IP CTS Modernization and Reform, 30082-30088 [2018-13753]
Download as PDF
nshattuck on DSK9F9SC42PROD with RULES
30082
Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 124 / Wednesday, June 27, 2018 / Rules and Regulations
Section 3(f) of Executive Order 12866
defines a ‘‘significant regulatory action’’
as an action that is likely to result in a
rule: (1) Having an annual effect on the
economy of $100 million or more in any
1 year, or adversely and materially
affecting a sector of the economy,
productivity, competition, jobs, the
environment, public health or safety, or
State, local or Tribal governments or
communities (also referred to as
‘‘economically significant’’); (2) creating
a serious inconsistency or otherwise
interfering with an action taken or
planned by another agency; (3)
materially altering the budgetary
impacts of entitlement grants, user fees,
or loan programs or the rights and
obligations of recipients thereof; or (4)
raising novel legal or policy issues
arising out of legal mandates, the
President’s priorities, or the principles
set forth in the Executive Order.
A regulatory impact analysis (RIA)
must be prepared for major rules with
economically significant effects ($100
million or more in any 1 year). HHS
submits that this final rule is not
‘‘economically significant’’ as measured
by the $100 million threshold, and
hence not a major rule under the
Congressional Review Act. This rule has
not been designated as a ‘‘significant
regulatory action’’ under Executive
Order 12866. Accordingly, this rule has
not been reviewed by the Office of
Management and Budget (OMB).
Executive Order 13771, titled
‘‘Reducing Regulation and Controlling
Regulatory Costs,’’ was issued on
January 30, 2017. HHS identifies this
final rule as a deregulatory action
(removing an obsolete rule from the
Code of Federal Regulations). For the
purposes of Executive Order 13771, this
final rule is not a substantive rule;
rather it is administrative in nature and
provides no cost savings.
Executive Order 13777, titled
‘‘Enforcing the Regulatory Reform
Agenda,’’ was issued on February 24,
2017. As required by Section 3 of this
Executive Order, HHS established a
Regulatory Reform Task Force (HHS
Task Force). Pursuant to Section 3(d)(ii),
the HHS Task Force evaluated this
rulemaking and determined that these
regulations are ‘‘outdated, unnecessary,
or ineffective.’’ Following this finding,
the HHS Task Force advised the HRSA
Administrator to initiate this
rulemaking to remove the obsolete
regulations from the Code of Federal
Regulations.
Regulatory Flexibility Act
This action will not have a significant
economic impact on a substantial
number of small entities. Therefore, the
VerDate Sep<11>2014
14:30 Jun 26, 2018
Jkt 244001
regulatory flexibility analysis provided
for under the Regulatory Flexibility Act
is not required.
Paperwork Reduction Act
This action does not affect any
information collections.
Dated: June 4, 2018.
George Sigounas,
Administrator, Health Resources and Services
Administration.
Approved: June 21, 2018.
Alex M. Azar II,
Secretary, Department of Health and Human
Services.
List of Subjects in 42 CFR Part 130
Health care, Hemophilia, HIV/AIDS.
PART 130—[REMOVED]
For reasons set out in the preamble,
and under the authority at 5 U.S.C. 301,
HHS amends 42 CFR chapter I by
removing part 130.
■
[FR Doc. 2018–13836 Filed 6–26–18; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4165–15–P
FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS
COMMISSION
47 CFR Part 64
[CG Docket Nos. 13–24 and 03–123; FCC
18–79]
IP CTS Modernization and Reform
Federal Communications
Commission.
ACTION: Final rule and clarification.
AGENCY:
In this document, the
Commission alters the methodology for
setting provider compensation rates for
internet Protocol Captioned Telephone
Service (IP CTS) and establishes interim
compensation rates for Fund Years
2018–19 and 2019–20. The Commission
also adopts rules that address the
provision of volume control on IP CTS
devices, require the accuracy of IP CTS
information disseminated by providers,
and prohibit the provision of service to
ineligible users. Finally, the
Commission declares that speech-to-text
automation, without the participation of
a communications assistant (CA), may
be used to generate IP CTS captions.
DATES:
Effective dates: 47 CFR 64.604(c)(10)
and (c)(13)(i)–(ii) are effective July 27,
2018. The Commission will publish a
document in the Federal Register
announcing the effective date of 47 CFR
64.604(c)(11)(v) and the amendments to
47 CFR 64.604(c)(5)(iii)(D)(1), (6), and
(c)(13)(iii)–(iv) of the Commission’s
SUMMARY:
PO 00000
Frm 00052
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
rules, which contain modified
information collection requirements that
have not yet been approved by the
Office of Management and Budget
(OMB) under the Paperwork Reduction
Act of 1995 (PRA), Public Law 104–13.
The IP CTS compensation rate adopted
for the 2018–19 Fund Year shall be
effective July 1, 2018.
Applicability date: IP CTS providers
must comply with the requirement to
ensure that any volume control or other
amplification feature can be adjusted
separately and independently of the
caption feature on or before December 8,
2018.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Michael Scott, Consumer and
Governmental Affairs Bureau, FCC, at
(202) 418–1264, or email
Michael.Scott@fcc.gov.
This is a
summary of the Commission’s Report
and Order and Declaratory Ruling in CG
Docket Nos. 03–123 and 13–24;
document FCC 18–79, adopted on June
7, 2018 and released on June 8, 2018.
Document FCC 18–79 concerns the
modernization and reform of the
Commission’s rules for IP CTS. The
Commission previously sought
comment on these issues in Misuse of
internet Protocol (IP) Captioned
Telephone Service;
Telecommunications Relay Services and
Speech-to-Speech Services for
Individuals with Hearing and Speech
Difficulties, published at 78 FR 54201,
September 3, 2013 (2013 IP CTS Reform
FNPRM). A Further Notice of Proposed
Rulemaking (Further Notice) and Notice
of Inquiry are contained in document
FCC 18–79 and address additional
issues concerning the funding,
administration, and user eligibility for
this service, as well as performance
goals and metrics to ensure service
quality for users. The Further Notice
and Notice of Inquiry will be published
elsewhere in the Federal Register. The
full text of document FCC 18–79 will be
available for public inspection and
copying via the Commission’s
Electronic Comment Filing System
(ECFS), and during regular business
hours at the FCC Reference Information
Center, Portals II, 445 12th Street SW,
Room CY–A257, Washington, DC 20554.
To request materials in accessible
formats for people with disabilities
(Braille, large print, electronic files,
audio format), send an email to fcc504@
fcc.gov, or call the Consumer and
Governmental Affairs Bureau at (202)
418–0530 (voice), (844) 432–2272
(videophone), or (202) 418–0432 (TTY).
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
E:\FR\FM\27JNR1.SGM
27JNR1
Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 124 / Wednesday, June 27, 2018 / Rules and Regulations
Congressional Review Act
The Commission sent a copy of
document FCC 18–79 to Congress and
the Government Accountability Office
pursuant to the Congressional Review
Act, 5 U.S.C. 801(a)(1)(A).
Final Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995
Analysis
The Report and Order in document
FCC 18–79 contains modified
information collection requirements,
which are not effective until approval is
obtained from OMB. The Commission,
as part of its continuing effort to reduce
paperwork burdens, will invite the
general public to comment on these
information collection requirements as
required by the PRA. The Commission
will publish a separate document in the
Federal Register announcing approval
of the information collection
requirements. Pursuant to the Small
Business Paperwork Relief Act of 2002,
Public Law 107–198, 44 U.S.C.
3506(c)(4), the Commission previously
sought comment on how the
Commission might ‘‘further reduce the
information burden for small business
concerns with fewer than 25
employees.’’ 2013 IP CTS Reform
FNPRM.
nshattuck on DSK9F9SC42PROD with RULES
Synopsis
IP CTS Compensation
1. IP CTS, a form of
telecommunications relay services
(TRS) supported by the Interstate TRS
Fund (TRS Fund), allows individuals
with hearing loss to both read captions
and use their residual hearing to
understand a telephone conversation. IP
CTS providers receive compensation
from the TRS Fund on a per-minute
basis. The compensation rate has been
determined using a methodology known
as the Multistate Average Rate Structure
(MARS) Plan, which calculates the
weighted average per-minute
compensation paid by state TRS
programs to providers of intrastate CTS
for the prior calendar year.
2. The Commission’s mandate in
determining TRS compensation rates is
to ensure that the rates correlate to
actual reasonable costs. MARS is no
longer an effective methodology to
accomplish this. The Commission
therefore terminates use of the MARS
methodology.
3. The per-minute costs currently
reported by IP CTS providers are not
comparable to those for CTS—largely, it
appears, because demand for IP CTS
now greatly exceeds the demand for
CTS. Specifically, from 2011 to 2017,
annual CTS minutes declined from
approximately 40 million to 19.9
VerDate Sep<11>2014
14:30 Jun 26, 2018
Jkt 244001
million, while annual IP CTS minutes
grew from approximately 29 million to
362 million—an amount that is more
than 18 times greater than annual CTS
minutes. Average per-minute expenses
for IP CTS dropped from $2.0581 in
2011 to $1.2326 in 2017, while the
MARS rate increased from $1.7630 to
$1.9467 for the same period. The 2017–
18 MARS rate exceeds the average 2017
IP CTS expenses by approximately 58
percent. This divergence invalidates the
rationale for continuing to use a MARSbased rate to determine IP CTS
compensation.
4. Setting a Rate Closer to Reasonable
IP CTS Costs. The Commission finds it
important to act without delay to bring
provider compensation more in line
with reported provider costs. IP CTS
minutes have increased dramatically
over the last nine years and the
contribution base for the TRS Fund has
been shrinking, requiring interstate and
international telecommunications and
VoIP service providers, and their
subscribers, to contribute an ever-larger
percentage of revenues to support these
services. The Commission is also
concerned that excessive compensation
for IP CTS may increase provider
incentives to recruit and register IP CTS
users, regardless of their actual need for
the service, leading to even greater
potential for waste of TRS Fund dollars.
