[Federal Register Volume 88, Number 152 (Wednesday, August 9, 2023)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 53850-53855]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2023-17076]


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

FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION

47 CFR Part 64

[WC Docket Nos. 12-375, 23-62; DA 23-656; FR ID 161579]


Wireline Competition Bureau and the Consumer and Governmental 
Affairs Bureau Seek Comment on Revisions to Providers' Annual Reporting 
and Certification Requirements

AGENCY: Federal Communications Commission.

ACTION: Proposed rule; solicitation of comments.

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

SUMMARY: In this document, the Wireline Competition Bureau (WCB) and 
the Consumer and Governmental Affairs Bureau (CGB) (collectively, the 
Bureaus) of the Federal Communications Commission (FCC or the 
Commission) seek comment on proposed revisions to the instructions and 
templates for the Annual Reports and Annual Certifications submitted by 
certain providers of incarcerated people's communications services 
(IPCS).

DATES: Comments are due September 8, 2023; and reply comments are due 
September 25, 2023.

ADDRESSES: You may submit comments, identified by WC Docket Nos. 23-62, 
12-375, by any of the following methods:
     Electronic Filers: Comments may be filed electronically 
using the internet by accessing the Electronic Comment Filing System 
(ECFS): https://www.fcc.gov/ecfs/.
     Paper Filers: Parties who choose to file by paper must 
file an original and one copy of each filing. Filings can be sent by 
commercial overnight courier, or by first-class or overnight U.S. 
Postal Service mail. Currently, the Commission does not accept any hand 
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.
    The Commission adopted a new Protective Order in this proceeding 
which incorporates all materials previously designated by the parties 
as confidential. Filings that contain confidential information should 
be appropriately redacted and filed pursuant to the procedure described 
in that Order.
    People with Disabilities: 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 (voice) or 
(202) 418-0432 (TTY).

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Amy Goodman, Pricing Policy Division, 
Wireline Competition Bureau, at (202) 418-1549 or via email at 
[email protected] or Michael Scott, Consumer and Governmental Affairs 
Bureau, at (202) 418-1264 or via email at [email protected].

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This is a summary of the FCC's Public 
Notice, DA 23-656, released August 3, 2023. The full text of this 
document is available at the following internet address: https://www.fcc.gov/document/2023-incarcerated-peoples-communications-services-annual-reports-pn. The full text of the draft instructions, templates, 
and certification form discussed in the document are available at the 
following internet address: https://www.fcc.gov/proposed-2023-ipcs-annual-reports.

Synopsis

    1. By this document, the Wireline Competition Bureau (WCB) and the 
Consumer and Governmental Affairs Bureau (collectively, the Bureaus) 
seek comment on proposed revisions to the instructions and templates 
for the Annual Reports and Annual Certifications that the Commission 
requires certain providers of

[[Page 53851]]

