Before the Federal Communications Commission Washington, D.C. 20554 In the Matter of ) ) Telecommunications Relay Services ) and Speech-to-Speech Services for ) Individuals with Hearing and Speech ) Disabilities ) ) Docket No. 98-67 ) MCI COMMENTS Lawrence Fenster Senior Economist MCI 1801 Pennsylvania Ave., NW Washington, DC 20006 July 20, 1998 MCI Comments In its January 14, 1997, Notice of Inquiry (Nor) the Commission sought comment on ways in which Telecommunications Relay Services (TRS) for persons with hearing and speech disabilities can be improved.1/ The Commission sought comment on technological advances that could improve the level and quality of service provided through TRS. In the Notice (Notice) in the above captioned proceeding, the Commission proposes a variety of amendments to its TRS rules, with the intent of broadening TRS use.2 Among them include: . requiring common carriers providing voice transmission service to ensure that nationwide speech-to-speech (STS) relay services are available to users with speech disabilities throughout their service areas within two years; . improving its speed-of-answer rules; . permitting TIU providers to recover costs from multilingual relay services; and . treating customer information. II. Improved Relay Services In this Notice, the Commission tentatively concluded that Title IV of the ADA is applicable to any wire or radio communication service that enables persons with hearing or speech disabilities to engage in communication with persons without such disabilities and is not limited to services using TTYs. MCI agrees with this conclusion. The plain language of Title IV, stating that TRS includes TTY-based services or services using other nonvoice terminal device[s], supports expanding beyond traditional TTY relay service as new technologies develop.3/ 1/ Telecommunications Relay Services, the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990, and the Telecommunications Act of 1996, Notice of Inquiry, CC Docket No. 90-571, 12 FCC Red 1152 (1997). 2/ Telecommunications Relay Services and Speech-to-Speech Services for Individuals with Hearing and Speech Disabilities, CC Docket No. 98-67, released May 20, 1998. 3/ See 47 U.S.C. $225(a)(3) . In order to promote new services, the Commission tentatively concluded that TRS providers should be able to recover the costs of Video Relay Interpreting (VRI) and Speech to Speech (STS) relay services from the interstate TRS fund. MCI strongly supports this conclusion. MCI currently provides STS in Wisconsin and California and provides VRI in North Carolina. MCI intends to provide STS broadly and believes the cost of this services will gradually be reduced as more TRS providers offer them. By reimbursing TRS providers for STS service costs, especially the development costs for outbound dialing not compatible with or possible from the present TRS system, the Commission will help expand the popularity of these services, and reduce their costs. MCI also strongly supports TRS funding of VRI. VRI is in the early stages of development, and promises to greatly improve the quality of TRS service. Traditional TRS is based on the typed word, which is often among the weakest skills of many TRS users. The use of a skilled sign language interpreter with VRI virtually eliminates difficulties associated with typing and is a more effective means for many TRS users to communicate. As use of VRI increases, demand for traditional TRS will decline, so the costs of implementing VRI will be offset by cost reductions elsewhere. MCI recommends the Commission closely monitor the impact of VRI reimbursement on the development of VRI. If this reimbursement sufficiently promotes VRI development, the Commission should then consider mandating VRI service. III. Speed of Answer Standards for STS The Commission also sought comment on whether these services must comply with all standards for TRS. The Commission tentatively concluded that only mandated services must comply with the mandatory minimum standards. These services would include standard TRS, voice carryover (VCO), and hearing carryover (HCO). The Commission also supported Ameritech's contention that STS may have operational differences that make compliance with current Commission standards inapplicable to STS. MCI concurs with this observation. For the immediate future, STS calls will account for an extremely small proportion of TRS volumes. TRS providers should be given the opportunity to gain experience regarding the development of appropriate answer time and blockage performance standards for STS, before a mandated standard, or before a uniform standard is imposed across all services. However, the Commission should apply uniform standards for confidentiality and CA proficiency across all mandated services. The Commission also proposed amending the current definition of Calling Assistant by removing the words "from text to voice and Tom voice to text," and maintaining the remainder of the current definition. MCI agrees this language change will permit persons employed in the provision of STS to qualify as Calling Assistants. Iv. Multilingual Relay Services @IRS) and Translation Services Multilingual relay services (&IRS) allow persons with hearing and speech disabilities who use languages other than English to communicate with voice telephone users in a shared foreign language, through a CA who is fluent in the selected language. MCI believes that MRS is a telecommunications relay service because it is a telephone transmission service that enables a person with a hearing or speech disability to communicate by wire or radio with a person without such a disability, but is not a mandated TRS service. However, MRS only encompasses same-language relay, so no translation service should be required. MCI concurs with the view that because language requirements may vary widely from state-to-state, the decision whether to implement MRS service is best left to the state TRS program. Once an affirmative decision is made, TRS providers should be eligible to recover the costs of intrastate or interstate MRS from the intrastate jurisdiction or the interstate TRS fund, as appropriate. V. Access