[Federal Register Volume 69, Number 169 (Wednesday, September 1, 2004)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 53346-53352]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 04-19955]


=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION

47 CFR Part 64

[CC Docket Nos. 90-571 and 98-67; FCC 04-137]


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

AGENCY: Federal Communications Commission.

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: In this document, the Commission addresses cost recovery and 
other matters relating to the provision of telecommunications relay 
services (TRS) pursuant to Title IV of the Americans with Disabilities 
Act of 1990 (ADA). This document is intended to improve the overall 
effectiveness of TRS to ensure that persons with hearing and speech 
disabilities have access to telecommunications networks that is 
consistent with the goal of functional equivalency mandated by 
Congress.

DATES: Effective October 1, 2004 except for the amendment to Sec.  
64.604 (a)(4) of the Commission's rules, which contains information 
collection requirements under the Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA) that 
are not effective until approved by Office of Management and Budget 
(OMB). Written comments by the public on the new and modified 
information collections are due November 1, 2004. The Commission will 
publish a document in the Federal Register announcing the effective 
date for that section.

ADDRESSES: Federal Communications Commission, 445 12th Street, SW., 
Washington, DC 20554. In addition to filing comments with the 
Secretary, a copy of any comments on the Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA) 
information collection requirements contained herein should be 
submitted to Judith B. Herman, Federal Communications Commission, Room 
1-C804, 445 12th Street, SW., Washington, DC 20554, or via the Internet 
to [email protected], and to Kristy L. LaLonde, OMB Desk Officer, 
Room 10234 NEOB, 725 17th Street, NW., Washington, DC 20503, via the 
Internet to [email protected], or via fax at (202) 395-
5167.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Cheryl King, of the Consumer & 
Governmental Affairs Bureau at (202) 418-2284 (voice), (202) 418-0416 
(TTY), or e-mail [email protected]. For additional information 
concerning the PRA information collection

[[Page 53347]]

requirements contained in this document, contact Judith B. Herman at 
(202) 418-0214, or via the Internet at [email protected].

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This Report and Order, Order on 
Reconsideration contains new or modified information collection 
requirements subject to the PRA of 1995, Public Law 104-13. These will 
be submitted to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) for review 
under section 3507(d) of the PRA. OMB, the general public, and other 
Federal agencies are invited to comment on the new or modified 
information collection requirements contained in this proceeding. The 
Report and Order addresses issues arising from Telecommunications Relay 
Services and Speech-to-Speech Services for Individuals with Hearing and 
Speech Disabilities, Cost Recovery Memorandum Opinion and Order and 
Further Notice of Proposed Rulemaking, (TRS Cost Recovery MO&O & 
FNPRM), CC Docket No. 98-67, FCC 01-371, 16 FCC Rcd 22948, December 21, 
2001; published at 67 FR 4203, January 29, 2002 and 67 FR 4227, January 
29, 2002; Telecommunications Relay Services and Speech-to-Speech 
Services for Individuals with Hearing and Speech Disabilities, 
Declaratory Ruling and Further Notice of Proposed Rulemaking, (IP Relay 
Declaratory Ruling & FNPRM), CC Docket No. 98-67, FCC 02-121, 17 FCC 
Rcd 7779, April 22, 2002; published at 67 FR 39863 , June 11, 2002 and 
67 FR 39929, June 11, 2002; Telecommunications Relay Services and 
Speech-to-Speech Services for Individuals with Hearing and Speech 
Disabilities, Second Report and Order and Notice of Proposed 
Rulemaking, (Second Improved TRS Order & NPRM), CC Docket 98-67,CG 
Docket 03-123, FCC 03-112, 18 FCC Rcd 12379, June 17, 2003; published 
at 68 FR 50973, August 25, 2003 and 68 FR 50993, August 25, 2003; 
Telecommunications Relay Services and Speech-to-Speech Services for 
Individuals with Hearing and Speech Disabilities, (VRS Waiver Order), 
CC Docket 98-67, DA 01-3029, 17 FCC Rcd 157, December 31, 2001; Sprint 
Petition for Declaratory Ruling, (711 Petition), CC Docket 98-67, filed 
May 27, 2003; Hands on Sign Language Services, Inc., Application for 
Certification as an Eligible VRS Provider, Request for Expedited 
Processing and Request for Temporary Certification During Processing 
(Hands on Application), CC Docket 98-67, filed August 30, 2002; and 
Communication Services for the Deaf, Petition for Limited Waiver and 
Request for Expedited Relief, (CSD Petition), CC Docket 98-67, filed 
June 12, 2003. The Order on Reconsideration resolves petitions filed 
against the Telecommunications Relay Services and Speech-to-Speech 
Services for Individuals with Hearing and Speech Disabilities, (Bureau 
TRS Order), CC Docket 98-67, DA 03-2111, 18 FCC Rcd 12823, June 30, 
2003; Second Improved TRS Order & NPRM; and the Telecommunications 
Relay Services and the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990, (Coin 
Sent-Paid Fifth Report and Order), CC Docket 90-571, FCC 02-269, 17 FCC 
Rcd 21233, October 25 2003; published at 68 FR 6352, February 7, 2003 
and 68 FR 8553, February 24, 2003. Copies of any subsequently filed 
documents in this matter will be available for public inspection and 
copying during regular business hours at the FCC Reference Information 
Center, Portals II, 445 12th Street, SW., Room CY-A257, Washington, DC 
20554. The complete text of this decision may be purchased from the 
Commission's duplicating contractor, Best Copy and Printing, Inc. 
(BCPI), Portals II, 445 12th Street, SW., Room CY-B402, Washington, DC 
20554. Customers may contact BCPI, Inc. at their Web site: http://www.bcpiweb.com or call 1-800-378-3160. To request materials in 
accessible formats for people with disabilities (Braille, large print, 
electronic files, audio format), send an e-mail to [email protected] or 
call the Consumer & Governmental Affairs Bureau at (202) 418-0530 
(voice) or (202) 418-0432 (TTY). This Report and Order, Order on 
Reconsideration can also be downloaded in Word and Portable Document 
Format (PDF) at: http://www.fcc.gov/cgb/dro.

Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 Analysis

    This Report and Order, Order on Reconsideration contains new or 
modified information collection requirements. The Commission, as part 
of its continuing effort to reduce paperwork burdens, invites the 
general public to comment on the information collection requirements 
contained in the Report and Order, Order on Reconsideration as required 
by the Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA) of 1995, Public Law 104-13. Public 
and agency comments are due November 1, 2004. In addition, the 
Commission notes that pursuant to the Small Business Paperwork Relief 
Act of 2002, Public Law 107-198, see 44 U.S.C. 3506(c)(4), we 
previously sought specific comment on how to Commission might ``further 
reduce the information collection burden for small business concerns 
with fewer than 25 employees.'' In this present document, we have 
assessed the effects of the new rule changes that clarify many of the 
current requirements for TRS providers which impose new and/or modified 
reporting requirements for TRS providers, and find that most TRS 
providers are not small entities, and are either interexchange carriers 
or incumbent local exchange carriers, with very few exceptions. The 
Commission refrained from requiring features such as interrupt 
functionality and talking return call because comments expressed 
concern that such features might be cost prohibitive, and might be 
unduly burdensome to the TRS provider and the TRS user. This Report and 
Order adopts rules that will improve the effectiveness of TRS and 
ensure access to telecommunications networks for persons with hearing 
and speech disabilities while imposing the least necessary regulation. 
Because such cost-prohibitive and unduly burdensome measures were 
rejected by the Commission, no arbitrary and unfair burdens are thereby 
imposed on smaller entities.

Synopsis

    In this Report and Order, Order on Reconsideration, the Commission 
addresses cost recovery and other matters relating to the provision of 
telecommunications relay services (TRS) pursuant to Title IV of the 
Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990 (ADA). The Report and Order 
addresses: (1) Cost recovery issues arising from the TRS Cost Recovery 
MO&O &FNPRM (2) cost recovery issues arising from the IP Relay 
Declaratory Ruling & FNPRM; (3) issues arising from the Notice of 
Proposed Rulemaking contained in the Second Improved TRS Order & NPRM; 
(4) petitions seeking extension of the waivers set forth in the VRS 
Waiver Order; (5) the 711 Petition; (6) the petition by a provider of 
VRS for ``certification'' as a TRS provider eligible to receive 
compensation from the Interstate TRS Fund; and (7) the petition for 
limited waiver concerning Video Relay Service (VRS) and interpreting in 
state legal proceedings. The Order on Reconsideration addresses 
petitions for reconsideration of three TRS matters: (1) the petitions 
for reconsideration of the June 30, 2003 Bureau TRS Order with respect 
to the per-minute compensation rate for VRS; (2) the Second Improved 
TRS Order & NPRM; and (3) the Coin Sent-Paid Fifth Report & Order.

