Telecommunications Relay Service Rules Modernization, 10844-10847 [2021-00792]
Download as PDF
<![CDATA[
10844
Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 34 / Tuesday, February 23, 2021 / Rules and Regulations
the only measure of value of an
auction; 11 society benefits when
spectrum available for flexible use for
next-generation wireless services and
assigned to those who are most likely to
use it themselves to deploy. The
Commission therefore finds that making
the remaining unassigned spectrum
available via competitive bidding is in
the public interest and is more likely to
expeditiously put this spectrum to its
highest and best use for the benefit of all
Americans.
31. Sixth, the Commission previously
stated its reasons for establishing the
Tribal Priority Window but not a broad
window for educational institutions.
Specifically, the Commission concluded
that Tribes have an interest in obtaining
access to 2.5 GHz spectrum to serve
their rural Tribal lands that is greater
than and distinct from that of
educational institutions, based on: (1)
The unique status of federally
recognized Tribes and the nature of the
Commission’s federal trust
responsibility, (2) the right of Tribes to
set their own communications policies
in the lands they govern, (3) the unique
and significant obstacles to offering
service in Tribal areas, and (4) the fact
that Tribes have not previously had
access to this spectrum. The SHLB et al.
fail to address these distinctions.12
32. In turn, the Commission finds that
SHLB et al.’s advocacy for a narrower
educational priority window analogous
to the Tribal Priority Window, or an
educational priority window limited to
New Channel Group 3 (old Channels
G1, G2, and G3), would not address the
Commission stated deployment
‘‘primarily’’ determines price as claimed by the
petitioners.
11 The Petitioners also argue any resulting lower
price would still not match the price educational
institutions could provide, but this is based on the
$15/month price the Commission discounts for
rural areas. In general, based on the historic success
of spectrum auctions at the FCC and the ability of
the overlay auction format to rationalize the
irregular patchwork of EBS license areas with often
complicated licensing arrangements, the
Commission believes that auctioning the fallow 2.5
GHz spectrum will provide the most benefit to the
American consumers.
12 The SHLB et al. acknowledge that the
Commission ‘‘attempt[ed] to distinguish the reasons
for the Tribal priority window from the more
general educational priority windows.’’ Id. at 16.
Rather than address the reasons for distinguishing
Tribal entities, the SHLB et al. cite a handful of
submissions in the record to contend that the
Commission’s ‘‘conclusion that many educators
might not be positioned to provide broadband is
unsupported in fact and in the record.’’ As
discussed above and in the 2.5 GHz Report and
Order, however, the Commission’s experience with
the EBS service and its review of the record indicate
that only ‘‘a small fraction of educational
institutions’’ have expressed an interest in
providing broadband service in rural areas, which
does not provide a sufficient basis for establishing
an educational priority window.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
21:28 Feb 22, 2021
Jkt 253001
objectives. The Tribal Priority Window
is readily distinguishable from any form
of educator window. Moreover, their
suggestion of creating an educational
priority window limited to New
Channel Group 3, comprised of 17.5
megahertz of spectrum, would not only
suffer from the same concerns the
Commission has previously identified,
but also would result in inefficient
allocation of mid-band spectrum. Under
that proposal, only the 17.5 megahertz
of non-contiguous spectrum in New
Channel Group 3 would be assigned and
licensed differently than the adjacent
commercial Broadband Radio Service
spectrum. The result would be that
educators would end up only with a
narrow spectrum band that they might
not be able to use fully because of the
need to protect adjacent channel
commercial operations. In contrast, in
the auction context, potential bidders
can take into consideration the
availability of and ability to aggregate
spectrum to make the best use of this
smaller Channel Group.
33. For these reasons, the Commission
affirms its conclusion in the 2.5 GHz
Report and Order that, ‘‘[g]iven the time
and effort and delay that would be
involved in establishing and running
[an educational] priority window, and
the likelihood that such a window for
all educational institutions would result
in having to auction the spectrum
anyway, the Commission finds that
moving directly to flexible use and open
eligibility would be the most
expeditious method of making spectrum
available to provide broadband service
in rural and underserved areas,
consistent with the Commission’s
statutory objective to ensure ‘the
development and rapid deployment of
new technologies, products, and
services for the benefit of the public,
including those residing in rural areas,
without administrative or judicial
delays.’ ’’ The Commission therefore
denies the SHLB et al. Petition.
