OMB Control Number: 3060-1047 March 2009
Telecommunications Relay Services and Speech-to-Speech Services for Individuals with Hearing and Speech Disabilities, FCC 03-112 and FCC 05-203
SUPPORTING STATEMENT
A. Justification:
1. Section 225 of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended (the Act), requires that:1
(a) The Commission ensures that telecommunications relay service (TRS)2 is available, to the extent possible and in the most efficient manner, to persons with hearing or speech disabilities in the United States;3 and
(b) TRS offers persons with hearing and speech disabilities telephone transmission services that are “functionally equivalent” to voice telephone services.4
47 C.F.R. Part 64, Subpart F implements certain provisions of the ADA pertaining to TRS. It contains the operational, technical, and functional standards required of all TRS providers and the procedures for certification.
History:
On April 22, 2002, the Commission released Provision of Improved Telecommunications Relay Services and Speech-to-Speech Services for Individuals with Hearing and Speech Disabilities; Petition for Clarification of WorldCom, Inc., CC Docket No. 98-67, Declaratory Ruling and Second Further Notice of Proposed Rulemaking, 17 FCC Rcd 7779 (2002) (2002 IP Relay Declaratory Ruling), published at 67 FR 39863 and 67 FR 39929, June 11,2002, concluding that IP Relay falls within the statutory definition of TRS.
On June 17, 2003, the Commission released Telecommunication Relay Services and Speech-to-Speech Services for Individuals with Hearing and Speech Disabilities; Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990, CC Docket No. 98-67, CG Docket No. 03-123, Second Report and Order, Order on Reconsideration, and Notice of Proposed Rulemaking, 18 FCC Rcd 12379 (2003) (2003 Second Improved TRS Order), published at 68 FR 50993, August 25, 2003. In this order, the Commission required that TRS providers offer certain local exchange carrier (LEC)-based improved services and features where technologically feasible, several additional types of TRS calls, and other services and features through which consumers with varying needs, abilities, and preferences may access and use TRS. These mandatory minimum requirements included a speed dialing feature in 47 C.F.R. § 64.604(a)(3), which may entail voluntary recordkeeping for TRS providers to maintain a list of telephone numbers.
The Commission, however, waived the speed dialing requirement, among many other requirements, for Video Relay Service (VRS) and Internet Protocol (IP) Relay providers until January 1, 2008. In the interim, in a subsequent declaratory ruling, the Commission also permitted entities desiring to provide IP captioned telephone service (IP CTS) to seek certification from the Commission for eligibility to receive compensation from the Interstate TRS Fund (Fund). Telecommunications Relay Services and Speech-to-Speech Services for Individuals with Hearing and Speech Disabilities; Internet-based Captioned Telephone Service, CG Docket No. 03-123, Declaratory Ruling, 22 FCC Rcd 379 (2007), published at 72 FR 6960, February 14, 2007.
On December 26, 2007, the Commission’s Consumer and Governmental Affairs Bureau (Bureau) extended most of the VRS and IP Relay mandatory minimum standards waivers for one year (i.e., until January 1, 2009), including the speed dialing requirements for IP Relay, though it allowed others to expire, including the waiver of the speed dialing requirement for VRS.5 On December 24, 2008, the Bureau released Telecommunications Relay Services and Speech-to-Speech Services for Individuals with Hearing and Speech Disabilities, CG Docket No. 03-123, Order, 23 FCC Rcd 18334 (CGB 2008), in which it extended most of the VRS and IP Relay mandatory minimum standards waivers for another year, until January 1, 2010, though waiver of the speed dialing requirement for IP Relay will expire on April 30, 2009.