5. The Commission concludes that the
most recently filed cost and demand
data are sufficiently reliable to serve as
a basis for setting interim IP CTS rates.
As with video relay service (VRS)
compensation rates, a weighted average
of the historical per-minute expenses
reported by providers for 2017 and the
projected per-minute expenses for 2018,
which for IP CTS is approximately $1.28
per minute, provides a reasonable
baseline for taking initial steps to move
the IP CTS compensation rate toward
actual cost. Further, the Commission
finds it reasonable to allow an operating
margin between 7.6% to 12.35% for IP
CTS providers in the same ‘‘zone of
reasonableness’’ that applies to VRS
providers given the service sector
similarities between VRS and IP CTS,
and that the bulk of costs for both are
attributable to labor rather than capital.
Adding an operating margin within that
reasonable range to the average IP CTS
expenses of $1.28 results in a total
average cost between approximately
$1.38 and $1.44.
6. While the Commission’s goal is to
move the IP CTS rate to a cost-based
level, immediately reducing the IP CTS
compensation rate to this extent could
produce a disruption in the IP CTS
market and potentially negative
consequences for both providers and
PO 00000
Frm 00053
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
30083
consumers. Initial rate reductions of
approximately 10 percent per year, over
two years, will strike a reasonable
balance between the need to bring IP
CTS rates in line with costs and reduce
the TRS Fund contribution burden, and
avoiding rate shock for IP CTS providers
and potential disruption of the
provision and quality of service for
consumers. This approach will allow a
reasonable opportunity for higher-cost
providers to adjust to average-cost-based
compensation by reducing unnecessary
expenses—and thereby encourage
multiple providers to remain in the IP
CTS market. Finally, allowing the
compensation rate to stay, for the
present, at levels well above average
allowable costs allows IP CTS providers
to continue participating in research
and thus will ‘‘not discourage or impair
the development of improved
technology.’’ 47 U.S.C. 225(d)(2).
7. Applying these interim rates for a
period of two years will allow the
Commission to fully evaluate the
appropriateness of some categories of
allowable costs for this service, as well
as the extent to which compensation for
this service should be subject to pricecap-index adjustments. In addition, this
period will afford the Commission an
opportunity to determine how best a
fully automated method of providing IP
CTS should be compensated.
8. The Commission directs that the IP
CTS compensation rate be reduced in
two steps of approximately 10 percent
each: First, a $0.19467 reduction from
the $1.9467 per minute rate currently in
effect, to a rate of $1.75 per minute for
the 2018–19 Fund Year, from July 1,
2018, to June 30, 2019; and second, a
further $0.17 reduction of the
compensation rate from $1.75 to $1.58
per minute for the 2019–20 Fund Year,
from July 1, 2019, to June 30, 2020.
These reductions will save the TRS
Fund a minimum of $399 million over
two years, as compared to applying the
MARS rate. If the Commission finds that
actual costs are substantially below the
interim rates, the Commission may
adjust those rates accordingly.
9. While the use of provider cost data
adds complexity, and may require
detailed analysis, it would not be
reasonable for the Commission, in order
to avoid such complexity, to continue to
rely on a proxy that does not bear a
reasonable relationship to actual costs.
Any burden arising from switching to a
more complex rate methodology is
outweighed by the benefits of having a
more accurate compensation rate,
including the benefit of savings to the
Fund.
10. Setting interim rates for two years,
rather than a single year, will provide a
E:\FR\FM\27JNR1.SGM
27JNR1
nshattuck on DSK9F9SC42PROD with RULES
30084
Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 124 / Wednesday, June 27, 2018 / Rules and Regulations
greater degree of rate certainty for
providers and can mitigate the risk of
rewarding inefficiency, discouraging
innovation, and incentivizing providers
to incur unnecessary costs, all potential
effects of annual cost-of-service rate
setting. A multi-year approach allows
individual providers to gain additional
profit during each multi-year period
from any innovations and efficiency
enhancing measures that reduce their
per-minute costs during that period.
11. The TRS Fund administrator’s
cost calculations used to establish the
interim rates are based on the same
categories of provider costs that
generally have been deemed allowable
in calculating rates for other forms of
TRS. Provider objections to these
categories raise no significant arguments
that have not been addressed and
previously resolved in the
Commission’s prior rulings.
12. Collecting Additional Cost
Information for Setting Future IP CTS
Rates. The Commission remains
concerned that some of the expenses
incurred by IP CTS providers have not
been reported in sufficient detail to
enable the Fund administrator to
confirm their allowability and
reasonableness. Some IP CTS providers,
who contract with other entities for the
provision of call centers, CA staffing,
and other services, as well as the
licensing of intellectual property, report
payments to contractors as
‘‘subcontractor expenses,’’ with no
breakdown into specific expense
reporting categories. Given that the
expenses classified in this manner
comprise an unusually large portion of
total reported IP CTS costs, such
reporting obscures the nature of a
substantial portion of reported IP CTS
costs and hinders review of such costs
incurred by such providers to assess
their allowability and reasonableness.
Accordingly, the Commission directs
the TRS Fund administrator to require
IP CTS providers that contract for the
supply of services used in the provision
of TRS to include information about
payments under such contracts
classified according to the substantive
cost categories specified by the
administrator, including, e.g., allocation
of subcontractor expenses between call
center expenses and intellectual
property licensing fees, and how the
provider determined or calculated the
portion of contractual payments
attributable to each cost category. All
cost reports submitted in the future by
IP CTS providers shall provide such a
breakdown and explanation. The
Commission also directs the Fund
administrator, to the extent that the
administrator reasonably deems
VerDate Sep<11>2014
14:30 Jun 26, 2018
Jkt 244001
necessary for the purpose of
determining the allowability and
reasonableness of costs reported to be
incurred in the provision of TRS, to
require providers to submit additional
detail on such contractor expenses,
including the submission of complete
copies of such contracts and related
correspondence or other records and
information relevant to determining the
nature of the services provided and the
allocation of the costs of such services
to cost categories. This additional
transparency will help the Commission
ensure that the costs reported by
providers are reasonable.
13. The Commission believes that its
current authority to collect the above
information is contained in rules that
require TRS providers to provide the
TRS Fund administrator ‘‘true and
adequate data, and other historical,
projected and state rate related
information reasonably requested to
determine the TRS Fund revenue
requirements and payments,’’ and
which authorize both the TRS Fund
administrator and the Commission ‘‘to
examine and verify TRS provider data
as necessary to assure the accuracy and
integrity of TRS Fund payments.’’ 47
CFR 64.604(c)(5)(iii)(D)(1), (6). To
further clarify such authority, however,
and to provide for greater consistency in
the rules, the Commission amends its
rules to explicitly provide for the
collection of information laid out in the
preceding paragraph. In addition, the
Commission further amends its rules to
provide that, in the course of an audit
or otherwise upon demand, an IP CTS
provider must make documentation,
including contracts with entities
providing services or equipment
directly related to the provision of IP
CTS, available to the Commission, the
TRS Fund administrator, or any person
authorized by the Commission or TRS
Fund administrator to conduct an audit.
Measures To Limit Unnecessary IP CTS
Use and Waste of the TRS Fund
14. The dramatic growth in IP CTS
call volume appears to result in part
from provider practices that promote
over-use of IP CTS, including by people
with hearing loss who may be able to
achieve functionally equivalent
telephone service using other forms of
off-the-shelf or assistive technologies.
The Commission concludes that the
following steps are needed to minimize
such unnecessary use, and the
consequent waste of TRS Fund
resources.
15. Volume Control and Caption
Settings. The Commission amends its
rules to prohibit IP CTS providers from
linking the volume control and
PO 00000
Frm 00054
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
captioning functions of an IP CTS
device or software application.
Allowing users to enable volume control
only when captions are turned on
promotes waste, in that it forces the
costly generation of captions even when
the user only requires increased volume
to communicate effectively by phone. In
addition, decoupling these features will
enable consumers who are not
registered IP CTS users to access the
amplification features of IP CTS devices
without the captions. Compliance with
a delinking requirement will not impose
a substantial cost on IP CTS providers,
and any likely cost will be more than
offset by the efficiency gain resulting
from the reduction in unnecessary
captioning services.
16. The compliance deadline for
making this change is December 8, 2018.
IP CTS providers must ensure that all IP
CTS devices—as well as user software
for such devices—that they newly
distribute to users after December 8,
2018 are configured to allow volume
control to be adjusted independently of
the captioning feature. The Commission
also requires providers to ensure that all
previously distributed devices are
delinked by December 8, 2018.
17. Website, Advertising and
Educational Information Notifications.
The Commission amends its rules to
require IP CTS providers to include both
of the following factual notifications in
a clear and prominent location on their
advertising brochures, websites, user
manuals, and other informational
materials and websites:
• IP captioned telephone service may
use a live operator. The operator
generates captions of what the other
party to the call says. These captions are
then sent to your phone.
• There is a cost for each minute of
captions generated, paid from a
federally administered fund.
The first part of the notification is not
required from those IP CTS providers
who do not use live CAs. In the case of
websites, The Commission requires
such language to be included on the
home page, each page that provides
consumer information about IP CTS,
and each page that provides information
on how to order IP CTS or IP CTS
equipment.
18. Requiring these notifications will
enhance the Commission’s efforts to
prevent casual or inadvertent use of IP
CTS and will not impose a significant
burden that outweighs their benefits.
