Federal Communications Commission  DA 11-739
Before the
Federal Communications Commission
Washington, DC  20554
In the Matter of
Federal-State Joint Board on
Universal Service  
Allo Communications Petition for Waiver of 
Section 54.307(c) of the Commission’s Rules
Bayland Communications, LLC Petition for 
Waiver of Section 54.904(d) Deadline for 
Submission of Annual Certification by Eligible 
Telecommunication Carrier Serving Lines in the 
Service Area of a Rate-of-Return Carrier to 
Receive Interstate Common Line Support
Columbus Telephone Company Petition for 
Waiver of Section 54.903(a) of the Commission’s 
Rules
Great Lakes of Iowa, Inc. Petition for Waiver of 
the Commission’s Universal Service Rules
HTC Communications, LLC Petition for Waiver 
of Section 54.802(a) of the Commission’s Rules
Pine Belt Cellular, Inc. Petition for Waiver of 
Section 54.314 and 54.904 of the Commission’s 
Rules 
Windy City Cellular, LLC Petition for Waiver of 
Universal Service High-Cost Filing Deadlines 
Section 54.307(c)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
CC Docket No. 96-45
WC Docket No. 08-71
ORDER
Adopted: April 28, 2011 Released: April 28, 2011
By the Chief, Wireline Competition Bureau:
I.  INTRODUCTION
1. In this Order, we deny seven separate petitions filed by Allo Communications (Allo), 
Bayland Communications, LLC (Bayland), Columbus Telephone Company (Columbus), Great Lakes of 
Iowa, Inc. (Great Lakes), HTC Communications, LLC (HTC), Pine Belt Cellular, Inc. (Pine Belt), and 
Federal Communications Commission DA 11-739
2
Windy City Cellular, LLC (Windy City) for waiver of high-cost universal service support filing deadlines 
set forth in sections 54.307, 54.314, 54.802, 54.809, 54.903(a), and 54.904(d) of the Commission’s rules.1  
For the reasons discussed below, we find that none of these petitioners has demonstrated that there is 
good cause to grant the requested waivers.  We therefore deny the petitions.
II.  BACKGROUND
A. Commission Precedent
2. Section 254(e) of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended, provides that “only an 
eligible telecommunications carrier [(ETC)] designated under section 214(e) shall be eligible to receive 
specific Federal universal service support”2 and such support shall be used “only for the provision, 
maintenance, and upgrading of facilities and services for which support is intended.”3 To implement this 
statutory requirement, the Commission has adopted rules that include various certification and data filing 
requirements and established deadlines for those filings.4 Consistent with our precedent, complete and 
accurate submissions must be received in the appropriate places by the applicable deadline to be 
considered timely filed.5 Each petitioner requests waiver of a filing deadline associated with one or more 
of the requirements described below.
3. Section 54.307(d) of the Commission’s rules provides that a newly designated ETC must 
file working line count information with the Universal Service Administrative Company (USAC) within 
sixty days of the effective date of its designation as an ETC in order to receive high-cost universal service 
support as of its designation date.6 After meeting the initial filing requirements, section 54.307(c) 
  
1 Allo Communications Petition for Waiver of Universal Service High-Cost Filing Deadlines in Section 54.307(c), 
CC Docket No. 96-45, WC Docket No. 08-71 (filed May 10, 2010) (Allo Petition); Bayland Communications, LLC 
Petition for Waiver of Section 54.904(d) Deadline for Submission of Annual Certification by Eligible 
Telecommunication Carrier Serving Lines in the Service Area of a Rate-of-Return Carrier to Receive Interstate 
Common Line Support, CC Docket No. 96-45 (filed Jan. 25, 2010) (Bayland Petition); Columbus Telephone 
Company Petition for Waiver of Section 54.903(a) of the Commission’s Rules, CC Docket No. 96-45 (filed Aug. 
20, 2009) (Columbus Petition); Great Lakes of Iowa, Inc. Petition for Waiver of the FCC’s Universal Service Rules, 
CC Docket No. 96-45 (filed Feb. 1, 2006) (Great Lakes Petition); HTC Communications, LLC Petition for Waiver 
of Section 54.802(a) of the Commission’s Rules, CC Docket No. 96-45 (filed Aug. 22, 2008) (HTC Petition); Pine 
Belt Cellular, Inc. Petition for Waiver of Sections 54.314 and 54.904 of the Commission’s Rules, WC Docket No. 
