Hamilton Relay told the FCC it made "substantial progress" in resolving call takeover issues for its telecom relay services, per a letter Tuesday in docket 03-123. It resolved "all remaining call takeover issues" for one-line and two-line captioned telephone services, traditional TTY-based telecom relay service, and most web and wireless IP CTS offerings. Hamilton hasn't resolved call takeover issues for one web-based IP CTS service because it "presents unique challenges," it said. The company sought a "brief additional extension" of answer performance requirements for traditional TRS and speech-to-speech relay, citing "severe labor shortages." It also sought a two-month extension on its speed of answer waivers for CTS and IP CTS, noting it anticipates fully implementing automatic speech recognition in "approximately two months."

The FCC’s Disability Advisory Committee approved reports Thursday on real-time text (RTT) on wireline networks and telecommunications relay services on videoconferencing platforms like Zoom, Microsoft Teams and Webex. All FCC meetings have used a video platform since the start of the COVID-19 pandemic almost two years ago.

Telecom relay service providers disagreed about Sorenson Communications’ petition for declaratory ruling that video relay service providers be allowed to recover the cost of service-related tasks, in comments posted Tuesday in docket 10-51. IP captioned telephone service provider Hamilton backed the petition and asked that it be extended to IP CTS providers. All "costs associated with an installation/training/registration visit should be reimbursable from the TRS Fund," said IP CTS provider ClearCaptions. VRS providers Convo Communications and GlobalVRS opposed the petition. Sorenson's request "constitutes a thinly veiled effort to increase its revenues while retaining its market dominance and captive users through continued leveraging of its proprietary equipment," GlobalVRS said. Convo asked the FCC to consider waiting to decide until at least "after it determines Ariel’s application to acquire control of Sorenson" (see 2112200045).

Industry and deaf and hard of hearing advocates asked the FCC to let IP relay providers recoup costs for outreach and marketing to users from the Telecom Relay Service Fund, in comments posted Tuesday in docket 03-123 (see 2108050038). The move to establish a new compensation methodology stemmed from a 2018 petition for rulemaking by T-Mobile, the sole remaining IP relay provider.

Disagreement continued between inmate calling service providers and advocates on the ICS rate-making process, in replies posted Monday in docket 12-375 (see 2109290074). Permanent caps “should be substantially lower than the current interim caps,” said the Prison Policy Initiative, asking the FCC to “prioritize the issue of USF relief for ICS customers.” PPI finds “that facility size does not correlate to costs and should be considered by the FCC as a rebuttal to the ICS providers’ argument that size impacts costs,” said 33 organizations led by the Leadership Conference on Civil and Human Rights. Make a list of ancillary fees that can and can’t be charged to ICS users, said NCIC. The fee caps the FCC previously adopted “have been subverted by certain ICS providers,” it said. All security and surveillance costs “are not inextricably intertwined with telecom costs,” said Worth Rises. Global Tel*Link said they’re “an integral part of ICS.” Consider a "brief pause" on additional reform to "allow for the collection of accurate and reliable data," said Pay Tel. The National Association of State Utility Consumer Advocates backed comments opposing security and surveillance costs being included in the rate-setting process. Require providers refund account holders after inactivity or an incarcerated person’s release, said the Wright Petitioners, Benton Institute for Broadband & Society, United Church of Christ and Public Knowledge. The record “unanimously confirms the commission’s legal authority under Section 225 of the [Communications] Act extends to incarcerated people with disabilities,” said deaf and hard of hearing advocates led by Telecommunications for the Deaf and Hard of Hearing. ICS providers and facilities “can readily provide modern forms of TRS, including VRS,” the groups said. ZP Better Together recommended a registration system for VRS providers to create an account to provide services to a correctional facility.

Sorenson Communications and its CaptionCall agreed to reimburse the Telecom Relay Service Fund $28 million and pay a $12.5 million fine for violating TRS rules on incentives and reimbursement filings, in a consent decree with the FCC Enforcement Bureau. It’s the “largest recovery of monies for the TRS Fund and the largest fine for violations of the TRS rules,” the bureau said Friday.

Hamilton Relay sought a six-month extension, until June 30, of its waiver of FCC rules on how fast non-video relay service providers must answer calls, said an ex parte letter posted Wednesday in docket 03-123. Hamilton said a waiver is needed because of the "notable increase in COVID-19 case numbers over the past two weeks" and "uncertainty surrounding recently announced federal COVID-19 vaccine mandates."

The Florida Public Service Commission renewed Sprint’s contract to provide telecom relay and captioned telephone services starting in March, the PSC said Tuesday. Sprint beat Hamilton Telecom’s proposal, in response to a May 11 request for proposals, the agency said.

The FCC Consumer and Governmental Affairs Bureau conditionally granted the General Services Administration's waiver request of telecom relay services user registration requirement for IP relay service and IP captioned telephone service, said an order Friday in docket 03-123 (see 2103230049). The waiver applies to federal government employees and on-premises contractors only, and providers are required to use a “modified form” of the video relay service enterprise registration process, the order said.

Industry and advocates disagreed whether the FCC should include ancillary fees or security and surveillance costs in inmate calling services rates, in comments posted Tuesday in docket 12-375 (see 2105200044). Security and surveillance costs "are neither necessary for the provision of communication services nor do they serve [ICS] consumers or the general public," said Worth Rises. There's "no reason that the staff time of a correctional officer should be reflected in rates for phone service, and security and surveillance should not be a profit center," said the United Church of Christ, New America's Open Technology Institute, Free Press, Benton Institute for Broadband & Society, National Consumer Law Center and Public Knowledge. Global Tel*Link and the National Sheriffs Association (NSA) disagreed. Facilities' costs "must include the security and surveillance costs" for providing ICS, said GTL. NSA said some security and administrative tasks are "directly related to and necessary for the provision of inmate calling services." The Prison Policy Initiative asked the FCC to prohibit revenue-sharing agreements between providers and third-party financial institutions. "We do not understand the justification for an ancillary charge in this circumstance above $3.00 and as high as $6.95" for single-call services, said NASUCA. Ensure sufficient cost recovery for facilities if site commissions are regulated, said Pay Tel. Securus backed "phasing out" site commissions from rates and "eliminating duplicative ancillary service charges." NCIC asked the FCC to consider NSA's 2015 data that suggested relying on facilities-based ICS costs rather than provider-generated proposals to develop permanent ICS rates. PPI said NSA's study "suffers from a plethora of problems." Consider how other states are adopting intrastate rates, said the California Public Utilities Commission: Those rates "are multiple times lower than the FCC's proposed interstate rate caps," and the agency should consider if its proposed caps are too high "in light of the ICS providers’ assertions that they incur little to no cost differential to provide interstate versus intrastate calling services." Commenters overwhelmingly backed efforts to expand access to telecom relay services for deaf and hard of hearing incarcerated people. Publicize "the importance of facilities and ICS providers asking individuals whether they require TRS upfront," asked Hamilton Relay. It may not be "administratively feasible" to allow incarcerated individuals to choose their IP captioned telephone service provider, said ClearCaptions. Amend TRS rules "to the maximal extent necessary" to limit barriers to access to communications services for deaf and hard of hearing incarcerated people, said a coalition that included Telecommunications for the Deaf and Hard of Hearing, Communications Services for the Deaf, Hearing Loss Association of America, and National Disability Rights Network. Prohibit ICS providers from charging for "all forms of TRS calls," they said.