[Senate Report 114-383]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
Calendar No. 687
114th Congress } { Report
SENATE
2d Session } { 114-383
======================================================================
IMPROVING RURAL CALL QUALITY AND RELIABILITY ACT OF 2015
_______
November 28, 2016.--Ordered to be printed
_______
Mr. Thune, from the Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation,
submitted the following
R E P O R T
[To accompany S. 827]
The Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation, to
which was referred the bill (S. 827) to amend the
Communications Act of 1934 to ensure the integrity of voice
communications and to prevent unjust or unreasonable
discrimination among areas of the United States in the delivery
of such communications, having considered the same, reports
favorably thereon with an amendment (in the nature of a
substitute) and recommends that the bill (as amended) do pass.
Purpose of the Bill
The purpose of S. 827, the Improving Rural Call Quality and
Reliability Act of 2015, is to ensure the integrity of voice
communications and to prevent unjust or unreasonable
discrimination among areas of the United States in the delivery
of such communications by requiring certain communications
providers that carry, route, or transmit voice traffic to
register with the Federal Communications Commission (FCC or
Commission) and to meet service quality standards to be
established by the Commission.
Background and Needs
The FCC has found that there is a frequent and pervasive
inability to properly complete long-distance calls to rural
areas.\1\ The problem, known as ``rural call completion,''
results in lengthy periods of dead air on the calling party's
end after dialing a number, audible ringing tones on the
calling party's end when the called party's telephone never
rings at all, false busy signals, inaccurate intercept
messages, and the inability of one or both parties to hear the
other when the call does go through.\2\ The Commission has
received examples of life-threatening call failures, including
a situation where an on-call surgeon was unable to receive a
call from a hospital for emergency surgery and a 9-1-1 call
center was unable to complete emergency call backs.\3\ In rural
and small-town America, call completion failures have created
```dire consequences' to consumers, economic development, and
public safety across the Nation.''\4\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\Rural Call Completion Report and Order and Further Notice of
Proposed Rulemaking, Rural Call Completion Order, 2013, 28 FCC Rcd.
16154, 16160-61 2013.
\2\Ibid. at p. 16161.
\3\Ibid.
\4\Ibid.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The FCC has determined that one of the main causes of the
rural call completion problem is that intermediate providers,
companies often hired by long distance providers to route and
deliver calls to local telephone providers serving rural areas,
are not completing the calls.\5\ Higher-than-average rates
charged to transport and terminate long-distance calls to rural
areas create an incentive for long-distance providers to hand
off these calls to intermediate providers that offer to deliver
them cheaply. Those high rates, though, also create an
incentive for those intermediate providers not to complete the
calls properly, to avoid paying those higher-than-average
transport and termination charges when it is not profitable to
do so.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\5\Ibid. at p. 16162.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Practices used for routing calls to rural areas that lead
to call termination and quality problems may violate the
Communications Act of 1934.\6\ The Commission has clarified the
applicability of its rules\7\ and imposed additional reporting
and data retention requirements for local telephone exchange
carriers, interexchange carriers (i.e., long distance
providers), commercial mobile radio service providers (i.e.,
cellular providers), and voice over Internet protocol
providers,\8\ but call completion problems remain.\9\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\6\See 47 U.S.C. 201(b), 202(a)
\7\ Developing a Unified Intercarrier Compensation Regime,
Establishing Just and Reasonable Rates for Local Exchange Carriers, CC
Docket No. 01-92, WC Docket No. 07-135, Declaratory Ruling, 27 FCC Rcd
1351, 1356, para. 12 n.37, Wireline Comp. Bur. 2012.
\8\Rural Call Completion Order, 28 FCC Rcd at 16164.
