Wireline Competition Bureau Seeks To Refresh the Record on Ancillary Service Charges Related to Inmate Calling Services
| Published date | 19 February 2020 |
| Record Number | 2020-03110 |
| Section | Proposed rules |
| Court | Federal Communications Commission |
Federal Register, Volume 85 Issue 33 (Wednesday, February 19, 2020)
[Federal Register Volume 85, Number 33 (Wednesday, February 19, 2020)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 9444-9446]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2020-03110]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION
47 CFR Part 64
[WC Docket No. 12-375; DA 20-127; FRS 16478]
Wireline Competition Bureau Seeks To Refresh the Record on
Ancillary Service Charges Related to Inmate Calling Services
AGENCY: Federal Communications Commission.
ACTION: Proposed rule; solicitation of comments.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: In this document, the Wireline Competition Bureau (Bureau)
seeks to refresh the record on ancillary service charges imposed in
connection with inmate calling services (ICS) in response to a remand
from the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia
Circuit.
DATES: Comments are due March 20, 2020. Reply Comments are due April 6,
2020.
ADDRESSES: Federal Communications Commission, 445 12th Street SW,
Washington, DC 20554
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Minsoo Kim, Wireline Competition
Bureau, Pricing Policy Division, via phone at 202-418-1739 or via email
at [email protected].
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This is a summary of the Public Notice that
the Federal Communications Commission's Wireline Competition Bureau
released on February 4, 2020. A full-text version of the Public Notice
is available at the following internet address: https://docs.fcc.gov/public/attachments/DA-20-127A1.pdf.
In this document, the Wireline Competition Bureau (Bureau) seeks to
refresh the record on ancillary service charges imposed in connection
with inmate calling services (ICS). In the 2015 ICS Order, the
Commission adopted rules limiting the ancillary services for which ICS
providers could assess fees and capping the permissible charges for
these ancillary services.
In Global Tel*Link v. FCC, the United States Court of Appeals for
the District of Columbia Circuit affirmed the Commission's plenary
authority to cap ancillary service charges for interstate ICS, but held
that, based on the record before the Court, the Commission lacked
authority to regulate ancillary service charges for intrastate ICS.
Because the Court could not ``discern from the record whether ancillary
fees can be segregated between interstate and intrastate calls,'' the
Court remanded the issue to the Commission for further consideration.
The Bureau seeks to refresh the record on ancillary service charges in
response to the D.C. Circuit's remand.
The 2015 ICS Order did not address whether any particular ancillary
service charge could be segregated between interstate and intrastate
calls given the Commission's imposition of identical rate caps for
interstate and intrastate calls alike. The Bureau now seeks specific
comment on whether each permitted ICS ancillary service charge may be
segregated between interstate and intrastate calls and, if so, how. The
Bureau asks commenters to explain in
[[Page 9445]]
detail the basis for any claim that an ancillary service charge may be
segregated, including addressing the range of different functions that
might be associated with each charge where relevant. For example, a
``Live Agent Fee'' can be assessed when an ICS consumer uses an
optional live operator to complete different types of ICS-related
transactions. To the extent these individual transactions
jurisdictionally differ (e.g., if a live operator is used by an ICS
consumer to complete either an interstate or intrastate ICS call as
well as to assist that same consumer with paper billing), how should
the Commission factor that transaction into applying the Live Agent Fee
cap?
The Bureau also seeks comment on how the Commission should proceed
in the event any permitted ancillary service is ``jurisdictionally
mixed'' and cannot be segregated between interstate and intrastate
calls. Jurisdictionally mixed services are ``[s]ervices that are
capable of communications both between intrastate end points and
between interstate end points.'' Jurisdictionally mixed services ``are
generally subject to dual federal/state jurisdiction, except where it
is impossible or impractical to separate the service's intrastate from
interstate components and the state regulation of the intrastate
component interferes with valid federal rules or policies.''
