Structure and Practices of the Video Relay Services Program, 19347-19349 [2017-08487]
Download as PDF
Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 80 / Thursday, April 27, 2017 / Proposed Rules
*
*
*
*
*
3. Section 52.145 is amended by:
a. Removing and reserving paragraph
(e)(1).
■ b. Removing paragraphs (e)(2)(iii)
through (vi).
■ c. Removing and reserving paragraph
(f).
■
■
[FR Doc. 2017–08543 Filed 4–26–17; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560–50–P
FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS
COMMISSION
47 CFR Part 64
[CG Docket Nos. 10–51 and 02–123; DA 17–
76]
Structure and Practices of the Video
Relay Services Program
Federal Communications
Commission.
ACTION: Proposed rule.
AGENCY:
In this document, the
Commission’s Consumer and
Governmental Affairs Bureau (Bureau or
CGB) seeks comment on the scope of
application of the technical standard for
user equipment and software used with
video relay service (VRS) and the extent
to which such a rule is necessary and
appropriate for functionally equivalent
communication.
SUMMARY:
Comments are due June 12, 2017.
Reply Comments are due July 11, 2017.
ADDRESSES: You may submit comments,
identified by CG Docket Nos. 10–51 and
03–123, by any of the following
methods:
• Electronic Filers: Comments may be
filed electronically using the Internet by
accessing the Commission’s Electronic
Comment Filing System (ECFS), through
the Commission’s Web site https://
apps.fcc.gov/ecfs/. Filers should follow
the instructions provided on the Web
site for submitting comments. For ECFS
filers, in completing the transmittal
screen, filers should include their full
name, U.S. Postal service mailing
address, and CG Docket Nos. 10–51 and
03–123.
• Paper Filers: Parties who choose to
file by paper must file an original and
one copy of each filing. If more than one
docket or rulemaking number appears in
the caption of this proceeding, filers
must submit two additional copies for
each additional docket or rulemaking
number. Filings can be sent by hand or
messenger delivery, by commercial
overnight courier, or by first-class or
overnight U.S. Postal Service mail. All
filings must be addressed to the
Commission’s Secretary, Office of the
nlaroche on DSK30NT082PROD with PROPOSALS
DATES:
VerDate Sep<11>2014
14:38 Apr 26, 2017
Jkt 241001
Secretary, Federal Communications
Commission.
For detailed instructions for
submitting comments and additional
information on the rulemaking process,
see the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION
section of this document.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Bob
Aldrich, Consumer and Governmental
Affairs Bureau (202) 418–0996, email
Robert.Aldrich@fcc.gov, or Eliot
Greenwald, Consumer and
Governmental Affairs Bureau, (202)
418–2235, email Eliot.Greenwald@
fcc.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Pursuant
to 47 CFR 1.415, 1.419, interested
parties may file comments on or before
the dates indicated in the DATES section.
Comments may be filed using the
Commission’s ECFS. See Electronic
Filing of Documents in Rulemaking
Proceedings, 63 FR 24121 (1998).
• All hand-delivered or messengerdelivered paper filings for the
Commission’s Secretary must be
delivered to FCC Headquarters at 445
12th St. SW., Room TW–A325,
Washington, DC 20554. The filing hours
are 8:00 a.m. to 7:00 p.m. All hand
deliveries must be held together with
rubber bands or fasteners. Any
envelopes and boxes must be disposed
of before entering the building.
• Commercial overnight mail (other
than U.S. Postal Service Express Mail
and Priority Mail) must be sent to 9300
East Hampton Drive, Capitol Heights,
MD 20743.
U.S. Postal Service first-class,
Express, and Priority mail must be
addressed to 445 12th Street SW.,
Washington, DC 20554.
This is a summary of document DA
17–76, Structure and Practices of the
Video Relay Service Program;
Telecommunications Relay Services and
Speech-to-Speech Services for
Individuals with Hearing and Speech
Disabilities, Further Notice of Proposed
Rulemaking, document DA 17–76,
adopted on January 17, 2017 and
released on January 17, 2017, in CG
Docket Nos. 10–51 and 03–123. The
Report and Order, DA 17–76, is
published elsewhere in this issue. The
full text of document DA 17–76 will be
available for public inspection and
copying via ECFS, and during regular
business hours at the FCC Reference
Information Center, Portals II, 445 12th
Street SW., Room CY–A257,
Washington, DC 20554. This proceeding
shall be treated as a ‘‘permit-butdisclose’’ proceeding in accordance
with the Commission’s ex parte rules.
