, 16 FCC Rcd 22350, 22355, ¶ 15 (2001); Coleman
Enters., Inc. d/b/a/ Local Long Distance, Inc., Order of
Forfeiture, 15 FCC Rcd 24385, 24388, ¶ 8 (2000).
53 The proposed forfeitures in this NAL relate only to the
portion of that period within a year of release of this NAL.
54 47 C.F.R. §§ 54.711(a), 64.604(c)(5)(iii)(B).
55 47 C.F.R. §§ 54.711(a), 64.604(c)(5)(iii)(B).
56 Sixty days prior to the start of each quarter, USAC is
required to provide the Commission with a projection of the high
cost, low income, schools and libraries, and rural health care
funding requirements for the following quarter. See
www.universalservice.org/overview/filings. Based on USAC's
projection of the needs of the USF, and revenue projections from
the registered carriers subject to universal service
requirements, the Commission establishes a specific percentage of
interstate and international end-user revenues that each subject
telecommunications provider must contribute toward the USF. This
percentage is called the contribution factor. The contribution
factor, and, consequently, the amount owed to the USF by each
affected telecommunications company, changes each quarter,
depending on the needs of the USF and carrier-provided revenue
projections. See www.fcc.gov/wcb/universal_service/quarter.
Thus, in cases where a carrier, such as Telecom House, fails to
file required Worksheets reporting its revenue projections in a
timely fashion, its revenues are excluded from the contribution
base from which universal assessments are derived, and the
economic burden of contributing falls disproportionately on
carriers that have satisfied their reporting obligations.
57 47 U.S.C. § 254(d).
58 47 U.S.C. § 254.
59 47 C.F.R. §§ 54.711, 64.604.
60 47 U.S.C. § 254(d); 47 C.F.R. § 54.706.
61 47 C.F.R. § 54.706(c).
62 See 47 C.F.R. § 54.706(c).
63 Globcom, Inc., Notice of Apparent Liability for Forfeiture and
Order, 18 FCC Rcd 19893, 19903, ¶ 26 (2003).
64 47 C.F.R. § 64.604(c)(5)(iii)(A).
65 Id. Each subject carrier must contribute at least $25 per
year. Carriers whose annual contributions are less than $1,200
must pay the entire amount at the beginning of the contribution
period. 47 C.F.R. § 64.604(c)(5)(iii)(B). Otherwise, carriers
may divide their contributions into equal monthly payments. Id.
66 47 C.F.R. § 64.604(c)(5)(iii)(B).
67 See id.
68 March 17, 2005 LOI Response (question #10).
69 August 5, 2005 LOI Response (question #4).
70 Id. at Attachment 4.
71 47 U.S.C. § 503(b)(1)(B); see also 47 C.F.R. § 1.80(a)(2).
72 47 U.S.C. § 503(b)(2)(B); see also 47 C.F.R. § 1.80(b)(2).
Effective September 7, 2004, the Commission amended its rules to
increase the maximum penalties to account for inflation since the
last adjustment of the penalty rates. See Amendment of Section
1.90 of the Commission's Rules, Order, 19 FCC Rcd 10945, 10946 ¶
6 (2004).
73 47 U.S.C. § 503(b)(2)(D); see also Forfeiture Policy
Statement, 12 FCC Rcd at 17100, ¶ 27; 47 C.F.R. § 1.80(b).
74 47 U.S.C. § 503(b)(6)(B); see also 47 C.F.R. § 1.80(c)(3).
75 See, e.g., Carrera Communications, LP, Notice of Apparent
Liability for Forfeiture and Order, FCC 05-147, 2005 WL 1750417
(F.C.C.) at ¶ 24 (released July 25, 2005); InPhonic, Inc., Notice
of Apparent Liability for Forfeiture and Order, FCC 05-145, 2005
WL 1750418 (F.C.C.) at ¶ 24 (released July 25, 2005);
Teletronics, Inc., Notice of Apparent Liability for Forfeiture
and Order, FCC 05-146, 2005 WL 1750420 (F.C.C.) at ¶ 28 (released
July 25, 2005); Globcom, Inc., 18 FCC Rcd at 19903; Roadrunner
Transp., Inc., Forfeiture Order, 15 FCC Rcd 9669, 9671 (2000);
Liab. of E. Broad. Corp., Memorandum Opinion and Order, 10 F.C.C.
2d 37 (1967).
76 See InPhonic, Inc., 2005 WL at 1750418 (F.C.C.) at ¶ 25;
Teletronics, Inc., 2005 WL 1750420 (F.C.C.) at ¶ 29.
