You are on page 1of 187

ATTORNEYS AT LAW

ffi NossAMAN'_,, 1666 K Skeet, NW


Suìte 500
Washington, DC 20006
T 202.887 .1400
F 202.466.3215

Tamir D. Damari
D 202.887 .1442
tdamari@nossaman.com

Refer To F¡le #: 29086'1-0003

July 2,2010

Federal Communications Commission


Office of General Counsel
44s 12'h street sw
Washington, DC 20554

Re: FOIA Control No.2010-379

skybridge spectrum Foundation ("skybridge"), by and through its undersigned

counsel, hereby files this Application for Review of Freedom of lnformation Act Action.

Skybridge seeks review, pursuant to 47 CFR 550.461Ú) and .115, of a June 2, 2010
'1

determination by scot stone, Deputy chief, Mobility Division, wireless


Telecommunications Bureau (the "wireless Bureau") denying skybridge's Freedom of

lnformation Act Request (the "Request") dated April 19,2010 (FOIA Control No. 2010-

37e).

249387 1.DOC
nossaman.con'l
July 2, 2010
Page 2

TABLE OF CONTENTS
J
QUESTION PRESENTED
3
FACTS AND PROCEDURAL HISTORY

FOIA REQUEST AT ISSUE 7

o
ARGUMENT
o
INTRODUCTION

THE WIRELESS BUREAU HAS NOT ESTABLISHED 10


THAT INFORMATION MAY BE PROPERLY WITHHELD
AS CONFIDENTIAL BUSINESS INFORMATION

THE WIRELESS BUREAU HAS NOT ESTABLISHED 15


THAT DOCUMENTS MAY BE PROPERLY
WITHHELD AS ATTORNEYWORK PRODUCT
-CC'D' ON CERTAIN 17
THE FACT THAT SKYBRIDGE WAS
LETTERS TRANSMITTED BY THE INVESTIGATED
PARTIES IS LEGALLY IMMATERIAL

CONCLUSION 19

249387 1.DOC
July 2, 2010
Page 3

QUESTION PRESENTED

1. Did the wireless Bureau err on June 2, 2010 by maintaining that certain

information responsive to the Request was exempt from disclosure by FolA?

RELEVANT UNDERLYING FACTS AND PROCEDURAL HISTORY

The Enforcement and wireless Bureaus of the commission are investigating

compliance by Maritime communications/Land Mobile, LLC ('MCLM) with 47 cFR


whether
ss1.2110, 1.2112, 1.17 and 1.65. Specifically, these Bureaus are investigating

MCLM and its principals failed to disclose all required ownership information in its

application to participate in FCC Auction No. 61 and in subsequent filings with the

Commission. (the "MCLM lnvestigation").

By letter dated AUguSt 18,2009, the Wireless Bureau directed MCLM' its

principals sandra and Donald DePriest, and its affiliates MariTEL, lnc. ("MariTEL") and

wireless Properties of Virginia, Inc. ("wPV") (collectively, the "lnvestigated Parties") to

provide certain information related to the MCLM lnvestigation (See letters collectively

attached as Exhibit l). This letter prohibited the lnvestigated Parties from withholding

information based upon generalized or unsubstantiated claims of confidentiality:

Request for confidentíal Treatment. lf [you] request that any information


or documents responsive to this letter be treated in a confidential manner,
[you]shallsubmit,alongwithallresponsiveinformationanddocuments,a
õtatement in accordance with Section 0.459 of ihe Commission's rules.
47 C.F.R. S0.459. Requests for confidential treatment must comply with
the requirements of section 0.459, including the standards of specificity
mandated by Section 0 459(b) 1 Accordingly' "blanket" requests for

I This regulation states, in relevant part

2493A7 1.DOC
July 2,2010
Page 4

a
confidentiality of large set of documents' and casual requests'
including simply stamping pages "confidential," are unacceptable'
Pursuant to Section 0.459(c),2 the Bureau will not consider requests that
do not comply with the requirements of Section 0'459'

Id., atPageT.

..(b) Except as provided in a.statement of


S0.a59(aX3), each s.uch request shall-contain
and of the facts
tÀË reasons foi withhotding-tne màtêìials from inspection (see $0.457)
upon which those records are based, including:

(1) ldentification of the specific information for which confidential treatment is sought;

(2) ldentification of the commission proceeding in which the information was submitted
òr a description of the circumstances giving rise to the submission;
(3) Explanation of the degree to which the information is commercial or financial, or
contains a trade secret or is privileged;
(4) Explanation of the degree to which the information concerns a service that is subject
to competition;
(5) Explanation of how disclosure of the information could result in substantial
competitive harm;
(6)ldentificationofanymeasufestakenbythesubmittingpartytopreventunauthorized
disclosure;
of
(7) ldentification of whether the information is available to the public and the extent
àny previous disclosure of the information to third parties:

(8) Justification of the period during which the submitting party asserts that material
should not be availablê for public disclosure; and
may be
(9) Any other information that the party seeking- confidential treaiment believes
granted."
ùÉeful'in assessing whether its request for confidentiality should be

stamping
2 This regulation states, in relevant part: "(c) Casual requests (including simply
pugå.;"ãniiduntiat') wtrich do not cómply w¡t¡' tf'e requirements of paragraphs (a) and
(b) of this section will noi be considered."

249387,1.DOC
July 2,2010
Page 5

The lnvestigated Parties responded by letters dated September 28, 2009 and

september 30, 2009. (see response of sandra DePrieslMCLM, attached as Exhibit 2'

response of wPV, attached as Exhibit 3, response of MariTEL, attached as Exhibit


4)

ln wPV's response, its counsel stated that "l am concurrently filing Attachment ll to

wPV's response under a request for confidential treatment of the document." (see
Exhib¡t 3). WPV did not provide any further explanation for this request'

on February 26,2010, the Enforcement Bureau sent a follow-up letier of inquiry


to
to the lnvestigated Parties, seeking additional information and documentation relating

the MCLM lnvestigation. (see letters collectively attached as Exhibit 5). This letter

once again prohibited the lnvestigated Parties from withholding information based upon

generalized or unsubstantiated claims of confidentiality:

RequestforConfidentialTreatment,lf[therespondingpartyrequests]lhat
any information or documents responsive to this letter be treated in a
coñfidential manner, it shall submit, along with all responsive information
anddocuments,astatementinaccordancewithSection0.4S9ofthe
Commission'srules.4Tc.F.R.so.4sg.Requestsforconfidentia|
treatment must comply with the requirements of section 0.459, including
the standards of spècificity mandated by section 0.459(b). Accordingly,
,,blanket" requests for coñfidentiality of a large set of documents,. and
casual requèsts, including simply stamping pages "confidential"' are
unacceptable. Pursuant to section 0.459(c), the Bureâu will not consider
requesti that do not comply with the requirements of Section 0'459'

See Exhibit 5, at Page 8.

The lnvestigated Parties responded by letters dated March 29, 20l0 (See

response of sandra DePriesvMCLM attached hereto as Exhibit 6, response of Donald

DePriesuwPV attached hereto as Exhibit 7, response of MariTEL, attached hereto as

Exhibit 8). once again, the lnvestigated Parties disregarded the Enforcement Bureau's

249387 1.DOC
July 2,2010
Page 6

claims of
admonition regarding withholding information based upon unsubstantiated
the
confidentiality. lnstead, they made generalized and conclusory claims regarding

purported confidentiality of information responsive to the Enforcement Bureau's request'

For example, MariTEL's response stated:

Certain of the requests seek confidential information ' ' Accordingly'


MariTelherebyrequestsconfidentialtreatmentundersection0.4S9ofthe
Commission'srules,forcertaincommerciallysensitivecorporateand
financial information contained in its response. . . MariTEL requests that
theredactedconfidentialinformationbepermanentlywithheldfrompublic
inspection under section 0.459 of the Commission's rules

See ExhibitS, at Page 1.

With particular respeci to MariTEL's aggregate gross revenues and other

financial information, MariIEL responded:

Mr.Schonman'sletterrequestsdocumentationdemonstratingMariTEL,s
aggregate gross revenues and other financial information ' This
informationhasbeenprovidedinExhibitsl,2and4,respectively'ofthe
CONFIDENTIAL version of MariTEL's response' The information
containedintheseExhibitsiscommerciallysensitivecorporateand
financial information that customarily would be guarded from competitors
and would not be made routinely available for public inspection'

ld., at page 2.

Similarly, Donald DePriestÄNPV stated:

DePriest requests confidential treatment of the Exhibits in their entirety '


..
The Exhibits merit confidential treatment because they address
strategically sensitive matters, including specific commercial and financial
¡ntortät¡on. DePriest would not cusiomarily release this type of sensitive
information to the public and believes that exposure of the specific
Such
business arrangements or its financial information is unwarranted
release could résult in substaniial competitive harm by placing DePriest at
providers
a disadvantage vis-à-vis other telecommunications servlce
añd against the private mobile radio service industry in general
ùËãit¡L"rv

249387 1.DOC
July 2,2o1O
Page 7

. . . There is no reasonably segreable information which could be released


without competitive harm to DePriest.

See ExhibitT, at Page 1.

MCLM/Sandra DePriest likewise responded by stating:

The Exhibits merit confidential treatment because they address


strategicallysensitivematters,includingspecificcommercialandfinancial
informãtion. MCLM would not customarily release ihis type of sensitive
information to the public and believes thai exposure of the .specific
businessu,,"ng"*"nt.oritsfinancialinformationisunwarranted.Such
release could result in substantial competitive harm by placing MCLM at
a
disadvantagevis-à-visothertelecommunicationsserviceproviders
general
specificallyãnd against the private mobile radio service industry in
. . . There ls no reasonably segreable information which could be released
without comPetitive harm io MCLM.

See Exhibit6, at Page 1.

THE FOIA REQUEST AT ISSUE

lntheRequest,skybridgesoughtthefollowingdocumentsrelatedtotheMCLM

lnvestigation:

(1) All records relating to the August 1 8, 2009 letters sent by the
ùvireless Bureau to MCLúI, Sandra DePriest, MariTEL, Donald DePriest
"section 308
and wpV ¡n connection *iÚ' tn" MCLM lnvestigation (the
Letters");

(2) All records relating to the February 26, 2010 letters sent by the
Ènforcement Bureau to thê lnvestigated Parties (the "EB Letters");

(3) Copies of all correspondence between the Commission and the


iecipients of the section 30g and EB Letters, regarding the subject
matters of these letters;

(4) Copies of all correspondence between the staffs of the Wireless


andEnforcementBureausrelatingiothesubjectmattersoftheSection
308 Letters and the EB Letters; and

249387 1.DOC
July 2, 2010
Page I

(5) Copies of all correspondence between ihe Commission and any


the
àón_commission governmental entity relating to the subject matters of
Section 308 Letters and the EB Letters.

See Exhibit9.

On June 2,2O1O,the Wireless Bureau responded to the Request as follows:

(1)AstoRequestNo.l,theWirelessBureaumaintainedthatithad
prevlousty prodúced all responsive documents in its possession in
i""ponr" to'st ybridge's prior FO|R request dated October 27, 2009 (FCC
FOIA Control No. ioos-o+s), except for a document for which the
Commissionhadtentativelygrantedconfidentiality;i.e.,Attachmentll^to
wpV's september 30, 200é response to the August 18, 2009 section 308
letter ("Attachment Il").

(2) As to Request No. 2' the Wireless Bureau maintained that "you
wére copleo on the. . EB letters to all three parties,.as well as the
,etpon.è" by those parties. No additional records beyond what you were
on ñave been filed or are in the commission's possession."
"oji"o
However, the Bureau further acknowledged that MCLM' WPV and MariTel
portions of their
had sought and obtained confidential treatment of certain
responses to the EB letters.

(3) As to Request No. 3, the Wireless Bureau maintained that "you


wáre copied on ihe three Section 308 Letters and Responses; the three
Commission staff may have
[EB] Letiers and responses; and any e-mail1
had with the affected parties. Beyond that, the Commission has no
other
records."

(4) As to Request No.4, the Wireless Bureau maintained that all


iesponsive documents "are protected by - the attorney work-product
¡oobtrinel which has been incoiporated
into Exemption 5 of the Freedom
äf lnformation Act' U.S.C. S552(b)(5), and are therefore . not
5
discloseable. ln the alternative, and also under Exemption 5, any such e-
mailswouldbe.pre-decisional,innature,andlikewisenotsubjectto
disclosure."

See Exhibit 10.

249387 1.DOC
July 2, 2010
Page 9

ARGUMENT

A. lntroduction
,,FOIA is often explained as a means for citizens to know what their government

isupto.,,NARAv.Favish,541U.S.157,171(2004).Thisphraseisnota..convenient

formalism," but rather "it defines a structural necessity in a real democracy


" ld''a|171-

72.

Thewithholdingagencybearstheburdenofestablishingthatagivendocument

is exempt from the disclosure requirements of FolA. center for Internat¡onal


2d
Environmental Law v- oftice of the IJS Trade Representative, 237 F. Supp.
17
'21

(D.D.c.2002).Mostrecently,thePresidentoftheUnitedStateshasissueda
may not be
memorandum to the heads of all agencies instructing them that information
fears"
withheld under FOIA simply because of the agency's "speculative or abstract
Government (fhe
regarding disclosure. FOIA Post (2009): Creating a New Era of open
,,FOIA Memorandum"), at page 1 The FOIA Memorandum also "strongly encourages

agencies to make discretionary disclosures of ¡nformation." /d.' at


page 2. lnformation

might apply
should not be withheld simply because an exemption "technically or legally"

Id., at page 4.
justify non-
The wireless Bureau has failed to meet its stringent burden to
with
disclosure, for the reasons set forth below. lts actions are therefore in conflict
policy. Furthermore,
statute, regulations, case precedent and established commission

these actions have caused prejudicial procedural error to Skybridge'

2493A7 ,1.DOC
July 2,2010
Page 10

B. The W¡reless Bureau Has Not Established that lnformation Mav Be Properlv
\ i¡thheld As Confidential Business Information
As noted above, the wireless Bureau has withheld certain responsive information
as
based on a request by the lnvestigated Parties that this information be treated

confidentiat under 5 u.s.c. s552(b)(4) (colloquially known as FOlA "Exemption 4.).3

Exemption 4 exempts from the disclosure requirements of FolA "trade secrets and

commercial or financial information obtained from a person and privileged or

confidential."

with
Nonetheless, because courts "have viewed [Exemption 4] arguments

skepticism" (ln Defense of Animats v. NlH, 543 F' Supp 2d'70'79 (D D'C'
2008))' the

"the government
scope of Exemption 4 has been carefully circumscribed. Firstly,
in any
retains the burden of demonstrating that the specific information withheld

particular instance qualifies as confidential commercial information." Government


(D D'C 2010)'
Accountability Proiectv. HHS,2010 U.S. Dist LEX|S 21415 "29
be
secondly, information will be considered confidential only if disclosure would
in the
likely either to (1) impair the government's ability to obtain necessary information
person from
future; or (2) cause substantial harm to the competitive position of the

whom information was obtained. see Government Accountability Proiect, at.13'

Thirdly,aparty..maywaiveitsclaimthatinformationisexemptfromdisclosureif
public domain
a FOIA plainiiff carries his burden of pointing to specific information in the

3 This statute states that "trade secrets and commercial or financial information
obtained from a person and privileged or confidential" are exempt
from disclosure under
FOIA.

249387 _1.DOC
July 2,2010
Page l1

Ethical
that appears to duplicate that [which is] being withheld." People for the
-26 (D D'C' 2005)'
Treatment of Anímals v. USDA,2005 U.S. Dist' LEXIS 10586
provide a so-
Fourthly, when an agency asserts Exemption 4, is must generally

calledVaughnlndex'whichdescribeseachwithhelddocument,andstatesa

justification for the exemption claimed. see vaughn v. Rosen, 449 F.3d 820 (D.c. cir.

1973)',JudicialWatchv.FDA,44gF.3d141,146(DDC2006)(stating'inthecontext

of Exemption 4, that "the Vaughn index . . .gives ' the challenging party a measure of

Treatment of
access without exposing the withheld information."); People for the Ethical
.11 (May 24' 2005)'
Animals v. ]JSDA,2005 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 10586

Finally,andmostimportantly,aconclusoryorgeneralizedallegationthat

responsive financial information is "privileged" or "confidential," is


perse insufficient to

demonstratethattherequestedinformationiswithinthescopeofExemption4.See
*14 ("Conclusory and generalized allegations of
Government Accountab¡tity, at
decision
competitive harm, of course, are unacceptable and cannot support an agency's

to withhold requested documents."); Green v. Dept' of Commerce'


489 F Supp' 977'

invocation of
980 (D.D.C. 1980). The paradigmatic example of an improper conclusory
of alleged
Exemption 4 occurs when no facts or supporting detail is alleged in support
-23-25 ("the explanation lacks
competitive harm. Government Accountability Proiect, al
the withheld
any supporting detail demonstrating that a competitor could, in fact, use

material . . The conclusory nature of Defendants' explanation on this


point is fatal ' ")

(D'D'C. 2008) (..NlH's argument


;In Defense of Animats v. NIH, 543 F. Supp. 2d'70,79

249387 1.DOC
July 2,2010
Page 12

identify with
for application of this Exemption consists of tvvo sentences . . . NIH fails to
explains how
any level of specificity what it means by 'cost and rate' information, nor

such information could be used by competitors to cause substantial harm to


cRL' NIH's

Exemption 4
failure in this regard is problematic, as courts in this circuit routinely reject

arguments that are grounded in generalizations.") ; People for the Ethical Treatment
of

Animals, al*22.

Section 0.45g of the Commission's rules likewise obligates parties requesting

confidential treatment of financial records to provide:

a statement of the reasons for withholding the materials from inspection


and of the facts upon which those records are based, including '(1)
ldentification of the specific information for which confidential treatment is
sought . . . (3) Explanation of the degree to which the information is
com-mercial'or financial, or contains à trade secret or is privileged . , .
(4)
Explanation of the degree to which the inform_ation concerns a service that
is òubject to competition . . .(5) Explanation of how disclosure of the
'
information could. result in substantial competitive harm (6)
ldentification of any measures taken by the submitting party to prevent .
unauihorized disclosure. . . (7) ldentification of whether the information is
available to the public and the extent of any previous disclosure of the
informationtothirdparties...(8)Justificationoftheperiodduring'which.
public
the submitting party asserts that material should not be available for
other information that the party seeking ..
disclosure; añcj (S) nny-believes
confidential treatment may be useful in assessing whether its
request for confidentiality should be granted'

Applyingtheforegoingstandardtothismatter,thelnvestigatedParties,

talismanic invocation of Exemption 4, which has been rubber stamped by the


wireless

Bureau, fails as a matier of law. The lnvestigated Parties have provided no

particularized ground for treating any of their information as confidential under

Exemption 4. Their arguments in support of confidentiality are nothing more than

2493a7 1.DOC
July 2,2010
Page 13

response io
tautologies devoid of any underlying factual basis. For example, MariTEL',s

the EB Letter stated: "certain of the requests seek confidential information '
. '

of the
Accordingly, MariTel hereby requests confidentiality under section 0.459

commission's rules, for ceriain commercially sensitive corporate and financial


in these
information contained in its response," and that "the information contained
and
Exhibits [provided by MariTEL to the FCC] is commercially sensitive corporate
and would not
financial information that customarily would be guarded from competitors
regurgitation of
be made routinely available for public inspection." This self-serving

more flimsy than the one summarily rejected


S552(bX4) comprises an argument even

bytheadjudicatingcourtsinGovernmentAccountabilityProjecfandlnDefenseof

Animals,supra.ltalsoplainlyviolates$0.45goftheCommission,sRules,which,as

notedabove,mandatesthatapartyclaimingExemption4protectionmustprovidea

detailed explanation of the basis for this claimed exemption'

the
This gossamer-thin justification for withholding information properly within
provide the
scope of FolA is only underscored by the wireless Bureau's failure to

requiredVaughnlndex,whichdeprivesSkybridgeofeventhemostbasicinformation

regarding the documents withheld.


..waive its claim that information is exempt
Finally, as noted above' a party may
information in
from disclosure if a FolA plaintiff carries his burden of pointing to specific
People for
the public domain that appears to duplicate that [which is] being withheld."
which the
the Ethical Treatment of Animals, at"26. Much of the information for

lnvestigatedPartiesseekconfidentialtreatment(e.g.,informationregardingtheir

249387_1.DOC
July 2, 2010
Page 14

attfibutable gross revenues, as disclosed in tax returns and other documents)


is

seeks a
information that must be publically disclosed when a wireless license applicant

Designated Entity bidding credit. Having sought the bidding credit, the lnvestigated

parties have waived their right to now seek the confidentiality of this information'a

UnderFolA,skybridgehasarighttoobtainthisinformationasamemberofthe

general public. skybridge also has the right to obtain such information as an interested

party in the MCLM lnvestigation. The MCLM lnvestigation stems directly from the

lnvestigated Parties' misstatements in Auction 61. Furthermore, as the commission is

aware, skybridge (along with companies that are affiliated with and have ongoing

business relationships with skybridge, including lntelligent Transportation & Monitoring

wireless LLC and Environmentel LLC) (collectively, the "Petitioners") have filed a

pending,
petition to deny and several petitions for reconsideration, which remain

challenging the MCLM long-form submitted in Auction 61. lnformation responsive to the
petitions, including
Request is necessary for Petitioners to adequately prosecute these

via a formal hearing pursuant to 47 C.F.R. S309(d). The MCLM lnvestigation


is

premised upon the facts asserted in the Petitioners' challenges to MCLM in Auction 61'
Parties
lndeed, the Enforcement and wireless Bureaus' letters to ihe lnvestigated
chosen
specifically reference Auction 61 as the gravamen of the investigation. Having
purported
to participate in Auction 61, the lnvestigated Parties have waived any

MCLM sought and obtained a bidding credit in Auction 6'1 . This


4 process required
its controlling interests and
disclosure of ihe gross revenues ot tr¡Ct-tr¡, its affiliates,
and WPV)'
officers, and their;ff¡liates (including Donald and Sandra DePriest, MariTEL
See 47 C.F.R. Part 1, Subpart Q, including 51.2110'

249387 1.DOC
July 2,2010
Page 15

disclosures in that
conf¡dentiality rights regarding information relevant to their truihful
convert public
auction. Neither the wireless Bureau, nor the lnvesiigated Parties, can
private affairs under the
petitions to deny and reconsideration proceedings into de facfo

guise of FOIA exemptions. As discussed supra' the purpose of FOIA is to open


up

government,nottocurtailaparty'srightstoadequatelyprosecuteapublicchallengeto

a license award.

C. The Wireless Bureau Has Not Establish9d that


Doct¡menG Mav Be Properlv Withheld As Attornev Work Product

TheWirelessBureaualsoclaimsthatitmaywithholdinformationonthebasisof
information is
5 U.S.C. S552(bX5)5 (colloquially known as"Exemption 5"), since such

allegedlysubsumedwithintheattorneywork-productdockine.Thisargumentlikewise

fails.

ThescopeofsU'S.C.552(bX5)mustbeconstruedas..narrowlyasconsistent

withefficientgovernmentoperation.,,seeLevyv.USPS,S6TF'2d162,166(D.D.c.

2008).Thus,..conclusoryexplanations''astowhyadocumentisbeingwithheldunder
Environmental
exemption 5 is perse insufficient. Id., at167; center for International

Law v. office of the IJS Trade Representative, 237 F. Supp. 2d


17 ,23 (D'D'C' 2002)

(..lnkeepingwiththeFolA,sgoalofbroaddisclosure,theSectionss2(bxs)exemption

isconstruednarrowly.,,);Nickersonv.US,,1996U.S.Dist.LEXIS14489-5(N.D.lll.

5This sub-section permits an agency to withhold "inter-agency or intra-agency


a party other than an
memorandums or letters which would not be available by law to
agency in litigation with the agency."

249387 _1.DOC
July 2,2010
Page 16

-7-8(ND Ca'
October1,1996); Miscavigev'/RS, 1992US Dist LEXIS19493

December 10, 1992). With respect to Exemption 5, the FolA Memorandum states:

memorandum containing a
[A] requested record might be a draft, or a
ieäommenOation. Such records might be properly withheld under ..
Exemption 5, but that should not bé the end of the review' Rather' the
be
content of that particular draft and that particular memorandum should
reviewed and a determination made as to whether the agency reasonably
foresees that disclosing that particular document, given its age'-content'
and character, would hãrm an interest protected by Exemption 5 ln
making these determinations, agencies sho-uld keep in mind that mere
;,sfecùative or abstract fears" are not a sufficient basis for withholding.
lnstead,theagencymustreasonablyforeseethatdisclosurewouldcause
harm.Moreover,agenciesmustbem¡ndfutofthePresident'sdirectivethat
in the face of doubi, openness prevails ' ' records protected by Exemption
5 hold the greatest'piomise for increased discretionary release under the
Attorney Gieneral's'Guídelines. Such releases will be fully consistent with
the purpose of the FOIA to make available to the public records which
reflect ihe operations and activities of the government'

/d., at Pages 5, 7 (emPhasis added).

Also,anagencyclaimingExemptionSshouldordinarilyprovideaVaughnlndex

providing
,,a particularized explanation of how disclosure of the particular document
to "afford the
would damage the interest protected by the claimed exemption," in order

FolArequesterameaningfulopportunitytocontest...thesoundnessofthe

withholding." Miscavige, at "10. This index must include a "relatively detailed

justification." Center for lnternational Environmental Law' at"22'

The wireless Bureau has failed to meet its burden with regard io Exemption
5

"are protected by the


The wireless Bureau',s contention that the withheld documents
Exemption 5 of the
attorney work-product [doctrine] which has been incorporated into
conclusory
Freedom of lnformation Aci . . . and are iherefore not discloseable" is utter

249387 1.DOC
July 2, 2010
Page 17

applicability of the
and therefore essentially meaningless. ln order to demonstrate the
developed
work product doctrine, a party must show that the material at ¡ssue has been

in anticipation of litigation or for trial by an attorney, or on his behalf'


see, F.R.C'P'

26(bX3).Documentspreparedintheordinarycourseofbusiness,orforanyothernon-
v. Bally's Park
litigation purpose, are not covered by the work product doctrine. Martin

place Hotel & Casino,g33 F.2d 1252,1260 (3'd Cir. 1993). Moreover, the work product

with
exception must be "strictly confined within the narrowest possible limits consistent
(3'd Cir.
the logic of its principle." tn re Grand Jury Proceedings, 604 F.2d 798, 802-03

1979). The wireless Bureau's work product doctrine claim, like its Exemption 4 claim,
assertion that all
is unsubstantiated by any facts. lt amounts 1o the prima facle suspect
developed
documentation exchanged by the wireless and Enforcement Bureaus were
failure to
by attorneys in anticipation of litigation. once again, the wireless Bureau's
fact
provide any substantiation for this claimed exemption is only underscored by the

thatithasfailedtoprovideaVaughnlndex,deprivingSkybridgeofanyinformation
has failed to
regarding the documents withheld. Furthermore, the wireless Bureau
is reasonably
even allege (let alone prove) that disclosure of the withheld information
of the FolA
likely to harm an interest protected by Exemption 5, in blatant disregard

Memorandum.
rcc'dn on certain Letters Transmitted Bv The
D. The Fact That skvbridqe was
lnvestiqated Parties ls Leqallv lmmaterial

Asdiscussedsupra,inresponsetoRequestNos.2and3,theWirelessBureau
Skybiridge had
maintained that production of information was unnecessary because

249387 1.DOC
July 2,2010
Page 18

beencopiedonthelnvestigatedParties,responsestotheWirelessBureauand

Enforcement Bureau's letters. This argument is beside the point'

SkybridgeacknowledgesthatitwascopiedontheSection30sletters,theEB
(with certain documents
Letters and the lnvestigated Parties' responses to these letters

enclosed).Nonetheless,thisfactdoesnotremedytheharmcausedbytheWireless
any authority in
Bureau,s non-disclosure. lndeed, the wireless Bureau does not cite to

suppori of its iacit assertion that it can jettison its obligations under FolA
simply by

from
claiming that the requesting party has obtained some of the responsive information

another source.
self-
Furthermore, Skybridge was not copied on the information and documents

servingly designated by the lnvestigated Parties as "confidential" under 5 U S C'

s552(bx4),and,forthereasonsdiscussedabove,skybridgeisentitledtothis
information. Additionally, neither the FCC, nor Skybridge, has any way of discerning
include all of
whether the documents enclosed with the lnvestigated Parties' responses

the documents actually submitted to the wireless and Enforcement Bureaus'


skybridge is entitled to whatever responsive documentsi information the
wireless

Bureau may have, and should not be forced to rely upon the Bureau's unfounded
Parties'
assurance that the documents enclosed with the cc'd copies of the lnvestigated

responses include all of the documents actually submitted io the wireless and

Enforcement Bureaus. This holds particularly true given the fact that the
instant

investigation arises out of the lnvestigated Parties' affirmative misstatements and


material non-disclosu res. As such, the lnvestigated Parties' propensity for
truthfulness

249387_',l.DOC
July 2,2010
Page 19

onevenbasicmattersisclearlySuspectinthiscase,andshouldnotbeacceptedasa

given.

CONCLUSION

Foreachoftheforegoingreasons,iheWirelessBureau'sdenialoftheRequest

shouldbereversed'andtheBureaushouldbecompelledtoproducetheinformation
basis of
responsive to the Request that has been previously withheld on the

erroneously-claimed FOIA exemptions.

Tamir Damari
NOSSAMAN LLP
1666 K Street NW, Suite 500
Washington, DC 20006
(202) 887-1442

Counsel for SkYbridge SPectrum


Foundation

cc. Dennis C. Brown, Esq.


Russell Fox, Esq.
Donald R. DePriest

249387_1.DOC
EXHIBIT 1
Auçf-ZZ-2009 05: 56 AM Te.l'esqurus 5IOA412276

Federal Communications Comnission


'TVashington, D.C' 20554

August 18, 2009

VIA qRTIFTED MAIL - RËTURN RECIFT REOT]ESIED

MariTËL, Inc.
4635 Church Rd., Suite 100
CunÌ'"ing, GA 300284084
ATTN: Jason Smith

Russell H. Fox, Esq.


Mintz, Levin, Cohen, Fenis, Glovsþ and Popeo, P.C.
70 I Pennsylvania Ave., N'W. - Suite 900
Wæhi-ugton, DC 20004

Re: FCCFilesNos.0002303355'0003463998,0003470447'0003470497'09034105n'
0003470576, 00034?05s3, 0003470593, 00034?0602, 0003470608, 00034706i3

Deâr Mr. Süith ând lW. Fox:

is
The lVireless Telecommunications Bureau of tho Federal Communications Commission
invesdsatiÌE comoliarce bv MariTBL, Inc. a¡d its subsidiaries (MariTEL) with Sections I 1? and I'65 of
ti¡e Coirmisîion's nulesr rãhting to providing truthñll and accumte information to the Commission'
ip""iü.r¡lv, ¿"rcribed more ñrly-below, tie Com¡nission has received conllicti.ng bformation ftom
*
lri*iiei *a ¡a*itime Communícations/Land Mobite, LLC (lvfC/LM) regarding tlte involvement ofl4r.
bon¿¿ n ml¡.rt Oltr. De.hiest) vith MâriTBL priór t0 the corisuftûratiôü
tf a ¡eceflt Eûnsactíon' Mr.
DePriest has been deemed tq have a conUolling interest in MffLM as the husbnqd of Sandra DePdest
(li4s. DepriesL). MC/LM, in its prosecution of its application for new.AutoÍi ed Maritime
i"l""o**onitotions Sysiem çAMts) ticcnses fo¡ which it was tlie high bidder in FCC "4uction No' 6l
that Mr. DePriest did not
trflLVt Apptication)i nas rep"atediy represented in pleadings and_other filings contrary, howevËr, in Fansfer
Èontrol lvlai'itl- at any relevant peïiod, ivIariTEL itself reprcÆerted to the
of seeking Comnrrssion authority to
of oonttol oppli*tionsit filed in iune 2008 for the expræs purpose.
divest Mr. DãÈiest of conrol of MæiTEL 0vfariTEl TC AppLications)''

Alùough both MC,iLM a¡d Ma¡iTEL subsequently fiIed pleadings addressilg this discrepalcy'
as to whether or not Mr,
the existilrg reclord is insuffrcìent to pe¡mit us to ¡each a defrnitive determination
record provide us
Depriest hád exerc ised dc jure or difacfo control of M¿¡iTEL. Nor does
the current
(and litigated)
with a sufficíenr basis for deteÛnining why i¡accurale ínforrnation thåt bears on a rn$erial
is"L .iìft t tp""t to both applicationi apparently was submitted in either the MOLM Application or tlre
MariTBL TC Àpplications.

'47 c.F.R. $$ 1.17, 1,65.

(MC/LM Application)'
2
FcC File No. 0002303355 (flled sept. 7, 2005, amended Aug. 21, 2006)
0003470583' 0003470593'
FCC Fite Nos. 0003463998, 00034?0447, 0003470497, 00034?0527, 00034?0576,
3

0003470602, 0003470608, 0003470613 (collectivsly, Ma¡iTEL TC Applications)'


Al¡g-22-2OO9 05:56 AM Telesourus 5LO84I7'?,26 2/7

MariTBL, Inc.
Letter of Inquiry re Don€ld R. DePÌíest

a$ ib conüolling pdncipal.4 Thc Mobüity Division


Ms. De.Priesr ha6 been identified by MC/LM
(Division), Wireless Telecom¡uunications Bureau, detorminecl that, under the spousal flffiüation rule.) Mr.
DePriest was tequired to be listed 8s a tìisclosable inte¡est holder for the puçose of determining
MOLM's cligbility for biddidg ëredits âs a dËsignatËd entity, irrespective of whatever åctuai role Mr.
DePriest played in MCyLMJ The M{JLM Applicâtion v,¡as amended orr August 21, 2006, to include the
grass rËv;nues of Mr. DePfiest in MC,/LM's desiguated entity showing, in keeping with the Division's
ãetermi¡ation. h t¡e amendment, MÜI-lvf represented, inrcÌ drt¿, thst Mr. DçPriest "controls Ameficâ¡
Nonwovons Corporâtion (ANC)" aud that "ANC is the odly revenue producing entity that Don owns o-r
co¡nols.,'7 Lr reipouse to a pleading frled by \Vaneu Havens on $eptember 6, 2006,0 MÇ/LM expressly
denied that Mr. DiPriest ownerl ar controlled MariTEL, and stated t}ì.1t whilê Mr. DeFtiest coûtrollêd
MCT Investors, L.P., which held stock h MariTEL, contol of Ma¡iTEL wæ instead vested in American
Tower, I¡c.e

on June i2, 2008, MariTEL fited the ten MzriTÊL Tc applications, one for MariTEL itself and
one for eaclr of ni¡e MariTEL subsidiades holding of,e maritime VIIF Pr¡blic Coast stâtion licènse aPiece.
The Ma¡iTEL TC Applicarions each included an identical, one-page exhibit descrilring the transaction,
which stated that
,tontot ot M.ireL .. .. will pass from Donald R. ÐePriest and MCT hvestoÏs, L.P. t0

r
In its FÇC Form 602 ownership rlisclosure filing thst ficcol)lpsnied the MC/LM Applicstion, YcyIM listcd thrc¿
disclosâb1e int¿rest hotdêrst Sandra M, Dehiest, Conmunicatious hvestments, Irc., and SII{IW Porurership, L.P.
S¿¿ FCC Filc No. 0002302467 (filcrl Sepr 6, 2005)' An exhibit to the FonD 602 clarified that:

one hundred percelt of the membership inta¡ests in Maritimø comrnunications/Land Mobile,


LLC are ownËd by SÆJW Paruership, L.P- Thc goneral partno¡ ir¡ S/R¡W Fart¡erthip' L P' is
Çonmunications investuçnls, Inc. Onc hundrcd pcrcont oftho sha¡es in CommunicEÉons
Investmeûts, Inc. are owned by ssndrs M. DeP¡icst Onc hundrtd porcant of tho partnorship
sbares in slRJW partnershþ, L.p. nre owned ì:y sandra M. DePricsr. Ssndfa
M. DoPfiest is
the sole of6cer, d¡çctot -ã k"y **"g"rnunt perso'ael Of Maritims C.fiflunicåtions/Lând
Mobile, LLC' Sandra M. DePdest is tlìe sole key $ânagement personnel of S/RIW
Partnership, L.P. Saldra M. DePriest is tlæ sole officer, director atrd key rnsnûgemÕnt
personneì of Çommunications Investmetrts' Inc.

5
4? c.F.R ç 1.2110(cX5X¡Ð(A). The spousal affiliatiorr rulo providcs that, for prpnses ofidcntifying disclo¡able
inter.est ¡otders irr demonstrating an appticant's aligibility for d¿signated êntity benefits, "[b]oth spouses are deemed
to own or contol or have the po-wer tõ control intercsß öwncd or conEolled by ôifhol Of Úôf¡l, ùnleli! ùey
åre

subject to a legal scpæation rãcognized ¡y I aourt ofcompcto¡ttjurisdiction in tho Unit¿d StÊtos."

'1v1D2006), aff'd, Oràcr on


Maritime Comrnunications/Land Mobile,LLC, Otder,ZtRCC Rcd 13?35 (WTB
6
See
Reconsideratíon,ZZFCC Rcd 4780 (WTB MD2007¡, recon. and reviÅw pên¿ing. Although MCYIM initisly fâiled
to list Mr, DePriesl Ãs a disclosable intere8t holder, and argued tltat dle sPousal Ðfflliation rule was either
lives,"_thc
fuapplicable ot should be waiyed ìn this cæe because Mr. DePriest ond his wife led "separau economic
âfid âffiliated
Diiision wns unpersuaded by either argumont, ånd de¡ermincd that úc gross fêvc¡rucs of Mr- DoPriost
entíties shoutd bà i*cluded in esscssing MC/LI4's des¡gnâtcd cntity eligibility, ld. at 13738-40 llll 5-8.

?
,See MC/LM Application, Disclosablc Intercst Holdors Amcndmont at I (file/ AUE 2l 2006)'
'
s
See Waren C. ÉIavens Perition for Rcconsidcratioo [of Muítimo Communicationslla¡d Mobile l,LC, Orde¿ 2l
FCC Rcd 8?94 (WIB PSCID 2006)1, flled Sept. 6' 2006.

e
See Ma¡itime Çommunications/Land Mobile LLC Opposition to Petition for Recousideration,
filed Sept 18' 2006'
stock in Maritel'
MC/LM explained that "lvlgf Inv€stors, L.l', 'rhich iiìonholled by Don DePdesL hold¡ common
I c, MCT invesrors, L.P. does not control Maritel, Inè.; funedcar To*eI, Inc. conbols Maritel, Inc.' Pursuant to a
,huæi,oide, ug.."ntunl This agreement provides American Tower,Inc. as the holders ofa majority of lhe common

stock equivalJnts with the power to etecia simple uajorily of the boÃrd of dfueclors of Ma¡itel, hc', subject to the
càïs"niof t"
Conmission, ifre4uired. Becauìe control ofMaritei, Inc. resides in the hands of American Tower,
Inc., Müitel, Ino, is not an atñliate of MC/I-M." Id' s¡ 10'
Aug-22-20O9 05:57 AM Telesourus 5LO84I2226

MariTEL, Inc.
Letter oflnquiry re Dorûld R. Dc.Prieçt

the sharetrolders of MariTBL as a group. Mr^ DePriest has coûtfoiled MâriTEL through a combittation of
direct invesü,nent tud his role as Geneål Patner of MCT Investors, L.P,"l0 (This representation is
substantially consisterìt with i.nforuìf,tiotr provided by MaúTEL in eulier FCC Form 602 ownership
disclosuro filings, except that the Fonn 6CÍZ fllings indicated, correctly as it now aPpcals' that Medcom
Developmeot óiporation, not Mr. DePríest, wai the general pa¡trer of MCT krvestors, L'P', ând Mr'
DePriest sontrolled Medcom Development Corpomtiou.rl)

MC/LM and MariTBL thus presented the Çommission with con-flicfiDg rePresÞntâtions_al_to -.
whether Mr. DePriest had conuolled M¡riTEL' Both MC/LM ¿rd MariTËL subsequently filed pleadittgs
discussing ùis cliscrepÂncy in theìr feprësentâtions, but this discussion is not adequate for the
Commission to ascert¿io whi"h tepret*tation is accù-rate ând which represeuution is not accurate' In
fact, botl¡ MC/LMr? a¡d Ma¡iTELl3 contirrued ro stand by their eårlier representations, and shed little
Iight on why they believe the other party is mistakeu.

rq
,See Exlúbit to MariTEL TC Applications (MariTBL TC Bùibit). Thc MåriTEL TÇ Exhib¡t turther explai ed'
"fir t¡^t *¡tt rhc tan¡for of control is the voluntory distibution of tho tajority of the æsets of MCT
74 corrstitueur iflvostôrs. This ttistribution will substsntially diluto thc ovnorship interest of
"""ntL,p. to its "ause
fûvostors,
MCT lûvo$tors, L.P, to approximately twû pcrccnt, and will decrease Mr. DePriest's ownefship intoro$l
io _

ãppt*.i*o"i' Z.Z% (i'nctuOing the reuraining stake of MCT iûvcsto¡s,-L'P', as Mr- DePdest shall rcou¡in Genêrâl
p-ainer of tlrat entity). Às resü1t of th" distributio* no single eotíty will contol MariTEL." Id.
"
rr cunent upuntit_the time the
In FcC Form 602 reporß thåt woro ffied on March 13, 2001, and apparenüy rcmaincd
MariTEL tansfer of couuol ws$ con$u*maþcl in 2008, MariTEL indicated that MCr Invtslors' L'P' held 58'3ø0 of
VlariTEUsissuedandoutsmndingvoringsrock(ând26.190ofallstock,votingandnon'votin_g),thatMedÇlm.
OuìuÇ*uni Cotpo*tion was thã solc g-onorsl pattner of Mç.I Investo$, L'P', flrd that Mr' пPr¡ost \4,ås Urs sole .
(filed Mar. 13' 200i). Tho
sfüfohùdo¡ of¡vlçdÇom Developmant ðorporaùon. ,S"", ag,, FCC File No. 0002080704
Mr.bePriest hcld an atklitionâl 8.9fl0 of the voting stock in lús own name'
MariTBL Form 602 also itrdicated that
n¡d rlnt Arflolican Tower Corpomtiofl held 1?.19¿ of MsriTEL's vqti[g stoÇk'
tz
on July 31, 2008, for examplq MC/LM filed a pleading in which itåsserted thatMffiTEL was simply incorrcct in
r"pp."núng it at it i ad been conùolted by M¡. ÐÁ'¡icsL, ¿ntl-said that MariTtsL's enor ilt dús rêgârd "apPears tö
.t*,iu¡ a¡ enor in MariTBLís irfonnstion ând from a diffe¡ence in methodology between
MuiTBL
h""" Êo*
;dDoItiësl"butofferedlittleexplanationastoúoÍâtûrëofthatsuggestedmetltodologicaldifferoncc.-See..
Rcgarding
Ma¡itimo communications&anal Mobile LLc, OPposition to supPlement to Petition for Reconsidetation
ñ"ii*t rhst MåfirBL fflay håvo coünted
, äãl"ry 31, 2008, at 3_4; see abo r¿ ar + n,r cpe
niesr betieves
,à*rì""-i",¡"g r*'.k tåwsrd controi, úù$ crêåtiflg a diffeience betweetr MflriTBL strd De Þriost a¡d botw¿en ús
iri*iTEi *¿ ñit.ltss Properties ofvirginia, fnc";¡' In the next sentence' moreovor' MCJJ-M indicaßd thatundpr
Jluded+o metbodologioal ãitrerence wo-uk¡ not sufhce o erplain why MariTEL concluded tbat it lnd been
Pdest control.
Mr. ÞePriesi's conhoi because "even if Do P¡icst hatl uscd ùa¡iTELìs methodology, De 1oÌld,not
which applicable to the instant matlel." Id. at 4. MC/LM also ugued'
Ma¡irEL under the c;or¡missiol's Rules arc
would lìnve pfevented
ínter aliø, thal if Mr, DePriest açtually contïolled Mg;TËL but uânted to çonceal that facL he
üc filing of the MariTEL TC AppËcátions, írC. ar 3 ; that Mr, DePriest neithcr "endoffiefs] nor suppot't[s]"
Inc'
ù"¡ffif,, j ovnustrip report, ¡d-. sr 4 tr.z; snd üat MCyLM stânds by its ea.rlier sttrtemetrt that Americ',' Towet,norMr'
.ãnuof * fr,løier- pri*àt to a shareholàer agresrnent, ¡d. ât 5. MCYI,lvf a'lso argued that¡reither MC/LM
bec¿use attdbudon
Oeeriest t"A any ,iOtive to deceile the Courñssion regarding Mr- ÐoPrieSt's ¡ole in MariTEL
MÇ/LM wotld ror have sffecred MC/tM's uligibility for the smail business bidding
of MariTEL's ¡evenues to
credit ¡fat it received in Auc[on No. 61. /d.

thatit had
13
Ma¡iTËL likewise filed a pleading on July 31, 2008, in which it rcaffimed irc ea¡lier rcPresertation
DePricsis of MariTEL's common stock, direcÙy
been contolied ty Mr. De.Priest tJ*ãugll N4r. ownorship 5Eyo__of

an¿r¡rorrgfr¡iro*oershipofMCTIniæots,L.P.,SeeOpposilionofMariTELInc,fiìedJuly31,2008'at2'
Auq-Z¿-ZOOg 05:58 At4 lelesourus 510A4I¿¿¿6

MariTËL, Inc.
Letter of hquiry rc Donsld R ÐeP¡iest

Based ol the existing record, \1re a¡e unable tó determine whetl¡er or not Mr, DePrièst èxercised
de jure or defacto oontrol of-MariTEl.la We have direcqy contrâatictofy ståteme.nts on the mâtter, Âudan
inabilty at this junctwe to determinË prccisely why thêre is a codlict on ilris poiut, why on¿ oJ the parties
evidently proviáed inaccuratÊ informâtïon on this material issue to the Comnission, and whether dre
submission of such inaccufâte information arises to tho level of misrepresentation or laok of c¿ndor under
the Commissiou's Character Qualificrtions Policy.rs We tlerefore direct MariTEL to provide addítional
information regarding this matter, as specified below.

R ea uests for Info r nntiotz

As explainecl above, we have determincd that ådditionâl fuformation is reçired to assist the
Cornmi ssion in reÉolvhg the issues that have arisen regarding the role played by Mr. DePriest in
MadTEL. Ma¡iTEL is accordingly directed. pursuånt t0 Section 308(b) oI the Communications Act of
1934, ès amendcd (thc Act),r6 to respond ro the foliowi¡g fequests for information. and to Flovide
âvait;bte dôùlmenìation supporting its rcspônses. Unless otlelwise indicåted, the pedod of time covered
by these inçiries is ranuary t,200-2, to thå present (tJre relevant period).u

1. Describe tha extênt anal nature óf Mr. DePriest's ownershþ holdings fu MariTELrs
during the rolevani period. Describa tìe porcentage of the equity in MarifBL held by
Mr. dePriest, and the form in which that equity was held, ¿.8., $tock, prefeffed stock,
etc. Describe the pefce age ôf the voting equity in MariTBL held by Mr' DePriest
and the form in which that equity was held' IT M¡. DePriest's holdings in MariTEL
fluctuated rluring the relevant pe.riod, provide s dotailed explarratioú.

In a plerding in a separate proceedíng, MsfiTEL å¡gued that, conb y to -tlË flssenioÉs in s pctitíon tO deny,
Ia
MoriTEL TC Applications and
ltltrerå is no Jontrov*uy r"g*Oing otio owns and controls MariTEL,'; ond tlat tho
üåiifwt ¡cC nor* ð¡Zi¡t"rJnt "..*"tu afld complete o\¡'r'rship inforuratiol regardirg Mâ¡TEL and its_ _ _
,ree oppositioriof Ma¡TEL inc. [to Petition to Deny flled by AMTS Co¡rsortium LLÇ er 4¿' re FCc
"uutiãi*i"t'"
ËUe ¡tos. OOO¡siOgS¿, 0003516656, 0003534598, 0003534602, 0003534?63, 0003534766, 0003534767,
dro uuthfrlncss of.
õoOSjS+ZeS, Ooo¡SS5bB?1, fited Sept 5,2008, åtz. Ever ifthe lâtter statement legüding
contadictory replcsotltâtions ñâdo by
Ma¡iTEL'S sarlier filings ii ultimately show[ t0 bo lfuo, wo bsliëve that the
MCILM ând MâriTEL have inrleed generatad å contovørsy flûcê$sitâting further Commìssíol irquiry'
ls
Eee Policy Regarding chåfåctêr Qualifications in Broadcast Licensing, Arnendment of Rules of Broadçast
practice anó p¡oiedutJR"l"ring to W.iun Responses to Commission Inquìrios and the Making of
Misrepresentations to the Commission by Po¡mitteæ and Licenæ es, Report, O¿er dn¿ POIìèI Stør¿rnent,l0Z
n C.cl zo trzs, 1210-1r lH[ 60-61 (19 8Q, Memorundwn Qpinion and otde\ 1 Fcc Rcd 421 (1986); Policv
ielarding Character Quaütlcrtions in Bioaclcæt Licensing, Amendment ofÌfft I , ùe Rulæ of Practic¿ and
prJcøurä nehting to-Written Responses to Commission Inquiries and the Making of Mistepresenlâtions to the
Comurission by Apjücants, Permiriees, and Licensees, and the Rep¡¡¡ing 6f Infor'mation Regarding Character
(1990 Charøcter Policy Statemeùt),
euåliflcûtions;pô:¡ry Stdtement and Order,S FCC Rcd 3252 (1990)
ïtìenoronaun' optniLt anrl order,6FCCRcd 344s ( 1991), Me morand.wn opiníon anl ortl¿r,7 FCCkcd 65.64
tt r Co;.t*ision appties irs broadqìst character stårdardslo applicstrts åíd licenseaç in thc oúc¡ ¡adio
ffSgz).
services. See e.g.,t990ChàmcterPot¿ç!Ststement,5FCÇRcdat32539110(adoPting47C.F.R.$ltZ-foap-¡ty
pr"f¡'Ulii"" rÁ,rUï ân¿l mâtêriål omi$sions to ãpplicanS, licensees, and permittees in all radio
se ices). "¡õrepresotrtâtions

t6
+l u.s.c. $ so¡(b).
ú January l, 2002, is the beginning of the fust calendar yeor in which the rovêfluos of MCILM's disclosabie i¡Lterest
with the MC/LM
holde¡s were to be co6idered iD d¿texaining MgIÀ4's dos¡gnât¿d ontity eiigibility in conjunction
Application.

lE ,MariTEU' mea¡s Meri'IEL, Jnc, and/or any ofits subsidiaries.


