Telecommunications Relay Services and Speech-to-Speech Services for Individuals With Hearing and Speech Disabilities; E911 Requirements for IP-Enabled Service Providers, 21252-21259 [E8-8597]

Agencies

• FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION

[Federal Register Volume 73, Number 77 (Monday, April 21, 2008)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 21252-21259]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E8-8597]


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

FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION

47 CFR Part 64

[CG Docket No. 03-123 and WC Docket No. 05-196; FCC 08-78]


Telecommunications Relay Services and Speech-to-Speech Services 
for Individuals With Hearing and Speech Disabilities; E911 Requirements 
for IP-Enabled Service Providers

AGENCY: Federal Communications Commission.

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: In this document, the Commission adopts emergency call 
handling requirements for Internet-based telecommunications relay 
service (TRS) providers. These measures will ensure that persons using 
Internet-based forms of TRS, i.e., Video Relay Service (VRS), Internet 
Protocol (IP) Relay, and IP captioned telephone relay service (IP CTS), 
can promptly access emergency services, pending adoption of a solution 
that will permit Internet-based TRS providers to immediately and 
automatically place the outbound leg of an emergency call to an 
appropriate public safety answering point (PSAP), designated statewide 
default answering point, or appropriate local emergency authority.

DATES: Effective May 21, 2008.

ADDRESSES: Federal Communications Commission, 445 12th Street, SW., 
Washington, DC 20554.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Thomas Chandler, Consumer and 
Governmental Affairs Bureau, Disability Rights Office at (202) 418-1475 
(voice), (202) 418-0597 (TTY), or e-mail at Thomas.Chandler@fcc.gov.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This is a summary of the Commission's 
Telecommunications Relay Services and Speech-to-Speech Services for 
Individuals with Hearing and Speech Disabilities; E911 Requirements for 
IP-Enabled Service Providers, Report and Order (VRS 911 Order), FCC 08-
78, adopted March 11, 2008, and released March 19, 2008, in CG Docket 
No. 03-123 and WC Docket No. 05-196. FCC 08-78 addresses issues arising 
from the Commission's Telecommunications Relay Services and Speech-to-
Speech Services for Individuals with Hearing and Speech Disabilities, 
Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (VRS/IP Relay 911 NPRM), CG Docket No. 
03-123, FCC 05-196, published at 71 FR 5221, February 1, 2006; 
Declaratory Ruling (IP CTS Declaratory Ruling), CG Docket No. 03-123, 
FCC 06-186, published at 72 FR 6960, February 14, 2007. The full text 
of FCC 08-78 and copies of any subsequently filed documents in this 
matter will be available for public inspection and copying during 
regular business hours at the FCC Reference Information Center, Portals 
II, 445 12th Street, SW., Room CY-A257, Washington, DC 20554. FCC 08-78 
and copies of subsequently filed documents in this matter also may be 
purchased from the Commission's duplicating contractor at Portals II, 
445 12th Street, SW., Room CY-B402, Washington, DC 20554. Customers may 
contact the Commission's duplicating contractor at its Web site 
www.bcpiweb.com or by calling 1-800-378-3160. To request materials in 
accessible formats for people with disabilities (Braille, large print, 
electronic files, audio format), send an e-mail to fcc504@fcc.gov or 
call the Consumer and Governmental Affairs Bureau at (202) 418-0530 
(voice), (202) 418-0432 (TTY). FCC 08-78 can also be downloaded in Word 
or Portable Document Format (PDF) at: https://www.fcc.gov/cgb/dro/
trs.html.

Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 Analysis

    FCC 08-78 does not contain new or modified information collection 
requirements subject to the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (PRA), 
Public Law 104-13. In addition, 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 106-198, see 44 U.S.C. 3506(c)(4).

Synopsis

Background

    1. In the 2000 TRS Order, CC Docket No. 98-67, 15 FCC Rcd at 5182-
84, paragraphs 99-102, published at 65 FR 38432, June 21, 2000 and 65 
FR 38490, June 21, 2000, the Commission required TRS providers to 
direct emergency calls as quickly as possible to the correct PSAP by 
matching a caller's phone number with the appropriate PSAP 
electronically. The Commission also required communications assistants 
(CAs) to pass along the caller's telephone number to the PSAP orally, 
which would allow the PSAP to directly call back the calling party if 
the relay call became disconnected.
    2. In 2003, the Commission again addressed the rules governing TRS 
access to emergency services. 2003 TRS Order, CC Docket No. 98-67, CG 
Docket No. 03-123, 18 FCC Rcd 12379, 12406-09, paragraphs 40-46 (June 
17, 2003),

[[Page 21253]]

