[116th Congress Public Law 105]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]



[[Page 3273]]

    PALLONE-THUNE TELEPHONE ROBOCALL ABUSE CRIMINAL ENFORCEMENT AND 
                             DETERRENCE ACT

[[Page 133 STAT. 3274]]

Public Law 116-105
116th Congress

                                 An Act


 
To deter criminal robocall violations and improve enforcement of section 
        227(b) of the Communications Act of 1934, and for other 
             purposes. <<NOTE: Dec. 30, 2019 -  [S. 151]>> 

    Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the 
United States of America in Congress assembled, <<NOTE: Pallone-Thune 
Telephone Robocall Abuse Criminal Enforcement and Deterrence Act 47 USC 
609 note.>> 
SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

    This Act may be cited as the ``Pallone-Thune Telephone Robocall 
Abuse Criminal Enforcement and Deterrence Act'' or the ``Pallone-Thune 
TRACED Act''.
SEC. 2. <<NOTE: 47 USC 227 note.>>  COMMISSION DEFINED.

    In this Act, the term ``Commission'' means the Federal 
Communications Commission.
SEC. 3. FORFEITURE.

    (a) In General.--Section 227 of the Communications Act of 1934 (47 
U.S.C. 227) is amended--
            (1) in subsection (b), by adding at the end the following:
            ``(4) Civil forfeiture.--
                    ``(A) In general.--Any person that is determined by 
                the Commission, in accordance with paragraph (3) or (4) 
                of section 503(b), to have violated this subsection 
                shall be liable to the United States for a forfeiture 
                penalty pursuant to section 503(b)(1). Paragraph (5) of 
                section 503(b) shall not apply in the case of a 
                violation of this subsection. A forfeiture penalty under 
                this subparagraph shall be in addition to any other 
                penalty provided for by this Act. The amount of the 
                forfeiture <<NOTE: Determination.>>  penalty determined 
                under this subparagraph shall be determined in 
                accordance with subparagraphs (A) through (F) of section 
                503(b)(2).
                    ``(B) Violation with intent.--Any person that is 
                determined by the Commission, in accordance with 
                paragraph (3) or (4) of section 503(b), to have violated 
                this subsection with the intent to cause such violation 
                shall be liable to the United States for a forfeiture 
                penalty pursuant to section 503(b)(1). Paragraph (5) of 
                section 503(b) shall not apply in the case of a 
                violation of this subsection. A forfeiture penalty under 
                this subparagraph shall be in addition to any other 
                penalty provided for by this Act. The amount of the 
                forfeiture penalty determined under this subparagraph 
                shall be equal to an amount determined in accordance 
                with subparagraphs (A) through (F) of section 503(b)(2) 
                plus an additional penalty not to exceed $10,000.

[[Page 133 STAT. 3275]]

                    ``(C) Recovery.--Any forfeiture penalty determined 
                under subparagraph (A) or (B) shall be recoverable under 
                section 504(a).
                    ``(D) Procedure.--No forfeiture liability shall be 
                determined under subparagraph (A) or (B) against any 
                person unless such person receives the notice required 
                by section 503(b)(3) or section 503(b)(4).
                    ``(E) Statute of limitations.--Notwithstanding 
                paragraph (6) of section 503(b), no forfeiture penalty 
                shall be determined or imposed against any person--
                          ``(i) under subparagraph (A) if the violation 
                      charged occurred more than 1 year prior to the 
                      date of issuance of the required notice or notice 
                      of apparent liability; or
                          ``(ii) under subparagraph (B) if the violation 
                      charged occurred more than 4 years prior to the 
                      date of issuance of the required notice or notice 
                      of apparent liability.
                    ``(F) Rule of construction.--Notwithstanding any law 
                to the contrary, the Commission may not determine or 
                impose a forfeiture penalty on a person under both 
                subparagraphs (A) and (B) based on the same conduct.'';
            (2) in subsection (e)(5)(A)--
                    (A) in clause (ii), by adding at the end the 
                following: ``Paragraph (5) of section 503(b) shall not 
                apply in the case of a violation of this subsection.''; 
                and
                    (B) in clause (iv)--
                          (i) in the heading, by striking ``2-year'' and 
                      inserting ``4-year''; and
                          (ii) by striking ``2 years'' and inserting ``4 
                      years''; and
            (3) by striking subsection (h) and inserting the following:

    ``(h) Annual Report to Congress on Robocalls and Transmission of 
Misleading or Inaccurate Caller Identification Information.--
            ``(1) Report required.--Not later than 1 year after the date 
        of the enactment of this subsection, and annually thereafter, 
        the Commission, after consultation with the Federal Trade 
        Commission, shall submit to Congress a report regarding 
        enforcement by the Commission of subsections (b), (c), (d), and 
        (e) during the preceding calendar year.
            ``(2) <<NOTE: Time periods.>>  Matters for inclusion.--Each 
        report required by paragraph (1) shall include the following:
                    ``(A) The number of complaints received by the 
                Commission during each of the preceding 5 calendar 
                years, for each of the following categories:
                          ``(i) Complaints alleging that a consumer 
                      received a call in violation of subsection (b) or 
                      (c).
                          ``(ii) Complaints alleging that a consumer 
                      received a call in violation of the standards 
                      prescribed under subsection (d).
                          ``(iii) Complaints alleging that a consumer 
                      received a call in connection with which 
                      misleading or inaccurate caller identification 
                      information was transmitted in violation of 
                      subsection (e).
                    ``(B) The number of citations issued by the 
                Commission pursuant to section 503(b) during the 
                preceding calendar

