**Before the**

**Federal Communications Commission**

**Washington, D.C. 20554**

+----------------------------------+----+------------------------------+
| In the Matter of                 | *  | File No. EB-04-IH-0587       |
|                                  | *) |                              |
| Telecom Management, Inc.         | ** | NAL/Acct. No. 200532080142   |
|                                  |    |                              |
| Apparent Liability for           | *  | FRN No. 0005-8591-11         |
| Forfeiture                       | *) |                              |
|                                  | ** |                              |
|                                  |    |                              |
|                                  | *  |                              |
|                                  | *) |                              |
|                                  | ** |                              |
|                                  |    |                              |
|                                  | *  |                              |
|                                  | *) |                              |
|                                  | ** |                              |
|                                  |    |                              |
|                                  | *  |                              |
|                                  | *) |                              |
|                                  | ** |                              |
|                                  |    |                              |
|                                  | *  |                              |
|                                  | *) |                              |
|                                  | ** |                              |
|                                  |    |                              |
|                                  | *  |                              |
|                                  | *) |                              |
|                                  | ** |                              |
|                                  |    |                              |
|                                  | *  |                              |
|                                  | *) |                              |
|                                  | ** |                              |
+----------------------------------+----+------------------------------+

**NOTICE OF APPARENT LIABILITY**

**FOR FORFEITURE**

**Adopted: August 12, 2005 Released: August 12, 2005**

By the Commission:

# 

# I. INTRODUCTION 

1.  In this Notice of Apparent Liability for Forfeiture ("NAL"), we find
    that Telecom Management, Inc. ("Telecom Management" or "TMI"), d/b/a
    Pioneer Telephone, a telecommunications carrier that has been
    operating since 2002 and at least indirectly benefiting from federal
    programs supporting the telecommunications industry since that time,
    apparently failed to meet its statutory and regulatory obligations
    related to those programs. Based upon the facts and circumstances
    surrounding this matter, we conclude that TMI is apparently liable
    for a total forfeiture of \$280,000.

2.  Specifically, we find that TMI has apparently violated sections
    254(d) of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended (the
    "Act"),[^1] and section 54.706(a) of the Commission's rules by
    willfully and repeatedly failing to contribute to the Universal
    Service Fund ("USF").[^2] We further find that TMI has apparently
    violated sections 1.1154 and 1.1157(b)(1) of the Commission's
    rules[^3] by failing to pay regulatory fees to the Commission.

# II. BACKGROUND

3.  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.[^4] The Commission also has been charged by
    Congress to establish, administer and maintain various
    telecommunications regulatory programs, which are described in more
    detail below, and to fund these programs through assessments on the
    telecommunications providers that benefit from them. 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.[^5] First, Commission rules require
    that, upon entry or anticipated entry into interstate
    telecommunications markets, telecommunications carriers must
    register by submitting information on an FCC Form 499-A, also known
    as the annual Telecommunications Reporting Worksheet
    ("Worksheet").[^6] The Commission also requires telecommunications
    providers to submit financial information on their annual and, with
    certain exceptions not applicable to TMI, quarterly short-form
    Worksheets to enable the Commission to determine and collect the
    statutorily mandated program assessments.[^7]

4.  The Telecommunications Act of 1996 codified Congress's historical
    commitment to promote universal service to ensure that consumers in
    all regions of the nation have access to affordable, quality
    telecommunications services.[^8] 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."[^9] 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.[^10] Failure by some providers
    to pay their share into the Fund skews the playing field by
    providing non-paying providers an economic advantage over their
    competitors, who must then shoulder more than their fair share of
    the costs of the Fund.

5.  Pursuant to section 9(a)(1) of the Act and section 1.1151 of the
    Commission's rules, interstate telecommunications and other
    providers must pay regulatory fees to the Commission to cover the
    costs of certain regulatory activities.[^11] 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.[^12]
    Such fees must be paid on an annual basis,[^13] and failure to do so
    subjects a carrier to late payment penalties, as well as possible
    revocation of its operating authority.[^14] 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 fees or
    any other program payment, such as USF contributions, and if payment
    or payment arrangements are not made within thirty days from notice
    to the applicant, such applications or requests will be
    dismissed.[^15]

