[Federal Register Volume 82, Number 70 (Thursday, April 13, 2017)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 17754-17765]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2017-07155]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION
47 CFR Part 64
[CG Docket Nos. 10-51 and 03-123; FCC 17-26]
Structure and Practices of the Video Relay Services Program
AGENCY: Federal Communications Commission.
ACTION: Final rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: In this document, the Commission takes steps to further
improve the quality of video relay service (VRS) by authorizing skills-
based routing and deaf-interpreter trials, directing the publication of
speed-of-answer data, permitting assignment of ten-digit telephone
numbers to hearing persons for point-to-point video communication in
sign language with VRS users, and authorizing a pilot program in which
some VRS calls are interpreted by communications assistants (CAs) at
home workstations.
DATES: Effective dates: Effective May 15, 2017, except for Sec.
64.604(b)(8) and amendments to Sec. Sec. 64.604(b)(4)(iii), 64.611,
64.615, 64.630, 64.5101, and 64.5103 of the Commission's rules, which
contain modified information collection requirements that have not yet
been approved by the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) under the
Paperwork Reduction Act. The Commission will publish a document in the
Federal Register announcing the effective date of those amendments.
Applicability dates: The skills-based routing and deaf-interpreter
trials will commence on August 1, 2017, and terminate March 31, 2018.
The pilot program for at-home VRS call handling will commence on
November 1, 2017, and end on November 1, 2018.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Bob Aldrich, Consumer and Governmental
Affairs Bureau (202) 418-0996, email [email protected], or Eliot
Greenwald, Consumer and Governmental Affairs Bureau, (202) 418-2235,
email [email protected].
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This is a summary of the Commission's
Report and Order, document FCC 17-26, adopted on March 23, 2017, and
released on March 23, 2017, in CG Docket Nos. 10-51 and 03-123. The
Notice of Inquiry and Further Notice of Proposed Rulemaking, FCC 17-26,
adopted on March 23, 2017, and released on March 23, 2017, was
published in an earlier issue, and the Order, FCC 17-26, adopted on
March 23, 2017, and released on March 23, 2017, will be published in a
later issue. The full text of document FCC 17-26 will be available for
public inspection and copying via the Commission's Electronic Comment
Filing System (ECFS), and during regular business hours at the FCC
Reference Information Center, Portals II, 445 12th Street SW., Room CY-
A257, Washington, DC 20554. To request materials in accessible formats
for people with disabilities (Braille, large print, electronic files,
audio format), send an email to [email protected] or call the Consumer and
Governmental Affairs Bureau at (202) 418-0530 (voice), (844) 432-2272
(videophone), or (202) 418-0432 (TTY).
Congressional Review Act
The Commission will send a copy of document FCC 17-26 to Congress
and the Government Accountability Office pursuant to the Congressional
Review Act, see 5 U.S.C. 801(a)(1)(A).
Final Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 Analysis
The Report and Order in document FCC 17-26 contains modified
information collection requirements, which are not applicable until
approval is obtained from OMB. The Commission, as part of its
continuing effort to reduce paperwork burdens, will invite the general
public to comment on the information collection requirements contained
in document FCC 17-26 as required by the Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA)
of 1995, Public Law 104-13. The Commission will publish a separate
document in the Federal Register announcing approval of the information
collection requirements contained in the document FCC 17-26 Report and
Order. In addition, the Commission notes that, pursuant to the Small
Business Paperwork Relief Act of 2002, Public Law 107-198, 44 U.S.C.
3506(c)(4), the Commission previously sought comment on how the
Commission might ``further reduce the information burden for small
business concerns with fewer
[[Page 17755]]
than 25 employees.'' Structure and Practices of the Video Relay Service
Program; Telecommunications Relay Services and Speech-to-Speech
Services for Individuals with Hearing and Speech Disabilities, Further
Notice of Proposed Rulemaking, published at 78 FR 40407, July 5, 2013
(2013 VRS Reform Order FNPRM); Structure and Practices of the Video
Relay Service Program; Telecommunications Relay Services and Speech-to-
Speech Services for Individuals with Hearing and Speech Disabilities,
Further Notice of Proposed Rulemaking, published at 80 FR 72029,
November 18, 2015 (2015 VRS FNPRM).
Synopsis
Trial of Skills-Based Routing
1. The Commission authorizes a voluntary trial of skills-based
routing by any of the currently certified VRS providers, for calls
pertaining to legal, medical, and technical computer support, to be
conducted for a period of eight months under the conditions set forth
below. There are currently five companies with Commission certification
to receive compensation from the Interstate Telecommunications Relay
Services Fund (TRS Fund) for providing VRS. The Commission may
authorize additional VRS providers to participate in the trial in the
event that any new providers apply for and are granted certification
before the end of the trial.
2. The Commission is persuaded that enabling consumers to have
conversations relayed by interpreters skilled in the vocabulary of
these subjects can contribute to achieving functional equivalence in
accordance with the goals of 47 U.S.C. 225. The Commission believes
that skills-based routing may increase the efficiency of VRS by
reducing the duration of calls and the need for duplicative calls.
Additionally, the Commission believes it can facilitate compliance with
each provider's obligation to ensure that its CAs can interpret
effectively and accurately, both receptively and expressively, using
any necessary specialized vocabulary.
3. Consumer groups identify the three skills listed above as those
most commonly needed. The Commission will limit the trial to these
three categories, in order to provide relatively clear-cut criteria for
the types of calls that qualify, to maximize the usefulness of the data
to be collected, and to provide a circumscribed test case to help the
Commission identify and address issues if skills-based routing is
permitted on a permanent basis. VRS providers participating in the
trial may offer one, two, or all three types of specialized
interpretation. Permitting a voluntary trial will allow VRS providers
to individually determine whether and how extensively to participate,
depending on how skills-based routing fits into their respective
budgets and business plans. The Commission further expects that an
eight-month period will be sufficient to gather data on the costs and
benefits of skills-based routing and to enable the Commission to
develop informed rules and policies governing this feature if it is
later authorized on a permanent basis.
4. To allow sufficient time for the design of each provider's
individual trial, the Commission directs that the formal trial period
commence August 1, 2017, and terminate March 31, 2018. Providers
interested in participating in the trial must provide notification of
their intent to participate to the Commission's Consumer and
Governmental Affairs Bureau (CGB) by June 1, 2017, including a
description of the standards they will use to determine whether a
particular CA may handle each type of skills-based call. Such
notification may be sent by email to [email protected]. The Commission
declines at this time to restrict the trial to a specified number of
consumers because selecting a limited subset of customers could pose
technical issues and be perceived as unfair to those customers not
selected. In addition, larger-scale trials will provide the Commission
with more data to aid in the Commission's assessment of a skills-based
routing feature. The results of a trial in which each provider
determines the scale of its participation may also provide information
about the competitive aspects of offering this feature to inform future
Commission decisions about how to structure skills-based routing in the
future.
5. For the duration of the trial, all participating VRS providers
will continue to be compensated at the applicable rate for compensable
minutes of use whether handled by a generalist or specialist CA.
6. Rule Waivers. To enable the Commission to gather data on the
costs and benefits of skills-based routing and develop informed rules
governing this practice should it be authorized in the future, the
Commission conditionally waives, for the duration of the trial, (1) the
requirement to answer calls in the order received, (2) the speed-of-
answer rule, (3) the ten-minute rule, and (4) the sequential call rule.
With these waivers, calls routed to specialized interpreters will
qualify for per-call compensation from the Fund, provided that such
calls are handled in accordance with the conditions below and all non-
waived mandatory minimum standards.
