IPCS Providers Criticize Proposed Reductions in Inmate Calling Rate Caps
Providers of incarcerated people's communications services criticized a draft FCC order proposing a reduction in the cap on rates providers may charge for audio or video communications. Most urged the commission to reconsider barring providers from recovering safety and security costs incurred for providing IPCS. Advocates welcomed the move and urged that the FCC continue examining other ways to increase access to communications services for incarcerated people. Commissioners will consider the item during their open meeting Thursday (see 2406270068). Comments were posted through Monday.
Sign up for a free preview to unlock the rest of this article
Timely, relevant coverage of court proceedings and agency rulings involving tariffs, classification, valuation, origin and antidumping and countervailing duties. Each day, Trade Law Daily subscribers receive a daily headline email, in-depth PDF edition and access to all relevant documents via our trade law source document library and website.
PayTel raised several concerns about the draft order. The IPCS provider said in a letter in docket 23-62 that while it welcomed basing rate caps on an average daily population-based structure, the draft will "threaten to derail the commission's efforts to achieve lasting regulatory reform in the IPCS industry." PayTel warned that the proposed rate caps decrease "actively shrinks the IPCS market by pricing out one-third of the providers," many of which serve smaller facilities.
"This draft order, if adopted, will create a serious problem for our nation’s jails and the incarcerated persons therein," PayTel said. It warned that the "improper exclusion of safety and security costs from rates is inexplicable, not legally defensible, and contrary to the public interest in deterring crime, theft, and abuse." IPCS is "a specialized communications service," the company said, adding that a "viable solution is achievable" that would allow providers to recover safety and security costs. Securus told an aide to Commissioner Brendan Carr that the proposed rate reduction "would leave a substantial number of providers unable to recover their reasonably incurred costs."
NCIC Communications noted there are "many different loopholes and lack of enforcement of existing IPCS rules" that should be addressed before adopting the draft order. "By NCIC’s calculations, if the FCC enforced its existing rules, the cost of IPCS would be reduced by as much as 90%, obviating the need to adopt new IPCS rate caps," the company said in separate meetings with aides to all commissioners. It also asked the FCC to reconsider its decision to exclude an inflation factor from the rate caps. The National Sheriffs' Association expressed "grave concerns" about the draft order. The proposed rate reduction is "in direct contravention of Congress' intention" and will "drive increases in incarcerated persons' calling," NSA said in separate meetings with Commissioners Geoffrey Starks, Nathan Simington, Carr and Chairwoman Jessica Rosenworcel.
"Without adequate funding, inmates may lose access to critical resources that support their rehabilitation and transition back into the community," said the American Jail Association. The funding "supports the technology infrastructure necessary for inmate protection, intelligence gathering and sharing, and victim protection from harassing communication from inmates," AJA said, adding that taxpayers will "inevitably bear the burden through increased taxes or an unnecessary reallocation of general funds."
Advocacy groups told the FCC its proposed rate caps should be even lower for voice and video communications. The Direct Action for Rights and Equality, Criminal Justice Reform Clinic at Lewis & Clark Law School, Correctional Association of New York and Pennsylvania Prison Society in a joint filing also suggested a "consumer disclosure label" similar to the commission's consumer broadband labels, so individuals can "monitor their own costs and ensure they are not paying illegally high costs." These groups opposed including the cost of communication security services in the rates.
The draft order "represents [a] high-water mark in agency decision-making," the United Church of Christ Media Justice Ministry, Worth Rises, HEARD and the National Consumer Law Center said in separate meetings with aides to the commissioners. They urged the FCC not to increase "the rate cap for [American Sign Language] point-to-point calls over the audio rate cap originally adopted."
The Wright Petitioners also met with aides to all commissioners, saying the proposed treatment of safety and security costs, site commissions and state and local preemption are "supported by the record" and "well justified." Eliminating site commissions "is long overdue and necessary to bring competition to this failed market," the group said. The Georgia Justice Project also welcomed the draft order, telling the FCC in a letter that "ongoing communication with loved ones and maintaining social ties is critical to successful reentry after any time incarcerated."