**Before the**

**Federal Communications Commission**

**Washington, DC 20554**

In the Matter of )

)

Request for Review of the )

Decision of the )

Universal Service Administrator by )

)

Congregation Bnos Yaakov ) File No. SLD- 147655

Lakewood, New Jersey )

)

Federal-State Joint Board on ) CC Docket No. 96-45

Universal Service )

)

Changes to the Board of Directors of the ) CC Docket No. 97-21

National Exchange Carrier Association, Inc. )

**order**

**Adopted: September 12, 2001 Released: September 13, 2001**

By the Accounting Policy Division, Common Carrier Bureau:

1.  This Order dismisses the Request for Review of the Congregation Bnos
    Yaakov (Bnos Yaakov), Lakewood, New Jersey, seeking review of a
    decision issued by the Universal Service Administrative Company's
    Schools and Libraries Division on April 18, 2000.[^1] The Commission
    received Bnos Yaakov's Request for Review on September 1, 2000.[^2]
    Under section 54.720 of the Commission's rules, any such appeal must
    be filed within 30 days of the issuance of the decision as to which
    review is sought.[^3] Documents are considered to be filed with the
    Commission only upon receipt.[^4] Because the instant Request for
    Review was not filed within the specified 30-day period, it will be
    dismissed without further consideration.

2.  A review of the record indicates that SLD issued two letters to Bnos
    Yaakov on April 18, 2000 and that both letters were mailed to Bnos
    Yaakov\'s current address. The first letter indicated that SLD had
    rejected Bnos Yaakov\'s application because it had \"insufficient
    support resources.\"[^5] Bnos Yaakov admits that it received this
    letter.[^6] The other letter provided an expanded description of
    Bnos Yaakov\'s failure to demonstrate sufficient resources in the
    areas of hardware, professional development, software, and
    retrofitting. [^7] The more detailed letter also alerted Bnos Yaakov
    to the timetable and process for appealing the SLD decision.[^8]

3.  Bnos Yaakov asserts that it did not receive the more detailed April
    18, 2000 decision letter, and became aware of the decision only
    after having contacted SLD on August 8, 2000 and receiving a faxed
    copy.[^9] We have held that merely stating that a letter was not
    received at the address provided to SLD and to which prior
    correspondence had been successfully mailed is insufficient grounds
    for reconsideration.[^10] Because the record demonstrates that Bnos
    Yaakov received mail from SLD at the same address listed in the more
    detailed letter, we find no reason to deviate from this standard.

4.  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 June 28, 2000, by Congregation Bnos Yaakov, Lakewood, New
    Jersey, IS DISMISSED.

FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION

Mark G. Seifert

Deputy Chief, Accounting Policy Division

Common Carrier Bureau

[^1]: *See* Letter from the Schools and Libraries Division, Universal
    Service Administrative Co., to Rabbi Yosef Herskovits, Congregation
    Bnos Yaakov, dated April 18, 2000.

[^2]: Letter from Rabbi Yosef Herskovits, to Federal Communications
    Commission, filed September 1, 2000 (Request for Review).

[^3]: 47 C.F.R. § 54.720. On September 1, 2000, Congregation Bnos Yaakov
    filed an appeal with the School and Libraries Division, Universal
    Service Administrative Co., which was also untimely filed.

[^4]: 47 C.F.R. § 1.7.

[^5]: *See* Letter from the Schools and Libraries Division, Universal
    Service Administrative Co., to Rabbi Yosef Herskovits, Congregation
    Bnos Yaakov, dated April 18, 2000.

[^6]: Request for Review.

[^7]: *See* Letter from the Schools and Libraries Division, Universal
    Service Administrative Co., to Rabbi Yosef Herskovits, Congregation
    Bnos Yaakov, dated April 18, 2000.

[^8]: *Id*.

[^9]: Request for Review.

[^10]: *See* *Request for Review by Whitehall City School District*,
    Docket Nos. 96-45 and 97-21, DA 00-1892 (rel. August 18, 2000);
    *Juan Galiano*, Memorandum Opinion and Order, 5 FCC Rcd 6442, 6443
    (1990) ("\[I\]f the Commission were to entertain and accept
    unsupported arguments that letters mailed in Commission proceedings
    were not delivered... procedural havoc and abuse would result.").