Federal Communications Commission DA 11-1025
Before the
Federal Communications Commission
Washington, D.C. 20554
In the Matter of
Voip Alliance, LLC
Apparent Liability for Forfeiture
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
File No. EB-08-TC-5961
NAL/Acct. No. 201032170898
FRN:  0015179807
ORDER OF FORFEITURE
Adopted:  June 9, 2011 Released:  June 10, 2011
By the Chief, Telecommunications Consumers Division, Enforcement Bureau:
I. INTRODUCTION AND BACKGROUND
1. In this Order of Forfeiture,1 we assess a monetary forfeiture of twenty thousand 
dollars ($20,000) against Voip Alliance, LLC (“Voip Alliance”).  Voip Alliance has willfully or 
repeatedly violated section 222 of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended (the 
“Communications Act” or “Act”),2 section 64.2009(e) of the Commission’s rules,3 and the 
Commission’s EPIC CPNI Order4 by failing to timely file an annual compliance certification 
with the Enforcement Bureau (“Bureau”) for calendar year 2007 on or before March 1, 2008.  
2. Voip Alliance is a prepaid calling card provider located in McAllen, Texas.  As a 
telecommunications carrier, Voip Alliance is subject to the requirements of section 222 of the 
Act and section 64.2009 of the Commission’s rules.  Section 222 imposes the general duty on all 
telecommunications carriers to protect the confidentiality of their subscribers’ proprietary 
  
1 The Commission has the authority to assess a forfeiture against any person who has “willfully or repeatedly failed 
to comply with any of the provisions of this [Act] or of any rule, regulation, or order issued by the Commission 
under this [Act] ....” 47 U.S.C. § 503(b)(1).
2 47 U.S.C. § 222.
3 47 C.F.R. § 64.2009(e).
4 Implementation of the Telecommunications Act of 1996: Telecommunications Carriers’ Use of Customer 
Proprietary Network Information and Other Customer Information; IP-Enabled Services, CC Docket No. 96-115, 
WC Docket No. 04-36, Report and Order and Further Notice of Proposed Rulemaking, 22 FCC Rcd 6927, 6953 
(2007) (“EPIC CPNI Order”); aff’d sub nom. Nat’l Cable & Telecom. Assoc. v. FCC, 555 F.3d 996, (D.C. Cir. 
2009).
Federal Communications Commission DA 11-1025
2
information.5 As part of that obligation, carriers that receive or obtain customer proprietary 
network information (“CPNI”) through the provision of telecommunications services can only 
use, disclose, or allow access to that information in connection with or to provide such 
telecommunications services.6
3. The Commission adopted rules implementing section 222 of the Act.7  Section 
64.2009 of these rules requires carriers to establish and maintain a system designed to ensure that carriers 
adequately protect their subscribers’ CPNI.8  Prior to the EPIC CPNI Order, section 64.2009(e) of 
the Commission’s rules required telecommunications carriers such as Voip Alliance to maintain 
and make publicly available annual certifications of their CPNI compliance.9 The EPIC CPNI 
Order strengthened the CPNI rules by adding additional safeguards to protect CPNI against 
unauthorized access and disclosure, including an obligation that carriers subject to the CPNI 
rules file their annual certification with the Commission on or before March 1 of each year.10  
Additionally, as part of their annual certification filing, carriers were required to provide “an 
explanation of any actions taken against data brokers and a summary of all customer complaints 
received in the past year concerning the unauthorized release of CPNI.”11  
  
5 Section 222 of the Communications Act, 47 U.S.C § 222, provides that:  “Every telecommunications carrier has a 
duty to protect the confidentiality of proprietary information of, and relating to, other telecommunications carriers, 
equipment manufacturers, and customers, including telecommunication carriers reselling telecommunications 
services provided by a telecommunications carrier.”  
6 The Act defines CPNI as “information that relates to the quantity, technical configuration, type, destination, 
location, and amount of use of a telecommunications service, subscribed to by any customer of a 
telecommunications carrier, and that is made available to the carrier by the customer solely by virtue of the carrier-
customer relationship” and “information contained in the bills pertaining to telephone exchange service or telephone 
toll service received by a customer of a carrier” excluding subscriber list information.  47 U.S.C. § 222(h)(1)(A)-
(B).  The Act provides for certain limited exceptions to a carrier’s obligation to protect CPNI.  See 47 U.S.C. § 
222(d).   
7 See Implementation of the Telecommunications Act of 1996: Telecommunications Carriers’ Use of Customer 
Proprietary Network Information and Other Customer Information and Implementation of Non-Accounting 
Safeguards of Sections 271 and 272 of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended, CC Docket Nos. 96-115 and 
96-149, Second Report and Order and Further Notice of Proposed Rulemaking, 13 FCC Rcd 8061, 8068-70, ¶ 7 
(1998).  See also Implementation of the Telecommunications Act of 1996: Telecommunications Carriers' Use of 
Customer Proprietary Network Information and Other Customer Information and Implementation of the Non-
Accounting Safeguards of Sections 271 and 272 of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended, CC Docket Nos. 