7. Answer-in-the-Order Received Waiver. For purposes of this eight-
month trial, a limited waiver of the requirement to answer calls in the
order received under the conditions described herein is necessary to
enable VRS users to effectively benefit from the availability of
skills-based CAs. Waiver of this rule will allow providers, to the
extent technically feasible, to give VRS users the option of selecting
a specialist CA at various points in the course of processing a call,
e.g., prior to initially being connected to the VRS provider, during
the call set-up with the CA, or after all parties to the call have been
connected--even if this entails providing a specialized CA out of the
order that calls seeking other types of specialized CAs are received.
However, the ``answer-in-the-order'' rule will still apply within each
subset of CA expertise, so that if two individuals both request the
same type of specialized interpreting, each of their requests must be
addressed in the order received. Nor do we waive the related
prohibitions disallowing advance reservations and ``call back''
arrangements for VRS. Moreover, the Commission does not authorize VRS
providers or users to treat skills-based routing of VRS calls as a
substitute for in-person or video remote interpreting when medical,
legal, and computer professionals need to communicate in person with
their patients and clients.
8. Speed-of-Answer Waiver. The Commission waives the speed-of-
answer rule, which requires that 80 percent of all VRS calls be
answered within 120 seconds, measured monthly, for calls routed to
specialized interpreters during the eight-month duration of the skills-
based routing trial. The Commission will permit providers to give
callers wait-time estimates for the provider's skills-based and
generalist queues, in addition to offering callers the option of
switching out of a skills-based routing queue and into the generalist
queue if the caller decides that the wait for a specialized CA is too
long.
9. Ten Minute Rule Waiver. To enable providers to reserve
interpreters who have specialized skills for those individuals who need
them, the Commission waives the requirement that the CA remain on the
call for a minimum of ten minutes for trial participants in the
circumstances described herein. If it becomes apparent during a call
that specialized interpretation is not needed, the call may be
transferred back to a generalist CA (or the generalist queue) after (1)
receiving confirmation from a
[[Page 17756]]
supervisor that a specialist CA is unnecessary and (2) notifying the
caller of the impending transfer. Doing so will allow VRS providers to
preserve the scarce resources of specialist CAs and best match the
unique skills of these individuals to the callers that need them.
10. Sequential Call Rule Waiver. The Commission waives the
sequential call rule, which prohibits CAs from refusing to handle
multiple calls in a row from the same caller, in those instances in
which, following a specialist call, a consumer asks the CA to place a
second call that requires no specialist handling. Waiving this rule in
these particular circumstances will help ensure that CAs skilled in
medical, legal, or technical terminology remain available for callers
in need of such skills to achieve effective communication.
11. Data Collection. To evaluate the demand for and the costs and
benefits of skills-based routing, the Commission requires each
participating provider to submit to the Fund Administrator, with their
monthly requests for compensation, the following data for each month of
the trial, disaggregated by each of the three skill set categories:
The number of CAs available for specialist interpreting
and the total number of hours per week that all such CAs were assigned
to such function (i.e., total hours in which they were actively engaged
in specialist interpreting plus total downtime associated with such
interpreting);
The percentage of active telephone numbers on the American
Sign Language (ASL) side and the voice side of calls, respectively, for
which a specialist interpreter was used for at least one call;
The numbers of compensable calls and conversation minutes
handled by specialist interpreters;
Identification within monthly call detail reports (CDRs)
of those calls routed or transferred to or from specialized CAs;
For each call sent to a specialist interpreter or queue,
the amount of time that elapsed between a request for a specialist
interpreter and the time the interpreter joined the call--i.e., the
speed of answering the caller's request; and
The number of calls for which a specialist interpreter was
requested but not provided.
12. The Commission also requires participants to submit, no later
than June 1, 2018, a final report on the trial containing the following
information, disaggregated by skill set where indicated:
A description of the standards used to determine (1)
whether a specialist interpreter was needed on a call and (2) whether a
particular CA was qualified for assignment as a specialist interpreter;
Detailed documentation of incremental costs incurred in
conducting the trial, including any incremental costs associated with
CA recruitment, training, and compensation, engineering and technical
implementation, marketing, and administrative and management support
(including oversight, evaluation, and recordkeeping);
For providers choosing to notify callers of wait-time
estimates, data on such waiting periods, as well as feedback on the
benefits and disadvantages of offering this feature; and
The percentage of requests for specialized interpreting by
individuals with disabilities as compared to requests made by hearing
individuals.
13. Consideration of whether to allow skills-based routing on a
permanent basis also would benefit from the submission by participating
providers of studies designed for objective assessment of whether and
by how much the accuracy of interpreting improves when calls involving
medical, legal, and computer support matters are subject to skills-
based routing, with full documentation of the standards and measurement
methods used.
14. The Commission requires providers to make all data collected in
the trial available upon request to the TRS Fund administrator and the
Commission staff. The TRS Fund administrator or the Commission may
release the results of the trial in an aggregated or anonymized
fashion. All personally identifiable user information gathered for the
purposes of the trial shall remain confidential pursuant to the
Commission's confidentiality rules.
15. The Commission directs the Office of Managing Director (OMD)
and the TRS Fund administrator to consult with each of the providers
participating in the trial, to formulate their individual data
collection strategies--before the beginning of the trial and as needed
during the trial--to ensure that the data collected addresses the
categories listed above and is robust enough to provide sufficient
basis for a Commission decision on whether to permit skills-based
routing on a permanent basis, as well as how to address any issues that
surface during the trial.
Trial of Deaf Interpreters
16. Based on the record in this proceeding, for the same eight-
month trial period used for assessing skills-based routing, the
Commission conducts a voluntary trial of the provision of deaf
interpreters for VRS calls under the conditions set forth below.
17. The Commission is interested in studying whether deaf
interpreters improve VRS efficiency and functional equivalency, but
presently lacks sufficient information about the demand for, as well as
the costs and benefits of, providing deaf interpreters in the VRS
setting. The Commission believes that the collection of this and other
data over an eight-month period will help inform it about whether and
how the provision of such interpreters should be included in allowable
costs or otherwise subject to compensation from the TRS Fund.
18. Providers interested in participating in the trial should
provide notification of their intent to participate to CGB by June 1,
2017, including a description of the standards they will use to
determine whether a deaf interpreter was needed for a call and whether
a particular individual is qualified for assignment as a deaf
interpreter. Such notification may be sent by email to
[email protected]. Participating providers are requested to submit to
the Fund Administrator, with their monthly requests for compensation,
the following data for each month of the trial:
The number of deaf interpreters utilized and the total
number of hours for which all such interpreters were employed;
The percentage of active telephone numbers on the ASL side
of a call for which a deaf interpreter was added for at least one call;
The numbers of compensable calls and conversation minutes
in which deaf interpreters participated, broken down, to the extent
ascertainable by the CA or provider, by whether such participation was
necessary due to the user's (1) age, (2) limited English, (3) limited
ASL proficiency, (4) cognitive or motor disability, or (5) other
characteristics;
Identification within monthly CDRs of those calls in which
deaf interpreters participated;
For each call on which a deaf interpreter was used, the
amount of time that elapsed between a request for a deaf interpreter
and the time a deaf interpreter joined the call--i.e., how quickly the
provider responded to the caller's request;
For each call on which a deaf interpreter was used, the
duration of the deaf interpreter's presence on the call; and
The number of calls for which a deaf interpreter was
requested but not provided.
[[Page 17757]]
19. The Commission also requests participants to submit, no later
than June 1, 2018, a final report on the trial containing the following
information, disaggregated by skill set where indicated:
A description of the standards that were used to determine
(1) whether a deaf interpreter was needed for a call and (2) whether a
particular individual is qualified for assignment as a deaf
interpreter; and
Detailed documentation of incremental costs incurred in
the use of deaf interpreters, including any incremental costs
associated with interpreter recruitment, training, and compensation,
engineering and technical implementation, marketing, and administrative
and management support (including oversight, evaluation and
recordkeeping).
