DART Act of 2019

Bill: 116-s-2204
Sponsor: full_name: Sen. Crapo, Mike [R-ID]
Introduced: 2019-07-23
Policy area: Science, Technology, Communications
Subjects: Administrative law and regulatory procedures

Child safety and welfare

Congressional oversight

Consumer affairs

Elementary and secondary education

Emergency communications systems

Federal Communications Commission (FCC)

Fraud offenses and financial crimes

Telephone and wireless communication
Latest action: action_date: 2020-12-21
text: Held at the desk.

Summaries:
action_date: 2019-07-23
action_desc: Introduced in Senate
text: <p><b>Data Analytics Robocall Technology Act of 2019 or the DART Act of 2019</b></p> <p>This bill allows the Federal Communications Commission to conduct a one-year pilot program enabling telephone companies to block automated calls they believe to be unlawful.</p>

action_date: 2020-11-16
action_desc: Reported to Senate
text: <p><b>Data Analytics Robocall Technology Act of 2019 or the DART Act of 2019</b></p> <p>This bill requires the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) to consider establishing a process for maintaining a list of numbers that are ineligible to be blocked by a voice service provider. </p> <p>These may include numbers used (1) for outgoing calls by a facility that is designated to originate or route emergency calls, (2) to originate calls from a government entity, or (3) by a school to provide school-related notifications.</p> <p>The FCC must submit a report containing an analysis of the effectiveness of various categories of call-blocking tools and any legislative recommendations relating to this report.</p>

action_date: 2020-12-19
action_desc: Passed Senate
text: <p><b>Data Analytics Robocall Technology Act of 2019 or the DART Act of 2019</b></p> <p>This bill requires the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) to consider establishing a process for maintaining a list of numbers that are ineligible to be blocked by a voice service provider. </p> <p>These may include numbers used (1) for outgoing calls by a facility that is designated to originate or route emergency calls, (2) to originate calls from a government entity, or (3) by a school to provide school-related notifications.</p> <p>The FCC must submit a report containing an analysis of the effectiveness of various categories of call-blocking tools and any legislative recommendations relating to this report.</p>

tv_txt: II 116th CONGRESS 1st Session S. 2204 IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES July 23, 2019 Mr. Crapo (for himself and Ms. Klobuchar ) introduced the following bill; which was read twice and referred to the Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation A BILL To allow the Federal Communications Commission to carry out a pilot program under which voice service providers could block certain automated calls, and for other purposes.

1. Short title This Act may be cited as the Data Analytics Robocall Technology Act of 2019 or the DART Act of 2019 . 2. Pilot program (a) Definitions In this section— (1) the term Commission means the Federal Communications Commission; (2) the term gateway provider means a voice service provider that, with respect to a consumer— (A) does not have a direct relationship with the consumer; and (B) offers an entry point onto the public switched telephone network with respect to a call made by the consumer; (3) the term originating provider — (A) means a voice service provider that permits a subscriber to originate a call that may be transmitted on the public switched telephone network; and (B) includes a gateway provider; (4) the term public safety answering point has the meaning given the term in section 222(h) of the Communications Act of 1934 ( 47 U.S.C. 222(h) ); and (5) the term voice service means any service that— (A) is interconnected with the public switched telephone network; and (B) furnishes voice communications to an end user using resources from the North American Numbering Plan or any successor to the North American Numbering Plan adopted by the Commission under section 251(e)(1) of the Communications Act of 1934 ( 47 U.S.C. 251(e)(1) ). (b) Pilot program Beginning not later than 18 months after the date of enactment of this Act, the Commission may carry out a 1-year pilot program under which, notwithstanding any other provision of law or regulation— (1) a voice service provider may, except as provided in paragraph (5)— (A) use data analytics and caller identification authentication procedures to identify any call that the voice service provider reasonably believes is highly likely to be unlawful; and (B) block a call identified under subparagraph (A); (2) the Commission may not penalize a voice service provider that, while acting in good faith under paragraph (1), inadvertently blocks a lawful call; (3) the Commission shall establish a process through which— (A) a caller that originates a call that a voice service provider blocks under paragraph (1)(B) may quickly report to the voice service provider that the caller believes that the call should not have been blocked; and (B) a voice service provider that receives a report under subparagraph (A) shall evaluate— (i) whether the call to which the report relates should have been blocked; and (ii) the means by which to address future calls from the number to which the report relates; (4) each voice service provider shall designate a single point of contact to whom a caller may submit a report described in paragraph (3); (5) a voice service provider that blocks a call under paragraph (1)(B) shall maintain a list of numbers that are not eligible to be blocked, including any number used— (A) for outgoing calls by a public safety answering point or a similar facility that is designated to originate or route emergency calls; (B) to originate calls from a government entity, such as a call generated during an emergency; and (C) by a school, or a similar institution, to provide school-related notifications, such as a notification regarding— (i) a weather-related closure; or (ii) the existence of an emergency affecting a school or students attending a school; (6) a voice service provider— (A) may obtain, upon affirmative consent provided by a consumer, a list of numbers from which the consumer is willing to receive calls; (B) shall, with respect to a consumer who provides to the provider a list described in subparagraph (A), block each call made to the consumer from a number that is not on the list; and (C) may not share a list obtained under subparagraph (A) with the Commission or any other voice service provider; and (7) the Commission shall ensure that no consumer incurs any cost relating to the pilot program. (c) Evaluation of pilot program If the Commission establishes the pilot program under subsection (b), after the expiration of the pilot program, the Commission may— (1) make a determination regarding the effectiveness of the pilot program; and (2) if the Commission determines under paragraph (1) that the pilot program was effective, make the pilot program permanent with any adjustments that the Commission determines to be necessary.

