On December 19, 2025, the FCC released the order and denied Brooklyn Public Library’s two Applications for Review and affirms full recovery of its FY 2014 E-Rate funding after finding that the library failed to follow its own bid evaluation process and did not select the most cost-effective bid. The FCC determined that this error constituted a substantive competitive bidding violation—not a waivable clerical mistake.
FCC Decision
The Commission denied Brooklyn Public Library’s 2017 and 2025 Applications for Review, which challenged earlier Wireline Competition Bureau decisions concerning its FY 2014 E-Rate funding.
The FCC concluded that the library violated sections 54.504(a)(1)(ix) and 54.511(a) of the Commission’s rules by failing to select the most cost-effective bid. As a result, the Commission directed USAC to proceed with full recovery of approximately $570,675 in FY 2014 E-Rate support.
Key Case Facts
For FY 2014, Brooklyn Public Library filed an FCC Form 470 and received bids for Internet and transport services from Cogent, Verizon, and incumbent provider Windstream.
The library used a bid evaluation worksheet that scored a Prices/Charges factor on a 1–5 scale, with a score of “5” assigned to the lowest-priced bid. However, the library misapplied its own scoring rubric, awarding Windstream—the highest-cost bidder—a higher price score than Verizon.
A KPMG audit conducted for USAC determined that if the library had correctly applied its price scoring criteria, Cogent—the lowest-cost bidder, with monthly costs ranging from approximately $5,298 to $8,956 compared to Windstream’s $55,298—would have been selected as the most cost-effective provider.
FCC’s Finding of a Rule Violation
The Commission found that the mis-scoring of the price factor was a substantive competitive bidding error because it altered the outcome of the procurement and resulted in the selection of a significantly higher-priced provider, leading to excessive E-Rate disbursements.
The FCC distinguished this error from ministerial or clerical mistakes—such as typographical errors on forms—that do not affect funding amounts and have previously qualified for waiver relief (e.g., Bishop Perry, Aberdeen, Allendale).
The order emphasizes that failure to correctly apply price scoring in a manner that results in the selection of a higher-cost bid undermines fundamental E-Rate requirements that price be the primary factor and that applicants choose the most cost-effective offering.
Consideration of Brooklyn’s Arguments
Brooklyn argued that the mis-scoring was a minor, unintentional clerical error and requested either a full waiver or partial recovery limited to the price difference between the Cogent and Windstream bids.
The Commission rejected this argument, finding that the error directly caused a non–cost-effective outcome and resulted in the receipt of more funding than the applicant was entitled to—circumstances that cannot be characterized as mere paperwork mistakes.
Brooklyn also attempted to distinguish prior precedents, including Central Islip and Chicago Public Schools, and cited concerns raised by then-Commissioner Pai regarding harsh penalties for paperwork errors. The Commission found those precedents applicable and noted that Commissioner Pai had concurred in enforcing competitive bidding rules in Henrico County.
The FCC further rejected claims based on financial hardship and community impact, reiterating that financial need and potential harm to patrons do not constitute “special circumstances” sufficient to waive core competitive bidding requirements.
Enforcement and Recovery Implications
The order reaffirms that competitive bidding violations that materially affect procurement outcomes require full recovery of associated E-Rate funds, consistent with the Fifth Report and Order.
The Commission explicitly declined Brooklyn’s request for partial recovery, warning that allowing recovery limited only to the price differential would weaken incentives for strict compliance with bid evaluation criteria and could encourage post-hoc waiver requests following non-compliant vendor selections.
More broadly, the decision underscores that E-Rate applicants must:
- Use price as the primary factor in vendor selection.
- Follow their bid evaluation matrices exactly; and
- Ensure that errors do not result in the selection of higher-priced bids or increased funding, or risk full recovery without waiver relief.
Click here to view the full Brooklyn Library Order: Brooklyn Library FCC Order