For purposcs ofthis and all folloving questions,
AuGf-¿2.-2009 05:58 At4 Ielesourus 5LOA4L¿¿:¿6

Ma¡iTEL, I¡c.
fßfter of Inquiry re Donsld R. DePdost

2. State wheùer Mr. DeP¡iest ever served ås a dirêctor' offrcer' ol emÞloyee of


MariTEL. If Mr, DePriest formerly held one or more of such positions in MariTEL,
but no longer does, stlte when the periotl in which he held dre positiott(s) ended'
3. StÃtË whethor Mr. DeP¡iest eve¡ held or Ëxercised del¿cta contoi of MariTÊL by
any üeans during thË relevsnt pedod. If so, describe the naturê of that conlrol, and
ho',Y it was obtained,
4, If you betieve tJrat Mr. DeP¡iest did control MariTEL, èxplain, to the best of your,
knowledge anrl belief, why and how MC/fÀ4 coüld ririve st the conclusion ùat Mr'
DePriÊst did not coûEÒl MariTEL.

We heteby direct MariTEL, pursuant to Sections 308(b) ard 403 of the Act'¡e to Jespond in
wriring üd under ôath, separately antl fuIly, to each of the foregoing requests within 30 business days
from íhe dute of this lot¿är., tl,i¡. Smirlr may provide any additional information thât he believÊs is
relevant to this üûâttêr. Thè IDstuctions for responiling to this letter a¡e contained in the Attæhment
hereto. Nf¡. Smith's responso shall be dirccted to:

Jefftey Tobiæ, Esq.


MobilitY Division
Wireloss Telecommunication Bureau
445 t2ù SheeE S.Tv.
lYaslrington, D.C. 20554

Il you have any qriestions rolating to this frfttter, pleÉ$ê contact Mr, Tobias at (20?) 418'1617 or
iefflqÞEq-@fcÊsqv.

Mr. Smith is atlvised that 1001 and section 1.17 of the co¡ômission's Ru]es, 47
18 u.s.c. $
to
c.F.R. ê 1.1?, prohibit misrepresentations and/or wìllful omissious of mateúal façts in response
Commission inquiries.

Sincerely,

&"fA-
Deputy Chief, Mobility Divísiôn
Wireless Telecommunications Burcau

te
4? u.s.c. $$ 308(b), 403.

æ
wo arc conremporsneously rnailing similar letters of inquiry under secdon 308(b) to MC/lì4 and to Mr' DePriest
Aug-ZZ-¿Oog 05r58 AM telesourus 510A41¿¿¿6

M$iTEL, Itrc.
LettÊr of I¡quiry re Doflsld R. Dekiest

cc: Maritifie Corûüüications/La¡d Mobile, LlÆ


206 North 8th Sheet
Columbus, MS 39701
ATTN: Saûdra M. DêPriest

Dennis C. Brown, Esq.


8124 CookË CoüÇ Suito 201
Mâüarsåß, VA 2'0109-7406

Donald R. DePriest
206 North 8th Stre€t
Columbus, MS 39701

Wireless hoperdes of Virginiq Inc,


1555 King StrÊet - Suite 500
Alexadria, VÄ 22314
ATTN: Don8ld R. DçPriest

Waneu Havets
2649 Benvenue Ave.- Suites 2-6
Berkeley, CA 94704
Auq-22-2OO9 05:59 AM Te.Iesqurus 5108412226 7 /7

MsriTEL, Inc.
Letter of Itrquiry re Donald R. DePríest

ÄTTACHMEI.IT

Instruclions

or documents responsive
RequestlOr Confidendal Treatmen| lf MariTEL requests't¡at sny information
io inis Urrnr ¡e treatø i.ü a conlidertiåI nâúnèr, it sbâIl submit, âlorg with åIl tesponsive i¡fotmation and
with of tllê Ccmmission's Rilleô,47 C.F.R $ 0.459'
documents, a statement in accordance Secdon 0.459
Ilequests for coDfidètrtial teatñe¡t tuust coûply with t¡e fêquifeÊetts of Sectiol 0.459, ifcludfuìg thê

staridards of specificity mandated by Section 0459(b). Accordingly, "blankef' requests for


confidentiality of a large set of docúments äfe ùûac4eptâble. Fûrsuânt to Se4tion 0.459(c)' we wül not
consider requests that ão not comPly with fhe requirements of Section 0459'

privilege, it
Claìms oJ Prìvilege. If MariTEL withholds aûy ínfo(mation or docüDents under claim of
shaÍ suumit, toeerhér wfth âny clâim of privilege, a schedr:Ie of thg items v\tithIeld th states,
"to
inãini¿ooUy'* such itlm: the nrimbereã inguiry to which each iiem rësPonds ând thE type,,title,
"ach aII
specinc suu¡ect maner ând dste of the item; the names, *ddresses, Positions' and arganizatio¡s of
a:uthors and"recipients of thc item; and the specific ground(s) for ctaiming that the item is privileged.

Format ofResponses- The response must be consistent with the forrûat of the questions askcd.

Methnd of producitzg Documents. Each requested documeûÌ, as define(i herein, shalt be submiited in
its
Ë* *li
if a portion of that docuñent is responsive to an inquiry made herein. This mea¡rs that
"otit.ty,
tfie dorument shall notie edited, cut, or exÊtfiged, ând shâll include a]l appendices, tables, or other. _

Jtachments, and all othe¡ doc.uments refened to in tle document or attachments.


All ì dfieû materiâls
o""u*-y to on¿""tand any docufûèût rcspotsive tÔ these inquides must also be submitted'

Identffication of Dorj¿rfl¿nt!. For each document or statement submitted in respanse to the inquiries - -
and_ identify thc person(s)
stated in flte coïer letter, iudicate, by number, to which iaquiry it is responsive
date on which lt wäs
from whose files the docuúeut wås fetrieved. If any document is not dsted, state flle
prêpâfed. If a¡y document does not idetìtify its author(s) or recipien(s), state, if lflown, the name(s)
of
it u'*¡o(t) oi*apient(s). The Licensêe mu$ identify with reasonable specificity all documents
provided in responsê to these i.úqtriries.
L/9
Auq-22-2O09 05:46 AM Telesourus 5LO84t22?'6

Federal Communications Commission


Washington, D.C.20554

August 18, 2009

VIA gERflFIEÞ MAII, - RETURN RECIPT REOTIF"STED

Ma¡ìtime Communicationsllard Mobile' LLC


206 North 8th SEeÊt
Columbus, MS 39701
ATTN; Sandra M. DePriest

Dennis C. Brown, Esq.


8124 Cooke Court, Suite 201
Manassas VA 20109-7406

Re: FCC Files Nos. 0002303355,0003 463gg8,l[tr/347044'l, 0003470497, 00ö3470527,


0003470576, 0003470583, 0003470s93, 0003470602. 00034?0608' 0003470613

Dear Ms. DePriest and Mr. Erown:

T]p \ìViroless Tolçcommunicatious Bu¡eau of the Ferleralcofifluûicâtíons commission is


inve,srigâüng cômpliance by Maritime Communications/l,and Mobile, LLC OfCiLM)
with Sectiotls i'17
âccûâte information to fie
an¿ t.6î5 otîile Cômmission's Ruiest relatisg ro p¡oviding firtthftf ând
Cåm¡¡s.ion. Specifically, æ described more fuþ below. the Commission has received conflicting
inforrnation from MariTEL, hrc, and its subsidiaríes (lvfariTBl) and MC/LM regardirg the involvement
oi tør. Oon¿a n. nepriest (Mr. Delrriest) with MarilEL prior to the consummation of a recent
trunsaction. The Commission alsq has r;eived conflícting information regatding the involvement ofMr'
DêPdest with MC/LM and othe¡ entities'

Mr. DePfiest hâs beeû deemed to have a contolling intefest in Maritime MC/LM æ the husband
of Sanclra DePriest (Ms. DePriest). As you know, MC/LM, i¡ its Prosecutiou of its application for
new
bidder in
Automared Ma¡itime Telecommunicatións system (AMTS) licenses for which it wæ the high
ÈCC Auction No. 61 (MglI.ì\{ Application)," hæ repeaædly reprcsented in pleadings and othor frlings
-úa¡iTEL to the
thst Mr, DePriesr did not control at any relevart period. MâriTBL itseu rePresented
ho*"u"r, in kmsfer of control appiications it filed in Juue 2008 fo¡ the express purpose of
"ànt*y,
seekinË êommission äuthoTity to divest Mi, ÞePriest of connol of MariTEL MatiTEL TC
Applications).3

Alrhough both MC/LM and MariTEL subsetlueEtly filed pleadings addressing this discrePânc_y:
or not Ml.
the existing recõrd is insufficiont to permit us to reach I defiÌlitive determì¡aûon as to whether
provide us
DePriest hãd rxercised de jure or dlfacfo cÖnhol of MûiTEL. Nor does the current record
matcrial (and litigated)
with a sufficicnt basis for âetermining why ineccurâte information that bears on a

issue with respect to both applicationi apparently was submitted in either t¡e M(YLM
Application or tbe

' 47 C.F.R 0å 1.17, 1.65.


(l\4ClLM Applicadon)'
FCC pite No. 0002303355 (frlod ScFt 7, 2005, amonrlcd .{ug. 21' ?006)
2

0003470593'
3
FCC FileNos. 0003 463998,0003410441,0003470497,0003470527, 0003470576.0003470583'
0003470602,0003470608, 00034?06I3 (collectivelv, MariTEL TC A'pplicatÍons)'
A¡:g-22-2OQ9 05r47 AM Telesourus 5IO84LZ??'6 2/9

Ma¡itirLe Commurúcations/La¡d Mobilc, LLC


Leüer of Inquiry re Donald R. ÞcPricst

MariTEL TC Applications. TVe find, moreover, that the rocoftl i¡ ttrese a¡d otler licensirg proceedings
also reflects potential inconsistencies and inaccu¡acies in the information provided by MC/T,M regarding
Mr. DePriesf s role in MC,/LM a¡d other entities,

Cofficting ReprcscfltatiÒns Re7ardin7 Control of MariTEL

Ms. Depriest has been identified by MqrLM ¡s ils controlti¡g priÉcipal.4 The Mobility Division
(Division), Wireless Telecommunications Bure¿u, deteûni¡ed thät, ùndex tlie spousal affiliation rule'' Mr'
DePriest wä5 requircd to be listed âs a dÍsclôsàble interest holder for the putpose of determining. . _
MC/LM'S eliCibility for bidding credits aE â design4ted entity, inespective of whâtèver actuäl role lvfi.
Depriest ptay;d in ívfc[Mj TTe MC/LM Application wæ ameuded on August 21, 2006, to include the
gross revenues of Mt. DePriesr in MC/LM's designatetl entity showing in keeping w¡th the Divisiod's
ãetermi¡ation. In the arnendment, MC/LM teprescnte d, inter alìa, thatw. DePriest 'iconnols American
Nonwovens Corporation (ANC)" ard that "ANC is the only revenue producing entity that Don owns or
coütrols.,'7 In response to a pteading filcd by Wanen Havens on September 6, 2006," MC/LM expressly
denied that Mr, DcPriest owned or cotrkôlled MariTÊL, and stated that wbile Mr. DePriest controlled
MCT l¡vesro¡s, L.P., which held stock in MadTEL, control of MæiTEL was instead vested in'Americau
Tower,Inc.9

on June MaliTEL fìled the ren MariTBL TC applications, one for Ma¡iTEL itself aud
12, 2008,
one fo¡ each of nine MariTEL subsidiæies holding one maritime Vi{F Public Coast st¿tion license apiece.
The MæiTEL TC Applioations eech included an i<leudcal, onê-page ðúibit dêsoribìng the fansactÌon,
which st¡ted that "côñtrol ot l¡a¡ngL ... will pass frorn Donald R. DePriest and MCT lnvestors, L.P. tÒ

d
S¿¿ FCC File No. 000230246?, ExhÍbit - Bxplanation ofOwncrship (frled Sept' 6, 2005)'
5
+z c.f.n $ 1.2110(cXjXüiXA). The spousal affiliarion rule Fovides that, for purposes of identi$iDg disclosÊblo_
intçrest holdërs iu dçmonstating an applicant'S oligibility for dèsignated entity bcneflts, "[b]odr spouses ue
deemcd
to own of contol or have the po-wcr m cOntfol intsfe-Sts Owlled or controlled by either of thefi, urùess drey 0re

subject to a legal seporatioù recognizcd by  cou$ of competentiurisdiction in the united ststes."


ú
Se¿Maritime Communicadons/Land MobiluLLÇ, Order,llFÇC Rcd 13?35 (W1B MD 2006), af'd, O èton
nicits¡¿eration,nncc Rcd 4zB0 (wTE MD zû7\, recott and review pending. Although Mc¡Àf irlitially failcd
ta list Mr. DePriest tts a disclosable intercst iroklor, and argued that the spousal afûliation rule was either
infficaute or stoutc be waived iu rlús a¡se beoausc lvf¡. ÐcF¡ic¡t and his wife led "separate no¡gmic liyesi-$e -
Diiiiion wæ unpersuaded by either argument, md dercrmincd drat úo grc$s rÊvônues of Mr. ÐePriest and afüliated
onririss should b; irÇtuded in assessir! MCIM's designatcd cntity cligibil¡ty. ld. ât 13?38.401111 5-8,
7
See MCTLM Application, Disclosable Intçrcst Holders Amendment at i (filed Aug' 21
'
2006)'

Jee War¡en C. Havens Petitíon for Rcconsidoration [of Maritìme Cornntunications/Land Mobile LLC,
s Ordsr' 21
FCÇ Rcd 8?94 (!VTB PSCID 2006)1, flrled SeFt 6' 2006,

e
,S¿¿ Maritime Comnunications/Land Mobile LLC Opposition to Petition for Reconsideration, flled Sept. 18, 2006
çtrac/I-M opposltion). MC/LM oxplaincrt tlat
'MCT Iavestors, L.P., which is connolled by Don De.Priast, holds
ìont*on stoit in l,tititrl, Inc. Mc;I Investors, L.P. does noÈ control Msritel, Inc.;Amctican Tower, Inc. controls
as theholders of
¡4aritcl,Inc,, pursuant to a shareholder agreement' Tbis a$eement providcs AficricÁn Towc¡,Inc
oi i¡r.o*mon srock cquivale-nt6 with the pow;r to elect a simple majority of theåoqrll of diretto¡s of
".qþri,yinc., sub¡ect to the co¡sent of ú¡s Commissioì. ifrequired. Because conúol of Mæitc1, Inc. resides in tho
Maritel,
hands oîAnr¿¡icãn Tower, Inc', Maritel, Inc. is not an afEliate ofMC/LM " Id sl 10'
(In the samc pleading'
pleading, drat Mr. DePricst
MC/LIvt did acknowledge for the first time, in response to allegations in art opposition -
csntrollad, ínter alíø, ¡iireless Froperties ofvirginia, tnc., wtrlch it represcnted had no revenues since 1999, id' at 9i
period, i¿ at 8-9; snd
sovcfål oúcr entiti6$ which if reprùented had nJrevenues rluri[g the lelevant üllee-yeü -
ð¡r.ir*" Bro"¿.rsting Co., Btaìo Communications, Inc., and Colden Triangle Radio,Inc., whichjt represented tô
håvc åg8regâto gfoss rovenues ofno consequence t0 MÇ/]-M's designated eDtity 6t8tus, ¡d. ¿t l0-11.)
Auq-22-2009 O5:47 AM Telesourus 5fa84LZ2'26 3/9

Msritims Communications/I¡nd Mobile, LLC


LeÌter of Inqúry rB DÖnald R. DePriest

rhe shareholders of M..riTEL as a group. MJ. DePriést häs controlled MffiTEL tlìfough a coülhâtion of
dir€ct invBstrnent and his role as Geueral Pa¡trer of MCT Investors, L.F."to (This representation is
substâltially consistent with informqtion tr rovided by MadTEL in ea¡lier FCC Form 602 ownership
disclosure frlings, except tllat the Foû.[ 602 filirgs indicated, conectly æ it no\4, åppears, that Madcom
Development Corporation, uot Mr. DePriest, was the geneÉl paÍ.ner of MCT fnvestors, L'P', and Mr'
DePriest connolled Medcom Development Corporâtiou.")

MC/LM and MåfiTEL thus presented the Comnissio 1Ã,ith ;¡-ftictilg representations as to
whether M¡. DeP¡iest had controlled MariTBL. Both MC/LM a¡d Ma¡iTEL subsequelìtly filed pteadings
discussing this cliscrepeürcy in thèir repreËentations, but tltis discussiol is lot âdequatÞ for the
Commission to ascertain wlúch representâtion is accurate ald which representafion is not sccurste. In
facr, both MC/LM|2 and Ma¡iTBLl3 con nued tô sta¡d by their e¡¡lier reptese[tations, and shed lítde
light on wl¡y they believe the ôther pârty is mistaken.

r0
Sse Exhibit to MariTEL TC Appticarìons (MariTEL TC Exhibit), TIre MuriTEL TC Exhibit
turthcr cxPlâired,
..The êvent of tlre majority of úe åssots of MCT
that will cause ttle uansfer of cônúol is thê roluntary distsibution
Invo$tors, L.F, to its ?4 coûstituerit inves¡ôrs. Ttris disr¡ibution will substaùtially dílute the owne-rslúp intarcst of
MCT Inv¿stors, LP. !o ãpproximâtely two percênt, ånd Will dccrease Mr. DePriest's ownership to
interest _

approximatoly à4.24% (inctuaing tUe remaining stake of McT Invcstors, LP., as Mr. DeP¡iest shall remni¡ Genersl
Pätnm of rlai ontity). As a rcsuÌt of the disrribution, no singlo ontrty will control MariTBL'" Id'
u Ifl FCC Foml 602 ropofts tltat vi,ere ñled on Merch 13, 2001, ánd appuently remained cunent up until the ü$e thc
MsriTEL Eânsf¿¡ ofcont¡ol was c¡nsum¡rated ir 2008, MuiTEL indicäted lhat MCT Investors, L.P. held 58.37o of
MÐfiTËUsissuedändoutstatrdiugvothgstock(8nd26.1%ofâ[stock,votingandlon-voting),thRtMedcem.
DePr¡est rÃ'gs the sol:
ÐeVelOpment COriroration was thã sole general páftnoJ Of MCT InvestOrS,_L.P., and th¿tt I!ft.
st¡arcno't¿or o¡ MË¿Com Developmeut õorporation. ,9ee, ¿.g., FCc fi1ë No. 0002080704 (fi1çd Ma¡. 13, 2001). The
MariTEL Forrn 602 also indicated that Mr. DeP¡iest held an additional 8.9% of the voting stock in his own name'
srid thât Aflcricåfl Towor Corporation held 17.17o ofMariTEl's voliDg stock
l2 Ou July 31, 200g, for cxample, MÇ/LM filecl a pleading irr which it glsfftcd that MariTFL was simply inconoct in
!o
represenúng tlrar it iurt bccn càtoned by Mr, DtPdest, aDd said dlat MadTEL's onot in úis rêgâ¡d 'hlPçars
ilán" riumti.U toto un ei:ror in Ma¡iTËLis information and from a difference in tnethodolog¡r botwcen MariTEL
ãna pe Priest"" Uut offererl littJe explanarion as to the nature of that suggEsted ûìetbodological diffcrcncc.
,gee

LLC, Opposition to supplenent to Petidon for Reconsidcradon Rogarding


t luritim" Corrunonications/Lard À4-obilc
Ñew Facts, flled July 31, 2008, at 3-4i s¿c also rdãt + n'l ("De ?riÞst believes dlåt MsriTBL fiåy hâvc
courlÉd
,oln" non-uoting .to"k toìvåfd control, thus creating a difference between MsÌiTBL snd Do Priest ànd botween

M¡riTE¿ and 5iir¿less propcrrios ofvirginia, Inc.'i. ln the next sente¡ce, moteovm, MCyL\4 indicåted th¿t the
ollurted-o netlodologiaal àiffarence woild not suffice to explain why MariTBL concludcd that it had been under
Mr. DePdest's contfol becauso "ovon if De Friesl had used MæiTBL's medrodology, Dc Priost would nolcontrol
MariTEL u|lder the Com.rnission's Rulæ which are applicable to the instml matrcr." Id. at 4, MC/lÀ4 also
argued,
ptovônted
ínter alia, rhú if\ft. DePriest acrually conuollecl MariTgL but warted to conc€8l thst fac! he
would lìåvc
irre tiing lvfr¡riral TC App)icarions, ;d at 3 ; tbat Mr, Depriest treithel "elrdo$els] Dor supportlsl"
ot the
i,iu¡rÉi'r o*n*rirlp reporr, d.; 4 n.zi âfld úat M(yLM stands by its earlie¡ statement that Americon Towe¡ Inc'
ltrtifg p"ituant tó a shareholder agrcemcnt, Ìd at 5. MCIT-M also argued that neithçI MC/LM uoI MI.
"å"tt"fr
OoÞ¡iest f,ad any moriye to deceire the Commission regarding Mr. DcItissf$ fôls in MadTEL because athibution
of Ma¡iTEL's rsverues to MC/LM rvould not h¿rye affe4æd MC/IÀf's eligibility for tho smail businoss bidding
cradit thåt il received iu Auction No.61. Id.

a pleading on July 31, 2008, in which itreaffirmed its ea¡üe¡ rcpresö tttion thatjt
13 l¡gd
MariTEL tikewíse filed
De?rlcsr rlrough Mr, DeÞriesfs owtrership of58% of MariTEL's coEunon stock, dirccdy
been controlled by lr4r.
anrlrfuougtrhisoïnershipofMCTInvestors,L.P.,SeeOppositionofMtuiTBLInc.,filedluly3l'2008,åt2.
Aug-22-2009 05:48 AM Telesourus 5108412226 4/9

Maririae Cosmunicåtions/Land Mobile, LLC


Letter of hquiry rc Dooald R, De.Friest

Based on tie existing reco¡d, we are umble to determine r¡rhet¡er or not Mr. DePriest exerciséd
de jure or de faAo canfiol of MariTli.ra We have conhadictory statements on thê ñattêr, ônd dn
iuaUiUty at tiris;uucture to determiue precisely why therè is a conflict on this poiut, why onc of the pæties
evidenúy proviáed insccurate iüforrdãdon on tlis maierial issuc to the Coñmission, ard whether dre
submissioi of such i¡accurate information arise.s to thè level of misrepresentation or lack of candor under
the Commission's Character Qualificatiofls Polièy.ri We the¡efo¡e d¡rect MC/LM to provide additional
information regarding this fnaÍer, as specified below.

Coffictíng Representatìow Regaruling Mr' DePriest's RoIe ìn MClill


As norcd above, MCf-M dìd not initially include Mf. Dehisst ûs a disclosable i¡terest holder in
MCILM for designated entity eligibility purposes, anti MC/LM has repeatedþ statelj1 llinSs.related to
tlre MC/LM Apf,lication ihâ; Ivfr. DePriest has not playsd ãny significânt fole itr MC/LM. In the FCC
Fonn 602Iiled i¡ conjunction witlt tho MC/LM Application, MOLM stated'

Oue hundred percent of tho tnembership i¡terests in Ma¡itime Ço¡¡munications/Land


Mobíle, I,LC a¡e owned by S/RJW Partnership, L.P' The general partrer in S/ßJW
Partnershþ, L.P. is Çommunications Investments, Inc. One hundred petceût of the shûfes in
Communiõadons l¡vestr'etrts, Iuc. are a*ned by Sandra M. Del¡riest. One hundred percent
of the p¿rtnÉrship shares in S/RIW Pârtnership, L.P. re owned by Sandra M' DePrìest' .
Sandta M. Depriest is the sole offrcer, director ancl key management pe.rsonnel of Ma¡itime
Coomunicatious/Land Mobile, LLC. Sa¡dra M. DeFriest is the solË key ma¡¡agoment
personnÉl of s/RIw Psfttrership, L,P. Sandra M. DePriest is the sole officef, directol and
k"y management peßomèl of ðommunications Investments, I¡c.16

la
In a plca<ling in ptoc€€ding, Ms.riTËL årguçd that, coflfary tolh€ âsserdons in â petitiori tA dsny,
a sepatatË
,,[r]horä
is no ännoversy tegìrOing whi owns ând ctnEols MadTEL," and th , the MariTEL lt
Applications and
trirtit¡t ,. fCC fo-,
åozi¡turr-nt n*ur*re and complcto ownership Ínformation regarding MariTBL and its _ - -
*¡.i¿¡oi*," søø oppositiou of MariTEL, Ilc. lto PetiLion þ Deny filed by AMTS Consoltiullt LLC ¿t aL taFCC
Fite Nos. 0003516654 0003516656, 0003534598, 000353460?, 00m534?63, 0003534766, 0003534767'
0003534768, 000353508fl, Ëled sept 5, 2008, åt 2, Elên if the latter statenent legsIdiflg the tfuthtulness of_
MariTEL's earlier filings ii ultimately shown to bo l.rlre, we believe that tlle contadictory reprascnntions made by
MOLM an4 MariTEL iave indeed gà'erated â cenkoversy neoessifirting ñuther Cornmission ¡nquùy.
see Polícy Regarding characþr quñtilicatiorß in Broadcast Licensing, Amendment of Rules ofBroadcesr
15

practicc sn(i P¡oced$re Relating to Written ResponsÉs to Cofû¡nìssion Inquiiies ald the Maldng of
Misfofrfo.$ênt4tions to the Comiùssion by Permineos snd LicenS ëèi, Report, Qrder and Polic! Statenent, 102
F.c.c: 2d 1179, 1210-l i Sl 60-61 (t986), Memorandum 2piníon and' Qrder,l FcÇ Rcd 421 (1986); Policy
Regarding ChÊfâcter Quaiifications in groadcast Licensing, Alnorr(1lllont ofPart 1, the Rules of P¡actice
and
pro-cedurã, Relating to-'lvritton RêSponses to Commission Inquiries ald tho Making of Mi$representations to the
Çonmission by Ap-plicantS, Fermitiees, and Licensees, 8nd rlìc Roporting of Information Regalding ChalacÞr
quaUfrcadons, poþ Stutument a d Order,s FCC Rcd 3252 (1990) (1990 Çharauer Polic! Statem¿fi)'
ùemo,andum Qpiníon and order,1BÇcRcd 3448 (1991)' Memorandum opinion and order'1 ßcc Rcd 6564
(1ggz). Thê Co;mission applies its brondcûsr chå¡åctcr stândard.s to applicant' and licensees in the odtff radio
isrvic'os. See i,g., 19gO Ciaracter
pol¡ty Sta¡eflÊnt,1¡.CC Rcd at 3253 J[ 10 (adopting 4? C¡t.p. g 1.17.¡6
T.Ply
protribition agai;si rniuepresentations anà material omisSiOns to applicants, licensees, ard perminees in sll Tsdio
services).

,!ee FCC Fito No. 0002302467, Exbibit - Explauation of Ownorship (filed Sept. 6, 2005). We note tliat
rd Ùe_

lâûguago employed by MÇ/Llvf suggess that, unlike MCff-lvl and communicalions Investments, JIlc'' S/I{IW
p,rr-ht¿Ãhip, L.p., hud offcers and/or direotors in addition to l"{s. D¿P¡iest. wo also note that MC/LM'E
represcnÞìi; th;tMs. DePriest væ the only officer or <lirecor qf Communications Investments, Itìc conflicts with
aôute ofMississippi Secretary of St¿te 2005 Corporae An-ousl Raport for Çúmmur¡ications Invesfn'lents, Inc.,
appatently signcd by Mr. Depriæt (on ¡ebruary 16, 2005, less than sevon monl.hs befo¡e the filing of the
MC/LIvf
5/9
AuEf-22-2009 O5:49 AM Telesourus 5108412226

Ms¡itime Communications/Land Mobilo, I,LC


Lcner of Inquiry re Donald R. DePriest

In amending tho MC/LM Applicatior ro includo Mr, DePriest as a discioÉâblÉ interest holder bæed on the
Division's ðetermination tlì;¡Mr, DePriest's ítrclüsior ¿s suoh is ma¡dated by the spousâl affiliâtion mle,
MCYLM reiterated thst 'Ðon hâs no ownership interest in an<I is teither an offrcer nor a director of
MCiLM,'r7

Qn September 22, 2006, however, Wirolqss PropeftiÉs of Virginia. Ir¡c' (WPÐ filed two
flt¡úIìcatíons tdåssim Broadbsnd Radio Service a¡d Edrrcational Broadband Service license's to Nextel.-
i;ä¡',ni;ü"i;iîilã-"fi.it-ryrt. o*tiest is tistÉd as the I00Zo owner of lVÞV in its FÇc Form 602,'e
aid signea the applicationi qn behslf of WPV, under the title "Officer," In tesponse to a petitiou_to_deny
ttr"se ãppfioutioni, WPV clåimed rhat Sa¡dra DePnest owned i00% of MCILM and conholled MC/LM,
Uut alsð sete¿ ttrai 'Don DePtiest is an officel ard dirêctor of MC/Ì-M. ,. ."'?o

Bæed on the conuadiótÖry statemÞnts on th9 rûatter if, the existing record" we aIÕ uuable to
determine whether o¡ not Mr. DePriost is ot was ân officer and/or director of MC/LM. There also
remahs contiauing uncertainty âs to whether Mr. DePriest is or was an offliëer ¿nd/or director of S/RIW
Parmership. L,P., är Communications Investments, Ilc.z¡ We ûotÞ, moreover, thât if Mr. DePriest wâs
indeed an officer or directÕr of MC/LM (or S/RIW Pârtnership, L.P. oI Cotnmulications lrvestftênts,
Inc.), it caìIs into question the represenntions by MQILM an¿t Mry that Mf ' DePriest did not exercise
conËol over MC/¿M. We beüeve it necessary to inquire further i¡to this matte¡. lve t}Blefore direct you
üô provide additional infonnation regarding this matter, as specífied below.

Reaue s ß þr Infpnn¿tiott

As explaiaed above, we have determined that additional informæíon is reqrrired to assist the
Cqmmission i; resolving the ìssues that have arisen reguding tlre roles played tV Ur' n9Uti91t!. - .
MariTEL, MC./LM, ¿¡d-other entities. MCILM is ac-cordingly directed, pursuaf¡t to section 308(b) of tìe
CommuüiÇatioDs Act of 1934 as arûended (the Act),'?? to respond to the following requests for
information, ø¡rl to provide availablé doculnontation suppofing its reçonses. unless otherwise

as. the
Application) as Presidenr, tisri¡lg lvff. ÐÊF est a5 also a dil€ctof of the company, md liÊting Mr- ÐePriest
.J'.porate Sá"r"t*y tut nãt a rtirlcctor. 5¿ø 11¡ancn C. Havens et ¿1., Petition to Dcny [the MüLM Application],
lled Nov. 14, 2005, at Exlúbit 1, Document4'
17
,See MCILM Applicatíon. Disclosable itrterest lIolde¡s Amendment at I (filed Aug' 2l ' ?006)'
:8
FCC File Nos. 00027 55676,0002695270.
re
Fiìe No. 0002792309 (filed Ocr.22,ZA0()). In this Form 602, WPV represents' infer all¿' that Mr.
See FCC
DeP¡iest hotds only a 12.137¿ irtcrest in MadTEL.
20
Søe Wireless properties of Virgini4 Inc,, opposition [to Petition to Deny, and in thc alter¡raLive, Section I '41
IntormJnequest tå Dismiss or ñcny, filed OiL tt, ZOO6, Uy Wutren C. Havensl, filcdOct. 23, 2006, ât 3 (emphasis
added).
2r
Unde¡ Section 1.2110(c)(2)(þ of the Commissiou's Rules,47 C.F R $ 1.2110(cX2XF), "[oifl:lcers ard directors
and di¡ectors of an
6f rhe applicant shall be considerçd to have a oonholling intÉtest in tho applicant [and] offrcers
ttt"t otr licensee or applicant shslÌ be coßidered [0 þavo a cOntrolling inFrest in the liçerlsE oI
,r,tiLy u
applicanl" "ont

æ
4? u.s.c. $ 3o8o).
6/9
Auç'-22-2009 05:49 AM Telesourus 510A4122?6

Mâritime Conrmunications/Land Mobilc, LLC


Lettcr oflnquiry re Donúld R. DePriest

indicated, the periorl of tirne covcterJ by these irgr.tiries is January I, 2002, to the Ptesent (fle ¡ËlevaDt
pËriod)j

1. Identify ånd de'süibe all businass entities, of whatever foffi, that havo beeÉ
contolied by Mr. Depriesr during rhe relevant period. For pùfposes of_ftis qrestion,
Mr. Depriesi should be deemed tã have conuolled arry entity in which he held a
served as a
50'070 or more ownenhip intÊtest' or se ed as a difectü or officer' or
geneml psrtnet, or exercísed defarfa contol in any way at any time during the
relevant Period.
2. State whether all ofthe intelests held by Mr' DePriËst thât should have been
werê
disclosed i! the MC¿M Application, æ amended, FCÇ File No' 0002303355'
disclosedi¡theMC/IMappucation.IdentifyanyintefestsaÍdentitiesthatshÖuld
have beon disclosecl in ttre üclt M application as ataibutalle to Mr. DePfiest) but
wele not so disclosêd:4 State thÞ leason \r'hy g8ch such ontity was uot disclosed in
ùe MC/LM Applícation, For each such entity, except tlose entities that were -
requiredtobe.disclosedonlyunde.r4TC.FJ{.$1.21l2(bxtXii)andnootlte¡rulq
provide its alnual gross revãnues for each of the ùree calendâr years 2002' 2003' and
àoc¡'!

;""-" t, ,t*, t, ," rhe fi'st cslendar yesr in whith thc rsvsnuês of Mc/LM's disclosable interest
"-1"-"*t
hoklors wora to be considerãd in rútermÍning MC/IM's tlesignatcil onlity oligibility in tonjunclion with the MSLM
AppliostiotL

I Since Àruricsll Nolwovens COrpOraLiOn Was adrled to the application in the August
21,2006, s.ne-Idment it .
in relevaut pleadings filcd
neeJ not Ue tiste¿ il resporso to thii çostion. Bæed on MC/Lù'S own rcllesentatioDs
ii .h" løøfuf Application, wc wouldc Pcôt thË entities listed h rcsPanse to tlút 1"":l3l l:l""I!,t*
"upp"riof Inc.' Uo¡6e¡
¡ui¡ii:ium, Wi¡eless proper{ies ofVirglnia, 6c., Chârisntâ Broadca.sting Co., Bravo Conmunication6,
well ôther comPanies-
mu"J" ifu¿t", ¡rr., Midcom Develõpment Corporation, and MCT Invêstors' L.P,, âÉ a$ tl¡e
MC/LM
*irictitt u ¡ttC¡i¡¡ OppositÍon acknovledged wore undm Mr' DoPri¿,st'$ ôort{ol but had no revenues' S¿s
rüJG Co" Inc" Cellular and Broadcast
opprriti." ti s+ ("tË.wlerlging Mr. DeÞriæt's conEol of Telephone
Cãi,-uniootionr, ioo., peneloie õorporatiob, Scotl$td Ho$e, Inc., Wüeless Properties, Inc., ïVireless
Prop,erties -
nã.t-It"" ùli.f;.t Properties - Wcst, Inc,, Wireloss Properties - Upper MdwesÇ Inc'' and Tlansition Funding'.
-s"i Mqtù r¡",iã aho irlentifo any other entities tnat Ivtc¿_lvt¡ow believes should have beer repo!rcd in
il|.j. C.F.R. 47
úe [4C/LM Applicârion porsu.nt to cfutiónr t.gtg, t,ztro, oo¿ t.2112 of tle commission's Rules,
defining tho typos ôf¿ntitie$ ro bê disclosed
$$ 1.919, 1.2ú-0, 1.2112' .gee, in particular,4? C.FJ- $ 1'2110(c)(5),
enriry
i.2112OX1Xü), requiring desiguated
rtf,U*t . of pursons dccmcd ro Jontrol an apptican! and 4?_C.Fß. $
"i FCC license, in w¡ioh any contfolling i¡1t*ost of
applicanæ fo diiclose,.an' fCC""goiäÞd ;ntiby or applicant fo_r an
geater ïtotal of 10 pere,ent or more of ary clsss of stock, wåff8nt$,
tiå applicant owns u l0 percent or inte¡åst o¡

options or debt securitiet."

ã We tote entity ownership disclosure


that drc Commission's Rules do not proviclc an oxcopLion to r-hs d¿signaæd
se¿ 47 C-F.R. $ 1.2112(b)(1)(iv)' wo
,eqoi*rnouts fo, othefivise disclosÈblÞ entities that have no gross levetrues.
th¿ entities that MC/LM
ooi", *or"ou"r, r¡ot ul¡rough rhe MC/LM Opposition proviåe¿ rovonuo_d¿ta for most of
ani first aoi<nowtc¿gccl as af-frliates of MT. DePri.st in tho MC/LM
o"rittrãê".lit O"rignnted entity showing
òpp"riti*, i, ¿ia ,"ven* dìå for Medcom DevelJpmont Corp' or MCT InvesÙors' L P See MC/Ï-M
"oiprovicle
õõiãritã"'"i s-ir. rricn¡¿ uot ttrat, rlthough ii.dirl not rlisclosc Mr. DcPricst's conrol of Medcom
pãirlop*"nr corp. ,nd MCT Invesion, L.rï *," vc/Iv Applicadon, Mr. Ðo?ricsr 'tonûols MCl lnvsstor$,
""too*lerlged
i.P.orir.sultoftoingowncrofirsicìcralpa,ncr,MctlcombovclopmentCorporatio":'*:YffiYOq!:t]ti"" Developmenf
io Sunolemental pFR ,ìotc 13, suprã at 4. We accordingly expect that the revenue data for Medcorn
in to thís request for
ö"*åfi;il i;êi i^ì*ioir, i.n.-*nf tê amons the i;form;tion provided response

information.
7 /9
Auq-22-2009 05:50 AM Telesourus 5108412226

Maritiûe Co¡Drtrulricatious,tl-and Mobilq LLC


Leter of Inquiry re Donald R. DePriest

J. Desc¡ibe the exænt â¡d natuÊ of Mr' DePriæt's ownership holdings in MariTBL26
duriag the relevant period. Describe the percentaga of tlte equity in MariTEL held by
Mr. D-eÞriesç arrd tlic form in which that equity whs hèld, e'8.' stocþ preferred stock,
etc. Describe the percentäge of the votisg equity in MariTEL held by Mr. DePrìest'
and the form in which tlratiquity was held. If Mr. DePriest's holdings in MariTEL
fluctuated dudng the relevant period, provide a detailed explanation.
4. Ståte whether ånd when ìi4r. DePriest sver served as a dircotor, officcr, or employee
of M¿riTEL. If Mr. DePriest for¡¡erþ held one or more of such positions il
M¿¡iTEL, but no lolger does, state when the period ir whioh lre held the positiot(s)
e¡ded.
5. Stâte whelher 4r. DePriest ever held or exaciseÅ dc facø control of MariTEL by
any mea.ns during the ïelevant Pedod. If so, desor-rbe the nature Ôf fhat coubol, and
how it was obtaincd.
b. ff MCILM believes a¡other porson or entity (or other persons or entities) held either
d,e facto c:onb:ol ofMariTEl-or de7'urc control of MadTBL, or both,
dr:ring the
relwant period, ídenrify such percon(s) or entity(ies), arrd explain in detail both the
naturê ofthe conttol yóu belieie to have been oxerted by such third Party(içs) and the
foundation for your belief.

If you believe that Mr. DePriest did not contol MariTEL, explain, m the be6t of your
knäwledge and belief, why ald how MæiTEL could anive at the conclusíon úat Mr'
DePriest did coûtrol MùiTÊL.

8. Dcscribe the natue and extent of Mr, DePriest's ownership and role in Maritime
Communicatíons/LandMobileLLC,SÆJIVPartnershíp,L'P.,andCommunications
Invesüueuts, Inc.z? Indicate whether Mr' ¡*¡is51 \'vas authoriT'ed to e ter into
contacts on bellqlf of any or ali of these thrcË enumerated entities' what other
,'tith respect to any or all of the e¡umerated entities'
authority, if any, he possessed
artd whát dutiei' if any' he had in comection with a¡y or all of the enumerated
entities.
g.BxplainwlryMC/LMandwPVmadeconflictingrepresgntstionstegâfdiÎgwhËthex
Mr' DePriest was ¿¡ offrce¡ or director of MC/LM, and with ¡esPËct to the entity that
you believe made a falsc tepresenmdon in this regard, eitlter MCIT'M or WPV'
Lxplail, to the best of your lmowlerlge ancl belíef, why it made such false.
reiresentation, If youÏelieve tlrere is no conflict between the fE)fQsentatiotrs, and
thãt oeither MC/Lil nor WPV was inaccurate in its representations regarding
that
wlìether lvfr. Delrriest w¿.s an offrc¡t or director of MC/Llvf. explain the bæis for
belief.

we hereby direct McyLM, pursuant to sections 308(b) and 403 of the Act,28 to respond iì wfiting
30 busincss drys from the
aud under path, sJparately a¡d fully, to each of the foregoing requests \vithih

of its subsidisfies'
%
For purposos Of this and all following questions, "Il,f$iTEL" mp¡nS MariTEL Inc' and/or any
27 h the subject enlities as di¡cctor, Office¡ partner' Iimited
At minimurn, list any posirions helcl by Mr. DePriest
or emPlovee, and the percentage of equity and voting equity hslcl bv M¡ DePriest
in
ilbùry ;";;*y #btr,
èntity, indicate if Mt.
cacb oirh" sub¡c"r cntities, at any time áuring thã relevaui period. Far.câch sübject
also

DePriest exercísed d¿fdcf, control ôf the Þ ity at any tinro, and providÕ ån cxplsnûtiÔn'
B 4? u.s.c.
$$ 308(b),403.
B/9
Aug-22-20Q9 05:50 AM Telesourus 51084|2226

Mårifiñc Cöfi¡îunications/Land Mobilc, LLC


Lener of Inquiry ro Donald R. DtPriest

to
ilate of this letter.Ð Ms. Dehiest may provide any additional informÂtion t¡at she believes ¡s televa[t
this rE ter. The InsEuctions for respo;ding to thi$lettcf are contåiíed in the Attâcbmeút heÉto. Ms.
DePriæt s esponse shall be dírected to:

Jeffrey Tôbiâs, Esq.


MobilitY Divisìon
Wirëless Telecommunicetion Bureau
445 12ù Street, S.W.
Washirgton, D.C. 20554

Ifyouhavoanyquestionsrelatiagtothisûlllftêr,pleasecontâctN4f.Tobiasflt(202)418.161?or
i ë.ff .tobiâs @fcë. gov.

Ms,ÐePriestisadviscdthatlsU'S'c.ç1001ârdsecdonl.lTofthecoffmission'sRules,47
in rosponse to
C.F.R. S 1,17, prohibit misrepresentations and/or willftrl omissions of material facts
Comnússion inquiries.

SincerelY'
n,tl

'
/+/Ð
¡Ú'"t¿ "'-
Scot Stone
Deputy chiaf, Mobilþ Division
Wireless Telecolûflunícations Bureau

çc: Ðonald R, DöPriest


206 North 8th Steet
Coiurobus, MS 39701

Wireless Propertiæ of Virginia' Inc.


1555 King Street - Suito 500
Alexand¡ia. VA 22314
ATTN: Donald R. DeÞíest

MariTEL, I¡c.
4635 Church Rd, suite 100
Curnmiug, GA 300284084
ATTN: Jason Smith

Russell H' Fox, Esq.


Mintz, Levin, Côhen, Fenis, Glovsky aad Popeo, P'C'
?01 Peunsylvania Ave., NIV - Suite 900
Washing¡on, DC 20004

Wanen llavens
2649 Benvenue Ave. ' Suites 2'6
BerkeleY, CA 94704

308(b) to MaiTEL atrd tÒ MI.


2e
We ale contemporaneously mailing similar letters of inquiry under Section
DoPriaBL
9/9
Auq-22-2OQ9 05:50 AM Telesourus 5LO84|Z2?'6

Mariti:ne Comrnu¡icationVl¡¡d Mobile, LLC


Letter of Ittquiry re Donald R. DePriest

ATTACHMENT

I¡stnrclion¡

Reøuest for confrd.eflt¡alTfeutm¿nt. If MCIIM requests that äl}y inforÍlâtiod or docufûeûß fespoûsive to
ürËffiåîJJ"åi;ã i";";"fiJ";rjr1,ril*, itshal submit, atong with alt responsiv".4_.ry3d:iT9^
Rules' 47 C.F.R. $ 0.459,
ão"om.nt", u ,t*tu*unt in accordnnce with slcfion 0.459 of tl¡e CõmmissÍon's
treatment must cotoply with t¡e reqrrir_ emelts ôf Sectioû 0.459, hcluding the
n"q*r,r iå. ,'blanked' requests for
ild-àr;f "orn¿ential
*"lfi"þ mandated.by Sec'on O.iSg(t ). Accordingiy, to Section 0.459(c), we will not
.à"fi¿"",iuUty u tarþ set of documents are unacòeptable. Pursuênt
"f tÌtat ão not comply with the requirements of Section
oon.idut t"qoutt.
0'459'

CIaûwofFrivÍIege,lfMC/LMwithholdsarryinformatio[oldocumeDtsunderclaimorprivilege,'itshall æ
.oUJ| iäg*., î"ittr any ctaim oiprivilcse, á schedulc of the items uithlìeld that state,s, individually
subject
and the typqritle. specific
to ,"ãr, it"*, the nlmbered iriquilio wni"h """¡ it"m responds
"l"ii and dâtê of the item; rtre namås, áddresses, positious, anrl organiz*tions of all authofs &nd
marÞr
privileged'
r*"ipi"nt oi tft rct; ana ihe specific ground(s) iôr cl¡iming that tlre item is
asked'
Format of Respanses' The ÉsPÖnse rEust be cÖnsistëDt with the fonnat of the guestions

Method of Producîng Documents. Each requested document' as defined herei¡, shall be submitted in its
ä"ì"ãry, å*" ii";rí o portion of tti iotrr.inçiry made ú"
do"uiunt is r"sponsi"e.
and shall include all
l"t"T:-lT:
appendices,
Ï:3t
toÞles, or oürêr.
in" aoóu^rot ,¡uli not be edited, cut, or expunged, .
o.ttachments, and all ott e, ¿oco*"nts .efe,,"d io in the document or attâchments' All written maærials
be submitted'
o""**V ,o oo¿"art"ocl any document responsive to úrese inquifies Éust ålso

IdenfficationofDocwnenß'Foreachdocumentofstâtemetrtsubrúitte<linresporrsetotheinquiries,.
staled in the coyôr letter, inclicate,îy nrriuo, to *lri"r,l"quiry
it is responsive and identify the person(s)
from whose files rh" ¿..u..o, *uiio,iruä. Ir *y is not date¿, ståre úe date.o,' which it was
-iäv oo"umen¡
the name(s) of.
p'r"p*"¿, aå"o*"nt ao", *iiJ.-n-tity its autho(Ð or recipien(Ð, state, if lgrown,
"Ur"åorrt*frt specifcíty all documents provided in
mC¿vI nüsi'id"otify wirù re.sonible
"i-."ipienttsl.
response to these inquiries,
L/9
Aug-22-2OQ9 05:51 AM Telesourus 5LO84I2ZZ6

Federal Cor¡munications Cotl:lission


Washilgton, D.C.20554

August 18, 2009

lTA CERTIFIED MAIL - ßETTJRN RECIPT REOI]ESTE.D

Donald R. DePriest
206 North Stlt Stteet
Columbus, MS 39701

Wirelcss Pto¡nrties of Virghia, Inc.


1555 King Steet - Suite 500
Alexanùi+ VA 22314
ATTN: Donald R. DePriest

Re:FCCFilesNos,0002303355,0003463998,000j470,147,0003470497'0003470527'
0003470576,0003470s83,0003470593,0003470602,0003470608,0003470613

Dea¡ Nfr. DePrìest:

TheWirelessTelecomnrunicationsBureauofthêFedera]cornrnunicationsCor¡missionis
(MariTEL) and Maritime
investigating compliance by MariTEL, Inc, and its subsidiaries
witl t.i? and t'65 ot tne Commission's Rulæ'
Commu¡ications/La"¿ fr,f"Uife, Liõ-tiúðnM sectioos
;iãg ," p,*täi"g *tfrn f *¿ inior*ution to tlt" Çommission' Specifically' as described'
"*tlt"
ãor" ñuv i.lo*, ,i" commissio¡ has receiverl corflicting information reguding
wìether you. wero in
.ont oJ oifr{urifgI-, priorto the of a ¡eceniüansaçtiou' The Commission alsq has
"onsummatiou
,.-""iutU'.""¡li.ti"ginfo.*ation t"g¿tdittg your involvement with MCILM and other entities'

as the husbând of Sândra


You have been deemed to have a contolling interest in MC/LM
oerrriest çtvtì oerriesQ. MCtr-M, I
itsprosecutíoã of its application for new Automated M¡ntime
it wL the¡ieh bidder in FCC Auctiou No. 61
Telecommunicatrou, Svrt"* C¿¡tifsiiic'enses for whictr ,
rhar you did n^ot coDtrol
MðËrüö;rffiõ, ñ;pe;;iry ;.p*seûred in pteadinss and other firnss
io the con*ary, however, in tansfer of
ìiAuinÈL uïiny ,"levant penoã. Vl*íitiL i*"U *preìented sutlroritv to
ir fited in June 2òôt ior tfrq exft'ep eyrpose of seektuìg Commission
"åîiåi^ppU.^iiòr,
divest yoïof conhol of MariTËL (MariTEL TC Applications)"

addressìng this discrepancy'


Altlrougtr both MCTLM a¡d Ma¡iTEL subsequently frled pleadings
determination âs to whether or not y.u
the exisiing recãrd is insuffioient to permit us to reach adefinitive
does the cur¡ent record provide us with a
lrad exerciserl de.¡a ," o, a, ¡orto JoÏioi oi rr¡anrgl-. Nor
on a material (and litigâtÈd) issuÈ
sufficient bâsis fof aeternining wtry inaccurate irformation tlut bea¡s
or the'.
*itïiop..t to Uottt appti"atio-ns apporcnily was submitttd in eìther tle MOLM Applicaüon
proceedings
ùäiel rc nppri.ati"n.. w" Èiä, *oiáver, that rle.ecor¿ i¡ rhese an¿ other Iìcensing

' 4? c.F.R. $$ 1.17, 1.65.