20. The Commission believes that these metrics will assist the
Commission in determining, among other things, the general availability
of and appropriate service quality for deaf interpreters, an
appropriate speed of answer, whether participation of deaf interpreters
results in more efficient calls--e.g., by shortening the length of
calls, and whether additional compensation is needed to support the
provision of such interpreters.
21. The Commission expects providers to make all data collected in
the trial available upon request to the TRS Fund administrator and the
Commission staff. The TRS Fund administrator or the Commission may
release the results of the trial in an aggregated or anonymized
fashion. All personally identifiable user information gathered for the
purposes of the trial will be treated as confidential pursuant to the
Commission's confidentiality rules.
22. The Commission directs OMD and the TRS Fund administrator to
consult with each of the providers participating in the trial, to
formulate their individual data collection strategies--before the
beginning of the trial and as needed during the trial--to ensure that
the data collected addresses the categories listed above and is robust
enough to provide sufficient basis for a Commission decision on whether
to incorporate deaf interpreters on a permanent basis, as well as how
to address any issues that surface during the trial.
23. VRS providers employing deaf interpreters must comply with all
applicable mandatory minimum standards. Because a deaf interpreter does
not perform all the functions of a CA, but rather provides
supplementary assistance, the participation of a deaf interpreter does
not necessarily affect a provider's speed of answer or compliance with
other telecommunications relay services (TRS) rules. Further, the
Commission leaves the parameters of participation in the deaf
interpreters trial largely to the discretion of individual providers.
For the same reasons discussed above regarding skills-based routing, in
any instance where a caller requests a deaf interpreter in advance of
placing a call and is subject to additional waiting time before the
call can be placed, in excess of the time needed for a hearing CA to be
available, the Commission waives the answer-in-the-order-received and
speed-of-answer rules with respect to such additional waiting time, for
those providers that participate in the trial and who provide timely
and accurate reports containing the information specified above, on
condition that the provider makes clear that there will be an
additional wait and expressly offers to proceed without a deaf
interpreter.
Speed of Answer
24. The Commission is persuaded that releasing summaries of each
provider's speed-of-answer performance data to the public would be
beneficial because it will enable consumers to monitor provider
performance and supply valuable information that can assist in their
selection of VRS providers. The Commission further believes that in the
interest of attracting customers, publication of this data may create
incentives for providers to tighten their speed-of-answer performance.
Accordingly, the Commission directs OMD, in coordination with CGB, to
publish summaries of each VRS provider's speed-of-answer data--obtained
from the TRS Fund administrator--on a semi-annual basis on the
Commission's Web site. The information published shall not identify
individual callers or phone numbers. Notification of the release of
such information shall be made by Public Notice. The Commission further
directs that such information be prepared for the public in an easy-to-
read format, to allow for easy comparisons of provider performance, and
that the summaries be accompanied by a statement that the data shown
are only averages and do not predict how long it will take for a
provider to answer any individual call.
25. Given that VRS users are now able to directly dial their
destination number without intervention by a CA, the Commission amends
its rules to define when VRS calls are ``answered'' for the purpose of
the speed-of-answer measurement as when a call is answered by a CA--
i.e., not when it is put on hold, placed in a queue, or connected to an
interactive voice response (IVR) system. Thus, the current formula for
assessing compliance will be amended to explicitly state that the call
must be answered by a CA, as follows: [(calls unanswered and
disconnected by the caller in 45 seconds or less) + (calls answered by
a CA in 45 seconds or less)] divided by [all calls (unanswered and
answered)].
26. The Commission declines to adopt a self-executing exemption
from the speed-of-answer standard for calls occurring as a result of
specific extraordinary events beyond a provider's control. The
Commission's mandatory minimum standards require all TRS providers to
have ``redundancy features functionally equivalent to the equipment in
normal central offices, including uninterruptable power for emergency
use.'' However, the Commission also recognizes that at times, there may
be exigent circumstances that affect either multiple centers at the
same time, or a single center in such an extraordinary way that meeting
the speed of answer becomes extremely difficult or impossible, and
warrant some flexibility by the Commission. Should this occur,
providers may bring such circumstances to the attention of the
Commission in the form of a waiver request, which shall be reviewed on
its merits on a case-by-case basis. The waiver request shall include a
description of the nature of the exigent circumstances, a discussion of
what the provider is doing to mitigate the effects of such
circumstances, and the average speed-of-answer calculations for the
period covered by the waiver request. To ensure that any delay in
addressing such requests does not unnecessarily disrupt the provision
of compensation, the Commission amends its rules to instruct the TRS
Fund administrator not to withhold payment pending review of such
waiver requests.
iTRS Numbers for Hearing People
27. The Commission believes that enabling registered VRS users to
communicate directly with hearing individuals who can sign not only
will conserve the resources of the TRS Fund but also will allow ``more
natural, efficient, and effective communication'' between the deaf and
hearing communities. Accordingly, the Commission amends the TRS rules
to permit VRS providers to assign ten-digit telephone numbers
associated with the TRS Numbering Directory (iTRS numbers) to hearing
individuals upon their request, in accordance with the rules adopted
herein. VRS providers shall allow such iTRS numbers to be
[[Page 17758]]
used only for point-to-point video communications and shall not allow
them to be used to place or receive VRS calls. Accordingly, it will not
be permissible for these numbers to be used for the purpose of
contacting 911 services. In order to ensure that there is no such
expectation by iTRS number recipients who are hearing, the Commission
directs providers who distribute such numbers to provide a clear
warning about this limitation.
28. Because the Commission is only permitting, and does not
require, VRS providers to assign iTRS numbers to hearing individuals,
and because such numbers may not be used to access TRS, the Commission
will not permit any costs associated with such number assignment to be
included as allowable costs in provider cost data submissions to the
TRS Fund administrator at this time. Thus, in VRS providers' annual
cost submissions, any incremental costs for number assignment, back-
office services, and the like associated with providing iTRS numbers
and connectivity to hearing individuals shall be separated from any
allowable costs associated with number assignment and point-to-point
communications for registered VRS users. Such costs may be recovered
from the individuals to whom such numbers are assigned.
29. To aid in the prevention of fraud, waste, and abuse, and to
ensure that only residents of the United States have access to point-
to-point service via iTRS numbers, the Commission requires that VRS
providers obtain from each hearing applicant seeking an iTRS number the
individual's full name, residential address, birth date, and a signed
self-certification that:
The individual is proficient in sign language;
The individual understands that the iTRS number may only
be used for the sole purpose of communicating--via point-to-point--over
distances with registered VRS users;
The individual understands that such iTRS number may not
be used to access VRS; and
The individual understands that calls to 911 are not
supported by such iTRS number.
30. In addition to transmitting the above information, the
Commission requires each VRS provider to deliver the following to the
TRS User Registration Database (TRS-URD) administrator:
Each iTRS number assigned in the TRS Numbering Directory
to hearing persons;
The VRS provider's name and dates of service initiation
and termination (as applicable); and
The date on which an iTRS number was assigned to or
removed from a hearing person.
31. To ensure that restrictions on the use of these numbers can be
implemented and enforced, the Commission requires each default provider
distributing an iTRS number to a hearing individual to notify both the
TRS Numbering Directory and the TRS-URD that the individual is a
hearing person who is not entitled to place or receive VRS calls. Such
numbers shall be coded in the TRS-URD and TRS Numbering Directory as
restricted numbers that may only be used for point-to-point calls. VRS
providers are prohibited from seeking compensation for any call
involving an iTRS number assigned to a hearing individual.