6.  The Commission has established specific procedures to administer the
    programs for universal service and regulatory fees. In addition to
    its obligation to register, a carrier is required to file Worksheets
    for the purpose of determining its USF and regulatory fee program
    payments,[^16] and, with certain exceptions, to file quarterly
    short-form Worksheets to determine monthly universal service
    contribution amounts. These periodic filings trigger a determination
    of liability, if any, and subsequent billing and collection, by the
    entities that administer the regulatory programs. For example, USAC
    uses the revenue projections submitted on the quarterly filings to
    determine each carrier's universal service contribution amount.[^17]
    Carriers are required to pay their monthly USF contribution by the
    date shown on their invoice.[^18] The Commission's rules explicitly
    warn contributors that failure to file their forms or submit their
    payments potentially subjects them to enforcement action.[^19]

7.  Telecom Management is a Maine-based telecommunications service
    provider of, among other services, long distance plans, toll free
    numbers, and phone cards.[^20] TMI provides these by reselling
    interstate, interexchange services purchased from Global Crossing
    Bandwidth, Inc. ("Global Crossing").[^21] TMI has provided
    telecommunications services since 2002.[^22]

8.  In 2004, the Enforcement Bureau ("Bureau") audit staff sought to
    identify resellers of telecommunications service that may have
    failed to register as telecommunications service providers with the
    Commission and, thus, may also have failed to satisfy various
    Commission program requirements.[^23] 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 March 30, 2004[^24] and June 18, 2004,[^25] the
    Bureau's audit staff sent letters to TMI at the address provided by
    its telecommunications wholesale service provider, Global Crossing,
    requesting information pertaining to TMI's compliance with the
    Commission's registration requirement. After receiving no response,
    the Bureau issued a letter of inquiry ("LOI") on November 18, 2004,
    directing TMI, among other things, to submit a sworn written
    response to a series of questions relating to TMI's alleged failure
    to satisfy its registration, filing and payment obligations.[^26]
    TMI filed its response, which included documents and information
    required by the LOI, on December 20, 2004,[^27] and supplemented
    that response on January 17, 2005.[^28]

    \`

9.  TMI's responses confirmed that the carrier had not met its
    contribution requirements to the aforementioned programs supporting
    the telecommunications industry despite operating as an interstate
    telecom carrier for more than two years.[^29] TMI made its first
    payments to the USF and FCC regulatory fees program more than two
    years after it began providing interstate telecommunications
    services.

# III. DISCUSSION

10. 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.[^30] 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.[^31] 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.[^32] As set forth below, we
    conclude under this standard that TMI is apparently liable for
    forfeiture for its apparent willful and repeated violations of
    section 254(d) of the Act[^33] and sections 54.706(a), 1.1154, and
    1.1157(b)(1) of the Commission's rules.[^34]

11. The fundamental issues in this case are whether TMI apparently
    violated the Act and the Commission's rules by: (1) willfully or
    repeatedly failing to make requisite contributions toward the
    Universal Service Fund; and (2) willfully or repeatedly failing to
    pay regulatory fees to the Commission. We answer these questions in
    the affirmative. Based on a preponderance of the evidence, we
    conclude that TMI is apparently liable for a forfeiture of \$280,000
    for apparently willfully and repeatedly violating section 254(d) of
    the Act[^35] and sections 54.706(a), 1.1154, and 1.1157(b)(1) of the
    Commission's rules.[^36]

12. Specifically, we propose the following forfeitures for apparent
    violations within the last year: (1) \$270,000 for failure to make
    USF contributions for the months August through October, 2004;
    and (2) \$10,000 for failure to make its 2004 FCC regulatory fee
    payment when due on August 19, 2004 until December 2004. Although we
    propose forfeitures only for apparent violations within the last
    year, we discuss below the history of TMI's noncompliance in prior
    years to demonstrate the scope of TMI's misconduct and to provide
    sufficient context for the misconduct that is within the statute of
    limitations period and thus covered by this NAL.

```{=html}
<!-- -->
```
A.  **Universal Service Contributions**

```{=html}
<!-- -->
```
13. We conclude that TMI has apparently violated section 254(d) of the
    Act and section 54.706 of the Commission's rules by failing to
    contribute to universal service support mechanisms.[^37] Section
    54.706(c) unambiguously directs that "entities \[providing\]
    interstate telecommunications to the public . . . for a fee . . .
    contribute to the universal service support programs."[^38]
    "Interstate telecommunications" include, among other things, "resale
    of interstate services" such as those provided by TMI.[^39] Although
    TMI has been providing interstate telecommunications services since
    2002,[^40] TMI made no universal service contributions until
    November 8, 2004.[^41] 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.[^42]

