*Pages 1--4 from Microsoft Word - 33033* Federal Communications Commission DA 03- 3526 Before the Federal Communications Commission Washington, D. C. 20554 In the Matter of Request for Review by Waldwick School District Waldwick, New Jersey File No. SLD- 256981 Schools and Libraries Universal Service Support mechanism ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) CC Docket No. 02- 6 ORDER Adopted: November 4, 2003 Released: November 5, 2003 By the Telecommunications Access Policy Division, Wireline Competition Bureau: 1. The Telecommunications Access Policy Division has under consideration a request filed by Bergen County Technical Schools on behalf of Waldwick School District (Waldwick), Waldwick, New Jersey (Appellant). 1 Appellant seeks review of a decision by the Schools and Libraries Division (SLD) of the Universal Service Administrative Company (Administrator) to reject an application from Waldwick in Funding Year 2002. 2 The application was rejected because there was no binding contract in place for the funding requested. For the reasons set forth below, we deny the Request for Review. 2. Under the schools and libraries universal service support mechanism, eligible schools, libraries, and consortia that include eligible schools and libraries, may apply for discounts for eligible telecommunications services, Internet access, and internal connections. 3 The Commission’s rules provide that, with one limited exception for existing, binding contracts, an eligible school, library or consortium must seek competitive bids for all services eligible for support. 4 In accordance with the Commission’s rules, the applicant must file with SLD, for posting on its website, an FCC Form 470 requesting services. 5 The applicant must wait 28 days 1 Letter from, John A. Serapiglia, Jr., Bergen County Technical Schools, on behalf of Waldwick School District, to Federal Communications Commission, filed January 28, 2002 (Request for Review). Section 54. 719( c) of the Commission’s rules provides that any person aggrieved by an action taken by a division of the Administrator may seek review from the Commission. 47 C. F. R. § 54. 719( c). 2 See Request for Review. 3 47 C. F. R. §§ 54. 502– 54. 503. 4 47 C. F. R. §§ 54. 504, 54. 511( c). 5 47 C. F. R. § 54.504( b). 1 Federal Communications Commission DA 03- 3526 3 number. 17 Furthermore, Waldwick listed the start of the school year – which had not yet arrived – as the date of the new contract. 18 Waldwick then attached an unsigned contract form between Waldwick and Bergen County. 6. Subsequently, the school board did not finalize selection of the proposed new service provider, Bergen County. 19 As a result, Waldwick continued to receive service from the original service provider, Intac Access Corporation. Bergen County sent SLD a letter explaining the circumstances and requesting a change of the service provider on the application from Bergen County to Intac Access Corporation. 20 7. Upon reviewing the application and finding the incomplete contract, SLD rejected the funding request as providing “insufficient documentation.” 21 Waldwick appealed the decision, which was denied by SLD. 22 SLD reasoned that there had been no binding agreement in existence at the time that the Form 471 was filed. 23 The instant appeal was then filed. 24 8. The Appellant argues that SLD incorrectly denied the funding request because there was a binding agreement in effect at the time the application was filed. 25 The Appellant notes that Waldwick had a month- to- month contract with Intac Access Corporation at the time of the application, and was therefore not required to submit a contract for the services requested. 26 We note, however, that Intac Access Corporation was not listed as the service provider on the application, Waldwick did not indicate that a month- to- month contract was in effect in Item 15 of the FCC Form 471, and Waldwick did not include copies of standard monthly bills as proof of a binding, legal arrangement between Waldwick and Intac. 27 Instead, the record shows that Waldwick listed Bergen County as the service provider, and that Waldwick did not have a signed, binding contract with Bergen County. 28 Thus, SLD was correct to conclude that there was no binding agreement in existence between Waldwick and the service provider listed on the FCC Form 471 application. It was Waldwick’s responsibility to provide SLD with accurate information regarding its agreement with the relevant service provider on the FCC Form 471 17 Id. 18 Id. 19 See Request for Review. 20 Letter from John A. Serapiglia Jr., Bergen County Technical Schools, to Schools and Libraries Division, Universal Service Administrative Company, dated July 12, 2001. 21 Letter from Schools and Libraries Division, Universal Service Administrative Company, to John Serapiglia, Waldwick School District, issued August 7, 2001 (Funding Commitment Decision Letter). 22 Letter from Robert J. Aloia, Waldwick Board of Education, to Schools and Libraries Division, Universal Service Administrative Company, filed August 16, 2001. 23 Letter from Schools and Libraries Division, Universal Service Administrative Company, to Robert Aloia, Waldwick Board of Education, issued November 19, 2001 (Administrator’s Decision on Appeal). 24 Request for Review. 25 Id. 26 Id. 27 Waldwick Form 471. 28 Waldwick FCC Form 471. 3 Federal Communications Commission DA 03- 3526 4 application, and such information was not provided. Therefore, we deny the Request for Review. 9. ACCORDINGLY, IT IS ORDERED, pursuant to authority delegated under sections 0.91, 0.291, and 54.722( a) of the Commission's rules, 47 C. F. R. §§ 0.91, 0.291, and 54.722( a), that the Request for Review filed by Bergen County Technical Schools on behalf of Waldwick School District, Waldwick, New Jersey, on January 28, 2002, IS DENIED. FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION ` Mark G. Seifert Deputy Chief, Telecommunications Access Policy Division Wireline Competition Bureau 4