[Congressional Bills 116th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[S. 151 Engrossed Amendment House (EAH)]
<DOC>
In the House of Representatives, U. S.,
December 4, 2019.
Resolved, That the bill from the Senate (S. 151) entitled ``An Act
to deter criminal robocall violations and improve enforcement of
section 227(b) of the Communications Act of 1934, and for other
purposes.'', do pass with the following
AMENDMENT:
Strike out all after the enacting clause and insert:
SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.
This Act may be cited as the ``Pallone-Thune Telephone Robocall
Abuse Criminal Enforcement and Deterrence Act'' or the ``Pallone-Thune
TRACED Act''.
SEC. 2. COMMISSION DEFINED.
In this Act, the term ``Commission'' means the Federal
Communications Commission.
SEC. 3. FORFEITURE.
(a) In General.--Section 227 of the Communications Act of 1934 (47
U.S.C. 227) is amended--
(1) in subsection (b), by adding at the end the following:
``(4) Civil forfeiture.--
``(A) In general.--Any person that is determined by
the Commission, in accordance with paragraph (3) or (4)
of section 503(b), to have violated this subsection
shall be liable to the United States for a forfeiture
penalty pursuant to section 503(b)(1). Paragraph (5) of
section 503(b) shall not apply in the case of a
violation of this subsection. A forfeiture penalty
under this subparagraph shall be in addition to any
other penalty provided for by this Act. The amount of
the forfeiture penalty determined under this
subparagraph shall be determined in accordance with
subparagraphs (A) through (F) of section 503(b)(2).
``(B) Violation with intent.--Any person that is
determined by the Commission, in accordance with
paragraph (3) or (4) of section 503(b), to have
violated this subsection with the intent to cause such
violation shall be liable to the United States for a
forfeiture penalty pursuant to section 503(b)(1).
Paragraph (5) of section 503(b) shall not apply in the
case of a violation of this subsection. A forfeiture
penalty under this subparagraph shall be in addition to
any other penalty provided for by this Act. The amount
of the forfeiture penalty determined under this
subparagraph shall be equal to an amount determined in
accordance with subparagraphs (A) through (F) of
section 503(b)(2) plus an additional penalty not to
exceed $10,000.
``(C) Recovery.--Any forfeiture penalty determined
under subparagraph (A) or (B) shall be recoverable
under section 504(a).
``(D) Procedure.--No forfeiture liability shall be
determined under subparagraph (A) or (B) against any
person unless such person receives the notice required
by section 503(b)(3) or section 503(b)(4).
``(E) Statute of limitations.--Notwithstanding
paragraph (6) of section 503(b), no forfeiture penalty
shall be determined or imposed against any person--
``(i) under subparagraph (A) if the
violation charged occurred more than 1 year
prior to the date of issuance of the required
notice or notice of apparent liability; or
``(ii) under subparagraph (B) if the
violation charged occurred more than 4 years
prior to the date of issuance of the required
notice or notice of apparent liability.
``(F) Rule of construction.--Notwithstanding any
law to the contrary, the Commission may not determine
or impose a forfeiture penalty on a person under both
subparagraphs (A) and (B) based on the same conduct.'';
(2) in subsection (e)(5)(A)--
(A) in clause (ii), by adding at the end the
following: ``Paragraph (5) of section 503(b) shall not
apply in the case of a violation of this subsection.'';
and
(B) in clause (iv)--
(i) in the heading, by striking ``2-year''
and inserting ``4-year''; and
(ii) by striking ``2 years'' and inserting
``4 years''; and
(3) by striking subsection (h) and inserting the following:
``(h) Annual Report to Congress on Robocalls and Transmission of
Misleading or Inaccurate Caller Identification Information.--
``(1) Report required.--Not later than 1 year after the
date of the enactment of this subsection, and annually
thereafter, the Commission, after consultation with the Federal
Trade Commission, shall submit to Congress a report regarding
enforcement by the Commission of subsections (b), (c), (d), and
(e) during the preceding calendar year.
``(2) Matters for inclusion.--Each report required by
paragraph (1) shall include the following:
``(A) The number of complaints received by the
Commission during each of the preceding 5 calendar
years, for each of the following categories:
``(i) Complaints alleging that a consumer
received a call in violation of subsection (b)
or (c).
``(ii) Complaints alleging that a consumer
received a call in violation of the standards
prescribed under subsection (d).
``(iii) Complaints alleging that a consumer
received a call in connection with which
misleading or inaccurate caller identification
information was transmitted in violation of
subsection (e).
``(B) The number of citations issued by the
Commission pursuant to section 503(b) during the
preceding calendar year to enforce subsection (d), and
details of each such citation.
``(C) The number of notices of apparent liability
issued by the Commission pursuant to section 503(b)
during the preceding calendar year to enforce
subsections (b), (c), (d), and (e), and details of each
such notice including any proposed forfeiture amount.
