By Sherrese Smith, Media Advisor to Chairman Genachowski, and David Goldman, Advisor to Chairman Genachowski on Wireless Issues

 The FCC has worked since its inception in 1934 to help the people with hearing disabilities gain equal access to telecommunications and media. To mark the Commission’s 75^th anniversary, Telecommunications for the Deaf and Hard of Hearing, Inc. (TDI) honored the Commission on Friday with an award recognizing this vital work. When presenting the award, Dr. Roy Miller, the Board President of TDI, as well as other members of TDI, took the opportunity to note the FCC’s contributions towards access to communication for people with hearing, vision, and other disabilities. Chairman Genachowski accepted the award on behalf of the Commission and stressed the Commission’s commitment to these crucial issues and the importance of access to communications for all.

The FCC held a field hearing at Gallaudet University in Washington, D.C. on November 6, 2009 as part of its effort to gather information from experts and consumers for the development of a National Broadband Plan. Among those on the first panel was Academy Award-winning actress Marlee Matlin, who is the spokesperson for the National Association of the Deaf for accessible broadband services and Internet media.

As referenced in my last post, we have a few follow up questions from the October 20^th workshop.  We would very much appreciate your input on these questions no later than November 16^th and sooner if possible.  In some cases, we may have some information in the record about a certain topic, but we would like more information from a broader range of stakeholders.  It is not necessary to repeat things that you've already put in the record (but feel free to cite back to comments you've already filed).

If you think it would be useful to meet with us and discuss, please request an ex parte meeting by clicking here.

Please respond with  your ideas to this blog post, or file your comments using our Electronic Filing Comment System, using either ECFS Express or our standard submission page if you need to attach a file.

*********************

1. There was a lot of discussion at the roundtable about the concept of getting companies, independent software developers, consumers, government, and universities together to share best practices, understand consumer needs, and foster innovation. What are the next steps to establishing an innovation center or focus center program?  Are there some specific ideas on this and more information about models we can follow?

2. There were some general concerns expressed that applying regulation to broadband services and equipment might hamper innovation.  Have the processes mandated under Section 255, including as they relate to equipment and devices developed for VoIP services, hampered innovation? Have the FCC's existing captioning rules or wireless Hearing Aid Compatibility rules hampered innovation?

3. What is the effect of Section 255, HAC, and Section 508 regulations on the telecom and electronic and information technology marketplace?

4. The record contains a few examples of companies voluntarily making devices used for Internet access accessible to people with disabilities - in particular, the Apple I-Phone was mentioned several times at the workshop.  What are some other examples of which we should be aware?  What motivates companies to make their products accessible on a voluntary basis?  Will companies consider accessibility issues in the design and development of their broadband products and devices on a widespread basis if there is no mandate to do so?

5. What can the government do to attract additional capital investment to make products accessible?  What can the government do to incentivize independent software designers to create innovative assistive and adaptive technologies?

6. How is the development and distribution of assistive and adaptive technologies currently funded, including assistive and adaptive technologies used to access the Internet?  What specific recommendations should we make to address concerns expressed in the record about the expense of assistive and adaptive technologies?  Are there specific recommendations regarding how state programs could partner with a federal universal service program?

7. Are there specific recommendations about the best way for the FCC to get more involved in International efforts to harmonize standards relating to accessibility?

How do you sum up over seven hours of rich and thoughtful content from our October 20 workshop in one blog post?  I'll do my best to follow the model of the 22 participants of the afternoon policy roundtable, each of whom managed to state their views of what recommendations we should include in the National Broadband Plan succinctly and passionately -- while at the same timing beating the three-minute buzzer.

In the first panel, Leveraging Federal and State Resources to make Broadband Accessible and Affordable, we heard about the efforts of Department of Commerce/NTIA, Department of Agriculture/RUS, the Department of Education, the Department of Labor, the Government Services Administration, and the State of Missouri (from Danny Weitzner, Gary Boles, Jennifer Sheehy, Richard Horne, Terry Weaver, and Marty Exline, respectively) to support broadband access for people with disabilities.   While each agency is clearly making an important contribution, the daunting task before us is to figure out how we can better coordinate our efforts at the tribal, local, state, federal, and international levels.