47 CFR 1.1200 et seq. Persons making ex
parte presentations must file a copy of
PO 00000
Frm 00019
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
19347
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
memoranda summarizing the
presentation must (1) list all persons
attending or otherwise participating in
the meeting at which the ex parte
presentation was made, and (2)
summarize all data presented and
arguments made during the
presentation. If the presentation
consisted in whole or in part of the
presentation of data or arguments
already reflected in the presenter’s
written comments, memoranda or other
filings in the proceeding, the presenter
may provide citations to such data or
arguments in his or her prior comments,
memoranda, or other filings (specifying
the relevant page and/or paragraph
numbers where such data or arguments
can be found) in lieu of summarizing
them in the memorandum. Documents
shown or given to Commission staff
during ex parte meetings are deemed to
be written ex parte presentations and
must be filed consistent with 47 CFR
1.1206(b). In proceedings governed by
47 CFR 1.49(f) or for which the
Commission has made available a
method of electronic filing, written ex
parte presentations and memoranda
summarizing oral ex parte
presentations, and all attachments
thereto, must be filed through the
electronic comment filing system
available for that proceeding, and must
be filed in their native format (e.g., .doc,
.xml, .ppt, searchable .pdf). Participants
in this proceeding should familiarize
themselves with the Commission’s ex
parte rules.
To request materials in accessible
formats for people with disabilities
(Braille, large print, electronic files,
audio format), send an email to fcc504@
fcc.gov or call the Consumer and
Governmental Affairs Bureau at (202)
418–0530 (voice), (844) 432–2272
(videophone), or (202) 418–0432 (TTY).
Initial Paperwork Reduction Act of
1995 Analysis
Document DA 17–76 does not contain
proposed information collection(s)
subject to the Paperwork Reduction Act
of 1995 (PRA), Public Law 104–13. In
addition, therefore, it does not contain
any new or modified information
collection burden for small business
concerns with fewer than 25 employees,
pursuant to the Small Business
Paperwork Relief Act of 2002, Public
Law 107–198, see 44 U.S.C. 3506(c)(4).
E:\FR\FM\27APP1.SGM
27APP1
nlaroche on DSK30NT082PROD with PROPOSALS
19348
Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 80 / Thursday, April 27, 2017 / Proposed Rules
Synopsis
1. The Commission’s TRS
interoperability and portability rules are
intended, among other things, to allow
VRS users to make and receive calls
through any VRS provider, and to
choose a different default provider,
without changing the VRS access
technology they use to place calls. The
Relay User Equipment (RUE) Profile
addresses this problem by specifying a
basic interface that is intended to enable
a user to use the same equipment and
software with any default provider
without experiencing any
inconvenience or disruption of basic
communications functions.
2. In document DA 17–76, the Bureau
pursuant to authority delegated by the
Commission in Structure and Practices
of the Video Relay Service Program, et.
al., Report and Order, published at 78
FR 40582, July 5, 2013, seeks additional
comment on the extent to which
adoption of a rule applying the RUE
Profile to provider-distributed VRS user
equipment and software is necessary
and appropriate for functionally
equivalent communication.
3. First, the Bureau seeks additional
comment on the user experience with
provider-supplied user equipment and
software. To what extent can users
currently use the features and functions
of provider-supplied equipment and
software when making and receiving
calls through other providers, or after
switching to another default provider?
To the extent that user equipment and
software supplied by one provider
performs less effectively with other
providers, which functions are most
problematic? Do the answers to these
questions vary depending on the
specific user equipment and software
used by a consumer, and if so, how?
How feasible is it currently for third
parties, including open source and
academic institutions, to innovate in
providing new relay user equipment or
to provide relay user equipment tailored
to specific user groups or application
scenarios, such as customer service or
government call centers or public safety
answering points (PSAPs)?