    Based on the preponderance of the evidence, we find that TMI has
    apparently violated section 254(d) of the Act and section 54.706(a)
    of the Commission's rules by willfully and repeatedly failing to
    make any universal service contributions from 2002 to October 2004.

```{=html}
<!-- -->
```
B.  **Payment of Regulatory Fees**

```{=html}
<!-- -->
```
14. We also conclude that TMI apparently has violated sections 1.1154
    and 1.1157(b)(1) of the Commission's rules by failing to pay, and
    untimely paying, required regulatory fees to the Commission for two
    years.[^43] As an interstate telephone service provider, TMI was
    apparently required as early as 2003 to pay regulatory fees on the
    basis of its interstate and international end-user revenues.[^44]
    TMI, however, made its first fee payment, covering the 2004 fiscal
    year, on December 28, 2004 -- nine months after the Bureau's
    compliance review identified TMI as a non-filer and over four months
    past the August 19, 2004 filing deadline for 2004 regulatory fee
    payments.[^45] For these reasons, we find that TMI apparently has
    violated sections 1.1154 and 1.1157(b)(1) of the Commission's rules
    by willfully and repeatedly failing to pay regulatory fees program
    payments when due, including one such failure in the past year.

```{=html}
<!-- -->
```
C.  **Proposed Forfeiture**

```{=html}
<!-- -->
```
15. 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.[^46]
    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
    \$120,000 for each violation or each day of a continuing violation,
    up to a statutory maximum of \$1.2 million for a single act or
    failure to act for violations occurring before September 7, 2004,
    and 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 for violations occurring on or after September
    7, 2004.[^47] 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."[^48]

16. Under section 503(b)(6) of the Act, we may only propose forfeitures
    for apparent violations that accrued within one year of the date of
    this NAL.[^49] Nevertheless, section 503(b) does not bar us from
    assessing whether TMI'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.[^50] Therefore, although we find that TMI apparently
    violated the Act and our rules for over two years, we propose
    forfeitures here only for violations that occurred within the last
    year.

17. Based on the facts above, it appears that TMI has failed to make the
    requisite contributions into the Universal Service Fund for a period
    of over two years. 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 hampers
    realization of 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.[^51]
    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.[^52] Consequently, we initially
    find that TMI is apparently liable for a base forfeiture of \$60,000
    for its failure to make universal service contributions for three
    months within the last year.[^53] That base amount is, however,
    subject to an upward adjustment.

18. In the past, we have calculated upward adjustments to forfeitures
    for failure to make USF payments based on one-half of the company's
    unpaid contributions.[^54] During the course of this investigation,
    TMI has back-filed the necessary Worksheets for USAC to determine
    TMI's USF contribution assessments, and USAC has completed billing
    for those back-payments. Based on those bills, TMI had an unpaid USF
    obligation of approximately \$420,000 at the time this investigation
    began. Therefore, taking into account all the factors enumerated in
    section 503(b)(2)(D) of the Act, we propose an upward adjustment of
    \$210,000 for TMI's apparent nonpayment violations. We thus find TMI
    liable for a total proposed forfeiture of \$270,000 for its apparent
    willful and repeated failure to make contributions into the
    Universal Service Fund.

19. We also conclude that TMI has apparently failed to make any
    regulatory fee payments to the Commission in 2003, and untimely paid
    the regulatory fee payments for the 2004 fiscal year on December 28,
    2004, long after its August 19, 2004 due date and only after
    receiving the Bureau's inquiries. 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. In recent orders, the
    Commission has established a base forfeiture amount of \$10,000 for
    failure to timely make required regulatory fee payments.[^55] We,
    therefore, find TMI apparently liable for a \$10,000 forfeiture for
    its apparent violation of sections 1.1154 and 1.1157 of the
    Commission's rules.

    **IV. CONCLUSION**

20. In light of the seriousness, duration and scope of the apparent
    violations, and to ensure that a company with substantial revenues
    such as TMI does not consider the proposed forfeiture merely "an
    affordable cost of doing business,"[^56] we find that a proposed
    forfeiture of \$280,000 is warranted. As discussed, this proposed
    forfeiture amount includes (1) a total proposed penalty of \$270,000
    for TMI's apparent failure to make required universal service
    contributions for three months in 2004; and (2) a total proposed
    penalty of \$10,000 for TMI's apparent failure to timely make 2004
    regulatory fee payments.

