Telecommunications Relay Services and Speech-to-Speech Services for Individuals With Hearing and Speech Disabilities

FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION

47 CFR Part 64

[CC Docket No. 98-67; FCC 98-90]

Telecommunications Relay Services and Speech-to-Speech Services

for Individuals With Hearing and Speech Disabilities

AGENCY: Federal Communications Commission.

ACTION: Proposed rule.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: On May 14, 1998, the Commission adopted a Notice of Proposed

Rulemaking (NPRM) regarding telecommunications relay services (TRS) and

speech-to-speech (STS) relay services, for persons with hearing and

speech disabilities. We believe that our proposed rule amendments will

enhance the quality of TRS, and broaden the potential universe of TRS

users. The proposals set forth in the NPRM are intended to further

promote access to telecommunications for the millions of persons with

disabilities who might otherwise be foreclosed from participation in

our increasingly telecommunications and information-oriented society.

Rules proposed in the NPRM would require that, within two years of the

publication in the Federal Register of a Report and Order in this

proceeding, common carriers providing voice transmission service must

ensure that nationwide STS relay services are available to users with

speech disabilities throughout their service area. Rules proposed in

the NPRM also would amend the Commission's current mandatory minimum

standards for TRS service to improve the effectiveness of these rules

and their application to TRS service.

DATES: Written comments are due on or before July 20, 1998. Reply

comments are due on or before September 14, 1998. Written comments by

the public on the proposed information collections are due July 20,

1998.

ADDRESSES: Office of the Secretary, Room 222, Federal Communications

Commission, 1919 M Street, NW, Washington, DC 20554. In addition to

filing comments with the Secretary, a copy of any comments on the

information collections contained herein should be submitted to Judy

Boley, Federal Communications Commission, Room 234, 1919 M Street,

N.W., Washington, DC 20554, or via the Internet to [email protected], and

to Timothy Fain, OMB Desk Officer, 10236 NEOB, 725--17th Street, N.W.,

Washington, DC 20503 or via the Internet to [email protected].

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Kris Monteith, 202/418-1098 (Voice),

202/418-0484 (TTY), 202/418-2345 (FAX), [email protected], Network

Services Division, Common Carrier Bureau. For additional information

concerning the information collections contained in this NPRM contact

Judy Boley at 202-418-0214, or via the Internet at [email protected].

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This is a summary of the Commission's Notice

of Proposed Rulemaking (NPRM) in the matter of Telecommunications Relay

Services and Speech-to-Speech Services for Individuals with Hearing and

Speech Disabilities, (CC Docket No. 98-67, adopted May 14, 1998, and

released May 20, 1998). The full text of the NPRM is available for

inspection and copying during the weekday hours of 9 a.m. to 4:30 p.m.

in the Commission's Reference Center, Room 239, 1919 M Street, N.W., or

copies may be purchased from the Commission's duplicating contractor,

ITS, Inc., 2100 M Street, N.W., Suite 140, Washington D.C. 20037, 202/

857-3800. Written comments must be submitted by the Office of

Management and Budget (OMB) on the proposed information collections on

or before August 17, 1998.

Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995

This NPRM contains proposed information collection. The Commission,

as part of its continuing effort to reduce paperwork burdens, invites

the general public and the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) to

comment on the information collections contained in this NPRM, as

required by the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, Public Law No. 104-13.

Public and agency comments are due at the same time as other comments

on this NPRM; OMB comments are August 17, 1998.

[[Page 32799]]

Comments should address: (a) whether the proposed collection of

information is necessary for the proper performance of the functions of

the Commission, including whether the information shall have practical

utility; (b) the accuracy of the Commission's burden estimates; (c)

ways to enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information

collected; and (d) ways to minimize the burden of the collection of

information on the respondents, including the use of automated

collection.

OMB Approval Number: 3060-0463.

Title: Telecommunications Relay Services and Speech-to-Speech

Services for Individuals with Hearing and Speech Disabilities--CC

Docket No. 98-67.

Form No.: N/A.

Type of Review: Revision.

------------------------------------------------------------------------

Estimated

Number of time per Total

Proposed information collection respondents response annual

(hours) burden

------------------------------------------------------------------------

Proposed 64.604(b)(2)............ 31 *1 11,315

Proposed 64.605(b)(2)............ 52 1 52

Proposed 64.605(f)............... 52 40 2,080

------------------------------------------------------------------------

* Based on 365 hours per respondent per year.

