|
|
|
|
 |
|
|
| ||||||
| Consumer & Governmental Affairs Bureau |
 |
|
|
 |
FCC > CGB Home
> CAC > CDTAC > August 6, 2001 Minutes
|
Monday, August 6, 2001 meeting
M I N U T E S
The second meeting of the Consumer/Disability Telecommunications Advisory Committee (CDTAC) was held on Monday, August 6, 2001, from 9:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m., at the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) in Washington, D.C. The following Committee members were in attendance:
- Rayna Aylward
- Chris Baker (alternate for Jeffrey Kramer)
- Brenda Battat
- Gil Becker
- Daniel Brenner
- Julie Carroll
- Robert E. Chrostowski
- Michael F. DelCasino
- Richard T. Ellis
- Joseph C. Gaskins
- Judith Harkins
- Larry Goldberg
- Susan Grant
- Dahlia E. Hayles
- Steve Jacobs
- Micaela Tucker (via conference call)
- Vernon R. James
- Matt Kaltenbach
- Karen Fullum Kirsch
- Andrew Lange
- Nanci Linke-Ellis
- Ken McEldowney
- Belinda Nelson
- Shelley Nixon
- Kathleen F. O’Reilly (via conference call)
- Susan Palmer
- David Poelhman
- Shirley L. Rooker
- Laura Ruby
- Paul Schroeder
- Bob Segalman
- Jim Tobias
- Paul Schroeder
- Karen Walls
- Andrea Williams
The following Committee members were absent:
- Maricela Gallegos
- Milton J. Little, Jr.
- Paul W. Ludwick
- Qwest Communications International, Inc. (representative to be designated)
- Dr. Refugio I. Rochin
- Judith A. Viera
FCC staff members participating were Anita Cheng, Paul Garnett, Greg Guice, Marsha MacBride, Scott Marshall, K. Dane Snowden, and Karen Peltz-Strauss.
Committee Chair Shirley Rooker opened the meeting by thanking members for their attendance and further acknowledging the work of the subcommittees since the last meeting. She urged subcommittees to complete their priority lists, which will then be reviewed by the full Committee as possible recommendations to the Commission.
Ms. Rooker indicated that the goal of today's meeting is to prepare recommendations for the FCC concerning a recent Notice of Proposed Rulemaking regarding financing of the Universal Service Fund.
After thanking the subcommittee chairs for their work in preparation for today's meeting, Ms. Rooker noted with thanks the generous contributions of Cingular Wireless, Ideal at NCR, and Sprint in support of the Committee's work. Finally, Ms. Rooker thanked Lila Laux for her service on the Committee, and further indicated that Qwest Communications would designate a new representative by the next Committee meeting. Ms. Rooker then introduced the CDTAC’s Designated Federal Official, Scott Marshall, who greeted the group and reviewed meeting logistics.
The meeting ensued with the introduction of Mr. K. Dane Snowden, Chief of the Consumer Information Bureau. Mr. Snowden reaffirmed the importance of the CDTAC, and further indicated that one of his goals is to broaden the outreach of the Consumer Information Bureau (CIB). He also noted the importance of the Universal Service Fund (USF), especially the Lifeline and Linkup programs.
Mr. Snowden then introduced Commissioner Michael Copps who addressed the Committee. After hailing the importance of public/private partnerships in the policymaking process, Commissioner Copps advised the CDTAC to choose its priorities carefully and to limit its focus to three or four issues each year in order to maximize the Committee's effectiveness. He also spoke about the value of input from under-served groups, acknowledged the effective advocacy efforts of the deaf community, and indicated a desire to continue to work with the CDTAC during the months and years ahead.
Following Commissioner Copps' presentation, Commissioner Kevin Martin was introduced and spoke to the Committee. After welcoming the group and thanking the Committee for its hard work, Commissioner Martin went on to underscore the importance of making sure that everyone has as much access to telecommunications as possible. This principle is "one that everyone here at the Commission is committed to."
After Karen Peltz-Strauss gave an update concerning the new 711 relay rule and some details about an upcoming forum on relay services to be held at the Commission, Chairperson Rooker then asked for approval of the March 6, 2001 meeting minutes, which were distributed in advance to Committee members. The following corrections to the minutes were proffered and agreed to by the Committee:
- Page 2, paragraph 4: Reference to the ADA should be changed to Section 255 of the Telecommunications Act.
- Page 6, paragraph 1: The word "conservation" should be changed to "conversation"
- Page 3, paragraph 3: It was noted that regular feedback from Commissioners would be valuable and that such feedback might not necessarily take the form of a personal meeting. Accordingly, based on this consensus, staff of the Committee has added the following language to the minutes: "Committee members expressed the desire to have regular dialog/feedback, either in person or in writing, with Commissioners relative to the Committee’s activities and recommendations."