77 See InPhonic, Inc., 2005 WL at 1750418 (F.C.C.) at ¶ 26;
Teletronics, Inc., 2005 WL 1750420 (F.C.C.) at ¶ 30.
78 InPhonic, Inc., 2005 WL at 1750418 (F.C.C.) at ¶ 26;
Teletronics, Inc., 2005 WL 1750420 (F.C.C.) at ¶ 30.
79 InPhonic, Inc., 2005 WL at 1750418 (F.C.C.) at ¶ 26;
Teletronics, Inc., 2005 WL 1750420 (F.C.C.) at ¶ 30.
80 Globcom, Inc., 18 FCC Rcd at 19905. See also Carrera
Communications, Inc., 2005 WL 1750417 (F.C.C.) at ¶ 25; InPhonic,
Inc., 2005 WL 1750418 (F.C.C.) at ¶ 27; Teletronics, Inc., 2005
WL 1750420 (F.C.C.) at ¶ 31.
81 See 47 U.S.C. § 254(d).
82 See Globcom, Inc., 18 FCC Rcd at 19903-19904, ¶¶ 25-27. See
also Carrera Communications, Inc., 2005 WL 1750417 (F.C.C.) at ¶
26; InPhonic, Inc., 2005 WL 1750418 (F.C.C.) at ¶ 28; Telecom
Mgmt., Inc., Notice of Apparent liability for Forfeiture, FCC 05-
156 2005 WL 1949643 (F.C.C.) at ¶ 17 (released Aug. 12, 2005);
Teletronics, Inc., 2005 WL 1750420 (F.C.C.) at ¶ 32.
83 See, e.g., Globcom, Inc., 18 FCC Rcd at 19903-19904, ¶¶ 25-27.
See also Carrera Communications, Inc., 2005 WL 1750417 (F.C.C.)
at ¶ 27; InPhonic, Inc., 2005 WL 1750418 (F.C.C.) at ¶ 29;
OCMC, Inc., Notice of Apparent Liability for Forfeiture, FCC 05-
157, 2005 WL 1949644 (F.C.C.) at ¶ 19; Telecom Mgmt., Inc., 2005
WL 1949643 (F.C.C.) at ¶ 18; Teletronics, Inc., 2005 WL 1750420
(F.C.C.) at ¶ 32.
84 See supra ¶13. Telecom House made its first USF payment of
$9,802.62 on August 24, 2005, but payment was due nearly ten days
before, and in any event, as explained above, the vast majority
of that amount corresponds to a partial payment for its overdue
balance due for 2003 and 2004.
85 The first figure ($12,794) is one half of the amount USAC
calculated that Telecom House owes to the USF for 2003, 2004, and
the late-paid sum for one month of the third quarter of 2005; the
second figure ($5,430) is one half of the amount that we estimate
Telecom House owes to the USF for the first and second quarters
of 2005.
86 47 U.S.C. § 225(b)(1).
87 See Globcom, Inc., 18 FCC Rcd at 19904, ¶ 29. See also
Carrera Communications, Inc., 2005 WL 1750417 (F.C.C.) at ¶ 29;
InPhonic, Inc., 2005 WL 1750418 (F.C.C.) at ¶ 31; Teletronics,
Inc., 2005 WL 1750420 (F.C.C.) at ¶ 34.
88 See Globcom, Inc., 18 FCC Rcd at 19904, ¶ 29. See also
Carrera Communications, Inc., 2005 WL 1750417 (F.C.C.) at ¶ 29;
InPhonic, Inc., 2005 WL 1750418 (F.C.C.) at ¶ 31; Teletronics,
Inc., 2005 WL 1750420 (F.C.C.) at ¶ 34.
89 See August 5, 2005 LOI Response at Attachment 4.
90 Forfeiture Policy Statement, 12 FCC Rcd at 17099; see also 47
C.F.R. § 1.80(b)(4).
91 47 C.F.R. § 64.1195.
92 See Business Options, Inc., Consent Decree, 19 FCC Rcd 2916
(2003); NOS Communications, Inc., Affinity Network Incorporated
and NOSVA Limited Partnership, Consent Decree, 2003 WL 22439710
(2003).
93 47 C.F.R. § 1.1910.
94 47 U.S.C. § 503(b).
95 47 C.F.R. § 1.80.
96 See 47 C.F.R. § 1.80(f)(3).
97 47 U.S.C. §§ 4(i), 219(b), and 254(d).
98 47 C.F.R. §§ 54.706(a) and 54.711(a).
99 See 47 C.F.R. § 1.1914.