Case Background
On September 11,
2026, LTE Wireless Inc. (LTE Wireless) filed an application with the Florida
Public Service Commission (FPSC or Commission) seeking a certificate to provide
local telecommunications service. LTE Wireless is a South Dakota corporation
registered as a foreign corporation with the Florida Department of State (DoS)
since May 25, 2022. LTE Wireless is independently owned and managed by Faizal
Hassad.
LTE Wireless has
a history of unsuccessful applications to the Commission that staff believes is
relevant to the current docket. On November 17, 2025, LTE Wireless filed a
petition for eligible telecommunications carrier (ETC) designation, seeking to
receive federal low-income support to provide Lifeline services statewide. On February 19, 2026, staff recommended
denying the petition, concluding that designation would not serve the public
interest, and that LTE Wireless had not demonstrated possession of the
necessary facilities for designation. Staff also identified inaccuracies in
several of the company’s responses to inquiries. Following staff’s
recommendation, LTE Wireless withdrew its petition that same day. On February 20, 2026, staff documented
that, despite lacking Commission approval, LTE Wireless had advertised on its
website that Florida customers could use their Lifeline qualification to
receive discounted services. LTE
Wireless has since corrected its website.[5]
On June 26,
2026, LTE Wireless filed an application for authority to provide
telecommunications service. In
that filing, staff identified incorrect or incomplete application responses,
including a discrepancy between the company’s name provided in response to
Question 1 and its registration with the DoS. Additionally, LTE Wireless had
inaccuracies concerning its regulatory history in other states in Question 7,
parts (c) and (e). Staff notified LTE Wireless of these deficiencies by
certified letter and email and provided an opportunity to correct its
responses. However, LTE Wireless failed to respond
within the requested timeframe. Consequently, the docket was administratively
closed on August 5, 2026, without a certificate being granted.
The instant
docket was opened when LTE Wireless filed a new application for authority to
provide telecommunications service, providing another opportunity to correct
the deficiencies identified in its previous filing. However, LTE Wireless did
not amend the inaccurate representations concerning its regulatory history in
Question 7 when it filed its new application.
The Commission
is vested with jurisdiction in this matter pursuant to Section 364.335, Florida
Statutes (F.S.) and Rule 25‑4.004, Florida Administrative Code
(F.A.C.).
Discussion
of Issues
Issue 1:
Should LTE Wireless Inc. be granted a Certificate of
Authority to Provide Telecommunications Service in Florida?
Recommendation:
No. LTE Wireless Inc. should not be granted a Certificate
of Authority to Provide Telecommunications Service in Florida. (Day, Deas,
Fogleman)
Staff Analysis:
Legal
Standard
Pursuant
to Rule 25‑4.004, Florida Administrative Code (F.A.C.), staff reviews
applications for certificates to provide Telecommunications Service in Florida
upon receipt of the required $500 nonrefundable filing fee. Applicants must
complete Form PSC 1020 (4/18) and attest to the accuracy of the information
submitted by signing the acknowledgment included in the application. This
acknowledgement affirms that the information provided is accurate and advises
applicants that false statements may result in denial of a telecommunications
certificate. In addition, pursuant to Section 364.335(2), Florida
Statutes (F.S.), an applicant must demonstrate sufficient technical, financial,
and managerial capability before the Commission may grant a telecommunications
certificate. Further, Section 364.335, F.S., requires applicants to provide
their official name, principal place of business, and the name, street address,
and telephone number of a contact person who is an officer, partner, owner,
member, or manager. The company is required to publish its rates of service to
be offered within Florida, as stated under Section 364.04, F.S.
Once
certificated, the company is responsible for ongoing compliance with all
statutory obligations and Commission Rules. Under Section 364.336, F.S., this
includes accurately submitting annual Regulatory Assessment Fee (RAF) payments
to the Commission. Telecommunications companies are subject to generally
applicable business regulation in Florida, including maintaining active
business status through Florida DoS. Additionally, because Form PSC 1020 (4/18)
requires the company to attest to the accuracy of the information provided in
its application, any changes to the originally submitted information must be
reported when they occur. These reporting obligations also include reporting
changes in ownership or control in accordance with Rule 25‑4.004, F.A.C. Furthermore,
companies must file responses to Commission data requests pursuant to the
annual reporting requirements of Section 364.386, F.S., which direct the
Commission to collect industry data for its report to the Florida Legislature
on telecommunications competition.
