******************************************************** 
                      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.

*****************************************************************



                                  May 26, 2010

   VIA CERTIFIED MAIL - RETURN RECEIPT REQUESTED

   AND FACSIMILE AT 248 239 0181

   Mr. Jim Bahri, Member Manager

   Air Voice Wireless, LLC

   2425 Franklin Road

   Bloomfield Hills, Michigan 48302-0336

   Re: File No. EB-09-SE-168

   Dear Mr. Bahri:

   This is an official CITATION issued to Air Voice Wireless, LLC ("Air
   Voice"), a reseller of wireless services, pursuant to section 503(b)(5) of
   the Communications Act of 1934, as amended ("Act"), for violating the
   digital wireless handset hearing aid compatibility status report filing
   requirements set forth in section 20.19(i)(1) of the Commission's Rules
   ("Rules"), and the public web site posting requirements set forth in
   section 20.19(h) of the Rules. We also find that Air Voice violated a
   Commission order by failing to respond to a Letter of Inquiry ("LOI") from
   the Enforcement Bureau. As explained below, continued violations of the
   Commission's rules and the Act in this regard will subject Air Voice to
   monetary forfeitures.

   In the 2003 Hearing Aid Compatibility Order, the Commission adopted
   several measures to enhance the ability of individuals with hearing
   disabilities to access digital wireless telecommunications. The Commission
   established technical standards that digital wireless handsets must meet
   to be considered compatible with hearing aids operating in acoustic
   coupling and inductive coupling (telecoil) modes. The Commission further
   established, for each standard, deadlines by which manufacturers and
   service providers were required to offer specified numbers or percentages
   of digital wireless handsets per air interface that are compliant with the
   relevant standard if they did not come under the de minimis exception. In
   February 2008, as part of a comprehensive reconsideration of the
   effectiveness of the hearing aid compatibility rules, the Commission
   released an order that, among other things, adopted new compatible handset
   deployment benchmarks beginning in 2008.

   Of primary relevance, the Commission also adopted reporting requirements
   to ensure that it could monitor the availability of these handsets and to
   provide valuable information to the public concerning the technical
   testing and commercial availability of hearing aid-compatible handsets,
   including on the Internet. The Commission initially required manufacturers
   and digital wireless service providers to report every six months on
   efforts toward compliance with the hearing aid compatibility requirements
   for the first three years of implementation (May 17, 2004, November 17,
   2004, May 17, 2005, November 17, 2005, May 17, 2006 and November 17,
   2006), and then annually thereafter through the fifth year of
   implementation (November 19, 2007 and November 17, 2008). In its 2008
   Hearing Aid Compatibility First Report and Order, the Commission extended
   these reporting requirements with certain modifications on an open ended
   basis, beginning January 15, 2009. The Commission also made clear that
   these reporting requirements apply to manufacturers and service providers
   that fit within the de minimis exception. In addition, the Commission
   instituted a requirement that manufacturers and service providers with
   publicly-accessible web sites maintain a list of hearing aid-compatible
   handset models and certain information regarding those models on their web
   sites. The web site postings, which must be updated within 30 days of a
   change in a manufacturer's or service provider's offerings, enable
   consumers to obtain up-to-date hearing aid compatibility information from
   their service providers.

   Air Voice, which offers prepaid wireless service, did not file a hearing
   aid compatibility status report prior to the January 15, 2009 deadline.
   The Wireless Telecommunications Bureau referred Air Voice's apparent
   violation of the hearing aid compatibility reporting requirement to the
   Enforcement Bureau for possible enforcement action. On November 4, 2009,
   the Enforcement Bureau's Spectrum Enforcement Division ("Division") issued
   Air Voice an LOI. On December 4, 2009, the Division re-mailed the LOI via
   certified mail, return receipt requested, to the Bloomfield Hills,
   Michigan address listed on the Air Voice web site. The U.S. Postal Service
   certified mail return receipt shows that the LOI was received on December
   10, 2009. To date, however, Air Voice has not responded to the LOI.

   We find that, as a reseller, Air Voice is a service provider subject to
   the wireless hearing aid compatibility requirements. It appears from Air
   Voice's web site that it purchases wireless services and wireless handsets
   and resells the services and handsets to its customers. The Commission has
   made clear that the hearing aid compatibility requirements apply to
   service providers such as resellers. Thus, Air Voice is a service provider
   subject to the wireless hearing aid compatibility requirements. Under
   section 20.19(i)(1) of the Rules, service providers must file hearing aid
   compatibility status reports initially on January 15, 2009, and annually
   thereafter. These reports are necessary to enable the Commission to
   perform its enforcement function and evaluate whether Air Voice is in
   compliance with Commission mandates that were adopted to facilitate the
   accessibility of hearing aid-compatible wireless handsets. These reports
   also provide valuable information to the public concerning the technical
   testing and commercial availability of hearing aid-compatible handsets. 
   Air Voice did not file the January 15, 2009 report, and to date, has not
   filed its January 15, 2010 status report. Accordingly, Air Voice violated
   the hearing aid compatibility status report filing requirements set forth
   in section 20.19(i)(1) of the Rules.

