Communications Advisory Bulletin
FCC Extends Hearing and Speech-Impaired Access
Requirements (TRS) to VoIP Services
By James
M. Smith
[June 2007]
On May 31, 2007, the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) moved
to extend its Telecommunications Relay Service (TRS) requirements,
which oblige telecommunications service providers and manufacturers
to afford persons with hearing and speech-impaired disabilities
reasonable access to telephone services and equipment. The Order
imposes those same requirements on “interconnected”
[to the public switched network] Voice over Internet Protocol (VoIP)
providers and manufacturers of VoIP equipment. VoIP providers will
also be required to offer abbreviated “711” dialing
to access these services and contribute to TRS funding. The text
of the FCC’s Order has not yet been released, and so the specific
details and effective date of these new VoIP regulations are not
yet known. We will issue further advice when those details are released.
The objective of the TRS rules is to provide telecommunications
services to disabled persons “functionally equivalent”
to those enjoyed by persons without disabilities. The services mandated
under the FCC’s TRS rules (47 C.F.R. §§ 64.601-64.605),
currently designed to serve hearing and speech-impaired persons,
comprise seven categories, the first four of which are mandatory
for telecommunications providers and, henceforth, VoIP providers
and equipment manufacturers:
- Text-to-Voice (TTY): the most basic type, where a TRS calling
party calls an access number and types a message on a special
phone keyboard, and a dedicated operator (the “Communications
Assistant” (CA)) reads the message to the called party;
- Voice Carry Over (VCO): wherein a hearing-impaired person
speaks directly to the called party, but receives responses
in text form through the CA;
- Hearing Carry Over (HCO): wherein a speech-impaired person
keyboards an outgoing TTY message but hears the response directly
from the called party;
- Spanish Relay Services (SRS): interstate TRS in Spanish;
- Speech-to-Speech Relay (STS): enabling a speech impaired
person to speak to a CA who is specially trained in speech disorders
and so can “translate” the voice message to the
called party, without the use of TTY;
- Video Relay Service (VRS): enabling those who use sign language
to “sign” to a CA via a video link (typically broadband
Internet), who then speaks the signed message to the other party;
and
- IP Relay: TRS using a computer, PDA or like device rather
than a TTY keyboard.
Providers must offer the mandatory services, and must (unless granted
a waiver) adhere to various “mandatory minimum” operational,
technical and functional standards set forth in Section 64.604 of
the FCC’s rules.
Importantly, these new rules apparently include funding obligations.
Therefore, all affected providers must contribute a percentage of
their interstate gross end-user revenues into the Interstate TRS
Fund, which is administered by USAC in a very similar way to the
Universal Service Fund (USF). Such entities are also eligible for
compensation from the Interstate TRS Fund for both the mandatory
and non-mandatory services they provide.
This action is the latest in a series in which the Commission has
gradually imposed various “telephone-type” public safety,
consumer protection and law enforcement-related regulations on VoIP
services, even as it declines to decide whether VoIP services are
“telecommunications” subject to traditional FCC regulation.
The Commission had already imposed 911/E911, universal service,
CALEA (wiretapping) and CPNI (subscriber privacy) obligations on
VoIP services. As FCC Chairman Kevin Martin stated yesterday, “VoIP
services are increasingly being marketed and used as a substitute
for traditional landline phones. While technologies will continue
to evolve, core social goals in the Act regarding the provision
of communications services to all remain unchanged.” Indeed,
he added that the Commission will “continue to evaluate”
the applicability of other telephone-type obligations to VoIP, including:
“numbering. . . and consumer protection issues (service discontinuance
notifications, slamming, and billing issues, etc). Chairman Martin
stated that he hoped that "by addressing these obligations,
the Commission will be able to continue to protect the interests
of consumers and establish a competitively neutral playing field
for competing services.” VoIP providers and equipment manufacturers
thus may expect additional FCC regulation in the future.
For further information, please contact:
This advisory is a publication of the Communications Group of Davis
Wright Tremaine LLP. Our purpose in publishing this advisory is
to inform our clients and friends of recent developments in the
communications industry. It is not intended, nor should it be used,
as a substitute for specific legal advice as legal counsel may be
given only in response to inquiries regarding particular situations.
Attorney Advertising. Prior results do not guarantee a similar outcome.
Thank you.
Copyright © 2007, Davis Wright Tremaine LLP.
return to bulletins main page
|
