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 )
Omniat International Telecom, LLC ) File No. EB-08-IH-1150
d/b/a OMNIAT Telecom
) NAL/Acct. No. 200932080032
Apparent Liability for Forfeiture
)
)
)
NOTICE OF APPARENT LIABILITY FOR FORFEITURE AND ORDER
Adopted: March 31, 2009 Released: March 31, 2009
By the Commission:
I. INTRODUCTION
1. In this Notice of Apparent Liability for Forfeiture and Order ("NAL"),
we find that Omniat International Telecom, LLC d/b/a OMNIAT Telecom
("Omniat") apparently violated sections 9(a)(1), 214(a), 225(b)(1),
and 251(e)(2) of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended (the
"Act"), and sections 1.1154, 1.1157(b)(1), 52.17(a), 52.17(b),
52.32(a), 52.32(b), 63.18, 64.604(c)(5)(iii)(A), and
64.604(c)(5)(iii)(B) of the Commission's rules by willfully and
repeatedly failing to (1) apply for and obtain authorization from the
Commission to provide international telecommunications service; (2)
submit annual Telecommunications Reporting Worksheets ("annual
Worksheet" or "Form 499-A"); (3) contribute to the Telecommunications
Relay Service ("TRS") Fund and cost recovery mechanisms for the North
American Numbering Plan ("NANP") and local number portability ("LNP");
and (4) pay regulatory fees to the Commission. We also find that
Omniat apparently violated a Commission order issued pursuant to
section 4(i), 4(j), 218 and 403 of the Act, by willfully and
repeatedly failing to respond to a directive of the Enforcement Bureau
("Bureau") to provide certain information or documents. Based on our
review of the facts and circumstances surrounding this matter, we find
that Omniat is apparently liable for a total forfeiture of $330,000.
2. We order Omniat to submit within thirty days 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 reporting and payment obligations discussed herein; all
authorization applications required under section 214(a) to provide
international telecommunications service; and a full response to the
Bureau's June 2, 2008 letter of inquiry to Omniat. We further order
Omniat to file with the Universal Service Administrative Company
("USAC") within thirty days all required Telecommunications Reporting
Worksheets reporting accurate annual revenue from the date it began
providing telecommunications service in the United States to the date
of this NAL.
II. BACKGROUND
A. Requirement to Apply for Authorization to Provide International
Telecommunications Service
3. Section 214(a) of the Act prohibits any carrier from constructing,
extending, or operating any line, and from engaging in transmission
through any such line, "unless and until there shall first have been
obtained from the Commission a certificate that the present or future
public convenience and necessity" require, or will require, the
construction, extension, or operation of the line. Part 63 of the
Commission's rules sets out the rules for providing U.S.-international
service, including the requirement that a carrier seek and obtain
Commission approval prior to providing international service. The
Commission has explained that the international section 214 review
process serves several purposes. It enables the Commission to review
applications for risks to competition, particularly in situations
where the applicant has an affiliation with a foreign carrier with
market power on the foreign end of the route that may be able to
leverage that market power to discriminate against U.S. competitors to
the detriment of U.S. consumers. The review process also includes
consultation with the Executive Branch agencies regarding national
security, law enforcement, foreign policy and trade concerns that may
be unique to the provision of international service. For these
reasons, section 63.18 of the Commission's rules requires that "any
party seeking authority pursuant to Section 214 . . . for the
provision of common carrier communications services between the United
States, its territories or possessions, and a foreign point shall
request such authority by formal application."
B. Requirements to Contribute to TRS, NANP, and LNP Administration, Pay
Regulatory Fees, and File Periodic Revenue Information
4. 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." To that end, the Commission established the TRS Fund to
reimburse TRS providers for the costs of providing interstate
telecommunications relay services. Pursuant to section
64.604(c)(5)(iii)(A) of the Commission's rules, every provider of
interstate telecommunications services must contribute to the TRS Fund
based upon its end-user revenues.
5. Section 251(e)(1) of the Act directs the Commission to oversee the
administration of telecommunications numbering to ensure the
availability of telephone numbers on an equitable basis. Section
251(e)(2) of the Act requires that "[t]he cost of establishing
telecommunications numbering administration arrangements . . . shall
be borne by all telecommunications carriers on a competitively neutral
basis as determined by the Commission." In carrying out this statutory
directive, the Commission adopted section 52.17 of its rules, which
requires, among other things, that all telecommunications carriers
contribute toward the costs of numbering administration on the basis
of their end-user telecommunications revenues for the prior calendar
year. In addition, the Commission adopted section 52.32 of its rules,
which requires, among other things, that all telecommunications
carriers contribute toward the costs of local number portability on
the basis of their end-user telecommunications revenues for the prior
calendar year.
6. Pursuant to section 9(a)(1) of the Act and section 1.1151 of the
Commission's rules, providers of interstate telecommunications
services and other providers must pay regulatory fees to the
Commission to cover the costs of certain regulatory activities. In
particular, sections 1.1154 and 1.1157(b)(1) of the Commission's rules
require that interstate telecommunications carriers pay regulatory
fees on the basis of their interstate and international end-user
revenues. Such fees must be paid on an annual basis, and failure to do
so subjects a carrier to late payment penalties, as well as possible
revocation of its operating authority.
7. The Commission has established specific procedures for the
administration of the TRS, NANP, LNP, and other associated federal
regulatory programs. A telecommunications provider is required to file
FCC Form 499-A, also known as the annual Telecommunications Reporting
Worksheet, reporting revenue information for the purpose of
determining its federal Universal Service Fund ("USF"), TRS Fund, LNP
and NANP administration and regulatory fee payments. All
telecommunications carriers providing interstate telecommunications
services must file a completed FCC Form 499-A, even if they qualify
for the de minimis exemption for USF contribution purposes, because
the 499-A triggers a determination of liability, if any, and
subsequent billing and collection, for all of the regulatory programs.
For example, the National Exchange Carrier Association ("NECA"), the
administrator of the TRS Fund, uses the annual filings to determine
each contributor's TRS Fund contribution amount. In 2007, the Wireline
Competition Bureau issued a public notice reminding de minimis
telecommunications providers of their obligations, and warned that the
Commission would not hesitate to take appropriate action to enforce
its rules against telecommunications providers who fail to satisfy
their obligations.