``(D) The number of final orders imposing
forfeiture penalties issued pursuant to section 503(b)
during the preceding calendar year to enforce such
subsections, and details of each such order including
the forfeiture imposed.
``(E) The amount of forfeiture penalties or
criminal fines collected, during the preceding calendar
year, by the Commission or the Attorney General for
violations of such subsections, and details of each
case in which such a forfeiture penalty or criminal
fine was collected.
``(F) Proposals for reducing the number of calls
made in violation of such subsections.
``(G) An analysis of the contribution by providers
of interconnected VoIP service and non-interconnected
VoIP service that discount high-volume, unlawful,
short-duration calls to the total number of calls made
in violation of such subsections, and recommendations
on how to address such contribution in order to
decrease the total number of calls made in violation of
such subsections.
``(3) No additional reporting required.--The Commission
shall prepare the report required by paragraph (1) without
requiring the provision of additional information from
providers of telecommunications service or voice service (as
defined in section 4(a) of the Pallone-Thune TRACED Act).''.
(b) Applicability.--The amendments made by this section shall not
affect any action or proceeding commenced before and pending on the
date of the enactment of this Act.
(c) Deadline for Regulations.--The Commission shall prescribe
regulations to implement the amendments made by this section not later
than 270 days after the date of the enactment of this Act.
SEC. 4. CALL AUTHENTICATION.
(a) Definitions.--In this section:
(1) STIR/SHAKEN authentication framework.--The term ``STIR/
SHAKEN authentication framework'' means the secure telephone
identity revisited and signature-based handling of asserted
information using tokens standards proposed by the information
and communications technology industry.
(2) Voice service.--The term ``voice service''--
(A) means any service that is interconnected with
the public switched telephone network and that
furnishes voice communications to an end user using
resources from the North American Numbering Plan or any
successor to the North American Numbering Plan adopted
by the Commission under section 251(e)(1) of the
Communications Act of 1934 (47 U.S.C. 251(e)(1)); and
(B) includes--
(i) transmissions from a telephone
facsimile machine, computer, or other device to
a telephone facsimile machine; and
(ii) without limitation, any service that
enables real-time, two-way voice
communications, including any service that
requires internet protocol-compatible customer
premises equipment (commonly known as ``CPE'')
and permits out-bound calling, whether or not
the service is one-way or two-way voice over
internet protocol.
(b) Authentication Frameworks.--
(1) In general.--Subject to paragraphs (2) and (3), and in
accordance with paragraph (6), not later than 18 months after
the date of the enactment of this Act, the Commission shall--
(A) require a provider of voice service to
implement the STIR/SHAKEN authentication framework in
the internet protocol networks of the provider of voice
service; and
(B) require a provider of voice service to take
reasonable measures to implement an effective call
authentication framework in the non-internet protocol
networks of the provider of voice service.
(2) Implementation.--The Commission shall not take the
action described in paragraph (1) with respect to a provider of
voice service if the Commission determines, not later than 12
months after the date of the enactment of this Act, that such
provider of voice service--
(A) in internet protocol networks--
(i) has adopted the STIR/SHAKEN
authentication framework for calls on the
internet protocol networks of the provider of
voice service;
(ii) has agreed voluntarily to participate
with other providers of voice service in the
STIR/SHAKEN authentication framework;
(iii) has begun to implement the STIR/
SHAKEN authentication framework; and
(iv) will be capable of fully implementing
the STIR/SHAKEN authentication framework not
later than 18 months after the date of the
enactment of this Act; and
(B) in non-internet protocol networks--
(i) has taken reasonable measures to
implement an effective call authentication
framework; and
(ii) will be capable of fully implementing
an effective call authentication framework not
later than 18 months after the date of the
enactment of this Act.
(3) Implementation report.--Not later than 12 months after
the date of the enactment of this Act, the Commission shall
submit to the Committee on Energy and Commerce of the House of
Representatives and the Committee on Commerce, Science, and
Transportation of the Senate a report on the determination
required under paragraph (2), which shall include--
(A) an analysis of the extent to which providers of
voice service have implemented the call authentication
frameworks described in subparagraphs (A) and (B) of
paragraph (1), including whether the availability of
necessary equipment and equipment upgrades has impacted
such implementation; and
(B) an assessment of the efficacy of the call
authentication frameworks described in subparagraphs
(A) and (B) of paragraph (1) in addressing all aspects
of call authentication.
(4) Review and revision or replacement.--Not later than 3
years after the date of the enactment of this Act, and every 3
years thereafter, the Commission, after public notice and an
opportunity for comment, shall--
(A) assess the efficacy of the technologies used
for call authentication frameworks implemented under
this section;
(B) based on the assessment under subparagraph (A),
revise or replace the call authentication frameworks
under this section if the Commission determines it is
in the public interest to do so; and
(C) submit to the Committee on Energy and Commerce
of the House of Representatives and the Committee on
Commerce, Science, and Transportation of the Senate a
report on the findings of the assessment under
subparagraph (A) and on any actions to revise or
replace the call authentication frameworks under
subparagraph (B).