[[Page 133 STAT. 3276]]

                year to enforce subsection (d), and details of each such 
                citation.
                    ``(C) The number of notices of apparent liability 
                issued by the Commission pursuant to section 503(b) 
                during the preceding calendar year to enforce 
                subsections (b), (c), (d), and (e), and details of each 
                such notice including any proposed forfeiture amount.
                    ``(D) The number of final orders imposing forfeiture 
                penalties issued pursuant to section 503(b) during the 
                preceding calendar year to enforce such subsections, and 
                details of each such order including the forfeiture 
                imposed.
                    ``(E) The amount of forfeiture penalties or criminal 
                fines collected, during the preceding calendar year, by 
                the Commission or the Attorney General for violations of 
                such subsections, and details of each case in which such 
                a forfeiture penalty or criminal fine was collected.
                    ``(F) <<NOTE: Proposal.>>  Proposals for reducing 
                the number of calls made in violation of such 
                subsections.
                    ``(G) <<NOTE: Analysis. Recommenda- tions.>>  An 
                analysis of the contribution by providers of 
                interconnected VoIP service and non-interconnected VoIP 
                service that discount high-volume, unlawful, short-
                duration calls to the total number of calls made in 
                violation of such subsections, and recommendations on 
                how to address such contribution in order to decrease 
                the total number of calls made in violation of such 
                subsections.
            ``(3) No additional reporting required.--The Commission 
        shall prepare the report required by paragraph (1) without 
        requiring the provision of additional information from providers 
        of telecommunications service or voice service (as defined in 
        section 4(a) of the Pallone-Thune TRACED Act).''.

    (b) <<NOTE: 47 USC 227 note.>>  Applicability.--The amendments made 
by this section shall not affect any action or proceeding commenced 
before and pending on the date of the enactment of this Act.

    (c) <<NOTE: 47 USC 227 note.>>  Deadline for Regulations.--The 
Commission shall prescribe regulations to implement the amendments made 
by this section not later than 270 days after the date of the enactment 
of this Act.
SEC. 4. <<NOTE: 47 USC 227b.>>  CALL AUTHENTICATION.

    (a) Definitions.--In this section:
            (1) STIR/SHAKEN authentication framework.--The term ``STIR/
        SHAKEN authentication framework'' means the secure telephone 
        identity revisited and signature-based handling of asserted 
        information using tokens standards proposed by the information 
        and communications technology industry.
            (2) Voice service.--The term ``voice service''--
                    (A) means any service that is interconnected with 
                the public switched telephone network and that furnishes 
                voice communications to an end user using resources from 
                the North American Numbering Plan or any successor to 
                the North American Numbering Plan adopted by the 
                Commission under section 251(e)(1) of the Communications 
                Act of 1934 (47 U.S.C. 251(e)(1)); and
                    (B) includes--
                          (i) transmissions from a telephone facsimile 
                      machine, computer, or other device to a telephone 
                      facsimile machine; and

[[Page 133 STAT. 3277]]

                          (ii) without limitation, any service that 
                      enables real-time, two-way voice communications, 
                      including any service that requires internet 
                      protocol-compatible customer premises equipment 
                      (commonly known as ``CPE'') and permits out-bound 
                      calling, whether or not the service is one-way or 
                      two-way voice over internet protocol.

    (b) Authentication Frameworks.--
            (1) <<NOTE: Deadline. Requirements.>>  In general.--Subject 
        to paragraphs (2) and (3), and in accordance with paragraph (6), 
        not later than 18 months after the date of the enactment of this 
        Act, the Commission shall--
                    (A) require a provider of voice service to implement 
                the STIR/SHAKEN authentication framework in the internet 
                protocol networks of the provider of voice service; and
                    (B) require a provider of voice service to take 
                reasonable measures to implement an effective call 
                authentication framework in the non-internet protocol 
                networks of the provider of voice service.
            (2) <<NOTE: Determination. Deadline.>>  Implementation.--The 
        Commission shall not take the action described in paragraph (1) 
        with respect to a provider of voice service if the Commission 
        determines, not later than 12 months after the date of the 
        enactment of this Act, that such provider of voice service--
                    (A) in internet protocol networks--
                          (i) has adopted the STIR/SHAKEN authentication 
                      framework for calls on the internet protocol 
                      networks of the provider of voice service;
                          (ii) has agreed voluntarily to participate 
                      with other providers of voice service in the STIR/
                      SHAKEN authentication framework;
                          (iii) has begun to implement the STIR/SHAKEN 
                      authentication framework; and
                          (iv) <<NOTE: Deadline.>>  will be capable of 
                      fully implementing the STIR/SHAKEN authentication 
                      framework not later than 18 months after the date 
                      of the enactment of this Act; and
                    (B) in non-internet protocol networks--
                          (i) has taken reasonable measures to implement 
                      an effective call authentication framework; and
                          (ii) will be capable of fully implementing an 
                      effective call authentication framework not later 
                      than 18 months after the date of the enactment of 
                      this Act.
            (3) Implementation report.--Not later than 12 months after 
        the date of the enactment of this Act, the Commission shall 
        submit to the Committee on Energy and Commerce of the House of 
        Representatives and the Committee on Commerce, Science, and 
        Transportation of the Senate a report on the determination 
        required under paragraph (2), which shall include--
                    (A) <<NOTE: Analysis.>>  an analysis of the extent 
                to which providers of voice service have implemented the 
                call authentication frameworks described in 
                subparagraphs (A) and (B) of paragraph (1), including 
                whether the availability of necessary equipment and 
                equipment upgrades has impacted such implementation; and

[[Page 133 STAT. 3278]]