08-71 (filed May 29, 2009) (Pine Belt Petition); Windy City Cellular, LLC Petition for Waiver of Universal Service 
High-Cost Filing Deadlines Section 54.307(c), CC Docket No. 96-45, WC Docket No. 08-71 (filed June 12, 2009) 
(Windy City Petition).  See also 47 C.F.R. §§ 54.307, 54.314, 54.802, 54.809, 54.903(a), 54.904(d). 
2 47 U.S.C. § 254(e).  
3 Id.
4 See, e.g., 47 C.F.R. §§ 54.301(b) and (e)(1) (data filing requirements for the Local Switching Support (LSS) 
mechanism), 54.307 (competitive ETC line count filing requirements for the Interstate Common Line Support 
(ICLS) mechanism and other high-cost universal service support mechanisms), 54.313 (state certification 
requirements regarding the use of high-cost support by non-rural carriers), 54.314 (state certification requirements 
regarding the use of high-cost support by rural carriers), 54.802(a) (ETC line count filing requirements for the 
Interstate Access Support (IAS) mechanism), 54.809 (carrier certification requirements regarding the use of IAS), 
54.903 (data filing requirements for the ICLS mechanism), 54.904 (carrier certification requirements regarding the 
use of ICLS).
5 See, e.g., Benton/Linn Wireless, LLC, Petition for Waiver of Section 54.307(c) of the Commission's Rules, et al., 
CC Docket No. 96-45, Order, 20 FCC Rcd 19212, 19218, 19220, paras. 12, 18 (Wireline Comp. Bur. 2005).
6 See 47 C.F.R. § 54.307(d).
Federal Communications Commission DA 11-739
3
provides that a competitive ETC must file working line count data with USAC on a quarterly basis to 
continue to receive certain high-cost support.7 Mandatory line count data must be submitted no later than 
March 30, July 31, September 30, and December 30 of each year.8  
4. Section 54.314 of the Commission’s rules provides that states shall file an annual 
certification with USAC and the Commission stating that all high-cost support received by rural ETCs 
within such states will be used only for the provision, maintenance, and upgrading of facilities and 
services for which support is intended.9 In instances where carriers are not subject to the jurisdiction of a 
state, the Commission allows ETCs to certify directly to the Commission and USAC that federal high-
cost support will be used in a manner consistent with section 254(e) of the Act.10 Section 54.314 states 
that the certification must be filed by October 1 of the preceding calendar year to receive support 
beginning in the first quarter of a subsequent calendar year.11  
5. To receive Interstate Access Support (IAS), an ETC that is providing service within an area 
served by a price cap local exchange carrier must file line count data on a quarterly basis, pursuant to 
section 54.802 of the Commission’s rules.12  Specifically, the ETC must submit line count data showing 
separately the number of residential/single-line business lines and multi-line business lines within its 
study area on a quarterly basis.13  Mandatory line count data are due on the last business day of March, 
June, September, and December of each year.14 In addition, pursuant to section 54.809 of the 
Commission’s rules, an ETC must file an annual certification with USAC and the Commission stating 
that all IAS received by the ETC will be used “only for the provision, maintenance, and upgrading of 
facilities and services for which support is intended.”15 A carrier’s certification must be filed on the date 
the carrier first files its line count data information with USAC, and thereafter on June 30 of each year.16
6. To receive Interstate Common Line Support (ICLS), rate-of-return carriers must submit to 
USAC, among other things, projected data necessary to calculate the carrier’s prospective ICLS, 
including common line cost and revenue data, for each of its study areas in the upcoming funding year.17  
This filing is due annually on March 31.18  In addition, pursuant to section 54.904 of the Commission’s 
rules, a carrier must submit a certification to USAC and the Commission stating that all ICLS received by 
  
7 See id.  
8 Id.
9 47 C.F.R. § 54.314.  The certification requirement for non-rural ETCs is found in section 54.313 of the 
Commission’s rules.  47 C.F.R. § 54.313.