Analysis
Application
Accuracy
As
discussed in the case background, LTE Wireless submitted its initial application
to the FPSC on June 29, 2026.[9] Staff identified a
deficiency in the company’s response to Question 1, where the name provided did
not match the name registered with the Florida DoS. Additionally, in its
response to Question 7 parts (c) and (e), included as Attachment A-1, LTE
Wireless stated that it held a telecommunications certificate in Wisconsin and
had never been subject to regulatory penalties for violations of
telecommunications statutes. However, on June 18, 2026, 11 days before LTE
wireless filed its application with the FPSC, the Wisconsin Public Service
Commission (Wisconsin PSC) issued a Notice of Proposed Rescission of
Certification due to the company’s failure to respond to a required annual
questionnaire. The notice advised LTE Wireless that its certification was
subject to rescission for noncompliance with Wisconsin telecommunications
statutes.[10]
The
Wisconsin PSC’s Notice of Rescission of Certification to LTE Wireless went into
effect on July 9, 2026.[11] Subsequently, on July 14,
2026, FPSC staff notified LTE Wireless, by certified letter and email, that
certain responses in its application required correction or updating.[12] Staff advised the company
to review and update its response to Question 7 as of the date of the
correspondence to ensure that the application contained current and accurate
information. Staff also instructed LTE Wireless to correct
the discrepancy in its response to Question 1 to ensure consistency with the
Florida DoS records. Staff requested that the company provide the necessary corrections
by July 30, 2026. However, the company did not respond within the specified
timeframe, which resulted in the administrative closure of Docket No.
20260096-TX on August 5, 2026.[13]
On September 11, 2026, LTE Wireless submitted its second, and
current, application with the FPSC. Although, LTE Wireless corrected the
inconsistency in its response to Question 1 by aligning its name with the
Florida DoS records, it did not correct the inaccuracies concerning its
regulatory history. As shown
in Attachment A-2, LTE Wireless again stated in its response to Question 7 that
it holds a telecommunications certificate in Wisconsin and has never been
subject to regulatory penalties for violations of telecommunications statutes.
During
this same period, LTE Wireless was corresponding with the Wisconsin PSC
regarding its rescission of its certification. On July 17, 2026, Wisconsin PSC staff informed LTE Wireless that
reinstatement would require a new application, and a letter explaining why it
failed to make the required filings and the corrective measures implemented or
planned to prevent future noncompliance.
That same day, LTE Wireless reapplied to regain its certificate in Wisconsin.[15] After several requests for
additional information and subsequent responses, LTE Wireless was recertified
in Wisconsin on October 6, 2026.
While
LTE Wireless was eventually recertified in Wisconsin, it did not hold an active
Wisconsin telecommunication certificate when it filed its September 11, 2026,
application with the FPSC. Accordingly, staff believes LTE Wireless should have
identified Wisconsin as a pending application in response to Question 7(b), and
disclosed those circumstances surrounding the recession and subsequent
application in response to Question 7(e).
Staff
is concerned that LTE Wireless continued to provide inaccurate information despite
having been notified of the deficiencies in its previous application and
afforded an additional opportunity to correct them. Furthermore, the company’s correspondence
with the Wisconsin PSC reflects its acknowledgement that it was decertified in
Wisconsin after being penalized for failing to comply with state
telecommunications statutes. Despite this, LTE Wireless continued to assert in
its September 11, 2026, application to the FPSC that it held a
telecommunications certificate in Wisconsin and had never been subject to any
regulatory penalties.
Managerial
Capabilities
In
addition to the current application, LTE Wireless has two previously closed
dockets with the FPSC, the prior application discussed above and an ETC
petition. Across all three matters, staff documented multiple instances in
which LTE Wireless submitted inaccurate information. Staff also documented LTE Wireless’s
failure to respond to required correspondence during the review of its prior
application, which resulted in the administrative closure of that docket. Taken
together, these issues raise concerns regarding LTE Wireless’s managerial
capability, particularly its ability to properly prepare, review, and submit
accurate documentation to regulatory authorities in a timely manner.
LTE
Wireless’s compliance record before other state commissions further underscores
these managerial concerns. As noted earlier, the Wisconsin PSC decertified LTE
Wireless due to its failure to respond to required filings. Similarly, the
Idaho Public Utilities Commission documented three instances of noncompliance
and untimely responses to annual data requests.[16]
These managerial issues reflect broader
concerns about LTE Wireless’s ability to maintain the level of compliance that
would be required under Florida Statutes if the Commission were to approve the
application, including timely notification of certificate‑related changes
and submission of required RAF payments. Approval would also impose annual
reporting requirements that support the Commission’s data‑collection
process required by Florida law, with the information collected being used in
annual reports to the Legislature. LTE Wireless has not demonstrated the
managerial capability necessary to reliably meet these prospective obligations.
Conclusion
Staff believes that LTE Wireless lacks the
appropriate managerial capability as required by Section 364.335(2), F.S., to
provide telecommunication service in Florida. The company has repeatedly
submitted inaccurate information in its applications and, in prior dockets,
either provided inaccurate representations or failed to respond to staff
correspondence. These concerns are further supported by documented instances of
noncompliance with regulatory requirements in other states. Therefore, staff
recommends that the Commission deny LTE Wireless Inc’s application for a Certificate
of Authority to Provide Telecommunications Service in Florida.
Issue 2:
Should this docket be closed?
Recommendation:
Yes. If no person whose substantial interests are
affected by the proposed agency action files a protest within 21 days of the
issuance of the Proposed Agency Action Order, this docket should be closed upon
the issuance of a consummating order. (Hixon)
Staff Analysis:
At the conclusion of the protest period, if no
protest is filed, this docket should be closed upon the issuance of a
consummating order.