                    (B) <<NOTE: Assessment.>>  an assessment of the 
                efficacy of the call authentication frameworks described 
                in subparagraphs (A) and (B) of paragraph (1) in 
                addressing all aspects of call authentication.
            (4) <<NOTE: Deadline. Time period. Public information.>>  
        Review and revision or replacement.--Not later than 3 years 
        after the date of the enactment of this Act, and every 3 years 
        thereafter, the Commission, after public notice and an 
        opportunity for comment, shall--
                    (A) <<NOTE: Assessment.>>  assess the efficacy of 
                the technologies used for call authentication frameworks 
                implemented under this section;
                    (B) <<NOTE: Determination.>>  based on the 
                assessment under subparagraph (A), revise or replace the 
                call authentication frameworks under this section if the 
                Commission determines it is in the public interest to do 
                so; and
                    (C) <<NOTE: Reports.>>  submit to the Committee on 
                Energy and Commerce of the House of Representatives and 
                the Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation 
                of the Senate a report on the findings of the assessment 
                under subparagraph (A) and on any actions to revise or 
                replace the call authentication frameworks under 
                subparagraph (B).
            (5) Extension of implementation deadline.--
                    (A) Burdens and barriers to implementation.--Not 
                later than 12 months after the date of the enactment of 
                this Act, and as appropriate thereafter, the 
                Commission--
                          (i) <<NOTE: Assessment.>>  shall assess any 
                      burdens or barriers to the implementation required 
                      by paragraph (1), including--
                                    (I) for providers of voice service 
                                to the extent the networks of such 
                                providers use time-division 
                                multiplexing;
                                    (II) for small providers of voice 
                                service and those in rural areas; and
                                    (III) the inability to purchase or 
                                upgrade equipment to support the call 
                                authentication frameworks under this 
                                section, or lack of availability of such 
                                equipment; and
                          (ii) in connection with an assessment under 
                      clause (i), may, upon a public finding of undue 
                      hardship, delay required compliance with the 18-
                      month time period described in paragraph (1), for 
                      a reasonable period of time, for a provider or 
                      class of providers of voice service, or type of 
                      voice calls, as necessary for that provider or 
                      class of providers or type of calls to participate 
                      in the implementation in order to address the 
                      identified burdens and barriers.
                    (B) Delay of compliance required for certain non-
                internet protocol networks.--Subject to subparagraphs 
                (C) through (F), for any provider or class of providers 
                of voice service, or type of voice calls, only to the 
                extent that such a provider or class of providers of 
                voice service, or type of voice calls, materially relies 
                on a non-internet protocol network for the provision of 
                such service or calls, the Commission shall grant a 
                delay of required compliance under subparagraph (A)(ii) 
                until a call authentication protocol has been developed 
                for calls delivered over non-internet protocol networks 
                and is reasonably available.

[[Page 133 STAT. 3279]]

                    (C) Robocall mitigation program.--
                          (i) Program required.--During the time of a 
                      delay of compliance granted under subparagraph 
                      (A)(ii), the Commission shall require, pursuant to 
                      the authority of the Commission, that any provider 
                      subject to such delay shall implement an 
                      appropriate robocall mitigation program to prevent 
                      unlawful robocalls from originating on the network 
                      of the provider.
                          (ii) Additional requirements.--If the 
                      consortium registered under section 13(d) 
                      identifies a provider of voice service that is 
                      subject to a delay of compliance granted under 
                      subparagraph (A)(ii) as repeatedly originating 
                      large-scale unlawful robocall campaigns, the 
                      Commission shall require such provider to take 
                      action to ensure that such provider does not 
                      continue to originate such calls.
                          (iii) Minimization of burden.--The Commission 
                      shall make reasonable efforts to minimize the 
                      burden of any robocall mitigation required 
                      pursuant to clause (ii), which may include 
                      prescribing certain specific robocall mitigation 
                      practices for providers of voice service that have 
                      repeatedly originated large-scale unlawful 
                      robocall campaigns.
                    (D) Full participation.--The Commission shall take 
                reasonable measures to address any issues in an 
                assessment under subparagraph (A)(i) and enable as 
                promptly as reasonable full participation of all classes 
                of providers of voice service and types of voice calls 
                to receive the highest level of 
                trust. <<NOTE: Determination.>> Such measures shall 
                include, without limitation, as appropriate, limiting or 
                terminating a delay of compliance granted to a provider 
                under subparagraph (B) if the Commission determines in 
                such assessment that the provider is not making 
                reasonable efforts to develop the call authentication 
                protocol described in such subparagraph.
                    (E) <<NOTE: Consultation.>>  Alternative 
                methodologies.--The Commission shall identify, in 
                consultation with small providers of voice service and 
                those in rural areas, alternative effective 
                methodologies to protect customers from unauthenticated 
                calls during any delay of compliance granted under 
                subparagraph (A)(ii).
                    (F) <<NOTE: Time period.>>  Revision of delay of 
                compliance.--Not less frequently than annually after the 
                first delay of compliance is granted under subparagraph 
                (A)(ii), the Commission--
                          (i) shall consider revising or extending any 
                      delay of compliance granted under subparagraph 
                      (A)(ii);
                          (ii) may revise such delay of compliance; and
                          (iii) <<NOTE: Public information.>>  shall 
                      issue a public notice with regard to whether such 
                      delay of compliance remains necessary, including--
                                    (I) why such delay of compliance 
                                remains necessary; and
                                    (II) when the Commission expects to 
                                achieve the goal of full participation 
                                as described in subparagraph (D).
            (6) No additional cost to consumers or small business 
        customers.--The Commission shall prohibit providers of voice

[[Page 133 STAT. 3280]]

        service from adding any additional line item charges to consumer 
        or small business customer subscribers for the effective call 
        authentication technology required under paragraph (1).
            (7) <<NOTE: Deadline.>>  Accurate identification.--Not later 
        than 12 months after the date of the enactment of this Act, the 
        Commission shall issue best practices that providers of voice 
        service may use as part of the implementation of effective call 
        authentication frameworks under paragraph (1) to take steps to 
        ensure the calling party is accurately identified.

