Federal Communications Commission DA 12-250 Before the Federal Communications Commission Washington, DC 20554 In the Matter of ) ) Requests for Waiver and Review of ) Decisions of the ) Universal Service Administrator by ) ) AllWays, Inc. (Prairie Hills School District 144) ) File Nos. SLD-623007, et al. Markham, Illinois, et al. ) ) Schools and Libraries Universal Service ) CC Docket No. 02-6 Support Mechanism ) ORDER Adopted: February 24, 2012 Released: February 24, 2012 By the Deputy Chief, Telecommunications Access Policy Division, Wireline Competition Bureau: 1. Consistent with Commission rules,1 we deny 25 requests from petitioners2 seeking review of decisions made by the Universal Service Administrative Company (USAC) under the E-rate program (more formally known as the schools and libraries universal service support program).3 In each decision, USAC found that the applicants sought support for service, products or maintenance that are not eligible 1 Under the E-rate program, applicants may only seek support for eligible services, products and maintenance. See 47 C.F.R. §§ 54.502, 54.504 and 54.518. See, e.g., Federal-State Joint Board on Universal Service, CC Docket No. 96-45, Report and Order, 12 FCC Rcd 8776, 9013, para. 444 (1997), aff’d in part, Texas Office of Public Utility Counsel v. FCC, 183 F.3d 393 (5th Cir. 1999) (subsequent history omitted); Schools and Libraries Universal Service Support Mechanism, CC Docket No. 02-6, Second Report and Order and Further Notice of Proposed Rulemaking, 18 FCC Rcd 9202, 9208, para. 17-18 (2003) (Second Report and Order); Schools and Libraries Universal Service Support Mechanism, CC Docket No. 02-6, Third Report and Order and Second Further Notice of Proposed Rulemaking, 18 FCC Rcd 26912, 26928, para. 40 (2003) (Schools and Libraries Third Report and Order); Schools and Libraries Universal Service Support Mechanism, CC Docket No. 02-6, Report and Order and Further Notice of Proposed Rulemaking, 25 FCC Rcd 6562 (2009) (2009 ESL Order); Schools and Libraries Universal Service Support Mechanism, A National Broadband Plan for Our Future, CC Docket No. 02-6, GN Docket No. 09- 51, Sixth Report and Order, 25 FCC Rcd 18762 (2010) (Sixth Report and Order). 2 The requests for waiver and review are listed in the appendix. We dismiss the appeal filed by Pleasants County School District because it had not received an adverse decision from USAC to appeal to the Commission. Therefore, its appeal was filed prematurely and is dismissed without prejudice. Another petitioner, Sweet Home Central School District, sought funding for internal connections components under the Internet access category. We agree with USAC that these eligible components should be moved to the internal connections category. Sweet Home Central School District, however, is not eligible to receive any funding for those requested services because its discount percentage was not high enough that funding year to receive funding for internal connections. See Request for Review of Sweet Home Central School District. In funding year 2006, USAC determined that funds were not sufficient to make commitments for priority 2 funding requests below the 86% discount level. See USAC website, Schools and Libraries News Brief, Jul. 6, 2007, http://www.usac.org/sl/tools/news- briefs/preview.aspx?id=98 (last visited Jan. 25, 2012). 3 Section 54.719(c) of the Commission’s rules provides that any person aggrieved by an action taken by a division of USAC may seek review from the Commission. 47 C.F.R. § 54.719(c). Federal Communications Commission DA 12-250 2 for E-rate funding.4 Applicants may seek E-rate support only for eligible telecommunications services or the other services and products that have been designated as eligible for E-rate support.5 Based on our review of the record, we affirm USAC’s decisions and deny these requests. We also find that petitioners have not demonstrated good cause justifying a waiver of the Commission’s rules. 