32. The Commission requires providers to make all information
collected to address the above requirements available upon request to
the TRS Fund administrator and the Commission staff. All personally
identifiable user information gathered for this purpose shall remain
confidential pursuant to the Commission's confidentiality rules.
At-Home VRS Call Handling
33. The Commission amends its rules to authorize a voluntary pilot
program of at-home VRS call handling, subject to specified safeguards,
for a twelve-month period, beginning November 1, 2017, and ending
November 1, 2018. During this period, in any month of the program, a
participating VRS provider may be compensated for minutes served by at-
home CA workstations up to a maximum of either 30 percent of a VRS
provider's total minutes for which compensation is paid in that month
or 30 percent of the provider's average monthly minutes for the 12
months ending October 31, 2017, whichever is greater. This is a
limitation on the minutes handled at-home that will be subject to
compensation; however, exceeding this limit during the pilot program
period will not result in penalties and forfeitures. The Commission
will gather data as the pilot proceeds, to inform a final determination
on whether to make this program permanent. The Commission will permit
any of the currently certified VRS providers to participate in this
pilot, subject to Commission approval of their plans for participation
and the conditions specified below.
34. The Commission believes that with current technology and
experienced CAs, VRS providers likely can protect against waste, fraud,
and abuse, and comply with the Commission's mandatory minimum standards
while effectively handling VRS calls from CA at-home workstations. This
approach aligns with current practices across industry and government
sectors that permit at-home communications-related work under strict
confidentiality standards. CA workstations, whether located in a call
center or at home, can be integrated in a virtual system in which call
handling protocols apply seamless capabilities and failover procedures
to ensure that quality standards are met at every workstation
regardless of its location.
35. Safeguards for At-Home Workstations. To protect against waste,
fraud, and abuse, guarantee call confidentiality, and ensure compliance
with the Commission's rules and orders governing TRS, during the trial
the Commission requires VRS providers to adhere to the following
safeguards for all of their at-home CA workstations. The Commission
also expects these providers to respond as quickly as they are able to
any indications that their at-home CAs or workstations may not be
meeting these safeguards or any of the Commission's TRS standards.
36. Personnel Safeguards. Providers must ensure that CAs working
from at-home workstations have the skills, experience, and knowledge to
effectively handle the wide range of communications that take place
over VRS. To achieve this, the Commission requires participating VRS
providers to comply with the following safeguards:
Before permitting CAs to handle calls from an at-home
workstation, VRS providers must ensure that they have a level of
experience, skills, and knowledge to effectively interpret from these
workstations, including a thorough understanding of the Commission's
mandatory minimum standards. This can be measured, for example, by
having providers conduct tests or assessments of a CA's capabilities
and knowledge prior to permitting participation in the program.
To provide a measure of added assurance that CAs working
at home have sufficient experience, skills, and knowledge to work
without in-person supervision, any CA permitted to work at home first
must have three years of experience as a call center CA.
Before authorizing at-home workstations, VRS providers
must establish protocols for the handling of calls from these stations
(to the extent there are additional protocols that differ from those
applicable to the provider's call centers) and must provide training to
at-home CAs on such protocols, in addition to all applicable training
that is required of CAs working from call centers.
[[Page 17759]]
Before being permitted to work at home, CAs must certify
to the provider in writing their understanding of and commitment to
complying with the Commission's rules governing TRS, including rules
governing caller confidentiality and fraud prevention.
VRS providers must provide CAs working from at-home
workstations equivalent support to that provided to their counterparts
working from call centers, as needed to effectively handle calls,
including, where appropriate, the opportunity to team interpret and
consult with supervisors. Supervisors located at call centers must be
readily available to CAs working from home to resolve problems that may
arise during a relay call, such as difficulty in understanding a VRS
user's signs, the need for added support for emergency calls, and
relieving a CA in the event of the CA's sudden illness.
Each provider shall establish grounds for dismissing a CA
from the at-home program (i.e., for noncompliance with the Commission's
at-home call handling safeguards and rules governing TRS), including a
process for such termination in the event that the CA fails to adhere
to these requirements. Such grounds and process must be put in writing
and provided to each CA participating in the pilot program. CAs must
certify as to their understanding of the reasons and process for such
dismissal.
37. Technical and Environmental Safeguards. The home environment
used to handle VRS calls must meet certain standards to ensure the
provision of confidential and uninterrupted services to the same extent
as the provider's call center. VRS providers must also ensure that at-
home CAs are seamlessly integrated into their call routing,
distribution, tracking, and support systems. This will help ensure that
VRS providers have the same level of oversight over an at-home CA
workstation as a CA workstation in a call center. To achieve this and
to ensure compliance with the Commission's minimum standards, the
Commission requires the following safeguards:
Each at-home workstation shall reside in a separate,
secure location in the CA's home, where access is restricted solely to
the CA.
Each at-home workstation shall allow a CA to use all call-
handling technology to the same extent as other CAs, including the
ability to transition a non-emergency call to an emergency call, engage
in virtual teaming with another CA, and allow supervisors to
communicate with and oversee calls.
VRS providers shall ensure that each at-home workstation
is capable of supporting VRS in compliance with the Commission's
mandatory minimum technical and emergency call handling standards,
including the provision of system redundancy, and other safeguards to
the same degree as these are available at call centers, and including
the ability to route VRS calls around individual CA workstations in the
event they experience a network outage or other service interruption.
Each at-home workstation shall be equipped with an
effective means to prevent eavesdropping, such as white noise emitters
or soundproofing, and to ensure that interruptions from noises outside
the room do not adversely affect a CA's ability to interpret a call
accurately and effectively.
Each CA workstation must connect to the provider's network
over a secure connection to ensure caller privacy.
38. Monitoring and Oversight Obligations. The Commission requires
the following additional measures in order to appropriately monitor and
oversee the at-home call handling pilot program:
To ensure CA compliance with the enumerated safeguards,
VRS providers shall inspect and approve each at-home workstation before
activating a CA's workstation for use.
The VRS provider shall assign a unique call center
identification number (ID) to each VRS at-home workstation and use this
call center ID to identify all minutes handled from each such
workstation in its call detail records submitted monthly to the TRS
Fund administrator.
Each at-home workstation shall be equipped with monitoring
technology sufficient to ensure that off-site supervision approximates
the level of supervision at the provider's call center, including the
ability to monitor both ends of a call, i.e., video and audio, to the
same extent as is possible in a call center. Although the Commission
does not dictate the form of such monitoring, the Commission notes that
commenters suggest an external camera with a view of the CA's workspace
and tracking software that is capable of recording CA actions and
producing reports that can be analyzed for anomalies. To the extent
that this method is used, providers shall regularly analyze such data
to proactively address possible waste, fraud, and abuse.
Each provider shall keep all records pertaining to at-home
work stations, including the data produced by any at-home workstation
monitoring technology, except for any data that records the content of
an interpreted conversation, for a minimum of three years. At-home
workstations and workstation records shall be subject to review, audit,
and inspection by the Commission and the Fund administrator to the same
extent as data produced from other call centers subject to the
Commission's rules.
Each provider must conduct random and unannounced
inspections of at least five percent (5%) of all at-home workstations
during the pilot program and report its findings as specified below. In
addition, each at-home work environment may be subject to unannounced
on-site inspections by the Commission.
Each at-home workstation will be subject to audits to the
same extent as other call centers subject to the Commission's rules.
