International Bureau Telecommunications Division Grants Pursuant to Section 214 of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended (the "Act") (47 U.S.C. § 214) and Section 63.18 of the Commission's rules (47 C.F.R. § 63.18), the International Bureau Telecommunications Division grants the applications filed by the following international service subsidiaries of Bell Atlantic Corp. d/b/a Verizon Communications for authority to provide international service originating in the State of Massachusetts: (1) Bell Atlantic Communications, Inc., d/b/a Verizon Long Distance (VLD); (2) NYNEX Long Distance Company, d/b/a Verizon Enterprise Solutions (VES); (3) Verizon Global Solutions Inc. (VGSI, formerly Bell Atlantic Global Network and Transport Solutions, Inc.); and (4) Verizon Select Services Inc. (VSSI, formerly GTE Communications Corporation) (collectively, "Applicants"). Specifically, Applicants request authority to provide global international facilities-based service between all points in Massachusetts and all international points except Gibraltar, and resale service between all points in Massachusetts and all international points. The applications cover traffic originating in the State of Massachusetts, which is one of the "in-region" states of Verizon New England Inc. and its subsidiaries, including VLD, VES, VGSI, and VSSI. The international Section 214 applications are companions to the joint application of Verizon New England Inc., VLD, VES and Verizon Global Networks (collectively, "Verizon") for authorization to provide in-region, interLATA service in the State of Massachusetts pursuant to Section 271 of the Act (47 U.S.C. § 271). No comments were filed on the international applications, which were put on public notice on November 22, 2000 (see Non-Streamlined International Applications Accepted for Filing, FCC File Nos. ITC-214-20001121-00680, ITC 214-20001121-00681, ITC-214-20001121-00682, ITC-214-20001121-00683, Public Notice, DA 00-2638 (rel. Nov. 22, 2000)). On April 16, 2001, the Commission approved Verizon's Section 271 application (see Application of Verizon New England Inc., Bell Atlantic Communications, Inc. (d/b/a Verizon Long Distance), NYNEX Long Distance Company (d/b/a Verizon Enterprise Solutions) And Verizon Global Networks Inc., for Authorization to Provide In-Region, InterLATA Services in Massachusetts, CC Docket 01-9, Memorandum Opinion and Order FCC 01-130, rel. April 16, 2001. Because Verizon has received Section 271 authority to provide in-region, interLATA service in the State of Massachusetts, we grant VLD, VES, VGSI, and VSSI authority to provide the services for which they request authority in their applications: international facilities-based service pursuant to Sections 63.18(e)(1) and (e)(4) of the Commission's rules, originating in the State of Massachusetts and terminating at all international points except Gibraltar; and international resale service pursuant to Sections 63.18 (e)(2) and (e)(4) of the Commission's rules, originating in the State of Massachusetts and terminating at all international points, including Gibraltar. Grant of the international Section 214 application will serve the public interest by increasing competition in international services, expanding the range of new and innovative services and allowing for more efficient use of existing international telecommunications facilities. These grants of authority, as agreed to by Applicants, are subject to Applicants' compliance with the Commission's international dominant carrier regulations as specified below on the following routes where Applicants have affiliations with foreign carriers that the Commission has not yet determined lack market power: (1) the U.S.-Dominican Republic route and the U.S.Venezuela route, for international facilities-based service; and (2) the U.S.-Dominican Republic route, the U.S.-Venezuela route, and the U.S.-Gibraltar route, for international resale service (except to the extent Applicants serve these routes solely by reselling the international switched services of unaffiliated U.S. facilities-based carriers). We grant Applicants request for nondominant treatment on the following routes where Applicants have affiliations with foreign carriers: the U.S.-Canada route; the U.S.-Mexico route; the U.S.-France route; the U.S.-Italy route; the U.S.-U.K. route; the U.S.-Japan route; the U.S.Netherlands route; the U.S.