Disagreement continued between inmate calling service providers and advocates on the ICS rate-making process, in replies posted Monday in docket 12-375 (see 2109290074). Permanent caps “should be substantially lower than the current interim caps,” said the Prison Policy Initiative, asking the FCC to “prioritize the issue of USF relief for ICS customers.” PPI finds “that facility size does not correlate to costs and should be considered by the FCC as a rebuttal to the ICS providers’ argument that size impacts costs,” said 33 organizations led by the Leadership Conference on Civil and Human Rights. Make a list of ancillary fees that can and can’t be charged to ICS users, said NCIC. The fee caps the FCC previously adopted “have been subverted by certain ICS providers,” it said. All security and surveillance costs “are not inextricably intertwined with telecom costs,” said Worth Rises. Global Tel*Link said they’re “an integral part of ICS.” Consider a "brief pause" on additional reform to "allow for the collection of accurate and reliable data," said Pay Tel. The National Association of State Utility Consumer Advocates backed comments opposing security and surveillance costs being included in the rate-setting process. Require providers refund account holders after inactivity or an incarcerated person’s release, said the Wright Petitioners, Benton Institute for Broadband & Society, United Church of Christ and Public Knowledge. The record “unanimously confirms the commission’s legal authority under Section 225 of the [Communications] Act extends to incarcerated people with disabilities,” said deaf and hard of hearing advocates led by Telecommunications for the Deaf and Hard of Hearing. ICS providers and facilities “can readily provide modern forms of TRS, including VRS,” the groups said. ZP Better Together recommended a registration system for VRS providers to create an account to provide services to a correctional facility.
FCC-proposed mandatory data collection on inmate calling services “fails to recognize that ICS providers are non-dominant competitive carriers that are not required to maintain their records in the same manner required of dominant carriers,” said Global Tel*Link in comments posted Tuesday in docket 12-375. Paperwork Reduction Act comments were due Monday (see 2110180007). GTL said FCC staff “grossly underestimated” how long it would take for ICS providers to respond, saying it would take 1,900 hours if it were to spend one hour per facility it serves. The FCC should also “re-evaluate the potential burden on ICS providers,” it said.
Inmate calling service providers and advocacy groups disagreed with some proposed reporting requirements in FCC mandatory data collection, in comments posted Friday (see 2105200044). Including surveillance and security costs is "vital" to determining rate caps, said Worth Rises in docket 12-375, saying the FCC should impose a penalty on ICS providers that "manipulate" those costs. The Prison Policy Institute sought clarity on how security services are defined. The Wright Petitioners, Benton Institute for Broadband & Society and Public Knowledge agreed and urged "robust collection" of data. Securus said security costs are "inextricably intertwined with the provisions of ICS," which Global Tel*Link echoed. Mandatory data collection is "not the proper administrative vehicle for evaluating what categories of security costs are directly related to ICS," GTL said. On a reporting period, advocacy groups and Securus want 2019-2021; NCIC suggested 2021 is "the most relevant year." GTL objected to several aspects of the proposed data collection. It said providers don't maintain sufficient records because they're nondominant competitive carriers and aren't required to do so: The FCC would "foist upon" them accounting and reporting requirements "impossible to satisfy."
The FCC Wireline Bureau granted Global Tel*Link's request to extend replies for a Further NPRM on interstate rate caps for inmate calling services, said an order listed in Monday's Daily Digest. The request was backed by the Wright Petitioners, Benton Institute for Broadband & Society, Free Press, New America’s Open Technology Institute, Public Knowledge and the United Church of Christ. Replies are now due by Dec. 17 in docket 12-375, following a previous extension to Oct. 27 (see 2108100036). The bureau denied GTL's request to extend comments on Paperwork Reduction Act and data collection.
Industry and advocates disagreed whether the FCC should include ancillary fees or security and surveillance costs in inmate calling services rates, in comments posted Tuesday in docket 12-375 (see 2105200044). Security and surveillance costs "are neither necessary for the provision of communication services nor do they serve [ICS] consumers or the general public," said Worth Rises. There's "no reason that the staff time of a correctional officer should be reflected in rates for phone service, and security and surveillance should not be a profit center," said the United Church of Christ, New America's Open Technology Institute, Free Press, Benton Institute for Broadband & Society, National Consumer Law Center and Public Knowledge. Global Tel*Link and the National Sheriffs Association (NSA) disagreed. Facilities' costs "must include the security and surveillance costs" for providing ICS, said GTL. NSA said some security and administrative tasks are "directly related to and necessary for the provision of inmate calling services." The Prison Policy Initiative asked the FCC to prohibit revenue-sharing agreements between providers and third-party financial institutions. "We do not understand the justification for an ancillary charge in this circumstance above $3.00 and as high as $6.95" for single-call services, said NASUCA. Ensure sufficient cost recovery for facilities if site commissions are regulated, said Pay Tel. Securus backed "phasing out" site commissions from rates and "eliminating duplicative ancillary service charges." NCIC asked the FCC to consider NSA's 2015 data that suggested relying on facilities-based ICS costs rather than provider-generated proposals to develop permanent ICS rates. PPI said NSA's study "suffers from a plethora of problems." Consider how other states are adopting intrastate rates, said the California Public Utilities Commission: Those rates "are multiple times lower than the FCC's proposed interstate rate caps," and the agency should consider if its proposed caps are too high "in light of the ICS providers’ assertions that they incur little to no cost differential to provide interstate versus intrastate calling services." Commenters overwhelmingly backed efforts to expand access to telecom relay services for deaf and hard of hearing incarcerated people. Publicize "the importance of facilities and ICS providers asking individuals whether they require TRS upfront," asked Hamilton Relay. It may not be "administratively feasible" to allow incarcerated individuals to choose their IP captioned telephone service provider, said ClearCaptions. Amend TRS rules "to the maximal extent necessary" to limit barriers to access to communications services for deaf and hard of hearing incarcerated people, said a coalition that included Telecommunications for the Deaf and Hard of Hearing, Communications Services for the Deaf, Hearing Loss Association of America, and National Disability Rights Network. Prohibit ICS providers from charging for "all forms of TRS calls," they said.
