The FCC is seeking unfairly to make Verizon reimburse “several million dollars” in TRS payments because the company didn’t meet IP Relay “speed-of-answer” rules for several days between May 2005 and Jan. 2006, the company said. Verizon has an “excellent” record of meeting an FCC requirement that TRS providers answer 85% of IP relay calls within 10 sec., the company said in a July 31 filing. The few delays arose from factors beyond Verizon’s control, such as fraudulent calls and natural disasters, it said. Bogus calls “cause unpredictable spikes in call volumes… and therefore make it difficult to staff effectively,” Verizon said: “Because these fraudulent calls often last longer than legitimate calls, they tie up staff resources and require additional time-consuming steps for communications assistants and their supervisors.” And tornados, power outages and fiber cuts affect service speed without warning, Verizon said. The FCC never has sought retroactive repayment of TRS funding, Verizon said. It asked the FCC to issue a declaratory ruling that the Commission “lacks authority to impose such a retrospective penalty” or alternatively give Verizon a waiver for the days it ran over the 10 sec. because Verizon’s record overall was so good. The TRS rules “nowhere purport to impose an automatic penalty in the form of forfeiting the compensation that is owed where the observed speed of answer for an individual day varies from the benchmark,” Verizon said. Until the June 15 letter from the FCC Consumer & Governmental Affairs Bureau, “the Commission never has sought to compel retroactive repayment,” Verizon said. The letter “is a glaring, unexplained departure from the Commission’s pre-existing policy that ‘absolute compliance with the [TRS] rules may not always be necessary.'” The company said it answered 89.7% of all IP Relay calls within 10 sec. between May 2005 and June 2006, and since Jan. 10 has met the benchmark 100% of the time. The number of days Verizon ran over the limit and the exact sum at stake weren’t revealed in the heavily-redacted filing.

The FCC asked for comment on whether to change the way providers of telecom relay services (TRS) are compensated. In a further notice of proposed rulemaking (FNPRM) adopted at the agency’s agenda meeting Thurs., the FCC asked for views on: (1) Alternative cost recovery mechanisms, including one proposed by Hamilton Relay called the multistate average rate structure (MARS) plan. (2) Whether traditional TRS, Speech- to-Speech Service and IP Relay should be compensated at the same rate. (3) The appropriate cost recovery method for Video Relay Service. (4) What costs are considered “reasonable” under the current methodology, including whether marketing and outreach expenses, overhead costs and executive compensation can be compensated from the TRS Fund. (5) Ways to improve the management and administration of the fund, including ideas for assessing the performance and efficiency of the fund. FCC Chmn. Martin said the FNPRM begins a “far- reaching inquiry” into the TRS Fund, similar to a study of the Universal Service Fund that began last summer. The questions asked in the proceeding are part of an attempt “to protect and maintain [the TRS Fund’s] integrity,” Martin said. FCC Comr. McDowell said the goal “cannot simply be eliminating economic uncertainty for providers.” The FCC must “balance” that need “with our obligation to see that rates are set and funds dispersed in a responsible manner.” Pat Nola, CEO of Sorenson Communications, a provider of relay equipment, said the action is “an important step” toward finding “a long-term rate methodology for VRS and other TRS service.” The goal will be coming up “with a system that provides the right incentives for providers to expand VRS service to reach more deaf people,” she said.

The FCC said late Thurs. it will vote at its July 13 meeting on an enforcement action against data broker 1st Source Information Specialist, d/b/a LocateCell.com. Putting an enforcement item on a meeting agenda is an unusual step at the FCC. It shows how much the agency has changed the way it does business since Chmn. Martin assumed the helm in March 2005, sources said Fri. The FCC under first Enforcement Bureau chief David Solomon refused to put enforcement actions on the agenda, sources said. Solomon headed the bureau from its opening in 1999 until May 2005.

Misuse of IP Relay, a service to help deaf people communicate, is becoming a serious problem, consumer and industry groups told the FCC this week. But there didn’t appear to be full agreement on how to fix the problem.