(5) Extension of implementation deadline.--
(A) Burdens and barriers to implementation.--Not
later than 12 months after the date of the enactment of
this Act, and as appropriate thereafter, the
Commission--
(i) shall assess any burdens or barriers to
the implementation required by paragraph (1),
including--
(I) for providers of voice service
to the extent the networks of such
providers use time-division
multiplexing;
(II) for small providers of voice
service and those in rural areas; and
(III) the inability to purchase or
upgrade equipment to support the call
authentication frameworks under this
section, or lack of availability of
such equipment; and
(ii) in connection with an assessment under
clause (i), may, upon a public finding of undue
hardship, delay required compliance with the
18-month time period described in paragraph
(1), for a reasonable period of time, for a
provider or class of providers of voice
service, or type of voice calls, as necessary
for that provider or class of providers or type
of calls to participate in the implementation
in order to address the identified burdens and
barriers.
(B) Delay of compliance required for certain non-
internet protocol networks.--Subject to subparagraphs
(C) through (F), for any provider or class of providers
of voice service, or type of voice calls, only to the
extent that such a provider or class of providers of
voice service, or type of voice calls, materially
relies on a non-internet protocol network for the
provision of such service or calls, the Commission
shall grant a delay of required compliance under
subparagraph (A)(ii) until a call authentication
protocol has been developed for calls delivered over
non-internet protocol networks and is reasonably
available.
(C) Robocall mitigation program.--
(i) Program required.--During the time of a
delay of compliance granted under subparagraph
(A)(ii), the Commission shall require, pursuant
to the authority of the Commission, that any
provider subject to such delay shall implement
an appropriate robocall mitigation program to
prevent unlawful robocalls from originating on
the network of the provider.
(ii) Additional requirements.--If the
consortium registered under section 13(d)
identifies a provider of voice service that is
subject to a delay of compliance granted under
subparagraph (A)(ii) as repeatedly originating
large-scale unlawful robocall campaigns, the
Commission shall require such provider to take
action to ensure that such provider does not
continue to originate such calls.
(iii) Minimization of burden.--The
Commission shall make reasonable efforts to
minimize the burden of any robocall mitigation
required pursuant to clause (ii), which may
include prescribing certain specific robocall
mitigation practices for providers of voice
service that have repeatedly originated large-
scale unlawful robocall campaigns.
(D) Full participation.--The Commission shall take
reasonable measures to address any issues in an
assessment under subparagraph (A)(i) and enable as
promptly as reasonable full participation of all
classes of providers of voice service and types of
voice calls to receive the highest level of trust. Such
measures shall include, without limitation, as
appropriate, limiting or terminating a delay of
compliance granted to a provider under subparagraph (B)
if the Commission determines in such assessment that
the provider is not making reasonable efforts to
develop the call authentication protocol described in
such subparagraph.
(E) Alternative methodologies.--The Commission
shall identify, in consultation with small providers of
voice service and those in rural areas, alternative
effective methodologies to protect customers from
unauthenticated calls during any delay of compliance
granted under subparagraph (A)(ii).
(F) Revision of delay of compliance.--Not less
frequently than annually after the first delay of
compliance is granted under subparagraph (A)(ii), the
Commission--
(i) shall consider revising or extending
any delay of compliance granted under
subparagraph (A)(ii);
(ii) may revise such delay of compliance;
and
(iii) shall issue a public notice with
regard to whether such delay of compliance
remains necessary, including--
(I) why such delay of compliance
remains necessary; and
(II) when the Commission expects to
achieve the goal of full participation
as described in subparagraph (D).
(6) No additional cost to consumers or small business
customers.--The Commission shall prohibit providers of voice
service from adding any additional line item charges to
consumer or small business customer subscribers for the
effective call authentication technology required under
paragraph (1).
(7) Accurate identification.--Not later than 12 months
after the date of the enactment of this Act, the Commission
shall issue best practices that providers of voice service may
use as part of the implementation of effective call
authentication frameworks under paragraph (1) to take steps to
ensure the calling party is accurately identified.