Total Annual Burden: 13,447 hours (proposed collections only)

Respondents: Business or other for-profit.

Estimated Costs per Respondent: $0.

Needs and Uses: The information collections proposed in this NPRM

are needed to ensure compliance with the Commission's mandatory minimum

standards for telecommunications relay services and will address

concerns from TRS users that state TRS programs are not providing

sufficient information to consumers on their complaint and grievance

options.

Synopsis of Notice of Proposed Rulemaking

1. The NPRM is based upon the record developed in

Telecommunications Relay Services, the Americans with Disabilities Act

of 1990, and the Telecommunications Act of 1996, Notice of Inquiry, CC

Docket No. 90-571, 12 FCC Rcd 1152 (1997). The NPRM tentatively

concludes that two forms of improved relay services, Video Relay

Interpreting (VRI) and speech-to-speech relay service (STS), are

``telecommunications relay services'' (TRS) within the meaning of Title

IV of the ADA (47 U.S.C. 225) and that the definition of ``TRS'' should

be expanded to encompass these services. VRI allows persons with

hearing disabilities to access the telephone network through the use of

sign language interpreters and desktop personal computer video

conferencing software. STS uses specially trained ``communications

assistants'' (CAs) that serve as call facilitators for persons with

speech disabilities. The tentative conclusion that these services fall

within the scope of ``TRS'' under Title IV of the ADA will allow TRS

providers to recover the costs of these improved TRS services from the

intrastate jurisdiction or from the interstate TRS Fund, as

appropriate.

2. The NPRM proposes that STS become a mandatory TRS feature two

(2) years after the effective date of final rules in this proceeding.

STS services provide access to the telephone network for people with

severe speech disabilities, a population that is still largely excluded

from the telephone network and that is not served by traditional TTY-

based TRS. The NPRM, however, does not propose to require that VRI

services become mandatory at this time, because of the high costs of

the service, an inadequate supply of qualified interpreters to provide

the service on a nationwide basis, and the need for further technical

development of the service. Allowing TRS providers to recover the costs

of voluntarily provided VRI service, however, will provide incentives

for TRS providers to continue to develop and test this service.

3. The NPRM does not propose to require multilingual relay services

(MRS) at this time, as some commenters suggested, although MRS is a

covered TRS under Title IV of the ADA. Because language needs and

population demographics vary widely from state to state, the NPRM

tentatively concludes that the decision whether or not to mandate MRS

should remain with the state TRS program administrators.

4. The NPRM also seeks comment on issues concerning access to

emergency services through TRS, because a number of commenters assert

that there are inconsistencies among the states as to how these

``critical'' TRS calls are handled. Finally, the NPRM does not propose

to require access to enhanced services through TRS, in light of

Congressional language stating that Title IV was not intended to

provide access to enhanced services. The NPRM proposes, however, to

encourage the voluntary provision of access to enhanced services by,

for example, allowing CAs to alert the TRS user to the presence of

recorded messages that cannot be relayed in a verbatim, effective

manner, and giving the TRS user the option of having the CA summarize

the message or listen for specific information.

5. The NPRM proposes a number of rule changes and clarifications

intended to improve the ``functional equivalency'' of TRS service.

First, the NPRM proposes to amend the rule requiring that 85% of all

TRS calls be answered in 10 seconds or less (47 CFR 64.604(b)(2)) to

require that: (1) calls be ``answered'' by a CA prepared to place the

TRS call, and not answered by an auto-answer system and placed on hold;

(2) the 85-10 calculation be performed on at least a daily basis; and

(3) the 10-second time period begin to run when the TRS call reaches

the TRS provider's network. Second, the NPRM proposes to require that a

CA answering and placing a TRS call stay with that call for at least

ten (10) minutes before an in-call transfer can take place. This

proposal should minimize the frequency of TRS call disruptions that

currently occur when CAs change shifts in the middle of ongoing TRS

calls. Finally, the NPRM does not propose to require a minimum typing

speed for CAs or other such CA standards at this time, because of

concern that such a regulation could shrink the labor pool of potential

CAs, a labor pool already subject to high turnover and attrition rates.