published at 68 FR 50093, August 25, 2003 and 68 FR 50973, August 25, 
2003. The Commission clarified that TRS providers must route emergency 
TRS calls to the appropriate PSAP and required TRS providers to adjust 
their databases accordingly. 2003 TRS Order, 18 FCC Rcd at 12406-08, 
paragraphs 40-42 (rejecting proximity as criterion for determining the 
appropriate PSAP and defining it, in light of the statutory functional 
equivalency mandate, as the PSAP to which a direct 911 call would be 
delivered over the PSTN). On reconsideration, the Commission clarified 
that the appropriate PSAP is ``either a PSAP that the caller would have 
reached if he had dialed 911 directly, or a PSAP that is capable of 
enabling the dispatch of emergency services to the caller in an 
expeditious manner.'' 2004 TRS Report and Order, CC Docket Nos. 90-571 
and 98-67, CG Docket No. 03-123, 19 FCC Rcd at 12559, paragraph 216, 
published at 69 FR 53346, September 1, 2004 and 69 FR 53382, September 
1, 2004. Because of jurisdictional boundaries, the appropriate PSAP is 
not always the geographically closest PSAP to the calling party.
    3. Emergency Call Handling Issues for Internet-Based Forms of TRS. 
Through a series of orders between 2001 and 2007, the Commission 
examined the emergency call handling requirement as applied to 
Internet-based relay services and, in particular, considered the 
technological challenges associated with determining the geographic 
location of TRS calls that originate over the Internet. The Commission 
recognized that because these services use the Internet, rather than a 
telephone and the PSTN, for the link of the call between the calling 
party and the relay provider, the relay provider does not receive the 
ANI of the calling party. See, e.g., 2004 TRS Report and Order, 19 FCC 
Rcd at 12522, paragraph 117. As a result, there is greater complexity 
with identifying the caller's location and determining the appropriate 
PSAP to call to respond to the emergency. See, e.g., 2004 TRS Report 
and Order, 19 FCC Rcd at 12522, paragraph 117; see also IP Relay 
Declaratory Ruling and Second FNPRM, 17 FCC Rcd at 7789, paragraph 30, 
published at 67 FR 39863, June 11, 2002 and 67 FR 39929, June 11, 2002 
(recognizing that, without ANI of the calling party, IP Relay provider 
petitioner could not provide PSAP with information regarding the 
calling party's location); and 47 CFR 64.604(a)(4) of the Commission 
rules. The Commission therefore determined that a temporary waiver was 
needed to the extent that these technological challenges hindered 
providers' ability to ``immediately and automatically'' place the 
outbound leg of an emergency call to an appropriate PSAP, as required 
by the Commission's emergency call handling rule. See, e.g., 2001 VRS 
Waiver Order, 17 FCC Rcd at 161, paragraph 11 (granting temporary 
waiver of emergency call handling requirement for VRS providers). The 
temporary waivers of the emergency call handling rule for VRS and IP 
Relay were scheduled to expire after December 31, 2007. See 2006 VRS 
Waiver Order, 21 FCC Rcd 14554; published at 72 FR 11789, March 14, 
2007 (extending VRS waiver through December 31, 2007); IP Relay 
Reconsideration Order, 18 FCC Rcd 4761(extending IP Relay waiver 
through December 31, 2007); 2007 IP CTS Declaratory Ruling, 22 FCC Rcd 
379 (waiving emergency call handling requirement for IP CTS until 
emergency access for the Internet-based forms of TRS is resolved).
    4. In November 2005, the Commission released the VRS/IP Relay 911 
NPRM seeking comment on possible means by which VRS and IP Relay 
providers might be able to handle emergency calls so that the waivers 
would no longer be necessary. VRS/IP Relay 911 NPRM, 20 FCC Rcd at 
19480-81, paragraphs 9-12 (at this time, the Commission had not yet 
recognized IP CTS as a form of TRS). The Commission recognized that 
many individuals use VRS and IP Relay to contact emergency services, 
rather than making emergency calls by directly calling 911 through a 
TTY and a traditional telephone line. The Commission therefore sought 
comment on what emergency call handling rules should apply to VRS and 
IP Relay providers, including by what means these providers may 
determine the appropriate PSAP to contact when they receive an 
emergency call. The Commission also sought comment on whether and how 
VRS and IP Relay providers may identify incoming calls as emergency 
calls so that such calls can promptly be directed to a Communications 
Assistant (CA) without waiting in a queue. VRS/IP Relay 911 NPRM, 20 
FCC Rcd at 19487, paragraph 26.
    5. In the VRS/IP Relay 911 NPRM, the Commission also sought comment 
on whether it should require the Internet-based TRS providers to 
establish a registered location process, similar to that adopted in the 
VoIP 911 Order, 20 FCC Rcd 10271, paragraph 46, published at 70 FR 
37273, June 29, 2005, whereby each Internet-based TRS provider would be 
required to obtain from its customers, prior to the initiation of 
service, the physical location from which the particular relay service 
will be utilized, so that a CA may determine an appropriate PSAP to 
call to respond in the event of an emergency. VRS/IP Relay 911 NPRM, 20 
FCC Rcd at 19484-87, paragraphs 19-24 (citing VoIP 911 Order, 20 FCC 
Rcd at 10271, paragraph 46) (describing Registered Location process for 
interconnected VoIP providers). Noting that the VoIP 911 Order had 
further required interconnected VoIP providers to offer their consumers 
a method of updating their ``Registered Location,'' the Commission 
sought comment on how it might ensure that Internet-based TRS providers 
have current location information, i.e., that the Registered Location 
is the actual location of the user when making an emergency call. VRS/
IP Relay 911 NPRM, 20 FCC Rcd at 19485, paragraph 21 (citing VoIP 911 
Order, 20 FCC Rcd at 10271, paragraph 46) (requiring providers of 
interconnected VoIP services that can be utilized from more than one 
physical location to provide their end users ``one or more methods of 
updating information regarding the user's physical location'')); see 
also 47 CFR 9.5(d)(2) of the Commission's rules (``[I]nterconnected 
VoIP service providers must * * * [p]rovide their end users one or more 
methods of updating their Registered Location, including at least one 
option that requires use only of the CPE necessary to access the 
interconnected VoIP service. Any method utilized must allow an end user 
to update the Registered Location at will and in a timely manner.''). 
The Commission asked, for example, if users should be required to 
affirmatively acknowledge whether they are at their Registered Location 
each time they initiate a call and, if they are not at their Registered 
Location, be prompted or required to provide their present location. 
VRS/IP Relay 911 NPRM, 20 FCC Rcd at 19485, paragraph 21; cf. VoIP 911 
Order, 20 FCC Rcd at 10271, paragraph 46 (any method utilized by an 
interconnected VoIP provider to update a customer's Registered Location 
must allow an end user to do so ``at will and in a timely manner''), 20 
FCC Rcd at 10273, paragraph 49 (noting that ``customers of portable 
interconnected VoIP services likely will need to be instructed on how 
to register their locations with their providers, the need to update 
that information promptly when they relocate, and how to confirm that 
the registration is effective'').
    6. In response to the VRS/IP Relay 911 NPRM, all of the commenting 
providers asserted that they presently do not have