10 See Federal-State Joint Board on Universal Service, Multi-Association Group (MAG) Plan for Regulation of 
Interstate Services of Non-Price Cap Incumbent Local Exchange Carriers and Interexchange Carriers, CC Docket 
Nos. 96-45, 00-256, Fourteenth Report and Order and Twenty-Second Order on Reconsideration, Report and Order, 
16 FCC Rcd 11244, 11318, para. 189 (2001) (Rural Task Force Order); 47 C.F.R. § 54.314(b).
11 47 C.F.R. § 54.314(d)(1); 47 U.S.C. §254(e).
12 See 47 C.F.R. § 54.802(a).
13 Id.
14 Id.  
15 47 C.F.R. § 54.809(a).
16 See 47 C.F.R. §54.809(c).
17 47 C.F.R. § 54.903(a)(3).
18 Id.
Federal Communications Commission DA 11-739
4
it will be used only for the provision, maintenance, and upgrading of facilities and services for which such 
support is intended.19 The certification must be filed on the date that the carrier first files its line count 
information and thereafter on June 30 of each year.20
B. The Petitions
7. Allo’s Petition.  On May 10, 2010, Allo filed a petition for waiver of the March 30, 2010 
filing deadline set forth in section 54.307(c) of the Commission’s rules.21 Allo states that this submission 
was due in the midst of its audit season and that it inadvertently missed the deadline.22 According to its 
petition, Allo submitted the required report as soon as the error was discovered, which was 40 days after 
the deadline.23
8. Bayland’s Petition. On January 25, 2010, Bayland filed a petition for waiver of the June 30, 
2009 certification filing deadline set forth in section 54.904(d) of the Commission’s rules.24 Bayland was 
acquired by Nsight at the end of 2007, but retained all Bayland staff to oversee the administration of the 
company during 2008.25 In 2009, Nsight redistributed various responsibilities, and the employee 
responsible for Bayland’s filings did not realize that he was required to file the annual ICLS certification 
in addition to FCC Form 525.26 Bayland states that it filed the certification on October 20, 2009, as soon 
as the oversight was discovered.27 Bayland states that it has put measures in place to ensure that this
oversight does not happen again.28
9. Columbus’ Petition. On August 20, 2009, Columbus filed a petition for waiver of the 
March 31, 2008 filing deadline set forth in section 54.903(a) of the Commission’s rules.29 Columbus 
states that it forwarded its requisite ICLS line count data and certification to NECA on March 31, 2008, 
the deadline for submission to USAC.30 Columbus contends that NECA provided verbal confirmation of 
its receipt and assurances that it would be forwarded to USAC.31 However, sometime in the fall of 2008, 
Columbus realized that the filings had not been received by USAC.  
10. Great Lakes’ Petition.  On February 1, 2006, Great Lakes filed a petition for waiver of the 
filing deadlines for the period between December 2002 and September 2003 set forth in sections 54.307, 
54.802, 54.809 and 54.904 of the Commission’s rules .32 During these twelve months, Great Lakes 
  
