Wireline Competition Bureau and the Consumer and Governmental Affairs Bureau Seek Comment on Revisions to Providers' Annual Reporting and Certification Requirements, 53850-53855 [2023-17076]
Download as PDF
<![CDATA[
53850
Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 152 / Wednesday, August 9, 2023 / Proposed Rules
networks that are external to such
eligible school or library. Excluded from
this definition is a data network that
provides connections between or among
instructional buildings of a school
campus or between or among nonadministrative buildings of a single
library branch.
■ 3. Section 54.503 is amended by
revising paragraph (b) to read as follows:
§ 54.503 Competitive bidding
requirements.
*
*
*
*
*
(b) Competitive bid requirements.
Except as provided in § 54.511(c), an
eligible school, library, or consortium
that includes an eligible school or
library shall seek competitive bids,
pursuant to the requirements
established in this subpart, for all
services eligible for support under
§ 54.502. These competitive bid
requirements apply in addition to state,
local, and Tribal competitive bid
requirements and are not intended to
preempt such state, local, or Tribal
requirements.
*
*
*
*
*
■ 4. Section 54.504 is amended by
revising paragraphs (d)(1)(iv) and (d)(2)
to read as follows:
§ 54.504
Requests for services.
lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with PROPOSALS1
*
*
*
*
(d) * * *
(1) * * *
(iv) The applicant certifies that the
requested change is either within the
scope of the controlling FCC Form 470,
including any associated Requests for
Proposal, for the original services, or is
the result of an unanticipated need for
additional bandwidth and the applicant
will seek competitive bids prior to the
next funding year.
(2) Except for documented cases of
transitioning from one service provider
to another service provider, in the event
that a service substitution results in a
change in the pre-discount price for the
supported service, support shall be
based on the lower of either the prediscount price of the service for which
support was originally requested or the
pre-discount price of the new,
substituted service.
*
*
*
*
*
■ 5. Section 54.514 is amended by
revising paragraphs (a)(2), (b), and (c) to
read as follows:
Payment for discounted services.
(a) * * *
(2) 120 days after the date of the
Funding Commitment Decision Letter;
or
*
*
*
*
*
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:06 Aug 08, 2023
Jkt 259001
[FR Doc. 2023–16985 Filed 8–8–23; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6712–01–P
FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS
COMMISSION
47 CFR Part 64
*
§ 54.514
(b) Invoice deadline extension.
Service providers or billed entities may
request a one-time extension of the
invoicing filing deadline if such request
is filed within 15 days after the deadline
calculated pursuant to paragraph (a) of
this section. The Administrator shall
grant a 120-day extension of the invoice
filing deadline, if it is timely requested.
(c) Choice of payment method.
Service providers providing discounted
services under this subpart in any
funding year shall, prior to the
submission of the FCC Form 471, permit
the billed entity to choose the method
of payment for the discounted services
from those methods approved by the
Administrator, including by making a
full, undiscounted payment and
receiving subsequent reimbursement of
the discount amount from the
Administrator or by making a
discounted payment and the service
provider receiving subsequent
reimbursement of the remaining amount
from the Administrator.
[WC Docket Nos. 12–375, 23–62; DA 23–
656; FR ID 161579]
Wireline Competition Bureau and the
Consumer and Governmental Affairs
Bureau Seek Comment on Revisions to
Providers’ Annual Reporting and
Certification Requirements
Federal Communications
Commission.
ACTION: Proposed rule; solicitation of
comments.
AGENCY:
In this document, the
Wireline Competition Bureau (WCB)
and the Consumer and Governmental
Affairs Bureau (CGB) (collectively, the
Bureaus) of the Federal
Communications Commission (FCC or
the Commission) seek comment on
proposed revisions to the instructions
and templates for the Annual Reports
and Annual Certifications submitted by
certain providers of incarcerated
people’s communications services
(IPCS).
SUMMARY:
Comments are due September 8,
2023; and reply comments are due
September 25, 2023.
ADDRESSES: You may submit comments,
identified by WC Docket Nos. 23–62,
12–375, by any of the following
methods:
DATES:
PO 00000
Frm 00036
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
• Electronic Filers: Comments may be
filed electronically using the internet by
accessing the Electronic Comment
Filing System (ECFS): https://
www.fcc.gov/ecfs/.
• Paper Filers: Parties who choose to
file by paper must file an original and
one copy of each filing. Filings can be
sent by commercial overnight courier, or
by first-class or overnight U.S. Postal
Service mail. Currently, the Commission
does not accept any hand or messenger
delivered filings as a temporary measure
taken to help protect the health and
safety of individuals, and to mitigate the
transmission of COVID–19. All filings
must be addressed to the Commission’s
Secretary, Office of the Secretary,
Federal Communications Commission.
The Commission adopted a new
Protective Order in this proceeding
which incorporates all materials
previously designated by the parties as
confidential. Filings that contain
confidential information should be
appropriately redacted and filed
pursuant to the procedure described in
that Order.
People with Disabilities: 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) or
(202) 418–0432 (TTY).
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Amy Goodman, Pricing Policy Division,
Wireline Competition Bureau, at (202)
418–1549 or via email at
Amy.Goodman@fcc.gov or Michael
Scott, Consumer and Governmental
Affairs Bureau, at (202) 418–1264 or via
email at Michael.Scott@fcc.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This is a
summary of the FCC’s Public Notice, DA
23–656, released August 3, 2023. The
full text of this document is available at
the following internet address: https://
www.fcc.gov/document/2023incarcerated-peoples-communicationsservices-annual-reports-pn. The full text
of the draft instructions, templates, and
certification form discussed in the
document are available at the following
internet address: https://www.fcc.gov/
proposed-2023-ipcs-annual-reports.
Synopsis
1. By this document, the Wireline
Competition Bureau (WCB) and the
Consumer and Governmental Affairs
Bureau (collectively, the Bureaus) seek
comment on proposed revisions to the
instructions and templates for the
Annual Reports and Annual
Certifications that the Commission
requires certain providers of
E:\FR\FM\09AUP1.SGM
09AUP1
lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with PROPOSALS1
Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 152 / Wednesday, August 9, 2023 / Proposed Rules
incarcerated people’s communications
services (IPCS) to submit pursuant to
the Commission’s regulations in 47 CFR
part 64. IPCS providers that are
classified as inmate calling services
(ICS) providers under the Commission’s
rules are required to make these filings
to enable the Commission to monitor
and track trends in the IPCS
marketplace, increase provider
transparency, and ensure compliance
with the Commission’s rules. In issuing
this document, the Bureaus propose
changes to reflect expanded reporting
requirements regarding access to IPCS
by persons with communication
disabilities, including
Telecommunications Relay Service
(TRS) access, and the addition of video
IPCS data necessary to help implement
the Martha Wright-Reed Just and
Reasonable Communications Act of
2022, Public Law 117–338, 136 Stat.
6156 (Martha Wright-Reed Act or Act).
2. In 2015, pursuant to delegated
authority, WCB created standardized
reporting templates (FCC Form 2301(a))
for the Annual Report and a related
certification of accuracy (FCC Form
2301(b)), as well as instructions to guide
providers through the reporting process.
WCB amended the instructions,
reporting templates, and certification
form in 2020 in order to improve the
type and quality of the information
collected. In 2022, WCB again amended
the instructions, reporting templates,
and certification form to reflect
significant reforms to the ICS rules
adopted in the 2021 ICS Order, Rates for
Interstate Inmate Calling Services, final
rule, 86 FR 40682, July 28, 2021 (2021
ICS Order) including lower interim rate
caps for interstate ICS calls, new interim
rate caps for international ICS calls, and
a rate cap structure that requires ICS
providers to differentiate between
legally mandated and contractually
required site commissions.
3. Subsequent developments now
require additional changes to the
instructions, reporting templates, and
certification form. In the 2022 ICS
Order, Rates for Interstate Inmate
Calling Services, final rule, 87 FR 75496,
December 9, 2022 (2022 ICS Order), the
Commission adopted requirements to
improve access to communications
services for incarcerated people with
communication disabilities and
expanded the scope of the Annual
Reports to reflect those new
requirements. Specifically, the
Commission required ICS providers to
list, at a minimum, for each facility
served, the types of TRS that can be
accessed from the facility and the
number of completed calls and
complaints for TTY-to-TTY calls,
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:06 Aug 08, 2023
Jkt 259001
American Sign Language (ASL) point-topoint video calls, and each type of TRS
for which access is provided. The
Commission also eliminated the safe
harbor, adopted in 2015, that had
exempted providers from any TRSrelated reporting requirements if they
either (1) operated in a facility that
allowed the offering of additional forms
of TRS beyond those mandated by the
Commission or (2) had not received any
complaints related to TRS calls. The
Commission found that the safe harbor
was no longer appropriate given the
expanded reporting requirement for
additional forms of TRS, and the
importance of transparency regarding
the state of accessible communications
in incarceration settings. The
Commission delegated authority to the
Bureaus to implement the expanded
reporting obligations and to develop a
reporting form that will most efficiently
and effectively elicit the required
information.