incarcerated people's communications services (IPCS) to submit pursuant 
to the Commission's regulations in 47 CFR part 64. IPCS providers that 
are classified as inmate calling services (ICS) providers under the 
Commission's rules are required to make these filings to enable the 
Commission to monitor and track trends in the IPCS marketplace, 
increase provider transparency, and ensure compliance with the 
Commission's rules. In issuing this document, the Bureaus propose 
changes to reflect expanded reporting requirements regarding access to 
IPCS by persons with communication disabilities, including 
Telecommunications Relay Service (TRS) access, and the addition of 
video IPCS data necessary to help implement the Martha Wright-Reed Just 
and Reasonable Communications Act of 2022, Public Law 117-338, 136 
Stat. 6156 (Martha Wright-Reed Act or Act).
    2. In 2015, pursuant to delegated authority, WCB created 
standardized reporting templates (FCC Form 2301(a)) for the Annual 
Report and a related certification of accuracy (FCC Form 2301(b)), as 
well as instructions to guide providers through the reporting process. 
WCB amended the instructions, reporting templates, and certification 
form in 2020 in order to improve the type and quality of the 
information collected. In 2022, WCB again amended the instructions, 
reporting templates, and certification form to reflect significant 
reforms to the ICS rules adopted in the 2021 ICS Order, Rates for 
Interstate Inmate Calling Services, final rule, 86 FR 40682, July 28, 
2021 (2021 ICS Order) including lower interim rate caps for interstate 
ICS calls, new interim rate caps for international ICS calls, and a 
rate cap structure that requires ICS providers to differentiate between 
legally mandated and contractually required site commissions.
    3. Subsequent developments now require additional changes to the 
instructions, reporting templates, and certification form. In the 2022 
ICS Order, Rates for Interstate Inmate Calling Services, final rule, 87 
FR 75496, December 9, 2022 (2022 ICS Order), the Commission adopted 
requirements to improve access to communications services for 
incarcerated people with communication disabilities and expanded the 
scope of the Annual Reports to reflect those new requirements. 
Specifically, the Commission required ICS providers to list, at a 
minimum, for each facility served, the types of TRS that can be 
accessed from the facility and the number of completed calls and 
complaints for TTY-to-TTY calls, American Sign Language (ASL) point-to-
point video calls, and each type of TRS for which access is provided. 
The Commission also eliminated the safe harbor, adopted in 2015, that 
had exempted providers from any TRS-related reporting requirements if 
they either (1) operated in a facility that allowed the offering of 
additional forms of TRS beyond those mandated by the Commission or (2) 
had not received any complaints related to TRS calls. The Commission 
found that the safe harbor was no longer appropriate given the expanded 
reporting requirement for additional forms of TRS, and the importance 
of transparency regarding the state of accessible communications in 
incarceration settings. The Commission delegated authority to the 
Bureaus to implement the expanded reporting obligations and to develop 
a reporting form that will most efficiently and effectively elicit the 
required information.
    4. On January 5, 2023, the President signed into law the Martha 
Wright-Reed Act, which expanded the Commission's statutory authority 
over communications between incarcerated people and the non-
incarcerated, including ``any audio or video communications service 
used by inmates . . . regardless of technology used.'' The new Act also 
amends section 2(b) of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended (the 
Communications Act), to make clear that the Commission's authority 
extends to intrastate as well as interstate and international 
communications services used by incarcerated people.
    5. The Act directs the Commission to ``promulgate any regulations 
necessary to implement'' the Act, including its mandate that the 
Commission establish a ``compensation plan'' ensuring that all rates 
and charges for IPCS ``are just and reasonable,'' not earlier than 18 
months and not later than 24 months after the Act's January 5, 2023 
enactment date. The Act also requires the Commission to consider, as 
part of its implementation, the costs of ``necessary'' safety and 
security measures, as well as ``differences in costs'' based on 
facility size, or ``other characteristics.'' It also allows the 
Commission to ``use industry-wide average costs of telephone service 
and advanced communications services and the average costs of service 
of a communications service provider'' in determining just and 
reasonable rates.
    6. Pursuant to the directive that the Commission implement the new 
Act and establish just and reasonable rates for IPCS services, the 
Commission released the 2023 IPCS Notice, Incarcerated People's 
Communications Services; Implementation of the Martha Wright-Reed Act; 
Rates for Interstate Inmate Calling Services, Notice of Proposed 
Rulemaking, 88 FR 20804, April 7, 2023 (2023 IPCS Notice), seeking 
comment on how to interpret the Act's language to ensure that the 
Commission implements the statute in a manner that fulfills Congress's 
intent. Because the Commission is now required or allowed to consider 
certain types of costs, the Act contemplates that it would undertake an 
additional data collection. To ensure that it has the data necessary to 
meet its substantive and procedural responsibilities under the Act, the 
Commission adopted the 2023 IPCS Order, Incarcerated People's 
Communications Services; Implementation of the Martha Wright-Reed Act; 
Rates for Interstate Inmate Calling Services, Delegations of Authority; 
Reaffirmation and Modification, 88 FR 19001, March 30, 2023 (2023 IPCS 
Order), delegating authority to WCB and the Office of Economics and 
Analytics (OEA) to modify the template and instructions for the most 
recent data collection to the extent appropriate to timely collect such 
information to cover the additional services and providers now subject 
to the Commission's authority. On July 26, 2023, WCB and OEA released 
an Order adopting instructions, a reporting template, and a 
certification form to implement the 2023 Mandatory Data Collection. 
2023 Mandatory Data Collection for Incarcerated People's Communications 
Services, final order, 88 FR 51240, August 3, 2023.
    7. In the 2023 IPCS Order, the Commission also reaffirmed and 
updated its prior delegation of authority to the Bureaus to revise the 
instructions and reporting templates for the Annual Reports. 
Specifically, the Commission delegated to the Bureaus authority to 
modify, supplement, and update the instructions and templates for the 
Annual Reports, as appropriate to supplement the information the 
Commission will receive in response to the 2023 Mandatory Data 
Collection.
    8. In the next sections, the Bureaus seek comment on their proposed 
revisions to the Annual Report instructions, templates, and 
certification form, which are necessary to reflect the revised 
disability access rules adopted in the 2022 ICS Order and to help 
implement the Martha Wright-Reed Act to ensure just and reasonable 
rates for consumers and fair compensation for providers.