The FCC raised the reimbursement rates for telecom relay services (TRS) above those recommended by the National Exchange Carrier Assn. (NECA), after deciding to include some costs that NECA had excluded. The FCC raised the overall TRS fund size to $419.7 million for the year beginning July 1, 2006, compared with the $387.8 million recommended by NECA. The higher FCC number reflects, in large part, the agency’s decision to restore advertising and marketing expenses, which NECA recommended dropping. Advocates for hearing-impaired people had argued that advertising and marketing were important to make potential users aware of the relay services. The FCC said there has been confusion about the nature of these expenses, which sometimes are labeled “outreach,” so while the expenses have been restored for reimbursement, this action shouldn’t be interpreted as stopping the FCC in the future from deciding some of these costs aren’t eligible for compensation. For video relay service (VRS), the largest type of relay services, the FCC froze the current compensation rate until the Commission adopts a new rate based on new methodology and clarification of some other cost recovery issues. NECA had recommended reducing the rate. Pat Nola, CEO of Sorenson Communications, which provides VRS products, said the company had argued costs justified raising the reimbursement rate. However, the decision to freeze this year’s rate “is a positive preliminary step” while the FCC begins creating a new rate methodology. TRS reimbursement pays for the cost of providing services.

The FCC is teeing up a notice of apparent liability (NAL) against a data broker for violating customer proprietary network information (CPNI) rules. It’s to be voted on at the FCC’s July 13 agenda meeting. The data broker item is expected to be the highlight of the meeting, which also will include a notice of proposed rulemaking on telecom relay services (TRS) and an order and NPRM addressing rules for wireless medical devices, sources said Fri.

The FCC certified GoAmerica to provide IP and video relay services, the company said. The 5-year certification makes GoAmerica eligible for Interstate Telecommunications Relay Services Fund (TRS) compensation. According to GoAmerica, TRS reimbursement will facilitate its ability to launch a proposed video relay service.

The FCC denied a Telco Group petition seeking exclusion of international revenue from the base used to calculate payments into the Telecom Relay Service Fund, or at least exclusion of Telco Group’s international revenue from its own contribution base. The FCC rejection of the requests said the TRS fund isn’t limited to supporting domestic relay service, but also is used to fund international relay calls. Telco had argued international revenue should be excluded because it’s excluded from contributions into the universal service fund. The FCC said that’s a different situation because USF money isn’t used for international service.

The FCC voted Wed. to require video relay service (VRS) equipment be interoperable and said equipment providers that block calls from competing carriers could be ineligible for Telecom Relay Service (TRS) Fund reimbursement. VRS is used by the deaf and hard-of-hearing to communicate with those who can hear. The FCC said VRS consumers must be able to place a VRS call via any VRS provider’s service and all VRS providers must be able to get calls from, and make calls to, any VRS consumer.

Advocates for the hearing impaired attacked a National Exchange Carrier Assn. (NECA) proposal to cut reimbursement rates for several relay services. In its May 1 FCC filing, NECA proposed lower reimbursement for traditional Telecom Relay Service (TRS), Speech-to-Speech service, Video Relay Service (VRS) and Internet Protocol Relay Service. NECA, the TRS fund administrator, said it based the proposed reductions on “cost and demand projections received from providers of relay services.” Revised data collection forms were sent to providers in the fall at the FCC’s instruction, NECA said. Due to changes in relay service technology, data now are collected from providers based on types of TRS services, not costs at each TRS center. The new forms also allow providers to report capital investment costs for the first time. In a letter to the FCC, advocacy groups said the FCC should reject the rates because NECA didn’t “factor in the access and functional equivalence requirements of the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA).” The letter was signed by the National Assn. of the Deaf, Deaf & Hard of Hearing Consumer Advocacy Network and the Cal. Coalition of Agencies Serving the Deaf & Hard of Hearing. To comply with ADA, rates should reflect the need for interoperability of devices used by the deaf, “speed of answer requirements,” recruiting and training interpreters, providing equivalent 911 access, and other factors, the groups said. VRS provider Sorenson Communications also urged the FCC to reject reimbursement rate cuts, saying the VRS rate would be “inadequate to make VRS service available for the entire deaf community.” Sorenson said that “rather than increasing the rate to reflect the forecasted increase in costs coinciding with new federal requirements, NECA has recommended a considerable rate reduction aimed at eliminating costs such as outreach, which have been accepted in previous years.”