Graphics Off
USAC Logo
Components
About the Schools and Libraries ProgramSchools and Libraries Tools

Minutes for February 11, 2004 Service Provider Call

A.

FY2004 FORM 471 WINDOW CLOSED ON FEBRUARY 4, 2004 AT 11:59 p.m.

Early evidence indicates at least 95% of Forms 471 for FY2004 were filed online, which is an improvement over last year.  We will have exact figures once all of the paper forms postmarked by the close of the window have been data-entered.


B.

FUNDING COMMITMENTS

A reminder that service providers can view funding commitments online.

  • FY2002
    FY2002--Letters in Wave 30G were issued on January 22, 2004; commitments in this wave totaled approximately $22.9 million. Letter is Wave 30H were issued on January 29, 2004; commitments in this wave totaled approximately 945K.  Total commitments for FY 2002 are now approximately $2.211 billion. Remember that the SLD is no longer issuing regular waves on FY2002, but will make commitments as applications are reviewed and funding decisions are made.

  • FY2003
    FY2003-- Letters in Wave 20 were issued on January 20, 2004; commitments in this wave totaled approximately $49.8 million. Letter is Wave 21 were issued on February 2, 2004; commitments in this wave totaled approximately 6.5M.  Total commitments for FY 2003 are now approximately $1.704 billion. 


C.

YSLETA REFILES

FY2002 appellants granted relief under the FCC's Ysleta Order can rebid certain FY2002 services.  Their Forms 470 must be filed as FY2004 forms featuring the word "REFILE" in the Applicant Form Identifier and containing identifying language in Item 13.  These forms must have been received or postmarked by February 6, 2004; paper forms postmarked by the deadline may not yet be data entered and posted to the SLD web site.  Service providers may bid on these services; the associated Forms 471 must be received or postmarked by April 23, 2004.


D.

ETP

This is a reminder that the SLD posted guidance a Special Notice to Providers of telecommunications Services on its web site. Please see:

Special Notice to Providers of Telecommunications Services (12/24/03, revised 12/31/03)

An Eligible Telecommunications Provider (ETP), a USAC term used for "telecommunications carrier," is an entity that provides telecommunications services, i.e., transmission services on a "common carriage" basis. To be a telecommunications carrier, the carrier must (1) allow the customer to transmit information of its own design and choosing, without change in the form or content of the information, and (2) provide that capability for a fee directly to the public, or to such classes of users as to be effectively available to the public (i.e., hold itself out to serve indifferently all potential users). In many instances, a state regulatory authority certifies a company providing telecommunications services as a common carrier through the issuance of a license or an order. However, some categories of service (such as cellular, paging and satellite) may not be subject to state regulatory authority.

All telecommunications carriers are required under FCC rules to file an FCC Form 499A. By filing a Form 499A and checking at least one of the boxes on line 227, you are indicating that you hold yourself out as a telecommunications carrier and that you meet the above definition. Telecommunications carriers are required to file an FCC Form 499A on an annual basis, as well as Form 499Qs quarterly, as applicable. In order to expedite processing, your FCC Form 498 should also reflect your Form 499 Filer I.D.

If you provided telecommunications services under the E-rate program and/or Rural Health Care program without having filed a Form 499A, this posting serves as notice that your failure to file a FCC Form 499A may be referred to the FCC for appropriate enforcement action.

USAC makes commitments for telecommunications services for applicants when the service provider is identified in USAC's database as an ETP; but, notwithstanding that identification, it is the service provider that is responsible for ensuring it meets these requirements in all instances of discounted telecommunications services.


E.

SERVICE PROVIDER WEBEX TRAINING

If you have any suggestions for WebEx training, please E-MAIL YOUR QUESTIONS FOR THE SERVICE PROVIDER CALL TO THE CUSTOMER SERVICE BUREAU.  PLEASE WRITE, "WEBEX TRAINING SUGGESTION" IN THE SUBJECT LINE SO THAT YOUR QUESTION IS ROUTED CORRECTLY.


F.