C. The Commission's Investigation
8. Omniat is a Florida-based company that characterizes itself as a
"prepaid card" provider. Since at least 2002, Omniat has offered
consumers the ability to place interstate and international
long-distance calls from any telephone by purchasing a block of
minutes in advance. To access the service, the customer dials Omniat's
toll-free number, and if not calling from a telephone number that has
been "subscribed" in advance, enters a card number or personal
identification number ("PIN") associated with the account. The
customer is then prompted to enter the destination number, and is
connected to the intended recipient of the call.
9. In July 2007, USAC received an anonymous complaint alleging that
Omniat had been in violation of FCC regulations requiring the filing
of Telecommunications Reporting Worksheets and/or payment of universal
service obligations "for the last 5-10 years." The complaint alleged
that Omniat had 10,000 to 30,000 subscribers. USAC subsequently
determined that Omniat had filed an annual Worksheet in July 2002,
but had not subsequently filed any annual Worksheets. On October 31,
2007, USAC sent Omniat detailed information concerning its filing
obligations, and requested that Omniat respond by November 31, 2007.
To date, Omniat has not responded to USAC's inquiry.
10. On April 21, 2008, USAC referred Omniat to the Bureau for potential
enforcement action. The Bureau initiated an investigation on June 2,
2008 by a letter of inquiry ("LOI") to Omniat. The LOI directed
Omniat, among other things, to submit a sworn written response to a
series of questions relating to Omniat's apparent failure to register
and file Telecommunications Reporting Worksheets and to make mandated
federal telecommunications regulatory program payments since January
2006. Omniat failed to respond to the LOI in any manner, despite
subsequent attempts by Bureau staff to contact the company regarding
the LOI.
III. DISCUSSION
11. 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 forfeiture
penalty. 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. 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 and the
Commission has so interpreted the term in the section 503(b) context.
The Commission may also assess a forfeiture for violations that are
merely repeated, and not willful. "Repeated" means that the act was
committed or omitted more than once, or lasts more than one day. 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. The Commission will then issue
forfeiture if it finds by a preponderance of the evidence that the
person has violated the Act or a Commission rule.
12. The fundamental issues in this case are whether Omniat apparently
violated the Act and the Commission's rules by willfully or repeatedly
failing to: (1) apply for and obtain authorization prior to providing
international telecommunications service; (2) file annual
Telecommunications Reporting Worksheets; (3) contribute to the TRS
Fund; (4) contribute to NANP administration; (5) contribute to LNP
administration; (6) pay required regulatory fees to the Commission;
and (7) respond to a directive of the Bureau to provide certain
information and documents. We answer these questions affirmatively.
Based on a preponderance of the evidence, we therefore conclude that
Omniat is apparently liable for a forfeiture of $330,000 for its
apparent willful and repeated violations of sections 9(a)(1), 214(a),
225(b)(1), and 251(e)(2) of the Act and sections 1.1154,
1.1157(b)(1), 52.17(a), 52.17(b), 52.32(a), 52.32(b), 63.18,
64.604(c)(5)(iii)(A), and 64.604(c)(5)(iii)(B) of the Commission's
rules.
A Omniat Apparently Failed to Obtain an International Section 214
Authorization
13. We conclude that Omniat has apparently been operating as an
international telecommunications service provider since 2002 without
authorization from the Commission. Prepaid calling cards are
telecommunications services and prepaid calling card providers are
subject to regulation as telecommunications carriers. Thus, prepaid
calling card providers must obtain prior authorization before
providing international telecommunications services, consistent with
the requirements of section 214 of the Act and section 63.18 of the
Commission's rules. Omniat has been providing prepaid international
long distance services to and from the U.S. to the public as a prepaid
calling card provider since at least 2002. However, the Commission's
International Bureau's Filing System ("IBFS") database has no record
that Omniat has applied for or obtained section 214 authorization.
Thus, we find by a preponderance of the evidence that Omniat
apparently violated section 214(a) of the Act and section 63.18 of the
Commission's rules by willfully and repeatedly failing to obtain
section 214 authority from the Commission prior to providing
international telecommunications service.
B. Omniat Apparently Failed to Submit Telecommunications Reporting
Worksheets
14. We also conclude that Omniat apparently has violated sections
225(b)(1) and 251(e)(2) of the Act and sections 64.604(c)(5)(iii)(B),
52.17(b), and 52.32(b) of the Commission's rules by willfully or
repeatedly failing to file annual Telecommunications Reporting
Worksheets since April 2003. Sections 64.604(c)(5)(iii)(B), 52.17(b),
and 52.32(b) of the Commission's rules each clearly establish a
carrier's obligation to file periodic Telecommunications Reporting
Worksheets. A carrier's failure to file these Worksheets as required
has serious implications for the TRS and other 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 TRS and other
regulatory programs. Consequently, a carrier's failure to file
required Worksheets frustrates the very purposes for which Congress
enacted sections 225(b)(1) and 251(e)(2) - 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," and to ensure that
the cost of establishing telecommunications numbering administration
arrangements is "borne by all telecommunications carriers on a
competitively neutral basis." Viewed in this context, the
Telecommunications Reporting Worksheet is not only an administrative
tool, but a fundamental and critical component of the Commission's
TRS, NANP, LNP, and regulatory fee programs.
15. Since Omniat began providing interstate and international
telecommunications service, it had an obligation to file annual
Telecommunications Reporting Worksheets in order to participate in the
applicable TRS, NANP, LNP and regulatory fee programs. USAC confirms
that Omniat has failed to file any Worksheets after 2002,
notwithstanding its regulatory obligations. Moreover, Omniat has
failed to cure these deficiencies despite the Bureau and USAC's
repeated contacts. Based on a preponderance of the evidence, we find
that Omniat has apparently violated sections 64.604(c)(5)(iii)(B),
52.17(b), and 52.32(b) of the Commission's rules by willfully and
repeatedly failing to file annual Telecommunications Reporting
Worksheets from 2003 to the date of this NAL.
C Omniat Apparently Failed to Make TRS Fund Contributions
16. As an interstate telecommunications carrier, Omniat is obligated to
contribute to the TRS Fund on the basis of its interstate end-user
telecommunications revenues. 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. NECA
indicates that Omniat has failed to make any payments towards its TRS
Fund obligation to date. We therefore conclude, based on a
preponderance of the evidence, that Omniat has apparently violated
section 225 of the Act and section 64.604(c)(5)(iii)(A) of the
Commission's rules by willfully and repeatedly failing to make
required TRS contributions from 2003 to the date of this NAL.