4. On January 5, 2023, the President
signed into law the Martha Wright-Reed
Act, which expanded the Commission’s
statutory authority over
communications between incarcerated
people and the non-incarcerated,
including ‘‘any audio or video
communications service used by
inmates . . . regardless of technology
used.’’ The new Act also amends section
2(b) of the Communications Act of 1934,
as amended (the Communications Act),
to make clear that the Commission’s
authority extends to intrastate as well as
interstate and international
communications services used by
incarcerated people.
5. The Act directs the Commission to
‘‘promulgate any regulations necessary
to implement’’ the Act, including its
mandate that the Commission establish
a ‘‘compensation plan’’ ensuring that all
rates and charges for IPCS ‘‘are just and
reasonable,’’ not earlier than 18 months
and not later than 24 months after the
Act’s January 5, 2023 enactment date.
The Act also requires the Commission to
consider, as part of its implementation,
the costs of ‘‘necessary’’ safety and
security measures, as well as
‘‘differences in costs’’ based on facility
size, or ‘‘other characteristics.’’ It also
allows the Commission to ‘‘use
industry-wide average costs of
telephone service and advanced
communications services and the
average costs of service of a
communications service provider’’ in
determining just and reasonable rates.
6. Pursuant to the directive that the
Commission implement the new Act
and establish just and reasonable rates
for IPCS services, the Commission
released the 2023 IPCS Notice,
PO 00000
Frm 00037
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
53851
Incarcerated People’s Communications
Services; Implementation of the Martha
Wright-Reed Act; Rates for Interstate
Inmate Calling Services, Notice of
Proposed Rulemaking, 88 FR 20804,
April 7, 2023 (2023 IPCS Notice),
seeking comment on how to interpret
the Act’s language to ensure that the
Commission implements the statute in a
manner that fulfills Congress’s intent.
Because the Commission is now
required or allowed to consider certain
types of costs, the Act contemplates that
it would undertake an additional data
collection. To ensure that it has the data
necessary to meet its substantive and
procedural responsibilities under the
Act, the Commission adopted the 2023
IPCS Order, Incarcerated People’s
Communications Services;
Implementation of the Martha WrightReed Act; Rates for Interstate Inmate
Calling Services, Delegations of
Authority; Reaffirmation and
Modification, 88 FR 19001, March 30,
2023 (2023 IPCS Order), delegating
authority to WCB and the Office of
Economics and Analytics (OEA) to
modify the template and instructions for
the most recent data collection to the
extent appropriate to timely collect such
information to cover the additional
services and providers now subject to
the Commission’s authority. On July 26,
2023, WCB and OEA released an Order
adopting instructions, a reporting
template, and a certification form to
implement the 2023 Mandatory Data
Collection. 2023 Mandatory Data
Collection for Incarcerated People’s
Communications Services, final order,
88 FR 51240, August 3, 2023.
7. In the 2023 IPCS Order, the
Commission also reaffirmed and
updated its prior delegation of authority
to the Bureaus to revise the instructions
and reporting templates for the Annual
Reports. Specifically, the Commission
delegated to the Bureaus authority to
modify, supplement, and update the
instructions and templates for the
Annual Reports, as appropriate to
supplement the information the
Commission will receive in response to
the 2023 Mandatory Data Collection.
8. In the next sections, the Bureaus
seek comment on their proposed
revisions to the Annual Report
instructions, templates, and certification
form, which are necessary to reflect the
revised disability access rules adopted
in the 2022 ICS Order and to help
implement the Martha Wright-Reed Act
to ensure just and reasonable rates for
consumers and fair compensation for
providers.
E:\FR\FM\09AUP1.SGM
09AUP1
53852
Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 152 / Wednesday, August 9, 2023 / Proposed Rules
I. Overall Structure of the Annual
Reporting and Certification
Requirements
9. Pursuant to their delegated
authority, the Bureaus propose to revise
the Annual Report instructions,
templates, and certification form to be
consistent with the Commission’s 2022
amendments to the annual reports rule
and to include the additional services
now subject to the Commission’s
authority under the Martha Wright-Reed
Act. The Bureaus also propose minor
improvements based on their experience
reviewing prior Annual Reports, which
has persuaded us that revised
instructions would help providers better
understand the requirements, making
the submitted reports more useful to the
Commission and consumers. As a
general matter, the Bureaus propose to
maintain the existing Excel-format
template and Word-format template for
the Annual Reports to better separate
individual data items from narrative
responses and seek comment on this
proposal. The Bureaus also seek
comment on these proposed revisions,
generally, and on the specific structure,
content, and format of the proposed
templates and instructions attached
hereto. The Bureaus likewise propose
minor revisions to the certification form.
Are there other general changes or
additions the Bureaus should make to
gather better or more accurate data or to
make the instructions clearer? Is there
additional information that the Bureaus
should require providers to submit to
enable the Commission to better
monitor compliance and industry
trends, or increase transparency to the
public? Conversely, are there any
proposed instructions, inquiries, or data
fields that should be removed because
they are unnecessary to ensure that
providers report uniform and accurate
data and other information?
10. As has been the case with prior
Annual Reports, the reporting period is
the calendar year immediately
preceding the year during which the
Annual Report is due. Thus, the
reporting period for the next Annual
Reports due on April 1, 2024 will be
January 1, 2023 through December 31,
2023.
lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with PROPOSALS1
A. General Proposals
11. The Bureaus seek comment on
whether the proposed instructions
provide sufficient guidance to ensure
that providers use uniform
methodologies and report the required
information in a consistent manner. Are
there any additional changes that would
help clarify the instructions, including
the definitions, and increase uniformity
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:06 Aug 08, 2023
Jkt 259001
across providers’ responses? The
Bureaus seek comment on all aspects of
the proposed instructions, including
any proposed revisions not explicitly
addressed in this document.
12. General Categories of Information
Requested. The proposed instructions,
like those for prior reports, require
providers to submit certain types of
information related to their operations,
IPCS rates, ancillary service charges, site
commissions, and disability access. As
a result of the Martha Wright-Reed Act,
the proposed instructions would require
providers to submit intrastate, interstate,
and international information for both
audio IPCS and video IPCS. Do the
proposed instructions describe these
categories of data in sufficient detail? Is
there additional information that the
Bureaus should require providers to
submit in any of these categories to
enable the Commission to better
monitor compliance and industry
trends, or increase transparency to the
public? Are there any additional
changes the Bureaus should make to the
proposed instructions and templates to
make them easier for providers to
understand? The Bureaus seek comment
generally on the benefits and burdens of
their proposals, and whether additional
changes to proposed or existing
reporting categories are warranted.
B. Specific Instructions
13. Definitions. The proposed
instructions contain new and revised
definitions reflecting the Commission’s
expanded authority over IPCS. The
Bureaus seek comment on these
definitions. Are they sufficiently clear?
If not, how should they be modified?
Are there any undefined terms the
Bureaus should define? Are there any
terms that should be added to the
proposed instructions that would help
ensure that the Commission receives all
relevant data? If so, what are they and
how should they be defined? Should
any proposed definitions be removed?
14. Facility and Contract Information.
The proposed instructions include a
reference to a new Excel template that
moves detailed contract and facility
information already collected on
multiple worksheets throughout the
Excel template to a single worksheet.
Collecting this granular information on
a single worksheet is intended to help
ensure consistent facility and contractlevel reporting, and eliminate the need
to repeatedly enter such detailed
information on other worksheets
throughout the Excel template. This
change is intended to reduce the
amount of duplicative information
required throughout the report and
consequently reduce the burden on
PO 00000
Frm 00038
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
providers. The Bureaus seek comment
on this proposal.
15. Audio and Video IPCS Rates. The
proposed instructions and templates
continue to require providers to submit
intrastate, interstate, and international
IPCS rates for audio services across a
number of categories, including: (i)
highest 15-minute rate; (ii) highest yearend 15-minute rate; and (iii) average per
minute rate. For interstate and
international rates, the Bureaus require
providers to identify all rates charged in
excess of the applicable rate caps. For
international rates, the Bureaus clarify
that reported termination charges
should reflect the amount billed by the
provider to the consumer for
termination to each international
destination. The Bureaus seek comment
on whether these instructions are
sufficiently clear.