-Argentina route; and the U.S.-Singapore route. Applicants have provided sufficient evidence that the foreign carriers with which they are affiliated on these routes lack sufficient market power on the foreign end of the routes to affect competition adversely in the U.S. market. In sum, VLD, VES, VGSI, and VSSI will be treated as nondominant in their provision of services on all routes except the U.S.-Dominican Republic route, the U.S.-Venezuela route, and the U.S.-Gibraltar route. This grant of the international Section 214 Application will become effective upon the effective date of the Commission Order granting authorization to Verizon to provide in-region, interLATA services in the State of Massachusetts. FCC 1. The Common Carrier Bureau (Bureau) has under consideration a Request for Review submitted by Mercer County School District (Mercer County), Cleveland, Ohio.' Mercer County seeks review of a decision issued by the Schools and Libraries Division (SLD) of the Universal Service Administrative Company (Administrator), denying some of its Funding Year 3 requests for discounts under the schools and libraries program. For the reasons set forth below, we deny the Request for Review and affirm SLD's decision. 2. Under the schools and libraries universal service support mechanism, eligible schools, libraries, and consortia that include eligible schools and libraries may apply for discounts for eligible telecommunications services, Internet access, and internal connections.3 The Commission's rules require that the applicant make a bona fide request for services by filing with the Administrator an FCC Form 470, which is posted to the Administrator's website for all 1 Letter from Nathaniel Hawthorne, Esq., on behalf of Mercer County School District, to Federal Communications Commission, filed June 7, 2000 (Request for Review). 2 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). 347 C.F.R. §§ 54.502, 54.503. 4 potential competing service providers to review and bid upon. After the FCC Form 470 is posted, the applicant must wait at least 28 days before entering an agreement for services and submitting an FCC Form 471, which requests support for eligible services.5 SLD reviews the FCC Forms 471 that it receives and issues funding commitment decisions in accordance with the Commission's rules." 6 3. The Commission's rules further provide, however, that eligible schools and libraries with pre-existing contracts are exempt from the competitive bidding requirement under certain circumstances. In relevant part, section 54.511(c)(1) exempts contracts entered into on or prior to July 10, 1997 from competitive bidding requirements for the duration of the contract. In such a case, the service request need not be subjected to competitive bidding. However, existing contract must have been reported on an FCC Form 470 either in the year of the funding request or in a prior funding year. The applicant's FCC Form 471 must demonstrate compliance with the competitive bidding rules by specifying, for each funding request, the FCC Form 470 in which the contract was either posted for competitive bidding or reported as a pre-existing contract." 9 4. It is these competitive bidding rules which are at issue in the pending Request for Review. Mercer County submitted an FCC Form 471 application for Funding Year 3 on January 17, 2000.10 On May 26, 2000, SLD issued a Funding Commitment Decision Letter to Mercer 4 Schools and Libraries Universal Service, Description of Services Requested and Certification Form, OMB 30600806 (FCC Form 470); 47 C.F.R. § 54.504(b); Federal-State Joint Board on Universal Service, CC Docket No. 9645, Report and Order, 12 FCC Rcd 8776, 9078, para. 575 (1997) (Universal Service Order), as corrected by Federal-State Joint Board on Universal Service, CC Docket No. 96-45, Errata, FCC 97-157 (rel. June 4, 1997), affirmed in part, Texas Office of Public Utility Counsel v. FCC, 183 F.3d 393 (5th Cir. 1999) (affirming Universal Service First Report and Order in part and reversing and remanding on unrelated grounds), cert. denied, Celpage, Inc. v. FCC, 120 S. Ct. 2212 (May 30, 2000), cert. denied, AT&T Corp. v. Cincinnati Bell Tel. Co., 120 S. Ct. 2237 (June 5, 2000), cert. dismissed, GTE Service Corp. v. FCC, 121 S.Ct. 423 (Nov. 2, 2000); see also SLD Website, <http://www.sl.universalservice.org>. 