(c) Safe Harbor and Other Regulations.--
(1) In general.--Consistent with the regulations prescribed
under subsection (j) of section 227 of the Communications Act
of 1934 (47 U.S.C. 227), as added by section 10, the Commission
shall, not later than 1 year after the date of the enactment of
this Act, promulgate rules--
(A) establishing when a provider of voice service
may block a voice call based, in whole or in part, on
information provided by the call authentication
frameworks under subsection (b), with no additional
line item charge;
(B) establishing a safe harbor for a provider of
voice service from liability for unintended or
inadvertent blocking of calls or for the unintended or
inadvertent misidentification of the level of trust for
individual calls based, in whole or in part, on
information provided by the call authentication
frameworks under subsection (b);
(C) establishing a process to permit a calling
party adversely affected by the information provided by
the call authentication frameworks under subsection (b)
to verify the authenticity of the calling party's
calls; and
(D) ensuring that calls originating from a provider
of voice service in an area where the provider is
subject to a delay of compliance with the time period
described in subsection (b)(1) are not unreasonably
blocked because the calls are not able to be
authenticated.
(2) Considerations.--In establishing the safe harbor under
paragraph (1), consistent with the regulations prescribed under
subsection (j) of section 227 of the Communications Act of 1934
(47 U.S.C. 227), as added by section 10, the Commission shall
consider limiting the liability of a provider of voice service
based on the extent to which the provider of voice service--
(A) blocks or identifies calls based, in whole or
in part, on the information provided by the call
authentication frameworks under subsection (b);
(B) implemented procedures based, in whole or in
part, on the information provided by the call
authentication frameworks under subsection (b); and
(C) used reasonable care, including making all
reasonable efforts to avoid blocking emergency public
safety calls.
(d) Rule of Construction.--Nothing in this section shall preclude
the Commission from initiating a rulemaking pursuant to its existing
statutory authority.
SEC. 5. INTERAGENCY WORKING GROUP.
(a) In General.--The Attorney General, in consultation with the
Chairman of the Commission, shall convene an interagency working group
to study Government prosecution of violations of section 227(b) of the
Communications Act of 1934 (47 U.S.C. 227(b)).
(b) Duties.--In carrying out the study under subsection (a), the
interagency working group shall--
(1) determine whether, and if so how, any Federal laws,
including regulations, policies, and practices, or budgetary or
jurisdictional constraints inhibit the prosecution of such
violations;
(2) identify existing and potential Federal policies and
programs that encourage and improve coordination among Federal
departments and agencies and States, and between States, in the
prevention and prosecution of such violations;
(3) identify existing and potential international policies
and programs that encourage and improve coordination between
countries in the prevention and prosecution of such violations;
and
(4) consider--
(A) the benefit and potential sources of additional
resources for the Federal prevention and prosecution of
criminal violations of that section;
(B) whether to establish memoranda of understanding
regarding the prevention and prosecution of such
violations between--
(i) the States;
(ii) the States and the Federal Government;
and
(iii) the Federal Government and a foreign
government;
(C) whether to establish a process to allow States
to request Federal subpoenas from the Commission;
(D) whether extending civil enforcement authority
to the States would assist in the successful prevention
and prosecution of such violations;
(E) whether increased forfeiture and imprisonment
penalties are appropriate, such as extending
imprisonment for such a violation to a term longer than
2 years;
(F) whether regulation of any entity that enters
into a business arrangement with a common carrier
regulated under title II of the Communications Act of
1934 (47 U.S.C. 201 et seq.) for the specific purpose
of carrying, routing, or transmitting a call that
constitutes such a violation would assist in the
successful prevention and prosecution of such
violations; and
(G) the extent to which, if any, Department of
Justice policies to pursue the prosecution of
violations causing economic harm, physical danger, or
erosion of an inhabitant's peace of mind and sense of
security inhibit the prevention or prosecution of such
violations.
(c) Members.--The interagency working group shall be composed of
such representatives of Federal departments and agencies as the
Attorney General considers appropriate, such as--
(1) the Department of Commerce;
(2) the Department of State;
(3) the Department of Homeland Security;
(4) the Commission;
(5) the Federal Trade Commission; and
(6) the Bureau of Consumer Financial Protection.
(d) Non-Federal Stakeholders.--In carrying out the study under
subsection (a), the interagency working group shall consult with such
non-Federal stakeholders as the Attorney General determines have the
relevant expertise, including the National Association of Attorneys
General.
(e) Report to Congress.--Not later than 270 days after the date of
the enactment of this Act, the interagency working group shall submit
to the Committee on Energy and Commerce of the House of Representatives
and the Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation of the
Senate a report on the findings of the study under subsection (a),
including--
(1) any recommendations regarding the prevention and
prosecution of such violations; and
(2) a description of what progress, if any, relevant
Federal departments and agencies have made in implementing the
recommendations under paragraph (1).
SEC. 6. ACCESS TO NUMBER RESOURCES.
(a) In General.--
(1) Examination of fcc policies.--Not later than 180 days
after the date of the enactment of this Act, the Commission
shall commence a proceeding to determine how Commission
policies regarding access to number resources, including number
resources for toll-free and non-toll-free telephone numbers,
could be modified, including by establishing registration and
compliance obligations, and requirements that providers of
voice service given access to number resources take sufficient
steps to know the identity of the customers of such providers,
to help reduce access to numbers by potential perpetrators of
violations of section 227(b) of the Communications Act of 1934
(47 U.S.C. 227(b)).
