Federal Communications Commission FCC 07-36
Before the
Federal Communications Commission
Washington, D.C. 20554
In the Matter of
Requests for Review of the Decision of the 
Universal Service Administrator by
Alpaugh Unified School District, 
Alpaugh, CA, et al.
Schools and Libraries Universal Service Support 
Mechanism
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
File Nos. SLD-523576, et al.
CC Docket No. 02-6
ORDER
Adopted:  March 22, 2007  Released:  March 28, 2007
By the Commission: Commissioner McDowell issuing a statement.
1. In this Order, we grant 78 appeals of decisions by the Universal Service Administrative 
Company (USAC) reducing or denying funding from the schools and libraries universal service support 
mechanism (also known as the E-rate program) on the grounds that applicants failed to respond to 
USACs requests for information within the USAC-specified time frame.1 As explained below, in each 
case we find good cause to grant the appeals and remand the underlying applications associated with these 
appeals to USAC for further action consistent with this Order.  To ensure that the underlying applications 
are resolved expeditiously, we direct USAC to complete its review of each application listed in the 
Appendix and issue an award or denial based upon a complete review and analysis no later than 120 days 
from the release of this Order.  In addition, we direct USAC to develop outreach procedures designed to 
better inform applicants of the additional information that may be needed and to provide applicants with a 
15-day opportunity to respond to such request.  
2. Background.  Under the E-rate program, eligible schools, libraries, and consortia that include 
eligible schools and libraries may apply for discounts for eligible telecommunications services, Internet 
access, and internal connections.2 USAC examines applications for discounted services to ensure that 
only eligible services are funded, and such scrutiny may result in requests by USAC for additional 
information from applicants.  Absent the applicant providing such additional information, USAC may 
deny the application for failure to demonstrate that the services in question are eligible for support.  
3. Given the volume of applications and other submissions that USAC processes and reviews 
each year, it is necessary for USAC to establish measures to ensure prompt resolution of applications.  
One such measure in place is an administrative procedure permitting USAC to request additional 
  
1 The list of Petitioners is attached in the Appendix.  Section 54.719(c) of the Commissions 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).  
2 47 C.F.R.  54.501-54.503.
Federal Communications Commission FCC 07-36
2
information from applicants.3 USAC requires that a response to all of its requests for additional or 
clarifying information or documentation be made within seven days of the applicant being contacted, 
unless the deadline is explicitly extended by USAC.4 If this deadline is not met, or the response provided 
is incomplete, USAC makes a funding determination based on the information it has in its possession.  
4. Discussion.  In this Order, we grant 78 appeals of decisions reducing or denying requests for 
funding from the E-rate program and remand the underlying applications associated with these appeals to 
USAC for further action consistent with this Order.5 Petitioners requests for funding were denied or 
reduced because applicants failed to respond to USACs requests for information within the specified 
time frame.  Petitioners generally argue that they did not actually receive the requests from USAC for 
additional information,6 that they submitted the requested information to USAC, 7 that they requested a 
  
3 See Request for Review by Boone County School District, Federal-State Joint Board on Universal Service, 
Changes to the Board of Directors of the National Exchange Carrier Association, Inc., File No. USAC-220067, CC 
Docket Nos. 96-45 and 97-21, Order, 17 FCC Rcd 22467, 22469, para. 5 (Wireline Comp. Bur. 2002) (Boone 
County Order); Request for Review by Henryetta Public Schools, Federal-State Joint Board on Universal Service, 
Changes to the Board of Directors of the National Exchange Carrier Association, Inc., File No. USAC-268075, CC 
Docket Nos. 96-45 and 97-21, Order, 17 FCC Rcd 17423, 17424, para. 3 (Wireline Comp. Bur. 2002).
4 See SLD website, www.sl.universalservice.org/reference/deadline.asp>, (visited December 11, 2006), see also 
Request for Review by Marshall County School District, Federal-State Joint Board on Universal Service, Changes 
to the Board of Directors of the National Exchange Carrier Association, Inc., File No. USAC-220105, CC Docket 
Nos. 96-45 and 97-21, Order, 18 FCC Rcd 4520, 4522, para. 6 (Wireline Comp. Bur. 2003).
