35632 Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 127 / Wednesday, July 7, 2021 / Rules and Regulations 

FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS 

COMMISSION 

47 CFR Part 64 

[CG Docket Nos. 03–123, 10–51; DA 20– 

219; FRS 32654] 

Structure and Practices of the Video 

Relay Services Program 

AGENCY: Federal Communications 

Commission. 

ACTION: Final rule. 

SUMMARY: In this document, the Federal 

Communications Commission’s 

(Commission’s) Consumer and 

Governmental Affairs Bureau (Bureau), 

pursuant to delegated authority, amends 

the Commission’s interoperability 

requirements for video relay service 

(VRS) to remove reference to the 

Interoperability Profile for Relay User 

Equipment (RUE Profile). 

DATES: These rules are effective August 

6, 2021. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Michael Scott, Consumer and 

Governmental Affairs Bureau, at (202) 

418–1264, or email Michael.Scott@

fcc.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This is a 

summary of the Bureau’s Order on 

Reconsideration, document DA 20–219, 

adopted on March 3, 2020, released on 

March 3, 2020, in CG Docket Nos. 10– 

51 and 03–123. The Bureau previous 

sought comment on a petition for 

reconsideration, published at 82 FR 

33856, July 21, 2017, with a correction 

published at 82 FR 34471, July 25, 2017. 

The full text of document DA 20–219 is 

available for public inspection via the 

Commission’s Electronic Comment 

Filing System (ECFS). To request 

materials in accessible formats for 

people with disabilities (Braille, large 

print, electronic files, audio format), 

send an email to fcc504@fcc.gov, or call 

the Consumer and Governmental Affairs 

Bureau at (202) 418–0530 (voice) or 

(202) 418–0432 (TTY). 

Incorporation by Reference: The 

Commission notified the Director of the 

Federal Register of the removal of the 

incorporation by reference to the RUE 

Profile from § 64.621(c) on May 5, 2020. 

Congressional Review Act 

The Commission sent a copy of 

document DA 20–219 to Congress and 

the Government Accountability Office 

pursuant to the Congressional Review 

Act, 5 U.S.C. 801(a)(1)(A). 

Final Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 

Analysis 

Document DA 20–219 does not 

contain new or modified or proposed 

information collections subject to the 

Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 

(PRA), Public Law 104–13. Therefore, it 

does not contain any new or modified 

information collection burden for small 

business concerns with fewer than 25 

employees, pursuant to the Small 

Business Paperwork Relief Act of 2002, 

Public Law 107–198, 44 U.S.C. 

3506(c)(4). 

Regulatory Flexibility Act Analysis 

Document DA 20–219 does not 

require a Final Regulatory Flexibility 

Analysis, pursuant to the Regulatory 

Flexibility Act of 1980 as amended 

(RFA), 5 U.S.C. 601–612, as amended by 

Public Law 104–121. Document DA 20– 

219 will be sent to the Chief Counsel for 

Advocacy of the Small Business 

Administration. 

Incorporation by Reference Summary 

Document DA 20–219 removes from 

the Commission’s rules the 

Interoperability Profile for Relay User 

Equipment, draft-vrs-rue-dispatch-00 

(2016) (RUE Profile). The RUE Profile 

provides technical specifications that 

define a standard interface between a 

relay user’s equipment and the services 

offered by relay service providers. The 

document is available from IETF 

Secretariat, 5177 Brandin Court, 

Fremont, CA 94538, 510–492–4080, 

https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draftvrs-rue-dispatch. 

Synopsis 

1. VRS, a form of telecommunications 

relay service (TRS), enables people with 

hearing or speech disabilities who use 

American Sign Language (ASL) to 

employ video equipment to 

communicate with voice telephone 

users. To ensure that consumers can 

communicate and port their service 

between VRS providers, the 

Commission requires VRS providers to 

ensure their services are interoperable 

and portable and has delegated 

rulemaking authority to the Bureau to 

adopt technical standards. 

2. In response to a petition, the 

Bureau reconsiders its 2017 decision 

incorporating the RUE Profile and 

deletes the interoperability rule’s 

reference to that standard. There are 

limited benefits to be gained from 

implementing the current version of the 

RUE Profile, which is undergoing 

review by a standards development 

organization, and at this time such 

limited benefits do not outweigh the 

costs of implementation. 