When captioning devices are turned on
by default, it is critical to make potential
users aware through ‘‘multiple and
repeated sources of information’’ that IP
CTS involves significant costs and must
not be used by individuals who do not
E:\FR\FM\27JNR1.SGM
27JNR1
nshattuck on DSK9F9SC42PROD with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 124 / Wednesday, June 27, 2018 / Rules and Regulations
need it. Persons that truly need this free
service for functionally equivalent
telephone service have every incentive
to obtain it. Rather than deter IP CTS
use by such individuals, these notices
will help to ensure that individuals who
might be attracted to it are aware of its
functions and financing.
19. General Prohibition on Providing
Service to Users Who Do Not Need It.
The Commission modifies the current
prohibition on VRS providers engaging
in fraudulent, abusive, and wasteful
practices by amending it to include IP
CTS providers. As amended, the rule
prohibits both IP CTS and VRS
providers from engaging in practices
that the provider knows or has reason to
know will cause or encourage (1) the
unauthorized use of TRS, (2) false or
unverified TRS Fund compensation
claims, (3) the making of TRS calls that
would not otherwise be made, and (4)
the use of TRS by consumers who do
not need the service in order to
communicate by telephone in a
functionally equivalent manner.
20. The Commission clarifies that
‘‘unauthorized use’’ of IP CTS, under
clause (1) above, means use by an
individual who is not registered with a
provider. Further, a practice is
prohibited where it artificially
stimulates TRS usage, enables or
encourages participation by
unauthorized users, or uses financial
incentives to attract new TRS users or
to increase usage. However, the
Commission allows IP CTS providers to
be compensated for calls made by
unregistered users when such calls are
made from temporary, public IP CTS
devices set up in emergency shelters.
When service for such a device is
initiated at the shelter, the IP CTS
provider must notify the TRS Fund
administrator of the date of such
activation and termination.
21. In addition, an IP CTS provider
shall not seek payment from the TRS
Fund for any minutes of service that it
knows or has reason to know are
resulting from such prohibited
practices. Any IP CTS provider that
becomes aware of such practices being
or having been committed by any
person shall, as soon as practicable,
report such practices to the Commission
or the TRS Fund administrator. All
monies paid from the TRS Fund to
providers who are found by the
Commission to be in violation of this
new IP CTS rule shall be recoverable by
the TRS Fund administrator, and such
providers may also be subject to
forfeitures and other enforcement
actions.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
14:30 Jun 26, 2018
Jkt 244001
Declaratory Ruling on Automatic
Speech Recognition
22. In document FCC 18–79, the
Commission determines that the
provision of CTS and IP CTS using
automated speech recognition (ASR) to
generate captions without the
involvement of a CA is a form of relay
service eligible for compensation from
the TRS Fund if provided in compliance
with applicable TRS mandatory
minimum standards. Specifically, the
Commission concludes that such
services are included within the
statutory definition of TRS, as
‘‘telephone transmission services that
provide the ability’’ to engage in
communication by wire or radio ‘‘in a
manner that is functionally equivalent’’
to voice communications service. 47
U.S.C. 225(a)(3).
Benefits of ASR
23. The use of ASR to generate
captions for CTS and IP CTS has several
benefits. First, ASR can better achieve
near simultaneous communication than
is possible with CA-assisted captions.
Second, the substantially lower costs of
operation for ASR can allow for the
provision of IP CTS with far greater
efficiency. Finally, as a fully automated
method of generating captions that is
not dependent on human intervention,
ASR can allow enhanced call privacy
and ensure the seamless continuation of
communications when exigent
circumstances, such as severe weather
events, threaten IP CTS call center
operations.
24. Improvements in accuracy,
coupled with ASR’s advantages in speed
and privacy, have made ASR a viable
alternative to the use of human relay
intermediaries for CTS and IP CTS. IP
CTS providers and others have shown
heightened interest in utilizing this
method for the provision of captions,
and the Commission has received two
applications for certification to provide
IP CTS using ASR. Additionally, ASRonly products are being trialed and
adopted internationally as a means of
generating captions from speech, for
people with hearing and speech
disabilities.
25. The Commission is not mandating
ASR as the sole means of offering IP
CTS. IP CTS providers will be able to
choose among three methods of
providing Fund-supported IP CTS: (1) IP
CTS using fully automated ASR; (2) IP
CTS using CA-assisted ASR; and (3)
stenographic-supported IP CTS.
Consumers will continue to be able to
select an IP CTS provider based on the
overall quality of service each provider
offers by means of the available
PO 00000
Frm 00055
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
30085
methods. As IP CTS providers begin
offering fully automated ASR, the
Commission will be able to gather data
that can inform the Commission’s
adoption of further measures to improve
its utility. Any provider offering ASR
must ensure that its service complies
with the mandatory minimum standards
of § 64.604 of the Commission’s rules in
order to obtain and retain certification
to provide IP CTS.
Consistency With Commission
Precedent
26. The use of ASR is consistent with
the Commission’s prior rulings
authorizing CTS in both its analog and
internet forms. The definition of IP CTS
does not specify how captions must be
generated, including whether they
should be generated through automation
or human-assisted methods. In this
regard, the Commission already has
approved a form of IP CTS that relies on
automated speech recognition programs
(assisted by CAs) to convert speech to
captions during an IP CTS call. The only
differences between ASR and CAassisted ASR is that with CA-assisted
ASR, CAs ‘‘train’’ speech recognition
programs to understand their voices
when they re-voice a caller’s speech,
and have a limited opportunity to make
corrections to the captions that are
produced. Advancements in ASR
reduce the need for such training and
human editing, and use of this
technology for IP CTS without CA
involvement does not fundamentally
change the functional role of the service,
which is to produce captions from a
user’s speech.
Statutory Authority
27. Using ASR for the provision of IP
CTS is fully consistent with the
Commission’s statutory authority. The
provision of IP CTS utilizing ASR will
contribute to functional equivalence by
enabling providers to enhance the
privacy, ensure seamless
communications, and reduce the latency
of IP CTS offerings. Section 225 of the
Act is neutral as to the technology and
method used to achieve functional
equivalency and expressly requires the
Commission to encourage technological
innovation in TRS. Further, offering an
ASR option that will largely eliminate
personnel costs associated with IP CTS
will help fulfill Congress’s directive to
provide TRS in the most efficient
manner.
Provider Certification and Other
Requirements
28. The Commission authorizes the
Consumer and Governmental Affairs
Bureau (Bureau) to review and approve
E:\FR\FM\27JNR1.SGM
27JNR1
nshattuck on DSK9F9SC42PROD with RULES
30086
Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 124 / Wednesday, June 27, 2018 / Rules and Regulations
applications for certification to provide
IP CTS by means of ASR in whole or in
part. The Bureau may determine on a
case-by-case basis the extent to which
an applicant’s proposed method of
providing ASR will enable it to provide
IP CTS in a manner that meets the
Commission’s minimum TRS standards
for functionally equivalent service. To
assist the Bureau in making this
assessment, where use of ASR in
conjunction with CA-assisted caption
generation is proposed, applicants
should include in their certification
applications a detailed description of
the criteria that will be used to
determine when to use and transfer
between each of these methods.
Applicants should support all claims
regarding their use of ASR and its
efficacy through documentary and other
evidence and should provide
information about measures they will
take to ensure the confidentiality of call
content. The Bureau will not approve
any application to provide IP CTS using
ASR that does not demonstrate that the
applicant will meet the Commission’s
mandatory minimum standards for
functional equivalency.
29. Certifications for the provision of
IP CTS using ASR may be granted on a
conditional basis, to enable the
Commission’s assessment of an
applicant’s actual performance in
meeting or exceeding the mandatory
minimum standards. In addition, to the
extent deemed necessary, certification
of a provider may be conditioned on the
submission of periodic data to help
confirm whether ASR-driven IP CTS is
providing functionally equivalent
service.
30. If a currently operating IP CTS
provider wishes to incorporate ASR in
its offerings, it must first receive
approval from the Bureau to provide IP
CTS in this manner. In order to obtain
approval, any provider operating under
conditional certification or interim
eligibility must update its application
for permanent certification to describe
the change, and may be asked to provide
additional data—beyond what was
submitted in its initial application for
certification—to demonstrate how
modifications to its service will ensure
the provision of a relay service that is
functionally equivalent to voice
telephone service through compliance
with the Commission’s mandatory
minimum standards.
Compensation
31. The Commission reminds all
providers that its rules require TRS
providers seeking compensation from
the TRS Fund to ‘‘provide the
administrator with true and adequate
VerDate Sep<11>2014
14:30 Jun 26, 2018
Jkt 244001
data, and . . . information reasonably
requested to determine the TRS Fund
revenue requirements and payments.’’
47 CFR 64.604(c)(5)(iii)(D)(1). Requests
from the TRS Fund administrator for
information that would help establish
whether payments are justified and help
determine the costs for ASR IP CTS
could reasonably include:
• A breakdown, in the provider’s
monthly call detail report, indicating
minutes for which ASR is substituted
for CA-assisted IP CTS;
• Estimates of the difference in the
costs incurred to handle ASR and CAassisted calls, with a detailed
breakdown of the specific variable costs
incurred for each type of call, as well as
underlying assumptions and
calculations; and
• Documentation of incremental costs
incurred in providing ASR, including
any incremental costs associated with
engineering and technical
implementation, marketing,
administrative and management support
(including oversight, evaluation, and
recordkeeping) and, for hybrid forms of
IP CTS, any costs associated with
enabling transfers back and forth
between ASR and CA-assisted IP CTS.
Final Regulatory Flexibility Analysis
32. As required by the Regulatory
Flexibility Act of 1980, as amended, the
Commission incorporated an Initial
Regulatory Flexibility Analysis (IRFA)
into the 2013 IP CTS Reform FNPRM.
