VRS Providers, Groups Seek FCC Relief Beyond Proposed Partial Rate Freeze

The FNPRM proposed to freeze the compensation rate of the three small, Tier 1 providers (handling fewer than 500,000 minutes per month) at $5.29 per minute between July 1, 2015, and Oct. 31, 2016, which otherwise would be trimmed under ongoing rate cuts. VRS provides video-connected interpreters for the deaf and hard of hearing to communicate with phone callers.

The FCC should move the “dividing line” and extend the rate freeze to all “smaller VRS providers,” said ZVRS (formerly CSDVRS). “At a minimum the line should be moved to include, ZVRS, the lone Tier 2 provider, because the Commission has acknowledged that the ‘smaller VRS providers' that need opportunities to reach scale and compete effectively include the Tier 1 and Tier 2 providers.” The freeze should be maintained until the agency “implements the competitive reforms promised” in a 2011 notice, including interoperability and portability mandates, ZVRS said. “The Commission cannot allow the negative impact on ZVRS of the rate cuts to date to continue.”

Purple Communications said the FCC should freeze the rates for all small providers "because they will be equally impacted by the current scheduled dramatic rate cuts.” Purple repeated its proposal that the freeze apply to any provider with fewer than 2.75 million minutes per month. It recently said the VRS market contains three very small providers, two small providers (including Purple), and “one near monopoly provider” (see 1512010006).

Sorenson Communications, the largest VRS provider, called the FCC plan a “half measure” that “may offer a measure of relief to the smallest providers in the short run.” But it said the proposal doesn’t address the “fundamental problem” affecting all VRS providers: It isn't "possible for any provider to continue providing the same high quality VRS service users expect -- and the [American Disabilities Act] guarantees -- as rates continue to plummet.” Sorenson urged the commission to adopt the Joint Proposal of all six VRS providers to freeze rates and improve the “functional equivalence” of VRS service -- the only proposal before the agency that “carefully balances cost and quality concerns.”

Telecommunications for the Deaf and Hard of Hearing Inc. (TDI) and other groups essentially backed the VRS provider joint proposal. They asked the commission to refrain from rate decreases until it “adopts service quality standards to ensure that the burden of VRS rate cuts in any rate tier do not fall primarily on the deaf and hard of hearing consumers and VRS interpreters.” They also said the FCC should “adequately compensate VRS providers in a transparent manner that reflects their business and technology development needs.”

“While we applaud the Commission’s efforts to keep small providers competitive, the Commission has not yet addressed the recommendations and issues noted by the [Government Accountability Office] report either in the FNPRM or in a separate proceeding,” TDI and the others said. “Keeping the small providers in the market is an important goal, but quality standards must nevertheless be determined first before any further rate cuts.” The other groups are: Association of Late Deafened Adults, California Coalition of Agencies Serving the Deaf and Hard of Hearing, Cerebral Palsy and Deaf Organization, Deaf and Hard of Hearing Consumer Advocacy Network and Deaf Seniors of America.

The Registry of Interpreters for the Deaf backed the filing of TDI and the other consumer groups. It similarly asked the FCC to “carefully consider the prudence of making decisions related to rate methodology, including rate cuts, in the absence of quality standards to ensure a functionally equivalent VRS.”

Hancock Jahn (Communications Access Ability Group) said, "as a Tier I provider that has been devastatingly impacted” by the FCC rate cuts and methodology, it "obviously supports the proposed rate freeze." But it said the freeze must be followed immediately by a proposed rate-setting period that will allow all providers to, not only cover the actual cost of providing VRS, but to remain competitive after the 16 months proposed freeze, regardless of size.” Hancock Jahn said it was disappointed the Joint Proposal wasn't adopted, and it urged the commission to adopt the emergency petition of the three smallest providers for FCC implementation of the partial freeze by Dec. 31, before the next planned rate cut (see 1511270011). Purple asked that it also be given relief under that petition.

ASL/Global VRS asked the FCC to restore the smaller-provider rates to what they were in 2013 before the cuts began. It also said the commission should “reframe the manner in which it views smaller provider participation in the Telecommunications Relay Service [TRS] program, acknowledge the challenges smaller providers have faced under the current rate methodology and operational framework that has undermined their growth let alone remain in the program, and commit to reform its rate methodology and framework to enable smaller providers and new entrants to meet Commission longer term expectations.”

Convo Communications supported the proposed temporary freeze, "which will ensure that Tier I providers have an opportunity to continue growing to scale by providing different products and services to diverse communities.” Convo also asked the FCC “to retain a rate glide path for the Tier I providers after the end of the 16-month freeze period consistent with its original precept of avoiding the disruption of an abrupt rate change." It also urged steps to encourage providers to advance VRS "towards functional equivalency, which includes safeguards against fraud, waste and abuse” of TRS funds.