FCC Record, Volume 26, No. 7, Pages 4843 to 5761, March 28-April 08, 2011

providers for USF purposes are therefore not required to file the FCC Form 499-A, unless required to do
so by the Commission's rules governing contributions to other federal regulatory programs.6
3. Generally, the Commission's rules may be waived for good cause shown.7 The
Commission may exercise its discretion to waive a rule where the particular facts make strict compliance
inconsistent with the public interest.! In addition, the Commission may take into account considerations
of hardship, equity, or more effective implementation of overall policy on an individual basis.9 Waiver of
the Commission's rules is appropriate only if both (i) special circumstances warrant a deviation from the
general rule and (ii) such deviation will serve the public interest.'o
4. We find that USAC was correct in assessing Manitowoc late filing fees for its failure to
timely file its 2010 FCC Form 499-A." Manitowoc's claim that it did not file its 2010 FCC Form 499-A
by the April 1 deadline because it failed to realize it was required to do so is not a unique circumstance
sufficient to warrant a waiver of the deadline.'2 Businesses associated with the Commission have a
responsibility to familiarize themselves with the rules and regulations that are relevant to their business."
Moreover, Manitowoc's reliance on the fact that it is a "very small municipal utility" that owes no
contribution to the USF, without more, is not sufficient to demonstrate that waiver is appropriate under
the circumstances. As previously noted, although a telecommunications provider may not be required to
contribute to the USF, a carrier may nonetheless be required by the Commission's rules to file the FCC
Form 499-A for purposes of contributions to the other federal regulatory support mechanisms.'4 We
therefore find that Manitowoc has failed to show good cause to waive the deadline associated with the
FCC Form 499-A, and accordingly we deny its requested waiver, consistent with precedent's
5. 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, 254, and pursuant
to sections 0.91, 0.291, 1.3, and 54.722(a) of the Commission's rules, 47 C.F.R. 0.91, 0.291, 1.3,
54.722(a), that the request filed by Manitowoc on October 1, 2010 IS DENIED.
6. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that this order SHALL BE transmitted to the Universal
Service Administrative Company.
6 Id.; 47 C.F.R. 52.17(b) (numbering administration); 47 C.F.R. 52.32(b) (local number portability); 47 C.F.R.
64.604(c)(5XiiiXB) (telecommunications relay service).
7 47 C.F.R. 1.3.
E Northeast Cellular Telephone Co. v. FCC, 897 F.2d 1164, 1166 (D.C. Cir. 1990) (Northeast Cellular).
9 WAITRadio v. FCC, 418 F.2d 1153, 1159 (D.C. Cir. 1969), affirmed by WAIT Radio v. FCC, 459 F.2d 1203 (D.C.
Cir. 1972); Northeast Cellular, 897 F.2d at 1166.
10 NetworklP, LLC v. FCC, 548 F.3d 116, 125-28 (D.C. Cir. 2008); Northeast Cellular, 897 F.2d at 1166.
" See 47 C.F.R. 54.713.
2 See, e.g., Requests for Review of Decisions of the Universal Service Administrator by Achilles Networks, Inc. et
al., WC Docket No. 06-122, Order, 25 FCC Rcd 4646, 4649, para. 8 (Wireline Comp. Bur. 2010); Request for
Review by Atlantic Digital, Inc., of a Decision of the Universal Service Administrator, CC Docket No. 96-45, Order,
20 FCC Rcd 4224, 4225, para. 4 (Wireline Comp. Bur. 2005).
" 47 C.F.R. 0.406.
" 47 C.F.R. 54.708, 52.17(b), 52.32(b), 64.604(cXSXiiiXB).
'" See supra note 1 2.

4926

Federal Communications Commission

DA 11-566

United States. Federal Communications Commission. FCC Record, Volume 26, No. 7, Pages 4843 to 5761, March 28-April 08, 2011. Washington D.C.. UNT Digital Library. http://digital.library.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metadc52169/. Accessed January 31, 2015.