[Federal Register Volume 75, Number 211 (Tuesday, November 2, 2010)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 67333-67341]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2010-27578]


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

FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION

47 CFR Part 64

[CG Docket No. 03-123; WC Docket No. 05-196; WC Docket No. 10-191; FCC 
10-161]


Telecommunications Relay Services and Speech-to-Speech Services 
for Individuals With Hearing and Speech Disabilities, E911 Requirements 
for IP-Enabled Service Providers, Internet-Based Telecommunications 
Relay Service Numbering

AGENCY: Federal Communications Commission.

ACTION: Proposed rule.

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

SUMMARY: In this document, the Federal Communications Commission 
(Commission) seeks comment on steps the Commission should take to 
improve assignment of telephone numbers associated with Internet-based 
Telecommunications Relay Service (iTRS), specifically, Video Relay 
Service (VRS) and IP Relay.

DATES: Comments on the proposed rules are due on or before December 2, 
2010 and reply comments are due on or before December 17, 2010. Written 
comments on the Paperwork Reduction Act proposed information collection 
requirements must be submitted by the public, Office of Management and 
Budget (OMB), and other interested parties on or before January 3, 
2011. If you anticipate that you will be submitting comments, but find 
it

[[Page 67334]]

difficult to do so within the period of time allowed by this summary, 
you should advise the contact listed below as soon as possible.

ADDRESSES: You may submit comments, identified by WC Docket No.10-191, 
by any of the following methods:
     Federal eRulemaking Portal: http://www.regulations.gov. 
Follow the instructions for submitting comments.
     Federal Communications Commission's Web site: http://fjallfoss.fcc.gov/ecfs2/. Follow the instructions for submitting 
comments.
     People with Disabilities: Contact the FCC to request 
reasonable accommodations (accessible format documents, sign language 
interpreters, CART, etc.) by e-mail: [email protected] or phone: (202) 
418-0530 or TTY: (202) 418-0432.
     In addition to filing comments with the Secretary, a copy 
of any comments on the Paperwork Reduction Act information collection 
requirements contained herein should be submitted to the Federal 
Communications Commission via e-mail to [email protected] and to Nicholas A. 
Fraser, Office of Management and Budget, via e-mail to [email protected] or via fax at 202-395-5167.

For detailed instructions for submitting comments and additional 
information on the rulemaking process, see the SUPPLEMENTARY 
INFORMATION section of this document.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Heather Hendrickson at (202) 418-7295, 
Wireline Competition Bureau, Competition Policy Division. For 
additional information concerning the Paperwork Reduction Act 
information collection requirements contained in this document, send an 
e-mail to [email protected] or contact Cathy Williams at 202-418-2918.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This is a synopsis of the Commission's 
Notice of Proposed Rulemaking in CG Docket No. 03-123; WC Docket No. 
05-196; WC Docket No. 10-191; FCC 10-161, adopted September 16, 2010, 
and released September 17, 2010. The complete text of this document is 
available for inspection and copying during normal business hours in 
the FCC Reference Information Center, Portals II, 445 12th Street, SW., 
Room CY-A257, Washington, DC 20554. The document may also be purchased 
from the Commission's duplicating contractor, Best Copy and Printing, 
Inc., 445 12th Street, SW., Room CY-B402, Washington, DC 20554, 
telephone (800) 378-3160 or (202) 863- 2893, facsimile (202) 863-2898, 
or via the Internet at http://www.bcpiweb.com. It is also available on 
the Commission's Web site at http://www.fcc.gov.
    Pursuant to Sec. Sec.  1.415 and 1.419 of the Commission's rules, 
47 CFR 1.415, 1.419, interested parties may file comments and reply 
comments on or before the dates indicated on the first page of this 
document. Comments may be filed using: (1) The Commission's Electronic 
Comment Filing System (ECFS), (2) the Federal Government's eRulemaking 
Portal, or (3) by filing paper copies. See Electronic Filing of 
Documents in Rulemaking Proceedings, 63 FR 24121, May 1, 1998.
     Electronic Filers: Comments may be filed electronically 
using the Internet by accessing the ECFS: http://www.fcc.gov/cgb/ecfs/ 
or the Federal eRulemaking Portal: http://www.regulations.gov. Filers 
should follow the instructions provided on the Web site for submitting 
comments.
    [cir] For ECFS filers, if multiple docket or rulemaking numbers 
appear in the caption of this proceeding, filers must transmit one 
electronic copy of the comments for each docket or rulemaking number 
referenced in the caption. In completing the transmittal screen, filers 
should include their full name, U.S. Postal Service mailing address, 
and the applicable docket or rulemaking number. Parties may also submit 
an electronic comment by Internet e-mail. To get filing instructions, 
filers should send an e-mail to [email protected], and include the following 
words in the body of the message, ``get form.'' A sample form and 
directions will be sent in response.
    [cir] Paper Filers: Parties who choose to file by paper must file 
an original and four copies of each filing. If more than one docket or 
rulemaking number appears in the caption of this proceeding, filers 
must submit two additional copies for each additional docket or 
rulemaking number.
    Filings can be sent by hand or messenger delivery, by commercial 
overnight courier, or by first-class or overnight U.S. Postal Service 
mail (although we continue to experience delays in receiving U.S. 
Postal Service mail). All filings must be addressed to the Commission's 
Secretary, Office of the Secretary, Federal Communications Commission.
    [cir] The Commission's contractor will receive hand-delivered or 
messenger-delivered paper filings for the Commission's Secretary at 236 
Massachusetts Avenue, NE., Suite 110, Washington, DC 20002. The filing 
hours at this location are 8 a.m. to 7 p.m. All hand deliveries must be 
held together with rubber bands or fasteners. Any envelopes must be 
disposed of before entering the building.
    [cir] Commercial overnight mail (other than U.S. Postal Service 
Express Mail and Priority Mail) must be sent to 9300 East Hampton 
Drive, Capitol Heights, MD 20743.
    [cir] U.S. Postal Service first-class, Express, and Priority mail 
should be addressed to 445 12th Street, SW., Washington, DC 20554.
    People with Disabilities: 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). Contact the FCC to request reasonable 
accommodations for filing comments (accessible format documents, sign 
language interpreters, CART, etc.) by e-mail: [email protected]; phone: 
(202) 418-0530 or (202) 418-0432 (TTY).
    In addition, one copy of each pleading must be sent to each of the 
following:
    [cir] The Commission's duplicating contractor, Best Copy and 
Printing, Inc, 445 12th Street, SW., Room CY-B402, Washington, DC 
20554; Web site: http://www.bcpiweb.com; phone:1-800-378-3160; and
    [cir] Heather Hendrickson, Competition Policy Division, Wireline 
Competition Bureau, 445 12th Street, SW., Room 5-C225, Washington, DC 
20554; e-mail: [email protected] or telephone number (202) 
418-7295.
    Filings and comments are also 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. Copies may also be purchased from the Commission's duplicating 
contractor, BCPI, 445 12th Street, SW., Room CY-B402, Washington, DC 
20554. Customers may contact BCPI through its Web site: 
www.bcpiweb.com, by e-mail at [email protected], by telephone at (202) 
488-5300 or (800) 378-3160 (voice), (202) 488-5562 (TTY), or by 
facsimile at (202) 488-5563.
    Comments and reply comments must include a short and concise 
summary of the substantive arguments raised in the pleading. Comments 
and reply comments must also comply with Sec.  1.49 and all other 
applicable sections of the Commission's rules. We direct all interested 
parties to include the name of the filing party and the date of the 
filing on each page of their comments and reply comments. All parties 
are encouraged to utilize a table of contents, regardless of the length 
of their