IV. Ordering Clauses
34. Accordingly, it is ordered
pursuant to sections 4(i), 4(j), 303(r),
and 309(j) of the Communications Act of
1934, as amended, 47 U.S.C. 154(i),
154(j), 303(r), and 309(j), as well as
§ 1.429 of the Commission’s rules, 47
CFR 1.429, that the Petitions for
Reconsideration filed by the National
Congress of American Indians and
jointly by the Schools, Health &
Libraries Broadband Coalition;
Consortium for School Networking;
State Educational Technology Directors
Association; American Library
Association; National Digital Inclusion
Alliance; Nebraska Department of
PO 00000
Frm 00142
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
Education; Utah Education and
Telehealth Network; Council of Chief
State School Officers; A Better Wireless;
and Access Humboldt on November 25,
2019, are dismissed to the extent
specified in this Order on
Reconsideration and, alternatively and
independently, denied as specified
herein.
35. It is further ordered, pursuant to
section 405 of the Communications Act
of 1934, as amended, and § 1.429 of the
Commission’s rules, 47 CFR 1.429, that
the Request for Withdrawal of Petition
for Reconsideration filed by the Hawaii
Broadband Initiative on March 30, 2020,
is granted, and the Petition for
Reconsideration by the Hawaii
Broadband Initiative on November 25,
2019, is dismissed.
Federal Communications Commission.
Marlene Dortch,
Secretary, Office of the Secretary.
Editorial note: This document was
received for publication by the Office of the
Federal Register on January 4, 2021.
[FR Doc. 2021–00051 Filed 2–22–21; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6712–01–P
FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS
COMMISSION
47 CFR Part 64
[CG Docket Nos. 03–123, FCC 20–105; FRS
17377]
Telecommunications Relay Service
Rules Modernization
Federal Communications
Commission.
ACTION: Final rule.
AGENCY:
In this document, the Federal
Communications Commission
(Commission) eliminates two
Telecommunications Relay Service
(TRS) mandatory minimum standards
because they are no longer necessary to
provide functional equivalence with
voice services, and ceases Federal
Register publication of applications for
certification of state TRS programs in
favor of providing notice on the
Commission’s website and in its
Electronic Document Management
System (EDOCS).
DATES: Effective Date: These rules are
effective March 25, 2021.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
William Wallace, Consumer and
Governmental Affairs Bureau, at (202)
418–2716, or email William.Wallace@
fcc.gov.
SUMMARY:
This is a
summary of the Commission’s Report
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
E:\FR\FM\23FER1.SGM
23FER1
Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 34 / Tuesday, February 23, 2021 / Rules and Regulations
and Order, document FCC 20–105,
adopted on August 4, 2020, released on
August 5, 2020, in CG Docket No. 03–
123. The Commission previously sought
comment on these issues in a Further
Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (2019
TRS Rules Modernization FNPRM),
published at 85 FR 1134, January 9,
2020. The full text of document FCC 20–
105 will be available for public
inspection and copying via the
Commission’s Electronic Comment
Filing System (ECFS). 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.
Congressional Review Act
The Commission sent a copy of
document FCC 20–105 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
Document FCC 20–105 does not
contain new or modified proposed
information collection requirements
subject to the Paperwork Reduction Act
of 1995, Public Law 104–13. In addition,
therefore, it does not contain any new
or modified information collection
burden for small business concerns with
fewer than 25 employees, pursuant to
the Small Business Paperwork Relief
Act of 2002, Public Law 107–198, see 44
U.S.C. 3506(c)(4).
Synopsis
1. The Commission updates certain
rules governing telecommunications
relay services (TRS) to improve the
efficiency and cost-effectiveness of TRS
for both TRS providers and users. In
keeping with current technology and
prevailing offerings in the voice
communications market, the
Commission repeals the ‘‘equal access’’
and ‘‘billing options’’ requirements for
TRS providers. The Commission also
ceases Federal Register publication of
state requests for TRS program
certifications, relying instead on
publication of these applications in the
Commission’s electronic document
management system and on its website.
2. Equal Access and Billing Options
Requirements. As required by section
225 of the Communications Act (the
Act), as amended, 47 U.S.C. 225, the
Commission’s rules prescribe
mandatory minimum standards to
ensure that TRS providers offer
telephone services for persons with
hearing and speech disabilities that are
VerDate Sep<11>2014
21:28 Feb 22, 2021
Jkt 253001
functionally equivalent to voice
communication services. The ‘‘equal
access’’ rule provides that ‘‘TRS users
shall have access to their chosen
interexchange carrier through the TRS,
and to all other operator services to the
same extent that such access is provided
to voice users,’’ and the ‘‘billing
options’’ requirement directs TRS
providers to offer ‘‘the same billing
options (e.g., sent-paid long distance,
operator-assisted, collect, and third
party billing) traditionally offered for
wireline voice services.’’
