[Federal Register Volume 76, Number 187 (Tuesday, September 27, 2011)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 59551-59557]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2011-23824]


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

FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION

47 CFR Part 64

[CG Docket No. 03-123; WC Docket No. 05-196; WC Docket No. 10-191; FCC 
11-123]


Internet-Based Telecommunications Relay Service Numbering

AGENCY: Federal Communications Commission.

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: In this document, the Federal Communications Commission 
(Commission) adopts rules to improve assignment of telephone numbers 
associated with Internet-based Telecommunications Relay Service (iTRS). 
These rules specifically address Video Relay Service (VRS), which 
allows individuals with hearing and speech disabilities to communicate 
using sign language through video equipment, and IP Relay, which allows 
these individuals to communicate in text using a computer. The final 
rules set forth in this Order reflect the objectives laid out in the 
iTRS Toll Free Notice to promote the use of geographically appropriate 
local numbers, while ensuring 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.

DATES: Effective October 27, 2011 except for Sec. Sec.  64.611(e)(2), 
64.611(e)(3), 64.611(g)(1)(v), 64.611 (g)(1)(vi), and 64.613(a)(3), 
which contain information collection requirements that have not been 
approved by OMB. The Federal Communications Commission will publish a 
document in the Federal Register announcing the effective date of the 
rules that require OMB approval.

ADDRESSES: Interested parties may submit PRA comments identified by OMB 
Control Number 3060-1089 by any of the following methods: Federal e-
Rulemaking Portal: http://www.regulations.gov. Follow the instructions 
for submitting comments.
     Federal Communications Commission's Web Site: http://www.fcc.gov/cgb/ecfs/. Follow the instructions for submitting comments.
     E-mail: Parties who choose to file by e-mail should submit 
their comments to [email protected]. Please include CG Docket No. 03-123; WC 
Docket No. 05-196; WC Docket No. 10-191 and OMB Control Number 3060-
1089 in the subject line of the message.
     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.

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 Judith B. Herman at 202-418-0214.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This is a synopsis of the Commission's 
Report and Order in CG Docket No. 03-123; WC Docket No. 05-196; WC 
Docket No. 10-191; FCC 11-123, adopted and released on August 4, 2011. 
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

[[Page 59552]]

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.
    In addition to filing comments with the Office of the Secretary, a 
copy of any comments on the Paperwork Reduction Act information 
collection requirements contained herein should be submitted to Judith 
B. Herman, Federal Communications Commission, Room 1-B441, 445 12th 
Street, SW., Washington, DC 20554, or via the Internet to [email protected].

Paperwork Reduction Act

    The Order contains new or modified 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 (PRA), Public Law 104-13. Public and agency 
comments are due 60 days after the date of publication of this document 
in the Federal Register. Comments should address: (a) Whether the 
proposed collection of information is necessary for the proper 
performance of the functions of the Commission, including whether the 
information shall have practical utility; (b) the accuracy of the 
Commission's burden estimates; (c) ways to enhance the quality, 
utility, and clarity of the information collected; and (d) ways to 
minimize the burden of the collection of information on the 
respondents, including the use of automated collection 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.''

Final Regulatory Flexibility Certification

    The Regulatory Flexibility Act of 1980, as amended (RFA), requires 
that a regulatory flexibility analysis be prepared for rulemaking 
proceedings, unless the agency certifies that ``the rule will not, if 
promulgated, have a significant economic impact on a substantial number 
of small entities.'' The RFA generally defines ``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 Small Business Administration 
(SBA).
    In this Order, the Commission issues final rules to improve 
assignment of telephone numbers associated with iTRS. Specifically, 
these rules are targeted to address VRS, which allows individuals with 
hearing and speech disabilities to communicate using sign language 
through video equipment, and IP Relay, which allows these individuals 
to communicate in text using a computer. The final rules set forth in 
this Order will satisfy the objective of this proceeding: 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.
    With regard to whether a substantial number of small entities will 
be affected by the requirements set forth in this Order, the Commission 
notes that only four providers affected by the Order meet the 
definition of a small entity. The SBA has developed a small business 
size standard for Wired Telecommunications Carriers, which consists of 
all such firms having 1,500 or fewer employees. Currently, fifteen 
providers receive compensation from the Interstate TRS Fund for 
providing any form of TRS: 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. Because only four of the 
providers affected by this Order are deemed to be small entities under 
the SBA's small business size standard, the Commission concludes that 
the number of small entities affected is not substantial. Moreover, 
given that all providers affected by the Order, including the four that 
are deemed to be small entities under the SBA's standard, are entitled 
to receive prompt reimbursement for their reasonable costs of 
compliance, the Commission concludes that the Order will not have a 
significant economic impact on these small entities. Therefore, we 
certify that requirements set forth in the Order will not have a 
significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities.
    The Commission will send a copy of the Order, including a copy of 
this Final Regulatory Flexibility Certification, to the Chief Counsel 
for Advocacy of the SBA. This final certification will also be 
published in the Federal Register.