16. To assist the Commission in
determining just and reasonable rates
for video IPCS, consistent with the
Martha Wright-Reed Act, the Bureaus
propose adopting a similar reporting
approach for video IPCS. The Bureaus
propose adding new worksheets that
collect the same rate information for
video IPCS as that collected for audio
IPCS. The Bureaus do not request
information on video IPCS rates that
exceed a cap, since there is no rate cap
for these services at this time. Is this
proposed approach the best way to
collect information on video IPCS rates?
Are there additional rate categories for
video IPCS that the Bureaus should
consider? Conversely, are there
categories for audio IPCS that should
not be included for video IPCS? For
example, the proposed worksheets for
international video IPCS exclude
charges to terminate communications to
foreign countries because while these
charges apply to audio services, they
may not apply to video services. Do
parties agree with this adjustment?
17. Because providers are already
familiar with these reporting categories
for audio IPCS, the Bureaus expect that
using the same rate reporting approach
for video IPCS will help minimize the
burdens associated with reporting this
additional information regarding their
video services. The Bureaus seek
comment on this assessment. Are there
other changes the Bureaus should make
to the proposed rate reporting structure
that would minimize the burden on
providers, without sacrificing any
necessary information or transparency?
The Bureaus also propose new
questions seeking certain narrative
information about the reported rates for
video IPCS and seek comment on these
proposed revisions.
E:\FR\FM\09AUP1.SGM
09AUP1
lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with PROPOSALS1
Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 152 / Wednesday, August 9, 2023 / Proposed Rules
18. The proposed worksheets for
video IPCS rate information ask
providers to submit information for 15minute intervals. The Bureaus propose
using a 15-minute interval because this
is the rate interval used for collecting
data on audio IPCS and using the same
interval should allow for more
meaningful rate comparisons. In
addition, audio call lengths are often
limited to around 15 minutes. Do parties
agree with use of this session interval to
evaluate video IPCS rates? If not, what
interval should the Bureaus use instead?
The proposed Excel template also seeks
rate information for both domestic and
international video calls. The Bureaus
seek comment on the extent to which
domestic video IPCS rates differ from
international video IPCS rates. Do the
Bureaus need separate worksheets for
domestic video IPCS rates and
international video IPCS rates? If the
Bureaus decide to use separate
worksheets and some providers have the
same rates for domestic and
international video IPCS, the Bureaus
propose allowing providers that charge
the same rates to opt out of filing a
separate worksheet for international
video IPCS. The Bureaus seek comment
on this proposed approach.
19. Finally, the Word template
contains questions seeking narrative
information about provider operations,
facilities, and services, including new
questions regarding video IPCS. The
Bureaus seek comment on these new
questions. Is there additional
information the Commission should
seek that would help increase
transparency and compliance without
imposing unwarranted burdens on
providers?
20. Ancillary Service Charges. The
current instructions require providers to
report a variety of information about any
ancillary service charges they have
assessed, and require a narrative
explanation concerning any
methodologies used to allocate these
charges among facilities that are covered
by a single contract, where applicable.
The Bureaus propose adding a new
worksheet that collects the same
ancillary service charge information for
video IPCS as that collected for audio
IPCS. Do the Bureaus need separate
worksheets for audio and video
ancillary service charges or are these
charges typically the same? If the
Bureaus decide to use separate
worksheets, the Bureaus propose
allowing providers that charge identical
ancillary service charges for audio and
video IPCS to opt out of filing a separate
worksheet for video services. The
Bureaus seek comment on this
approach. Is there any additional
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:06 Aug 08, 2023
Jkt 259001
information the Bureaus should seek
regarding ancillary service charges for
audio or video IPCS?
21. Site Commissions. The current
instructions require providers to report
their average total monthly site
commission payments on a facility-byfacility basis and to separate those
payments between legally mandated
and contractually prescribed site
commission payments, consistent with
the Commission’s rules. The existing
instructions also require providers to
subdivide both types of payments
between monetary and in-kind
payments and, within those
subdivisions, to report the portions of
the payments that were either fixed or
variable. The Bureaus propose adding a
new worksheet that collects the same
site commission payment information
for video IPCS as that collected for
audio IPCS. The Bureaus seek comment
on this approach or whether a different
approach should be considered. Is there
any additional information the Bureaus
should seek related to site commission
payments made in connection with
audio IPCS or video IPCS?
22. To the extent providers pay site
commissions for both audio IPCS and
video IPCS on a per-provider, perfacility, or per-contract basis, and those
site commissions are fixed, the Bureaus
propose requiring providers to allocate
such site commission payments
between audio IPCS and video IPCS
based on their best estimate of the
percentage of the total amount of their
fixed site commissions attributable to
each type of IPCS. The Bureaus also
propose to direct providers to explain,
document, and justify, in the Word
template, any alternative methodology
used to allocate fixed site commission
payments between audio IPCS and
video IPCS. Do commenters agree with
this approach? Why or why not? Should
the Bureaus require a different
allocation methodology to help ensure
more consistent reporting of fixed site
commission payments that apply to
multiple services? If so, what
methodology should the Bureaus
require and why?
23. Disability Access and Related
Considerations. The proposed
instructions modify providers’ reporting
obligations regarding the provision of
TTY-based TRS and TTY-to-TTY calling
for incarcerated people with hearing
and speech disabilities, including any
ancillary service charges that providers
have assessed for or in connection with
TTY-based calls. Providers would no
longer be required to report the number
of dropped calls for TTY-based TRS or
TTY-to-TTY calls, but would still be
required to report the number of calls
PO 00000
Frm 00039
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
53853
and number of complaints related to
TTY-based TRS and TTY-to-TTY calls.
The Bureaus also propose updates to the
instructions and the Excel template to
reflect the 2022 reforms to the
Commission’s rules. Under the
proposed changes to the ‘‘Disability
Access’’ worksheet of the Excel
template, providers would report, on a
facility-by-facility basis, for each of the
six kinds of TRS authorized by the
Commission, (1) whether the service
was available for use at the facility
during the reporting period, (2) the
number of calls made using the service,
and (3) the number of complaints
regarding the service. The same
information would be collected for
point-to-point video service and for
TTY-to-TTY calling. The Bureaus seek
comment on whether these proposed
changes capture all of the information
now required by the revised rules. If
not, what additional changes should the
Bureaus make?
24. Miscellaneous. The proposed
Excel template includes minor changes
designed to help reduce burdens and
minimize provider error when
completing the worksheets. For
instance, the proposed template
includes ‘‘drop-down’’ menus for data
entry when there are only a few answer
options. It also includes new cell
formatting that restricts the data that can
be entered (e.g., numbers vs. text). For
the worksheets that include rates paid
for IPCS calls to international
destinations, the Bureaus propose to
require providers to enter their
international destinations only once for
each worksheet, instead of repeating
this information multiple times on each
worksheet. The Bureaus seek comment
on these minor modifications. The
Bureaus also seek comment on their
proposed minor updates to the
certification form (e.g., inserting the
word ‘‘Authorized’’ before ‘‘Officer’’).
Finally, the Bureaus ask for suggestions
on additional modifications to the
instructions, Excel and Word templates,
and certification form that would make
them clearer and easier to use.
II. Procedural Matters
25. Ex Parte Presentations. This
proceeding shall be treated as a ‘‘permitbut-disclose’’ proceeding in accordance
with the Commission’s ex parte rules.
Persons making ex parte presentations
must file a copy of any written
presentation or a memorandum
summarizing any oral presentation
within two business days after the
presentation (unless a different deadline
applicable to the Sunshine period
applies). Persons making oral ex parte
presentations are reminded that
E:\FR\FM\09AUP1.SGM
09AUP1
lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with PROPOSALS1
53854
Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 152 / Wednesday, August 9, 2023 / Proposed Rules
memoranda summarizing the
presentation must (1) list all persons
attending or otherwise participating in
the meeting at which the ex parte
presentation was made, and (2)
summarize all data presented and
arguments made during the
presentation. If the presentation
consisted in whole or in part of the
presentation of data or arguments
already reflected in the presenter’s
written comments, memoranda, or other
filings in the proceeding, the presenter
may provide citations to such data or
arguments in the prior comments,
memoranda, or other filings (specifying
the relevant page and/or paragraph
numbers where such data or arguments
can be found) in lieu of summarizing
them in the memorandum. Documents
shown or given to Commission staff
during ex parte meetings are deemed to
be written ex parte presentations and
must be filed consistent with section
1.1206(b) of the Commission’s rules.