[[Page 21254]]

the technological means of automatically obtaining identifiable 
location information from VRS and IP Relay callers. At that point in 
time, providers stated that they had been working on a technological 
solution for emergency access through Internet-based TRS services, but 
they required additional time to find a solution. The Commission also 
notes that the 2007 waiver reports filed by VRS and IP Relay providers 
state that presently it is not technologically feasible to 
automatically route emergency calls to an appropriate PSAP. See 
generally 2004 TRS Report and Order, 19 FCC Rcd at 12520-22, paragraphs 
111, 116-18 (conditioning waivers of the TRS mandatory minimum 
standards on the filing of annual reports addressing waived standards). 
Although commenters generally opposed Commission adoption of a 
Registered Location process, similar to that adopted in the VoIP 911 
Order, others expressed qualified support for it. Likewise, a majority 
of commenters opposed the proposed adoption of a procedure for updating 
a customer's Registered Location information that would require 
Internet-based TRS callers to acknowledge their location at the 
beginning of every call, a minority of commenters expressed qualified 
support for such a requirement, provided that a user is offered the 
option to update his or her location at the start of each call, but 
then need not do anything if there has been no change in the caller's 
previously registered location.
    7. On November 15, 2006, the Commission held an E911 disability 
access summit (E911 Summit) to discuss advances in E911 calling 
technology and E911 access for persons with hearing and speech 
disabilities, including via VRS and IP Relay. FCC Releases Agenda for 
November 15 E9-1-1 Disability Access Summit, News Release (November 13, 
2006). During the E911 Summit, Internet-based TRS providers noted that 
technology had not yet been developed to allow them to immediately 
place the outbound leg of an Internet-based TRS emergency call to the 
appropriate PSAP. They also explained the interim methods being used to 
handle emergency VRS and IP Relay calls, even though this requirement 
is waived.

Discussion

    8. In FCC 08-78, the Commission takes action to ensure that users 
of the Internet-based forms of TRS can better rely on these services to 
make emergency calls. The Commission does not believe that the 
continued waiver of the emergency call handling requirement can be 
justified when balanced against the obvious public safety benefits 
derived from ensuring reliable 911 access.

A. Emergency Call Handling Requirements for Internet-Based TRS 
Providers

    9. In light of the present imperative to provide Internet-based TRS 
users a reliable means of accessing emergency services, the Commission 
concludes that the waivers of the emergency call handling requirement 
for VRS, IP Relay, and IP CTS should terminate contemporaneously with 
the effective date of FCC 08-78 on May 21, 2008. In addition, at that 
time (i.e., May 21, 2008), the Commission requires VRS, IP Relay, and 
IP CTS providers to accept and handle emergency calls and to access, 
either directly or via a third party, a commercially available database 
that will allow the provider to determine an appropriate PSAP, 
designated statewide default answering point, or appropriate local 
emergency authority that corresponds to the caller's location, and to 
relay the call to that entity. Further, providers will be required to: 
(1) Implement a system that ensures that they answer an incoming 
emergency call before other non-emergency calls (i.e., prioritize 
emergency calls and move them to the top of the queue); (2) request, at 
the beginning of every emergency call, the caller's name and location 
information (in time, this requirement will be superseded by the 
Registered Location process, discussed herein); (3) deliver to the 
PSAP, designated statewide default answering point, or appropriate 
local emergency authority, at the outset of the outbound leg of the 
call, at a minimum, the name of the relay user and location of the 
emergency, as well as the name of the relay provider, the CA's callback 
number, and the CA's identification number, thereby enabling the PSAP, 
designated statewide default answering point, or appropriate local 
emergency authority to re-establish contact with the CA in the event 
the call is disconnected; and (4) in the event one or both legs of the 
call are disconnected (i.e., either the call between the TRS user and 
the CA, or the outbound voice telephone call between the CA and the 
PSAP, designated statewide default answering point, or appropriate 
local emergency authority), immediately re-establish contact with the 
TRS user and/or the appropriate PSAP, designated statewide default 
answering point, or appropriate local emergency authority and resume 
handling the call, when feasible. The Commission recognizes that, in 
some instances, the CA may not be able to call back a TRS customer 
using one of the Internet-based forms of TRS because the CA will not 
know the current IP address of the relay customer. The Commission urges 
Internet-based TRS providers to give their customers the option of 
providing an alternative method of re-establishing contact with the 
caller to facilitate a callback in the event that an emergency call is 
disconnected. The Commission also notes that, in this context, 
providers are expressly permitted to contact consumers directly, 
notwithstanding any prohibitions regarding contacts with consumers as 
described in other Commission orders. See, e.g., Telecommunications 
Relay Services and Speech-to-Speech Services for Individuals with 
Hearing and Speech Disabilities, CG Docket No. 03-123, Report and Order 
and Declaratory Ruling, FCC 07-186, paragraph 95 (November 19, 2007), 
published at 73 FR 3197, January 17, 2008 (placing restrictions on use 
of consumer or call database information to contact TRS users).
    10. Based on the record in this proceeding, which reflects that 
some providers have already implemented some of these measures, the 
Commission believes it is reasonable for all providers to comply with 
these requirements by the effective date announced here. The Commission 
affirms that providers' costs of compliance with FCC 08-78 are 
compensable from the Interstate TRS Fund as part of providing TRS 
service in compliance with the mandatory minimum standards. The 
Commission reminds providers, however, that costs are not recoverable 
for meeting waived mandatory minimum standards. See, e.g., 
Telecommunications Relay Services and Speech-to-Speech Services for 
Individuals With Hearing and Speech Disabilities, CG Docket No. 03-123, 
Order on Reconsideration, 21 FCC Rcd 8050, 8057, paragraph 15 (July 12, 
2006) (2006 TRS Order on Reconsideration), published at 71 FR 47141, 
August 16, 2006. The Commission amends its rules to reflect these new 
requirements.
    11. In the event that a relay caller is incapacitated or is 
otherwise unable or unwilling to provide their name and location, the 
provider should use best efforts to obtain it, including providing to 
an appropriate PSAP, designated statewide answering point, or 
appropriate local emergency authority, any location information that a 
customer may have on file with the provider in connection with his or 
her ``customer profile.'' The Commission notes that some (but not all) 
TRS consumers file customer profiles