39. Participation in the Pilot Program. Each currently certified
VRS provider interested in participating in the pilot program must
provide notification to the Commission of its intent to participate to
CGB by September 1, 2017, together with a detailed plan of how it
intends to achieve compliance with the Commission's safeguards
enumerated above and standards governing VRS. Per the safeguards noted
above, in these plans VRS providers shall specify the following:
A description of the screening process used to select CAs
for the at-home call handling program;
A description of specific training to be provided for at-
home CAs;
A description of the protocols and CA expectations
developed for the at-home call handling program;
A description of the grounds for dismissing a CA from the
at-home program and the process for such termination in the event that
the CA fails to adhere to applicable requirements;
A description of all steps that will be taken to install a
workstation in a CA's home, including evaluations that will be
performed to ensure all workstations are sufficiently secure and
equipped to prevent eavesdropping and outside interruptions;
A description of the monitoring technology to be used by
the provider to ensure that off-site supervision approximates the level
of supervision at the provider's call center;
An explanation of how the provider's workstations will
connect to the provider's network, including how they will be
integrated into the call center routing, distribution, tracking, and
support systems, and how the provider will ensure system redundancy in
the event of service disruptions in at-home workstations;
[[Page 17760]]
A signed certification by an officer of the provider that
the provider will conduct random and unannounced inspections of at
least five percent (5%) of all at-home workstations during the pilot
program; and
The provider's commitment to comply with all other
safeguards enumerated above and Commission rules governing TRS.
40. CGB, in consultation with OMD, will approve plans that
demonstrate that the provider will fully comply with the Commission's
standards and safeguards. Such approval may be canceled if the provider
falls out of such compliance at any time. In addition, providers may be
subject to withholding, forfeitures, and penalties for noncompliant
minutes handled by at-home workstations, as is the case for non-
compliant minutes handled by call centers.
41. Data Collection. Participating providers will be required to
submit to the TRS Fund administrator, with their monthly requests for
compensation for minutes handled from both call centers and at-home
workstations, the following data for each month of the pilot program:
The call center ID and full street address (number,
street, city, state, and zip code) for each at-home workstation and the
CA ID number for each individual handling VRS calls from that
workstation; and
The location and call center IDs of call centers providing
supervision for at-home workstations, plus the names of persons at such
call centers responsible for oversight of these workstations.
42. In addition to these monthly reports, the Commission requires
participants to submit, no later than seven months after the start of
the program, a report covering the first six months of their individual
pilot programs containing the following information:
A description of the actual screening process used to
select CAs for the at-home call handling program;
Copies of training materials provided to at-home CAs;
Copies of written protocols used for CAs working from
home;
The total number of CAs handling VRS calls from at-home
workstations over the first six months of the program;
The number of 911 calls handled by the provider's at-home
workstations;
A description and copies of any surveys or evaluations
taken of CAs concerning their experience using at-home workstations and
participating in an at-home call handling program;
The total number of CAs terminated from the program;
The total number of complaints, if any, submitted to the
provider regarding its at-home call handling program or calls handled
by at-home CAs;
The total number of on-site inspections of at-home
workstations conducted, along with the dates and locations of such
inspections;
A description of the monitoring technology used to monitor
CAs working at home and an analysis of the experience of supervisors
overseeing at-home CAs compared to overseeing CAs in a call center;
Copies of any reports produced by tracking software and a
description explaining how the provider analyzed the reports for
anomalies; and
Detailed documentation of costs incurred in the use of at-
home workstations, including any costs associated with CA recruitment,
training and compensation, engineering and technical set-up (including
workstation set-up), and administrative and management support
(including oversight, evaluation, and recording).
43. In light of these information reporting requirements, during
the pilot program the Commission does not require VRS providers to
include redundant data pertaining to at-home call handling workstations
in semi-annual call center reports and in call center change
notifications under the Commission's existing rules. See 47 CFR
64.604(c)(5)(iii)(N)(2).
44. The Commission acknowledges the concerns of some commenters
about the costs that may be associated with safeguards required for at-
home call handling. However, the Commission's action today authorizes,
rather than mandates, participation in the at-home pilot program.
Accordingly, each VRS provider has the opportunity to assess for itself
whether the costs of implementing this practice--and the requisite
safeguards--outweigh its benefits. Additionally, the Commission
believes that there may be some cost savings associated with
implementing at-home interpreting. The Commission is hopeful that the
data it collects during the pilot program will test the accuracy of
this assumption and provide comprehensive information about the costs
and benefits of allowing at-home workstations. The Commission concludes
that if implemented with safeguards, the benefits of a pilot at-home
interpretation program may outweigh its costs and warrant lifting the
prohibition against this feature for a one-year period. The Commission
will evaluate the value and effectiveness of this program at the
conclusion of this period to make a determination on its continuation.
Legal Authority for Trials of Skills-Based Routing and Deaf
Interpreters, and Pilot Program for At-Home Interpreting
45. The Commission concludes it has authority under 47 U.S.C. 225
to conduct trials of skills-based routing and the use of deaf
interpreters, and to establish a pilot program for at-home
interpreting. Section 225 of the Act defines TRS as services that
enable individuals with hearing and speech disabilities to engage in
communication in a manner that is functionally equivalent to voice
communications service, directs the Commission to ensure that such
services are available to the extent possible and the most efficient
manner, and authorizes the Commission to prescribe regulations to
implement section 225 of the Act, including functional requirements,
guidelines, operational procedures, and minimum standards. 47 U.S.C.
225(a)(3), (b)(1), (d)(1), (d)(1)(A), (B). The record indicates that
the use of skills-based routing, deaf interpreters, and at-home
interpreting may improve the functional equivalence and efficiency of
VRS. The data gathered from these trials and pilot program will enable
the Commission to more fully assess these benefits as well as any
additional costs resulting from such practices.
Final Regulatory Flexibility Analysis
46. As required by the Regulatory Flexibility Act of 1980 (RFA), as
amended, the Commission incorporated an Initial Regulatory Flexibility
Analysis (IRFA) into each of the Further Notices of Proposed
Rulemaking. The Commission sought written public comment on the
proposals in the 2013 VRS FNPRM and the 2015 VRS FNPRM, including
comment on the two IRFAs. No comments were received on either IRFA.
Need for, and Objectives of, the Proposed Rules
47. Document FCC 17-26 makes rule changes to improve the functional
equivalence of VRS by approving, pursuant to Commission authority under
47 U.S.C. 225, eight-month trials for: (a) skills-based routing by
which VRS calls can be routed to a CA who specializes in legal, medical
or technical terminology; and (b) the use of deaf interpreters who work
in conjunction with hearing interpreters in special situations, such as
when a caller has limited signing ability. Document FCC 17-26 also: (a)
Modifies the formula for calculating the speed of answer so that the
measured wait time does not end
[[Page 17761]]
until the call is answered by a CA--i.e., not when the call is put on
hold, placed in a queue, or connected to an IVR system; (b) permits the
assignment of iTRS numbers to hearing individuals who know ASL to
communicate directly with VRS users through point-to-point video
service without the use of a CA; and (c) authorizes, pursuant to
Commission authority under 47 U.S.C. 225, a twelve-month pilot program
for at-home VRS call handling, subject to requirements, including
training, having secure workstations in a separate room, monitoring,
and reporting to the Commission on the number of CAs working from home,
their locations, and the minutes of use, which are necessary to protect
to the privacy of VRS users and prevent waste, fraud, and abuse.
Summary of Significant Issues Raised by Public Comments in Response to
the IRFA
48. No comments were filed in response to either IRFA.
Small Entities Impacted
49. The rules adopted in document FCC 17-26 will affect obligations
of VRS Providers. These services can be included within the broad
economic category of All Other Telecommunications. Five providers
currently receive compensation from the TRS Fund for providing VRS: ASL
Services Holdings, LLC; CSDVRS, LLC; Convo Communications, LLC; Purple
Communications, Inc.; and Sorenson Communications, Inc.