3. In 2014, the Commission revisited
these rules in part. The Commission
recognized that the voice
communications marketplace had
undergone major changes since the rules
were adopted in 1991. As a result,
consumers of Voice over internet
Protocol and mobile telephone services
routinely received long distance service
as a bundled feature of their service
plans, with no separate time- or
distance-sensitive fees, eliminating the
need for equal access and alternative
billing options. The Commission
concluded that these features had
become unnecessary to ensure
functional equivalence for internetbased forms of TRS in cases where the
internet-based TRS provider is not
charging users for long distance service.
As a result, the equal access and billing
options requirements currently only
apply to the three non-internet-based
forms of TRS, which are provided
through state programs.
4. Federal Register Publication.
Section 225 of the Act provides that
states choosing to establish state TRS
programs for intrastate service must
request and receive certification for
such programs from the Commission.
Since 1991, the Commission’s TRS rules
have required that, upon the filing of
state certification applications, a notice
seeking public comment on such
applications shall be published in the
Federal Register. In 2000, the
Commission established EDOCS, and
decided that notice of applications for
certification of internet-based forms on
TRS would be published in EDOCS and
on the Commission’s website, with no
requirement to publish such notice in
the Federal Register.
5. Further Notice of Proposed
Rulemaking. In the 2019 TRS Rules
Modernization FNPRM, the Commission
proposed (1) to repeal the equal access
and billing options rules for all TRS
providers and (2) to cease Federal
Register publication of state TRS
certification applications in favor of
publication on its website and in
EDOCS.
PO 00000
Frm 00143
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
10845
6. Repeal of Equal Access Rule. The
Commission repeals the equal access
requirement in its entirety. This rule is
no longer needed to ensure the
functional equivalence of TRS. Because
voice customers today typically obtain
telephone service by paying a bundled
or flat rate without time or distance
differentials for long distance calls, the
ability to select a long distance provider
is no longer an essential aspect of
telephone service, and the Commission
has terminated equal access
requirements for voice service. Further,
section 225 of the Act only requires TRS
to include equal access ‘‘to the same
extent that such access is provided to
voice users,’’ and there are few
situations in which a TRS provider
would be obligated to provide equal
access under the current rule, even if a
consumer were to request such access.
7. This unnecessary rule also burdens
TRS providers with the cost of
maintaining an equal access
infrastructure, hindering the efficient
provision of TRS. Deleting the equal
access rule will allow TRS providers to
modernize their TRS facilities and
discontinue what can be a confusing
and time-consuming call setup process.
8. Clarification Regarding Financial
Incentives. The Commission clarifies
that, when TRS providers allow
consumers to make long distance calls
without incurring per-minute charges,
such offerings do not constitute an
impermissible financial incentive for
TRS use. In today’s marketplace, the
widespread bundling of long distance
and local calling negates any risk that
offering free long distance to TRS users
would create an impermissible
incentive to make long distance calls.
This clarification is limited to the
specific issue regarding per-minute
charges for long distance service and
does not, for example, authorize a TRS
provider to reimburse or otherwise
assume payment for charges currently
assessed on TRS users for internet
access or telephone service.
9. Repeal of Billing Options
Requirement. The Commission repeals
the billing options requirement in its
entirety. Alternative billing options are
disappearing from the world of voice
services, and thus options such as sentpaid long distance and collect, calling
card, and third-party billing are no
longer essential to ensure that TRS is
functionally equivalent to voice service.
10. Eliminating this obligation will
relieve TRS providers from any need to
maintain obsolete features of circuitswitched networks at a time when they
and others within the communications
industry have been transitioning to IPbased platforms. In addition to
E:\FR\FM\23FER1.SGM
23FER1
10846
Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 34 / Tuesday, February 23, 2021 / Rules and Regulations
functional equivalence and efficiency,
allowing TRS users access to
improvements in technology is another
one of the Commission’s mandates
under section 225 of the Act. Repealing
the billing options rule will benefit TRS
providers and users by allowing
technological improvements with no
consequential costs or harms to the
functional equivalence and efficiency of
TRS.
11. Ceasing Federal Register
Publication. The Commission deletes
the requirement that public notices of
applications for certification of state
TRS programs be published in the
Federal Register. This action will
improve the efficiency of the
Commission’s TRS certification process
and conserve administrative resources,
and will not conflict with statutory
requirements or the Commission’s
ability to make informed certification
decisions. Federal Register publication
of state certification applications is not
required by section 225 of the Act or the
Administrative Procedure Act, 5 U.S.C.
551 et seq. Such certifications do not
involve rulemaking, and the
Commission’s review is conducted
based on the documentation submitted
by a state, with no adjudicatory hearing
ordinarily needed to determine whether
a state program merits certification.