The Commission sought written public
comment on the proposals in the 2013
IP CTS Reform FNPRM, including
comment on the IRFA. No comments
were received in response to the IRFA.
Need For, and Objectives of, the Rules
33. Document FCC 18–79 adopts an
interim rate for IP CTS reflecting a
weighted, cost-of-service methodology
based on an analysis of providers’ actual
and projected costs.
34. In addition, the Commission
directs the TRS Fund administrator to
require IP CTS providers that contract
for the supply of services used in the
provision of TRS to include information
about payments under such contracts
classified according to the substantive
cost categories specified by the
administrator.
35. Document FCC 18–79 also adopts
three rule changes to facilitate the
Commission’s efforts to reduce waste,
fraud, and abuse and improve its ability
to efficiently manage the IP CTS
program. First, the Commission
prohibits linking volume control and
captioning use on IP CTS devices.
Second, the Commission requires IP
CTS providers to include the following
PO 00000
Frm 00056
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
notifications in a clear and prominent
location on their advertising brochures,
websites, user manuals, and other
informational materials and websites:
• IP captioned telephone service may
use a live operator. The operator
generates captions of what the other
party to the call says. These captions are
then sent to your phone.
• There is a cost for each minute of
captions generated, paid from a
federally administered fund.
The first part of the notification is not
required from those IP CTS providers
who do not use live CAs. Third, the
Commission adopts a general
prohibition against providing IP CTS to
consumers who do not genuinely need
the service. Providers that become
aware of prohibited practices must
report them to the Commission or the
TRS Fund administrator.
Summary of Significant Issues Raised by
Public Comments in Response to the
IRFA
36. No comments were filed in
response to the IRFA.
Response to Comments by the Chief
Counsel for Advocacy of the Small
Business Administration
37. The Chief Counsel for Advocacy
of the Small Business Administration
did not file any comments in response
to the proposed rules in this proceeding.
Small Entities Impacted
38. The rules adopted in document
FCC 18–79 will affect obligations of IP
CTS providers. These services can be
included within the broad economic
category of All Other
Telecommunications.
Description of Projected Reporting,
Recordkeeping, and Other Compliance
Requirements
39. The rule implementing a general
prohibition against providing IP CTS to
consumers who do not genuinely need
the service and the requirement to
separate volume control and captioning
functions on IP CTS devices do not
create direct reporting, recordkeeping or
other compliance requirements on IP
CTS providers.
40. In transitioning away from the
MARS methodology for IP CTS, the
Commission will require IP CTS
providers to file annual cost and
demand data reports with the TRS Fund
administrator. There is no additional
burden on IP CTS providers to file these
reports, as IP CTS providers have been
voluntarily submitting such reports to
the TRS Fund administer since 2011.
The Commission has received approval
to require the collection of such
E:\FR\FM\27JNR1.SGM
27JNR1
Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 124 / Wednesday, June 27, 2018 / Rules and Regulations
nshattuck on DSK9F9SC42PROD with RULES
information pursuant to the PRA, and
the Commission is requiring the IP CTS
providers to submit their cost and
demand data for 2017. In addition, the
Commission is requiring providers to
supplement their cost data filings with
information about payments made by
providers to subcontractors for the
provision of call centers, CA staffing,
and other services by classifying such
payments according to the substantive
cost categories specified by the
administrator. These requirements,
which place minimal additional filing
burdens on IP CTS providers, will be
offset by the benefit to the TRS Fund
and its contributors by the increased
precision of calculating cost-based rates
resulting from increased accuracy of
TRS cost data submitted to the TRS
Fund administrator.
41. The adoption of a requirement for
IP CTS providers to include a notice on
IP CTS websites and informational
materials to inform consumers about the
process, cost, and source of funding will
place only a minimal burden on IP CTS
providers. It will be offset by the benefit
to the TRS Fund and contributors to the
Fund resulting from the reduction of
casual or inadvertent use of IP CTS that
such notice may provide by educating
consumers via multiple sources of
information.
42. The requirement for providers that
become aware of prohibited practices to
report them to the Commission or the
TRS Fund administrator should not be
burdensome and is needed to prevent
waste, fraud, and abuse of the TRS
Fund.
Steps Taken To Minimize Significant
Impact on Small Entities, and
Significant Alternatives Considered
43. The interim rates for IP CTS will
apply only to providers who are or may
become certified by the Commission to
offer IP CTS in accordance with its
rules. The Commission adopts these
interim rates to: (1) Ensure that rates
compensate providers for their
reasonable cost; (2) reduce waste of TRS
Fund resources and the amounts that
TRS Fund contributors pay to the fund;
and (3) ensure that TRS is made
available to the extent possible and in
the most efficient manner. The
requirement to file cost and demand
data annually will not increase the
burden on IP CTS providers because
they have been submitting such data to
the TRS Fund administrator since 2011.
The Commission is requiring providers
to supplement their cost data filings
with information about payments made
by providers to subcontractors for the
provision of call centers, CA staffing,
and other services by classifying such
VerDate Sep<11>2014
14:30 Jun 26, 2018
Jkt 244001
payments according to the substantive
cost categories specified by the
administrator. This requirement, which
places minimal additional filing
burdens on IP CTS providers, will be
offset by the benefit to the TRS Fund
and its contributors by the increased
precision of calculating cost-based rates
resulting from increased accuracy of
TRS cost data submitted to the TRS
Fund administrator.
44. Separating the volume control and
captioning functions on IP CTS devices
will place a minor burden on IP CTS
providers and device manufacturers to
reconfigure the functionality. Such costs
will be offset from the likely decrease in
waste and misuse of IP CTS, as
individuals will be able to use a device’s
amplification features without also
being required to use the device’s
captioning features. Providers have until
December 8, 2018, to ensure that new
and previously distributed devices are
in compliance.
45. The general prohibition on
practices resulting in IP CTS use by
ineligible individuals, the requirement
for providers that become aware of
prohibited practices to report them to
the Commission or the TRS Fund
administrator, and the requirement for
IP CTS providers to include notices on
their informational materials and
websites should not be burdensome and
are necessary to combat waste, fraud,
and abuse. These requirements will help
ensure the efficiency of the TRS
program, control the expenditure of
public funds, reduce the amounts paid
by contributors to the TRS Fund, and
ensure the future viability of the TRS
Fund and the provision of IP CTS.
Federal Rules Which Duplicate,
Overlap, or Conflict With, the
Commission’s Proposals
46. None.
Ordering Clauses
Pursuant to sections 1, 2, 201(b), and
225 of the Communications Act of 1934,
as amended, 47 U.S.C. 151, 152, 201(b),
225, document FCC 18–79 is adopted,
and part 64 of Title 47 is amended.
The Commission’s Consumer and
Governmental Affairs Bureau, Reference
Information Center, shall send a copy of
document FCC 18–79, including the
Final Regulatory Flexibility Analysis, to
the Chief Counsel for Advocacy of the
Small Business Administration.
List of Subjects in 47 CFR Part 64
Individuals with disabilities,
Telecommunications.
PO 00000
Frm 00057
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
30087
Federal Communications Commission.
Marlene Dortch,
Secretary, Office of the Secretary.
Final Rules
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
1. The authority citation for part 64
continues to read as follows:
■
Authority: 47 U.S.C. 154, 202, 225, 251(e),
254(k), 403(b)(2)(B), (c), 616, 620, Pub. L.
104–104, 110 Stat. 56. Interpret or apply 47
U.S.C. 201, 202, 218, 222, 225, 226, 227, 228,
251(e), 254(k), 616, 620, and the MiddleClass Tax Relief and Job Creation Act of
2012, Pub. L. 112–96, unless otherwise
noted.
2. Amend § 64.604 by revising
paragraphs (c)(5)(iii)(D)(1) and (6),
(c)(10), adding paragraph (c)(11)(v), and
revising paragraph (c)(13) to read as
follows:
■
§ 64.604
Mandatory minimum standards.
*
*
*
*
*
(c) * * *
(5) * * *
(iii) * * *
(D) Data collection and audits. (1)
TRS providers seeking compensation
from the TRS Fund shall provide the
administrator with true and adequate
data, and other historical, projected and
state rate related information reasonably
requested to determine the TRS Fund
revenue requirements and payments.
TRS providers shall provide the
administrator with the following: total
TRS minutes of use, total interstate TRS
minutes of use, total TRS investment in
general in accordance with part 32 of
this chapter, and other historical or
projected information reasonably
requested by the administrator for
purposes of computing payments and
revenue requirements. In annual cost
data filings and supplementary
information provided to the
administrator regarding such cost data,
IP CTS providers that contract for the
supply of services used in the provision
of TRS shall include information about
payments under such contracts,
classified according to the substantive
cost categories specified by the
administrator. To the extent that a third
party’s provision of services covers
more than one cost category, the
resubmitted cost reports must provide
an explanation of how the provider
determined or calculated the portion of
contractual payments attributable to
each cost category. To the extent that
E:\FR\FM\27JNR1.SGM
27JNR1
30088
Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 124 / Wednesday, June 27, 2018 / Rules and Regulations
nshattuck on DSK9F9SC42PROD with RULES
the administrator reasonably deems
necessary, providers shall submit
additional detail on such contractor
expenses, including but not limited to
complete copies of such contracts and
related correspondence or other records
and information relevant to determining
the nature of the services provided and
the allocation of the costs of such
services to cost categories.