[[Page 67335]]

submission. We also strongly encourage parties to track the 
organization set forth in the NPRM in order to facilitate our internal 
review process.
    Initial Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 Analysis:
    This document contains proposed information collection 
requirements. 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 collection 
requirements contained in this document, as required by the Paperwork 
Reduction Act of 1995, Public Law 104-13. Public and agency comments 
are due January 3, 2011.
    Comments on the proposed information collection requirements 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 techniques or other forms of information technology. In 
addition, pursuant to the Small Business Paperwork Relief Act of 2002, 
Public Law 107-198, see 44 U.S.C. 3506(c)(4), we seek specific comment 
on how we might further reduce the information collection burden for 
small business concerns with fewer than 25 employees.
    OMB Control Number: 3060-1089.
    Title: Telecommunications Relay Services and Speech-to-Speech 
Services for Individuals with Hearing and Speech Disabilities; E911 
Requirements for IP-Enabled Service Providers; Internet-Based 
Telecommunications Relay Service Numbering, CG Docket No. 03-123, WC 
Docket No. 05-196, and WC Docket No. 10-191; FCC 08-151, FCC 08-275, 
and FCC 10-161.
    Form Number(s): Not applicable.
    Type of Review: Revision of a currently approved collection.
    Respondents: Business or other for-profit entities; Not-for-profit 
institutions; Individuals or households; State, local or tribal 
government.
    Number of Respondents and Responses: 15 respondents and 5,763,199 
responses.
    Estimated Time per Response: .25-1.5 hours (average time per 
response).
    Obligation to Respond: Required to obtain or retain benefits. The 
statutory authority for the collection is contained in Sections 1, 2, 
4(i), 4(j), 225, 251, and 303(r) of the Communications Act of 1934, as 
amended, 47 U.S.C. 151, 152, 154(i), 154(j), 225, 251, 303(r).
    Frequency of Response: On occasion, quarterly and one time 
reporting requirements, recordkeeping and third party disclosure 
requirements.
    Total Annual Burden: 279,891 hours.
    Total Annual Cost: $4,269,135.
    Privacy Act Impact Assessment: No impact(s).
    Nature of Extent of Confidentiality: An assurance of 
confidentiality is not offered because the Commission has no direct 
involvement in the collection of personally identifiable information 
(PII) from individuals and/or household.
    Needs and Uses: On September 16, 2010, the Commission adopted 
Telecommunications Relay Services and Speech-to-Speech Services for 
Individuals with Hearing and Speech Disabilities; E911 Requirements for 
IP-Enabled Service Providers; Internet-Based Telecommunications Relay 
Service Numbering, CG Docket No. 03-123, WC Docket No. 05-196, and WC 
Docket No. 10-191, Notice of Proposed Rulemaking, FCC 10-161 (the iTRS 
Toll Free NPRM) seeking comment on steps the Commission should take to 
improve assignment of telephone numbers associated iTRS, specifically, 
VRS and IP Relay. The Commission proposes several requirements to both 
encourage use of geographically appropriate local numbers, and ensure 
that the deaf and hard-of-hearing community has access to toll free 
telephone numbers that is equivalent to access enjoyed by the hearing 
community. The iTRS Toll Free NPRM proposes to revise the ``User 
Notification'' information collection requirement adopted in the First 
and Second Numbering Orders to add additional requirements. 
Specifically, in addition to provisioning their registered users' 
routing information to the TRS Numbering Directory and maintaining such 
information in the database, the Commission proposes that VRS and IP 
relay providers must: (1) Remove from the Internet-based TRS Numbering 
Directory any toll free number that has not been transferred to a 
subscription with a toll free service provider and for which the user 
is the subscriber of record, and (2) ensure that the toll free number 
of a user that is associated with a geographically appropriate NANP 
number will be associated with the same Uniform Resource Identifier URI 
as that geographically appropriate NANP telephone number.
    In addition to the information that the Commission instructed VRS 
and IP Relay providers to include in the consumer advisories required 
by the First and Second Numbering Orders, the Commission proposed that 
VRS and IP Relay providers include certain additional information in 
their consumer advisories under the iTRS Toll Free NPRM. Specifically, 
the consumer advisories must explain: (1) The process by which a VRS or 
IP Relay user may acquire a toll free number from a toll free service 
provider, or transfer control of a toll free number from a VRS or IP 
Relay provider to the user; and (2) the process by which persons 
holding a toll free number may have that number linked to their ten-
digit telephone number in the TRS Numbering Directory. The Commission 
also proposes that VRS and IP Relay providers that have already 
assigned or provided a toll free number to a VRS or IP Relay user must, 
at the VRS or IP Relay user's request, facilitate the transfer of the 
toll free number to a toll free subscription with a toll free service 
provider that is under the direct control of the user.
    To view a copy of this information collection request (ICR) 
submitted to OMB: (1) Go to the Web page http://www.reginfo.gov/public/do/PRAMain, (2) look for the section of the Web page called ``Currently 
Under Review,'' (3) click on the downward-pointing arrow in the 
``Select Agency'' box below the ``Currently Under Review'' heading, (4) 
select ``Federal Communications Commission'' from the list of agencies 
presented in the ``Select Agency'' box, (5) click the ``Submit'' button 
to the right of the ``Select Agency'' box, (6) when the list of FCC 
ICRs currently under review appears, look for the OMB control number of 
this ICR and then click on the ICR Reference Number. A copy of the FCC 
submission to OMB will be displayed.