\9\National Telecommunications Cooperative Association (NTCA)
reports that 80 percent of its members responding to a questionnaire
indicated that they have had call completion problems in the past year,
and over 25 percent indicated that they receive complaints from
subscribers at least weekly. Letter from Jill Canfield, Vice President
of Legal and Industry, NTCA-The Rural Broadband Association, to Marlene
H. Dortch, Secretary, Federal Communications Commission, WC Docket No.
13-39, June 2, 2016.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Summary of Provisions
S. 827 would increase the reliability of intermediate
providers by bringing transparency and standards to the
intermediate provider market. Specifically, it would require
intermediate providers to register with the Commission and
maintain compliance with service quality standards to be
adopted by the Commission. Covered providers, generally long-
distance voice service providers with more than 100,000
domestic subscriber lines, would be prohibited from using an
unregistered intermediate provider to transmit voice
communications. The requirements would apply regardless of the
format, protocol, or technology by which a communication or
service is provided or achieved, or the regulatory
classification of such communication or service.
The Commission would have 180 days to promulgate rules to
establish the registry, which would be publicly available. The
Commission would have 1 year to promulgate rules to establish
intermediate provider service quality standards.
Legislative History
In 2013, the Committee approved S. Res. 157, introduced by
Senator Klobuchar, expressing the sense of the Senate that
telephone service must be improved in rural areas of the United
States and that no entity may unreasonably discriminate against
telephone users in those areas.
Senator Klobuchar, for herself and Senator Tester,
introduced S. 827 on March 19, 2015. Senators Baldwin, Ernst,
Franken, Grassley, Heinrich, King, and Merkley later joined as
additional cosponsors of the measure.
On June 29, 2016, the Committee held an Executive Session
at which S. 827 was considered. Senator Klobuchar offered a
substitute amendment, which was adopted. The bill was approved
unanimously by the Committee by voice vote and ordered to be
reported with an amendment (in the nature of a substitute).
Estimated Costs
In accordance with paragraph 11(a) of rule XXVI of the
Standing Rules of the Senate and section 403 of the
Congressional Budget Act of 1974, the Committee provides the
following cost estimate, prepared by the Congressional Budget
Office:
S. 827--Improving Rural Call Quality and Reliability Act of 2016
The Federal Communications Commission (FCC) is an
independent agency that regulates various aspects of wireline
(telephone, for example), wireless, cable, and satellite
communications. S. 827 would require certain providers of voice
communication services to register with the FCC. It also would
require the FCC to issue rules establishing service quality
standards for those providers.
On the basis of information from the FCC about the effort
needed to create those service standards, CBO estimates that
implementing S. 827 would cost $3 million over the 2017-2021
period. However, under current law the FCC is authorized to
collect fees sufficient to offset the cost of its regulatory
activities each year. Therefore, CBO estimates that the net
cost to implement S. 827 would be negligible, assuming annual
appropriation actions consistent with the agency's authorities.
Enacting S. 827 would not affect direct spending or
revenues; therefore, pay-as-you-go procedures do not apply.
CBO estimates that enacting S. 827 would not increase net
direct spending or on-budget deficits in any of the four
consecutive 10-year periods beginning in 2027.
S. 827 contains no intergovernmental mandates as defined in
the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act (UMRA) and would not affect
the budgets of state, local, or tribal governments.
The bill contains private-sector mandates as defined in
UMRA. Specifically, the bill would require all intermediate
providers of voice communications services to register with the
FCC and to comply with service quality standards established by
the agency. (Intermediate providers contract with other
telecommunication providers to transmit voice calls from one
destination to another.) The bill also would require
telecommunications providers that contract with intermediate
providers to use only those providers that are registered with
the FCC. Lastly, if the FCC increases annual fee collections to
offset the costs of implementing its additional regulatory
activities, the bill would increase the cost of an existing
mandate on commercial entities required to pay those fees. On
the basis of information about current industry and regulatory
practices, CBO estimates that incremental cost to comply with
the requirements of the bill would not be substantial. Further,
any increase in fees would amount to no more than $3 million
over the 2017-2021 period. Therefore, CBO estimates that the
aggregate cost of the mandates in the bill would probably fall
below the annual threshold established in UMRA for private-
sector mandates ($154 million in 2016, adjusted annually for
inflation).
The CBO staff contacts for this estimate are Stephen Rabent
(for federal costs) and Logan Smith (for private-sector
mandates). The estimate was approved by H. Samuel Papenfuss,
Deputy Assistant Director for Budget Analysis.