96-115 and 96-149, Order on Reconsideration and Petitions for Forbearance, 14 FCC Rcd 14409 (1999);
Implementation of the Telecommunications Act of 1996: Telecommunications Carriers’ Use of Customer 
Proprietary Network Information and Other Customer Information and Implementation of the Non-Accounting 
Safeguards of Sections 271 and 272 of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended, CC Docket Nos. 96-115 and 
96-149; 2000 Biennial Regulatory Review -- Review of Policies and Rules Concerning Unauthorized Changes of 
Consumers’ Long Distance Carriers, CC Docket No. 00-257, Third Report and Order and Third Further Notice of 
Proposed Rulemaking, 17 FCC Rcd 14860 (2002); EPIC CPNI Order.
8 47 C.F.R. § 64.2009.
9 See EPIC CPNI Order, 22 FCC Rcd at 6953–54, ¶ 52.
10 Id. at 6953; 47 C.F.R. § 64.2009(e).
11 EPIC CPNI Order, 22 FCC Rcd at 6953.
Federal Communications Commission DA 11-1025
3
4. On September 2, 2008, the Bureau sent a Letter of Inquiry (“LOI”) to Voip 
Alliance requesting copies of its timely filed CPNI compliance certificate for 2007, which was 
due by March 1, 2008, or an explanation as to why no certification was filed.12 Voip Alliance 
responded to the LOI on September 17, 2008 stating that the company was unaware of the filing 
requirement.13 The Bureau concluded that Voip Alliance failed to submit satisfactory evidence 
of its timely filing of the annual CPNI compliance certification.  On February 24, 2009, the 
Bureau released the Omnibus NAL against numerous companies, including Voip Alliance, 
proposing a monetary forfeiture of $20,000 for the apparent failure to comply with section 
64.2009(e) of the Commission’s rules, and the Commission’s EPIC CPNI Order, and ordered 
Voip Alliance to either pay the proposed forfeiture or file a written response within 30 days of 
the release date stating why the proposed forfeiture should be reduced or canceled.14 Voip 
Alliance did not submit a response to the Omnibus NAL.
II. DISCUSSION
5. Section 64.2009(e) of the Commission’s rules requires telecommunications 
carriers such as Voip Alliance to file annually before March 1st a CPNI compliance certification 
signed by an officer of the carrier.15 By its own admission, Voip Alliance failed to comply with 
this Commission rule for calendar year 2007 and is subject to forfeiture.  Section 503(b) of the 
Communications Act authorizes the Commission to assess a forfeiture against a common carrier 
of up to $150,000 for each violation of the Act or of any rule, regulation, or order issued by the 
Commission under the Act.16 The Commission may assess this penalty if it determines that the 
carrier’s noncompliance is “willful or repeated.”17 For a violation to be willful, it need not be 
intentional.18 In exercising our forfeiture authority, we are required to take into account “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.”19 In addition, the Commission has established guidelines for forfeiture 
  
12 See Letter from Marcy Greene, Deputy Division Chief, Telecommunications Consumers Division, Enforcement 
Bureau, FCC, to Voip Alliance (Sept. 2, 2008).
13 See Letter from Juan Salazar, CEO and President, Voip Alliance, to the FCC (Sept. 17, 2008) (“LOI Response”).
14 Annual CPNI Certification, Omnibus Notice of Apparent Liability for Forfeiture, 24 FCC Rcd 2299 (Enf. Bur. 
2009) (“Omnibus NAL”).
15 47 C.F.R. § 64.2009(e); see also EPIC CPNI Order, 22 FCC Rcd at 6953-54, ¶¶ 51-53.
16 47 U.S.C. § 503(b)(2)(B); see also 47 C.F.R. § 1.80(b)(2); Amendment of Section 1.80 of the Commission’s Rules 
and Adjustment of Forfeiture Maxima to Reflect Inflation, Order, 23 FCC Rcd 9845 (2008) (inflation adjustment to 
$150,000/$1,500,000); FCC Enforcement Advisory No. 2011-02, 26 FCC Rcd 650 (Enf. Bur. 2011).  At the time 
the Omnibus NAL was released the maximum forfeiture was $130,000 for each violation of the Act or of any rule, 
regulation, or order issued by the Commission.  See Omnibus NAL, 24 FCC Rcd at 2301, ¶ 5.
