Implementation of the Twenty-First Century Communications and Video Accessibility Act of 2010, Section 105, Relay Services for Deaf-Blind Individuals, 4838-4847 [2011-1405]

Agencies

• FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION

[Federal Register Volume 76, Number 18 (Thursday, January 27, 2011)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 4838-4847]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2011-1405]


=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION

47 CFR Part 64

[CG Docket No. 10-210; FCC 11-3]


Implementation of the Twenty-First Century Communications and 
Video Accessibility Act of 2010, Section 105, Relay Services for Deaf-
Blind Individuals

AGENCY: Federal Communications Commission.

ACTION: Proposed rule.

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

SUMMARY: In this document, the Commission proposes rules for a pilot 
program to distribute funds for the National Deaf-Blind Equipment 
Distribution Program (NDBEDP) established by Congress in the Twenty-
First Century Communications and Video Accessibility Act of 2010 
(CVAA). The law directs the Commission to establish rules within six 
months of enactment of the new statute that define as eligible for 
relay service support those programs approved by the Commission for the 
distribution of specialized customer premises equipment (specialized 
CPE) to people who are deaf-blind. The goal of this NDBEDP is to make 
telecommunications service, Internet access service, and advanced 
communications, including interexchange services and advanced 
telecommunications and information services, accessible by low income 
individuals who are deaf-blind.

DATES: Comments are due on or before February 4, 2011. Reply comments 
are due on or before February 14, 2011. Written comments on the 
proposed information collection requirements, subject to the Paperwork 
Reduction Act (PRA) of 1995, Public Law 104-13, should be submitted on 
or before March 28, 2011.

ADDRESSES: You may submit comments, identified by [CG Docket No. 10-
210], 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) https://fjallfoss.fcc.gov/ecfs2/ or the Federal 
eRulemaking Portal: https://www.regulations.gov. Filers should follow 
the instructions provided on the Web site for submitting comments and 
transmit one electronic copy of the filing to each docket number 
referenced in the caption, which in this case is CG Docket No. 10-210. 
For ECFS filers, in completing the transmittal screen, filers should 
include their full name, U.S. Postal Service mailing address, and the 
applicable docket number.
     Parties may also submit an electronic comment by Internet 
e-mail. To get filing instructions, filers should send an e-mail to 
ecfs@fcc.gov, and include the following words in the body of the 
message, ``get form .'' A sample form and 
directions will be sent in response.
     Paper Filers: Parties who choose to file by paper must 
file an original and four copies of each filing. In addition, parties 
must send one copy to the Commission's duplicating contractor, Best 
Copy and Printing, Inc., 445 12th Street, SW., Washington, DC 20554, or 
via e-mail to fcc@bcpiweb.com. 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.
     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. All hand 
deliveries must be held together with rubber bands or fasteners.
     Envelopes must be disposed of before entering the 
building. The filing hours are 8 a.m. to 7 p.m.
     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-

[[Page 4839]]

class, Express, and Priority mail must be addressed to 445 12th Street, 
SW., Washington, DC 20554.
    In addition, document FCC 10-210 contains proposed information 
collection requirements subject to the PRA. It will be submitted to the 
Office of Management and Budget (OMB) for review under section 3507 of 
the PRA. OMB, the general public, and other Federal agencies are 
invited to comment on the proposed information collection requirements 
contained in this document. PRA comments should be submitted to Cathy 
Williams, Federal Communications Commission via e-mail at PRA@fcc.gov 
and Cathy.Williams@fcc.gov and Nicholas A. Fraser, Office of Management 
and Budget via fax at 202-395-5167 or via e-mail to Nicholas_A._Fraser@omb.eop.gov.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Diane Mason, Consumer and Governmental 
Affairs Bureau, Disability Rights Office, at (202) 418-7126 or e-mail 
Diane.Mason@fcc.gov.
    For additional information concerning the PRA information 
collection requirements contained in this document, contact Cathy 
Williams, Federal Communications Commission, at (202) 418-2918, or via 
e-mail Cathy.Williams@fcc.gov.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This is a summary of the Commission's 
Implementation of the Twenty-first Century Communications and Video 
Accessibility Act of 2010, Section 105, Relay Services for Deaf-Blind 
Individuals, Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (NPRM), document FCC 11-3, 
adopted and released on January 14, 2011, in CG Docket No. 10-210.
    The full text of document FCC 11-3 and copies of any subsequently 
filed documents in this matter 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. They may also be purchased from the 
Commission's duplicating contractor, Best Copy and Printing, Inc., 
Portals II, 445 12th Street, SW., Room CY-B402, Washington, DC 20554, 
telephone: (800) 378-3160, fax: (202) 488-5563, or Internet: https://www.bcpiweb.com. Document FCC 11-3 can also be downloaded in Word or 
Portable Document Format (PDF) at https://www.fcc.gov/cgb/policy. 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). To view a copy of this 
information collection request (ICR) submitted to OMB: (1) Go to the 
Web page https://www.reginfo.gov/public/do/PRAMain, (2) look for the 
section of the Web page called ``Currently Under Review,'' (3) click on 
the downward-pointing arrow in the ``Select Agency'' box below the 
``Currently Under Review'' heading, (4) select ``Federal Communications 
Commission'' from the list of agencies presented in the ``Select 
Agency'' box, (5) click the ``Submit'' button to the right of the 
``Select Agency'' box, (6) when the list of FCC ICRs currently under 
review appears, look for the Title of this ICR and then click on the 
ICR Reference Number. A copy of the FCC submission to OMB will be 
displayed. Pursuant to 47 CFR 1.1200 et. seq., this matter shall be 
treated as a ``permit-but-disclose'' proceeding in accordance with the 
Commission's ex parte rules. Persons making oral ex parte presentations 
are reminded that memoranda summarizing the presentations must contain 
summaries of the substances of the presentations and not merely a 
listing of the subjects discussed. More than a one or two sentence 
description of the views and arguments presented is generally required. 
Other rules pertaining to oral and written ex parte presentations in 
permit-but-disclose proceedings are set forth in 47 CFR 1.1206(b).