    (c) Safe Harbor and Other Regulations.--
            (1) <<NOTE: Deadline.>>  In general.--Consistent with the 
        regulations prescribed under subsection (j) of section 227 of 
        the Communications Act of 1934 (47 U.S.C. 227), as added by 
        section 10, the Commission shall, not later than 1 year after 
        the date of the enactment of this Act, promulgate rules--
                    (A) establishing when a provider of voice service 
                may block a voice call based, in whole or in part, on 
                information provided by the call authentication 
                frameworks under subsection (b), with no additional line 
                item charge;
                    (B) establishing a safe harbor for a provider of 
                voice service from liability for unintended or 
                inadvertent blocking of calls or for the unintended or 
                inadvertent misidentification of the level of trust for 
                individual calls based, in whole or in part, on 
                information provided by the call authentication 
                frameworks under subsection (b);
                    (C) establishing a process to permit a calling party 
                adversely affected by the information provided by the 
                call authentication frameworks under subsection (b) to 
                verify the authenticity of the calling party's calls; 
                and
                    (D) ensuring that calls originating from a provider 
                of voice service in an area where the provider is 
                subject to a delay of compliance with the time period 
                described in subsection (b)(1) are not unreasonably 
                blocked because the calls are not able to be 
                authenticated.
            (2) Considerations.--In establishing the safe harbor under 
        paragraph (1), consistent with the regulations prescribed under 
        subsection (j) of section 227 of the Communications Act of 1934 
        (47 U.S.C. 227), as added by section 10, the Commission shall 
        consider limiting the liability of a provider of voice service 
        based on the extent to which the provider of voice service--
                    (A) blocks or identifies calls based, in whole or in 
                part, on the information provided by the call 
                authentication frameworks under subsection (b);
                    (B) implemented procedures based, in whole or in 
                part, on the information provided by the call 
                authentication frameworks under subsection (b); and
                    (C) used reasonable care, including making all 
                reasonable efforts to avoid blocking emergency public 
                safety calls.

    (d) Rule of Construction.--Nothing in this section shall preclude 
the Commission from initiating a rulemaking pursuant to its existing 
statutory authority.
SEC. 5. INTERAGENCY WORKING GROUP.

    (a) <<NOTE: Consultation. Study.>>  In General.--The Attorney 
General, in consultation with the Chairman of the Commission, shall 
convene an interagency working group to study Government prosecution of 
violations of section 227(b) of the Communications Act of 1934 (47 
U.S.C. 227(b)).

[[Page 133 STAT. 3281]]

    (b) Duties.--In carrying out the study under subsection (a), the 
interagency working group shall--
            (1) determine whether, and if so how, any Federal laws, 
        including regulations, policies, and practices, or budgetary or 
        jurisdictional constraints inhibit the prosecution of such 
        violations;
            (2) identify existing and potential Federal policies and 
        programs that encourage and improve coordination among Federal 
        departments and agencies and States, and between States, in the 
        prevention and prosecution of such violations;
            (3) identify existing and potential international policies 
        and programs that encourage and improve coordination between 
        countries in the prevention and prosecution of such violations; 
        and
            (4) consider--
                    (A) the benefit and potential sources of additional 
                resources for the Federal prevention and prosecution of 
                criminal violations of that section;
                    (B) whether to establish memoranda of understanding 
                regarding the prevention and prosecution of such 
                violations between--
                          (i) the States;
                          (ii) the States and the Federal Government; 
                      and
                          (iii) the Federal Government and a foreign 
                      government;
                    (C) whether to establish a process to allow States 
                to request Federal subpoenas from the Commission;
                    (D) whether extending civil enforcement authority to 
                the States would assist in the successful prevention and 
                prosecution of such violations;
                    (E) whether increased forfeiture and imprisonment 
                penalties are appropriate, such as extending 
                imprisonment for such a violation to a term longer than 
                2 years;
                    (F) whether regulation of any entity that enters 
                into a business arrangement with a common carrier 
                regulated under title II of the Communications Act of 
                1934 (47 U.S.C. 201 et seq.) for the specific purpose of 
                carrying, routing, or transmitting a call that 
                constitutes such a violation would assist in the 
                successful prevention and prosecution of such 
                violations; and
                    (G) the extent to which, if any, Department of 
                Justice policies to pursue the prosecution of violations 
                causing economic harm, physical danger, or erosion of an 
                inhabitant's peace of mind and sense of security inhibit 
                the prevention or prosecution of such violations.

    (c) Members.--The interagency working group shall be composed of 
such representatives of Federal departments and agencies as the Attorney 
General considers appropriate, such as--
            (1) the Department of Commerce;
            (2) the Department of State;
            (3) the Department of Homeland Security;
            (4) the Commission;
            (5) the Federal Trade Commission; and
            (6) the Bureau of Consumer Financial Protection.

    (d) <<NOTE: Consultation. Determination.>>  Non-Federal 
Stakeholders.--In carrying out the study under subsection (a), the 
interagency working group shall consult

[[Page 133 STAT. 3282]]

with such non-Federal stakeholders as the Attorney General determines 
have the relevant expertise, including the National Association of 
Attorneys General.

    (e) Report to Congress.--Not later than 270 days after the date of 
the enactment of this Act, the interagency working group shall submit to 
the Committee on Energy and Commerce of the House of Representatives and 
the Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation of the Senate a 
report on the findings of the study under subsection (a), including--
            (1) <<NOTE: Recommenda- tions.>> any recommendations 
        regarding the prevention and prosecution of such violations; and
            (2) a description of what progress, if any, relevant Federal 
        departments and agencies have made in implementing the 
        recommendations under paragraph (1).
SEC. <<NOTE: 47 USC 227b-1.>>  6. ACCESS TO NUMBER RESOURCES.