D. Omniat Apparently Failed to Make NANP Administration Contributions
17. Omniat is also obligated to contribute to costs of numbering
administration on the basis of its interstate end-user
telecommunications revenues. A carrier's contributions to support
numbering administration are based upon its subject revenues for the
prior calendar year and a contribution factor determined annually by
the Commission. Welch LLP, the Billing and Collection Agent for the
NANP, indicates that Omniat has failed to make any payments towards
its NANP administration obligations accruing from 2004 to the present.
We therefore conclude, based on a preponderance of the evidence, that
Omniat has apparently violated section 251(e)(2) of the Act and
section 52.17(a) of the Commission's rules by willfully and repeatedly
failing to make required NANP administration contributions from 2004
to the date of this NAL.
E. Omniat Apparently Failed to Make LNP Administration Contributions
18. As a telecommunications carrier, Omniat is also obligated to
contribute to LNP cost recovery mechanisms on the basis of its
end-user telecommunications revenues reported on its annual Worksheet.
Neustar, the LNP administrator, indicates that Omniat has failed to
make any payments towards its LNP administration obligations to date.
We therefore conclude, based on a preponderance of the evidence, that
Omniat has apparently violated section 251(e)(2) of the Act and
section 52.32(a) of the Commission's rules by willfully and repeatedly
failing to make required LNP administration contributions.
F. Omniat Apparently Failed to Pay Its Regulatory Fees
19. As an interstate telephone service provider, Omniat is required to pay
regulatory fees on the basis of its interstate and international
end-user revenues as reported on its Form 499-A. The Commission's
records indicate that Omniat has failed to make any regulatory fee
payments to date. We therefore conclude, based on a preponderance of
the evidence, that Omniat apparently violated section 9(1)(a) of the
Act and sections 1.1154 and 1.1157(b)(1) of the Commission's rules by
willfully and repeatedly failing to pay regulatory fees.
G. Omniat Apparently Failed to Respond to Commission Communications
20. The Commission has broad authority to investigate the entities it
regulates under, inter alia, sections 4(i), 4(j), 218, and 403 of the
Act. 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." Section 218
of the Act authorizes the Commission to "obtain from . . . carriers .
. . full and complete information necessary to enable the Commission
to perform the duties and carry out the objects for which it was
created."
21. As indicated above, the Bureau directed Omniat through the June 2,
2008 LOI to provide certain documents and information in order to
enable the Commission to perform its enforcement function and evaluate
allegations that Omniat had violated Commission rules. Omniat received
the LOI, as evidenced by return of the mail receipt to the Bureau and
confirmation of the facsimile transmission. Omniat failed to respond
in any manner to the LOI or to the Bureau staff's attempts to contact
the company regarding the LOI. Omniat's willful and repeated failures
to respond to the Bureau's LOI constitute apparent violations of
Commission orders.
H. Proposed Forfeiture
22. Section 503(b)(1) 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. Section 503(b)(2)(B) of
the Act authorizes the Commission to assess a forfeiture of up to
$150,000 for each violation or each day of a continuing violation, up
to a statutory maximum of $1,500,000 for a single act or failure to
act. In determining the appropriate forfeiture amount, we consider the
factors enumerated in section 503(b)(2)(E) 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."
23. Below, we propose the following forfeitures for Omniat's apparent
violations: (1) $100,000 for failure to obtain international section
214 authority to provide international telecommunications service; (2)
$50,000 for failure to file the annual Telecommunications Reporting
Worksheet due on April 1, 2008; (3) $40,000 for failure to pay TRS
Fund contributions for the 2005-2008 funding periods; (4) $40,000 for
failure to pay NANP administration contributions for the 2005-2008
funding periods; (5) $40,000 for failure to pay LNP administration
contributions for the 2005-2008 funding periods; (6) $40,000 for
failure to make regulatory fee program payments for 2005-2008; and (7)
$20,000 for failure to respond to a directive of the Bureau to provide
certain information and documents.
24. We conclude that Omniat has apparently failed to obtain an
international section 214 authorization from the Commission prior to
providing international telecommunications service. A carrier's
failure to obtain the 214 authorization undermines the Commission's
ability to accomplish Congress' objectives in section 214 of the Act.
Omniat has apparently operated as an international telecommunications
service provider since 2002 without authorization from the
Commission. We therefore find that this apparent violation of the Act
and the Commission's rules was continuing. Given the unambiguous
language of the Act, the Commission's rules and decisions, and even
the Commission's web site, it should have been apparent to Omniat that
it was required to obtain section 214 authority from the Commission to
provide international telecommunications service.
25. In light of the Commission's clear requirements, and the important
public interest considerations involving national security, law
enforcement, foreign policy and trade policy, we find that Omniat's
failure to obtain section 214 authority from the Commission prior to
providing international telecommunications service was also egregious.
Pursuant to the Commission's mandate from Congress to consider "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," we find, consistent with prior precedent for entities
failing to receive prior authorization from the International Bureau,
that a proposed forfeiture of $100,000 is warranted for Omniat's
apparent willful repeated failure to obtain section 214 authority from
the Commission prior to providing international telecommunications
service.
26. Omniat has also failed to file annual Telecommunications Reporting
Worksheets after 2002. As we noted above, a carrier's obligation to
file Worksheets is directly linked to, and thus has serious
implications for, administration of the TRS, NANP, LNP, and regulatory
fee programs. By ignoring its reporting obligations, Omniat
unilaterally shifted to compliant carriers and their customers the
economic costs associated with the administration of these programs.
The failure to file Telecommunications Reporting Worksheets
constitutes a continuing violation for which the one-year statute of
limitations for forfeiture under section 503(b)(2)(B) does not begin
to run until the violation is cured. Consistent with precedent,
however, we exercise our prosecutorial discretion here and decline to
propose forfeitures for Omniat's failures to file Worksheets more than
one year prior to the date of the NAL. 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. Therefore, we find that Omniat is apparently
liable for a $50,000 forfeiture for failure to file the annual
Worksheet due April 1, 2008. We caution Omniat and other carriers that
future enforcement actions may consider all failures to file
Worksheets as continuing violations subject to forfeiture action.
27. We also find that Omniat has apparently failed to make TRS
contributions since 2003. 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." Every carrier providing interstate and
international telecommunications services, which receives some
revenues, must contribute at least $25 annually to the TRS Fund. We
have previously stated that nonpayment of TRS and other contributions
constitute continuing violations, and to effectively deter companies
like Omniat from violating our rules governing payment into the TRS
and other programs, our forfeiture calculations will reflect not only
the violations that began within the last twelve months, but all such
continuing violations. The Commission has established a base
forfeiture amount of $10,000 for each instance in which a carrier
fails to make required TRS contributions. Therefore, we find Omniat
apparently liable for a forfeiture in the amount of $40,000 for its
willful and repeated failure to satisfy its TRS obligations for the
2005-2008 funding periods.