[[Page 53852]]

I. Overall Structure of the Annual Reporting and Certification 
Requirements

    9. Pursuant to their delegated authority, the Bureaus propose to 
revise the Annual Report instructions, templates, and certification 
form to be consistent with the Commission's 2022 amendments to the 
annual reports rule and to include the additional services now subject 
to the Commission's authority under the Martha Wright-Reed Act. The 
Bureaus also propose minor improvements based on their experience 
reviewing prior Annual Reports, which has persuaded us that revised 
instructions would help providers better understand the requirements, 
making the submitted reports more useful to the Commission and 
consumers. As a general matter, the Bureaus propose to maintain the 
existing Excel-format template and Word-format template for the Annual 
Reports to better separate individual data items from narrative 
responses and seek comment on this proposal. The Bureaus also seek 
comment on these proposed revisions, generally, and on the specific 
structure, content, and format of the proposed templates and 
instructions attached hereto. The Bureaus likewise propose minor 
revisions to the certification form. Are there other general changes or 
additions the Bureaus should make to gather better or more accurate 
data or to make the instructions clearer? Is there additional 
information that the Bureaus should require providers to submit to 
enable the Commission to better monitor compliance and industry trends, 
or increase transparency to the public? Conversely, are there any 
proposed instructions, inquiries, or data fields that should be removed 
because they are unnecessary to ensure that providers report uniform 
and accurate data and other information?
    10. As has been the case with prior Annual Reports, the reporting 
period is the calendar year immediately preceding the year during which 
the Annual Report is due. Thus, the reporting period for the next 
Annual Reports due on April 1, 2024 will be January 1, 2023 through 
December 31, 2023.

A. General Proposals

    11. The Bureaus seek comment on whether the proposed instructions 
provide sufficient guidance to ensure that providers use uniform 
methodologies and report the required information in a consistent 
manner. Are there any additional changes that would help clarify the 
instructions, including the definitions, and increase uniformity across 
providers' responses? The Bureaus seek comment on all aspects of the 
proposed instructions, including any proposed revisions not explicitly 
addressed in this document.
    12. General Categories of Information Requested. The proposed 
instructions, like those for prior reports, require providers to submit 
certain types of information related to their operations, IPCS rates, 
ancillary service charges, site commissions, and disability access. As 
a result of the Martha Wright-Reed Act, the proposed instructions would 
require providers to submit intrastate, interstate, and international 
information for both audio IPCS and video IPCS. Do the proposed 
instructions describe these categories of data in sufficient detail? Is 
there additional information that the Bureaus should require providers 
to submit in any of these categories to enable the Commission to better 
monitor compliance and industry trends, or increase transparency to the 
public? Are there any additional changes the Bureaus should make to the 
proposed instructions and templates to make them easier for providers 
to understand? The Bureaus seek comment generally on the benefits and 
burdens of their proposals, and whether additional changes to proposed 
or existing reporting categories are warranted.