Congressional Review Act

    The Commission will send a copy of this Report and Order in a 
report to be sent to Congress and the Government Accountability Office 
pursuant to the Congressional Review Act.

Synopsis of Report and Order

    1. In this Order, we adopt rules to improve assignment of telephone 
numbers associated with Internet-based Telecommunications Relay Service 
(iTRS). These rules specifically address Video Relay Service (VRS), 
which allows individuals with hearing and speech disabilities to 
communicate using sign language through video equipment, and IP Relay, 
which allows these individuals to communicate in text using a computer. 
The final rules set forth in this Order reflect the objectives laid out 
in the iTRS Toll Free Notice 75 FR 67333, November 2, 2010: to promote 
the use of geographically appropriate local numbers, while ensuring 
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. These objectives, and the rules to implement them, received 
strong support in the record. Reflecting that record in this Order, we 
adopt the rules as proposed.
    2. In 2008, the Commission instituted a ten-digit numbering plan 
for iTRS in order to make access by deaf and hard-of-hearing people 
more functionally equivalent to access enjoyed by the hearing 
community, as required by section 225 of the Communications Act of 
1934, as amended 73 FR 41286, July 18, 2008. The Commission sought to 
ensure that iTRS users can be reached via telephone, as hearing users 
can. As a result of that order, most deaf and hard-of-hearing iTRS 
users have obtained local telephone numbers. Nevertheless, some iTRS 
providers have continued to assign customers a toll free number in 
addition to a local number, even if the customer did not request a toll 
free number.
    3. In the iTRS Toll Free Notice, the Commission proposed rules to 
align the use of local and toll free numbers by iTRS users more closely 
with the way that hearing users use local and toll free numbers. The 
Commission's goal was to ensure that an iTRS user's local number

[[Page 59553]]