Initial Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 Analysis

    The Commission, as part of its continuing effort to reduce 
paperwork burdens, invites the general public and OMB to comment on the 
proposed information collection requirements contained in this 
document, as required by the PRA. Public and agency comments are due 
March 28, 2011. Comments should address: (a) Whether the proposed 
collection of information is necessary for the proper performance of 
the functions of the Commission, including whether the information 
shall have practical utility; (b) the accuracy of the Commission's 
burden estimates; (c) ways to enhance the quality, utility, and clarity 
of the information collected; (d) ways to minimize the burden of the 
collection of information on the respondents, including the use of 
automated collection techniques or other forms of information 
technology; and (e) ways to further reduce the information collection 
burden on small business concerns with fewer than 25 employees. In 
addition, pursuant to the Small Business Paperwork Relief Act of 2002, 
Public Law 107-198, see 44 U.S.C. 3506(c)(4), the Commission seeks 
specific comment on how it may ``further reduce the information 
collection burden for small business concerns with fewer than 25 
employees.''
    OMB Control Number: 3060-XXXX.
    Title: Implementation of the Twenty-first Century Communications 
and Video Accessibility Act of 2010, section 105, Relay Services for 
Deaf-Blind Individuals, CG Docket No. 10-210.
    Form No.: N/A.
    Type of Review: New collection.
    Respondents: Individuals or households; Businesses or other for-
profit entities; Not-for-profit Institutions; Federal government; 
State, local or Tribal governments.
    Number of Respondents and Responses: 106 respondents and 583 
responses.
    Estimated Time per Response: 15 to 120 hours.
    Frequency of Response: Annual, on occasion, one-time, monthly, and 
semi-annually reporting requirements; Record keeping requirement; Third 
party disclosure requirement.
    Obligation to Respond: Required to obtain or retain benefits. The 
statutory authority for these proposed information collections is found 
at sections 1, 4, 225, 303(r), and 619 of the Communications Act of 
1934, as amended (Act), 47 U.S.C. 151, 154, 225, 303(r), and 619 of the 
Communications Act of 1934, as amended.
    Total Annual Burden: 22,472 hours.
    Total Annual Costs: None.
    Nature and Extent of Confidentiality: Confidentiality is an issue 
to the extent that individuals and households provide personally 
identifiable information, which is covered under the FCC's system of 
records notice (SORN), FCC/CGB-1, ``Informal Complaints and 
Inquiries.'' As required by the Privacy Act, 5 U.S.C. 552a, the 
Commission also published a SORN, FCC/CGB-1 ``Informal Complaints and 
Inquiries'', in the Federal Register on December 15, 2009 (74 FR 66356) 
which became effective on January 25, 2010.
    Privacy Act Impact Assessment: Yes. The Privacy Impact Assessment 
(PIA) was completed on June 28, 2007. It may be reviewed at: https://www.fcc.gov/omd/privacyact/Privacy_Impact_Assessment.html. The 
Commission is in the process of updating the PIA to incorporate various 
revisions made to the SORN.
    Needs and Uses: In document FCC 11-3, the Commission proposes rules 
that would provide State equipment distribution programs (EDPs) and 
potentially qualifying public or private entities the opportunity to 
apply for Commission certification in order to be eligible to operate 
an equipment

[[Page 4840]]

distribution program under the NDBEDP. The proposed rules would also 
require program recipients of funding under the NDBEDP to submit the 
proposed data to the Fund Administrator every six months necessary to 
ensure that the Fund is being used for the purpose intended by 
Congress. Further, the proposed rules would require program recipients 
of funding under the NDBEDP to submit data and report on: (1) 
Administrative expenses incurred in participating in this program; (2) 
complaints received on the equipment and appeals on eligibility; and 
(3) other consumer related disputes. Finally, the proposed rules would 
require program recipients to retain electronic records of the proposed 
data at a reasonable period of time necessary for administrative review 
and audits.

Synopsis

    1. In document FCC 11-3, the Commission proposes rules to implement 
section 105 of the Twenty-First Century Communications and Video 
Accessibility Act of 2010 (CVAA), Public Law 111-260. The CVAA 
authorizes the FCC to allocate $10 million annually from the interstate 
relay fund (TRS Fund) for the NDBEDP. The need for an effective 
equipment distribution program for communications access for people who 
are deaf-blind has been well documented. While many States already 
distribute some specialized communications equipment to people with 
disabilities through their own State equipment distribution programs 
(EDPs), many, if not most, have been unable to afford the extremely 
high costs associated with communications equipment needed by people 
who are deaf-blind.
    Comments received in response to the Public Notice that initiated 
this proceeding provide further evidence of the need for this program. 
See Consumer And Governmental Affairs Bureau Seeks Comment On 
Implementation Of Requirement To Define Programs For Distribution Of 
Specialized Customer Premises Equipment Used By Individuals Who Are 
Deaf-Blind, Public Notice, document DA 10-2112, released November 3, 
2010 in CG docket number 10-210 (NDBEDP PN).
    2. People who are deaf-blind may have varying levels of residual 
sight and hearing. While some may be born with significant levels of 
hearing and vision loss, others lose their sight and hearing gradually 
throughout their lifespan; and for some, deafness and blindness are 
experienced as a result of an illness, injury, or aging. These varying 
levels of disability, together with the geographically diverse nature 
of this population, present novel challenges for the Commission in its 
efforts to develop a nationwide equipment distribution program that 
effectively meets the communication needs of these individuals. The 
establishment of permanent rules for this program must be informed by 
both data and experience.
    3. For this reason, the Commission proposes to implement an 
eighteen-month pilot program of the NDBEDP, with interim regulations. 
The Commission believes it is prudent to engage in such a trial program 
because the experiences gained and data gathered will provide us with a 
more complete and practical understanding of how to ensure the best use 
of the funds available under this program for the intended population. 
The Commission further proposes that it reserve the option to extend 
the pilot program for up to an additional six months, for a total of 
two years if the Commission determines that such additional time is 
needed for this assessment.
    4. The proposed pilot program relies heavily on currently operating 
State EDPs, and turns to alternative local distribution efforts only 
where State entities are not available to participate in this national 
program. During this trial period, the Commission will be gathering 
extensive data to build a foundation for the development of permanent 
rules for the NDBEDP, which will be adopted through a future rulemaking 
proceeding.