Initial Regulatory Flexibility Analysis

    1. As required by the Regulatory Flexibility Act of 1980, as 
amended (RFA), the Commission has prepared the present Initial 
Regulatory Flexibility Analysis (IRFA) of the possible significant 
economic impact on small entities that might result from this Notice of 
Proposed Rulemaking (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 provided above. 
The Commission will send a copy of the NPRM, including this IRFA, to 
the Chief Counsel for Advocacy of the Small Business Administration. In 
addition, the NPRM and the IRFA (or summaries thereof) will be 
published in the Federal Register.

[[Page 67336]]

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

    2. In the NPRM, the Commission seeks comment on steps the 
Commission should take to improve toll free access for Internet-based 
Telecommunications Relay Service (iTRS). Specifically, as a 
continuation of the Commission's ten-digit numbering plan for iTRS, we 
propose rules, and seek comment, to ensure that toll free numbers are 
as available, and used, by deaf and hard-of-hearing users as they are 
for hearing users. For example, the Commission seeks comment on ways to 
ensure that iTRS users in most cases use a local number as the primary 
telephone number. The Commission seeks comment on prohibiting iTRS 
providers from assigning new toll free numbers to users. The Commission 
also seeks comment on methods for an iTRS provider to assist an iTRS 
user in the process of transferring his or her assigned toll free 
number to a subscription with a toll free service provider. The 
Commission seeks comment on a proposal that a deaf or hard-of-hearing 
iTRS user that obtains a toll free number from, or ports a toll free 
number to, a toll free service provider that has mapped the number to 
the user's local number in the SMS/800 Database, may also have that 
toll free number mapped to the user's local number in the iTRS 
Directory. The Commission seeks comment on a one-year transition period 
for iTRS users to transfer toll free numbers to a direct subscription 
with a toll free service provider. The Commission also seeks comment on 
whether there is any reason not to remove any non-user selected toll 
free numbers from the iTRS database. The Commission seeks comment on 
consumer outreach efforts to educate and assist iTRS users with the 
changes to toll free access.

B. Legal Basis

    3. The legal basis for any action that may be taken pursuant to 
this Notice of Proposed Rulemaking is contained in sections 1, 4(i), 
4(j), 225, 251(e), and 255 of the Communications Act of 1934, as 
amended, 47 U.S.C. 151, 154(i), 154(j), 225, 251(e), and 255, and 
Sec. Sec.  0.91, 0.141, 0.291, 0.361, and 1.3 of the Commission's 
rules, 47 CFR 0.91, 0.141, 0.291, 0.361, 1.3.

C. Description and Estimate of the Number of Small Entities to Which 
the Proposed Rules Will Apply

    4. 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. The RFA generally defines the 
term ``small entity'' as having the same meaning as the terms ``small 
business,'' ``small organization,'' and ``small governmental 
jurisdiction.'' In addition, the term ``small business'' has the same 
meaning as the term ``small business concern'' under the Small Business 
Act. 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 SBA.
    5. With regard to whether a substantial number of small entities 
may be affected by the requirements proposed in this, the Commission 
notes that, of the fifteen providers affected by the NPRM, four meet 
the definition of a small entity. The SBA has developed a small 
business size standard for Wired Telecommunications Carriers, which is: 
All such firms having 1,500 or fewer employees. The fifteen providers 
currently receiving compensation from the Interstate TRS Fund for 
providing any form of TRS are: American Network, AT&T Corp.; CSDVRS; 
CAC; GoAmerica; Hamilton Relay, Inc.; Hands On; Healinc; Kansas Relay 
Service, Inc.; Michigan Bell; Nordia Inc.; Snap Telecommunications, 
Inc; Sorenson; Sprint; and State of Michigan.

D. Description of Projected Reporting, Recordkeeping, and Other 
Compliance Requirements

    6. Should the Commission decide to adopt any of the proposed rules 
to improve toll free access for iTRS, such action could potentially 
result in increased, reduced, or otherwise modified recordkeeping, 
reporting, or other compliance requirements for affected iTRS 
providers. For instance, VRS and IP Relay providers would be required 
to include an advisory on their Web sites describing the process by 
which a VRS or IP Relay user may acquire a toll free number from a toll 
free service provider, or transfer control of a toll free number from a 
VRS or IP Relay provider to the user; and the process by which persons 
holding a toll free number may have that number linked to their ten-
digit telephone number in the TRS Numbering Directory. We seek comment 
on the effect of these proposals, and commenters are encouraged to 
quantify the costs and benefits of any reporting, recordkeeping, or 
compliance requirement that may be established in this proceeding.

E. Steps Taken To Minimize Significant Economic Impact on Small 
Entities, and Significant Alternatives Considered

    7. 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 and 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 part thereof, for small 
entities. As stated above, only four current providers would be 
affected by this NPRM.

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

    None.