Participants in this proceeding should
familiarize themselves with the
Commission’s ex parte rules.
26. Regulatory Flexibility Act. As
required by the Regulatory Flexibility
Act, the Commission has prepared a
Supplemental Initial Regulatory
Flexibility Analysis (Supplemental
IRFA) of the possible significant
economic impact on small entities by
the policies and rules proposed in the
document. The Supplemental IRFA
supplements the Commission’s
Regulatory Flexibility Analyses
included in both the 2022 ICS Order,
and in the 2023 IPCS Order and serves
to further the process of implementing
the revised disability access rules
requirements adopted in the 2022 ICS
Order and in the Martha Wright-Reed
Act. The Supplemental IRFA is set forth
in Appendix B. The Commission
requests written public comments on
the Supplemental IRFA. Comments
must be identified as responses to the
Supplemental IRFA and must be filed
by the deadlines for comments provided
in this document. The Commission will
send a copy of this document, including
the Supplemental IRFA, to the Chief
Counsel for Advocacy of the Small
Business Administration. In addition,
summaries of this document and the
Supplemental IRFA will be published in
the Federal Register.
27. Initial Paperwork Reduction Act
Analysis. The document, and the
attached instructions and templates,
contain new or modified information
collection requirements subject to the
Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995
(PRA), Public Law 104–13. It will be
submitted to the OMB for review under
section 3507(d) of the PRA. OMB, the
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:06 Aug 08, 2023
Jkt 259001
general public, and other federal
agencies are invited to comment on the
new or modified information collection
requirements contained in this
proceeding. In addition, the Bureaus
note that pursuant to the Small Business
Paperwork Relief Act of 2002, Public
Law 107–198; see 44 U.S.C. 3506(4), the
Bureaus seek comment on how the
Commission will further reduce the
information collection burden for small
business concerns with fewer than 25
employees.
Supplemental Initial Regulatory
Flexibility Analysis
1. As required by the Regulatory
Flexibility Act of 1980, as amended
(RFA), the Wireline Competition Bureau
(WCB) and the Consumer and
Governmental Affairs Bureau (CGB)
(collectively, the Bureaus) have
prepared this Supplemental Initial
Regulatory Flexibility Analysis
(Supplemental IRFA) of the possible
significant economic impact on small
entities by the policies and rules
proposed in the document to
supplement the Commission’s
Regulatory Flexibility Analyses
contained in the Rates for Interstate
Inmate Calling Services, Order and
Notice of Proposed Rulemaking, and in
the Incarcerated People’s
Communications Services;
Implementation of the Martha WrightReed Act; Rates for Interstate Inmate
Calling Services, Notice of Proposed
Rulemaking and Order. The Bureaus
request written public comment on this
Supplemental IRFA. Comments must be
identified as responses to the
Supplemental IRFA and must be filed
by the deadlines for comments provided
on the first page of the document.
A. Need for, and Objectives of, the
Proposed Rules
2. In the document, the Bureaus seek
comment regarding proposed revisions
to the instructions, templates, and
certification form for the Annual
Reports submitted by providers of
incarcerated people’s communications
services (IPCS). In issuing the
document, the Bureaus act pursuant to
the Commission’s delegation of
authority to the Bureaus to modify,
supplement, and update the Annual
Report instructions, templates, and
certification form, as appropriate, to
reflect revised rules adopted in the 2022
ICS Order and to provide additional
information the Commission will need
to implement the Martha Wright-Reed
Just and Reasonable Communications
Act of 2022 (Martha Wright-Reed Act or
Act).
PO 00000
Frm 00040
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
3. In the 2022 ICS Order, the
Commission adopted requirements to
improve access to communications
services for incarcerated people with
communication disabilities and
expanded the scope of the Annual
Reports to reflect these changes. Under
the proposed, expanded reporting
requirements, IPCS providers would be
required to list, at a minimum, for each
facility served, the types of TRS that can
be accessed from the facility and the
number of completed calls and
complaints for TTY-to-TTY calls,
American Sign Language (ASL) point-topoint video calls, and each type of TRS
for which access is provided. The
Commission also eliminated the safe
harbor adopted in 2015 concerning the
reporting requirement for TTY-based
TRS calls. Additionally, the
Commission delegated authority to the
Bureaus to implement the expanded
reporting obligations contained in the
2022 ICS Order and to develop a
reporting form that will most efficiently
and effectively elicit the required
information.
4. On January 5, 2023, the President
signed the Martha Wright-Reed Act into
law, thereby expanding the
Commission’s statutory authority over
communications between incarcerated
people and the non-incarcerated to
include ‘‘any audio or video
communications service used by
inmates . . . regardless of technology
used.’’ The new Act also amends section
2(b) of the Communications Act of 1934,
as amended (the Communications Act),
to make clear that the Commission’s
authority extends to intrastate as well as
interstate and international
communications services used by
incarcerated people. Further, the Martha
Wright-Reed Act also directs the
Commission to ‘‘promulgate any
regulations necessary to implement’’ the
Act, including its mandate that the
Commission establish a ‘‘compensation
plan’’ ensuring that all rates and charges
for IPCS ‘‘are just and reasonable,’’ not
earlier than 18 months and not later
than 24 months after the Act’s January
5, 2023 enactment.
5. In accordance with the Martha
Wright-Reed Act’s directive, the
Commission released the 2023 IPCS
Notice, which sought comment on how
to best interpret the Act’s language in
order to ensure the Commission
implemented the statute in a manner
that fulfills Congress’s intent. In the
2023 IPCS Order, the Commission
reaffirmed and updated its prior
delegation of authority to the Bureaus to
revise the instructions and reporting
template for the Annual Reports.
Specifically, the Commission delegated
E:\FR\FM\09AUP1.SGM
09AUP1
Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 152 / Wednesday, August 9, 2023 / Proposed Rules
authority to the Bureaus to modify,
supplement, and update those
instructions and templates as
appropriate to supplement information
WCB will be receiving in response to
the 2023 Mandatory Data Collection.
6. Pursuant to their delegated
authority, the Bureaus have proposed
revisions to the instructions, templates,
and certification form for the Annual
Reports and are issuing the document to
seek comment on all aspects of these
proposed changes.
B. Legal Basis
7. The proposed action is authorized
pursuant to sections 1, 2, 4(i)–(j), 5(c),
201(b), 218, 220, 225, 255, 276, 403, and
716 of the Communications Act of 1934,
as amended, 47 U.S.C. 151, 152, 154(i)–
(j), 155(c), 201(b), 218, 220, 225, 255,
276, 403, and 617, and the Martha
Wright-Reed Act, Public Law 117–338,
136 Stat. 6156 (2022).
lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with PROPOSALS1
C. Description and Estimate of the
Number of Small Entities to Which the
Proposed Rules Would Apply
8. The RFA directs agencies to
provide a description of, and where
feasible, an estimate of the number of
small entities that may be affected by
the proposed Annual Reports data
collection. The RFA generally defines
the term ‘‘small entity’’ as having the
same meaning as the terms ‘‘small
business,’’ ‘‘small organization,’’ and
‘‘small governmental jurisdiction.’’ In
addition, the term ‘‘small business’’ has
the same meaning as the term ‘‘smallbusiness concern’’ under the Small
Business Act. noted above,
9. As noted above, Regulatory
Flexibility Analyses were incorporated
in the 2022 ICS Order and the 2023
IPCS Notice. In those analyses, the
Commission described in detail the
small entities that might be affected. In
this Supplemental IRFA, the Bureaus
hereby incorporate by reference the
descriptions and estimates of the
number of small entities from the
previous Regulatory Flexibility
Analyses in the 2022 ICS Order and
2023 IPCS Notice.
D. Description of Projected Reporting,
Recordkeeping, and Other Compliance
Requirements for Small Entities
10. The document seeks comment on
the specifics of the proposed revisions
to the instructions, templates, and
certification form to ensure the
Commission receives the data it needs
for the Annual Reports. The proposed
data collection would require certain
providers that are classified as inmate
calling services providers under the
Commission’s rules to submit, among
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:06 Aug 08, 2023
Jkt 259001
other things, data and other information
on providers’ operations, IPCS rates,
ancillary services, site commissions,
and disability access. The proposed data
collection may subject small and other
providers to modified or new reporting
or other compliance obligations. In
addition, the Bureaus recognize that
their actions in this proceeding may
affect the reporting, recordkeeping, and
other compliance requirements for
several groups of small entities. At this
time, the Bureaus do not have sufficient
information to determine whether the
proposed revisions to the Annual
Reports data collection will require
small entities to hire attorneys,
engineers, or other professionals to
comply with the new rules. The
Bureaus, however, anticipate the
information they receive in the
comments will help the Commission
identify and evaluate relevant
compliance matters for small entities,
including compliance costs and other
burdens that may result from the
proposals and inquiries the Bureaus
make in the document.