Regulatory Impact
In accordance with paragraph 11(b) of rule XXVI of the
Standing Rules of the Senate, the Committee provides the
following evaluation of the regulatory impact of the
legislation, as reported:
number of persons covered
The bill, as reported, would require intermediate providers
to register with the Commission and maintain compliance with
service quality standards to be adopted by the Commission.
Providers that meet the definition of intermediate providers
therein would be subject to these new compliance requirements.
The scope of entities covered by the new requirements to
register and for service standards would be limited, however,
as it would clarify the definition of what constitutes an
intermediate provider, ensuring that carriers that merely
originate and terminate traffic are not subject to new service
quality standards that do not apply to their actions.
economic impact
S. 827 is intended to improve the efficiency and certainty
of voice communications to rural areas of the country by
requiring intermediate providers to register with the FCC and
comply with service quality standards to be established by the
Commission. Further, covered providers would be prohibited from
using an intermediate provider that is not registered with the
FCC. The Committee expects that improved voice communications
for households, businesses, and public safety officials located
in rural areas will result in positive economic benefits to
those areas and the Nation as a whole.
privacy
The bill would not have any adverse impact on the personal
privacy of individuals.
paperwork
The Committee does not anticipate a major increase in
paperwork burdens resulting from the passage of this
legislation.
Congressionally Directed Spending
In compliance with paragraph 4(b) of rule XLIV of the
Standing Rules of the Senate, the Committee provides that no
provisions contained in the bill, as reported, meet the
definition of congressionally directed spending items under the
rule.
Section-by-Section Analysis
Section. 1. Short title.
This section provides that this Act may be cited as the
``Improving Rural Call Quality and Reliability Act of 2016.''
Section. 2. Ensuring the integrity of voice communications.
This section would amend part II of title II of the
Communications Act of 1934 (47 U.S.C. 251 et seq.) by adding a
new section 262. Section 262 would require that intermediate
providers, as defined in such section, register with the
Commission and maintain compliance with service quality
standards to be adopted by the Commission. The Commission would
have 180 days to promulgate rules to establish the registry,
and 1 year to promulgate rules to establish service quality
standards. Carriers that qualify for the FCC's ``safe
harbor''\10\ within a year of enactment (and maintain their
qualification) would still be required to register but would
not have to comply with the service quality standards.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\10\47 C.F.R. 64.2107
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Covered providers, as defined in section 64.2101 of title
47 of the Code of Federal Regulations, generally those
providers of long-distance voice service that make the initial
long-distance call path choice for more than 100,000 domestic
retail subscriber lines, would not be permitted to use an
unregistered intermediate provider to transmit most voice
communications.
The FCC would be required to establish the registry to
record intermediate provider registrations, make the registry
publicly available on the Commission's website, and establish
intermediate provider service quality standards. In
establishing those standards, the Commission would be required
to prevent unjust and unreasonable discrimination among areas
of the United States in the delivery of voice communications,
regardless of the format or protocol by which the service is
provided.
Nothing in the new section 262 would preempt or expand the
authority of a State public utilities commission or other
agency to collect data or investigate or enforce State call
completion laws or regulations.
The new section 262 would further provide that its
requirements apply regardless of the format by which any
communications or service is provided, the protocol or format
by which the transmission of such communication or service is
achieved, or the regulatory classification of such
communication or service. In addition, it would provide that
nothing in such section shall be construed to affect the
regulatory classification of any communication or service.
Finally, the new section 262 would define an ``intermediate
provider'' as an entity that enters into a business arrangement
with a covered provider or other intermediate provider for the
specific purpose of carrying, routing, or transmitting voice
traffic. The Committee intends that, to meet this definition,
an entity must have a business relationship for the specific
purpose of carrying, routing, or transmitting traffic. It is
not the intent of the Committee that this definition be
interpreted to cover entities that only incidentally transmit
voice traffic, like Internet Service Providers who may carry
voice traffic alongside other packet data, without a specific
business arrangement to carry, route, or transmit that voice
traffic.