Inmate calling service providers could shift costs to video calling if the California Public Utilities Commission caps only voice rates, said public advocates Wednesday at a CPUC prehearing conference. After last month capping voice intrastate ICS rates at 7 cents a minute on an interim basis (see 2108190046), the commission is preparing for a phase two that might include rates for text and video services, despite some ICS providers disagreeing they're under the agency’s jurisdiction. Some providers sought a several-month delay so the effectiveness of new interim rates can be analyzed.
Global Tel*Link must produce information about video calling services even before the California Public Utilities Commission decides if it has jurisdiction over such services, ruled Assigned Commissioner Martha Guzman Aceves and Administrative Law Judge Cathleen Fogel Monday in an inmate calling services rulemaking (docket 20-10-002). The CPUC’s independent Public Advocates Office asked the commission to order GTL to respond to its discovery request. The company claimed video calling was outside the CPUC’s jurisdiction, limiting PAO discovery rights. “Like any other tribunal, the Commission has jurisdiction to determine its own jurisdiction, and to develop the facts necessary to make that determination,” the commissioner and ALJ ruled before a Wednesday pre-hearing conference. “Because this is ... a novel issue for the Commission, the information sought by Public Advocates may help us answer the jurisdictional question.” Even if material sought isn’t admissible, GTL hasn’t shown it couldn’t “lead to the discovery of admissible evidence,” they said. GTL declined to comment.
California Public Utilities Commission members unanimously supported reducing inmate calling services rates, at a virtual Thursday meeting. Commissioners voted 5-0 to adopt a proposed interim ICS order capping intrastate rates at 7 cents per minute for debit, prepaid and collect calls, and prohibiting some fees. ICS providers will have 45 days to reduce rates. A day earlier, at the first meeting of the California Middle-Mile Advisory Committee, state legislators questioned the CPUC’s approach to locating nodes of an upcoming open-access network.
California regulators should reject prison-phone provider claims that a competitive market is already bringing reduced intrastate rates, consumer groups said in Monday reply comments in docket R.20-10-002. They responded to Global Tel*Link (GTL) and Securus telling the California Public Utilities Commission earlier this month that proposed limits on inmate calling service (ICS) rates and some fees are illegal (see 2108030041). A 7 cent cap would be “just and reasonable,” said the CPUC’s Public Advocates Office (PAO). GTL and Securus arguments that the interim rules wouldn't allow them to recover costs are “invalid,” the PAO said. It plans to meet by videoconference Thursday with aides to President Marybel Batjer and Commissioner Darcie Houck, and Friday with aides to Commissioner Cliff Rechtschaffen, the public advocate said in filings Monday and Tuesday. The Center for Accessible Technology urged the CPUC to reject ICS provider arguments that they lack market power. “That ... providers cannot set prices as high as they might like is not evidence that the market is competitive.” The proposed decision “properly views the market through the lens of the end-user, who has no choice of IPCS [incarcerated persons calling services] service provider,” replied The Utility Reform Network: Provider “arguments claim theoretical negotiation dynamics and restrictions on rate changes within the RFP process but lack the end-user perspective entirely.” The Prison Policy Initiative said “numerous factors other than market competition can lead to lower calling rates: facilities may demand or encourage carriers to offer lower rates; legislative bodies may require lower rates; carriers or facilities may simply want the administrative ease of a uniform rate structure for inter- and intrastate calling; carriers may lower voice calling rates and compensate by boosting revenue through unregulated services that are bundled in the same contract.” A 7 cent rate “is feasible for all facilities ... based on existing lower rates in facilities with populations less than 500 people” in other states, including local jails in Maryland, New Jersey and Washington state, said the Californians for Jail and Prison Phone Justice Coalition. Providers repeated their opposition to the interim plan. “The arbitrarily low single-rate cap and limits on ancillary service fees are unworkable and unlawful,” and would “undermine the substantial progress” made through competition, commented GTL. The CPUC may vote Aug. 19 on the draft order.
Inmate calling service providers rejected proposed California limits on intrastate rates and some fees. The California Public Utilities Commission received comments Monday on an interim order, up for a possible Aug. 19 vote, that would include a cap of 7 cents per minute on intrastate rates for debit, prepaid and collect calls (see 2107130047). Consumer groups supported the plan and urged the CPUC to next seek ways to reduce video call and text-messaging costs. Also, the CPUC teed up implementation of the state’s $6 billion broadband law.