4. Second, the Bureau seeks comment
on the appropriate scope of application
of the RUE Profile. There are a number
of possible approaches. One possible
approach could be to require RUE
compliance for all user equipment and
software, including equipment and
software provided prior to the
designated compliance deadline. As an
alternative, to avoid imposing
retrofitting costs on VRS providers, the
Commission could require RUE
compliance only for new user
VerDate Sep<11>2014
14:38 Apr 26, 2017
Jkt 241001
equipment and for new versions of user
software. Under a third, more limited
alternative, the Commission could
require VRS providers to make RUEProfile-compliant user equipment or
software available to those users
affirmatively requesting such equipment
or software, as well as to provide
information on their Web sites
indicating how to obtain such user
equipment and software. Which
operating system platforms should be
supported under this alternative? Under
a fourth alternative, the Commission
could make no further changes to its
VRS interoperability and portability
requirements. The Bureau seeks
comments on the relative costs and
benefits of these alternatives. In this
regard, CGB invites commenters to
submit additional specific cost
information quantifying the costs of the
three alternatives outlined above. The
Bureau also seeks comment on the
providers’ claim that ‘‘forcing provider
endpoints to adhere to the RUE Profile
would require that providers remove
any innovative or useful features of their
endpoints that are not specified in the
RUE Profile and subject their networks
to lower security than they employ
today.’’ What specific aspects of the
RUE Profile would require removal of
innovative or useful features, and what
kinds of innovative or useful features
would need to be removed? What
specific aspects of the RUE Profile
would subject networks to lower
security?
Comment is sought on a variety of
alternatives, including the alternative of
leaving the rule as is.
Initial Regulatory Flexibility Analysis
5. As required by the Regulatory
Flexibility Act, as amended (RFA), the
Bureau has prepared this Initial
Regulatory Flexibility Analysis (IRFA)
of the possible significant economic
impact on a substantial number of small
entities by the policies and rules
proposed document DA 17–76. Written
public comments are requested on this
IRFA. Comments must be identified as
responses to the IRFA and must be filed
by the deadlines for comments specified
in the DATES section. The Commission
will send a copy of document DA 17–
76, to the Chief Counsel for Advocacy
of the Small Business Administration.
Steps Taken To Minimize Significant
Economic Impact on Small Entities, and
Significant Alternatives Considered
Need for, and Objectives of, the
Proposed Rules
6. In document DA 17–76, the Bureau
seeks comment on whether the scope of
application of the RUE Profile should be
expanded beyond the interface between
provider networks and user equipment
employing ACE software, to apply more
generally to the interface between
provider networks and providersupplied user equipment and software.
PO 00000
Frm 00020
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
Legal Basis
7. The proposed action is authorized
under sections 1, 2, 4(i), 225, 251, 255,
303, 316, and 716 of the
Communications Act of 1934, as
amended, section 6 of the Wireless
Communications and Public Safety Act
of 1999, and section 106 of the CVAA;
47 U.S.C. 151, 152, 154(i), 225, 255, 303,
316, 615a–1, 615c, 617.
Listing of Small Entities to Which the
Proposed Rules Will Apply
8. The proposals in document DA 17–
76 will affect obligations of VRS
providers, who are classified by the
Census Bureau as ‘‘all other
telecommunications.’’
• All Other Telecommunications.
• VRS Providers, which are generally
classified within the broad category of
‘‘All Other Telecommunications.’’
Description of Projected Reporting,
Recordkeeping, and Other Compliance
Requirements
9. Document DA 17–76 does not
include new or modified reporting,
recordkeeping, and other compliance
requirements, except for compliance
with a potentially broader application of
the RUE Profile technical standard, to
apply more generally to the interface
between a VRS provider and providersupplied user equipment and software.
10. Regarding the possible broadening
of the application of the RUE Profile,
document DA 17–76 seeks comment on
a variety of alternative approaches,
including alternatives with minimal or
no impact on small entities.
Federal Rules That May Duplicate,
Overlap, or Conflict With the
Commission’s Proposals
11. None.
Ordering Clauses
Pursuant to sections 1, 2, 4(i), 4(j), 225
and 303(r) of the Communications Act
of 1934, as amended, 47 U.S.C. 151, 152,
154(i), 154(j), 225, 303(r), and the
authority delegated by the Commission
in Structure and Practices of the Video
Relay Service Program et al., Report and
Order, published at 78 FR 40582, July 5,
2013, document DA 17–76 is adopted.