[[Page 21255]]

detailing the customer's preferences with respect to particular aspects 
of a provider's relay service (e.g., designating a preference regarding 
the gender of the CA who relays the customer's TRS calls). To the 
extent that the customer profile includes location information, this 
information may assist a CA in identifying an appropriate PSAP, 
designated statewide answering point, or appropriate local emergency 
authority. (The Commission emphasizes that a provider must use best 
efforts to handle an emergency call and place the outbound leg of such 
a call, even if the calling party refuses to provide his or her 
identity.) Further, on an interim basis, the requirement to deliver 
emergency calls permits VRS, IP Relay, and IP CTS providers to route 
911 calls to PSAPs' ten-digit administrative lines. Upon the effective 
date of the forthcoming Registered Location requirement discussed 
herein, however, all Internet-based TRS calls must be routed through 
the Wireline E911 Network. See VoIP 911 Order, 20 FCC Rcd at 10270 
paragraph 42 and note 142 (requiring interconnected VoIP providers to 
transmit 911 calls to the appropriate PSAP via the Wireline E911 
Network).
    12. The Commission recognizes that there are different ways by 
which providers may ensure that emergency calls receive priority 
handling and are not put in a queue with all incoming calls to wait for 
an available CA to handle the call. Some providers note, for example, 
that they would use a separate IP access address dedicated for 
emergency calls only. The Commission does not mandate a specific means 
by which providers must give priority to, and answer, emergency calls, 
so long as such calls are handled in accordance with the requirements 
set forth above.
    13. The Commission's Consumer & Governmental Affairs Bureau has 
previously advised TRS providers of their obligation to handle incoming 
calls in the order in which they are received. See FCC Clarifies that 
Certain TRS Marketing and Call Handling Practices are Improper, CC 
Docket No. 98-67, CG Docket No. 03-123, Public Notice, DA 05-141 
(released January 26, 2005), at 3, published at 70 FR 8034, February 
17, 2005. The Bureau issued this advisory in response to complaints 
that certain TRS providers were selectively handling non-emergency 
calls placed by preferred customers ahead of non-emergency calls placed 
by other, non-preferred customers. In that context, the Bureau 
determined that the selective handling of incoming calls was improper 
and inconsistent with the notion of functional equivalency. The 
Commission clarifies here that the obligation to handle incoming calls 
in the order in which they are received applies to non-emergency calls 
only and that, under the call handling rules the Commission adopts, 
providers are under an affirmative obligation to ensure that emergency 
calls receive priority handling. Because of the importance of emergency 
call handling, the Commission expects that providers will ensure 
adequate staffing of emergency call handling processes so that CAs are 
not required to disconnect non-emergency calls in order to process 
emergency calls.
    14. Based on the record before us, it appears that some Internet-
based TRS providers presently accept and handle emergency calls made 
via VRS or IP Relay by asking the caller for location and other 
essential information necessary to identify, and make the outbound call 
to, an appropriate PSAP. In this regard, several VRS providers assert 
that as long as the providers obtain the location information from the 
calling party, they can route the call to an appropriate PSAP based 
upon PSAP databases that are commercially available.
    15. In conjunction with the requirement that a CA request, at the 
beginning of an emergency call, the name and location information of 
the relay user placing the call, the Commission permits a CA to 
memorialize the caller's name and location information in writing for 
the purposes of communicating this information to an appropriate PSAP, 
designated statewide default answering point, or appropriate local 
emergency authority, and facilitating access to emergency services. The 
Commission also permits a CA to retain such information after the call, 
where necessary to facilitate the dispatch of emergency services or for 
other emergency (e.g., where a relay caller becomes incapacitated while 
placing a relay call) or law enforcement purposes. The Commission notes 
that section 225(d)(1)(F) of the Act and Sec.  64.604(a)(2) of the 
Commission's TRS rules generally prohibit a CA from keeping records of 
the ``content'' of a relay conversation beyond the duration of a call. 
See 47 U.S.C. 225(d)(1)(F) of the Act (instructing the Commission to 
prescribe regulations prohibiting relay operators from keeping records 
of the content of any conversation beyond the duration of the call); 47 
CFR 64.604(a)(2)(i) of the Commission's rules (prohibiting relay 
operators from keeping records of the content of any conversation 
beyond the duration of the call). With respect to these provisions, the 
Commission concludes that the ``content'' of a relayed conversation 
reasonably does not include basic identifying information, such as the 
name and present location of an emergency TRS caller. Consistent with 
this interpretation, the Commission permits a CA to memorialize in 
writing, and retain records pertaining to, the name and location of a 
consumer who places an emergency call via an Internet-based TRS 
provider. The Commission reminds providers, however, that even this 
information may be made available only to emergency call handlers, and 
emergency response or law enforcement personnel solely for the purpose 
of ascertaining a customer's location in an emergency situation or for 
other emergency or law enforcement purposes.
    16. Finally, the Commission notes that at least two Internet-based 
TRS providers have requested that the Commission exempt these providers 
from liability resulting from their handling of emergency TRS calls to 
the same extent Congress has insulated wireline and wireless carriers 
from liability in connection with those carriers' handling of emergency 
911 and E911 calls. As the Commission stated in the interconnected VoIP 
context, before it would consider taking any action to preempt 
liability under state law, the Commission would need to demonstrate 
that limiting liability is ``essential to achieving the goals of the 
Act.'' To its knowledge, no commenter contends here that such action is 
``essential'' to achieving the goals of the Act. Nor has any commenter 
identified a source of authority for providing liability protection to 
Internet-based TRS providers. For the reasons the Commission denied 
requests to limit the liability of interconnected VoIP providers in the 
VoIP 911 Order, the Commission similarly declines to limit the 
liability of Internet-based TRS providers in connection with their 
handling of emergency TRS calls. VoIP 911 Order, 20 FCC Rcd at 10275, 
paragraph 54 (noting that Congress had enacted no liability protection 
for interconnected VoIP providers, the Commission declined to adopt 
such protections and would not consider doing so unless such action 
were deemed to be ``essential to achieving the goals of the Act''). 
Although Congress has provided limited liability protections to local 
exchange carriers and wireless carriers, it has not done so for 
Internet-based TRS providers. See Wireless Communications and Public 
Safety Act of 1999, Public Law 106-81, 113 Stat. 1286 (1999) (911 Act); 
47