28. We further find that Omniat has apparently failed to make any
contributions toward NANP administration and LNP cost recovery
mechanisms on the basis of its actual end-user telecommunications
revenues since 2003. As with TRS, the failure of carriers to make
required NANP administration and LNP contributions for an extended
period of time severely hampers the Commission's ability to ensure
that the cost of establishing telecommunications numbering
administration arrangements is "borne by all telecommunications
carriers on a competitively neutral basis" as Congress envisioned. For
the same reasons that failures to make TRS contributions are
continuing violations, the failure to make NANP administration and LNP
contributions are continuing violations until they are cured by
payment of all monies due. The Commission has generally established a
base forfeiture amount of $10,000 for each instance in which a
contributor fails to make required contributions to the NANP and LNP
administration cost recovery mechanisms. Consequently, and consistent
with precedent, we find that Omniat is apparently liable for a
forfeiture of $40,000 for failing to timely pay contributions toward
NANP administration cost recovery mechanisms from 2005 to 2008.
Consistent with precedent, we also find that Omniat is apparently
liable for a forfeiture of $40,000 for failing to timely pay
contributions toward LNP administration cost recovery mechanisms from
2005 to 2008.
29. We also find that Omniat has apparently failed to make any regulatory
fee payments to the Commission on the basis of its actual interstate
and international end-user telecommunications revenues since 2003. A
carrier's failure to contribute toward the costs of certain regulatory
activities from which it benefits undermines the efficiency,
equitability, and effectiveness of the regulatory fee program and
accomplishment of Congress' objectives in section 9(a)(1) of the Act.
As with the failure to make TRS, NANP and LNP contributions, failures
to make regulatory fee payments are continuing violations until they
are cured by the payment of all monies owed. The Commission has
established a base forfeiture amount of $10,000 for failure to make
required regulatory fee payments. Therefore, we find Omniat is
apparently liable for a forfeiture of $40,000 for its willful and
repeated failure to make regulatory fee payments from 2005 to 2008.
30. Finally, we find that Omniat has repeatedly and willfully failed to
provide a timely and complete response to the LOI. Section 1.80 of the
Commission's rules and the Commission's Forfeiture Policy Statement
establish a base forfeiture amount of $3,000 for failure to file
required forms or information, and $4,000 for failure to respond to a
Commission communication. We find that Omniat's total failure to
respond to the LOI warrants a substantial increase to this base
amount. Misconduct of this type exhibits a disregard for the
Commission's authority and, more importantly, threatens to compromise
the Commission's ability to adequately investigate violations of its
rules. In this case, such misconduct inhibits our ability adequately
to detect and deter potential rule violations in an area of critical
importance to the Commission -- contributions to the USF, TRS Fund,
NANP administration, and LNP administration. Prompt and full responses
to Bureau inquiry letters are critical to the Commission's enforcement
function. Therefore, consistent with precedent, we propose a total
forfeiture against Omniat of $20,000 for failing to respond to the
LOI.
IV. CONCLUSION
31. In light of the seriousness, duration and scope of the apparent
violations, we find that a proposed forfeiture in the amount of
$330,000 is warranted. As discussed, this proposed forfeiture amount
includes: (1) $100,000 for failure to obtain international section 214
authority to provide international telecommunications service; (2)
$50,000 for failure to file the annual Telecommunications Reporting
Worksheet due on April 1, 2008; (3) $40,000 for failure to pay TRS
Fund contributions for the 2005-2008 funding periods; (4) $40,000 for
failure to pay NANP administration contributions for the 2005-2008
funding periods; (5) $40,000 for failure to pay LNP administration
contributions for the 2005- 2008 funding periods; (6) $40,000 for
failure to make regulatory fee program payments for 2005-2008; and (7)
$20,000 for failure to respond to a directive of the Bureau to provide
certain information and documents.
32. We order Omniat, within thirty days of the release of this NAL, to (1)
submit to the Commission all authorization applications required under
section 214(a) to provide international telecommunications service;
(2) file with USAC all Telecommunications Reporting Worksheets
required under the Commission's rules from the date it began providing
telecommunications service in the United States to the date of this
NAL; (3) submit, 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 authorization, payment, and
reporting rules discussed herein; and (4) respond fully to the June 2,
2008 LOI.
33. We caution that additional violations of the Act or the Commission's
rules could subject Omniat to further enforcement action, including
potentially higher monetary forfeitures, the revocation of operating
authority, and the disqualification of any Omniat principal from the
provision of any common carrier services without the prior consent of
the Commission. In addition, we note that, to the extent Omniat is
found to be delinquent on any debt owed to the Commission, the
Commission will not act on, and may dismiss, any application or
request for authorization filed by Omniat, in accordance with the
agency's "red light" rules.
V. ORDERING CLAUSES
34. ACCORDINGLY, IT IS ORDERED THAT, pursuant to section 503(b) of the
Communications Act of 1934, as amended, 47 U.S.C. S: 503(b), and
section 1.80 of the Commission's rules, 47 C.F.R. S: 1.80, that Omniat
International Telecom, LLC is hereby NOTIFIED of its APPARENT
LIABILITY FOR A FORFEITURE in the amount of $330,000 for willfully and
repeatedly violating the Act and the Commission's rules.
35. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED THAT, pursuant to section 1.80 of the
Commission's Rules, within thirty days of the release date of this
NOTICE OF APPARENT LIABILITY FOR FORFEITURE AND ORDER, Omniat
International Telecom, LLC SHALL PAY the full amount of the proposed
forfeiture or SHALL FILE a written statement seeking reduction or
cancellation of the proposed forfeiture.
36. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED THAT, pursuant to sections 4(i), 9(a)(1),
214(a), 225(b)(1), and 251(e)(2) of the Act, 47 U.S.C. S:S: 4(i),
159(a)(1), 214(a), 225(b)(1), 251(e)(2), and sections
64.604(c)(5)(iii), 52.17, 52.32, 1.1154, and 1.1157(b)(1) of the
Commission's rules, 47 C.F.R. S:S: 64.604(c)(5)(iii), 52.17, 52.32,
1.1154, and 1.1157(b)(1), within thirty days of the release of this
NOTICE OF APPARENT LIABILITY FOR FORFEITURE AND ORDER, Omniat
International Telecom, LLC 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
authorization, payment and reporting rules discussed herein, and its
application for authority provide international telecommunications
services. Omniat International Telecom, LLC also SHALL SUBMIT to the
Universal Service Administrative Company within thirty days all
Telecommunications Reporting Worksheets required under the
Commission's rules from the date Omniat International Telecom, LLC
began providing telecommunications service in the United States to the
date of this NOTICE OF APPARENT LIABILITY FOR FORFEITURE AND ORDER.
