[Federal Register Volume 87, Number 97 (Thursday, May 19, 2022)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 30442-30444]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2022-10784]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION
47 CFR Part 14
[CG Docket No. 10-213, DA 22-463; FR ID 86631]
Interoperable Video Conferencing Service
AGENCY: Federal Communications Commission.
ACTION: Proposed rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: In this document, the Consumer and Governmental Affairs Bureau
(CGB or Bureau) of the Federal Communications Commission (FCC or
Commission) seeks to refresh the record on proposed rules to enable
people with disabilities to access and use interoperable video
conferencing services by requesting further comment on the kinds of
services encompassed by the term ``interoperable video conferencing
service,'' a type of advanced communications service.
DATES: Comments are due on or before June 21, 2022, and reply comments
are due on or before July 18, 2022.
ADDRESSES: Comments may be submitted, identified by CG Docket No. 10-
213, by either of the following methods:
Federal Communications Commission's Website: https://www.fcc.gov/ecfs/filings/standard. Follow the instructions for
submitting comments.
Paper Filers: Parties who choose to file by paper must
file an original and one copy of each filing. Filings can be sent by
hand or messenger delivery, by commercial overnight courier, or by
first-class or overnight U.S. Postal Service mail. Currently, the
Commission does not accept any hand delivered or messenger delivered
filings as a temporary measure taken to help protect the health and
safety of individuals, and to mitigate the transmission of COVID-19.
All filings must be addressed to the Commission's Secretary, Office of
the Secretary, Federal Communications Commission.
For detailed instructions on submitting comments and additional
information on the rulemaking process, see document DA 22-463 at:
https://www.fcc.gov/document/pn-refresh-record-re-interoperable-video-conferencing.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For further information, contact
Darryl Cooper at: 202-418-7131; email: [email protected].
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This is a summary of the Commission's Public
Notice, document DA 22-463, released on April 27, 2022, in CG Docket
No. 10-
[[Page 30443]]
213. The full text of document DA 22-463 is available for public
inspection and copying via the Commission's Electronic Comment Filing
System (ECFS) and at https://www.fcc.gov/document/pn-refresh-record-re-interoperable-video-conferencing.
To request materials in accessible formats for people with
disabilities (Braille, large print, electronic files, audio format),
send an email to [email protected] or call the Consumer and Governmental
Affairs Bureau at (202) 418-0530.
This proceeding is a ``permit-but-disclose'' proceeding in
accordance with the Commission's ex parte rules. Persons making ex
parte presentations must file a copy of any written presentation or a
memorandum summarizing any oral presentation within two business days
after the presentation (unless a different deadline applicable to the
Sunshine period applies) in the docket(s). Persons making oral ex parte
presentations are reminded that memoranda summarizing the presentation
must (1) list all persons attending or otherwise participating in the
meeting at which the ex parte presentation was made, and (2) summarize
all data presented and arguments made during the presentation. If the
presentation consisted in whole or in part of the presentation of data
or arguments already reflected in the presenter's written comments,
memoranda or other filings in the proceeding, the presenter may provide
citations to such data or arguments in his or her prior comments,
memoranda, or other filings (specifying the relevant page and/or
paragraph numbers where such data or arguments can be found) in lieu of
summarizing them in the memorandum. Documents shown or given to
Commission staff during ex parte meetings are deemed to be written ex
parte presentations and must be filed consistent with rule Sec.
1.1206(b) of the Commission's rules. In proceedings governed by rule
Sec. 1.49(f) of the Commission's rules or for which the Commission has
made available a method of electronic filing, written ex parte
presentations and memoranda summarizing oral ex parte presentations,
and all attachments thereto, must be filed through the electronic
comment filing system available for this proceeding, and must be filed
in their native format (e.g., .doc, .xml, .ppt, searchable .pdf).
Participants in this proceeding should familiarize themselves with the
Commission's ex parte rules.
Initial Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 Analysis
This document does not contain proposed information collection
requirements subject to the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, Public Law
104-13, beyond those already proposed in this proceeding. In addition,
therefore, it does not contain any proposed information collection
burden for small business concerns with fewer than 25 employees,
pursuant to the Small Business Paperwork Relief Act of 2002, Public Law
107-198, see 44 U.S.C. 3506(c)(4), beyond those already proposed in
this proceeding.
Synopsis
1. In document DA 22-463, the Bureau seeks to refresh the record in
CG Docket No. 10-213 on proposed rules to enable people with
disabilities to access and use an interoperable video conferencing
service. The Bureau requests further comment on the kinds of services
encompassed by the term ``interoperable video conferencing service,'' a
type of advanced communications service (ACS) subject to section 716 of
the Communications Act of 1934, as amended (the Act). 47 U.S.C. 617.
Other forms of ACS include interconnected voice over internet Protocol
service, non-interconnected VoIP, and electronic messaging service.
