**Before the**

**Federal Communications Commission**

**Washington, DC 20554**

In the Matter of )

)

Request for Review of the )

Decision of the )

Universal Service Administrator by )

)

Westport Edison Academy ) File No. SLD-254889

Kansas City, Missouri )

)

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 25, 2002 Released: January 28, 2002**

By the Accounting Policy Division, Common Carrier Bureau:

1.  The Accounting Policy Division has under consideration a Request for
    Review filed by Westport Edison Academy (Westport Edison), Kansas
    City, Missouri.[^1] Westport Edison seeks review of a decision
    issued by the Schools and Libraries Division (SLD) of the Universal
    Service Administrative Company (Administrator) to reject Westport
    Edison's appeal on the grounds that it was untimely filed.[^2] For
    the reasons set forth below, we deny Westport Edison's Request for
    Review.

2.  SLD issued a Funding Commitment Decision Letter on July 23, 2001,
    denying Westport Edison's request for discounted services under the
    schools and libraries universal service support mechanism.[^3]
    Specifically, SLD denied Westport Edison's request for discounts for
    Internet access and telecommunications services, Funding Request
    Numbers (FRNs) 633360, 633524, 633598, and 633686.[^4] On October
    26, 2001, Westport Edison filed an appeal of SLD's decision to deny
    FRNs 633360, 633524, 633598, and 633686.[^5] On November 9, 2001,
    SLD issued an Administrator\'s Decision on Appeal indicating that it
    would not consider Westport Edison's appeal because it was received
    more than 30 days after the Funding Commitment Decision Letter was
    issued.[^6] Westport Edison subsequently filed the instant Request
    for Review with the Commission.

3.  Under section 54.720(b) of the Commission's rules, an appeal must be
    filed with the Commission or SLD within 30 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] The 30-day deadline contained in section 54.720(b) of
    the Commission's rules applies to all requests for review filed by a
    party affected by a decision issued by the Administrator.[^9]
    Because Westport Edison failed to file an appeal of the July 23,
    2001 Funding Commitment Decision Letter within the requisite 30-day
    appeal period, we affirm SLD's decision to dismiss Westport Edison's
    appeal to SLD as untimely and deny the instant Request for Review.

4.  To the extent that Westport Edison is requesting that we waive the
    30-day deadline established in section 54.720(b) of the
    Commission\'s rules, we deny that request.[^10] The Commission may
    waive any provision of its rules, but a request for waiver must be
    supported by a showing of good cause.[^11] Westport Edison has not
    shown good cause for the untimely filing of its initial appeal.
    Westport Edison explains that it had to gather information to
    support its appeal and that process took a long while.[^12] Westport
    Edison asserts that, as a result, it did not file an appeal of the
    July 23, 2001 Funding Commitment Decision Letter until after the
    30-day appeal period had passed.

5.  We conclude that Westport Edison 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.[^13] 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. The July 23, 2001 Funding Commitment Decision Letter clearly
    states that \"your appeal must be ... RECEIVED BY THE SCHOOLS AND
    LIBRARIES DIVISION (SLD) ... WITHIN 30 DAYS OF THE ... DATE ON \[THE
    FUNDING COMMITMENT DECISION LETTER\].\"[^14]

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 responsibility of adhering strictly to its filing
    deadlines.[^15] 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. Here, Westport Edison 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 Request for
    Review filed by Westport Edison Academy, Kansas City, Missouri on
    January 3, 2002, and the request to waive the 30-day time limit in
    which to file an appeal ARE DENIED.

    FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION

Mark G. Seifert

Deputy Chief, Accounting Policy Division

Common Carrier Bureau

[^1]: Letter from Tod King, Westport Edison Academy, to Federal
    Communications Commission, filed January 3, 2002 (Request for
    Review).

[^2]: *Id*.

[^3]: Letter from Schools and Libraries Division, Universal Service
    Administrative Company, to Tod King, Westport Edison Academy, dated
    July 23, 2001 (Funding Commitment Decision Letter).

[^4]: *Id*.

[^5]: Letter from Tod King, Westport Edison Academy, to Schools and
    Libraries Division, Universal Service Administrative Company, filed
    October 26, 2001 (Request for Administrator Review).

[^6]: Letter from Schools and Libraries Division, Universal Service
    Administrative Company, to Tod King, Westport Edison Academy, dated
    November 9, 2001 (Administrator\'s Decision on Appeal).

[^7]: 47 C.F.R. § 54.720(b).

[^8]: 47 C.F.R. § 1.7.

[^9]: We note that, due to recent disruptions in the reliability of the
    mail service, the 30-day appeal period has been extended by an
    additional 30 days for requests seeking review of decisions issued
    on or after August 13, 2001. *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, FCC 01-376
    (rel. Dec. 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. Dec. 28, 2001) and (Com. Car. Bur. rel. Jan. 4,
    2002). Because the July 23, 2001 Funding Commitment Decision Letter
    was issued before August 13, 2001, the extended appeal period does
    not apply to Westport Edison.

[^10]: *See* 47 C.F.R. § 54.720(b).

[^11]: *See* 47 C.F.R. § 1.3.

[^12]: Request for Review.

[^13]: *Northeast Cellular Telephone Co. v. FCC*, 897 F.2d 1164, 1166
    (D.C. Cir. 1990).

[^14]: Funding Commitment Decision Letter at 2.

[^15]: *See* *Request for Review by Anderson School Staatsburg,
    Federal-State Joint Board on Universal Service, Changes to the Board
    of Directors of the National Exchange Carrier Association*, File No.
    SLD-133664, CC Docket Nos. 96-45 and 97-21, Order, 15 FCC Rcd 25610
    (Comm. Car. Bur. rel. Nov. 24, 2000), para. 8 ("In light of the
    thousands of applications that SLD reviews and processes each
    funding year, it is administratively necessary to place on the
    applicant the responsibility of understanding all relevant program
    rules and procedures.").