Before the

**Federal Communications Commission**

In the matter of )

)

Request for Review by )

)

Shawano-Gresham School District ) File No. SLD-292913

Shawano, Wisconsin )

)

Schools and Libraries Universal Service ) CC Docket No. 02-6

Support Mechanism )

**ORDER**

**Adopted: February 5, 2004 Released: February 6, 2004**

By the: Telecommunications Access Policy Division, Wireline Competition
Bureau:

### 

### 1. The Telecommunications Access Policy Division has before it a request by the Shawano-Gresham School District (Shawano-Gresham), Shawano, Wisconsin, to review a decision by the Schools and Libraries Division (SLD) of the Universal Service Administrative Company (USAC, or Administrator) to deny a funding request made by Shawano-Gresham pursuant to the universal service schools and libraries support mechanism (E-rate).[^1] For the reasons set forth below, we grant the request.

2\. As part of Shawano-Gresham's Funding Year 2002 FCC Form 471
application, Shawano-Gresham submitted Funding Request Number (FRN)
756101 for Internet access, one of the three categories of eligible
services under the E-rate program.[^2] In support of the FRN,
Shawano-Gresham attached an invoice for \$1142 from the Shawano
Municipal Utilities (SMU Invoice No. 1). The invoice stated the charges
were for "Electric Charges," and under "Type of Service" stated "Elec."
Elsewhere on the invoice, under "Name and Service Address," the invoice
stated "Shawano Gresham School" and the words "Fiber Optics."

3\. SLD denied the FRN on the grounds that "electric charges" are an
ineligible service and here they constituted more than the 30% of the
charges in the FRN.[^3] Shawano-Gresham appealed the initial decision to
SLD, stating that SMU Invoice No. 1 was really for "fiber optic"
transmission, an eligible service, as evidenced by the words on SMU
Invoice No. 1. Shawano-Gresham also attached a second invoice from
Shawano Municipal Utilities (SMU Invoice No. 2), an earlier invoice for
\$1142, that clearly itemizes the charge as fiber optic transmission
services.[^4] SLD denied Shawano-Gresham's appeal on the grounds that
"\[d\]uring the appeals process we are unable to accept new information
except under limited circumstances."[^5] SLD also stated: "\[t\]his
funding request was correctly denied based on the original support
documentation you have included with the Form 471." Shawano-Gresham then
filed the instant Request for Review.

5\. We find that SLD should have considered the new information
submitted by Shawano-Gresham on appeal. We also find that the new
information supports Shawano-Gresham's claim that the FRN was for an
eligible service. Pursuant to USAC appeal guidelines, new information
may not be admitted on appeal to contradict earlier information, but it
can be admitted to clarify an ambiguity in earlier information.[^6]
Here, the first invoice, SMU Invoice No. 1, was ambiguous on its face
because it contained the words "Fiber Optics," which were at odds with
the service line statement of "Electric Charges." The new information
supports Shawano-Gresham's claim that the instant invoice is, in fact,
for fiber optics transmission, an eligible service.

6\. SMU Invoice No. 2 also is admissible pursuant to SLD's own Appeal
Guidelines, which state that when "...funding is denied based on an
incorrect assumption, the SLD will grant appeal when the appellant
points out the incorrect assumption and provides documentation about the
issue that is consistent with information originally provided but also
successfully resolves the ambiguity in the original file."[^7] Here,
some of the language on the face of SMU Invoice No. 1 led SLD to the
erroneous assumption that Shawano-Gresham had submitted an invoice for
electrical utility charges. The new information offered on appeal, in
SMU Invoice No. 2, provided SLD the opportunity to correct this
assumption.

8\. 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 by
Shawano-Gresham School District, Shawano, Wisconsin, on October 3, 2002,
IS GRANTED, and the application is REMANDED to SLD for further
consideration consistent with this opinion.

FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION

Narda M. Jones

Deputy Chief, Telecommunications Access Policy Division

Wireline Competition Bureau

[^1]: Letter from Steve Miller, Shawano-Gresham School District, to the
    Federal Communications Commission, filed October 30, 2002 (Request
    for Review); 47 C.F.R. § 54.719(c).

[^2]: For the list of eligible services, *see* SLD Website at
    <http://www.sl.universalservice.org/reference/eligible.asp>. *See*
    *also* *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, 9207 (2003) (*Second Report
    and Order*).

[^3]: Letter from the Schools and Libraries Division, Universal Service
    Administrative Company, to Steve Miller, Shawano-Gresham School
    District, May 7, 2002.

[^4]: Letter from Steve Miller, Shawano-Gresham School District, to
    Schools and Libraries Division, Universal Service Administrative
    Company, dated May 13, 2002. *See Second Report and Order*, para.
    38.

[^5]: Letter from the Schools and Libraries Division, Universal Service
    Administrative Company, to Steve Miller, Shawano-Gresham School
    District, dated October 17, 2002.

[^6]: *Request for Review by Pope Branch Elementary School,
    Federal-State Joint Board on Universal Service, Changes to the Board
    of Directors of the National Exchange Carrier Association,* File No.
    SLD-200168, CC Docket Nos. 95-46 and 97-21, Order, 16 FCC Rcd 20205,
    20207 (Com. Car. Bur. 2001).

[^7]: *See* SLD website Appeal Guidelines at
    <http://www.sl.universalservice.org/reference/AppealsSLDGuidelines.asp>;
    *see also* *Request for Review by Carrollton-Farmers Branch
    Independent School District, Federal-State Joint Board on Universal
    Service, Changes to the Board of Directors of the National Exchange
    Carrier Association,* File No. SLD 229384, CC Docket Nos. 95-46 and
    97-21, Order, 17 FCC Rcd 16067, 16070 (Wireline Comp. Bur. 2002).