37. 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 979088, St. Louis, MO 63197-9000.
Payment by overnight mail may be sent to U.S. Bank - Government
Lockbox #979088, SL-MO-C2-GL, 1005 Convention Plaza, St. Louis, MO
63101. Payment by wire transfer may be made to ABA Number 021030004,
receiving bank TREAS/NYC, and account number 27000001. For payment by
credit card, an FCC Form 159 (Remittance Advice) must be submitted.
When completing the FCC Form 159, enter the NAL/Account number in
block number 23A (call sign/other ID), and enter the letters "FORF" in
block number 24A (payment type code). Requests for full payment under
an installment plan should be sent to: Chief Financial Officer -
Financial Operations, 445 12th Street, S.W., Room 1-A625, Washington,
D.C. 20554. Please contact the Financial Operations Group Help Desk
at 1-877-480-3201 or Email: ARINQUIRIES@fcc.gov with any questions
regarding payment procedures. Omniat International Telecom, LLC will
also send electronic notification within forty-eight (48) hours of the
date said payment is made to Hillary.DeNigro@fcc.gov.
38. The response, if any, to this NOTICE OF APPARENT LIABILITY FOR
FORFEITURE AND ORDER must be mailed to Hillary S. DeNigro, Chief,
Investigations and Hearings Division, Enforcement Bureau, Federal
Communications Commission, 445 12th Street, S.W., Room 4-C330,
Washington, D.C. 20554 and must include the NAL/Acct. No. referenced
above. Omniat International Telecom, LLC also will e-mail an
electronic copy of its response to Hillary.DeNigro@fcc.gov.
39. 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.
40. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that a copy of this NOTICE OF APPARENT LIABILITY
FOR FORFEITURE AND ORDER shall be sent by certified mail, return
receipt requested, to Hatem Akil, President, Omniat International
Telecom, LLC, 127 W. Fairbanks Avenue, Suite 322, Winter Park, FL
32789-4326.
FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION
Marlene H. Dortch
Secretary
In 2002, an entity called "OMNIAT Telecom" obtained an FCC registration
number and submitted an annual Telecommunications Reporting Worksheet,
listing an address in Winter Park, Florida and Mr. Hatem Akil,
President/CEO, as the contact. However, "OMNIAT Telecom" does not appear
to be a corporate entity, as there is no company named "OMNIAT Telecom" or
"OMNIAT Telecom, LLC" registered with the Florida Secretary of State's
Division of Corporations. Instead, Commission staff's search of the
Florida Secretary of State Division of Corporations web site found a
company called Omniat International Telecom, LLC listed as an active
corporation in Florida since 2002, located at the same Winter Park address
and with Mr. Akil as its registered agent. See infra n. 30.
47 U.S.C. S:S: 159(a)(1), 214(a), 225(b)(1), 251(e).
47 C.F.R. S:S: 1.1154, 1.1157(b)(1), 52.17(a), 52.17(b), 52.32(a),
52.32(b), 63.18, 64.604(c)(5)(iii)(A), 64.604(c)(5)(iii)(B).
47 U.S.C. S:S: 4(i), 4(j), 218, 403.
47 U.S.C. S: 214(a).
47 C.F.R. S:S: 63.09 et seq. The Commission has granted "blanket"
authority to carriers providing domestic service, meaning that such
carriers need not apply to the Commission prior to offering domestic
service. See 47 C.F.R. S: 63.01(a) ("Any party that would be a domestic
interstate communications common carrier is authorized to provide
domestic, interstate services to any domestic point and to construct or
operate any domestic transmission line as long as it obtains all necessary
authorizations from the Commission for use of radio frequencies").
Providers of international telecommunications services, however, must seek
authorization from the Commission prior to offering international
telecommunications services. 47 C.F.R. S: 63.18.
See 1998 Biennial Regulatory Review of Int'l Common Carrier Regulations,
Report & Order, 14 FCC Rcd 4909, 4915-16, 4918, 4921 P:P: 16, 21, 27
(1999) ("1998 International Biennial Review Order"); Personal
Communications Indus. Ass'n's Broadband Personal Communications Servs.
Alliance's Pet. for Forbearance for Broadband Personal Communications
Servs., Memorandum Opinion & Order & Notice of Proposed Rulemaking, 13
FCC Rcd 16857, 16883 P:P: 50-51 (1998) ("PCIA Forbearance Order").
See 1998 International Biennial Review Order, 14 FCC Rcd at 4914-16 P:P:
14-16; PCIA Forbearance Order, 13 FCC Rcd at 16882-83 P: 50.
1998 International Biennial Review Order, 14 FCC Rcd at 4914-15 P: 14;
PCIA Forbearance Order, 13 FCC Rcd at 16882 P: 50.
47 C.F.R. S: 63.18.
47 U.S.C. S: 225(b)(1).
See Telecommunications Relay Services and the Americans with Disabilities
Act of 1990, Third Report and Order, 8 FCC Rcd 5300, 5301 P: 7 (1993).
Telecommunications relay services enable persons with hearing and speech
disabilities to communicate by telephone with voice-telephone users. 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
voice-telephone users. See Telecommunications Relay Services and
Speech-to-Speech Services for Individuals with Hearing and Speech
Disabilities, Report and Order, 15 FCC Rcd 5140, 5143 P: 5 (2000). The
National Exchange Carriers Association ("NECA") currently is responsible
for administering the TRS Fund.
47 C.F.R. S: 64.604(c)(5)(iii)(A).
47 U.S.C. S: 251(e)(1).
47 U.S.C. S: 251(e)(2).
47 C.F.R. S: 52.17(a). Carriers contribute based on a percentage of their
intrastate, interstate, and international end-user telecommunications
revenues. The minimum contribution amount is $25, even if a carrier has no
end-user telecommunications revenues.
47 C.F.R. S: 52.32. Carriers contribute based on their intrastate,
interstate, and international end-user revenues. Carriers that have no
intrastate, interstate, or international end-user revenues derived from
providing telecommunications services must contribute $100.