I. Introduction

    1. In this Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (NPRM), we seek comment on 
steps the Commission should take to improve assignment of telephone 
numbers associated with Internet-based Telecommunications Relay Service 
(iTRS), specifically, Video Relay Service (VRS) and IP Relay. VRS 
allows individuals with hearing and speech disabilities to communicate 
using sign language through video equipment, and IP Relay allows these 
individuals to communicate in text using a computer. We seek to 
encourage use of geographically appropriate local numbers, and ensure 
that the deaf and hard-of-hearing community has access to toll free 
telephone numbers that is equivalent to access enjoyed by the hearing 
community.
    2. In June 2008, the Commission instituted a ten-digit numbering 
plan for iTRS in order to make access by deaf and hard-of-hearing 
people functionally equivalent to access enjoyed by the hearing 
community, as required by statute. The Commission recognized that doing 
so would further the functional equivalency mandate by ensuring that 
Internet-based TRS users can be reached by voice telephone users in the 
same way that voice telephone users are called. The Commission sought 
to ensure that iTRS users can be reached via telephone, just as hearing 
users can be reached via telephone. As a result of that order, most 
deaf and hard-of-hearing iTRS users have obtained local telephone 
numbers.

[[Page 67337]]

Although iTRS providers are required to assign local numbers to their 
customers, at least some iTRS providers assign a toll free number as 
well, even if the customer does not request one. Thus, a large number 
of personal toll free numbers have been issued to iTRS users.
    3. The automatic issuance and prevalence of toll free iTRS numbers 
presents several concerns. For example, the use of toll free numbers 
increases the risk of confusion and delay during an emergency call. The 
automatic issuance of toll free numbers also may be inconsistent with 
the statutory requirement to provide service that is functionally 
equivalent to hearing individuals, and is at odds with other Commission 
policies such as local number portability (LNP). Consumer groups 
representing deaf and hard-of-hearing users have raised similar 
concerns, and agreed with the Commission on the need to limit or 
prohibit the distribution of toll free numbers by iTRS providers. In 
this NPRM, we seek comment on proposed rules designed to align access 
to local and toll free numbers by iTRS users more closely with the way 
that hearing users obtain toll free numbers. We expect to establish 
rules that will ensure that an iTRS user's local number is used 
routinely as the primary telephone number that hearing users dial to 
reach the deaf or hard-of-hearing user via an iTRS provider and that 
deaf and hard-of-hearing users employ for point-to-point calling with 
other deaf and hard-of-hearing users.

II. Background

    4. Authority. The Commission has authority to adopt and implement a 
system for assigning iTRS users local numbers linked to the NANP 
pursuant to sections 225 and 251(e) of the Communications Act of 1934, 
as amended (the Act). Section 225 requires the Commission to ensure 
that functionally equivalent TRS be available nationwide to the extent 
possible and in the most efficient manner, and directs the Commission 
to adopt regulations to govern the provision and compensation of TRS. 
Section 251 grants the Commission authority to oversee numbering 
administration in the United States. Establishing rules governing the 
use of toll free numbers by iTRS providers in connection with iTRS 
services is a continuation of the implementation of the Commission's 
numbering plan, and is essential to the Commission's goal of making the 
numbering system used by deaf and hard-of-hearing individuals 
functionally equivalent to the system used by hearing individuals.
    5. Internet-based TRS Orders. On June 24, 2008, the Commission 
issued the First Internet-based TRS Order, (73 FR 41307, July 18, 2010) 
in which it adopted a uniform numbering system for iTRS. Prior to the 
Commission's numbering plan, there was no uniform numbering system for 
iTRS. Rather, iTRS users were reached at a dynamic IP address, a proxy 
or alias number, or a toll free number. In the case of toll free 
numbers, an iTRS user would provide the number to any hearing user. 
When a hearing user dialed the iTRS user's toll free number, the voice 
call was routed by the PSTN to the provider that had subscribed to the 
number and assigned it to a user. That toll free number was not linked 
to a user-specific local number but the provider would be able to 
translate the toll free number dialed by the hearing user to the iTRS 
user's IP address in the provider's database. However, prior to 
December 31, 2008, iTRS providers did not share databases, and 
therefore, the iTRS user and people calling that user were forced to 
use the service of the iTRS provider that gave the user the toll free 
number. This arrangement was in tension with the Commission's 
interoperability requirements, which prohibit a VRS provider that seeks 
compensation from the Interstate TRS Fund from restricting the use of 
its equipment or service so that a VRS user cannot place or receive a 
call through a competing VRS provider.
    6. The Commission established the numbering system to advance 
functional equivalency by ensuring that deaf and hard-of-hearing iTRS 
users can be reached by hearing telephone users in the same way that 
hearing telephone users are reached. The numbering system was designed 
to ensure that emergency calls placed by iTRS users would be directly 
and automatically routed to the appropriate emergency services 
authorities. The system also provides the benefits of local number 
portability, to allow deaf and hard-of-hearing iTRS users to port their 
telephone numbers from one iTRS provider to another. The Commission's 
numbering plan included the creation of a central database mechanism 
that maps the NANP telephone numbers assigned to iTRS users' devices to 
an appropriate IP address known as a Uniform Resource Identifier (URI). 
In the First Internet-based TRS Order's Further Notice of Proposed 
Rulemaking, the Commission sought comment on issues involved in using 
toll free numbers for iTRS, including any impact that such numbers may 
have on the provision of 911 service and whether iTRS users should be 
subject to a fee for use of a personal toll free number, as hearing 
users are.
    7. In the Second Internet-based TRS Order, FCC 08-275 (75 FR 29914, 
May 28, 2010) released on December 19, 2008, the Commission addressed 
issues included in the First Internet-based TRS Order's Further Notice 
of Proposed Rulemaking, FCC 08-151 (73 FR 41307, July 18, 2008). Among 
other things, the Commission provided existing users a three-month 
``registration period,'' during which iTRS users could select a default 
provider, provide their Registered Location, and obtain their new ten-
digit NANP telephone numbers, followed by a three-month ``permissive 
calling period,'' which ended on November 12, 2009. During these 
registration and permissive calling periods, existing iTRS users were 
able to place and receive calls via the method used prior to 
implementation of the Commission's numbering plan. At the conclusion of 
the permissive calling period, however, providers were required to 
register any unregistered user before completing a non-emergency VRS or 
IP Relay call.
    8. The Commission also found that, to further the goals of the 
numbering system, ``Internet-based TRS users should transition away 
from the exclusive use of toll free numbers'' and required all iTRS 
users to obtain ``ten-digit geographically appropriate numbers, in 
accordance with our numbering system.'' The Commission reasoned that 
local numbers, and not toll free numbers, should be used when 
contacting Public Safety Answering Points (PSAPs). Accordingly, the 
Commission stated that a user's toll free number must be mapped to the 
user's local, geographically appropriate number. Moreover, the 
Commission found that, just as voice telephone users are responsible 
for the costs of obtaining and using toll free numbers, the TRS fund 
should not compensate providers for the use of toll free numbers by 
iTRS users.
    9. Toll Free Clarification Public Notice. In August 2009, the 
Consumer and Governmental Affairs Bureau and the Wireline Competition 
Bureau (the Bureaus) released the Toll Free Clarification Public Notice 
(24 FCC Rcd 10626, August 11, 2010) to clarify the intent of the Second 
Internet-based TRS Order that any toll free number retained or acquired 
by an iTRS user must be directed to the user's local number in the 
Service Management System (SMS)/800 database by November 12, 2009, and 
that a toll free number and a local number should not be directed to 
the