B. Specific Instructions

    13. Definitions. The proposed instructions contain new and revised 
definitions reflecting the Commission's expanded authority over IPCS. 
The Bureaus seek comment on these definitions. Are they sufficiently 
clear? If not, how should they be modified? Are there any undefined 
terms the Bureaus should define? Are there any terms that should be 
added to the proposed instructions that would help ensure that the 
Commission receives all relevant data? If so, what are they and how 
should they be defined? Should any proposed definitions be removed?
    14. Facility and Contract Information. The proposed instructions 
include a reference to a new Excel template that moves detailed 
contract and facility information already collected on multiple 
worksheets throughout the Excel template to a single worksheet. 
Collecting this granular information on a single worksheet is intended 
to help ensure consistent facility and contract-level reporting, and 
eliminate the need to repeatedly enter such detailed information on 
other worksheets throughout the Excel template. This change is intended 
to reduce the amount of duplicative information required throughout the 
report and consequently reduce the burden on providers. The Bureaus 
seek comment on this proposal.
    15. Audio and Video IPCS Rates. The proposed instructions and 
templates continue to require providers to submit intrastate, 
interstate, and international IPCS rates for audio services across a 
number of categories, including: (i) highest 15-minute rate; (ii) 
highest year-end 15-minute rate; and (iii) average per minute rate. For 
interstate and international rates, the Bureaus require providers to 
identify all rates charged in excess of the applicable rate caps. For 
international rates, the Bureaus clarify that reported termination 
charges should reflect the amount billed by the provider to the 
consumer for termination to each international destination. The Bureaus 
seek comment on whether these instructions are sufficiently clear.
    16. To assist the Commission in determining just and reasonable 
rates for video IPCS, consistent with the Martha Wright-Reed Act, the 
Bureaus propose adopting a similar reporting approach for video IPCS. 
The Bureaus propose adding new worksheets that collect the same rate 
information for video IPCS as that collected for audio IPCS. The 
Bureaus do not request information on video IPCS rates that exceed a 
cap, since there is no rate cap for these services at this time. Is 
this proposed approach the best way to collect information on video 
IPCS rates? Are there additional rate categories for video IPCS that 
the Bureaus should consider? Conversely, are there categories for audio 
IPCS that should not be included for video IPCS? For example, the 
proposed worksheets for international video IPCS exclude charges to 
terminate communications to foreign countries because while these 
charges apply to audio services, they may not apply to video services. 
Do parties agree with this adjustment?
    17. Because providers are already familiar with these reporting 
categories for audio IPCS, the Bureaus expect that using the same rate 
reporting approach for video IPCS will help minimize the burdens 
associated with reporting this additional information regarding their 
video services. The Bureaus seek comment on this assessment. Are there 
other changes the Bureaus should make to the proposed rate reporting 
structure that would minimize the burden on providers, without 
sacrificing any necessary information or transparency? The Bureaus also 
propose new questions seeking certain narrative information about the 
reported rates for video IPCS and seek comment on these proposed 
revisions.

[[Page 53853]]