Moreover, for comparable Commission
authorization processes, such as
certifications for internet-based TRS
providers and common-carrier
applications for certificates of ‘‘public
convenience and necessity,’’ Federal
Register publication is not required
unless special circumstances apply.
12. Ceasing Federal Register
publication will not prevent or deter
public input on state TRS certification
proposals. Since this rule was adopted,
the Commission has introduced an
internet-based document management
system, which makes public notices
requesting comment on applications (as
well as the applications themselves)
readily accessible through the
Commission’s EDOCS and ECFS on the
Commission’s website. Posting
electronic notices of state TRS
certification applications via EDOCS
and the Commission’s website will
provide sufficient notice to enable
interested members of the public to
comment on an application.
Final Regulatory Flexibility Analysis
As required by the Regulatory
Flexibility Act of 1980 as amended, the
Commission incorporated an Initial
Regulatory Flexibility Analysis (IRFA)
into the Further Notice of Proposed
Rulemaking. The Commission sought
written public comment on the
VerDate Sep<11>2014
21:28 Feb 22, 2021
Jkt 253001
proposals in the 2019 TRS Rules
Modernization FNPRM, including
comment on the IRFA.
Need For, and Objectives of, the Rules
13. Document FCC 20–105 eliminates
the outdated equal access and multiple
billing options requirements form the
TRS mandatory minimum standards
and streamlines Commission processes
by ceasing Federal Register publications
of state requests for TRS program
certification, while continuing to
publish notice of certification
applications in the Commission’s
electronic document management
system and on the Commission’s
website.
Summary of Significant Issues Raised by
Public Comments in Response to the
IRFA
14. No comments were filed in
response to the IRFA.
Response to Comments by the Chief
Counsel for Advocacy of the Small
Business Administration
15. The Chief Counsel did not file any
comments in response to the proposed
rules in this proceeding.
Description and Estimate of the Number
of Small Entities to Which the Rules
Will Apply
16. The amendments to rules adopted
in the Report and Order will affect the
obligations of non-internet based TRS
providers. These services can be
included within the broad economic
category of All Other
Telecommunications.
Description of Projected Reporting,
Recordkeeping, and Other Compliance
Requirements
17. Elimination of the equal access
and billing options for TRS providers
and ceasing Federal Register
publication for state TRS program
certification applications do not create
direct reporting, recordkeeping, or other
compliance requirements on TRS
providers.
Steps Taken To Minimize Significant
Impact on Small Entities, and
Significant Alternatives Considered
18. Repeal of the equal access and
billing options requirements will reduce
the burden on small entities subject to
the rule. Such entities would no longer
need to provide TRS users with the
ability to select their long distance
carrier or offer billing options, and the
providers would no longer be required
to configure their networks for such
functionalities. Other small entities
would not be affected.
PO 00000
Frm 00144
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
19. Eliminating the requirement for
the Commission to publish in the
Federal Register notice of applications
for certification of state TRS programs
will have no impact on small entities
because only the Commission is
burdened by this obligation.
Ordering Clauses
20. Pursuant to sections 1, 2, and 225
of the Communications Act of 1934, as
amended, 47 U.S.C. 151, 152, and 225,
document FCC 20–105 is adopted, and
the Commission’s rules are amended.
21. The Commission’s Consumer and
Governmental Affairs Bureau, Reference
Information Center, shall send a copy of
the Report and Order, 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,
Telecommunications relay services.
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. 151, 152, 154, 201,
202, 217, 218, 220, 222, 225, 226, 227, 227b,
228, 251(a), 251(e), 254(k), 262, 276,
403(b)(2)(B), (c), 616, 620, 1401–1473, unless
otherwise noted; Pub. L. 115–141, Div. P, sec.
503, 132 Stat. 348, 1091.
2. Amend § 64.604 by revising
paragraph (a)(3)(ii) to read as follows
and removing and reserving paragraph
(b)(3):
■
§ 64.604
Mandatory Minimum Standards.
*
*
*
*
*
(a) * * *
(3) * * *
(ii) Relay services shall be capable of
handling any type of call normally
provided by telecommunications
carriers unless the Commission
determines that it is not technologically
feasible to do so. Relay service providers
have the burden of proving the
infeasibility of handling any type of call.
*
*
*
*
*
■ 3. Amend § 64.606 by revising
paragraph (a)(1) to read as follows:
E:\FR\FM\23FER1.SGM
23FER1
Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 34 / Tuesday, February 23, 2021 / Rules and Regulations
§ 64.606 internet-based TRS provider and
TRS program certification.
(a) * * * (1) Certified state program.