[[Page 67338]]

same URI in the iTRS Directory. Additionally, the Bureaus acknowledged 
that certain point-to-point calls, as well as inbound dial-around 
calls, would require the use of a local number.
    10. CSDVRS and TDI Petitions. On September 10, 2009, CSDVRS filed a 
petition for expedited reconsideration of the Toll Free Clarification 
Public Notice. CSDVRS claimed, among other things, that the Toll Free 
Clarification Public Notice violated the Administrative Procedure Act, 
impeded VRS interoperability, and undermined functional equivalency by 
eliminating toll free numbers for point-to-point and dial-around calls. 
Subsequently, the TDI Coalition, which represents deaf and hard-of-
hearing iTRS users, filed a Petition for Emergency Stay and a Request 
to Return to the Status Quo Ante. The TDI Coalition asked the 
Commission to stay certain portions of the Toll Free Clarification 
Public Notice, and direct any iTRS provider that had removed toll free 
numbers from the iTRS Directory to reinstate those numbers. The TDI 
Coalition claimed that this relief was necessary to avoid ``disruption 
of service to the severe detriment of people who are deaf, hard-of-
hearing, deaf-blind or have speech disabilities who currently use toll 
free numbers.''
    11. Toll Free Waiver Order and Extensions. In response to TDI's 
concerns that certain point-to-point calls would not be completed, on 
December 4, 2009, the Bureaus waived the portion of the Toll Free 
Clarification Public Notice that stated that a toll free number and a 
local geographic number should not be directed to the same URI in the 
iTRS Directory. Also, the Bureaus directed those iTRS providers that 
had removed working, assigned toll free numbers that did not point to 
the iTRS user's local number in the SMS/800 database in accordance with 
the Toll Free Clarification Public Notice, to reinstate those toll free 
numbers to the iTRS Directory. This four-month waiver was designed to 
give the Commission time to consider the CSDVRS petition for 
reconsideration as well as iTRS toll free issues generally. The 
Commission also recognized that it would take consumers and certain 
small businesses time to transition to geographically appropriate local 
numbers. On April 2, 2010, the Bureaus extended the waiver for an 
additional four months, until August 4, 2010, and on August 4, 2010, 
the Bureaus further extended the waiver until February 4, 2011.
    12. Continued Distribution of Toll Free Numbers. Although 
Commission rules require iTRS providers to give each customer a local 
number, some providers are routinely distributing toll free numbers in 
addition to local numbers. These toll free numbers are being 
distributed at no charge to the user and are provided even if the iTRS 
user does not request it. This practice encourages the use of toll free 
numbers, which is inconsistent with the Commission's ruling that iTRS 
users should ``transition away from the exclusive use of toll-free 
numbers to ten-digit, geographically appropriate numbers, in accordance 
with our numbering system.''
    13. There are several problems with the use of toll free numbers in 
the context of iTRS.
     Lack of Functional Equivalency and Consumer Confusion. The 
First Internet-based TRS Order attempted to ensure that ``Internet-
based TRS users can be reached by voice telephone users in the same way 
that voice telephone users are called.'' Hearing users are not 
typically reached via personal toll free numbers, nor are they 
automatically provided a personal toll free number when they sign up 
for service. Moreover, evidence in prior proceedings reflects that the 
automatic issuance of toll free numbers can cause confusion and 
frustration. An iTRS user may not understand the purpose of the toll 
free number, or understand that it is duplicative of the local number. 
In addition, many iTRS users do not want to receive a toll free number, 
even if it is provided free of charge. Finally, because iTRS customers 
are issued a local number, they do not need toll free numbers to 
achieve functional equivalency.
     Emergency Calling. One of the primary purposes for 
developing a numbering system for iTRS that is linked to the NANP was 
to ensure that emergency calls placed by iTRS users ``will be routed 
directly and automatically to the appropriate emergency services 
authorities'' by iTRS providers. The Commission reaffirmed that the 
local numbers will ensure automatic routing. In a typical 911 call, the 
call taker at the PSAP will see the user's local number displayed and 
will verbally confirm that number as the call-back number. If the 
person placing an emergency call through iTRS provides a toll free 
number as the call-back number (for example, out of habit), there will 
be a discrepancy with the local number displayed. This discrepancy 
could cause confusion and in turn affect critical response time.
     Lack of Portability and Impairment of Full Competition. 
When an iTRS provider secures a toll free number for one of its users, 
the ``toll free subscriber,'' for porting purposes of the toll free 
number, is the iTRS provider and not the user. Thus, when an iTRS user 
leaves the service provider, the user cannot easily and reliably take 
the toll free number with him or her. For example, many iTRS providers 
that would otherwise be a competitive alternative to that service 
provider simply do not support provider-paid personal toll free 
numbers. As a result, an iTRS user that has relied heavily on a 
personal toll free number may be reluctant to switch providers. 
Further, although the Commission has found that iTRS providers are 
obligated to take all steps necessary to port on behalf of the user, we 
do not believe this is consistently achievable for toll free numbers. 
Moreover, as a technical matter, the Commission's iTRS Directory is not 
able to automatically synchronize the porting of a device's local 
number and toll free number from one provider to another.
    Because local numbers are readily portable and toll free numbers 
are not, the automatic issuance of personal toll free numbers limits 
user choice and reduces competition, raising concerns about functional 
equivalency. One policy goal of the Commission's numbering plan was to 
create competition in the iTRS market and enhance consumer choice. For 
example, the Commission made clear that iTRS users could ``dial 
around'' their default provider in order to utilize the services of a 
different iTRS provider. Moreover, the Commission stated that an iTRS 
user could select and register with a new default provider at any time 
and have his or her number ported to that provider. To the extent that 
iTRS providers promote the use of toll free numbers, that practice is 
at odds with our interoperability requirements and competitive goals.
     Number Conservation. To the extent that iTRS providers 
automatically provide a personal toll free number at the same time they 
provide the requisite local number, the toll free number is 
duplicative. The Commission has articulated a policy of promoting 
number conservation. Issuing toll free numbers that do not serve a 
unique purpose, and indeed, that the customer does not request, 
undermines that policy. While iTRS users are free to obtain a toll free 
number in the same manner as hearing users do, we seek to discontinue 
the automatic and unnecessary dissemination of toll free numbers.
     Costs to the Fund. In the Second Internet-based TRS Order, 
the Commission concluded that costs associated with iTRS users' toll 
free numbers are not compensable from the