E. Steps Taken To Minimize the
Significant Economic Impact on Small
Entities and Significant Alternatives
Considered
11. The RFA requires an agency to
describe any significant alternatives that
it has considered in reaching its
proposed approach, which may include
the following four alternatives (among
others): ‘‘(1) the establishment of
differing compliance or reporting
requirements or timetables that take into
account the resources available to small
entities; (2) the clarification,
consolidation, or simplification of
compliance and reporting requirements
under the rules for such small entities;
(3) the use of performance rather than
design standards; and (4) an exemption
from coverage of the rule, or any part
thereof, for such small entities.’’ The
Bureaus will consider these factors after
reviewing any substantive comment the
Bureaus have received from the public
and potentially affected small entities.
12. In the document, the Bureaus have
taken steps to minimize the economic
impact on small entities and consider
alternatives through its proposals that
include considering different ways to
revise the Annual Reports instructions,
templates, and certification form
without causing significant economic
impact to small entities. For example,
the Bureaus propose reporting and
certification requirements that are
similar to those used in prior Annual
Reports data collections. In addition, the
standardized templates and instructions
simplify compliance with, and reduce
PO 00000
Frm 00041
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
53855
the burden of, the information
requirements related to submission of
the Annual Reports. Further, the
Bureaus have taken steps to ensure the
instructions, annual reporting
templates, and certification form are
competitively neutral and are not
unduly burdensome for all providers.
Finally, the document proposes to allow
providers that charge the same rates for
domestic and international video IPCS
to opt out of filing a separate
spreadsheet for international video
IPCS, thus reducing the regulatory
burden to providers. The Bureaus will
also consider any significant economic
impact to small entities that may be
raised in comments filed in response to
the document and Supplemental IRFA.
F. Federal Rules That May Duplicate,
Overlap, or Conflict With the Proposed
Rules
13. None.
Federal Communications Commission.
Lynne Engledow
Deputy Chief, Pricing and Policy Division,
Wireline Competition Bureau.
[FR Doc. 2023–17076 Filed 8–8–23; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6712–01–P
DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE
GENERAL SERVICES
ADMINISTRATION
NATIONAL AERONAUTICS AND
SPACE ADMINISTRATION
48 CFR Part 16
[FAR Case 2020–005; Docket No. FAR–
2020–0005; Sequence No. 1]
RIN 9000–AO08
Federal Acquisition Regulation:
Explanations to Unsuccessful Offerors
on Certain Orders Under Task and
Delivery Order Contracts
Department of Defense (DoD),
General Services Administration (GSA),
and National Aeronautics and Space
Administration (NASA).
ACTION: Proposed rule.
AGENCY:
DoD, GSA, and NASA are
proposing to amend the Federal
Acquisition Regulation (FAR) to
implement a section of the National
Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal
Year 2020 that requires explanations to
unsuccessful awardees on certain orders
under task order and delivery order
contracts.
SUMMARY:
Interested parties should submit
written comments to the Regulatory
DATES:
E:\FR\FM\09AUP1.SGM
09AUP1
]]>Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 88, Number 152 (Wednesday, August 9, 2023)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 53850-53855]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2023-17076]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION
47 CFR Part 64
[WC Docket Nos. 12-375, 23-62; DA 23-656; FR ID 161579]
Wireline Competition Bureau and the Consumer and Governmental
Affairs Bureau Seek Comment on Revisions to Providers' Annual Reporting
and Certification Requirements
AGENCY: Federal Communications Commission.
ACTION: Proposed rule; solicitation of comments.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: In this document, the Wireline Competition Bureau (WCB) and
the Consumer and Governmental Affairs Bureau (CGB) (collectively, the
Bureaus) of the Federal Communications Commission (FCC or the
Commission) seek comment on proposed revisions to the instructions and
templates for the Annual Reports and Annual Certifications submitted by
certain providers of incarcerated people's communications services
(IPCS).
DATES: Comments are due September 8, 2023; and reply comments are due
September 25, 2023.
ADDRESSES: You may submit comments, identified by WC Docket Nos. 23-62,
12-375, by any of the following methods:
Electronic Filers: Comments may be filed electronically
using the internet by accessing the Electronic Comment Filing System
(ECFS): https://www.fcc.gov/ecfs/.
Paper Filers: Parties who choose to file by paper must
file an original and one copy of each filing. Filings can be sent by
commercial overnight courier, or by first-class or overnight U.S.
Postal Service mail. Currently, the Commission does not accept any hand
or messenger delivered filings as a temporary measure taken to help
protect the health and safety of individuals, and to mitigate the
transmission of COVID-19. All filings must be addressed to the
Commission's Secretary, Office of the Secretary, Federal Communications
Commission.
The Commission adopted a new Protective Order in this proceeding
which incorporates all materials previously designated by the parties
as confidential. Filings that contain confidential information should
be appropriately redacted and filed pursuant to the procedure described
in that Order.
People with Disabilities: 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) or
(202) 418-0432 (TTY).
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Amy Goodman, Pricing Policy Division,
Wireline Competition Bureau, at (202) 418-1549 or via email at
[email protected] or Michael Scott, Consumer and Governmental Affairs
Bureau, at (202) 418-1264 or via email at [email protected].
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This is a summary of the FCC's Public
Notice, DA 23-656, released August 3, 2023. The full text of this
document is available at the following internet address: https://www.fcc.gov/document/2023-incarcerated-peoples-communications-services-annual-reports-pn. The full text of the draft instructions, templates,
and certification form discussed in the document are available at the
following internet address: https://www.fcc.gov/proposed-2023-ipcs-annual-reports.
Synopsis
1. By this document, the Wireline Competition Bureau (WCB) and the
Consumer and Governmental Affairs Bureau (collectively, the Bureaus)
seek comment on proposed revisions to the instructions and templates
for the Annual Reports and Annual Certifications that the Commission
requires certain providers of
[[Page 53851]]
incarcerated people's communications services (IPCS) to submit pursuant
to the Commission's regulations in 47 CFR part 64. IPCS providers that
are classified as inmate calling services (ICS) providers under the
Commission's rules are required to make these filings to enable the
Commission to monitor and track trends in the IPCS marketplace,
increase provider transparency, and ensure compliance with the
Commission's rules. In issuing this document, the Bureaus propose
changes to reflect expanded reporting requirements regarding access to
IPCS by persons with communication disabilities, including
Telecommunications Relay Service (TRS) access, and the addition of
video IPCS data necessary to help implement the Martha Wright-Reed Just
and Reasonable Communications Act of 2022, Public Law 117-338, 136
Stat. 6156 (Martha Wright-Reed Act or Act).
2. In 2015, pursuant to delegated authority, WCB created
standardized reporting templates (FCC Form 2301(a)) for the Annual
Report and a related certification of accuracy (FCC Form 2301(b)), as
well as instructions to guide providers through the reporting process.
WCB amended the instructions, reporting templates, and certification
form in 2020 in order to improve the type and quality of the
information collected. In 2022, WCB again amended the instructions,
reporting templates, and certification form to reflect significant
reforms to the ICS rules adopted in the 2021 ICS Order, Rates for
Interstate Inmate Calling Services, final rule, 86 FR 40682, July 28,
2021 (2021 ICS Order) including lower interim rate caps for interstate
ICS calls, new interim rate caps for international ICS calls, and a
rate cap structure that requires ICS providers to differentiate between
legally mandated and contractually required site commissions.
3. Subsequent developments now require additional changes to the
instructions, reporting templates, and certification form. In the 2022
ICS Order, Rates for Interstate Inmate Calling Services, final rule, 87
FR 75496, December 9, 2022 (2022 ICS Order), the Commission adopted
requirements to improve access to communications services for
incarcerated people with communication disabilities and expanded the
scope of the Annual Reports to reflect those new requirements.
Specifically, the Commission required ICS providers to list, at a
minimum, for each facility served, the types of TRS that can be
accessed from the facility and the number of completed calls and
complaints for TTY-to-TTY calls, American Sign Language (ASL) point-to-
point video calls, and each type of TRS for which access is provided.