*
*
*
*
*
(6) Audits. The Fund administrator
and the Commission, including the
Office of Inspector General, shall have
the authority to examine and verify TRS
provider data as necessary to assure the
accuracy and integrity of TRS Fund
payments. TRS providers must submit
to audits annually or at times
determined appropriate by the
Commission, the fund administrator, or
by an entity approved by the
Commission for such purpose. A TRS
provider that fails to submit to a
requested audit, or fails to provide
documentation necessary for
verification upon reasonable request,
will be subject to an automatic
suspension of payment until it submits
to the requested audit or provides
sufficient documentation. In the course
of an audit or otherwise upon demand,
an IP CTS provider must make available
any relevant documentation, including
contracts with entities providing
services or equipment directly related to
the provision of IP CTS, to the
Commission, the TRS Fund
administrator, or any person authorized
by the Commission or TRS Fund
administrator to conduct an audit.
*
*
*
*
*
(10) IP CTS settings. Each IP CTS
provider shall ensure that, for each IP
VerDate Sep<11>2014
14:30 Jun 26, 2018
Jkt 244001
CTS device it distributes, directly or
indirectly:
(i) The device includes a button, key,
icon, or other comparable feature that is
easily operable and requires only one
step for the consumer to turn on
captioning; and
(ii) On or after December 8, 2018, any
volume control or other amplification
feature can be adjusted separately and
independently of the caption feature.
(11) * * *
(v) IP CTS providers shall ensure that
their informational materials and
websites used to market, advertise,
educate, or otherwise inform consumers
and professionals about IP CTS include
the following language in a prominent
location in a clearly legible font:
‘‘FEDERAL LAW PROHIBITS ANYONE
BUT REGISTERED USERS WITH
HEARING LOSS FROM USING
INTERNET PROTOCOL (IP)
CAPTIONED TELEPHONES WITH THE
CAPTIONS TURNED ON. IP Captioned
Telephone Service may use a live
operator. The operator generates
captions of what the other party to the
call says. These captions are then sent
to your phone. There is a cost for each
minute of captions generated, paid from
a federally administered fund.’’ For IP
CTS provider websites, the language
shall be included on the website’s home
page, each page that provides consumer
information about IP CTS, and each
page that provides information on how
to order IP CTS or IP CTS equipment.
IP CTS providers that do not make any
use of live CAs to generate captions may
shorten the notice to leave out the
second, third, and fourth sentences.
*
*
*
*
*
PO 00000
Frm 00058
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 9990
(13) Unauthorized and unnecessary
use of VRS or IP CTS. (i) A VRS or IP
CTS provider shall not engage in any
practice that the provider knows or has
reason to know will cause or encourage:
(A) False or unverified claims for TRS
Fund compensation;
(B) Unauthorized use of VRS or IP
CTS;
(C) The making of VRS or IP CTS calls
that would not otherwise be made; or
(D) The use of VRS or IP CTS by
persons who do not need the service in
order to communicate in a functionally
equivalent manner.
(ii) A VRS or IP CTS provider shall
not seek payment from the TRS Fund
for any minutes of service it knows or
has reason to know are resulting from
the practices listed in paragraph
(c)(13)(i) of this section or from the use
of IP CTS by an individual who does not
need captions to communicate in a
functionally equivalent manner.
(iii) Any VRS or IP CTS provider that
becomes aware of any practices listed in
paragraphs (c)(13)(i) or (ii) of this
section being or having been committed
by any person shall, as soon as
practicable, report such practices to the
Commission or the TRS Fund
administrator.
(iv) An IP CTS provider may complete
and request compensation for IP CTS
calls to or from unregistered users at a
temporary, public IP CTS device set up
in an emergency shelter. The IP CTS
provider shall notify the TRS Fund
administrator of the dates of activation
and termination for such device.
*
*
*
*
*
[FR Doc. 2018–13753 Filed 6–26–18; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6712–01–P
E:\FR\FM\27JNR1.SGM
27JNR1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 83, Number 124 (Wednesday, June 27, 2018)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 30082-30088]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2018-13753]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION
47 CFR Part 64
[CG Docket Nos. 13-24 and 03-123; FCC 18-79]
IP CTS Modernization and Reform
AGENCY: Federal Communications Commission.
ACTION: Final rule and clarification.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: In this document, the Commission alters the methodology for
setting provider compensation rates for internet Protocol Captioned
Telephone Service (IP CTS) and establishes interim compensation rates
for Fund Years 2018-19 and 2019-20. The Commission also adopts rules
that address the provision of volume control on IP CTS devices, require
the accuracy of IP CTS information disseminated by providers, and
prohibit the provision of service to ineligible users. Finally, the
Commission declares that speech-to-text automation, without the
participation of a communications assistant (CA), may be used to
generate IP CTS captions.
DATES:
Effective dates: 47 CFR 64.604(c)(10) and (c)(13)(i)-(ii) are
effective July 27, 2018. The Commission will publish a document in the
Federal Register announcing the effective date of 47 CFR
64.604(c)(11)(v) and the amendments to 47 CFR 64.604(c)(5)(iii)(D)(1),
(6), and (c)(13)(iii)-(iv) of the Commission's rules, which contain
modified information collection requirements that have not yet been
approved by the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) under the
Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (PRA), Public Law 104-13. The IP CTS
compensation rate adopted for the 2018-19 Fund Year shall be effective
July 1, 2018.
Applicability date: IP CTS providers must comply with the
requirement to ensure that any volume control or other amplification
feature can be adjusted separately and independently of the caption
feature on or before December 8, 2018.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Michael Scott, Consumer and
Governmental Affairs Bureau, FCC, at (202) 418-1264, or email
[email protected].
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This is a summary of the Commission's Report
and Order and Declaratory Ruling in CG Docket Nos. 03-123 and 13-24;
document FCC 18-79, adopted on June 7, 2018 and released on June 8,
2018. Document FCC 18-79 concerns the modernization and reform of the
Commission's rules for IP CTS. The Commission previously sought comment
on these issues in Misuse of internet Protocol (IP) Captioned Telephone
Service; Telecommunications Relay Services and Speech-to-Speech
Services for Individuals with Hearing and Speech Difficulties,
published at 78 FR 54201, September 3, 2013 (2013 IP CTS Reform FNPRM).
A Further Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (Further Notice) and Notice of
Inquiry are contained in document FCC 18-79 and address additional
issues concerning the funding, administration, and user eligibility for
this service, as well as performance goals and metrics to ensure
service quality for users. The Further Notice and Notice of Inquiry
will be published elsewhere in the Federal Register. The full text of
document FCC 18-79 will be available for public inspection and copying
via the Commission's Electronic Comment Filing System (ECFS), and
during regular business hours at the FCC Reference Information Center,
Portals II, 445 12th Street SW, Room CY-A257, Washington, DC 20554. To
request materials in accessible formats for people with disabilities
(Braille, large print, electronic files, audio format), send an email
to [email protected], or call the Consumer and Governmental Affairs Bureau
at (202) 418-0530 (voice), (844) 432-2272 (videophone), or (202) 418-
0432 (TTY).
[[Page 30083]]
Congressional Review Act
The Commission sent a copy of document FCC 18-79 to Congress and
the Government Accountability Office pursuant to the Congressional
Review Act, 5 U.S.C. 801(a)(1)(A).
Final Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 Analysis
The Report and Order in document FCC 18-79 contains modified
information collection requirements, which are not effective until
approval is obtained from OMB. The Commission, as part of its
continuing effort to reduce paperwork burdens, will invite the general
public to comment on these information collection requirements as
required by the PRA. The Commission will publish a separate document in
the Federal Register announcing approval of the information collection
requirements. Pursuant to the Small Business Paperwork Relief Act of
2002, Public Law 107-198, 44 U.S.C. 3506(c)(4), the Commission
previously sought comment on how the Commission might ``further reduce
the information burden for small business concerns with fewer than 25
employees.'' 2013 IP CTS Reform FNPRM.
Synopsis
IP CTS Compensation
1. IP CTS, a form of telecommunications relay services (TRS)
supported by the Interstate TRS Fund (TRS Fund), allows individuals
with hearing loss to both read captions and use their residual hearing
to understand a telephone conversation. IP CTS providers receive
compensation from the TRS Fund on a per-minute basis. The compensation
rate has been determined using a methodology known as the Multistate
Average Rate Structure (MARS) Plan, which calculates the weighted
average per-minute compensation paid by state TRS programs to providers
of intrastate CTS for the prior calendar year.
2. The Commission's mandate in determining TRS compensation rates
is to ensure that the rates correlate to actual reasonable costs. MARS
is no longer an effective methodology to accomplish this. The
Commission therefore terminates use of the MARS methodology.
3. The per-minute costs currently reported by IP CTS providers are
not comparable to those for CTS--largely, it appears, because demand
for IP CTS now greatly exceeds the demand for CTS. Specifically, from
2011 to 2017, annual CTS minutes declined from approximately 40 million
to 19.9 million, while annual IP CTS minutes grew from approximately 29
million to 362 million--an amount that is more than 18 times greater
than annual CTS minutes. Average per-minute expenses for IP CTS dropped
from $2.0581 in 2011 to $1.2326 in 2017, while the MARS rate increased
from $1.7630 to $1.9467 for the same period. The 2017-18 MARS rate
exceeds the average 2017 IP CTS expenses by approximately 58 percent.
This divergence invalidates the rationale for continuing to use a MARS-
based rate to determine IP CTS compensation.
4. Setting a Rate Closer to Reasonable IP CTS Costs. The Commission
finds it important to act without delay to bring provider compensation
more in line with reported provider costs. IP CTS minutes have
increased dramatically over the last nine years and the contribution
base for the TRS Fund has been shrinking, requiring interstate and
international telecommunications and VoIP service providers, and their
subscribers, to contribute an ever-larger percentage of revenues to
support these services. The Commission is also concerned that excessive
compensation for IP CTS may increase provider incentives to recruit and
register IP CTS users, regardless of their actual need for the service,
leading to even greater potential for waste of TRS Fund dollars.