On December 12, 2005, the Commission released Telecommunications Relay Services and Speech-to-Speech Services for Individuals with Hearing and Speech Disabilities, CG Docket No. 03-123, Report and Order and Order on Reconsideration, 20 FCC Rcd 20577 (2005) (2005 TRS Provider Certification Order), published at 70 FR 76208, December 23, 2005, which created another method for some TRS providers to become eligible to receive compensation from the Fund. Specifically, the 2005 TRS Provider Certification Order amended the TRS regulations to permit a common carrier seeking to offer VRS or IP Relay and receive compensation from the Fund to apply to the Commission for certification as an entity providing these services in compliance with the TRS rules, and therefore eligible to receive reimbursement from the Fund. This certification procedure permitted common carriers desiring to offer VRS and IP Relay service, and not the other forms of TRS, to receive compensation from the Fund without having to meet one of the existing three eligibility criteria previously set forth in the rules.6 The intent of the 2005 TRS Provider Certification Order was, inter alia, to possibly reduce the cost of providing service, give consumers greater choice, and bring innovation to the provision of VRS and IP Relay, both with new equipment and new service features.
In order to facilitate this Commission certification process, the 2005 TRS Provider Certification Order imposed new information collection requirements that include the following:
(a) 47 C.F.R. § 64.606(a)(2):7 Providing documentation detailing: (1) a description of the forms of TRS to be provided, (2) a description of how the provider will meet all non-waived mandatory minimum standards applicable to each form of TRS offered, (3) a description of the provider’s procedures for ensuring compliance with all applicable TRS rules, (4) a description of the provider’s complaint procedures, (5) a narrative describing any areas in which the provider’s service will differ from the applicable mandatory minimum standards, (6) a narrative establishing that services that differ from the mandatory minimum standards do not violate applicable mandatory minimum standards, (7) demonstration of status as a common carrier, and (8) a statement that the provider will file annual compliance reports demonstrating continued compliance with the rules.
(b) 47 C.F.R. § 64.606(c)(2): A provider may apply for renewal of its certification by filing documentation with the Commission, at least 90 days prior to expiration of certification, containing the information described in 47 C.F.R. § 64.606(a)(2).
(c) 47 C.F.R. § 64.606(e)(2): A provider must submit documentation demonstrating ongoing compliance with the Commission's minimum standards if, for example, the Commission receives evidence that a certified provider may not be in compliance with the minimum standards and the Commission requests such information.
(d) 47 C.F.R. § 64.606(f)(2): Providers certified under this section must notify the Commission of substantive changes in their TRS programs, services, and features within 60 days of when such changes occur, and must certify that the interstate TRS provider continues to meet federal minimum standards after implementing the substantive change.
(e) 47 C.F.R. § 64.606(g): Providers certified under this section shall file with the Commission, on an annual basis, a report providing evidence that they are in compliance with 47 C.F.R. § 64.604.
The Commission is requesting OMB approval for a three year extension of this collection.
As noted on the OMB Form 83-I, this information collection does not affect individuals or households; thus, there are no impacts under the Privacy Act.
The statutory authority for this information collection is found at section 225 of the Act, 47 U.S.C. § 225. The law was enacted on July 26, 1990, as Title IV of the ADA, Public Law 101-336, 104 Stat. 327, 366-69.
The 2005 TRS Provider Certification Order added another mechanism for certain common carriers seeking to offer IP-based TRS to become eligible to receive reimbursement from the Fund for doing so. In order to facilitate this certification process, which is detailed in 47 C.F.R. § 64.606, the Commission adopted information collection requirements to ensure that providers seeking initial certification or to maintain their certification comply with the minimum standards set forth in 47 C.F.R. § 64.604, and have in place adequate procedures and remedies for ensuring ongoing compliance with the Commission’s rules. The Commission uses this documentation to determine whether the provider will be eligible or will continue to be eligible for compensation from the Fund for provision of the proposed service(s). The Commission has reviewed and acted upon several applications for Commission certification under these processes.
3. The information collection requirements at issue here are mainly narratives which do not lend themselves to automation. The Commission, however, permits them to be submitted electronically. To the extent a provider voluntarily maintains a list of telephone numbers in order to fulfill the speed dialing requirement, the provider is free to employ any automated technique it wishes to reduce the burden.
4. There are no comparable information collection requirements regarding the Commission’s provider certification process. This collection previously included burden estimates associated with the filing of annual waiver reports in support of requests for waiver of various TRS mandatory minimum standards, as well as with the reporting requirements in 47 C.F.R. § 64.604(c)(2). There are also burden estimates associated with these requirements, however, in Collections 3060-1043 and 3060-0463, respectively, so the Commission is removing them from this collection in order to avoid duplication.
