Provider certification record

A.T.C. Voice Data Inc.

Listed

Deficiency Report ↓︎Similarity Report ↓︎View on FCC RMD ↗︎

RMD number: RMD0010499
FRN: 0031776164
OCN

Identity

Legal business name: A.T.C. Voice Data Inc.
Doing-business-as
Foreign Voice Service Provider: No
Business address: 46 Center Ave, Atlantic Highlands NJ 07716
Filing contact: Mike Doherty
President · Operations
service@atcvoicedata.com
(732) 291-7500
46 Center Ave Atlantic Highlands NJ 07716
United States of America
Principals, Affiliates, Subsidiaries, and Parent Companies: Michael Doherty

Classification

Provider role(s): Voice service provider
STIR/SHAKEN implementation: Role Implementation
Voice service provider None
Overall None
Exemption rules: 35 FCC Rcd 3241, para. 40, we are a downstream reseller of VoIP services provided through Re-Invent Telecom and Coredial and do not have the capability to implement STIR/SHAKEN. We do not operate our own SIP infrastructure or network and do not originate calls directly and have no network equipment in the call path. STIR/SHAKEN implementation is performed by our underlying hosted VoIP providers.

Role	Implementation
Voice service provider	None
Overall	None

Prior investigations / actions

Description: 1. Description of the Action or Investigation: On August 25, 2025, the FCC’s Enforcement Bureau (“Bureau”) issued an order that removed A.T.C. Voice Data Inc. (“A.T.C.”), along with over 1,200 providers (collectively, “Companies”) from the FCC’s Robocall Mitigation Database (“RMD”). See Robocall Mitigation Database Filers, EB-ECD-25-00038590, Order, DA-25-737 (E.B. rel. Aug 25, 2025) (“Removal Order”). The Removal Order was effective upon its release and stated that A.T.C.’s RMD certification was “deficient because: (a) a Robocall Mitigation Plan (“RMP”) was not provided or the plan lacks information required to be submitted by February 26, 2024, and (b) the certification lacks information required by that same date.” Removal Order, at para. 1, Prior to the Removal Order, on December 10, 2024, the Bureau issued an order affording A.T.C., “a final opportunity to cure the deficiencies in their RMD certification and notify the Bureau that the deficiencies have been cured; or to file a response with sufficient explanation for why the Bureau should not remove the Company’s certification from the RMD. The Removal order held that “the Companies failed to do either,” which prompted the Removal Order and its final determination. The Removal Order stated that “removal of a Company’s certification from the RMD requires all intermediate providers and voice service provider to cease accepting all calls directly from the Company and that Companies identified in Appendix A (which included A.T.C.) shall not re-file an RMD certification without the prior approval of the FCC’s Wireline Competition Bureau (WCB) and the Bureau. A.T.C. did not respond to the December 10, 2024, Show Cause Order and notice because A.T.C. had not revised the contact information in their RMD certification and the notice was sent to an incorrect email address. Promptly after the Removal Order was released, A.T.C. addressed the issues that caused it to be included in the Removal Order (and December 10, 2024, Show Cause Order) and sought approval of the WCB and Bureau to re-file this cured RMD certification and attached RMP. In a subsequent notice on March 25, 2026, from the Bureau, stated, “As an initial matter, Commission staff have identified the following deficiencies in the Company’s filing: A. The Company does not answer “yes” in the field that asks providers whether they have been subject to a “formal Commission, law enforcement, or regulatory agency action or investigation . . .” Note: The removal orders issued on August 6, 2025, and August 25, 2025, fall under this category. Once “yes” is selected, the Company must provide a description of the action or investigation in the next field. This field asks for multiple pieces of information that the Company must provide a description for. B. The Company’s STIR/SHAKEN attestation is inconsistent because it attests to partial STIR/SHAKEN implementation but the Company does not appear to be on the Secure Telephone Identity Policy Administrator (STI-PA)’s list of authorized providers. A provider certifying to complete STIR/SHAKEN implementation in the RMD must be registered with the STI-PA, obtain its own SPC token and digital certificate, and authenticate all its calls with that certificate, whether directly or through a third party. See 47 CFR §§ 64.6301, 64.6302; Call Authentication Trust Anchor, WC Docket No. 17-97, Eighth Report and Order, 39 FCC 12894, 12916, para. 30 (2024). C. The Company’s STIR/SHAKEN attestation is inconsistent because it attests to partial STIR/SHAKEN implementation but the company did not provide its Operating Company Number (OCN). A provider must include an OCN on its RMD filing, if it has one. See 47 CFR §§ 64.6305(d)(4)(vii), (e)(4)(vii), (f)(4)(vii). The policy of the Secure Telephone Identity Governance Authority (STI-GA) requires providers to obtain an OCN in order to obtain the SPC token necessary to implement STIR/SHAKEN, unless the company is a Resp Org. See STI-GA, Policy Decision Binder, Version 9.1, at 5, https://cdn.atis.org/sti-ga.atis.org/2026/01/14175322/260113-STIGA-Board-Policy-Decision-Binder-v9-1-1.pdf. On April 6, 2026, A.T.C. acknowledged the errors and responded to the Bureau that A.T.C. is a reseller of voice services from a wholesale hosted VoIP provider and that it does not have an OCN and that Option 3 should have been selected. On April 10, 2026, the Bureau acknowledged receipt of the RMD certification updates but requested more specific information describing the action or investigation and a valid extension or exemption as to the STIR/SHAKEN attestation. These corrections are provided herewith and incorporated into the RMD and RMP. 2. All law enforcement or regulatory agencies involved: It was only the FCC’s Enforcement Bureau. No other regulatory or law enforcement agencies were involved. 3. The date that any action or investigation was commenced: The action was commenced on December 10, 2024, which was the date the Show Cause Order was released. Because the RMD was not cured as required by the Show Cause Order, the Bureau released its Removal Order on August 25, 2025. 4. The current status of the action or investigation: The Removal Order was the latest formal action taken against A.T.C. Subsequent requests from the Bureau have been addressed. 5. A summary of the findings of wrongdoing made in connection with the action or investigation: The Removal Order held the A.T.C.’s filing in the RMD (along with over 1,200 other Companies, as noted above) was deficient because (a) an RMD was not provided or the plan lacks information required to be submitted by February 26, 2024; and (b) the certification lacks information required by the same date. Removal Order, at para. 1. 6. Whether any final determinations have been issued: The Removal Order was a final determination; however promptly after the Removal Order was released, A.T.C. addressed the issues that caused it to be included in the Removal Order (and December 10, 2024 Show Cause Order) and sought approval of the WCB and Bureau to re-file its cured RMD certification and RMP. The Bureau Staff allowed A.T.C. to re-file and subsequently requested additional clarification and descriptive data which has now been provided. The re-instatement request is pending further review as of April 17, 2026.

Robocall mitigation plan

PDF RMD.pdfFiled 2026-04-17 · 796 KB

Declaration

By: Michael Doherty
Date: 2026-04-24No Recertification Date

Listing history

Date	Event	Detail / diff
2026-05-11	New	Initial certification filed and added to database.