Federal Communications Commission DA 10-1696
Before the
Federal Communications Commission
Washington, D.C. 20554
In the Matter of
Universal Telecommunications, Inc.
Apparent Liability for Forfeiture
)
)
)
)
)
)
File No. EB-05-IH-0808
NAL/Acct. No. 200632080162
FRN No. 0010-5735-09
ORDER
Adopted:  September 3, 2010 Released:  September 3, 2010
By the Chief, Enforcement Bureau:
1. In this Order, based on information that Universal Telecommunications, Inc.
(“Universal”) submitted to the Enforcement Bureau (“Bureau”) in response to a Notice of Apparent 
Liability for Forfeiture (“NAL”),1 we determine that no forfeiture penalty should be imposed on 
Universal.
 
2. As explained in the NAL, following a series of audits of telecommunications resellers, 
Bureau staff identified Universal as a reseller that seemingly failed to satisfy various Commission 
program requirements.2 On August 17, 2005, the Bureau sent a letter of inquiry (“LOI”) to Universal 
requesting specific information relating to Universal’s compliance with filing and payment requirements 
for various federal telecommunications regulatory programs.3 Universal did not respond to the LOI on 
the due date, nor did it respond to subsequent Bureau staff communications directing a response.4 On 
June 15, 2006, the Bureau issued the Universal NAL, in which it concluded that Universal was a regulated 
telecommunications carrier subject to the Commission’s investigative authority pursuant to sections 4(i), 
4(j), 218, and 403 the Communications Act of 1934, as amended (the "Act"),5 and was apparently liable 
  
1 See Universal Telecommunications, Inc., Notice of Apparent Liability for Forfeiture and Order, 21 FCC Rcd 
6579 (Enf. Bur. 2006) (“NAL” or “Universal NAL”).
2 See NAL, 21 FCC Rcd at 6579, para. 3. 
3 See Letter from Hillary S. DeNigro, Deputy Chief, Investigations and Hearings Division, Enforcement Bureau, to 
Ruth Peterson, Universal Telecommunications, Inc., and CT Corporation, Registered Agent for Universal 
Telecommunications, Inc., dated August 17, 2005 (“LOI”).
4 See e.g., Letter from Hillary S. DeNigro, Deputy Chief, Investigations and Hearings Division, Enforcement 
Bureau, to Ruth Peterson, Universal Telecommunications, Inc., dated October 21, 2005 (“October 21, 2005 
Letter”).  See also Universal NAL, 21 FCC Rcd at 6570-80, paras. 3-4 (describing Bureau staff attempts to solicit 
the requested information from Universal).
5 See id.
Federal Communications Commission DA 10-1696
2
for a forfeiture in the amount of $20,000 for Universal’s failure to provide certain information and 
documents as directed by the Bureau.6
3. Universal filed a response to the NAL on August 2, 2006.7 Based upon that response, we 
conclude that as a factual matter the company is not a telecommunications carrier and did not hold any 
license, permit, certificate or other authorization issued by the Commission at the time of the apparent 
violation.8 As a result, we are precluded by section 503(b)(5) of the Act from imposing a forfeiture 
against Universal unless we first issue a citation notifying the company of the violation charged (in this 
case, failure to respond to a Commission directive).9 Because no such citation was issued here, we find 
that no forfeiture should be imposed.  
4. ACCORDINGLY, IT IS ORDERED THAT, pursuant to sections 4(i), 4(j), and 503(b) of 
the Communications Act of 1934, as amended, 47 U.S.C. §§ 154(i), 154(j), 503(b), the proposed 
forfeiture against Universal Telecommunications, Inc. on June 13, 2006 WILL NOT BE IMPOSED.
5. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED THAT a copy of this ORDER shall be sent, by certified 
mail/return receipt requested to Ms. Ruth Peterson, Chief Executive Officer, Universal 
Telecommunications, Inc., 3781 Presidential Parkway, Suite 132, Atlanta, GA 30340.
FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION
P. Michele Ellison
Chief
Enforcement Bureau 
  
6 47 U.S.C. §§ 154(i), 154(j), 218, 403.
7 NAL Response.
8 See id. at 3.  Based on our review of the NAL Response, we issued a supplemental letter of inquiry seeking 
additional information regarding services provided by Universal.  See Letter from Trent B. Harkrader, Deputy 
Chief, Investigations and Hearings Division, Enforcement Bureau, to Ruth Peterson, Universal 
Telecommunications, Inc., dated July 23, 2007.  Universal responded on September 26, 2007.  See Letter from 
Adrian L. Ferguson, Universal Telecommunications., Inc., to Vickie Robinson, Assistant Chief, Investigations and 
Hearings Division, Enforcement Bureau, FCC, filed Sept. 26, 2007.
9 47 U.S.C. § 503(b)(5).