[[Page 21256]]

U.S.C. 615a; 911 Act section 4 (providing wireless carriers same degree 
of liability protection relating to 911 service as local exchange 
carriers). The Commission notes that in the VoIP 911 Order, the 
Commission advised interconnected VoIP providers seeking to protect 
themselves from liability for negligence to do so through ``their 
customer contracts and through their agreements with PSAPs, as some 
interconnected VoIP providers have done.'' Nothing in FCC 08-78 
prevents Internet-based TRS providers from taking similar actions. In 
particular, nothing the Commission does here would prevent a TRS 
provider from incorporating into their consumer notification or future 
registration processes described herein, the same protections that 
interconnected VoIP providers typically include in their subscription 
agreements with consumers.
    17. As noted above, the Commission is adopting these requirements 
to help facilitate access to emergency services for consumers of 
Internet-based relay services, pending the adoption of a longer term 
solution. These requirements will become effective May 21, 2008, and 
the Commission extends the present VRS and IP Relay emergency call 
handling waivers, previously scheduled to expire after December 31, 
2007, such that those waivers, along with the IP CTS emergency call 
handling waiver, will remain in effect until May 21, 2008.

B. Transition to Additional E911 Capabilities for Internet-Based Forms 
of TRS

    18. The Commission believes that the use of a Registered Location 
process, similar to that adopted in the VoIP 911 Order, constitutes an 
additional critical component of an E911 solution for Internet-based 
TRS providers, so that a CA may promptly determine an appropriate PSAP, 
designated statewide default answering point, or appropriate local 
emergency authority to call to respond to the emergency. Accordingly, 
as the Commission requires of all interconnected VoIP providers, the 
Commission will require in a forthcoming order that all Internet-based 
TRS providers obtain or have access to consumer location information 
for the purposes of emergency calling requirements.
    19. As the Commission has stated previously, the goal of its E911 
rules is to provide meaningful location information to first 
responders, regardless of the technology or platform employed. See, 
e.g., 2007 Wireless E911 NPRM, 22 FCC Rcd at 10609, paragraph 6. Public 
safety officials need to receive accurate and timely information 
concerning the current location of an individual who places an 
emergency call, notwithstanding the platform or technology used by the 
provider or the means by which the individual places the call. The 
Commission believes that user registration is critical to achieving the 
goal of providing location identification to first responders in the 
context of emergency calls placed over Internet-based TRS. As noted 
above, providers' costs of compliance with FCC 08-78 are compensable 
from the Interstate TRS Fund as part of providing TRS service in 
compliance with the mandatory minimum standards, but costs associated 
with meeting waived mandatory minimum standards are not recoverable 
from the fund. Accordingly, the registration process the Commission 
outlines today, in large part, will be guided by the manner in which 
interconnected VoIP providers obtain location information of 
interconnected VoIP users pursuant to the Commission's VoIP 911 Order. 
However, the Commission recognizes, as some commenters have noted, that 
there are differences between interconnected VoIP services and 
Internet-based TRS that must be addressed in adopting a registration 
process for Internet-based TRS users. For example, while interconnected 
VoIP subscribers receive a ten-digit telephone number in conjunction 
with the service, Internet-based TRS users currently do not. 
Accordingly, the Commission will adopt a ten-digit numbering plan in a 
future Commission order that ties numbering to the registration process 
and renders relay providers' situation more analogous to that of 
interconnected VoIP providers.
    20. The Commission plans to move forward on adopting a ten-digit 
numbering plan in an expeditious manner. Specifically, simultaneously 
with the Commission's release of FCC 08-78, the Commission's Consumer & 
Governmental Affairs Bureau is releasing a public notice seeking to 
refresh the record on relay service numbering issues. See 2008 
Numbering PN. The Commission plans to hold a stakeholder workshop 
immediately following the release of these items. The Commission 
commits to completing a final order on a ten-digit numbering plan in 
the second quarter of this year. In order to provide stakeholders 
sufficient time to implement these rules, the Commission will require 
that the ten-digit numbering plan be implemented no later than December 
31, 2008.
    21. Consumer Notification Requirement. VRS providers currently are 
required to include ``a clear and bold written statement on their web 
site and promotional materials explaining the shortcomings and 
potential dangers of using VRS to place an emergency call'' so that 
those making a 911 call over TRS facilities understand the implications 
of making such a call, particularly in the context of the Commission's 
encouragement to TRS users to access emergency services directly. In 
the VoIP 911 Order, the Commission required interconnected VoIP service 
providers to ``specifically advise every subscriber, both new and 
existing, prominently and in plain language, [of] the circumstances 
under which E911 service may not be available.'' VoIP 911 Order, 20 FCC 
Rcd at 10272, paragraph 48. The Commission also required interconnected 
VoIP providers to ``obtain and keep a record of affirmative 
acknowledgement by every subscriber, both new and existing, of having 
received and understood this advisory'' and to distribute labels 
``warning subscribers if E911 service may be limited or not available 
and instructing the subscriber to place them on and/or near the CPE 
used in conjunction with the interconnected VoIP service.'' In light of 
these requirements for interconnected VoIP providers, the Commission's 
VRS/IP Relay 911 NPRM sought comment on whether the Commission's 
current consumer notification requirements for Internet-based TRS 
providers should be revised, for example, to require that providers 
specifically advise new and existing subscribers of the circumstances 
under which E911 service may not be available through Internet-based 
forms of TRS or may be in some way limited by comparison to traditional 
E911 service. VRS/IP Relay 911 NPRM, 20 FCC Rcd at 19486, paragraph 22. 
The Commission also sought comment on whether Internet-based TRS 
providers should be required to provide appropriate warning labels for 
installation on CPE used in connection with Internet-based relay 
services or to obtain and keep a record of affirmative acknowledgement 
by every subscriber of having received and understood this advisory.
    22. Consistent with the VoIP 911 Order, the Commission requires 
each Internet-based TRS provider, if not already doing so, to include 
an advisory on its Web site and in any promotional materials directed 
to consumers, prominently and in plain language, explaining the 
circumstances under which emergency calls made via Internet-based TRS 
may be in some way