2
File No. 0002303355 (filed Sept T' ?005, amenrlerl Aug'
zI, 2006) (McyLM Application)'
Fcc
00034?05?6, 00034?0583, 00034?0593'
3
FCC File Nos' 0003463998' 0003470447 , ooo347o4g7 ' 00034.t052?,
0ôß4?óäó; ú0tt0608, 0ó03470ó13 (collectivelv, MarirÊL Tc Applications)'
2/9
A¡¿g-22-2QQ9 05:52 AM Telesourus 5|08412'226

Donald R. DePriest
lætær of rnquiry re MC/LM, MariTEi.

by MC/LM regarding
also reflects potendÃl inconsistencies and i¡accuracies in ùe infoÍdåtioû Pfovided
your role in MC/LM snd other efltitiès.

ÇonÍl.iclîd¡ Rep resentatîöfls Re 84rdín g C onü'ol ol MaiTEL

Ms'DePriesthasbeenidentifiedbyMC/LMâsitscoDfrollingpdncipal.4TlleMobilityDivi$ol
rffireless Telecommunicatio¡s BurËau' determined t¡Ût, urder the spousûl ¡ltftllattonÌulë; you
çDivision),
ì"1i" r"qtiit"a to u- Iisied ss a disclosable i¡tefåst hôlder for the pürposê of de!êrmi¡ing MC/LM's -
role you played in
etigi¡liry for Ui¿¿ing credits as a iesign"t a uotity, itt""p*tive ãf whatever actual
.¡¡" fr¡Cri,M l,ppticatio' wi, ,rn"na"á on Augustzl, 2006, to include yotr gross revenuæ in
frl-äi¡,,f]t
In the amendment,
nnCtf-Nf;, O"signut ri entity showing in keeping with thiDivis,ion's determin¿tion.
iriõll-Ll *"pt ti"*a, ;nteåfa, *ràiyou tood41 a-oi"* Nonw.ovens Corporatioua pleding filed by
(ANC)" and that
;ñCi, tfi" oofy ,rueoou p-ao"ing'"ntiry" that you own or contro'I,z In rËsponse to
co¡rtrolled MsriTEL' snd
W;; H;;""; ;r Septemïer 6, z0õ6,s IriCll-U åxprussty denied thåt you in MarirEL, cofltrol of MafiTEL
**
,iutr¿irr*t *Lii. yo, ôrot ouø rr.lcr ion.srors, 1,.p., wtrictr t ekl stock
*u. i*iau¿ nurta¿ irr 'American Tower, Inc.q
Ôüe for MâriTEL ißelf ând
On Ju¡e 12, 2008, Ma¡iTEL Fr]ed the ten MariTEL TC appligations'
putrlic Coast station license apiece
one for each of nin" fuæif¡I, soUsi¿iorià iiotaing one maritime"VfF
exhibit describing ùe nansaction,
The MariTBL TC Appìicatìons each included ¿¡r iãentic¿I, one-page
*rti"rr ri""ã ur^r
*"ånø or Mu¡nÈ-L... witt pass trorn oonalà R' DoPriest atìd MCT Investors, L'P to
rhe shärehôIders ôf MariTEr. æ a þop. Mr. úepriest has conbollod Ma¡irEL tfuough a combination of

2005)'
4
S¿s FCC File No' 000?30246?, Exhibit - Bxplmation of Ownership (flled Sept' 6'
that, for purposes of identifuing disclosable,
s
4Z C,F.R. $ 1.2110(cX5XiüXÐ. The spousal ofúliatioD lule Provides
berefts, "[b]oth spouses are deemed
interest hoklers in demousraung an ap!U'ca;i;s etigibiliry for disÍgnÂtedçntiËy
or have the power to'contol inteiests owlred or óontrolled
by either of them, udess dley are
to orÃ,Ã or contol
-aÇJ*p"ratior. judsdictioÄ in dË United states.''
;Ë;; tËcoguizea by * court of oomPetem
ó.'ee Maritime connunications/Land Mobüe ,ILC, ordenllF3CRcd 13735 (wTB MD 290(ùq!'.?4er-o: ,
,ru¡¿w_pe d¡ng. AlthoughMC/LMinitially failed
Reconsideration,Z1Fcc Rcd a?80 (s¡T3-ffi zooi¡, r""on o,,a
.;tff;;i eirher inapplicîble or
; ;i*bsable interçst holdel ond nrguld th* dre spousfù [fßliûrior rule was
;
uoã lñ. oePrl"st ecoromic lives"' the Division was
shoulal be waived in thi, t."our" yoo leá "sepalate
"or" üt* you' gtoo (nnd those of' ¿'g" entities deemed to be
*Oø fry tlr¡* a.gunent, ana d'eËrminJ '*enues ertitv
""p.t ."¿e¡ tÈe conmissionls nules) stouí¿ ¡eicluded in assessing MC/LM's
designated
v"'"J*rr¡i.*i'
eligbility. ¡d. at t373840 !ll[ 5-8'
(¡led Aug' 21' 2006)'
?
See MC/LM APplication, Disclosable Interest Holders Amendment at 1
Mobile LLC, O¡d¿r' 21
s
s,laner c, Hav¿ns pctiticn fo¡ Rc¡onsitloration lof Ma¡iLimc co¡nmuuications/La¡rd
,g¿¿
FCC Rcrl 8794 (WTB PSCID 2006)J, filcd Scpt' 6,2006'
SePt' 18' 2006
e
,See Mobile LLC Oppositíoll to Petidon fo¡ Reconsideration' filed
M¡ritimc Conrmunicntions/Land
DoPriest' holds
oll-ðlä¡-oìp"riti*1. rrtcn r.',r oprrin"ã tirtirutgt'l},u"rtotr, r,¡., which is çonholled bv Dor¡
Maritet' Inc'; Americân Tower' Inc controls
con*',on stock in Madtet, rnc, l'Icr iìves¡ors, L'P' does not control
Arnericafl Tower, inê. â$ thê holdefs of
MqJitel, Inc., pursuant to o ,norrnor¿o ogr".[*i This agreement provides
of dire¿rors of
il;.i;;ïLñi .to.r. .quiiotit"îüü¡r'," po*"l to a".t'a simple majo¡ity of thç loafd
il;;.r,"n Maritel' Inc' residcs in the
Maritel,Inc., subject to the consent oith;-om*isi*, ifttquittd'
Becau6e conbol of
(In pleading,
hands of Americfin To*rr, tr"., t'I*ita, tnrìs Jan ámuoie
ot tr¡c¡l-tut-" Id.at 10. the same _.

did acknowteage ror rtre trst rime, ini"rjour" to nttegotions in un opposition pleading, that you canEollcd'
MC/LN4 id at9; several
since 1999'
irr¡r.ãio. Wi.efes ofVirgini¿. in"', *'hi"h irttptu*nrcd harl no rcvenues
frop"erLies
relcvânt thrcc'yêaf p*iod, id' at 8-9; and Cltarisma
other entitics which it rrpres"nteo traå'noïvcnuos during ihe
Inc'' which it roprcscñted to havo
;;;;ü,1ü ó;., B;avJ co*tuni"itions, in"., tn¿ corã* rtiaoglo Râdio'
;;iì;ñäir-t il*ues of no consequence to McrLM's ausignarcd entitv status' td' at 10'11')
Telesourus 5tO84I2226 3/9
Aug-22-2OO9 05:52 AM

Donald R. DePriest
Letter of Inquiry rc MC/LM, Ma¡iTEL

direct hvestment atrd his tole âs Gsüelel Pffhef of MCT InvestÖß, L.P."r0 (This representation.is
,ulrt*tiutty .o*istenr with infon'ation provided by MariTEL in ea¡_ Iier FCC Form 602 ownership
air"to*ru f,lingr, t¡at tha Form 6ó2 filings indicåted,-cortëtly as it now ap'earsr-that Medcom
"*capt you
l-åuãop*.ttt öipora¡ìon actuålly was the general partoer of MCT Investors, L'P'' and that
coBtrofed Medcolu Development Corpor¿tíon.")
ss ta
MCyLM a¡d MariTEL thus ÞtEsented the Commission witlt conflicting represetrtalio¡s
pleadiftgs
wherher you had controuect Ma¡iTEi. Both MCll,M and MariTEL subsequentþ
fi¡tèd
but this discussion is not adequate for the
¿i*i*r-irg thi* dia*apa¡cy in their rePrèsentations,
is not accufåto'
Commissîon to ascertain which reprcsint$ion is åccurÂte tud which representatiot ,In
tleir representations, a¡d shed litde
iactlil[ üóiÀ{ìt -JV*
eL1t *ntínued to stand by earlier
light on why they believe the other Party is mistaken.

r0
.t¿¿ Exhibir to MariTBL TC Applicâtions (MariTEL TC Bxlùbit).
The MariTEL TC Exlúbit frrrther explahed'
,The event that will cause the hansfer J conhol is th, volunt¿uy dishibution of tbÞ msjority of the.assets of MC'T
dihte tl]e or nership interest of
Inìestors, Lp. to its ?4 constituent investors. This distribution witl substsntifl[y
interest to.
¡r,iCi ir"!rt"*, f.p. to approximately two percent, and will decrease Mr.DeP¡iest's ownçrshiP -
shsll remåin Gen*sl
iplir¡^ *lï u.z¿ø, (iiri,roaine rhc ËÀ"iiìn! suko of Mcr 1.v¿.stors,.L.P., ss I\4f. DcP¡icst
a res;-h of rhe distrib:uion, no singlc cntity will conrrol MÚiTBL."
ft/.
iãiù* ãi ¡í. *,¡ø. À
lr remdned cunent up until the dtne the
FCC Form 602 Ìeports that were flled on March 13, 2001, sld appuentlv
I[
Muif¡L tirat lr¿CT lnvcslors' L,P. held 58.3ø¿ of
Ma¡iTBL ransfc¡ of contr,ol wss consì;;ata; in eoOg, indícated
that Medcour
MarirEL's issue¿ atrd outstatrding voting srock (and 26.170 0f all stock, voting and mn-votiug),
b"u"top*"ui Cotporation was ürã sole gineral p'utnm of MCf, Invostors, L P" ffd thår you w9¡e tlte
¡919 ^- - -
õoiioraûon. See, e.6., FCC File No. 0002080?04 (filed Mar. 13' 2001)'. -,
Tlrc
lareiroïer of tUårCo- U"u"top."oi th't
\iæi.¡glForm OOZ afso indicat'd thâa tou'held ur addiúor;1 8.99ø of t¡e voting
stock i¡ you' owr na'e, aud

American Tower Coryoration held 1?'l7o of MariTBL's voting stock'


t2
On July 3t . 2008, for oxarnple, MUJ,M frled a plcading in which
it åsseded thât MüiTEL was simply ilconcct in
itrui iiira| ueen conr¡olletl ¡y Mr.
pei'riesç ând soid thât MariTËL's ¿fior in üis rogård "åppeårs to
""tÀ"riru
;ä;äil;1,älo*; ù",iriit
.uo, i. i"roirnarion ând fram â differencs in nothortolo$r bcrwc¿nt Ms.firgl
äråï"i,;"ç;u"iJfe"redlitloaxplanationâ6tothênåtureôfthâtsugge$terlñol¡odologicaldifforelce'-See..'
for Rcconsideration Rcgarding
i¿.fA* Co***iraAonyfan¿ lioUiã U,C, Opposition to Supplomentro Potition may havo counLerl
New Façts, fitçd Juty 31, ZOOB, at S.i: seø àkoü.'aú
(neii¡iest bçlieves that MariTEL
".t berween Ma¡irEL and Ds Prie¡r and b¿rv.,eon
;;;;;;-;;-e;s,,*k ówu.d conrot, ti,o, oearing a difference
ü;Til;"d r;ir"i"s nop.ttius orvitginii Inc.i), In the n¿xt sellsnc-ei ¡norcovcr' MC/[M indicatcd tbat thc
¡tuJ.¿_,o *u$o¿ologi.U åftforun." woü¿ noi suffrco to cxplai" i,uhy MåfiTEL côncludcd that it had be€n ünder
,,svsn r'\|ôuld not conbol
n¡ì. n"ni.st s .*f.o'f , b¿cause if De Riest had used Må{iTEUs irêtÏodology, Do Priost .
i¡stÂrt m{fler," Id. at 4. MC/LM slso argucd'
Ma¡iTEL under the Cor*irrion'. n rlÀ-wUicfr ar" appti"aUte to Ure

il;;î,h,;h.t if Mr.-úen¡Àt u"ruully .ontort"o t',luirel tut wanteû to conceâl thât fâct, ho would hâvc ftrôvented
rril, hä't gü,riJ r';r*iei iC apptications, id. at 3 | that Mr' DePric$t nciüor "ondoßols] no¡ suppotttsl'-
Inc'
iri-."ïär.ü"*ì-.ül"p irpùr, ¡¿. ut + .no tt'ut Itlc¡¡,M tt^nds by its ea¡lier suLo¡nont rhåt Americsn Tower,
".äl arsrad rhåt.rcirhcf MC/LM nor Mr.
;;|i6f, N,r;;iTËi pG;u'Jþ u d'ur.üolär, ugr.r*ent, ¿. ar s. MCiT,t4 âtso
bscauso atçibudon
it"äãért tu'*yï"W, to O"reive tto ComJission regarding Mr. ÐcP¡i¡st's ¡ole in Ma¡iTEL
uffåt eligibility for the small business bidding
of MariTEL,s revenues to MÇ/Ì.M ;;uld norttur," ¿ lÌCla1gls
credit that it received in ¡\r¡ctioq No. 61. Id'

iE eslliel representation thatjt had


MariTEL likervisø filcrl a plcading on iuly 31, 2008, in whictr it reÊfrtumed
tJ
DáPriesis ow'erslúp of 5870 oiMariTEl's coÍ.Elon stoçk, directly
¡uän .änrroffu¿ Uy ¡,tt. Depiiest rbrãugh Nd.
L.p. MsrirBLlnc., flled July 31, 2008, at 2.
-.1,¡*"etlri, ã"*"orship of Mc.f Iniætors, ,see opposidon of
4/9
Aus-22-2QQ9 05r53 AM Telesourus 5LO84LZ?'?6

Dôr¡sld R. DcPrië$t
Let{er of lûquiry re MCltM, MffiTBL

you exetcised de jure ot


Based on the eústilg fecofd, we âfe uEable to deterÉine whethèr or not
ând an inflbilíty at this
drl*r";;;E"i;f M.iffiLlt We have contadictory statements on the mâtter.
juritore to ¿"temine precisely why therc is a co¡flici on this one of tlt.P*i:: :liu:t]l[-
-poírt, .why ^"
of
irovided inaccu¡ate i"tor.at¡" on tnis material issue to thë Cor¡mission, a¡d whether tbe submission
of candor under the
iu"h ina."*at" information Âr¡$es to the level oT misrepresentation or lack
provide ådditional
Commíssion,s Cha¡acef quaüflcations Policy,rs We ùereforc direct you to
information regardiag tlis matter, as speoified below.

Cordli.cting Representaliorc Regarding Your Role ín MCII)í

Asnotedabove,MC/LMdidnatinitisllyinclucleyouæadisclosableinterestlrolderinMC/LNÍ
for designated entiry eligib iry purposes, and MbILM has repeaEdly.statsd ìn filings relåtqto
thg --- .
ttti yo"iuuåot p-tayed any significant role in MC/LM' In the FCC Form 602 filed
i,{'Cf-Ir,I-Appii*,i"i
in conjunctión with thÊ MSLM ApFlication, MCILM stateil'

onehunrlredpercentoftlrememberslripinterestsinMa¡itimeCommunicatío¡s/La¡d
Mobüe, LLC ãre owned by S/RÍW Partloership, L'P. The general pârtuer ifl S/RIW -
Þr**ifr¡, l.e. is Comríunications hrvestmãnts, hc. One hundred percent ôf theshafes in
percent
Commuuications ]¡vestl]1ents, Lt¡c. âre ovvned by Ssndrs M' DePriest' One hundred
oi-n" puttn"ttt ip shares in S/RJW Pa¡tnership, L'?. are owned by Sandra M' DePriest' .
personnel of Maritime
san¿rå u' oep¡ist is the sole officer' directoi and kcy -¡nagement
communicâtions/Land Mobite, LLC. Sanclro M. DePriest is the sole lcey managÞment
f"*"*J or snrw parnership, L-p. sasdta M. Depriest is rhe sole offlrcer, director and
key manôgement personnel of Communicâtions Ir¡vËstments, Inc'16

r{ in a Petition to deny,
In a pleading in a separate Ploceeding, MariTEL argr¡cd thaq contÎary to lho âsscrtions
.,ttJU"rã i" no Joot o""iry ,"gà.Oing *iri o;, Ãd coirots Ma¡iTEL,'; ¡nd that tho MuiTBL '1 C Applìcations and

infomaúon rogarding MüiTBL and its---


úäfei;r iCC-Ë"*r åo2\res.lnt
"..urat
and complûto oì¡,nôrshþ
lrc ¿t al' te FCC
;bttãt"tt.." i"; oppositioriof MariTEL, Inc' lto Petition to Dgry- frled q 'AMTS
co¡sortium
0003534766' 000353476?'
lilr Ñor. ooossree5a 0003516656, 000353459ã, 0003534602' 0003s34?63'
regarding tIË üut¡ûllness of-
ôôigjã+iãá, Oooàiã5'087!;filed SêpL 5,2008, afz. Ever if rle latet statement
tue, believo ürat the conu¡díotory representations made by
i,i"ritrr', .ltifi"r niings is ulLimatoly shown to bc we
fr]rd¡er couunission inquiry.
üèÄM an¿ MarirEL lavc inrlccd gÉnffarcd a conrroversy necessirsring

ú ofRules of Broâdcåst
Policy Rcgarding CbÐ.rsoter QuåIif¡cmions in Broodcast Licensing, Arnendment
,Sce
p*iu¿oro-Relating Comnision Inquiries and the Making of
nã.ti"u *á to ivritten Responses to
,
i"ä.Jpi"r*"rio* thc Comirission by perrinees ard Licenseur,\"p:!, Order
Fcc
urd Polìq Statemënt, .102
4u (1986): Folicv
Ë.ðilãììiãí, ¡ãro-11{1t60-61 (t9s6i, Memorandum opittìon and Òrder,1 Rcd
pûr1 1, the Rules ofPracdce and
irîräine ¿#r.r". qurûiicarions in eiórdcasr LicensinglAmerdme_trr_of to úc
_

Þìäc¿urä nel"ring ,o-Wdnen Responses ro Commission-inquiries and the Making of MisrêPrescfltstions


perminees, Rcportilg_of Inforuration Rcgâ{dirig Charåcr*
èoi*i"i"" Uy epllicants, and Licensees, and the
3252 (1990) (1990 Charucter Policy Støtên¿nt), . . . - .
õ*iin*'¡"*, ¡"iày Sratánent ard, Order,S FCC Rcd
i,Ëi"l^i"*' Op¡^øn and Order,íiCcticd 3448 (1991), Memorøndam Opinion.and Ordc\1 ,lc?.,k:d-::,94
'broadcast
character stafldaldJ to aPPlicanß ånd liccnse¿s tn the oüer raoro
iiSSz). Th" Co;-issioD applies its
$s(viccs. S¿c, e.g,, Igg0 charucter iàiícy state*ent,sr1ÇRcd at 325311
i0 (âdopLing 47 C¡l R' $ 1'17.to aPply
,Ë"in'riCIsï€FesentÃtion;;nä material omissions to âppticânB, ticonsccs, Ând permiftees in all radio
piàniuitio"
services).
Wê note tll8t üro.
16
s¿¿ FCC Fìle No. 0002302467, Exhibir - Explanation of ownership (filed sept. 6, 2005).
Investments, Inc., S/RI"W
lr"er.g. by MC/LM suggess t¡"t, ,rtik" tnlc¡LM *ntl comnunications
"*pì.y"1 Ms. DePriest. we also note that Mglljvr's
i;"rit t'rfrio, î-.n., #officers anüìí di¡cctois in addition to
Investments' Inc' conflicts wjth
reoresentation that Ms. pep¡ust wæ ttro oily offrccr or director ofCoÍununicâüons
ot srste zooi corpóråre A-nnuat Reporr for coümudcations Investmsnts, Inç',
; õiä;ùffi;úiuc.err¡y
you (on Écbru$v t6' 2005, Íess than seven molths before the ûIing of the MOLM
il;;,i;;ú;;Jü;
5/9
AuI-ZZ-ZQQ9 05:53 AM Te.Lesourus 510A412?26

Donald R. DçP¡iest
L€tter of Inquiry re MCÍ-M, MariTEL

on the
h amending the MC/LM Application to include you as a disclosable interest holder based
Division's ãerermhation thüyour inctusion as such is man¿late<t by the spousâl_aifliaúo1-rltlealtC.p,ttl
reiterâtêd t¡at 'ÐôE bas no ownership interest il and is neither ¿n ofËcçr nor a di¡ector of
MC/LM""'

On Septeruber 22, 2006, however, Wireless Propertias of Virgidq Inc'


(WPÐ filed twÒ
-
aunlications to assisn Broadbsnd Radio Service snd Etlucationgl Broadb8nd Service licenses
toNertel
602"" 8ùd
Sþcrnrm Âcquisirñn Co¡p.rs You are listed as the 1009o o\arner of WPV in its FCC Form
;Ë;til;pËlit"6ons onieba'lf of WPV, under the title "Offrcer'" In 9-sg91s9 to 1 P"tilio.: Tj":L
"
coutrolled MC/LM'
ttrise apptcãfions, WpV claimed that Sandr¿ DePtiest owned 10070 of MC/LM and
but alså stated thai "Don DePriest is a¡ offrcer änd direotor of MC/LM ' ' ' ''20

arc unable. to
Based on the contrådictory ststements on úe mâfier in the o(isthg recofd, we
determine wheúrer or nÖt you ärË or were an officer and-/or director of MC/IM. There also
remains
condnuing ìrncertsrnty as io whetlrer you ffe or were s¡ì officcr and/or direotor of SIRIW Parbrership,
or
L.Þ., or Cã¡¡munications l¡vestmenti, Lnc,zl We note, moreover, that if yorr were indeed an.o{ßcer
ãù"* ãf ùc¿fvf (or S/RIIV Parnzul:ip, L.P. or Couununications f¡tvestments, Inc.), it calls into
qouì,ion ,t ,upr"reùtations by MCILM ana WPV th"t you Aid nat ex€rcise contfol over MC/LM.
We
" to hquire fì,1her iúto this úatter. iVe therefore direct you to
o...i*w provide additional
u-"Uà"* ir
information regarding this matter, as sP€cified below.

Requests fo r lnfontntion
*t,
As explained abovo, we have determincd that additionsl informätion is requircd g "t -th"
com*issiou io resoiv;ng the issues t¡at havê adsên fegåfding the roles played by you in MariTEL'
ùClfU, *¿ ottt t entiti;'. You are acconlilgly di{gie{ pursuaut to Section 308(b) of the
Comrnuni"ations e"t of 1934. as amended (úã Àct),z to resPond to the following requests,for .
iofo*^ùon, *¿ to pfovide avâilable ilocuÀentation supporûng your responses. Utrless othewise

Dolricst ss tll oorporatc.


Application)
'Sãr'*t.ry Presideal listing you as also a director of thë cÓmPany, andjisting Sandrâ
as
bcny MCILM Application], filed Nov 14'
uít""t ¿iir"tor, S"ãwu.t* C. Havens cf sl., Potition to [the
"
2005, ât Erhibit. l, Docuücnt 4.

'? See MCßM Applicatiofi, Disclgssblo Intorest Holdofs Ancndment at 1 (filed Aug ' ZL,Z006)'
rr
Fcc Filé NÞs. 00027s561 6, 0002.695270'
re
FCC Ffls No. 0002?92309 (filed Oat. 22, 2006). In this Forn 602, VIPV represenls,
,See
i fer 4lí¿, tbat you hold

only 12.13% intercst iÉ MsriTEL.


â
20
See Wireloss properties ofVirgini4 Inc., Opposition [to Petition to Deny, and in the altetuativo, Sêction 1'41
at 3 (ornpbæis
fnformat Rcquesr tô Di.*i*, o, õ.oy, nirá O'"i. t t, ZOtiO, Uy W*t"n C. Havensl, lled Oct. ?3' 2006'

added).
1.2110(cX2)(F), "fo]tEcers and dircctors
Uuder Secrion t.Zt tg(cXzXF) of th¿ Coñmissioû's Rules, 4? C.F.R. $

ofthe applicanr sball be cónridered to hau" a c.ntrolling intêrestjn thc âpplicánt [s-ûd] offioels a,.d dteçtols of an
consiãorotl to have a co tolling interest in the liÇënse or
ãrity uir"It . ftensee or applicant shall b¿
âpplicaùt." ""io"G

2 4z u.s.c. g :os1l¡.
6/9
Auçr-22-2009 05:54 AM Telesourus 5LO84t?226

Dounld R. DeP¡iest
Letter of Inquiry re MC/LM, MæiTEL

lt 2002, to the Prèseltt (tlre relev rt


indicated, tltê period of time covereil by these iuquiries is lanuary
period).23

1. Identify aad clesc¡ibe ali business entitìes, of whatever form' that have beeü
you arc
contolþd by you durÍng Uro relevant Pcriod' For purposes aftl¡is question'
deemerl to have controilerl any entity ín which you held a 50'07s or more owneTshlp
general partrer' or exercised
i.uterest, or sewed as a directoï or officer, or served as a
delacø coutrol in any w&y at sny tûlr during the televant period'
disc'losed in the
2, State whetlre¡ all ofthe inte¡osts hold by you tÌat should have been
FCi Éil" No' 0002303355' were disclosed in the
MC/LM Application, as arnended,
ån'l entities that should have been
MCILM APPlicatian. Identify any inte¡ests
.disclosed in the MULM Applicâtion ås stributÂble to yoìI but wele noj s:
.
the
¿isciose¿.* To the extent yóu have personal knowledge of the fia$ef, indicate .
For- each
,easoo why each soch entity *as noidisclosed in the MC/LM Applicæion'
such entity, except those entities that wete fequired to be discloscd
only under 47
rule, grovide its annual gtoss rcvenues for each
c.F.R. 0 i.2i i2(i)(1)(ü) anrl no other
of tl," tlrru" vlís zo0z, zoos, an¿ 2oo+'6
"uluìá.

B revenues of MOLM's disÇlosablo intercst


Jaruary t, 2002, is the beginning of the first calendâr year in whith the
holders were to be considued in oetermining McttÀ,['s designatea entiry
eligibility itr conjullction with thÉ Mc¡-M
Applicatiou.

ã Si¡ce Amc¡ican Nonwovens Corporation wqs addËd to the ÂPPlication in the Augìst 21, 2006, amendment, it
in relevs¡t P'eaorßgs nleo -,
neid not be listed in response to úl cuestion, Basçd on MC/LM'' own r'Presentåtians
entities tist"d_ii ¡esnonsn to this quesúon o incfttdo, at
il;ù-o,i;iil; Mgti4 Ãp¿i"ution1 *"-"outa'expæt thep*"¿casting Lrc'' Goldcn
minimurn, lùvireless Propcrtius orvirå"i", i""-ìï¡fir*"
Co'' Brävo Communications'
,ilüüRrdi:ì";., Nläd"orn nuv.ifrÀ.Ti Córporation, and MCt Ñastors, L,P., ss w¿1l ås úc oth¿r contps¡lics
bur hâd ¡ô fGvonuês. sdc Mc/1,\4 oppositiofr
ili;f ,il MÇ;it óf position actoo*,*lcdgud *"i. undui you.Inc.,"onkolCcllsr ârtd Eroådcåst com¡nunications' Inc''
ii'd:g ir.k"ä;i"osi"iyiur conkol of tV¡ê Tdephono Çó,,
Bast, Inc', Wireless
Ë"i"f"ìãC"ipo"t¡1'nlécott"nd ttouse, to"., Wfôt"** ftopàrti._t, Inc., W_ireless Properties - ..
_.üy"u, I"á., Wir"t.", rrop"rti"r'- u¡per Midwest, Itrc., and Tra'sition Funding, Inc.). But you should
Þr"pài ¡",
cntitics rhat yåu cuncntly'bclicvc shoulrl have boen reponed in tlìe YC/LM
Aqlli:a-lo-1
,isäi¿"nrify óOror
"ny
porruunt to SuriÍon, 1.919, 1.2110, and 1.2112 of the Çommissior's Rules, 47 C,F,R' $$
l'919' 1'21i0' l'2r12'
be disclosed as affiliate$ af persoTrs
i,¿¿, in parr¡cur"r, ¿z c-F.R. g 1.2110(cxÐ, defining the types of eutitics to
ontity âpplicanb.to disclosa
deemito contol an applirant ana 4r êiR. 5 l'Zi lz(bxlXii), requiring designâtêd
;auy fCCLegutateO etrtity * *
oppti"*t fot ËCC Ucensi, in'wtticn any oortou¡¡g inlëreâ! of the apPlicant owns a
of any class of stock, wu¡ants, options or dçbt
l0 pø".nt orþrrcr ¡nti"st oi á tot¿ of t0 percent or rnore
securitìos,"

4 Ws ¡¡ote lhät the Comrussìon's Rulos do not provide an


excepúon to thÞ desig¡rated entity ownership dìsclosu-re
see a7c'FR'$ 1'2112(b)(1)(iv) we
requirements for otlerwÍse disclosable entities that have no $oss rêvenuss'
data foÌ most of the entities thât M(yLM
norc, morcovcr, thai sltfrougfr tfre Vrô¡¡Ufi,ppo.ition ptouiãø t*enue OÞposition' iL
snãwin! alã 6'st aJtnowteOgea_as Your affi'liates in tho MC/I¡'4
omitted frorn íts designated e'tity
ãia nìf pìoniou ."*nîut oato ¡or t rràco*iet"ropm*t cotp' ãt Mgf
Investo$' L'P See MC/LM opposition at
ii dio not aiìclose your conEol of Mcdcôm Development corp. -and
8_11. MC/LM hns n"lroo*"1øe"o tbäi, oìihough
L'P. âs å rcsult of being owner of its
MCT Investors, L.p in r¡r frtcm¡ Àipfil"tiío, you 't*rof û Uct_lnYestors,
opposition to suPPlemêntÈl PFR-'not¿ )3'
lo*"J p*n"r, u.oco* uuu"ropnl"irï cotp*lú*'1¿otaseeforMb&.M Medcom-Development Corporation and Mff
¡unra. al4. Wo accordingly expe"t Ooi t¡"i"uunu*
ffiffi,;.Ë. ;il båätioíc ,tit ittf*ro,ion provirled in response to this request for information.
Aug-ZZ-¿OO9 05:54 Al'1 I'elesdurus 5IOe4l¿¿26

Donald R. DePriest
Lcttcr of inquiry re MC/LM, MariTEL

drrring the.
3, Describe the extÞnt and nanlfe of youf ownership holdings in MariTEIlG
you' and
relevant Period. Describe the perienage of the équitY in MariTE! held by
tlrc form in which that etluity ùas held, e'g', stock; prefened stoch etc'
Describe the
pêrce agö of tlle voting equity in MariTEL held by you, st¡d the formjn whlch thaÌ
ãquity was freta, If your holdilgs in MariTBL fluchìated during the relevaît perÖd'
Provide a detailed exPlaration.
4. State whether you ever served ¿s a ditector' officer, or employeeofMadTBl'
If you
lotrgèr do' stâtè
formerly lreld óne or mo¡e of such positions in Mâri'IBL' but nÕ

when ùe period ir which you held the position(s) ended'


State whether vou ever hel<l or exercis uJ de facto cottttol of MariTEL by any
means
5. it
during the relJvant period, If so, describe the Dâ$re ôf thâr conrrol, and how wâs
obt¿ined'
6.Ifyoubelieveanotlterpersonorentity(orotherpenonsoreûtities)beldeitherde
jzre ionnol of MariTEL' or both' durirg the relevant
¡ocla conrol of MariTif- or de
bolh the nature of
ieriod, identify such person(s) or entiiy(ies), and expiai¡ in detail
ilre contol yoú beüeve to have been eierted by such third party(ies) and the

foundation for Your belief.

7. If you believe thât yoü did nÓt cÖDtrol MariTEL, explain' to the best of your .,
htwbdge and belief, why and how MariTEL could anive at the conclusioD thst you
did coútrol MäriTEL.
8. Describe the nature and cxtont of your ownership and role i¡ Maritims
communìcations/Land Möbite Lic, s/Rñv Partrership, L-P., and
communications
autlorized to entör into contracts on
Invesfrnents, Inc.z? State u'hÉther you were
behslfofånyoÏalloflhesethÎeeenumelatedentifÌes,whatÖtherauthotity,ifany'
yoo porr*r.J*itl, rospect to any or all of theenumerated onfitios, and wlì0t duties,
if
a-ny, you had il connecïon with any or all of the enumerated entities'

To the extent you have personal knowledge of the matter' explain why M{/LM
and
9. you a¡ offrce¡ or
WPV mach cónflicting ìepresentations regarding whether were
false
diïector of MC/LM, aoa witn tttpttr to the entity thåt you believe made a
representation in tlus regaid, either MC/LM or WPV, explain' to the best of yoÙr
.
IfJou bÞlievc there is
knowledgc antl belief, ühy it Ioade sueh fal€e repfesefltation.
_

no cbnfliit between the representations. and that neidrer MC/IM uorIiVPV


was
inæoulÂte in ii.s repr'"sentations regatding whethçf you were an officet or director of
MC/LM, explail the bæis for that belief'
rcspond in writing and
hereby direct you, pursuant to Sections 308(b) and 403 of thc Act,a to
rMo
days from thé dâtc
r¡nder oatÍ. sepa¡atelv uod zutv. io eo"h of the foregoing ieçests wÍthin 30 busincss
il.1.¡ilr.F v""îuy provide rny additional i¡iormation that you believe is relevânt to this matter'
"f

" * ,-p"$r "f


aLt*ud rt f"ll"-tng questions, 'MariTBU' meilns MaIiTEL, Inc. and/or any of its subsidía¡ies'

2?
minimum, lisr ary posidons held by you in the subject entiries os director,
.Ar
ofÍcer' paltner, Iimited liability
voting equity held by you in each of tlte subject
.o*p"iy t""*úut, o. employeq and rtre'percentage ofequity snd
ù"i, ¿uriíg tÉc relevant päriod. Fãr euchsubjcct cntiry, also indicate if you exercised delacro
""Í,i*,'"i "ry
qont{ol of tbô entity at åny ti¡flc, 8nd providc an cxplarradon-

" +r u.s.c, $$ :os(¡), ¿os.

308(b) to MârilEL and to MC/LM'


We are ccntemporaneously mailing simila¡ leuers of inquiry undorSection
2e
8/9
Aug-22-2009 05:55 AM Telesourus 5108412226

Donald IL DePriest
Letter of Inquiry re MC/LM, MsrilEL

TT¡ol¡sEuctionsfofrcspondi¡gtothislettelarecont¿inedintheAttachmerrthereto.Yourresponseslrall
b'¡ dirêcted to:

Jeffrey Tobias, Esq.


Mobüity DivisíÖ
'Wireless Teleco¡¡muuication Bureau
445 12t' süÉet, s.w.
Wæhin$on, D.C. 20554

pieåso cottact Mr' Tobias at (202) 4i8'16i7 or


If you have any questions relating to this úatter,
ieff.tobiasGrfcc.sov'
qf the cor¡mission's Rules,47 C'FR'
You are advised tbat 18 U.S.C. $ 1001 anrl section I'i7
of ftåtedal facts iû fespoüse to comfüssiôn
ç l.rz, piorriuit mùrepresentations and/or wiIfuI omissio¡s
fuquiries.

ùluçcrlt-ty t

/t//
-
"4,i-/Æ_
tvr4 t./1,/ --
Scot Stone
DeputY Chief, MobilitY Division
Wireless Telecom¡nuniçations Bureau

cc: Mrritime Comururications/Land Mobilq LLC


206 North 8th Steet
Columbus, MS 39701
ATTN: Sa¡d¡¿ M. DeP¡iest

Deonis C. Brown, Esq.


8124 Cooke Court, suíte 201
Ma¡assæ. VA 20109-7406

MæiTEL,I¡c.
4635 Church Rd, Suite 100
Cumming, GA 300284084
ATTN: Jasot Smith

Russoll I{. Fox, Esq.


Mintz, Levin, Cohen, Feuis, Giovsky end PoPeo' P'C'
701 Pennsylvaaia Ave.. Il'iV - S\rite 900
Washington, DC 20004

'Warre¡
Haveus
2649 Beuvenue Ave.- Suitas 24
Berkeley, CA 94704
[,uq-¿¿-¿Ojg 05 : 55 At'l 'l elesqurus \IjA4LZ¿¿6

Douald R. DePriesr
Leuer of Inquiry ¡e Mffllvl, MaIITEL

A'fTAEHMENT

InsErctio¡s
or documents resPonsive to this
Requestfor Corfitlentíal Treatment' If you lequest that ûny i¡fomation
¿t
u confidçntiai mamäyou ittatt suUmii aloug with
all responsiye i1l91t9!on- a¡{-^
i"tti,, fru"r"ot
*itiSection 0.459 of the-Commis¡ion's Rul6Ê, 47 C'F R' $ 0'459'
documeuts, a ståtemênt in a".or¿r¡""
of Section 0'459' including iÌ¡ë
ReouestÈ fôr öonfidential reatruent musrcoÉply with rhe requûements
.äilä",¿r **¿ot"¿ tv st"tion ô'4s9þ)' Accordinslv' "bla¡ked'É$¡ests for
"itri"ãniitv set of documents are unaôépuble' Pursusnt to Section
0'459(c)' we will not
large
"""nJ*ti-liti "f
itqì'"tt" ",ttat ão not comply with ùe requireÉeûts of Sectior 0'459'
"ã"rià".
Cl.aims d PrivíIege. If you withhold 8ry information or
documenb under claim of privitege' you shall
,*",1,, ì1,e"t1r", ;"th ari' Aai- of øîí"æ, r t.l,",tul" oi ttt" items r ithheld that
states, individuallv as

i" .*rt ,"ãn it"* tht nimterea in'quiry io ïni"n **t item responds and the type' tide' speeific subject
of all authon and
mafiêr a¡d date ôf the item; ure namås, áddtesses, positious, and organizations
iteú is privileged'
i""ipì"r , ,ft" ir"m; and the specific ground(s) fàr clairnhg thât the
"f
of the questions a'sked'
Format of Responses' The response must be consistent with the format

horeir, shall be $úmitted in it5


Method of Producíng Documents. Eåch fequestEd docuüent, as defined
made herein' This me¿r¡s that
ä;t"ty,-;";; if u pottion of trtut ã*umont is ru'pontiv" toan inquiry
iniäoåÁ"ni ,¡¡r "tlynotte e¿ite¿, c,rì, or expuged, anï shall include all appendices, tables, or other. .
or àttachments' All wriften mÂþúals
âttachme[ts, ârd all othor docu¡nents ¡efeff"a io in ttrg document
subrritted.
i ir_¿*"and a.ny docrrment respoûsive to these iûquiries ruust also b6
"ll-".r"ry
in resPonse to the inquiries , ,
Idatification af DocLunenß. Fot ffichdocument or statement submitted
and identify the person(s)
ri",J ir t¡" "** f"tter, indicate, Ç number, to which inquiry it is respoÞsive
dated' statê the dâte o which it was
fÍoñ whose files the ¿ocumerrt was ttii*td. ff tty do"o*entis-not name(s) of
pl"pal"å. lr ¿""o*"ot ao", oãii¿intiry irs a,_rrio4s¡ or recipient(Ð, state, ifknown, the
""y all documenrs provìded in
ãi"'uo,rror(Ð oir."ipient(Ð, You musriJ"ntity *ittt
'"^onableipecificity
response to thesa inquiries.
EXHIBIT 2
l/ ¿5
Oct-z3-ZOO9 11:1Z All lelesourus 5IOA4L¿¿à6

DENMS C. BROWN
ATTORNEY ÁT LÀW
8124 CooKE CouRr, SUITE 201
M^NÀssAs, VtrrGINI/l 20109-7406

F^x 703/365-9456
PHoNE 703i365-9437
NoT AÐMITTED IN VIROINIA
D.C.BROWN@,{TI.NBr

September 30, 2009

Jeffrey Tobias, Esq.


Mobility Division
Wireless Telecornmunications Bureau
445 12'r'Steet, SW
Washiugton, DC 20554

Re: FCC File Nos, 0002303355,0003463998' 0003470447'


o}o347 0491, 0N3410527, 0003470576' 0003470583'
0003470s93, 0003470602, 0003470608' 0003470613

Dear Mr. Tobias:

I represenr rhe fâdio system iüterests ôf Mâritime conrm[nicatious/Land Mol¡ile, LLc


(lvlc/Lt,Ð tefore r1e Federal Coumruuications Commission. On behalf of MC/LM, I am
iubmiui¡Ê herewith the response of Sandra DePriest, the ultimate owucr of MC/LM, to the
Ms'
Commisslon's letter of inquiry to MC/LM daæd August 18, 2009' Concurtently'
OaFi.*'r respoEse is U"iog fii"d electronically in each ofthe above-trfereuced proceedings'

Please direct any furttter communication coticerning this mâfier


to my atte ion'

Thank you for your atteûtion to this mafter'

Very truly yout's,


z/25
Oct-23-2009 11:13 AM TeLesourus 5108412226

The Reverend Sandra DePriest


510 Seventh Street North
Columbus, MississiPPi

SePtember 30, 2009

Mr. Jeffrey Tobias, Esq.


Mol¡ility Division
lVirelcss Telecomruunication Bureau
445 12tr'Street, S.W.
Wæhíngton, D.C.205s4

Re: FCC File Nos, 00023033s5, 0003463998, 00034700441,0003470527 '


000347Ö613
0003470576, 0003470583, 000 3470s93,0003470602, 0003470608'

Dear Mr. Tobias,

This ietter is in response to your lette:: ofAugust I B, 2009 requesting additional


DePLiest with
information conccrning the iaterests and involvement of Mr' Donald R'
you are
Ma¡iTEL and Maritimã Communications/Land MoSile, LLC (MCiLM). A.s
o*t, ftft p.¡¡est is my husband, and Dennis C' Btown represents both of us in our
tffan'en Havens æ an FCC Attofiey, I
f.CC ãctivities. Wrile I ¡ave beeu referred to by
than the pro botro
have not been involved in the active practice of lew since 1996, other
reoresentation ofseveral chatitabie orgauizations in the frliug oftheir tax exenrpt
;ñtüffi O,h* than my involvenient with MC/LM since 2005, aud tlte operation of a
õiictaw eed a Brcaldast, firc. in Natchez, Mississippi since 2{06' I have
l¡eeu
Príest sewi'g a
a'ssãciated with th" ministry since 1g96, and I arn an ordaiued Episcopal
chrllch pârt{ime.

Questionl.Identifyanddescribeailbusinessentities,ofwhateverfornr,ttrat
have beeì controlled by Mr. Depriest during the relcvaut period, For purposes of this
conrrolled any enrity in which he
lu".tioo, M¡. Dep¡iesi should be deemed þ have
tret¿ a Só.0% or more ownership ifteresf, or served as a director or
officer' or served
atly tilne during rlte
a general parmer, or exercised de¡ac¡o control in any way at
",
relevâút period.
3/25
Oct-23-ZOO9 11:13 Al'1 Ielesourus 5IOA4L¿¿¿6

Arswer 1. Except with wlìich I am involved, I defer to Mr'


as to the etrtilies
DePriest's response to the lefter of the same dâte directed to hil]l'

MCiLM Ownershipr All of the membership illterests irr MC/LM were owned by S/RJW
Parmershþ, L.P. u¡til 2008, wlnI.2} of 1,000 paru-rership units were issued' No interests
have been issued to Mr. DePriest fr'on1 inception to date, A copy ofan Incumbency Certificate
execured ou August 25, 2005 reflecting the ownership fbr a bank loan is attâched as Exiìibit '
I

OffTcers and Directorsl At all tines siuce the formatiou of MC/LM' I have been
dre

sole officer and director of MC/LM. On several promissoLy notes¡ Ms, Belindâ Hì.rdson

signed the notes âs Trcasuler, but that was am honorary title. She has not beerr elected
Treasurer ín the
an officer of MC/LM, ancl she has been iûstructed by me not to sign as
future.

Mr. Depriest has occasionally been asked to serve as a nralaget'/ agenl to conduct
cerrâin âspects of the business of MCILM which witl be discussed heteafter in Question
g. Mr. John Reardon serves as the CEO. At uo tirne has Mr'. DePriest been an of{ice¡
or dhector of MC/LM-

are owned by
S/RJW Psrtnership, L,P. (S/RJ![) Ownership: All of the parnership shares
me, Sandra Depriest. The Resotution of ûre Board of Directors of MedCom
Development
ræígning General Part[er
coiporation, the former GeneÍal Palmer of s/RIW PârtneÌship, as

is agached as Exhibit 2, atong witir ùe Resolution of Coffinunications l¡vestments,


Inc' (CII)
succeeding Metlcou Devetopmeü colpolâlion as ceneral PâfiûeI âs
Exhibit 3. MedCon
Developlrienr Cofpofalion is coûtrolleal by Doû DePriest. It hâs no
sales or gross receipts,
in 2002 and 2003
Accrueã manageme4 fees were pâid to Medconr Developnrent Corpolation
by MCT Investors, L.P., but noue after tbat'

officers antl Directors: Tlre general partner in S/RJW is Comrnunications


IûvesÍnents, ka' as ofFeb' 18, 2009. on that szune day, I, Sandra DePÍiesL
was

elestedPresidetrtofS/RM.I,SandraDePriest,Ðnthesolekeymanagetnent
Partnership of S/RJW filed with the
.s.","t",y of S/RJW. The Certiñcate of Limitcd
persormel
of State of Delawaro i5 attaclred at Exhibii 4, TIre Snte of Delaware
Amendment to the Certificate of Limited Panne¡ship is attached as Exhibit 5'
'lelesourus 5LÇA4f¿¿¿6 4/ ¿5
Oct-23-2O09 1t : L3 Al'1

of stock wele
coüEr¡nicâfions Investment6, Inc, (Çtt) ownershipl Ä'11 1000 shates
the stock cettificate issued
nansfeffe*p m. by Don Depriest ou Feb. 18 2005, aud a copy of
in mY name is attached as Exhibit 6'

officersauilDirectors:AsofFebruaryIS,2005,IwasSoleSlruelrolderaltd
of CII' Dou
was elecledl Director and serve a¡ the sole offrce¡ a¡rd director
his resignation is
O"Priest r"sign"a as of Feb. 18, 2005 as Ptesideut' A copy of
liowever' I note
attached âs ¡iniUit Z' In reviewing fte corporate rniuute book'
that due to an oversight, tTre change in the oftice of Presidelt fÌom Don
DePriest to *" ** ¡ç¡ ¡sflected in the Corporate Annual Report submitted to
copy of wltich is
ine Secretary of Sfate until re January 2008 Aunual Report, a
to bor'::ow bank
a$âched as Ë*ibit 8, On August 25, 2005, I was authorized
funds as the sole Officer, Dilector and Shareholder of CIl'

will to and adopt Mr'


I have tro first-hând lfiowleclge of Mr, Depriest's owncrship and intcrest, so-i -d.efer
to Wireless Pr:operties of Virginia' I'c' (WPV) witlt
Dep¡iest,s fesponses to euætion i oîtrtu Commission's i'qui'y
or served âs a dirõct6r or office¡' or served
i*rpårt a a"ttii.r in wniùr he held a 50.0% o, ¡oot" o*o"rrltÞ interest,
the relevânt period'
*-ã g"*ruf pâl1rro, or exercised rlepclo cotrTrÖl il any way at ¿my tinÉ duri-ng
that. should,hâve been disclosed in
Question State whetlrer all of t]re interests held by Mr. DePriest
2:
were disclosed in the MC/LM Application'
the MC/LM Àpplication, as ,meud"d, FCC File No. 0002303355,
in the MC/LM Application as attibutâble to Mr'
ñ;;tôr any inierests a¡d entities tÏæ strorld have been disclosed
such entity was not disciosed in the MC/LM Applicatiou'
ÐePriest, but Were not so Oisclose¿. Statt the reason wiry
only under 47 C'F'R'
¡roi.*ft'*"h enrtity, except those that entities fhat were iequired to be disciosed1¡e calendar years 2002' 2003' and
and no ourer r]Ic,-pto"i¿" io annual grosi income for each
of
$i.21l2(b)OxiÐ
2004.