    (a) In General.--
            (1) <<NOTE: Deadline. Determination.>>  Examination of fcc 
        policies.--Not later than 180 days after the date of the 
        enactment of this Act, the Commission shall commence a 
        proceeding to determine how Commission policies regarding access 
        to number resources, including number resources for toll-free 
        and non-toll-free telephone numbers, could be modified, 
        including by establishing registration and compliance 
        obligations, and requirements that providers of voice service 
        given access to number resources take sufficient steps to know 
        the identity of the customers of such providers, to help reduce 
        access to numbers by potential perpetrators of violations of 
        section 227(b) of the Communications Act of 1934 (47 U.S.C. 
        227(b)).
            (2) Regulations.--If the Commission determines under 
        paragraph (1) that modifying the policies described in that 
        paragraph could help achieve the goal described in that 
        paragraph, the Commission shall prescribe regulations to 
        implement those policy modifications.

    (b) <<NOTE: Penalties.>>  Authority.--Any person who knowingly, 
through an employee, agent, officer, or otherwise, directly or 
indirectly, by or through any means or device whatsoever, is a party to 
obtaining number resources, including number resources for toll-free and 
non-toll-free telephone numbers, from a common carrier regulated under 
title II of the Communications Act of 1934 (47 U.S.C. 201 et seq.), in 
violation of a regulation prescribed under subsection (a), shall, 
notwithstanding section 503(b)(5) of the Communications Act of 1934 (47 
U.S.C. 503(b)(5)), be subject to a forfeiture penalty under section 
503(b) of that Act (47 U.S.C. 503(b)). A forfeiture penalty under this 
subsection shall be in addition to any other penalty provided for by 
law.
SEC. 7. <<NOTE: 47 USC 227 note.>>  PROTECTIONS FROM SPOOFED 
                    CALLS.

    (a) <<NOTE: Deadline. Regulations.>>  In General.--Not later than 1 
year after the date of the enactment of this Act, and consistent with 
the call authentication frameworks under section 4, the Commission shall 
initiate a rulemaking to help protect a subscriber from receiving 
unwanted calls or text messages from a caller using an unauthenticated 
number.

    (b) Considerations.--In promulgating rules under subsection (a), the 
Commission shall consider--
            (1) the Government Accountability Office report on combating 
        the fraudulent provision of misleading or inaccurate caller 
        identification information required by section 503(c) of

[[Page 133 STAT. 3283]]

        division P of the Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2018 (Public 
        Law 115-141);
            (2) the best means of ensuring that a subscriber or provider 
        has the ability to block calls from a caller using an 
        unauthenticated North American Numbering Plan number;
            (3) the impact on the privacy of a subscriber from 
        unauthenticated calls;
            (4) the effectiveness in verifying the accuracy of caller 
        identification information; and
            (5) the availability and cost of providing protection from 
        the unwanted calls or text messages described in subsection (a).
SEC. 8. CONSUMER PROTECTIONS FOR EXEMPTIONS.

    (a) In General.--Section 227(b)(2) of the Communications Act of 1934 
(47 U.S.C. 227(b)(2)) is amended--
            (1) in subparagraph (G)(ii), by striking ``; and'' and 
        inserting a semicolon;
            (2) in subparagraph (H), by striking the period at the end 
        and inserting ``; and''; and
            (3) by adding at the end the following:
                    ``(I) shall ensure that any exemption under 
                subparagraph (B) or (C) contains requirements for calls 
                made in reliance on the exemption with respect to--
                          ``(i) the classes of parties that may make 
                      such calls;
                          ``(ii) the classes of parties that may be 
                      called; and
                          ``(iii) the number of such calls that a 
                      calling party may make to a particular called 
                      party.''.

    (b) <<NOTE: 47 USC 227 note.>> Deadline for Regulations.--In the 
case of any exemption issued under subparagraph (B) or (C) of section 
227(b)(2) of the Communications Act of 1934 (47 U.S.C. 227(b)(2)) before 
the date of the enactment of this Act, the Commission shall, not later 
than 1 year after such date of enactment, prescribe such regulations, or 
amend such existing regulations, as necessary to ensure that such 
exemption contains each requirement described in subparagraph (I) of 
such section, as added by subsection (a). To the extent such an 
exemption contains such a requirement before such date of enactment, 
nothing in this section or the amendments made by this section shall be 
construed to require the Commission to prescribe or amend regulations 
relating to such requirement.
SEC. 9. REPORT ON REASSIGNED NUMBER DATABASE.

    (a) <<NOTE: Public information. Web posting.>>  Report to 
Congress.--Not later than 1 year after the date of the enactment of this 
Act, the Commission shall submit to Congress, and make publicly 
available on the website of the Commission, a report on the status of 
the efforts of the Commission pursuant to the Second Report and Order in 
the matter of Advanced Methods to Target and Eliminate Unlawful 
Robocalls (CG Docket No. 17-59; FCC 18-177; adopted on December 12, 
2018).

    (b) Contents.--The report required by subsection (a) shall describe 
the efforts of the Commission, as described in such Second Report and 
Order, to ensure--
            (1) the establishment of a database of telephone numbers 
        that have been disconnected, in order to provide a person making 
        calls subject to section 227(b) of the Communications Act of 
        1934 (47 U.S.C. 227(b)) with comprehensive and timely 
        information to enable such person to avoid making calls without

[[Page 133 STAT. 3284]]

        the prior express consent of the called party because the number 
        called has been reassigned;
            (2) that a person who wishes to use any safe harbor provided 
        pursuant to such Second Report and Order with respect to making 
        calls must demonstrate that, before making the call, the person 
        appropriately checked the most recent update of the database and 
        the database reported that the number had not been disconnected; 
        and
            (3) that if the person makes the demonstration described in 
        paragraph (2), the person will be shielded from liability under 
        section 227(b) of the Communications Act of 1934 (47 U.S.C. 
        227(b)) should the database return an inaccurate result.
SEC. 10. STOP ROBOCALLS.

