See Streamlined Process for Resolving Requests for Review of Decisions by the Universal Service Administrative

Company, CC Docket Nos. 96-45 and 02-6, WC Docket Nos. 02-60, 06-122, 08-71, 10-90, 11-42, and 14-58, Public

Notice, 29 FCC Rcd 11094 (WCB 2014). Sections 54.719(b) and 54.1718(a)(2) of the Commission’s rules provide

that any person aggrieved by an action taken by a division of USAC, after first seeking review at USAC, may seek

review from the Commission. Sections 54.719(c) and 54.1718(a)(3) of the Commission’s rules provide that parties

seeking waivers of the Commission’s rules shall seek review directly from the Commission. In this Public Notice,

we have reclassified as Requests for Waiver any appeals seeking review of a USAC decision that appropriately

should have requested a waiver of the Commission’s rules. Similarly, we have reclassified as Requests for Review

by Al Noor High School et al.; Schools and Libraries Universal Service Support Mechanism, CC Docket No. 02-6,

Order, 27 FCC Rcd 8223, 8224, para. 2 (WCB 2012) (dismissing as moot requests for review where USAC

approved the underlying funding request).

See, e.g., Requests for Review of Decisions of the Universal Service Administrator by Diversified Computer

Solutions, Inc.; Schools and Libraries Universal Service Support Mechanism, CC Docket No. 02-6, Order, 27 FCC

Rcd 5250, 5251, para. 3 (WCB 2012) (dismissing appeals as moot where invoicing records demonstrate that the

entity was fully compensated for the funding it requested and all submitted invoices were funded).

et. al, CC Docket No. 02-6, Order, 2022 WL 6351643, DA 22-1063, para. 8 (WCB Oct. 4, 2022) (Hurricane Ian

Order) (waiving section 54.504(d) of the Commission’s rules requirement that the substituted service or product

must have the same functionality as the service or product it is replacing, allowing the maximum flexibility to

substitute services based on local needs without being constrained by categories of service or service types).

However, we deny the Department’s request to reset its category 2 funding budget because we find that it has not

demonstrated that the Department has little to no funds remaining in its budget to replace any necessary internal

connections, and we also granted increased flexibility for the use of its funding year 2022 funding requests. See

Schools and Libraries Universal Service Support Mechanism, CC Docket No. 02-6 Order, 34 FCC Rcd 56, 60, para.

9 (WCB 2019) (California Wildfire Order) (denying request to increase category 2 funding budgets where applicant

petitions for reconsideration that fail to identify any material error, omission, or reason warranting reconsideration,

and rely on arguments that have been fully considered and rejected by the Bureau within the same proceeding).

While Elk Hill Farm School does not raise any new arguments on reconsideration, it continues to assert that it met

the statutory requirements or is deserving of a waiver of the red light rule because, though it did not pay its debt in

full within 30 days, it made “other satisfactory arrangements” under 47 CFR § 1.1910(b)(3). While Elk Hill Farm

might have been working with its school board to authorize payment for the delinquent funds within 30 days, this

does not constitute a satisfactory arrangement with USAC or the Commission, because the school did not inform

either one of these entities of these factual circumstances. We also reiterate that waiver of the red light rule is not

justified by asserting that the parties were late in paying the debt because they failed to receive the notifications.

See, e.g., Requests for Review of Decisions of the Universal Service Administrator by Net56, Inc., Wheeling School

Parties seeking review of USAC decisions must first file an appeal with USAC. See 47 CFR § 54.719(a). Because

the petitioners above filed their appeal with the Commission first, we now provide them 60 days from the release

date of this Public Notice to refile their appeal at USAC. Pursuant to the Little Falls Township Order, we also waive

the 60-day appeal filing deadline, 47 CFR § 54.720(a), to allow the appeal to be considered on the merits by USAC

without being considered late. See Little Falls Township Order, at para. 10. Appeals for funding year 2016 and

forward should be filed in the E-Rate Productivity Center portal, found here: EPC. Appeals from funding year 2015

and prior funding years should be filed by email to [email protected].

We remand these applications to USAC and direct USAC to complete its review of the applications and issue a

funding decision based on a complete review and analysis, no later than 90 calendar days from the release date of

We find that Carrizo Springs Consolidated Independent School District demonstrated that it had an agreement with

its service provider in place that met the Commission’s rules and procedures at the time their FCC Forms 471 were

submitted. See, e.g., Request for Waiver of the Decision of the Universal Service Administrator by Barberton City

School District et al.; School and Libraries Universal Service Support Mechanism, 23 FCC Rcd 15526, 15528, para.