Any state, through its office of the
governor or other delegated executive
office empowered to provide TRS,
desiring to establish a state program
under this section shall submit
documentation to the Commission
addressed to the Federal
Communications Commission, Chief,
Consumer and Governmental Affairs
Bureau, TRS Certification Program,
Washington, DC 20554, and captioned
‘‘TRS State Certification Application.’’
All documentation shall be submitted in
narrative form, shall clearly describe the
state program for implementing
intrastate TRS, and the procedures and
remedies for enforcing any requirements
imposed by the state program. The
Commission shall give public notice of
state applications for certification.
*
*
*
*
*
[FR Doc. 2021–00792 Filed 2–22–21; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6712–01–P
FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS
COMMISSION
47 CFR Part 73
[MB Docket No. 20–145; FCC 20–181; FRS
17327]
Promoting Broadcast Internet
Innovation Through ATSC 3.0
Federal Communications
Commission.
ACTION: Final rule.
AGENCY:
Through this final rule, the
Commission fosters the efficient and
robust use of broadcast spectrum
capacity for the provision of Broadcast
internet services consistent with
statutory directives. In this document,
the Commission concludes that
ancillary and supplementary (A&S) fees
should be calculated based on the gross
revenue received by the broadcaster,
without regard to the gross revenue of
an unaffiliated third party, such as a
spectrum lessee; should retain the
existing standard of derogation of
broadcast service, but amend the
wording of the rules to eliminate the
outdated reference to analog television;
and should reaffirm that noncommercial
educational television broadcast stations
(NCEs) may offer Broadcast internet
services. The Commission also
reinterprets the application to permit
noncommercial educational stations
(NCEs) to devote the substantial
majority of their spectrum not just to
free over-the-air television but also
ancillary and supplementary services;
SUMMARY:
VerDate Sep<11>2014
21:28 Feb 22, 2021
Jkt 253001
lowers the ancillary and supplementary
service fee for certain NCE services; and
clarifies that NCEs may offer limited
Broadcast internet services to donors
without transforming those donations
into feeable ancillary and
supplementary service revenue.
DATES: Effective March 25, 2021.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For
additional information, contact Lyle
Elder, Lyle.Elder@fcc.gov, of the Media
Bureau, Policy Division, (202) 418–
2120. Direct press inquiries to Janice
Wise at (202) 418–8165.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This is a
summary of the Commission’s Report
and Order, FCC 20–181, adopted and
released on December 10, 2020. The full
text of this document is available
electronically via the FCC’s Electronic
Document Management System
(EDOCS) website at https://
www.fcc.gov/edocs or via the FCC’s
Electronic Comment Filing System
(ECFS) website at https://www.fcc.gov/
ecfs. (Documents will be available
electronically in ASCII, Microsoft Word,
and/or Adobe Acrobat.) Alternative
formats are available for people with
disabilities (Braille, large print,
electronic files, audio format), by
sending an email to fcc504@fcc.gov or
calling the Commission’s Consumer and
Governmental Affairs Bureau at (202)
418–0530 (voice), (202) 418–0432
(TTY).
Synopsis
1. Earlier last year, the Commission
initiated a proceeding to encourage the
provision of new and innovative
Broadcast internet services enabled by
ATSC 3.0—the ‘‘Next Generation’’
broadcast television standard often
referred to as Next Gen TV—that can
complement the nation’s 5G wireless
networks.1 In so doing, the Commission
sought to eliminate uncertainty cast on
such services by legacy regulations and
to consider whether, and if so how, to
update the Commission’s rules
regarding ancillary and supplementary
services, adopted over 20 years ago.
With this item, we take additional steps
to clarify and update the regulatory
landscape in order to foster the efficient
and robust use of broadcast spectrum
1 Promoting Broadcast Internet Innovation
Through ATSC 3.0, MB Docket No. 20–145,
Declaratory Ruling and notice of proposed
rulemaking, 85 FR 43142 and 85 FR 43195 (July 16,
2020) (Declaratory Ruling and NPRM). The
Commission referred to these new ancillary
offerings over broadcast spectrum as ‘‘Broadcast
internet’’ services to distinguish them from
traditional over-the-air video services. We note that
the rule changes we adopt herein will apply equally
to all ancillary and supplementary services
provided using either the ATSC 1.0 or 3.0
transmission standards.
PO 00000
Frm 00145
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
10847
capacity for the provision of Broadcast
internet services consistent with
statutory directives.
2. In this Report and Order (Order),
we adopt, with only minor changes, four
of the tentative conclusions set forth in
the NPRM. Specifically, we clarify the
basis on which to calculate ancillary
and supplementary service fees. We
retain the existing standard of
derogation of broadcast service. We also,
however, amend the derogation rule to
eliminate an outdated reference to
analog television. We reaffirm the
freedom of noncommercial educational
television stations (NCEs) to provide
ancillary and supplementary services.