5. The Commission concludes that the most recently filed cost and
demand data are sufficiently reliable to serve as a basis for setting
interim IP CTS rates. As with video relay service (VRS) compensation
rates, a weighted average of the historical per-minute expenses
reported by providers for 2017 and the projected per-minute expenses
for 2018, which for IP CTS is approximately $1.28 per minute, provides
a reasonable baseline for taking initial steps to move the IP CTS
compensation rate toward actual cost. Further, the Commission finds it
reasonable to allow an operating margin between 7.6% to 12.35% for IP
CTS providers in the same ``zone of reasonableness'' that applies to
VRS providers given the service sector similarities between VRS and IP
CTS, and that the bulk of costs for both are attributable to labor
rather than capital. Adding an operating margin within that reasonable
range to the average IP CTS expenses of $1.28 results in a total
average cost between approximately $1.38 and $1.44.
6. While the Commission's goal is to move the IP CTS rate to a
cost-based level, immediately reducing the IP CTS compensation rate to
this extent could produce a disruption in the IP CTS market and
potentially negative consequences for both providers and consumers.
Initial rate reductions of approximately 10 percent per year, over two
years, will strike a reasonable balance between the need to bring IP
CTS rates in line with costs and reduce the TRS Fund contribution
burden, and avoiding rate shock for IP CTS providers and potential
disruption of the provision and quality of service for consumers. This
approach will allow a reasonable opportunity for higher-cost providers
to adjust to average-cost-based compensation by reducing unnecessary
expenses--and thereby encourage multiple providers to remain in the IP
CTS market. Finally, allowing the compensation rate to stay, for the
present, at levels well above average allowable costs allows IP CTS
providers to continue participating in research and thus will ``not
discourage or impair the development of improved technology.'' 47
U.S.C. 225(d)(2).
7. Applying these interim rates for a period of two years will
allow the Commission to fully evaluate the appropriateness of some
categories of allowable costs for this service, as well as the extent
to which compensation for this service should be subject to price-cap-
index adjustments. In addition, this period will afford the Commission
an opportunity to determine how best a fully automated method of
providing IP CTS should be compensated.
8. The Commission directs that the IP CTS compensation rate be
reduced in two steps of approximately 10 percent each: First, a
$0.19467 reduction from the $1.9467 per minute rate currently in
effect, to a rate of $1.75 per minute for the 2018-19 Fund Year, from
July 1, 2018, to June 30, 2019; and second, a further $0.17 reduction
of the compensation rate from $1.75 to $1.58 per minute for the 2019-20
Fund Year, from July 1, 2019, to June 30, 2020. These reductions will
save the TRS Fund a minimum of $399 million over two years, as compared
to applying the MARS rate. If the Commission finds that actual costs
are substantially below the interim rates, the Commission may adjust
those rates accordingly.
9. While the use of provider cost data adds complexity, and may
require detailed analysis, it would not be reasonable for the
Commission, in order to avoid such complexity, to continue to rely on a
proxy that does not bear a reasonable relationship to actual costs. Any
burden arising from switching to a more complex rate methodology is
outweighed by the benefits of having a more accurate compensation rate,
including the benefit of savings to the Fund.
10. Setting interim rates for two years, rather than a single year,
will provide a
[[Page 30084]]
greater degree of rate certainty for providers and can mitigate the
risk of rewarding inefficiency, discouraging innovation, and
incentivizing providers to incur unnecessary costs, all potential
effects of annual cost-of-service rate setting. A multi-year approach
allows individual providers to gain additional profit during each
multi-year period from any innovations and efficiency enhancing
measures that reduce their per-minute costs during that period.
11. The TRS Fund administrator's cost calculations used to
establish the interim rates are based on the same categories of
provider costs that generally have been deemed allowable in calculating
rates for other forms of TRS. Provider objections to these categories
raise no significant arguments that have not been addressed and
previously resolved in the Commission's prior rulings.
12. Collecting Additional Cost Information for Setting Future IP
CTS Rates. The Commission remains concerned that some of the expenses
incurred by IP CTS providers have not been reported in sufficient
detail to enable the Fund administrator to confirm their allowability
and reasonableness. Some IP CTS providers, who contract with other
entities for the provision of call centers, CA staffing, and other
services, as well as the licensing of intellectual property, report
payments to contractors as ``subcontractor expenses,'' with no
breakdown into specific expense reporting categories. Given that the
expenses classified in this manner comprise an unusually large portion
of total reported IP CTS costs, such reporting obscures the nature of a
substantial portion of reported IP CTS costs and hinders review of such
costs incurred by such providers to assess their allowability and
reasonableness. Accordingly, the Commission directs the TRS Fund
administrator to require IP CTS providers that contract for the supply
of services used in the provision of TRS to include information about
payments under such contracts classified according to the substantive
cost categories specified by the administrator, including, e.g.,
allocation of subcontractor expenses between call center expenses and
intellectual property licensing fees, and how the provider determined
or calculated the portion of contractual payments attributable to each
cost category. All cost reports submitted in the future by IP CTS
providers shall provide such a breakdown and explanation. The
Commission also directs the Fund administrator, to the extent that the
administrator reasonably deems necessary for the purpose of determining
the allowability and reasonableness of costs reported to be incurred in
the provision of TRS, to require providers to submit additional detail
on such contractor expenses, including the submission of complete
copies of such contracts and related correspondence or other records
and information relevant to determining the nature of the services
provided and the allocation of the costs of such services to cost
categories. This additional transparency will help the Commission
ensure that the costs reported by providers are reasonable.
13. The Commission believes that its current authority to collect
the above information is contained in rules that require TRS providers
to provide the TRS Fund administrator ``true and adequate data, and
other historical, projected and state rate related information
reasonably requested to determine the TRS Fund revenue requirements and
payments,'' and which authorize both the TRS Fund administrator and the
Commission ``to examine and verify TRS provider data as necessary to
assure the accuracy and integrity of TRS Fund payments.'' 47 CFR
64.604(c)(5)(iii)(D)(1), (6). To further clarify such authority,
however, and to provide for greater consistency in the rules, the
Commission amends its rules to explicitly provide for the collection of
information laid out in the preceding paragraph. In addition, the
Commission further amends its rules to provide that, in the course of
an audit or otherwise upon demand, an IP CTS provider must make
documentation, including contracts with entities providing services or
equipment directly related to the provision of IP CTS, available to the
Commission, the TRS Fund administrator, or any person authorized by the
Commission or TRS Fund administrator to conduct an audit.
Measures To Limit Unnecessary IP CTS Use and Waste of the TRS Fund
14. The dramatic growth in IP CTS call volume appears to result in
part from provider practices that promote over-use of IP CTS, including
by people with hearing loss who may be able to achieve functionally
equivalent telephone service using other forms of off-the-shelf or
assistive technologies. The Commission concludes that the following
steps are needed to minimize such unnecessary use, and the consequent
waste of TRS Fund resources.
15. Volume Control and Caption Settings. The Commission amends its
rules to prohibit IP CTS providers from linking the volume control and
captioning functions of an IP CTS device or software application.
Allowing users to enable volume control only when captions are turned
on promotes waste, in that it forces the costly generation of captions
even when the user only requires increased volume to communicate
effectively by phone. In addition, decoupling these features will
enable consumers who are not registered IP CTS users to access the
amplification features of IP CTS devices without the captions.
Compliance with a delinking requirement will not impose a substantial
cost on IP CTS providers, and any likely cost will be more than offset
by the efficiency gain resulting from the reduction in unnecessary
captioning services.
16. The compliance deadline for making this change is December 8,
2018. IP CTS providers must ensure that all IP CTS devices--as well as
user software for such devices--that they newly distribute to users
after December 8, 2018 are configured to allow volume control to be
adjusted independently of the captioning feature. The Commission also
requires providers to ensure that all previously distributed devices
are delinked by December 8, 2018.
17. Website, Advertising and Educational Information Notifications.
The Commission amends its rules to require IP CTS providers to include
both of the following factual notifications in a clear and prominent
location on their advertising brochures, websites, user manuals, and
other informational materials and websites:
IP captioned telephone service may use a live operator.
The operator generates captions of what the other party to the call
says. These captions are then sent to your phone.
There is a cost for each minute of captions generated,
paid from a federally administered fund.
The first part of the notification is not required from those IP
CTS providers who do not use live CAs. In the case of websites, The
Commission requires such language to be included on the home page, each
page that provides consumer information about IP CTS, and each page
that provides information on how to order IP CTS or IP CTS equipment.
18. Requiring these notifications will enhance the Commission's
efforts to prevent casual or inadvertent use of IP CTS and will not
impose a significant burden that outweighs their benefits. When
captioning devices are turned on by default, it is critical to make
potential users aware through ``multiple and repeated sources of
information'' that IP CTS involves significant costs and must not be
used by individuals who do not
[[Page 30085]]
need it. Persons that truly need this free service for functionally
equivalent telephone service have every incentive to obtain it. Rather
than deter IP CTS use by such individuals, these notices will help to
ensure that individuals who might be attracted to it are aware of its
functions and financing.
19. General Prohibition on Providing Service to Users Who Do Not
Need It. The Commission modifies the current prohibition on VRS
providers engaging in fraudulent, abusive, and wasteful practices by
amending it to include IP CTS providers. As amended, the rule prohibits
both IP CTS and VRS providers from engaging in practices that the
provider knows or has reason to know will cause or encourage (1) the
unauthorized use of TRS, (2) false or unverified TRS Fund compensation
claims, (3) the making of TRS calls that would not otherwise be made,
and (4) the use of TRS by consumers who do not need the service in
order to communicate by telephone in a functionally equivalent manner.