In the second panel, we heard consumers discuss very movingly the specific barriers and opportunities that broadband presents to those who have speech, hearing, vision, hearing and vision, mobility, and intellectual disabilities.  A consultant gave a "big picture" analysis of these barriers and opportunities.  The panel did a superb job of clearly articulating the problems that we have to solve.  Thanks to Eric Bridges of the American Council of the Blind; Rosaline Crawford of the National Association of the Deaf; Peggy Hathaway of Spinal Cord Advocates; Rebecca Ladew of Speech Communications Assistance by Telephone; Elizabeth Spiers of the American Association of the Deaf-Blind; Jim Tobias of Inclusive Technologies; and Elizabeth Weintraub of the Council on Quality and Leadership.

"Advancing National Purposes for People with Disabilities" was the theme of the third panel.  Jim Fruchterman of Benetech discussed how Bookshare allows people with vision, learning, and mobility disabilities to have online access to over 50,000 books and periodicals.  Peggy Hathaway of Spinal Cord Advocates discussed how broadband  provides new job and civic participation opportunities for people with mobility disabilities, and Claude Stout of Telecommunications for the Deaf discussed the urgent need for people in the deaf and hard-of-hearing community to be able to contact E-911 services directly using pagers, e-mail, and real-time text and video.  Kate Seelman of the University of Pittsburgh discussed how broadband-enabled telerehabilitation can help people with disabilities better manage their health and employment, and Ishak Kang of DOT UI discussed how the Smart Grid could benefit people with disabilities.

During the lunch break, people had time to check out some technology exhibits.  They included a demonstration of WGBH's Teacher Domain; Bookshare; PLYmedia's online video captioning solution; RIM's blackberry smartphones; and the Wireless RERC's emergency communications project.

The fourth panel was a fascinating exploration of the technological barriers and opportunities relating to broadband accessibility.  Among other things, the panelists addressed E-911 issues; the importance of interoperability and open architecture; the potential to address accessibility challenges through cloud computing; and the challenges related to captioning on the Internet.  We needed a lot more time than 55 minutes to cover these topics (and other topics that we wanted to cover).  Thanks to Greg Elin of United Cerebral Palsy and Life Without Limits; Jim Fruchterman of Benetech; Dale Hatfield of Silicon Flatirons;  John Snapp of Intrado; and Gregg Vanderheiden of the Trace Center at the University of Wisconsin-Madison for their participation.

The contributions of the wide variety of stakeholders who gave us their views on what recommendations we should include in the National Broadband Plan were amazing.  Most consumers and some in industry stated that it was critical to update the accessibility regulatory framework and promote universal design but others warned that too much regulation could hamper innovation.  A wide range of stakeholders thought that subsidizing broadband services and equipment -- particularly expensive assistive technologies used by people with disabilities -- was critical.  Most stakeholders thought that consumer/industry/government fora could play an important role in addressing some complex issues.  Most participants also thought that the government could take an active role in working with industry to promote best practices -- and perhaps foster some kind of innovation center.  Finally, many stated that government itself should be a better model of accessibility and do a better job of enforcing the accessibility rules that are already on the books, including the ADA, Section 255, and Section 508. We very much appreciate the participation of Rob Atkinson of IITF; Ellen Blackler of AT&T; Alan Brightman of Yahoo; Kathy Brown of Verizon; Deborah Buck of the Association of Assistive Technology Act Programs; David Capozzi of the U.S. Access Board; Larry Goldberg of the Media Access Group at WGBH; Patrick Halley of NENA; Dale Hatfield of Silicon Flatirons; Matthew Knopf of PLYmedia; Jane Mago of NAB; Helena Mitchell of the Wireless RERC at Georgia Tech; Randy Pope of the American Association of the Deaf-Blind; Ken Salaets of ITIC; Paul Schroeder of American Foundation of the Blind; Grant Seiffert of TIA; Dane Snowden of CTIA; Claude Stout of TDI; Karen Peltz Strauss of COAT;  Jim Tobias of Inclusive Technologies; Gregg Vanderheiden of the Trace Center at University of Wisconsin-Madison; and Joe Waz on Comcast.