Answer2lTlrefirstaldsecondsentencesofQuestion2callforalegalconclusionwhichonlythe
or director of ceruiû entities which were not
commission can reach. Mr. DePriçst controlled or was ân Officer
disclosed to ùe Coûmission in MC/LM's application'

had no revenues during dtc relcvant


TLe following entities were ûot disclosed by MC/LM because they
rc a bidding credii:
period and, tlus, corltd not hâve âffected ttre calculation of MC/LM'' right

during the releval]t peliod and' thus'


The following e ides wefe úot disclosed because they had no reveuues
to a bidding credit:
could not have affecred the calculation of MC/LM's riglit

a) Wireless ProPerties, Inc.

b) Wireless Properties of Virginia' Ilc'


Oct-23-2009 11r14 AM Telesourus 5108412?'?6

c) Wireless Properties - East, Inc'

d) Wireless ProPerties - Wesr, Inc.

e) Wireless Properties - Upper Midwest, Inc'

f¡ Conrmunications l[vestments, Inc'

g) Columbus Yarn Mills ConPanY

h) San Pedro Gauze Mill, hc.

i) WJG Teþhone Co', hc'

j) Cellular ancl Broadcast Communications, lnc'

k) Tupelo Broadcasting Corporation

l) Penelore CorPoration

m) $cotland House, Inc.

n) Transition Funding, L.L.C.

o) MCT lûvestors, L.P.

p) BD Parmers

q) CD Partners

r) Ground Zero Fashions, Inc.

s) Ground Zero lndustries, Inc.

t) Greenbriar Consuuction CorP'

u) Enviroworld Solutions, L.L.C'

v) Maritime Commuuications/La¡d Mobile, LLC


Oct-23-2O09 11:14 AM Te.Lesourus 5LO84I2ZZ6

time of the
The fo¡owing entities ìtrere ûot disclosed because úey were not âffiliated ôr did not exist at the
filirg of the application.

a) Critical R,F,, Inc - MC/LM did not acquire control uutil 2006'

b) Excite Teclrnologies, krc. did not exist until 2009.

itlaccurate
Except as notod, below, the following entities were not disclosed because of ovetsights or au
understa¡dhg tlat ttrey had had no revenues. Their ¡evenues were' as follows:

The foliowing revenues of Bravo Communicadons, Inc.; Charisma Communications, Inc'; and Oolden
Triangle Radio, Inc. wete ûot disclosed because the de minimis tevenues were overlooked:

a) Bravo Communications, Inc' -


2002 - $119,000
2003 - No revenues
2004 - No revenues

b) Charisma Coñfûuûications, lnc. -


2002 - $54,800
2003 - No revenues
2004 - No rovenues

c) Goldetr Triangle Radio, Inc, -


2002 - $107,4n
2003 - No revetrues
2004 - No revenues

because they eithe¡ were


The foltowing revenues of Medcom Deveiopment Corporation were not reported
received in compensätion for cxpenses incurred in prior years td, thus, not actuâlly
available for use, or we¡e de
ûIiniftis Ít d overlooked,
2002 - 52,585,998 (receivcd iu compensation for past expenses)
2003 - fi426'789 (overlooked)
2004 - No revenues
t/¿5
Oct-23.-2OO9 11:14 At4 lelesourus 5|0A412¿¿6

The following revenues of Warpath Properties, loc. were not rePorted because Mr'. DePriest
cotrtuolled it for only the miror part of tlle relevalt period:
2002 - $76,500
2003 &, 2004 - Mr. DePriest sokl all of his interest iû the cômpâny in 2003 ard
I have no
information concerning revenues for 2003 or 2004 '

The following entity was not disclosed because Mr. DePriest Uelieved üìat lre did tlot control iu

MariTEL, Inc. - In its Opposition to Petition for Reconsideradon in FCC File No. 0002303355'
dated

Seprember lB, 2006, MCILM info¡metl rhe Comrnission of tire following revenues
for MaliTEL, inc.:
2002 - $715, 548
2003 - 91,022,423
2004 - $2,076,507
provided the
[r Mr.
response to DePriest's inquiry of Septembel 13, 2009, the President ancl CEO of MariTEL
following MariTEL revenues:
2002 - s308,7n
2003 - $i72,849
20a4 - fi1,267,99'l

Describe the extent ând ûâture of Mr. DePliest's ownershþ holdings in MaliTEL
3: during
euestion
DePriest, ard the folm in which
the relevant peÀd. Deseribe the perceutage of the equity in MariTEL held by Mr.
of voting equity ir MariTEL held by
tlut eqrriny was held, e.g., stock, prefenedìtock, etc. Describe the percentage
Ur. nepiiest, and the fã¡m in ihich ttrat equity was held, If Mr, DePriest's holdings iu MariTEL fluctuâted during
the relevant period, provide a detailed explanation.

so I
A¡swer I have ¡¡o fi¡st-ha¡d larowletlge of Mr. DePriest's ownershi'p and interests in MariTEL
3:
will defer to his answers to this question.

euestion Sute l¡lhether Mr. DePriesr ever served as a director, officer, or employee of MariTEL'
4:
period
If Mr. Depriest formerly held one or more of such positions in MariTEL, but no longer cloes, state when the
in which he held the positioû(s) ended.

I have no ñrst-liand luowledge of Mr. DePriest's role as an officer, direotot', or enrployee


4. of
A¡swer
l]te conttol of MadTEL
MariTEL, so I will defer to his answers to this questioû, I hâve flo first-hand knowledge of
questioû.
ãi.rin! thå..t"uunt period so I will defer to Mr. DePriest's âr$wers to this

euestion 5: wlether Mr. DePriest ever held or e)(cercised de lacto corLltol of MariTEL by any
State
relevant periocl. If so, describe the nature of tirat conhol a¡d how it was
obtained'
meâns duri¡g tli
as to the efltities
Answef 5. I do uot have the filsþhand loowledge upon w'hich to form an opinion
to Mr' Del'riest's ansrvers to this
involved in the coutol of MariTEL during the relevant period, so I will defcl
a/25
Oct-23-2009 11:15 AM Te.Iesourus 5tAA412?26

not fofce Mal'iTEL to take actioru tllat he


questíon, I will state that he fegulârly communicated to mc that he could
DePriest's ârswers t0
believe<l were in the best interesËîf'tlæ In the intercst of accuracy' I will <lefer to Mr'
"o*p*V'
this question.

held either
6: If MC/LM believes that another person or etrtity (or other persons or entities) such
euestion
of MariTEL, or ÞoTh, during re t'olevaut period'
identifv
d.e facto coruolof Marirnr orJeizit .onttor
control you ìlelieve to have been exercised by
person(s) or entiry(ies), aoo ,*pr*in in a.tuil both ttre nature of the
iucb tbird party(ies) and the fou¡dation for your belief'

A¡swer6.Idonothavethefirst+aüdknov/ledgeuponwlrichtg|or1r1'orlnionastotheentitiês
involved in the control of MadTEï ä*iog tlu ."f**t period, so I
will defe. to Mr. DePriest's auswers to this
not fot'ce MaIi'lEL to take actious that he
qìrestion. I will state that he t"g;;.ù;;;;;cated to me that he coulcl auswe¡s to
believedwe¡e in 1ft,¡rrtint"r.*t*li't¡.;;p^"y. ¡a thc intcrest ofaccuracy, I will defe¡ to Mr' DePriest's
this question.

dicl not conuol MariTEL, explain, to the lrest of yout'


Question 7: If you believe that Mf . DePriest
knowledge âtrd belief, why and how MadTEL could atrive
âl the conclusion thar you did control MatiTEL'

Answer 7: I do not know âúd will not speculâte how MafiTEL arrived at the conclusion that Mr'
DeFriest contolled MariTEL.

QuestionS:Describethenaureandextenlol.Mr,DePriest'sowrrerslripandroleinMaritime
and Co¡nmunications Investt ents' Inc' Indicate
Comnrunicarionslf-¿ Uotile, üò,-S¡RJW Punrership, L'P.'
ot behalf of âny of all of ürese tllree enumerated
wheùef Mr. DePriest was authorized to enter into coneâcts if
to any or all of the enumefâted entides' alld whal duties'
eûtities, and what duties,if any, he possessed with respect
*V, U. nu¿ in connection wifh any or all of fhe enumemted entities
Answer 8: Mr. DePriest's ownership a¡d role i¡
a, MC/LM. At no time did Mr' Delriest hsve an ownetship i tercst in MC/LM' Mr'

DePriestwasaut]lorizedasmyagenttoassistmeasneccssary,andasrequcslcdbymc,
in a"rr"topiog noun"ìã ãn bendf of MC/LM' He has suggested equipntent
"ontocts aud professional âssocíation
vendors. He has a""oÁpani"a the cEo to conveDtions
radio servi-".t. Mt;-D:,P-:::1i.1t *y
meetings of potential uåers or ploflloter$ of two-way
request, guaiaut"ed rotes o\{eil bv MC/LM púmalilv
i' *l9"iiti:llltl",|T1:lltlt^tv
fuld massive amouflt 0l lltlgarrotl
,påut^i ltttiblttion acknowledgenreu! anl q the
wbich we havÊ recefltly prevailed at the
origioot.a Uy Wu,'"o ÞIavens in Califoruia' in
perrding' and befbre.the I'CC'
Çoui of Appealsllu"i'"o¿ itt Nt* Jersey' whiclt is still
a salaly' At nÔ timc did Mr'
Don DePricst is noi u-o't*ploy" und cìoes not receive
DePriest exercise de fdclo conttol of MC/LM'
Telesqurus 9/25
Oct-23-2009 11:15 AM 5LO84122?'6

b.S/RJIVPartnership,L.P.AtnotirnehasMr..DePriestlradanowllershipiDtercstin
S/RIW, Mr. Deprieiihæ hatl no rote in the mânâgemeût 0IS/RJW'
At no time did Mr.
DePriest exercise delaclo conftol of S/RIW Partnership' L'P'

0,Communicntionslnvestments,lrc.(CIÐ:PriortoFebrrrary'lB,2005,Mr.DePriest\¡Ís
dealt with the
tire sole owner.and president of CII. The assets ofthe cotporation which
and none
pubiication of phone Boolc Enterprises, had been sold beforc Decembet, 1998,
1998 and 2002,
,"orained. ih.re is no fecofd of cofporåte activiry betveen December,
to sene as the
when S/RJW }aÚnerslìip was organiTÆd' I needed a cotlorate eutity
Cel1eral parher of S/RJW. Since this Corpolatiou was iu existeDce,
I asked Mr. DePriost
had any value..
to traoster att otttrc stock ofthe Corporation to me. The eutity no longer
stock to me, and resigrred
H* m¿ oÀ ur. for thc cntity and transferrcd all of thc common
as president. He has not owncd any interest in CII since February
18,2005, and âlthougll
the change in the offrcers was not i'eflected with the Mississippi Sectetary ol'StatÈ
until
aûd director of
fanuary,iOoa, Ulis was an oversight. i began serving as the _solê.officer
CIi Àoá neU",ary 1g, 2005. At no time after Febnrary t 8, 2005 has Mr. DePrjest
au¡o"ío control over Couuluriications Inv€stnrc ts, Inc. Mr. DePriest was
"*"iriiA
üJ;;;i;"C";porarc Books of the empty corpoïatc Stmcture of CII as Presideui and
Ðirec¡or until his resignation in February 0f2005, but he took
flo action and tliere was rto
oolloratÊ activity between December, l99B and February' 2005'

representâtions regarding whedrer Mr.


euestion 9: Explain why MCiLM and WPV marle conflicting
and with respect !o tbe entiry rttat you believe made a false
Depriest was au officer or dùecþr ãf MC/LM, .WPV'
,-pr.s*trtion in this regard, timt UCli.Vt of explain, to the best 0I youf knowledge and belief' why it
the represennüons' and the neither
màde such false representation. Ifyou believe tlat there ìs no conflict between
MC/LM nor WPV *u, iour.oråt'io its regafding whether MI' DePriest was an officer or director of
'epresentations
MC/LM, explain the basis for that belief'

Maritime cornmunications/Land Mobile, LLC has ûever âsserted thât Mr.


DePriest wâs an
.{nswer 9:
qnestiou'
oflicer of MC/LM' MC/LM must defer to WPV for an answer fo dris
to/¿5
Oct-¿3.-ZOO9 11:15 Al{ lelêsourus 5|0A4I¿¿¿6

on behalf of MC/LM" S/RJW Parmership and communications Investnents, Iac.'


I respeotfirlly submif the above ansr'¡ers aatl ask your indulgence whete we have made
an

inadîe¡tent etror or misstatements or have neglected to cofieot a docuúetrt' I humbly


request that you resolve these fiâltêrs wtfl Wanen Havens quioldy and with fuali$'
as

this is a temendous outlay ofresourcðs that coì¡ld be spent furthering the publio interost
rather tha:r litigating Tle sâüe issues aÖIoss the cou¡lt'y. Thosç aotions havç becu tho
geatest itetenãnt I õo¡til ever imaginÊ t0 furthering the publiç itrlffest aud encouraging
tle diversity of pæticipation in the marketing of telecoumunioatiÖns speotum'

Respeotfrrlly submitted,

q...ø"CI:hH
Sanùa M. DePriesf
1r/¿5
Oct-23-2009 11:1ô At{ 'lelesourus 5LOe47¿¿¿6

EXHIBITS
Oct-¿3-ZOO9 11:16 At'l lelesourus 5lOe4I¿2¿6 r¿/ ¿5

Exhibit f. inoumbency Certificate


ForMC&M.

INCUMBENCY CERTIFICATE FQR MARITIME COMMUNICd.TIONS/LÄND


MOBILE. LLC

I, Sandra M. DePriest, Secretâry of Maritime Communicâtions/Lnnd Mobtle' LLC


..LLC'), â Delawârê limiled liability ôompâÍy (the "LLC"), do hereby certify as follows, as
0he
ofthe date set forth below:

i. The following persons are the duly elected a¡d qrralified officen ofthe LLC and
they hold the offices and títle set forth opposife thçir names below'

NAMB OFFICE

SANDRAM. DEPRIEST PRESIDENT AND CHIEF M.ANAGER

Sandra M. DePriest Secretary

2, The LLC is memlier-manâged.

3. Attached hereto as Exhibit A is a true, côrrect ând comPlete copy of tlio action
taken by the LLC, by unanimous written consent, signed by the sole member of tlie LLC (the
"Resolutions") which, among other thíngs, âpprove: (1) a $a,000,000,00 nou-revolviug credit
täcility from Plnnacle National Bank io the LLC; an<l (2) the oxeoution ofafl documents required
by pinnacle N¿tiofla'l Bâ¡k. to evidende, securc and document said credit facility, including
withour limitation, a promissory note, sêcurity agreements pledging all the assets of the LLC to
secure said credit faãility, a loan agreement, and all other documents required by Lender in
connection witli said oredit facility.

4, Attåched hereto as p¡$þl!S is a true, conect and complete copy ofthe A¡ticies
of Organizatioa of the LLC, which was in fuIl force and effect on the date tìat the Resolutions
were ãdopted by the mernbers of the LLC a¡d is in full force and effeôt on the datê horeof. They
have notbeen modified or amended except as set forth in Exhibit B'

5. Attached hereto as Exhibit C is a true, correct and complete copy of the


Operating Agreement of the LLC, which was in full brce ând effect on the date that the
Råsolutions were adopted by the membe¡s ofthe LLC and is in full foroe and effect on the date
hereof. It has not been modified or amended oxcept as set forth i-n Exhibit C'

6. Attached as Exhibit D is a certificate of Existence issued by the secretary of


State for the State of Delawarg showing that the LLC is in good standing under the laws of that
State.

IN V/ITNESS \#I{EREOF,, I have hereunto set my hand and delivered this Certificate
as of this å.S*fuayof August,200t.

.=ä-o^Ë\fò\
-_
@

Error! [Inknowb docr¡úÉlt !roÞtrty nâme.Ërrorl Unk¡orrn dgcumcdt J¡r'opcrty ¡lÂlllc'


'lelesourus 5fOA4l¿¿¿6 L3/25
Oct-¿3-zOO9 11:16 A1L

The undersigned, being the dulv elected, qualified ând âcting PRESIDENT a.nd
CI{.FI
qualüed
MANAGER of the LLC, hereby certifies that Sandra M. DePriest is the duly elected,
above his name on
and acting Secretary ofthe ILC and that the signature âppearing i'xnediately
the foregoing Certificate is his genuine si$rature'

IN WITMSS WHEREOF, thë rrndersigned has executed this Certificate ¿s of the


.*ffuay of August,2005,

Érrorl Uoknow4 docrlncnr DroÞcrty n¡mc.Er¡rrir! tldkíown docutn¡rnl n!ofl'rly lr¡lllc'


t4/25
Oct-23-2009 11:16 AM TeÌesourus 51OA4t2226

STATE OF MISSISSPPI

COUNTY OF LOWNÐES
notaty public in and for the state
Personally aPpeared before me, the undersigned
she sigûed
and county aforesaid, Sandra M' DePriest' who âcknowledged before me that

and delivered the âbove ând

for and on behalf of and as tlre act and deed


on the day and for the purposes therein suted,

of Maritime Commuflicadpns/Laûd Mobile,


LLC' and thât she was duly âuthorized to ãct'

Given under my hard and officiâl seal on


this the Z5'l4day of August' 2005"

rsEÁL)

l'{y commission exPtres:


L5/25
Oct-23-2009 11:17 AM Telesqurus 5L0A4I?'226

Exhibit 2. Resolution of MedCom


Development CorPoraf ion

COPY
BOARD OF DIRBCTORS CORPORÀTE RESOLUTÍON

BE IT that or¡ this 18th dav of FebrrÂry' 2005


RESoLYE]),

MedCon Developurent Corporatlon is vÍfhdrâffing fron S/RJI'I


Partnership'
L'P'
L.P. ae General Partûer for business rêâaons' S/RJl'l Partnership'
h¿s no liabillLies' Connunications Tnvestnênts' Iflc" a Mtssissfftpi
CorporaUiorr, solely owned by Sandra M' DePriesr' has succeeded
MedCom

L'P'
)evelopment Corporation as General Pärtner of S/RJl,l PartnershiÞ'
effective as of this date-

CÒrporâcfon

Sôle Dlr e c eor


16/¿5
Oct-23-2009 11:1/ Al4 'telesourus 5lOA4f¿¿¿6

Exhibit 3. Resalution of
Commudcaf ions Invesmeuts, I[c'

BOARD OF DTRECTORS CORPORATE RESOLUTION

BE IT that on this 18th day of February' 2005'


RESOLVED,

CÒmnuníëatlons Ir¡vestûìents' Inc.. t'il1 become General Partner of


S/RJll ParcûeróhiÞ, L.P' Con¡municâtiÔns InvesEnenbs ' Iuc" a Mississippi
CorporaLion, solely owned bv the urde-rsi8ned, S.andra M' 1{:i.11-t' ntt
succeeded Me<ICom Development CorDoraf:ion as GenêraI Partner of S/RJI'I
Partneréhl.É, L.P. effective as Ôf this date'

COMMUNIC¡,TIONS INVESTMENTS' INC.

Sandra M, DePrlese
SoIe Shareholder and ÐÍrector

GOP\'
Oct-23-¿009 11: L/ At4 lelesûurus 5lOt34I¿¿¿6
t/ /¿5

vjs,,@u,"frnhu*n PAGE 1

Tlr.e
Jírst $tate Exhibit 4. Certificate of Limited
Parurership for SIRIW

T, EARRIET SMTTH WINDSOR, SECREÍARY OF STAÍE OF TEE SÍA|IE OF

ÐEI,ÀVI.AAE, DO EEREBY CERIIFY THE ATTÀCEED TS A TRUE .èND CORRECÍ

CO9Y O!'IEE CEF-TI¡'ICATÍ O!' I,IMITED PÀ¡{TNERSEIP OF ''S / R-TTÍ

PÃ-FJNERSEIÞ, L^P,". T'IIED IN BEIS OFFICE ON gHE ÍWENIY-Í'IRSÍ DÀY

OF NOVEMBER¡ Z'.D. 2002¡ LT L2:20 O'CI,ÛCK P'M'

J/",-:"L J*t¿ta'øh;^¿^'¿
Har.iet smith Windsor, Secrecary of st¿te

3619940 8100 AUSEENEICATIAN: 2233129

a2a129778 oATË,:01-30-03
L8/ ¿5
Oct-23-2O09 11:1/ At{ 'lelesourus 51084I¿¿¿6

Oî DELÀHàRE
EîATE
S8öRET¿RY oF srÀÍE
Drvrsro{ o¡ coRpoRÀfrÖ¡¡'s
FILEIJ 7Z:2Q Fll l1/2t/2Òoz
02a729778 - 3ó1994Ô

STATE OFDELA\Yá.RE
CERTIFICATE OF LTMITED PÄRTNERSItrF

. Thé Ur¡dÊrs¡gr¡Ë4 doSiti¡lg to form ¿ lifnrttld PattnershiP ftt¡Gurr¡lt to tj¡e Delawsrc

RcviscdUniformLim¡tcdPå¡rnellhipAct'6Dct¿wgrcCodc'chaPrêrl7'dohcfcby
ëëd,ry ôs fötlÕwsi

r t'l¡¡t: Thc narnë ofthc limitçd ps¡fncrship is q / RgLFrÊ tne É4 Þ¿Þ1¿L¿-

. S€coßd: Thê addreGê oFilr registcrcd oflìce in thc


Stât¿ of DÊlevJårc is l209
orÊnqe gtreet cityof irhin9Fou- -
at snch addrëss is
ÎLê corPUSètiÕn Tryst
The flame ôfthc -inthc
RËSistorcd .{gênt

address ofcach gcôöEâl PartrlÈt is


ôs followsi
r Third: Thc ¡rame ¡nd mailing
Hcd.c*omDevelÉgoeq#.'.-
206 sth streëe NÓrtt¡ -
- ,
P. O. Box IO? 6

-. çfJ.lt¡!bu:.
Hs 397of - ------
-
e - this Cc(tiftcatç ôf]-¡mitcd
fn W¡tn€sr \trberÊofi the undcrsigncd h¡s cxecutcd
,D
5/'R.IH F.ðrtngfsh¡ir' L-' r-õ-s
Ûf
Partncrship of ( .- --...-
,:
lctn
!{Ëdcôqì DeïeloËmenr çôrünrãt
[Þnafu,PrÉntr #t s
ur, Ê'-]]-Ê+L'tat,
Gonê¡r¡l ttE P
- :
r€61d¡"nt-¡-4À (¡-¿"-
/

r'{sÞc, hnÐIl-lj-g+:¡i-
ft!?e ûr gr¡int flaÛ161
L9/25
Oct-Z3-2009 11:17 AM Telesourus 5LO84L2?'26
þ
Ër(hibit 5. Amend¡rent tot¡e l
Ce¡tificate of Limited Parmership
for S/RIW

STATE OF DELÁWARE
AMENDMENTTO THE CERTIFICATE OF
LIMITED PARTNERSHfP

The undersigned, desiring to amend the certilicate of Limited Partnership pursuant to the

provisiofls of Section I ?-202 of the Revised Uniform Lîmited Partnership Act of the State of

Delaware, does hereby certily as followsl

FIRST: 'fhe name of the Limited Partnership ís Sfi[W Parfnership, L.P.

SECOND: Articte Third of the Ceriificate of Limited Pattnership shall be amended as

iollows: The name and na¡ling address of each general parfuier is as foflowsl

Communications Inves{ments, Inc'


P. O. Box 1076
Columbus, MS 3S703

lN WITNESS WHEREOF, the undersigned executed this Amendment to the Cerlificate of

Limited Partnership on this the ltä day ot February, 2005'

Communications lnvestrnents, Inc.,


Its Oeneral Partne¡

coPv
20 / ?,5
Oct-23-2009 11:18 AM Telesourus 5|OA4LZ226
zl/25
Oct-23-2009 11:18 AM Telesourus 510A4I?'226

Exhibit 7. Resignation ofDon


ÐePriest as PrcBident and Directof
of Comm¡¡rications Invesbrents'
Inc.
Februrry 18, 2005

Communications twe$tøEnts, Ino.


206 8û sftetNoilh
Colunbus, MS 39701

Attentio¡: Sandra DePriost Secretåry

I hereby resþ as President a¡d Dirøtor of Coffnunicatio¡s Lnvestments' Inc'


¿¿/¿5
Oct.-¿3-2009 11¡19 At'Ì'lelesourus 510A4|¿¿26
Pase: P¿5
sEP-es-?øøg 19:16 FromlSCnNNER 66a3e?5993 tor3??1669

$tate of ltllississippi
Eecretäry of Státe
2008 Corporate Annual Report
--l lfthcrcare no EhBrgaE ma an "Xr berq
corPorätå lD: 553340 Exhibit g, 200g Amual Report for I delctnd ¡lIh ¡r tio hqfton qf thc Þ?gc,
CII filed with the Secretary ofSlate
Regrsterèd Ag€nt and e¡s of MS Ðorporale Nõhe ¿ Prlnclpsl Addrc$s:
SANDRA F- D EPRIEST õAMMUN¡qAf ËÄ1S IIWE$IMENI.S, INC.
206 STH Sl NORÎfi, PO Éo,( 10?0 ?06 fiH ETREET NOR TH
Þ.o- Bôx 1076
cotu!¡Bus, Ms 39701 COLUMBU6. i¡ts 3E?0¿

" CqrpoÌate PrinciFal Addrçt5

Federå d: 0¡077582ð
lëlËphonq: New offiseffl I Add¡csrês
Cunënl Pdoc¡pEl offiEcrE , AdúrEsssE ÞlrectoÍ É P.ÞrlCahB aANÞFA DEFR{EÛI
PrEBidrllf: DoNALD F DEPÊ|EST
2ó6 åTH EÌREET i{ORTH, P.O, BOX I 070
tr 20€ BrH srHËiT-fi oÈrE;To.EöTT'öÍ6-
ÇOLUMBU5, MS T97A¡
çoLUMBU€, Mgâ0t03

Vlcr Ptês: !
-V¡Eé Fresldcfil:
tr
--:
ú Êtër.tãry: tr
gecrehry:
?0q sTH sÎ
SANDFA F DEPRIESf
NORTH, P O BOX 1076
r_l -t I

I
ÇotuMEus, M5 39703
Tlc!surer ü
-ftê¡sur.¡:
--- ;l I

---
lDÈæb'ts ¡4 adûÍañ toth0$61^9le{ Eòovê &e lo ¡e tsled
I n"nu"rY
o¡ II

W,ri1rt,puge! __ _ ll
Slock shsrEE Àuthcr¡red, lEãuqd & outats rdlng: ' Stock shar66 Authórizcd, l6süsc Ú' outBtanding: I

Oláåi SeieE Avthddrêd lssucd C¡ssa s€tlEs A(¡thÞr¡rld lrBr¡cd


conrnon_--.-.-----------_ l!gl-- 1000 _t I

I
I

ñ-nrcsco¿en¡a6ñäElsirLesi
nñÃrcs¡ãAãÑatü-tEor'B*inlo--
453S98 AllOtrot Misce sneo(¡s Star. R{Ú118"":4- I

_
:---:'
-l

This flpoñ h¡E Þêcî ex¡mlned by ñr snd tÞ lhe Þrrt ol my lmc¡rlcdqc srrt Dclièf, iB llþê' co ëcç comF¡Eté âBd
jlo
cuÍeÍt ¡¡ cflhl¡ ätld d¡y ol Janusry , 08
PifltcdN¡m¡

Sandrd F DeÞ¡lÊ.sl
Se.rolâly-
5iC¡lore
Íttc
gECRETARY OFSTATE
fi(1te cheçx for$25,00r Psyablc to
,o,,o-*.
H,.:im*;ruÍi,äijg.t"iF:nn*'.11"î'll"tl)î'"'î,"xii,if:i'iJ'!Hå'ffis4n.".*
Telesqurus 5|084122'26 23/25
Oct-23-2009 11:19 AM

tht forËgoinE iB tsuë ånd


ooEcol BÍÓout4d oñ
I dcolerc undm pcnelty of psrjury thÊt

Sand¡s M. DePriçst
Oct-23-2009 11:19 AM Telesourus 5108412226

C-ERTIFIC.ATE OF SERVICE

Iherebycertifythåtoûthisthirtiethdayofsöptember,2009,Iserveda-copyofthe
foregoing Response by placing a copy, first-class postage prepaid, in the united states
Mail,
on each of the following püsons:

Russell I{. Fox, Esq.


Mintz, lævin, Cohn, Feffis,
Glovsþ and PoPeo, P.C'
701 PennsYlvania Avenue, N.W.
suite 900
liVashington, D.c. 20004-2608

Warren C. Havens
2649 Benvenue Avenue, #2-6
Berkeley, California 94704

/s/ Dennis Ç. Brown


IJ.S. POSTÁGE
PÊI N
cEr'lTFÉvit LE. vê
24t21
sEP 30.'¡s
Æilililil1illiltil ÊtÐn¡¡f

$2.t7
tl00953-,?-t I

First Cla Mail


ilEm-ssElo tsrlc

I
NJ
N
N:
o

DrÀfirs C. BRoçÑ
ATfOtrNEY ÀT LÀìY
8124 CooI(E CouRT' S0IrE20l
MÁ.YÁssÁs, vm Gh'IA 20109-7406

*;-*-
2-6

4
2649 Benvenue Avenue, Suiæs
BerkeleY, California 94704

€'
EXHIBIT 3
L/16
Oct-23-2009 11:24 AM Telesourus 5fOA4l22Z6

Dsnms C. BRowN
ATTORhEY AT LAW
8124 Coorc CouRT, SUITE201
MANÄssa6, vm.cINIA 20109-7406

FAJ( ?03/365-9456
PHoNE 701/365'9437
Nor ADMTmED IN VIRGTNI^
D.C.BROWN@ATI.NDr

Septunber 30, 2009

Jeflrey Tobias, Esq.


Mobility Division
Wireless Telecommunications Bureau
445 12ù Süeet, SW
Wastrington, DC 20554

Re: FCC File Nos' 0002303355' 0003463998' 0003470447'


0003470497' 000347 0sz7' 0003470576' 0003470583'
0003470593, 0003470602, 0003470608' 0003470613

Dear Mr. Tobias:

I repÌeseff the údio Virginia' Inc' (WPVJ


sysæm interests of lVìreless Properdes 0f
behalf of w?v, I am submiuing wPV's
before the Èederal Communications coÉdis$ioû. on
."qp""* t"rI" Commission's letter of irquùy to \ryPV dàted Augusl lB' 2009' Concurrently'
proceedings.
WfV, ,.rpo*. is being frte<i electronicaiiy in each of rhe above-referenced ¡eque$ for
irp.tut"ìv, f t-.oncuriently filing Attâchment II lo WPV's response under a
confidenti¿l Eeâttrent of tIe docurûeúl.

Pleæe direct any further communicadon conceming this mâtter


þ my attention

Thank you for your attention fo fhis matter'

Very truly yours,

Dennis C- Brov/n
Oct.-¿3-¿OO9 11¡25 Al'1 lelesourus 510A4|¿¿¿6

WIRELESS PROPERTIES OF VIRGINIA' INC'


P.O. Box 1076
Columbus, MississiPPi 39703-1076

Jeffrey Tobias, Esq.


Mobüity Division
Wireless Telecommunications Bureau
445 12ú Street, SW
Washinglor, DC 20554

Re: FCC File Nos. 0002303355, 0003463998' 0003470447'


0o$c7 a497, 0003470527, 000347057 6' 0003470583'
0003470593, 0003470602, 0003470608' 0003470613

Dear Mr. Tobias:

WirelessPropertiesofVirginia,I¡c.(WPV)andDonaltlR'DePriest(..I''or"Mr.
*" go¡lmissiou's irrquiry daæd August
DePriest") hereby respecñrlly fiIe their response ,o
i8, 2009.

.
Question I itfentify and describe all business
e ities , of whatever form' drat have
been coìtrolled by you during the releva periocl. For
purposes ofthis q'estiott, you are
deemed to bave c-on1,olled â''y entity in which you held a 50,0% ot more ownership interest,
0r served âs â dhector or officer, oi served as â gcncral
parmer, of exefcised de lüüo corifJol
in any way at any time during the relevant period'

A¡swerl:Duringthereleva-ntperiod,TVPVueitlterownednorcontrolledanyotler
an officer 0r directol of the
entity. Þufiûg the felevaPe.Iiod MI. DePriest controlled or was
following business entities:

Wiretess Properties, Inc. flilPD hel<I, some ter years ago'


liccnses-fbr
a)
t¡e relevant period,
Ëxperimentat radio stations. f iontrolled the inactive WPI during

b) Wireless Properties of vilginiâ' Inc' (rilPv) held the


licenses for
and Broadband Radio
Eclucation¡l Broadband Servicå srations WQtPgzB arul WQGI{2TT
ServicestationsTVMY290anclWMYZlgdurilgtherelevantperiod.Icontrolled\UPVduring
the relevant period.

c)WirelessProperties-East,inc.(WPEI),aforrrrerlrolderofMMDSlicelìses,
duriug tlte relevant period'
was inactive during the relevant period. I controiled WPEI
Oct-¿3-2OO9 11r25 Al4 'lelesourus 5|0A4I¿¿¿6

d) Witetess Properties - West, [ic' OPfúÐ, a fomer hokler of MMDS


licenses, wæ inictive during the reievant period. i contolled WP\ryI du¡i¡g the relev'¿nt
period.

e) Wfeless Properties - Upper Midwes! lnc' (WPUPI), a former holde¡


of
during tlte
MMDS licenses, was i¡active during the reievaut period. I conrolled WPUPI
relevant Pedod.

f¡Commuuicationslnvostnents,hrc.(CII)wÂsaûiúvesmlentvehicledrrritgtlre
relevant pedod. I wâs presideût and director of CII prior $ Februâ¡y
18' 2005' As showtt by
18' 2005'
Anachmånt I he¡eto, Iìesigned as president and director on February

g) Columbus Yarn Mills Company (CYMC), ownet of a yarn mill some 30


years ago, waslnactive during the relevant pedod' I controlled CYMC
duritlg tlte relevant
period.

h)SanPedroGauzeMill,Inc'(SPGMI),ownerofagauzetrrillsome30yeâIs
I co¡trolled SPGMI durirrg the relevant period'
ago, wâs inactive during the felevant period.

i) Ämerican Nouwovens Corporation wâs â Producer of nouwoven f'aÞrics


the relevant
during tie relevaat period' I confolled Atnerican Nonwovens, Inc' during
period.

j)WJGTelephoneCo.,Inc.(WJG)wasformedasanacquisitionconrpanyfor
relevant period. I
an acquisition íhich failed-to occur. WJG was iuacüve during the
controllerl WJG durilg the relevant period'

vehicle'
k) Cellular antl Broadcast Colnmunications, lnc' (CPCI)' ân investnent
lelevânt periÖd '
\ryâs inâcÉve during the relevant periotl. I cotlTrolled CBCI during the

Tupelo Broadcasting Corporation (TBC)' a former holder


1)
of radio broadcast
duri'g the relevant period'
licenses, was inactive during ttre relJvarrt perio¿. I co''ffolled TBC

prupose of excavating a
m) Penelore Corporaflon (PC) was fonneri for the
sunken steamboat, I controlled PC rturing the relevaût
period'

the
n) Scotland House, Inc' served solely as a payroll mechanism during
period'
relevant period. I controlled Scotlald House, lnc' during the relevan!

to provide
o) Transition Funtljng, L,L'C' was a temporary entiry formed
financing for entities in which I wal involved' Trânsitiot Funding'
L L'C' was inactive
4/ 16
Oct-23-ZOO9 11:Z5 Al4 'lelesourus 51094I¿¿¿6

during the relevant period. I controlied Transitíon Funcling, L.L.C. durir:g tle relevatlt
period.

p) Medcorn Devclopment Corporation (MDC): MDC, an illvestment vehicle'


was the generi pa¡bre¡ i¡ MCT Investors, L.P. dufiilg the relevânt period. I was
general
partner in MDC during the relevalt period.

q) MCT Investors, L.F' (MCTI): MCT Invætors' L'P' was an investment


vehicle durirg tire relevant period. As general parmer in MDC, I controiled MCTI
dutirtg tlte
relevânt period .

r) BIâvo Cofûmunications, Inc. (Bravo) was a former twne¡ ofradio lrroadcast


stations during the relevânt period. I contolled Bravo during the felevant Period.

s) Chârisflâ Broâdcasthg Company (Charisma) \ryâs a formel owner of tadio


broadcast stâtiöns rìuring the relevant period. I couüolled charisma during the relevant
period.

t)GoldenTriangleRadio,Inc.(GTR)wasaformerownefofradiobloâdcast
period.
stations during ttre relevant period. I controlled GTR during re felevant

u)MCTCorp.MCTCorp.wasâcellulalteleplrorreserviceploviderinRussia,
Uzbekistan, Tajikistal, anúAfghanistan during the relevant periÔd' I was a
director of MCT
Corp. during the relevalt Period.

v) BD Piltrrers. BD P¿¡t¡rers is a¡ invesrnent velricle holding limited


partner in BD
parmership inteiests in MCTI during the relevant pcriod. I wâs the general
Partaers during the relevalt period.

w) CD Parners. CD Parnrers is an investr¡ent velricle holding limited


ìn CD
partnerslrip inter'gsts in MCTI during the relevant period. I was tirc general parurer
Parnrers during the relevant period.

x)Biovenures,Iûc.Bioveures,lnc'wasinvolvedintlaptnarkersandgene
atrd related DNA ard RNA products a¡d serviCeS during the relevalt
period. I was a
matkers
clireotor of BioVentures, Inc. during the relevant periorl'

Warpath Properties, Iuc. ownecl la¡d zoned for residences


y) l owned
Warpath Properties, lnc. during the relevant period'

Ground Zero Fæhions' Inc- (GZFÐ was formed for fhe purposs of
z)
pcriod,
prgducirig comáe¡ative leatÌ¡er jackets. I controlfed GZFI durirrg dte relevant
5/ 16
Oct-23-ZOO9 11 : Zb At'l 't'elesourus 5|OA4L¿¿¿6

aa) Grouud Zero Industries' Inc' (GZtr) was fon::ed for the purpose of
producing leather jackets. I controiled GZII during the releva't period.
"ommlmorative
bb) Gre€rrbriâr Construction Corp. (GCC) constructed ote residence' I
controlled GCC tlurilg tlte relevant period.
cc) En;iroworld Soluûons, L.L'C, (ES) was foÍmed to develop âfl oil âûd
warer separation unii. I conUoued ES during t.Ile relevartt period'

dd)MüiTEL,Inc.isanoperatolofmâritimefâdiocoñfflunicationssystens.I
wæ chairman of MùiTEL, Inc. durilg the relevant period'

ee) Worldæx, Iric. makes covered elastic yarn products a¡d na¡row elastic
fabrics. I wæ a director of Worldtex, Iûc' drrring the relevânt pedod'

ff)ExciteTechnologies,Inc.wasfolmedin200gtodevelopadvancedwâste
<lestrucdon tech¡ologies, I am a director of Excite Tecltuologies, Inc'

gg) Àuthorþ (TV'{) - Appointed by tbe Presidenr of ìe


Tennessee Valley
United Stâtes to a three-year term a;d confirmed in May 2006, I
wæ a director of the TVA
during the relevant Period.

kk) Critical RF' I¡c' - i am chairman and CEO of Clitical RF' Inc'

ll)TheCommissior'bâsdetermi$edthatlhaveacontrolliuginterestinMC/LM
by virtûe of my marriage to Sandra M. DePriest'

Questionz:Statewhethelalloftheinterestsheldbyyouthatshouklhavebeen
rliscloseà in fte MC/LM Application, as âÍrended, FCC File No. 0002303355, were disclosed
'Identig
iri tlo ftlC¡f-ftf Applicatiou. any interests âüd effides that should have beerr disclosed
in the MC./LM apprcation as atributabte to Mr. DePriest, but wele mt so
disclosed. To the
uxteot th"t you huvì personal knowledge of the mâtter, intlicate the reason
why sucìr eûtity was
those that Ëntities that
not disclos;d in flre VC/Llt Appticatiðn. For each such entify,
except
and no otirer rule,
were requirea n be rlisclosed ori,y under 47 C.F.R. $i.2il2(bxlxíi)
calendar years 2002,2003, and 2004.
froviae its annual gross income fôr each of thc

Answer 2: The first and second sentences of Question 2 call


for a legal couclusion
director
wliich only the Conl}ission ca¡ reach. Mr. DePriest controlled or was an of{icer Of
of certain entities which were not disclosed to the commission in MC/LM's applicarion.
6/ 16
Uct-23-2009 11 : Zô Al"1 I'elesourus 5LOð4I¿¿¿6

ThefollowingelltitieðwerenotdisclosedbecausetheyhadnorevetrueEduringtlte
of MC/LM's right ro a
relevant teriorl a¿¿,-thus, could trot have affected the câIculation
bidding credit:

a) Wireless Properties, Inc.

b) Wireiess Properties of Virginia, inc.


.Wireless
c) Properties - Bâst, lûc.

d) Wireless ProPerties - West, Inc.

e) Wireless Properties - Upper Midwest, Inc'

f) Cornrnuuications Investments, Inc.

g) Columbus Yarn Mills ComPauY

h) Sal Pedro Gauze Mill' Inc'

i) WIG Tslephone Co,, Inc'

j) Cellular and Broadcæt Conrmuuicatioru, Inc'

k) Tupelo Broadcasting Corporation

1) Penelore CorPoration

m) Scotl¿nd House, Ïnc,

u) Transition Funding, L.L.C.

o) MCT Investors, L'P.

p) BD Parmers

q) CD Purners

r) Ground Zero Fæhiors, Inc.

s) Ground Zero Industries, Inc'

t) Gree[bdar Coustruction CorP.


Oct-23-2009 11:2ó AM Telesourus 5tO8412226

u) Ënviroworld Solutions, L'L'C'

v) Maritime Conrmunications/Land Mobile' LLC

Thefollowilgentitieswerenotdisclosedbecauset]æywererlotâffiliatedordidnot
exist at the riEe of úe filing of ùe applicaüon'

a) Critical R'F., Inc - MC/LM did not acquire coûfiol until 200Ó'

b) Excite Tecbnologies, Iûc' di<l not exist until 2009'

Excöptãsnoted,below,thefollowingentitieswerenotrliscloserlbecauseofoversiglrts
Their revenües were' as
or an inaccurate unilerstanding úrat they had had no revenues'
follows:

The following levenues ofBravo Communications' Inc';


Charisma Broadcastrng
disclosed because dre de miuimis
Comprny; and Goldãn Triangle Radio, Inc' were uot
tevetrues wef e oveflookedl

a) Bravo Communications, Inc' '


2002 - $1l9'0oo
2003 - No röverues
2004 ' No revenues

b) Charisma Broadcasting Company -


2002 - $54'800
2003 ' No revenues
?004 - No ¡evenues

c) Golden Triangle Radio, I¡c' -


2002 'fiio'l,4n
2003 - No revenues
2004 - No rËveuues

The following revenues of Metlcour Development


Corporation were tjf:::tl-,
"ol
incurrerl in prtor yeâfs âno'
te.aus. tlt.y eitirer õere received in compensation for
expeflses

tUutÃt utît*fy available fo¡ use, or were de nrinimis and ove¡looked' past expenses)
2O0Z - 82,585,998 (received in compensatiou
for
2003 - $426'789 (overlooked)
2004 - No levenues
ð/ r6
Oct-23-¿009 11:2ô At'l lelesourus 5IOð4t¿¿¿6

ThefollowingrevenuesofwarpâtlrProperties'Inc.werenotlepoftedbecausel
controlled it for ôdy tire minor part of the releva¡t pe¡iod:
2002 _ 976,500
2003 & 2004 - I sold all of nry interest in the compary in 2003 and I
have no infonnation concernilg revenues for 2003 or 2004'

The following entity was not disclosed because I beliÊved that I did not
control it:

Mar.iTEL,inc..InitsoppositiontoPetitio¡forReconsiderationinFCCFile
No. 0002303355, dated september 18, 2006, MC/LM i¡formed the commission of the
following revenues for MariTEL, Inc.:
2002 - $715' s48
2oo3 - $t,022,423
2004 - $2,076,s07

MariTEL
In response to my inquiry of SePtembff 13, 2009, tho Plesiden! and CEO of
provideal me with the following MæiTEL revenues:
zMZ-$308,1n
2ffi3 -$172'849
2004 - st,26't ,99'1
I believe lhat other persons holding interests in MariTËL ltld options to âcquire
period, but I have not been able
between 800 t¡ousand and à milion sharu auring the relevant
interest itt
io verif tJrat undersanding. If consiclered as hâving been fully exercised, 'ry
MariTEL would be diluted thereby.

Question 3: Describe the extenl âIld úaturc


of yotr ownership holdings iu MariTEL
during tlìe relevant period' Desoribe the percenuge of the equity in
MUiTEL lteld by you'
and de fomr iri which urat equþ was heid, e.g', stock, prefened stock'
etc' Describe the
of voti'g çquiry in lria¡iT'L held by you, aûd ùe foffi iû wlrich that
equity was
;;*r"g. period, provide
If-Mr. Oerriäsri nãtOings in MariTEL fluctüâted duritrg the relevant
a
ilelA,
deuiled explanation.
Oct-23-¿009 11:2'l At4 Ielesourus 5LOA4L¿¿¿6

based Ûû all issued and


Answe¡ 3: During the relevant period, directly and inclirectiy'
outsnnding stock, I held stock in the following percentages iu
MariTEL:
2001 - 68,183%
2002 - 51.8081o
2003 - 41'334%
2004 - 4s.f60%
200s -39.922%
2006 -31.912%
2007 -35.943%
2008 -23.692%
2009 -23.186%

only on voting stock' I lleld


During tlte relevant perioil, directly and indirectly, based
stock in the following percentages in MariTEL:
2001" -73,162%
?;002 - 54.914fo
2003 - 50.800%
2A04 - 48.64L%
2005 - 43,163%
2006 - 49'149/o
2007 -39,14rT0
2008 -25'5437o
?009 -25.016%

WhenWPVfileditsownershipReportiu2006,Idirectlyheldll,|SvoofMaIfIEL'

SÍate whethel you ever se ed as a dircctor' officer'


or employee of
Question 4:
no longer do,
MæiTEi. If yoü forfûerly held one o¡ more of such positíons iu MariTEL, but
state when ùiperiod in which you held ùe
position(s) eilded'

Answer 4: During the relevant period,I was a director ald non'executive ohâirma¡
(notanofficer)oftrlarir-Bltetw*.nz0o1âtld200s.Totliebestofrrryrecoliection'Iwas
between 198? and 1989'
iiesioent of úariTEL aûtt a diïector

Quesúon5:smEwhetheryoueverheldorexerciseddefac,ocotltl.olofMariTELby
contÌol arrd how it was
uoy..rì* during the relevant p.tioA. Ifso, clescribe the nature of that
obhined.

Answer 5: I did not exercise de fûdo co rol of MaliTEL during the relevant Peliod
ro/ 16
Oct-23-¿OO9 77tZ'/ Al4 lelesourus 5IOA4L¿¿¿6

Question6:IfyoubelievethataDotlterpefsonofentity(orotherpersonsorentitieÐ
atier rìe factocontol of MariTEL ot de iure control of MariTEL' or both'
during the
held,
na$re of
,-.f**t poioä, identify such person(s) or eutity(ies),_ and explai' ìn detail both the
for
tL to havå been àiercised by suctr third party(ics) and rhe fbundation
you'frelieve
your"*th
belief.

Answer6:ChiefExecutiveofficer,President'a¡rdboardmembctDanSmitlrrân]e
âssefl rny will on Dan
.ompanJ arra m"ae rhe operatrng and executive tlecisions. l-did not
but I was not actively
iiniåi,s ¿."isious. At ali releva"nt times, I was chairrnau of MafiTEL,
ieaving the presidency of
involved in MariTEL's governarce ot businæs activity' Since -
MariTELinlgSg,llravenotfeceivedaIIysalaryorlrerrefitsatrdllravellothadâlìyregular
preserce at the MariTEL ofÉces.

Fully diluted
Section i.2110(c)(2XüXA) of the CommissioÛ's RulÊs' 'arled
"
(cX2XiiXAXz) of this sectiott'
reouirement," provides tUat "except as set fofth in pffagraPh
sugh as.
;";ilñ.;d*ìs shau be catcutated on a fuly <]ituted basis; aII agreemenrs .
optiors anrl coûvertibte debentüres will generaliy be lI91F1.1:
if úe liglits
*rrt-.-ot*, *tort
Section
,lr"rroo¿å, have åbeady been tully exercised, " 47 C'F'R' $1'2110(cX2XiÐ(A)'
oue or more
iiïfot"iOXO provid"s that "every busiuess concern is considered toit.have coutrol llray be
o*i., iuo dirãôrrv or indirectty control of have rhe power ro conrrol as lhe power to
ãfñ;;.;".d,ive and it is immaþriâ1 whether it is exeÉised so long
1'2i10(c)(5)(A)
,o*tol .*lot," ¿Z C.¡.n' Ë1'21i0(cX5XA)' The example for Section the power to cont¡ol a
.*prri*, if, relevant part, trt"t "*inliátìon tiittt *hto the applicånt hâs or the coücern àt ùe
*rtIt the iame time, anotber person, or persoÑ' are in control
*iU àf ,n. p",V" or parries wirn tne powri to .ontroi. " Secüon
"lã** 1.21 10(c)(5)@) provides in
..iontrol c¿n arise througir . . . conracruâl^or orhef business relations, of
,.lru.ot prh m.t
.o*Ui*ton, of tlrese antl otirer factors,' 47 C'F'R' $t '2i tO(c)(sXB)'
is MariTEL's Third
Àtøchmert lI hercb, for wlúch confidentialiry is requested'
dated as of February 15, 2005. Please ret'er.to
AmendeJ and Restated stookholder .Agreement
Seäiions z.S6)A(c) at page 21 of Atticiunent
II' Explaiuing why MCT Invcßtors' L'P-" and
d;: ùt. pepriest' diá not control MariTEL, MC/LM sHæd tlut "American Tower' Inc'
contolsMadTBllpufsuâfl:roas¡aremneragreefûent.ThisagreementprovidesAmerican
equivalef s with the power [o elect a
Tower, Irrc' as holders ora ma¡ority 0f the coftflon stock
dre consent of dre
,i*pfr'* .i*ity of the boa¡d oi ¿itoto" of MæiTEL' Inc' ' subject torequires such an
äãä;r;iå", ii required'" Because 47 C'F'R' S1'2110(c)(2XiÐ(A) fully exerçised, American .

*-gr.. r* ,; þ trËated as if tne rights thereunrier have alreacly been


of the board of
fo*rr, fo.. had to be treated as h;ving the power to appoint a majority
direclors, anr1, tlius, rrao to o" cotui¿u"re¿ to te
i', ut ttrà t"ust, de facto, if not delare,. conttol
reason to disagree with the :?tetl:"
of MariTEL' Wireless Properties, ürc' has had no
con ol MariTEL'
,"tti.¿ ty it¡Cll-L¡ r¡at l't-ci trvestors, L'P', and thus' that I did Dot
TL/T6
Oct-23-2009 11:27 AM Telesourus 5lO8412'226

you did Bot coufol MariTEL' explain) to the best of-. .


7: If you believe tlat
Questiou
the couclusion thâl you did
you, koà*ledg" anU teUef, why and how MariTEL could arrive at
conuol Mari'fEL.

A¡swer7:IdonotknowandwilluotspecrilatehowMariTELarrivedattlreconclusiotr
factors
ttrat I contolled MariTEL. However, I believe that if MariTEL had takeir all televant
ioto u""o*,, M¿riTEL would not hâve reâched the colclusiou which it did'

role- in Maritime
Question Describe the nâh¡re âûd extent of your ownerslrip and
8:
Commr¡ications/Lantl Mobile, LLC, S/RIW Pâfinershþ ' L'P''
a¡d Communications
to enler into contrâct$ on behalf of any
Iouo..*t,, Irrc. State whether you wefe authofized
you possessed with lespect to
* .U oi t1".. t¡tae enumetated entities, and what dllties, if ary'
widr any
,"Vìt ¿i"f ,it" enumerâted entfties, âfld what dÛties, if any' you had in connection
or all of the enu[Ierâted eÚities.

Answe¡ B: I have never had an ownership interest in MC/LM' I have beeu autho¡ized

toeûterintocoûEactsonbehalfofMC/LM,Ihavesuggæteclequiplnentveûdors'and.have
accompaniedtheCEotoconventionsanclprofÞssionâlassociationmeetingsofpoteûtiâlusefs
of two-way radio service'

At no time have I had an ownership interest in S/FJW Pafinelship'


L'P' I have not
beenanofficerolâdifectorandhavehadnoroleinthemanagementofs/f{IwPartnership'
L.P.
of Communications
Priorto February 18,2005,I was tl¡e sole owner and Prcsident
Investments' Inc and I have
I-nvesfuionts, Inc. I have not ow¡id any interest in Communications
its manageurenr since FebÌ uary 18,
h"à oo1b.fr;"ffi.., o, u dir.rio. ood lraue had no roie in
200s.

why
9: To tlrc extent that you have personal lcrowledge of the matter' expiain
Question
ân officeror
Mc/LlVl-and wpv rnade conflicting representatiols regarding whetÏer you were
you believe màde â false rePresent¿ltior
äir.rtoL or rr¿qr.ir¿, and with respãct io the entity that
io the-bestof your ktrowledge and- belief' why
-ri"n eitrrei tvtc/uu ot fupv, explain,
i""url, t"g*¿,
ü*iã" i"rtt representâtion. If vou believe that there is no co$lct uety1L$1..^
reprerentatioos,andtheneidrerMCILMûorW?Vwasi.naccuraleinitsrelrresentauotls
regardingwhetheryouwere-otfi.''ordtecþrofMC/LM,exÞiainùebâsisforillatbelief.