19 See 47 C.F.R. §§ 54.904(a).
20 See 47 C.F.R. § 54.904(d).
21 Allo Petition at 1.
22 Id. 
23 Id.
24 Bayland Petition at 1.
25 Id. at 5.
26 Id.
27 Id.
28 Id. at 6.
29 Columbus Petition at 1.
30 Id.
31 Id.
32 Great Lakes Petition at 1.
Federal Communications Commission DA 11-739
5
missed 18 separate filing deadlines.  Great Lakes asserts that it missed the deadlines due to the alleged 
confusion of the manager responsible for these filings.33 Great Lakes states that his failure to seek help or 
inform anyone at Great Lakes of his filing lapses ultimately resulted in his firing.34 Upon his firing, Great 
Lakes states that its new manager provided the Commission and USAC with its line count reports and 
annual certifications.35  
11. HTC’s Petition.  On August 22, 2008, HTC filed a petition for waiver of the June 30, 2008 
deadline set forth in section 54.802(a) of the Commission’s rules.  HTC was designated as a competitive 
ETC on April 17, 2008, and its first line count filing deadline for receiving IAS support was due to USAC 
on June 30, 2008.36 On April 11, 2008, HTC mailed its FCC Form 498, which was rejected on April 21 
because HTC had used a Post Office box as a mailing address and had neglected to include a general 
contact signature with the form.37 On April 28, 2008, HTC mailed a second FCC Form 498 which 
rectified the errors in the first form.  However, USAC placed HTC’s request for a new service provider 
identification number (SPIN) on hold because USAC’s records showed that HTC already had a SPIN and 
HTC did not elect Schools and Libraries Funding.38 Therefore, HTC mailed a third FCC Form 498 to 
USAC.39 USAC rejected the form on May 29, 2008 because the accompanying W-9 form was incorrectly 
populated with a Post Office box as the mailing address.40 On June 11, HTC mailed a fourth FCC Form 
498 to USAC and followed up with two phone calls on June 25, 2008, receiving its SPIN on that date.41 It 
did not receive its study area code (SAC) until June 30, 2008, the due date of HTC’s IAS line count 
filing.42 HTC subsequently filed its IAS line count data on July 31, 2008.43 HTC asserts that USAC’s 
administrative inefficiencies constitute special circumstances warranting waiver in this instance.44
12. Pine Belt’s Petition.  On May 29, 2009, Pine Belt filed a petition for waiver of the deadlines 
set forth in sections 54.314 and 54.904 of the Commission’s Rules.  Pine Belt states that it intended to file 
on time and its consultant prepared the required certifications in a timely manner, but due to 
miscommunication between the company and consultant, the certifications were not timely filed.45 Pine 
Belt states it did not discover the error until it did not receive payments for High Cost Model Support, 
High Cost Loop Support, Local Switching Support and Interstate Common Line Support for January and 
  
33 Id. at 2–3.
34 Id. at 6.
35 Id. at 3.
36 HTC Petition at 2–3.
37 Id. at 3.
38 Id. at 4.
39 Id.
40 Id.
41 Id. at 5.
42 Id.
43 Id.
44 Id. at 6.
45 Pine Belt Petition at 4. 
Federal Communications Commission DA 11-739
6
February 2009.46 After conversations with USAC about the missed filing, Pine Belt filed the 
certifications more than fourteen business days late.47  
13. Windy City’s Petition.  On June 12, 2009 Windy City Cellular filed a petition for waiver of 
the deadline set forth in section 54.307(d) of the Commission’s rules.48 The Regulatory Commission of 
Alaska designated Windy City as an ETC on December 3, 2008.49 After being designated, Windy City 
began the process of applying for high-cost support by requesting a FCC Form 499-A filer ID on 
December 22, 2008.50 On January 12, 2009, Windy City filed FCC Form 498, which was rejected on 
January 21 due to an incorrect email and location address.51 By February 1, 2008 it had not yet received a 
SPIN.52 Finally, on April 11, 2009, Windy City filed all the requisite data, more than two months after 
the deadline.53
III.  DISCUSSION
14. We find that each petitioner has failed to demonstrate that there is good cause to waive the 
applicable sections of the Commission’s rules.  Generally, the Commission’s rules may be waived if good 
cause is shown.54 The Commission may exercise its discretion to waive a rule where the particular facts 
make strict compliance inconsistent with the public interest.55 In addition, the Commission may take into 
account considerations of hardship, equity, or more effective implementation of overall policy on an 
individual basis.56 Waiver of the Commission’s rules is appropriate only if both (i) special circumstances 
warrant a deviation from the general rule, and (ii) such deviation will serve the public interest.57  
15. Because USAC processes such a large amount of data each year, it is necessary that carriers 
meet the requisite filing deadlines, absent special circumstances.58 Carriers are responsible for reviewing 
and understanding the rules to ensure that submissions are filed in a timely manner.59 The petitioners did 
not promptly cure their failure to timely file, nor did the petitioners provide evidence of special 
circumstances sufficient to satisfy the good cause waiver standard.60
  
46 Id.
47 Id.
48 Windy City Petition at 1.
49 Id. at 4.
50 Id.
51 Id.
52 Id.
53 Id. at 5.
54 47 C.F.R. § 1.3.  