5 (WCB 2008) (granting appeals when petitioners demonstrated that they had agreements in place that met the

Commission’s rules and procedures at the time their FCC Forms 471 were submitted); see also Modernizing the E-

rate Program for Schools and Libraries, WC Docket No. 13-184, Order and Further Notice of Proposed

Rulemaking, 29 FCC Rcd 8870, 8950-51, para. 203 (2014) (easing the signed contract requirement to allow legally

binding agreements to be in place, instead of a signed contract); 47 CFR § 54.504(a). We therefore authorize USAC

to change the petitioner’s category of service from month-to-month to contractual. See, e.g., Requests for Waiver

Consistent with precedent, we also find good cause exists to waive section 54.720(a) or (b) of the Commission's

See Requests for Waiver and Review of Decisions of the Universal Service Administrator by Agri-Business Child

the FCC Form 471 application filing deadline for applicants impacted by the coronavirus (COVID-19) pandemic

See, e.g., Ann Arbor Public Schools Order, 25 FCC Rcd at 17319-20, nn.5, 10, 20 (granting waivers where the

applicant omitted a service that was included on a source list or mischaracterized a one-time cost as a recurring cost

or entered the wrong category of service on its FCC Form 471).

Alsip School District 126 unexpectedly received an increase in its E-Rate-funded bandwidth because of a

miscommunication with its service provider. We find that this is permissible because the increase in bandwidth did

not increase the amount of E-Rate funding committed and the error was not the fault of the applicant.

See, e.g., Application for Review of the Decision of the Universal Service Administrator by Aberdeen School

See Requests for Review and/or Waiver of Decisions of the Universal Service Administrator by Accomack County

provider identification number or wrong customer billed date on the BEAR or SPI form, entered the wrong

Chaparral Schools’ timely-filed invoices for its special construction project were rejected because the contract

expiration date was before the shipping date. The school system tried twice to correct the issue by extending the

contract with FCC Forms 500, but both times it inadvertently listed the wrong date. We grant this appeal and

instruct USAC to revise the parties’ contract expiration date to June 30, 2022 and service start date to June 1, 2022

to allow reimbursement for the project. See, e.g., Ann Arbor Public Schools Order, 25 FCC Rcd at 17320 n.9

(permitting applicant to correct the expiration date of a contract).

See Modernizing the E-rate Program for Schools and Libraries, WC Docket No. 13-184, Order and Further

Notice of Proposed Rulemaking, 29 FCC Rcd 8870, 8921-22, paras. 132-33 (2014) (allowing applicants to seek

See, e.g., Request for Review/Waiver of the Decision of the Universal Service Administrator by Accelerated

Charter et al.; Schools and Libraries Universal Service Support Mechanism, CC Docket No. 02-6, Order, 29 FCC

Rcd 13652, 13652-3, para. 2 (WCB 2014) (granting late-filed extensions of the deadline for service implementation

USAC denied funding after the service provider submitted an invoice containing a billing statement that was dated

after the last date for installation for non-recurring services (Sept. 30, 2021). In its appeal, MTM Technologies, Inc.

explained that it provided services to the school before September 30, 2021, the last date for the installation of

services, even though the billing statement was sent later. While we grant this appeal, on remand USAC should

verify that the last date of non-recurring services occurred before September 30, 2021. In this instance, we waive

sections any procedural deadlines, including the invoice filing deadline, that might be necessary to effectuate our

submitted their appeals or waiver requests only a few days late or within a reasonable period of time after receiving

actual notice of USAC’s adverse decision).

We make no finding on the underlying issues in these appeals and remand these applications back to USAC to make

a determination on the merits. See also supra note 8.

We grant Burke County Board of Education’s appeal with respect to the issue of discount calculations. See, e.g.,

Academia Claret Order, 21 FCC Rcd at 10708, para. 12 (remanding applications for further processing when, upon

eligible for E-rate support). We also find that the applicant made a calculation error and over-invoiced for E-Rate

services in the amount of $6,030.03.

See, e.g., Requests for Waiver and Review of the Decisions of the Universal Service Administrator by Academy of

Math and Science, Schools and Libraries Universal Service Support Mechanism, CC Docket No. 02-6, Order, 25

FCC Rcd 9256, 9261-62, para. 13 (2010) (denying waivers of the FCC Form 471 application filing deadline where

petitioners failed to present special circumstances justifying a waiver of our rules).