[[Page 67339]]

TRS Fund. We remain concerned, however, that costs associated with 
obtaining and distributing toll free numbers may be directly or 
indirectly compensated. We are also concerned that extensive use of 
toll free numbers may increase per-minute costs to the Fund. Although 
staff analysis cannot determine whether ``unlimited free calling'' 
encourages more calls to be placed from hearing people to iTRS users, 
analysis does indicate that ``unlimited free calling'' encourages such 
calls to be held longer than otherwise would be the case; the extra 
minutes of traffic that toll free numbers generate in this fashion are 
compensable from the Fund.

III. Discussion

    14. In this NPRM, we seek comment on proposed rules intended to 
improve access to telephone numbers associated with iTRS and to ensure 
that such numbers are assigned in the same manner as numbers are 
assigned to hearing telephone users. While iTRS users are of course 
free to obtain toll free numbers, our goal is to encourage iTRS users 
to use the local number as their primary--and in most cases exclusive--
telephone number, as this is the case for hearing users. Similarly, the 
local number should be the number that the user gives out for contact 
information, applications and resumes, and online purchases, and that 
is presented, for example, for Caller ID purposes. We are not seeking 
to prevent deaf or hard-of-hearing individuals who want the use of a 
toll free number from obtaining one. Instead, we are seeking to ensure 
that toll free numbers do not serve as default personal numbers simply 
because a customer is deaf or hard-of-hearing. Deaf and hard-of-hearing 
users who wish to use a toll free number for business or personal use 
may acquire a toll free number, or keep a toll free number that an iTRS 
provider has already assigned, in a manner consistent with how toll 
free numbers are used by hearing individuals.
    15. Pursuant to our authority under sections 225 and 251 of the 
Act, we propose rules to address the problems identified above that are 
caused by the promotion and disproportionately high use of toll free 
numbers in connection with iTRS services. Moreover, we seek comment on 
ways to ensure that those iTRS users who have a need for toll free 
numbers for business purposes or who wish to obtain a toll free number 
for personal use are able to use toll free numbers in the same manner 
as hearing users. Our specific requests for comment are set forth 
below.
    16. User-Selected Toll Free Use. We propose that the first step in 
reforming the use of toll free numbers for iTRS be to prohibit iTRS 
providers, acting in the capacity of a user's default number provider, 
from also automatically assigning a new toll free number to the user. 
The Commission's previous efforts have not led to a significant 
reduction in the assignment of toll free numbers by iTRS providers. We 
therefore believe that immediately prohibiting iTRS providers from 
automatically issuing toll free numbers is the best way to achieve the 
goal of encouraging the use of local numbers. Furthermore, the consumer 
groups representing iTRS users support this approach. Indeed, consumer 
groups have expressed a desire to work with the Commission to promote 
use of local numbers as the primary contact for deaf and hard-of-
hearing persons. We seek comment on this approach.
    17. Continuing Use of and Access to Toll Free Numbers. We emphasize 
that our proposed rules do not preclude iTRS users from having toll 
free numbers if they want them. On the contrary, we believe that iTRS 
users should have the same access to toll free numbers that hearing 
users do. A hearing user who wants a toll free number for personal or 
business use contacts a toll free service provider to obtain a toll 
free number; we believe that deaf and hard-of-hearing users should do 
the same. Moreover, we recognize that it would be disadvantageous to 
iTRS users who want to continue to use a toll free number to have to 
obtain a new number and inform people of that new number. Accordingly, 
we propose that any iTRS user who wants to keep a toll free number that 
was issued by an iTRS provider may do so. At the user's request, the 
iTRS provider must facilitate the transfer of the user's toll free 
number to a direct subscription with a toll free service provider, 
making the iTRS user the toll free subscriber for that number. At that 
point, the iTRS user will be a customer of the toll free service 
provider: The toll free service provider will bill the iTRS user 
directly, and the iTRS provider that originally provided the toll free 
number will have no continuing role in administering the toll free 
number on the user's behalf.
    18. No Support for Toll Free Numbers from TRS Fund. The Commission 
has concluded that the costs associated with assigning and providing to 
iTRS users toll free numbers are not compensable from the TRS Fund. 
Thus, if an iTRS user transfers his or her toll free number from an 
iTRS provider to a toll free service provider (or obtains a toll free 
number directly from a toll free service provider), the user assumes 
responsibility for all costs associated with the toll free number.
    19. Transfer of Toll Free Numbers. We seek comment on ways that 
iTRS providers can help transfer a toll free number assigned by the 
iTRS provider to the user's direct subscription with a toll free 
service provider. We seek comment on any jurisdictional or policy 
issues the Commission should consider in regard to this change in toll 
free subscription. Consistent with our Toll Free Clarification Public 
Notice, toll free numbers that are used in conjunction with the iTRS 
Numbering Directory will be mapped to the user's local number. We seek 
comment on any technical or policy issues involved with this proposal 
or mapping the toll free number to the user's local number in the SMS/
800 database.
    20. We also seek comment on how iTRS providers should assist an 
iTRS user in the process of transferring his or her toll free number to 
a toll free service provider. We propose that, at a minimum, iTRS 
providers modify the user notifications they currently provide to 
include information on how users can acquire or transfer a toll free 
number and how toll free numbers may be linked to ten-digit telephone 
numbers in the iTRS Directory. We also seek comment on whether there 
are any additional steps the Commission should take to protect users or 
ensure they get unbiased and full information? We want to make the 
transition to a new toll free number process as easy as possible for 
iTRS users. Commenters should therefore address what information would 
be most helpful to users, and what steps the Commission can take to 
minimize customer confusion.
    21. Toll Free Numbers in the iTRS Directory. When a hearing 
customer obtains a toll free number from a toll free provider, that 
number is mapped to the user's local number in the SMS/800 database. We 
believe that when a deaf or hard-of-hearing person obtains a toll free 
number from a toll free provider, the number should also be mapped to 
the user's local number in the iTRS Directory. This will permit a deaf 
or hard-of-hearing user to be reached at a toll free number both by 
other deaf and hard-of-hearing users on direct calls that are 
completely Internet-based, and by hearing users who ``dial around'' the 
user's default provider.
    22. Parties have identified routing problems that occur when toll 
free numbers are not linked to the associated local numbers in the iTRS 
Directory. We also recognize that these routing problems can create a 
``walled garden''

