News of the Week

Wave 24 for FY 2015 will be released on Thursday, November 5th. Funding for FY 2015 is available for both Category 1 and Category 2 services at all discount levels. As of Wave 23, cumulative funding for FY 2015 was over $2.46 billion.

Wave 69 for FY 2014 will be released next Tuesday, November 3rd. Funding for FY 2014 is available for Priority 1 services only. Priority 2 funding has been denied at all discount levels. Cumulative funding for FY 2014 is over $2.27 billion.

Adding and Deleting Entities:

EPC portals for school districts and library systems include — or should include — lists of those organizations’ component schools, libraries, and non-instructional facilities (“NIFs”). When USAC initially created these portals, they populated them with entities drawn from FY 2015 applications. The import process, however, was not perfect nor does it take account of entities more recently added or closed. Applicants need to make sure that their entity lists are up-to-date before starting work on their FY 2016 applications.

There are at least two problems with updating EPC entity lists.

In its current state of development, EPC permits applicants to update the entity data for existing entities. However, it does not provide a function for users — even a user with Account Administrator rights — to add or delete entities. Note that users can add school and library “annexes” to existing entities (see our newsletter of October 12th). To add actual state-defined schools and libraries, or to delete them, applicants must work through USAC’s Client Service Bureau (“CSB”). This can be done by telephone (888-203-8100) or by submitting a Customer Service Case online through EPC (with or without an attached spreadsheet of requested changes).

The second problem, often affecting some of the larger applicants, is that USAC’s initial load of entities did not include many NIFs. USAC has since added many of the missing NIFs to EPC’s background entity list, but did not have the capability to enter these NIFs into the actual EPC accounts. As a result, applicants will have to add these NIFS through CSB, as discussed above, but at least the basic NIF data lies resident within EPC. 

Upcoming E-Rate Training:

Form 486 Deadlines for November:

The first Form 486 deadline for certifying the start of service (and CIPA compliance, if applicable) for FRNs approved for FY 2015 on or before July 1, 2015 (i.e., in Waves 1-6) was last week on October 29th. On a going forward basis, the Form 486 deadline is 120 days from the later of the FCDL approval date or the start of service date. The November deadlines (adjusted to Monday when the 120-deadline fell on a Saturday) are:

                                          Wave   7                11/03/2015
                                          Wave   8                11/16/2015
                                          Wave   9                11/23/2015
                                          Wave 10                11/30/2015

Nominations for USAC Board Positions:

In October, the FCC took two steps to fill or refill all 18 industry positions on the USAC Board of Directors. As discussed in our newsletter of October 19th, FCC Chairman Wheeler appointed twelve individuals — including two representing schools and one representing libraries — to expired or unfilled slots. Those appointments became effective yesterday, November 1st.

The FCC also requested nominations (DA 15-1188) for the remaining six positions whose terms are set to expire at the end of this year. The deadline for these nominations is November 16th. An important part of this nomination request is the school representative position currently held by Julie Tritt Schell, presently serving as the Chair of the Board’s Schools and Libraries Committee. Her re-nomination to the USAC Board was submitted to the FCC by the State E-Rate Coordinators’ Alliance (“SECA”) last week.

With all the challenges being faced by the E-rate program today, E-Rate Central believes that it is critical to have a proactive and experienced E-rate person on the USAC Board. Both professionally and personally, we know of no one who has been, nor can be, as effective in this position as Ms. Schell. We encourage the E-rate community to fully support her re-nomination.

Status of Forms 470, 471, and 498:

The FCC’s request for comments (due November 30th) on revised versions of the Form 470 and the Form 471, due November 30th, was published last week in the Federal Register. The revised Form 470 had been approved on an emergency basis for six months so that USAC could enable it through EPC last July. The FCC is asking to extend this approval for a full three years. The FCC is requesting that approval for the revised Form 471, also to be implemented within EPC, be granted by December 30, 2015.

The FCC has also sent a revised version of the Form 498 to OMB for approval. For the first time, the Form 498 will be used by E-rate applicants, not just suppliers, to provide electronic banking information. Approval of the revised Form 498, also to be EPC-enabled, is expected in the January timeframe. Applicant banking information will be required to provide direct payment of E-rate reimbursements effective July 1, 2016  A revised EPC version of the Form 472 (“BEAR”) will be required as this time.

FCC Appeal Decision Watch:

The FCC issued another monthly set of precedent-based decisions in Public Notice DA 15-1237, including:

1. Granted:
   1. Two requests, including one Petition for Reconsideration, to permit the applicants to submit additional documentation supporting their calculated discount rates.
   2. One request to review an application initially denied as a result of the applicant’s failure to consider price as the primary factor, but where the petitioner had “selected the lowest priced option.”
   3. One request to give an applicant additional time to submit a response to a PIA inquiry.
   4. One request for application review in a case involving a school contact, who was also an employee of a service provider, but who was not associated with any supplier bidding on the school’s E-rate services.
   5. One request for an invoice deadline extension filed less than 12 months late that was made “in good faith and within a reasonable period of time after services were provided.”
   6. Three waivers for late-filed Form 471 applications submitted within 14 days of the close of the window (a standard FCC waiver condition).
   7. Three requests for extensions of service implementation deadlines due to “reasons beyond the service providers’ control.”
   8. Three requests for review of previously denied service substitutions.
   9. One request for a waiver of the signed contract requirement in a case involving a Form 471 filing, following vendor selection, but “shortly before” signing the formal contract.
   10. Two requests for waivers of technology plan requirements involving plans that were in effect, but had not been formally approved “in a timely fashion.”
   11. One request for waiver of the 28-day competitive bidding rule in which the applicant “only missed the deadline by one to three days.”
   12. Two requests for waiver of the appeal filing deadline by “only a few days.”  These appeals were remanded to USAC for review..
2. Denied:
   1. One request for review of a USAC decision that a pre-K program was not eligible in Arizona. Pre-K programs are a form of “non-traditional” education whose eligibility depends on specific state definitions of primary and secondary education. For a state-by-state review, see USAC’s Eligibility Table for Non-Traditional Education.
   2. One request for review for a denial involving the applicant’s inability “to produce documentation regarding its vendor selection process.”
   3. Four requests for waivers for late-filed Form 471 applications unsupported by any “special circumstances.”
   4. One request for the extension of a service implementation deadline for which neither the applicant nor the service providers could show that “significant efforts” were made to secure an extension.
   5. Two requests for review filed beyond the 60-day appeal window.
3. Dismissed two Petitions for Reconsideration, one for lack of cause and one for missing the 30 day filing deadline. 

The S&L News Brief of October 30, 2015, discusses the use of the Form 470 to initiate the competitive bidding process. It provides a useful review of the following procurement topics:

• The 28-day posting requirement
• Issuing a RFP
• Treating all potential bidders equally
• Reposting, as necessary, for existing contracts

The News Brief also mentions the two special cases for which a Form 470 is not required. One is for the use of “preferred master contracts” approved by the FCC, of which there are currently none. The other is for “business-class Internet access service” — an exception we do not recommend because it relies so heavily on a specific service definition.