Equipment Distribution Programs

    5. The Commission has reviewed the benefits and disadvantages of 
utilizing the State equipment distribution programs (EDPs) and believes 
that on balance, the use of these programs for a pilot program would be 
appropriate, with certain safeguards to protect against State program 
eligibility criteria that are not consistent with the CVAA. 
Specifically, if a State has an established EDP that is willing to 
participate in this program and is approved by the Commission, the 
Commission proposes that such program become the sole authorized entity 
for the State to receive compensation from the TRS Fund for the 
distribution of equipment to that State's deaf-blind residents. For 
States that do not have an EDP or that have an EDP that is not approved 
to participate in this program, the Commission proposes allowing other 
programs (e.g., vocational rehabilitation programs, assistive 
technology programs, or schools for the deaf, blind or deaf-blind) or 
private entities (e.g., independent living centers, organizational 
affiliates, or private schools) to apply to the Commission for 
certification to distribute this specialized CPE in the State. The 
Commission further proposes that the factors to be considered in 
determining whether to grant certification of a local program--as well 
as in selecting among multiple applicants--include the extent to which 
each applicant has:
     Expertise in the field of deaf-blindness, including a 
strong familiarity with the communications needs of this population;
     Adequate staffing and facilities to administer the 
program;
     Experience with the distribution of specialized CPE, 
especially to people who are deaf-blind;
     The ability to install specialized CPE covered under the 
program and train users on how to use that equipment;
     The ability to effectively communicate with people who are 
deaf-blind (for training and other purposes), including the ability to 
communicate in sign language, provide materials in Braille, and use 
other assistive technologies and methods to achieve effective 
communication; and
     The ability to distribute equipment and related services 
to eligible individuals throughout the State (including to remote 
areas), either directly or in coordination with other local programs.
    6. The Commission seeks comment on this approach as well as on 
other criteria it should add to this list. The Commission proposes to 
provide notice to the public of which States will participate in the 
NDBEDP pilot program via their State EDP, after which the Commission 
proposes to commence the process of accepting and reviewing 
applications from other eligible entities (for States in which a State 
EDP has either not applied or has not been deemed eligible to 
participate in the NDBEDP). The Commission further seeks comment on the 
length of time such certification should be granted at the conclusion 
of this pilot program if it continues utilizing this certification 
process. In addition, the Commission seeks comment on a proposal to 
permit coordinated State ventures, so long as a single entity--either 
the State's EDP or the certified entity discussed above--assumes full 
oversight and responsibility for all equipment distributed within its 
State under the NDBEDP and becomes the sole entity authorized to 
receive compensation from the TRS Fund.

[[Page 4841]]

Consumer Eligibility

(1) Definition of Individuals Who Are Deaf-Blind

    7. The CVAA defines as eligible for the receipt of specialized CPE 
low income persons who meet the definition of ``individuals who are 
deaf-blind'' contained in the Helen Keller National Center Act (HKNC 
Act). See Pub. L. 111-260, Section 105, citing the Rehabilitation Act 
Amendments of 1992 (29 U.S.C. 1905(2)). The HKNC Act defines such 
individuals as persons:
    (1) Who have a central visual acuity of 20/200 or less in the 
better eye with corrective lenses, or a field defect such that the 
peripheral diameter of visual field subtends an angular distance no 
greater than 20 degrees, or a progressive visual loss having a 
prognosis leading to one or both these conditions; (2) who have a 
chronic hearing impairment so severe that most speech cannot be 
understood with optimum amplification, or a progressive hearing loss 
having a prognosis leading to this condition; and (3) for whom the 
combination of impairments described in clauses (i) and (ii) cause 
extreme difficulty in attaining independence in daily life activities, 
achieving psychosocial adjustment, or obtaining a vocation.
    8. The NDBEDP PN noted that under the HKNC Act, where individuals 
``cannot be measured accurately for hearing and vision loss because of 
cognitive and/or behavioral constraints, they may still be considered 
deaf-blind if, though functional, they are considered either by 
themselves or others to be both deaf and blind.'' NDBEDP PN at 2.
    9. Commenters largely proposed a flexible interpretation of this 
definition that would allow determinations of eligibility for equipment 
to turn on an individual's functional abilities. While the Commission 
is bound by statute to use the definition of individuals who are deaf-
blind in the HKNC Act, the Commission believes it would be appropriate 
to direct State programs that are authorized to distribute equipment 
under the NDBEDP to apply this definition in accordance with the 
underlying intent of the CVAA To this end, the Commission proposes that 
when applying the second prong of this definition, which requires a 
chronic hearing impairment so severe that most speech cannot be 
understood with optimum amplification, local distribution programs take 
into consideration the settings in which the deaf-blind applicant is 
likely to establish communication with others. Similarly, the 
Commission proposes that the third prong of the HKNC Act definition, 
which focuses on the difficulties that an individual with a combination 
of vision and hearing losses has in attaining independence in daily 
life activities, apply to the ability of such individual to use the 
communication services covered by section 105. The Commission seeks 
comment on this approach.

(2) Verification of Disability

    10. While the Commission believes that some verification of a 
person's disability is necessary to prevent fraud and abuse, given the 
physical limitations of persons covered under this program, the 
Commission understands the need to permit verification of one's 
disability in a non-burdensome manner. Accordingly, the Commission 
seeks comment on its tentative conclusion that individuals claiming 
eligibility under the NDBEDP should be permitted to obtain verification 
from any practicing professional who has direct knowledge of the 
individual's disability. Such professionals would include, but not be 
limited to, a vocational rehabilitation counselor, audiologist, speech 
pathologist, educator, hearing instrument specialist, or physician. Any 
of these professionals must be able to attest to the applicant's 
physical disability (as defined above), and in doing so, may include 
information about the inability of such individual to use traditional 
or emerging communications equipment as a result of his or her hearing 
and vision loss. The Commission seeks comment on the content of the 
attestations of such professionals. The commission proposes that the 
professional provide his or her name, title, and contact information, 
including address, phone number and e-mail address in the 
certification. The Commission also seeks comment on whether such 
professionals should be required to certify to the best of their 
knowledge that the individual's disability satisfies our eligibility 
requirements. Alternatively, should the Commission require such 
certifications be made under penalty of perjury?