The Commission also eliminated the safe harbor, adopted in 2015, that
had exempted providers from any TRS-related reporting requirements if
they either (1) operated in a facility that allowed the offering of
additional forms of TRS beyond those mandated by the Commission or (2)
had not received any complaints related to TRS calls. The Commission
found that the safe harbor was no longer appropriate given the expanded
reporting requirement for additional forms of TRS, and the importance
of transparency regarding the state of accessible communications in
incarceration settings. The Commission delegated authority to the
Bureaus to implement the expanded reporting obligations and to develop
a reporting form that will most efficiently and effectively elicit the
required information.
4. On January 5, 2023, the President signed into law the Martha
Wright-Reed Act, which expanded the Commission's statutory authority
over communications between incarcerated people and the non-
incarcerated, including ``any audio or video communications service
used by inmates . . . regardless of technology used.'' The new Act also
amends section 2(b) of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended (the
Communications Act), to make clear that the Commission's authority
extends to intrastate as well as interstate and international
communications services used by incarcerated people.
5. The Act directs the Commission to ``promulgate any regulations
necessary to implement'' the Act, including its mandate that the
Commission establish a ``compensation plan'' ensuring that all rates
and charges for IPCS ``are just and reasonable,'' not earlier than 18
months and not later than 24 months after the Act's January 5, 2023
enactment date. The Act also requires the Commission to consider, as
part of its implementation, the costs of ``necessary'' safety and
security measures, as well as ``differences in costs'' based on
facility size, or ``other characteristics.'' It also allows the
Commission to ``use industry-wide average costs of telephone service
and advanced communications services and the average costs of service
of a communications service provider'' in determining just and
reasonable rates.
6. Pursuant to the directive that the Commission implement the new
Act and establish just and reasonable rates for IPCS services, the
Commission released the 2023 IPCS Notice, Incarcerated People's
Communications Services; Implementation of the Martha Wright-Reed Act;
Rates for Interstate Inmate Calling Services, Notice of Proposed
Rulemaking, 88 FR 20804, April 7, 2023 (2023 IPCS Notice), seeking
comment on how to interpret the Act's language to ensure that the
Commission implements the statute in a manner that fulfills Congress's
intent. Because the Commission is now required or allowed to consider
certain types of costs, the Act contemplates that it would undertake an
additional data collection. To ensure that it has the data necessary to
meet its substantive and procedural responsibilities under the Act, the
Commission adopted the 2023 IPCS Order, Incarcerated People's
Communications Services; Implementation of the Martha Wright-Reed Act;
Rates for Interstate Inmate Calling Services, Delegations of Authority;
Reaffirmation and Modification, 88 FR 19001, March 30, 2023 (2023 IPCS
Order), delegating authority to WCB and the Office of Economics and
Analytics (OEA) to modify the template and instructions for the most
recent data collection to the extent appropriate to timely collect such
information to cover the additional services and providers now subject
to the Commission's authority. On July 26, 2023, WCB and OEA released
an Order adopting instructions, a reporting template, and a
certification form to implement the 2023 Mandatory Data Collection.
2023 Mandatory Data Collection for Incarcerated People's Communications
Services, final order, 88 FR 51240, August 3, 2023.
7. In the 2023 IPCS Order, the Commission also reaffirmed and
updated its prior delegation of authority to the Bureaus to revise the
instructions and reporting templates for the Annual Reports.
Specifically, the Commission delegated to the Bureaus authority to
modify, supplement, and update the instructions and templates for the
Annual Reports, as appropriate to supplement the information the
Commission will receive in response to the 2023 Mandatory Data
Collection.
8. In the next sections, the Bureaus seek comment on their proposed
revisions to the Annual Report instructions, templates, and
certification form, which are necessary to reflect the revised
disability access rules adopted in the 2022 ICS Order and to help
implement the Martha Wright-Reed Act to ensure just and reasonable
rates for consumers and fair compensation for providers.
[[Page 53852]]
I. Overall Structure of the Annual Reporting and Certification
Requirements
9. Pursuant to their delegated authority, the Bureaus propose to
revise the Annual Report instructions, templates, and certification
form to be consistent with the Commission's 2022 amendments to the
annual reports rule and to include the additional services now subject
to the Commission's authority under the Martha Wright-Reed Act. The
Bureaus also propose minor improvements based on their experience
reviewing prior Annual Reports, which has persuaded us that revised
instructions would help providers better understand the requirements,
making the submitted reports more useful to the Commission and
consumers. As a general matter, the Bureaus propose to maintain the
existing Excel-format template and Word-format template for the Annual
Reports to better separate individual data items from narrative
responses and seek comment on this proposal. The Bureaus also seek
comment on these proposed revisions, generally, and on the specific
structure, content, and format of the proposed templates and
instructions attached hereto. The Bureaus likewise propose minor
revisions to the certification form. Are there other general changes or
additions the Bureaus should make to gather better or more accurate
data or to make the instructions clearer? Is there additional
information that the Bureaus should require providers to submit to
enable the Commission to better monitor compliance and industry trends,
or increase transparency to the public? Conversely, are there any
proposed instructions, inquiries, or data fields that should be removed
because they are unnecessary to ensure that providers report uniform
and accurate data and other information?
10. As has been the case with prior Annual Reports, the reporting
period is the calendar year immediately preceding the year during which
the Annual Report is due. Thus, the reporting period for the next
Annual Reports due on April 1, 2024 will be January 1, 2023 through
December 31, 2023.
A. General Proposals
11. The Bureaus seek comment on whether the proposed instructions
provide sufficient guidance to ensure that providers use uniform
methodologies and report the required information in a consistent
manner. Are there any additional changes that would help clarify the
instructions, including the definitions, and increase uniformity across
providers' responses? The Bureaus seek comment on all aspects of the
proposed instructions, including any proposed revisions not explicitly
addressed in this document.
12. General Categories of Information Requested. The proposed
instructions, like those for prior reports, require providers to submit
certain types of information related to their operations, IPCS rates,
ancillary service charges, site commissions, and disability access. As
a result of the Martha Wright-Reed Act, the proposed instructions would
require providers to submit intrastate, interstate, and international
information for both audio IPCS and video IPCS. Do the proposed
instructions describe these categories of data in sufficient detail? Is
there additional information that the Bureaus should require providers
to submit in any of these categories to enable the Commission to better
monitor compliance and industry trends, or increase transparency to the
public? Are there any additional changes the Bureaus should make to the
proposed instructions and templates to make them easier for providers
to understand? The Bureaus seek comment generally on the benefits and
burdens of their proposals, and whether additional changes to proposed
or existing reporting categories are warranted.
B. Specific Instructions
13. Definitions. The proposed instructions contain new and revised
definitions reflecting the Commission's expanded authority over IPCS.
The Bureaus seek comment on these definitions. Are they sufficiently
clear? If not, how should they be modified? Are there any undefined
terms the Bureaus should define? Are there any terms that should be
added to the proposed instructions that would help ensure that the
Commission receives all relevant data? If so, what are they and how
should they be defined? Should any proposed definitions be removed?
14. Facility and Contract Information. The proposed instructions
include a reference to a new Excel template that moves detailed
contract and facility information already collected on multiple
worksheets throughout the Excel template to a single worksheet.
Collecting this granular information on a single worksheet is intended
to help ensure consistent facility and contract-level reporting, and
eliminate the need to repeatedly enter such detailed information on
other worksheets throughout the Excel template. This change is intended
to reduce the amount of duplicative information required throughout the
report and consequently reduce the burden on providers. The Bureaus
seek comment on this proposal.
15. Audio and Video IPCS Rates. The proposed instructions and
templates continue to require providers to submit intrastate,
interstate, and international IPCS rates for audio services across a
number of categories, including: (i) highest 15-minute rate; (ii)
highest year-end 15-minute rate; and (iii) average per minute rate. For
interstate and international rates, the Bureaus require providers to
identify all rates charged in excess of the applicable rate caps. For
international rates, the Bureaus clarify that reported termination
charges should reflect the amount billed by the provider to the
consumer for termination to each international destination. The Bureaus
seek comment on whether these instructions are sufficiently clear.
16. To assist the Commission in determining just and reasonable
rates for video IPCS, consistent with the Martha Wright-Reed Act, the
Bureaus propose adopting a similar reporting approach for video IPCS.
The Bureaus propose adding new worksheets that collect the same rate
information for video IPCS as that collected for audio IPCS. The
Bureaus do not request information on video IPCS rates that exceed a
cap, since there is no rate cap for these services at this time. Is
this proposed approach the best way to collect information on video
IPCS rates? Are there additional rate categories for video IPCS that
the Bureaus should consider? Conversely, are there categories for audio
IPCS that should not be included for video IPCS? For example, the
proposed worksheets for international video IPCS exclude charges to
terminate communications to foreign countries because while these
charges apply to audio services, they may not apply to video services.