(2) Regulations.--If the Commission determines under
paragraph (1) that modifying the policies described in that
paragraph could help achieve the goal described in that
paragraph, the Commission shall prescribe regulations to
implement those policy modifications.
(b) Authority.--Any person who knowingly, through an employee,
agent, officer, or otherwise, directly or indirectly, by or through any
means or device whatsoever, is a party to obtaining number resources,
including number resources for toll-free and non-toll-free telephone
numbers, from a common carrier regulated under title II of the
Communications Act of 1934 (47 U.S.C. 201 et seq.), in violation of a
regulation prescribed under subsection (a), shall, notwithstanding
section 503(b)(5) of the Communications Act of 1934 (47 U.S.C.
503(b)(5)), be subject to a forfeiture penalty under section 503(b) of
that Act (47 U.S.C. 503(b)). A forfeiture penalty under this subsection
shall be in addition to any other penalty provided for by law.
SEC. 7. PROTECTIONS FROM SPOOFED CALLS.
(a) In General.--Not later than 1 year after the date of the
enactment of this Act, and consistent with the call authentication
frameworks under section 4, the Commission shall initiate a rulemaking
to help protect a subscriber from receiving unwanted calls or text
messages from a caller using an unauthenticated number.
(b) Considerations.--In promulgating rules under subsection (a),
the Commission shall consider--
(1) the Government Accountability Office report on
combating the fraudulent provision of misleading or inaccurate
caller identification information required by section 503(c) of
division P of the Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2018 (Public
Law 115-141);
(2) the best means of ensuring that a subscriber or
provider has the ability to block calls from a caller using an
unauthenticated North American Numbering Plan number;
(3) the impact on the privacy of a subscriber from
unauthenticated calls;
(4) the effectiveness in verifying the accuracy of caller
identification information; and
(5) the availability and cost of providing protection from
the unwanted calls or text messages described in subsection
(a).
SEC. 8. CONSUMER PROTECTIONS FOR EXEMPTIONS.
(a) In General.--Section 227(b)(2) of the Communications Act of
1934 (47 U.S.C. 227(b)(2)) is amended--
(1) in subparagraph (G)(ii), by striking ``; and'' and
inserting a semicolon;
(2) in subparagraph (H), by striking the period at the end
and inserting ``; and''; and
(3) by adding at the end the following:
``(I) shall ensure that any exemption under
subparagraph (B) or (C) contains requirements for calls
made in reliance on the exemption with respect to--
``(i) the classes of parties that may make
such calls;
``(ii) the classes of parties that may be
called; and
``(iii) the number of such calls that a
calling party may make to a particular called
party.''.
(b) Deadline for Regulations.--In the case of any exemption issued
under subparagraph (B) or (C) of section 227(b)(2) of the
Communications Act of 1934 (47 U.S.C. 227(b)(2)) before the date of the
enactment of this Act, the Commission shall, not later than 1 year
after such date of enactment, prescribe such regulations, or amend such
existing regulations, as necessary to ensure that such exemption
contains each requirement described in subparagraph (I) of such
section, as added by subsection (a). To the extent such an exemption
contains such a requirement before such date of enactment, nothing in
this section or the amendments made by this section shall be construed
to require the Commission to prescribe or amend regulations relating to
such requirement.
SEC. 9. REPORT ON REASSIGNED NUMBER DATABASE.
(a) Report to Congress.--Not later than 1 year after the date of
the enactment of this Act, the Commission shall submit to Congress, and
make publicly available on the website of the Commission, a report on
the status of the efforts of the Commission pursuant to the Second
Report and Order in the matter of Advanced Methods to Target and
Eliminate Unlawful Robocalls (CG Docket No. 17-59; FCC 18-177; adopted
on December 12, 2018).
(b) Contents.--The report required by subsection (a) shall describe
the efforts of the Commission, as described in such Second Report and
Order, to ensure--
(1) the establishment of a database of telephone numbers
that have been disconnected, in order to provide a person
making calls subject to section 227(b) of the Communications
Act of 1934 (47 U.S.C. 227(b)) with comprehensive and timely
information to enable such person to avoid making calls without
the prior express consent of the called party because the
number called has been reassigned;
(2) that a person who wishes to use any safe harbor
provided pursuant to such Second Report and Order with respect
to making calls must demonstrate that, before making the call,
the person appropriately checked the most recent update of the
database and the database reported that the number had not been
disconnected; and
(3) that if the person makes the demonstration described in
paragraph (2), the person will be shielded from liability under
section 227(b) of the Communications Act of 1934 (47 U.S.C.
227(b)) should the database return an inaccurate result.