[[Page 21257]]

limited by comparison to traditional E911 service. The Commission 
believes it is important to caution consumers of the limitations of 
using the Internet-based forms of TRS to make emergency calls in the 
event that a caller does place an emergency call via an Internet-based 
relay service. In addition, the Commission may address additional 
consumer notification requirements in a forthcoming order, consistent 
with the consumer notification requirements adopted in the VoIP 911 
Order, as appropriate.
    23. Enhanced 911 Service. In the VoIP 911 Order, the Commission 
required interconnected VoIP providers to transmit all E911 calls to 
the appropriate PSAP, designated statewide answering point, or 
appropriate local emergency authority via the Wireline E911 Network, 
and prohibited the use of so-called ten-digit ``administrative 
numbers.'' See VoIP 911 Order, 20 FCC Rcd at 10266-69, paragraphs 37-41 
(requiring interconnected VoIP providers to transmit all E911 calls via 
the Wireline E911 Network). The Commission defined ``Wireline E911 
Network'' as a ``dedicated wireline network that (1) is interconnected 
with but largely separate from the public switched telephone network, 
(2) includes a selective router, and (3) is utilized to route emergency 
calls and related information to PSAPs, designated statewide default 
answering points, appropriate local emergency authorities or other 
emergency answering points.'' 47 CFR 9.3 of the Commission's rules 
(defining Wireline E911 Network). In a typical implementation, the 
Wireline E911 Network includes the Selective Router, which receives 911 
calls from competitive and incumbent LEC central offices over dedicated 
trunks. The Selective Router, after querying an incumbent LEC-
maintained Selective Router Database (SRDB) to determine which PSAP 
serves the caller's geographic area, forwards the calls to the PSAP 
that has been designated to serve the caller's area, along with the 
caller's phone number (ANI). The PSAP then forwards the caller's ANI to 
an incumbent LEC maintained Automatic Location Information database 
(ALI Database), which returns the caller's physical address (that has 
previously been verified by comparison to a separate database known as 
the Master Street Address Guide (MSAG)). The Wireline E911 Network thus 
consists of: the Selective Router; the trunk line(s) between the 
Selective Router and the PSAP; the ALI Database; the SRDB; the trunk 
line(s) between the ALI database and the PSAP; and the MSAG. VoIP 911 
Order, 20 FCC Rcd at 10252, paragraph 15 (citations omitted). The 
Commission required that all interconnected VoIP calls be routed 
through the dedicated Wireline E911 Network based on evidence in the 
record that use of ten-digit administrative numbers for routing E911 
calls is not in the public interest to the extent that these numbers 
are not as reliable or consistently staffed as Wireline E911 Network 
call centers.
    24. Consistent with the VoIP 911 Order, the Commission expects that 
a forthcoming order will require that, upon the effective date of the 
forthcoming Registered Location requirement, an Internet-based TRS 
provider must transmit all 911 calls via the dedicated Wireline E911 
Network, and the Registered Location must be available from or through 
the ALI Database. By requiring that all 911 calls be routed via the 
dedicated Wireline E911 Network, Internet-based TRS service providers 
would provide E911 service in those areas where Selective Routers are 
utilized and they would provide such call back and location information 
as a PSAP, designated statewide default answering point, or appropriate 
local emergency authority is capable of receiving and utilizing. The 
Commission expects that providers will be able to use much of the same 
infrastructure and technology that is already in place for the delivery 
of 911 calls by interconnected VoIP service providers.

Conclusion

    25. Because of the importance of emergency call handling for all 
Americans, in FCC 08-78, the Commission adopts interim emergency call 
handling requirements for Internet-based TRS providers. These measures 
will ensure that persons using Internet-based forms of TRS can promptly 
access emergency services pending the development of a technological 
solution that will permit Internet-based TRS providers to automatically 
determine the geographic location of the consumer and place the 
outbound leg of an emergency call to an appropriate PSAP, designated 
statewide default answering point, or appropriate local emergency 
authority. These actions reinforce the Commission's longstanding and 
continuing commitment to make available a nationwide communications 
system that promotes the safety and welfare of all Americans, including 
individuals with hearing and speech disabilities.