5. While the Commission believes that the burdens associated with this collection are relatively minimal to begin with, as a practical matter, they are further minimized by the fact that at least the cost of renewing Commission certification of eligibility to recover reimbursement from the Fund, as well as attendant costs of recordkeeping and reporting, may be included as expenses in calculating interstate TRS reimbursement rates. Therefore, there are no significant economic impacts on small businesses or small entities.
Providers who do not have a waiver of the speed dialing requirement may choose to maintain a list of telephone numbers in order to fulfill that requirement. Eliminating the voluntary collection associated with that requirement would diminish the alternatives available to providers for meeting the requirement, and may lead to greater costs to the TRS program. In addition, to the extent that providers satisfy the requirement in part through maintaining a list of telephone numbers, they are free to pursue other methods of satisfying the requirement that do not involve such recordkeeping.
In the 2005 TRS Provider Certification Order, the Commission added Commission certification as another mechanism for certain common carriers seeking to offer IP-based TRS to become eligible to receive reimbursement from the Fund for doing so. If these collections of information were not conducted, either fewer providers would be eligible to participate in the TRS program, or the Commission would have much less of a basis for determining whether would-be participants are likely to comply with the Commission’s TRS rules. Likewise, if the Commission did not require the annual filing of a compliance report pursuant to 47 C.F.R. § 64.606(g), the Commission’s oversight of the TRS program would be undermined.
7. These collections of information are not being conducted in any manner that is inconsistent with the guidelines of 5 C.F.R. § 1320.5(d).
8. On September 8, 2008 (73 FR 52044), pursuant to 5 C.F.R. § 1320.8(d), the Commission published a notice in the Federal Register soliciting comment on the collections of information. The Commission received no comments in response to the notice.
9. The Commission does not anticipate providing any payment or gift to respondents.
10. The Commission is not requesting that respondents submit confidential information, and therefore is not providing assurances of confidentiality to respondents, pursuant to this collection. If the Commission requests that respondents submit information which the respondents believe is confidential, respondents may request confidential treatment of such information pursuant to 47 C.F.R. § 0.459.
11. There are no questions of a sensitive nature as part of these collections of information.
12. In order to avoid duplication with other Commission collections, the Commission has removed from this information collection burden estimates associated with the filing of annual waiver reports in support of requests for waiver of various TRS mandatory minimum standards, as well as with the reporting requirements in 47 C.F.R. § 64.604(c)(2). In addition, for the remaining existing requirements associated with this information collection, the Commission has modified its estimates for the numbers of respondents, responses, annual burden hours, and annual in-house costs to more accurately account for them.
Speed Dialing Requirement
47 C.F.R. § 64.604(a)(3) – Recordkeeping for the speed dialing feature:
The Commission estimates approximately 23 TRS providers (respondents) voluntarily will maintain a list of telephone numbers for this feature, and further that this process will require each such provider approximately 5 hours per year to complete.
23 respondents x 1 list/respondent/yr = 23 lists/yr (responses)
23 respondents x 5 hrs/respondent to maintain lists = 115 hrs
The Commission assumes that respondents use “in-house” personnel whose pay is comparable to a GS-12/5 ($39.70, plus 30% overhead ($11.91)) to maintain the lists of telephone numbers. Therefore, the Commission estimates respondents’ costs to be about $51.61 per hour.
23 respondents x 5 hrs/respondent x $51.61/hr = $5,935
Commission Certification Process8
(a) 47 C.F.R. § 64.606(a)(2).
The Commission estimates that, over the next three years, 6 TRS providers who elect to provide IP-based TRS will seek to become eligible for reimbursements from the Fund for doing so through the Commission certification process outlined in 47 C.F.R. § 64.606. This is a one-time application process. The Commission has found that, on average, providers seek certification for reimbursements for the provision of two TRS services in their certification applications. Because each application covers an average of two services, the Commission now estimates that each will require respondents approximately 8 hours to complete.