SEC. 10. STOP ROBOCALLS.
(a) Information Sharing Regarding Robocall and Spoofing
Violations.--Section 227 of the Communications Act of 1934 (47 U.S.C.
227) is amended by adding at the end the following:
``(i) Information Sharing.--
``(1) In general.--Not later than 18 months after the date
of the enactment of this subsection, the Commission shall
prescribe regulations to establish a process that streamlines
the ways in which a private entity may voluntarily share with
the Commission information relating to--
``(A) a call made or a text message sent in
violation of subsection (b); or
``(B) a call or text message for which misleading
or inaccurate caller identification information was
caused to be transmitted in violation of subsection
(e).
``(2) Text message defined.--In this subsection, the term
`text message' has the meaning given such term in subsection
(e)(8).''.
(b) Robocall Blocking Service.--Section 227 of the Communications
Act of 1934 (47 U.S.C. 227), as amended by subsection (a), is further
amended by adding at the end the following:
``(j) Robocall Blocking Service.--
``(1) In general.--Not later than 1 year after the date of
the enactment of this subsection, the Commission shall take a
final agency action to ensure the robocall blocking services
provided on an opt-out or opt-in basis pursuant to the
Declaratory Ruling of the Commission in the matter of Advanced
Methods to Target and Eliminate Unlawful Robocalls (CG Docket
No. 17-59; FCC 19-51; adopted on June 6, 2019)--
``(A) are provided with transparency and effective
redress options for both--
``(i) consumers; and
``(ii) callers; and
``(B) are provided with no additional line item
charge to consumers and no additional charge to callers
for resolving complaints related to erroneously blocked
calls; and
``(C) make all reasonable efforts to avoid blocking
emergency public safety calls.
``(2) Text message defined.--In this subsection, the term
`text message' has the meaning given such term in subsection
(e)(8).''.
(c) Study on Information Requirements for Certain VoIP Service
Providers.--
(1) In general.--The Commission shall conduct a study
regarding whether to require a provider of covered VoIP service
to--
(A) provide to the Commission contact information
for such provider and keep such information current;
and
(B) retain records relating to each call
transmitted over the covered VoIP service of such
provider that are sufficient to trace such call back to
the source of such call.
(2) Report to congress.--Not later than 18 months after the
date of the enactment of this Act, the Commission shall submit
to Congress a report on the results of the study conducted
under paragraph (1).
(3) Covered voip service defined.--In this subsection, the
term ``covered VoIP service'' means a service that--
(A) is an interconnected VoIP service (as defined
in section 3 of the Communications Act of 1934 (47
U.S.C. 153)); or
(B) would be an interconnected VoIP service (as so
defined) except that the service permits users to
terminate calls to the public switched telephone
network but does not permit users to receive calls that
originate on the public switched telephone network.
(d) Transitional Rule Regarding Definition of Text Message.--
Paragraph (2) of subsection (i) of section 227 of the Communications
Act of 1934 (47 U.S.C. 227), as added by subsection (a) of this
section, and paragraph (2) of subsection (j) of such section 227, as
added by subsection (b) of this section, shall apply before the
effective date of the amendment made to subsection (e)(8) of such
section 227 by subparagraph (C) of section 503(a)(2) of division P of
the Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2018 (Public Law 115-141) as if
such amendment was already in effect.
SEC. 11. PROVISION OF EVIDENCE OF CERTAIN ROBOCALL VIOLATIONS TO
ATTORNEY GENERAL.
(a) In General.--If the Chief of the Enforcement Bureau of the
Commission obtains evidence that suggests a willful, knowing, and
repeated robocall violation with an intent to defraud, cause harm, or
wrongfully obtain anything of value, the Chief of the Enforcement
Bureau shall provide such evidence to the Attorney General.
(b) Report to Congress.--Not later than 1 year after the date of
the enactment of this Act, and annually thereafter, the Commission
shall publish on its website and submit to the Committee on Energy and
Commerce of the House of Representatives and the Committee on Commerce,
Science, and Transportation of the Senate a report that--
(1) states the number of instances during the preceding
year in which the Chief of the Enforcement Bureau provided the
evidence described in subsection (a) to the Attorney General;
and
(2) contains a general summary of the types of robocall
violations to which such evidence relates.
(c) Rules of Construction.--Nothing in this section shall be
construed to affect the ability of the Commission or the Chief of the
Enforcement Bureau under other law--
(1) to refer a matter to the Attorney General; or
(2) to pursue or continue pursuit of an enforcement action
in a matter with respect to which the Chief of the Enforcement
Bureau provided the evidence described in subsection (a) to the
Attorney General.
(d) Robocall Violation Defined.--In this section, the term
``robocall violation'' means a violation of subsection (b) or (e) of
section 227 of the Communications Act of 1934 (47 U.S.C. 227).