[[Page 67340]]

for the dominant iTRS provider. Therefore, we believe that mapping the 
toll free number to the local number in the iTRS directory is an 
important aspect of functional equivalency because it allows deaf and 
hard-of-hearing users to receive calls through any iTRS provider, and 
propose that such mapping to the iTRS directory be mandatory. We seek 
comment on that proposal.
    23. Transition Period. We recognize that it would take time for 
iTRS users to become aware of and conform to the toll free number 
procedures that may result from this NPRM. We agree with the TDI 
Coalition that we need to allow a reasonable period of time for 
consumer outreach and education to transition consumers from toll free 
numbers to local numbers. We believe that a one-year transition period 
would be sufficient. During this time, the Commission, iTRS providers, 
and consumer groups can engage in outreach efforts to educate users on 
the problems of toll free numbers in the iTRS context, the benefits of 
using geographically appropriate numbers in this context, and the steps 
for obtaining toll free numbers directly from a toll free service 
provider. Moreover, iTRS users can update contact information, obtain a 
toll free number from a toll free provider, if desired, and make any 
other necessary adjustments. We also expect to use the transition 
period to educate users on the new procedures for obtaining a toll free 
number. We seek comment on our proposal to allow a one-year transition 
period. We also seek comment on whether there are any other issues we 
must consider in connection with the proposed transition period.
    24. Removing Non-Selected Toll Free Numbers from the iTRS 
Directory. We believe that an important outcome of this proceeding 
should be to cleanse the iTRS Directory of extra or unwanted toll free 
numbers. Accordingly, we propose that after the transition period, any 
toll free numbers that have not been mapped to local numbers in the 
SMS/800 database by a toll free service provider be removed from the 
iTRS Directory. We seek comment on whether there is any reason not to 
remove these numbers from the iTRS Directory. Moreover, we seek comment 
on whether there should be a process where, during the transition 
period, iTRS users who know they do not want their toll free number(s) 
can request that those numbers be deleted from the iTRS Directory. Such 
a procedure may help clean up the iTRS Directory on an ongoing basis as 
opposed to being done all at once at the end of the transition period. 
We seek comment on whether this proposal may cause any service 
disruption to users and, if so, steps we can take to minimize such 
disruption. We also seek comment on whether there are any technical or 
policy considerations regarding, for example, toll free number 
administration, that must be addressed.
    25. Consumer Outreach. We believe that the success of the 
Commission's numbering plan was in major part due to the outreach 
efforts by consumer groups, as well as by iTRS providers and the 
Commission. We believe this will be the case for our efforts to revise 
the Commission's policies and procedures regarding toll free number use 
in connection with iTRS service as well. Consumer groups representing 
deaf and hard-of-hearing iTRS users have stated that iTRS providers 
have given inconsistent information regarding the use of and need for 
toll free numbers. We recognize that deaf and hard-of-hearing 
individuals may be used to the current process for obtaining toll free 
numbers and that any change will require substantial education and 
outreach. We also recognize that iTRS providers will need to play a 
major role in consumer education because of their relationships with 
the users and their history as providers of toll free numbers. Consumer 
advocacy groups as well as the Commission will also play a significant 
role in consumer outreach and education efforts. The Commission is 
committed as well to playing a significant role in conducting consumer 
outreach and education on this issue. We seek input on ways to make 
information about the availability and use of toll free numbers 
available to iTRS users, such as fact sheets and Web sites. We 
encourage consumers to assist in outreach efforts through their 
community contacts, and welcome other ideas about what the Commission 
might do to help facilitate consumer outreach efforts.

IV. Procedural Matters

1. Ex Parte Presentations

    26. This proceeding shall be treated as a ``permit-but-disclose'' 
proceeding in accordance with the Commission's ex parte rules. Persons 
making oral ex parte presentations are reminded that memoranda 
summarizing the presentations must contain summaries of the substance 
of the presentations and not merely a listing of the subjects 
discussed. More than a one or two sentence description of the views and 
arguments presented is generally required. Other requirements 
pertaining to oral and written presentations are set forth in Sec.  
1.1206(b) of the Commission's rules.