6 respondents x 1 application/respondent = 6 responses (over the next three years)
6 responses/3 yrs = 2 responses/yr
2 responses/yr x 8 hrs/response = 16 hrs/yr
The Commission assumes that respondents will use “in-house” personnel whose pay is comparable to a GS-15/5 ($65.62, plus 30% overhead ($19.69)). Therefore, the Commission estimates respondents’ costs to be about $85.31 per hour.
2 responses/yr x 8 hrs/response x $85.31/hr = $1,365/yr
(b) 47 C.F.R. § 64.606(c)(2).
Certification granted under this section and maintaining good standing remains in effect for five years. Because the information required to be provided in the certification renewal application is the same as what must be provided in the initial certification request, the Commission estimates that it will take respondents applying for certification renewal the same amount of time per submission as is estimated for compliance with 47 C.F.R. § 64.606(a)(2).
Four certifications granted by the Commission are due to expire over the next three years (specifically, in 2011). For purposes of estimating burdens, the Commission produces estimates annualized over the three-year period, as follows:
4 respondents x 1 renewal application/respondent = 4 renewal applications (responses) (over the next three years)
4 responses/3 yrs = 1.33 responses/yr
1.33 responses/yr x 8 hours/response = 10.64 hrs/yr
The Commission assumes that respondents will use “in-house” personnel whose pay is comparable to a GS-15/5 ($65.62, plus 30% overhead ($19.69)). Therefore, the Commission estimates respondents’ costs to be about $85.31 per hour.
1.33 responses/yr x 8 hrs/response x $85.31 = $908/yr
(c) 47 C.F.R. § 64.606(e)(2).
The Commission estimates that there will be up to 18 separate providers offering IP-based TRS services and receiving reimbursements from the Fund, pursuant to the FCC certification process outlined in 47 C.F.R. § 64.606. Thus, the Commission must estimate conservatively that 18 respondents may be required to submit documentation demonstrating ongoing compliance with the Commission minimum standards. Though this process would be done “on-occasion,” again the Commission estimates conservatively that it may be done once per provider per year. The Commission further estimates that it will require approximately 4 hours per submission to complete.
18 respondents x 1 response/respondent = 18 responses
18 responses x 4 hrs/response = 72 hours
The Commission assumes that respondents will use “in-house” personnel whose pay is comparable to a GS-15/5 ($65.62, plus 30% overhead ($19.69)). Therefore, the Commission estimates respondents’ costs to be about $85.31 per hour.
18 responses x 4 hrs/response x $85.31/hr = $6,142
(d) 47 C.F.R. § 64.606(f)(2).
As with the burden estimates relative to 47 C.F.R. § 64.606(e)(2), the Commission must estimate conservatively that all 18 respondents may substantively change their TRS programs, services, and features, and that, while this would occur “on-occasion,” it could be done once per provider per year. The Commission further estimates that it will require approximately 1 hour per submission to complete.
18 respondents x 1 response/respondent = 18 responses
18 responses x 1 hr/response = 18 hours
The Commission assumes that respondents will use “in-house” personnel whose pay is comparable to a GS-15/5 ($65.62, plus 30% overhead ($19.69)). Therefore, the Commission estimates respondents’ costs to be about $85.31 per hour.
18 responses x 1 hr/response x $85.31/hr = $1,536
(e) 47 C.F.R. § 64.606(g).
The Commission estimates that the same 18 respondents will file reports with the Commission providing evidence that they are in compliance with 47 C.F.R. § 64.604. This process will be done annually and will require approximately 5 hours per report to complete.
18 respondents x 1 report/respondent = 18 reports (responses)
18 responses x 5 hrs/response = 90 hours
The Commission assumes that respondents will use “in-house” personnel whose pay is comparable to a GS-15/5 ($65.62, plus 30% overhead ($19.69)). Therefore, the Commission estimates respondents’ costs to be about $85.31 per hour.