    18. The proposed worksheets for video IPCS rate information ask 
providers to submit information for 15-minute intervals. The Bureaus 
propose using a 15-minute interval because this is the rate interval 
used for collecting data on audio IPCS and using the same interval 
should allow for more meaningful rate comparisons. In addition, audio 
call lengths are often limited to around 15 minutes. Do parties agree 
with use of this session interval to evaluate video IPCS rates? If not, 
what interval should the Bureaus use instead? The proposed Excel 
template also seeks rate information for both domestic and 
international video calls. The Bureaus seek comment on the extent to 
which domestic video IPCS rates differ from international video IPCS 
rates. Do the Bureaus need separate worksheets for domestic video IPCS 
rates and international video IPCS rates? If the Bureaus decide to use 
separate worksheets and some providers have the same rates for domestic 
and international video IPCS, the Bureaus propose allowing providers 
that charge the same rates to opt out of filing a separate worksheet 
for international video IPCS. The Bureaus seek comment on this proposed 
approach.
    19. Finally, the Word template contains questions seeking narrative 
information about provider operations, facilities, and services, 
including new questions regarding video IPCS. The Bureaus seek comment 
on these new questions. Is there additional information the Commission 
should seek that would help increase transparency and compliance 
without imposing unwarranted burdens on providers?
    20. Ancillary Service Charges. The current instructions require 
providers to report a variety of information about any ancillary 
service charges they have assessed, and require a narrative explanation 
concerning any methodologies used to allocate these charges among 
facilities that are covered by a single contract, where applicable. The 
Bureaus propose adding a new worksheet that collects the same ancillary 
service charge information for video IPCS as that collected for audio 
IPCS. Do the Bureaus need separate worksheets for audio and video 
ancillary service charges or are these charges typically the same? If 
the Bureaus decide to use separate worksheets, the Bureaus propose 
allowing providers that charge identical ancillary service charges for 
audio and video IPCS to opt out of filing a separate worksheet for 
video services. The Bureaus seek comment on this approach. Is there any 
additional information the Bureaus should seek regarding ancillary 
service charges for audio or video IPCS?
    21. Site Commissions. The current instructions require providers to 
report their average total monthly site commission payments on a 
facility-by-facility basis and to separate those payments between 
legally mandated and contractually prescribed site commission payments, 
consistent with the Commission's rules. The existing instructions also 
require providers to subdivide both types of payments between monetary 
and in-kind payments and, within those subdivisions, to report the 
portions of the payments that were either fixed or variable. The 
Bureaus propose adding a new worksheet that collects the same site 
commission payment information for video IPCS as that collected for 
audio IPCS. The Bureaus seek comment on this approach or whether a 
different approach should be considered. Is there any additional 
information the Bureaus should seek related to site commission payments 
made in connection with audio IPCS or video IPCS?
    22. To the extent providers pay site commissions for both audio 
IPCS and video IPCS on a per-provider, per-facility, or per-contract 
basis, and those site commissions are fixed, the Bureaus propose 
requiring providers to allocate such site commission payments between 
audio IPCS and video IPCS based on their best estimate of the 
percentage of the total amount of their fixed site commissions 
attributable to each type of IPCS. The Bureaus also propose to direct 
providers to explain, document, and justify, in the Word template, any 
alternative methodology used to allocate fixed site commission payments 
between audio IPCS and video IPCS. Do commenters agree with this 
approach? Why or why not? Should the Bureaus require a different 
allocation methodology to help ensure more consistent reporting of 
fixed site commission payments that apply to multiple services? If so, 
what methodology should the Bureaus require and why?
    23. Disability Access and Related Considerations. The proposed 
instructions modify providers' reporting obligations regarding the 
provision of TTY-based TRS and TTY-to-TTY calling for incarcerated 
people with hearing and speech disabilities, including any ancillary 
service charges that providers have assessed for or in connection with 
TTY-based calls. Providers would no longer be required to report the 
number of dropped calls for TTY-based TRS or TTY-to-TTY calls, but 
would still be required to report the number of calls and number of 
complaints related to TTY-based TRS and TTY-to-TTY calls. The Bureaus 
also propose updates to the instructions and the Excel template to 
reflect the 2022 reforms to the Commission's rules. Under the proposed 
changes to the ``Disability Access'' worksheet of the Excel template, 
providers would report, on a facility-by-facility basis, for each of 
the six kinds of TRS authorized by the Commission, (1) whether the 
service was available for use at the facility during the reporting 
period, (2) the number of calls made using the service, and (3) the 
number of complaints regarding the service. The same information would 
be collected for point-to-point video service and for TTY-to-TTY 
calling. The Bureaus seek comment on whether these proposed changes 
capture all of the information now required by the revised rules. If 
not, what additional changes should the Bureaus make?
    24. Miscellaneous. The proposed Excel template includes minor 
changes designed to help reduce burdens and minimize provider error 
when completing the worksheets. For instance, the proposed template 
includes ``drop-down'' menus for data entry when there are only a few 
answer options. It also includes new cell formatting that restricts the 
data that can be entered (e.g., numbers vs. text). For the worksheets 
that include rates paid for IPCS calls to international destinations, 
the Bureaus propose to require providers to enter their international 
destinations only once for each worksheet, instead of repeating this 
information multiple times on each worksheet. The Bureaus seek comment 
on these minor modifications. The Bureaus also seek comment on their 
proposed minor updates to the certification form (e.g., inserting the 
word ``Authorized'' before ``Officer''). Finally, the Bureaus ask for 
suggestions on additional modifications to the instructions, Excel and 
Word templates, and certification form that would make them clearer and 
easier to use.

II. Procedural Matters

    25. Ex Parte Presentations. This proceeding shall be treated as 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). Persons 
making oral ex parte presentations are reminded that

[[Page 53854]]

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 the 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 section 1.1206(b) of the Commission's rules. 
Participants in this proceeding should familiarize themselves with the 
Commission's ex parte rules.
    26. Regulatory Flexibility Act. As required by the Regulatory 
Flexibility Act, the Commission has prepared a Supplemental Initial 
Regulatory Flexibility Analysis (Supplemental IRFA) of the possible 
significant economic impact on small entities by the policies and rules 
proposed in the document. The Supplemental IRFA supplements the 
Commission's Regulatory Flexibility Analyses included in both the 2022 
ICS Order, and in the 2023 IPCS Order and serves to further the process 
of implementing the revised disability access rules requirements 
adopted in the 2022 ICS Order and in the Martha Wright-Reed Act. The 
Supplemental IRFA is set forth in Appendix B. The Commission requests 
written public comments on the Supplemental IRFA. Comments must be 
identified as responses to the Supplemental IRFA and must be filed by 
the deadlines for comments provided in this document. The Commission 
will send a copy of this document, including the Supplemental IRFA, to 
the Chief Counsel for Advocacy of the Small Business Administration. In 
addition, summaries of this document and the Supplemental IRFA will be 
published in the Federal Register.
    27. Initial Paperwork Reduction Act Analysis. The document, and the 
attached instructions and templates, contain new or modified 
information collection requirements subject to the Paperwork Reduction 
Act of 1995 (PRA), Public Law 104-13. It will be submitted to the OMB 
for review under section 3507(d) of the PRA. OMB, the general public, 
and other federal agencies are invited to comment on the new or 
modified information collection requirements contained in this 
proceeding. In addition, the Bureaus note that pursuant to the Small 
Business Paperwork Relief Act of 2002, Public Law 107-198; see 44 
U.S.C. 3506(4), the Bureaus seek comment on how the Commission will 
further reduce the information collection burden for small business 
concerns with fewer than 25 employees.