tv_txt: II Calendar No. 585 116th CONGRESS 2d Session S. 2204 [Report No. 116–292] IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES July 23, 2019 Mr. Crapo (for himself and Ms. Klobuchar ) introduced the following bill; which was read twice and referred to the Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation November 16, 2020 Reported by Mr. Wicker , with an amendment Strike out all after the enacting clause and insert the part printed in italic A BILL To allow the Federal Communications Commission to carry out a pilot program under which voice service providers could block certain automated calls, and for other purposes.

1. Short title This Act may be cited as the Data Analytics Robocall Technology Act of 2019 or the DART Act of 2019 . 2. Pilot program (a) Definitions In this section— (1) the term Commission means the Federal Communications Commission; (2) the term gateway provider means a voice service provider that, with respect to a consumer— (A) does not have a direct relationship with the consumer; and (B) offers an entry point onto the public switched telephone network with respect to a call made by the consumer; (3) the term originating provider — (A) means a voice service provider that permits a subscriber to originate a call that may be transmitted on the public switched telephone network; and (B) includes a gateway provider; (4) the term public safety answering point has the meaning given the term in section 222(h) of the Communications Act of 1934 ( 47 U.S.C. 222(h) ); and (5) the term voice service means any service that— (A) is interconnected with the public switched telephone network; and (B) furnishes voice communications to an end user using resources from the North American Numbering Plan or any successor to the North American Numbering Plan adopted by the Commission under section 251(e)(1) of the Communications Act of 1934 ( 47 U.S.C. 251(e)(1) ). (b) Pilot program Beginning not later than 18 months after the date of enactment of this Act, the Commission may carry out a 1-year pilot program under which, notwithstanding any other provision of law or regulation— (1) a voice service provider may, except as provided in paragraph (5)— (A) use data analytics and caller identification authentication procedures to identify any call that the voice service provider reasonably believes is highly likely to be unlawful; and (B) block a call identified under subparagraph (A); (2) the Commission may not penalize a voice service provider that, while acting in good faith under paragraph (1), inadvertently blocks a lawful call; (3) the Commission shall establish a process through which— (A) a caller that originates a call that a voice service provider blocks under paragraph (1)(B) may quickly report to the voice service provider that the caller believes that the call should not have been blocked; and (B) a voice service provider that receives a report under subparagraph (A) shall evaluate— (i) whether the call to which the report relates should have been blocked; and (ii) the means by which to address future calls from the number to which the report relates; (4) each voice service provider shall designate a single point of contact to whom a caller may submit a report described in paragraph (3); (5) a voice service provider that blocks a call under paragraph (1)(B) shall maintain a list of numbers that are not eligible to be blocked, including any number used— (A) for outgoing calls by a public safety answering point or a similar facility that is designated to originate or route emergency calls; (B) to originate calls from a government entity, such as a call generated during an emergency; and (C) by a school, or a similar institution, to provide school-related notifications, such as a notification regarding— (i) a weather-related closure; or (ii) the existence of an emergency affecting a school or students attending a school; (6) a voice service provider— (A) may obtain, upon affirmative consent provided by a consumer, a list of numbers from which the consumer is willing to receive calls; (B) shall, with respect to a consumer who provides to the provider a list described in subparagraph (A), block each call made to the consumer from a number that is not on the list; and (C) may not share a list obtained under subparagraph (A) with the Commission or any other voice service provider; and (7) the Commission shall ensure that no consumer incurs any cost relating to the pilot program. (c) Evaluation of pilot program If the Commission establishes the pilot program under subsection (b), after the expiration of the pilot program, the Commission may— (1) make a determination regarding the effectiveness of the pilot program; and (2) if the Commission determines under paragraph (1) that the pilot program was effective, make the pilot program permanent with any adjustments that the Commission determines to be necessary.