2. Comment Filing Procedures

    27. Pursuant to Sec. Sec.  1.415 and 1.419 of the Commission's 
rules, interested parties may file comments and reply comments 
regarding the further notice on or before the dates indicated on the 
first page of this document. All filings should refer to WC Docket No. 
10-191. Comments may be filed using: (1) The Commission's Electronic 
Comment Filing System (ECFS); (2) the Federal Government's e-Rulemaking 
Portal; or (3) by filing paper copies.
    28. Electronic Filers: Comments may be filed electronically using 
the Internet by accessing the ECFS: http://fjallfoss.fcc.gov/ecfs/ or 
the Federal e-Rulemaking Portal: http://www.regulations.gov.
    29. Paper Filers: Parties who choose to file by paper must file an 
original and four copies of each filing. If more than one docket or 
rulemaking number appears in the caption of this proceeding, filers 
must submit two additional copies for each additional docket or 
rulemaking number.
    30. Filings can be sent by hand or messenger delivery, by 
commercial overnight courier, or by first-class or overnight U.S. 
Postal Service mail. All filings must be addressed to the Commission's 
Secretary, Office of the Secretary, Federal Communications Commission.
    31. Effective December 28, 2009, all hand-delivered or messenger-
delivered paper filings for the Commission's Secretary must be 
delivered to FCC Headquarters at 445 12th St., SW., Room TW-A325, 
Washington, DC 20554. All hand deliveries must be held together with 
rubber bands or fasteners. Any envelopes must be disposed of before 
entering the building. Commercial overnight mail (other than U.S. 
Postal Service Express Mail and Priority Mail) must be sent to 9300 
East Hampton Drive, Capitol Heights, MD 20743. U.S. Postal Service 
first-class, Express, and Priority mail must be addressed to 445 12th 
Street, SW., Washington DC 20554.
    32. People with Disabilities: 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 and Governmental Affairs Bureau at 202-418-0530 (voice), 202-
418-0432 (tty).
    33. Parties should send a copy of their filings to Heather 
Hendrickson, Competition Policy Division, Wireline Competition Bureau, 
Federal Communications Commission, Room

[[Page 67341]]

5-C225, 445 12th Street, SW., Washington, DC 20554, or by e-mail to 
[email protected]. Parties shall also serve one copy with the 
Commission's copy contractor, Best Copy and Printing, Inc. (BCPI), 
Portals II, 445 12th Street, SW., Room CY-B402, Washington, DC 20554, 
(202) 488-5300, or via e-mail to [email protected].
    34. Documents in WC Docket No. 10-191 will be available for public 
inspection and copying during business hours at the FCC Reference 
Information Center, Portals II, 445 12th Street SW., Room CY-A257, 
Washington, DC 20554. The documents may also be purchased from BCPI, 
telephone (202) 488-5300, facsimile (202) 488-5563, TTY (202) 488-5562, 
e-mail [email protected].

V. Ordering Clauses

    35. Accordingly, it is ordered, pursuant to the authority contained 
in sections 1, 4(i), 4(j), 225, 251(e), and 255 of the Communications 
Act of 1934, as amended, 47 U.S.C. 151, 154(i), 154(j), 225, 251(e), 
and 255, and Sec. Sec.  0.91, 0.141, 0.291, 0.361, and 1.3 of the 
Commission's rules, 47 CFR 0.91, 0.141, 0.291, 0.361, 1.3, that this 
Notice of Proposed Rulemaking is adopted.
    36. It is further ordered that the Commission's Consumer and 
Governmental Affairs Bureau, Reference Information Center, shall send a 
copy of this NPRM, including the Initial Regulatory Flexibility 
Analysis, to the Chief Counsel for Advocacy of the Small Business 
Administration.

List of Subjects in 47 CFR Part 64

    Telecommunications.

Federal Communications Commission.
Marlene H. Dortch,
Secretary.

Proposed Rules

    For the reasons discussed in the preamble, the Federal 
Communications Commission proposes to amend 47 CFR part 64 as follows:

PART 64--MISCELLANEOUS RULES RELATING TO COMMON CARRIERS

    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), Pub. L. 
104-104, 110 Stat. 56. Interpret or apply 47 U.S.C. 201, 218, 222, 
225, 226, 228, and 254(k) unless otherwise noted.

    2. Section 64.611 is amended by redesignating paragraphs (e) and 
(f) as paragraphs (f) and (g), by adding a new paragraph (e) and by 
adding paragraph (g)(1)(v) and (g)(1)(vi) to read as follows:


Sec.  64.611  Internet-based TRS registration.

* * * * *
    (e) Toll free numbers. A VRS or IP Relay provider:
    (1) May not assign or issue a toll free number to any VRS or IP 
Relay user.
    (2) That has already assigned or provided a toll free number to a 
VRS or IP Relay user must, at the VRS or IP Relay user's request, 
facilitate the transfer of the toll free number to a toll free 
subscription with a toll free service provider that is under the direct 
control of the user.
    (3) Must remove from the Internet-based TRS Numbering Directory any 
toll free number that has not been transferred to a subscription with a 
toll free service provider and for which the user is the subscriber of 
record as of [end date of transition period].
* * * * *
    (g) * * *
    (1) * * *
    (v) The process by which a VRS or IP Relay user may acquire a toll 
free number from a toll free service provider, or transfer control of a 
toll free number from a VRS or IP Relay provider to the user; and
    (vi) The process by which persons holding a toll free number may 
have that number linked to their ten-digit telephone number in the TRS 
Numbering Directory.
* * * * *
    3. Section 64.613 is amended by redesignating paragraph (a)(3) as 
(a)(4), by revising paragraphs (a)(1) and (a)(2), and by adding a new 
paragraph (a)(3) to read as follows:


Sec.  64.613  Numbering directory for Internet-based TRS users.

    (a) * * *
    (1) The TRS Numbering Directory shall contain records mapping the 
geographically appropriate NANP telephone number of each Registered 
Internet-based TRS User to a unique Uniform Resource Identifier (URI).
    (2) For each record associated with a VRS user's geographically 
appropriate NANP telephone number, the URI shall contain the IP address 
of the user's device. For each record associated with an IP Relay 
user's geographically appropriate NANP telephone number, the URI shall 
contain the user's user name and domain name that can be subsequently 
resolved to reach the user.
    (3) As of [date reserved], Internet-based TRS providers must ensure 
that the toll free number of a user that is associated with a 
geographically appropriate NANP number will be associated with the same 
URI as that geographically appropriate NANP telephone number.
* * * * *
[FR Doc. 2010-27578 Filed 11-1-10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6712-01-P