SEC. 12. PROTECTION FROM ONE-RING SCAMS.
(a) Initiation of Proceeding.--Not later than 120 days after the
date of the enactment of this Act, the Commission shall initiate a
proceeding to protect called parties from one-ring scams.
(b) Matters To Be Considered.--As part of the proceeding required
by subsection (a), the Commission shall consider how the Commission
can--
(1) work with Federal and State law enforcement agencies to
address one-ring scams;
(2) work with the governments of foreign countries to
address one-ring scams;
(3) in consultation with the Federal Trade Commission,
better educate consumers about how to avoid one-ring scams;
(4) incentivize voice service providers to stop calls made
to perpetrate one-ring scams from being received by called
parties, including consideration of adding identified one-ring
scam type numbers to the Commission's existing list of
permissible categories for carrier-initiated blocking;
(5) work with entities that provide call-blocking services
to address one-ring scams; and
(6) establish obligations on international gateway
providers that are the first point of entry for these calls
into the United States, including potential requirements that
such providers verify with the foreign originator the nature or
purpose of calls before initiating service.
(c) Report to Congress.--Not later than 1 year after the date of
the enactment of this Act, the Commission shall publish on its website
and submit to the Committee on Energy and Commerce of the House of
Representatives and the Committee on Commerce, Science, and
Transportation of the Senate a report on the status of the proceeding
required by subsection (a).
(d) Definitions.--In this section:
(1) One-ring scam.--The term ``one-ring scam'' means a scam
in which a caller makes a call and allows the call to ring the
called party for a short duration, in order to prompt the
called party to return the call, thereby subjecting the called
party to charges.
(2) State.--The term ``State'' has the meaning given such
term in section 3 of the Communications Act of 1934 (47 U.S.C.
153).
(3) Voice service.--The term ``voice service'' has the
meaning given such term in section 227(e)(8) of the
Communications Act of 1934 (47 U.S.C. 227(e)(8)). This
paragraph shall apply before the effective date of the
amendment made to such section by subparagraph (C) of section
503(a)(2) of division P of the Consolidated Appropriations Act,
2018 (Public Law 115-141) as if such amendment was already in
effect.
SEC. 13. ANNUAL ROBOCALL REPORT.
(a) In General.--Not later than 1 year after the date of the
enactment of this Act, and annually thereafter, the Commission shall
make publicly available on the website of the Commission, and submit to
the Committee on Energy and Commerce of the House of Representatives
and the Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation of the
Senate, a report on the status of private-led efforts to trace back the
origin of suspected unlawful robocalls by the registered consortium and
the participation of voice service providers in such efforts.
(b) Contents of Report.--The report required under subsection (a)
shall include, at minimum, the following:
(1) A description of private-led efforts to trace back the
origin of suspected unlawful robocalls by the registered
consortium and the actions taken by the registered consortium
to coordinate with the Commission.
(2) A list of voice service providers identified by the
registered consortium that participated in private-led efforts
to trace back the origin of suspected unlawful robocalls
through the registered consortium.
(3) A list of each voice service provider that received a
request from the registered consortium to participate in
private-led efforts to trace back the origin of suspected
unlawful robocalls and refused to participate, as identified by
the registered consortium.
(4) The reason, if any, each voice service provider
identified by the registered consortium provided for not
participating in private-led efforts to trace back the origin
of suspected unlawful robocalls.
(5) A description of how the Commission may use the
information provided to the Commission by voice service
providers or the registered consortium that have participated
in private-led efforts to trace back the origin of suspected
unlawful robocalls in the enforcement efforts by the
Commission.
(c) Additional Information.--Not later than 210 days after the date
of the enactment of this Act, and annually thereafter, the Commission
shall issue a notice to the public seeking additional information from
voice service providers and the registered consortium of private-led
efforts to trace back the origin of suspected unlawful robocalls
necessary for the report by the Commission required under subsection
(a).
(d) Registration of Consortium of Private-Led Efforts To Trace Back
the Origin of Suspected Unlawful Robocalls.--
(1) In general.--Not later than 90 days after the date of
the enactment of this Act, the Commission shall issue rules to
establish a registration process for the registration of a
single consortium that conducts private-led efforts to trace
back the origin of suspected unlawful robocalls. The consortium
shall meet the following requirements:
(A) Be a neutral third party competent to manage
the private-led effort to trace back the origin of
suspected unlawful robocalls in the judgement of the
Commission.
(B) Maintain a set of written best practices about
the management of such efforts and regarding providers
of voice services' participation in private-led efforts
to trace back the origin of suspected unlawful
robocalls.
(C) Consistent with section 222(d)(2) of the
Communications Act of 1934 (47 U.S.C. 222(d)(2)), any
private-led efforts to trace back the origin of
suspected unlawful robocalls conducted by the third
party focus on ``fraudulent, abusive, or unlawful''
traffic.