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. In this Order, we 
adopt those proposed rules, and in doing so we advance the Commission's 
statutory responsibility to ensure that deaf and hard-of-hearing users 
are able to communicate in a manner that is ``functionally equivalent'' 
to the way in which hearing users communicate.
    4. Authority. The Commission has authority, pursuant to sections 
225 and 251(e) of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended (the Act), 
to adopt and implement a system for assigning iTRS users local numbers 
linked to the NANP. 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. Adopting rules to govern 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. Ten-digit numbering plan. The Commission released the First 
Internet-based TRS Order on June 24, 2008, 73 FR 41286, July 18, 2008, 
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, and iTRS users were reached at an IP address, a proxy or alias 
number, or a toll free number. With respect to toll free numbers, when 
a hearing user dialed the iTRS user's toll free number, the voice call 
was routed by the public switched telephone network (PSTN) to the 
provider that had subscribed to the number and assigned it to a user. 
Although that toll free number was not linked to a user-specific local 
number, the provider would translate the toll free number dialed by the 
hearing user to the iTRS user's IP address in the provider's database. 
However, until the First Internet-based TRS Order took effect, 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.
    6. In the Second Internet-based TRS Order, released on December 19, 
2008, 73 FR 79683, December 30, 2008, the Commission addressed issues 
raised in a Further Notice of Proposed Rulemaking 73 FR 41307, July 18, 
2008, that accompanied the First Internet-based TRS Order. With respect 
to the use of toll free numbers, the Commission 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 determined, among other things, that local numbers rather 
than toll free numbers should be used when an iTRS user contacted 
Public Safety Answering Points (PSAPs). Accordingly, the Commission 
required that a user's toll free number be mapped to the user's local, 
geographically appropriate number. Moreover, the Commission found that, 
because hearing telephone users are responsible for the costs of 
obtaining and using toll free numbers, functional equivalency dictates 
that the TRS Fund should not compensate providers for the use of toll 
free numbers by iTRS users.
    7. iTRS Toll Free Issues. In August 2009, the Consumer and 
Governmental Affairs Bureau and the Wireline Competition Bureau (the 
Bureaus) released the Toll Free Clarification Public Notice to clarify 
the requirement, imposed in 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, and that a toll free number and a local number 
should not be directed to the same Uniform Resource Identifier (URI) in 
the Internet-based TRS Numbering Directory (iTRS Directory). This 
action was taken to ensure that the use of toll free numbers by iTRS 
users would be functionally equivalent to the use of toll free numbers 
by hearing users. Additionally, the Public Notice acknowledged that 
certain point-to-point calls, as well as inbound dial-around calls, 
would require the use of a local number.
    8. On September 10, 2009, CSDVRS, a provider of VRS, filed a 
petition for expedited reconsideration of the Toll Free Clarification 
Public Notice, claiming, among other things, that the Toll Free 
Clarification Public Notice violated the Administrative Procedure Act, 
impeded VRS interoperability, and undermined functional equivalency by 
eliminating the use of 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 to direct iTRS providers that had removed toll free 
numbers from the iTRS Directory to reinstate those numbers to avoid any 
disruption in service.
    9. 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 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. The waiver was designed 
to give the Commission time to consider the CSDVRS petition for 
reconsideration as well as iTRS toll free issues generally. The Bureaus 
also recognized that it would take consumers and certain small 
businesses time to transition to geographically appropriate local 
numbers. The Bureaus have issued several extensions of this waiver.
    10. iTRS Toll Free Notice. To address the issues raised in response 
to the Toll Free Clarification Public Notice and to generally improve 
assignment of telephone numbers associated with iTRS, the Commission 
issued the iTRS Toll Free Notice. In the Notice, the Commission found 
that the routine issuance and prevalence of toll free iTRS numbers 
presented concerns with respect to: (1) Lack of functional equivalency 
and consumer confusion; (2) emergency calling; (3) lack of number 
portability and impairment of full competition; (4) number 
conservation; and (5) costs to the TRS Fund. The Commission, pursuant 
to its authority under sections 225 and 251 of the Act, proposed rules 
to address the problems that are caused by the promotion and 
disproportionately high use of toll free numbers in connection with 
iTRS services.
    11. The Commission emphasized in the iTRS Toll Free Notice that it 
was not seeking to prevent deaf or hard-of-hearing individuals from 
obtaining a toll free number, but rather to ensure that toll free 
numbers do not serve as default personal numbers. The Commission

[[Page 59554]]