And while we generally decline at this
time to adjust the fee imposed on
ancillary and supplementary services,
we intend to revisit this issue at a future
date to determine whether we should
adjust the fee or the basis of the fee once
the market for Broadcast internet
services develops.
3. Recognizing the unique educational
public service mission of NCEs seeking
to provide Broadcast internet services,
we also adopt a number of additional
proposals designed to preserve and
expand this essential mission. Notably,
we find that an NCE television
broadcast station may use its 6 MHz
channel capacity primarily not only for
its free, over-the-air nonprofit,
noncommercial, educational, television
broadcast service, as under our current
interpretation of the rule, but also for
any nonprofit, noncommercial,
educational (‘‘primary’’) ancillary and
supplementary services. We also adopt
a reduced fee of 2.5% on gross revenue
generated by such ‘‘primary’’ ancillary
and supplementary services, as opposed
to the 5% fee applied to ancillary and
supplementary services generally. With
these actions, this Order continues to
lay the groundwork for broadcasters,
and thereby the general public, to
explore and benefit from the
possibilities and opportunities that
Broadcast internet provides.
4. Background. As the Commission
explained in the NPRM, the ATSC 3.0
IP-based standard offers greater effective
spectral capacity than ATSC 1.0, the
current digital broadcast television
standard. The additional capacity will
allow broadcasters to expand their
traditional television offerings,
including by offering higher quality
video and audio and a wider range of
programming choices. Broadcasters may
also provide innovative non-traditional
services, and the NPRM asked about the
‘‘types of Broadcast internet services
that are likely to be provided in the
future.’’ Commenters describe a wide
array of exciting possibilities. APTS/
E:\FR\FM\23FER1.SGM
23FER1
]]>Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 86, Number 34 (Tuesday, February 23, 2021)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 10844-10847]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2021-00792]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION
47 CFR Part 64
[CG Docket Nos. 03-123, FCC 20-105; FRS 17377]
Telecommunications Relay Service Rules Modernization
AGENCY: Federal Communications Commission.
ACTION: Final rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: In this document, the Federal Communications Commission
(Commission) eliminates two Telecommunications Relay Service (TRS)
mandatory minimum standards because they are no longer necessary to
provide functional equivalence with voice services, and ceases Federal
Register publication of applications for certification of state TRS
programs in favor of providing notice on the Commission's website and
in its Electronic Document Management System (EDOCS).
DATES: Effective Date: These rules are effective March 25, 2021.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: William Wallace, Consumer and
Governmental Affairs Bureau, at (202) 418-2716, or email
[email protected].
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This is a summary of the Commission's Report
[[Page 10845]]
and Order, document FCC 20-105, adopted on August 4, 2020, released on
August 5, 2020, in CG Docket No. 03-123. The Commission previously
sought comment on these issues in a Further Notice of Proposed
Rulemaking (2019 TRS Rules Modernization FNPRM), published at 85 FR
1134, January 9, 2020. The full text of document FCC 20-105 will be
available for public inspection and copying via the Commission's
Electronic Comment Filing System (ECFS). 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.
Congressional Review Act
The Commission sent a copy of document FCC 20-105 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
Document FCC 20-105 does not contain new or modified proposed
information collection requirements subject to the Paperwork Reduction
Act of 1995, Public Law 104-13. In addition, therefore, it does not
contain any new or modified information collection burden for small
business concerns with fewer than 25 employees, pursuant to the Small
Business Paperwork Relief Act of 2002, Public Law 107-198, see 44
U.S.C. 3506(c)(4).
Synopsis
1. The Commission updates certain rules governing
telecommunications relay services (TRS) to improve the efficiency and
cost-effectiveness of TRS for both TRS providers and users. In keeping
with current technology and prevailing offerings in the voice
communications market, the Commission repeals the ``equal access'' and
``billing options'' requirements for TRS providers. The Commission also
ceases Federal Register publication of state requests for TRS program
certifications, relying instead on publication of these applications in
the Commission's electronic document management system and on its
website.
2. Equal Access and Billing Options Requirements. As required by
section 225 of the Communications Act (the Act), as amended, 47 U.S.C.
225, the Commission's rules prescribe mandatory minimum standards to
ensure that TRS providers offer telephone services for persons with
hearing and speech disabilities that are functionally equivalent to
voice communication services. The ``equal access'' rule provides that
``TRS users shall have access to their chosen interexchange carrier
through the TRS, and to all other operator services to the same extent
that such access is provided to voice users,'' and the ``billing
options'' requirement directs TRS providers to offer ``the same billing
options (e.g., sent-paid long distance, operator-assisted, collect, and
third party billing) traditionally offered for wireline voice
services.''