The Commission’s Consumer and
Governmental Affairs Bureau, Reference
Information Center, shall send a copy of
document DA 17–76, including the
E:\FR\FM\27APP1.SGM
27APP1
Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 80 / Thursday, April 27, 2017 / Proposed Rules
Initial Regulatory Flexibility Analysis to
the Chief Counsel for Advocacy of the
Small Business Administration.
Federal Communications Commission.
Karen Peltz Strauss,
Deputy Chief, Consumer and Governmental
Affairs Bureau.
[FR Doc. 2017–08487 Filed 4–26–17; 8:45 am]
nlaroche on DSK30NT082PROD with PROPOSALS
BILLING CODE 6712–01–P
VerDate Sep<11>2014
14:38 Apr 26, 2017
Jkt 241001
PO 00000
Frm 00021
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 9990
E:\FR\FM\27APP1.SGM
27APP1
19349
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 82, Number 80 (Thursday, April 27, 2017)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 19347-19349]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2017-08487]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION
47 CFR Part 64
[CG Docket Nos. 10-51 and 02-123; DA 17-76]
Structure and Practices of the Video Relay Services Program
AGENCY: Federal Communications Commission.
ACTION: Proposed rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: In this document, the Commission's Consumer and Governmental
Affairs Bureau (Bureau or CGB) seeks comment on the scope of
application of the technical standard for user equipment and software
used with video relay service (VRS) and the extent to which such a rule
is necessary and appropriate for functionally equivalent communication.
DATES: Comments are due June 12, 2017. Reply Comments are due July 11,
2017.
ADDRESSES: You may submit comments, identified by CG Docket Nos. 10-51
and 03-123, by any of the following methods:
Electronic Filers: Comments may be filed electronically
using the Internet by accessing the Commission's Electronic Comment
Filing System (ECFS), through the Commission's Web site https://apps.fcc.gov/ecfs/. Filers should follow the instructions provided on
the Web site for submitting comments. For ECFS filers, in completing
the transmittal screen, filers should include their full name, U.S.
Postal service mailing address, and CG Docket Nos. 10-51 and 03-123.
Paper Filers: Parties who choose to file by paper must
file an original and one copy of each filing. If more than one docket
or rulemaking number appears in the caption of this proceeding, filers
must submit two additional copies for each additional docket or
rulemaking number. Filings can be sent by hand or messenger delivery,
by commercial overnight courier, or by first-class or overnight U.S.
Postal Service mail. All filings must be addressed to the Commission's
Secretary, Office of the Secretary, Federal Communications Commission.
For detailed instructions for submitting comments and additional
information on the rulemaking process, see the SUPPLEMENTARY
INFORMATION section of this document.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Bob Aldrich, Consumer and Governmental
Affairs Bureau (202) 418-0996, email Robert.Aldrich@fcc.gov, or Eliot
Greenwald, Consumer and Governmental Affairs Bureau, (202) 418-2235,
email Eliot.Greenwald@fcc.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Pursuant to 47 CFR 1.415, 1.419, interested
parties may file comments on or before the dates indicated in the DATES
section. Comments may be filed using the Commission's ECFS. See
Electronic Filing of Documents in Rulemaking Proceedings, 63 FR 24121
(1998).
All hand-delivered or messenger-delivered paper filings
for the Commission's Secretary must be delivered to FCC Headquarters at
445 12th St. SW., Room TW-A325, Washington, DC 20554. The filing hours
are 8:00 a.m. to 7:00 p.m. All hand deliveries must be held together
with rubber bands or fasteners. Any envelopes and boxes must be
disposed of before entering the building.
Commercial overnight mail (other than U.S. Postal Service
Express Mail and Priority Mail) must be sent to 9300 East Hampton
Drive, Capitol Heights, MD 20743.
U.S. Postal Service first-class, Express, and Priority mail must be
addressed to 445 12th Street SW., Washington, DC 20554.