Do parties agree with this adjustment?
17. Because providers are already familiar with these reporting
categories for audio IPCS, the Bureaus expect that using the same rate
reporting approach for video IPCS will help minimize the burdens
associated with reporting this additional information regarding their
video services. The Bureaus seek comment on this assessment. Are there
other changes the Bureaus should make to the proposed rate reporting
structure that would minimize the burden on providers, without
sacrificing any necessary information or transparency? The Bureaus also
propose new questions seeking certain narrative information about the
reported rates for video IPCS and seek comment on these proposed
revisions.
[[Page 53853]]
18. The proposed worksheets for video IPCS rate information ask
providers to submit information for 15-minute intervals. The Bureaus
propose using a 15-minute interval because this is the rate interval
used for collecting data on audio IPCS and using the same interval
should allow for more meaningful rate comparisons. In addition, audio
call lengths are often limited to around 15 minutes. Do parties agree
with use of this session interval to evaluate video IPCS rates? If not,
what interval should the Bureaus use instead? The proposed Excel
template also seeks rate information for both domestic and
international video calls. The Bureaus seek comment on the extent to
which domestic video IPCS rates differ from international video IPCS
rates. Do the Bureaus need separate worksheets for domestic video IPCS
rates and international video IPCS rates? If the Bureaus decide to use
separate worksheets and some providers have the same rates for domestic
and international video IPCS, the Bureaus propose allowing providers
that charge the same rates to opt out of filing a separate worksheet
for international video IPCS. The Bureaus seek comment on this proposed
approach.
19. Finally, the Word template contains questions seeking narrative
information about provider operations, facilities, and services,
including new questions regarding video IPCS. The Bureaus seek comment
on these new questions. Is there additional information the Commission
should seek that would help increase transparency and compliance
without imposing unwarranted burdens on providers?
20. Ancillary Service Charges. The current instructions require
providers to report a variety of information about any ancillary
service charges they have assessed, and require a narrative explanation
concerning any methodologies used to allocate these charges among
facilities that are covered by a single contract, where applicable. The
Bureaus propose adding a new worksheet that collects the same ancillary
service charge information for video IPCS as that collected for audio
IPCS. Do the Bureaus need separate worksheets for audio and video
ancillary service charges or are these charges typically the same? If
the Bureaus decide to use separate worksheets, the Bureaus propose
allowing providers that charge identical ancillary service charges for
audio and video IPCS to opt out of filing a separate worksheet for
video services. The Bureaus seek comment on this approach. Is there any
additional information the Bureaus should seek regarding ancillary
service charges for audio or video IPCS?
21. Site Commissions. The current instructions require providers to
report their average total monthly site commission payments on a
facility-by-facility basis and to separate those payments between
legally mandated and contractually prescribed site commission payments,
consistent with the Commission's rules. The existing instructions also
require providers to subdivide both types of payments between monetary
and in-kind payments and, within those subdivisions, to report the
portions of the payments that were either fixed or variable. The
Bureaus propose adding a new worksheet that collects the same site
commission payment information for video IPCS as that collected for
audio IPCS. The Bureaus seek comment on this approach or whether a
different approach should be considered. Is there any additional
information the Bureaus should seek related to site commission payments
made in connection with audio IPCS or video IPCS?
22. To the extent providers pay site commissions for both audio
IPCS and video IPCS on a per-provider, per-facility, or per-contract
basis, and those site commissions are fixed, the Bureaus propose
requiring providers to allocate such site commission payments between
audio IPCS and video IPCS based on their best estimate of the
percentage of the total amount of their fixed site commissions
attributable to each type of IPCS. The Bureaus also propose to direct
providers to explain, document, and justify, in the Word template, any
alternative methodology used to allocate fixed site commission payments
between audio IPCS and video IPCS. Do commenters agree with this
approach? Why or why not? Should the Bureaus require a different
allocation methodology to help ensure more consistent reporting of
fixed site commission payments that apply to multiple services? If so,
what methodology should the Bureaus require and why?
23. Disability Access and Related Considerations. The proposed
instructions modify providers' reporting obligations regarding the
provision of TTY-based TRS and TTY-to-TTY calling for incarcerated
people with hearing and speech disabilities, including any ancillary
service charges that providers have assessed for or in connection with
TTY-based calls. Providers would no longer be required to report the
number of dropped calls for TTY-based TRS or TTY-to-TTY calls, but
would still be required to report the number of calls and number of
complaints related to TTY-based TRS and TTY-to-TTY calls. The Bureaus
also propose updates to the instructions and the Excel template to
reflect the 2022 reforms to the Commission's rules. Under the proposed
changes to the ``Disability Access'' worksheet of the Excel template,
providers would report, on a facility-by-facility basis, for each of
the six kinds of TRS authorized by the Commission, (1) whether the
service was available for use at the facility during the reporting
period, (2) the number of calls made using the service, and (3) the
number of complaints regarding the service. The same information would
be collected for point-to-point video service and for TTY-to-TTY
calling. The Bureaus seek comment on whether these proposed changes
capture all of the information now required by the revised rules. If
not, what additional changes should the Bureaus make?
24. Miscellaneous. The proposed Excel template includes minor
changes designed to help reduce burdens and minimize provider error
when completing the worksheets. For instance, the proposed template
includes ``drop-down'' menus for data entry when there are only a few
answer options. It also includes new cell formatting that restricts the
data that can be entered (e.g., numbers vs. text). For the worksheets
that include rates paid for IPCS calls to international destinations,
the Bureaus propose to require providers to enter their international
destinations only once for each worksheet, instead of repeating this
information multiple times on each worksheet. The Bureaus seek comment
on these minor modifications. The Bureaus also seek comment on their
proposed minor updates to the certification form (e.g., inserting the
word ``Authorized'' before ``Officer''). Finally, the Bureaus ask for
suggestions on additional modifications to the instructions, Excel and
Word templates, and certification form that would make them clearer and
easier to use.
II. Procedural Matters
25. Ex Parte Presentations. This proceeding shall be treated as a
``permit-but-disclose'' proceeding in accordance with the Commission's
ex parte rules. Persons making ex parte presentations must file a copy
of any written presentation or a memorandum summarizing any oral
presentation within two business days after the presentation (unless a
different deadline applicable to the Sunshine period applies). Persons
making oral ex parte presentations are reminded that
[[Page 53854]]
memoranda summarizing the presentation must (1) list all persons
attending or otherwise participating in the meeting at which the ex
parte presentation was made, and (2) summarize all data presented and
arguments made during the presentation. If the presentation consisted
in whole or in part of the presentation of data or arguments already
reflected in the presenter's written comments, memoranda, or other
filings in the proceeding, the presenter may provide citations to such
data or arguments in the prior comments, memoranda, or other filings
(specifying the relevant page and/or paragraph numbers where such data
or arguments can be found) in lieu of summarizing them in the
memorandum. Documents shown or given to Commission staff during ex
parte meetings are deemed to be written ex parte presentations and must
be filed consistent with section 1.1206(b) of the Commission's rules.
Participants in this proceeding should familiarize themselves with the
Commission's ex parte rules.
26. Regulatory Flexibility Act. As required by the Regulatory
Flexibility Act, the Commission has prepared a Supplemental Initial
Regulatory Flexibility Analysis (Supplemental IRFA) of the possible
significant economic impact on small entities by the policies and rules
proposed in the document. The Supplemental IRFA supplements the
Commission's Regulatory Flexibility Analyses included in both the 2022
ICS Order, and in the 2023 IPCS Order and serves to further the process
of implementing the revised disability access rules requirements
adopted in the 2022 ICS Order and in the Martha Wright-Reed Act. The
Supplemental IRFA is set forth in Appendix B. The Commission requests
written public comments on the Supplemental IRFA. Comments must be
identified as responses to the Supplemental IRFA and must be filed by
the deadlines for comments provided in this document. The Commission
will send a copy of this document, including the Supplemental IRFA, to
the Chief Counsel for Advocacy of the Small Business Administration. In
addition, summaries of this document and the Supplemental IRFA will be
published in the Federal Register.
27. Initial Paperwork Reduction Act Analysis. The document, and the
attached instructions and templates, contain new or modified
information collection requirements subject to the Paperwork Reduction
Act of 1995 (PRA), Public Law 104-13. It will be submitted to the OMB
for review under section 3507(d) of the PRA. OMB, the general public,
and other federal agencies are invited to comment on the new or
modified information collection requirements contained in this
proceeding. In addition, the Bureaus note that pursuant to the Small
Business Paperwork Relief Act of 2002, Public Law 107-198; see 44
U.S.C. 3506(4), the Bureaus seek comment on how the Commission will
further reduce the information collection burden for small business
concerns with fewer than 25 employees.
