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-05-IH-0808
)
Universal Telecommunications, Inc. NAL/Acct. No. 200632080162
)
Apparent Liability for Forfeiture FRN No. 0010-5735-09
)
)
ORDER
Adopted: September 3, 2010 Released: September 3, 2010
By the Chief, Enforcement Bureau:
1. In this Order, based on information that Universal Telecommunications,
Inc. ("Universal") submitted to the Enforcement Bureau ("Bureau") in
response to a Notice of Apparent Liability for Forfeiture ("NAL"), we
determine that no forfeiture penalty should be imposed on Universal.
2. As explained in the NAL, following a series of audits of
telecommunications resellers, Bureau staff identified Universal as a
reseller that seemingly failed to satisfy various Commission program
requirements. On August 17, 2005, the Bureau sent a letter of inquiry
("LOI") to Universal requesting specific information relating to
Universal's compliance with filing and payment requirements for
various federal telecommunications regulatory programs. Universal did
not respond to the LOI on the due date, nor did it respond to
subsequent Bureau staff communications directing a response. On June
15, 2006, the Bureau issued the Universal NAL, in which it concluded
that Universal was a regulated telecommunications carrier subject to
the Commission's investigative authority pursuant to sections 4(i),
4(j), 218, and 403 the Communications Act of 1934, as amended (the
"Act"), and was apparently liable for a forfeiture in the amount of
$20,000 for Universal's failure to provide certain information and
documents as directed by the Bureau.
3. Universal filed a response to the NAL on August 2, 2006. Based upon
that response, we conclude that as a factual matter the company is not
a telecommunications carrier and did not hold any license, permit,
certificate or other authorization issued by the Commission at the
time of the apparent violation. As a result, we are precluded by
section 503(b)(5) of the Act from imposing a forfeiture against
Universal unless we first issue a citation notifying the company of
the violation charged (in this case, failure to respond to a
Commission directive). Because no such citation was issued here, we
find that no forfeiture should be imposed.
4. ACCORDINGLY, IT IS ORDERED THAT, pursuant to sections 4(i), 4(j), and
503(b) of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended, 47 U.S.C. S:S:
154(i), 154(j), 503(b), the proposed forfeiture against Universal
Telecommunications, Inc. on June 13, 2006 WILL NOT BE IMPOSED.
5. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED THAT a copy of this ORDER shall be sent, by
certified mail/return receipt requested to Ms. Ruth Peterson, Chief
Executive Officer, Universal Telecommunications, Inc., 3781
Presidential Parkway, Suite 132, Atlanta, GA 30340.
FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION
P. Michele Ellison
Chief
Enforcement Bureau
See Universal Telecommunications, Inc., Notice of Apparent Liability for
Forfeiture and Order, 21 FCC Rcd 6579 (Enf. Bur. 2006) ("NAL" or
"Universal NAL").
See NAL, 21 FCC Rcd at 6579, para. 3.
See Letter from Hillary S. DeNigro, Deputy Chief, Investigations and
Hearings Division, Enforcement Bureau, to Ruth Peterson, Universal
Telecommunications, Inc., and CT Corporation, Registered Agent for
Universal Telecommunications, Inc., dated August 17, 2005 ("LOI").
See e.g., Letter from Hillary S. DeNigro, Deputy Chief, Investigations and
Hearings Division, Enforcement Bureau, to Ruth Peterson, Universal
Telecommunications, Inc., dated October 21, 2005 ("October 21, 2005
Letter"). See also Universal NAL, 21 FCC Rcd at 6570-80, paras. 3-4
(describing Bureau staff attempts to solicit the requested information
from Universal).
See id.
47 U.S.C. S:S: 154(i), 154(j), 218, 403.
NAL Response.
See id. at 3. Based on our review of the NAL Response, we issued a
supplemental letter of inquiry seeking additional information regarding
services provided by Universal. See Letter from Trent B. Harkrader, Deputy
Chief, Investigations and Hearings Division, Enforcement Bureau, to Ruth
Peterson, Universal Telecommunications, Inc., dated July 23, 2007.
Universal responded on September 26, 2007. See Letter from Adrian L.
Ferguson, Universal Telecommunications., Inc., to Vickie Robinson,
Assistant Chief, Investigations and Hearings Division, Enforcement Bureau,
FCC, filed Sept. 26, 2007.
47 U.S.C. S: 503(b)(5).
(Continued from previous page)
(continued....)
Federal Communications Commission DA 10-1696
2
2
Federal Communications Commission DA 10-1696