(D) File a notice with the Commission that the
consortium intends to conduct private-led efforts to
trace back in advance of such registration.
(2) Annual notice by the commission seeking
registrations.--Not later than 120 days after the date of the
enactment of this Act, and annually thereafter, the Commission
shall issue a notice to the public seeking the registration
described in paragraph (1).
(e) List of Voice Service Providers.--The Commission may publish a
list of voice service providers and take appropriate enforcement action
based on information obtained from the consortium about voice service
providers that refuse to participate in private-led efforts to trace
back the origin of suspected unlawful robocalls, and other information
the Commission may collect about voice service providers that are found
to originate or transmit substantial amounts of unlawful robocalls.
(f) Definitions.--In this section:
(1) Private-led effort to trace back.--The term ``private-
led effort to trace back'' means an effort made by the
registered consortium of voice service providers to establish a
methodology for determining the origin of a suspected unlawful
robocall.
(2) Registered consortium.--The term ``registered
consortium'' means the consortium registered under subsection
(d).
(3) Suspected unlawful robocall.--The term ``suspected
unlawful robocall'' means a call that the Commission or a voice
service provider reasonably believes was made in violation of
subsection (b) or (e) of section 227 of the Communications Act
of 1934 (47 U.S.C. 227).
(4) Voice service.--The term ``voice service''--
(A) means any service that is interconnected with
the public switched telephone network and that
furnishes voice communications to an end user using
resources from the North American Numbering Plan or any
successor to the North American Numbering Plan adopted
by the Commission under section 251(e)(1) of the
Communications Act of 1934 (47 U.S.C. 251(e)(1)); and
(B) includes--
(i) transmissions from a telephone
facsimile machine, computer, or other device to
a telephone facsimile machine; and
(ii) without limitation, any service that
enables real-time, two-way voice
communications, including any service that
requires internet protocol-compatible customer
premises equipment (commonly known as ``CPE'')
and permits out-bound calling, whether or not
the service is one-way or two-way voice over
internet protocol.
SEC. 14. HOSPITAL ROBOCALL PROTECTION GROUP.
(a) Establishment.--Not later than 180 days after the date of the
enactment of this Act, the Commission shall establish an advisory
committee to be known as the ``Hospital Robocall Protection Group''.
(b) Membership.--The Group shall be composed only of the following
members:
(1) An equal number of representatives from each of the
following:
(A) Voice service providers that serve hospitals.
(B) Companies that focus on mitigating unlawful
robocalls.
(C) Consumer advocacy organizations.
(D) Providers of one-way voice over internet
protocol services described in subsection
(e)(3)(B)(ii).
(E) Hospitals.
(F) State government officials focused on combating
unlawful robocalls.
(2) One representative of the Commission.
(3) One representative of the Federal Trade Commission.
(c) Issuance of Best Practices.--Not later than 180 days after the
date on which the Group is established under subsection (a), the Group
shall issue best practices regarding the following:
(1) How voice service providers can better combat unlawful
robocalls made to hospitals.
(2) How hospitals can better protect themselves from such
calls, including by using unlawful robocall mitigation
techniques.
(3) How the Federal Government and State governments can
help combat such calls.
(d) Proceeding by FCC.--Not later than 180 days after the date on
which the best practices are issued by the Group under subsection (c),
the Commission shall conclude a proceeding to assess the extent to
which the voluntary adoption of such best practices can be facilitated
to protect hospitals and other institutions.
(e) Definitions.--In this section:
(1) Group.--The term ``Group'' means the Hospital Robocall
Protection Group established under subsection (a).
(2) State.--The term ``State'' has the meaning given such
term in section 3 of the Communications Act of 1934 (47 U.S.C.
153).
(3) Voice service.--The term ``voice service''--
(A) means any service that is interconnected with
the public switched telephone network and that
furnishes voice communications to an end user using
resources from the North American Numbering Plan or any
successor to the North American Numbering Plan adopted
by the Commission under section 251(e)(1) of the
Communications Act of 1934 (47 U.S.C. 251(e)(1)); and
(B) includes--
(i) transmissions from a telephone
facsimile machine, computer, or other device to
a telephone facsimile machine; and
(ii) without limitation, any service that
enables real-time, two-way voice
communications, including any service that
requires internet protocol-compatible customer
premises equipment (commonly known as ``CPE'')
and permits out-bound calling, whether or not
the service is one-way or two-way voice over
internet protocol.
SEC. 15. SEPARABILITY CLAUSE.
If any provision of this Act, the amendments made by this Act, or
the application thereof to any person or circumstance is held invalid,
the remainder of this Act, the amendments made by this Act, and the
application of such provision to other persons or circumstances shall
not be affected thereby.
Attest:
Clerk.
116th CONGRESS
1st Session
S. 151
_______________________________________________________________________
AMENDMENT