18 responses x 5 hrs/response x $85.31/hr = $7,678
Cumulative Totals:
Total number of respondents: 23 respondents9
Total number of responses: 80 responses
Total annual hourly burden: 322 hours
Total “in-house” cost: $23,566
Information Collection Requirements
|
Total Number of Respondents |
Total Annual Number of Responses |
Hours Per Response |
Total Annual Burden Hours
|
Staff Hourly Wages |
Total Annual “In House” Costs |
47 CFR § 64.604 (a)(3): |
23 |
23 |
5 |
115 |
$51.61 |
$5,935 |
47 CFR § 64.606 (a)(2): |
6* |
2 |
8 |
16 |
$85.31 |
$1,365 |
47 CFR § 64.606 (c)(2): |
4* |
1.33 |
8 |
10.67 |
$85.31 |
$ 910 |
47 CFR § 64.606 (e)(2): |
18 |
18 |
4 |
72 |
$85.31 |
$6,142 |
47 CFR § 64.606 (f)(2): |
18 |
18 |
1 |
18 |
$85.31 |
$1,536 |
47 CFR § 64.606 (g): |
18 |
18 |
5 |
90 |
$85.31 |
$7,678 |
Revised Total Annual Burdens |
23 |
80 |
|
322 |
|
$23,566 |
13. The only potential “outside” cost burden to respondents could be for software related to the maintaining of telephone number lists pursuant to the speed dialing requirement of 47 C.F.R. § 64.604(a)(3). The Commission believes, however, that such software either would be a standard component of office computer “suites,” or should be readily available “off the shelf.” Therefore, the Commission estimates that up to 23 respondents will purchase such software at up to $100 per provider. The Commission further estimates that such software would have a useful life of 10 years. Thus:
(a) Total annualized capital/start-up cost: $230
(b) Total annual costs (operation and maintenance): $0
(c) Total annualized cost requested: $230
14. Estimates of annualized costs to the Federal government are as follows:
The Commission uses attorneys at the GS-15/5 level to review applications, reports, and other filings associated with the Commission certification process. Federal employees at the GS 15/5 level earn $65.62 per hour; when adding a factor of 30% for overhead costs ($19.69 per hour), the Commission estimates its costs associated with the certification process to be $85.31 per hour.
The Commission estimates that each application will require its attorneys on average approximately 8 hours to review and process. As set forth above in Question 12(a), the Commission estimates that it will receive 2 certification applications per year. Therefore, the Commission estimates its costs of reviewing those applications as follows:
2 responses/yr x 8 hrs/response x $85.31/hr = $1,365/yr
The Commission estimates that each certification renewal application will require its attorneys on average approximately 8 hours to review and process. As set forth above in Question 12(b), the Commission estimates that it will receive 4 renewal applications over the next three years. Therefore, the Commission estimates its annualized costs of reviewing those applications as follows:
4 renewal applications/3 yrs = 1.33 renewal applications (responses)/yr
1.33 responses/yr x 8 hrs/response x $85.31/hr = $908/yr
As set forth above in Question 12(c), the Commission estimates that, over the next three years, there will be up to 18 separate providers required to submit documentation demonstrating compliance with the Commission’s mandatory minimum standards for TRS, and that such submissions may occur up to once per provider per year. It further estimates that each submission will require its attorneys on average approximately 1 hour to review and process. Therefore, the Commission estimates its costs of reviewing those submissions as follows:
18 responses/yr x 1 hr/response x $85.31/hr = $1,536/yr
As set forth above in Question 12(d), the Commission estimates that up to 18 separate providers will substantively change their TRS programs, services, and features, and that such changes may occur up to once per provider per year. It further estimates that each provider submission reflecting such changes will require its attorneys on average approximately 0.5 hours to review and process. Therefore, the Commission estimates its costs of reviewing those submissions as follows:
18 responses/yr x 0.5 hrs/response x $85.31/hr = $768/yr
The Commission estimates that each compliance report will require its attorneys on average approximately 4 hours to review and process. As set forth above in Question 12(e), the Commission estimates that 18 respondents will each file an annual compliance report. Therefore, the Commission estimates its costs of reviewing those reports as follows:
18 responses/yr x 4 hrs/response x $85.31/hr = $6,142/yr
Total cost to Federal government: $1,365 + $908 + $1,536 + $768 + $6,142 = $10,719/yr
15. This supporting statement contains various adjustments from previous collections of information under OMB Control Number 3060-1047. First, in its review for this supporting statement, the Commission has found some duplication of burdens between the burdens that OMB approved for this collection on February 21, 2006, and those that it has approved in Collections 3060-1043 and 3060-0463. Therefore, the Commission has adjusted the estimated burdens accordingly, removing duplicated burdens from this collection.