5 See Appendix.
6 See Request for Review by Alice Ward Memorial Library; Request for Review by Bais Yaakov High School of 
Chicago; Request for Review by Canon City Schools; Request for Review by Cleora Public School; Request for 
Review by Cotulla Independent School District; Request for Review by Diboll Independent School District; Request 
for Review by Evangelical Childrens Home; Request for Review by Fairfax School District; Request for Review by 
Fairland Public Schools; Request for Review by Glassboro Public School District; Request for Review by Grass 
Lake Community School District; Request for Review by Lubavitch Yeshiva of Minnesota-Wexler Learning 
Institute; Request for Review by Marvin L. Winans Academy of Performing Arts; Request for Review by 
Pleasantville School District; Request for Review by Toras Imecha; Request for Review by Vicksburg Warren 
School District; and Request for Review by Yeshiva Beth Yitzchok DSpinka.
7 See Request for Review by Beaver Area School District; Request for Review by Berrien County Schools; Request 
for Review by Boone County School District; Request for Review by Brewster Central School District; Request for 
Review by Charleston County School District; Request for Review by Cherry Creek Schools; Request for Review 
by Colegio Dr. Roque Diaz; Request for Review by Delta-Schoolcraft Intermediate School District; Request for 
Review by Devereux Foundation; Request for Review by DINE Southwest High School; Request for Review by 
District of Columbia Public Schools; Request for Review by East Cleveland School District; Request for Review by 
Eastern Upper Peninsula Independent School District; Request for Review by East Orange Community Charter 
School; Request for Review by Educational Institute Oholei Torah; Request for Review by Florence City School 
District; Request for Review by Franklin Township School District; Request for Review by Greater Johnstown 
AVTS; Request for Review by Jennings County Schools; Request for Review by Lake Erie Educational Computer 
Association; Request for Review by Leominster Public Schools; Request for Review by Long Valley Charter 
School; Request for Review by Lynd Public School; Request for Review by Madison-Oneida Board of Cooperative 
Educational Services; Request for Review by Madison-Plains Local School District; Request for Review by The 
Mesorah School; Request for Review by The Mill School; Request for Review by Milltown School District; Request 
for Review by Montezuma-Cortez School District RE-1; Request for Review by Oak Hills Local School District; 
Request for Review by Oakland Unified School District; Request for Review by Petersburg Independent School 
District; Request for Review by Point Pleasant Schools; Request for Review by Rylie Family Faith Academy 
Consortium; Request for Review by Silo Public Schools; Request for Review by St. Johns County School District; 
Request for Review by Saint Martin de Porres Church; Request for Review by Taft School District; Request for 
Review by Wellsville Local School District; Request for Review by Winn Parish School District; and Request for 
Review by Youthbuild Albuquerque.
Federal Communications Commission FCC 07-36
3
deferral over the summer, 8 or that a staffing problem prevented them from submitting the requested 
information.9  
5. Balancing the facts and the circumstances of these specific cases as described below, we find 
that good cause exists to grant these appeals and remand them back to USAC for further processing.  
Importantly, these appeals involved a procedural error on the part of the Petitioners, not a failure to 
adhere to a core program requirement or a misuse of funds.  As the Commission has noted previously, 
given that any violations that occurred were procedural, not substantive, we find that the complete 
rejection of these applications is not warranted.10 Furthermore, these appeals involved a processing 
deadline, not a program rule.  Although deadlines are necessary for the efficient administration of the 
program, in these cases, the applicants have demonstrated that rigid adherence to such procedures does 
not further the purposes of section 254(h) of the Telecommunications Act of 1996 or serve the public 
interest.11  We also note that grant of these appeals should have a minimal impact on the Universal 
Service Fund because the monies needed to fund the underlying applications, should they all be fully 
funded, have already been collected and held in reserve.12 We therefore find that good cause exists to 
grant and remand these appeals.  In remanding these applications to USAC, we make no finding as to the 
ultimate eligibility of the services.  To ensure these issues are resolved expeditiously, we direct USAC to 
complete its review of the applications listed in the Appendix and issue an award or a denial based on a 
complete review and analysis no later than 120 calendar days from release of this Order.
6. We emphasize the limited nature of this decision.  As stated above, we recognize that filing 
deadlines are necessary for the efficient administration of the schools and libraries E-rate program.  