sought comment on ways to ensure that iTRS users who need toll free 
numbers for business purposes or who wish to obtain a toll free number 
for personal use are able to do so in the same manner as hearing users. 
Interested parties, including providers and consumer groups, commented 
on the iTRS Toll Free Notice and generally supported the Commission's 
proposed rules.
    12. User-Selected Toll Free Use. In the iTRS Toll Free Notice, we 
proposed to prohibit iTRS providers, acting in the capacity of a user's 
default number provider, from routinely assigning a new toll free 
number to the user. We noted that consumer groups representing iTRS 
users supported this approach and agreed with the Commission on the 
need to limit or prohibit the distribution of toll free numbers by iTRS 
providers. The consumer groups continue to support this proposal. The 
TDI Coalition states that it supports the transition from toll free to 
geographically appropriate numbers, ``as it will (1) reduce confusion, 
both for service providers and consumers, by making clear the 
responsibilities of the various parties, and (2) provide that the 
continued use of toll-free numbers, under specific circumstances, is 
not prohibited by the Commission.'' The TDI Coalition further states 
that it ``do[es] not condone the way some iTRS providers have pushed 
toll free numbers on consumers, and would prefer that in general, 
consumers use geographically appropriate ten-digit geographic NANP 
numbers.'' No iTRS provider opposes this proposal. Indeed, CSDVRS--a 
VRS provider--comments that it ``fully supports this measure as a means 
to meet the Commission's efforts to encourage the use of local ten-
digit numbers, rather than toll free numbers.''
    13. Sorenson Communications--the largest VRS provider--comments 
that it ``does not automatically assign toll-free numbers to its 
default users, but instead offers consumers the option of obtaining a 
toll-free number in addition to their ten-digit local number.'' 
Sorenson further states that ``a default user must affirmatively 
request a toll-free number in order to receive one. Regardless of 
whether Sorenson or any other iTRS provider assigns toll free numbers 
``automatically,'' we agree with the consumer groups that the 
widespread assignment of toll free numbers in addition to local numbers 
continues to cause problems for iTRS users. Therefore, based on the 
record and consistent with our proposal in the iTRS Toll Free Notice, 
we revise Sec.  64.611 of the Commission's rules to prohibit iTRS 
providers from assigning or issuing toll free numbers to users. We 
expect that requiring an iTRS subscriber to pay for his or her toll 
free number, and to transfer an already assigned number to a toll free 
service provider or Responsible Organization (RespOrg) should the 
subscriber want to keep it, will significantly reduce the number of 
toll free numbers assigned by iTRS providers.
    14. In its comments, Sorenson proposes that iTRS providers be 
allowed to assign toll free numbers in instances where geographically 
appropriate numbers are not available. Currently, when a geographically 
appropriate number is unavailable, an iTRS provider may assign the user 
a ``geographically approximate'' number, which is a ten-digit number as 
close to a user's rate center as possible. Sorenson claims, however, 
that for these iTRS users, ``toll charges can result even for calls 
placed to the iTRS user by hearing persons--including health care 
providers, schools, governments and employers--located within the same 
local calling area.'' Sorenson argues that the Commission should 
therefore waive its rules to permit the assignment of toll free numbers 
where geographically appropriate numbers are not available.
    15. We disagree with Sorenson that a general waiver is appropriate. 