Section 9(a)(1) of the Act directs the Commission to "assess and collect
regulatory fees to recover the costs of the following regulatory
activities of the Commission: enforcement activities, policy and
rulemaking activities, user information services, and international
activities." 47 U.S.C. S: 159(a)(1); see also 47 C.F.R. S: 1.1151.
Interstate telecommunications service providers ("ITSPs") are subject to
regulatory fees based on billed (...continued)
(...continued from previous page)
interstate and international end-user revenues for local and most toll
services. Carriers whose total regulatory fee payment obligation is less
than $10 are exempt; however, the vast majority of FCC Form 499-A filers
are required to pay ITSP regulatory fees. See Regulatory Fees Fact Sheet:
What You Owe - Interstate Telecommunications Service Providers (ITSP) for
FY 2008 at 7,
http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-284863A3.pdf (rel.
Aug. 2008) ("ITSP Regulatory Fees Fact Sheet").
See 47 C.F.R. S:S: 1.1154, 1.1157(b)(1).
47 C.F.R. S: 1.1157(b)(1). Section 1.1154 of the Commission's rules sets
forth the schedule of annual regulatory charges and filing locations for
common carrier services. See 47 C.F.R. S: 1.1154.
See 47 U.S.C. S:S: 159(c)(1), (c)(3).
See FCC Form 499-A Telecommunications Reporting Worksheet - Annual Filing,
available at http://www.fcc.gov/Forms/Form499-A/499a-2008.pdf (February
2008).
Under the Commission's rules, a telecommunications provider is considered
de minimis if it is required to contribute to the federal USF, but its
contribution to the USF in a given year would be less than $10,000.
Telecommunications providers that would be required to contribute to USF
but meet the de minimis standard in a given year are not required to
contribute to the USF that year. 47 C.F.R. S: 54.708. De minimis
telecommunications providers are not required to file the quarterly
Telecommunications Reporting Worksheet, which is used to determine monthly
universal service contribution amounts. See Wireless Competition Bureau
Reminds De Minimis Telecommunications Providers of Certain FCC
Registration, Reporting, and Contribution Requirements, Public Notice, 22
FCC Rcd 1889, 1891 (Wireline Comp. Bur. 2007) ("De Minimis Public
Notice"). Carriers who are de minimis for universal service purposes may
still be liable for contributions to the TRS Fund, NANP administration,
and LNP administration. Id., 22 FCC Rcd at 1891-1892.
See 47 U.S.C. S:S: 225(d)(3); 251(e)(2). 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. 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, 16026 P:
63 (2000) ("Carrier Selection Order"). Regulatory fees for interstate
telecommunications service providers are also calculated on the basis of
information provided on Form 499-A. See ITSP Regulatory Fees Fact Sheet at
2-3.
64 C.F.R. S: 64.604(c)(5)(iii)(B).
De Minimis Public Notice, 22 FCC Rcd at 1893.
See Omniat's 2002 FCC Form 499-A Telecommunications Reporting Worksheet,
Line 105, filed June 22, 2002 ("Omniat 2002 499-A").
See Omniat home page, http://www.omniat.com; Omniat Questions and Answers,
http://www.omniat.com/Questions.asp (last visited Jan. 21, 2009). Omniat
advertises interstate rates of "4.5 cents anywhere in the US," and the
"lowest international rates in the US." Id.
USAC is the administrator of the federal universal service fund. 47 C.F.R.
S: 54.701(a).
Omniat's web site refers to the company interchangeably as "OMNIAT,"
"OMNIAT Telecom," and "OMNIAT Telecom, LLC." See Omniat Questions and
Answers, http://www.omniat.com/Questions.asp (last visited Jan. 21,
2009). The web site lists the address of the company as 127 W. Fairbanks
Avenue, Suite 322, Winter Park, FL 32789. See About OMNIAT,
http://www.omniat.com/About.asp (last visited Jan. 21, 2009). Omniat
obtained an FCC registration number and filed its 2002 499-A under the
name "OMNIAT Telecom," using the company's Winter Park address and listing
Mr. Hatem Akil, President/CEO, as the contact. See
https://fjallfoss.fcc.gov/coresWeb/searchDetail.do?frn=0007310477; Omniat
2002 499-A. However, "OMNIAT Telecom" does not appear to be a corporate
entity, as there is no company named "OMNIAT Telecom" or "OMNIAT Telecom,
LLC" registered with the Florida Secretary of State's Division of
Corporations. Instead, Commission staff's search of the Florida Secretary
of State Division of Corporations web site found a company called "Omniat
International Telecom, LLC" listed as an active corporation in Florida
since 2002, located at the Winter Park address and with Mr. Akil as its
registered agent. See Florida Secretary of State Division of Corporations
Report, October 31, 2008. Accordingly, all references in this NAL to
"Omniat" encompass Omniat International Telecom, LLC, Mr. Akil, and all
other principals and officers of this entity, as well as any other
entities through which Omniat provides the services described on its web
site at http://www.omniat.com.
Letter from Tracey Beaver, Universal Service Administrative Company to
Trent Harkrader, Deputy Chief, Investigation and Hearings Division,
Enforcement Bureau, Federal Communications Commission (Apr. 21, 2008)
("USAC Referral"); E-mail from Tracey Beaver, Universal Service
Administrative Company to Trent Harkrader, Deputy Chief, Investigation and
Hearings Division, Enforcement Bureau, Federal Communications Commission
(Oct. 30, 2008).
Letter from Trent B. Harkrader, Deputy Chief, Investigations & Hearings
Division, Enforcement Bureau, FCC, to Hatem Akil, President, OMNIAT
International Telecom, LLC (June 2, 2008) ("LOI").
47 U.S.C. S: 503(b)(1)(B); 47 C.F.R. S: 1.80(a)(1); see also 47 U.S.C. S:
503(b)(1)(D) (forfeitures for violation of 14 U.S.C. S: 1464).
47 U.S.C. S: 312(f)(1).
H.R. Rep. No. 97-765, 97th Cong. 2d Sess. 51 (1982).
See, e.g., Application for Review of Southern California Broadcasting Co.,
Memorandum Opinion and Order, 6 FCC Rcd 4387, 4388 P: 5 (1991) ("Southern
California Broadcasting Co.").
See, e.g., Callais Cablevision, Inc., Grand Isle, Louisiana, Notice of
Apparent Liability for Monetary Forfeiture, 16 FCC Rcd 1359, 1362 P: 10
(2001) ("Callais Cablevision") (issuing a Notice of Apparent Liability
for, inter alia, a cable television operator's repeated signal leakage).