21. We caution that additional violations of the Act or the Commission's
    rules could subject TMI to further enforcement action. Such action
    could take the form of higher monetary forfeitures and/or possible
    revocation of TMI's operating authority, including disqualification
    of TMI's principals from the provision of any interstate common
    carrier services without the prior consent of the Commission.[^57]
    In addition, we note that, to the extent TMI is 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 TMI, in accordance
    with the agency\'s red light rules.[^58]

    **V. ORDERING CLAUSES**

22. ACCORDINGLY, IT IS ORDERED THAT, pursuant to section 503(b) of the
    Communications Act of 1934, as amended, 47 U.S.C. § 503(b), and
    section 1.80 of the Commission's rules, 47 C.F.R. § 1.80, that
    Telecom Management, Inc. is hereby NOTIFIED of its APPARENT
    LIABILITY FOR A FORFEITURE in the amount of \$280,000 for willfully
    and repeatedly violating the Act and the Commission's rules.

23. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED THAT, pursuant to section 1.80 of the
    Commission's Rules,[^59] within thirty days of the release date of
    this NOTICE OF APPARENT LIABILITY, Telecom Management, Inc. SHALL
    PAY the full amount of the proposed forfeiture or SHALL FILE a
    written statement seeking reduction or cancellation of the proposed
    forfeiture.

24. 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
    Forfeiture Collection Section, Finance Branch, 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.

25. The response, if any, to this NOTICE OF APPARENT LIABILITY must be
    mailed to William Davenport, Chief, Investigations and Hearings
    Division, Enforcement Bureau, Federal Communications Commission, 445
    12^th^ Street, S.W., Washington, D.C. 20554 and must include the
    NAL/Acct. No. referenced above.

26. 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.

27. Requests for payment of the full amount of this NAL under an
    installment plan should be sent to Chief, Credit and Management
    Center, 445 12^th^ Street, S.W., Washington, D.C. 20554.[^60]

28. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that a copy of this NOTICE OF APPARENT
    LIABILITY shall be sent by certified mail, return receipt requested,
    to Sue Bouchard, Telecom Management, Inc., 583 Warren Avenue,
    Portland, ME 04103, and Leon Nowalsky, Counsel for Telecom
    Management, Inc., Nowalsky, Bronston & Gothard, APLLC, 3500 N.
    Causeway Blvd, Suite 1442, Metaire, LA 70002.

    FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION

    Marlene H. Dortch

    Secretary

[^1]: 47 U.S.C. § 254(d).

[^2]: 47 C.F.R. § 54.706(a).

[^3]: 47 C.F.R. §§ 1.1154, 1.1157(b)(1).

[^4]: *See, e.g.,* 47 U.S.C. § 151.

[^5]: *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*").

[^6]: 47 C.F.R. § 64.1195.

[^7]: *See* 47 U.S.C. §§ 159(a),(b); 225(d)(3); 251(e)(2); 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.

[^8]: 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) ("1996 Act").

[^9]: 47 U.S.C. § 254(d).

[^10]: 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.*

[^11]: 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. § 159(a)(1); *see also* 47
    C.F.R. § 1.1151.

[^12]: *See* 47 C.F.R. §§ 1.1154, 1.1157(b)(1).

[^13]: 47 C.F.R. § 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. §
    1.1154.

[^14]: *See* 47 U.S.C. §§ 159(c)(1), (c)(3).

[^15]: 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).

[^16]: Upon submission of a Form 499-A registration, the carrier is
    issued a filer identification number by USAC, which is then
    associated with further filings by the company and used to track the
    carrier's contributions and invoices.

[^17]: 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) ("*Quarterly Reporting
    Order*"); 47 C.F.R. § 54.709(a).

[^18]: *See* *Globcom, Inc.*, Notice of Apparent Liability for
    Forfeiture and Order*,* 18 FCC Rcd 19893, 19896 (2003)
    ("*Globcom*"); 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 (Wir. Comp. Bur. 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 minimus.* The instructions for the Telecommunications
    Reporting Worksheet include tables for carriers to determine their
    annual contributions.

[^19]: 47 C.F.R. § 54.713.

[^20]: *See* Letter from Leon L. Nowalsky, Nowalsky, Bronston & Gothard,
    Counsel for Telecom Management, Inc., to Hillary S. DeNigro, Deputy
    Chief, Investigations and Hearings Division, Enforcement Bureau,
    FCC, dated December 20, 2004 ("TMI December 20, 2004 Letter"),
    Response to Inquiry 5.