Section 716 of the Act also requires that service providers and
equipment manufacturers make advanced communications services and
equipment accessible to and usable by people with disabilities, unless
the requirements are not achievable.
2. In 2011, the Commission adopted rules implementing the
Communications and Video Accessibility Act of 2010 (CVAA) in a Report
and Order and Further Notice of Proposed Rulemaking published at 76 FR
82240, December 30, 2011 and 76 FR 82354, December 30, 2011. See also
47 CFR part 14. The Commission incorporated into its rules the
statutory definition of ``interoperable video conferencing service'' as
``a service that provides real-time video communications, including
audio, to enable users to share information of the user's choosing.''
Noting that a question was raised as to what Congress meant by
including the word ``interoperable'' in the term ``interoperable video
conferencing service,'' the Commission found that ``the record is
insufficient to determine how exactly to define `interoperable' '' in
this context. The Commission also found that the word ``interoperable''
did not indicate a Congressional intent to require that non-
interoperable video conferencing services be made interoperable.
3. In the 2011 Further Notice, Commission invited further comment
on the meaning of the term ``interoperable'' in the context of video
conferencing services and equipment. Based on the record at that time,
the Commission invited comment on three alternative definitions of an
``interoperable'' service: (1) Able to function inter-platform, inter-
network, and inter-provider; (2) having published or otherwise agreed-
upon standards that allow for manufacturers or service providers to
develop products or services that operate with other equipment or
services operating pursuant to the standards; or (3) able to connect
users among different video conferencing services, including video
relay service (VRS). The Commission also asked whether only one of
these alternatives should be adopted, or whether they should all be
encompassed in a single definition of ``interoperable,'' such that a
video conferencing service would be deemed interoperable as long as any
of the three alternative criteria is satisfied.
4. In response to the 2011 Further Notice, commenters did not reach
a consensus on any of the three suggested alternatives. Stating that
the definition did not apply to then-current services, some commenters
argued that Congress could not have intended that no existing video
conferencing services were covered by the statute. Others disagreed,
while suggesting that video conferencing services might grow in the
direction of interoperability. Some commenters supported a fourth
alternative definition of ``interoperable'' that would apply to those
video conferencing services capable of being used on different types of
hardware and different types of operating systems.
5. In response to the Commission's April 7, 2021 Public Notice,
seeking comment on whether the Commission's accessibility rules should
be updated, Consumer and Governmental Affairs, Media, and Wireless
Telecommunications Bureaus Seek Update On Commission's Fulfillment of
The Twenty-First Century Communications and Video Accessibility Act, GN
Docket No. 21-140, Public Notice, 36 FCC Rcd 7108 (2021), the
Commission received several comments that briefly addressed the issue
of how to define ``interoperable video conferencing.'' CTIA states that
standards groups are best suited to define interoperability standards.
The Accessibility Advocacy and Research Organizations (AARO) urge the
Commission to resolve the definitional
[[Page 30444]]
issue by ``simply clarify[ing] that the statutory definition of
`interoperable video conferencing service,' as a `service that uses
real-time video communications, including audio, to enable users to
share information of the user's choosing,' is an exhaustive
articulation of what Congress intended to be covered.''
6. In February 2022, the Commission's Disability Advisory Committee
highlighted the issue of the accessibility of video conferencing
platforms in recommending Commission action to facilitate
interconnection of such platforms with telecommunications relay
services (TRS). The Committee also recommended that the Commission
ensure, at a minimum, that video conferencing platforms include built-
in closed captioning functionality that is available to all users,''
and allow users to control the activation and customize the appearance
of captions and video.
7. Request for Additional Comment. The Bureau invites the public to
file additional comments on the questions posed in the 2011 Further
Notice regarding the meaning of the term ``interoperable'' in the
context of video conferencing service and equipment. The Bureau invites
commenters to submit new or additional relevant information about what
types of services are currently available in the video conferencing
marketplace, the kinds of interoperability they currently offer, and
how such developments may assist in reaching an interpretation of
``interoperable'' that is consistent with the intent of Congress in
enacting the CVAA. For example, are there video conferencing services
that can be accessed from a wide range of user equipment, software, and
device operating systems? How do consumers gain access to video
conferencing services today? Are telecommunications services,
interconnected and non-interconnected VoIP, and electronic messaging
services included in some video conferencing services? Are these ACS
components of video conferencing services generally accessible and
usable? The Bureau also invites comment on any other developments that
the Commission should consider in resolving this issue. While the 2011
Further Notice proposed three possible definitions for the word
``interoperable,'' commenters may suggest additional alternatives or
other types of input on how to interpret that word.
Federal Communications Commission.
Suzanne Singleton,
Chief, Disability Rights Office, Consumer and Governmental Affairs
Bureau.
[FR Doc. 2022-10784 Filed 5-18-22; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6712-01-P