[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