Supplemental Initial Regulatory Flexibility Analysis

    1. As required by the Regulatory Flexibility Act of 1980, as 
amended (RFA), the Wireline Competition Bureau (WCB) and the Consumer 
and Governmental Affairs Bureau (CGB) (collectively, the Bureaus) have 
prepared this Supplemental Initial Regulatory Flexibility Analysis 
(Supplemental IRFA) of the possible significant economic impact on 
small entities by the policies and rules proposed in the document to 
supplement the Commission's Regulatory Flexibility Analyses contained 
in the Rates for Interstate Inmate Calling Services, Order and Notice 
of Proposed Rulemaking, and in the Incarcerated People's Communications 
Services; Implementation of the Martha Wright-Reed Act; Rates for 
Interstate Inmate Calling Services, Notice of Proposed Rulemaking and 
Order. The Bureaus request written public comment on this Supplemental 
IRFA. Comments must be identified as responses to the Supplemental IRFA 
and must be filed by the deadlines for comments provided on the first 
page of the document.

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

    2. In the document, the Bureaus seek comment regarding proposed 
revisions to the instructions, templates, and certification form for 
the Annual Reports submitted by providers of incarcerated people's 
communications services (IPCS). In issuing the document, the Bureaus 
act pursuant to the Commission's delegation of authority to the Bureaus 
to modify, supplement, and update the Annual Report instructions, 
templates, and certification form, as appropriate, to reflect revised 
rules adopted in the 2022 ICS Order and to provide additional 
information the Commission will need to implement the Martha Wright-
Reed Just and Reasonable Communications Act of 2022 (Martha Wright-Reed 
Act or Act).
    3. In the 2022 ICS Order, the Commission adopted requirements to 
improve access to communications services for incarcerated people with 
communication disabilities and expanded the scope of the Annual Reports 
to reflect these changes. Under the proposed, expanded reporting 
requirements, IPCS providers would be required to list, at a minimum, 
for each facility served, the types of TRS that can be accessed from 
the facility and the number of completed calls and complaints for TTY-
to-TTY calls, American Sign Language (ASL) point-to-point video calls, 
and each type of TRS for which access is provided. The Commission also 
eliminated the safe harbor adopted in 2015 concerning the reporting 
requirement for TTY-based TRS calls. Additionally, the Commission 
delegated authority to the Bureaus to implement the expanded reporting 
obligations contained in the 2022 ICS Order and to develop a reporting 
form that will most efficiently and effectively elicit the required 
information.
    4. On January 5, 2023, the President signed the Martha Wright-Reed 
Act into law, thereby expanding the Commission's statutory authority 
over communications between incarcerated people and the non-
incarcerated to include ``any audio or video communications service 
used by inmates . . . regardless of technology used.'' The new Act also 
amends section 2(b) of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended (the 
Communications Act), to make clear that the Commission's authority 
extends to intrastate as well as interstate and international 
communications services used by incarcerated people. Further, the 
Martha Wright-Reed Act also directs the Commission to ``promulgate any 
regulations necessary to implement'' the Act, including its mandate 
that the Commission establish a ``compensation plan'' ensuring that all 
rates and charges for IPCS ``are just and reasonable,'' not earlier 
than 18 months and not later than 24 months after the Act's January 5, 
2023 enactment.
    5. In accordance with the Martha Wright-Reed Act's directive, the 
Commission released the 2023 IPCS Notice, which sought comment on how 
to best interpret the Act's language in order to ensure the Commission 
implemented the statute in a manner that fulfills Congress's intent. In 
the 2023 IPCS Order, the Commission reaffirmed and updated its prior 
delegation of authority to the Bureaus to revise the instructions and 
reporting template for the Annual Reports. Specifically, the Commission 
delegated

[[Page 53855]]

authority to the Bureaus to modify, supplement, and update those 
instructions and templates as appropriate to supplement information WCB 
will be receiving in response to the 2023 Mandatory Data Collection.
    6. Pursuant to their delegated authority, the Bureaus have proposed 
revisions to the instructions, templates, and certification form for 
the Annual Reports and are issuing the document to seek comment on all 
aspects of these proposed changes.