Answer in FCC File Nos' 0002755676 and


9: At page 3 of an Opposition
stated üat "Don DePrÌest is an
o0oz6g52.l0.dated o;tober 23,2006;'wpv inacculârely
ãü..iunAu¿ir.ctorofMC/Livl,,'Theinaccurâresratemeurwassimplytheresultofân
oversight.Accufately,itshouldhavestatedtlrat,.DonDePriestisanofficeraldadirectorof

10
-' o¿L--z 3': z\N)v' I r : ¿ö At4: 'lë1èsö-u-rils J|Qö4I¿¿¿6

\VPV.,'DonDePriestisnotaldneverhasbeenanoflìceroradirecto¡ofMC,LM.Inlight
ofthefactthat,ifâccuÏâte,tbestatementwould¡¿ygþeenofnobeflefittoWPV,itwouldnot
false'
be reasonable ro conclude that the statelrent was intentionally

to provide any additioilâl


The Commission's Iener offeted tlre opportunþ for me
Íote would appear to be
ûâteriâl rhât üay be felevant iû this flatfef. À ¡rief biographical
relevant to the Coünissíon's i¡quiry.

As can be seeû from the infomation providecl herein'


I have been involved in the
which have given employúen[ t0
founding and <levelopment of numerous business enterprises
For 30 years' I hâve been
tUoum"ãt or pt"ous and contributetl to the generâl welfare'
bfoadcÍrsting,
,ìlrsrlir, ,hi, a*elopmeru of new teleco¡munications services, including
provided new servjce to
actually
cellular, and MMDS sysÞms' Suif¿ittg compaÏlies üat have
united stâtes' I was head of^
iu. p"tii'q i ntut contiiuute¿ to t¡e åcinomi" auv*toprnenr of.ùe
the fi{st cellular company to be'actuirø by t'tcçaw
ôellular Cornrnunicatious Compa'ies,
comparv now
i;;, ;;å;;;il""ciais used in McCaw's IPo helped to set into motion the
lcnow¡ as AT&T Wileless, Inc.

ùe MMDS service'-
In the 1990s, I led A¡reric¿¡' Telecasting, Inc' as we developerl
Sprint acquired that interest and the service is usttl
by Sptirtt customers todây for wireless data
on cellphones and PDAs.

to MCT Corp''s bringing.


More recently, as chairma¡ of MCT Corp" I coltributed
nations of the former soviet repubiics
new cellular servi"" to ,o-" oithì less well developed
¡elations of the
i¡ ;"*rl Asia and to Russia, itself, r¡ereby contriburing ro the inrernatio]lal
UdtedstatesofAmerica.no'n*''¡.Afghanisnnicellphoneoperatorwhichwasformedby
in
the GSM World Corrgress
MCT Corp. ao¿ two otner compan'ies, was'given ûre awarrJ.ar
pãri* fãrtir. *otkl's best mark;ing .t*poign, It also obtained the first Asian Developtneff
te country'
Ba¡k loan fo¡ Afghanístån since the Soviet Union invaded

Senate' I served lhe public as a


By Presiilential appohtment and confirmation by the
largest public power ¡o.rnPanY';Litlt
member of the Tennessee Valley norf,otiry, rhe nauon\
an ircsrimable vatue or criricJLàust y intiort*"tor".
For the TvA, I was chairman of thc
Relations and Energy
Governâ¡ce coûrfrlittee, as well âs cbairman of üre community
Comurittee, which i¡cluded economíc clevelopment
of the TVA region'
Èfd;.y
Ihavebeench¿irma¡oftheColumbus,MississiPpiPublicUti]itiesCommission,a
dishibutorofTVApower.Iamapastse¡vicememberofüÉRotafyC}ub,andhavebeen-
the Silver Beaver award from
t**iàrni pr"ria"ff ;f the Regioûâl^Boy Scout CouncíI. and I hotd
of America. i **, *..-uo of rhe inirial/firsr setecEd
class or Leadership
ild;;¡;;r" for many years arìd
fr,rìrrirírppi^a tave beeo insnumental in Employment of the
Hândicapped

received the Golden Heart award in the 1970ifor


this' Il 1974' I wæ recognized æ
Businessman of the Year by the Smali Business
Adminisffation for Mississippi' the Souüreast

1I
Telesourus t3/16
Oct-23-2009 11:28 AM 5LOA4LZ226

nationul runner-up. For two yean, I served as prcsidenl


oflhe Columbus
Unitcd S1ßtcs and was
of directo¡s of ùe
llisrcrical ¡-oundatiotr *d w^, foiältii åäu"i ä¿ "
*e¡nt¡cr of ihe board
" I have served as a member ofthe
st+tc oflvtississipp¡ uistoric rr"seriáii'åiðot'oi*'¡orr'
üilii;tîT;;;;å"d æ a *"*uo the Statc of Mississippi
Mi,uissippi Govemor's vcnture "fmultiple rorms on lbe
Ludit Ovc'rsight Corn*iu* fo.
gti,i"" i"-S-t'æ Go"t**tnt I sewed
Atl¡nrs ReBional p"n"t to. t¡e setciìt-n'oi mirc li"tt"
ftllows' I have beeu r trustee oft!¡e
Nal i 0nâl SYmFhoDY OlchestÌa'

I anr rhc fathe¡ offou¡ child¡en and residc with nry


witb' Sanclr4 in hisroric Columbus'
Mississippi.

,lM-
ReÉìÞootfullY .\ubnr¡tted'

Donlltt R- DePriest
Oct-23-2009 11:28 AM Telesourus 510A4|2226

Februuy 18, 2005

Communi cations ü¡vestments, lnc.


206 8ü SteetNorth
Columbus, MS 39701

Attention: Sandra DcP¡iest, Secretary

I hereby resign as Pfôs¡dÊnt end Directot o¡Çgmmsnications Investmonts, Inc'


effective immediatelY.

.'ffirrñ
L5/ 16
Oct-¿3-2OO9 1l :29 At'l 'lelesourus 510A47¿¿¿6

ATTACHMENT II
Oct-23-¿009 11:29 Al'1'lelesourus 510A4I¿¿¿6

is fuê ând cqrrect' E (Êcuted ofl


I ilêclârë uftlêr FeBalty of Perjury thât the for€goiûg

-5É-ÈrÉr\ße4 .l9, Zoaq --


EXHIBIT 4
Oct-23-2009 11:02 AM Telesourus 5L084I2226

:;
@)m**'
Seplember 28. 200q

By Hûrd (iù the office of the FCC Secr'etary) ¡¡d F'Mail

Mr. Jeffrey Tobias


Mobility Division
Wiroless Telecommttnicaiions Buleau
445 12ù Strect, SW
Washington. DC 20554

000j47 Q527'
Re: FCr( File Nor' 0002303355, 000346'ìe98' 0001470441'
ôoo¡+zoszo. ooo:+ioie¡, ô0034705si' 0003470602' 0003470608' 00Û3470ól l
Dear Mr. 'lbbias:

Division' Wireless
This lesponcls to the letter sent by Scot Snne, DepLrty Chief'.Ìr4obility
lvlaliTEl' lnc' dated August lfì'
Telecot¡ntutications Bl.'r'.ou' to ¡ni o-n¿ Russell Fo*' "ounscl tt:
ioòs. yout. t.rt., firur rcqucsts [ôT in[ormâtiùrt Ptlrsuant to Scction 308(b) olthc
"ontained lhc rerrucsted i¡[6¡'nrriion (thu
Cor¡munications ¿\üt of lg]¡+. as anìend.'tl. ProvicleC br-'low is
*¡,ao, ur, irr it,r/,¿.î ([ÔùInotcs ilfc omitrod) ânrl thc answers f'ollüu thc requests)'
I. {)çr.r'i¿' thc cxle tttiJ ntthm o!-Ìv{"' Dcl r'- t ' o'r'nt shi¡t
)i' tiít'tgs ,itt .l'lû i'l'EL'!tt'¡ 'e
rirc '."!uì¡t'.it' Iruri'l i"L held hv ML D¿Pnt"
ìhu ,rloi'int ¡ori,ul. tteçÜ¡h¿ th, ¡erce)nge of
-e'g',
.rAii" ¡oi,it, 'çhich llt tquity rias held sto|i' prefoL ett sto':k' ¿lc De':críbc tht'

percantagettfrhevotingtt¡trlt'ntr'IuriTELìzeldb1'kh"bePti'tt'lntitheJorninvhicltlitur
'rlrì¡iy *ã, n"n. y nn:. nipr.test's ioklings in MariTEL flucruated thu.ing the reletuttt pÜiotl
providè a deldile expltrtttrlkuz.

Mr.DePfiestwas,andconlinuestobe,ashaLehol<letinMari.{.t:i,'lnc.atrd'thrnughMari.I.lÌ1..
period..specifred by thc FCC of
in.., oiii, i turioiurics (cottcctivcty, 'ii¡lailTEu) during the
had and continues to
;;;;*y i, tóitì; thc prcscnt. níring thc pcrioä in qtrestion' M¿rirEL it and continues to havç
have scveral scries ofstock. ln ad<litión n ðommon, voting
stock, had
voring inter ests (until such
;;;;i, ;Jü"iprefer¡ect stock that clid not generally conre¡,any of pt'eferred stock (in
;'t*; til;i".k *as conveúccl to cotnlnon itock) bther to'vt)tc fcrr
classes
members ofthe Board ol'
p-ïtf*l-ï, iàt"i O and U p,"tt"'a stock) penrrit'holderr
¿rnd on an ui-ion""ttud 6asis. The nr*r6er
ofshates ofcomrnun
ilì="mri pii",:ao
"o.versiàn (and on which voting lighrs
r*"f i"t"ï,i"f, Series B and fl preferred stock could bc convcrte^d
"No*, fo"*ontple' one sharc of.selies B or H prelen'ed fock
är"G"O has varìed ovet'tim"- were apprô."-imatêly 22
ìf it
louta Lu áonu".t"¿ (anrl can therel'ore voLe beforà ...onversit'n) ¿s

shates of conuron stock-

'fhe polcentage end charactel of Mr' DePriest'5 equity inteÌests lìuÚtuaßd during tlre relevani
effecr on Mr. Depriest's coltrol o[ Mari'l'E[. nor
;;;tå;;ìrdeil ihe fluctuarion lrad no material As MariTF)t'
ïhc compâny's obligation to rcport changes in the leveì ol-eqrrity ownership'

4635churchRd.Stlirel00Cul]nnhrg.CA30028.VoicerFrìx:888.989-jjj9.wlvw.m8l'ite.!!1.5-a'1çQ|-]]
2/7
Oct-23-2009 11:03 AM Telesourus 5L084I2?26

(@wu*ri'"r l

his interess in MCT


reported in 2001. Mr. DePl'iest (both dirçctly and inclìrectly.through.
and prcfcned
li
iri.riài., CùCIT'.) aud MedCorn Deveíoprnent tìorp.jheld both common67% of thc slock-
stook. At that time, MariTDL r,.pott ltnut ttir. DePriesi held approximately
"Ëil-""]'ùilñ
;;i,iì-iil'..t-ìiäir Nta'iiËL's zooe applic*ion for transfer of control' Mr'
several reaso's
o"î,*iî,".ì_""ge of equity inte.est in Mari.l.EL gradually tlec.eæed t'or the
not n"""ssiintt a change iu control requiting F('C
Uifo*; Ito*"u-.r. ttt.r"
"ot.J "i,ung"sãid
approval.?

as payments in kind ("PtK")'


First, additional shaÌes ofstock rvere issued to various shaÌeholders
stock to ncw and
b..."a, r"rrriiel- iold an additional series ofstock. Scries H pref'ened Mr. DePriest's
i,*.rt"". Both of'these occunences tçsulte4 in routinc prior to tho indístfiburion
fluctuations
"*iriir!
pËärt-oge int.re.t in all classes olMariTEL stock. lmmcdiatcly
olthc
FCC approval' Mr'
i;c1''slì;es thqt resuh"d iu th" trarisier of oontrol for which MariTEL,sought
The chflrts bclow show'
DePriest held approximately l5%;i;li isiueJ and ouetan¿ing stock'3/

information on all issued and


" As the Comtnissìon is aware. its o"vncrshiP riPolts rcquirc
purpàs",ofatter*ining genetally considers
ootranaìngstock. Ho*"uur. tìu "onirol'the-Comruission
theentities'rhatt,otovotlngstock..Såe.eg..47C'F'R'$l'qtq(cxzltii)te)("ConrollinginlüÈstrncarìs
t"-jãi,,y owïersrrlp. ani'g;ñtì^t pt'Lnutstt¡ lntcresi' or arrv,means ofactual wolking
""üiá;q"rty
n.!ati,'. contiolt wí the oieration offlle licensee- ' '") lu 2001' MuriTEL presented
"oìuoiti."ru¿lts Eiglrt ycors aftc¡ tic fact' thc
inf*Ànìion ,"goäin! ownersrrip or votint auá nol-voting stock - lbr
äî'np^Ñ- i"-.""øì àî t'uutu¿ (as iidid ¡n 200s ard it does in this letter) nn:r ol
"oii.n.i,t '"¡oìü.lii
to, purpo,*, ofcalculatiig each tlísgìosable interest holdef's percentågÈ ol
preferred stock as con"",r"O
¡ssued û|rd outst8nd¡ng stoct- ltÓwcvci thc ¡csult -
-
w]lh rcspÊct to Mr. DcPrìest's conhsl would hov¡
madc ¡ro diffcrcncc. In zoo r. rvrr. ucpiLst held significantly
grmtcl thfln 50o/o oftlÌe company's tbtal
convcrlcd of nÔt'
stock, whether the preferted stock was Îrcäted ås
?/'[hcCom¡nission'slettcrsuggestÊthatMadTEL'sownelsh¡prentainedtlìesatneflom200luntil
Stone' Depury Chief' Mobility Division' Wirclcss
its reÞofied change in control in 20d8: Lttt"r ûom Stot
tÍrc. anrl R¡sscll H- Fox, Mintz, l'evin.
r"ùËro,nuniontîons eur"au, I.CC, tÔ JL;i Smirh, Mâri't'ÈL,
Pi. at 3 n.l I (Aue' 18, 2009) ("FCC.Letter") (notiug fhat dre FCC-
å:"ni, F"ri¡r, cro"rLy and Popeo,
Fo¡.m 602 filed on March 13, 2001
,;;O*iliy;;;"*i".d cur renr ùpulìtil the lime the MûriTEL transfer of
cortlol wâs corsl.ìùunated in 200S):Ï tiJ nóU rathff, thc'c wcrc ceruin routine changes in MariTEL's
geuerally do not oblignte-
ãí"".r¡ip ,tt""i"" that occurred rluling that tiine' However' the,FCÇ's rules
changc in conrol' 47 C F R' !i L919{ b)'
licensees to ìçport chmrges in ownet shif that do tlot constilüte
a

ñ;åäì-"g-úi.ì;;; t¡Ëìonsto, ot"oit'ol' thete were changes in MariTEL's owneßhiP' btrt none thnl
requiled leporting to the FCC.
3/ h i$ recently subrnirLed FCC Form 602, MariTÊL prtscnled infornation ¡eEalding all ofihe
ofclais' ås.directed bv the FCC's rules and forms'
irrur¿ uJ oui"ton¿iíg stock of MariTeL, regardless
H stock, .s cliscrtssed
cìîiärr-iä iig¡i"'.t*tioted with SeriËs B and
I-lowever, bcoau,e onthc voting and
ba$¡s' All
lt¿*iffL *fculated rhJs"rieti unO n ptãfttt"a ttotk ownctship on an æ'convertêd and
lâlt'j tha;; ¿pptoåtn Refercnce to Percenhges of all . ^ and
"-fr*", issueci
*åi.i."ìli irtit but trêâting the Series B
"rpo¡$s
oirtstanOi,rg stoct means the perceutaje ofall to**on and p'cfcrrcd stock'
"basis'
H prefêrred Stock on an as-convened References to perc€ntage ofvothlg stock means the

o.L"oiog" of"o,ruoon stock. plus rlìe-fer.ì""


s ;¿ H p*rd"ed stock'¡s-convcrted (buL omitting thc othcr
continues to believe its
lu¡os ofîruf.oucf ttock). Asixplainect more fully beiow, while.MariTEL
th" distinction bctwccn all ofthc issued and
reportiug approach i, uppropriot. unJ"itto
"i*utått*""i'
stoÇk trcated as converted is i¡nuratcr ial l'or
.,irt^iàÏ"Å !t."t -¿ rri or,rÌ" ¡tu"ã.nl autstênding

4635 church Rd, suile 100 cunming' GA 30028'Voice/Fax:888Ð89-3319 'ryJlarrt9!'Es'çqnl


3/7
Oct-23-2009 11:03 AM Telesourus 5LO84|ZZZ6

(@)*mT ri
by Mr' DcPriost on.ân
on dle one hand. the ¡:ercentage ofthe issued end outsta¡dhrg stock held
stock hcld by
ãnn,*l t æiu du.ing tire relevirrt period, and on the other, the percentage ofvoting
Mr. DePriest duririg the relevaniperiodÍ

MariTEL Ownership Intorcsts Based oD All IssuÊd anti Outstlnding Stock

2001
b;;rd
DePríesl -llEl¡it;
¡t¡ncricun I ?4.781% I 19.2419å

MirriTEL Ownership Interests Bnsed on Voting Stock Only

whèther Mt . I)t:l'rit'st t,var s¿rved as u dircctor. offìter, or employee


of Mat.'iTIi!'
Z. State
in I'Íaril'ËL' hut rc longer doas'
ii Ar'. nuPrirrt¡orrterly held onc of ntolz oJrs¿rch ?lor;!íons
.'*ai Yhm rhe perío¿l in ,vhich hc htkl the PÒsit¡on(s) endetl'

lteginuing of the relevant.period ..


Mr. DePriæt was the Chaírman of ùe Board of Mari'lEt' at the
Depriest ever sn ernployee of
,lpiäzooa *hen he resignerf from the Boa¡d. At no tinre wa.s
"itil
Mari'fEl or an officer of MariTEL'
dryt
J. .S¡atç wherherltlt'. Deìriest ever heklot øxercisetl de fuclo cÒnl|'ol Ôl MariTEL by
how it v'as
,**t àring tn* netenant period lf so, descrÍbe the ndlut'c qf lllat contrcI' and
ohtaìtrcd-

over MariTEL dtrring the


It is lvfariTEL's judgeme¡rt thÂt Mr. DePl iest exercisecl dalctcto control
¡"J.rn äooT and July 200g. As noted above, until l.tpril 2008, Mf. DePriesr wás Ùe
"ì.i"J
Ëil;;;;i;|le Båo,o of MariTEL, \4,ith authoriry- ro, among orher rhings, set rhe
oròii".tors

purposcs ofdctermining control; Mr' DePriest continued to lìave dellôto


contlol duringdre relevrDt
ll wâ$ thê ch¡¡nge in control
neliocl re!.aldless oflìow tlË peÌcelllâges Ôfstock owncrship wcrc Prcsentcd
ofthe apPlication for FCc
ffir.iüä;j;t;il,Íä" ãiir'" rt¡c'ftn"res that promptecl the strbnttssiou
approval.
o, Tlle percenlâge ofstock hÈld reflects dâtâ âs Of Decenrbcr i of
I cach year, The charLs cornbine
through Ënlitigs he corrtolled' The
rhc intcrcsg in Ma TÉL thut Mr. D"Pri"rt lìetd individuslly and
greater than l0%o interest in
cirÂrt; inclÌrde Arnerican Tower whicli ís the only cntiry that atso
had

MflriTEL all througìlout t'he relevant peliod'

4635 Church Rd, Suite 100 Cumming, GA i0028 ' Voice/Fax: 888-989'3339 ' vrww'mariteluss'com
4/7
Oct-23-2009 11r04 AM Telesourus 5108412226

Ôf Di¡ectots and the


agcndâ lor meetings and exercise ol'gÊnizotional cont¡ol ovol-thc Boâfd
äñy.' Mor"ori".. *hen Mrl DePricst no longer held a majority of the voting stock of
V*hgL, n" held rnore voting stock than any other sñareholder. During tlrat_thne, he also ltad
"u.n
iir. rigltt to as lnany B;ard of Directór positions as any shareholdet' Because'
-other voting equity in.
"ppoi,rt
befo'I tne Mç'l disirìbutioï, lvir. DePriest hel<l approximatoly 38% ofùè
fr¡..nÈi, ¡. ha-ve any sh*reholder action fls wcll as Board olDirector ¿'.tion to
f'eve'ted
"""f¿
whiclì hè wâs opposËd.

Ifi2006'
Other actions provide indicia of Mr. ÞePtiest's defcto control ol'the company'
Bank. Mr. DePriest was instrumentâl in
Irl*üfSL r*.,iru¿ o $i00.000 bridge loan fiom Pinnacle 't'hË
àrr;o,ì,rg rrr. co,npany in obrzrinin[ that bridge loa'. Tern.sheet pl epared in advance ofthc
in the event ofa loan
ioun ..ufi"n".¿ frir. óepLiest's wiiingness tõ provide a personal Su'råntee
*
àrioun Ño otut ,hareholder tool< thãse ki¡di of me¿usures designerl to prevcnt tho
company
?005 and September 2006 Mt'
irom becoming insolvent. Additionally. between Jåuuary
other
óuiii".iurqut=¿ nn addirional $1,23i,500 ofoonvertil¡le suborclinate notes liom
he
i"u..iorr. Àa ,m rame time Mr. Depriest reducecl ltis percentetge ofequiry ownership,
extend the rnaturity ofthe
incl.eâsed the levet ôlthe cÒurpäny's debt he lreld and iielped
company's obligalions to preventjeoPardizing the cornpary's solvency'

drat Mari'l'EL
Al no ti¡ne untilthe distribution of the MC:T sharcs rlid Mr. DePriÛst ever assert
of contrcl ot'
,¡oui¿ t*u. rut *itted an applicatiÓt to the FCC sqeking its conscnt tô the lransfer
MariTEL based tn a stock ownership' Orr separate occuions' Mr' DePriesl
"hangl'in control of
äifiowleageo t at the dis-nibution,bf the MCT shares.would cause a change irì ^
tô MCT investo* âddressinga number of
f,¡o¡i.¡gl. Ïn par.ticular, in a December 2005 lerler
business issues, Mr. DePriest statcd, "Äs cdnclusions and
reso¡utions Ùe reached on the above
would ooustiftrte
*ott"rr, ft¡Cf áoti.ipates a distribuiion of MâriTEL sh¿ires ' ' ' A disb'ibutiÓn
in an e-mail
* .f*"tr"l åf MariTEL for FCC licensing putposes ' ' ''' Simil¿ìrly'
once thë
"ftãtË" ;itL u ,,',e¡¡ber oftlre Board ofDirectorsin 2007, Mr. DePries[ stated that
the
fufëi áîrU.ifrution *us compl"te, túËiËwoukl bea tmnsfbr of contfol.5/ Atnotime
"n"i,on"g. before

distributioßoftlìeMCTstock<IkltVIl..DePficstassertthâtMâriTELshÔtrldseekFCCrrppr.oval
for a transfer ofcont¡ol.

retnained in ¿le
M¿riTEL's assessment was the same as Mr' DePriest's' Whilc Mr' DePriest
believed fhat
;;r"*;o;l .;;;ft;,
htu p""entâsó of voting eqllitv wæ under 50%' MariTEL

to thc Boârd o[Þirectors suggcstcd


" Mr, DePriest's e-tnnil to the A¡rericafi Towel tcprescntâtivc
rhflt Mr. DcPricsr bcl¡cvcd thât control would be hãflsferred to ¡\merican Tower' Mr' DePriest's
uesunrutiollsweLeiucorrectlrecar¡seaftelthedistrib[tio[oftlteMCTsltntes,AmericanTowerdidnot
fiäiilril;y;iirr. "ì,ìig
,i"*, orMa¡iTEL and American Tower did nor exercise defàcro control
;;;;,h;o;p*"i. MoreoverfMnriTEl's shnrehokìers' Agrccmcnt spccilically contemplate the
-AiC Event " whe. À'rerican Tower would be deer edtocoñrol
;;;";;;;;;ã"" oran negularory
that citlrèr Èn ATC ReEulalory Evenl
fulariTEL. No shaLeholder, includìnã Mr. ócPricst, has suggcsted
t'ot such an ATC Regulâtory Eveut'
hæ occurred or that it was necessatito seek FCC approval

4635 Clrurch Rd, Suitc 100 Cumming, GA 30028 ' Voice/Fâx: 888-989'iii9 ' \^/ww lìlaritelusa'coln
5/7
Oct-23-2009 11:04 AM Telesourus 510A412226

;i::
K@**rr ó/
After that tinre' Mr'
his ribláctd cotìtrol lvould end onthe distributiou ofthe MC'l'shares-
conrpu¡'ed to Anrerical
DcPriest wotrld hold only 24'716% oftlte votinqshares of MatiT['L'. ,,.
tg.o*v]'
M,. DeP¡ìest wquld *o longer have.the a6ilitv
l;";;-c.ü;i"'r whi"h wou6 ttoi¿
his level ofvoting
t" Uf"* -.ii",i p,"posed by other.members ofthe Board of Directors through to
eouitirr. Thoså falt,u's rrromt>t"d MariTEL io subnrit an application to seek FCC appro'val
trar'rsf., de/acto from Mr. DePriest to sharehÓlders of MariTEL' nrore broadly'"
"outrol
held in Mâ TEl-
The logic olMariTËl.'s decisio ìs validated fulther try the perceltage interests
Del)riest's ownership of ì:oth issued
ü;;1,;;;ù,.tif*,rt shareholders during the per.iod thar Mr. of.both issued
*íi"i,trtrñ¿ì,ig r"d voting stock deoreäsed.' Þu'irig that period, the percentage
tlre same
;ä ffi;;åi;ü;à voti'f stock for MariTËl,'s othct shareholders renrained nearlv
ö;äììi";.,"1 ,ñreholdã.s,u.,. "r*tJJUyati. àirtriUution of the MCT shares).l/ The'efore.
io oth.r shareholders gained any control as Ìesult ofthe reduction in Mr. DePriest's percentâgc
iniicia of d¿lacro control Mr..Depliest exhibited, neirhê¡ M¿¡iTEL
ip i|] r¡ghtîrtl.,"
"i.*rìrrt
;;^ü.iäJ;;f,otders viewe<l the graáualreduction in lvlr. DePrìest's ownership
interest as

rreanirrgftll until the distribution of the MCT shares'

4. Iftotr believe th( lvlr' D(Prie clitl Ôonu'ol Mar¡TEL' c:spluin' to the best ofyour
lvtÇ/LM cot d att"itte cu tltc ¿t¡nclution that M' DePriest
dirl
in*¿uitgu'àri AiutnJ wlry ancl hor,r,

n ot co nu'o I þ[ aril']i I'

Despite Mr. DePriË$'s res¡gllntioir from the Board ofDhçcturs in Aplil


2008' he continued.(and
"' ',t other shareholder'
to it to ltave the auihority to aPPoi[t aJ nräny Boardmembers âs any
àt)
"on¡nu* distlibutior oftbe MCT stock'
f"f"t.""àr, f,¿t. Orpríest rsrnained NfaiiiÉLt t'aig"st sha'eh;lder until the
that distributfun'
Âcco¡dingly, the transfel ofcontrol w¿s not comPlete until
7/ The foregoitìg percentflges flÍe not ¡eflected in the chad that acconrPanies l'ïli:l
.ll^::ü1',tI"
yc¿lr: the Percentsges teterenceo
¡c.centapcs in th¿rÎ chs-ri are calculated as oflthe eud ofench cÂlendal
lbove arã calcul¿ted at thc closc ofthê distribütion ofthc MCT $hârcs'
o, The FÇC has routinely recogniz_ed thatconfiol may transfer
lrom one individual orentity to a
ol.Conventional
compzury's shareltolders, norc getterally. see eg', TrausferofContlol
pool sdvicã Statioìs WPJLi20, WPJP7$2' ürd WPJPTB3 and 900 Mllz Local
ii¿u'."iáf¿eu"in.rt
Eneryy' Inc to the Shareholders of Peabody
Nar¡owband Service Station WPJR3I I fiom Peabody
Èiàiey, ii." ÚLs nile No. 0003202401 (filerl oct. 25' 200?) i Donßsric Attthor¡zaliott Gnnted:of
conttnon"t'ealth
iäìír,¡ilr¡øa ¡"r the n'ansfer of co,ìm! o¡'T,ttn? L-'orpo.ruted 'fi'ont^the
'íírt*,ttn 22 FCC Rcd28'1 (200'1):
- ø Sn^'ånolden oJTetsn'u Corpotøtion L¡nned,Piblic Notice'
ênd Notice of Apparent
ä,1¡los"_wirronr¡, Broadiastiug Corp., Memolandum opinion md order
'J*uiäy,
e fCC R.¿ i607 ( t99ii.MiriîEL recognízes ttrat Mr.. DePriest mny have been reduciug his
irlar¡rgl iururidiately preceding the ãistribution ofthe MCT shares However' the
"onirotiv", ycars and Ma¡iTEL' like Mt' DcPricsl'
à'rstriUution ofth, itlCT shares ha<l úcen fore-cæt for scvcral
bclicved thst úe disrriburion ofrhe MCT shares wns dre evetit most
logically associated vvith the trânsfer
ofcontrol.
e' The percentage ofstoql( no longer treld by Mr' DePriest
rvas acqrrired by nrany other entilies'

nonu of *i;"[
mta grãatc. rhan t0% of;¡rhff Ma;iTEL's issucd fltìd orßrflrìding stock or its votitlg
stock.

463i Church Rd, Suite 100 Ctlnming. OA 30028' Voice/Fnx: 888-989-3339 ' www'lnaliteluseconl
Telesourus 6/7
Oct-23-2009 11:05 AM 510A412226

(@lyt-ni 'r:ì
no kuowledge or
MariTEL believes that Mr- DePriest controlled Mari'lHl, until July 2008. lt ha.s

þeliefregading how a contrary conclusiotl could be reached.

I rrust tlïat the lolegoing is responsive tÔ Mr' Stonê's requests lor information' We are aware
-w.rirrnt
thar sìnrilar letters tó Mr. DePrieSt and MC/[.M. Pleæe let usknowthe procedule by
*ni"n *e *uy oaaress matters. ifany, in their responses to you that \ e believe may require
clarifioation.

I declare undel penatty of perjury under the lews ofthe united stflies of Amsricfl that tho
foregoing is true and correct. Ëxecuted on September zß' 2009.

g^*"1
JagflSurith

cc: Scot Stone (via ts-Mail)

By First Class Mail:

Marilíme Communications/Land Mobile, t.LC


206 North 8ú Street
Columbus, MS 39701
Attn.: Sandra M. DePriëst

Dennis C. Erown, Esq.


8124 Cooke Court, Suite 201
Manassas, VA 20109-7406

Donald R. DePriesL
206 North Srli Srcel
Columbus, MS 39701

Wireless Properties of Virginia


1555 King Street -Suite 500
Àlexandria, V A22314
Attn.: Donald R. DePliest

Wa¡ren Flave¡rs
2649 Benvenue Ave. - Suites 2-6
Berlceley, CA 94704

46i5 Church Rd, Suite 100 Curnrnil1g, GA 30028 ' Voice/Fax: 888-989-l.lJq ' www'maritelusa'colì
Oct-23-2009 11:05 AM Telesourus 5|08412Z?'6
vv

Ft
ßt
Ht
J
,t
t'*
J?-
'Þ c\-
4
ôr
ç, 1Ç
q
\J ¿l

A3 9ï r
e!,

5(\å sJ
ç"-$
ÈJ .-+
^^ j t
L-
t- 6-,'¿
..y, 5 w

>ç\3 tn ccl
.'3
F


C\)
ç5
(\
--7J r\^
È¿
€*t
P\Ð
jop'
çl I .=.
lJ,tJ<
,.l,-f 5
q-,,
ã'..Ô
EXHIBIT 5
FEDERÁL COMMUNICÄTIONS COMMISSION
Enforcement Bureau, Investigations and Hearings Division
445 S.W., Suite 4-C330
12th Street,
Washington, D.C. 20554

February 26,2010

VIA CERTTFIED MAIL -- RETUNN RECEIPT REOUESTED

Donald R. DePriest
Wireless Properties of Virginia' lnc.
1555 King Street - Suite 500
Alexandria, V A22314

Re: Applications of Maritme Communications/Land Moblle'


LLC for Automated Maritime Telecommunications System
Licenses and to Participate in FCC Auction No 6l
FiIe No': EB-09'IH-1751

Dea¡ Mr. DePdest:

is
The Enforcetnent Bureau of the Federal Communications Cornmission
investigatirigcompliancebyMaritimeCommunicaliorrs/LalldMobile,LLC(..Marítinre',)
wiur sãctioà 1.2110,I.21t2,1,17 and 1.65 0f rhe commission's Rules, 47 C.F.R. $S
in FCC
L21IO, l.2l\2,1. 17 and 1.65, relating to ownership disclosure lequilements
to ths
auctions and appticarions, and providing truthful and accurate information
Commissjon. Specifically, the Commission is investigating whether Matitime
may have
participate in
failed to disclosã aü required ownership information in its application to
FCC Auction No. 6l and in subsequent filings with the Commission

By letter, dated August 18, 2009, the Wireless Telecommunications Bureau


directed you to provide infórmation relaied to the above-referenced
investigation.r You
r"spondJd on Sàpternbcr 30,2OOg.2 The instant, follow-up letter of inquiry seeks
adciitional infonnation ancl docunentation with regard to the curreut investigation-

We direct you, pursuant to Sections 4(i),4(j), 308(b) and 403 of the


and 403,
Communicarions Àct of 1934, as ar'rended,47 U.S.C. SS 154(Ð, 154C), 308(b),

I Wireless Tclecornmunications
Letter from Jct^fr.cy Tobias, Esq , Attorncy-Aclvisor, Mobility Division'
Donald i. Deprìest and Wirelcss Prope*ics of Virginia, Inc. dated August 18, 2009'
Bureau, tr¡

? l-ctter to Jefl'ìey Tobias, Esq., Atto¡ney Advisor' Mobility Division' Wi¡eless Telecornmunications
Bulea,-r, frourDcnnisC Brown' Esq.' counscl I'o¡ Wircless
Properties of'Vilginia'lnc dated SePtembcr30'
2009.
Donaid R. DePriest
February 26, 2010
Page 2 of 8

days
to provide the information and documents specified herein, within 30 calendar
to this letter and the
from the date of tllis letter. The InstructionJ for responding
hereto'
Definitions for certain terms used in this letter are contained in the attachment
Unless otherwise indicated, the period of time covered by these
inquiries January 1'
is
2002 to the present.

Inquiries: Documents and Information to be Provided


provided a list of
1.
- In the Donald DePriest LOI Response (at pages 1-4), you
entities that you indicated you côntrolled õr in which you served as an officer
or director. Ás to those entities that were in existence
(even if inactive) during
to
the 2002, 2003 and 2004 calendar years, provide relevant documentation
the 2002'
demonstrate the aggregate gross revenues of each such entity during
2003 and2004 cuiendat yeats, including but not limited to' each entity's
Federal tax returns for the calendar years 2002,2003, and 2004'

2. In the Donald DePriest LOI Response (at pages 4-7), you provided a list of
entities that you indicated Maritime did not disclose to the Commission'

to those entities that you described as being in existence during


(a) As the
calendal year. s 2002,2003, and 2004, but which you described as
having no revenues, provide relevant documentation to demonshate
the aggregate gross rwenues of each such entity during the 2002'
2OOZ- inA Z}Oq calendar years, including but not limited
to' each
entity's Federal tax returns for the calendar yeas 2002' 2003' and
2004.

(b) As to those entitiesthat you described as being in existence during the


caiendar year s 2002,2003, and 20O4' and which you desc¡ibed as
having revenues (namely Bravo Communications, Inc ' Charisma
ComÃunications, lnc', Golden Triangle Radio, Inc ' Medcom
Development Corporation, Warpath Properties, lnc ' and MariTEL'
Inc.), piovide relevant documentation to demonstrate the aggregate
groi, i"u"nu". of each such entity during the 2002,2O03 and2004
ãalendar years, including but not limited to, each entity's Federal tax
returns for the calendar years 2002,2003, and 2004'

3. In the Donald DePriest LOI Response (at page 11), you indicated that you
haveservedasChairmanofMCTCorp.Providethefollowinginformation:

(a) The date that you became Chairman of MCT Corp'


(b) The length of time that you have served as Chairman
Donald R. DePriest
February 26, 2010
Page 3 of 8

4. Provide relevant documentation to demonstrate thg ag$egate gross revenues


of MCT Corp' útirng lhe 2002,2003 and 2004 calendar years' including
but
not limited tõ, MCT Corp.'s Fedetai tax retums for the calendar years 2002,
2003, and 2004.

5. Explain fully why Maritime did not disclose MCT Corp' in its application to
participate in.Luction No. 61 (FCC Form 175) and in subsequent filings with
the Commission, including Maritime's LOI Response'

6. Describe futly your relationship to Ma¡itirne'

7. In the Ma¡itime LOI Response (at page 7), Maritime indicated that' at Sandra
DePriest's ."qu".t, yoo gìrtanteed notes owed by Maritime' Explain fully
by
what authority (whéther verbal or written) you guarânteed notes on behalf of
Ma¡itime. Provide a narrative description as well as acopy of each note
glaranteed by you on behalf of Maritime'

8. In the Donald DePriest LOI Response (at page 10), you indicated that' among
other things, you were authorized to enter into conhacts on behalf of
Maritime. Provide the following information:

(a)Alldocumentsgrantingyouauthoritytoenterintocontractsonbehalf
of Ma¡itine.

(b) A nanative description of each contract that you entered into on


behalf of Maritime.

9. To the extent not otherwise provided in response to the preceding lnquiries'


provide any additional information that you believe may be helpful to our
consideration and resolution of this matter..

We direct you to support your responses with an affidavit or decla¡ation under


penatty of perjury, signed -d ¿ut"d by you acknowledging that you have personal
ino*l"dg" ìf1há representations provided in your response, verifying the truth and
accuracf of the infoìmation therein and that all of the Documents and information
requestód by this letter which are in your possession, custody, control or knowledge have
beån produóed. if multiple parties contribute to the response, in addition to
your general
affi¿avit o¡ decla¡ation noted aboue, provide separate affidavits or decla¡ations of each
such individual that identify clearly to which responses the affiant oÌ decla¡ant is
attesting. All such decla¡ations provided should comply with section 1.16 of the
Commiision's rules, 47 C.F.R. g 1. 16, and be substantially in the form set forth therein
Donald R. DePriest
February 26, 2010
Page 4 of 8

To knowingly and willfully make any false statement or conceal any material fact
j Failure to respond
in reply to this inqiiiy is punishable by fine or imprisonment
upp.àj.iut"ty to tttis iettei ofinquiry may constitute a violation of the Communications
Act and our rules.

Wireless Properties of Virginia, Inc., shall also serve its response and supporting
Documentation upon vr'rt Havens (at the address listed below). Wireless Properties
"r,
of virginia, Inc. and warren Havens are reminded that this is a restricted proceeding
under the Commission's ex parte ruLes, so that neither pafiy may make a presentation
(i.e., a communication direcied to the merits or outcome of a proceeding) to decision-
àaking personnel which, if written, is not served on the other party or, if oral' is made
present'
withou-t ãdvance notice to the other party and without opportunity for them to be

You should direct your response, if sent by messenger or hand delivery' to


Marlene H. Dortch, Secretâry, Fedleral Communications Commission, 445 12' Street'
S.W., Room TW-A325, Waahington, D.C. 20554, to the attention of Brian J Carter'
Investigations and Hearings Division' Enforcement Bureau, Room 4-C330, with
a copy

to Garf schonman, Speciãt counsel, Investigations and Hearings Division, Enforcement


Bureau, Room 4-C33ò, Federal Communications Commission' If sent by commercial
ovemightmaii(otherthanU.S.PostalserviceExpressMailandPriorityMail),the
responie should be sent to the Federal Communications Commission, 9300 East
Hainpton Drive, Capitol Heights, M atyland 207 43. If sent by first-class, Express' or
Priorìty mail, the reiponse should be sent to Brian J. Carter, InvestigatioT-u19."H^"-inC'
Divisíón, Enforcemenr Bureau, Federal Comrnunications Commission, 445 12"' Street,
S.W., Room 4-C330, Washington , D.C.20554, with a copy to Gary Schonman' Special
Counsel, Investigations and Hearings Division, Enforcement Bureau' Federal
Communicationi Commission, 445 12th Street, S.W., Room 4-C330, Washington' D'C'
20554. You should a1so, to the extent practicable, transmit a copy of the response via
email to Brian.Carter@fcc.gov and Gary.Schonman@fcc.gov'

Direct any questions regarding this investigation to Brian J. Carter, Esq' at 202-
4t8-t334.

Spe6ral Counsel
Investigations and Hearings Division
Enforcement Bureau

r r.l7
S¿¿ 18 U.S.C. $ l00l; se¿ also 47 C.F R s
4
See47 C.F.R. $$ 1.1200 - 1216.
Donald R. DePriest
Febmary 26, 2010
Page 5 of 8

cc: Dennis C. Brown, Esq.


8124 Cooke Court, Suite 201
Manassas, VA 20109-7406
Counsel for Wi¡eless Properties of Virginia, Inc.

Sandra M. DePriest
Maritime Communications/Land Mobile, LLC
206 North 8ù Street
Columbus, MS 39701

Donald R. DePriest
206 North 8th Street
Colur¡bus, MS 39701

Russell Fox, Esq.


Mintz, Levin, Cohen, Fenis, Glovsky and Popeo, P.C
701 Pennsylvania Ave., NW - Suite 900
Washington, DC 20004
Counsel for Ma¡iTEL, I¡c.

Warren Havens
2649 Benvenue Ave.- Suites 2-6
Berkeley, C^ 94704
Donald R. DePriest
February 26, 2010
Page 6 of 8

ATTACHMENT

Instructions

Requestfor Confidentinl Treatment. If you request that any infomation or


documents responsive to this letter be treated in a confidential manne¡, it shall submit,
along with all responsive information and documents, a statement in accordance with
Section 0.459 of the Commission's ru1es. 47 C.F.R. $ 0.459. Requests for confidential
treatment must comply with the requirements of Section 0.459, including the standards of
specificity mandated by Section 0.459(b). Accordingly, "blanket" requests for
confidentiality of a large set of documents, and casual requests, including simply
starnping pages "confidential," are unacceptable. Pursuant to Section 0.459(c), the
Bureau will not consider requests that do not comply with the requirements of Section
0.459.

Claims of Privilege. If you withhold any information or documents under claim


of privilege, you shall submit, together with any claim of privilege, a schedule of the
items withheld that states, individually as to each such item: the numbered inquiry to
which each item responds and the type, tìtle, specific subject matter and date of the item;
the names, addresses, positions, and organizations of all autho¡s ând recipients of the
item; and the specific ground(s) for claiming that the item is privileged.

Method of Producing Documents. Each requested document, as defined herein,


shall be submitted in its entirety, even if only a portion of that document is responsive to
an inquiry made he¡ein. This means that the document shall notbe edited, cut, or
expunged, and shall include all appendices, tables, or other attachments, and all other
documents referred to in the document or attachments. All written materials necessa-ry to
undelstand any document responsive to these inquiries must also be submitted.

Identification of Docunxents. For each document or statement submitted in


response to the inquiries stated in the cover letter, indicate, by number, to which inquiry it
is responsive and identify the person(s) from whose fiIes the document was retrieved. If
any document is not dated, state the date on which it was prepared. If any document does
not identify its author(s) or recipient(s), state, if kno\rn, the name(s) of che author(s) or
recipient(s). You must identify with reasonable specificity all documents provided in
response to these inquiries.

Docutnents No Longer AvaiLttble. If a document responsive to any inquiry made


herein existed but is no longer available, or if you ale unable for any reason to produce a
document responsive to any inquiry, identify each such document by author, recipient,
date, title, and specific subject matter, and explain fully why lhe document ìs no longer
available or why you are other-w.ise unable to produce it.
Donald R. DePriest
February 26, 2010
Page 7 of 8

Retention of Original Documents. With respect only to documents responsive to


the specific inquiries made herein and any other documents relevant to those inquiries,
you are directed to retain the originals of those documents for twelve (12) months from
the date ofthis letter unless (a) you are directed or informed by the Enforcement Bureau
in writing to retain such documents for some shorter or longer period of time or (b) the
Enforcement Bureau or the Commission releases an item on the subject of this
investigation, including, but not limited to, a Notice of Apparent Liability fo¡ Forfeiture
or an order disposing of the issues in the investigation, in which case, you must retain all
such documents until the matter has been finally concluded by payment of any monetary
penalty, satisfaction of all conditions, expiration of alÌ possible appeals, conclusion of
any collection action brought by the United States Departrnent ofJustice or execution and
implementation of a final settlement with the Commission or the Enforcement Bureau.

Continuing Nature of Inquiries. The specific inquiries made herein are continuing
in nature. You are required to produce in the future any and all documents and
information that are responsive to the inquides made herein but not initially produced at
the time, date and place specified herein, In this regard, you must supplement your
responses (a) ifyou learn that, in some material respect, the documents and information
ìnitially disclosed were incomplete or incorrect or (b) if additional responsive documents
or information are acquired by or become known to you after the initial productìon. The
requirement to update the record will continue for twelve (12) months from the date of
this lette¡ unless (a) you are directed or informed by the Enforcement Bureau in writing
that your obligation to update the record will continue for some shorter or longer period
of time or (b) the Enforcement Bureau or the Commission releases an item on the subject
of this investigation, including, but not limited to, a Notice of Apparent Liabìlity for
Forfeiture or an order disposing of the issues in the investigation, in which case the
obligation to update the record will continue until the release of such item.

Definitions

For purposes of this letter, the following definitions apply:

"Any" shall be construed to include the word "all," and the word "all" shall be
construed to include the word "any." Additiona.lly, the word "or" shall be construed to
include the word "and," and the word "and" shall be construed to include the word "or."
The word "each" shall be construed to include the word "every," and the word "every"
shall be construed to include the word "each."

"Document" shall mean the complete original (or in lieu thereof, exact copies of
the original) and any non-identical copy (whether different from the orìginal because of
notations on the copy or otherwise), regardless of origin or ìocation, of any taped,
recorded, transcdbed, written, typed, printed, filmed, punched, computer-stored, or
graphic matter of every type and descripcion, however and by whomever prepaled,
produced, disseminated, or- made.
Donald R. DePriest
February 26, 2010
Page 8 of 8

"Identify,' when used with reference to a person or persons, shall mean to state
his/her full legal name, job title (if any), current business address, and business phone
number. Ifbusiness adà¡ess and/or telephone number are not available, state the person's
home address and/or telephone number.

"Identify," when used with reference to a document, shali mean to state the date'
author, addressåe, type of document (¿.8., the types of document, as described above), a
brief description of the subject matter, its present or last known location, and its
custodian.

"Identify," when used with reference to an entity other than a person, shall mean
to state its ram;, cunent or last known business áddress, and current or last known
business telephone number.

"Donald DePriest LOI Response" shall mean the letter to Jeffrey Tobias' Esq '
Attorney-Advisor,
-c. Mobility Division, Wireless Telecommunications Bureau, from
Dennis Brown, Esq., counsel for wireless Properties of virginia, Inc. dated september
3O,2OO}, responding io the lette¡ from Jeffrey Tobias, Esq', Attorney-Advisor, Mobility
Division, wireless Telecommunications Bureau, to Donald R. DePriest and wireless
Properties of Virginia, lnc. dated August 18' 2009, relating to the Commission's
invåstigation of Maritime's non-disclosure of ownership information in its application to
pa¡tici;ate in FCC Auction No. 61 and in subsequent f,lings with rhe commission.

"Maritime" shall mean Maritime Communications/Land Mobile, LLC and any


predecessor-in-interest, affil.iate, parent company' wholly or partially owned subsidìary'
ãther affiliated company or business, and all owners, including but not limited to,
partners or principals, and all members, directors, officers' employees, or agents,
including cònsultants and any other persons working for or on behalf of the foregoing at
any time during the period covered by this letter.

"Ma¡itime LOI Response" shall mean the letter to Jeffrey Tobias, Esq', Attorney-
Advisor, Mobility Division, Wileless Telecommunications Bureau, from Dennis C'
Brown, Esq., counsel fo¡ Maritime Communicatlons/Land Mobile, LLC, dated
Septemberl0, 2009, r'esponding to the letter from Jeffrey Tobias, Esq', Attorney-
Adìisor, Mobility Division, Wiretess Telecommunications Bureau, to Dennis C' Brown'
Esq., counsel forÎaritime Communications/Land Mobile, LLC, dated August 18' 2009'
relåting to the Commission's investigation of Maritime's non-disclosure of ownership
informãtion in its application to participate in FCC Auction No' 61 and in subsequenr
filings with the Commission.
FEDDRAL COMMUNICÄTIONS COMMISSION
gnto.""*"nt g*eau, Investigations and Hearings Division
445 llh Street, S'W', Suite 4-C330
Washington, D C 20554

February 26, 2010

Jason Smitb
MariTEL, Inc
4635 Church Road, Suite 100
Cumming, GA 30028-4084

Mobile'
AnDlications of Maritime Cornmunications/Land
liö i;, Ã;,"*"ted Maritime Telecommunications system
ñ;; and to Participate in FCC Auction
No 6I
File No.: EB'O9-IH-1751

Dea¡ Mr. Slnith:


Comtnission is
The Enforcement Bureau of the Federal Communicatio-ns ("Maritime")
Mobile' LLC
investigating compliance by ftatiìi'""t"--"nications/I-¿nd Rules' 47 C F'R $S
with Sections l.2Ilo, l.Lllz,l;i? -d 1'¿5 of the
Commission's
requìrements in FCC
1.2lLO,l.2II2,1 17 and 1 65, rJutint to o*,'"ttttip.disclosure information to the
;;";;.;¡ "pplications, *a p'ouiaing ttthful and.accwate
whether Ma¡itirne may have
Commission. Specificatly, ti'" ôot-¡t"tito
is investigating
failed to disclose uu ."qoi,"a oJ'ì"itttif inro'mution
i" its ãppücation to particrpate in
Commission
fCð a""rion No. 61 and in subsequ"ni filingt with the
Telecommunica[ions Bureau
By letter, dated August 18, 2009' the Wireless
related to the above-
¿lr".t"JilüirÉr-, rn" ('u*irel') to provide information 28, 200e.2 rhe instant,
september
:ffi;:;:iî;ï#;"ii"*'^vr-äel',",ri"ia"¿ "" and documentatìon
.
with regald to
follow-up letter of inquiry .""f't ^¿¿ititl¡ informarión
the current investigation.