With these revisions, the minutes were adopted. Ms. Rooker then turned to consideration of the membership applications of the U.S. Telecom Association, the League for the Hard of Hearing, and the Seimens Corporation. She explained that the Committee is empowered to consider new membership applications and to make recommendations concerning new members to the Chairman of the Federal Communications Commission.
After extended discussion, it was moved and adopted by a vote of 27/5, with no abstentions, that the Committee would not recommend any new applicants at this time, and that future membership applications would not be considered unless a vacancy occurs on the Committee. A motion to establish an administrative committee to prescreen membership applications was defeated.
During discussion, some Committee members expressed concern that the Committee was already very large (40 members). Others members felt that the interests of the three applicants were already adequately represented on the Committee, and still others felt that the addition of new industry representatives would further skew the balance between consumer and industry members. Others were also concerned that it would be inappropriate to recommend additions to the Committee at this time, since many applicants were rejected for membership when the Committee was originally constituted.
The Committee does urge these applicants, or other interested parties, to attend and be heard at meetings of the Committee and to participate on subcommittees and the CDTAC
e-mail lists. However, such individuals or entities will not be considered as voting members of the CDTAC or its subcommittees.
Chairperson Rooker then thanked Ms. O'Reilly for her suggested amendments to the Committee's operating protocols, and further stated that the protocols should be reviewed and considered at the November 2001 meeting.
The meeting ensued with the introduction of Anita Cheng of the FCC's Common Carrier Bureau who briefed the Committee on the workings of the Universal Service Fund and the Commission's contribution reform proposals. Ms. Cheng, Assistant Chief, Accounting Policy Division, Common Carrier Bureau, explained that the Universal Service Fund is a fund that helps to promote telephone and telecommunications service to all of the people in America including those people that live in rural areas or that have low incomes.
The Universal Service Fund is one central fund that pays out to four mechanisms or programs: the high-cost program; the low-income program; the schools and libraries program (which is also called E-Rate); and the rural healthcare program.
The high-cost program provides discounts to telephone companies who provide service in areas of the country where the cost of providing service is very high. The low-income program provides discounts to consumers with low incomes who might otherwise be unable to afford telephone service. The E-Rate program enables schools and libraries to get discounts on telephone service, Internet access and internal wiring for these services. Finally, the rural healthcare program enables healthcare providers in rural areas to have access to such services as telemedicine for the same costs as their counterparts in urban areas.
After noting recent successes of the Universal Service Fund, especially with respect to low-income individuals, Native Americans, and schools, Ms. Cheng outlined the Commission's recent proposal to reform the financing mechanism of the fund. In May of this year, the Commission sought comment on several proposals including: (1) whether carriers should continue to contribute based on a percentage, or whether a flat fee such as a per line charge would be more appropriate; (2) whether the Commission should limit the way carriers can recover their contribution costs; and (3) whether carriers should title their line items on bills all in the same way. A summary of this Notice of Proposed Rulemaking was previously distributed to Committee members.
Ms. Cheng then introduced Paul Garnett and Greg Guice of her staff and proceeded to entertain questions from Committee members.
Following a brief break, Chairperson Rooker asked Ken McEldowney and Andrea Williams to lead the discussion on the Universal Service Fund. A summary of comments from Committee members received through the Committee's e-mail discussion list was then distributed to Committee members.
After protracted discussion, which was continued during the afternoon session, the Committee decided that it could not come to consensus on the specific questions posed in the Commission's Notice of Proposed Rulemaking. It was then decided that a "statement of guiding principles" could be developed and sent to the Commission. The Committee felt that a statement of principles could be utilized by the Commission in its analysis of the Universal Service Fund proposals.
During the afternoon session, the Committee reached consensus on several principles which were later edited for clarity and filed as an ex parte communication with the Commission In the Matter of Notice of Proposed Rulemaking, Federal-State Joint Board on Universal Service, CC Docket No. 96-45, released May 8, 2001. The guiding principles are as follows:
- USF contributions and assessments should be calculated and disclosed in an easy-to- understand manner.
- USF contributions and assessments should be equitable among customers and among members of the telecommunications industry.
- The public should be educated on the social benefits of USF.
- When the Commission evaluates comments to its USF NPRM, it should consider as a minimum maintaining the existing Lifeline exemptions and perhaps extending such exemptions where circumstances are appropriate.
- USF should not be a profit center. However, telecommunications companies should be able to recover reasonable and demonstrable administrative costs for supporting the USF program.
The Committee further urged the Commission to support the Consumer Information Bureau's efforts to engage early consumer and industry participation in future Universal Service Fund proceedings and should take a forward-looking approach on USF issues in our rapidly evolving technological environment.