A general waiver allowing the assignment of toll free numbers where 
geographically appropriate numbers are not available would undermine 
the intent of this proceeding to promote the use of geographically 
appropriate numbers and to provide iTRS customers with access 
functionally equivalent to that enjoyed by hearing customers. 
Furthermore, Sorenson does not demonstrate that, where geographically 
appropriate numbers are not available, toll free numbers, rather than 
geographically approximate numbers, are necessary to avoid widespread 
harm to iTRS users. Once the rules we adopt today become effective, 
iTRS providers may request waivers on a case-by-case basis, where they 
believe that the assignment of geographically approximate numbers is an 
inadequate solution.
    16. We also note that Jay Carpenter, member of the North American 
Numbering Council Future of Numbering Working Group, requests that the 
Commission postpone adopting any rules with respect to the distribution 
of toll free numbers for iTRS. Mr. Carpenter asserts that issues raised 
in the iTRS context with respect to toll free numbers are ``symptomatic 
of a general need within the toll free telephone number industry.'' Mr. 
Carpenter requests that we delay this proceeding for six months while 
the toll free industry has ``vetted'' a white paper drafted by the 
North American Numbering Council Future of Numbering Working Group. 
Although we applaud efforts made by the working group to address issues 
of the toll free industry, we find that issues raised in the instant 
proceeding regarding distribution of toll free numbers for iTRS are 
distinct and severable from those raised in the Commission's general 
toll free docket, CC Docket No. 95-155.
    17. Continuing Use of and Access to Toll Free Numbers. In the iTRS 
Toll Free Notice, we stated that iTRS users should have the same access 
to toll free numbers that hearing users have, and that any iTRS user 
who wants to keep a toll free number that has been issued by an iTRS 
provider may do so. We proposed a rule requiring that at the user's 
request, an iTRS provider must facilitate the transfer of the user's 
toll free number to a direct subscription with a toll free service 
provider or RespOrg. Under this approach, the iTRS user would become a 
customer of the toll free service provider, and the iTRS provider that 
originally provided the toll free number would have no continuing role 
in administering that number. The consumer groups support this 
proposal, ``so long as those measures do not cause undue disruption to 
consumer services.'' We agree, and we expect that the rules we adopt in 
this Order can be implemented without significant disruption to the 
iTRS user. Accordingly, we adopt the rule we proposed in the iTRS Toll 
Free Notice, which will allow an iTRS user to maintain his or her toll 
free number by transferring such number to a toll free service 
subscription.
    18. Sorenson asserts that the iTRS Toll Free Notice ``does not 
propose, and should not be interpreted to propose, a prohibition of VRS 
providers acting as RespOrgs or interexchange carriers, or entering 
into sales and marketing relationships with RespOrgs or interexchange 
carriers.'' Commission rules do not prohibit iTRS providers from 
serving as or entering into business relationships with RespOrgs or 
interexchange carriers. We emphasize, however, that any provision of 
toll free numbers by iTRS providers must be consistent with the rules 
that we adopt in this proceeding. Moreover, we will closely monitor the 
implementation of these rules to ensure that iTRS customers routinely 
use local numbers as their primary telephone numbers. We will take 
action, if necessary, to ensure that iTRS providers and other entities 
do not induce iTRS customers to obtain or maintain toll free numbers. 
For example, the provision by iTRS