[^21]: *See, e.g.*,
    <http://support.pioneertelephone.com/test/support.asp?kb=42>
    (providing evidence that TMI utilizes the underlying network of
    Frontier/Global Crossing) (last accessed on July 11, 2005).

[^22]: TMI December 20, 2004 Letter, Response to Inquiry 4. TMI's
    website states, however, that it is a long-distance service provider
    founded in 1989. *See*
    <http://support.pioneertelephone.com/test/support.asp?kb=42> (last
    accessed July 11, 2005).

[^23]: *See* 47 C.F.R. § 64.1195(a).

[^24]: *See* Letter from Hugh L. Boyle, Chief Auditor, Investigations
    and Hearings Division, Enforcement Bureau, FCC, to Telecom
    Management, Inc., dated March 30, 2004 (requesting confirmation that
    Telecom Management had filed registration information pursuant to
    section 64.1195(a) of the Commission's rules) ("March 30, 2004 Audit
    Letter").

[^25]: *See* Letter from Hugh L. Boyle, Chief Auditor, Investigations
    and Hearings Division, Enforcement Bureau, FCC, to Telecom
    Management, Inc., dated June 18, 2004 (requesting confirmation that
    Telecom Management had filed registration information pursuant to
    section 64.1195(a) of the Commission's rules) ("June 18, 2004 Audit
    Letter").

[^26]: Letter from Hillary S. DeNigro, Deputy Chief, Investigations and
    Hearings Division, Enforcement Bureau, FCC, to Sue Bouchard, Telecom
    Management, Inc., dated November 18, 2004 ("November 18, 2004 LOI").

[^27]: *See* TMI December 20, 2004 Letter. On December 8, 2004, TMI
    requested an extension of time to file its response to the LOI. The
    Division granted TMI's request on December 9, 2004 by extending the
    deadline to December 20, 2004. *See* Letter from Hillary S. DeNigro,
    Deputy Chief, Investigations and Hearings Division, Enforcement
    Bureau, FCC, to Leon Nowalsky, Counsel for TMI, Nowalsky, Bronston &
    Gothard, APLLC, dated December 9, 2004.

[^28]: *See* Letter from Leon L. Nowalsky, Counsel for TMI, Nowalsky,
    Bronston & Gothard, APLLC, to Hillary S. DeNigro, Deputy Chief,
    Investigations and Hearings Division, Enforcement Bureau, FCC, dated
    January 17, 2005 ("TMI January 17, 2005 Supplemental Letter").

[^29]: The record shows that TMI filed its registration in April 2004
    and back-filed Worksheets in December 2004 only after we initiated
    our audit inquiry. *See* TMI December 20, 2004 Letter.

[^30]: 47 U.S.C. § 503(b)(1)(B); 47 C.F.R. § 1.80(a)(1). Section
    312(f)(1) of the Act defines willful as "the conscious and
    deliberate commission or omission of \[any\] act, irrespective of
    any intent to violate" the law. 47 U.S.C. § 312(f)(1). The
    legislative history to section 312(f)(1) of the Act clarifies that
    this definition of willful applies to both sections 312 and 503(b)
    of the Act, H.R. Rep. No. 97-765, 97^th^ Cong. 2d Sess. 51 (1982),
    and the Commission has so interpreted the term in the section 503(b)
    context. *See, e.g., Application for Review of Southern California
    Broadcasting Co.*, Memorandum Opinion and Order, 6 FCC Rcd 4387,
    4388 (1991) ("*Southern California Broadcasting Co.*"). The
    Commission may also assess a forfeiture for violations that are
    merely repeated, and not willful. *See, e.g.,* *Callais Cablevision,
    Inc., Grand Isle, Louisiana*, Notice of Apparent Liability for
    Monetary Forfeiture, 16 FCC Rcd 1359 (2001) (issuing a Notice of
    Apparent Liability for, *inter alia*, a cable television operator's
    repeated signal leakage). "Repeated" means that the act was
    committed or omitted more than once, or lasts more than one day.
    *Callais Cablevision, Inc.,* 16 FCC Rcd at 1362, ¶ 9; *Southern
    California Broadcasting Co.,* 6 FCC Rcd at 4388, ¶ 5.

[^31]: 47 U.S.C. § 503(b); 47 C.F.R. § 1.80(f).

[^32]: *See, e.g., SBC Communications, Inc*., Forfeiture Order, 17 FCC
    Rcd 7589, 7591, ¶ 4 (2002) (forfeiture paid).

[^33]: 47 U.S.C. § 254(d).