Changes in Existing Law
In compliance with paragraph 12 of rule XXVI of the
Standing Rules of the Senate, changes in existing law made by
the bill, as reported, are shown as follows (existing law
proposed to be omitted is enclosed in black brackets, new
material is printed in italic, existing law in which no change
is proposed is shown in roman):
PART II OF TITLE II OF COMMUNICATIONS ACT OF 1934
[47 U.S.C. 251 et seq.]
SEC. 262. ENSURING THE INTEGRITY OF VOICE COMMUNICATIONS.
(a) Registration and Compliance by Intermediate Providers.--
An intermediate provider that offers or holds itself out as
offering the capability to transmit covered voice
communications from one destination to another and that charges
any rate to any other entity (including an affiliated entity)
for the transmission shall--
(1) register with the Commission; and
(2) comply with the service quality standards for
such transmission to be established by the Commission
under subsection (c)(1)(B).
(b) Required Use of Registered Intermediate Providers.--A
covered provider may not use an intermediate provider to
transmit covered voice communications unless such intermediate
provider is registered under subsection (a)(1).
(c) Commission Rules.--
(1) In general.--
(A) Registry.--Not later than 180 days after
the date of enactment of this section, the
Commission shall promulgate rules to establish
a registry to record registrations under
subsection (a)(1).
(B) Service quality standards.--Not later
than 1 year after the date of enactment of this
section, the Commission shall promulgate rules
to establish service quality standards for the
transmission of covered voice communications by
intermediate providers.
(2) Requirements.--In promulgating the rules required
by paragraph (1), the Commission shall--
(A) ensure the integrity of the transmission
of covered voice communications to all
customers in the United States; and
(B) prevent unjust or unreasonable
discrimination among areas of the United States
in the delivery of covered voice
communications.
(d) Public Availability of Registry.--The Commission shall
make the registry established under subsection (c)(1)(A)
publicly available on the website of the Commission.
(e) Scope of Application.--The requirements of this section
shall apply regardless of the format by which any communication
or service is provided, the protocol or format by which the
transmission of such communication or service is achieved, or
the regulatory classification of such communication or service.
(f) Rule of Construction.--Nothing in this section shall be
construed to affect the regulatory classification of any
communication or service.
(g) Effect on Other Laws.--Nothing in this section shall be
construed to preempt or expand the authority of a State public
utility commission or other relevant State agency to collect
data, or investigate and enforce State law and regulations,
regarding the completion of intrastate voice communications,
regardless of the format by which any communication or service
is provided, the protocol or format by which the transmission
of such communication or service is achieved, or the regulatory
classification of such communication or service.
(h) Exception.--The requirement under subsection (a)(2) to
comply with the service quality standards established under
subsection (c)(1)(B) shall not apply to a covered provider
that--
(1) on or before the date that is 1 year after the
date of enactment of this section, has certified as a
Safe Harbor provider under section 64.2107(a) of title
47, Code of Federal Regulations, or any successor
regulation; and
(2) continues to meet the requirements under such
section 64.2107(a).
(i) Definitions.--In this section:
(1) Covered provider.--The term ``covered provider''
has the meaning given the term in section 64.2101 of
title 47, Code of Federal Regulations, or any successor
thereto.
(2) Covered voice communication.--The term ``covered
voice communication'' means a voice communication
(including any related signaling information) that is
generated--
(A) from the placement of a call from a
connection using a North American Numbering
Plan resource or a call placed to a connection
using such a numbering resource; and
(B) through any service provided by a covered
provider.
(3) Intermediate provider.--The term ``intermediate
provider'' means any entity that--
(A) enters into a business arrangement with a
covered provider or other intermediate provider
for the specific purpose of carrying, routing,
or transmitting voice traffic that is generated
from the placement of a call placed--
(i) from an end user connection using
a North American Numbering Plan
resource; or
(ii) to an end user connection using
such a numbering resource; and
(B) does not itself, either directly or in
conjunction with an affiliate, serve as a
covered provider in the context of originating
or terminating a given call.
[all]