(3) Income Eligibility

    11. The CVAA limits eligibility in the NDBEDP to individuals who 
have low incomes. In the NDBEDP PN, the Commission sought comment on 
the appropriateness of applying to the NDBEDP the definition of 
``qualifying low-income consumer'' that is used by the Lifeline and 
Link up universal service programs.
    12. The Commission is concerned about achieving consistency across 
the States, and unnecessarily complicating the equipment application 
process by requiring individual evaluations of personal expenses. At 
the same time, the Commission recognizes the extraordinarily high costs 
of the specialized equipment covered under this program (which 
virtually all commenters agree range from $5,000 to $10,000 per 
person), as well as he unusually high medical and related costs 
associated with being both deaf and blind. In order to effectively take 
these costs into consideration, the Commission seeks comment on its 
proposal to adopt an income threshold, to be applied nationwide, that 
is 400% of the Federal Poverty Guidelines (FPG). Alternatively, the 
Commission seeks comment on whether States that already have EDPs with 
income thresholds should be permitted to use their own low income 
criteria for distributing equipment under the NDBEDP during the pilot 
program. For States that do not have an EDP with an income threshold, 
the Commission seeks comment on a proposal that would allow such 
programs to use the proposed Federal default income threshold.
    13. The Commission seeks comment on its proposal that individuals 
already enrolled in certain low income programs automatically be deemed 
eligible to receive equipment as long as the income threshold for 
eligibility in those programs does not exceed the threshold the 
Commission establishes for participation in this program. Where 
individuals are not already enrolled in any such programs, the 
Commission seeks proposals for a method of verification that is not 
unduly burdensome.

(4) Other Eligibility Requirements and Considerations

    14. The Commission seeks comment on other eligibility requirements, 
unrelated to disability or income, that might be appropriate for the 
NDBEDP, such as access to telecommunications or Internet service. The 
Commission has tentatively proposed not to make employment status an 
eligibility requirement.

Covered Equipment and Related Services

(1) Scope of Specialized CPE

    15. Section 105 of the CVAA authorizes the distribution of 
specialized CPE needed to make telecommunications services, Internet 
access service or advanced communications accessible to people who are 
deaf-blind. Given the varied nature of both the deaf-blind population

[[Page 4842]]

and breadth of communication technologies that can meet the individual 
and unique needs of these individuals, the Commission seeks comment on 
a proposal that certified NDBEDP programs be given the discretion to 
determine the specific equipment needed by individual consumers during 
the NDBEDP's pilot period.
    16. The Commission seeks comment on the extent to which certain 
mainstream equipment should be considered ``specialized customer 
premises equipment'' under the statute and should be covered. The 
Commission also seeks comment on the extent to which funding caps 
should be imposed on the amount of money available for the purchase of 
equipment--whether mainstream or adaptive--for each individual who is 
eligible to receive equipment under the NDBEDP, what the appropriate 
funding caps should be, and the period of time to which such cap should 
apply.
    17. Finally, seeking to balance the limited funding in this program 
with advances in technology, the Commission seeks comment on its 
proposal that individuals be permitted to obtain new equipment every 
five years and new software on an as needed basis.

(2) Research and Development

    18. One of the purposes of the NDBEDP is to ensure that as 21st 
century communications technologies continue to be developed for the 
general public, people who are deaf-blind are not left behind. Yet the 
record in this proceeding suggests that even current communications 
technologies may not be meeting the needs of the full spectrum of 
people who are deaf-blind. However, at this stage of the NDBEDP, 
without a better grasp of the specific gaps in current technologies 
used by the deaf-blind community, and without a fuller understanding of 
what the costs of closing those gaps are likely to be, the Commission 
is concerned that it would be premature to set aside significant funds 
for research and development (R&D) efforts.
    19. Accordingly, the Commission tentatively proposes not to 
allocate funding at this time for R&D. However, the Commission seeks 
further comment on the extent to which there is a basis for concluding 
that R&D is necessary to ensure an effective distribution program 
because solutions do not exist to meet the needs of certain individuals 
who make up the deaf-blind population.
    20. With respect to conducting inquiries on the equipment needs and 
preferences of the deaf-blind community, the Commission does not 
propose setting aside funding for market research at this time. Rather, 
it is the Commission's expectation that it will be able to collect much 
of the information that such research would gather through the various 
reporting requirements that it proposes below. To the extent that the 
reporting obligations are not adequate for this purpose, the Commission 
proposes reconsidering the need for specific market research in the 
context of a future rulemaking proceeding on this program. The 
Commission seeks comment on this approach, and solicits as well input 
on ways to encourage and facilitate innovations on a long-term basis, 
to fully address the communications access needs of the deaf-blind 
population.

(3) Individualized Assessment of Communication Needs

    21. The Commission recognizes a definite need for qualified 
assistive technology specialists, familiar with both the manner in 
which deaf-blind people communicate and the range of specialized 
equipment available, to conduct such assessments to ensure that the 
equipment given out effectively meets each recipient's unique 
communications needs. The Commission seeks comment on its proposal that 
the State EDPs or certified NDBEDP programs (where there is no State 
EDP) be given the discretion to determine the need for such assessments 
on a case-by-case basis, and to select the appropriate personnel within 
their programs to carry out this responsibility. The Commission also 
seeks comment on its proposal that the costs for such assessments be 
reimbursable as necessary to facilitate the efficient and effective 
distribution of equipment for use by people who are deaf-blind.

(4) Installation and Training

    22. Given the highly specialized nature of the equipment to be 
distributed under this program, and the lack of communications 
experience by its future participants, the Commission proposes that 
funding be available for the installation of equipment and 
individualized training of end users associated with equipment 
distributed under the NDBEDP. The Commission seeks comment on how such 
training can best be achieved, given the scarcity of experienced 
trainers, especially in remote and rural areas. The Commission also 
seeks comment on the extent to which equipment and software 
manufacturers whose equipment is purchased for the program should 
provide training or contribute to the costs of providing training for 
their products.

(5) Maintenance, Repairs and Warranties

    23. Given the past practices of State EDPs to include the costs of 
maintenance and repairs within their local distribution programs, the 
Commission tentatively concludes that such expenses should be 
compensable under the NDBEDP where these are not incurred as a result 
of negligence or misuse on the part of the consumer or distribution 
program, and seeks comment on this approach. In addition, the 
Commission seeks comment on the appropriateness of loaning equipment 
and whether participants in the NDBEDP should have a means of allowing 
consumers to return equipment that they no longer need so that it can 
be re-furbished and re-distributed to other individual program 
participants on an as needed basis.

Outreach and Education About the NDBEDP

    24. The Commission seeks comment on the level and types of outreach 
that will be needed to enable the NDBEDP to fulfill Congress's 
objective of bringing communication technologies to the deaf-blind 
community. It is the Commission's expectation that States will have 
their own incentives to conduct the outreach necessary to get this 
equipment into the hands of their deaf-blind citizens so they can 
spend, rather than forfeit, the money allotted to them in any given 
year. However, because not all States have EDPs, and because some 
States may not act on this incentive, the Commission seeks comment on 
whether to set aside a portion of the $10 million for a contract that 
would be awarded to a national organization to conduct outreach.