3. In 2014, the Commission revisited these rules in part. The
Commission recognized that the voice communications marketplace had
undergone major changes since the rules were adopted in 1991. As a
result, consumers of Voice over internet Protocol and mobile telephone
services routinely received long distance service as a bundled feature
of their service plans, with no separate time- or distance-sensitive
fees, eliminating the need for equal access and alternative billing
options. The Commission concluded that these features had become
unnecessary to ensure functional equivalence for internet-based forms
of TRS in cases where the internet-based TRS provider is not charging
users for long distance service. As a result, the equal access and
billing options requirements currently only apply to the three non-
internet-based forms of TRS, which are provided through state programs.
4. Federal Register Publication. Section 225 of the Act provides
that states choosing to establish state TRS programs for intrastate
service must request and receive certification for such programs from
the Commission. Since 1991, the Commission's TRS rules have required
that, upon the filing of state certification applications, a notice
seeking public comment on such applications shall be published in the
Federal Register. In 2000, the Commission established EDOCS, and
decided that notice of applications for certification of internet-based
forms on TRS would be published in EDOCS and on the Commission's
website, with no requirement to publish such notice in the Federal
Register.
5. Further Notice of Proposed Rulemaking. In the 2019 TRS Rules
Modernization FNPRM, the Commission proposed (1) to repeal the equal
access and billing options rules for all TRS providers and (2) to cease
Federal Register publication of state TRS certification applications in
favor of publication on its website and in EDOCS.
6. Repeal of Equal Access Rule. The Commission repeals the equal
access requirement in its entirety. This rule is no longer needed to
ensure the functional equivalence of TRS. Because voice customers today
typically obtain telephone service by paying a bundled or flat rate
without time or distance differentials for long distance calls, the
ability to select a long distance provider is no longer an essential
aspect of telephone service, and the Commission has terminated equal
access requirements for voice service. Further, section 225 of the Act
only requires TRS to include equal access ``to the same extent that
such access is provided to voice users,'' and there are few situations
in which a TRS provider would be obligated to provide equal access
under the current rule, even if a consumer were to request such access.
7. This unnecessary rule also burdens TRS providers with the cost
of maintaining an equal access infrastructure, hindering the efficient
provision of TRS. Deleting the equal access rule will allow TRS
providers to modernize their TRS facilities and discontinue what can be
a confusing and time-consuming call setup process.
8. Clarification Regarding Financial Incentives. The Commission
clarifies that, when TRS providers allow consumers to make long
distance calls without incurring per-minute charges, such offerings do
not constitute an impermissible financial incentive for TRS use. In
today's marketplace, the widespread bundling of long distance and local
calling negates any risk that offering free long distance to TRS users
would create an impermissible incentive to make long distance calls.
This clarification is limited to the specific issue regarding per-
minute charges for long distance service and does not, for example,
authorize a TRS provider to reimburse or otherwise assume payment for
charges currently assessed on TRS users for internet access or
telephone service.
9. Repeal of Billing Options Requirement. The Commission repeals
the billing options requirement in its entirety. Alternative billing
options are disappearing from the world of voice services, and thus
options such as sent-paid long distance and collect, calling card, and
third-party billing are no longer essential to ensure that TRS is
functionally equivalent to voice service.
10. Eliminating this obligation will relieve TRS providers from any
need to maintain obsolete features of circuit-switched networks at a
time when they and others within the communications industry have been
transitioning to IP-based platforms. In addition to
[[Page 10846]]
functional equivalence and efficiency, allowing TRS users access to
improvements in technology is another one of the Commission's mandates
under section 225 of the Act. Repealing the billing options rule will
benefit TRS providers and users by allowing technological improvements
with no consequential costs or harms to the functional equivalence and
efficiency of TRS.
11. Ceasing Federal Register Publication. The Commission deletes
the requirement that public notices of applications for certification
of state TRS programs be published in the Federal Register. This action
will improve the efficiency of the Commission's TRS certification
process and conserve administrative resources, and will not conflict
with statutory requirements or the Commission's ability to make
informed certification decisions. Federal Register publication of state
certification applications is not required by section 225 of the Act or
the Administrative Procedure Act, 5 U.S.C. 551 et seq. Such
certifications do not involve rulemaking, and the Commission's review
is conducted based on the documentation submitted by a state, with no
adjudicatory hearing ordinarily needed to determine whether a state
program merits certification. Moreover, for comparable Commission
authorization processes, such as certifications for internet-based TRS
providers and common-carrier applications for certificates of ``public
convenience and necessity,'' Federal Register publication is not
required unless special circumstances apply.