Although we grant the subject appeals before us, our action here does not eliminate USACs deadlines for 
processing applications.13 In addition, this decision is not intended to reduce or eliminate any application 
review procedures or lessen the program requirements that applicants must comply with to receive 
funding.  We continue to require E-rate applicants to submit, complete and accurate information to USAC 
  
8 See Request for Review by Bethlehem Area School District; Request for Review by De Soto Unified School 
District 232; and Request for Review by University Academy.  
9 See Request for Review by Alpaugh Unified School District; Request for Review by Crockett Independent School 
District; Request for Review by Cypress Heights Academy; Request for Review by Griffin Foundation Inc.; Request 
for Review by Jessamine County Schools; Request for Review by Oberlin Unified School District No. 294; Request 
for Review by Pelham City Public Schools; Request for Review by Perry Unified School District 343; and Request 
for Review by Scranton School District.
10 Request for Review of the Decision of the Universal Service Administrator by Bishop Perry Middle School, 
Schools and Libraries Universal Service Support Mechanism, File Nos. SLD-487170, et al., CC Docket No. 02-6, 
Order, 21 FCC Rcd 5316, 5319, para. 9 (rel. May 19, 2006) (Bishop Perry Middle School).
11 47 U.S.C.  254(h).  The Telecommunications Act of 1996, Pub. L. No. 104-104, 110 Stat. 56, amended the 
Communications Act of 1934.
12 We estimate that the appeals granted in this Order involve applications for approximately $45 million in funding 
for Funding Years 2000-2006.  We note that USAC has already reserved sufficient funds to address outstanding 
appeals.  See, e.g., Universal Service Administrative Company, Federal Universal Service Support Mechanisms 
Fund Size Projections for the Second Quarter 2007 (dated Jan. 31, 2007). 
13 We note that the Commission has initiated a proceeding to address whether particular deadlines should be 
modified.  Comprehensive Review of Universal Service Fund Management, Administration, and Oversight, Federal-
State Joint Board on Universal Service, Schools and Libraries Universal Service Support Mechanism, Rural Health 
Care Support Mechanism, Lifeline and Linkup, Changes to the Board of Directors of the National Exchange Carrier 
Association, Inc., WC Docket Nos. 05-195, 02-60, 03-109, CC Docket Nos. 96-45, 02-6, 97-21, Notice of Proposed 
Rulemaking and Further Notice of Proposed Rulemaking, FCC 05-124, para. 29 (2005) (Comprehensive Review 
NPRM).
Federal Communications Commission FCC 07-36
4
in a timely fashion as part of the application review process.  However, beginning with applications for 
funding year 2007, we require USAC in each instance to detail in writing and with specificity to the 
applicant any information or documentation USAC is seeking.  In addition, USAC shall permit applicants 
to provide the information to USAC within 15 calendar days from the date of receipt of the written notice 
from USAC that additional information is required.14  
7. Finally, we are committed to guarding against waste, fraud, and abuse, and to ensuring that 
funds disbursed through the E-rate program are used for appropriate purposes.  Although we grant the 
appeals addressed here, this action in no way affects the authority of the Commission or USAC to 
conduct audits or investigations to determine compliance with the E-rate program rules or requirements.  
Because audits and investigations may provide information showing that a beneficiary or service provider 
failed to comply with the statute or Commission rules, such proceedings can reveal instances in which 
universal service funds were improperly disbursed or in a manner inconsistent with the statute or the 
Commissions rules.  To the extent we find that funds were not used properly, we will require USAC to 
recover such funds through its normal process.  We emphasize that we retain the discretion to evaluate the 
uses of monies disbursed through the E-rate program and to determine on a case-by-case basis that waste, 
fraud, or abuse of program funds occurred and that recovery is warranted.  We remain committed to 
ensuring the integrity of the program and will continue to aggressively pursue instances of waste, fraud, 
or abuse under the Commissions procedures and in cooperation with law enforcement agencies.   
8. Accordingly, IT IS ORDERED that, pursuant to the authority contained in sections 1-4 and 
254 of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended, 47 U.S.C.  151-154 and 254, the Requests for 
Review as listed the Appendix ARE GRANTED and REMANDED to USAC for further consideration in 
accordance with the terms of this Order.
9. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that, pursuant to the authority contained in sections 1-4 and 254 
of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended, 47 U.S.C.  151-154 and 254, USAC SHALL 
COMPLETE its review of each remanded application listed in the Appendix and SHALL ISSUE an 
award or a denial of each application based on a complete review and analysis no later than 120 calendar 
days from release of this Order.
10. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that this Order SHALL BE EFFECTIVE upon release, in 
accordance with section 1.103 of the Commissions rules, 47 C.F.R.  1.103.
FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION
Marlene H. Dortch
Secretary 
  
14 Applicants will be presumed to have received notice five days after such notice is postmarked by USAC.  USAC 
shall continue, however, to work beyond the 15 days with applicants attempting in good faith to submit the 
necessary documentation.    
Federal Communications Commission FCC 07-36
5
APPENDIX
Applicant Application Number Funding Year
Alpaugh Unified School 
District
Alpaugh, CA
523576 2006
Alice Ward Memorial Library
Canaan, VT
487811 2005
Bais Yaakov High School of 
Chicago
Chicago, IL
234381 2001
Beaver Area School District
Beaver, PA
526862 2006
Berrien County School 
District
Nashville, GA
426240 2004
Bethlehem Area School 
District
Bethlehem, PA
532028, 532117, 534228, 
534843, 534980, 535090
2006
Bethlehem Area School 
District
Bethlehem, PA
533726, 533860, 533981, 
534601, 534316 
2006
Bethlehem Area School 
District
Bethlehem PA
534078 2006
Boone County School District
Madison, WV
338632 2003
Brewster Central School 
District
Brewster, NY
398144 2004
Canon City School District 
RE-1
Canon City, CO
422001 2004
Charleston County School 
District
Charleston, SC
399988, 400066, 400095, 
400135, 400148, 400166, 
400185, 400199, 420054, 
420158, 420266, 421719, 
421919, 423536, 424838, 
429071
2004
Cherry Creek School District 
5
Englewood, CO
226427 2001
Cleora Public School
Afton, OK
466824 2005
Colegio Dr. Roque Diaz 
Yabucoa, PR
414245 2004
Cotulla Independent School 
District
Cotulla, TX
320087 2002
Federal Communications Commission FCC 07-36
6
Crockett Independent School 
District
Crockett, TX
504311, 506302, 524164, 
524195, 527805, 527831, 
527849, 527885, 527903, 
530689, 532849
2006
Cypress Heights Academy
Baton Rouge, LA
533588, 537630, 537700 2006
Delta-Schoolcraft Intermediate 
School District
538357 2006
De Soto Unified School 
District 232
De Soto, KS
476682 2005
Devereux Foundation
King of Prussia, PA
538789 2006
Diboll Independent School 
District
Diboll, TX
430473 2004
DINE Southwest High School
Winslow, AZ
398842 2004
District of Columbia Public 
Schools
Washington, DC
393708 2004
East Cleveland School 
District,
East Cleveland, OH
4233380, 423397 2004
Eastern Upper Peninsula 
Independent School District
Sault St. Marie, MI
471037, 469866 2005
East Orange Community 
Charter School
East Orange, NJ
415781 2004
Educational Institute Oholei 
Torah
Brooklyn, NY
382666 2003
Evangelical Childrens Home
St. Louis, MO
392392 2004
Fairfax School District
Bakersfield, CA
477012 2005
Fairfax School District
Bakersfield, CA
478082 2005
Fairfax School District
Bakersfield, CA
478152 2005
Fairland Public Schools
Fairland, OK
463624 2005
Fairland Public Schools
Fairland, OK
466913 2005
Florence City School District
Florence, AL
464775 2005
Franklin Township School 
District
Somerset, NJ
474034 2005
Federal Communications Commission FCC 07-36
7
Glassboro Public School 
District
Glassboro, NJ
487609 2005
Grass Lake Community 
School District
Tecumseh, MI
514283 2006
Greater Johnstown AVTS
Johnstown, PA
533504 2006
Griffin Foundation Inc.