20. The Commission clarifies that ``unauthorized use'' of IP CTS,
under clause (1) above, means use by an individual who is not
registered with a provider. Further, a practice is prohibited where it
artificially stimulates TRS usage, enables or encourages participation
by unauthorized users, or uses financial incentives to attract new TRS
users or to increase usage. However, the Commission allows IP CTS
providers to be compensated for calls made by unregistered users when
such calls are made from temporary, public IP CTS devices set up in
emergency shelters. When service for such a device is initiated at the
shelter, the IP CTS provider must notify the TRS Fund administrator of
the date of such activation and termination.
21. In addition, an IP CTS provider shall not seek payment from the
TRS Fund for any minutes of service that it knows or has reason to know
are resulting from such prohibited practices. Any IP CTS provider that
becomes aware of such practices being or having been committed by any
person shall, as soon as practicable, report such practices to the
Commission or the TRS Fund administrator. All monies paid from the TRS
Fund to providers who are found by the Commission to be in violation of
this new IP CTS rule shall be recoverable by the TRS Fund
administrator, and such providers may also be subject to forfeitures
and other enforcement actions.
Declaratory Ruling on Automatic Speech Recognition
22. In document FCC 18-79, the Commission determines that the
provision of CTS and IP CTS using automated speech recognition (ASR) to
generate captions without the involvement of a CA is a form of relay
service eligible for compensation from the TRS Fund if provided in
compliance with applicable TRS mandatory minimum standards.
Specifically, the Commission concludes that such services are included
within the statutory definition of TRS, as ``telephone transmission
services that provide the ability'' to engage in communication by wire
or radio ``in a manner that is functionally equivalent'' to voice
communications service. 47 U.S.C. 225(a)(3).
Benefits of ASR
23. The use of ASR to generate captions for CTS and IP CTS has
several benefits. First, ASR can better achieve near simultaneous
communication than is possible with CA-assisted captions. Second, the
substantially lower costs of operation for ASR can allow for the
provision of IP CTS with far greater efficiency. Finally, as a fully
automated method of generating captions that is not dependent on human
intervention, ASR can allow enhanced call privacy and ensure the
seamless continuation of communications when exigent circumstances,
such as severe weather events, threaten IP CTS call center operations.
24. Improvements in accuracy, coupled with ASR's advantages in
speed and privacy, have made ASR a viable alternative to the use of
human relay intermediaries for CTS and IP CTS. IP CTS providers and
others have shown heightened interest in utilizing this method for the
provision of captions, and the Commission has received two applications
for certification to provide IP CTS using ASR. Additionally, ASR-only
products are being trialed and adopted internationally as a means of
generating captions from speech, for people with hearing and speech
disabilities.
25. The Commission is not mandating ASR as the sole means of
offering IP CTS. IP CTS providers will be able to choose among three
methods of providing Fund-supported IP CTS: (1) IP CTS using fully
automated ASR; (2) IP CTS using CA-assisted ASR; and (3) stenographic-
supported IP CTS. Consumers will continue to be able to select an IP
CTS provider based on the overall quality of service each provider
offers by means of the available methods. As IP CTS providers begin
offering fully automated ASR, the Commission will be able to gather
data that can inform the Commission's adoption of further measures to
improve its utility. Any provider offering ASR must ensure that its
service complies with the mandatory minimum standards of Sec. 64.604
of the Commission's rules in order to obtain and retain certification
to provide IP CTS.
Consistency With Commission Precedent
26. The use of ASR is consistent with the Commission's prior
rulings authorizing CTS in both its analog and internet forms. The
definition of IP CTS does not specify how captions must be generated,
including whether they should be generated through automation or human-
assisted methods. In this regard, the Commission already has approved a
form of IP CTS that relies on automated speech recognition programs
(assisted by CAs) to convert speech to captions during an IP CTS call.
The only differences between ASR and CA-assisted ASR is that with CA-
assisted ASR, CAs ``train'' speech recognition programs to understand
their voices when they re-voice a caller's speech, and have a limited
opportunity to make corrections to the captions that are produced.
Advancements in ASR reduce the need for such training and human
editing, and use of this technology for IP CTS without CA involvement
does not fundamentally change the functional role of the service, which
is to produce captions from a user's speech.
Statutory Authority
27. Using ASR for the provision of IP CTS is fully consistent with
the Commission's statutory authority. The provision of IP CTS utilizing
ASR will contribute to functional equivalence by enabling providers to
enhance the privacy, ensure seamless communications, and reduce the
latency of IP CTS offerings. Section 225 of the Act is neutral as to
the technology and method used to achieve functional equivalency and
expressly requires the Commission to encourage technological innovation
in TRS. Further, offering an ASR option that will largely eliminate
personnel costs associated with IP CTS will help fulfill Congress's
directive to provide TRS in the most efficient manner.
Provider Certification and Other Requirements
28. The Commission authorizes the Consumer and Governmental Affairs
Bureau (Bureau) to review and approve
[[Page 30086]]
applications for certification to provide IP CTS by means of ASR in
whole or in part. The Bureau may determine on a case-by-case basis the
extent to which an applicant's proposed method of providing ASR will
enable it to provide IP CTS in a manner that meets the Commission's
minimum TRS standards for functionally equivalent service. To assist
the Bureau in making this assessment, where use of ASR in conjunction
with CA-assisted caption generation is proposed, applicants should
include in their certification applications a detailed description of
the criteria that will be used to determine when to use and transfer
between each of these methods. Applicants should support all claims
regarding their use of ASR and its efficacy through documentary and
other evidence and should provide information about measures they will
take to ensure the confidentiality of call content. The Bureau will not
approve any application to provide IP CTS using ASR that does not
demonstrate that the applicant will meet the Commission's mandatory
minimum standards for functional equivalency.
29. Certifications for the provision of IP CTS using ASR may be
granted on a conditional basis, to enable the Commission's assessment
of an applicant's actual performance in meeting or exceeding the
mandatory minimum standards. In addition, to the extent deemed
necessary, certification of a provider may be conditioned on the
submission of periodic data to help confirm whether ASR-driven IP CTS
is providing functionally equivalent service.
30. If a currently operating IP CTS provider wishes to incorporate
ASR in its offerings, it must first receive approval from the Bureau to
provide IP CTS in this manner. In order to obtain approval, any
provider operating under conditional certification or interim
eligibility must update its application for permanent certification to
describe the change, and may be asked to provide additional data--
beyond what was submitted in its initial application for
certification--to demonstrate how modifications to its service will
ensure the provision of a relay service that is functionally equivalent
to voice telephone service through compliance with the Commission's
mandatory minimum standards.
Compensation
31. The Commission reminds all providers that its rules require TRS
providers seeking compensation from the TRS Fund to ``provide the
administrator with true and adequate data, and . . . information
reasonably requested to determine the TRS Fund revenue requirements and
payments.'' 47 CFR 64.604(c)(5)(iii)(D)(1). Requests from the TRS Fund
administrator for information that would help establish whether
payments are justified and help determine the costs for ASR IP CTS
could reasonably include:
A breakdown, in the provider's monthly call detail report,
indicating minutes for which ASR is substituted for CA-assisted IP CTS;
Estimates of the difference in the costs incurred to
handle ASR and CA-assisted calls, with a detailed breakdown of the
specific variable costs incurred for each type of call, as well as
underlying assumptions and calculations; and
Documentation of incremental costs incurred in providing
ASR, including any incremental costs associated with engineering and
technical implementation, marketing, administrative and management
support (including oversight, evaluation, and recordkeeping) and, for
hybrid forms of IP CTS, any costs associated with enabling transfers
back and forth between ASR and CA-assisted IP CTS.
Final Regulatory Flexibility Analysis
32. As required by the Regulatory Flexibility Act of 1980, as
amended, the Commission incorporated an Initial Regulatory Flexibility
Analysis (IRFA) into the 2013 IP CTS Reform FNPRM. The Commission
sought written public comment on the proposals in the 2013 IP CTS
Reform FNPRM, including comment on the IRFA. No comments were received
in response to the IRFA.
Need For, and Objectives of, the Rules
33. Document FCC 18-79 adopts an interim rate for IP CTS reflecting
a weighted, cost-of-service methodology based on an analysis of
providers' actual and projected costs.
34. In addition, the Commission directs the TRS Fund administrator
to require IP CTS providers that contract for the supply of services
used in the provision of TRS to include information about payments
under such contracts classified according to the substantive cost
categories specified by the administrator.
35. Document FCC 18-79 also adopts three rule changes to facilitate
the Commission's efforts to reduce waste, fraud, and abuse and improve
its ability to efficiently manage the IP CTS program. First, the
Commission prohibits linking volume control and captioning use on IP
CTS devices. Second, the Commission requires IP CTS providers to
include the following notifications in a clear and prominent location
on their advertising brochures, websites, user manuals, and other
informational materials and websites:
IP captioned telephone service may use a live operator.
The operator generates captions of what the other party to the call
says. These captions are then sent to your phone.
There is a cost for each minute of captions generated,
paid from a federally administered fund.
The first part of the notification is not required from those IP
CTS providers who do not use live CAs. Third, the Commission adopts a
general prohibition against providing IP CTS to consumers who do not
genuinely need the service. Providers that become aware of prohibited
practices must report them to the Commission or the TRS Fund
administrator.
Summary of Significant Issues Raised by Public Comments in Response to
the IRFA
36. No comments were filed in response to the IRFA.
Response to Comments by the Chief Counsel for Advocacy of the Small
Business Administration
37. The Chief Counsel for Advocacy of the Small Business
Administration did not file any comments in response to the proposed
rules in this proceeding.
Small Entities Impacted
38. The rules adopted in document FCC 18-79 will affect obligations
of IP CTS providers. These services can be included within the broad
economic category of All Other Telecommunications.