1. Short title This Act may be cited as the Data Analytics Robocall Technology Act of 2019 or the DART Act of 2019 . 2. Definitions In this Act— (1) the term Commission means the Federal Communications Commission; (2) the term covered ruling means the Declaratory Ruling and Third Further Notice of Proposed Rulemaking in the matter of Advanced Methods to Target and Eliminate Unlawful Robocalls , adopted by the Commission on June 6, 2019 (FCC 19–51; CG Docket No. 17–59); (3) the term public safety answering point has the meaning given the term in section 222(h) of the Communications Act of 1934 ( 47 U.S.C. 222(h) ); and (4) the term voice service means any service that— (A) is interconnected with the public switched telephone network; and (B) furnishes voice communications to an end user using resources from the North American Numbering Plan or any successor to the North American Numbering Plan adopted by the Commission under section 251(e)(1) of the Communications Act of 1934 ( 47 U.S.C. 251(e)(1) ). 3. Rulemaking Not later than 18 months after the date of enactment of this Act, the Commission shall initiate a rulemaking to consider establishing a process under which the Commission shall maintain a list of numbers that are not eligible to be blocked by a voice service provider, which may include a number used— (1) for outgoing calls by a public safety answering point or a similar facility that is designated to originate or route emergency calls; (2) to originate calls from a government entity, such as a call generated during an emergency; (3) by a school, or a similar institution, to provide school-related notifications, such as a notification regarding— (A) a weather-related closure; or (B) the existence of an emergency affecting a school or students attending a school; and (4) for similar or emergency purposes, as determined appropriate by the Commission. 4. Reports on deployment and implementation of call blocking and caller ID authentication Not later than 180 days after the date on which the Commission receives any report under paragraph 90 of the covered ruling, the Commission shall submit to the Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation of the Senate and the Committee on Energy and Commerce of the House of Representatives— (1) an analysis by the Commission with respect to the effectiveness of various categories of call blocking tools, as evaluated in the report; and (2) any legislative recommendations of the Commission relating to the report. 5. Rule of construction Nothing in this Act may be construed to impede or delay the analysis by the Commission of the most effective means by which to maintain and administer a list of numbers that may not be blocked (referred to in the covered ruling as a Critical Calls List ), as considered in the covered ruling.

November 16, 2020 Reported with an amendment

tv_txt: 116th CONGRESS 2d Session S. 2204 IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES AN ACT To allow the Federal Communications Commission to carry out a pilot program under which voice service providers could block certain automated calls, and for other purposes.

1. Short title This Act may be cited as the Data Analytics Robocall Technology Act of 2019 or the DART Act of 2019 . 2. Definitions In this Act— (1) the term Commission means the Federal Communications Commission; (2) the term covered ruling means the Declaratory Ruling and Third Further Notice of Proposed Rulemaking in the matter of Advanced Methods to Target and Eliminate Unlawful Robocalls , adopted by the Commission on June 6, 2019 (FCC 19–51; CG Docket No. 17–59); (3) the term public safety answering point has the meaning given the term in section 222(h) of the Communications Act of 1934 ( 47 U.S.C. 222(h) ); and (4) the term voice service means any service that— (A) is interconnected with the public switched telephone network; and (B) furnishes voice communications to an end user using resources from the North American Numbering Plan or any successor to the North American Numbering Plan adopted by the Commission under section 251(e)(1) of the Communications Act of 1934 ( 47 U.S.C. 251(e)(1) ). 3. Rulemaking Not later than 18 months after the date of enactment of this Act, the Commission shall initiate a rulemaking to consider establishing a process under which the Commission shall maintain a list of numbers that are not eligible to be blocked by a voice service provider, which may include a number used— (1) for outgoing calls by a public safety answering point or a similar facility that is designated to originate or route emergency calls; (2) to originate calls from a government entity, such as a call generated during an emergency; (3) by a school, or a similar institution, to provide school-related notifications, such as a notification regarding— (A) a weather-related closure; or (B) the existence of an emergency affecting a school or students attending a school; and (4) for similar or emergency purposes, as determined appropriate by the Commission. 4. Reports on deployment and implementation of call blocking and caller ID authentication Not later than 180 days after the date on which the Commission receives any report under paragraph 90 of the covered ruling, the Commission shall submit to the Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation of the Senate and the Committee on Energy and Commerce of the House of Representatives— (1) an analysis by the Commission with respect to the effectiveness of various categories of call blocking tools, as evaluated in the report; and (2) any legislative recommendations of the Commission relating to the report. 5. Rule of construction Nothing in this Act may be construed to impede or delay the analysis by the Commission of the most effective means by which to maintain and administer a list of numbers that may not be blocked (referred to in the covered ruling as a Critical Calls List ), as considered in the covered ruling.

Passed the Senate December 19, 2020. Secretary