Funding

    25. In addition to seeking comment on its authority to set aside 
specific funding portions, the Commission seeks input on suggested 
amounts for each of their allocations, with a goal of not unduly 
limiting the amount of money left for the principal purpose of the 
program, equipment distribution. The Commission tentatively proposes a 
funding allocation that is proportional to the population at large of 
each State and seeks comments on this approach. The Commission proposes 
to require that all costs incurred through participation in the NDBEDP 
pilot program be reasonable, and seeks comment on whether caps should 
be placed on the administrative functions related to participation in 
this program,

[[Page 4843]]

and if such caps should vary based on factors such as State deaf-blind 
population numbers.
    26. Distribution of funding can occur in one of two ways: By 
advance distribution of one-time allocations to eligible programs or 
via a reimbursement mechanism that pays for equipment already 
distributed (up to each State's allotment). The Commission tentatively 
concludes that the latter approach would provide greater 
accountability, as well as provide the incentives needed for local 
distribution programs to actively locate and provide equipment to their 
deaf-blind communities. The Commission seeks comment on this approach, 
which would periodically reimburse authorized distribution programs for 
equipment distributed in their States up to the allocable ceiling for 
that State, and asks at what intervals such payments should be made. 
The Commission further seeks comment on a proposal to require that any 
money allocated to a State that is not spent in any given year be 
returned to the TRS Fund, to be re-distributed to all of the States 
during subsequent funding years. This approach would ensure that the 
failure of any program to fulfill its commitment to distribute devices 
would not penalize people who are deaf-blind because unused funds would 
continue to be available in future years for their communication needs. 
Nevertheless, section 105 of the CVAA limits the total amount of 
support that the Commission may provide to this program for any fiscal 
year to $10 million. In light of this statutory restriction, the 
Commission seeks comment on whether it has the discretion to carry over 
unused allotments to subsequent years.

Oversight and Reporting

    27. Data on the distributed equipment and related services in the 
NDBEPD pilot program will provide the Commission with much needed 
information about the technology needs and preferences of the deaf-
blind community, along with how local distribution programs are able to 
meet those needs. To this end, the Commission proposes to require that 
State EDPs and certified program recipients in States without EDPs 
submit data every six months until the completion of the pilot program 
on the following:
     For each piece of equipment distributed, its name, serial 
number, brand and function (e.g., amplifier, Braille embosser), its 
cost, the type of service with which it is used (e.g., telephone, 
Internet), and the type of relay service it can access (e.g., TRS, 
video relay, etc.);
     For each piece of equipment distributed, the identity and 
contact information for the consumer receiving that equipment;
     For each piece of equipment distributed, the identity and 
contact information for the individual attesting to the disability of 
the individual who is deaf-blind;
     The cost, time and any other resources allocated to 
assessing an individual's equipment need;
     The cost, time and any other resources allocated to 
installing equipment and training deaf-blind participants on using 
equipment;
     The cost, time and any other resources allocated to repair 
and maintenance of equipment;
     The cost, time and any other resources allocated to 
outreach activities related to the NDBEDP;
     The cost, time and any other resources allocated to 
upgrading the distributed equipment during the pilot program, along 
with the nature of such upgrades (e.g., software upgrade; replacement 
part); and
     Any research and development performed.
    28. The Commission seeks comment on its proposal for the collection 
of the above information, and solicit recommendations on any additional 
data it should require local distribution programs to submit. For 
example, should these semi-annual reports also contain proposed best 
practices for each of the obligations noted above, including which 
equipment is most effective in terms of usability and reliability for 
deaf-blind participants? Should programs be required to report on the 
administrative expenses incurred in participating in this program? 
Should programs be required to report complaints received on the 
equipment and appeals on eligibility, as well as other consumer related 
disputes? The Commission also seeks comment on how long programs should 
be required to retain electronic records with the above information, as 
well as what specified period of time--for example, 5 years--is 
appropriate for the retention of these records.
    29. The Commission proposes that certified distribution programs be 
subject to regular audits by an independent entity to prevent fraud, 
waste and abuse, and asks what would be an appropriate interval of time 
for such audits to be conducted. Additionally, the Commission 
tentatively concludes that equipment distribution programs covered 
under the NDBEDP not be permitted to accept any type of financial 
arrangement from equipment vendors that could incentivize the purchase 
of particular equipment. Such arrangements could run counter to the 
program's purpose, which is to provide equipment that meets each 
individual's unique needs.
    30. Finally, the Commission tentatively proposes that program 
administrators who submit any data to the Commission certify such data 
to be true and accurate under penalty of perjury.

Logistics and Division of Responsibilities

    31. The Commission proposes to delegate authority to the Consumer 
and Governmental Affairs Bureau to designate a NDBEDP Program 
Administrator. This individual would work in collaboration with the TRS 
Fund Administrator, and be responsible for:
     Identifying, verifying and contacting current State EDPs 
to notify them of their eligibility for program participation.
     Reviewing program applications and certifying local 
programs to administer the distribution of equipment in each of the 
States.
     Serving as the Commission point of contact and overseeing 
all of the certified distribution programs.
     Overseeing any national training programs.
     Reviewing and evaluating State data for best practices.
     Working with Commission staff to adopt permanent rules for 
the NDBEDP.
    32. The Commission further proposes that the Fund Administrator (as 
directed by the NDBEDP Program Administrator) have responsibility for:
     Reviewing cost submissions and releasing funds for 
equipment purchases and authorized associated services.
     Releasing funds for a nationwide training program.
     Releasing funds for a nationwide outreach effort.
     Releasing funds for other purposes, as directed by the 
Commission.
     Collecting data as needed for delivery to the NDBEDP 
Program Administrator.