Southern California Broadcasting Co., 6 FCC Rcd at 4388 P: 5; Callais
Cablevision, Inc., 16 FCC Rcd at 1362 P: 9.
47 U.S.C. S: 503(b); 47 C.F.R. S: 1.80(f).
See, e.g., SBC Communications, Inc., Apparent Liability for Forfeiture,
Forfeiture Order, 17 FCC Rcd 7589, 7591 P: 4 (2002) ("SBC Forfeiture
Order") (forfeiture paid).
As discussed above, a telecommunications carrier whose contribution to the
USF in a given year would be less than $10,000 is not required to
contribute to the USF. See supra n. 23. Any entity required to contribute
to the USF whose projected collected interstate end-user
telecommunications revenues comprise less than 12 percent of its combined
projected collected interstate and international end-user
telecommunications revenues may contribute based only on the entity's
projected collected interstate end-user telecommunications revenues. 47
C.F.R. S: 54.706(c). Because Omniat characterizes itself primarily as an
"international long distance provider" providing the ability to "[c]all
from anywhere in the world, to anywhere in the world," we do not, at this
time, have the revenue information needed to determine whether Omniat has
had sufficient interstate and international revenue to be liable for USF
contributions since 2003. See Omniat home page, http:// www.omniat.com;
About OMNIAT, http://www.omniat.com/About.asp; Omniat Questions and
Answers, http://www.omniat.com/Questions.asp (last visited Jan. 21, 2009).
Nevertheless, we direct Omniat in this NAL to file all required
Telecommunications Reporting Worksheets reporting revenue from the date it
began providing telecommunications service in the United States, in part
so we can determine the company's USF obligations. We expressly reserve
our ability to propose a forfeiture or any other enforcement action if we
determine Omniat should have made USF contributions based on its reported
revenue. Because de minimis entities are not required to file the
quarterly Telecommunications Reporting Worksheet ("quarterly Worksheet"),
we do not propose a forfeiture for Omniat's failure to submit quarterly
Worksheets at this time, see infra P:P: 15, 26. We do, however, expressly
reserve our ability to propose a forfeiture or any other enforcement
action if we determine that Omniat should have filed quarterly Worksheets.
47 U.S.C. S:S: 9(a)(1), 214(a), 225(b)(1), 251(e); 47 C.F.R. S:S: 1.1154,
1.1157(b)(1), 52.17(a), 52.17(b), 52.32(a), 52.32(b), 63.18,
64.604(c)(5)(iii)(A), 64.604(c)(5)(iii)(B).
Regulation of Prepaid Calling Card Services, Declaratory Ruling and Report
and Order, 21 FCC Rcd 7290 P: 10 (2006) ("prepaid calling cards are
telecommunications services and ... their providers are subject to
regulation as telecommunications carriers.... [i]n the future, if prepaid
calling card providers introduce new and different card types that they
believe should be classified as information services, they may seek a
declaratory ruling, a waiver, or other relief"). Prepaid calling cards
provide consumers with the ability to place long-distance calls without
presubscribing to an interexchange carrier ("IXC") or using a credit card.
A calling card customer typically dials a number to reach the service
provider's centralized switching platform and the platform requests the
unique personal identification number associated with the card for
purposes of verification and billing. When prompted by the platform, the
customer dials the destination number and the platform routes the call to
the intended recipient. The prepaid calling card is then debited based on
the price of the completed call. Id. at P: 2.
See
http://svartifoss2.fcc.gov/myibfs/quickSearch.do?sortBy=callsign&ssid=960021005&pgid=2.
47 U.S.C. S:S: 225(b)(1), 251(e)(2); 47 C.F.R. S:S: 64.604(c)(5)(iii)(B),
52.17(b), 52.32(b).
Id.
47 U.S.C. S: 225(b)(1).
47 U.S.C. S: 251(e)(2).
47 C.F.R. S: 64.604(c)(5)(iii)(B). Under the Commission's rules, each
subject carrier must contribute at least $25 per year, and subject
carriers must make TRS contributions on an annual basis, with certain
exceptions.
47 C.F.R..S: 52.17(a). NANP administration contributions are due on an
annual basis, with certain exceptions.
Id. Under the Commission's rules, each subject carrier, including carriers
with no end user telecommunications revenue, must contribute at least $25
per year. Id.
Because Omniat failed to report its revenue on Form 499-A, Welch LLP,
Billing and Collection Agent for NANP, billed the company for the minimum
annual NANP contribution of $25 in each year from 2003 through 2008. Welch
LLP subsequently transferred the debt to the Commission for collection.
The Commission was able to collect the 2003 payment, plus interest, from
Omniat in 2007.
47 U.S.C. S: 251(e)(2); 47 C.F.R. S: 52.17(a).
47 C.F.R. S: 52.32(a). Telecommunications carriers providing
telecommunications service in a region that have no end-user revenue
derived from providing telecommunications service in the region are
assessed a $100 yearly contribution.
47 U.S.C. S: 251(e)(2); 47 C.F.R. S: 52.32(a).
See 47 C.F.R. S:S: 1.1154, 1.1157(b)(1).
47 U.S.C. S: 159(a)(1); 47 C.F.R. S:S: 1.1154, 1.1157. Payments of
standard regulatory fees applicable to common carrier services must be
filed in full on an annual basis. Id. S: 1.1157(b)(1).
47 U.S.C. S:S: 4, 218, 403.
See, e.g., SBC Forfeiture Order, 17 FCC Rcd at 7600 P: 28; Globcom, Inc.
d/b/a Globcom Global Communications, Notice of Apparent Liability for
Forfeiture and Order, 18 FCC Rcd 19893, 19898 n. 36 (2003) ("Globcom
NAL"); BigZoo.com Corp., Notice of Apparent Liability for Forfeiture and
Order, 19 FCC Rcd 24437 (Enf. Bur. 2004), Order of Forfeiture, 20 FCC Rcd
3954 (Enf. Bur. 2005) ("BigZoo Forfeiture Order"); American Family
Association, Licensee of Station KBMP(FM), Enterprise, Kansas, Notice of
Apparent Liability for Forfeiture, 19 FCC Rcd 14072, Forfeiture Order, 19
FCC Rcd 22025 (Enf. Bur. 2004); World Communications Satellite Systems,
Inc., Notice of Apparent Liability for Forfeiture, 18 FCC Rcd 18545 (Enf.