3. Benefits. The need for a mandatory 

provider-to-device technical standard to 

ensure objective interoperability testing 

is not as critical as appeared to be the 

case when this proceeding began. In 

2013, when the Commission delegated 

authority to the Bureau to adopt VRS 

technical standards, interoperability 

could not be assured due to the absence 

of any applicable standards, and there 

were disputes among providers over 

who was responsible for alleged failures 

of interoperability. More recently, 

however, the other technical standards 

adopted in 2017—the Provider 

Interoperability Profile and the xCard 

standard for porting consumer contact 

lists—appear to have been implemented 

successfully. Further, VRS providers 

now work together to ensure 

interoperability through an informal 

process in which engineers from each 

company collaborate on interoperability 

testing and information exchange. In 

addition, the MITRE Corporation has 

established a testing laboratory 

environment that enables effective 

testing of interoperability using 

provider-supplied user devices and 

software. In short, even though 

compliance with the RUE Profile has 

not been required to date, processes to 

implement the substance of the 

Commission’s current interoperability 

and portability rules are in place and 

have produced positive results. 

4. More fundamentally, the RUE 

Profile remains a work in progress, 

currently under consideration by a 

working group of the internet 

Engineering Task Force. No benefit can 

be gained by enforcing compliance with 

a technical standard that is not ready to 

be implemented. 

5. Costs. Implementation of the RUE 

Profile at this time would require VRS 

providers to incur substantial costs. In 

addition, RUE Profile compliance may 

impose additional indirect costs that are 

difficult to quantify, including, e.g., 

costs caused by unforeseen technical 

problems and security issues arising out 

of consumer use of the VATRP, as well 

as potential opportunity costs due to the 

diversion of engineering and research 

resources from technical improvements 

that may offer greater benefit to 

consumers. 

6. The Bureau will maintain this 

docket as an open proceeding, to allow 

for consideration of new or updated 

technical standards, including further 

consideration of provider-to-device 

standards, should they be submitted for 

consideration. 

Ordering Clauses 

7. Pursuant to the authority contained 

in sections 4(i), 4(j), and 225 of the 

Communications Act of 1934, as 

amended, 47 U.S.C. 154(i), (j), 225, and 

§§ 0.141, 0.361, and 1.3 of the 

Commission’s rules, 47 CFR 0.141, 


khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 127 / Wednesday, July 7, 2021 / Rules and Regulations 35633 

0.361, 1.3, the petition for 

reconsideration filed by Sorenson 

Communications, LLC, is granted in 

part and dismissed in part. 

List of Subjects in 47 CFR Part 64 

Incorporation by reference, 

Individuals with disabilities, 

Telecommunications, 

Telecommunications relay services. 

Federal Communications Commission. 

Gregory Haledjian, 

Legal Advisor, Consumer and Governmental 

Affairs Bureau. 

Final Rules 

For the reasons discussed in the 

preamble, the Federal Communications 

Commission amends 47 CFR part 64 as 

follows: 

PART 64—MISCELLANEOUS RULES 

RELATING TO COMMON CARRIERS 

■ 1. The authority citation for part 64 

continues to read as follows: 

Authority: 47 U.S.C. 151, 152, 154, 201, 

202, 217, 218, 220, 222, 225, 226, 227, 227b, 

228, 251(a), 251(e), 254(k), 262, 276, 

403(b)(2)(B), (c), 616, 620, 1401–1473, unless 

otherwise noted; Pub. L. 115–141, Div. P, sec. 

503, 132 Stat. 348, 1091. 

■ 2. Amend § 64.621 by 

■ a. Revising paragraph (a)(3); and 

■ b. Removing and reserving (c)(2)(ii). 

The revision reads as follows: 

§ 64.621 Interoperability and portability. 

(a) * * * 

(3) All VRS providers must ensure 

that their VRS access technologies and 

their video communication service 

platforms are interoperable with the 

VRS Access Technology Reference 

Platform, including for point-to-point 

calls. No VRS provider shall be 

compensated for minutes of use 

involving their VRS access technologies 

or video communication service 

platforms that are not interoperable with 

the VRS Access Technology Reference 

Platform. 

* * * * * 

[FR Doc. 2021–13486 Filed 7–6–21; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6712–01–P 

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 

Federal Motor Carrier Safety 

Administration 

49 CFR Parts 381, 382, 383, 384, 385, 

390, and 391 

[Docket No. FMCSA–2020–0135] 

RIN 2126–AC33 

General Technical, Organizational, 

Conforming, and Correcting 

Amendments to the Federal Motor 

Carrier Safety Regulations 

AGENCY: Federal Motor Carrier Safety 

Administration (FMCSA), Department 

of Transportation (DOT). 

ACTION: Final rule. 