[[Page 59555]]

providers of toll free numbers or toll free calling at no charge to 
iTRS customers, or efforts by iTRS providers to market toll free 
numbers to iTRS customers, would contravene the Commission's goals in 
this proceeding.
    19. No Support for Toll Free Numbers from TRS Fund. The Commission 
has previously concluded that the costs associated with assigning and 
providing to iTRS users toll free numbers are not compensable from the 
TRS Fund. Thus, should an iTRS user choose to transfer his or her toll 
free number from an iTRS provider to a toll free service provider (or 
obtain a toll free number directly from a toll free service provider or 
RespOrg), the user would assume responsibility for all costs associated 
with the toll free number.
    20. The consumer groups agree that iTRS users should pay for their 
own toll free numbers. CSDVRS also agrees that iTRS users should pay 
for costs associated with toll free number subscription. Sorenson 
argues that ``[r]equiring consumers to pay for toll-free service is 
likely to force at least some consumers to relinquish their access to 
toll-free numbers, thus degrading their service.'' We disagree that 
requiring iTRS users to pay for toll free service would ``degrade'' 
service. Rather, this approach is consistent with the functional 
equivalency requirement of section 225 of the Act because it aligns 
toll free use by iTRS users with toll free use by hearing customers. We 
agree with Sorenson that if it is not economically worthwhile for an 
iTRS user to pay for his or her own toll free number, then he or she 
will likely relinquish the number. However, this economic decision is 
no different for deaf and hard-of-hearing users than for hearing 
consumers.
    21. While CSDVRS agrees that iTRS users should be responsible for 
the costs associated with a toll free number, it suggests that ``in the 
interests of maintaining equal access to the use of toll free numbers 
by deaf, hard-of-hearing, and deaf-blind individuals * * * the FCC set 
a minimum allowable price charged to an iTRS consumer for a toll free 
number at $9.95 per month.'' We do not believe, however, that 
functional equivalency requires the establishment of a minimum 
allowable price for toll free service to iTRS users when there is no 
comparable minimum price for toll free service to hearing users. 
Accordingly, we decline to adopt CSDVRS's proposal.
    22. Transfer of Toll Free Numbers. Section 251(e)(1) of the Act 
grants the Commission exclusive jurisdiction over ``those portions of 
the North American Numbering Plan that pertain to the United States.'' 
The Act also requires the Commission to ``ensure the efficient, fair, 
and orderly allocation of toll-free numbers.'' All telephone numbers 
are a public resource and neither carriers nor subscribers ``own'' 
their telephone numbers. Under the Commission's rules, toll free 
numbers are made available to end users on a first-come, first-served 
basis unless otherwise directed by the Commission. Several commenters 
state that in order to effectuate the transfer of the iTRS toll free 
numbers from the iTRS provider to the toll free service provider, the 
Commission must waive its first-come, first-served policy.
    23. Section 52.111 of the Commission's rules authorizes the 
Commission to direct assignment of toll free numbers on a basis 
different than the usual first-come, first-served basis. Moreover, the 
Commission has authority to waive any provision of its rules for good 
cause shown. The Commission may exercise its discretion to waive a rule 
where particular facts would make strict compliance inconsistent with 
the public interest.
    24. To fully implement the Commission's numbering system for iTRS 
users and to ensure that iTRS users have the same access to toll free 
numbers as hearing users, we waive the first-come, first-served rule 
for the limited purpose of enabling those iTRS users who wish to 
continue to use their existing toll free numbers to do so. Under the 
ordinary operation of the Commission's numbering rules, when an end 
user relinquishes a toll free number, that number is returned 
immediately to the number pool before it is reassigned. Accordingly, 
under the first-come, first-served rule, when a toll free number is 
transferred from an iTRS provider to a toll free service provider, the 
iTRS user may not be able to retain his or her toll free number because 
the number may be assigned to someone else. To prevent this potential 
disruption, we waive our first-come, first-served rule, Sec.  52.111 of 
the Commission's rules, to allow iTRS users to transfer their existing 
toll free numbers to a toll free service provider. This limited waiver 
will remain in place during the one-year transition period that we 
establish in this Order and will thus expire one year after the 
effective date of this Order. By the time this waiver expires, all iTRS 
users who want to keep their existing toll free numbers will have had a 
reasonable opportunity to transfer those numbers to a direct 
subscription with a toll free service provider.
    25. Toll Free Numbers in the iTRS Directory. We proposed in the 
iTRS Toll Free Notice that if a deaf or hard-of-hearing person obtains 
a toll free number from a toll free provider, the number would also be 
mapped to the user's local number in the iTRS Directory. This approach 
would allow such users 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. The record supports this approach. 
Accordingly, we adopt the proposal in the iTRS Toll Free Notice and 
revise Sec.  64.613 of our rules to require that iTRS providers ensure 
that the toll free number of a user associated with a geographically 
appropriate NANP number will be associated with the same URI as that 
geographically appropriate NANP number.
    26. This requirement should eliminate problems involving service 
disruption when toll free numbers are not directly linked to the 
associated local numbers in the iTRS Directory. We note that Neustar--
the administrator for the iTRS Directory--has recommended a process or 
mapping toll free numbers to local numbers through the Canonical Name 
(CNAME) Resource Record. Neustar's comments highlight that the mapping 
function is feasible. The Commission, through its contracting process, 
will determine the best method to implement its new iTRS toll free 
rules.
    27. We find that adopting this rule addresses the concerns raised 
in CSDVRS's Petition for Expedited Reconsideration of the Toll Free 
Clarification Public Notice as well as the TDI Coalition's Petition for 
Emergency Stay and a Request to Return to the Status Quo Ante. CSDVRS 
and the TDI Coalition had expressed concern that the Commission's 
clarification 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 would cause service disruption and 
undermine functional equivalency for iTRS users. The specific 
requirement that a toll free number associated with a geographically 
appropriate NANP number be associated with the same URI as that 
geographically appropriate NANP number will alleviate any service 
disruption or problems completing point-to-point calls and therefore, 
we dismiss these petitions as moot.
    28. Transition Period. In the iTRS Toll Free Notice, we proposed a 
one-year transition period to allow a reasonable period for consumer 
outreach and education to transition consumers from toll free numbers 
to local numbers. This proposal was unanimously supported in