Final Regulatory Flexibility Certification

    26. The Regulatory Flexibility Act of 1980, as amended (RFA), 
requires that a regulatory flexibility analysis be prepared for 
rulemaking proceedings, unless the agency certifies that ``the rule 
will not, if promulgated, have a significant economic impact on a 
substantial number of small entities.'' 5 U.S.C. 605(b). The RFA 
generally defines ``small entity'' as having the same meaning as the 
terms ``small business,'' ``small organization,'' and ``small 
governmental jurisdiction.'' 5 U.S.C. 601(6). In addition, the term 
``small business'' has the same meaning as the term ``small business 
concern'' under the Small Business Act. 5 U.S.C. 601(3) (incorporating 
by reference the definition of ``small business concern'' in Small 
Business Act, 15 U.S.C. 632). Pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 601(3), the 
statutory definition of a small business applies ``unless an agency, 
after consultation with the Office of Advocacy of the Small Business 
Administration and after opportunity for public comment, establishes 
one or more definitions of such term which are appropriate to the 
activities of the agency. A small business concern is one which: (1) Is 
independently owned and operated; (2) is not dominant in its field of 
operation; and (3) satisfies any additional criteria established by the 
Small Business Administration (SBA). Small Business Act, 15 U.S.C. 632.
    27. FCC 08-78 adopts emergency call handling requirements for 
Internet-based TRS providers. These measures will ensure that persons 
using Internet-based TRS services can promptly access emergency 
services. The Commission requires VRS, IP Relay, and IP CTS providers 
to accept and handle emergency calls and to access, either directly or 
via a third party, a commercially available database that will allow 
the provider to determine an appropriate PSAP, designated statewide 
default answering point, or appropriate local emergency authority that 
corresponds to the caller's location, and to relay the call to that 
entity. Further, FCC 08-78 requires that providers: (1) Implement a 
system that ensures that providers answer an incoming emergency call 
before other non-emergency calls; (2) request, at the beginning of 
every emergency call, the caller's name and location information; (3) 
deliver to the PSAP, designated statewide default answering point, or 
appropriate local emergency authority, at the outset of the outbound 
leg of the call, at a minimum, the name of the relay user and location 
of the

[[Page 21258]]

emergency, as well as the name of the relay provider, the CA's callback 
number, and the CA's identification number, thereby enabling the PSAP, 
designated statewide default answering point, or appropriate local 
emergency authority to re-establish contact with the CA in the event 
the call is disconnected; and (4) in the event one or both legs of the 
call are disconnected, immediately re-establish contact with the TRS 
user and/or the appropriate PSAP, designated statewide default 
answering point, or appropriate local emergency authority and resume 
handling the call, when feasible. Finally, FCC 08-78 requires each 
Internet-based TRS provider to include an advisory on its web site and 
in any promotional materials directed to consumers, prominently and in 
plain language, explaining the circumstances under which emergency 
calls made via Internet-based TRS may be in some way limited by 
comparison to traditional E911 service.
    28. To the extent that all Internet-based TRS providers, including 
small entities, will be eligible to receive compensation from the 
Interstate TRS Fund for their reasonable costs of complying with these 
emergency call handling and consumer notification requirements, the 
Commission finds that these requirements will not have a significant 
economic impact on a substantial number of small entities. The 
Commission also believes it is reasonable for Internet-based TRS 
providers to comply with these requirements by May 21, 2008 because 
based on the record in this proceeding, some providers have already 
implemented some of these measures. For instance, several providers 
assert that as long as the providers obtain location information from 
the calling party, they can route an emergency call to an appropriate 
PSAP based upon PSAP databases that are commercially available. The 
Commission infers that, if such voluntary steps had been unduly 
economically burdensome for small entities, such entities would not 
have undertaken them voluntarily. For all of these reasons, the 
Commission concludes that these measures will not have a significant 
economic impact on a substantial number of small businesses.
    29. With regard to whether a substantial number of small entities 
may be affected by the requirements adopted in FCC 08-78, the 
Commission notes that, of the 11 providers affected by FCC 08-78, only 
three meet the definition of a small entity. The SBA has developed a 
small business size standard for Wired Telecommunications Carriers, 
which consist of all such firms having 1,500 or fewer employees. 13 CFR 
121.201, NAICS code 517110. According to Census Bureau data for 1997, 
there were 2,225 firms in this category which operated for the entire 
year. U.S. Census Bureau, 1997 Economic Census, Subject Series: 
Information, ``Establishment and Firm Size (Including Legal Form of 
Organization),'' Table 5, NAICS code 513310 (issued October 2000). Of 
this total, 2,201 firms had employment of 999 or fewer employees, and 
an additional 24 firms had employment of 1,000 employees or more. Thus, 
under this size standard, the majority of firms can be considered 
small. (The census data do not provide a more precise estimate of the 
number of firms that have employment of 1,500 or fewer employees; the 
largest category provided is ``Firms with 1,000 employees or more.'') 
Currently, eleven providers receive compensation from the Interstate 
TRS Fund for providing VRS, IP Relay and IP CTS: AT&T Corp.; 
Communication Access Center for the Deaf and Hard of Hearing, Inc.; 
GoAmerica; Hamilton Relay, Inc.; Hands On; Healinc; Nordia Inc.; Snap 
Telecommunications, Inc; Sorenson; Sprint; and Verizon. Because only 
three of the providers affected by FCC 08-78 are deemed to be small 
entities under the SBA's small business size standard, the Commission 
concludes that the number of small entities affected by its decision in 
FCC 08-78 is not substantial. Moreover, given that all affected 
providers, including the three that are deemed to be small entities 
under the SBA's standard, will be entitled to receive prompt 
reimbursement for their reasonable costs of compliance, the Commission 
concludes that FCC 08-78 will not have a significant economic impact on 
these small entities.
    30. Therefore, for all of the reasons stated above, the Commission 
certifies that the requirements of FCC 08-78 will not have a 
significant economic impact on any small entities.
    31. The Commission will send a copy of FCC 08-78, including a copy 
of this Final Regulatory Flexibility Certification, in a report to 
Congress pursuant to the Congressional Review Act. In addition, FCC 08-
78 and this final certification will be sent to the Chief Counsel for 
Advocacy of the SBA.