SUMMARY: FMCSA amends its 

regulations by making technical 

corrections throughout the Federal 

Motor Carrier Safety Regulations 

(FMCSRs). The Agency makes minor 

changes to correct inadvertent errors 

and omissions, remove or update 

obsolete references, and improve the 

clarity and consistency of certain 

regulatory provisions. The Agency also 

makes nondiscretionary, ministerial 

changes that are statutorily mandated 

and changes that merely align regulatory 

requirements with the underlying 

statutory authority. Finally, this rule 

contains two minor changes to FMCSA’s 

rules of agency procedure or practice 

that relate to separation of functions and 

allowing FMCSA and State personnel to 

conduct off-site compliance reviews of 

motor carriers following the same safety 

fitness determination criteria used in 

on-site compliance reviews. 

DATES: This final rule is effective July 7, 

2021, except for amendatory instruction 

31 which is effective September 7, 2021. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr. 

Nicholas Warren, Regulatory 

Development Division, Office of Policy, 

Federal Motor Carrier Safety 

Administration, 1200 New Jersey 

Avenue SE, Washington, DC 20590– 

0001; (202) 366–6124; nicholas.warren@

dot.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

I. Legal Basis for the Rulemaking 

Congress delegated certain powers to 

regulate interstate commerce to the 

United States Department of 

Transportation (DOT or Department) in 

numerous pieces of legislation, most 

notably in section 6 of the Department 

of Transportation Act (DOT Act) (Pub. 

L. 89–670, 80 Stat. 931, 937, Oct. 15, 

1966). Section 6 of the DOT Act 

transferred to the Department the 

authority of the former Interstate 

Commerce Commission (ICC) to regulate 

the qualifications and maximum hours 

of service of employees, the safety of 

operations, and the equipment of motor 

carriers in interstate commerce (80 Stat. 

939). This authority, first granted to the 

ICC in the Motor Carrier Act of 1935 

(Pub. L. 74–255, 49 Stat. 543, Aug. 9, 

1935), now appears in 49 U.S.C. chapter 

315. The regulations issued under this 

(and subsequently enacted) authority 

became known as the FMCSRs, codified 

at 49 CFR parts 350–399. The 

administrative powers to enforce 

chapter 315 (codified in 49 U.S.C. 

chapter 5) were also transferred from the 

ICC to the DOT in 1966, and assigned 

first to the Federal Highway 

Administration (FHWA) and then to 

FMCSA. The FMCSA Administrator has 

been delegated authority under 49 CFR 

1.87 to carry out the motor carrier 

functions vested in the Secretary of 

Transportation. 

Between 1984 and 1999, several 

statutes added to FHWA’s authority. 

Various statutes authorize the 

enforcement of the FMCSRs, the 

Hazardous Materials Regulations, and 

the Commercial Regulations, and 

provide both civil and criminal 

penalties for violations of these 

requirements. These statutes include the 

Motor Carrier Safety Act of 1984 (Pub. 

L. 98–554, Title II, 98 Stat. 2832, Oct. 

30, 1984), codified at 49 U.S.C. chapter 

311, subchapter III; the Commercial 

Motor Vehicle Safety Act of 1986 (Pub. 

L. 99–570, Title XII, 100 Stat. 3207–170, 

Oct. 27, 1986), codified at 49 U.S.C. 

chapter 313; the Hazardous Materials 

Transportation Uniform Safety Act of 

1990, as amended (Pub. L. 101–615, 104 

Stat. 3244, Nov. 16, 1990), codified at 49 

U.S.C. chapter 51; the Omnibus 

Transportation Employee Testing Act of 

1991 (Pub. L. 102–143, Title V, 105 Stat. 

917, 952, Oct. 28, 1991), codified at 49 

U.S.C. 31306; and the ICC Termination 

Act of 1995 (Pub. L. 104–88, 109 Stat. 

803, Dec. 29, 1995), codified at 49 

U.S.C. chapters 131–149. 

The Motor Carrier Safety 

Improvement Act of 1999 (Pub. L. 106– 

159, 113 Stat. 1748, Dec. 9, 1999) 

established FMCSA as a new operating 

administration within DOT, effective 

January 1, 2000. The motor carrier safety 

responsibilities previously assigned to 

both the ICC and FHWA are now 

assigned to FMCSA. 

Congress expanded, modified, and 

amended FMCSA’s authority in the 

Uniting and Strengthening America by 

Providing Appropriate Tools Required 

to Intercept and Obstruct Terrorism Act 

of 2001 (Pub. L. 107–56, 115 Stat. 272, 

Oct. 26, 2001); the Safe, Accountable, 

Flexible, Efficient Transportation Equity 


khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with RULES