FCC THIRD REPORT AND ORDER

The Third Report and Order and Second Further Notice of Proposed Rulemaking was published in the Federal Register on February 10, 2004.  The effective date of the Third Report and Order is March 11, 2004.  The effective date does not apply to section 54.513(c); the FCC will publish a document in the Federal Register when that section becomes effective, which will probably not be for at least 120 days.

Comments on the Second Further Notice of Proposed Rulemaking are due on or before March 11; reply comments are due on or before April 12.  Topics for which the FCC seeks comment include the discount matrix, the competitive bidding process, the definition of rural area, the definition of Internet access, wide area networks, recovery of funds, consultants, deadlines, technology plans, and actions to reduce waste, fraud and abuse.


G.

INVOICING ISSUES

Mick Kraft provided a status update.


H.

ELIGIBLE SERVICES ONLINE INTERNAL CONNECTIONS MATRIX

Phil Gieseler presented information about the FCC-mandated pilot program for an online Eligible Services List for internal connections.  Development of this system will be taking place over the next several months.


I. 

GENERAL QUESTIONS AND ANSWERS RECEIVED BY E-MAIL

 

Q.

We have recently seen several schools and school districts issue E-Rate RFP's that require Service Providers to 'pre-qualify' before they are able to bid on the work requested on the Form 470.  This means that the district is evaluating Service Providers on other basis besides price.  Does the SLD believe this to be in compliance with FCC orders regarding evaluation of proposals with price being the most heavily weighted?  Also, should this requirement be posted in the Form 470 (block 11??)?

Many Schools and School Districts have been posting Form 470's and prior to issuing RFP's to the Service Providers have simply given the interested Service Providers a list of eligible services that the School or District may be interested in.  Service Providers are asked to complete the unit pricing form and then the School or District's are comparing the unit pricing and making their decision as to their selection of the Service Provider from this pricing.  After which they then give the Scope of Work to that selected Service Provider and ask for a quote, which they then accept and enter into a contract, then submit a Form 471.  This seems not to be the intent of FCC, in that unit pricing of all potential eligible products and services without a Scope of Work simply provides the School or District with a Service Providers 'catalog of products and services', which may or may not be incidental to the actual work required.  Additionally, evaluating pricing from a unit price list does not allow the applicant to compare Service Providers proposals based on the most 'cost-effective' bid.  It unnecessarily restricts competition.  Is this type of "bidding comparison" allowed under FCC/SLD rules? John Price, Spectrum Communications

R. This issue is currently under review within SLD and we are seeking FCC guidance.
   

Q.

What is the escalation path for finding out status on invoices that are very old? The current method keeps you in a loop that gives no timeline or indication of the problem that needs to be resolved.  It is very difficult get any effective response.  If sending in emails and leaving messages at the invoice hot line do not elicit a response, where do we go to get answers? Regina Campbell, Apple Computer
R. Please submit your inquiry through structured e-mail and choose invoicing as the topic.  Please remember your assigned case number.  If you are not satisfied with the response or have not received a response, please submit a follow-up inquiry using the original assigned case number and ask that the inquiry be escalated.  It will then be routed to the next level of escalation.
   

Q.

As it is now, contracts have to be signed between the allowable contract date and the time the Form 471 is filed.  Since the Form 486 is the form that basically says, "I'm going ahead with these services and or these services have started..." wouldn't it make more sense for the contracts to have to be signed by the time the Form 486 is done rather than by the time the Form 471 is filed?  Barbara Berkenpas, E-Rate Complete
R. This issue is currently under consideration at the FCC.  The FCC has sought comment on competitive bid issues in its 3rd Report and Order .  If this is an issue of interest to you, then you may want to consider submitting comments to the FCC.
   

Q.

If an applicant posts a Form 470, and has an RFP, does the RFP have to be open for the full 28 days that the Form 470 is posted?  Most RFPs are only open 2-3 weeks. Mary Jo Sagnella, SNET
R. Yes.

REMINDER: THE NEXT SERVICE PROVIDER CALL IS SCHEDULED FOR THURSDAY, MARCH 11, 2004 (RESCHEDULED) AT 3:00PM EST.

Content Last Modified: March 9, 2004