Other Considerations

    33. Advisory Body. Because of the specialized nature of this 
program, the Commission seeks comment on the need for a newly created 
advisory body that could work with the NDBEDP Program Administrator and 
Fund Administrator to evaluate consumer experiences with the program, 
assess the program's benefits, explore new technologies, and consider 
changes to the program's

[[Page 4844]]

features. Alternatively, the Commission seeks comment on whether this 
advisory function can be satisfactorily accomplished by charging one of 
the following existing advisory bodies to monitor the operations and 
effectiveness of the NDBEDP: the FCC's Consumer Advisory Committee, 
whose purpose is to make recommendations to the Commission regarding 
consumer issues or the Interstate TRS Fund Advisory Council, whose 
purpose is to monitor TRS cost recovery matters.
    34. Central Repository. The Commission seeks comments on use of a 
future clearinghouse for the purpose of a central repository, including 
ways in which the NDBEDP and clearinghouse could work together to 
inform the deaf-blind public about the local equipment distribution 
programs available to them.
    35. Whistleblower Provision. The Commission recognizes that the 
NDBEDP involves the use and management of funds which may, like any 
funding program, be susceptible to waste, abuse and fraud. As part of 
the Commission's obligation to ensure that this fund is being used for 
its targeted consumers, it proposes to adopt a specific whistleblower 
protection rule for the employees of State and local programs 
authorized to distribute equipment under the NDBEDP.
    36. NDBEDP as a Supplemental Funding Source. When it is 
established, the NDBEDP will be one of several governmental programs 
that either authorize or direct the distribution of specialized CPE to 
the deaf-blind community. The Commission proposes that where existing 
Federal or State programs already direct or fund equipment distribution 
for the deaf-blind community, or are required to provide equipment to 
certain eligible deaf-blind persons, the NDBEDP work along side these 
programs, to serve as a supplement to, rather than as a replacement 
for, their distribution efforts. In this manner, the Commission will be 
able to maximize the availability of these funds for those who are 
unable to qualify for such other programs. The Commission seeks comment 
on this proposal. In addition, the Commission seeks comment on the need 
for safeguards to ensure that individuals seeking equipment under the 
NDBEDP do not ``double dip'' into multiple equipment distribution 
programs for the same devices. For example, as part of the application 
process, should the Commission require that individual applicants be 
required to certify that they have not otherwise received the same 
equipment from other Federal and State program sources? Given that many 
people who are deaf-blind may require multiple devices to achieve the 
communications accessibility intended by Congress under the CVAA, how 
should the Commission define such ``double dipping?'' Finally, given 
the Commission's overall goal to distribute end-user equipment under 
this program to individuals who have not been able to otherwise receive 
such equipment, should the Commission adopt a rule that disqualifies 
from participation, during this pilot program, those individuals who 
are eligible under or have already received equipment from these other 
equipment distribution programs? The Commission seeks comment on 
whether such an approach during our pilot program would assist in 
reaching portions of this population that have never been served by any 
equipment distribution source.

Initial Regulatory Flexibility Analysis

    37. The Regulatory Flexibility Act of 1980, as amended (RFA), see 5 
U.S.C. 603 (b), requires that an initial regulatory flexibility 
analysis be prepared for notice-and-comment 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.'' The RFA generally defines the term ``small entity'' as 
having the same meaning as the terms ``small business,'' ``small 
organization,'' and ``small governmental jurisdiction.'' In addition, 
the term ``small business'' has the same meaning as the term ``small 
business concern'' under the Small Business Act. A ``small business 
concern'' is one that: (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), 15 U.S.C. 632.
    38. In document FCC 11-3, the Commission seeks comment on its 
proposal to implement section 105 of The Twenty-First Century 
Communications and Video Accessibility Act of 2010 (Communications 
Accessibility Act or CVAA), signed into law by President Obama on 
October 8, 2010, that requires the Commission to take various measures 
to ensure that people with disabilities have access to emerging 
communications technologies in the 21st Century. Section 105 of this 
law directs the Commission to establish rules within six months of 
enactment of the new statute that define as eligible for relay service 
support those programs approved by the Commission for the distribution 
of specialized customer premises equipment (specialized CPE) to people 
who are deaf-blind. The goal of this NDBEDP is to make equipment used 
with telecommunications service, Internet access service, and advanced 
communications, including interexchange services and advanced 
telecommunications and information services, accessible by low income 
individuals who are deaf-blind. This item proposes rules to create an 
effective and efficient process governing the distribution of 
specialized CPE to enhance and promote access to telecommunications and 
related communications services by low-income individuals who are deaf-
blind.
    39. Specifically, the Commission seeks comment on a proposed 
definition of individuals who are deaf-blind for purposes of 
eligibility in the NDBEDP, proposed criteria for verifying a person's 
disability, proposed income criteria, and other eligibility 
considerations. In addition, the Commission seeks comment on the scope 
of specialized CPE covered under this program; and whether any portion 
of the funding should be allocated to research and development, 
individualized assessment of communication needs, installation and 
training, maintenance, warranties, repairs, outreach, or education. The 
Commission seeks comment on the appropriate allocation of funding, and 
on a proposal for specific reporting requirements to be imposed on 
recipients of NDBEDP funding. The Commission also seeks comment on the 
logistics of administering the program. Finally, the Commission seeks 
comment on several other considerations including the establishment of: 
an advisory body to provide input on the program; a central repository 
of information; whistleblower protections for individuals who provide 
information on fraud, waste and abuse; and a vehicle for the NDBEDP to 
be used as a supplemental funding source to other Federal programs.
    40. The Commission proposes to require that recipients of NDBEDP 
funding seeking to distribute specialized CPE and receive compensation 
for the distribution of such equipment under the NDBEDP pilot program 
first receive certification from the Commission. The Commission 
proposes the following factors to be considered in determining whether 
to grant certification: (i) Expertise in the field of deaf-blindness, 
including a strong familiarity with the communications needs of this 
population; (ii) adequate staffing and facilities to administer the 
program; (iii) experience with the distribution of specialized CPE, 
especially to people who are deaf-blind; (iv) the ability to install 
specialized CPE covered under the program and to train users on how

