 |
| |
|
FCC E-rate OrdersGlobal Resolution Orders (GROs)In 2006 the Federal Communications Commission (FCC or the Commission) began releasing single Orders that affect multiple applicants. Appeals that have a similar denial reason are grouped; the Order then approves and/or denies the appeals in mass. These are called Global Resolution Orders (GROs). There were 5 Orders of significance released in 2006 and at least 10 Orders in 2007.Many of these GROs have changed the way applications are now processed by the Schools and Libraries Division (SLD) of the Universal Service Administrative Company (USAC). The Bishop Perry Order, for instance, is responsible for categorizing many applicant errors associated with Forms 470 and 471 as “ministerial and clerical” (M&C). These M&C errors can be corrected by the applicant under certain conditions and during some defined period of time. See the USAC/SLD web site (http://www.usac.org/sl/) for more details on M&C error corrections. Another example is the Alaska Gateway Order in which the Commission requires USAC to notify an applicant in writing that they have missed a deadline for submitting the FCC Form 486. The applicant then has 15 days from the date of receipt of such notice to file or amend their FCC Form 486. According to USAC, the Bishop Perry Middle School Order (FCC 06-54; released May 19, 2006) has reduced the number of appeals:
Links to the full orders on the FCC web site are found below. If you would like a summary of important language from each order and other related references see the other documents on this web site: FCC E-rate Order Summaries.
2007 Global Resolution Orders:Aberdeen School District Order (28-Day Posting):http://fjallfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-07-63A1.doc http://fjallfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-07-63A1.pdf
Academy for Academic Excellence Order (Form 471 Filing Deadline):
Academy of Excellence Order (Required Resources):
Adams County School District 14 Order (Contracts):
Aiken County Public Schools Order (“30% Rule”):
Alpaugh Unified School District Order (PIA Responses):
Approach Learning and Assessment Center Order (Competitive Bidding Violations):
Bootheel Consortium Order (Ineligible Entities):
Brewster Academy Order (Eligible Telecom Provider SPIN):
Brownsville Independent School District Order (Technology Plans):
2006 Global Resolution Orders:Academia Claret Order (Discount Rate Justification):http://fjallfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-06-1907A1.doc http://fjallfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-06-1907A1.pdf
Academia Discipulos de Cristo Order (Bid Assessments):
Academy of Careers and Technologies Order (Pattern Analysis):
Alaska Gateway School District Order (Form 486 Deadline):
Bishop Perry Middle School Order (Ministerial and Clerical Errors):
2005 FCC Orders of Importance:West Virginia Waiver Request Approved by FCC (July 2005):
West Virginia Waiver Decision (DA 05-2179):
"In this Order, we grant the petition of the West Virginia Department of Education (West Virginia) seeking a waiver of section 54.504(c) of the Commission’s rules to enable West Virginia schools to use state master contracts to apply for universal service support under the schools and libraries support mechanism for Funding Year 2005 and future funding years. We find that this waiver is in the public interest and warranted by the special circumstances of applicants utilizing state master contracts in the state of West Virginia." (paragraph 1) FCC Reverses SLD Procedure for Denying Requests for Unsubstantiated Charges (January 2005):
Iroquois West School District 10 Order (Unsubstantiated Charges): The critical paragraph in the Order reads:
"We find that SLD’s actions go beyond the appropriate application of the 30 percent benchmark. We understand SLD’s rationale for applying the 30 percent policy to unsubstantiated amounts for eligible services – to create incentives for applicants to request only those amounts that they can justify as reasonable estimates of the costs of eligible services. The 30 percent policy, however, applies to requests for ineligible services, not for unsubstantiated amounts of eligible services. Such an application goes beyond the scope of the 30 percent policy as drafted. Applicants must be aware, however, that if funding requests are submitted in amounts that go beyond what they can substantiate, their funding requests will be reduced to the amount that is substantiated. Accordingly, we remand this case and direct SLD to grant the commitment request ... in accordance with this order, unless SLD identifies other grounds for denial." Additonal Related References:
|