55 Northeast Cellular Telephone Co. v. FCC, 897 F.2d 1164, 1166 (D.C. Cir. 1990) (Northeast Cellular).  
56 WAIT Radio v. FCC, 418 F.2d 1153, 1159 (D.C. Cir. 1969); Northeast Cellular, 897 F.2d at 1166.  
57 NetworkIP, LLC v. FCC, 548 F.3d 116, 125-128 (D.C. Cir. 2008); Northeast Cellular, 897 F.2d at 1166.
58 FiberNet, LLC, Petition for Waiver of Section 54.307(c) of the Commission’s Rules and Regulations, CC Docket 
No. 96-45, Order, 19 FCC Rcd 8202, 8204, para. 5 (Wireline Comp. Bur. 2004).
59 Id.
60 Compare Federal-State Board on Universal Service, NPCR, Inc. Petition for Waiver of Section 54.802(a) of the 
Commission’s Rules, CC Docket No. 96-45, Order, 22 FCC Rcd 560 (Wireline Comp. Bur. 2007) (waiver granted 
Federal Communications Commission DA 11-739
7
16. Allo, Columbus, and Pine Belt.  Allo, Columbus, and Pine Belt have previously filed for and 
received waivers of high-cost filing deadlines.61 At that time, Columbus and Pine Belt committed to put 
procedures in place to avoid missing future deadlines.  We do not find good cause to grant these 
additional waiver requests when these carriers either committed to or should have put in place sufficient 
procedures to avoid missing subsequent high-cost filing deadlines.  
17. Bayland and Great Lakes.  Bayland and Great Lakes claim that their employees were 
confused about the filing requirements.62 In addition, Bayland notes that the company was undergoing a 
reorganization.63 Confusion about the Commission’s rules64 and administrative reorganizations65 do not 
     
when line count data was received one business day after the filing deadline); Verizon Communications Inc. Petition 
for Waiver of Section 54.802(a) of the Commission’s Rules, CC Docket No. 96-45, Order, 21 FCC Rcd 10149 
(Wireline Comp. Bur. 2006) (waiver granted when deadline was missed by two business days); Citizens 
Communications and Frontier Communications Petition for Waiver of Section 54.802(a) of the Commission’s Rules, 
CC Docket 96-45, Order, 20 FCC Rcd 16761 (Wireline Comp. Bur. 2005) (waiver granted when deadline was 
missed by two business days), with Federal-State Joint Board on Universal Service, Cedar Valley Communications, 
Inc. Petition for Waiver of 47 C.F.R. §§ 54.307(d), 54.314(a), and 54.904(d), CC Docket 96-45, Order, 23 FCC Rcd 
114 (Wireline Comp. Bur. 2008) (waiver denied because the filing deadline was missed by more than five months); 
South Slope Cooperative Telephone Company Petition for Waiver of Filing Deadline in 47 C.F.R. Section 54.307(c),
CC Docket 96-45, Order, 19 FCC Rcd 17493 (Wireline Comp. Bur. 2004) (waiver denied because the data was filed 
more than a month late); NPI-Omnipoint Wireless, LLC Petition for Waiver of Sections 54.307(c), 54.802(a), and 
54.903 of the Commission’s Rules; SouthEast Telephone, Inc. Petition of Waiver of Deadlines in 47 C.F.R. § 
54.809(c); SEI Data, Inc. Petition for Waiver of Filing Deadline in 47 C.F.R. Section 54.802(a), CC Docket 96-45, 
Order, 22 FCC Rcd 4946 (Wireline Comp. Bur. 2007) (NPI’s waiver denied because the data was filed six months 
late, SouthEast’s waiver denied because the data was filed two months late; SEI’s waiver denied because the data 
was filed three months late).
61 See Allo Communications Petition for Waiver of a Filing Deadline, CC Docket No. 96-45 (filed Nov. 30, 2007); 
Columbus Telephone Company Petition for Waiver of Deadline in 47 C.F.R. § 54.301(b), CC Docket No. 96-45 
(filed Nov. 26, 2003); Pine Belt Cellular, Inc. Petition for Waiver of Section 54.313 of the Commission’s Rules, CC 
Docket No. 96-45 (filed Mar. 3, 2005); Pine Belt Cellular, Inc. Petition for Waiver of Section 54.307(c) of the 
Commission’s Rules, CC Docket No. 96-45 (filed June 2, 2006).  The Commission granted the waivers.  See Allo
Communications Petition for Waiver of Filing Deadline; Aventure Communication Technology, LLC Petition for 
Waiver of Sections 54.307(c) and 54.802 of the Commission's Rules; CC Cellular Study Area Code 559002 Petition 
for Waiver of Section 54.307(c)(4) Line Count Certification for CETC Universal Service Funding; PrairieWave 
Black Hills, LLC Petition for Waiver of Section 54.802(a) of the Commission's Rules; Texas RSA 1 Limited 
Partnership dba XIT Wireless Petition for Waiver of the Section 54.307(c)(1) Applicable to the Line Count 
Submission Applicable to Interstate Common Line Support, WC Docket No. 08-71, CC Docket No. 96-45, Order, 23 
FCC Rcd 15325 (Wireline Comp. Bur. 2008) (granting Allo Petition); Alliance Communications Cooperative, Inc. 