This event could never have happened without the engagement of so many people throughout the Commission.  Moderators included Commissioner Copps; Sherrese Smith and Mary Beth Richards of the Chairman's office; Jennifer Schneider of Commissioner Copps' office; Erik Garr, General Manager of the Broadband Team; Workshop Coordinator and DRO Deputy Chief Cheryl King; Broadband Team members Elise Kohn, John Horrigan, Kristin Kane, Steve Midgley, Jing Vivatrat, and Kerry McDermott; Walter Johnston of OET (subbing for Chief Technologist Stagg Newman); and Jennifer Manner and Ronnie Cho of PSHSB.  Official Government Observers included David Furth of PSHSB; Jane Jackson of WTB; Mark Stone and Cheryl King of CGB; and Terry Weaver of GSA.  Finally, there were numerous people behind the scenes from CGB and DRO, the A-V team, and on the Broadband team policy staff who helped make the event run smoothly.

The input we've received is invaluable.  We do have some follow up questions and will be soliciting further ex parte submissions in a separate blog post in the very near future.  But for now, my three-minute buzzer has gone off!

We are now planning to have an expanded two-hour policy roundtable on policy solutions and recommendations at our October 20 workshop.  We expect 15-20 stakeholders from the disability community, industry, academia, and government to have a high-level discussion of policy recommendations that should be included in the National Broadband Plan.  Among other things, the roundtable will discuss whether additional legislative and regulatory action is needed to address accessibility and affordability challenges; what non-regulatory actions the FCC could or should take to promote accessibility to broadband by people with disabilities; and what actions other federal agencies, state, local and tribal governments, industry and industry consortia and other national and international industry/consumer/government consortia, the disability community, consumer groups, and other non-profits should take to promote broadband accessibility for people with disabilities.

Please give us your feedback on workshop planning issues (e.g., how to structure this roundtable, suggested questions and speakers, and helpful background reading material) and policy issues.

• What additional legislative and regulatory action is needed to address accessibility and affordability challenges?

• Should Congress require that the same kinds of accessibility regulations that have applied to telecommunications and media in the past be applied to broadband?  How successful have these regulations been?  Are there any differences between telecommunications/media accessibility and broadband accessibility which may affect whether regulation is effective and efficient?

• To what extent should captioning requirements be applied to Internet content, including user-generated content?

• What reforms should be made to the Interstate TRS Fund, particularly the funding of VRS?  Should the Commission consider funding VRS equipment through a separate mechanism?

• Is there a mechanism in which the federal government could partner with state equipment distribution programs to ensure that there was a comprehensive broadband assistive technologies program in each state?  Could universal service funds be used to supplement state funds for broadband assistive technologies?  Under what circumstances should people with disabilities be eligible for universal service funds?

• What additional funds, including research funds, should Congress appropriate to promote access to broadband for people with disabilities?

• What actions are necessary to promote open standards and interoperability between broadband technologies and assistive technologies?

• What is the best mechanism to ensure that meaningful data about broadband usage by people with disabilities is collected and analyzed?

• What additional action should other agencies take relating to the implementation and enforcement of current laws? Should DOJ apply the provisions of the ADA to companies selling products on the Internet?  Should the Department of Education do more to apply the protections of the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act to services that are provided over the Internet?  Should the accessibility requirements that are applicable to the procurement of electronic and information technology by federal agencies be more broadly required?

• What legal and regulatory actions are needed to implement an "overarching accessibility principle"?  How would an "Accessibility Impact Statement" be effectuated?

• What non-regulatory actions should the FCC take to promote the accessibility and affordability of broadband for people with disabilities?  What kinds of outreach activities should the Commission engage in? Are there some broadband accessibility issues that may be better addressed in an interagency forum?  When might it be appropriate for the Commission to facilitate consumer-industry agreements or participate in consumer-industry standards forums?  Should the Commission make more information available to the public about the complaints it receives related to broadband accessibility?