Second, the Commission generally reevaluated the assumptions underlying and calculation of its total annual burden estimates for this collection, which also contributed to adjustments to the estimated burdens associated with these collections of information.
16. The results of these collections of information are not planned to be published.
17. The Commission is not seeking approval not to display the expiration date for OMB approval of these collections of information, because the collections do not include a specific form.
18. In the 60 day Federal Register Notice (“Notice”) published on September 8, 2008 at 73 FR 52044, the Commission reported the total number of respondents as “78”, total annual number of responses as “209”, estimated time per response as “30 minutes (0.5 hours) to 10 hours,” total annual burden hours as “766”, and total annual cost as “$0.” These burdens were based on extending the existing collections of information approved by OMB in 2006 for Collection 3060-1047. The Commission now modifies some of the existing collections of information burden estimates that were published in the Notice, as follows: total number of respondents as “23”, total annual number of responses as “80”, estimated time per response as “1 hour to 8 hours,” total annual burden hours as “322”, and total annual cost as “$230.” There are no other exceptions to the certification statement.
B. Collections of Information Employing Statistical Methods
The Commission does not anticipate that the collection of information will employ statistical methods.
1 Section 225 was added to the Act by Title IV of the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990 (ADA).
2 TRS is a telephone transmission service that allows persons with a hearing or speech disability to engage in communications by wire or radio with a hearing individual in a manner that is functionally equivalent to the ability of an individual who does not have a hearing or speech disability to communicate using voice communication services by wire or radio. See 47 CFR § 64.601(14). TRS facilities are staffed by communications assistants who relay conversations between people with hearing or speech disabilities and hearing users.
3 47 U.S.C. § 225(b)(1).
4 47 U.S.C. § 225(a)(3).
5 Telecommunications Relay Services and Speech-to-Speech Services for Individuals with Hearing and Speech Disabilities, CG Docket No. 03-123, Order, 22 FCC Rcd 21869 (CGB 2007), published at 73 FR 9031, February 19, 2008. Though the Commission has also waived various TRS requirements for IP CTS, these waivers are all for an indefinite period.
6 Previously existing eligibility criteria include: (1) TRS facilities operated under contract with and/or by certified state TRS programs pursuant to 47 C.F.R. § 64.606; (2) TRS facilities owned by, or operated under contract with, a common carrier providing interstate services operated pursuant to 47 C.F.R. § 64.604; or (3) Interstate common carriers offering TRS pursuant to 47 C.F.R. § 64.604.
7 These rules were originally codified as revisions to 47 C.F.R. § 64.605. Section 64.605, however, was redesignated as 47 C.F.R. § 64.606 pursuant to Telecommunications Relay Services and Speech-to-Speech Services for Individuals with Hearing and Speech Disabilities; E911 Requirements for IP-Enabled Service Providers, CG Docket No. 03-123, WC Docket No. 05-196, Report and Order, 23 FCC Rcd 5255 (2008), published at 73 FR 21252, April 21, 2008.
8 All of the items listed for the Commission’s certification process have true burden attached to them.
9 The up to 18 respondents subject to burdens pursuant to 47 C.F.R. § 64.606 are among the 23 estimated respondents subject to 47 C.F.R. § 64.604(a)(3).
* These numbers account for the total number of respondents responsible for the requirements under 47 CFR §§ 64.606(a)(2) and 64.606(c)(2) over the next three not the annual number of respondents.
| File Type | application/msword |
| File Title | 3060-xxxx |
| Author | Dana.Jackson |
| Last Modified By | cathy.williams |
| File Modified | 2009-03-04 |
| File Created | 2009-03-04 |