Consumer Groups Urge Congress to Expand FCC's CVAA Authority

The “true crux” of the problem is that the CVAA and its biennial reports to Congress “focus on a limited range of equipment and services, ignoring the wide array of inaccessible equipment and services that fall right outside the scope of the report’s parameters,” said Telecommunications for the Deaf and Hard of Hearing, the National Association of the Deaf, and other groups in a joint filing.

Numerous consumer groups said the COVID-19 pandemic caused rising reliance on videoconferencing technology that highlighted accessibility gaps, and the FCC’s rules don’t clearly encompass the devices and services for videoconferencing. The FCC “must define interoperable video communications services to include all two-way communications services between devices that include any combination of video, audio and text communications,” said the American Council of the Blind (ACB). “Significant variability exists in the market for app- and internet-based communications,” said the American Foundation for the Blind. “Mandate that these services are covered by the accessibility requirements for advanced communications services,” ACB said.

A lack of accessibility in interoperable videoconferencing is “the biggest problem within the area of advanced communication services,” said the joint filing from TDI and other groups. The issue affects the ability to use the services for work, remote learning and telehealth, the groups said. “The Commission’s statutory authority must be expanded in order to effectively address the broader picture of accessibility, a limitation that must be addressed by Congress.”

Expanding the scope of the biennial report would allow accessibility groups to address gaps in what the CVAA covers, consumer groups said. Because the term “accessible” is “not as well-defined as it could be” in the rules, many products and services lack interoperability with the relay services many consumers use to access them, said the joint filing. “Expanding the scope of the Commission’s authority to report on these issues would provide Congress with a more accurate landscape of the accessibility of equipment and services.”

CTIA and CTA also focused on the pandemic in their comments. The CVAA’s “built-in flexibility has allowed the wireless industry to innovate and create at a time when the need for accessible communications has been especially critical,” said CTIA. During the pandemic, “as companies rushed to scale technologies in response to unprecedented demand, they also rolled out important accessibility features,” said CTA. “Connected consumer technologies, and innovations in these technologies, helped individuals with disabilities remain connected throughout the pandemic.” The agency should avoid “slow-to-change prescriptive technical mandates,” CTA said.

Allow consumers with disabilities to continue benefiting from FCC programs to obtain wireless services, such as the affordable connectivity program and the Emergency Connectivity Fund, CTIA said. “Expanding broadband coverage is not only critical for next generation technologies but also to close equity gaps in our healthcare system and prepare for future pandemics,” said CTA.

There is “low transparency between manufacturers and consumers on the topic of inclusive features,” said the Georgia Institute of Technology Center for Advanced Communications Policy. That makes it difficult for consumers to know which devices have what accessibility features, the CACP said: “This is a missed opportunity, as clarity on whether a device has the accessibility features that consumers seek could improve consumer satisfaction and potentially reduce call center complaints concerning access issues.”