**Before the**

**Federal Communications Commission**

**Washington, DC 20554**

In the Matter of )

)

Petition for Reconsideration of the )

Request for Review of the )

Decision of the )

Universal Service Administrator by )

)

Children's Village Academy ) File No. SLD-204351

Kinston, North Carolina )

)

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 ON RECONSIDERATION**

**Adopted: November 19, 2001 Released: November 20, 2001**

By the Accounting Policy Division, Common Carrier Bureau:

1.  The Accounting Policy Division (Division) has under consideration a
    Petition for Reconsideration filed by Children's Village Academy
    (CVA), Kinston, North Carolina.[^1] CVA seeks reconsideration of our
    denial of its request for review of the decision of the Schools and
    Libraries Division (SLD) of the Universal Service Administrative
    Company (Administrator).[^2] For the reasons set forth below, the
    petition is dismissed.

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 require that the applicant
    make a bona fide request for services by filing with the
    Administrator an FCC Form 470,[^4] which is posted to the
    Administrator's website for all potential competing service
    providers to review.[^5] After the FCC Form 470 is posted, the
    applicant must wait at least 28 days before entering an agreement
    for services and submitting an FCC Form 471, which requests support
    for eligible services.[^6] SLD reviews the FCC Forms 471 that it
    receives and issues funding commitment decisions in accordance with
    the Commission's rules.[^7]

3.  On the FCC Form 470, applicants must attest that any support they
    receive is conditional upon their "securing access to all of the
    resources, including computers, training, software, maintenance, and
    electrical connections necessary to use the services purchased
    effectively."[^8] Similarly, on the FCC Form 471, applicants must
    certify that they have secured access "to all of the resources,
    including computers, training, software, maintenance, and electrical
    connections necessary to make effective use of the services
    purchased as well as to pay the discounted charges for eligible
    services."[^9] In the Commission's May 8, 1997 *Universal Service
    Order,* the Commission stated that applicants for schools and
    libraries discounts would be required to certify in their requests
    for services that "all of the necessary funding in the current
    funding year has been budgeted and will have been approved to pay
    for the 'non-discount' portion of requested connections and services
    as well as any necessary hardware, software, and to undertake the
    necessary staff training required in time to use the services
    effectively."[^10] The necessary resources certification requires
    applicants to examine their technology needs and available
    technological and budgetary resources before making funding
    requests, in order to ensure that applicants will be able to make
    effective use of any discounted services they receive. The review of
    these certifications by SLD to determine whether applicants have the
    necessary resources to make effective use of the services that they
    request is an integral part of SLD's responsibility for reviewing
    funding applications to ensure compliance with statutory
    requirements and Commission rules.[^11] Also, SLD's review of
    applicants' necessary resources certifications is an important means
    to curb waste, fraud, and abuse in the schools and libraries
    universal service support mechanism.[^12]

4.  In our previous decision, we denied CVA's request for review and
    upheld SLD's determination that CVA had failed to demonstrate to SLD
    during its application review that CVA had all the resources
    necessary to make effective use of its requested services.[^13] In
    particular, we noted that CVA had failed to respond to several of
    SLD's requests for information in this regard.[^14]

5.  In its pending Petition for Reconsideration, CVA does not dispute
    that it failed to demonstrate that it had all necessary
    resources.[^15] CVA asserts that this failure was due to the
    irresponsibility of the employee who was assigned to handle CVA's
    application and that this employee has since been discharged.[^16]
    CVA therefore submits further information to demonstrate that it has
    all necessary resources and asks for consideration of this new
    evidence.[^17]

6.  Section 1.106 of the Commission\'s rules provides that a petition
    for reconsideration of an order denying an application for review
    will be entertained only if: 1) the petition relies on facts which
    have occurred or circumstances which have changed since the last
    opportunity to present such matters; or 2) the petition relies on
    facts unknown to the petitioner until after the last opportunities
    to present such matters could not, through ordinary diligence, have
    been learned prior to that opportunity.[^18] Although CVA does
    present new evidence, including school budgets, invoices, and
    telephone bills, CVA does not argue that this is evidence that was
    unknown to it when it filed its Request for Review.[^19] Rather, CVA
    asserts that it was not aware that the information had been
    requested because of the errors of its employee.[^20] However, a
    school is responsible for the errors of its employees in handling
    its application.[^21] We find that CVA's reconsideration petition
    fails to demonstrate that either of the two specified circumstances
    is present here. As a result, CVA's Petition for Reconsideration is
    subject to dismissal as repetitious pursuant to Section
    1.106(b)(3).[^22]

7.  ACCORDINGLY, IT IS ORDERED, pursuant to section 1.106(j) of the
    Commission\'s rules, 47 C.F.R. § 1.106(j), that the Petition for
    Reconsideration filed by Children's Village Academy, Kinston, North
    Carolina, on April 30, 2001 IS DISMISSED.

    FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION

    Mark G. Seifert

    Deputy Chief, Accounting Policy Division

    Common Carrier Bureau

[^1]: Letter from Lavinia Greene-Hall, Children's Village Academy, to
    Federal Communications Commission, filed April 30, 2001 (Petition
    for Reconsideration).