    (a) Information Sharing Regarding Robocall and Spoofing 
Violations.--Section 227 of the Communications Act of 1934 (47 U.S.C. 
227) is amended by adding at the end the following:
    ``(i) Information Sharing.--
            ``(1) <<NOTE: Deadline. Regulations.>>  In general.--Not 
        later than 18 months after the date of the enactment of this 
        subsection, the Commission shall prescribe regulations to 
        establish a process that streamlines the ways in which a private 
        entity may voluntarily share with the Commission information 
        relating to--
                    ``(A) a call made or a text message sent in 
                violation of subsection (b); or
                    ``(B) a call or text message for which misleading or 
                inaccurate caller identification information was caused 
                to be transmitted in violation of subsection (e).
            ``(2) Text message defined.--In this subsection, the term 
        `text message' has the meaning given such term in subsection 
        (e)(8).''.

    (b) Robocall Blocking Service.--Section 227 of the Communications 
Act of 1934 (47 U.S.C. 227), as amended by subsection (a), is further 
amended by adding at the end the following:
    ``(j) Robocall Blocking Service.--
            ``(1) <<NOTE: Deadline.>>  In general.--Not later than 1 
        year after the date of the enactment of this subsection, the 
        Commission shall take a final agency action to ensure the 
        robocall blocking services provided on an opt-out or opt-in 
        basis pursuant to the Declaratory Ruling of the Commission in 
        the matter of Advanced Methods to Target and Eliminate Unlawful 
        Robocalls (CG Docket No. 17-59; FCC 19-51; adopted on June 6, 
        2019)--
                    ``(A) are provided with transparency and effective 
                redress options for both--
                          ``(i) consumers; and
                          ``(ii) callers; and
                    ``(B) are provided with no additional line item 
                charge to consumers and no additional charge to callers 
                for resolving complaints related to erroneously blocked 
                calls; and
                    ``(C) make all reasonable efforts to avoid blocking 
                emergency public safety calls.
            ``(2) Text message defined.--In this subsection, the term 
        `text message' has the meaning given such term in subsection 
        (e)(8).''.

    (c) Study on Information Requirements for Certain VoIP Service 
Providers.--

[[Page 133 STAT. 3285]]

            (1) In general.--The Commission shall conduct a study 
        regarding whether to require a provider of covered VoIP service 
        to--
                    (A) provide to the Commission contact information 
                for such provider and keep such information current; and
                    (B) retain records relating to each call transmitted 
                over the covered VoIP service of such provider that are 
                sufficient to trace such call back to the source of such 
                call.
            (2) Report to congress.--Not later than 18 months after the 
        date of the enactment of this Act, the Commission shall submit 
        to Congress a report on the results of the study conducted under 
        paragraph (1).
            (3) Covered voip service defined.--In this subsection, the 
        term ``covered VoIP service'' means a service that--
                    (A) is an interconnected VoIP service (as defined in 
                section 3 of the Communications Act of 1934 (47 U.S.C. 
                153)); or
                    (B) would be an interconnected VoIP service (as so 
                defined) except that the service permits users to 
                terminate calls to the public switched telephone network 
                but does not permit users to receive calls that 
                originate on the public switched telephone network.

    (d) <<NOTE: Applicability. 47 USC 227 note.>>  Transitional Rule 
Regarding Definition of Text Message.--Paragraph (2) of subsection (i) 
of section 227 of the Communications Act of 1934 (47 U.S.C. 227), as 
added by subsection (a) of this section, and paragraph (2) of subsection 
(j) of such section 227, as added by subsection (b) of this section, 
shall apply before the effective date of the amendment made to 
subsection (e)(8) of such section 227 by subparagraph (C) of section 
503(a)(2) of division P of the Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2018 
(Public Law 115-141) as if such amendment was already in effect.
SEC. 11. <<NOTE: 47 USC 227b-2.>> PROVISION OF EVIDENCE OF CERTAIN 
                      ROBOCALL VIOLATIONS TO ATTORNEY GENERAL.

    (a) In General.--If the Chief of the Enforcement Bureau of the 
Commission obtains evidence that suggests a willful, knowing, and 
repeated robocall violation with an intent to defraud, cause harm, or 
wrongfully obtain anything of value, the Chief of the Enforcement Bureau 
shall provide such evidence to the Attorney General.
    (b) <<NOTE: Web posting.>>  Report to Congress.--Not later than 1 
year after the date of the enactment of this Act, and annually 
thereafter, the Commission shall publish on its website and submit to 
the Committee on Energy and Commerce of the House of Representatives and 
the Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation of the Senate a 
report that--
            (1) states the number of instances during the preceding year 
        in which the Chief of the Enforcement Bureau provided the 
        evidence described in subsection (a) to the Attorney General; 
        and
            (2) contains a general summary of the types of robocall 
        violations to which such evidence relates.

    (c) Rules of Construction.--Nothing in this section shall be 
construed to affect the ability of the Commission or the Chief of the 
Enforcement Bureau under other law--
            (1) to refer a matter to the Attorney General; or

[[Page 133 STAT. 3286]]

            (2) to pursue or continue pursuit of an enforcement action 
        in a matter with respect to which the Chief of the Enforcement 
        Bureau provided the evidence described in subsection (a) to the 
        Attorney General.

    (d) Robocall Violation Defined.--In this section, the term 
``robocall violation'' means a violation of subsection (b) or (e) of 
section 227 of the Communications Act of 1934 (47 U.S.C. 227).
SEC. 12. <<NOTE: 47 USC 227 note.>> PROTECTION FROM ONE-RING 
                      SCAMS.