• What non-regulatory actions are needed by other federal, state, local, and tribal agencies to promote accessibility to broadband by people with disabilities?  Please provide more information about roles industry and industry consortia and other national and international industry/consumer/government consortia and standards setting groups can play and how effective these efforts are. What role can the disability community, consumer groups, and other non-profits play to promote and ensure accessibility?

• What other information, including information responsive to the more specific questions in the Public Notice do you think would help us better understand potential policy recommendations related to providing accessible and affordable broadband to people with disabilities?

Please file your comments using our Electronic Filing Comment System, using either ECFS Express or our standard submission page if you need to attach a file.

We have tentatively planned for a panel at our October 20 workshop to discuss funding and other resources at the federal, state, local, and tribal level that promote or could promote broadband accessibility and affordability for people with disabilities.

Please give us your feedback on workshop planning issues (e.g., how to structure this panel, suggested questions and speakers, and helpful background reading material) and policy issues.

• What federal resources are available or could be available to fund broadband access and equipment for people with disabilities?

• What are the potential sources for federal research funding that could promote broadband accessibility and affordability?

• What resources are available to help better coordinate federal data collection relating to broadband usage by people with disabilities?

• What lessons can we learn from programs that currently serve to promote broadband accessibility and affordability for people with disabilities?

• What state, local and tribal resources are available to fund broadband access for people with disabilities?

• What state equipment distribution programs provide equipment that can be used by people with disabilities to access broadband? Are there model programs that could be replicated elsewhere?

• Are there potential state, local, and tribal resources that promote research or provide other support to promote broadband accessibility?

• What other information, including information responsive to the more specific questions in the Public Notice do you think would help us better understand the federal, state, local, and tribal resources available to make broadband accessible and affordable to people with disabilities?

Please file your comments using our Electronic Filing Comment System, using either ECFS Express or our standard submission page if you need to attach a file.

We have tentatively planned for a panel at our October 20 workshop to discuss the potential for broadband to further health care, education, public safety and homeland security, job creation/worker training, civic participation/community development for people with disabilities.

Please give us your feedback on workshop planning issues (e.g., how to structure this panel, suggested questions and speakers, and helpful background reading material) and policy issues.

• Health Care. Please comment and elaborate on the suggestion of one workshop participant that the "National Broadband Plan include a direction that the Health IT standards and funding be highly cognizant of the needs of people with disabilities."  Are there certain health care applications that are particularly beneficial for people with disabilities?  What policies are needed to spur the development of these applications?

• Education. Are there certain education applications that are particularly helpful to people with disabilities?  Does Bookshare, the world's largest accessible digital library of scanned material for people with vision and reading disabilities, provide a useful model for those seeking to use broadband to further educational opportunity for people with disabilities? What policies are needed to develop and further the distribution and use of accessible educational media, accessible distance learning applications, and accessible school-home integration programs?

• Public Safety and Homeland Security.  Are there certain public safety and homeland security applications that are particularly helpful to people with disabilities?  What policies are needed to allow users to send and receive public safety and homeland security messages in voice, real-time text, and video for sign language? What interfaces need to be available for those with cognitive disabilities?  What policies do we need to adopt to ensure that 9-1-1 services, including location capabilities, are accessible to people using wireless broadband services?

• Job creation/worker training.  Are there certain job creation/worker training applications that are particularly helpful to people with disabilities?  We seek comment on the potential of broadband to further opportunities in teleworking, job creation, and worker training for people with disabilities.

• Civic Participation/community development. Are there certain civic participation/community development applications that are particularly helpful to people with disabilities? What actions are needed to assure the accessibility of . . . [civic participation] platforms and applications?  We seek comment on the potential of broadband to further opportunities in civic participation and community development for people with disabilities.

• What other information, including information responsive to the more specific questions in the Public Notice do you think would help us better understand the potential for broadband to further these or other national purposes for people with disabilities?

Please file your comments using our Electronic Filing Comment System, using either ECFS Express or our standard submission page if you need to attach a file.