Tucson, AZ
486140 2005
Jennings County Schools
North Vernon, IN
522029 2005
Jessamine County Schools
Nicholasville, KY
498994 2005
Lake Erie Educational 
Computer Association
Elyria, OH
387075 2004
Leominster Public Schools
Leominster, MA
372922 2003
Long Valley Charter School
Doyle, CA
410086 2004
Lubavitch Yeshiva of 
Minnesota-Wexler Learning 
Institute
St. Paul, MN
266085 2001
Lynd Public School
Lynd, MN
393043 2004
Madison-Oneida Board of 
Cooperative Educational 
Services
Verona, NY
312009 2002
Madison-Plains Local School 
District
London, OH
524383 2005
Marvin L. Winans Academy 
of Performing Arts
Detroit, MI
500983 2006
Milltown School District
Monsey, NY
470851 2005
Montezuma-Cortez School 
District RE-1
Cortez, CO
414192 2004
Oak Hills Local School 
District
Cincinnati, OH
463594 2005
Oakland Unified School 
District
Novato, CA
263553 2001
Oakland Unified School 
District
327574, 327579, 327586 2002
Federal Communications Commission FCC 07-36
8
Oakland, CA
Oberlin Unified School 
District No. 294
Oberlin, KS
460015 2005
Pelham City Public Schools
Pelham, GA
362302 2003
Perry Unified School District 
343
Perry, KS
532787 2006
Petersburg Independent 
School District
Petersburg, TX
446593 2005
Pleasantville School District
Broomall, PA
484579, 485093, 485464 2005
Point Pleasant Schools
Point Pleasant, NJ
457647 2005
Rylie Family Faith Academy 
Consortium
Dallas, TX
425796 2004
Saint Martin de Porres Church
Philadelphia, PA
359750 2003
Scranton School District
Scranton, PA
530269 2006
Silo Public Schools
Allen, OK
443976 2005
St. Johns County District
St. Augustine, FL
409719, 411916 2004
St. Johns County School 
District
St. Augustine, FL
409805 2004
Taft School District
Lockport, IL
501995 2006
The Mesorah School
Brooklyn, NY
382513 2003
The Mill School
Baltimore, MD
354229 2003
Toras Imecha
Lakewood, NJ
404918, 421609 2004
University Academy
Lawrence, KS
486799, 486829 2005
Vicksburg Warren School 
District
Vicksburg, MS
265505 2001
Wellsville Local School 
District
Wellsville, OH
512851 2006
Winn Parish School District
Winnfield, LA
427753 2004
Yeshiva Beth Yitzchok 
DSpinka
262909 2001
Federal Communications Commission FCC 07-36
9
Brooklyn, NY
Youthbuild Albuquerque
Philadelphia, PA
524250 2006
Youthbuild Albuquerque
Philadelphia, PA
524253 2006
Federal Communications Commission FCC 07-36
10
STATEMENT
COMMISSIONER ROBERT M. McDOWELL
Re: Requests for Waiver of the Decision of the Universal Service Administrator by
Adams County School District 14, Commerce City, CO, et al., and
Schools and Libraries Universal Service Support Mechanism, CC Docket No. 02-6
Re: Requests for Review of the Decision of the Universal Service Administrator by
Alpaugh Unified School District, Alpaugh, CA, et al., and
Schools and Libraries Universal Service Support Mechanism, CC Docket No. 02-6
Re: Requests for Review or Waiver of the Decision of the 
Universal Service Administrator by
Brownsville Independent School District, Brownsville, TX, et al., and
Schools and Libraries Universal Service Support Mechanism, CC Docket No. 02-6
By adopting these three orders, we are granting 182 appeals of decisions taken by the Universal 
Service Administrative Company (USAC) that reduced or denied funding by applicants of the schools 
and libraries universal service mechanism.  This program promotes the noble goal of assisting schools and 
libraries in the United States to obtain affordable telecommunications and Internet access. I support these 
decisions for several reasons.   First, each of these appeals involves technicalities in the USAC 
procedures.  Our actions here do not substantively alter the eligibility of the Schools and Libraries 
program.  Furthermore, we find no indication of any intention to defraud the system on the part of any of 
these applicants.  Also, our decisions and USACs actions on appeal should have minimal effect on the 
level of the Universal Service Fund, because USAC has already reserved sufficient funds to take into 
account pending appeals.  Finally, I am pleased that we impose reasonable time limits on USAC to 
address these cases on appeal so they can be resolved expeditiously.