MariTEL, pursuant to Sections 4(i)' 4C)' 308(b)


and 403 ofthe
-ly'e direct ' '^^
e"t of tS:+, u'äLn¿"¿' +f U S C $r\ i54(Ð' 154(')' 308(b)' and 403'
Communicatj.ons

Mohility Divisron wireless Telecotnmuntcatto¡s


I
Letter trom Jeffrey Tobias, Esq., Attoflrey-Advisor,
tor MarirEL. Inc. dalod August l8' 2009'
Bureau. ro MarirEL,ln"- on¿ r{u.r"iiîà-]Érq , ""u"."r
Mobility Divisiorr' Wirclc's l clcco tn¡¡ unicat ion
s
:L,:tter Lo Jeffrc¡ Tobi¡s. Esq , Altorney-AJvisor' 28' 2009'
MrriTEL' Inc clated Septernber
Burcau, fror¡ MariTEL, lnc and tt*t"ìíÉ"i'
Ëtq ' '
"l-seifor
Jason Smith
MariTEL, Inc.
February 26,2010
Page 2 of1

to provide the information and documents specified herein,


within 30 calentlar days
and the
irJÀ tn" ¿ut" of this letter' The Instruction; for responding to this letter
contained in the attachment hereto'
Definitions for certain terms used in this letter are
Únless otherwise indicated, the period of time covered by these
inquiries is JanuarY I'
2002 to the Present.

Inquiries: Documents and lnformation to be Provided

l.Identifyatlofficers,directors,shareholders,partners'andbeneficialownersof
MariTEL since January 1, 2002 and provide the dates upon which such
individuals secured their respective positions with MariTEL'
but not
2. Provide a copy of all corporate documents of Ma¡iTEL' inciuding
the
Iimìted to, aly articles, bylaws, and minutes of a1l meetings held during
.calendar Years 2OO2lo 2006.

a December
3. In the MariTEL LOI Response (at page 4), MariTEL referenced
2005 letter written Uy DoìalO DePiiest to MCT lnvestors' L'P''
in which
of MariTEL sha¡es would
Donald DePriest indicated that a distribution
licensìng purposes'
constitute a change of control of Ma¡iTEL for FCC
Provide a coPY of this letter.

gross reve¡ues
4. Provide relevant documentation to demonstate the agglegate
2004' including but not
of Ma¡iTEL during the calendar y ears 2002,2003' and
limitedto,tvtarifEl'sFederaltaxreturnsforthecalendaryeats2002'2003'
and2004.

5. To the extent not otherwise provided in response to the preceding lnquüies'


provide any additional information that you believe may be helpful to our
consideration and lesolution of this matter'

under
We direct you to support your responses with an affidavit or declaraúon
penalty of perjury, signed ä¿ ¿i"¿ by you acknowledging that
you have personal
in verifying the truth and
icnowt"age äf thó repiesentations proviáeá your
-response'
uc"u.a"/ of the infoìmation therein and that all of the I)ocuments and information
or knowledge have
."qu"r,ä ty this letter which are in your possession, custody' control
in addition to your general
beån produáed. If multiple parties côntribute to the response,
affrdávit or declaration noted above, provide separate affidavits or declarations of each
suchindividualthatidentifyclearlytowhichresponsestheaffiantordeclarantis
utte.ting. Al1 such declarations piovided should comply with section 1'16 of the
forrh therein.
com¡niision's rules, 47 C.F.R. $ 1.16, and be subsranrially in rhe form set
Jason Smith
MariTEL, Inc.
February 26, 2010
Page 3 o17

fact
To knowingly and willfullymake any faise statement or conceal any material
Failure to respond
io r"prvìã inl, inqíiry i, punirnuút" uy hnetr imprisonment'3
;;rõ.t"d;L ,Ëis íettei ot inçlry áuy constitt'te u violation of the Communications
Act and our rules'
Document¿tion l]pon
Ma¡itime shall also serve its response and supporting
wut¡en Havens are reminded
warren Havens (ut tt u¿or"r, ü,;Jb"bt) Maritime anì
" ex parte tules' so that neither
that this is a restricted proce"Ai"ä"ti"t t¡" C"mmission's
communication directed to the merits or
outcome
äñaj Àut" u p."."otution (i'e, a p"i'on*f which' if v/ritten' is not served on the
of a proceeding) to decision-màtinf party and without
ä;;õ;;:î o.ut, l, ,nu¿"-Jtño'ut udu*"" notice to the other
opportunity for them to be present'
or hand delivery' to
You should dìrect your response, if sent by messenger
445 12rh Street'
Marlene
'S
H. Dortch, Secretary, r"ã'"iui io*rnunióations Cómmission'
Brian J' C¿¡te¡'
*, n"ã* fW 4325, Washington, D'C' 20554' to the attention of4-c330' with a copy
*d Hearings nivisioá, Enforcement Bureau' Room
i;;;*g;; Division' Enforcement
;; õ;y"i;h;".-, Speciãl Counsel, Investigations and HearingsIf sent by commercial
Bureau, Room 4-csso, ne¿Jéo;municaãio"s
Commission'
Express MaiI and Priority Mail)' the
ã""*fgf,ì.Af t"ther than U.S. Postal Service 9300 East
."rpå"i" ttt"tlÀ te sent to the Federal Communications Comnrission'
sent by flrst-class' Express' or
ä#ñ ñ.t"", Capitol Heights, M aryland 207 43 J''-Ifca¡ter' lnvestigations and Hearings
itî"riy.ãr, th" ."rpon." ,ñoolå u" '"nt to B¡an Commission' 445 12th SÍeet'
Division, Enforcement Bur""t, Þ"ááta óot"t"nications
to Gary Schonman' Special
S.w., Room 4_C3SO, W*hrngion,'c. 20554, with a copy
Federal
ó"""*f f"""ttigations and Iiea¡ings ?ivision, EnforcementBureau'
Communications Com isslon, +¿S"t2tn St¡e"t,
S'W'' Room 4-C330'.W^hingtl ?^C
a copy of the response vra
ãOJsi. vou should also, to the extent practicable, transmit
gov'
,o gri^n.C*"t@fcc.gov and Gary'schonman @fcc
"Àuit
J' Carter' Esq at 202-
Direct any questions regarding this investigation to Brian
418-1334'
s inçÃv' 72
// /,/ ,
/ø--/.-,Y-
,/
GarY6chonman
SPecial Counsel
Investigations and Hearings Division
Enfo¡cement Bureau

3
S¿e 18 U.S.C. $ 1001; .te¿ also 47 C F R $ r.l7
4
See 4? C.F.R. $$ 1.1200 - i 216.
Iason Smith
MariTEL, Inc.
February 26, 2010
Page 4 of?

cc: Russell Fox, Esq.


Minø, Levin, Côhen, Fenis, Glovsky and Popeo' P C
701 Pennsylvania Ave., NW - Suite 900
Washington, DC 20004

Ma¡itime Communications/Land Mobile' LLC


206 North 8tb Street
Columbus, MS 39701
ATTN: Sandra M. DePriest

Dennis C. Brown, Esq


8 I 24 Cooke Court, Suite 20 1
Manassas, VA 20109-7406

Donald R. DePriest
20ó North 8th St¡eet
Columbus, MS 39701

Wireless Properties of Virginia' Inc'


1555 King Street - Suite 500
Alexandtia, Y A 22314
ATTN: Donald R. DePriest

Warren Havens
2649 Benvenue Ave - Suites 2-6
BerkeleY, CA 94704
Jason Smith
Ma¡iTEL, Inc.
FebruarY 26, 2010
Page 5 of 7

ATTACTIMENT

Instructions
you requesi that any information or
for Confidentidl Treafinent' lf
Request
a conitdential manner' it shall submit'
documents responsive to this r"tt"t t" tt""t"¿ iti with
iio;|iiü Ji;"tponsive information and documents' a statement in accordance
g 0.459' Requests for confide¡tif
Secdon 0.459 of the Commissioîs *1".. +z C.F.R. of
treatment must comply witt tn"T"qult"*"nts
of Section 0'459' including the standârds
"blanket" requests for
öiltü;;;i"å úy s"ctio-n 0.¿s9þ) Accordinglv'
of u I.g" ,"t or àÀtutànit, und iequests' including simply
confidentiality "u'ual the
i"onlrãentia1," unu"t"p'ubl" Pursuant to Section 0'459(c)'
;;;o;; n*á, -" with the requirements of Section
Bureau will not consider requ"* ,¡u. ¿o no.
"omply
o.459.

Claims of Prívileg¿' If you withholdany information or documents under claim


ctaim of privilege' a schedule of the
of pri"if"ö, y"" stralt suîm;q JÇrler with any
such iæm: the numbered inquiry to
items withheld that states, ,no'uìãulty as to eaãh
which each item rerponO. iit"ìÇå' titLe' specific subject matter and date of thetheitem;
-a
the names, addresses, po.itioo', uoã LtianøatLns
or u
áu.thors and recipients of

;;' ñih";p;ific lround(s)for claiming that the item is privileged'

document' as defined herein'


Method of Producing Documents' Each requested to
a portion of that document is responsive
shall be submittea in its entireiy, wen if only cut' or
î"-*qùl -"¿" iterein. This á"-t
t¡"t tné ¿oãument shall not be edited'
tables' or other attachments' and all other
expunged, and shall incruO" arïãpp"nJices'
All wriuen materials necessary to
äü"ri"r"i"r""ed to in the dociment or auachments. must also be submitted'
understand any document responsive to these
inquiries

or statement submitted in
Identification of Documents For each document
indicate' by number' to which inquiry it
response to the inquties *u,"Jin iit" "ou"r letter'
the- document was retrieved' If
is responsive and i¿"tt fV tit" p"t'átttl fro* 1¡9si.fiIes
If any document does
i.*-"", l. not dadd, ,tui" tt'" àÁ" on *hich it wastheprepared'name(s) of the author(s) or
"'ry
not identify its author(s) or recipient$)' state'
if known'
speciflrcity a11 documents provided in
ä;ì;(ti Y;t -uii¿"ntiivîitrt'reasonable
response to these inquiries'

Documents No I'onger AvaiLable lf a document responsive to any inquiry made


hereinexistedbutisnotongeravailable,orifyouareunableforanyreasontoproducea
document by author' recipient'
;;:;;;;a t;tp"".lu" to u,,v inqul'f, identify each such
fully why the document is no longer
date, title, and specihc subje"i i"*i"t, and explain
produce it'
ãuuìiuul"'ot *rty you are otherwise unable to
Jason Smith
MariTEL, lnc.
February 26, 2010
Page 6 of 7

Retention oÍ OriUinal Documents' With respect


only to documents responsive to
to those inquiries'
tfr" .p""ifr" inquiri", *ã¿" ft"."ln und any other doãuments^relevant (12) months from
documents for twelve
vou a¡e directed to retain the oÃ!ìnals ofrhose
il" ñ;?ñË* t"lvi" are di¡ected or informed by the Enforcement Bureau
"ii"t,
in writing to retain such documånts for some shorter
or longer period of time or (b) the
gnfor""ri"nt Su.eau or the Commission releases an item on the subject of this -.
ütit"¿ to, a Notice of Apparent Liability for Forfeiture
investigation, including, but noì
inwhich case' you must retain all
or an order disposing of tfre issuesìn tfre nvestigation'
concluded.by payment of anj monetary
such doiuments until the matter has been finally
il possible appeals' conclusion of
penalty, satisfaction or al conáìiions, expiration of
of Justice or execution and
anv collection action brought uy tire Ûniied States Department
til;";ä;;iä'rt"uií"t,ron"nt with the commission or the Enforcement Bureau'

made herein are continuing


Continuing Nature of Inquiries' The specific inquiries
and all documents and
in nature. You are required to pioduce in the iuture any
made hàrein but not initially produced at
information that are ."rpor,ri',,"'to irr" inquiries your
,iì"'ii*iãã" ""¿ place specified herein' In ttris regard' you must supplement
q"..d9**ents and information
t"rp"*"<;l if yo'u learrrthat' in to-" -"'"'iul t"tp?:!if addiúonal responsive documents
iriãrffy ai."L*Ja *"r" in"o-pl"t" or incorect or fo)
to you after the initial production The
or information ar" ucquir"a uy'åiU"come known
requirement to up¿ate the recárd wili contioue
tor twelve (l') months ftom the date of
the Enforcement Bureau in writing
this letter unless (a) you are ¿ir"ct"i ot infor-ed by
shorrer or longer period
üïîàr, Jìlei";á L "pa",rit".""ord will continue for some releases an item on the subject
of time or (b) the Enforcement lureau or the Commission
of Apparent.r jability.for
ãi rfri, io"àrúg*ion, including, but not limited to' a Notice
investigation' in which case the
Forfeiture or an oraer aisposiii of the issues in the
the rãcorÑill continue until the release of such
item
ãùiigution to
"paate
Definitions

For purposes ofthis letter, the following defrnítions apply:


..Any',shallbeconstruedtoincludetheword..atl','andtheword..all''shallbe
the word "or" shall be construed to
construed to include the word "any " Additionally'
includetheword..and,''andtheword..and''shallbeconstruedtoincludetheword..or'''
word "every"' and the word "every"
The word "each" snati ¡e coist¡ued to include the
shall be construed to include the word "each
"
(or in lieu thereof' exact copies of
"Document" shall mean the complete original
from the original because of
the original) unA uny non-ia"nti"ui copy i*tt"trt"idifferent
or.location' of any taped'
notations on the copy or otherwise), rågardless of origin
punched' computer-stored' or
.e"o.¿"¿, transcribèå, written' typed, piinted' frlmed'
Jason Smith
Ma¡iTEL, Inc.
February 26, 2010
Page 7 of 1

whomever prepared'
graphic matter of every type and description, however and by
produced, disseminated, or made'
to state
"Identify," when used with reference to a person or persons' shall mean
address' and business phone
trisltrer fuit tegat name, job title (if any)' cunent business
available, state the person's
number. If business address anùo, á"pnon" oo-ter a¡e not
home address and/or telephone number'
to state the date'
"Identify," when used with reference to a document' shall mean
described above)' a
u,rtho., uid."rrå", type of document (¿'8 , the types of document'
as
and its
trl"ia"r"ription of'tire subject matter, iL preserlt or last known location'
custodian.
person' shall mean
"Identify," when used with reference to an entity ottler than a
known
to state its namá, currentor last known business address' and current or last
business telePhone number.
E-sq Attorney-
"Ma¡iTEL LOI Response" shali mean the letter to Jefftey Tobias' '
Bureau' from MariTEL' Inc'
Advisor, Mobilìty Division, Wireless Telecommunications
and Russell Fox, e.q., r"i io, MariTEL, lnc', dated Septemb er 28' 2009 ' responding
"out Division' Wireless
io tt t"n", frorn Jefüey Tobias, Esq', Attomey-Advisor' Mobility
" Russell Fox' Esq'' counsel for -
Telecommunications Bureau, to M;iTEL, Inc' and
investigation of
Ma¡iTEL, lnc., dated August 18,2009, relating to the Commission's participate in
rrl*l i-";, non-disclosuà of ã*n".tttip inro*ation in its application to
pCð eu"tioo No. 61 and in subsequent filings with the Commission'
LLC and any
"Maritime" shall mean Ma¡itime Communications/Land Mobile'
owned subsidiary'
pr"d"""rroi-in-interest, affiliate, palent company' wholly or partially
but not limited to'
ã,ft"t.fftli""¿ company o. busin"st' and all owners' including or agents'
plit"t. ã. pti""ipalì, and all members, directors, officers' employees'
behalf of the foregoing at
including cånsultãnts and any other persons working for or on
any time during the period covered by this letter'

mean MariTEL, Inc' and any predecessor-in-interest'


affiliate'
'Ma¡iTEL" shall
parent company, wholly or partially owned subsidiary' other
affiliated company or
partners or principals, and all .
ãurin"rr, uÅ¿ ¿t o*n"ri, in;luding bur not limited to,
consultants and ariy other.
members, directors, officers, empioyees, or agents' including
period covered
p"itåt, *".ti.g for or on behali of-the foregáing at any time during the
by this letter.
FEDERAL CoMMUNICATIoNS CoMMIssroN
Enforcement Bureau, lnvestigations and Hearings Division
445 l2th Street, S.W., Suite 4-C330
Washington, D.C' 20554

February 26, 2010

VIA CERTIFIED MAIL -- RETURN RECEIPT REOUESTED

Sandra M. DePriest
M¿uitinre Communications/l¿nd Mobile, LLC
206 Nofih 8th Street
Columbus, MS 39701

Re Annlicadons of Maritime Comnrunications/Land Mobi lc'


LLb fo, Automoted Maritime Telecommunicat ions Sysfem
Licenses and to Palicipate in FCC Auction No' 61
File No.: EB-09-III-1751

Dear Ms. DePriest:

is
The Enforcement Bureau of the Federal Communications Commission
LLC ("Maritime")
investigating compliance by Maritime Communications/Land Mobile'
Commission's Rules' 47 C F'R' $$
*it¡ sä,ioi', l.Lilo, 1.2112,1.17 and 1.65 of rhe
in FCC
1 .2ll}, I.2112,1.17 and 1 .65, relatirrg to ownership
disclosure requirements
jntblmation to the
auciions and applicaûons, and providing tluthful and accurate
may have
óo--irrion. Specificatly, the Commission is investigating whetl.rer Malitime ìn
failed to disclosà required ownership inforntation in its application to participate
a
FCC Auction No. 61 anì in subsequent filings witll the Cornmission'

By letter, dated August 18, 2009, the Wireless Telecommunications Bureau l


directed Maritime to provide infoimation r-elated to the above-referenced investigation
2 letter of inqìiry
Malitime responded ôn Septernber 30, 2009 The instant, follow-up
seeks additional information and documentation with regard
to [he current investigation'

WiÌelcss Teleconlmunications
I
Lerter lrom JefÍr'ey Toblas, Esq , Attorllcy Advisor, Mobiliry DivÌsion'
d Mobilc' LLC' daþd
Bur"au, ¡o Dennjs ó Brown, Esq , counsoí ftir Maritinrc Communications/La
August 18, 2009.
2 Letter to Jclhey Tobias, Esq-. Attorney-Advisor, Mobilìty Division' Wirelcss Telecot¡ì-rìÙnicaLioDs
Mobilc' I-LC' datcd
Bureau. 1'rom Dennis C. Brown, Esq , counscl for Maritine Com¡nunications/Land
Septcmber 30, 2009
Sandra M. DePriest
February 26, 2010
Page 2 of 9

a03 of the
We direct Ma¡itime, pursuant to Sections 4(i), 4O' 3Q8(b) and - -^-
154(i)' 308G)' and 403'
Communications Act of 1934, as amended,4T U'S'C' $$ 154(Ð'
days
aJÃuiaà ,rt" inrormation and documents specified herein, within 30 calendar
to this letter and the
from the date of this letter. The Instructions for responding
the attachment hereto'
Definitions for ce¡tain terms used in this letter are contained in
these inquiries is January 1'
Unless otherwise indicated, the period of time covered by
2002 to the Presenl

Inqui¡ies: Documents and lnformation to be Provided


owners of
1. Identify all officers, directors, shareholders, partners' and beneficial
Ma¡itime since January 1, 2002 and provide the dates upon which such
individuals secured their respective positions with Maritime'
but not
2.
- Provide a copy of all corporate documents of Maritime' including
and minutes of all
ii-it"d ,o, uny u.ti"t"t, t¡uws, operating agreements'
meetings held during the relevant period'

3. Identify John Reardon and describe fully his relationship to Maritime'


and specify
4. Specify the date that John Reardon became an officer of Maritime
ali titlás and positions held by him Provide a copy of all documents
authorizing his appointed positions'

5. In the Ma¡itime LOI Response (at page 2), Maritime indicated tìat John
-R"a,donservesasitsChiefExecutiveofficer.ourrecordsindicatethat
in
Maritime did not disclose John Rea¡don in its application to participate
Auction No. 61 (FCC Form 175) or in subsequent filings with the
as its
Commission. Explain fully why Maritime did not identify John Reardon
Chief Executive òffrcer in its application to participate in Auction
No' 61
(FCC form 175) and in subsequint filings with the Corrunission' including but
Àot ümited to, Maritime's application for Automated Maritime
Telecommunications System licenses (FCC Form 601)'

6. Identify all entities, if any, athibutable to John Realdon as an officer of


Maritime during the calendar years 2OO2' 2OO3 anó 2004' Provide relevant
documentation to demonstrate the aggregate gross revenues of
each such
entity, including but not limited to' each entity's Federal tax returns for
the
calendar years 2002,2003' and 2004.

7. Identify Donald DePriest and describe fully his relationship to Maritime'


Sandra M. DePriest
February 26, 2010
Page 3 of 9

8. ln the Donald DePriest LOI Response (at page 10), he indicated that' among
other things, he was authorized to enter into contracts on behalf of Maritime'
Provide the following information:

(a) All documents granting Donald DePriest authority to enter into


contracts on behalf of Maritime.

(b) A nanative description of each contlact that Donald DePriest entered


into on behalf of Maritime.

9. In the Maritime LOI Response (at page 7), Maritime indicated that' among
other things, Donald DePiest was autlorized to serve as Sandra DePriest's
(whether
agent and; assist her as necessal y. Explain fully by-wh-at authority
vãrbal or written) Donald DePriest acted as an agent for Maritime and/or
Sand¡a DePriest. Provide all documents authorizing Donald DeP¡iest's
appoinünent as an agent for Maritime and/or Sandra DePdest'

10. ln the Maritime LOI Response (at page 7), Maritime indicated that' at Sandra
DePriest's request, Donaid DePdest guaranteed notes owed by Maritime'
Explain fulyty what authority (whether verbal or written) Donald DePriest
guäant""d notå. on behalf of Maritime. Provide a narrative description as
ivell as a copy of each note guæanteed by Donald DePriest on behalf of
Maritime.

11. In the Maritime LOI Response (at pages 3-6), Maritime provided a list of
entities that it did not disclose in its application to participate in Auction No'
61 (FCC Form 175) and in subsequent filings with the Commission'

(a) As to those entitiesthat Maritime described as being in existence


during the calendar years 2002,2003, and 2004, but which Ma¡itime
described as having no revenues, provide relevant documentation to
demonstrate the aggregate gross revenues of each such entity during
the calendar yeas 2O02,2003, and 2004, including but not limited to'
each entity's Federal tax returns for the calendar y eats 2002' 2003 '
a¡d2004.

(b) As to those entities that Maritime described as being in existence


during the calendar years 2002,2003, and 2004, and which Maritime
described as having revenues (namely Bravo Communications, lnc '
Charisma Communications, Inc., Golden Triangle Radio, lnc ,
Medcom Development Corporation, Warpath Properties, Inc ' and
M¿riTEL, Inc.), provide releva¡t documentation to demonsfate the
ag1regate gross revenues of eacl.t such entity during the calendar years
Sandra M. DePriest
February 26,2010
Page 4 of 9

2002,2003, and 2004, inctuding but not limited to, each entity's
Federal tax returns for the calendar years 2002,2003, ald 2004'

12. Identify MCT CorP.

13. Our records indicate that Donald DePriest sewed as chai¡man of MCT Corp.
ourrecordsfurtherindicatethatMaritimedidnotdiscloseMCTCorp.inits
application to participate in Auction No. 6l (FCC Form 175) and in
subsequent filing. tith the Co*mission, including Maritime's LOI Response'
explaii fully why Maritime did not disclose MCT Corp' in its application to-
participate in Auction No. 61 (FCC Form 175) and in subsequent fiiings with
the Commission, including Maritime's LOI Response'

14. Provide relevant documentation to demonstrate the agglegate gross revenues


of MCT Corp. during the calendar years 2002, 2003, and 2O04' including but
not limited tõ, its Federal tax returns for the calendar years 2O02,2003, and
2004.

15. To the extent not otherwise provided in response to the preceding Inquiries,
plovide any additional information that you believe may be helpful to our
consideration and resolution of this matter.

Wedirectyoutosupportyourresponseswithanaflrdavitordeclarationunder
penalty of perjury, signed an¿ dut"¿ by you acknowledging that you have personal
iroo*têOg" àf iné t"p."r"ntrtions provided in your response, verifying the truth and
accura"y- of the information therein and that aII of the Documents and information
requestãd by this letter which are in your possession, custody, control or knowledge have
beån produóed. If multiple parties contribute to the respoûse, in addition to your general
affidavit or declaration noted above, provide separate affrdavits or declarations of each
such individual that identify clearty to which responses the affrant or decla¡ant is
attesting. All such decla¡arions provided should comply with section i.16 of the
Commiision,s rules,47 C.F.R. g 1.16, and be substantially in the form set forth therein.

To knowingly and willfully make any false statement or conceal any material fact
in reply to th-is inquiry is punishable by fine or imprisonment.' Failure to respond
appròpriately to this letter of inquiry may constitute a violation of the Communications
Act and our rules.

Ma¡itime shall also serve its response and supporting Documentation upon
Warren Havens (at the address listed below). Maritime and Warren Havens ar.e rerninded
that this is a res;icted proceeding under thé Commission's ex parte rules,a so that nej.ther

r l00l l?
,t¿e 18 U.S,C. $ ; s¿¿ ¿lso 47 C.F.R. $ l -

a
See 4'1 C.F.R. $$ 1.1200 - t216.
Sandra M. DePriest
February 26, 2010
Page 5 of 9

party may make a presentation (i.e.' a communication di¡ected


to tlte merits or outcome
on the
ãiu'proã""¿ingl tå decision_màking personnel which, if wrinen, is not servedwithout
;h;;*y or,'i o.ul, is made witñout advance notice to the other party and
opportunity for them to be present.
delivery' to
You should direct your response, if sent by messenger or hand
445 12"' Street'
Marlene H. Dortch, Secreiary, Fedìral Communications Commission'
i w, noo- fw-A325, Wa;hington, D.C. 20554, to the attention of Brian J Carter'
4-C330' with a copy
inr"rìGái¡"t u"d Hearings Division, Enforcement Bureau' Room
io C-íS"ftonrnun, Speciãì Counsel, lnvestigations and Hearings
Division' Enforcement
gu..;;, noo* +-ci¡õ, pederal communicaiions commission. If sent by commercial
Mail and Priority Mail)' the
ãu"rrrijnt -uit (other than U.S. Postal Service Express
9300 East
."rpo"i" tft""là Ue sent to the Federal Communications Commission'
Express' or
rrãilpion n.iln., Capitot Heights, Maryland 20743' If sent by first-class'
p.io¡tv.¡f, the reiponse shoulâ be sent to Brian J Ca¡ter' InvestiSations-and*Hear-in€s
Divisián, Enforc".t Bor"urr, Federal Communications Commission' 445 I2'' sheet'
"nt to Gary Schonman' Special
S.W., Room 4-C330, Washingion 'D C 20554, with a copy
Counsel, Investigations and Èearings Division, Enforcement
Bureau' Federal
W', Room 4-C330' Washiûgton' D'C'
CommunicationJ Commission, 44i12'h Street, S
copy of the response via
20554. You should also, to the extent practicable, transmit a

email to Brian.Carter@fcc.gov and Gary'Schonman@fcc'gov'


Esq' at
Direct any questions regarding this investigation to Brian J' Carter'
202418-1334.

Special Counsel
Investigations and Hearings Division
Enforcement Bureau

Dennis C. Brown, Esq.


8124 Cooke Court, Suite 201
Manassas, VA 20109-7406
Counsel for Ma¡itime Communications/Land Mobile, LLC

Donald R. DePriest
206 North 8th Street
Columbus, MS 39701
Sandra M. DePriest
February 26, 2010
Page 6 of 9

Wireless Properties of Virginia, Inc'


1555 King Street - Suite 500
Alexandria, VA 22314
ATTN: Donald R. DePriest

Russell Fox, Esq.


Mintz, Levin, Cohen, Fenis, Glovsky and Popeo, P'C
701 Pennsylvania Ave., l'{W - Suite 900
washington, DC 20004
Counsel for Ma¡iTEL, Inc.

Wanen Havens
2649 Benvenue Ave.- Suites 2-6
BerkeleY, CA 94704
Sandra M. DePriest
February 26, 20i0
Page7 of9

ATTACHMENT

Instructions

Request for Confidential Treatment' Il yo'r request


that any informatign . 9r
in confidential manner' it shall submit'
ao"u**t, ,"rpänsive ó this letter be teated a
with
tt Lrponsive information and documents' a statement in accorda¡ce
"1""1*i "ff g 0.459. Requests for confidential
Secti"on O.+S9 of ihe Commission's rules. 47 C.F.R.
of^
,."u*"n, *u* with the requirements of Section 0'459.' including the standards
rp"riLrtv -*¿ateå"omply úy Section 0.¿59@) Accordingly, "blanket" requests for
simply
or a larle set of documents, and casual requests' including
"ãüiã"níi¡irv to Sectíon 0 459(c)' the
,,r-pttry p"gåt "confiãential," are unacceptable' Pursuant of Section
requirements
Bureau will not consider requests that do not comply with
the

0.459.
oÌ documents under claim
Claims of Privilege. If you withhold any information
privilege' a schedule of the
of priviùge, you snAt suúmiq together with any-claim of
inquiry to
iæir, ritñn"í¿ *rat states, indiviãually as to eaôh such irem: the numbered
date of the item;
wlicn eactr item responds and the typå, titte, specific subject matter and
and recipients of the
the names, addresses, positions, anáirganizations of all authors
privileged'
ireI"-' ãna iftt .p"cific ground(s) for claiming that the item is

as defined herein'
Method oJ Producing Documents' Each requested document'
that document is responsive to
shail be submitted in its entirety, even if only a poriion of
be edited' cut' or
an inquiry marle herein. This means that the document shall not
.ftall include all appendices' tables, or other attachments' and all other
".p"ig"ã, ""¿
docum-ents referred to in the document or attachments' All
written materials necessa-ry to
also be submitted'
understand any document responsive to these inquiries must
in
Identffication of Documents. For each document or statement submitted
number' to which inquiry it
response to ttre inquiriås stated in the cover letter, indicate' by
document was retrieved lf
i. .ãtpÀt.i"" -a identify the person(s) from whose files the
àny ao"o-"nt i, not datåd, søìe the àate on which it was prepared
lf any document does
of the author(s) or
noí identify its author(s) or recipient(s), state, if known, the nameþ)
r*ipi".tlri iou -ortia"ntify with reasonable specifrcity all documents provided in
response to these inquiries.

to any inquiry made


Documents No Longer Available. If a document responsive
herein existed but is no longer available, or if you are unable
for any [eason to produce a
author' recipient'
ãã"u*"nr.".ponsive to any inquiry, identify each such document by
is no longer
ã"r", ii,r", anå specifrc ,ubj""t àuti"., and explain fully why the document
available or why you are otherwise unable to produce it'
Sand¡a M. DePriest
February 26, 2010
Page 8 of 9

responsive to
Retention of Original Documenrs' With respect only to documents
to those inquiries'
the specific inqui.i"s -ãde h".ein und any other documents^ relevant
for twelve (12) months from
you åre air""tå to retain the originals of-thosedocuments
Enforcement Bureau
th" dut" of thi, 1"tter unless (a) yiu are directed or informed by
the
time.or (b) the
in writing to retain such documånts for some shorter or longer period of
Enforcerient Bureau or the Commission releases an item on the subject
of this -.
itcluding, but not limited to, a Notice of Apparent Liability for Forfeiture,
investigation,
you must retain all
ã. * oî¿", dirpo.ing õf the issues in the investigation, in which case'
payment of any monetary
such documenis until the matter has been finally concluded by
conclusion of
p"nutty, .utirfu"tion of all conditions, expiration ofall possible appeals'
action brought by the Uniied States Depafment of Justice or execution and
ã"V
"å'fi*,f"" of a find ãettlement with the Commission or the
iÃpt"-"tttution Enforcement Bureau'

herein are continuing


Contínuing Nature of Inquiries. The specifrc inquiries made
and all documents and
in nature. You arã required to pi'oduce in the future any
informationthatarcresponsivetotheinquiriesmadehereinbutnotinitiallyproducedat
supplement your
the time, date and place specified herein. In this regard, you must
and information
responses (a) if you learn that, in some material respect, the documents
(b) if addirionat responsive documents
initìany aiìciosóa were incomplete or inconect o¡
production' The
or infoimation a¡e acquired by or become known to you after the initial
(12) months from the date of
requirement to update the record will continue for twelve
informed by the Enforcement Bureau in writing
tt i" t"tt", unt"r. (a) you are directed or
for or longer period
iirat your obligation io update the record will continue sor'ne shorter
an item on the subject
of tiåe or (b) the Enforcãment Bureau or the Commission releases
of tnis invesíigation, including, but not limited to, a Notice of Apparent Liability.for
case the
Forfeiture or a'n order disposiÁg of the issues in the investigation, in which
obligation to update the record will continue until the reiease of such item'

Def,initions

For purposes of this letter, the following definitions apply:

"Any"shallbeconstruedtoincludetheword"all,"andtheword"all"shailbe
construed to include the word "any." Additionally, the word "or" shall be construed to
the word "and," and the word "and" shall be construed to include the word
"or'"
include
Theword..each''shallbeconst¡uedtoincludetheword..every,,'andtheword.,every''
shall be constmed to include the word "each."

"Document"shallmeanthecompleteoriginaì(orinlieuthereof'exactcopiesof
because of
the original) and any non-identical copy (whether different from the original
notatio;s on the copy or otherwise), rãgardless of origin or location' of
any taped'
punched, computer-stored' or
¡ecorded, transcribåá, written, typed, printed' filmed,
prepared'
grâphic matter of every type anà description, however and by whomever
produced, disseminated, or made'
Sandra M. DePriest
February 26, 2010
Page 9 of 9

..DonaldDePriestLoIResponse''shallmeanthelettgrtoJefffeyTobias,Esq.'
Bureau' from
Attorney-Advisor, Mobility Divisiãn, Wireless Telecomm¡nications
of Vhginia' Inc'' dated
Dennis C. Brown, Esq', counsel for Wireless Properties
from Jeffrey Tobias' Esq'' Attorney-
l"fi"ãU".eO, 20b9, räponding to the letter to Dennis C' Brown'
Ái"i*t, tr'tobitity nivtion, Wireless Telecommunications Bureau'
grq., of Virginia, Inc" dated August 18' 2009' relating to
-on."f fo.-Vy'ireless Properties information
tt investigation of MaritimJ s non-disclosure of ownership
"torn-is.ion's 6l in subsequent filings with the
in it. uppti"ution to particþate in FCC Auction No' and
Commission.
mean to state
"Identify," when used with reference to a person or persons' shall
address' and business phone
his/her full legal name, job title (if any), cunent business
not available' state the person's
number. If business address uoùo, t"l"phon" number are
home address and./or telephone number'
the date'
"Identify," when used with reference to a document' shall mean to state
described above)' a
author, addressáe, type of document (e'8 , the types of
document' as
location' and its
uri"f ã"t*iption åf-tire subject mauei, iis present or last known
custodian.
shali mean
"Identify," when used with reference to an entity other than a person'
and current or last known
to state its nam;, culÏett or last known business address'
business telePhone number.

Esq'' Attorney-
"Ma¡itime LOI Response" shall mean the letter to Jeffrey Tobias'
fiom Dennis C'
Advisor, Mobility Division, Wireless Telecommunications Bureau'
nÀ*n, btq., counsel for Maritime Communications/Land Mobile' LLC'Attorney- dated
Tobias' Esq''
õ"pt".u"t ä'0, 2009, responding to the letter from Jeffrey C' Brown'
ÿïi.*, trtoultity oivision, Wäeless Telecommunications Bu¡eau' to Dennis i8' 2009'
Èîq., -""t"f f".'Maritime Communications/Land Mobile' LLC'
dated August
of Ma¡ltime'¡ non-disciosure of ownership
r"täting to tt Commission's investigation
"in its application to participate in FCC Auction No 61 and in subsequent
informiion
filings with the Commission.

"Maritime" shall mean Ma¡itime Communications/t-and Mobile' LLC


and any
partially owned subsidiary'
predecessor-in-interest, affiliate, palent company, wholly or
but not limited to'
ãther affiliated company or busin-ess, and all owners, including
directors, officers' employees' or agents'
futtn".s o, p.in"iputr, una all members,
and any other persons working for or on behalf of the foregoing
at
inctuding
"ån.rltãnm
any time during the period covered by this letter'
EXHIBIT 6
Michelle Ellison, Clfef
Ë forcerüent Bureau
Federal Communications Commissiou
445 12th Street, SW
Washington, DC 20554
to
Re: Request for Confidential Treatme¡rt' Pursuâot
portions
Section O'45S of the Comrnission's Rules' of
Response to Lener of Inquiry and
Sa¡dra DePriest's
AIt Exhibits to that Response

ResPonse to Letter of Inquiry


File No' EB-09'IH-i751

Dear Chief Ëllison:


Mobile' LLC (collectively'
Sandra M. DePriest and Maritime Communications/Lard
pursuãnt to 47 C'F'R' Ê0'459 of the
MCLM) resPectfully request confrdeÑial treatment'
Rutes forthe third paragraph at page 5 of
MCLM's ResPonse to the .
ö;""tilri"ir "Mr' DePriest is.^
Enforcement Bureau's le$er oti.ig.ti"*y Zol ZbrO, which begins
Chairman...'"MCLMofro"q*tttconf,dentialtreaunentforExhibitslthrough13'
l6ner dated February
tîî"äùî.u ,_up*t-¡" rvrcur¡], R.rponr. to the Enforcemeûr Bufeau's
of the Exhibits in their entirety'
26,20L0. MCLM requests confidentiai t¡eatneût

Tlrethirdparagraplratpage5ofMCLM'sResponseiueludesstrategicaltysensitive
release to the public' The Exhibits merit
commercial clata MCI-Vf *nicniòuf¿ not customarily
¡.***tft-VäJt"" sensitive matters' hcludírg specific
confidential treatrnent 't'*tgi*ity
woutd not customarily release thìs rype of
commercial and financial informaíion. MCLM
-""-lË"" *f*taAon to the public âÍd believes that exposure of the specifìc businessin
release could result
;t*g;ilts ; its fi¡anciai inió*ution is unwarrante<l' such
a disadvantaoe vis-a-vis other
r-Uîr":"6¿ competitive harm by placing MCJ M- ar
a-ud againsr th-e private mobile radio service
teleconrmutricatioo, ***i." práuiaürîpecifically
tttt typt of commercial and financial
indusny in general. In short, ,ftt Bittiuio "oottio not
guarded.from competitors"r and lherefore should
information "which would curiot*ify be
ressonably segfegable informatiou
be made routineiy available foffiJ,ioo.- fftut. is no-
which could be released witlout competitive halm
to MULM'

I in the requcst that the materiâls


C.F.R $0457(d)(2), which provides that "if it shown
See, 47
guarded
ot ttcttnical clata.which would customarily be
cont¿in trade secrets o¡ commer;íiínn-"i*i
for inspeotion' ' ' .''
t"* ""*p"it"", tire materials wili not be made routinely available
MCLM has continuoûsly affordeal the infbrmation contained in tlte Exxibits highly
confïdential tfeatment ând hâs, until now, restricted distribution to pasonnel wíthin MCLM
¡¡d
to legal counsel for MCLM, These precautions emphæize MCLM's intent that the contents
of
the Exhibits not be released to third paniæ.

Fof âll the foregoing reasons, MCLM requests that the Exhibifs, in their entirety, be
withhelcl from public inspection under the Free<lom of Information Act püsuãnt to 5 U.S.C.
$s52(bx4),

Ttrank you for your âttention to this matter.

MARITIME COMMIJNICATIONS/
LAND MOBILE, LLC

jz

/:-,t ,- - ,,!-
--{'¿ø/Ú/-Y
Dennis C. Brown' Counscl to MCLM
8124 Cooke Court, Suite 201
Manassas, Virginia 20 109-7406
703t365-9437

Dated; Ma¡ch 29, 2010


DENTüs C. Bnowlr
ATTORNEY ¡TT L.{W
8124 CooKE CoURT, SurE 201
MANASSAS, VIRGTMA 20LM-7 4n6

FN( 703/365-9456
PHoNÉ 703/3 65-0437
NoT AIMN-TED N VRCINIÂ
D.Ç.BROWN@ÁTT.NET

March 29, 2009

Mar leneH, Ðortch, SecretarY


Federal Communications Commission
445 12tl St¡eet. SW
Washirgtor, DC20554

Attention: Chief, Enforcement Bureau

Re: ResPonse to Letter of [rquirY


File No, EB-091H-1751

Dear Secretâty DoÍch:

of Maritime
I represent the radio system interests of Sandra M' DeÈiest â¡d
before the Federal
Comrnunicätions/Lanct Mobile, LLC (collectively, Mrs' DePriest)
communications commission. on behalf of Mrs. DePriest, I am
filing herewith her -Respolse
in FiIe No' EB-O9-IH-
to tlrc Enforcôment Bureau's letter of inquiry dated Febfuary 26,2009
1751.

Pleâse direct any questioûs concernilg this fili4 to me' Thank you for your attention
to this matter,

Very truly yours,


The Reverend Sandra DePriest
510 Seventh Street North
Columbus, Mississippi
g{gpgc)¡glcsu
662-328-2017; 652-574-1972 (cell);

March 29,2010

Msdene H. Dortob. SecretarY


Federal Communications Commissìon
445 12ú Steet, S.W.
Room TIV-4325
Washingon, D.C.20554

Attention: Briar J, Cartet, lnvestigations and Hearing Division,


Enforoement Bureau, Room 4-C330

Re: Âpplications of Maritime Communications/Land Mobile, LLC


for Automated Mæitime Teleconmunications System Licenses
and to Partioipate in FCC Äuction No. 6l
FilcNo.: Eþ09-IE-f751

þs¡ ffi. Carter,

This letter is in response to your follow-up letter of iuquiry seeking additional


i¡fonnation a¡rd documontatiOn r¡r'tth tegard to Maritime Communicatio¡s/l,and Mobile,
LLC ('Marítime') in support of your iavestigation of its compliance with Sections
1.2110,1,2112,1.17 and 1.65 of the Commission's Rúes, 47 C'F. R. Seo. 1'2110'
1.2112,1,17 and.l.65 in its application to participate in FCC Auotion No' 6l and in
subsequeut filings with the Commission.

shøreholders, parnørs, and benaficial owners


t. Identify all officers, directors, of
Maritime since January I , 2002 and provide the dates upon which such individwls
secured theìr respective positíow wìth Maritime.

Maritime w¿s formed on February 15, 2005. Accordingly, Maritime had no offïcer,
director, shareholder, partner, or benefioial owner before that date. The Managing
Member of Maritime is SIRIW Partne¡ship, L.P ("S/UW")' The Certificatê of
parhership was originalþ filed with tho secretary of statc of Delawffe on November 2l,
2002, a oopy ofwhich is attached as Exhibit 2(i). Communications Invesbnents, úrc' was
substituted for Medcom Development Corporation, ('Medcom") as the Genetal Pa¡brer
of S/RIW, effective February 15,2005, which action was üled as a matter ofnotice as
paft of the loan t¡ansaction wth Pinnacle Bnnk, with tJte secretary of state of Delawa¡e
ãn ¡\ugust 24, 2005, a copy of whìch document æ fi1e stampcd by the Secretary of State
Inc. has
ofDelaware is altached as Exhibit Z(iÍ),r Corrmunications Investments,
of the
continued as the Genetal Pa¡tuier of S/ÈÑV to the present date' I own I 00%
the stock
Common Stock of Communicatio¡s investments, inc' and have ftom the time
I bave also remained the
*ä motf"""a to me by Don DePriest on Fobrutry 1 8, 2005 '
p*i¿.of S."r"rrry anå sole director of Comsrunications Invesùrlents, Inc, since
l¡¡^ ,
since Iy9U'-
Depriest iesigned as President and Director ofwhat wæ a shell corporation

offTcerça¡dDircctors:AtalltimessincetheformationofMoritime,Ihave
*yr"lfìo be the soie elected offioer and director of Maritime. As an LLC' I
believeil that ihe titles given to the employees were unofficial empþee
""oriAurËå titles',On
i*"*y o, ZOO6, f exec;ted Mirutos whish fie attached,.as hereto as Exhibit I (viü)i in
wbi"ni g;e titi"s whioh I termed in ihe mjtrutés to be employees" titles to John ..
nu*¿oo-" CN"f e*ecutive Officer, to Robert "Tim" Smilt¡ Vice-Prosiden! and to Belinda
üoO*oilrr.**"t.3 I did not considet any of these persors to be '(Coryorate Officeru"'
i* *_pr"v."r. I ¿i¿ not see ths cEo æ a corporato ofËcer,.just as tho cFo is not âlways
irr, .oriork t**er. There was no inrent to deosive as I disclosed openly in my
äJei"ri ioirrrponses ro the FCC thar John Reaxdon wæ rhe cEo. but he is
not a
påi¡¿ent, Vioe-pìesiilenq Seoretary or Tfeasuïer. I{e is not a sbâreholder and does not
pi.rl"lp"il rn B.t¿ -""tiogs o. uuthorization of loans or other major oompany dccisions'
'tfu
n-ttio* ** operatiois malager. Nor doos Tim Smith partioipate in Board
Meetings or decisiors, and he firnctio¡s as ths Chiefpngineer'
,.PresidenÇ' ¿¡d he has been
Jãbn Reardon was never authodzed to use the title
i*tooi"¿ nÀt to ¿o so in the futurc. I had no intent to dsssiys ths commission in these
of titles and I tust that the Commissiou wæ not deceived'
"noì*u "tpfoy"e
Maritimeshareholders,p¡rhersandbeneficialownerusinceJanuarylt2002:
l'{"'iç*e o* ro'-ed on Fehruary 15, 2005. SiRIW hæ at all times been the Managilg s/RJW
iri"Åuurìþv*iti"t". ¿ll of the msmbersltup interests in Maritime were owned by
2008' when 22 of 1,ö00 parmership rmits were issued to
an
;;r*;hú;tJ., .ntil
--*-ãñparty.
outside
oi,¡" p*u"ship of s/Iuw are owned by me. The General Partner of
shares
sn-lu r,.p. ¡s commuruiatio¡s Invostnents, I-nc. aud, since February 18,2005,Ilave
Ino' No htelests bave been
ão,""¿iõ0"2" .f tnu stock ofComrnu¡icatious Invoshneflts,
issued to lvfr. DeP¡iest Êom inoeption to date'

t wss signed by me on February lE' 2005 aIld vas


A ÇorÞo¡ate version oftbat docuñc¡t, identicål in text,
in these two docume nts is simply rhat the
nir¿-"ì'ut tnr C"rp"*" Ecords at ú;ii^e. The differcnce
u'as kçpt vrith dre Legal file,T lho .o$9e o-f the.
àîî¡rääîi nrä *tlttn" n.to*tt" s."ttu.v ofbVstatç
me' I had scen the orighal filêd with the Secrelåry
âttorney, and onc wås a Co.potare copy t*ecuíed l9t
of Staté and thc sttomey did not have ¡ coPy o[my origlnal rn nls.rue'
'wc
; ¡" àiscfose¡ i" ûre LOl, a" nn oversieht negiecteá to show tbe cbange in Prcsident with the
Mississþpi Sccretary of Stste utrtil200E.
mirrutes ofthe meetings of Msritime
3
Correcfiou: It has co*u to ¡1y uttlntion in tlç dehiled rÊviÊw ofthe
reviewing the minut€s, I3ee that
that I ,'eed to co'ect a srrrement maJe in my €a ier LoI fesponses.
In
Januarv 6, 200ó minut'es,oJMålt-l{r'Þ .
Ëü;I"d,il*J indce¿ aut¡o¡ize,l io sign as Treaswr
pxñUit"t(viii) her¿to'
in üre
wcll as in the miuutes of Ma¡itime ofMarch
authorizing ber to si$ *s 'f'reæur"t, as
1(x) hereto'
iO, zOOS ñ th. optoiog of+bank accounl Exhibit
warratrts to pluchase units of the 1 '000
F¡om time to time over thê lâst five years'
¡*ue t*pit"d' A' litt of tho warrants is
units of Maritime f,ou" U.'" er*ttî, *otiot*í¡"n
treatment of this information'
attached as Exhib itl We request conJìitenttal
' dated Mey 28' 2008'^and
John Reædon's mo¿in"¿ åmpf'ívÀ*t agreemeut
a 1 0% share of the
;
il*¡ibit e Oi, proni¿L-ioiinlr' Reaidon to ¡eceive
^ftr.ü
Company in lieu of ot¡., ,o*p"Ëoüoi
tp"t tt*i""ti*
of his-employment other than
of the Company'
i"r .l*ã. g" he could be considered a beneficial owner
tt"l
of Matitimø' but not limìted lo'
2. Provide a copy of all corporare doctments -íncludin1
ofall meetìngs held during the
any drticles, bylaws, operating;8'";;;;i;'-;"á ^ìnutes
relernnt period.
are
Minutes and operating agreoments
The Co¡porate organization Documents'
pr."iOåä Èittitit 1 (i--x), Exhibit 2 (i-vi) and Éxhibit 3'
*
j. hß relationship to Mafitima
Identìfy John Reardon and desrribefuIty

of Dave þ1ùq91e' attached as Exhibit 4'


As set forth in the aftached Declaration
Mobex Communications'
from 2000 to 200s, rohn nea¡dlìîäFi*iJt* '"a 999-of
Inc. and its subsidiary vr"¡.* Ñ"t*Jt
Sã*i"tt' rrc
C'tt'tobe-t'')' a company
whose

ät ij*"ttu"iio' zoòs A ti*t


j
otthe a"sets of Mobex
assets we¡e acquire¿ ty ¡,r"tun" into in May'
Putciase egreeruunt ettered
i"ï-tãs*i
acouitcd by Maritime i, roäl
'"t
20rj5. aod is âttaon"¿ æ S*hiUit S.}f,;
**¡et-""t to Maritime was approved by
ii"ï*. 30' 2005'
;;JËbË il N;#;', æos' l'"iJt*" ä"*a tn"ii""y¡3n on Deoember

John Reardon was r.,ir.¿


;l;r"tir
nn äpÏoy.* I , 2006, a few days after the Mobex

¡O'
",
ZOOs' Ai uå 6*s \'¿as Johfl
pefl¡dolr simultancousiy an
closing on Dccember him to
emolovee of Mobex an¿ lr¿"'iiimu'õn
i**ty ' f "*"",ut"d minutes authoÍizing
e
has done so sincc
of Maritime and he
ï#"å"äËä:Ëi;"uy * ,r"*"o.rJ,n;*",*ärÉr septenber 18' 2006' and amended
tlattime. Ä copy otlis "*pråfr'äiäT"ä*"'ia"tt¿
-øl
#Ëöäia æ çl' C"'¡¿"rltidl tredtment is requested
on May 28, 2008 i* uua"u"¿ and is paid a base
for salary and oItte, ,o^n""åíî"ry1"3À* lt;:l I :ly*"Ider
Maritime above a certain level' As
an employee' he
salary plus a commssroo oo of
'J"s äJüË oo"i t*pr"yees' is eligible to participate in the
rtceives ¿ salary, heuru'u"""ä*",
401 ft) Progam.
bøca¡ne an offrcer of Maritíme
and specify all títles
4.tpecily the date that John Reardon
antlpositiont held W hí*' P;;;;e-; "ipv
iÍat ¿o**ents authüizinThîs dppoínted
poritiÕns'

to be a corporate officer of Maritime'


While I have not considered Job¡ Re¿rdon
uut oslled a "CEo"'he becams the
but an emplovee itth" t"'"*ïi;ä;;tJvrãue't¡ a oopy of tho minutes of a meeting
desimated CEo ot :*u"v ã'äoiã'bîitturt
r<"ttO t
";:ä'i;ih;"r;;i'î"î¿i'¡s*it*s MCLM as
tittes for per'sons.who have ioíned
of atl of thu assets of Moher Netwotk
employees upon co'"'*'onffiiui'naíe behalf of
Servìces, Inc- rn"" ii
i"tig'*'í¿ iuthorizer) signers on
^
"^pøyä''
seüing fo¡th these same facts'
t ttf-"-* -* to tlte FCC dated January 29' 2007
""- ""*-t
18, 2006' and amended on
MCLM." A, copy of his employment conü:âct dated September
neatmenr of
;;;;;,idg3-,'it ;'"i"."¿ L É*i'iilit e(al and(b)' we'røquest confidential
thesë doëuments,

5. In the Maritime LOI Respotw (at page 2), Mmìtime indicateil ¡hat John Reardon
,"*il ir, cär¡ n**tiw oÍìàr,' oí, r"cords indìcale that Mdrìtime did not disclose
^
iini'near¿onn'nt
-rîiiiîu"n¡tngt applìcatiü to partìcìpate in Auction No'-61.(FCC Forn J!Ð ":':.
*itnn" co*^íition' hxplaìnfuIlvwttv Maritine dídnot ìdentifv John
in ¡tuction No' 6 I
Reailon
-irCC as its Chìef fxecznve ficet tn its appiicanon to paftícíPdte
for* 175) and ìn subseq,ånt ¡ttngl *itìt the Commissîon' including but notü¡stem
';r;;td;;," ú;ítr^t;t oj,moii* ¡å' einmated Maritime Telecommunications
Iìcenses (FCC Form 601)-

Ms¡itime' Ma¡itime did not include Joht


John Reardon has never been an officer of
for the reasons set
n"ur¿on æ CSO for cach ofthe following requested circumst¡nces
forth:
a. Regarding perticipation in Auction 61
(FCÇ Form l?5)' John Reardo'n^was af
aU tim;;;îbye¿*ù r,¡o¡ò* ¿*Ue 2005'
The date of the Auction was Àugus! 2005' -
the Asset Pu¡ohase Rgr"*."ot **
iot approved by ihe FCC until Novembcr' 2005' and
r¡ntil December 30' 2005' and John
the Asset Purohæe Agrcement was not ciosed
bv the Compalylntil January' 2006' Therefore it was
not
nì*àït ** tmpìoyed
necessary
""t
to include John Reardon in this filing'
b. Maritime's rot ¿tUtS iicenses {f'CC-Form 601)' Maritime's -
Àpp["tt¡il
wæ filed on september 7'
au"tiorriqo-åi ri"*uïppli*tjoo'icc Fite No' 00023033,55
and did not even be come a¡r
2005, John Rcardoo *æ n"v"' uo áfficer of Maritime'
employee of Maritime until January' 2006'
Maritíme
as, an oftcer of
6. Identífy all entitìes, ìf any, dttributable ro John Reardon
to
;;fi*'íí"-;;irrd; i"*tlon, 2003, and 2004' Províde re.lepont documentation
cntitv' including but not límited
demonstrøte the aggtega" c,,il iü;"i'i of each
-such
2002' 2003' and 2004'
î1,' ,orn indty't irl¿"rat tæ ìeirns¡or theïdlendør vears

because he was uot empþed by


Thsre was no entity attibutable to John Reardon
has tho suthonty to
Ir¿*itirru *úi ¡-t-y'
iooO' Ñ"üi"t Marit'rme nor John Reârdon
disolose Mobex corpo*t* tt* ttt*¿" ¡no
Joln Rea¡don left Mobex' it is a matter of
the Chief Admrmstrative Offioer of Mobex'
FCC Reoord that Dutu ft*¿-ãi" tutt"a À
ihe Universal
il;tìip*rq,, Ldt pr"¿-ot" tøu nlings to the FCC' including for
íeeds this informarion it woulil need to be
ö'#;ffift, *¿ irm cor;ssion
""* through¿i¿him'
obtained
uot t¡ke ove¡ the cotporate struttue
of Mobex' No tax retums were
ft¿øti-ã governmr'nJ ot
¡1"¿ ti t',rLiti-u for ptob"r Vtu¡itime fi1ed no document wilh any state
** a subsidiary nor a sister enrirv of Maritime'
lä""1i'.iî-"î"* u""ï*ã vúï,.
""rtl,er
and had no autloritY to do so'
Maritime because he is not a
Mr. Rea¡don does not exercise conhol ove¡ is
sha¡eholder and do", oo, **.ä- omoiul offi""t, ttoolholder or Board Member' nor
major corporate or fi¡ancial decisions
of Maritime'
il*utlt"i".Jto *rt"
to Matitime'
7. Identify Donald Ðelriest and desÜihe fuIIy hìs relationshìp

ownership md role in.


