Federal Communications Commission FCC 15-162
STATEMENT OF 
COMMISSIONER MICHAEL O’RIELLY
In re: PTT Phone Cards, Inc., File No. EB-IHD-13-00011669
I generally support this Forfeiture Order because it is clear that PTT violated a number of our 
rules.  I write simply to question the Commission’s perfunctory application of gross revenues as the basis 
for the forfeiture.  In item after item, the Commission cites its “long-established” standard of considering 
gross revenues.  While that may be true, that does not relieve the Commission of its responsibility to give 
serious and substantive consideration to arguments raised in the record as to why the standard is 
inappropriate in a given case.  Here, the item briefly notes that PTT contended that the Commission 
should consider its net revenues before summarily dismissing the argument.  No attempt is made to rebut 
the specific points that PTT raised in support of its position.     
I have voted for certain Notices of Apparent Liability with the understanding that all counter 
arguments would be fully considered and addressed at the forfeiture stage.  Therefore, it is disappointing 
to see such a cursory response in a Forfeiture Order.  The failure to engage on arguments raised by 
companies in response to NALs risks leaving the impression that the outcome of an investigation is 
preordained and a respondent’s replies are irrelevant, which shouldn’t be the case.  Moreover, summarily 
dismissing concerns about how a fine is calculated could give the appearance that preserving the proposed 
fine is worth more than setting it at a level that is fully justified and designed to achieve compliance with 
the rules.  While I disagree that monetary penalties should be the focus of the Commission’s enforcement 
process, driving a business to the point of bankruptcy does, in fact, decrease the likelihood of collecting 
the forfeiture.  In this case, the investigation itself prompted PTT to come into compliance.  While a fine 
is certainly warranted, I would have given more consideration to PTT’s arguments, albeit not suggesting I 
would necessarily fully agree per se.