    (a) <<NOTE: Deadline.>>  Initiation of Proceeding.--Not later than 
120 days after the date of the enactment of this Act, the Commission 
shall initiate a proceeding to protect called parties from one-ring 
scams.

    (b) Matters To Be Considered.--As part of the proceeding required by 
subsection (a), the Commission shall consider how the Commission can--
            (1) work with Federal and State law enforcement agencies to 
        address one-ring scams;
            (2) work with the governments of foreign countries to 
        address one-ring scams;
            (3) <<NOTE: Consultation.>>  in consultation with the 
        Federal Trade Commission, better educate consumers about how to 
        avoid one-ring scams;
            (4) incentivize voice service providers to stop calls made 
        to perpetrate one-ring scams from being received by called 
        parties, including consideration of adding identified one-ring 
        scam type numbers to the Commission's existing list of 
        permissible categories for carrier-initiated blocking;
            (5) work with entities that provide call-blocking services 
        to address one-ring scams; and
            (6) establish obligations on international gateway providers 
        that are the first point of entry for these calls into the 
        United States, including potential requirements that such 
        providers verify with the foreign originator the nature or 
        purpose of calls before initiating service.

    (c) <<NOTE: Web posting.>>  Report to Congress.--Not later than 1 
year after the date of the enactment of this Act, the Commission shall 
publish on its website and submit to the Committee on Energy and 
Commerce of the House of Representatives and the Committee on Commerce, 
Science, and Transportation of the Senate a report on the status of the 
proceeding required by subsection (a).

    (d) Definitions.--In this section:
            (1) One-ring scam.--The term ``one-ring scam'' means a scam 
        in which a caller makes a call and allows the call to ring the 
        called party for a short duration, in order to prompt the called 
        party to return the call, thereby subjecting the called party to 
        charges.
            (2) State.--The term ``State'' has the meaning given such 
        term in section 3 of the Communications Act of 1934 (47 U.S.C. 
        153).
            (3) Voice service.--The term ``voice service'' has the 
        meaning given such term in section 227(e)(8) of the 
        Communications Act of 1934 (47 U.S.C. 
        227(e)(8)). <<NOTE: Applicability.>> This paragraph shall apply 
        before the effective date of the amendment made to such section 
        by subparagraph (C) of section 503(a)(2) of division P of the 
        Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2018 (Public Law 115-141) as if 
        such amendment was already in effect.

[[Page 133 STAT. 3287]]

SEC. 13. ANNUAL ROBOCALL REPORT.

    (a) <<NOTE: Public information. Web posting.>>  In General.--Not 
later than 1 year after the date of the enactment of this Act, and 
annually thereafter, the Commission shall make publicly available on the 
website of the Commission, and submit to the Committee on Energy and 
Commerce of the House of Representatives and the Committee on Commerce, 
Science, and Transportation of the Senate, a report on the status of 
private-led efforts to trace back the origin of suspected unlawful 
robocalls by the registered consortium and the participation of voice 
service providers in such efforts.

    (b) Contents of Report.--The report required under subsection (a) 
shall include, at minimum, the following:
            (1) A description of private-led efforts to trace back the 
        origin of suspected unlawful robocalls by the registered 
        consortium and the actions taken by the registered consortium to 
        coordinate with the Commission.
            (2) <<NOTE: Lists.>>  A list of voice service providers 
        identified by the registered consortium that participated in 
        private-led efforts to trace back the origin of suspected 
        unlawful robocalls through the registered consortium.
            (3) <<NOTE: Lists.>>  A list of each voice service provider 
        that received a request from the registered consortium to 
        participate in private-led efforts to trace back the origin of 
        suspected unlawful robocalls and refused to participate, as 
        identified by the registered consortium.
            (4) The reason, if any, each voice service provider 
        identified by the registered consortium provided for not 
        participating in private-led efforts to trace back the origin of 
        suspected unlawful robocalls.
            (5) A description of how the Commission may use the 
        information provided to the Commission by voice service 
        providers or the registered consortium that have participated in 
        private-led efforts to trace back the origin of suspected 
        unlawful robocalls in the enforcement efforts by the Commission.

    (c) <<NOTE: Public information.>>  Additional Information.--Not 
later than 210 days after the date of the enactment of this Act, and 
annually thereafter, the Commission shall issue a notice to the public 
seeking additional information from voice service providers and the 
registered consortium of private-led efforts to trace back the origin of 
suspected unlawful robocalls necessary for the report by the Commission 
required under subsection (a).

    (d) Registration of Consortium of Private-Led Efforts To Trace Back 
the Origin of Suspected Unlawful Robocalls.--
            (1) In general.--Not later than 90 days after the date of 
        the enactment of this Act, the Commission shall issue rules to 
        establish a registration process for the registration of a 
        single consortium that conducts private-led efforts to trace 
        back the origin of suspected unlawful 
        robocalls. <<NOTE: Requirements.>> The consortium shall meet the 
        following requirements:
                    (A) Be a neutral third party competent to manage the 
                private-led effort to trace back the origin of suspected 
                unlawful robocalls in the judgement of the Commission.
                    (B) Maintain a set of written best practices about 
                the management of such efforts and regarding providers 
                of voice services' participation in private-led efforts 
                to trace back the origin of suspected unlawful 
                robocalls.

[[Page 133 STAT. 3288]]

                    (C) Consistent with section 222(d)(2) of the 
                Communications Act of 1934 (47 U.S.C. 222(d)(2)), any 
                private-led efforts to trace back the origin of 
                suspected unlawful robocalls conducted by the third 
                party focus on ``fraudulent, abusive, or unlawful'' 
                traffic.
                    (D) <<NOTE: Notice.>>  File a notice with the 
                Commission that the consortium intends to conduct 
                private-led efforts to trace back in advance of such 
                registration.
            (2) Annual notice by the commission seeking registrations.--
        Not <<NOTE: Deadline. Public information.>> later than 120 days 
        after the date of the enactment of this Act, and annually 
        thereafter, the Commission shall issue a notice to the public 
        seeking the registration described in paragraph (1).