Description of Projected Reporting, Recordkeeping, and Other Compliance
Requirements
50. The two trials--for skills-based routing and deaf
interpreters--are voluntary. There are some recordkeeping, reporting
and other compliance requirements associated with the trials, but those
requirements apply only if a VRS provider decides to engage in a trial.
51. The long-term rules adopted in the document FCC 17-26 have
minor compliance requirements. First, the modification for measuring
the speed-of-answer only requires VRS providers to make minor
adjustments to their automated methods of keeping records of how fast
calls are answered. Second, the assignment of iTRS numbers to hearing
individuals who can sign is essentially an extension of the VRS
providers' existing obligation to collect and maintain the required
data to facilitate the assignment and usage of such numbers by VRS
callers and to prevent waste, fraud, and abuse. Finally, although
document FCC 17-26 includes regulatory requirements associated with a
pilot program for at-home VRS call handling, including training, having
secure workstations in a separate room, monitoring, and reporting to
the Commission on the number of CAs working from home, their locations,
and the minutes of use, such requirements are necessary to protect the
privacy of users and prevent waste, fraud, and abuse.
Steps Taken To Minimize Significant Impact on Small Entities, and
Significant Alternatives Considered
52. The skills-based routing trial and the trial of deaf
interpreters are voluntary, thereby minimizing the potential
recordkeeping, reporting, and compliance requirements. Even for VRS
providers that choose to participate in the trials, the VRS providers
will be designing their own trials; therefore, they will control the
sizes of their trials and the corresponding compliance impacts.
Moreover, the proposal for a skills-based routing trial was initially
made jointly by all of the VRS providers in 2015, and many of the
reporting requirements for both trials have been suggested by the
smaller VRS providers.
53. The new rules concerning speed of answer evolved from a
proposal to increase the speed-of-answer requirement. To address
concerns raised by the VRS providers of having to comply with an
increased speed of answer without receiving corresponding increases in
their compensation, the Commission decided not to change the speed of
answer at this time. The small change in the methodology for
calculating speed-of-answer will have minimal impact on the VRS
providers.
54. The authorization to provide iTRS numbers to hearing
individuals will have similar proportional impact on large and small
VRS providers. The data gathering and recordkeeping associated with the
provision of such numbers is basically an extension of the VRS
providers' current roles in providing iTRS numbers to VRS users. The
costs of number assignments, back-office services, and the like shall
be handled in the same manner as comparable cost functions performed in
connection with number assignment and point-to-point communications for
registered VRS users.
55. The regulatory requirements associated with the pilot program
for at-home VRS call handling, including training, having secure
workstations in a separate room, monitoring, and reporting to the
Commission on the number of CAs working from home, their locations, and
the minutes of use, are necessary to protect the privacy of users and
prevent waste, fraud, and abuse. The VRS providers will be in control
of the number of such CAs working at home, and a VRS provider can
decide not to allow any CAs to work at home. The costs of setting up
the necessary workstations and the associated training, monitoring,
reporting, etc. shall be handled in a manner similar to comparable
functions performed at the VRS providers' call centers.
56. No commenters raised other alternatives that would lessen the
impact of any of these requirements on small entities vis-[agrave]-vis
larger entities.
Federal Rules Which Duplicate, Overlap, or Conflict With, the
Commission's Proposals
57. None.
Ordering Clauses
Pursuant to sections 1, 2, 225, and 251 of the Communications Act
of 1934, as amended, 47 U.S.C. 151, 152, 225, 251, document FCC 17-26
is adopted, and part 64 of title 47 is amended.
The Commission's Consumer and Governmental Affairs Bureau,
Reference Information Center, shall send a copy of document FCC 17-26,
including the Final Regulatory Flexibility Analysis, to the Chief
Counsel for Advocacy of the Small Business Administration.
List of Subjects in 47 CFR Part 64
Individuals with disabilities, Telecommunications,
Telecommunications relay services, Video relay services.
Federal Communications Commission.
Marlene H. Dortch,
Secretary.
Final Rules
For the reasons discussed in the preamble, the Federal
Communications Commission amends 47 CFR part 64 as follows:
PART 64--MISCELLANEOUS RULES RELATING TO COMMON CARRIERS
0
1. The authority citation for part 64 continues to read as follows:
Authority: 47 U.S.C. 154, 225, 254(k), 403(b)(2)(B), (c), 715,
Pub. L. 104-104, 110 Stat. 56. Interpret or apply 47 U.S.C. 201,
218, 222, 225, 226, 227, 228, 254(k), 616, 620, and the Middle Class
Tax Relief and Job Creation Act of 2012, Pub. L. 112-96, unless
otherwise noted.
0
2. Amend Sec. 64.601 by adding paragraphs (a)(47) through (49) to read
as follows:
[[Page 17762]]
Sec. 64.601 Definitions and provisions of general applicability.
(a) * * *
(47) Hearing point-to-point video user. A hearing individual who
has been assigned a ten-digit NANP number that is entered in the TRS
Numbering Directory to access point-to-point service.
(48) Point-to-point video service. A service that enables a user to
place and receive non-relay video calls without the assistance of a CA.
(49) Point-to-point video call. A call placed via a point-to-point
video service.
* * * * *
0
3. Amend Sec. 64.604 by revising paragraphs (b)(2)(iii)(B) and
(b)(4)(iii) and adding paragraphs (b)(8) and (c)(5)(iii)(L)(6) to read
as follows:
Sec. 64.604 Mandatory minimum standards.
* * * * *
(b) * * *
(2) * * *
(iii) * * *
(B) VRS CA service providers must meet the speed of answer
requirements for VRS providers as measured from the time a VRS call
reaches facilities operated by the VRS CA service provider to the time
when the call is answered by a CA--i.e., not when the call is put on
hold, placed in a queue, or connected to an IVR system.
* * * * *
(4) * * *
(iii) A VRS CA may not handle VRS calls from a location primarily
used as his or her home unless as part of the voluntary at-home VRS
call handling pilot program as provided for by paragraph (b)(8) of this
section.
* * * * *
(8) Voluntary at-home VRS call handling pilot program. Any VRS
provider that holds a conditional or full certification to receive
compensation from the TRS Fund pursuant to Sec. 64.606 as of March 23,
2017 may participate in the voluntary at-home VRS call handling pilot
program. The pilot program shall be in effect for one year, for service
provided by participants beginning November 1, 2017, and ending October
31, 2018.
(i) Notification of intent to participate. A VRS provider seeking
to participate in the pilot program shall notify the Commission of its
intent to participate on or before September 1, 2017, and shall include
in such notification a detailed plan demonstrating that the VRS
provider intends to achieve compliance with the mandatory minimum
standards applicable to VRS and with the safeguards enumerated in this
paragraph (b)(8). Plans submitted by VRS providers shall specify the
following:
(A) A description of the screening process used to select CAs for
the at-home call handling program;
(B) A description of specific training to be provided for at-home
CAs;
(C) A description of the protocols and CA expectations developed
for the at-home call handling program;
(D) A description of the grounds for dismissing a CA from the at-
home program and the process for such termination in the event that the
CA fails to adhere to applicable requirements;
(E) A description of all steps that will be taken to install a
workstation in a CA's home, including evaluations that will be
performed to ensure all workstations are sufficiently secure and
equipped to prevent eavesdropping and outside interruptions;
(F) A description of the monitoring technology to be used by the
provider to ensure that off-site supervision approximates the level of
supervision at the provider's call center;
(G) An explanation of how the provider's workstations will connect
to the provider's network, including how they will be integrated into
the call center routing, distribution, tracking, and support systems,
and how the provider will ensure system redundancy in the event of
service disruptions in at-home workstations;
(H) A signed certification by an officer of the provider that the
provider will conduct random and unannounced inspections of at least
five percent (5%) of all at-home workstations during the pilot program;
and
(I) A commitment to comply with all other safeguards enumerated in
this paragraph (b)(8) and the applicable rules in this chapter
governing TRS.
