Proceeding:IN THE MATTER-OF TELECOMMUNICATIONS RELAY SERVICES    
            AND SPE  Record 1 of 2
 Applicant Name: Augusta Goldstern
 Proceeding Name :98-67           Author Name: `Augusta Goldstein

                    Contact Email:aagus@earthlrnk net
Address Line I- 15431 California #I                     
  City: San Francisco          State: CA 
Zip Code: 94118  Postal Code:
      
Submission type:CO  Submission Status:ACCEPTED  Viewing Status:
UNRESTRICTED

                      Exparte Late Filed:   File Number:
Calendar Date Filed: 07/26/l998 1:1O:46 AM      Date Disseminated
 Official Date Filed:07/27/l 998                 Filed From EMAIL
Confirmation #'

IN THE MATTER-OF TELECOMMUNICATIONS RELAY SERVICES AND SPE Record
2 of 2
                                              _' '
Applicant Name: Augusta Goldstein

Proceeding name 98-67     Author Name:Augusta Goldstein      

Name.           Contact Email:

Line 1. 5431 California #I

Line 2:
       City: San Francisco         State:CA 
   Zip Code:94118  Postal Code:
Submission Type: CO   Submisston Status:ACCEPTED Viewing Status:
UNRESTRICTED 
    Subject:           
  DA Number:                  Exparte Late Filed:   File Number: 
  Calendar Date Filed:07/25/1998 11:50:32 PM       Date
Disseminated
     Official Date Filed: 07/27/1998                    Filed
From EMAIL

        Confirmation #

COMMENTS ON THE STS NOTICE OF PROPOSED RULE MAKING -  Revised
7/5/98

(PLEASE ACCEPT THE FOLLOWING LATE COMMENTS. WHEN THEY WERE
SUBMITTED PREVIOUSLY--AND ON TIME--THE SYSTEM REJECTED THEM AND
RETURNED THEM TO ME WHILE I WAS ON VACATION.   THANK YOU. /25/98)

I am making these comments as an occasional user of
Speech-to-Speech (STS). I have used it to communicate with a
speech disabled friend, as well as with my own mother when I was
myself temporarily speech disabled. The service is invaluable.

REGULATORY ISSUES - GENERAL

1. Many consumers and potential consumers will be unable to
respond to this Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (NPRM) because of
the nature of their multiple disabilities.  Please do not take
the lack of response as a lack of interest.

2. Text Telephones (TTYs) have been the standard technology for
improving communication for the deaf,  formerly the only
community recognized as needing assistance in telephone
communication.  It is important to recognize that there are other
speech disabled people for whom TTY service is not -applicable.  
For these people,  STS is (or could become) an essential
technology. STS should be required nationally even though it does
no? utilize the standard technology, TTYs. I support the
California Public Utilities Commission (CPUC) position that the
specific reference to TTYs in the Americans with Disabilities Act
(ADA) "....is meant to illustrate the type of technology that
might be used,  not TV preclude the use of other- technologies."

  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.

3.  Regarding the specifics of how STS should most effectively be
implemented I refer you to the communication you have received
from Bob Segalman in this regard. I hope you will study it with
care and come to the same conclusion that I have: that STS
should be implemented nationwide so that the speech disabled of
this country can live their lives with greater ease and hope to
conduct their lives and business with the same advantages that
are enjoyed by those who are not speech disabled. That is, after
all, the intent of the ADA.

Sincerely,
Augusta Goldstein