Donald Dehiest is my husbân'l of over 26 ycars' His
hete'
lutarit¡rn"ã"* ,trt"¿ i" p¡or f,Oi gnswer 8a' ând as rciterated aud supplemented
he sewed æ an officer or
il;^ilttt-stil;ot*iur"up iott*tt i¡r Maritìme' Norhas
24, 2005, I designated him to sewe
¿ir""r. oivr*iti-". rn sxhibiti(vil,
datêit February
* on bunaE of ùa¡itime, ¡s was stated in 8c of the prior LoI a¡swer,
ftlr."ir*gr¿rigr*
p"p¡Ë"t ** the prior owner of a shell corporatioo named Commuuications
ionurun"oe, h". tl" .oip"¿ æ nesident andbirector and,tansfened the stock of
Cî.*ì*i.ãtioo* Ioverd€ots, I"o. to me on Febnrary 18, 2005-. (Soe Letter of
ñ;;iF ld;¡t"tald R DePriest as Presideut and Director of commuuications
as Exhiuit 2(iv))' Effective February. 18'
2005'
ililitu ;*, d.;attached Parbrer of SIRIW
C""r-.rf."itf"* Investment., Ia"- is antl ilas been the General
Parhcrship, which is the Managing Mcmber of Maritime'
of documents on my
Mr. DoPriest is an authorized manager and authorized siguer
in tho office or
b"h"lff; Mt idrne, He is not à on+iæ ñanager' nor does -he work He has
ää;i;;tct'l*ìi." to pra¡it¡-u, tuttlat rãle is handledtv John Rea¡don'
and conhacts oD behãlf of
il;-ü-t'to fi*. *ri"t"¿ ¡o tfu otiotiotion of financing
o* ubility to tuton'tt'"t any and all
Ma¡itime, æ eaum.*æ¿ nur.oiu, tTint t"tt of 8(b)' He
conhacts {hat hemignt nouu ,ipä, anä they are set forth-hereafter in Question
has atso guaranteed loa¡s made to Mantime'

8. In the Donald DePríest LoI Resnorue


(at Pase 10)'r\:i:ff#;H:
things, he wa authorhed to efil ;Xi;ir":li
followÍng inþrmation:

(a) AII docvments gdntE Donatd DeP ert duthorit! to e ter into contrdcts
on behalf of Maritime'

to euter into contacts on behalf of


(a) Documeüls grånting Donald DePriest authoríty
Maritime, wor:ld inolude:
dated February 24'
i. The above mentioned Exlibit l(vi)' Corporate.min-utes
and Ron Fancher as Managers
2005 in which I äppol"t*ã noouì¿ Íjupriest
of Maritime'
dated February 15' 2005' and
2. The Limitett Liability Company Agreement'
6:
attached as Exhibit i 1ü¡, whicn states in paragraph
'ÉI lrqrqr(g ú qIoJ lãs sl ãu+FBI/ilJ9 JIBqeq uo olul
a"r¡¡umu y (q)
p êluâ lsâl¡däd plËÛoo lÉq¡ lcB4u;þìäi*oirá"t"p
',u!lr¿tl\ lo Ãryãq uo
qtna fo uopducsap egnanu y( q)
o ! patàtuã $au¿ëo p\Ðuod 1D4l tto't1uot
.,',{ueduoc
âql Jo ¡â5!s9 ¡o r:--qy:1-[ Ëutãeuu¡'r1 e se
6¡¡rqr¡¡ peltult PaurroJ :q o-l
ilâqo
,Árædmoc ,$¡llqü-Il ?ãllu¡Ii päEroJ
i.ä iea"*;, iem pue
e se rÉ¡e Á1uo
rdi ãrI¡
ou êlBq 1¡rrr ã{ lnq 'uoBcËsuÉ¡}
âq 01 oq¡ u! Í+roqrnE .roq1o ;o a¡erod:òc
âEITF*IAI Jo uoJtEII¡roJ stfi
î ""gä"i cir àt¡qonl pusr6trog'öI'n*.lroc *lTT.:-g.1ry*4'"+to"
e qa"sn"¿
*"" J#-ö.q u,tiå'i'n*p oep o1,;ii¡¡¿'ç
",ï "ìì iiir liqr.q*g t* ptqtqp rnn'rq"¡ uo lsãIrile(I-'u pptot
p* rs"lrdrq;tptug *n pæn*its¿¡r luauoet8v Jo ÚnpusrowâI I v '9
1"q

'uospnH ?pülâg pw ãlrl


aarqr¡o euo s¡
eq¡ uo sa¡ro1euËrs poreú¡sep--a"¡o"do
ç¡rr îuo¡e lunocct "'raËuue¡rt¡
'(x)
'lsâl¡däo '¿ p1noo6,, p* tooo"* þq t io oq¡
-*Foqne
1

qc¡ey\i uo ourlluey\l¡o lu4eo¡41 t'¡o sa¡ntr¡yq'ç


rqffiäi.ñ"ir"'eîói'or
pa4ro4fin ÍuP alw ínu Jþqwolì'l
JTI a¡tlo ltDILaq uo uoltcD.¡¡77
,;
âqtfo ssaulsnq tl'ÌtptÌor ol
pgtiìí"ìi íq'Ì;"í *t'ilni auony þqs puÐ 'J77 Ð41
-â.41
*ouri ,iàir¿ iup n' atlo! ot tl!'totfin¿ a¡øtl
¡prsatuu
ahnuou¡nqs'nq*oyy1a,¡'|iu'¡jffiouvw"'olawaen¿:qde'Éend
ã"r"r"ih
"äp"q**äq å,¡ ui ffi int t"tguäpl âql sq'luoo 1I {^ÐI ilqFt*s
"á"nã-*t paooãxo oslu sB'$
Ë Tooz 'çt '{tn*qn¿ uo'âIrqonl "'ärsÀ\Bião
lo r*aur'o3 ¡rlnqenielmn c11 Pue'fËulFe4ununüoJ
"rnrs
';;-Ïörö;;å;ãåili;'ù"rjio¡ãqrns¡'ri-o¡Bu¡g,,er'rsuedxeeromv'þ
,,'lundwot
lun zloyrou øy-ua1l.-\n¡1u¡ ø4t lq
aqt lo !¡nqaq uo uoltco pazl'toqvo
'ssaulsnq s¡fuodwo7 øqt øBouow llaqs
ra.qwaw Plllul
pn grå,rllni'rio,tuy
' ,rl 'þrryls sl ll ,,1ueruoãuuelr,i,, 'Pe¡lpue qduBered eq q 'GD t ilqTqxs
- -'ri
¿,,
p* ,ttooiq'Jp"¡"p 1ot*tä€v ãqrerãdo etlt
q '[
üq* 'ç00u'çI
o1 1s1a'-ínw
*'ssàulsnq PnPuoc
rttndwo3 aqt qxltlt ut uo¡cl4sln¡ n u1 ssøu¡snq op o¡ Íf1¡nnÞ f,undwoS
ol
a'o*ùow" topuo svaupuauu [un puø)'
aut 'tol l-rossatau 6üiå''¡i
tí'q; l;ilï'"¡io"u't, rt'n*øtt)tsat ro/pu, suawpuawo tw puo)
,rro$,tÏr'l
"-'
niá*ra ui¡1 ¡o ufilnutollo fin$luac ary a¡r! puy tãl.W'atnl'xÐ
o1'tÐY

- 'ií huluþaw
Ðt4tþ a41 í*q*';; 'w¿o'*'f iua '-y P .øuas ot øãPunw
ut'ltt^
plouoQ"
puo uotrrtl prr¡to4t* uo * punuSlsap tQanr4 tsalr¿ao v
s1
ãu4luByi[ 1zr$ sappua asoql ($'11
Swluq pue acuetrs¡xâ q ãqeq s¿ pâqFcsãP
rþPaaqr a4! &u¡tnP lJ\ua 4tns.
ot uolJtlua.wncop lun^alat ap!^o'ta
qtoa lo senuarct ssoti alo*atÊln at al'll4suouap
aoltbnd'oJlu,audo7a'taq utocpa¡'¡ ''cu¡
'r'y"ll'i'lioi-,a
'(cu¡ '7g¿1to¡t¡ puo ''"u¡ .?q o^i)g'
''uoui"ioo*'fox ÐutsultlJ '':u!
'otpn¿ a¡huntt¡ uÐp9oÐ pû:-!!!.2 -'s1tortfltluttwuto) p*
'8002 '2002 sna'l
tyeuou) sanuarct zu1*q ,, p,qltiiii
ui*il¡ffi ¡a'l
npuapc aqt hu¡tnp uruur,l,u
påq';t;p iwpl'toy¡ to'|t s"ltnua êsoqt ol sv (q)
*
'1'Bu1'þ
'olâ¡Ðfl
pEB (¿) 6 {qlqxg q q¡:oJ lâs ê¡B sâ ¡êÀãl
pãqcqtÉ âre sûm]ãJ lÈe1 âIqBIJB,IE êr$
nätifte*y¡ r"ç s'an1¡ua osoq¡ (e)'i
ou ãq,req se asuoo'oU lof tlîã På'q.;'+
1

to!-su'wat m! Tnnpa¿ s'tlgua 4cna


puÐ 't002 '2002 s.ûâK npua1n a4¡
'þ002
tot patlwlt tou flq 3u1pn7cu1 't'o'Oz puo 'çgç7 '1g¡t smo'(
tnpua1nc atll Sulmp ¡filua 4cns'
ol uolto$awn?op lwttaq't ?Pl,.ora
rhbã fo sanua^nt sro,e qoti"'Éao all"it'i*o*up
'""'iíäíi*",î'aî,*;i,;;";;;"';;iinii!$ns'eolîpTD'800¿'200r-::11:
äatq'* pi'qlt"iøp u4¡ln|n¡ tot salulue esotlt ol sv P)
,tppualv à4! fuu!,mp a?uã!s!*
"f
'uolssluttt)oJ Ðtlt t#rø s3u1$ ganbasgns
ut

uolln4Èdn sï àsollslp lou plP l!


püþ G ¿ I uto¿ XX¿) g uolznl u! andlcltnd ot
'oN 't! tq 'l
I
sagna tfl asuodsay ¡67 øulrlta4{ aw I
pqr sanuua lo tsl1, poplno'o 'i11¿nw 'þ-t

'(g t - t )g s+rqF a se palãqEl puÉ pãqÕÌ$E ârs


sã]oÛ p:1To¡ las s¡ salou peeluurtnB
1cl 14 qroJ tes s" âqiI¡BI^[
as¡¡o uogducsap Ç '9'-1$¡$ topiâ"b
"npeuoo ài"^oäo"s-t' ï:lsoe.€qì :1
r"ç p"tlâs l'ql â^ãlãq I'râ^âiYroH
J.;åilI ÑiJ.H
,q pãÀ\o
üanotql ní"
sqooä"r*t"oB ol 'çlgoqlnB IBqrã^ /çuI
puq $ãlrdâCl 'rhl
'âE4u€l l
pqttog tq paaya.lltl8-
fintlaq uo $a!'t¿ÐQ
'awy1m¡t¿ lo

ø1ou qcoa lo rØoc o * :


;*::::
.'p¡ttot¿
'øw171ny¿
'þ l1n'¡aq
'o'ìopd¡i'í'p py11þwàat ) &ry\fln Pqú^-!!
uo søtoupaatuolnrs ttnti¿iø pwoa fuaitty*''u
:;;i,,row ,tq pli^i íoiou påiunt1,a- rytqagltþ'too 'Fanbal s, tsÐtttÐQ
ø,t"irîra.; anodsa¿ ¡67 ÐruPUnn aLF uI
'0¡'
Drpuo¡ tìr '¡þqt Parbítlpu! u*g¡ti¡n¡ (¿ a$oiI w)
'ua,t¡B ueaq seq aq uols¿Foqlflu
âr¡q'fra'ro leq¡ ere¡¡eq
IIEJ pltroÀr eEop
sutt
sô$lÍrr ãq¡ uF{ll,\t flig-"qg^"q
uiquù pt to n* to'I roipue€rtr$I¡Bl^l *J
ol råÀh'" 1T:1:
¡ '9-1 (u)g uonsonu "'n nuåumcop eq¡-1e¡g ÛottsânÒ ol s¡oÄ\sue â^oqe
'r¡41 twzuoq¡ne
";ctsB âÀrãs ot rsâF¿og
rre
#*
o¡ lsâFifâc PlÉuog ro¡ '(liroipna
uarut ar¿
r{";#; ,i i"aì" iù *i
"t
'¡sø!J¿AQ
gu1z1toqlnt
DtpuDS rÙ/puÞ Ðwll1n¡t¡ to! 7ua3n un
sv ¡uawwloddn qts,ay¿aÜ plþuoT
aø *ø PaþD lra!¿aÛ
stuÐunxop aploor¿ 1ru1'¿''g o'punl lotvuo ãnt!l!t!!-tol ua&n
D
't'tossatw w '1a4-
pl,uoe @att!,¿.*,to ToqrinÏrwi4"iayàqvo toqnlg 't¡¡ntu1nldr¿ plauot
otw;S rp ol P'"t*qtnl sþ tsàu¿au 'sUu!41
ts¡sso ot pun ¡uøhn ,,1rugr¿rq "oi awltuow aw ul '6
,ratlto B ôurD lall palntlwt '(¿ o&nd w) asuoclsay ¡67
'io1¡tn¡'¡
rsvenues aÊ set forür in Exhibit 9(b) hercto'

12. Iilentify MCT CorP.


My husbeud, Dorald DePriest' was
I havo no first hand howledge of MCT Coqp.
íts Board and æ Non-Executive
iouoV.ä io'its fonoadon in 2000,-âid served on
any ofthe corporate records' a¡d I have no
Chairman ofthe Boa¡d. I nave nàt s"en
oersonal loowledge of the corporat" ttto"t*t'
I m*t defer to Adc Holsinser's
iì), atråiä ;hõ;läf*,i* oi
p*¿¿
¡ePriest ûttached as Exrribit
üïffiöffiitr, ü"ooo" u"¿ ownuship' I know that it was
sold to
I 1 , as to all pe*inent d"tCI, * tä-iü of
Teiiasonera in approximatery 2ó"0îi io
i* toot" Ot exaät percentage of ovmership

MCT CorP' held bY Donald DePriest'


semed as Chainnan of MCT Corp'
Our
13. Our records indicate thdt Donald De1riest to
)í"irit'n*ä* u;ilii
¡|"¿tratu tn"t aí¿ nôt disclose Mcr cotp' ìn its awlîcdtion
iäí'i,íär"iíniîi"; N"i l dc:c ¡T m t z ss and tn subæquent fitìngs
with the
Explainfullv wttv Màtitime díd no|
i1i Ã;tp;^"'
Commission, ìncluding Maritim;;
61 (FCC Forn I7s)
disclose MCT Corp. itr opptioioiii'i'Ãliip't' in ¡ui79nai,o
i,
Íncluding Matitíme's LOI Response'
and ìn subsequentfrt¡nys wirn ile'Colrrmxsion''

its applicatiou to participate in Auction


Maritìme did not disclose MCT Corp' in
No. 61 (FCC Form f ZÐ an¿ in-its Jrit*ltit"t
nlineï*itr tho FCC for tle foliowtng
re8sol¡s:
^'îo"Uon Co"rmissionr
no. g1 and in subsequcnú filings with the
t" p*parË au<l file thc application and it did not
M¿ritime relíed ot
""*tå
receive anv i¡stuction* t"g*ffiti"iiå¿i"g ""tlit "tlcuiations
or any i¡fomration

ï:ffi Ë'd;il;;"JJb'-Ë;;ãI*nitiàìoi'-*tl: ::Th"io:ry"tiT'-Yi,9:^"


,"feionce nfe 1.2110(c )(s)(iiixA) or
contain *¡ry wâm'ogs or
Ëoäizí åo oot uxplicitly
i¡stuctions about ,pot.,r ¡" tt rufci uità-otlut entities with whioh Donald
"tniutäãl revenue
vl'iti*" was unaware of its need to supplv
;;PffiïJ;;;iurìo^nip'
*o*u*1T; to Donald DePriest in his
,ot Response. Maritime deferred in itsdid'response
I thought the responses wete û
,urpo*ä äñoii"i J*tìit""t i"ro*ation
than I
sinele collective rerp"**, *à'L-i"'oi
tl"v *tãnr-¿ *¿er.aiingie cover letter ftom our
* to the entities with which l am
atio-mev Dennis B**o. Ltu*¿-ioîi'*ä ';'¡*ttpt
f
date directçd to
involved, I defer to Nft' ÐtPti;tt';
;;oit* io 'lu ftn*t oftlie samelesponse into úy
him,', By this respo*", I inttnã"Jto
iiørpo'utt by t"f"rcnce his
I
*-t"fti *"f"ai 1a¡scription of MCT' apologize
¡esponse, and I thoognt ¡¡s
'"spî*J aoJi cetøily aid not intend to iElrore the request'
ttrat this was not mor"
"t.rrry-íäiJ
of Donaid'R' DePriest attached as Exhibit
1 1'
S* oä;ä;il
the (rgglegate Eross revønues of
MCT
14.Provîde relevant documentation to dømonsttete rÔ' its
,,t,nao' v"ä''ititii'iõ6i' ana zool' nchdng b"t not limìrcd
Corp. durinl the
2003 and 2004'
äírräî;;"r;;,*'s for rhi catendar vears 2t02'
',lPmruruor rno rn ..'PrenrY
18002 q 'sæa'{ g
áql-pâPæ^Àt sB^[ I ¡
âcllsnf pus l¡Iopâârt -lIIBârq E ä^EH -1,, )I'ly{ 'cu1
râ^o roJ pânulluo, *q l¡ pon 'rnq*\op qi¡!éÀõ¡1"g
x¡Ïs-âlqjg gsllqü¡sâ ?adlsq ¡
"ä;*lñ;;il;qtrty äi'os rrdn*tå3 s"qsr¡ ry *e'no1âtllJo s¡ãpu110J âqlJo ãuo plm

,{reprcog alerodroC âtl} uru I 'sreâ'( I rõ¡ uopoìaao q uoaq seq qcrq*r uru:8or¿ 8uuoln¡
0q} J0
Iooqôs-räurr' s¿uvEtH
âlï Jo sro]tâ4g ¡o pt"og ât{t ¡o u8ünsqc ãq} pue srâPünoJ
'¡dd¡Ss¡ss't¡^1
âuo uu I 'pâ]lnBss, ,ou pruopsánt oiãq i¡*otn"ø 'te"tou
s'uq ¡elcs¡Bqc ,,qN

,snqrnlo3 rI â¡ãq qtJnqC uo.Iss¡¡a á,t\Ircu ,(guroPro/À EJo rBcl^ se Stri^lâs '6661
pI¡B '6¿6I ãculs rug âql Jo ¡ãq*¡eut Pâsuá'll
n"o¡r îoìrrã'rão¡3 ln,ioåttag peulúpio uB
E ltrB I 'UOISSIm.tro3 ãIIl PÉãlslt¡¡ Jo â',r-Iâcâp
o] uo$uã]u! Áu uâsq Jâ^âu sEI{ {

'lqep FuoplppB Fluelsqns


pêrrncul â tq 'llnsãr B se'pue ãuIItFB¡tr1¡o suolFrado-pus-ti-t:11]-":*-"1:-tt"T"i
¡ullstssu rrt InJqlaq
ûââq ã^Bq e¡[ '8ÛpæmJ ]Bq]ftrlt4ø]qo.ul âltr
1n¡¡inro1" o1 e1qeufl pue lmoc ãu¡âJdns
uããq seq lsãlrdefl 'l¡r¡ 'rerr"¡ eqt ur esec Êurpuedcq u1
^n¡1joìlels êql eJoJâq r¡loq suãÀeH rlârrslfi
Blr¡roJllpJ âql âroJ"q ¡t"i"rä o¡,r"p'o ul PrT c)c
pêpâêu
*o,¡ .iol#iuî¡o ì,"ai a,T,u aql aupnp suous:edo r¡rerucu¡ otpuu
sputg IBU'PPPE
e"'r uer¡¡ lue8e
ä^Br{ ð¡A 'qcns sE â râs ûlq,nojì"aitoiou 1ì"' i:t-T:.1T,-,:T'::
'p"^I"^iT:tÏ
ollninii¿áq ppuo6 ro¡ erur:doiddeul oq ol cJc ârD /q Pâr'u.ãp sÌ llJI
lno pue sprocêI pu? s{ooq mo dn
rlcuâJo sâlor äql pogr:u¡c pue sãu¡¡g:eiu¡SJo 'ftel-s¡res
'prüslq¡il *oir it1$ 'ç¡e3 pooB ul st'u 1! '}ãäfo¡d slql ìoo¡râpm âllIlrreN uâtlll\

pttl tl âliãqãq los PIp puÌ '0¿'I¿l


'sPl?puBls âsoql poPâãcxâ
ãJc [r urârqnrspr"p**å"¡J.qp*'torizl
*tp:f ÊI
"t*T:d"::.:T:::
.ut. pn*'.loã selil Ygs l'glJallãq
-]jJ
uâìBtslÛ or rÐPÛn õull'râoo
lfeurs e JoJ sp¡Bput4, az¡s psure"ro3 339
seÀ\ âulllurl^tr ' l9 uorlcny o1 lopil sått'*inq ¡¡t*s 'to¡
sprupue¡s
'ropuÉi suor¡u1n8e¡ puu sap¡
r"^ åt¡ uì áá*q" * ,n^ .t"þ,{puanddy lle,T}lr'r
"q¡ qr,v, ,qciuoc oi au$Fel I Jo uoguâlq âql uããq seg pue sl 1l 'Fãurll IIB lv
cc¡ip

' n¡ow s¡t¡lto uogt4o s a.t


uopnutotul puo11lppø t(ttn
pup uot4raplsuoc no o7 Tnid¡aq aq tow adanatt no! tlt-r¡1
lualxa aLfl o,L'ç'
upí-¿ ;iitrtürt Bqpæari ir¡ioi atuodsat u¡ pap¡toñ asldl'àL!,o lou

8u¡lop 'a'o3
'zl tlq$lxg q lllroJ lâs ãrc ù002 puB g00z'2002 srBâÁ ¡upuo¡"
âqJ
p¡a¡o rnniåiåit.olt¡ å¡n¡nisa" nql êPrtsuo.oâP ol uolrluâünÔop 1üÈ^Ðlãr
The Commission's rules for chæacter and fitress to be a licensee are aimed at
eDsr¡xing that spectum will be used for the public good.s ahs s¡¡min¡1ion of character
is thus not an eicl in iuelf, but is iutended as a means to âr end¡ wrll the licensee u.se the
licenses in the publio interest.

Over the past four years since the auction closed, Maritime has surely done thal
and continues tÀ do ihat customers have included ihe New Jorsoy Tumpike Aüthority
safety crews that dsliver services to drivers along the NJ Tumpike end Garden Shte
Part<iray- lowboat ald barge operatots along over 3,000 miies ofinland waterways
have benefitted beoausó Mâritirn; is a licensee and operator' Other users include a
school distiot in \ilastringfon $tate, helping to get studonts to school safd and ontime
wíth bus radios. Customers include several energy companies in Texæ and Louisiana"
deliveriug natural Eas aud oil, and utilities iu Perusylvanþ Vi¡ehia ând elsewhere'
which are providing sewioe to rural commr¡nities.

Havens' paperwork blockade has hindercd additional use ofthe spechum.


Metoli¡k wants to use our specfoum for Positive Train contuol. That applicâtion ws.s
filed on Mæch 11, 2010. For the past 12 months, Big Rivers Eleotio Cooperative has
sought FCC authority to serve hundreds of thousa¡ds of oustomers with our spechum in
feJtucky. fhe list goes ou and on of customers who ar." waiting for the FCC to finally
rosolve riis litigatioi against Maritime brought by Havens, a.ud to âlso norv resolve This
inquiry involviis Ma¡itime. Character questions arc ai'ed.at promoting the delivcry of
sefocä to customers iu the public interesq Maritime is mee¡ng the public interest, and
would fi¡¡ther sorvo the public interest ifthis cloud on Ítc licenses and now its chexaator'
wotld be fimlly removed by the Conrmission.

Recently, the commission released its B¡oadbantl Plan for America. I¡r the Plan'
the Commissiãn calls for enteproueurs to deploy spectum creativeþ and for seoondary

s As the Commission has statcd,

23. The key hctor involved in the support of some commenters for a "conducf' as opposed to a
:thu,nct"i .an¿"td generally appeãis to be the desire for elimlnation of tle mora¡ly'tinged
and "character"
decision-making of tri pasu ¡towãver, establishing a d¡chotomyletwee¡ "conducfl
i, not n.*r"".y:to of lesi value-ladeñ decision-maklng. [FN25] The rcmrd developed
ü*"in ã..¿y ¡it¿iotes that neither sec11ons 308(b) and 319(â) nor the public interest sÞndard
"chiåvement
embodied in-the Çommunication$ Act mândates tiré type of'good vs bad/evit"
aeagnent of "moral"
delibe*tions. Focuslng on the chäract€r frai¡e
Àaracterwhich somedmes color€d past Commission
ì'to
opante the station " ai ABC suggests, seems-a proper move in the dlrection ofa
nai"t."ry
*ore r"låu"nt, i"us ualue-laden character inquiry,. . [FNZ6] The "better wat' to e,''åluât€ an
äppriont r foát." -t¡ethan ttre
son oi inquiries conducted ln the Past is generally identified
""riability" issue as a narrowing of Commfssion concern to encompâss only
tl'aormeìì"rr.¿¿rcssing
misconduct relevant to operatio ofbroâdcast stations. [FN27] Fcc 85-648'
In tlle Matter of Pollcy Regarding Character Quâlifiõâtions In Broadcast Licenslng
ResÞonses to
Amendment of Rules Of Bioadcast Pmctice And Procedure Relating to Wfitten
of Misrepresenhdons to the Cornmission by Permiftees ând
Cà**ìri¡oi l"q"ities and the Making
STATBMENT
ù""nr*r, Gen.'Docket No. 81-500, Docket No. 78'108, REPoRT, ORDERAND POLICY

Adopted: December 10, 1985; Released; Jânuary 14 1986'

l0
markêts to play m incrcasing role in Cetting
spectrut inJo.use' li4CLM wæ the iìnt
an¿ a¿visor' MCLM is aggressively
comnarv to retâin Sp"ctrum Brite aiïurLorcr
;öäiñpJ"t*Ji; tì;"-r"il, and energv industries'
"tilitv
(Maritirne' Havens' Paging
Of the four initial geographical area AMTS iicensees the most
is the entity aeployingspectrum to
Svstems, I¡c., and Tonr Kurian)Jüa¡itìme and
toauv,iotü-Ji*trv to end user.s like towboats
ta><i
Tiåî* in"ä"i"çr"*
leæes to tailroads' utilities' and energv
ääi,anie*"t, *ãìdt""tlv tú;sh ;les aná
companies'

to character atrd fitness to be ¿ licensee'


The FCC has st¿ted that when it comes
the b€st prodictor of n tu.e teha;äiit
p*ip*itt"t-. te' Herq ttre FCC has the benefit
of seeins how Ma¡itime h* dtpi;;Jåe
-l'í¿"ä+ siecnrm since acquiring the auction license
äiä i,t"ä.uî'isJ0oe mtiöc also has a long track record on which towill
boso the experienr" oruotn *yï'i't*ã
*¿ *"
rttt uuciaitest for chæacter is how
the licensee deploy trr* ,p."*'{"äa*iU ii te iu the public intuest? We' the DePríests'
First' as
have deploye<l sp..tn - iot¡" plt"rii #t,e,ii"t tht ftt iou¡ decades'6
fur the 1970's'
broadcasters of radio t o"¿"*t1äiio'Jio iUu Soutt"*t"* IJniled States we cngaged in
i"¿*ty licensees'.1¡ the 1990's'
Then, in the 1980's, as nascent
"äiJ*
*iî"fptlt*utJ *hut it toa"y t¡u backbone of the Sprint
MMDS license rc-pttp"tittg,
digitsldalâfletworlcInfhe2000's,webecameengagedi'"ma¡itimecommunicafions in
i;iöff;iv;;; *rn r"rJu'å *¿Mæirel' inã continued our involvement
MlvÐS licensing'
the DoPriests' been fourid to be lackbg
At Eo time in the pâst forty years have we'
in character to be a licensee. ,i;1íhtäîk;;;d r;;;*Hcbthe commission can a¡d
going forward'
iffiË;ü. ; il;;t the DePriests, will opemte

CFR-1'2110 are not black a¡d white'


The FCC ownership affiliatiou rules in 4? tÍan a
The rule's exampt"u tiru.reþäs
poi"t o-ut i¡stances wherc f, person ffiay own less
bæed on circumstances
*4ffit| ;iJr""Ë u* ,cu ut at*åJin contol' or not in contol' of cou¡sel, Maritime
br{ts. f"tying upou the ¿dvice
to be detennined on of
^ "rrr-b;;;;;
nõä"udilut""
interptetcd theso sou.ieot¡ve
Åt* ttnuit" it to disclose owtrership
t*r"*i

É the dlsçlssion into consideration


ofthe treaûnent to be
?6. The Commtssion frrrther divided of ñllngs from
as arrerentiated from tlrc handling
affordcd applisetions *uo'"necj;;;gjiiãnìees
"Ú'" n"ul predictor of tuturt sÊrvice Is
d1e
new applicanb, we so*g.ttto *lJå'itoi*i'''inftiiense*s' as to hÔw
rn rot*¡ns our iudgments
aÞÞlicant s pãst [bro"¿*,tl should be tÍmtted to broadcast
"*"iTü;"-itï;ittã*rtetrrer
suih a¡rplrcants migtrt pt'ro'* ii
üLì"
ti" oìîùt"nting concems
or defråuding
or.ãi¿or"to n" commissioí, deceÞËon
misconducr such æ misr"p."..rlîänïiìãrt
of the broadøst pubti", orläcà't lå;iltties through ft-audulent or ãnticompetitlve
"u"'" ¡tt orthe commission's rules and
commercial pr¿ctices, tn¿ uior"tii'ni"Jr'frt
'äå^*"1*otit ln Erôädcast
85-ooe, r" *"îäïttîiP;icy {ei"roing ct'"r¿ctet QualificätioÚs
¡oticies. Seç, FCC Written ResponsÊs to
Licensing Arnendment of nor"s oi
fiåiã"tt-ptátt¡tä o*¿ riocedure Relating to Permittces and
by
commisston tnquiri.t tfte MåËtngîùit"pt*"nationt-to-thecommissionpoLlcY STATEMENT
"n¿ 81'så0,ä;il";:t+lú' neponr' oBptn ¿uD
Licensees, Ger Docket No'
ffi ;i#il;;-Ñä,ìsss; n"r'ä""a' lanuäry 14' 1e86'

11
its reasous for its
certain entitiss. When questioned about this, Maritimo has explained
beliefs.IfMaritime'sinterprctationofFCCrulestumsouttodifferfiomtheFCC'sview
;;;; tñ".. basis, then Maritime, in good faitþ has misinterpreted the complex
rules of attibution in an auction bidding environment'

rule' and Matitime


The Commission felt this way about the spousal athibuticn
Maritime reitetates its
,.p"i¿ p*t oltü" Uij"t"¿it, as the Cämmìssion reqlestcd'
commituent to fully cooperate to assist the Commission
in *ryq8
"^dtt"ryqTt"
t¡ir io"t*t-."t.t,*¿ ,n* *-.ffi*m our willinguess to meet with the Commission and
thæs rnattffs'
other interested partios at any time to help resolve

*^e--m\
Siuaerely You¡s'

The Rev' Sandra M' DePÌiest+

t2
LLC
Exhibit List for Maritime Communications/Laud Mobile'

Exhibitl.CorporateDocumentsofMaritimeCorrurrunications/Land
Mobile, LLC:
ExhÍbii 1(i): Certificate of Fonnation of Marìtime
15' 2005'
Communications/Land Mobile, LLC' dated Feb'
(ii)l Lirnited Linbility Company Ägreemeirt of
Maritime CorununicationsÃand Mobile' LLC
(iii): Operating Agreement of Meritime
15' 2005
Cormnunicaiions/La:nd Mobile' LLC dated Feb'
(iv): Singie-Membel Operating Anangement of
Maritirne Comlnunications/Land Mobile' LLC Limitçd -
Liabilþ Co*putty State ofDetaware' dated Feb' 15' 2005
thele would possibly be
lExecuted priår to determination
additioual members')
(v): Mernorandun of Agreement datecl February 3'
2005 between S/RIW Partuership' the Managing
Mernber of Maritirre and Donald R' DePliest'
(vi) ¡ tvtirluæs of Meeting of Maritime Communicatious/
Land Mobile, LLC, dated February 24'2005'
(vii¡: Àction on Written Conserf bV the 59þ Member
of Maritirne Conrmunications/T'and Mobile'
LLC dated
August 25, 2005'
(vii¡)¡ Minutes of Meeting of Maritime Comrnunications/
Land Mobile, LLC dated Jan' 6' 2006'
Communications/
Cxlt fvfin"t*t otMeeting of Marithrre
Land Mobile, LLC dated January 9'2006'
(*), ftlinutes ofMeeting of Maritime Communicationsi
Land Mobile, LLC, dated March l0' 2009'

(i) November 21, 2002 State of Del-a1are Certificate of


Linited
Exhibit 2.
Èartnership of SiRJW Partnership' L'P'
15,2OOS State of Delawarç Arnendinent
to the
(ii) Febniáry
Certificate of Pármership qf S/RJW Partnership'
L'P' filed
August 25, 2005.
the
(iiifFebluary 18, 2005 State of Dela¡'vare Arnendment to
corporate f,rles.
certificate oîLi*it d prrtnership of s/Riw in
(Sarne as Exhibit 5 of LOI Responso)
iin¡ Frb.,^ty 18' 2005 Letter from Donald R' DePriesf to
Corununications Investments, Inc., resigning as Prcsident and
Director of Cotnmunications lrlestments, Inc'
(v) February 18, 2005 Resolution of the Boa¡d of Directors of
òommunications Investrnents, Inq' acknowleclging that the
Corporation has succeeded Medcorn DeveloPment Çorporation
as General Partrçr of S/RIW Partnership, L'P'
(vi) August25,2005 Minutes of Meeting of Communications
ùwestments, Inc' authorizing loan agreement with Pinnacle
National Banlc.
Exhibit 3. Corporate docttments retrieved from Gary Geeslin March l6'
2010.
Exhibit 4. Declar.ation of Dave Preclmore as to the Ernployment dates of
John Reardon with Mobex Comrnunications, Inc', and Mobex
Network Services, LLC,
ExhibÍt 5. Asset Purchase z\.gr-eerrient between Mobex and Maritime
Comrnunicatìonsiland Mobile, LLC, dated December 30' 2005
Exhibit 6. (a) Employment Agreemenf between John Reardon and
Maritime a¡rd Critical RF, Inc. dated September 18, 2006'
(b) Arnended Ernploynent Agreement between John Reardon
and Mariti¡ne and Critical RF, Inc. dated May 28' 2008'
Exhihit 7, List of Warrants
Exhibit I List and Copies of Maritime Notes Guaranteed by Donald R'
DePriest.

Exhibit 9. (a) List and çopies of available tax returns for those entities
stated to have had no tevenues during the calendar years
2002,2003, and2004
(b) List and copies of available tax retunrs for those entities
stated as having revenues:

E)trIIBIT 10. Declaration of Aric Holsinger


EXIIIBIT 11. Declaration of Donald R. DePriest
EXHIBIT 12. Revenues of MCT CorP.
EXIIIBIT 13. A Namative Description of each contract entered into on
behalf of Maritime,
ÈIt(¡tE uBl.nest I {jttz-3z /-1 b69 -1

DËCLARAl'ION
I have persÔüal
I decla¡e undc¡ pena&y of Periury úât Úte forcgoing is fue-and cônect'
knodeAge oiÉ,e rcp¡Ë;ntafiorrs i-"id.¿ in -y toponse- I verifu tlre
tfi¡th fild acuraÊy of lhe
iofot tt i" rlat ¿t of Ure docum¡nr¡ a¡d informalion requested by the , -
"t¡îo "t
ørr**iÅ";t Itttt, oi "nd ioqoi.y *ni"n æe in my possession, cusody, çônllol or knowledge have
been t'roduced.

Exçoured on Ma¡ch ,ìq, , zOro.


CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

I hereby ceniff thâl otr rhis twenty-ninth day of Ma¡ch, 2010' I sewed a copy of the
foregoing Response on each of the following persons by placing a copy il the Uûited Stâtes
Mail, first-class postage PtePaid:

Donald R. DePriest*
Maritime Communicationsi Land Mobile, LLC
206 Nofth 8th Strcet
Columbus, Mississippi 39701

Russell Fox, Esq.


Mintz, Levit, Ferris, Glovsþ and Popeo, P.C.
701 Pennsylvania Avenue, Nr , Suite 9O0
Wæhington, DC 20004

Warren C. IIavem
2649 Benveuue Aveûue, #2{
Berkeley, Califorûia 94704

* by hand
EXHIBIT 7
Michelle Ellison' chief
Enforcement BUfeAu
Federal Communicatio¡s Cor¡mission
445 12th Street, 5ÏV
Washingloú, DC 20554
to
Resuest for Confidentiâl Treatment' Pufsuant
iìJilo" o.+:s ofthe Commission's Rules' ofportions
Letter of Inquiry and
óãn¿¿ n. DePriest's Response to
Atl Exhibits to t¡at Response

ResDonse to Letter of Inquiry


File No. EB-09-I[I-I751

Dear Chief Ellison:

Donald R, DePriest and Wireless Properties


of YTg^hl*: Inc' (collectively' DePriest) '
respecttully request confidentid;äd;;'ï;ù * a7-c $0'459 of the Commission's
I:R Response to the
ilffiarËxñËilr t¡to"gtt s,'i;thdi"g aii subp"tt' to DePriest's
ptp'itst requests confidential treafo'ent
loto'
Énforcement Bureau's letter tr*éä-ii¡*1*;
z6'
of the Exhibits in their errtirerY'
seusitive
becaüse they. address strâtegically
The Exhibits ûerit cotrfidetlial üeatEeût would not
matters, inoludi¡g spe"ir,"
a¡d financiat information' DePrÌest
t "oÍtlií"ìä
p* ittr"t*;doú',lo tho public and believes that exposure of
customarily releasr,n"
"itit-iti"t
rhe specific busine* .rr*g"ln"oir'ãrî
t"*.i.1 informatiôn is unwarranted' such releaseotlet
DePriest at a disadvantage vis-a-vis
coulå resuu iD suustaoti¿
"omËitiäi;îË"d"c
telecommunicarioo. ...ui., pràiioi; il;ifi-..,"üy
;"*gaimt the private mobile radio service
t#;Ålú* ;t"í" the tlpe of comme¡cial a¡d fira¡cial
industry in general. In slrort' not
*which would cutät"*ly U* go*ded Aomiomp-etitors"t a¡d therefore should
information
bemaderoutinelyavailablefor'inspection'-The¡eisnoreasonablysegregableinformafion
coulñÑeased wifhout competitive haffi to
DePriest'
ñffi

that the materials


"if it shown in the request
I See, 47 C.F.R, $0457(dX2),
which provides that
guarded
to*t""íìi, hn*oiui o' data.which would customariþ be
confain trade secr",, o. ""ft"ical
flot be made routiuely available for inspection' ' ' '"
from competitors, tt e mut"'iut' wiii
DePriest has coûtinuously afforded the information coumined il the Éxhibits
highty
the pfesident of Maritime
confidential trearnent and has, until now, reshicted distribution to
communications/Lanrl Mobile, LLC, to whom DePriest is maüied, Ù1d
þ legal cou sel for
peiri.st. These precautions emphæize Depriest's intent thãt the coffeüts of the Exhibits not be
released to thhd Parties.

in their entirety, be
For all tfie foregoing reasons, Dehiest requests Úrat the Exhibits,
pursuart to 5 U.S'C'
withleld from public iispeðtion uruler the Freedom of I¡forrnatiou Ast
$s52(bx4).

Thank you for youl attendon to this matter'

DONAI.D R. DEPRIEST

Do¡ald R. DePriest
8124 Cooke Court, $uite 201
Manassas, Virginia 20109-7406
703t365-9437

Dated: March 29, 2010


DENNIS C. BNOWN
ATTORNEY ÀT LÂW
8124 cooKE CouRT, StlIrE 201
MANAssAs, VIRGIMA 20LA9-7406

FAx 703/365-9456
PHoNE 703/365-9437
NOT ADMTTED N VIRGINIÀ
D.C.BROWN@Ãff.NEr

March 29, 2009

Ma ene H. Dortoh, Secretary


Federal Communications Commission
M512th Street, SW
Wâshington, DC 20554

Attention: Chief, Enforccrnent Bureau

Re: ResPonse to Lstter of InqufuY


File No' EB49-[I'I-1751

Deâr SecretaÌY Dortch:

and of Wireless Properties


represent the radio system interests of Domld R' DePriest
I
commission.
virgi*àl rnc- icollectivety, røi. ñrp.i.o before rhe Federat communic¿tions
"r
On befialf of Mariti*., I am filing herewith M¡' DePriest's Response to tle Euforcement
EB-09-IFI-1751'
il;;;; letter of inquiry tlatetl Fãbruarv 26,?Ã09 in File No'

Plea$e direct any questions concerning this tiling to me' Thank you for your attentiou
to this mattor.

Very truly yours,


Donald R. DePriest
206 North 8th Street
Columbus, MississiPPi 39701

Marlene H. Dortch, Secretary


Fecleral Communications Commission
445 Twelfrh Sueet, SW
Room TW-4325
Washington, DC 20554

A.ttetrdon; Brian J. Carter, Investigations and Heuings


Division'
Enfolcement Bureau, Room 4-C330

Dea¡ Mr. Carter:

Wireless Properties of Virginia, Inc' flMPV) and ^Do¡ald


R' DePriest ("I" or "Mr'
Commission's inquiry dated February
DePriest") hereby respecttully file"flreir resPoItse to t¡e
26,2010.

I: Itt the Donald DePriest LOI Response (at pages I'4)' loil Provi¡leA
o.!ß' of
Suestion
you conttolled or ín which you sened as an officer or diractor' As-þ
,. '
enl¿tieÍ thttt you indícãted
antl 2004 calendar
tää r*a¡^ thüt were in-exkiazce (even ir ina.ctive) dnring the 2002, 2003revulue: of each
vco¡s. orôride relevant docuntettatiàn rc dennnstra¡e the a17rc7ate Eross ,
'ru"n'rir¡ry ¿or¡ng ùe 2002, 2003 atzd 2004 calerulnr years' includittg but not Lmrúed îo' eøcn
"*rirt;;
ítdr;rl;* returns
for the calendar years 2002' 2003' and 2004'

period and filed no tax return


a, Wireless Propertíes, Inc. had no revenues during the
since 1998.

Wireless Propefties of Virginia, Inc' had no tevenues


during the period' Tax
b,
returN for the period are provided at Exhibit 1'
tax
c. Wi¡eless Properties ' East, lnc' had no revenues ciuring the period and filed no
return since 1998,
during the period and
d, Wireless Properties - Upper Midwest, Inc' had no revenues
filed o tax refltrn since 1998'

period Tax feturns


Communications Invesfirents, Inc' had no revenues cluring
the
e.
for the period are provided at Exhibit 1 '
for over 35 years a-ud hled
f. Columbus Yarn Mills Company has been out of busiress
û.o lâx rehün since some time in tlle 1970s.

g.SanPedroGauzeMills,I¡c'haclnorevônuesduringtherelevantperiod'isoutof
business, and fìled no tax return since the rnid-1990s'

during the period:


America¡ Nonwovens corporatiou had the following feve ues
h.
2002 - $13'521,000
2003 - $8,015,559
2004 - $7,978,652
Àverage: $9,838,403
Tax returns for the period are provided at Exhibf 1'

anrl filed no tax returns fot


i. WJG Telephone Co. had no revenues duting the periocl
the period.

j.Cellularan<IBroadcastComrnuncations,Inc.hatluoleveIluescluringtheperiodand
filed no tax returûs for the Period'

the period aüd filed no tax


k. Tupeio Broadcasting Corporation had tro reveûues during
leturns for the Petiod.