[^34]: 47 C.F.R. §§ 54.706(a), 1.1154, and 1.1157(b)(1).

[^35]: 47 U.S.C. § 254(d).

[^36]: 47 C.F.R. §§ 54.706(a), 1.1154, and 1.1157(b)(1).

[^37]: 47 U.S.C. § 254(d); 47 C.F.R. § 54.706(c).

[^38]: 47 C.F.R. § 54.706(c).

[^39]: *See* 47 C.F.R. § 54.706(a)(16).

[^40]: TMI December 20, 2004 Letter, Response to Inquiry 4.

[^41]: *See* TMI December 20, 2004 Letter, Response to Inquiry 10,
    attaching USAC's November 2004 billing to TMI, which shows TMI's
    full payment of its first (October 2004) USF billing. We note also
    that TMI began making USF payments only after receiving the Bureau's
    letters and it still owes a significant unpaid past due balance.
    *See* March 30, 2004 Audit Letter; June 18, 2004 Audit Letter;
    November 18, 2004 LOI. The Commission has repeatedly stated that
    post-investigative corrective measures to address a violation do not
    eliminate a licensee's responsibility for the period during which
    the violation occurred. *See 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).

[^42]: *Globcom, Inc.,* 18 FCC Rcd at 19903 ¶ 26.

[^43]: 47 U.S.C. § 159(a)(1); 47 C.F.R. §§ 1.1154, 1.1157. Payments of
    standard regulatory fees applicable to common carrier services must
    be filed in full on an annual basis. *Id.* § 1.1157(b)(1).

[^44]: *See* 47 C.F.R. §§ 1.1154, 1.1157(b)(1). Regulatory fees are paid
    in arrears for the previous calendar year. Thus, TMI failed to pay
    any regulatory fees in 2003, and made an untimely payment on
    December 28, 2004 for fiscal year 2004.

[^45]: TMI's regulatory fees were due on August 19, 2004. *See* FCC Form
    159-W (Interstate Telephone Service Provider Regulatory Fee Bill);
    <http://www.fcc.gov/fees/regfees.html>. On December 28, 2004, TMI
    made an FCC regulatory fee payment of \$5,339.24. *See* TMI January
    17, 2005 Supplemental Letter.

[^46]: 47 U.S.C. § 503(b)(1)(B); 47 C.F.R. § 1.80(a)(2).

[^47]: 47 U.S.C. § 503(b)(2)(B); *see also* 47 C.F.R. § 1.80(b)(2). The
    Commission recently amended its rules to increase the maximum
    penalties to account for inflation since the last adjustment of the
    penalty rates. *See Amendment of Section 1.80(b) of the Commission's
    Rules and Adjustment of Forfeiture Maxima to Reflect Inflation*,
    Order, 15 FCC Rcd 18221 (2000). However, the new rates apply to
    violations that occur or continue after September 7, 2004. *See
    Amendment of Section 1.80(b) of the Commission's Rules and
    Adjustment of Forfeiture Maxima to Reflect Inflation*, Order, 19 FCC
    Rcd 10945 (2004).

[^48]: 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).

[^49]: 47 U.S.C. § 503(b)(6)(B); *see also* 47 C.F.R. § 1.80(c)(3).

[^50]: *See, e.g., 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).

[^51]: *See* 47 U.S.C. § 254(d).

[^52]: *See Globcom, Inc.,* 18 FCC Rcd at 19903-19904, ¶¶ 25-27.

[^53]: As noted above, TMI made no universal service payments until
    November 2004. Thus, TMI's failure to make required universal
    service contributions within the one-year statute of limitations
    occurred in August, September, and October 2004.

[^54]: *See, e.g., Globcom*, *Inc*., 18 FCC Rcd at 19904.

[^55]: *See Teletronics, Inc.*, Notice of Apparent Liability for
    Forfeiture and Order, FCC 05-146, ¶ 36 (rel. Jul. 25, 2005);
    *Carrera Communications, LP*, Notice of Apparent Liability for
    Forfeiture and Order, FCC 05-147, ¶ 30 (rel. Jul. 25, 2005).

[^56]: *Forfeiture Policy Statement*, 12 FCC Rcd at 17099; *see also* 47
    C.F.R. § 1.80(b)(4).

[^57]: *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).

[^58]: *See* *supra* n. 15.

[^59]: *See* 47 C.F.R. § 1.80(f)(3).

[^60]: *See* 47 C.F.R. § 1.1914.