A federal appeals court rejected two FCC rules designed to protect deaf consumers from unwanted lobbying. Ruling late Thursday on appeals by Sorenson and Purple Communications, the 10th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in Denver remanded the telecom relay service rules, calling one unconstitutional and the other arbitrary and capricious under the Administrative Procedures Act. The court dismissed a challenge by Purple to a third rule on abusive marketing practices, because the TRS provider hadn’t sought FCC reconsideration.

Video relay service providers urged the FCC to reject a request by a consumer group representing the deaf for access to confidential company cost data. Telecommunications for the Deaf and Hard of Hearing asked for the data so it and other consumer groups could comment on new compensation rates for VRS proposed by the National Exchange Carrier Association (CD May 21 p5). VRS providers receive federal funding under the interstate telecom relay service fund. In an opposition filing Monday, Sorenson Communications, the biggest VRS provider in the U.S., said revealing the data could harm competition because it “would expose rivals’ market shares, as well as details indicative of individual business strategies, priorities and allocations of financial resources.” AT&T, Hamilton Relay and Sprint Nextel concurred in a separate filing. “The TRS Providers, while reluctant to oppose consumer group involvement in Commission proceedings, must respectfully object to the motion because of the potential damage that could be caused by the essentially limitless number of proposed parties seeking to review the TRS Providers’ confidential data submissions.”

AT&T and Sprint Nextel urged the FCC to abolish a telecom relay service rule requiring conventional Teletype TRS providers to automatically and immediately call the appropriate public safety answering point when they get a 711 emergency call from an interconnected-VoIP user. In separate comments last week at the FCC, AT&T and Sprint said such users make too few of the calls to justify the costs of building the system needed to comply. But consumer groups said “people with disabilities must have the same access to emergency services as any person without disabilities.”

Clarification: Providers of telecom relay service asked the FCC to put off a deadline for TRS users to register 10- digit numbers (CD May 22 p6) until Dec. 31 or until technical milestones are met.

Telecom relay service providers urged the FCC, in meetings this week with the Consumer & Governmental Affairs Bureau and aides to all three commissioners, to delay the June 30 deadline for TRS users to register 10-digit numbers, said an ex parte. The meetings were attended by AT&T, Sprint Nextel, Hamilton Relay, Purple Communications and Snap Telecommunications. The agency should grant the providers’ petition to indefinitely delay the registration deadline (CD May 1 p5), they said. Providers also urged establishment of a “vendor-neutral source” for information on the 10-digit transition. “Despite providers’ extensive outreach and education efforts, many relay users remain confused or uneducated about the registration process,” the companies said. In addition, they said “many public institutions, including the FCC, have not yet registered for 10-digit numbers for their public videophones.”

The FCC asked for comments on whether it should refigure compensation rates for video relay services under the interstate telecom relay service fund for the 2009-2010 fund year. In addition, it sought comment on the National Exchange Carrier Association’s proposed compensation rates for different types of TRS, and its proposed funding requirement of $891 million and carrier contribution factor of 0.01137. Relay providers get paid based on consumer usage by the minute. NECA administers the fund and proposed the permanent rates. It has been following a three-year interim plan established in 2007. “The Commission now has the benefit of experience with two VRS rate cycles since the adoption of the 2007 TRS Rate Methodology Order, and the VRS rates adopted in that order may not accurately reflect the providers’ reasonable actual costs of providing service in compliance with our rules,” the FCC said. The new rates would reflect provider cost data presented in NECA’s May 1 filing, it said. The regulator shouldn’t modify rates before the conclusion of the three-year plan, a written statement Thursday by relay provider Sorenson Communications said. “The three-year plan, adopted unanimously by the FCC, cuts VRS rates every year, but also provides the stability, fairness, and predictability that providers need to make investments in VRS technology.”

Advocates for people who are deaf endorsed a proposal by Purple Communications for a ban on “white labeling” (CD April 28 p4), but rejected several of the telecom relay service provider’s suggestions for tightening certification requirements. White labeling is a revenue-sharing arrangement for uncertified relay providers to offer service to consumers by billing through certified providers. In reply comments Monday, the National Association of the Deaf and six other consumer groups said they “generally agree” with Purple’s proposed ban on white-label providers. “The existence of ‘white label’ providers creates a market for unregulated services and presents substantial risks regarding the quality of services … being provided to the deaf and hard of hearing communities,” the groups wrote. When a provider applies for certification, it should be required to disclose ownership information, but it shouldn’t have to show that it meets a minimum level of capitalization or staffing, as Purple proposed, they said. “The FCC should not be in the business of reviewing relay providers’ financial statements to determine whether or not an Internet-based relay provider is ‘adequately’ funded.” A provider with more money won’t necessarily provide better service, and start-up companies “should have the opportunity to succeed or fail in the marketplace based on the merits of the service provided,” they said. Likewise, requiring a minimum amount of staffing “would make it impossible for a new provider to start small and grow in size,” they said. “The Commission should not be the arbiter of a relay provider’s business plan.” Finally, the consumer groups rejected Purple’s proposal to require FCC rather than state certification, saying states should retain certification power in cases where the provider is compensated from a state TRS fund. In separate reply comments, Purple said “divergent views” on its proposals “suggest that further discussion in a full rulemaking proceeding would be beneficial.” Opening one “would not have the effect of putting any existing certified provider at risk or disrupting such providers’ operations,” it said.

An FCC rule requiring equipment portability among video relay service providers “only creates unnecessary costs to providers,” said the National Association of the Deaf and six other consumer groups. In comments Monday, they endorsed a petition by Sprint Nextel, CSDVRS, Viable and Snap Telecom to kill the porting requirement. It was in the FCC’s June order on adopting 10-digit phone numbers for Internet-based telecom relay service. Relay provider American Network disagreed, saying the market will eventually work out the porting requirement’s kinks.

The FCC should extend the deadline for deaf people to register 10-digit phone numbers for Internet-based telecom relay service, said AT&T, Sprint Nextel, Purple Communications and five other telecom relay service providers. Many relay users are unaware that they will lose service if they don’t register numbers by June 30 (CD April 17 p3). The companies’ Wednesday petition didn’t suggest a new deadline, but said Dec. 31 “might be achievable” if the FCC acts quickly to address registration and implementation problems.

Telecom Relay Service providers gave mixed reviews to a proposal designed to prevent uncertified companies from providing unregulated service and to tighten certification requirements for Internet-based telecom relay providers. Companies must be certified to receive reimbursement from the interstate TRS fund. Petitioner Purple Communications framed its plan as an effort to protect consumers. But in comments at the FCC last week, some accused the company of trying to thwart competition by smaller companies.