[[Page 53348]]

Final Regulatory Flexibility Analysis (CG Docket No. 03-123)

    As required by the Regulatory Flexibility Act of 1980, as amended 
(RFA), (see 5 U.S.C. 603; the RFA, see 5 U.S.C. 601-612, has been 
amended by the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 
1996 (SBREFA), Public Law 14-121, Title II, 110 Statute 857 (1996)), an 
Initial Regulatory Flexibility Analysis (IRFA) was incorporated in the 
notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM) to which this Report and Order 
responds. Telecommunication Relay Services and Speech-to-Speech 
Services for Individuals with Hearing and Speech Disabilities, Second 
Report and Order, Order on Reconsideration, and Notice of Proposed 
Rulemaking, CC Docket No. 98-67, CG Docket No. 03-123, FCC 03-112, 18 
FCC Rcd 12379 (June 17, 2003) (Second Improved TRS Order & NPRM). The 
Commission sought written public comment on the proposals in the NPRM 
section of the Second Improved TRS Order & NPRM, including comment on 
the IRFA incorporated in that proceeding. The comments we have received 
discuss only the general recommendations, not the IRFA. This present 
Final Regulatory Flexibility Analysis (FRFA) conforms to the RFA. See 5 
U.S.C. 604. We also expect that we could certify the Report and Order 
under 5 U.S.C. 605 because it appears that only one TRS provider is 
likely a small entity (because it is a non-profit organization). 
Therefore, there are not a substantial number of small entities that 
may be affected by our action.

Need for, and Objective of, This Report and Order

    This proceeding was generally initiated to establish technological 
advancements that could improve the level and quality of service 
provided through TRS for the benefit of the community of TRS users. 
This proceeding would ensure compliance with the requirement that 
telecommunications relay services (TRS) users have access to telephone 
services that are functionally equivalent to those available to 
individuals without hearing or speech disabilities. The intent of the 
proposed rules is to improve the overall effectiveness of TRS, and to 
improve the Commission's oversight of certified state TRS programs and 
our ability to compel compliance with the federal mandatory minimum 
standards for TRS.
    The Commission issued the NPRM in the Second Improved TRS Order & 
NPRM to seek public comment on technological advances that could 
improve the level and quality of service provided through TRS for the 
benefit of TRS users. In doing so, the Commission sought to enhance the 
quality of TRS and broaden the potential universe of TRS users, 
consistent with Congress's direction under 47 U.S.C. 225(d)(2) that TRS 
regulations encourage the use of existing technology and not discourage 
or impair the development of improved technology. The Commission sought 
comment on: (1) Whether, in times of emergency, TRS services should be 
made available on the same basis as telephone services for the general 
public, and whether the Commission's rules should be amended to provide 
for continuity of operation for TRS facilities in the event of an 
emergency; (2) whether additional requirements were necessary for 
ensuring the security of IP Relay transmissions; (3) how TRS facilities 
might determine the appropriate PSAP to call when receiving an 
emergency 711 call via a wireless device; (4) whether wireless carriers 
should be required to transmit Phase I or Phase II E-911 information to 
TRS facilities; (5) whether certain additional features, services, or 
requirements should be required, namely non-shared language TRS, speed 
of answer and call set-up times for the various forms of TRS, use of 
communication access real-time translation (CART), interrupt 
functionality, LEC offerings, talking return call, speech recognition 
technology, improved transmission speeds, and additional TTY protocols; 
(6) issues concerning increasing public access to information and 
outreach; and (7) procedures for determining eligibility payments from 
the Interstate TRS Fund. The intent of the proposed rules is to improve 
the overall effectiveness of TRS, and to improve the Commission's 
oversight of certified state TRS programs and our ability to compel 
compliance with the federal mandatory minimum standards for TRS.
    In this Report and Order, the Commission establishes new rules and 
amends existing rules governing TRS to further advance the functional 
equivalency mandate of section 225. First, the Commission adopts the 
per minute reimbursement methodology for IP Relay. Second, the 
Commission requires that TRS providers offer anonymous call rejection, 
call screening, and preferred call-forwarding to the extent that such 
features are provided by the subscriber's LEC and the TRS facility 
possesses the necessary technology to pass through the subscriber's 
Caller ID information to the LEC. Third, the Commission grants VRS 
waiver requests of the following TRS mandatory minimum requirements: 
(1) Types of calls that must be handled; (2) emergency call handling; 
(3) speed of answer; (4) equal access to interexchange carriers; (5) 
pay-per-call services; (6) voice initiated calls--VCO and HCO; (7) 
provision of STS and Spanish Relay. Fourth, the Commission amends the 
definition of ``711'' by deleting the words ``all types of'' from the 
definition, in order to clarify its meaning. Fifth, in the Order on 
Reconsideration, the Commission adopts the interim TRS compensation 
rates for traditional TRS, IP Relay and STS that were established in 
the Bureau TRS Order. See Bureau TRS Order. The Commission also adopts 
a compensation rate for VRS that increases the interim rate established 
in the Bureau TRS Order. Sixth, the Commission has amended the 
definition for an ``appropriate'' PSAP to be either a PSAP that the 
caller would have reached if he had dialed 911 directly, or a PSAP that 
is capable of enabling the dispatch of emergency services to the caller 
in an expeditious manner. These amended and new rules will improve the 
overall effectiveness of TRS to ensure that persons with hearing and 
speech disabilities have access to telecommunications networks that is 
consistent with the goal of functional equivalency mandated by 
Congress. No changes were made to the following items proposed in the 
NPRM: (1) Whether, in times of emergency, TRS services should be made 
available on the same basis as telephone services for the general 
public, and whether the Commission's rules should be amended to provide 
for continuity of operation for TRS facilities in the event of an 
emergency; (2) whether additional requirements are necessary for 
ensuring the security of IP Relay transmissions; (3) whether wireless 
carriers should be required to transmit Phase I or Phase II E-911 
information to TRS facilities; (4) whether certain additional features, 
services or requirements should be required for non-shared language 
TRS, speed of answer and call set-up times for the various forms of 
TRS, use of communication access real-time translation (CART), 
interrupt functionality, talking return call, speech recognition 
technology, improved transmission speeds, and additional TTY protocols; 
(5) issues concerning increasing public access to information and 
outreach; and (6) procedures for determining eligibility payments from 
the Interstate TRS Fund.