Description of Projected Reporting, Recordkeeping, and Other Compliance
Requirements
39. The rule implementing a general prohibition against providing
IP CTS to consumers who do not genuinely need the service and the
requirement to separate volume control and captioning functions on IP
CTS devices do not create direct reporting, recordkeeping or other
compliance requirements on IP CTS providers.
40. In transitioning away from the MARS methodology for IP CTS, the
Commission will require IP CTS providers to file annual cost and demand
data reports with the TRS Fund administrator. There is no additional
burden on IP CTS providers to file these reports, as IP CTS providers
have been voluntarily submitting such reports to the TRS Fund
administer since 2011. The Commission has received approval to require
the collection of such
[[Page 30087]]
information pursuant to the PRA, and the Commission is requiring the IP
CTS providers to submit their cost and demand data for 2017. In
addition, the Commission is requiring providers to supplement their
cost data filings with information about payments made by providers to
subcontractors for the provision of call centers, CA staffing, and
other services by classifying such payments according to the
substantive cost categories specified by the administrator. These
requirements, which place minimal additional filing burdens on IP CTS
providers, will be offset by the benefit to the TRS Fund and its
contributors by the increased precision of calculating cost-based rates
resulting from increased accuracy of TRS cost data submitted to the TRS
Fund administrator.
41. The adoption of a requirement for IP CTS providers to include a
notice on IP CTS websites and informational materials to inform
consumers about the process, cost, and source of funding will place
only a minimal burden on IP CTS providers. It will be offset by the
benefit to the TRS Fund and contributors to the Fund resulting from the
reduction of casual or inadvertent use of IP CTS that such notice may
provide by educating consumers via multiple sources of information.
42. The requirement for providers that become aware of prohibited
practices to report them to the Commission or the TRS Fund
administrator should not be burdensome and is needed to prevent waste,
fraud, and abuse of the TRS Fund.
Steps Taken To Minimize Significant Impact on Small Entities, and
Significant Alternatives Considered
43. The interim rates for IP CTS will apply only to providers who
are or may become certified by the Commission to offer IP CTS in
accordance with its rules. The Commission adopts these interim rates
to: (1) Ensure that rates compensate providers for their reasonable
cost; (2) reduce waste of TRS Fund resources and the amounts that TRS
Fund contributors pay to the fund; and (3) ensure that TRS is made
available to the extent possible and in the most efficient manner. The
requirement to file cost and demand data annually will not increase the
burden on IP CTS providers because they have been submitting such data
to the TRS Fund administrator since 2011. The Commission is requiring
providers to supplement their cost data filings with information about
payments made by providers to subcontractors for the provision of call
centers, CA staffing, and other services by classifying such payments
according to the substantive cost categories specified by the
administrator. This requirement, which places minimal additional filing
burdens on IP CTS providers, will be offset by the benefit to the TRS
Fund and its contributors by the increased precision of calculating
cost-based rates resulting from increased accuracy of TRS cost data
submitted to the TRS Fund administrator.
44. Separating the volume control and captioning functions on IP
CTS devices will place a minor burden on IP CTS providers and device
manufacturers to reconfigure the functionality. Such costs will be
offset from the likely decrease in waste and misuse of IP CTS, as
individuals will be able to use a device's amplification features
without also being required to use the device's captioning features.
Providers have until December 8, 2018, to ensure that new and
previously distributed devices are in compliance.
45. The general prohibition on practices resulting in IP CTS use by
ineligible individuals, the requirement for providers that become aware
of prohibited practices to report them to the Commission or the TRS
Fund administrator, and the requirement for IP CTS providers to include
notices on their informational materials and websites should not be
burdensome and are necessary to combat waste, fraud, and abuse. These
requirements will help ensure the efficiency of the TRS program,
control the expenditure of public funds, reduce the amounts paid by
contributors to the TRS Fund, and ensure the future viability of the
TRS Fund and the provision of IP CTS.
Federal Rules Which Duplicate, Overlap, or Conflict With, the
Commission's Proposals
46. None.
Ordering Clauses
Pursuant to sections 1, 2, 201(b), and 225 of the Communications
Act of 1934, as amended, 47 U.S.C. 151, 152, 201(b), 225, document FCC
18-79 is adopted, and part 64 of Title 47 is amended.
The Commission's Consumer and Governmental Affairs Bureau,
Reference Information Center, shall send a copy of document FCC 18-79,
including the Final Regulatory Flexibility Analysis, 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 Dortch,
Secretary, Office of the Secretary.
Final Rules
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, 202, 225, 251(e), 254(k),
403(b)(2)(B), (c), 616, 620, Pub. L. 104-104, 110 Stat. 56.
Interpret or apply 47 U.S.C. 201, 202, 218, 222, 225, 226, 227, 228,
251(e), 254(k), 616, 620, and the Middle-Class Tax Relief and Job
Creation Act of 2012, Pub. L. 112-96, unless otherwise noted.
0
2. Amend Sec. 64.604 by revising paragraphs (c)(5)(iii)(D)(1) and (6),
(c)(10), adding paragraph (c)(11)(v), and revising paragraph (c)(13) to
read as follows:
Sec. 64.604 Mandatory minimum standards.
* * * * *
(c) * * *
(5) * * *
(iii) * * *
(D) Data collection and audits. (1) TRS providers seeking
compensation from the TRS Fund shall provide the administrator with
true and adequate data, and other historical, projected and state rate
related information reasonably requested to determine the TRS Fund
revenue requirements and payments. TRS providers shall provide the
administrator with the following: total TRS minutes of use, total
interstate TRS minutes of use, total TRS investment in general in
accordance with part 32 of this chapter, and other historical or
projected information reasonably requested by the administrator for
purposes of computing payments and revenue requirements. In annual cost
data filings and supplementary information provided to the
administrator regarding such cost data, IP CTS providers that contract
for the supply of services used in the provision of TRS shall include
information about payments under such contracts, classified according
to the substantive cost categories specified by the administrator. To
the extent that a third party's provision of services covers more than
one cost category, the resubmitted cost reports must provide an
explanation of how the provider determined or calculated the portion of
contractual payments attributable to each cost category. To the extent
that
[[Page 30088]]
the administrator reasonably deems necessary, providers shall submit
additional detail on such contractor expenses, including but not
limited to complete copies of such contracts and related correspondence
or other records and information relevant to determining the nature of
the services provided and the allocation of the costs of such services
to cost categories.
* * * * *
(6) Audits. The Fund administrator and the Commission, including
the Office of Inspector General, shall have the authority to examine
and verify TRS provider data as necessary to assure the accuracy and
integrity of TRS Fund payments. TRS providers must submit to audits
annually or at times determined appropriate by the Commission, the fund
administrator, or by an entity approved by the Commission for such
purpose. A TRS provider that fails to submit to a requested audit, or
fails to provide documentation necessary for verification upon
reasonable request, will be subject to an automatic suspension of
payment until it submits to the requested audit or provides sufficient
documentation. In the course of an audit or otherwise upon demand, an
IP CTS provider must make available any relevant documentation,
including contracts with entities providing services or equipment
directly related to the provision of IP CTS, to the Commission, the TRS
Fund administrator, or any person authorized by the Commission or TRS
Fund administrator to conduct an audit.
* * * * *
(10) IP CTS settings. Each IP CTS provider shall ensure that, for
each IP CTS device it distributes, directly or indirectly:
(i) The device includes a button, key, icon, or other comparable
feature that is easily operable and requires only one step for the
consumer to turn on captioning; and
(ii) On or after December 8, 2018, any volume control or other
amplification feature can be adjusted separately and independently of
the caption feature.
(11) * * *
(v) IP CTS providers shall ensure that their informational
materials and websites used to market, advertise, educate, or otherwise
inform consumers and professionals about IP CTS include the following
language in a prominent location in a clearly legible font: ``FEDERAL
LAW PROHIBITS ANYONE BUT REGISTERED USERS WITH HEARING LOSS FROM USING
INTERNET PROTOCOL (IP) CAPTIONED TELEPHONES WITH THE CAPTIONS TURNED
ON. IP Captioned Telephone Service may use a live operator. The
operator generates captions of what the other party to the call says.
These captions are then sent to your phone. There is a cost for each
minute of captions generated, paid from a federally administered
fund.'' For IP CTS provider websites, the language shall be included on
the website's home page, each page that provides consumer information
about IP CTS, and each page that provides information on how to order
IP CTS or IP CTS equipment. IP CTS providers that do not make any use
of live CAs to generate captions may shorten the notice to leave out
the second, third, and fourth sentences.
* * * * *
(13) Unauthorized and unnecessary use of VRS or IP CTS. (i) A VRS
or IP CTS provider shall not engage in any practice that the provider
knows or has reason to know will cause or encourage:
(A) False or unverified claims for TRS Fund compensation;
(B) Unauthorized use of VRS or IP CTS;
(C) The making of VRS or IP CTS calls that would not otherwise be
made; or
(D) The use of VRS or IP CTS by persons who do not need the service
in order to communicate in a functionally equivalent manner.
(ii) A VRS or IP CTS provider shall not seek payment from the TRS
Fund for any minutes of service it knows or has reason to know are
resulting from the practices listed in paragraph (c)(13)(i) of this
section or from the use of IP CTS by an individual who does not need
captions to communicate in a functionally equivalent manner.
(iii) Any VRS or IP CTS provider that becomes aware of any
practices listed in paragraphs (c)(13)(i) or (ii) of this section being
or having been committed by any person shall, as soon as practicable,
report such practices to the Commission or the TRS Fund administrator.
(iv) An IP CTS provider may complete and request compensation for
IP CTS calls to or from unregistered users at a temporary, public IP
CTS device set up in an emergency shelter. The IP CTS provider shall
notify the TRS Fund administrator of the dates of activation and
termination for such device.
* * * * *
[FR Doc. 2018-13753 Filed 6-26-18; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6712-01-P