[[Page 59556]]

the record. Specifically, the TDI Coalition commented that the 
``Commission's proposed transition plan of one year is reasonable, and 
indeed, necessary.'' CSDVRS also agrees with the Commission's one-year 
transition plan proposal, stating it will ``allow ample time for 
providers to undertake consumer outreach and any necessary 
technological adjustments.'' Sorenson also agrees.
    29. Based on the record, we find that a one-year transition is 
appropriate. During this transition period, the Commission will work 
diligently to educate iTRS users about the transition plan. We expect 
that consumer groups and iTRS providers will do the same. We also agree 
with the consumer groups that this time can be used to allow iTRS users 
who wish to relinquish their toll free numbers to inform their family, 
friends and other correspondents that they must be called on their 
geographic numbers and allow those iTRS users who wish to maintain 
their toll free number to transition to a toll free subscribership. We 
therefore adopt the one-year transition period proposed in the iTRS 
Toll Free Notice. This transition period will expire one year after the 
effective date of the rules we adopt today. By that date, iTRS 
providers must remove from the iTRS 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 at the end 
of the transition period. iTRS providers must also, by the end of the 
transition period, ensure that the toll free number of a user that is 
associated with a geographically appropriate NANP number is associated 
with the same URI as that geographically appropriate NANP telephone 
number in the iTRS Directory.
    30. Removing Non-Selected Toll Free Number from the iTRS Directory. 
In the iTRS Toll Free Notice, we emphasized that an important outcome 
of this proceeding was to ``cleanse'' the iTRS Directory of extra or 
unwanted toll free numbers at the end of the transition period. We 
proposed that 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 at the end of the transition period. 
There is support in the record for removing such numbers from the iTRS 
Directory at the end of the transition period, and no commenter opposed 
this proposal. Thus, we adopt a rule requiring that iTRS providers, 
within one year after the effective date of this Order, remove from the 
iTRS Directory any toll free numbers that have not been mapped to local 
numbers in the SMS/800 database, and have not been mapped directly to a 
local number in the iTRS Directory by the iTRS provider.
    31. The Commission also sought comment on whether it should 
establish a process whereby during the transition period, iTRS users 
who know that they do not want their toll free number(s) could request 
that those numbers be deleted from the iTRS Directory. Although we 
received no comment on this specific issue, we find that, should an 
iTRS user wish to relinquish his or her toll free number at any time 
during the one-year transition period, the iTRS provider should 
facilitate the request and delete the number from the iTRS directory. 
If the user makes an affirmative request, there should be no service 
disruption. Moreover, such a process will help cleanse the database on 
an ongoing basis. Thus, we adopt the proposal. We find that this clean-
up of the iTRS Directory is not unduly burdensome. Moreover, it will 
provide the Commission with clearer indications of how relay services 
are being used to serve the deaf and hard-of-hearing community and the 
extent to which that community is using toll free numbers.
    32. Consumer Outreach. The record in this proceeding reinforces the 
Commission's view that the success of the Commission's new iTRS toll 
free numbering rules will be enhanced by outreach efforts by consumer 
groups, as well as by iTRS providers and the Commission. We recognize 
that deaf and hard-of-hearing individuals may be accustomed to the 
current process for obtaining toll free numbers and that any change 
will require substantial education and outreach. We do not seek to 
impose overly burdensome obligations on any one sector involved, and 
seek instead to share the responsibilities, with the highest priority 
being to fully inform the iTRS community of the transition.
    33. We agree with the consumer groups that the iTRS providers are 
on the ``front line'' of the outreach effort as they have the most 
interaction with iTRS users. However, there appears to be disagreement 
in the record as to whether iTRS providers should be responsible for 
providing toll free terms and conditions to users. The consumer groups 
want iTRS providers and toll free service providers to ``fully inform 
the customers of the terms and conditions associated with the use of 
the toll free number.'' Sorenson, on the other hand, argues that unless 
it ``is the toll free consumer's chosen [toll free service] provider, 
Sorenson should not bear any responsibility for disclosing the terms 
and conditions associated with the service.''
    34. Under the user notification rule we adopt, every iTRS provider 
must include certain information on its Web site as well as in any 
promotional materials. Providers must clearly explain, in layman's 
terms, the process by which a user may acquire a toll free number from 
a toll free service provider, or transfer a toll free number from an 
iTRS provider to a toll free service provider or RespOrg. The 
notification must include contact information for toll free service 
providers so that users may easily access necessary information. Such 
contact information will also be available from consumer groups and the 
Commission. iTRS providers must also provide information on how an iTRS 
user may request that his toll free numbers be linked to his ten-digit 
telephone numbers in the iTRS Directory.
    35. The Commission will play a significant role in consumer 
outreach and education efforts. In the iTRS Toll Free Notice, the 
Commission had asked for comment on how to make information about the 
availability and use of toll free numbers available to iTRS users, such 
as fact sheets and Web sites. Commenting consumer groups recommend that 
iTRS providers' Web sites should ``include contact information for the 
appropriate FCC consumer information portals to provide additional 
sources of information on the transition plan.'' Moreover, CSDVRS 
suggests that ``a central repository of information'' be created on the 
Commission's Web site, along with a posting on all provider Web sites, 
``similar to that required for E911.'' We find both to be useful 
suggestions. Thus, we conclude that providers must post on their Web 
sites contact information for toll free service providers. The 
Commission will also provide this information on its Web site. We 
encourage consumer groups also to provide this information.
    36. Toll Free Waiver Order. Since December 2009, the Commission has 
waived the portion of the Toll Free Clarification Public Notice that 
stated that toll free numbers and ten-digit geographic numbers should 
not be directed to the same URI in the iTRS Directory. The Commission's 
waiver is set to expire today. We hereby extend the waiver, effective 
immediately, until February 6, 2012, to allow the rules set forth in 
this Order to become effective, including the necessary information 
collection approvals. We find that the rules, once effective, will 
achieve the policy goals of this proceeding and the Commission's iTRS 
numbering plan.