17 See 47 U.S.C. § 503(b)(1)(B).
18 See, e.g., Southern California Broadcasting, 6 FCC Rcd at 4387-88, ¶ 5.
19 See 47 U.S.C. § 503(b)(2)(E); see also The Commission’s Forfeiture Policy Statement and Amendment of Section 
1.80 of the Commission’s Rules, 12 FCC Rcd 17087, 17100-17101, ¶ 27 (1997) (“Forfeiture Policy Statement”); 
recon. denied, 15 FCC Rcd 303 (1999).
Federal Communications Commission DA 11-1025
4
amounts and, where there is no specific base amount for a violation, retained discretion to set an 
amount on a case-by-case basis.20
6. The Commission’s Forfeiture Policy Statement does not establish a base forfeiture 
amount for the failure to timely file an annual CPNI certification.  The $3,000 base forfeiture 
amount suggested in the Commission’s Forfeiture Policy Statement for failure to file documents 
generally is inadequate when applied to failure to file CPNI certifications.  The Commission 
adopted the annual CPNI certification filing requirement to “ensure that carriers regularly focus 
their attention on their duty to safeguard CPNI. . . [and] remind carriers of the Commission’s 
oversight and high priority regarding carrier performance in this area.”21 In the Omnibus NAL, 
the Bureau took into account the statutory factors for determining a forfeiture amount, the 
gravity of the offense, Commission precedent involving violations of our CPNI rules, and the 
fact that protection of a subscriber’s CPNI is an important carrier obligation and the certification 
filing is an important part of that obligation.22 Taking these factors into account, the Bureau 
proposed a forfeiture amount in the Omnibus NAL of $20,000.  This amount is consistent with 
other recent forfeiture orders.23 Further, we have examined Voip Alliance’s response to the 
LOI, pursuant to the statutory factors, our rules, and the Forfeiture Policy Statement and find that 
no further downward adjustment from the $20,000 forfeiture amount is warranted.  
7. As a preliminary matter, Voip Alliance’s failure to timely file its annual 2007 
CPNI certification is not disputed.  By its own admission, Voip Alliance failed to file its CPNI 
certification by the March 1st filing deadline.24 Voip Alliance may have been unaware that it was 
required to file an annual CPNI certification, or unaware that it had failed to do so; however, 
oversight or inadvertently not filing is not a mitigating factor.25
  
20 See Forfeiture Policy Statement, 12 FCC Rcd at 17098-99, ¶ 22. 
21 EPIC CPNI Order, 22 FCC Rcd at 6953, ¶ 51.
22 See Omnibus NAL, 24 FCC Rcd at 2302, ¶ 8; see also EPIC CPNI Order, 22 FCC Rcd at 6953, ¶ 51.
23  See USA Teleport, Inc., Apparent Liability for Forfeiture, EB-08-TC-5801, Order of Forfeiture, 26 FCC Rcd 
2456 (Tel. Con. Div. 2011), recon. denied, Memorandum Opinion & Order, DA 11-802 (Enf. Bur. Apr. 29, 2011); 
Think 12 Corporation d/b/a Hello Depot, Apparent Liability for Forfeiture, EB-08-TC-5708, Order of Forfeiture, 26 
FCC Rcd 2135 (Tel. Con. Div. 2011); Nationwide Telecom, Inc., Apparent Liability for Forfeiture, EB-08-TC-4772, 
Order of Forfeiture, 26 FCC Rcd 2440 (Tel. Con. Div. 2011); Calmtel USA, Inc., Apparent Liability for Forfeiture, 
EB-08-TC-3240, Order of Forfeiture, 26 FCC Rcd 2445 (Tel. Con. Div. 2011); Diamond Phone, Inc., Apparent 
Liability for Forfeiture, EB-08-TC-3704, Order of Forfeiture, 26 FCC Rcd 2451 (Tel. Con. Div. 2011). 
24 See LOI Response (“The answer would be no, we did not file this compliance and we were not aware of this filing 
requirement”).
25 See Southern California Broadcasting, 6 FCC Rcd at 4387, ¶ 3; see also STI Prepaid, LLC, Notice of Apparent 
Liability for Forfeiture, 25 FCC Rcd 17836, 17845, ¶ 20 (Enf. Bur. 2010) (“STI Prepaid”) (“It is well established 
that administrative oversight or inadvertence is not a mitigating factor warranting a downward adjustment of a 
forfeiture. Likewise, a violator's lack of knowledge or erroneous beliefs is not a mitigating factor warranting 
reduction of a forfeiture.”).  This case is different than where the rule was recently modified and the violation was 
due to a licensee’s lack of actual knowledge of the rule change.  Prior to adoption of the annual CPNI certification 
filing requirement, our CPNI rules already required telecommunications carriers such as Voip Alliance to have a 
CPNI compliance program and to have an officer of the company certify annually that the company was in 
compliance with our CPNI rules.  See EPIC CPNI Order, 22 FCC Rcd at 6953, ¶ 52.  As discussed in paragraph 7, 
(continued….)