Supplemental Initial Regulatory Flexibility Analysis
1. As required by the Regulatory Flexibility Act of 1980, as
amended (RFA), the Wireline Competition Bureau (WCB) and the Consumer
and Governmental Affairs Bureau (CGB) (collectively, the Bureaus) have
prepared this Supplemental Initial Regulatory Flexibility Analysis
(Supplemental IRFA) of the possible significant economic impact on
small entities by the policies and rules proposed in the document to
supplement the Commission's Regulatory Flexibility Analyses contained
in the Rates for Interstate Inmate Calling Services, Order and Notice
of Proposed Rulemaking, and in the Incarcerated People's Communications
Services; Implementation of the Martha Wright-Reed Act; Rates for
Interstate Inmate Calling Services, Notice of Proposed Rulemaking and
Order. The Bureaus request written public comment on this Supplemental
IRFA. Comments must be identified as responses to the Supplemental IRFA
and must be filed by the deadlines for comments provided on the first
page of the document.
A. Need for, and Objectives of, the Proposed Rules
2. In the document, the Bureaus seek comment regarding proposed
revisions to the instructions, templates, and certification form for
the Annual Reports submitted by providers of incarcerated people's
communications services (IPCS). In issuing the document, the Bureaus
act pursuant to the Commission's delegation of authority to the Bureaus
to modify, supplement, and update the Annual Report instructions,
templates, and certification form, as appropriate, to reflect revised
rules adopted in the 2022 ICS Order and to provide additional
information the Commission will need to implement the Martha Wright-
Reed Just and Reasonable Communications Act of 2022 (Martha Wright-Reed
Act or Act).
3. In the 2022 ICS Order, the Commission adopted requirements to
improve access to communications services for incarcerated people with
communication disabilities and expanded the scope of the Annual Reports
to reflect these changes. Under the proposed, expanded reporting
requirements, IPCS providers would be required to list, at a minimum,
for each facility served, the types of TRS that can be accessed from
the facility and the number of completed calls and complaints for TTY-
to-TTY calls, American Sign Language (ASL) point-to-point video calls,
and each type of TRS for which access is provided. The Commission also
eliminated the safe harbor adopted in 2015 concerning the reporting
requirement for TTY-based TRS calls. Additionally, the Commission
delegated authority to the Bureaus to implement the expanded reporting
obligations contained in the 2022 ICS Order and to develop a reporting
form that will most efficiently and effectively elicit the required
information.
4. On January 5, 2023, the President signed the Martha Wright-Reed
Act into law, thereby expanding the Commission's statutory authority
over communications between incarcerated people and the non-
incarcerated to include ``any audio or video communications service
used by inmates . . . regardless of technology used.'' The new Act also
amends section 2(b) of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended (the
Communications Act), to make clear that the Commission's authority
extends to intrastate as well as interstate and international
communications services used by incarcerated people. Further, the
Martha Wright-Reed Act also directs the Commission to ``promulgate any
regulations necessary to implement'' the Act, including its mandate
that the Commission establish a ``compensation plan'' ensuring that all
rates and charges for IPCS ``are just and reasonable,'' not earlier
than 18 months and not later than 24 months after the Act's January 5,
2023 enactment.
5. In accordance with the Martha Wright-Reed Act's directive, the
Commission released the 2023 IPCS Notice, which sought comment on how
to best interpret the Act's language in order to ensure the Commission
implemented the statute in a manner that fulfills Congress's intent. In
the 2023 IPCS Order, the Commission reaffirmed and updated its prior
delegation of authority to the Bureaus to revise the instructions and
reporting template for the Annual Reports. Specifically, the Commission
delegated
[[Page 53855]]
authority to the Bureaus to modify, supplement, and update those
instructions and templates as appropriate to supplement information WCB
will be receiving in response to the 2023 Mandatory Data Collection.
6. Pursuant to their delegated authority, the Bureaus have proposed
revisions to the instructions, templates, and certification form for
the Annual Reports and are issuing the document to seek comment on all
aspects of these proposed changes.
B. Legal Basis
7. The proposed action is authorized pursuant to sections 1, 2,
4(i)-(j), 5(c), 201(b), 218, 220, 225, 255, 276, 403, and 716 of the
Communications Act of 1934, as amended, 47 U.S.C. 151, 152, 154(i)-(j),
155(c), 201(b), 218, 220, 225, 255, 276, 403, and 617, and the Martha
Wright-Reed Act, Public Law 117-338, 136 Stat. 6156 (2022).
C. Description and Estimate of the Number of Small Entities to Which
the Proposed Rules Would Apply
8. The RFA directs agencies to provide a description of, and where
feasible, an estimate of the number of small entities that may be
affected by the proposed Annual Reports data collection. The RFA
generally defines the term ``small entity'' as having the same meaning
as the terms ``small business,'' ``small organization,'' and ``small
governmental jurisdiction.'' In addition, the term ``small business''
has the same meaning as the term ``small-business concern'' under the
Small Business Act. noted above,
9. As noted above, Regulatory Flexibility Analyses were
incorporated in the 2022 ICS Order and the 2023 IPCS Notice. In those
analyses, the Commission described in detail the small entities that
might be affected. In this Supplemental IRFA, the Bureaus hereby
incorporate by reference the descriptions and estimates of the number
of small entities from the previous Regulatory Flexibility Analyses in
the 2022 ICS Order and 2023 IPCS Notice.
D. Description of Projected Reporting, Recordkeeping, and Other
Compliance Requirements for Small Entities
10. The document seeks comment on the specifics of the proposed
revisions to the instructions, templates, and certification form to
ensure the Commission receives the data it needs for the Annual
Reports. The proposed data collection would require certain providers
that are classified as inmate calling services providers under the
Commission's rules to submit, among other things, data and other
information on providers' operations, IPCS rates, ancillary services,
site commissions, and disability access. The proposed data collection
may subject small and other providers to modified or new reporting or
other compliance obligations. In addition, the Bureaus recognize that
their actions in this proceeding may affect the reporting,
recordkeeping, and other compliance requirements for several groups of
small entities. At this time, the Bureaus do not have sufficient
information to determine whether the proposed revisions to the Annual
Reports data collection will require small entities to hire attorneys,
engineers, or other professionals to comply with the new rules. The
Bureaus, however, anticipate the information they receive in the
comments will help the Commission identify and evaluate relevant
compliance matters for small entities, including compliance costs and
other burdens that may result from the proposals and inquiries the
Bureaus make in the document.
E. Steps Taken To Minimize the Significant Economic Impact on Small
Entities and Significant Alternatives Considered
11. The RFA requires an agency to describe any significant
alternatives that it has considered in reaching its proposed approach,
which may include the following four alternatives (among others): ``(1)
the establishment of differing compliance or reporting requirements or
timetables that take into account the resources available to small
entities; (2) the clarification, consolidation, or simplification of
compliance and reporting requirements under the rules for such small
entities; (3) the use of performance rather than design standards; and
(4) an exemption from coverage of the rule, or any part thereof, for
such small entities.'' The Bureaus will consider these factors after
reviewing any substantive comment the Bureaus have received from the
public and potentially affected small entities.
12. In the document, the Bureaus have taken steps to minimize the
economic impact on small entities and consider alternatives through its
proposals that include considering different ways to revise the Annual
Reports instructions, templates, and certification form without causing
significant economic impact to small entities. For example, the Bureaus
propose reporting and certification requirements that are similar to
those used in prior Annual Reports data collections. In addition, the
standardized templates and instructions simplify compliance with, and
reduce the burden of, the information requirements related to
submission of the Annual Reports. Further, the Bureaus have taken steps
to ensure the instructions, annual reporting templates, and
certification form are competitively neutral and are not unduly
burdensome for all providers. Finally, the document proposes to allow
providers that charge the same rates for domestic and international
video IPCS to opt out of filing a separate spreadsheet for
international video IPCS, thus reducing the regulatory burden to
providers. The Bureaus will also consider any significant economic
impact to small entities that may be raised in comments filed in
response to the document and Supplemental IRFA.
F. Federal Rules That May Duplicate, Overlap, or Conflict With the
Proposed Rules
13. None.
Federal Communications Commission.
Lynne Engledow
Deputy Chief, Pricing and Policy Division, Wireline Competition Bureau.
[FR Doc. 2023-17076 Filed 8-8-23; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6712-01-P