to Emergency Services The Commission's current TRS regulations require CAs to handle emergency calls in the same manner as they handle any other TRS calls. MCI believes this requirement sufficiently protects public safety. MCI does not currently have the capability to act as an emergency service provider. Under our current platform we can verbally pass the ANI to the emergency service, but MCI is unable to automatically transfer ANI to the emergency service provider. Moreover, the costs of developing Caller ID and other intelligent services may not be recovered from the interstate TRS fimd, and so should not be mandated. vi. Access to Enhanced Services In its Notice, the Commission tentatively concluded that Title IV of the ADA does not permit mandating access to such services. Congress expressly stated that Title IV was not intended to mandate access to enhanced services such as pay per call, or menu driven answering systems. The Commission also tentatively concluded that CAs should be allowed to alert the TRS user to the presence of a recorded message and also should be permitted to inquire as to whether the TRS user wishes the CA to summarize the message or to listen for specific information. MCI agrees, and also supports the notion that rather than requiring CAs to summarize recorded messages, CAs should be permitted to offer the TRS user the option of having the CA handle such calls. VII. Speed-of-Answer Requirements In its Notice the Commission tentatively revised its speed-of-answer rules to require TRS providers to answer 85% of all calls within 10 seconds by a CA prepared to place the TRSntS call at that time. The Commission also proposed requiring that the calculation of whether a provider is in compliance with the 85% - 10 second rule must be performed on at least a daily basis, and that abandoned and redialed calls not be included. MCI supports this standard and agrees that uniform speed of answer standards are desirable, but notes that this proposed standard will increase the cost of providing relay services. VIII. Conclusion For the above-mentioned reasons, MCI encourages the Commission to adopt the MCI's recommendations discussed in these comments. RespectfUlly submitted, MCI TELECOMMUNICATIONS CORPORATION Lawrence Fenster MCI Telecommunications Corporation 180 1 Pennsylvania Ave., NW Washington, DC 20006 (202) 887-2180 July 20, 1998 Statement of Verification I have read the foregoing and, to the best of my knowledge, information and belief, there is good ground to support it, and it is not interposed for delay. I verify under penalty of perjury that the foregoing is true and correct. Executed on July 20, 1998. 1801 Pennsylvania Ave., N.W. Washington, DC 20006 202-887-2180 Service List I, Barbara Nowlin, do hereby certify that a copy of MCI's Comments has been sent by United States first class mail, postage prepaid, hand delivery, to the following parties on this 20th July, 1998. Carmell Weathers* Common Carrier Bureau, 2000 M Street, N.W., Room 221 Washington, D.C. 20554. Andrew Firth* Common Carrier Bureau Federal Communications Commission 2000 M Street, NW Room 210F Washington, DC 20554 James R. Keegan* Network Services Division Federal Communications Commission 2025 M Street, NW Room 6010 Washington, DC 20554 Jim Lande* Common Carrier Bureau Federal Communications Commission 2033 M Street, NW, Suite 500 Washington, DC 20554 Jose Rodrgiuez** Audits Branch Accounting & Audit Division Common Carrier Bureau Federal Communications Commission 2000 L Street, NW, Suite 257 Washington, DC 20554 ITS* Federal Communications Comm. 1919 M Street, NW Room 246 Washington, DC 20554 Pamela Gerr* Common Carrier Bureau Federal Communications Commission 2000 M Street, NW Room 235C Washington, DC 20554 Cynthia Miller Florida Public Service Commission 2540 Shumard Oak Blvd. Tallahassee, FL 32399-0850 Melinda McDowell TRS Administration National Exchange Carrier Assoc. 100 South Jefferson Road Whippany, NJ 07981 James Forstall Florida Telecommunications Relay, Inc. 13 11-B Paul Russell Road Suite 203 Tallahassee, FL 32301 Susan C. Langston Florida Telecommunications Industry Post Office Box 1776 Tallahassee, FL 32302-1776 Robert Giuntoli Florida Relay Service Program MCI Telecommunications Corp. 200 S. Biscayne Blvd., Suite 500 Miami, FL 3313l-5310 Bryan E. Carrel1 MCI Telecommunications Corp. 325 John Knox Road Suite 105-Atrium Building Tallahassee, FL 32303 Norman H. Horton Messer, Vickers, Caparello, Madsen, Goldman & Metz PA P.O. Box 1876 Tallahassee, FL 32302 Joseph A. McGlothlin McWhirter, Reeves, McGlothlin, Davidson, Rief & Bakas, P.A. Florida Competitive Carriers Assoc. 117 South Gadsden Street Tallahassee, FL 32301 John A. Ricker National Exchange Carrier Association 100 South Jefferson Road Whippany, NJ 07981 Sprint Corporation 1850 M Street, NW Suite 1110 Washington, DC 20036 Ameritech 30 South Wacker Drive Chicago, IL 60606 A.K. Gilbert, III BellSouth Telecommunications, Inc. 675 W. Peachtree Street, NW Southern Bell Center Suite 4300 Atlanta, GA 30375 NYNEX 120 Bloomingdale Road White Plains, NY 10605 United States Telephone Association c/o Mary McDermott 1401 H Street, NW Suite 600 Washington, DC 20005 Frank Landia Nebraska Public Service Commission P.O. Box 94927 Lincoln, Nebraska 68500-4027 Larry A. Schroeder Public Utility Division 2101 North Lincoln Road Room 500, Jim Thorpe Bldg Oklahoma City, OK 73105 Tacip - MN Department of Public Service 121 E. 7thPlace Suite 200 St, Paul, MN 55101 Ameritech Services, Inc. 2000 West Ameritech Center Drive Ho&ran Estates, IL 60196 US West Communications Dana A. Rassnussen 1020 19th Street, NW Suite 700 Washington, DC 20036 Office of Advocacy U.S. Small Business Administration 409 Third Avenue, SW 7th Floor Washington, DC 20416 William B. Barfield A. Kirvens Gilbert, III 1155 Peachtree Street, NW Suite 1800 Atlanta, GA 303 67-6000 GTE Services Corporation 1850 M Street, NW Suite 1200 Washington, DC 20036 Southwestern Bell Telephone Company c/o Thomas A. Pajda One Bell Center Suite 3520 St. Louis, Missouri 63 101 International Transcription Service* 2100 M Street, NW Suite 140 Washington, DC 20037 Barbara B. Nowlin *HAND DELIVERED*