[[Page 4845]]

to use that equipment; (v) the ability to effectively communicate with 
people who are deaf-blind (for training and other purposes), including 
the ability to communicate in sign language, provide materials in 
Braille, and use other assistive technologies and methods to achieve 
effective communication; and (vi) the ability to distribute equipment 
and related services to eligible individuals throughout the state 
(including to remote areas), either directly or in coordination with 
other local programs.
    41. In addition, the Commission proposes to require that each 
program certified under the NDBEDP pilot program must: (1) Distribute 
specialized customer premises equipment needed to make 
telecommunications service, Internet access service, and advanced 
communications, including interexchange services and advanced 
telecommunications and information services, accessible to individuals 
who are deaf-blind; (2) verify that each individual applying to the 
NDBEDP pilot program for equipment meets the definition of an 
individual who is deaf-blind contained at Sec.  64.610(b) of the 
Commission's rules; and (3) verify that each individual applying to the 
NDBEDP pilot program for equipment meets the income eligibility 
requirements established by the Commission. The Commission proposes to 
allow each program certified under the NDBEDP pilot program to: (1) Use 
a portion of the funds received under the NDBEDP pilot program for 
individual needs assessments; (2) use a portion of the funds received 
under the NDBEDP pilot program for installation of equipment and 
consumer training; and (3) use a portion of the funds received under 
the NDBEDP pilot program for maintenance, repairs, and warranties on 
equipment distributed to consumers.
    42. Finally, the Commission proposes to require each program 
certified under the NDBEDP pilot program to submit data every six 
months until the completion of the pilot program on the following: (1) 
For each piece of equipment distributed, its name, serial number, brand 
and function, its cost, the type of service with which it is used, and 
the type of relay service it can access; (2) for each piece of 
equipment distributed, the identity and contact information for the 
consumer receiving that equipment; (3) for each piece of equipment 
distributed, the identity and contact information for the individual 
attesting to the disability of the individual who is deaf-blind; (4) 
the cost, time and any other resources allocated to assessing an 
individual's equipment needs; (5) the cost, time and any other 
resources allocated to installing equipment and training deaf-blind 
participants on using equipment; (6) the cost, time and any other 
resources allocated to repair and maintenance of equipment; (7) the 
cost, time and any other resources allocated to outreach activities 
related to the NDBEDP; and (8) the cost, time, and any other allocation 
related to upgrading the distributed equipment during the pilot 
program, along with the nature of such upgrades.
    43. With regard to whether a substantial number of small entities 
may be economically impacted by the requirements proposed in document 
FCC 11-3 the Commission notes that, a substantial number of small 
entities will be likely be affected; however, the economic impact on 
such entities will be de minimis. Most participating entities are 
likely meet the definition of a small entity as a ``small 
organization,'' or a ``small governmental jurisdiction.'' Our proposed 
action, if implemented, may, over time, affect small entities that are 
not easily categorized at present. The Commission therefore describe 
here, at the outset, three comprehensive, statutory small entity size 
standards. First, nationwide, there are a total of approximately 27.2 
million small businesses, according to the SBA. In addition, a ``small 
organization'' is generally ``any not-for-profit enterprise which is 
independently owned and operated and is not dominant in its field.'' 
Nationwide, as of 2002, there were approximately 1.6 million small 
organizations. Finally, the term ``small governmental jurisdiction'' is 
defined generally as ``governments of cities, towns, townships, 
villages, school districts, or special districts, with a population of 
less than fifty thousand.'' Census Bureau data for 2002 indicate that 
there were 87,525 local governmental jurisdictions in the United 
States. The Commission estimates that, of this total, 84,377 entities 
were ``small governmental jurisdictions.'' Thus, the Commission 
estimates that most governmental jurisdictions are small. In addition, 
it is possible that some entities that fall under the category of 
``advanced communications services'' may be participants in the NDBEDP 
pilot program. Section 101 of Title I of the Act, defines ``advanced 
communications services'' to mean (A) interconnected VoIP service; (B) 
non-interconnected VoIP service; (C) electronic messaging service; and 
(D) interoperable video conferencing service. See Pub. L. 111-260, 
101(1) (amending Section 3 of the Communications Act). While the 
Commission's rules already define interconnected VoIP service, the Act 
provides new definitions for non-interconnected VoIP service, 
``electronic messaging service'' and ``interoperable video conferencing 
service.''
    44. While the Congressional mandate has led us to list the above 
entities as the ones that in all reasonable likelihood will function as 
EDPs, there exists the possibility that our list herein of entities 
that will foreseeably function as EDPs may not be complete and/or may 
subsequently include entities not listed above. This includes entities 
which may not fit into traditional categories currently under the 
Commission's jurisdiction. However, as noted above, section 105 of the 
CVAA gives the Commission broad authority to establish rules that 
define as eligible for relay service support those programs approved by 
the Commission for the distribution of specialized customer premises 
equipment (specialized CPE) to people who are deaf-blind.
    45. In addition, given that all providers potentially affected by 
the proposed rules, including those deemed to be small entities under 
the SBA's standard, would be entitled to receive prompt reimbursement 
for their reasonable costs of participation and compliance, the 
Commission concludes that document FCC 11-3, if adopted, will not have 
a significant economic impact on these small entities.
    46. Therefore, the Commission certifies that the proposals in 
document FCC 11-3, if adopted, will not have a significant economic 
impact on a substantial number of small entities.
    47. The Commission will send a copy of document FCC 11-3, including 
a copy of this Initial Regulatory Flexibility Certification, to the 
Chief Counsel for Advocacy of the SBA.

Ordering Clauses

    Pursuant to the authority contained in sections 1, 4(i), and 4(j) 
of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended, 47 U.S.C. 151, 154(i), 
154(j), and The Twenty-First Century Communications and Video 
Accessibility Act of 2010, Pub. L. No. 111-260, that document FCC 11-3 
is adopted.
    The Commission's Consumer and Governmental Affairs Bureau, 
Reference Information Center, shall send a copy of document FCC 11-3, 
including the Initial Regulatory Flexibility Analysis, to the Chief 
Counsel for Advocacy of the Small Business Administration.

[[Page 4846]]

List of Subjects in 47 CFR Part 64

    Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Telecommunications, 
Telephone.

Federal Communications Commission.
Marlene H. Dortch,
Secretary.

Proposed Rules

    For the reasons discussed in the preamble, the Federal 
Communications Commission proposes to amend 47 CFR part 64 as follows:

PART 64--MISCELLANEOUS RULES RELATING TO COMMON CARRIERS

    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, 254(k), and 619, unless otherwise noted.

Subpart F--Telecomunications Relay Services ABD Related Customer 
Premises Equipment for Persons with Disabilities

    2. The authority citation for subpart F is revised to read as 
follows:

    Authority: 47 U.S.C. 151-154; 225, 255, 303(r), and 619.

    3. Section 64.610 is added to subpart F to read as follows:


Sec.  64.610  Establishment of a National Deaf-Blind Equipment 
Distribution Pilot Program.

