FCC Taking Heat for Proposed VRS Rate Change
A possible FCC decision to reconfigure video relay service rates may be illegal, said Sorenson Communications, the biggest U.S. VRS provider, in comments this week at the FCC. The commission is considering an early change to rates used to determine compensation for VRS under the interstate telecom relay service fund (CD June 26 p6). The agency is currently following a three-year interim rate plan set by the National Exchange Carrier Association in 2007.
Sign up for a free preview to unlock the rest of this article
Communications Daily is required reading for senior executives at top telecom corporations, law firms, lobbying organizations, associations and government agencies (including the FCC). Join them today!
The commission has taken much flak for its rate recalculation proposal from relay providers and consumer groups for the deaf. Many of them have urged the FCC to instead initiate a rulemaking to set new rates that would take effect after the three-year plan expires July 30, 2010. The commission has also received a flood of letters on the issue from consumers who oppose the change.
Abandoning the three-year plan would violate the Administrative Procedure Act, and may be unconstitutional, Sorenson said. “The skimpy, one-paragraph NPRM cites no new development or exigent circumstance that might justify such a reversal, and none in fact exists. In the absence of any credible rationale, it would be arbitrary and capricious for the FCC to depart abruptly from its unanimous commitment to a three-year plan that was implemented only 15 months ago.”
In addition, the FCC didn’t provide enough detail “to permit stakeholders to respond in a meaningful way when they submit their comments,” Sorenson said. Therefore, any resulting FCC decision “would likely run afoul of the Federal Advisory Committee Act and the Regulatory Flexibility Act,” it said. And abandoning the three-year plan likely would discourage investment in VRS, which could reduce the quality and availability of the service, in violation of the Americans with Disabilities Act.
“The three-year rate period was a commitment made to provide stability to providers, carriers, and most importantly consumers,” agreed the National Association for the Deaf and other consumer groups in comments filed last month. “Without this stability, consumers cannot be assured of receiving the quality of VRS service that they have been accustomed to receiving and is required by the functional equivalency requirements.”
But USTelecom said fast FCC action is needed to streamline the TRS fund, which is almost $1 billion. “USTelecom agrees with the Commission that a prompt reexamination of the way providers are reimbursed is essential to maximize the Fund’s resources, discourage those who would make a ‘quick buck’ at the expense of consumers, and preserve the integrity of the program,” it said. “All consumers ultimately pay for TRS through Commission assessments on carriers -- and their contributions must be used effectively and in accordance with the FCC’s rules.”