Bur. 2003); Donald W. Kaminski, Jr., Notice of Apparent Liability for
Forfeiture, 16 FCC Rcd 10707 (Enf. Bur. 2001), Forfeiture Order, 18 FCC
Rcd 26065 (Enf. Bur. 2003).
47 U.S.C. S: 503(b)(1)(B); 47 C.F.R. S: 1.80(a)(2).
47 U.S.C. S: 503(b)(2)(B); see also 47 C.F.R. S: 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, 23 FCC Rcd 9845 (2008). The
Commission most recently adjusted the maximum statutory forfeiture amounts
for inflation effective September 2, 2008. See 73 FR 44663-5. Apparent
violations which occurred before that date were subject to lower statutory
maxima.
47 U.S.C. S: 503(b)(2)(E).
47 U.S.C. S: 214(a).
See, e.g., 47 C.F.R. S:S: 63.12, 63.18, 63.20, 63.21, 63.23; see also 1998
International Biennial Review Order, 14 FCC Rcd 4909; Regulation of Int'l
Common Carrier Services, Report and Order, 7 FCC Rcd 7331 (1992)
("International Resale Order").
See International Bureau Frequently Asked Questions,
http://www.fcc.gov/ib/pd/pf/214faq.html (last visited Jan. 21, 2009).
See 1998 International Biennial Review Order, 14 FCC Rcd at 4915-17 P:P:
15-18; id. at 4939-40 P:P: 72-74.
47 U.S.C. S: 503(b)(2)(E).
InPhonic, Inc., Order of Forfeiture and Further Notice of Apparent
Liability for Forfeiture, 22 FCC Rcd 8689, 8703 P: 35 (2007); ADMA
Telecom, Inc., Notice of Apparent Liability for Forfeiture, FCC 09-1 P: 38
(rel. Jan. 14, 2009).
Telrite Corporation, Notice of Apparent Liability for Forfeiture & Order,
23 FCC Rcd 7231, 7244 P: 30 (2008) ("Telrite NAL").
Globcom NAL, 18 FCC Rcd at 19905 P: 32; Globcom, Inc., 21 FCC Rcd 4710,
4727 P: 45 (2006) ("Globcom Forfeiture Order").
47 U.S.C. S: 225(b)(1).
47 C.F.R. S: 64.604(c)(5)(iii)(B). If a carrier contributes less than
$1,200 annually, that payment must be made at the beginning of the
contribution period. Otherwise, a carrier may divide contributions into
equal monthly payments. Id.
Telrite NAL, 23 FCC Rcd at 7243 P: 27.
See Globcom NAL, 18 FCC Rcd at 19904 P: 29. Consistent with precedent, the
Commission generally includes an upward adjustment based on one-half of
the company's approximate unpaid TRS contributions at the time the
investigation was initiated when proposing forfeiture for TRS violations.
See Globcom Forfeiture Order, 21 FCC Rcd at 4721-24 P:P: 31-38. We are not
proposing an upward adjustment at this time, however, because we lack the
revenue data needed to determine the precise scope of Omniat's TRS
obligations. We expressly reserve our ability to make an upward adjustment
in the forfeiture amount once the amount of Omniat's unpaid TRS
obligations is determined.
47 U.S.C. S: 251(e)(2).
Globcom NAL, 18 FCC Rcd at 19904 P: 29.
See e.g., Teletronics, Inc., Notice of Apparent Liability for Forfeiture
and Order, 20 FCC Rcd 13291, 13303, P: 35 (2005) ("Teletronics NAL"),
consent decree entered, 22 FCC Rcd 8681 (2007); Telrite NAL, 23 FCC Rcd at
7245 P: 33.
See e.g., Telrite NAL, 23 FCC Rcd at 7245 P: 34.
Id., 23 FCC Rcd at 7245 P: 35.
See Telecom Management Inc., Notice of Apparent Liability for Forfeiture
and Order, 20 FCC Rcd 14151, 14158 P: 22 (2005); Teletronics NAL, 20 FCC
Rcd at 13304 P: 36; Carrera Communications, LP, Notice of Apparent
Liability for Forfeiture and Order, 20 FCC Rcd 13307, 13318 P: 36 (2005);
Telrite NAL, 23 FCC Rcd at 7245 P: 35.
47 C.F.R. S: 1.80; Commission's Forfeiture Policy Statement and Amendment
of Section 1.80 of the Rules to Incorporate the Forfeiture Guidelines,
Report and Order, 12 FCC Rcd 17087, 17114 (1997) ("Forfeiture Policy
Statement"), recon. denied 15 FCC Rcd 303 (1999).
See, e.g., BigZoo Forfeiture Order, 20 FCC Rcd at 3955 P: 6 (ordering
$20,000 forfeiture for failure to respond to LOI); QuickLink Telecom,
Inc., Order of Forfeiture, 20 FCC Rcd 14464 (Enf. Bur. 2005) (same);
(...continued)
(...continued from previous page)
Universal Telecommunications, Inc., Notice of Apparent Liability and
Order, 21 FCC Rcd 6579, 6582 P: 9 (Enf. Bur. 2005) (same).
See CCN, Inc., et al, Order to Show Cause and Opportunity for Hearing,
Order, 13 FCC Rcd 13599 (1998) (revoking carrier's operating authority
based on findings of repeated violations); see also, e.g., 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).
47 C.F.R. S: 1.1910. See Debt Collection Improvement Act of 1996, Pub. L.
No. 104-134, 110 Stat. 1321, 1358 (1996). In 2004, the Commission adopted
rules implementing the DCIA requirements. See Amendment of Parts 0 and 1
of the Commission's Rules, Report and Order, 19 FCC Rcd 6540 (2004) ("DCIA
Order"). In its Order, the Commission codified procedures at 47 C.F.R. S:
1.1910, the "red light rule," to extend and clarify existing policies in
the management of the Commission's accounts, and to withhold action on
applications or other requests for benefits by delinquent debtors, and
ultimately to dismiss such applications or other requests if the
delinquency is not resolved. See 47 C.F.R. S: 1.1910; DCIA Order, 19 FCC
Rcd at 6541-45 P:P: 3-15. The DCIA rules specify that the term
"Commission" includes the USF, TRS Fund, "and any other reporting
components of the Commission." See 47 C.F.R. S: 1.1901(b). Thus, the
Commission has determined that unpaid obligations to the USF and TRS Fund
are subject to the DCIA.
See id. S: 1.1914.
Federal Communications Commission FCC 09-26
5
16
Federal Communications Commission FCC 09-26