    (a) Certification to receive funding from the NDBEDP. All programs 
seeking to distribute specialized customer premises equipment and 
receive compensation for the distribution of such equipment from the 
Interstate TRS Fund, pursuant to the National Deaf-Blind Equipment 
Distribution Pilot Program (NDBEDP pilot), must first receive 
certification from the Commission.
    (1) Any State with an established equipment distribution program 
(EDP), may have such EDP apply for certification as the sole authorized 
entity for the State to receive compensation for the distribution of 
equipment to the deaf-blind residents of that State.
    (2) In States without an EDP, States that have an EDP that chooses 
not to apply for certification or States that have an EDP that is not 
deemed eligible to participate in the NDBEDP by the Commission under 
this section, other public programs, including, but not limited to, 
vocational rehabilitation programs, assistive technology programs, or 
schools for the deaf, blind or deaf-blind; or private entities, 
including but not limited to, organizational affiliates, independent 
living centers, or private educational facilities, may apply to the 
Commission for certification to distribute the specialized CPE covered 
by the NDBEDP.
    (3) The Commission shall review applications and determine whether 
to grant certification based on the following factors:
    (i) Expertise in the field of deaf-blindness, including a strong 
familiarity with the communications needs of this population;
    (ii) Adequate staffing and facilities to administer the program;
    (iii) Experience with the distribution of specialized CPE, 
especially to people who are deaf-blind;
    (iv) The ability to effectively communicate with people who are 
deaf-blind (for training and other purposes), including the ability to 
communicate in sign language, provide materials in Braille, and use 
other assistive technologies and methods to achieve effective 
communication; and
    (v) The ability to distribute equipment and related services to 
eligible individuals throughout the State (including to remote areas), 
either directly or in coordination with other local programs.
    (b) Definition. For purposes of this section, the following 
definitions shall apply:
    (1) Individual who is deaf-blind. Any person: (i) Who has a central 
visual acuity of 20/200 or less in the better eye with corrective 
lenses, or a field defect such that the peripheral diameter of visual 
field subtends an angular distance no greater than 20 degrees, or a 
progressive visual loss having a prognosis leading to one or both these 
conditions;
    (ii) Has a chronic hearing impairment so severe that most speech 
cannot be understood with optimum amplification, or a progressive 
hearing loss having a prognosis leading to this condition; and
    (iii) For whom the combination of impairments described in 
paragraphs (b)(1)(i) and (b)(1)(ii) cause extreme difficulty in 
attaining independence in daily life activities, achieving psychosocial 
adjustment, or obtaining a vocation.
    (2) Individuals claiming eligibility. Individuals claiming 
eligibility under the NDBEDP are permitted to obtain verification from 
any practicing professional who has direct knowledge of the 
individual's disability.
    (i) Such professionals would include, but not be limited to, a 
vocational rehabilitation counselor, audiologist, speech pathologist, 
educator, hearing instrument specialist, or physician.
    (ii) Any of these professionals must be able to attest to the 
applicant's physical disability (as defined above), and, in doing so, 
may include information about the inability of such individual to use 
traditional or emerging communications equipment as a result of his or 
her hearing and vision loss.
    (3) Low-income. 400 percent of the Federal Poverty Guidelines as 
defined at 42 U.S.C. 9902(2) or enrolled in for one of the following 
subsidy programs: Federal Public Housing Assistance (FPHA) or Section 
8; Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP), formerly known as 
Food Stamps; Low Income Home Energy Assistance Program (LIHEAP); 
Medicaid; National School Lunch Program's free lunch program; 
Supplemental Security Income (SSI); or Temporary Assistance for Needy 
Families (TANF).
    (c) Verification of disability. Individuals claiming eligibility 
under the NDBEDP are permitted to obtain verification from any 
practicing professional who has direct knowledge of the individual's 
disability.
    (1) Such professionals would include, but not be limited to, a 
vocational rehabilitation counselor, audiologist, speech pathologist, 
educator, hearing instrument specialist, or physician.
    (2) Any of these professionals must be able to attest to the 
applicant's physical disability, and, in doing so, may include 
information about the inability of such individual to use traditional 
or emerging communications equipment as a result of his or her hearing 
and vision loss.
    (d) Prohibition against requiring employment. No EDP or other 
program authorized to distribute equipment under the NDBEDP may impose 
as a qualification for eligibility in this program the extent to which 
a person who is deaf-blind is employed or actively seeking employment.
    (e) Equipment distribution and related services. Each program 
certified under the NDBEDP pilot program must:
    (1) Distribute specialized customer premises equipment needed to 
make telecommunications service, Internet access service, and advanced 
communications, including interexchange services or advanced 
telecommunications and information services, accessible to individuals 
who are deaf-blind;
    (2) Verify that each individual applying to the NDBEDP pilot 
program for equipment meets the definition of an individual who is 
deaf-blind contained at Sec.  64.610(b); and
    (3) Verify that each individual applying to the NDBEDP pilot 
program

[[Page 4847]]

for equipment meets the income eligibility requirements established by 
the Commission.
    (f) Each program certified under the NDBEDP pilot program may:
    (1) Use a portion of the funds received under the NDBEDP pilot 
program for individual needs assessments;
    (2) Use a portion of the funds received under the NDBEDP pilot 
program for installation of equipment and consumer training; and
    (3) Use a portion of the funds received under the NDBEDP pilot 
program for maintenance, repairs, and warranties on equipment 
distributed to consumers.
    (g) Reporting requirements. Each program certified under the NDBEDP 
pilot program must submit data every six months until the completion of 
the pilot program on the following:
    (1) For each piece of equipment distributed, its name, serial 
number, brand and function, its cost, the type of service with which it 
is used, and the type of relay service it can access;
    (2) For each piece of equipment distributed, the identity and 
contact information for the consumer receiving that equipment;
    (3) For each piece of equipment distributed, the identity and 
contact information for the individual attesting to the disability of 
the individual who is deaf-blind;
    (4) The cost, time and any other resources allocated to assessing 
an individual's equipment needs;
    (5) The cost, time and any other resources allocated to installing 
equipment and training deaf-blind participants on using equipment;
    (6) The cost, time and any other resources allocated to repair and 
maintenance of equipment;
    (7) The cost, time and any other resources allocated to outreach 
activities related to the NDBEDP; and
    (8) The cost, time and any other resources allocated to the need 
for upgrading the distributed equipment during the pilot program, along 
with the nature of such upgrades.
    (h) Administration of the program. The Consumer and Governmental 
Affairs Bureau shall designate the NDBEDP Program Administrator.
    (1) This Commission official will work in collaboration with the 
TRS Fund Administrator, and be responsible for:
    (i) Identifying, verifying and conta