To the extent any permitted ancillary service charge or associated
function is jurisdictionally mixed, the Bureau seeks comment on how
best to apply the prescribed cap to that ancillary service or function
pursuant to section 201(b) of the Communications Act of 1934, as
amended. Should the Bureau simply apply the cap to jurisdictionally
mixed services? Is it possible or practical to allow higher rates on
only a portion of such ancillary services? How would such a rule apply
here? Is it possible to separate the interstate and intrastate aspects
of each such ancillary service charge or function? If so, how? If not,
can the Commission proceed to regulate the entire ancillary service
charge to the extent it is not jurisdictionally severable? One court
has interpreted GTL v. FCC to hold that the Commission may not cap
interstate ancillary fees ``except to the extent those for interstate
calls `can be segregated' from intrastate calls.'' Given the holdings
of the Supreme Court and federal appellate courts on the issue, is that
interpretation correct?
Finally, the Bureau asks commenters to (1) suggest specific rule
language responsive to the D.C. Circuit's remand, and (2) propose any
additional steps the Commission should take to ensure, consistent with
the D.C. Circuit's opinion, that its actions on remand ``properly
reflect[]'' the reforms adopted in 2015 and that providers of
interstate ICS do not circumvent or frustrate the Commission's
ancillary service charge rules. For example, should the Commission
prohibit an ICS provider that generates separate paper bills for
interstate and intrastate ICS (merely to impose two separate paper bill
charges on ICS consumers) from imposing a $2.00 charge for the
interstate paper bill and an additional charge for the intrastate bill?
Alternatively, should the Commission lower the cap for any separate
paper bills for interstate ICS to $0.00 if an ICS provider charges
$2.00 or more for paper bills for intrastate services?
Pursuant to sections 1.415 and 1.419 of the Commission's rules,
interested parties may file comments and reply comments on or before
the dates set forth in the Federal Register notice of this document.
Comments may be filed using the Commission's Electronic Comment Filing
System (ECFS). See Electronic Filing of Documents in Rulemaking
Proceedings, 63 FR 24121 (1998).
Electronic Filers: Comments may be filed electronically
using the internet by accessing the ECFS: http://www.fcc.gov/ecfs/.
Paper Filers: Parties who choose to file by paper must
file an original and one copy of each filing. If more than one docket
or rulemaking number appears in the caption of this proceeding, filers
must submit two additional copies for each additional docket or
rulemaking number.
Filings can be sent by hand or messenger delivery, by commercial
overnight courier, or by first-class or overnight U.S. Postal Service
mail. All filings must be addressed to the Commission's Secretary,
Office of the Secretary, Federal Communications Commission.
All hand-delivered or messenger-delivered paper filings
for the Commission's Secretary must be delivered to FCC Headquarters at
445 12th St. SW, Room TW-A325, Washington, DC 20554. The filing hours
are 8:00 a.m. to 7:00 p.m. All hand deliveries must be held together
with rubber bands or fasteners. Any envelopes and boxes must be
disposed of before entering the building.
Commercial overnight mail (other than U.S. Postal Service
Express Mail and Priority Mail) must be sent to 9050 Junction Drive,
Annapolis Junction, MD 20701.
U.S. Postal Service first-class, Express, and Priority
mail must be addressed to 445 12th Street SW, Washington, DC 20554.
People with Disabilities. 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), 202-
418-0432 (tty).
Ex Parte Rules. This proceeding shall be treated as a ``permit-but-
disclose'' proceeding in accordance with the Commission's ex parte
rules. 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 presenter's
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 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
section 1.1206(b) of the Commission's rules. In proceedings governed by
section 1.49(f) of the rules 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 Commission's
ex parte rules.
Additional Information. For further information, contact Minsoo Kim
of the Wireline Competition Bureau at (202) 418-1739 or
[email protected].
[[Page 9446]]
Federal Communications Commission.
Daniel Kahn,
Associate Bureau Chief, Wireline Competition Bureau.
[FR Doc. 2020-03110 Filed 2-18-20; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6712-01-P
