The authoritative news source for communications regulation
‘Party in Interest’

TRS Provider Seeks to Intervene in Challenging FCC’s Revised Data Breach Rules

Hamilton Relay, a telecommunications relay service (TRS) provider, seeks to intervene in support of the Ohio Telecom Association’s petition for review challenging the FCC’s Dec. 21 order modifying and expanding the commission’s data breach notification rules on telecom carriers, VoIP…

TO READ THE FULL STORY
Start A Trial
providers and TRS providers (see 2402210026), said its unopposed motion Wednesday (docket 24-3133) in the 6th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals. Hamilton provides TRS to individuals who are deaf, hard of hearing, DeafBlind or have difficulty speaking, said its motion. The company provides intrastate and interstate text telephone, speech-to-speech and captioned telephone services in numerous states through individual state TRS contracts, nationwide relay service through its internet protocol captioned telephone service, which is regulated by the FCC, it said. Hamilton is entitled to intervene because it was a “party in interest” in the proceeding leading to the adoption of the order and the order’s changes to the FCC’s data breach notification rules adversely affect its interests, said the motion. Hamilton submitted comments in February 2023 in the FCC’s NPRM in the run-up to the order, it said. The order expands reporting obligations to the FCC and law enforcement agencies and imposes certain other duties on TRS providers pertaining to unauthorized access to or disclosure of customer proprietary network information and personally identifiable information, it said. In its February 2023 comments, Hamilton urged the FCC to consider how TRS providers are different from common carriers in the services they provide and the information they collect from their customers. The commission should ensure that any reporting obligations imposed on TRS providers “allow for the necessary flexibility to report relevant and actionable information to the appropriate law enforcement agencies and to customers,” it said then. It also urged the commission “to consider how its proposed rules will align, or potentially conflict, with existing state and federal privacy regimes,” it said.