and Hills Telephone Company, Inc.; East Ascension Telephone Company, LLC and Columbus Telephone Company 
Petitions for Waiver of Section 54.301 Local Switching Support Data Submission Reporting Date, CC Docket No. 
96-45, Order, 20 FCC Rcd 18250 (Wireline Comp. Bur. 2005) (granting the Columbus petition); Pine Belt Cellular, 
Inc. Petition for Waiver of Section 54.313 of the Commission’s Rules, CC Docket No. 96-45, Order, 21 FCC Rcd 
9175 (Wireline Comp. Bur. 2006) (granting first Pine Belt petition); SouthEast Telephone, Inc. Expedited Petition 
for Waiver of Deadlines in Sections 54.307(c)(2) and 54.802(a) of the Commission’s Rules; Cellular Network 
Partnership d/b/a Pioneer Cellular Petition for Waiver of Deadline in 47 C.F.R. § 54.307(c); Pine Belt Cellular, 
Inc. Petition for Waiver of Section 54.307(c) of the Commission’s Rules, CC Docket No. 96-45, Order, 21 FCC Rcd 
10149 (Wireline Comp. Bur. 2006) (granting second Pine Belt petition).  
62 See supra paras. 8, 10.
63 See supra para. 8.
64 See, e.g., Mid-Tex Cellular, Ltd. Petition for Waiver of the FCC’s Universal Service Rules, CC Docket No. 96-45, 
21 FCC Rcd 14931, 14933–34, para. 10 (Wireline Comp. Bur. 2006) (“Mid-Tex’s only excuse for its late filing was 
its confusion over the deadline. Such an excuse does not constitute special circumstances.”). 
Federal Communications Commission DA 11-739
8
constitute special circumstances warranting waiver.  Without additional compelling facts surrounding the 
missed deadlines, which have not been presented here, we cannot conclude that good cause supports the 
requested waivers.  
18. HTC and Windy City. HTC and Windy City contend that they missed the deadlines due to 
administrative difficulties.66 Where administrative difficulties are the cause of late-filed line counts and 
certifications, some additional showing is necessary to establish special circumstances.  HTC pleads that 
USAC’s “inefficient administrative procedures” caused the delay.67 However, both HTC and Windy 
City’s pleadings fall short, particularly because the parties’ own errors contributed to the delay 
experienced by both.  For example, both parties failed to follow the FCC Form 498 instructions,68
resulting in the rejection of their respective forms.  In total, neither company’s administrative difficulties 
were so unique as to constitute special circumstances.
19. We remind carriers that it is their responsibility to ensure that their complete and accurate 
filings are timely received in the appropriate places, regardless of the time and method of their filings.  
Carriers now have many options by which to file, including U.S. Mail, other sources of commercial 
delivery, facsimile, and electronic mail (e-mail).  For instance, any carrier receiving funding from the 
high-cost universal support mechanism may file timely via email at 
hcfilings@HCLI.universalservice.org.  Additional information regarding USAC’s filing procedures and 
deadlines can be found at http://www.usac.org/hc/tools/filing-tool/default.aspx. We encourage carriers to 
use any and all methods they deem necessary to ensure that their filings are timely received.  
20. We conclude that no carrier has demonstrated that good cause exists to grant its petition.  
Therefore, we deny all of the petitions.
