**Before the**

**Federal Communications Commission**

**Washington, DC 20554**

In the Matter of )

)

Requests for Review and Waiver of the )

Decisions of the )

Universal Service Administrator by )

)

St. Patrick School ) File No. SLD-313964

Jersey City, 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: January 8, 2003 Released: January 9, 2003**

By the Telecommunications Access Policy Division, Wireline Competition
Bureau:

1.  The Telecommunications Access Policy Division has under
    consideration a Request for Review filed by St. Patrick School,
    Jersey City, New Jersey.[^1] St. Patrick School seeks review of a
    decision issued by the Schools and Libraries Division (SLD) of the
    Universal Service Administrative Company (Administrator), rejecting
    St. Patrick School's appeal on the grounds that it was untimely
    filed.[^2] For the reasons set forth below, we affirm SLD's
    rejection and deny St. Patrick School\'s Request for Review.

2.  SLD issued a Funding Commitment Decision Letter on May 7, 2002,
    denying St. Patrick School's request for discounted services under
    the schools and libraries universal service support mechanism.[^3]
    Specifically, SLD denied St. Patrick School's request for discounts
    for internal connections, Funding Request Number (FRN) 822199.[^4]
    On August 26, 2002, St. Patrick School filed an appeal of SLD's
    decision.[^5] On August 27, 2002, SLD issued an Administrator\'s
    Decision on Appeal indicating that it would not consider St. Patrick
    School's appeal because it was received more than 60 days after the
    May 7, 2002 Funding Commitment Decision Letter was issued.[^6] St.
    Patrick School subsequently filed the instant Request for Review
    with the Commission.

3.  For requests seeking review of decisions issued on or after August
    13, 2001 under section 54.720(b) of the Commission's rules, any such
    appeal must be filed with the Commission or SLD within 60 days of
    the issuance of the decision that the party seeks to have
    reviewed.[^7] Documents are considered to be filed with the
    Commission or SLD only upon receipt.[^8] Because the St. Patrick
    School's Request for Administrator Review was not filed within the
    requisite 60-day period, we affirm the Administrator's Decision on
    Appeal and deny the instant Request for Review.

4.  To the extent that St. Patrick School is requesting that we waive
    the 60-day deadline established in section 54.720(b) of the
    Commission\'s rules for its underlying appeal of SLD\'s denial of
    its funding request, we deny that request as well.[^9] The
    Commission may waive any provision of its rules, but a request for
    waiver must be supported by a showing of good cause.[^10] St.
    Patrick School has not shown good cause for the untimely filing of
    its appeal with SLD. St. Patrick School states that the technology
    coordinator at St. Patrick School was forced to take an emergency
    medical leave of absence and as a result, St. Patrick School was
    prevented from filing the appeal in a timely fashion.[^11]

5.  We conclude that St. Patrick School has not demonstrated a
    sufficient basis for waiving the Commission's rules. Waiver is
    appropriate if special circumstances warrant a deviation from the
    general rule, and such deviation would better serve the public
    interest than strict adherence to the general rule.[^12] In
    requesting funds from the schools and libraries universal service
    support mechanism, the applicant has certain responsibilities. The
    applicant bears the burden of submitting its appeal to SLD within
    the established deadline if the applicant wishes its appeal to be
    considered on the merits.

6.  The particular facts of this case do not rise to the level of
    special circumstances required for a deviation from the general
    rule. In light of the thousands of applications that SLD reviews and
    processes each year, it is administratively necessary to place on
    the applicant the burden of adhering strictly to its filing
    deadlines. In order for the program to work efficiently, the
    applicant must assume responsibility for timely submission of its
    appeal to SLD if it wishes its appeal to be considered on the
    merits. An applicant must take responsibility for the action or
    inaction of those employees, consultants and other representatives
    to whom it gives responsibility for submitting timely appeals of SLD
    funding decisions on its behalf, even when such persons are away
    from the office on medical leave or otherwise incapacitated.[^13]
    Here, St. Patrick School fails to present good cause as to why it
    could not timely file its appeal to SLD. We therefore find no basis
    for waiving the appeal filing deadline.

7.  ACCORDINGLY, IT IS ORDERED, pursuant to authority delegated under
    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), that the Requests for
    Review filed on September 26, 2002, by St. Patrick School, Jersey
    City, New Jersey, as well as the request to waive the deadline for
    filing its appeal with SLD ARE DENIED.

    FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION

    Mark G. Seifert

Deputy Chief, Telecommunications Access Policy Division

Wireline Competition Bureau

[^1]: Letter from Scott DeCarolis, St. Patrick School, to Federal
    Communications Commission, filed September 26, 2002 (Request for
    Review).

[^2]: *See* Request for Review. Section 54.719(c) of the Commission\'s
    rules provides that any person aggrieved by an action taken by a
    division of the Administrator may seek review from the Commission.
    47 C.F.R § 54.719(c).

[^3]: Letter from Schools and Libraries Division, Universal Service
    Administrative Company, to Maeve McDermott, St. Patrick School,
    dated May 7, 2002 (Funding Commitment Decision Letter).

[^4]: *Id*.

[^5]: Letter from Howard Gerber, St. Patrick School, to Schools and
    Libraries Division, Universal Service Administrative Company, filed
    August 26, 2002 (Request for Administrator Review).

[^6]: Letter from Schools and Libraries Division, Universal Service
    Administrative Company, to Howard Gerber, St. Patrick School, dated
    August 27, 2002 (Administrator\'s Decision on Appeal).

[^7]: 47 C.F.R. § 54.720(b). *See Implementation of Interim Filing
    Procedures for Filings of Requests for Review, Federal-State Joint
    Board on Universal Service*, CC Docket No. 96-45, Order, 17 FCC Rcd
    339 (Com. Car. Bur. rel. December 26, 2001), as corrected by
    *Implementation of Interim Filing Procedures for Filings of Requests
    for Review, Federal-State Joint Board on Universal Service*, CC
    Docket No. 96-45, Errata (Com. Car. Bur. rel. December 28, 2001 and
    January 4, 2002).

[^8]: 47 C.F.R. § 1.7.

[^9]: *See* 47 C.F.R. § 54.720(b).

[^10]: *See* 47 C.F.R. § 1.3.

[^11]: Request for Waiver at 1.

[^12]: *Northeast Cellular Telephone Co. v. FCC*, 897 F.2d 1164, 1166
    (D.C. Cir. 1990).

[^13]: *See, e.g., Request for Review by New Orleans Public Schools, New
    Orleans, Louisiana, Federal-State Joint Board on Universal Service,
    Changes to the Board of Directors of the National Exchange Carrier
    Association, Inc.*, File Nos. SLD-201456, 201463, 201409, 201449,
    and 201493, CC Docket Nos. 96-45 and 97-21, Order, 16 FCC Rcd 16653
    (Com. Car. Bur. rel. September 18, 2001), para. 17 (unavailability
    of responsible staff person due to sick leave is not a basis for
    granting an appeal).