(ii) Authorization for at-home VRS call handling. Upon Commission
approval of a VRS provider's plan, the provider may conduct at-home VRS
call handling during the period of the pilot program. The Commission
may cancel such approval if a VRS provider fails to comply with any of
the safeguards enumerated in this paragraph (b)(8) or other applicable
mandatory minimum TRS standards. VRS providers may be subject to
withholding, forfeitures, and penalties for noncompliant minutes
handled by at-home workstations, as is the case for non-compliant
minutes handled by call centers.
(iii) Limit on minutes handled. In any month of the program, a VRS
provider may be compensated for minutes served by at-home CA
workstations up to a maximum of either thirty percent (30%) of a VRS
provider's total minutes for which compensation is paid in that month
or thirty percent (30%) of the provider's average monthly minutes for
the 12 months ending October 31, 2017, whichever is greater.
(iv) Personnel safeguards. Before permitting CAs to handle VRS
calls from at-home workstations, VRS providers shall:
(A) Ensure that each CA handling calls from an at-home workstation
has the experience, skills, and knowledge necessary to effectively
interpret from these workstations, including a thorough understanding
of the TRS mandatory minimum standards and at least three years of
experience as a call center CA.
(B) Establish protocols for the handling of calls from at-home
workstations (to the extent there are additional protocols that differ
from those applicable to the provider's call centers) and provide
training to at-home CAs on such protocols, in addition to all
applicable training that is required of CAs working from call centers.
(C) Provide each CA working from an at-home workstation equivalent
support to that provided to CAs working from call centers, as needed to
effectively handle calls, including, where appropriate, the opportunity
to team interpret and consult with supervisors, and ensure that
supervisors are readily available to a CA working from home to resolve
problems that may arise during a relay call, such as difficulty in
understanding a VRS user's signs, the need for added support for
emergency calls, and relieving a CA in the event of the CA's sudden
illness.
(D) Establish grounds for dismissing a CA from the at-home VRS call
handling program (i.e., for noncompliance with the standards and
safeguards enumerated in this paragraph (b)(8) and the rules governing
TRS), including a process for such termination in the event that the CA
fails to adhere to these requirements, and provide such grounds and
process in writing to each CA participating in the pilot program.
(E) Obtain from each CA handling calls from an at-home workstation
a certification in writing of the CA's understanding of and commitment
to complying with the rules in this chapter governing TRS, including
rules governing caller confidentiality and fraud prevention, and the
CA's understanding of the reasons and process for dismissal from the
at-home VRS call handling program.
(v) Technical and environmental safeguards. Participating VRS
providers shall ensure that each home environment used for at-home VRS
call
[[Page 17763]]
handling enables the provision of confidential and uninterrupted
services to the same extent as the provider's call centers and is
seamlessly integrated into the provider's call routing, distribution,
tracking, and support systems. VRS providers shall ensure that each at-
home workstation:
(A) Resides in a separate, secure location in the CA's home, where
access is restricted solely to the CA;
(B) Allows a CA to use all call-handling technology to the same
extent as other CAs, including the ability to transition a non-
emergency call to an emergency call, engage in virtual teaming with
another CA, and allow supervisors to communicate with and oversee
calls;
(C) Is capable of supporting VRS in compliance with the applicable
mandatory minimum technical and emergency call handling standards to
the same degree as these are available at call centers, including the
ability to route VRS calls around individual CA workstations in the
event the CA experiences a network outage or other service
interruption;
(D) Is equipped with an effective means to prevent eavesdropping,
such as white noise emitters or soundproofing, and to ensure that
interruptions from noises outside the room do not adversely affect a
CA's ability to interpret a call accurately and effectively; and
(E) Is connected to the provider's network over a secure connection
to ensure caller privacy.
(vi) Monitoring and oversight obligations. VRS providers shall:
(A) Inspect and approve each at-home workstation before activating
a CA's workstation for use;
(B) Assign a unique call center identification number (ID) to each
VRS at-home workstation and use this call center ID to identify all
minutes handled from each such workstation in its call detail records
submitted monthly to the TRS Fund administrator;
(C) Equip each at-home workstation with monitoring technology
sufficient to ensure that off-site supervision approximates the level
of supervision at the provider's call center, including the ability to
monitor both ends of a call, i.e., video and audio, to the same extent
as is possible in a call center, and regularly analyze the records and
data produced by such monitoring to proactively address possible waste,
fraud, and abuse;
(D) Keep all records pertaining to at-home workstations, including
the data produced by any at-home workstation monitoring technology,
except for any data that records the content of an interpreted
conversation, for a minimum of five years; and
(E) Conduct random and unannounced inspections of at least five
percent (5%) of all at-home workstations during the pilot program.
(vii) Commission audits and inspections. At-home workstations and
workstation records shall be subject to review, audit, and inspection
by the Commission and the Fund administrator and unannounced on-site
inspections by the Commission to the same extent as other call centers
and call center records subject to the rules in this chapter.
(viii) Monthly reports. Each participating VRS provider shall
report the following information to the TRS Fund administrator with its
monthly requests for compensation:
(A) The call center ID and full street address (number, street,
city, state, and zip code) for each at-home workstation and the CA ID
number for each individual handling VRS calls from that workstation;
and
(B) The location and call center IDs of call centers providing
supervision for at-home workstations, plus the names of persons at such
call centers responsible for oversight of such workstations.
(ix) Six-month report. Each participating VRS provider shall
submit, no later than seven months after the start of its program, a
report covering the first six months of its program, containing the
following information:
(A) A description of the actual screening process used to select
CAs for the at-home call handling program;
(B) Copies of training materials provided to at-home CAs;
(C) Copies of written protocols used for CAs working from home;
(D) The total number of CAs handling VRS calls from at-home
workstations over the first six months of the program;
(E) The number of 911 calls handled by the provider's at-home
workstations;
(F) A description and copies of any surveys or evaluations taken of
CAs concerning their experience using at-home workstations and
participating in an at-home call handling program;
(G) The total number of CAs terminated from the program;
(H) The total number of complaints, if any, submitted to the
provider regarding its at-home call handling program or calls handled
by at-home CAs;
(I) The total number of on-site inspections conducted of at-home
workstations and the date and location of each inspection;
(J) A description of the monitoring technology used to monitor CAs
working at home and an analysis of the experience of supervisors
overseeing at-home CAs compared to overseeing CAs in a call center;
(K) Copies of any reports produced by tracking software and a
description explaining how the provider analyzed the reports for
anomalies; and
(L) Detailed documentation of costs incurred in the use of at-home
workstations, including any costs associated with CA recruitment,
training, and compensation, engineering and technical set-up (including
workstation set-up), and administrative and management support
(including oversight, evaluation, and recording).
(c) * * *
(5) * * *
(iii) * * *
(L) * * *
(6) If the VRS provider submits a waiver request asserting exigent
circumstances affecting one or more call centers that will make it
highly improbable that the VRS provider will meet the speed-of-answer
standard for call attempts occurring in a period of time identified by
beginning and ending dates, the Fund administrator shall not withhold
TRS Fund payments for a VRS provider's failure to meet the speed-of-
answer standard during the identified period of time while the waiver
request is under review by the Commission. In the event that the waiver
request is denied, the speed-of-answer requirement is not met, and
payment has been made to the provider from the TRS Fund for the
identified period of time or a portion thereof, the provider shall
return such payment to the TRS Fund for any period of time when the
speed-of-answer requirement was not met.