1'PeneloreCorporationhadnofËvenuesdÛringtheperiod.Taxreturflsfortheperiod
are provided at Exhibit I.

m. Scorland House, luc. hatl no tevenues during the period' Tax returns for the
periocl are provided at Exhibit 1.

n. Transition Funding, L.L.C. hâd ûo fevenües during the period and filed no tax
retüms foÍ the Period.

o. Medcom DeveioplnenÍ Corporatiotr tÐ( re rns are provided at Exhibit 1'

p. MCT Investors, L,p. tax returffi ate provided at Exhibit 1'

Bravo Comrlunications, Inc. tax retutns are provided at Exhibit


1'
q.
at Exhibit 1'
r, Charisma Commuuicarions, Inc' tar returûs are ProYided

s. Col<len Triangle Radio, Inc. tax reurns ale provided ât Exhibit 1'

t. MCT Corp': Please see tny respolse to Question 4' beiow'

u. BD Partnership tax retur s are provided at Exhibit 1'

v. CD F¿¡tners tax retutns are provided at Exhibit I


I hotd only miûority
w. Bioventures, Inc. tax leh¡rns ate not availabie t0 üe because
pdnciples generally accepted in
sha¡es. lncome statcmonts prepffed in accord with accoutrtitrg
fte Uûiæd States are provided at Exhibit l.
is releva¡t !o me' are
x. Warpath Properties, Inc, tâx roturns' the only year which
provided at Exhibit l.

had no revenues during the period and filed no


tax
y. Ground ZeIo Fashions, I¡c'
returns for tle Period'
the period and fited no tax
z. Ground Zero Indusbies, Inc' harl no revenues during
returns for the Period,

aa,GreenbriarConstructionCorp.hadtrolevenuesduringtheperiodaúdfilednotax
renrrns for the Period'

bb.Envi¡oworldsolutions,L'L'C'wasformedin2006buthadno¡evenuesandfiled
no tax Ìetums for the Period'
2001 and 2002 which
tax returts for the period' inclu<ling parts of
cc. MariTEL, lnc.
provided at Exhibit 1'
have ovJupping caiendar and fiscal years, are

owned no sha¡es in Worldtex;


dd. Worldtcx, Inc. tax returns ate nol available to me' I
about the company '
it is out of business and I have no fuflher information

ee.ExciteTec}rnologies,Inc.didnotexistduringtheperioda¡dhasnotfìledatax
return.

ff. wholþ owned coqporate agency and ìnstruflentality


Tennessee Valley Authority is a
income taxes or to taxâtioí states or
of the UniterÌ states, Tne rvÀî ooiruu¡..t to tia"ral
at Exhibit I shows TVA
iUri. *uUJiuiriont. The page ftom the Tvn web site provi<led
to me
operafing for the period' nole of which was available
returns for the
gg. Critical RF, Inc. did not exist during the pcriod a¡d filecl no tax
period.

þt ptges 47)' you provided a list of


Question 2: Ín the Donakl DePriest LOI Res¡orße
Tntiies tnat you indtcated Maritime did' nat disclose ta the Commíssion'

(a) As to (lesc bed s behzg-.ùz existence during the cølendat


those entities that you
you descìibc¿I as havütg no reverzues' províde
ií*ii zooz, zoos, an¿ looi, but whictl ilw aggregare Sross .revenues. or edch such,enlity
relevattt tlocunrcntation to demonstrrare
bui nat linzÚe(t to' eacn
tturing the 2002, 2003 antt 2004 caleular years' Ìncltldinq
years 2002' 2003' an¿|2004'
entityls Federal tot returns Íor the calendar
Please refer to my responsos at Questiou 1'
above' and to Ëxhibit 1'

in existetzce tluring' Ihe ca'Iendnr


(b) As to thnse etttities that yÒu described as being
2M3, and 2ffi, aia inicn you dttcribetl as having t'evenues (nanrcly ..
ïior:i zooz, Ittc" Goklen'l'iongle Radio'
Bravo Comnt¡tnict¿t¡our,'in,',-cno'ü;ma'Conununicaiotls'
htc'' and MariTEL'
Inc., Medcom De*øp^inl ci'ii'ntÍon' warPath Properties'
tlxe a#Sregate lt'oy teyeyuel'of
Inc.), provide rrtrrn rt ¿o"u*i'iotion ti demonstrate
ìncluding þat nþt
r*;' ;_rh intity during tlze 2002, 2003 antt 2004 calentlør,¡ears,
timítedto, ,orn feielmi'wl'tunitp'tne calendiryears 2002' 2003' and
"urry's
2004.

Please refer to my resPoßes ât Questiofl 1' above' and to Exhibit 1'

you inl'ìcated that yM hew


Questíott 3:ln the Donalit Deïriest LOI Response (dt.pag.e I l),
í"r*¿ ot Clzairman oÍ MCT Corp, Provide th'e following ínformation:

(a) The date that you becanÊ Chairman o!MCT Corp'

2000' I have been


I became chairma¡ of MCT Corp' during February
that I became chairman'
unable to locate thô day within February 2000

(b) The tenSth ol tíme thût yÔu have served' as Cluzirnznn'

July 2007' I have been


I served as chairman fiorn February 2000 until
unable to locate the dây within July 2007 on which
I ceased being chainnan'

al?reTate gross revenues of


10 demonsttate the
4: Provide relevant docunzentation
;'lendar vears' íncludi'[ bø not litníted to' MCI
Question
MCT cotp. ituritts the 2002' ;õü'
'"iù;;;;rr"r^ *;;;i',i
and 2004'
ieturns þr the calendar vears 2002' 2003'

For the aggregate gross rcvenues of MCT Corp"


please soe Exhibit 2'
I do not have
copies of MCT Corp,'s tax returns' MCT Corp'
andits tax returns are owned by Souem
I{olclings, B,V. and were mout¿-io nutop" in
â007' Please see the declaration of Aric
Holsinger provided ât Exhibit 3.

not rlisctose MCT Cotp' in its applicatizn


10
Question 5: hplain fully why Maritîme did Connission'
pafticipate ittAuctiott no. Al eCC io"t 175) and itt subsequent fiIings with the

inctuiting Mantíme's LOI Response'

which govern FCC auctions but having


Having no experience with the peculiar rules
su¡staniiut e*f,"ri"o"" in business mafiärs,
I had no reason ro believe that rny role as non-
executive cbairman of MCT Corp. or any of the other e¡tities in which I
had âû ûrtefest
business situation,
affecterl Sandra DePriest's positiãn witn ìne Commission. In an ordinary
of votiug shares'
ownefship and control âfe;arrowly defined by one's percentage of o'ûship
DePriest;
and the busi¡ess activities of spouses do not impinge on otro atrother' Sandra
had uo olvnership or
Cornmuûic¿tions Investments, Ilc'; S/I{JW Partnership an<l Maritime
have taken
oÌIeÌ affiliation with MCT corp. Had I fully undeßtood the auction mles I wouid
the positior flrat my minority ownership in tvtcT corp. and the
fact that I was non'executive
chairman of MCT-Corp, (my port u, catried no ëxecutive duties) should not affect
"hairman
I do not lsrow why MCT Corp. was tot disclosed
Ma¡itime's eligibitiry tor a tidaiog cfedit.
in Maritime's LOI ResPotne.

Question 6, Describe fully lo r relatiotßhip to Maritime'

I am the husband of the owner of the general parmer of the partnership holding
the
time to tifie
- --
verbally
coutrolling interest i¡ Maritime. sa¡dra DePriest has authorized me from
in
ard in writirrg to sign documents. I am ûot an offÎcËr of Mæitime and I own no inærest
participate in day to day operations.
Maritime but-l havã helped when âsked to do so. I <10 not
title for use in signing documents is "Mamger"; rot meant to irnply that I
am
irly
ilrÉ
""tl*i""¿ tnember', of MaritimË. I have never ¡epreseûted mysolf as the mtn:ging
,,*-aging
succesful in the
member oiMãridme. I help as I can bec¿use I desire for Sanclra to be
efficient use of the
operâtion of Maritimô and appreciate the nation's treed fo nâke full and
scffce radio specrum.

Suestion 7. I,x the Ma Response (ût pdge n, Maritime indicaled ¿h&t, at San.dra
tinte LoI
-ÐePrÌest's what üuthority
rcquest, Jou Eu,rattteed iotes owerl by Mørithne' E*plain fully by
(whøher verial or written) yoa guarûnteed notes on behalf of Marítiw. Provfule a
narraüve
you on behalf of Maútinæ'
descrþtion as well as ã copy of each note guaranleetÌ by

I had Sandra DePriest'$ verüa1 authority to gualantee notes owed by Maritime' I


also

had writtën âuthority in my role as a manager of Ma¡itime' But since


the burden of
gù¿,ùrteeing the noies feliou me, rarher than on Ma¡itime, I do not believe fhat I requiled any
description of each
ãuthority of Ma¡itime to guâtanæe such notes. I have inclutled a narrative
nore wh-ich I guararteed for the benefit of Maritime æ well as a copy
of each notõ at Exhibit 4
hereto,

8: ht the Donald DePriest LOI Response (at page I0), you indicated tha¡ a_tnong
Question
îther thittgs, you were authorized to enter into contrac¡s on behalf of Marìtime. Provîde tlrc
following ìtformøion:

(a)AlltlocunlentsSrantilTsyoua'uthor¡tjtocnterinrcco]\tractsonbehalfo!Marítime.

See Exhibit 5 hereto.


(b)Anarratived¿scriptionofeachcontraLtthatyouentereditztoonbehalfofMaritinte.

See Exh¡bit 6 hereto.

To the erte nat otheru,)ße provitleil in rcsp?nsl t! the


preceding Inquiries'
Suestìott 9:
f,rovide any adtl.ítíonøI infomnrion
that you believe ntay be httppt to our consideratìon and
rcsoluti.on oÍ this matter'

SarrdraanrllhavebeenÌnvolvedinmultiÞleradioserviceswhichareregulatedbythe
been ftlly awâre of the
Commissiot. Since our first Brôadcâst stadons in the 1970s, we have
commission,s requiremeff$ for complete cando¡ anrt trulhful lepreseûtations.
le ìnve always
Broadcast years of ttre 1970s in
been candid a¡d t¡utåful With the Commission' F¡om our
*tri"t oo, perforfiance brought many awards for excelleuce and local market leadership'
for Cellular
,frùf, oui successful involiement in the early days of comparative hearings -
with úe Commissiont.
licen#s to the present day, we have always done our best ro comply
Cellular, I was inshurnental in
ruiæ anO poti"i., to the úest of our understanding of them, In
interests that desired
ruindìnitig **petitive position for non-wireliie carriers against those
^ irr negotiating excharges of
to giv. dr";irrtioã teþhône companies a headstart. I succeeded
i*tEi.u, *'oog Cellulai carriers ,õ tir"t *. obtâiûed colrtrolling positions in I
1 southeâstern
major license holder ftom
narkets. In thi MMDS lVireless Cable hdusty my strategy saved a
programming and
tuotooptay aßd helped put the inrtustry on the path away from-television
part of Anerica's competitive
toward the broadband service which hãs become such a critical
position in the world.

Iafiftanklydisappointedthatûeaflyfiveyearshaselapsedsincelitigationbegarr
date, some 158 pleadings
following tTre grani of license to Maritime in Auciion No. 61, To
proceeding as the cornmission has
and omeî flinls have âccumulated in the Maritime license
pleadiug' Just as that
aif*ta u.iogie plotestor to iile tluplicative pleacling upon unauthorized
prù.rr- ¿rrË*d, fuality wirh respecr to Mâritime'i s'owing. that he gamed the Commission's
aucrion rules âûd violaFal blackletter anti-trust law by fiiing bids
in competition with himself'
desire finality to
Maritime aud the public which desires improved telecommuuications service
úiSmâttef'Thisdelayhascostusmillionsofdollarsandlosttimgwhichcanûotberecovered
at any price, If the Cåmmissioû finds that I erred in some way,
I am wifing to do what is
recessaly to rectify any such error.
vorur¿ LrÈtr I rìJt L
'l{62a32/-1669

D ECLARÂTI ON

. I declare
,krowledge under penârry ofperjury trrat rhc forcgoing
ofrhe repre.sentar;ous pmïid-ea i"
is tue and conecl I have personal

the ì¡forua¡ion thercin and thet olt


-y ,.;p;;;;: i;.,i$, tÌ,. ü'rà ;d ;;rd;ï'
oJrh" ¿**í"iËäJi"f"räiin ,"quesæa Uy úc
co¡nmission's leuer of inauirv which are ia p.**ì.+-"*r"L conuol o, knowredge have
nry
bcen goduced.

Executed on Marc n 29 -zolo.


CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

a copy of the
I hereby certify thal on this t\ryenty'ninth day of March' 2010' I served
in the United States
for.goùe R rpoote oi each of the follo;ing pcrsons by placing a copy
Mail, fust-class postage Prepaid:

Sandra M. DePriest*
Maritime Communications/Land Mobile, LLC
206 North 8th Street
Columbus, MississþPi 39701

Russell Fox, Esq.


Mintz, Levin, Férris, Glovsþ and Popeo, P'C'
?01 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW, Suite 900
lùashington, DC 20004

Warren C. Havens
2649 Benvenue Avenue, #2'6
Berkeley, California 94704

+ by ha¡d
EXHIBIT 8
' ' -i :ir-
I
FoRPIIELICIN$PECTIoN-CONFIDENTIALINFoII]VÍATIONÉXCLUDED

(e)rynHHffi
March 26,2010

By Eaud

Marlene H. Dortch
SecretarY
Federal Communications Commission
445 12ú stset, S,W.
Rooqt TW-4325
W¿shingloq DC 20554

Attn.: Briân J, Csrter


hvestigations ard Hearings Division
Enforcemeqt BuÌeau
Room 4-C330
Mobilc' LLC for Automated
Re: Applications of Maritime Communícationsiland
MaritiroeTsleço,,oou,licationsSystemLicensesandtoParticipateinFCC
Auctíon No. 61
File No': EB-09-trI-1751

Dear Ms. Dortch.

'[his responds t]re letter sent to úe by Gary Schonman' Speciøl


10
Couscl in the investigatíons
aa<l Hea¡inss Divísion ofth" sof;;;;t du¡eau' date¿l February 26' 2010' Mr' Schonma¡'s
î"î";îËr,ä-r#TBt l*. crnr"riiËiiìo pÑde certain documenrs a¡d information for the
uedocl January 1, 2002 to tnc presolnr-fio1ui¿fi
Uao* u"¿ attaohed is the requested information
foilowth" teq.rusts)-_ certaín of the requests seek
i'l#ääts #ilìi"¿* *¿'rr,"äwerslni*ifÉf' Itu" toÛtitÉd two ve¡sions of tlris letter with
confidential i¡fornutio.r. n""oriii'gly,
ärËå"i mt o*lon iíiil* iett"r m-ked coNF IDEI*ITIAI - NoT FoR
by lvlr. schonman's letter'
I'UEüð "n-tlr**t-.
iÑËpä¿TIOt { .onø; âI of the infqrm¿ion reqoested
rh""#; ;ithl; i"tto .*t"¿ io-n iurirc rxspncrloN - cot.{FIDENrrAr'
tio¡ Êom the exhibits, is available
I¡IFORMATI0N pxclrmEnìiits cooa¿.ori¿ inior.
puttitt to this proceeding' we have
iåt tîr;ul ¡iJt*i*; u"¿ l* tt"*"t"ãliottto
.-^-""rah, ÊA,ìûhr c"rfi¿emiA tre¿tmmt oi tile versioo of tt¡s leüer' along with all
attâchjüents'

#;üiõi{ñËni;i¿r - Nor F'oR PITBLIc INsPE crloN'


cíal owners
l. Identfu all oficers, ditactors, sharehoklers' partners,and.benef 3f-WíTEL
ihích such individuals secured their
,n* ¡t*iri I , zOiz o,a proviae ii'e dotes upon
rërp¿.ctfue posítíonÍ with Mar¡TEL

Diffe¡ent vcrsions ofExhibit i a¡e


This infotmation is iqclutled at Exhibit 1 to this lettçr^
of this letter'
i.rctuaed with th. publio and non-public copies

; \twwmaritetusa'com
4635 church Rd, $trite 100 Cr¡rirming, GA 30028 ' Voicc/Fax: 888-989-3339

'. . r.: .r ...:...


' , ;'.,. :S..uf ..
F'OR PIJBLIC INSFËCTION - CONFIDENTIÄL INFORI\{ATION EXCLUDED

(eÐvmrxnþ
2, Províde d ôopy of all corporate doaments of MatiTEL, includiW but not IimY4':'ony
în¿ri,ïyw, *ãhiíiìiu, o¡ oil *uti"go held duríng the calendar yßdÌs 2002 to 2006.
Attaohed,asExhibit2,arearticles,bylaws,aldminutesofallmectingsheldduringthecalcndæ
documenl"" because such term caÉ be
i"ui, zo<iz to zoog. I'arn tot ptoviding wery 'torporate of MariTEL's business'
áo¡st o"d to rrr.un iquthe documcnts ãeooui.d ioìht no*al course
MariTEL which relate 10
tlowever" inoludeil in Exhibit 2 are any dooumcnts gonerated by
the letter
l"*rti"* l, S and 5 ofMr, Schonmanis letter or which rolate to the rnaÍers r¿ísêd by
ä,o* Ltnuí rofri*, Esq., Attomey'.r\dvisor, Mobility Divisio+ Mretess
Telecommunicatious
MariTEL, Inc'' dated Aucust
il."rr' ¡C'C t" M*iTEI. Inc. ¿ttã nussell Fox, counscl for
nonaublic
18? .
copies of this
t00ó: iltr r""t ùions åf sxhibir Z arc included with rhe public and

lette¡.

Røsponse (at page 4), lufariTEL referenced e December


20t5 lettet
3, In tlrc MdtiTEL LOI
*r¡tø" i:, no*t¿ iupr¡est to mestoís, LP., ¡nwhîch Dowld DePriest indìcaled that a
ilgt
rtísltíbxtion of MariT'EL shqret would eonstirute a change of control of MariTEL þr
FCC
licensing purposes. Provide a copy ofthis letter'

:fhe requested document is an exce4h from a letter from MCT Investors, L.P^, whÌch uPdatcs its
of the
in*itois ."gataing vadous mattcrs affesting the compüy' MariTEL only has a copy
excexot änd dôes not have a copy ofthe entiie tetter' À copy of tlis excerpt is attached as
contain the tequested letter'
ilht# t'i-g-tll th. puutic a"¿ rio"*oUlis versions of this responsc

4. þ demokshûM the d4?rcg*te gross revenues of


providø relevant doc mentdtiûn
Uor¡f l,d*Wøecalendaryears2002,2003,and2004,includingbutnotlimitedto'
¡riirllfnt ¡ f"a7ø tax rctutns for the colendar yeais 2002, 2003' and 2004'

The te4uested information is contai¡ed at Exhibit 4 to fhis letler.


Differef,t versions ofExhibir 4
arè included wirh ttte ¡iublic and uonaublic copies of this letter'

preceding Inquiríes' provìde any


5, To the extent not ôtherwise provided in response to the
-oaanioiãiin¡or*"tiò#
you belie,iê'may ba heffi and rcîolutíon of this
to our consíderatíon

. matÌer.

No additional information is providcd.

. ' www.madt¡lrrsa.coi4
4635 Chufch Rd, suire 100 cürïrníng, GA 30028 voiceiF¿x: 888-989-3339

¡ .. .. .. _..
''ì:j. , i ..' . .. SyS
-ir
FOR PI]BLIC INSPECTION. CONT'IDENTIAL TNF'ORMá'TION F,XCLUDED

(e)v,s:ä*F
I hwt rhat the forcgoing is responsive to Mr. Schonman's requests for informatio¡¡-

I deolare under penalty of pefury uuler the laws ofthe unítod stai¡s of America that
the

foregoing is fiue and conecl Exccuted oü Match 26, 2010.

ço: Gary Sohonman


Special Counsel
Investigations and Hearings Division
Enforcement Bu¡eau
gqqrn 4_C330
Fede¡al Communicaûons Commission
. 445 12rh Steet, S.W.
, Washington' DC 20554
,.' ;, -.. (By händ, via the offrce ofthe Secretary)

ByFirst Class Mail:


'
' ,' Manfime CommunicationslT,a¡rd Mobile, LLC
I 206 Nôrth 8ú Steët
Colunrbuq MS 39701
Attn.: Sandm M. DePriest

Ðennis C. Brow4 Esq'


8 I 24 Cooke Court, Suitc 20 I

Manæsas, VA 20109-7406

Donald R. DêPdest
' 20ó North St6 Stcet
Columbus, MS 39701

\{ireless ProPerties çf Virginia


1555 lüng Street - Suite 500
Atex¿¡driq VA 22314
Attn.; Dons]d R. ÐePriest

'War¡en Havens
Benvenue Ave. - Suites 24
' 2649
Berkeley, CA 94704

4655 Church Rd, Suite 100 Curnrni g, GA 30028 ' Voice./l:át: 888-989-3339 'l1luÀ!In4&lgE4'cq!1

5#
P ø.osylvunia Avenuc, N,W'

MINTZ l¡vltrt Washiogtoa, D.C. 20004


202.43+:1300
2Ù243#74fÆ føx
Russell lI. Fox | 2024341183 | rfox@mì-u.com l¡¡1t,w.ûinu.com

March 29, 2010

By Haud ..

Marlene H. Dortch
$ecrc1ary
Fetleral Commwrications Cornmission
445 12b St€et, S.'W.
Room TW-43?5
Washingfor¡ DC 20554

Att¡r.: Briau J. Carter


Iuvestigations and Headngs Division
Iinfo¡cemcnt Bureau
Room 4-C330

CoNFTDEN'IïAL TRnATMENT RqoUEsTÐ

Re: Applications of Ma¡trme Communioations/land Mobile, LLC for Automated


M-a¡itime'Islcoommunicetions Systen Liceüses a¡d to Pa¡ticipate in FCC
Austiou No. 61
File No.: EB-09-IH-1751

De¿r¡ Ms, Ðo¡tohl

Enclosed, on bohaJf of our olient MariTEL, Inc. (MariTEL"), is a responso to thr leltËr seDt by
Gary $c¡bnnan, Special Counsel ir the Investigations ald Fleaxings Ðivision of the Enfôrceñent
euréau, datect Fåbnrary 26, 2010 in the above-refbre4ced matteü, Mr. Soho¡man's letter dirsçtçd
MarifÉL to provide càrtdn doouments and i¡formation for the period Jauuary 1, 2002 to the
present, Ceia'r-n of the requests seok confide'tial idoffiation. Accordingly, MeriTEL hereby
iequests confidential fueAtmönt Under sestion 0.459 ofthe CoEmission's rules,¡¿ for cerlain
ooimcroially sensitive coïParate and fi¡anoial information contaÍned in ils response'

There are two versiOnS of Ma¡i'IEL's response enclosed'' eaoh with diffcrent attâcb.ments' MariTEL
has submitted a:r onginal confidential version of its respouso matketl CONtr'IDEI{TIAL
* NOT
FOR PIIBLIC INSÞECtlOl\t, *hioh contatus all of the information requested by Mr. Sohonmar's
lstt¡r. Ma¡iTEL also has submitted ¿n original and four copies of its response marked FOR
PUßLIC INSPDCTION - CONFIDENTÍAL INI'ORM" TION EXCLIIDDD wiú ttre

'/ 47 c.F.R. g o.as9.

Minø, Lcvin, Cohn, Fettis, Glo.'sþ and Popeo, P.C,


BorloN lw^s¡rrNçToN I NBlcYoRK I sr^MFqßD I Los lPÁl-o,¡!!To lS^NDlEGo lLoNDoN
^NGÊLËS
Mirtz, Levin, cohq Feüis, Glo\¡Eky â¡d Popeo, P.C.

MaIch 29, 2010


I'*æ 2

confidcntial infomration omitte¡l foÌ public inspection purposes. This latter version has been served
on o{rer parties to this proceeding'

lvfr. SchOnlran's içttçr requests dooumentåtiotr doEonstating MadTÊL's aggegaÈ gfÔSsrêVenues


Federal tax
anrl other finanoisl information, inoluding but mt lihitcd to, certain of M¿¡iTEL's
rEh¡¡ns, t his infonnation has beon provided in Exlibils 1, 2 and 4, respectively, oflìe
CONFIÐENTL\L version of MarlTEL's rtsponse. The infotmalion contained in these Exhibits is
guarded from
cOmmercially sensitive corporafe and finanoial i¡formation that oustomarily would be
and would not be made routinely available fot public inspeotior'
"ompetitors
publio
MariTEL requests t¡at the redacted co¡fidential irformation be permanentþ witirheld from
rcquest fol
ûrspeotion under seotiou 0.459 ofthe commissiotfs nrlss. Itr t¡e event thât this
oonfidontiality is denicrl, MariTEL respectñrlly requests notification aqd immèdiate return of ils
co¡Ídentiat i¡formatioot the eXtent iuctrr informatiou may be roturned under seotion 0'459 of tle
Commission's rules.
z

Kindly ilàle-stamp the additiouäl ofeaclt versiou oftlE tosponse and this lettef afld return
c.opy
them ío tle Should you have questions or rcquire additioual informatio¡' pleâse coutact the
"ou¡iår,
undersigned-

Sincercly,

A.-
{'utt^r?\ t',
Russell H. Fox
MrMz, LEvq.r, Cortl.I, FERRrs,
GLOVSKY AND POPEO, P.C.
701 Pennsylvania Ave¡ue, N.W
Washinetor! DC 20004
(202) 434-7300
(202) 434-74AA Qþx)
rfox@mintz.com

Counsel for MañTEL, Inc.

Enclosures

' 4? c.F.R g 0,459(e).


Iúiutz, Lereir, Cohfl, Fcnit' Glovslv end Popeor F.C.

March 29, 2010

c0: (witt¡ CONFIDENTIAL version of MariTEL's tesponse atd attachnrents)


Gary Scho¡n¡n
Speoial Counsel
Investigations and Hearings Þivision
Enforcement Buleau
Room 4-C330
Federal Communications Co¡runission
445 12ù Steôt, S.w.
Wa¡hingto+ DC 20554
(By Ìrand, via tlre offioe of the Sec,rotary)

By First Class Mail (with PIIBLIC version of MariTEL',s response 8nd attacbütents):

Mæitíme Çoruruu¡ications/l,snd Mobile LLC


2û6 North 8ü Stect
Columbus, MS 39701
Ath.: Sanùa M. DePriest

Demis C, Brown, Esq.


8124 Cookc Cou¡t, Suite 201
Maræsas, VA 20109-7406

Donald R. DePriest
206North Ith Street
Columbus, MS 39701

Wireless Roperties of Virginia


1555 King Street -- Suite 500
Alexa¡clria, VA 22314
Attn.: Donald R- DePdé$t

Waren Havens
2649 Benvcnue .A've. - Suites 2-6
Berkeioy, CÀ 94704
FOR PUBLIC INSPECTION - CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION EXCLUDED
olrectors and of{ìcers of MARITEI- f NC. from Jänuary t, ?o01to Mãrch 20L0

Directors of MARITEL, lNc offìcer.ç of MARITEL. lNC.


Beø¡n End Nãmê Besln End
Name
PrÌdr td r01 lân uarv-02 Þrês¡dênt & CEO
Mitchell Hâuser
rñnâìd R. DePr¡est PrÌor to '01 M¡tchell Haus€r Prlorto'O1
Rlchârd F. Senev. MCi- PrÌor to '01 october-04 Dãh Srnith Eêhrrrânt¡? Dècember.o8
Prlôr fô 'O1 Present lãçon Smith 1âfl râñt.ng Present
Peter schiff- NorÈhwoad
foseoh L. Winn, ATc Prior to '01 ll
nôrrd WFiçl ÄT{ Prior to '01 Mãr.hJ]7
Richard carvalho MAV.UU Mãrch'O3

PÞfÞr Pe+rillo. Wãtre lüne41 Prêçent BiltCadoEan Àáar¡h-O4 Mev-07


lâ(ññ Srñifh Mav-07 December-08
Êhrrrâru.fl2 Present lânùãñ¡-Og
iãn Pembertofl
loe Forbes 03 ro4
ahlê+ ñnêrâiihc Offll:Þr
Dan Smith
Ri.hãr.l Nrìrrlstrôm ËÊbl"rÞñ/-O7 30 2002
qfrve D.rdEe- ATC
James D. Ta¡clet, ATC O.t.lhêr-tl4 Mârch-09

Mlcha€l Mccormack, ATc Márch.o8 Prêsent


Ed Disanto. ATc March-08 Prêsent

lason Smith January-o9 Present


FOR PUBLIC INSPECTION - CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION EXCLUDED
ARIIËI,lNc. C€p'd6@Eon 1¿31 û1

3t¿9t2o',t0
ÄiadTELcr¡T¿blé laf ,LsouRCE Ooc-etrÊLlc VERSlOl{
FOR PUBLIC INSPECTION - CONFIDENTIAL ÍNFORMATION EXCLUDED
fiáÂnÉL-INc. C¡Éû.li4ll6 !2 3r,@

H¿tr'TÉ! c0 oT¿btå r4.LSotrÀcÉ ôoc-PlrEUC VÉ.Rs!oÑ


FOR PUBLIC INSPECTION - CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION EXCLUDED
I'iAÉÍTEl- l[C, C¿¡þE¡úoÞ f2¡1,0S

þimL cê¡r!blo !r¡¿-soiJRcÊoot.?uBLlc l¡ÊRsloN


FOR PUBLIC INSPECTION - CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION EXCLUDED
MÀE¡lEL, lÑC' cEdB¿¡Uoñ 12.1t.04

[r¡61!L CeTâ!r4 !4¿SOt¡RC€ !OCIFUÈllcl'¡ERSIOH


FOR PUBLIC INSPECTION . CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION EXCLUDED
r¡¡RtlEL $¡Ê c.!r¡ÊrÆo¡ t23t¡¡¡5

¡r¿gÞDl0
lrkf€L c¡Êl¡brÉ r¡:-soUâCE DOC.f,UBLTC V€ÊsloN
FOR PUBL1C INSPECTION - CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION EXCLUDED
tüRffEL ll\ic, (>pl¡rtEíhn 12,11:ll0€

$ùr=LcdÞf dÉ16 ú,2-SOLFCS 0OC-F[E¿lCVEtßloN


FOR PUBLIC INSPECTION - CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATÍON EXCLUDED
M¡ÂllEL, lÀ+åcEtllô¡ùlhà 12¡121Þ?
FOR PUBLIC TNSPEGTION - CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION EXCLUDED
t/¡Fná. llrG $tl¡l¡tf¡û ¿4r.03

¡¡eìtr- c¡prog. {r-solrrxÉ 0oêJUÞllc vERsþÑ


FOR PUBLIC INSPECTION - CONFIDENTIAL ¡NFORMATION EXCLUDEÞ
l¡ÀFffEL l,\¡c c¡çlÞ:zlþr l¡lll.0E

|!!ÍÉl cãÞtub1â 94,LEÐUFCe DCC-FUELIE V¡RElOt{


FOR PUBL]C INSPECTION - CONFIDENTIAL ]NFORMATION EXCLUDED
¡rÀåíEl tlc, c.Fhdãtts 12¡1¡€

Itb'tEL Cær¿ìô ú.¿souFcÊ 0ôc.¡LßLlc vêÂ510N


FOR PUBLIC INSPECTION - CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION EXCLUDED
¡rúÈreL, ll¡c. 6çlhÈ.ñn lr3rlÉ
ltãflEL ê¡l¿ÈÊ v,ll-souRcEoocjU¡L¡c!-.FstþL
FOR PUBLIC INSPECTION - CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION EXCLUDED
i{Àff¡El- lxE. c!,ùlÞ¡úan izli 0s

i¡Én'lEr c6Êi¡ìL w¡,-solJßcE DOC-FIJSlllc V_.FslO'l


FOR PUBLTC INSPECTION . CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION EXCLUDED
FOR PUBLIC INSPECTION - CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATTON EXCLUDED
r¡,l¡IÊL lllc. c.rrã!¿llkÉ 33rr0
FOR PUBLIC INSPECTION . CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION EXCLUDED
r¡¡ftl¡EL lÈC,4.ÈhlE¡d.n¡J1.10

tìt¡tf EL cdô'Lhh.i,q,2-60uqcE ooc-PUELlc vEFsloil


EXHIBIT 9
FOIA Request to the FCC, via
FOIA@FCC.GOV

Requestor: SkybridgeSpectrumFoundation("Skybridge")

Address: 2'd Office at: 2649 Benvenue Ave., Berkeley' CA94704

Phone: 510 -84I -2220 or 5 10-848-7 1 97


Fax: 51,0-740-3412
Email: istobaugh @ telesaurus.com and
warren.havens @ sbc global.net

Date: April 19,2010

Description of Records Requested


FCC received'
1. Full and complete copies of all documents and information that the
or materiaìs (delivered to
in written and electronic form, including all attached appended
Requestor in their original forms)-

from eøch of" the following:


j
1t Uaritime Communications/Land
Mobile' LLC ('MCLM')'
(2) Wireless Properties of Virginia, Inc',
(3) MariTel, Inc. and its subsidiaries ("Maritel")'
(4) Donald DePriest ("DePriest"),
(5) Sandra DePriest ("Mrs' DePriest")
(these five together, the "Five Parties"),
or succ^essors in
or from øny of the Five Parties' employees, legøl counsel' predecessors(tgents of any kind
i7*rnrt, poí"nî, ana subs¡¿íaiä, o'7tner representatives or
(together, the "Eivq Pqlligq-l\ggnrlq"),
"*ptoy"",'
at or represents the FCC that directly or indirectly responds to any
@ any person that is employed
of the following six letters:

Three Enforcement Bureau Letters of Investigation re:


File No EB-09-IH-1751
Donald
ã*a n"U.ou.y 26, 2O1O and addressed to MCLM' Sandra DePriest'
n"pni"r,, Maiitel, and Wireless Properties of Virginia' Inc (the "3 Enforcement
Letters")

Three Leuers dated 8/18/09 from Scot Stone, Deputy chief,


Mobility Division,
Mobile
Wireless Telecommunications Bureau to Maritime Communications/Land
Fox, Donald DePriest and
LLC and Dennis Brown, MariTel, Inc and Russell and
0003463998' et al'
W;l*t Properties of Virginia, Inc re: File Nos 0002303355'
(the "3 Section 308 Letters")

l-etters are hetein


Said 3 Enforcement Letters together with said 3 Section 308
called the "6 Letters."
and
2. Full and complete copies of all conespondence and other documents'
or agent of
information transmitted, in either direåtion' between' on the one side' any employee
Agents= that
the FCC, and on the other side. any of the Five Parties and/ or the Five
Parties'
info uti,on thæ pertains to the 6 Letters' stated purposes and topics.
"ontain
and
3. Full and complete copies of all correspondence and other documents' any
information transmitted, in either ãirection, between, on the one side'
employee'
and on the other side'
representative or agent of the FCC Vr'ireless Telecommunications Bureau'
repåsentative or agent of the Enforcement Bureâu -- that contain information that
uny
"*ptoy"",
pertains to the 6 Letters' stated purposes and topics'

FCC and any


4. Same as in the preceding paragraph, but between any person at the
govemmental agency of any kind'
employee, representative or agent of an-y òutside (non-FCC)

ThepersonsattheFCCwhomaybehelpfulinlocatingtherequesteddocumentsare:.Scot
-wireless
i*å, n"po,y chief, Mobility Division, Telecommunications Bureau and Brian J.
Carter, Invìstigations and Hearings Division, Enforcement Bureau

Maximum Search Fee

$5'000(fivethousanddollars).Ifgettingtherequesteddocumentsisgoingtoexceedthis be
amount by which it will
maximum search fee, then Skybridgá askJ thatlt be informed of rhe
exceeded since Skybridge .rruy lvu:nt the FCC to proceed anyway
for whatever additional cost
copies of documents up to the
there may be, or Skybridge may modify its requesi as as to obtain
maximum amount sPecified here.

Waiver of Fees

SkybridgeiSanonprofit,tax-exemptscientific,educationalandcharitablefoundation
on FCC matters
which, as one óf its primary functions, researches and publishes information
resulting
(and other matters) in the public interest.* skybridge intends to publish information
fees charged should be
from the fulfillment of rhis FOIA request. Th;s, bt FoIA statute, the
waived or reduced.
* See e.g. www.tetra-us us website http://vvww'scribd-com/warren havens'

However, the fulfillment of this request should not be detayed in


considering this fee
to pay the- fees as if it did
waiver or reduction matter, and to insure nó d"luy, Skybridge agrees
pursuit of this after the materìals
not submit this, if consideration causes any delay, subjàct to its
are released.

decisions by the
Skybridge strongly disagrees with past erroneous and discriminatory
intends to appeal any case
FCC denying s-kybridge-,i f"e *luiue. or reduction in FOIA requests,
action'
of furthel: de;ial, and in such cases, Skybridge may seek damages in court

Request for Accelerated Processinq


to. this request
Skybridge requests that the FCC accelerate its processing and response
and fulI petition to deny
since it needs th" ."qu"rt"d records in order to submit a more complete
alor]g with its affiliates' are
and comments in the \ryT Docket No. 10-83, and because Skybridge,
pending challenge to tne,!t!t-\t n11m
entitled to [his information including since they have a
deadline in WT Docket No'
601, File No. 0002303355, from Auðtion No. 6t. Tire cu¡ent hling
io_á: i, ap.it 2g,2010. Skybridge, along with its afhliates, inrends ro file a
requesr to exrend
this FOIA request as
the current pleading and comment filing dãadline in which it will reference
does not know if that extension
fun or ,1" iusi, ro", grant of an extensi-on; however, skybridge
i"lo""t titt be g.anðd. For the above and other reaqsons' obtaining the requested records as

soån as possible]including before the currenr filing deaãline in


wT Docket No. 10-83, is critical.

Withheld Documents
(not at all' or in
Any of the requested records that exist but that are not provided in full
along with the
some redaåted form) a,'Withheld Materials") should be fully listed and
described,
reason under FOIA law that the Withheld Mâterials are not
provided'

SkybridgeisawarethatcertainoftheoutsìdePartieshaverequestedconfidential
treatment for cerîain of the records requested here'

Inthisregard'skybridgerequeststhatforanyrequestedrecordthattheFCCdetermines
contains information that it must ïitnnotA under an ãppücable
FOIA exemption, that said
portions of the record
information be narrowly and precisely redacted, leaving all other
unredacted, and that the FCC release the redacted copy

Additional Information or Comments

If FCC FOIA staff has any questions concerning this request' it should contact the
Skybridge representatives listed above as soon as possible'

Thanks for Your assistance.


EXHIBIT 1O
Federal Communications Commission
Washington, D.C. 20554

June 2, 2010

By USPS and e-mail: wanen.havens@sbcglobal'net


j stobaugh@telesaurus.com

'Warren Havens
Skybridge Spectrum Foundation
2649 Benvenue Avenne
Berkeley, CA 94704

Re: FCC FOIA Control No. 2010-379

Dear Mr. Havens:


(Request)
This letter responds to the Freedom of I¡formation Act (FOIA) request
included in your e-toåil dut"d Aptil i9' 2010, which was received by the
Federal
Staff on April 20, 2010, and
communìcátions commission ('commission or FCC) FOIA ControL
assigned FCC FOIA Control Number 2010-379'

In the Request, you seek four discrete sets of records:

1)AllrecordsrelâtingtotheAugust18,2009,letter-sthatWirelessTelecommunications
Communicationsi Land
Bureau, Mobility Division Deputy Chiei Scot Stone sent Ma¡itime
lnl"¡
-1"". rr_c (sandra Depriest) (iøcnt); MariTEL, Inc.; and wireless Properties of virginia,
tijå"J¿ò"priest) grgiÈe"tior, áôs Leners); and the Febraary Counsel Gary
", 26,2010, letrers that
Enfoìcement Bur"uu (SB), níestigations ana Hearings Division Special
Schonman sent to the same parties.l

a) August 18, 2009, Mobitity Division Section 308 Letters The Mobility
records beyond
Division responáed to a simila¡ request on Oct;ber 27 ,2009 '2 No additional
Aswe
*rrut*u, pråuia"d to you in response to that request are in the commission's possession.
i" .".porr.e io you. initial request, should you seek the document for which the
"*
commission has tentatively gËnted confirlentiality (i.e., Attachment
"áiáâ II to wPV',s September 30,
y-ou should proceed under Section
iOOõ, ,"rpon." to the Augusi 18, 2009, Section 308 letter),
0.459(dX1) of the Commission's rules' 47 C.F.R. $0'459(dX1)'

t C".-"t"t -."tt"*"""" -ith WPv includes Donald DePriest' and conespondence w¡th MCLM includes
^11 DePriest.
Sandra

2
See Octobe¡ 2'7, 2OOg, Lefter fiom Scot Stone, Deputy Chiet Mobility Division' Wi¡eless TelecommunLcations
g*""", a Warr"n Huu"ns, Stytri¿ge ìp""t u¡n Fo.,rrátion" (rOie Cò"t ot Number 2009-645) (copy attached,
without enclosure).
you were
February 26,2010, Enþrcement Bureau Letters' We note that
b)
parties, as well as the responses by those
copied on the Feb aÎy 26,20í0, EB letters to all three
in the
ionaírecords báyond what you were copied on have been filed o¡
are
p"it".. Ñ"
"¿¿i
òommission's possession.

Wenotethatallthreepaltiessoughtconfidentialityforsomeportionoftheirresponses:

i. Under Sections 0 457(d)(2) and 0'459 of the Commission's rules'


47 C'F R $$0 457(dX2), 0'459' MCLM seeks confidential
tteatment oith" thitd p*"gt'aph of its March 29' 2010' response'
on the grouuds that it ;olìt;in; sensitive cornmercial and financial
ilrlormation.'
rules'
ii. Under Sections 0 a57(d)(2) and 0'459 ofthe Comrnission's
treatment
47 C.F.R' $$0'457(dX2), 0'459' WPV seeks conltdential
of Exhibiti i through 5, ir, their errtirety' to its Mârch 29' 2010'
response, on tlie gróunds that it contains sensitive cormnercial
and
u
financial information

iii. Under Section 0 459 of the Commission's rules' 47 C'F'R' $0'459'


MariTELseeksconfidentialtreatmentofcertainofitsresponses;
you were copied bn MariTEL's letter indicating the information
for which MaritEL sought such treatment'5 as well as its request
fÀr confr¿entiat treatmeñt of tbat information'6

sougþt confldential tre-atment


should you seek the information for which the three parties have
proceed under Section 0.a59(dX1) of
under Sáction 0.459 ofthe Commission,s rules, you ihould
the Commission's rules, 47 C-F.R. $0.459(dxl)'
subjects of the
2) Copies of all correspondence between the Commßsion and the
Section308
iect¡on 3fi8 onã EB l"ttn r. We note that you were copied on the th¡ee
Letters and responses; and any e-
Letters and responses; the three Enforcemànt Bureau
parties Beyond that' the
mails Commisiion staff may have had with the affected
Commission has no othe¡ records.

t LLC, to Michelle Ellison,


Letter f¡o- Demis C. Brown, Courisel to Maritime Communications/Land Mobile.
Chief, Erforcement Bureau (Mar. 29' 2010)'
to Michelle Ellison' Chiet
Lette¡ from De¡nis C. Blown, Counsel to Wir€less Prcperties of
a Virginia' Inc
'
Enfo¡cement Bu¡eau (Mar' 29, 20 I 0)

H Dortch' Sec¡etary' Fede¡al Commuûicatiols


5
Lette¡ ftom Russell H. Fox, Counsel, MariTEL, Inc, to Marlene
Commission, er al. (Mar.26,2010)'

ó
Letter from Russell H. Fox, Counsel' MariTEL, lnc, to Ma¡lene
H Dortch' Secretary' Federal Communicatíons
Con¡nission, el a/ (Mar- 29,2010)
3) Copies ofall cotespondence Wireless
between the sxffofthe
e-maits are protected by the
Telecommunícatio^ ord the nniiíriemettt Bttreaus. Any
suóh
hå been incotporated into Exemption 5 the Freedom of
*"tt-ptoduct which of
"1"-"v In the alteraative, and
lnformarion Act, 5 U.S.C. S SSZiUXil, -¿ äe rherefore not discloseable.T
¡n natuc' and likewise not
also undcr Exctltptiou 5, any such e-mails would be "pre-decisional''
subject to disclostlre.u
ancl any non-FCC
4) Copias of all conesponclence bettveen lhe Cotntníssion
goveflunenf al enliÔ,. No suchìecotds exist

Tire Comnlission is requit ecl to charge fees for processiug a FOIA request- loY"u:" '
itself'
of flre feã is n.rost likely eqÙaì to or greater than the lee
because the routi,.r"
"o.t "oll""ting
lvc shaltnot asscss lces in this case.e

lf you believe this to be a clenial of voLrr request, vou mîv fi1:.": Allìi:lt],:]l f:1,1*f*
of Ltt¡ tt1tc. o1.t¡ts.lettct )&?
ri'ith thc ltlCl's Ofñcc of Genetal Counsel rvìthin i0 calendal dr¡'s
.""tì"., O.iCf C'l and I.1I5 of the Cornmissìou's Lules,47 C F R"ReviewSS0'461Ú)' l ll5 The capLtotr
of Freedom of
o^t.n-rnn,U cnvclope of auy such application mìI! gottlìin
""ã
ln-fo.roution .n"î,t"tion," ancl súoultl fCC FOIA Conù'ol Number 2010-379'
'"i"ì'"n""
may be referred to Michael Cormelly (202-418-0132'
Qtrestions regarding the foregoing

tu-
michael.connelly @fcc.gov) of this Division'

SincerelY,

Scot Stone
Deputy Chief, MobilitY Division
Wìreless Telecommunications Bueau

Enclosure

The Comntission personDel that have wo¡ked on tüs natter


7 ale attorueys

' 5 u.s.c. $552(bX5).


to this FolA, aud the
, Se¿ 47 C F R. {0.471(l). we nore rlÌar there was no ¡esearch fee incurrecl itr respondirg
¡esponses
duplicating cost lo¡ p¡ovidlng åilu* FOIA request regarding the Section 303 letters ¿nd
" "opy "iiginal
Federal Communications Commission
'Washington, D.C. 20554

Octobe¡ 27, 2009

By USPS and e-mail: lvarren.havens@sbcglobal net

Wan'en Havens
Skybrige Spectrum Foundation
2649 Benvenue Avenue
Berkelêy, C^ 94704

Re: FCC FOIA Control No 2009-645

Dear Mr. Havens:

(Request)
This letter r.esponds to the Freedorn ofInfonlation Act (FOIA) request
by the Federal
inclucled ìn yottr e-toåi1 dut"d S"pt"rl-tb et 27 ,2009, whicir u'as receivcd
(ôornmissìon oI FCC) FOIA Conûol Staff on Septembor 28'
Corn-uni"otioo, Comn.rission
2009, ancl assigned FCC FOIA Control Number 2009-645'

letters that Mobility__-


In the Request, you seek all records relating to August 18, 2009,
Mobile, LLC; Ma¡iTEL,
Divtsion Deputy bhiei-scot Stone sent Mar.itime communications/Land
Wii"fárt Prôperties of Virgida (Section 308 Letters)' In response t"
1"".; lb: -11:"T'^*"
""ã
are ánclosìng copies olthe three Section 308 Letters; documents received tn response to me
308 Letters'
Section 308 Letters; and an e-mail chain involving the Section
withheld' along
ln the Request, you ask for a description.of any document that is being
that Wireless Properties
with the reason the document is being witbield.l In ràsponse, we note
response it filed on--
å¡îirgU" tWpV) sought confidentiä treatrnent of Attãchment II toitstheentirety, is the MariTEL,
é"pt",fuo ì0, zoóg; thã document, which wpv seeks to protect in
¿ w?v believes the document
irrð., rm¿ Amendeá a¡d Restated Stockholders Agreement
including commercial and
åi¡t "ln¡¿*ti¿ treatment because it addresses sensitive matters' -
ä"ä;it"f#;tt' âr,i-ttut ."qt that the document be exempt from F.IA pnrsuant to 5.
"tt"a
ü.îõ. T;;;"ôÏ;t;-it v", .""r. ,ri" oocument for which rhe commission has tentativelv sranted

I Request at I.
,See

lnc-- to Ruth MitkmaJt, chief, Wireless


2
Letter fiom Dennis C. Brown, counsel to wireless Properties ofvirgiûia,
gur.au (hana-d"Liveied S"pt ¡0, (Sto*"ietter) We note that W?V indicated i¡ its
fã1""0-ãt¡.".* Z'OOÐ
coimissioo's UoiveÅal Licensing Service site) that it woùld be filing â request for
,"rp*.îi"t"il.üf " "" tt e
coDfi dentiality of such documett.

¡ules' 4? C F R
3
wPv seek confidential treatment of the document un¿ler Sectio¡ 0 459 of the comúission's
$0.459.
a
Brown Letter at 2
of the Cornnission's rules' 47
confidentìality, you should proceed rnder Sectìon 0'459(d)(l)
c.F.R. S0.4se(dx1).
the instant Request' you were also
Iu your Request, you indicate that at the time you filed
sameletms' for aly records the
filing a second f Oi,L."qu"st tor. tt e same records, under the only those lecords
that
Commission tnay obtain ftom today ootit t'lou"*t"' 15'
2009'5 We note
date of theFOIA Ïequest (heTe'
within the Commission's possessio'n and cont¡ol as of the
6
iåpã*¡.t zs, 2009) shali be constdered

a FOiA request Hol'ev9r' ...


Thc Comrnissiou is required to cìrarge fees for processing
because the routine cost ofcottectingit i"ã ¡ .t o.t tit ety equai to or greater tlìaD Î.he fee itself,
T "
*" ,t,rotl assess fees in this case
"nt
an Appiication for Revicrv
you believe this to be a denial of your Ïequest' yor: may file
lf
calándar clays of the clate ofthis letter' Se¿
wÍth the FCC,s Offce ofGeneral Co..or"l ívitttin:b
47 C F R $$0461Û)' I Ll5 The captiot1
sections 0.461(j) and 1.1 15 of tn" ðãttt-ittion's rules,
contain."Revierv of Freedom of
äiiìtt"t-i"-é "nu"lop" of uny stt"h application nrust 2009-645
¡ri"ÃãC* n"î,tction," and should reiåence FCC FOIA Control Numbet
may be referred to Miohael Connelly (202-418-0132'
Questions regarding the foregoing
michael.colnelly@fcc.gov) of this Division'
SincerclY,

øÅ-
Scot Stone
Dêoutv Chief, MobilitY Division
Wireiãss Telecommunications Bureau

Enclosure

I ,9¿¿ Request at 2.

6
See 41 C.F.P'. $0 461(Ð(6).

fee iocu¡¡ed in resoonding to ûis FOIA' as


the
1
See 4't C.F -P- ÈA.4'11(Ð. We note that there was no ¡escarch the duplicating costs are de
responsrve document. *"." in ,lt" pott"tt'iãî"i*tp""¿G
c"t-ission personieì' and
ñlmtmis-