In addition to the action item on universal service described above, the afternoon session of the Committee's meeting included remarks by Marsha MacBride, Chief of Staff at the Commission, subcommittee breakout sessions, and a report back from the Disabilities Issues Subcommittee. Ms. MacBride reviewed with the Committee Chairman Powell's speech on consumerism, which was originally delivered at the Federal Communications Bar Association meeting in June 2001. The main thrust of his remarks was to emphasize that everything the Commission does is about consumers. As public servants the Commission only has one real client and that is the consumer. Competition policy that focuses on only competitors but doesn't take that next step of looking at what the impact of those competitors are on the consumer "sorely misses the mark."
While government can take steps to promote competitors in a market, it is ultimately up to the consumer as to whether the goods and services being offered by that particular company are particularly appealing.
Most of the Commission's emphasis so far has been trying to find ways to help consumers navigate through the maze of goods and services that are currently available in our highly competitive telecommunications marketplace. This can be accomplished through several mechanisms including: more effective outreach to consumers; education of consumers; empowerment of the consumer to make more effective decisions; and the elimination of confusion in the marketplace through the publication of factsheets, content-rich websites, etc. In addition, information and analysis gleamed from a streamlined complaint processing system will also help the Commission to make sound policy.
The Commission is also committed to working with organizations such as those represented on the Advisory Committee to insure access for individuals with special needs. Access for people with disabilities is one of those areas, which may not be effectively addressed by the market. The Commission is also very focused on advancing opportunity in the communications field.
To this end, the Chairman has strongly supported the McCain tax credit bill, which is a good way of helping consumers – and many different types of consumers – to become involved in the communications industry, through both employment and ownership.
Ms. MacBride concluded her remarks by noting the Commission's concern about access to the network by low-income individuals. Access means not only voice, but also high speed data, and the Commission continues to work with state and local communities to increase participation in the Lifeline Program.
During the question and answer period following Ms. MacBride's remarks, she agreed to furnish the Committee with a statement of Commission priorities, which would help the Committee to more effectively prioritize its work.
Chairperson Rooker then thanked Ms. MacBride for her remarks and directed the Committee to recess into subcommittee groups. The Consumer and Affordability Subcommittees met jointly to continue the discussion on Universal Service, while the Disabilities Subcommittee adjourned separately to discuss internal business.
Following the subcommittee breakout sessions, Jim Tobias, Acting Chair of the Disability Subcommittee, gave a brief report of activities. He indicated that the subcommittee wished to split into working groups: one focusing on Section 255 and the other on Telecommunications Relay Services (TRS). Overarching issues such as standards setting, consumer outreach and education would be addressed by both groups.
Some of the priorities for the subcommittee include:
- An appraisal of compliance with Section 255 of the Telecommunications Act. This would include a request to the FCC for statistics and additional information on disability-related complaint processing.
- Access to network functionality (such as operator intercept messages which often do not provide a TTY parallel).
- Reimbursement for emerging relay service technologies such as IP telephony and video interpreting.
- Access to information technology beyond Section 255, including IP telephony and web access. The subcommittee would like the Commission to act on the Further Notice of Inquiry on these topics, which was issued about a year and a half ago.
- A need to provide technical assistance to consumers with disabilities regarding Commission processes and product options which best meet these consumers' needs.
- A priority or dedicated frequency allocation for assistive listening devices and equipment which transmits audio descriptions in theaters.
- The creation of a disability-specific Universal Service Fund, especially targeted to equipment distribution.
Finally, Mr. Tobias on behalf of the subcommittee urged Committee members to provide feedback and to participate on the disability e-mail discussion list.
Chairperson Rooker then commenced further discussion on the Universal Service Fund. A statement of guiding principles was adopted as described above.
Chairperson Rooker then asked Committee members or the public observers to make any comments or to raise questions before the Committee. One Committee member expressed a concern about the public not knowing enough about what the FCC does. She suggested that CIB's outreach would benefit from a public service campaign perhaps focusing on educating the consumer about telephone charges. An audience member further commented that outreach and education was not only a FCC responsibility, but also should be shared by each Committee member in his/her own organization. Another Committee member suggested that outreach with respect to Telecommunications Relay Services could be enhanced through liaison with state rehabilitation and other government agencies.
With respect to future agenda topics, Committee members suggested a presentation on the Disabilities Rights Office and Consumer Information Bureau outreach and complaint processing. A desire was also expressed to have a presentation on emerging technologies, although it was noted that this may be more within the jurisdiction of the FCC's Technological Advisory Committee (TAC). Larry Goldberg is a member of both the TAC and CDTAC Committees.
There being no further business, the Committee adjourned at approximately 5:00 p.m.
Approved: November 30, 2001
| last reviewed/updated on 02/20/03 |
FCC Home |
| | Search | | | Updates | | | E-Filing | | | Initiatives | | | For Consumers | | | Find People |
 Federal Communications Commission445 12th Street SW Washington, DC 20554 More FCC Contact Information... |
|
|