[[Page 53349]]

Summary of Significant Issues Raised by Public Comments in Response to 
the IRFA

    No comments were filed directly in response to the IRFA in this 
proceeding. Furthermore, no small business issues were raised in the 
comments. The Commission has nonetheless considered the potential 
significant economic impact of the rules on small entities and, as 
discussed below, has concluded that the rules adopted may impose some 
economic burden on at least one small entity that is a TRS provider. 
Accordingly, in consideration of this small entity and other small 
entities that may be similarly situated, we issue this final regulatory 
flexibility analysis rather than issue a final regulatory flexibility 
certification.

Description and Estimate of the Number of Small Entities to Which the 
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 rules adopted herein. 5 U.S.C. 604(a)(3). The RFA 
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 5 U.S.C. 601(3), 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.'' 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). 15 U.S.C. 632. A small organization is generally ``any not-for-
profit enterprise which is independently owned and operated and is not 
dominant in its field.'' 5 U.S.C. 601(4).
    Below, we further describe and estimate the number of small entity 
licensees and regulatees that, in theory, may be affected by these 
rules. For some categories, the most reliable source of information 
available at this time is data the Commission publishes in its Trends 
in Telephone Service Report. FCC, Wireline Competition Bureau, Industry 
Analysis and Technology Division, ``Trends in Telephone Service'' at 
Table 5.3, Page 5-5 (Aug. 2003) (Trends in Telephone Service). This 
source uses data that are current as of December 31, 2001.
    Incumbent Local Exchange Carriers. Neither the Commission nor the 
SBA has developed a size standard specifically directed toward 
providers of incumbent local exchange service. The closest applicable 
size standard under the SBA rules is for Wired Telecommunications 
Carriers. 13 CFR 121.201, NAICS Code 517110. This provides that such a 
carrier is small entity if it employs no more than 1,500 employees. 
Commission data from 2001 indicate that there are 1,337 incumbent local 
exchange carriers, total, with approximately 1,032 having 1,500 or 
fewer employees. Trends in Telephone Service at Table 5.3. The small 
carrier number is an estimate and might include some carriers that are 
not independently owned and operated; we are therefore unable at this 
time to estimate with greater precision the number of these carriers 
that would qualify as small businesses under SBA's. Therefore, the 
majority of entities in these categories are small entities.
    Small Incumbent Local Exchange Carriers. We have included small 
incumbent local exchange carriers in this present RFA analysis. As 
noted above, a ``small business'' under the RFA is one that, inter 
alia, meets the pertinent small business size standard (e.g., a 
telephone communications business having 1,500 or fewer employees), and 
``is not dominant in its field of operation.'' 15 U.S.C. 632. The SBA's 
Office of Advocacy contends that, for RFA purposes, small incumbent 
local exchange carriers are not dominant in their field of operation 
because any such dominance is not ``national'' in scope. Letter from 
Jere W. Glover, Chief Counsel for Advocacy, SBA, to William E. Kennard, 
Chairman, FCC (May 27, 1999). The Small Business Act contains a 
definition of ``small-business concern,'' which the RFA incorporates 
into its own definition of ``small business.'' See 15 U.S.C. 632(a) 
(Small Business Act); 5 U.S.C. 601(3) (RFA). SBA regulations interpret 
``small business concern'' to include the concept of dominance on a 
national basis. 13 CFR 121.102(b). We have therefore included small 
incumbent local exchange carriers in this RFA analysis, although we 
emphasize that this RFA action has no effect on Commission analyses and 
determinations in other, non-RFA contexts.
    Interexchange Carriers. Neither the Commission nor the SBA has 
developed a small business size standard specifically directed toward 
providers of interexchange service. The closest applicable size 
standard under the SBA rules is for Wired Telecommunications Carriers. 