This is a summary of document DA 17-76, Structure and Practices of
the Video Relay Service Program; Telecommunications Relay Services and
Speech-to-Speech Services for Individuals with Hearing and Speech
Disabilities, Further Notice of Proposed Rulemaking, document DA 17-76,
adopted on January 17, 2017 and released on January 17, 2017, in CG
Docket Nos. 10-51 and 03-123. The Report and Order, DA 17-76, is
published elsewhere in this issue. The full text of document DA 17-76
will be available for public inspection and copying via ECFS, and
during regular business hours at the FCC Reference Information Center,
Portals II, 445 12th Street SW., Room CY-A257, Washington, DC 20554.
This proceeding shall be treated as a ``permit-but-disclose''
proceeding in accordance with the Commission's ex parte rules. 47 CFR
1.1200 et seq. 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 memoranda
summarizing the presentation must (1) list all persons attending or
otherwise participating in the meeting at which the ex parte
presentation was made, and (2) summarize all data presented and
arguments made during the presentation. If the presentation consisted
in whole or in part of the presentation of data or arguments already
reflected in the presenter's written comments, memoranda or other
filings in the proceeding, the presenter may provide citations to such
data or arguments in his or her prior comments, memoranda, or other
filings (specifying the relevant page and/or paragraph numbers where
such data or arguments can be found) in lieu of summarizing them in the
memorandum. Documents shown or given to Commission staff during ex
parte meetings are deemed to be written ex parte presentations and must
be filed consistent with 47 CFR 1.1206(b). In proceedings governed by
47 CFR 1.49(f) or for which the Commission has made available a method
of electronic filing, written ex parte presentations and memoranda
summarizing oral ex parte presentations, and all attachments thereto,
must be filed through the electronic comment filing system available
for that proceeding, and must be filed in their native format (e.g.,
.doc, .xml, .ppt, searchable .pdf). Participants in this proceeding
should familiarize themselves with the Commission's ex parte rules.
To request materials in accessible formats for people with
disabilities (Braille, large print, electronic files, audio format),
send an email to fcc504@fcc.gov or call the Consumer and Governmental
Affairs Bureau at (202) 418-0530 (voice), (844) 432-2272 (videophone),
or (202) 418-0432 (TTY).
Initial Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 Analysis
Document DA 17-76 does not contain proposed information
collection(s) subject to the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (PRA),
Public Law 104-13. In addition, therefore, it does not contain any new
or modified information collection burden for small business concerns
with fewer than 25 employees, pursuant to the Small Business Paperwork
Relief Act of 2002, Public Law 107-198, see 44 U.S.C. 3506(c)(4).
[[Page 19348]]
Synopsis
1. The Commission's TRS interoperability and portability rules are
intended, among other things, to allow VRS users to make and receive
calls through any VRS provider, and to choose a different default
provider, without changing the VRS access technology they use to place
calls. The Relay User Equipment (RUE) Profile addresses this problem by
specifying a basic interface that is intended to enable a user to use
the same equipment and software with any default provider without
experiencing any inconvenience or disruption of basic communications
functions.
2. In document DA 17-76, the Bureau pursuant to authority delegated
by the Commission in Structure and Practices of the Video Relay Service
Program, et. al., Report and Order, published at 78 FR 40582, July 5,
2013, seeks additional comment on the extent to which adoption of a
rule applying the RUE Profile to provider-distributed VRS user
equipment and software is necessary and appropriate for functionally
equivalent communication.
3. First, the Bureau seeks additional comment on the user
experience with provider-supplied user equipment and software. To what
extent can users currently use the features and functions of provider-
supplied equipment and software when making and receiving calls through
other providers, or after switching to another default provider? To the
extent that user equipment and software supplied by one provider
performs less effectively with other providers, which functions are
most problematic? Do the answers to these questions vary depending on
the specific user equipment and software used by a consumer, and if so,
how? How feasible is it currently for third parties, including open
source and academic institutions, to innovate in providing new relay
user equipment or to provide relay user equipment tailored to specific
user groups or application scenarios, such as customer service or
government call centers or public safety answering points (PSAPs)?