12. Ceasing Federal Register publication will not prevent or deter
public input on state TRS certification proposals. Since this rule was
adopted, the Commission has introduced an internet-based document
management system, which makes public notices requesting comment on
applications (as well as the applications themselves) readily
accessible through the Commission's EDOCS and ECFS on the Commission's
website. Posting electronic notices of state TRS certification
applications via EDOCS and the Commission's website will provide
sufficient notice to enable interested members of the public to comment
on an application.
Final Regulatory Flexibility Analysis
As required by the Regulatory Flexibility Act of 1980 as amended,
the Commission incorporated an Initial Regulatory Flexibility Analysis
(IRFA) into the Further Notice of Proposed Rulemaking. The Commission
sought written public comment on the proposals in the 2019 TRS Rules
Modernization FNPRM, including comment on the IRFA.
Need For, and Objectives of, the Rules
13. Document FCC 20-105 eliminates the outdated equal access and
multiple billing options requirements form the TRS mandatory minimum
standards and streamlines Commission processes by ceasing Federal
Register publications of state requests for TRS program certification,
while continuing to publish notice of certification applications in the
Commission's electronic document management system and on the
Commission's website.
Summary of Significant Issues Raised by Public Comments in Response to
the IRFA
14. No comments were filed in response to the IRFA.
Response to Comments by the Chief Counsel for Advocacy of the Small
Business Administration
15. The Chief Counsel did not file any comments in response to the
proposed rules in this proceeding.
Description and Estimate of the Number of Small Entities to Which the
Rules Will Apply
16. The amendments to rules adopted in the Report and Order will
affect the obligations of non-internet based TRS providers. These
services can be included within the broad economic category of All
Other Telecommunications.
Description of Projected Reporting, Recordkeeping, and Other Compliance
Requirements
17. Elimination of the equal access and billing options for TRS
providers and ceasing Federal Register publication for state TRS
program certification applications do not create direct reporting,
recordkeeping, or other compliance requirements on TRS providers.
Steps Taken To Minimize Significant Impact on Small Entities, and
Significant Alternatives Considered
18. Repeal of the equal access and billing options requirements
will reduce the burden on small entities subject to the rule. Such
entities would no longer need to provide TRS users with the ability to
select their long distance carrier or offer billing options, and the
providers would no longer be required to configure their networks for
such functionalities. Other small entities would not be affected.
19. Eliminating the requirement for the Commission to publish in
the Federal Register notice of applications for certification of state
TRS programs will have no impact on small entities because only the
Commission is burdened by this obligation.
Ordering Clauses
20. Pursuant to sections 1, 2, and 225 of the Communications Act of
1934, as amended, 47 U.S.C. 151, 152, and 225, document FCC 20-105 is
adopted, and the Commission's rules are amended.
21. The Commission's Consumer and Governmental Affairs Bureau,
Reference Information Center, shall send a copy of the Report and
Order, 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,
Telecommunications relay services. 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. 151, 152, 154, 201, 202, 217, 218, 220,
222, 225, 226, 227, 227b, 228, 251(a), 251(e), 254(k), 262, 276,
403(b)(2)(B), (c), 616, 620, 1401-1473, unless otherwise noted; Pub.
L. 115-141, Div. P, sec. 503, 132 Stat. 348, 1091.
0
2. Amend Sec. 64.604 by revising paragraph (a)(3)(ii) to read as
follows and removing and reserving paragraph (b)(3):
Sec. 64.604 Mandatory Minimum Standards.
* * * * *
(a) * * *
(3) * * *
(ii) Relay services shall be capable of handling any type of call
normally provided by telecommunications carriers unless the Commission
determines that it is not technologically feasible to do so. Relay
service providers have the burden of proving the infeasibility of
handling any type of call.
* * * * *
0
3. Amend Sec. 64.606 by revising paragraph (a)(1) to read as follows:
[[Page 10847]]
Sec. 64.606 internet-based TRS provider and TRS program
certification.
(a) * * * (1) Certified state program. Any state, through its
office of the governor or other delegated executive office empowered to
provide TRS, desiring to establish a state program under this section
shall submit documentation to the Commission addressed to the Federal
Communications Commission, Chief, Consumer and Governmental Affairs
Bureau, TRS Certification Program, Washington, DC 20554, and captioned
``TRS State Certification Application.'' All documentation shall be
submitted in narrative form, shall clearly describe the state program
for implementing intrastate TRS, and the procedures and remedies for
enforcing any requirements imposed by the state program. The Commission
shall give public notice of state applications for certification.
* * * * *
[FR Doc. 2021-00792 Filed 2-22-21; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6712-01-P