B. Legal Basis

    7. The proposed action is authorized pursuant to sections 1, 2, 
4(i)-(j), 5(c), 201(b), 218, 220, 225, 255, 276, 403, and 716 of the 
Communications Act of 1934, as amended, 47 U.S.C. 151, 152, 154(i)-(j), 
155(c), 201(b), 218, 220, 225, 255, 276, 403, and 617, and the Martha 
Wright-Reed Act, Public Law 117-338, 136 Stat. 6156 (2022).

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

    8. 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 proposed Annual Reports data collection. 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. noted above,
    9. As noted above, Regulatory Flexibility Analyses were 
incorporated in the 2022 ICS Order and the 2023 IPCS Notice. In those 
analyses, the Commission described in detail the small entities that 
might be affected. In this Supplemental IRFA, the Bureaus hereby 
incorporate by reference the descriptions and estimates of the number 
of small entities from the previous Regulatory Flexibility Analyses in 
the 2022 ICS Order and 2023 IPCS Notice.

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

    10. The document seeks comment on the specifics of the proposed 
revisions to the instructions, templates, and certification form to 
ensure the Commission receives the data it needs for the Annual 
Reports. The proposed data collection would require certain providers 
that are classified as inmate calling services providers under the 
Commission's rules to submit, among other things, data and other 
information on providers' operations, IPCS rates, ancillary services, 
site commissions, and disability access. The proposed data collection 
may subject small and other providers to modified or new reporting or 
other compliance obligations. In addition, the Bureaus recognize that 
their actions in this proceeding may affect the reporting, 
recordkeeping, and other compliance requirements for several groups of 
small entities. At this time, the Bureaus do not have sufficient 
information to determine whether the proposed revisions to the Annual 
Reports data collection will require small entities to hire attorneys, 
engineers, or other professionals to comply with the new rules. The 
Bureaus, however, anticipate the information they receive in the 
comments will help the Commission identify and evaluate relevant 
compliance matters for small entities, including compliance costs and 
other burdens that may result from the proposals and inquiries the 
Bureaus make in the document.

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

    11. The RFA requires an agency to describe any significant 
alternatives that it has considered in reaching its proposed approach, 
which may include the following four alternatives (among others): ``(1) 
the establishment of differing compliance or reporting requirements or 
timetables that take into account the resources available to small 
entities; (2) the clarification, consolidation, or simplification of 
compliance and reporting requirements under the rules for such small 
entities; (3) the use of performance rather than design standards; and 
(4) an exemption from coverage of the rule, or any part thereof, for 
such small entities.'' The Bureaus will consider these factors after 
reviewing any substantive comment the Bureaus have received from the 
public and potentially affected small entities.
    12. In the document, the Bureaus have taken steps to minimize the 
economic impact on small entities and consider alternatives through its 
proposals that include considering different ways to revise the Annual 
Reports instructions, templates, and certification form without causing 
significant economic impact to small entities. For example, the Bureaus 
propose reporting and certification requirements that are similar to 
those used in prior Annual Reports data collections. In addition, the 
standardized templates and instructions simplify compliance with, and 
reduce the burden of, the information requirements related to 
submission of the Annual Reports. Further, the Bureaus have taken steps 
to ensure the instructions, annual reporting templates, and 
certification form are competitively neutral and are not unduly 
burdensome for all providers. Finally, the document proposes to allow 
providers that charge the same rates for domestic and international 
video IPCS to opt out of filing a separate spreadsheet for 
international video IPCS, thus reducing the regulatory burden to 
providers. The Bureaus will also consider any significant economic 
impact to small entities that may be raised in comments filed in 
response to the document and Supplemental IRFA.

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

    13. None.

Federal Communications Commission.
Lynne Engledow
Deputy Chief, Pricing and Policy Division, Wireline Competition Bureau.
[FR Doc. 2023-17076 Filed 8-8-23; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6712-01-P