[^2]: *Request for Review by Children's Village Academy, Federal-State
    Joint Board on Universal Service, Changes to the Board of Directors
    of the National Exchange Carrier Association, Inc.*, File No.
    SLD-204351, CC Dockets No. 96-45 and 97-21, Order, DA 01-794 (Com.
    Car. Bur. rel. March 30, 2001) (*Request for Review by Children's
    Village Academy*). Parties may seek reconsideration from a final
    action of the Commission or its designated authority pursuant to 47
    C.F.R. § 1.106.

[^3]: 47 C.F.R. §§ 54.502, 54.503.

[^4]: Schools and Libraries Universal Service, Description of Services
    Requested and Certification Form, OMB 3060-0806 (September 1999)
    (FCC Form 470).

[^5]: 47 C.F.R. § 54.504(b); *Federal-State Joint Board on Universal
    Service*, CC Docket No. 96-45, Report and Order, 12 FCC Rcd 8776,
    9078, para. 575 (1997) (*Universal Service Order*), as corrected by
    *Federal‑State Joint Board on Universal Service*, CC Docket No.
    96‑45, Errata, FCC 97‑157 (rel. June 4, 1997), *affirmed in part*,
    *Texas Office of Public Utility Counsel v. FCC*, 183 F.3d 393 (5th
    Cir. 1999) (affirming *Universal Service First Report and Order* in
    part and reversing and remanding on unrelated grounds), *cert.
    denied, Celpage, Inc. v. FCC*, 120 S. Ct. 2212 (May 30, 2000),
    *cert. denied,* *AT&T Corp. v. Cincinnati Bell Tel. Co*., 120 S. Ct.
    2237 (June 5, 2000*), cert. dismissed,* *GTE Service Corp. v. FCC*,
    121 S. Ct. 423 (November 2, 2000).

[^6]: 47 C.F.R. §§ 54.504(b), (c); Schools and Libraries Universal
    Service, Services Ordered and Certification Form, OMB 3060-0806
    (September 1999) (FCC Form 471).

[^7]: *Request for Review by Metropolitan School District of Pike
    Township*, *Federal-State Joint Board on Universal Service, Changes
    to the Board of Directors of the National Exchange Carrier
    Association, Inc.*, File No. SLD-120821, CC Dockets No. 96-45 and
    97-21, Order, 15 FCC Rcd 13891, para. 2 (Com. Car. Bur. 2000).

[^8]: *See* Instructions for Completing the Schools and Libraries
    Universal Service, Description of Services Requested and
    Certification Form, OMB 3060-0806 (FCC Form 470) (September 1999)
    (FCC Form 470 Instructions), at Block 5, Item 23; *see also* SLD
    website, \<[http://www.sl.universalservice.org]{.underline}\>.

[^9]: *See* Instructions for Completing the Schools and Libraries
    Universal Service, Services Ordered and Certification, OMB 3060-0806
    (FCC Form 471) (September 1999) (FCC Form 471 Instructions), at
    Block 6, Item 25; *see also* SLD website,
    \<[http://www.sl.universalservice.org]{.underline}\>.

[^10]: *Universal Service Order*, 12 FCC Rcd at 9079, para. 577. *See
    also* 47 C.F.R. § 54.504(b)(1) (requiring applicants to provide
    information about equipment, services, training, and other
    facilities in place to make use of the services requested) *and* 47
    C.F.R. § 54.504(b)(2) (requiring that each applicant's FCC Form 470
    certify that "all of the necessary funding in the current funding
    year has been budgeted and approved to pay for the 'non-discount'
    portion of requested connections and services as well as any
    necessary hardware or software, and to undertake the necessary staff
    training required to use the services effectively. . . . "). These
    requirements are referred to collectively hereinafter as the
    "necessary resources certifications."

[^11]: *Request for Review of the Decision of the Universal Service
    Administrator by United Talmudical Academy*, CC Docket Nos. 96-45
    and 97-21, Order, 15 FCC Rcd 423, 430, para. 14 (2000).

[^12]: *See* 47 C.F.R. § 54.702(h) (requiring that the Administrator's
    annual report to the Commission detail the Administrator's
    "administrative action intended to prevent waste, fraud, and
    abuse").

[^13]: *Request for Review by Children's Village Academy*, paras. 6-8.

[^14]: *Id.*, paras. 7-8.

[^15]: Petition for Reconsideration, at 1.

[^16]: *Id.*

[^17]: *Id.* at 2.

[^18]: *See* 47 C.F.R. § 1.106(b)(2).

[^19]: Petition for Reconsideration, Attachments.

[^20]: Petition for Reconsideration, at 1.

[^21]: *See* *Request for Review by Massachusetts Department of
    Education, Federal-State Joint Board on Universal Service, Changes
    to the Board of Directors of the National Exchange Carrier
    Association, Inc.*, File No. SLD-149217, CC Dockets No. 96-45 and
    97-21, Order, 16 FCC Rcd 7775, para. 10 (Com. Car. Bur. 2001).

[^22]: *See* 47 C.F.R. § 1.106(b)(3).