Quiero saber acerca de...

7682

Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 19 / Monday, February 1, 2021 / Proposed Rules
messenger delivery, by commercial overnight courier, or by first-class or overnight U.S. Postal Service mail. All filings must be addressed to the Commissions Secretary, Office of the Secretary, Federal Communications Commission.
For detailed instructions on submitting comments and additional information on the rulemaking process, see document FCC 20132 at https
docs.fcc.gov/public/attachments/FCC20-132A1.pdf.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
William Wallace, Consumer and Governmental Affairs Bureau, FCC, at 2024182716, or William.Wallace@
fcc.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This is a summary of the Commissions Further Notice of Proposed Rulemaking Further Notice, document FCC 20132, adopted on September 30, 2020, released on October 2, 2020, in CG Docket Nos. 13
24, 03123, and 1051. The Report and Order and Order on Reconsideration in document FCC 20132 was published at 85 FR 64971, October 14, 2020. The full text of this document is available for public inspection and copying via the Commissions Electronic Comment Filing System ECFS. To request materials in accessible formats for people with disabilities Braille, large print, electronic files, audio format, send an email to fcc504@fcc.gov or call the Consumer and Governmental Affairs Bureau at 202 4180530.
This proceeding shall be treated as a permit-but-disclose proceeding in accordance with the Commissions ex parte rules. 47 CFR 1.1200 et seq.
Persons making ex parte presentations must file a copy of any written presentation or a memorandum summarizing any oral presentation within two business days after the presentation unless a different deadline applicable to the Sunshine period applies. Persons making oral ex parte presentations are reminded that memoranda summarizing the presentation must 1 list all persons attending or otherwise participating in the meeting at which the ex parte presentation was made, and 2
summarize all data presented and arguments made during the presentation. If the presentation consisted in whole or in part of the presentation of data or arguments already reflected in the presenters written comments, memoranda or other filings in the proceeding, the presenter may provide citations to such data or arguments in his or her prior comments, memoranda, or other filings specifying the relevant page and/or paragraph
VerDate Sep<11>2014

16:45 Jan 29, 2021

Jkt 253001

numbers where such data or arguments can be found in lieu of summarizing them in the memorandum. Documents shown or given to Commission staff during ex parte meetings are deemed to be written ex parte presentations and must be filed consistent with 1.1206b. In proceedings governed by 1.49f or for which the Commission has made available a method of electronic filing, written ex parte presentations and memoranda summarizing oral ex parte presentations, and all attachments thereto, must be filed through the electronic comment filing system available for that proceeding, and must be filed in their native format e.g., .doc, .xml, .ppt, searchable .pdf. Participants in this proceeding should familiarize themselves with the Commissions ex parte rules.
Initial Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 Analysis The Further Notice in document FCC
20132 seeks comment on proposed rule amendments that may result in modified information collection requirements. If the Commission adopts any modified information collection requirements, the Commission will publish another document in the Federal Register inviting the public to comment on the requirements, as required by the Paperwork Reduction Act. Public Law 10413; 44 U.S.C.
35013520. In addition, pursuant to the Small Business Paperwork Relief Act of 2002, the Commission seeks comment on how it might further reduce the information collection burden for small business concerns with fewer than 25
employees. Public Law 107198; 44
U.S.C. 3506c4.
Synopsis 1. The Commission seeks comment on proposed rules to enable the Commission to better evaluate the efficacy of the IP CTS and CTS programs and the performance of individual service providers. The Commission proposes to amend its rules to provide for robust, efficient, objective, and quantifiable measurement of the quality of service offered by each CTS and IP
CTS provider and by the telephone caption service program as a whole. The Commissions objective is to adopt minimum performance standards that will allow it to evaluate progress toward achieving the Congressional objectives set forth in section 225 of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended the Act. 47 U.S.C. 225.
2. IP CTS is a form of Telecommunications Relay Service TRS that permits an individual who
PO 00000

Frm 00027

Fmt 4702

Sfmt 4702

can speak but who has difficulty hearing over the telephone to use a telephone and an internet Protocol-enabled device via the internet to simultaneously listen to the other party and read captions of what the other party is saying. CTS is another form of telephone captioning, offered through state TRS programs, that functions similarly to IP CTS but without using the internet for the delivery of captions.
3. The Commission proposes to amend the minimum TRS standards applicable to CTS and IP CTS to provide quantifiable, measurable benchmarks for caption delay and accuracy. The Commission seeks comment on whether it should modify any other minimum TRS standards to provide more specific service-quality standards for CTS and IP
CTS. The Commission also proposes to amend its rules to define how testing and measurement should be conducted to gauge provider performance in relation to these standards and to measure progress by the telephone caption service program as a whole toward achieving the statutory goals in section 225 of the Act. In addition, the Commission seeks comment on whether such performance assessment is best carried out by the Commission, by individual providers, or by an entity selected and overseen by all providers.
More generally, the Commission seeks comment on whether these proposals will advance the relevant statutory objectives in section 225 of the Act, or performance goalstechnological currency and efficiency, and the overarching statutory goal of functional equivalence. What types of measurements are needed to ensure that service quality for telephone caption services is not only functionally equivalent but technologically current, and does not impede the development of improved technology?
4. The Commission invites commenters to propose performancemeasurement alternatives that would advance the statutory goals and objectives, and the Commission seeks comment on the costs and benefits of its proposal and any alternatives. For example, would quantifiable, measurable benchmarks for caption delay and accuracyor methods for measuring performance against such benchmarksbe more effectively and efficiently developed by a voluntary, consensus standards organization? If so, which standards-setting organization would be appropriate for developing such benchmarks and methods? What steps would be needed to ensure all stakeholders are able to participate effectively? How could a consensus process be managed so as not to unduly
E:FRFM01FEP1.SGM

01FEP1