   Section 20.19(h) of the Rules requires that, beginning January 15, 2009,
   each manufacturer and service provider that operates a publicly-accessible
   web site make available on its web site a list of all hearing
   aid-compatible handset models currently offered, the ratings of those
   models, and an explanation of the rating system. In addition, the
   Commission has stated that any changes to a manufacturer's or service
   provider's offerings must be reflected on its public web site listing
   within 30 days. These web site postings provide consumers up-to-date
   hearing aid compatibility information. Based on our review of Air Voice's
   web site, it has not posted the hearing aid compatibility ratings of the
   various handsets on its web site with an explanation of the rating system
   in accordance with section 20.19(h) of the Rules.

   Sections 4(i), 4(j), and 403 of the Act afford the Commission broad
   authority to investigate the entities it regulates. Section 4(i)
   authorizes the Commission to "issue such orders, not inconsistent with
   this Act, as may be necessary in the execution of its functions," and
   Section 4(j) states that "the Commission may conduct its proceedings in
   such manner as will best conduce to the proper dispatch of business and to
   the ends of justice." Likewise, Section 403 grants the Commission "full
   authority and power to institute an inquiry, on its own motion ...
   relating to the enforcement of any of the provisions of this Act."
   Numerous FCC decisions have reaffirmed the Commission's authority to
   investigate potential misconduct and to punish those that disregard
   Commission inquiries.

   Congress has directed the Commission to "ensure reasonable access to
   telephone service by persons with impaired hearing." In furtherance of
   that mission, the Division's LOI directed Air Voice to provide, by
   December 19, 2009, certain information regarding the company's compliance
   with hearing aid compatibility reporting requirements. The U.S. Postal
   Service certified mail return receipt shows that the LOI was received. To
   date, the Division has received no response to its LOI. Accordingly, we
   find that Air Voice violated a Commission order by failing to provide the
   information requested.

   Air Voice is again ordered to provide the information sought by the LOI. A
   copy of the LOI is enclosed.  You must provide the requested information
   in the manner indicated therein within 15 days of the date of this
   citation.

   Air Voice should take prompt action to ensure that it does not continue to
   violate the Commission's wireless hearing aid compatibility rules. Air
   Voice should also take prompt action to respond to the LOI. If, after
   receipt of this citation, Air Voice continues to violate the
   Communications Act or the Commission's rules or orders in any manner
   described herein, the Commission may impose monetary forfeitures not to
   exceed $150,000 for each such violation or each day of a continuing
   violation. 

   Additionally, Air Voice may respond to this citation within 30 days from
   the date of this letter either through (1) a personal interview at the
   Commission's Field Office nearest to your place of business, or (2) a
   written statement. Air Voice's response should specify the actions that it
   is taking to ensure that it does not violate the Commission's rules
   governing the filing of hearing aid compatibility status reports in the
   future.

   The nearest Commission field office appears to be the Detroit District
   Office, in Farmington Hills, Michigan. Please call Jacqueline Johnson at
   202-418-2871 if Air Voice wishes to schedule a personal interview. Air
   Voice should schedule any interview to take place within 30 days of the
   date of this letter. Air Voice should send any written statement within 30
   days of the date of this letter to:

   Jacqueline Johnson

   Spectrum Enforcement Division

   Enforcement Bureau

   Re: EB-09-SE-168

   Federal Communications Commission

   445 12th Street, S.W., Rm. 4-A431

   Washington, D.C. 20554

   Under the Privacy Act of 1974, we are informing Air Voice that the
   Commission's staff will use all relevant material information before it,
   including information that Air Voice discloses in its interview or written
   statement, to determine what, if any, enforcement action is required to
   ensure Air Voice's compliance with the Communications Act and the
   Commission's rules and orders.

   The knowing and willful making of any false statement, or the concealment
   of any material fact, in response to this citation is punishable by fine
   or imprisonment.

   We thank Air Voice in advance for its anticipated cooperation.

   Sincerely,

   Kathryn Berthot

   Chief, Spectrum Enforcement Division

   Enforcement Bureau

   Enclosure

   47 U.S.C. S: 503(b)(5).

   47 C.F.R. S: 20.19(i)(1), (h).

   The Commission adopted these requirements for digital wireless telephones
   under the authority of the Hearing Aid Compatibility Act of 1988, codified
   at Section 710(b)(2)(C) of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended, 47
   U.S.C. S: 610(b)(2)(C). See Section 68.4(a) of the Commission's Rules
   Governing Hearing Aid-Compatible Telephones, Report and Order, 18 FCC Rcd
   16753, 16787 P: 89 (2003); Erratum, 18 FCC Rcd 18047 (2003) ("Hearing Aid
   Compatibility Order");  Order on Reconsideration and Further Notice of
   Proposed Rulemaking, 20 FCC Rcd 11221 (2005).