[[Page 59557]]

    37. Accordingly, it is ordered that, 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.  1.3 of the Commission's rules, 47 CFR 
1.3, this Report and Order is adopted, and that part 64 of the 
Commission's rules, 47 CFR part 64, is amended as set forth in Appendix 
A. The Report and Order shall become effective October 27, 2011 except 
for Sec. Sec.  64.611(e)(2), 64.611(e)(3), 64.611(g)(1)(v), 
64.611(g)(1)(vi), and 64.613(a)(3), which require approval by OMB under 
the PRA and which shall become effective after the Commission publishes 
a notice in the Federal Register announcing such approval and the 
relevant effective date(s).
    38. It is further ordered that, pursuant to sections 1, 4(i), 4(j) 
and 251(e) of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended, 47 U.S.C. 
151, 154(i), 154(j) and 251(e), and Sec. Sec.  1.3 and 52.111 of the 
Commission's rules, 47 CFR 1.3 and 52.111, a waiver of the Commission's 
first-come, first-served rule, 47 CFR 52.111, is granted for a period 
of one year after the effective date of this Order, to allow iTRS users 
to transfer their existing toll free numbers to new toll free 
subscribership.
    39. It is further ordered that the Commission's requirement that 
toll free numbers and ten-digit geographic numbers not be directed to 
the same URI in the iTRS Directory is waived, effective upon release of 
this Report and Order, until February 6, 2012.
    40. It is further ordered that, pursuant to 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), the 
Petition for Expedited Reconsideration filed by CSDVRS LLC on September 
10, 2009, in CG Docket No. 03-123, CC Docket No. 98-67, and WC Docket 
No. 05-196 is dismissed as moot.
    41. It is further ordered that, pursuant to 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), the 
Petition for Emergency Stay filed by the TDI Coalition in CG Docket No. 
03-123, WC Docket No. 05-196 on October 27, 2009 and the Request for 
Return to the Status Quo Ante filed by the TDI Coalition in CG Docket 
No. 03-123 and WC Docket No. 05-196 on November 12, 2009 are dismissed 
as moot.
    42. It is further ordered that the Commission's Consumer and 
Governmental Affairs Bureau, Reference Information Center, shall send a 
copy of this Report and Order, including the Final Regulatory 
Flexibility Analysis, to the Chief Counsel for Advocacy of the Small 
Business Administration.

List of Subjects in 47 CFR Part 64

    Telecommunications.

Federal Communications Commission
Marlene H. Dortch,
Secretary.

Final Rules

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

PART 64--MISCELLANEOUS RULES RELATING TO COMMON CARRIERS

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

    Authority: 47 U.S.C. 154, 254(k), 227; secs. 403(b)(2)(B)(c), 
Pub. L. 104-104, 100 Stat. 56. Interpret or apply 47 U.S.C. 201, 
218, 222, 225, 226, 228, and 254(k) unless otherwise noted.


0
2. Section 64.611 is amended by:
0
a. Redesignating paragraphs (e) and (f) as paragraphs (f) and (g);
0
b. Adding a new paragraph (e);
0
c. Removing ``and'' from the end of newly designated paragraph 
(g)(1)(iii);
0
d. Removing the period from the end of newly designated paragraph 
(g)(1)(iv) and adding ``;'' in its place; and
0
e. Adding paragraphs (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 within one year after the effective date of this Order 
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.
* * * * *
    (g) * * *
    (1) * * *
    (v) The process by which a VRS or IP Relay user may acquire a toll 
free number, 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 
request that the toll free number be linked to their ten-digit 
telephone number in the TRS Numbering Directory.
* * * * *

0
3. Section 64.613(a) is amended by revising paragraphs (a)(1) and 
(a)(2), redesignating paragraph (a)(3) as paragraph (a)(4) and 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) Within one year after the effective date of this Order, 
Internet-based TRS providers must ensure that a user's toll free number 
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. 2011-23824 Filed 9-26-11; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6712-01-P