Congressional Review Act

    The Commission will send a copy of FCC 08-78 in a report to be sent 
to Congress and the Government Accountability Office pursuant to the 
Congressional Review Act, see 5 U.S.C. 801(a)(1)(A).

Ordering Clauses

    Pursuant to sections 1, 2, and 225 of the Communications Act of 
1934, as amended, 47 U.S.C. 151, 152, and 225, FCC 08-78 is adopted.
    Pursuant to sections 1, 2, and 225 of the Communications Act of 
1934, as amended, 47 U.S.C. 151, 152, and 225, part 64 of the 
Commission's rules, 47 CFR part 64 is amended.
    FCC 08-78 shall become effective May 21, 2008. The waivers of the 
emergency call handling requirement for VRS and IP Relay providers are 
extended until the effective date of FCC 08-78, and, along with the 
waiver for IP CTS providers, shall terminate on May 21, 2008.
    The Commission's Consumer & Governmental Affairs Bureau, Reference 
Information Center, shall send a copy of FCC 08-78, including the Final 
Regulatory Flexibility Certification, to the Chief Counsel for Advocacy 
of the Small Business Administration.

List of Subjects in 47 CFR Part 64

    Individuals with disabilities, Telecommunications.

Federal Communications Commission.
Marlene H. Dortch,
Secretary.

Rule Changes

0
For the reasons discussed in the preamble, the Federal Communications 
Commission amends 47 CFR part 64 as follows:

PART 64--MISCELLANEOUS RULES RELATING TO COMMON CARRIERS

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

    Authority: 47 U.S.C. 154, 254 (k); secs. 403 (b)(2)(B), (c), 
Pub. L. 104-104, 110 Stat. 56. Interpret or apply 47 U.S.C. 201, 
218, 222, 225, 226, 228, and 254(k) unless otherwise noted.


Sec. Sec.  64.603 and 64.604  [Amended]

0
2. Remove the internal cross-references to ``Sec.  64.605'' and add in 
its place ``Sec.  64.606'' in the following locations:
0
(a) 64.603(a)
0
(b) 64.603(b)
0
(c) 64.604(c)(5)(ii)
0
(d) 64.604(c)(5)(iii)(F)(1)
0
(e) 64.604(c)(5)(iii)(F)(4)
0
(f) 64.604(c)(6)(i)
0
(g) 64.604(c)(6)(iii)(B)

0
3. Section 64.604 is amended by revising paragraph (a)(4) to read as 
follows:


Sec.  64.604  Mandatory Minimum Standards.

* * * * *

[[Page 21259]]

    (a) * * *
    (4) Emergency call handling requirements for TTY-based TRS 
providers. TTY-based TRS providers must use a system for incoming 
emergency calls that, at a minimum, automatically and immediately 
transfers the caller to an appropriate Public Safety Answering Point 
(PSAP). An appropriate PSAP is either a PSAP that the caller would have 
reached if he had dialed 911 directly, or a PSAP that is capable of 
enabling the dispatch of emergency services to the caller in an 
expeditious manner.
* * * * *


Sec. Sec.  64.605 through 64.608  [Redesignated as Sec. Sec.  64.606 
through 64.609]

0
4. Sections 64.605, 64.606, 64.607, and 64.608 are re-designated as 
Sec. Sec.  64.606, 64.607, 64.608, and 64.609, and a new Sec. Sec.  
64.605 is added as follows:


Sec.  64.605  Additional Operational Standards Applicable to Internet-
Based TRS Providers.

    Each VRS, IP Relay, and IP CTS provider must accept and handle 
emergency calls and access, either directly or via a third party, a 
commercially available database that will allow the provider to 
determine an appropriate PSAP, designated statewide default answering 
point, or appropriate local emergency authority that corresponds to the 
caller's location, and to relay the call to that entity. The terms 
PSAP, statewide default answering point, and appropriate local 
emergency authority are defined in Sec.  9.3 of this chapter. Each VRS, 
IP Relay, and IP CTS provider also is required to:
    (a) Implement a system that ensures that the provider answers an 
incoming emergency call before other non-emergency calls (i.e., 
prioritize emergency calls and move them to the top of the queue);
    (b) Request, at the beginning of each emergency call, the caller's 
name and location information;
    (c) Deliver to the PSAP, designated statewide default answering 
point, or appropriate local emergency authority, at the outset of the 
outbound leg of an emergency call, at a minimum, the name of the relay 
user and location of the emergency, as well as the name of the relay 
provider, the CA's callback number, and the CA's identification number, 
thereby enabling the PSAP, designated statewide default answering 
point, or appropriate local emergency authority to re-establish contact 
with the CA in the event the call is disconnected; and
    (d) In the event one or both legs of an emergency call are 
disconnected (i.e., either the call between the TRS user and the CA, or 
the outbound voice telephone call between the CA and the PSAP, 
designated statewide default answering point, or appropriate local 
emergency authority), immediately re-establish contact with the TRS 
user and/or the appropriate PSAP, designated statewide default 
answering point, or appropriate local emergency authority and resume 
handling the call, when feasible;
    (e) Ensure that information obtained as a result of this section is 
limited to that needed to facilitate 911 services, is made available 
only to emergency call handlers and emergency response or law 
enforcement personnel, and is used for the sole purpose of ascertaining 
a customer's location in an emergency situation or for other emergency 
or law enforcement purposes.
* * * * *


Sec.  64.609  [Amended]

0
5. In the text of the newly re-designated Sec.  64.609, remove the 
internal cross-reference to ``Sec.  Sec.  64.606 and 64.607'' and add 
in its place ``Sec.  Sec.  64.607 and 64.608.''

[FR Doc. E8-8597 Filed 4-18-08; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6712-01-P