13 CFR 121.201, NAICS Code 517110. This provides that such a carrier is 
small entity if it employs no more than 1,500 employees. Commission 
data from 2001 indicate that there are 261 interexchange carriers, 
total, with approximately 223 having 1,500 or fewer employees. Trends 
in Telephone Service at Table 5.3. The small carrier number is an 
estimate and might include some carriers that are not independently 
owned and operated; we are therefore unable at this time to estimate 
with greater precision the number of these carriers that would qualify 
as small businesses under SBA's size standard. Consequently, we 
estimate that there are no more than 223 interexchange carriers that 
are small businesses possibly affected by our action.
    TRS Providers. Neither the Commission nor the SBA has developed a 
definition of ``small entity'' specifically directed toward providers 
of telecommunications relay services (TRS). Again, the closest 
applicable size standard under the SBA rules is for Wired 
Telecommunications Carriers. 13 CFR 121.201, NAICS Code 517110. 
Currently, there are 10 interstate TRS providers, which consist of 
interexchange carriers, local exchange carriers, state-managed 
entities, and non-profit organizations. The Commission estimates that 
at least one TRS provider is a small entity under the applicable size 
standard. The FCC notes that these providers include several large 
interexchange carriers and incumbent local exchange carriers. Some of 
these large carriers may only provide TRS service in a small area but 
they nevertheless are not small business entities. MCI (WorldCom), for 
example, provides TRS in only a few states but is not a small business. 
Consequently, the FCC estimates that at least one TRS provider is a 
small entity that may be affected by our action.

Description of Projected Reporting, Recordkeeping and Other Compliance 
Requirements

    Reporting and Recordkeeping. This Report and Order may involve new 
mandatory reporting requirements. First, the Commission requires that 
TRS providers offer anonymous call rejection, call screening, and 
preferred

[[Page 53350]]

call-forwarding to the extent that such features are provided by the 
subscriber's LEC and the TRS facility possesses the necessary 
technology to pass through the subscriber's Caller ID information to 
the LEC. However, the Commission does not adopt specific requirements 
for the functionality of these features. We anticipate that TRS 
providers will offer these features to the extent, and in a manner, 
that is best suited to their facilities. Second, the Commission granted 
waiver requests of the Commission's mandatory minimum standards for 
VRS, providing that VRS providers submit annual reports to the 
Commission. The report must be in narrative form detailing; (1) the 
provider's plan or general approach to meeting the waiver standards; 
(2) any additional costs that would be required to meet the standards; 
(3) the development of any new technology that may affect the 
particular waivers; (4) the progress made by the provider to meet the 
standard; (5) the specific steps taken to resolve any technical 
problems that prohibit the provider from meeting the standards; and (6) 
any other factors relevant to whether the waivers should continue in 
effect. The report may be combined with the existing VRS/IP Relay 
reporting requirements scheduled to be submitted annually to the 
Commission on April 16th of each year. All such compliance requirements 
will affect small and large entities equally, with no arbitrary, unfair 
or undue burden for small entities.
    Other Compliance Requirements. The rules adopted in this Report and 
Order require that TRS facilities route emergency TRS calls to either a 
PSAP that the caller would have reached if he had dialed 911 directly, 
or a PSAP that is capable of enabling the dispatch of emergency 
services to the caller in an expeditious manner to the designated PSAP 
to which a direct voice call from a non-TRS number would be delivered. 
Furthermore, the rules require that TRS facilities provide certain 
technological features including: anonymous call rejection, call 
screening, and preferred call-forwarding. These rules will affect TRS 
providers. All such compliance requirements will affect small and large 
entities equally, with no arbitrary, unfair or undue burden for small 
entities.