* * * * *
0
4. Amend Sec. 64.611 by:
0
a. Adding paragraph (a)(5);
0
b. Removing the ``and'' at the end of paragraph (g)(1)(v);
0
c. Removing the period at the end of paragraph (g)(1)(vi) and adding
``; and'' in its place;
0
d. Adding paragraph (g)(1)(vii); and
0
e. Revising paragraph (c)(2)(i).
The additions and revision read as follows:
Sec. 64.611 Internet-based TRS registration.
(a) * * *
(5) Assignment of iTRS Numbers to Hearing Point-to-Point Video
Users. (i) Before assigning an iTRS telephone number to a hearing
individual, a VRS provider shall obtain from such individual, the
individual's full name, residential address, date of birth, and a
written certification, attesting that the individual:
(A) Is proficient in sign language;
(B) Understands that the iTRS number may be used only for the
purpose of
[[Page 17764]]
point-to-point communication over distances with registered VRS users;
and
(C) Understands that such iTRS number may not be used to access
VRS.
(ii) Before assigning an iTRS telephone number to a hearing
individual, a VRS provider also shall obtain the individual's consent
to provide the information required by this paragraph (a)(5) to the TRS
User Registration Database. Before obtaining such consent, the VRS
provider, using clear, easily understood language, shall describe the
specific information to be provided, explain that the information is
provided to ensure proper administration of the TRS program and inform
the individual that failure to provide consent will result in denial of
service. VRS providers shall obtain and keep a record of affirmative
acknowledgment of such consent by every hearing point-to-point video
user to whom an iTRS number is assigned.
(iii) The certification required by paragraph (a)(5)(i) of this
section must be made on a form separate from any other agreement or
form, and must include a separate signature specific to the
certification. For the purposes of this rule, an electronic signature,
defined by the Electronic Signatures in Global and National Commerce
Act, as an electronic sound, symbol, or process, attached to or
logically associated with a contract or other record and executed or
adopted by a person with the intent to sign the record, has the same
legal effect as a written signature. For the purposes of this rule, an
electronic record, defined by the Electronic Signatures in Global and
National Commerce Act as a contract or other record created, generated,
sent, communicated, received, or stored by electronic means,
constitutes a record.
(iv) Before commencing service to any hearing point-to-point video
user to whom a VRS provider assigns an iTRS number on or after the TRS
User Registration Database is operational, a VRS provider shall submit
to the TRS User Registration Database the information listed in
paragraph (a)(5)(i) of this section and the following additional
information:
(A) The ten-digit telephone number assigned in the TRS Numbering
Directory to the hearing point-to-point user;
(B) The VRS provider's name and the date of service initiation; and
(C) The date on which a ten-digit number was assigned to or removed
from a hearing point-to-point user.
(v) For all other hearing point-to-point video users to whom a VRS
provider has assigned an iTRS number, the VRS provider shall transmit
the information required by paragraph (a)(5)(iv) of this section within
60 days after the TRS User Registration Database is operational.
(vi) Upon the termination of service to any hearing point-to-point
video user, a VRS provider shall submit to the TRS User Registration
Database the date of termination of service.
(vii) A VRS provider shall maintain the confidentiality of the
information about hearing individuals required by this paragraph (a)(5)
and may not disclose such information except as required by law or
regulation.
(viii) Before commencing service to a hearing point-to-point video
user who is transferring point-to-point video service from another VRS
provider, a VRS provider shall notify the TRS User Registration
Database of such transfer and shall obtain and submit a properly
executed certification under paragraph (a)(5)(i) of this section.
(ix) Hearing individuals who are assigned iTRS numbers under this
paragraph (a)(5) shall not be deemed registered VRS users. VRS
providers shall not be compensated and shall not seek compensation from
the TRS Fund for any VRS calls to or from such iTRS numbers.
* * * * *
(c) * * *
(2) * * *
(i) Take such steps as are necessary to cease acquiring routing
information from any VRS, IP Relay, or hearing point-to-point video
user that ports his or her number to another VRS or IP Relay provider
or otherwise selects a new default provider;
* * * * *
(g) * * *
(1) * * *
(vii) If the provider assigns iTRS numbers to hearing point-to-
point video users, an explanation that hearing point-to-point video
users will not be able to place an emergency call.
* * * * *
0
5. Amend Sec. 64.613 by revising paragraphs (a)(1) and (2) to read as
follows:
Sec. 64.613 Numbering directory for Internet-based TRS users.
(a) * * *
(1) The TRS Numbering Directory shall contain records mapping the
geographically appropriate NANP telephone number of each Registered
Internet-based TRS User and hearing point-to-point video user to a
unique Uniform Resource Identifier (URI).
(2) For each record associated with a VRS or hearing point-to-point
video user's geographically appropriate NANP telephone number, the URI
shall contain the IP address of the user's device. For each record
associated with an IP Relay user's geographically appropriate NANP
telephone number, the URI shall contain the user's user name and domain
name that can be subsequently resolved to reach the user.
* * * * *
0
6. Amend Sec. 64.615 by revising paragraphs (a)(3)(i) introductory
text and (a)(3)(i)(A) to read as follows:
Sec. 64.615 TRS User Registration Database and administrator.
(a) * * *
(3) * * *
(i) Each VRS provider shall request that the administrator of the
TRS User Registration Database remove from the TRS User Registration
Database user information for any registered VRS user or hearing point-
to-point video user:
(A) Who informs its default provider that it no longer wants use of
a ten-digit number for TRS or (in the case of a hearing point-to-point
video user) for point-to-point video service; or
* * * * *
0
7. Amend Sec. 64.621 by revising paragraph (a)(1) to read as follows:
Sec. 64.621 Interoperability and portability.
(a) * * *
(1) All VRS users and hearing point-to-point video users must be
able to place a VRS or point-to-point video call through any of the VRS
providers' services, and all VRS providers must be able to receive
calls from, and make calls to, any VRS or hearing point-to-point video
user.
* * * * *
0
8. Revise Sec. 64.630 to read as follows:
Sec. 64.630 Applicability of change of default TRS provider rules.
(a) Sections 64.630 through 64.636 governing changes in default TRS
providers shall apply to any provider of IP Relay or VRS eligible to
receive payments from the TRS Fund.
(b) For purposes of Sec. Sec. 64.630 through 64.636, the term iTRS
users is defined as any individual that has been assigned a ten-digit
NANP number from the TRS Numbering Directory for IP Relay, VRS, or
point-to-point video service.
0
9. Amend Sec. 64.5101 by revising paragraph (b) to read as follows:
Sec. 64.5101 Basis and purpose.
* * * * *
(b) Purpose. The purpose of the rules in this subpart is to
implement customer proprietary network information protections for
users of telecommunications relay services and
[[Page 17765]]
point-to-point video service pursuant to sections 4, 222, and 225 of
the Communications Act of 1934, as amended, 47 U.S.C. 154, 222, 225.
0
10. Amend Sec. 64.5103 by revising paragraph (m) to read as follows:
Sec. 64.5103 Definitions.
* * * * *
(m) Point-to-point service. The term ``point-to-point service''
means a service that enables a VRS or hearing customer to place and
receive non-relay calls without the assistance of a communications
assistant over the facilities of a VRS provider using VRS access
technology. Such calls are made by means of ten-digit NANP numbers
registered in the TRS Numbering Directory and assigned to VRS customers
and hearing point-to-point customers by VRS providers. The term
``point-to-point call'' shall refer to a call placed via a point-to-
point service.
* * * * *
[FR Doc. 2017-07155 Filed 4-12-17; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6712-01-P