    (e) List of Voice Service Providers.--The Commission may publish a 
list of voice service providers and take appropriate enforcement action 
based on information obtained from the consortium about voice service 
providers that refuse to participate in private-led efforts to trace 
back the origin of suspected unlawful robocalls, and other information 
the Commission may collect about voice service providers that are found 
to originate or transmit substantial amounts of unlawful robocalls.
    (f) Definitions.--In this section:
            (1) Private-led effort to trace back.--The term ``private-
        led effort to trace back'' means an effort made by the 
        registered consortium of voice service providers to establish a 
        methodology for determining the origin of a suspected unlawful 
        robocall.
            (2) Registered consortium.--The term ``registered 
        consortium'' means the consortium registered under subsection 
        (d).
            (3) Suspected unlawful robocall.--The term ``suspected 
        unlawful robocall'' means a call that the Commission or a voice 
        service provider reasonably believes was made in violation of 
        subsection (b) or (e) of section 227 of the Communications Act 
        of 1934 (47 U.S.C. 227).
            (4) Voice service.--The term ``voice service''--
                    (A) means any service that is interconnected with 
                the public switched telephone network and that furnishes 
                voice communications to an end user using resources from 
                the North American Numbering Plan or any successor to 
                the North American Numbering Plan adopted by the 
                Commission under section 251(e)(1) of the Communications 
                Act of 1934 (47 U.S.C. 251(e)(1)); and
                    (B) includes--
                          (i) transmissions from a telephone facsimile 
                      machine, computer, or other device to a telephone 
                      facsimile machine; and
                          (ii) without limitation, any service that 
                      enables real-time, two-way voice communications, 
                      including any service that requires internet 
                      protocol-compatible customer premises equipment 
                      (commonly known as ``CPE'') and permits out-bound 
                      calling, whether or not the service is one-way or 
                      two-way voice over internet protocol.
SEC. 14. <<NOTE: 47 USC 227 note.>>  HOSPITAL ROBOCALL PROTECTION 
                      GROUP.

    (a) <<NOTE: Deadline.>>  Establishment.--Not later than 180 days 
after the date of the enactment of this Act, the Commission shall 
establish an

[[Page 133 STAT. 3289]]

advisory committee to be known as the ``Hospital Robocall Protection 
Group''.

    (b) Membership.--The Group shall be composed only of the following 
members:
            (1) An equal number of representatives from each of the 
        following:
                    (A) Voice service providers that serve hospitals.
                    (B) Companies that focus on mitigating unlawful 
                robocalls.
                    (C) Consumer advocacy organizations.
                    (D) Providers of one-way voice over internet 
                protocol services described in subsection (e)(3)(B)(ii).
                    (E) Hospitals.
                    (F) State government officials focused on combating 
                unlawful robocalls.
            (2) One representative of the Commission.
            (3) One representative of the Federal Trade Commission.

    (c) <<NOTE: Deadline.>>  Issuance of Best Practices.--Not later than 
180 days after the date on which the Group is established under 
subsection (a), the Group shall issue best practices regarding the 
following:
            (1) How voice service providers can better combat unlawful 
        robocalls made to hospitals.
            (2) How hospitals can better protect themselves from such 
        calls, including by using unlawful robocall mitigation 
        techniques.
            (3) How the Federal Government and State governments can 
        help combat such calls.

    (d) <<NOTE: Deadline. Assessment.>>  Proceeding by FCC.--Not later 
than 180 days after the date on which the best practices are issued by 
the Group under subsection (c), the Commission shall conclude a 
proceeding to assess the extent to which the voluntary adoption of such 
best practices can be facilitated to protect hospitals and other 
institutions.

    (e) Definitions.--In this section:
            (1) Group.--The term ``Group'' means the Hospital Robocall 
        Protection Group established under subsection (a).
            (2) State.--The term ``State'' has the meaning given such 
        term in section 3 of the Communications Act of 1934 (47 U.S.C. 
        153).
            (3) Voice service.--The term ``voice service''--
                    (A) means any service that is interconnected with 
                the public switched telephone network and that furnishes 
                voice communications to an end user using resources from 
                the North American Numbering Plan or any successor to 
                the North American Numbering Plan adopted by the 
                Commission under section 251(e)(1) of the Communications 
                Act of 1934 (47 U.S.C. 251(e)(1)); and
                    (B) includes--
                          (i) transmissions from a telephone facsimile 
                      machine, computer, or other device to a telephone 
                      facsimile machine; and
                          (ii) without limitation, any service that 
                      enables real-time, two-way voice communications, 
                      including any service that requires internet 
                      protocol-compatible customer premises equipment 
                      (commonly known as ``CPE'') and permits out-bound 
                      calling, whether or not the service is one-way or 
                      two-way voice over internet protocol.

[[Page 133 STAT. 3290]]

SEC. 15. SEPARABILITY CLAUSE.

    If any provision of this Act, the amendments made by this Act, or 
the application thereof to any person or circumstance is held invalid, 
the remainder of this Act, the amendments made by this Act, and the 
application of such provision to other persons or circumstances shall 
not be affected thereby.

    Approved December 30, 2019.

LEGISLATIVE HISTORY--S. 151:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

SENATE REPORTS: No. 116-41 (Comm. on Commerce, Science, and 
Transportation).
CONGRESSIONAL RECORD, Vol. 165 (2019):
            May 23, considered and passed Senate.
            Dec. 4, considered and passed House, amended.
            Dec. 19, Senate concurred in House amendment.

                                  <all>