Steps Taken to Minimize Significant Economic Impact on Small Entities, 
and Significant Alternatives Considered

    The RFA requires an agency to describe any significant alternatives 
that it has considered in reaching its proposed approach, which may 
include the following four alternatives (among others): (1) The 
establishment of differing compliance or reporting requirements or 
timetables that take into account the resources available to small 
entities; (2) the clarification, consolidation, or simplification of 
compliance or reporting requirements under the rule for small entities; 
(3) the use of performance, rather than design, standards; and (4) an 
exemption from coverage of the rule, or any part thereof, for small 
entities. See 5 U.S.C. 603(c)(1)-(c)(4).
    One of the main purposes of this Report and Order and Order on 
Reconsideration is to clarify many of the current requirements for TRS 
providers. The Report and Order and Order on Reconsideration impose new 
and/or modified reporting requirements for TRS providers. In addition, 
they impose new service requirements. Because these new service 
requirements are similar to services currently being offered, the 
Commission expects a minimal impact on small business. First, the 
Commission permanently adopts the per minute reimbursement methodology 
for IP Relay. The per-minute reimbursement methodology simplifies the 
compliance and reporting requirements for small entities by permanently 
adopting the interim methodology. Second, the Commission requires that 
TRS providers offer anonymous call rejection, call screening, and 
preferred call-forwarding to the extent that such features are provided 
by the subscriber's LEC and to the extent that the TRS facility will 
possess the necessary technology to pass through the subscriber's 
Caller ID information to the LEC. This new requirement does not 
adversely impact small business entities because these features are 
only required where it is technologically feasible to do so; the 
Commission does not require providers to purchase new equipment or 
upgrade their equipment to accommodate these new requirements. Third, 
the Commission grants waiver requests of several TRS mandatory minimum 
requirements for VRS service. These standards were waived because the 
Commission determined that they were either technologically infeasible, 
extremely difficult to comply with given the infancy of the service, or 
they were more closely related to verbal communication, as opposed to a 
visual service. Furthermore, these waivers consolidate the reporting 
requirements for providers, and ensure that VRS facilities are only 
responsible for those rules that are technologically feasible. 
Therefore, these waivers have no adverse impact on small businesses. 
Fourth, the Commission amends the definition of ``711'' by deleting the 
words ``all types of'' from the definition, in order to clarify its 
meaning. This rule clarifies the definition of 711, thereby simplifying 
the application of the rule for TRS providers. This clarification has 
no adverse impact on small entities but, on the contrary, will benefit 
all entities equally. Fifth, in the Order on Reconsideration, the 
Commission adopts the interim TRS compensation rates for traditional 
TRS, IP Relay, and STS for the 2003-2004 fund year that were 
established in the Bureau TRS Order, and are effective from June 30, 
2003, through the June 30, 2004, end of fund year. The Commission also 
adopts a compensation rate for VRS that increases the interim rate 
established in the Bureau TRS Order; the new rate is effective from 
September 1, 2003, through June 30, 2004. The new VRS compensation rate 
was established after review of supplemental expense and service data 
filed with the TRS administrator. The per-minute reimbursement 
methodology takes into account the projected cost and demand data of 
all TRS providers for a given service. Therefore, it does not unduly 
burden small businesses. Sixth, the Commission has amended the 
definition for an ``appropriate'' PSAP to be either a PSAP that the 
caller would have reached if he had dialed 911 directly, or a PSAP that 
is capable of enabling the dispatch of emergency services to the caller 
in an expeditious manner. The revision of this rule simplifies the 
ability of TRS providers to comply with the Commission's emergency call 
handling requirement for TRS. The revision has no adverse impact on 
small entities.
    Currently, most TRS providers are not small entities, and are 
either interexchange carriers or incumbent local exchange carriers, 
with very few exceptions. The Commission refrained from requiring 
features such as interrupt functionality and talking return call 
because commenters expressed concern that such features might be cost 
prohibitive, and might be unduly burdensome to the TRS provider and the 
TRS user. This Report and Order adopts rules that will improve the 
effectiveness of TRS and ensure access to telecommunications networks 
for persons with hearing and speech disabilities while imposing the 
least necessary regulation. Because such cost-prohibitive and unduly 
burdensome measures were rejected by the Commission, no arbitrary and 
unfair burdens are thereby imposed on smaller entities.