   See Hearing Aid Compatibility Order, 18 FCC Rcd at 16777 P: 56; 47 C.F.R.
   S: 20.19(b)(1), (2).

   The term "air interface" refers to the technical protocol that ensures
   compatibility between mobile radio service equipment, such as handsets,
   and the service provider's base stations. Currently, the leading air
   interfaces include Code Division Multiple Access (CDMA), Global System for
   Mobile Communications (GSM), Integrated Digital Enhanced Network (iDEN),
   and Wideband Code Division Multiple Access (WCDMA) a/k/a Universal Mobile
   Telecommunications System (UMTS).

   See Hearing Aid Compatibility Order, 18 FCC Rcd at 16780 P: 65; 47 C.F.R.
   S: 20.19(c), (d). The de minimis exception  provides that manufacturers or
   mobile service providers that offer two or fewer digital wireless handset
   models per air interface are exempt from the hearing aid compatibility
   deployment requirements, and manufacturers or mobile service providers
   that offer three digital wireless handset models per air interface must
   offer at least one compliant model. 47 C.F.R. S: 20.19(e).

   See Amendment of the Commission's Rules Governing Hearing Aid-Compatible
   Mobile Handsets, First Report and Order, 23 FCC Rcd 3406 (2008) ("Hearing
   Aid Compatibility First Report and Order"), Order on Reconsideration and
   Erratum, 23 FCC Rcd 7249 (2008).

   See Hearing Aid Compatibility First Report and Order, 23 FCC Rcd at 3443
   P: 91.

   Hearing Aid Compatibility Order, 18 FCC Rcd at 16787 P: 89; see also
   Wireless Telecommunications Bureau Announces Hearing Aid Compatibility
   Reporting Dates for Wireless Carriers and Handset Manufacturers, Public
   Notice, 19 FCC Rcd 4097 (Wireless Tel. Bur. 2004).

   See Hearing Aid Compatibility First Report and Order, 23 FCC Rcd at
   3445-46 P:P: 97-99.

   Id. P: 99.

   Id. at 3450 P: 112.

   Id.

   See Air Voice web sites:  http://www.airvoicewireless.com/gsmRates.asp and
   http://www.airvoicewireless.com/CDMARates.asp.

   See Letter from Kathryn S. Berthot, Chief, Spectrum Enforcement Division,
   Enforcement Bureau to Atheer Toma, Air Voice, Wireless, LLC (November 4,
   2009).

   See http://www.airvoicewireless.com/contactus.asp.

   See http://airvoicewireless.com/gsmPurchaseAirtime.asp and
   http://airvoicewireless.com/CDMAPurchaseAirtime.asp.

   See e.g., Hearing Aid Compatibility First Report and Order, 23 FCC Rcd at
   3424 P: 46 (concluding that a three-month extension of deadlines for
   meeting the handset deployment benchmarks is appropriate with regard to
   "service providers that are not Tier I nationwide providers, including
   regional and smaller providers, such as Tier II and Tier III carriers, and
   other service providers such as resellers and MVNOs.").

   47 C.F.R. S: 20.19(i)(1).

   47 C.F.R. S: 20.19(h).

   See Hearing Aid Compatibility First Report and Order, 23 FCC Rcd at 3450
   P: 112.

   We note that Air Voice's web site promotes 24 handset models for use with
   its wireless services. See
   http://www.airvoicewireless.com/gsmPhoneModels.asp and
   http://www.airvoicewireless.com/CDMAPhoneModels.asp. Thus, it does not
   appear that Air Voice falls within the de minimis exception. See 47 C.F.R.
   S: 20.19(e).

   47 U.S.C. S: 154(i).

   47 U.S.C. S: 154(j).

   47 U.S.C. S: 403.

   See, e.g., Connect Paging, Inc., Notice of Apparent Liability for
   Forfeiture and Order, 22 FCC Rcd 6303, 6306 (Enf. Bur. 2007) (proposing
   forfeiture of $4,000 for failure to respond to an LOI); Digital Antenna,
   Inc.,  Notice of Apparent Liability for Forfeiture and Order, 23 FCC Rcd
   7600, 7602 (Enf. Bur., Spectrum Enf. Div. 2008) (proposing forfeiture of
   $11,000 for failure to provide a complete response to two letters of
   inquiry); Hauppauge Computer Works, Inc., Notice of Apparent Liability for
   Forfeiture and Order, 23 FCC Rcd 3684, 3688 (Enf. Bur., Spectrum Enf. Div.
   2008) (proposing forfeiture of $11,000 for failure to provide a complete
   response to two letters of inquiry).

   47 U.S.C. S: 610(a).

   See 47 C.F.R. S: 1.80(b)(3).

   See 5 U.S.C. S: 552a(e)(3).

   See 18 U.S.C. S: 1001.

   Federal Communications Commission DA 10-931

   1

   3

   Federal Communications Commission DA 10-931

                       FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION

                             WASHINGTON, D.C. 20554