5 47 C.F.R. § 54.504(b), (c); Schools and Libraries Universal Service, Services Ordered and Certification Form, OMB 3060-0806 (FCC Form 471). Request for Review by Metropolitan School District of Pike Township, Federal-State Joint Board on Universal Service, Changes to the Board of Directors of the National Exchange Carrier Association, Inc., File No. SLD120821, CC Dockets No. 96-45 and 97-21, Order, 15 FCC Rcd 13891, para. 2 (rel. 2000). 7 47 C.F.R. § 54.511(c)(1). See Federal-State Joint Board on Universal Service, Access Charge Reform, Price Cap Performance Review for Local Exchange Carriers, Transport Rate Structure and Pricing, End User Common Line Charge, CC Docket Nos. 96-45, 96-262, 94-1, 91-213, and 95-72, Fourth Order on Reconsideration in CC Docket No. 96-45, Report and Order in CC Docket Nos. 96-45, 96-262, 96-262, 94-1, 91-213, 95-72, 13 FCC Rcd 5318, 5441, para. 217 (1997) (Fourth Order on Reconsideration). 8 See SLD Website, Reference, Frequently Asked Questions, 9 <http://www.sl.universalservice.org/reference/faq.asp#1>. Instructions for Completing the Schools and Libraries Universal Service, Services Ordered and Certification Form (FCC Form 471), OMB 3060-0806 (September 1999) (Form 471 Instructions) at 19. 10 FCC Form 471, Mercer County School District, App. No. 160177, filed January 17, 2000 (Mercer County Form 471). 11 At issue now are six granting six of its twenty-five funding requests and denying the rest. funding requests, Funding Request Numbers (FRN) 312404, 313595, 313597, 313598, 313602, and 313609, which SLD denied because it found that “[t]he 470 cited [in each of these requests] did not include service of this type, [and] therefore it does not meet the 28 day competitive bidding requirement."12 On June 7, 2000, Mercer County filed the pending Request for Review. 5. In its Request for Review, Mercer County asserts that it complied with the competitive bidding rules.13 Mercer County notes that, in accordance with the Commission's rules regarding pre-existing contracts, SLD program instructions provide that "[s]ervices that are covered by a qualified existing contract for all or part of the funding year do NOT require filing of a Form 470 since you are not seeking bids for these services and have submitted a Form 470 for the contract in a prior year. A qualified existing contract is: a signed, written contract executed pursuant to the posting of a Form 470 in a previous funding year, OR a contract signed on or before July 10, 1997 and reported on a Form 470 in a previous year as an existing contract. Mercer County asserts that it reported its pre-existing contracts in an FCC Form 470. More specifically, Mercer County argues that the six denied FRNs satisfy the second test for existing contracts, because they arise from contracts signed before July 10, 1997 which were reported in a Year 1 Form 470.15 14 6. The six funding requests at issue all reference FCC Form 470 No. 798200000009067, which was posted by the West Virginia State Department of Education in Funding Year 1.16 The West Virginia Form 470 does not present any service requests for bidding, but does report a lengthy list of pre-existing contracts, each of which is specified only by the date the contract was signed and the contract termination date.17 Mercer County notes that two of the listed pre-existing contracts were executed on July 8, 1997 and March 1, 1993 respectively. Mercer County asserts that these are the contracts underlying its current funding requests. It argues that since the contracts were signed before July 10, 1997 and were reported in a Form 470 which was cited by the funding requests at issue, Mercer County has fully satisfied its obligations under the competitive bidding rules stated above. 11 Letter from Schools and Libraries Division, Universal Service Administrative Co., to Mercer County School District, dated May 26, 2000 (Funding Commitment Decision Letter). 16 See FCC Form 470, West Virginia Department of Education, Year 1, Universal Serv. Control No. 798200000009067 (West Virginia DOE Form 470). The data on the posted Form 470 does not include the date on which it was posted. However, it does specify that the allowable contract date for services requested in the form is April 11, 1998. West Virginia DOE Form 470 at 1. Given the 28-day waiting rule, the date of posting must therefore be on March 13, 1998. 17 West Virginia DOE Form 470, at 2. |