Federal Communications Commission DA 11-1025
5
8. In addition, Voip Alliance failed to show past compliance with the Commission’s 
CPNI certification requirements.  Prior to the annual certification filing requirement, carriers 
were required to have a CPNI compliance plan and keep an annual CPNI compliance certificate 
in their files (i.e., carriers were required to annually certify but were not required to file the 
certification with the Commission).26 In lieu of an annual filing requirement, carriers were 
required to produce their annual certifications for inspection upon Commission request.27 Voip 
Alliance has failed to show that it was in compliance with the earlier certification requirement.  
Thus, the Commission cannot consider past CPNI compliance as a mitigating factor.28
III. CONCLUSION
9. In the Omnibus NAL, the Bureau considered several factors including the amount 
of forfeiture necessary to have the intended deterrent effect.  The Bureau concluded that the goal 
of deterring future non-compliance would be met by issuing forfeitures consistent with the 
proposed amount.  We take noncompliance with our CPNI rules very seriously.  This forfeiture 
order should advise Voip Alliance and other carriers that the protection of a subscriber’s CPNI 
and the annual CPNI compliance certification filing requirements are important carrier 
obligations.  
IV. ORDERING CLAUSES
10. Accordingly, IT IS ORDERED, pursuant to section 503(b) of the 
Communications Act of 1934, as amended, 47 U.S.C. § 503(b), section 1.80 of the 
Commission’s rules, 47 C.F.R. § 1.80, that Voip Alliance, LLC SHALL FORFEIT to the 
United States government the sum of $20,000 for willfully or repeatedly violating the Act and 
the Commission’s rules.
(Continued from previous page)    
Voip Alliance failed to show it had complied with the certification filings under the old rules.  Thus, any lack of 
knowledge in the instant case does not warrant a downward adjustment.
26 Omnibus NAL, 24 FCC Rcd at 2302, ¶ 7.  This prior rule is discussed in the EPIC CPNI Order:  “each 
telecommunications carrier must have an officer, as an agent of the carrier, sign a compliance certificate on an 
annual basis stating that the officer has personal knowledge that the company has established operating procedures 
that are adequate to ensure compliance with the Commission’s CPNI rules and to make that certification available to 
the public.” EPIC CPNI Order, 22 FCC Rcd at 6953, ¶ 52 (citation omitted).   
27 Omnibus NAL, 24 FCC Rcd at 2302, ¶ 7.
28 Moreover, in a number of recent actions, the Commission has held that the failure to file forms is a continuing 
violation until cured.  See Annual CPNI Certification, Omnibus Notice of Apparent Liability for Forfeiture and 
Order, 26 FCC Rcd 2160, 2162, ¶ 8 (Enf. Bur. 2011); STI Prepaid, LLC, Notice of Apparent Liability for Forfeiture, 
25 FCC Rcd 17836, 17845, ¶ 20 (Enf. Bur. 2010); Champaign Telephone Company d/b/a CT Communications, Inc., 
Order and Notice of Apparent Liability for Forfeiture, 25 FCC Rcd 17814, 17818-18, ¶ 9 (Spec. Enf. Div. 2010); 
Lightyear Network Solutions, LLC, Order and Notice of Apparent Liability for Forfeiture, 25 FCC Rcd 16212, 
16217, ¶ 12 (Spec. Enf. Div. 2010); Alpheus Communications, LP, Notice of Apparent Liability for Forfeiture, 25 
FCC Rcd 8993, 8998, ¶ 12 (Enf. Bur. 2010); Compass Global, Inc., Notice of Apparent Liability for Forfeiture, 23 
FCC Rcd 6125, 6138-39, ¶ 31 (2008); Telrite Corp., Notice of Apparent Liability for Forfeiture and Order, 23 FCC 
Rcd 7231, 7244, ¶ 30 (2008); VCI Company, Notice of Apparent Liability for Forfeiture and Order, 22 FCC Rcd 
15933, 15940, ¶ 20 (2007).  Thus, Voip Alliance continued to violate the certification filing requirement for 
calendar year 2007 until it filed the certification.  
Federal Communications Commission DA 11-1025
6
11. Payment of the forfeiture shall be made in the manner provided for in section 1.80 
of the rules within thirty (30) days of the release of this Forfeiture Order. If the forfeiture is not 
paid within the period specified, the case may be referred to the Department of Justice for 
collection pursuant to section 504(a) of the Act.  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/Account No. and FRN 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-C 2-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 24A.  Voip Alliance will also send electronic notification on the date said payment 
is made to johnny.drake@fcc.gov.  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. 
12. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that a copy of this Order for Forfeiture shall be 
sent by Certified Mail Return Receipt Requested and First Class Mail to the company at 200 S. 
10th Street, Suite 702, McAllen, TX 78501.
FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION
Richard A. Hindman
Chief
Telecommunications Consumers Division
Enforcement Bureau