[[Page 53351]]

Report to Congress

    The Commission will send a copy of the Report and Order, Order on 
Reconsideration, including this FRFA, in a report to be sent to 
Congress pursuant to the Congressional Review Act. See 5 U.S.C. 
801(a)(1)(A). In addition, the Commission will send a copy of the 
Report and Order, including this FRFA, to the Chief Counsel for 
Advocacy of the Small Business Administration. A copy of the Report and 
Order, Order on Reconsideration and FRFA (or summaries thereof) will 
also be published in the Federal Register. See 5 U.S.C. 604(b).

Ordering Clauses

    Accordingly, pursuant to the authority contained in sections 1,2, 
4(i), 4(j), 201-205, 218, and 225 of the Communications Act of 1934, as 
amended, 47 U.S.C. 151, 152, 154(i), 154(j), 201-205, 218, and 225, 
this Report and Order, Order on Reconsideration are adopted, and part 
64 of Commission's rules is amended as set forth in the rule changes.
    Hamilton's Petition for Waiver Extension is granted to the extent 
indicated herein.
    Hands On's Petition for Waiver is granted to the extent indicated 
herein.
    Sprint's Petition for Declaratory Ruling, CC Docket No. 98-67 
(filed May 27, 2003) (711 Petition) is granted as provided herein.
    Hands On's Application for Certification as an Eligible VRS 
Provider (filed August 30, 2002) (Hands On Application) is dismissed 
without prejudice.
    Communication Services for the Deaf, Petition for Limited Waiver 
and Request for Expedited Relief, CC Docket 98-67 (filed June 12, 2003) 
(CSD Petition) is denied as provided herein.
    The petitions of AT&T, CSD, Hands On, Sorenson, and Sprint for 
reconsideration of the Bureau TRS Order are denied.
    The Interstate TRS Fund shall compensate VRS providers at the rate 
of $8.854 per completed interstate or intrastate conversation minute, 
which rate shall apply to the provision of eligible VRS services by 
eligible VRS providers effective September 1, 2003.
    Interim per-minute compensation rates set forth in the Bureau TRS 
Order for traditional TRS, IP Relay, and STS are hereby adopted as the 
final compensation rates for such services for the period July 1, 2003, 
through June 30, 2004. These rates are $1.368 per completed interstate 
conversation minute for traditional TRS and per completed interstate or 
intrastate conversation minute for IP Relay; and $2.445 per completed 
interstate conversation minute for STS.
    Except as otherwise specifically provided herein, the Bureau TRS 
Order is affirmed.
    Petitions for reconsideration of Telecommunication Relay Services 
and the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990, Fifth Report and 
Order, CC Docket No. 90-571, FCC 02-269, 17 FCC Rcd 21233 (Oct. 25, 
2002) (Coin Sent-Paid Fifth Report & Order) are denied as provided 
herein.
    Petitions for reconsideration of Telecommunication Relay Services 
and Speech-to-Speech Services for Individuals with Hearing and Speech 
Disabilities, Second Report and Order, CC Docket No. 98-67, FCC 03-112, 
18 FCC Rcd 12379 (June 17, 2003) (Second Improved TRS Order) are 
granted to the extent indicated herein.
    Amendments to Sec. Sec.  64.601 through 64.605 of the Commission's 
rules are adopted, effective October 1, 2004 except Sec.  64.604 (a)(4) 
of the Commission's rules which contains information collection 
requirement under the Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA), that are not 
effective until approved by Office of Management and Budget (OMB). The 
Commission will publish a document in the Federal Register announcing 
the effective date for that section.
    The Commission's Consumer & Governmental Affairs Bureau, Reference 
Information Center, shall send a copy of this Report and Order, Order 
on Reconsideration, including the Final Regulatory Flexibility Analysis 
to the Chief Counsel for Advocacy of the Small Business Administration.

List of Subjects in 47 CFR Part 64

    Telecommunications, Individuals with disabilities, Reporting and 
recordkeeping requirements.

Federal Communications Commission.
Marlene H. Dortch,
Secretary.

Rule Changes

0
For the reasons discussed in the preamble, the Federal Communications 
amends 47 CFR part 64 as follows:

PART 64--MISCELLANEOUS RULES RELATING TO COMMON CARRIERS

0
1. The authority citation for part 64 continues to read as follows:

    Authority: 47 U.S.C. 154, 254(k); secs. 403(b)(2)(B), (c), 
Public Law 104-104, 110 Stat. 56. Interpret or apply 47 U.S.C. 201, 
218, 225, 226, 228, and 254(k) unless otherwise noted.


0
2. Section 64.601 is amended by revising paragraph (1) to read as 
follows:


Sec.  64.601  Definitions.