4. Second, the Bureau seeks comment on the appropriate scope of
application of the RUE Profile. There are a number of possible
approaches. One possible approach could be to require RUE compliance
for all user equipment and software, including equipment and software
provided prior to the designated compliance deadline. As an
alternative, to avoid imposing retrofitting costs on VRS providers, the
Commission could require RUE compliance only for new user equipment and
for new versions of user software. Under a third, more limited
alternative, the Commission could require VRS providers to make RUE-
Profile-compliant user equipment or software available to those users
affirmatively requesting such equipment or software, as well as to
provide information on their Web sites indicating how to obtain such
user equipment and software. Which operating system platforms should be
supported under this alternative? Under a fourth alternative, the
Commission could make no further changes to its VRS interoperability
and portability requirements. The Bureau seeks comments on the relative
costs and benefits of these alternatives. In this regard, CGB invites
commenters to submit additional specific cost information quantifying
the costs of the three alternatives outlined above. The Bureau also
seeks comment on the providers' claim that ``forcing provider endpoints
to adhere to the RUE Profile would require that providers remove any
innovative or useful features of their endpoints that are not specified
in the RUE Profile and subject their networks to lower security than
they employ today.'' What specific aspects of the RUE Profile would
require removal of innovative or useful features, and what kinds of
innovative or useful features would need to be removed? What specific
aspects of the RUE Profile would subject networks to lower security?
Initial Regulatory Flexibility Analysis
5. As required by the Regulatory Flexibility Act, as amended (RFA),
the Bureau has prepared this Initial Regulatory Flexibility Analysis
(IRFA) of the possible significant economic impact on a substantial
number of small entities by the policies and rules proposed document DA
17-76. Written public comments are requested on this IRFA. Comments
must be identified as responses to the IRFA and must be filed by the
deadlines for comments specified in the DATES section. The Commission
will send a copy of document DA 17-76, to the Chief Counsel for
Advocacy of the Small Business Administration.
Need for, and Objectives of, the Proposed Rules
6. In document DA 17-76, the Bureau seeks comment on whether the
scope of application of the RUE Profile should be expanded beyond the
interface between provider networks and user equipment employing ACE
software, to apply more generally to the interface between provider
networks and provider-supplied user equipment and software. Comment is
sought on a variety of alternatives, including the alternative of
leaving the rule as is.
Legal Basis
7. The proposed action is authorized under sections 1, 2, 4(i),
225, 251, 255, 303, 316, and 716 of the Communications Act of 1934, as
amended, section 6 of the Wireless Communications and Public Safety Act
of 1999, and section 106 of the CVAA; 47 U.S.C. 151, 152, 154(i), 225,
255, 303, 316, 615a-1, 615c, 617.
Listing of Small Entities to Which the Proposed Rules Will Apply
8. The proposals in document DA 17-76 will affect obligations of
VRS providers, who are classified by the Census Bureau as ``all other
telecommunications.''
All Other Telecommunications.
VRS Providers, which are generally classified within the
broad category of ``All Other Telecommunications.''
Description of Projected Reporting, Recordkeeping, and Other Compliance
Requirements
9. Document DA 17-76 does not include new or modified reporting,
recordkeeping, and other compliance requirements, except for compliance
with a potentially broader application of the RUE Profile technical
standard, to apply more generally to the interface between a VRS
provider and provider-supplied user equipment and software.
Steps Taken To Minimize Significant Economic Impact on Small Entities,
and Significant Alternatives Considered
10. Regarding the possible broadening of the application of the RUE
Profile, document DA 17-76 seeks comment on a variety of alternative
approaches, including alternatives with minimal or no impact on small
entities.
Federal Rules That May Duplicate, Overlap, or Conflict With the
Commission's Proposals
11. None.
Ordering Clauses
Pursuant to sections 1, 2, 4(i), 4(j), 225 and 303(r) of the
Communications Act of 1934, as amended, 47 U.S.C. 151, 152, 154(i),
154(j), 225, 303(r), and the authority delegated by the Commission in
Structure and Practices of the Video Relay Service Program et al.,
Report and Order, published at 78 FR 40582, July 5, 2013, document DA
17-76 is adopted.
The Commission's Consumer and Governmental Affairs Bureau,
Reference Information Center, shall send a copy of document DA 17-76,
including the
[[Page 19349]]
Initial Regulatory Flexibility Analysis to the Chief Counsel for
Advocacy of the Small Business Administration.
Federal Communications Commission.
Karen Peltz Strauss,
Deputy Chief, Consumer and Governmental Affairs Bureau.
[FR Doc. 2017-08487 Filed 4-26-17; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6712-01-P