6. Consistent with the overall policy goal of the

Telecommunications Act of 1996 to introduce competition into

telecommunications markets, the NPRM seeks comment on several

competitive issues surrounding TRS. First, the NPRM seeks comment on

the issue of ``multivendoring,'' the practice of allowing several TRS

vendors to compete directly for consumers in a state for their

intrastate TRS calling needs (the vast majority of states currently

rely on a single-provider TRS mechanism, where one provider obtains

exclusive rights to deliver intrastate TRS

[[Page 32800]]

service for a period of time). The NPRM seeks comment on jurisdictional

and cost-recovery issues regarding multivendoring. Second, the NPRM

seeks comment on the use of TRS caller profile data collected by TRS

providers. Specifically, the NPRM seeks to identify whether this data

is the property of, and transferable to the state TRS program, or

whether it is proprietary to the TRS provider, who does not have to

surrender this data to its competitors in the event it no longer is the

incumbent TRS provider for that state.

7. To increase the effectiveness of the Commission's certification

process, the NPRM proposes that certified state programs shall be

required to notify the Commission of substantive changes to their state

TRS program within sixty (60) days of the effective date of the change,

and to file documentation demonstrating that the state TRS program

remains in compliance with the Commission's mandatory minimum

standards. This proposal is intended to remedy a gap in current

Commission rules where, once a five-year certification is obtained from

the Commission, certified state TRS programs are not required to update

their certification file regardless of whether or not substantive

changes occur in their programs during the five-year certification

period. Also, the NPRM proposes to amend the Commission's certification

rules to require that, as a condition of certification, a state TRS

program must demonstrate that its program makes available to TRS users

informational materials on state and Commission complaint procedures.

This proposal would address a concern from TRS users that state

programs are not providing sufficient information to consumers on their

complaint and grievance options. Finally, the NPRM seeks comment on

whether the Commission should adopt specific guidelines that can be

used to assess whether a state TRS program provides ``adequate

procedures and remedies for enforcing the requirements of the state

program,'' pursuant to 47 U.S.C. 225(f)(2)(B).

Initial Regulatory Flexibility Analysis

As required by the Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA), 5 U.S.C. 603,

the Commission has prepared this present Initial Regulatory Flexibility

Analysis (IRFA) of the possible significant economic impact on small

entities by the policies and rules proposed in the NPRM. Written public

comments are requested on this IRFA. Comments must be identified as

responses to the IRFA and must be filed by the deadlines for comments

on the NPRM. The Commission will send a copy of the NPRM, including

this IRFA, to the Chief Counsel for Advocacy of the Small Business

Administration. See 5 U.S.C. 603(a).

A. Need for, and Objectives of, the Proposed Rules

The NPRM is based upon the record developed in Telecommunications

Relay Services, the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990, and the

Telecommunications Act of 1996, Notice of Inquiry, CC Docket No. 90-

571, 12 FCC Rcd 1152 (1997). The goal of this proceeding is to consider

ways in which TRS can be improved, both to better serve current TRS

users and to ensure that TRS serves the broadest possible population of

persons with hearing and speech disabilities, consistent with Congress'

direction at 47 U.S.C. 225(d)(2) to the Commission to ensure that its

regulations encourage the use of existing technology and do not

discourage or impair the development of improved technology.

Specifically, the NPRM proposes to require nationwide speech-to-speech

(STS) service for persons with severe speech disabilities as a

mandatory TRS feature within two years of publication of final rules in

this proceeding, and requests comment on this proposal. The NPRM also

proposes a number of rule amendments based upon the comments submitted

by parties in the Notice of Inquiry, and seeks comment on those

proposals. The overall intent of these proposed rules is to improve the

effectiveness of TRS service and the Commission's oversight of TRS, and

to clear up ambiguities surrounding several of the Commission's current

TRS rules.

B. Legal Basis

Authority for actions proposed in this Notice may be found in:

Sections 1, 4(i) and (j), 201-205, 218 and 225 of the Communications

Act of 1934, as amended, 47 U.S.C. sections 151, 154(i), 151(j), 201-

205, 218 and 225.

