Regulatory News – Bell Atlantic’s OSS Problems Spill Out of N.Y.
Posted: 05/2000
Delivery Deadline Set for Telecom Relay Services
The FCC
(www.fcc.gov) amended its rules governing the delivery of Telecommunications Relay Service
(TRS) to expand its availability to consumers who have hearing and speech impairments, as well as to improve its
QoS.
In its order, the commission seeks comment on how to improve TRS and on what role smaller carriers play. Comments must be filed May 5, with replies due July 5.
TRS–a telephone transmission service that originated as part of the 1990 Americans with Disabilities Act–was implemented nationwide in 1993 to enable the hearing and speech disabled to communicate by telephone.
Today, TRS uses many services to do this, including relays between TTY and voice users through a relay operator, also known as a Communications Assistant (CA).
It works like this: the CA reads to a voice user what the TTY user types, then the CA types responses back to the TTY (TeleTypewriter or text telephone) user throughout the duration of a phone call.
As competitors enter the marketplace, the FCC says TRS users don’t always have the same access to their carrier of choice or special pricing plans. Some TRS users are unable to make dial-around calls that use a carrier-specific access code. Because of this, TRS users may pay higher rates or may not have access to particular services, according to the FCC.
“Carriers should take appropriate measures to ensure that callers in the areas that they serve have access to their services through
TRS," the FCC’s order says. It adds that it may consider enforcement action, including forfeitures, if the obligation
isn’t met.
What is important for carriers to understand regarding this order is that they must implement TRS by March 1, 2001. The majority of TRS is provided by large IXCs and ILECs, so the FCC believes “that the number of small entities impacted by these proposals would be potentially very small.”
“Common carriers providing voice transmission services who are subject to the TRS rules, including small entities, may comply with their obligations individually, through designees, through competitively selected vendor, or in concert with other carriers,” the FCC reasons. However, the federal agency also says that while it believes smaller carriers won’t carry the heavy burden of delivering TRS, it seeks comment on whether it’s correct to make such an assumption.
In its Further Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (FNPR), the FCC also asks carriers how to further improve TRS. The FCC wants to increase public awareness of TRS and find out whether other technologies, services and features should be made available to TRS users. Specifically, the FCC proposes minimum mandatory standards of speech-to-speech (STS) service for severely speech-disabled people.
EXECUTIVE TRS SUMMARY |
Highlights of FCC action on telecommunications relay services (TRS): |
| * Requires that common carriers provide speech-to-speech (STS) relay services and interstate Spanish relay services by March 1, 2001; |
* Finds that the statutory definition of TRS is not limited to relay services using a TTY |
* Requires that all relay services, whether mandatory or voluntary, funded by the interstate TRS Fund must comply with minimum QoS standards and modifies the rules to accommodate STS and VRI service; |
* Modifies the speed of answer requirement so that consumers will reach a communications assistant (CA) more quickly; |
* Amends the rules to minimize disruption during relay calls by establishing a minimum time that a CA must stay with a call; |
* Permits the STS CA to facilitate a call for a user with a speech disability; |
| * Requires that relay providers offer STS users the option to maintain at the relay center a list of frequently called names and telephone numbers; |
* Establishes that information gathered by relay providers on individual caller preferences and used to complete TRS calls is not customer proprietary network information |
* Concludes that Sec. 225 does not prohibit FCC from requiring relay services to accommodate enhanced or information services; and |
* Requires relay service to include the ability to make pay-per-call calls. |
Source: Federal Communications Commission (www.fcc.gov) |
“The intent of these proposed rules is to improve the overall effectiveness of the TRS program, and to improve the commission’s oversight of certified state TRS programs and its ability to compel compliance with the federal mandatory minimum standards for TRS,” according to the FCC’s notice.
In the rules, the FCC specifically:
* requires that STS relay services be provided which utilize individuals trained in understanding certain speech patterns
to relay conversations for people with speech disabilities,
* requires that Spanish language relay service be provided for interstate calls,
* revises its minimum standards that TRS must be “functionally equivalent” to voice telecom services, and
* encourages the provision of video relay interpreting service by making it eligible for reimbursement from the TRS fund. Video relay interpreting utilizes CAs skilled in sign language to relay conversations for users of American Sign Language.
Commissioner Gloria Tristani says the FCC’s amended rules “keep pace with the rapid demographic change in this country” by recognizing that non-English language relay services fall under the Telecommunication Act of 1996’s definition of “telecommunications relay services.” Such services are entitled to reimbursement from relay funds.
“Joining the 18 states that make intrastate and interstate Spanish relay services available to date, we require interstate common carriers to provide interstate Spanish relay service within one year,” Tristani says.
A disabilities advisory committee of experts also is being formed to advise the FCC on technological advances and their impact on services for the disabled.
“The commission benefits greatly from the expertise of committees established to advise us on such specialized issues as numbering, public safety, technological innovations and issues of concern to state and local governments,” Commissioner Susan Ness says. “An advisory committee could serve as a clearinghouse for relay concerns and could provide an ongoing dialogue to resolve issues before regulatory action becomes necessary.”