IV.  ORDERING CLAUSES
21. Accordingly, IT IS ORDERED, pursuant to sections 1, 4(i), 5(c), 214, and 254 of the 
Communications Act of 1934, as amended, 47 U.S.C. §§ 151, 154(i), 155(c), 214, and 254, and sections 
0.91, 0.291, and 1.3 of the Commission’s rules, 47 C.F.R. §§ 0.91, 0.291, and 1.3, that this order IS 
ADOPTED.
22. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED, pursuant to authority delegated under sections 0.91, 0.291, 
1.3 and 54.722(a) of the Commission's rules, 47 C.F.R. §§ 0.91, 0.291, 1.3 and 54.722(a), that the Petition 
for Waiver of Section 54.307(c) of the Commission’s Rules filed by Allo Communications IS DENIED. 
23. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED, pursuant to authority delegated under sections 0.91, 0.291, 
1.3 and 54.722(a) of the Commission's rules, 47 C.F.R. §§ 0.91, 0.291, 1.3 and 54.722(a), that the 
Bayland Communications, LLC Petition for Waiver of Section 54.904(d) Deadline for Submission of 
     
65 See, e.g., Citizens Communications and Frontier Communications Petition for Waiver of Section 54.802(a) of the 
Commission's Rules, CC Docket No. 96-45, 20 FCC Rcd 16761, 16762–63, paras. 5, 7 (Wireline Comp. Bur. 2005) 
(finding that a corporate reorganization, a potential loss of $9.6 million dollars, and a filing two business days late, 
constituted special circumstances); Verizon Communications Inc. Petition for Waiver of Section 54.802(a) of the 
Commission’s Rules, CC Docket No. 96-45, 21 FCC Rcd 10155, 10156, para. 4 (Wireline Comp. Bur. 2006) 
(finding that a corporate reorganization and a filing two business days late constituted special circumstances).  We 
note that Commission staff requested additional information from Great Lakes’ counsel regarding the circumstances 
surrounding the missed deadlines, which petitioner’s counsel did not provide.
66 See supra paras. 11, 13.
67 HTC Petition at 5.
68 See HTC Petition 3–4; Windy City Petition at 4.
Federal Communications Commission DA 11-739
9
Annual Certification by Eligible Telecommunication Carrier Serving Lines in the Service Area of a Rate-
of-Return Carrier to Receive Interstate Common Line Support IS DENIED. 
24. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED, pursuant to authority delegated under sections 0.91, 0.291, 
1.3 and 54.722(a) of the Commission's rules, 47 C.F.R. §§ 0.91, 0.291, 1.3 and 54.722(a), that the 
Columbus Telephone Company Petition for Waiver of Section 54.903(a) of the Commission’s Rules IS 
DENIED.
25. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED, pursuant to authority delegated under sections 0.91, 0.291, 
1.3 and 54.722(a) of the Commission's rules, 47 C.F.R. §§ 0.91, 0.291, 1.3 and 54.722(a), that the Petition 
for Waiver of the FCC’s Universal Service Rules filed by Great Lakes of Iowa, Inc. IS DENIED. 
26. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED, pursuant to authority delegated under sections 0.91, 0.291, 
1.3 and 54.722(a) of the Commission's rules, 47 C.F.R. §§ 0.91, 0.291, 1.3 and 54.722(a), that the HTC 
Communications, LLC Petition for Waiver of Section 54.802(a) of the Commission’s Rules IS DENIED.
27. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED, pursuant to authority delegated under sections 0.91, 0.291, 
1.3 and 54.722(a) of the Commission's rules, 47 C.F.R. §§ 0.91, 0.291, 1.3 and 54.722(a), that the Pine 
Belt Cellular, Inc. Petition for Waiver of Sections 54.314 and 54.904 of the Commission’s Rules IS 
DENIED.
28. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED, pursuant to authority delegated under sections 0.91, 0.291, 
1.3 and 54.722(a) of the Commission's rules, 47 C.F.R. §§ 0.91, 0.291, 1.3 and 54.722(a), that the Windy 
City Cellular, LLC Petition for Waiver of Universal Service High-Cost Filing Deadlines Section 
54.307(c) IS DENIED.
29. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that, pursuant to section 1.102(b)(1) of the Commission’s 
rules, 47 C.F.R. § 1.102(b)(1), this order SHALL BE EFFECTIVE upon release.
FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION
Sharon E. Gillett
Chief
Wireline Competition Bureau