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.

Telecom relay service companies need more money from the interstate TRS fund to improve outreach to people with speech problems, said Commissioner Monica Martinez of Michigan’s Public Service Commission. In a letter Wednesday to acting FCC Chairman Michael Copps, Martinez said TRS fund reimbursement rates are “failing to keep pace” with the need to educate potential speech-to-speech users. “Although the program potential is immense, without outreach and training, many Speech Disabled citizens with a need for STS telecommunications are not accessing the technology on a regular basis,” she said. “Without adequate reimbursement, companies are not able to offer multiple training sessions to STS users, lessening the probability that affected persons will use the technology.” Lawrence Brick of Pennsylvania’s TRS advisory board asked the FCC, in a comment filed Tuesday, to explore ways to reach out nationally to those with disabilities. “Because of the diversity among those with speech impairment and because the causes of speech impairment are so varied … these speech impaired people do not share a strong bond of support like members of the deaf community who share a common bond because of similar experiences, culture, language, and coping strategies which brings them together to advocate as a group,” Brick said. “Because of such diversity among those with speech impairment, it is critical to find ways to reach out to them, perhaps via the medical establishments, speech therapy clinics, hospitals, etc. to educate them” about speech-to-speech relay technology.

A major transition this summer may leave thousands of Americans without service, and it has nothing to do with digital TV. Starting July 1, deaf consumers using Internet- based telecom relay service will no longer be reachable through the proxy numbers they've used for years. But despite education efforts, many TRS users still don’t realize they need to register a local 10-digit phone number, said executives of relay companies and consumer groups we polled. “There are a lot of consumers who are still confused and experiencing problems getting a telephone number,” and they're facing new problems once they do have one, said CEO Sheri Farinha of the NorCal Center, a consumer group.

To speed responses to emergency calls from users of telecom relay service, the FCC should allow video and Internet-based TRS providers to give communications assistant ID numbers to public safety orally, APCO and the National Emergency Number Association said in a letter to the FCC Tuesday. Commission rules require providers to send the IDs through the automatic location database, but public safety answering points can’t receive the information without making expensive changes to their systems, the groups said. The changes may also add to the costs of providers and 911 equipment vendors, they said. The FCC can avoid raising costs by removing the automatic-transmission requirement, APCO and NENA said. “Oral transmission of CA ID information can occur without any delay to emergency call processing and at no additional cost to PSAPs or providers.”

The FCC is working on an American Sign Language video to help teach the deaf how to get 10-digit phone numbers for Internet-based telecom relay services, said a spokeswoman for the Consumer & Governmental Affairs bureau. The video will appear on the commission’s Web site, but the spokeswoman declined to say when. An FCC official told us the project is on the “front burner.” Consumer groups for the deaf have urged the commission to do more outreach. The groups say marketing-filled education efforts by TRS companies have confused consumers (CD March 30 p8). One of the groups, Telecommunications for Deaf and Hard of Hearing is “optimistic” that the FCC will finish the clips “within the next several weeks,” Executive Director Claude Stout said. “The videos will be extremely helpful as we would get the information neutrally from the FCC. Some providers are doing a good job producing their own video clips. But they also market their brand” relay services “as they explain how to get a 10-digit number or how to make an emergency call.”