* * * * *
    (1) 711. The abbreviated dialing code for accessing relay services 
anywhere in the United States.
* * * * *

0
3. Section 64.604 is amended by revising paragraphs (a)(4), 
(c)(5)(iii)(B) and (c)(5)(iii)(I) to read as follows:


Sec.  64.604  Mandatory minimum standards.

* * * * *
    (a) * * *
    (4) Handling of emergency calls. Providers must use a system for 
incoming emergency calls that, at a minimum, automatically and 
immediately transfers the caller to the nearest Public Safety Answering 
Point (PSAP). An appropriated PSAP is either a PSAP that the caller 
would have reached if he had dialed 911 directly, or a PSAP that is 
capable of enabling the dispatch of emergency services to the caller in 
an expeditious manner.
* * * * *
    (c) * * *
    (5) * * *
    (iii) * * *
    (B) Contribution computations. Contributors' contribution to the 
TRS fund shall be the product of their subject revenues for the prior 
calendar year and a contribution factor determined annually by the 
Commission. The contribution factor shall be based on the ratio between 
expected TRS Fund expenses to interstate end-user telecommunications 
revenues. In the event that contributions exceed TRS payments and 
administrative costs, the contribution factor for the following year 
will be adjusted by an appropriate amount, taking into consideration 
projected cost and usage changes. In the event that contributions are 
inadequate, the fund administrator may request authority from the 
Commission to borrow funds commercially, with such debt secured by 
future years' contributions. Each subject carrier must contribute at 
least $25 per year. Carriers whose annual contributions total less than 
$1,200 must pay the entire contribution at the beginning of the 
contribution period. Service providers whose contributions total $1,200 
or more may divide their contributions into equal monthly payments. 
Carriers shall complete and submit, and contributions shall be based 
on, a ``Telecommunications Reporting Worksheet'' (as published by the 
Commission in the Federal Register). The worksheet shall be certified 
to by an

[[Page 53352]]

officer of the contributor, and subject to verification by the 
Commission or the administrator at the discretion of the Commission. 
Contributors' statements in the worksheet shall be subject to the 
provisions of section 220 of the Communications Act of 1934, as 
amended. The fund administrator may bill contributors a separate 
assessment for reasonable administrative expenses and interest 
resulting from improper filing or overdue contributions. The Chief of 
the Consumer & Governmental Affairs Bureau may waive, reduce, modify or 
eliminate contributor reporting requirements that prove unnecessary and 
require additional reporting requirements that the Bureau deems 
necessary to the sound and efficient administration of the TRS Fund.
* * * * *
    (I) Information filed with the administrator. The administrator 
shall keep all data obtained from contributors and TRS providers 
confidential and shall not disclose such data in company-specific form 
unless directed to do so by the Commission. Subject to any restrictions 
imposed by the Chief of the Consumer & Governmental Affairs Bureau, the 
TRS Fund administrator may share data obtained from carriers with the 
administrators of the universal support mechanisms (See 47 CFR 54.701 
of this chapter), the North American Numbering Plan administration cost 
recovery (See 47 CFR 52.16 of this chapter), and the long-term local 
number portability cost recovery (See 47 CFR 52.32 of this chapter). 
The TRS Fund administrator shall keep confidential all data obtained 
from other administrators. The administrator shall not use such data 
except for purposes of administering the TRS Fund, calculating the 
regulatory fees of interstate common carriers, and aggregating such fee 
payments for submission to the Commission. The Commission shall have 
access to all data reported to the administrator, and authority to 
audit TRS providers. Contributors may make requests for Commission 
nondisclosure of company-specific revenue information under Sec.  0.459 
of this chapter by so indicating on the Telecommunications Reporting 
Worksheet at the time that the subject data are submitted. The 
Commission shall make all decisions regarding nondisclosure of company-
specific information.
* * * * *
0
4. Section 64.605 is amended by revising paragraph (a) to read as 
follows:


Sec.  64.605  State certification.

    (a) State documentation. Any state, through its office of the 
governor or other delegated executive office empowered to provide TRS, 
desiring to establish a state program under this section shall submit, 
not later than October 1, 1992, documentation to the Commission 
addressed to the Federal Communications Commission, Chief, Consumer & 
Governmental Affairs Bureau, TRS Certification Program, Washington, DC 
20554, and captioned ``TRS State Certification Application.'' All 
documentation shall be submitted in narrative form, shall clearly 
describe the state program for implementing intrastate TRS, and the 
procedures and remedies for enforcing any requirements imposed by the 
state program. The Commission shall give public notice of states filing 
for certification including notification in the Federal Register.
* * * * *
[FR Doc. 04-19955 Filed 8-31-04; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6712-01-P