C. Description and Estimate of the Number of Small Entities To Which

the Proposed Rules Will Apply

The RFA directs agencies to provide a description of and, where

feasible, an estimate of the number of small entities that may be

affected by the proposed rules, if adopted. 5 U.S.C. 603(b)(3). The RFA

generally defines the term ``small entity'' as having the same meaning

as the terms ``small business,'' ``small organization,'' and ``small

governmental jurisdiction.'' 5 U.S.C. 601(6). In addition, the term

``small business'' has the same meaning as the term ``small business

concern'' under the Small Business Act. 5 U.S.C. 601(3) (incorporating

by reference the definition of ``small business concern'' in 15 U.S.C.

632). Pursuant to the RFA, the statutory definition of a small business

applies ``unless an agency, after consultation with the Office of

Advocacy of the Small Business Administration and after opportunity for

public comment, establishes one or more definitions of such term which

are appropriate to the activities of the agency and publishes such

definition(s) in the Federal Register.'' Id. A small business concern

is one which: (1) is independently owned and operated; (2) is not

dominant in its field of operation; and (3) satisfies any additional

criteria established by the Small Business Administration (SBA). Small

Business Act, 15 U.S.C. 632 (1996).

TRS Providers. Neither the Commission nor the SBA has developed a

definition of small entity specifically applicable to providers of

telecommunications relay services (TRS). The closest applicable

definition under the SBA rules is for telephone communications

companies other than radiotelephone (wireless) companies. Id. The SBA

defines such establishments to be small businesses when they have no

more than 1,500 employees. 13 CFR 121.201, Standard Industrial

Classification (SIC) code 4813. According to our most recent data,

there are 12 interstate TRS providers, and these consist of

interexchange carriers, local exchange carriers, and state-managed

entities. We do not have data specifying the number of these providers

that are either dominant in their field of operations, are not

independently owned and operated, or have more than 1,500 employees,

and we are thus unable at this time to estimate with greater precision

the number of TRS providers that would qualify as small business

concerns under the SBA's definition. We note, however, that these

providers include large interexchange carriers and incumbent local

exchange carriers. Consequently, we estimate that there are fewer than

12 small TRS providers that may be affected by the proposed rules, if

adopted. We seek comment generally on our analysis identifying TRS

providers, and specifically on whether we should conclude, for

Regulatory Flexibility Act purposes, that any TRS providers are small

entities.

D. Description of Projected Reporting, Recordkeeping, and Other

Compliance Requirements

This NPRM proposes the following information collection: that

states be

[[Page 32801]]

required to notify the Commission of substantive changes in their state

TRS program within 60 days of the effective date of the change and to

file documentation demonstrating that the state TRS program remains in

compliance with the Commission's mandatory minimum standards. The

information collection generally would be performed by a state official

familiar with the state's telecommunications relay program; it would

have no impact on large or small entities. The Commission estimates

that the costs of compliance with this information collection will be

minimal.

E. Significant Alternatives Minimizing Impact on Small Entities and

Consistent With Stated Objectives

The proposals in the NPRM, and the comments the Commission seeks

regarding them, are part of the Commission's analysis of its role with

respect to the implementation and operation of nationwide TRS for

persons with hearing and speech disabilities. The guiding principal

shaping these proposals is Congress' direction to the Commission to

ensure that TRS keeps pace with advancing technology and that the

Commission's rules do not discourage the implementation of

technological advances or improvements. The majority of TRS service is

provided by large interexchange carriers and incumbent local exchange

carriers, and we believe that the number of small entities impacted by

these proposals would be potentially very small. With respect to

proposed amendments to the Commission's rules governing TRS, by

statute, common carriers providing voice transmission services who are

subject to the TRS rules, including small entities, may comply with

their obligations individually, through designees, through a

competitively selected vendor, or in concert with other carriers. 47

U.S.C. 225(c). For this reason, the Commission expects that the

proposed rule amendments will have a minimal impact on small entities.

Moreover, the NPRM does not propose any reporting requirements

applicable to small entities. We tentatively conclude that our

proposals in the NPRM would impose minimum burdens on small entities.

We encourage comment on this tentative conclusion.

F. Federal Rules That Duplicate, Overlap, or Conflict With Proposed

Rules

None.

List of Subjects in 47 CFR Part 64

Communications common carriers, disabilities, telephone,

telecommunications relay service.

Federal Communications Commission.

Magalie Roman Salas,

Secretary.

[FR Doc. 98-15719 Filed 6-15-98; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6712-01-P