We have tentatively planned for a panel at our October 20 workshop on providing access to people with disabilities to discuss technological barriers, solutions, and costs as they relate to broadband networks, services, equipment, software, content, and tech support.

Please give us your feedback on workshop planning issues (e.g., how to structure this panel, suggested questions and speakers, and helpful background reading material) and policy issues.

• As a general matter, what technical issues do we need to consider as we formulate policy recommendations "to stay ahead of technology?"

• How would a "functionally inclusive infrastructure" which would build accessibility features directly into the broadband infrastructure be built?  How much would it cost? Should the National Broadband Plan include specific policy recommendations relating to the "functionally inclusive infrastructure?"

• What are the technical issues that we need to consider as we formulate policies related to "improve access to 9-1-1 (including location capabilities) for those communicating with non-traditional text, video, and instant messaging communications services?

• On what technical issues relating to equipment, software, content and tech support affecting the accessibility of broadband should we focus?

• What are the interoperability challenges that manufacturers face and what steps need to be taken to address these challenges?  What policies would promote "openness" and ensure that assistive technology (AT) vendors are not locked out of closed systems?

• What are the technical challenges related to ensuring that AT equipment is compatible with broadband equipment and software - and that sufficient tech support is available to help consumers navigate the interaction between these devices?

• How much accessibility should be incorporated in mass market equipment through universal design principles and how much accessibility should be gained through assistive technologies?

• What are the technical issues related to making broadband media accessible and what are some of the innovations that will be necessary to make user-generated content accessible?

• What other information that you think would help us better understand the technological barriers and solutions, including information responsive to the more specific questions in our recent Public Notice?.

Please file your comments using our Electronic Filing Comment System, using either ECFS Express or our standard submission page if you need to attach a file.

We have tentatively planned for a panel at our October 20 workshop to discuss barriers to broadband accessibility and affordability for (i) people with hearing disabilities; (ii) people who are blind and have vision disabilities; (iii) people with speech disabilities; (iv) people who are deaf-blind; (v) people with mobility disabilities; and (vi) people with intellectual disabilities and social communication disabilities, including autism.

Please give us your feedback on workshop planning issues (e.g., how to structure this panel, suggested questions and speakers, and helpful background reading material) and policy issues.  For each disability, we are interested in learning

• the number of people who use broadband;

• the biggest accessibility barriers;

• whether affordability is a major concern;

• whether subsidizing the cost of specialized equipment would increase broadband use, and, if so, by how much;

• whether subsidizing the cost of broadband service by low-income consumers in the community would increase broadband use, and, if so, by how much;

• whether the marketplace is more or less responsive to accessibility concerns than it was in the past;

• the percentage of mass market consumer broadband equipment and devices that have the needed accessibility features;

• what broadband applications are potentially the most beneficial;

• whether more outreach will help spur broadband use, and, if so, whether there are effective mechanisms or networks by which to do so; and

• any other information that you think would help us better understand the accessibility and affordability barriers faced by people with disabilities, including information responsive to the more specific questions in the PN.

Please file your comments using our Electronic Filing Comment System, using either ECFS Express or our standard submission page if you need to attach a file.

Today, we are launching a new category on Blogband called "disabilities access."  In this category, we will start with five posts tracking the five panels that we have tentatively proposed for our October 20^th follow-up workshop on disabilities access.  The first five posts solicit information relating to workshop planning and policy issues on the following topics:

• Accessibility and Affordability Barriers Faced by People with Disabilities

• Technological Barriers and Solutions

• Furthering National Purposes and People with Disabilities

• Federal, State, and Local Resources to Make Broadband Accessible and Affordable to People with Disabilities

• Policy Solutions and Recommendations

This new process has tremendous potential to shape our work on the national broadband plan.  It will allow many more people to have input on the structure and substance of our upcoming workshop.  It will also make possible in-depth, collaborative discussions on complex topics - of which there are many.  In sum, we hope to facilitate an iterative process in which diverse parties can build from and react to the ideas of others, in a productive and thoughtful manner.  And, of course, we welcome your ideas about how we can make this process more accessible.