2. ACCORDINGLY, IT IS ORDERED, pursuant to the authority contained in sections 1-4 and 254 of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended, 47 U.S.C. §§ 151-154 and 254, and 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), the requests for review or requests for waiver filed by the petitioners listed in the appendix ARE DENIED. FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION Gina M. Spade Deputy Chief Telecommunications Access Policy Division Wireline Competition Bureau 4 See supra note 1. See appendix. 5 See 47 U.S.C. § 254(h)(1)(B) and (h)(2)(A). See also USAC website, Eligible Services List, http://www.usac.org/sl/tools/eligible-services-list.aspx (last visited Jan. 19, 2012) (providing links to the Eligible Services Lists for funding years 2010-2012 and a link to archived Eligible Services Lists for funding years 1998- 2009). Federal Communications Commission DA 12-250 3 APPENDIX Petitioner Application Number(s) Funding Year Date Request for Review/Waiver Filed AllWays, Inc. (Prairie Hills School District 144) Markham, Illinois 623007 2008 Oct. 11, 2011 Bridgeport School District Bridgeport, Connecticut 610843 2008 Mar. 19, 2010 Detroit Public Library Detroit, Michigan 362377 2003 Nov. 23, 2005 Digital Networks Group, Inc (Panama-Buena Vista School District) Bakersfield, California 623923 2008 Aug. 29, 2011 Diversified Computer Solutions (Orangeburg County School District 3) Holly Hill, South Carolina 536972 2006 Jul. 15, 2011 Emek Hebrew Academy Sherman Oaks, California 378260 2003 Dec. 22, 2003 Greensville County School District Emporia, Virginia 733398 2010 May 4, 2011 Information Transport Solutions, Inc. (Sumter County School Dist.) Livingston, Alabama 522125; 561762 2006; 2007 Apr. 19, 2011; May 6, 2011 Lexington County School District 2 West Columbia, South Carolina 566958 2007 Nov. 27, 2007 Los Angeles Unified School District and Vector Resources, Inc. Los Angeles, California 337123 2003 Oct. 22, 2007 Mattawan Consolidated School District Mattawan, Michigan 582769 2007 Oct. 3, 2008 Oswego Unified School District Oswego, Kansas 506312 2006 Apr. 13, 2011 Pitt County Schools Greenville, North Carolina 405782; 405985; 405831 2004 Oct. 18, 2005 Pleasants County School District Saint Marys, West Virginia 635103 2008 Aug. 11, 2008 Ridgewood Village School District Ridgewood, New Jersey 692467; 684891 2009 Oct. 20, 2009 San Marcos Consolidated Independent School District San Marcos, Texas 532185; 655683; 632665 2006;2008; 2009 Sept. 22, 2009; May 5, 2010; Jul. 7, 2011 Spring Cove School District Roaring Spring, Pennsylvania 756389 2010 Aug. 9, 2010 Sprint Local Telephone Division (Oak Ridge Elementary School) Tallahassee, Florida 420917 2004 Mar. 10, 2006 Federal Communications Commission DA 12-250 4 Petitioner Application Number(s) Funding Year Date Request for Review/Waiver Filed Sprint Local Telephone Division (Pineview Elementary School) Tallahassee, Florida 421005 2004 Mar. 10, 2006 Sprint Local Telephone Division (Wesson Elementary School) Tallahassee, Florida 422448 2004 Mar. 10, 2006 Sweet Home Central School District Amherst, New York 492809 2006 Jun. 21, 2007 Tonasket School District 404 Tonasket, Washington 535250 2006 Jan. 11, 2011 Vertex Technologies, Inc. (Camden City Public Schools) Camden, New Jersey 424058 2004 Mar. 7, 2006 Vertex Technologies, Inc. (Lenape Regional High School District) Shamong, New Jersey 483421 2005 Jun. 19, 2007 Windber Area School District Windber, Pennsylvania 609497; 686107; 762951 2008; 2009; 2010 Nov. 26, 2008; Aug. 9, 2010