Table of Contents
Executive summary
I. Introduction
II. Commission Process
III. Recommendations and Summary of Key Findings
Appendices
A Resolve 1997, chapter 72
B List of Commission Members
C Meeting summaries and public hearing testimony summary
D Assistive equipment loan program
E Additional informatoin on other states’ assistive equipment loan programs
F Compliance requirements for telecommunications equipment
1. The current use and distribution of teletypewriters and other telecommunications equipment for persons with disabilities in the State, including the current loaner program;
2. The use and distribution of teletypewriters and other telecommunications equipment for persons with disabilities in other states, including, but not limited to, the financing of teletypewriters and other telecommunications equipment and the type of equipment currently being used;
3. The compliance requirements of the federal Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990 regarding the use of teletypewriters and other telecommunications equipment;
4. How to purchase specialized customer premise equipment, or SCPE, such as artificial larynges, signaling devices, amplified handsets, large number dial overlays, direct telephone dialing, telebraille, teletypewriters or telecommunications equipment for persons with disabilities, and other devices that provide access to telephone networks for people with hearing, speech, vision or mobility impairments;
5. Establishing a system of administration and record keeping as well as distribution, repair and replacement of SCPE units for certified subscribers; and
6. Establishing a funding mechanism for expansion of the program that will include use of additional equipment.
The Commission was convened on December 5, 1997 and met four times. The Commission makes the following recommendations:
1. The Commission recommends that the statutory provisions of the Telecommunications Equipment Fund and the
Telecommunications Equipment Plan be amended to include the purchase and distribution of adaptive customer premise
equipment appropriate to meet the telecommunications needs of hearing individuals with disabilities, as well as
those persons who are deaf, hard-of-hearing or speech-impaired.
2. The Commission recommends that the Division of Deafness, in consultation with TTY advisory council established
in the Department of Labor’s Bureau of Rehabilitation Services and other advisory councils representing individuals
with disabilities, should develop a plan that provides for the expenditure of money from the Telecommunications
Equipment Fund to ensure that specific equipment will be readily achievable solutions to individual barriers to
telecommunications as defined by the accessibility guidelines to be established by the federal Access Board in
March 1998.
3. The Commission recommends that representatives from the Telecommunications Relay Services Advisory Council,
the TTY advisory council established in the Department of Labor’s Bureau of Rehabilitation Services, other advisory
councils representing the interests of persons with disabilities, and the State’s 24 telephone companies work together
to develop a comprehensive plan that, when implemented, will provide deaf, hard-of-hearing and hearing-impaired
persons and individuals with disabilities with direct access to TTY and SCPE throughout the state; and that the
comprehensive plan shall be presented to the 119th Legislature for approval by January 1, 1999.
4. The Commission recommends a three-tiered approach to funding the purchase and distribution of TTY and specialized
customer premise equipment (SCPE) as determined by the expanded Telecommunications Equipment Plan:
Tier 1: Fiscal Year 1998-99. The Commission recommends that the Legislature appropriate an additional $85,000
in fiscal year 1998-99 to the Telecommunications Equipment Fund to provide greater accessibility for deaf, hard-of-hearing
or speech-impaired persons and to expand the program to include the purchase and distribution of adaptive equipment
for individuals with disabilities.
Tier 2: Fiscal Year 1999-2000. The Commission recommends that if legislation authorizing a State Universal
Service Fund (USF) is not enacted in time for fiscal year 1999-2000, the annual budget for the Telecommunications
Equipment Plan should be $140,000; and that legislation should be presented to the 119th Legislature authorizing
this amount to be allocated from a required annual assessment based on the gross revenues of the interexchange
carriers, cellular and personal communications services (PCS) carriers, and local exchange carriers that provide
telephone service in the State.
Tier 3: Fiscal Year 2000-01. The Commission recommends that should legislation authorizing a State USF be
enacted, the Public Utilities Commission shall adopt rules that require providers of interstate and intrastate
telecommunications services to contribute to the State USF to support access to specialized customer premise equipment
under the provisions of the Telecommunications Equipment Plan; and that if the funding mechanism recommended under
Tier 2 is in effect at the time that a State USF is created, it will be merged with the State USF, otherwise the
this funding mechanism must be added to the other provisions of the State USF.
5. The Commission recommends that the Department of Education should make every reasonable effort to ensure
that Maine school children have access to TTY and other augmentative communication devices in schools. The department
shall report their findings and disclose any ongoing efforts to address conditions that limit access to telecommunications
for public school students to Joint Standing Committee on Labor no later that January 1, 1999.
6. The Commission recommends that the Commission to Study the Funding and Distribution of Teletypewriters and Other
Telecommunications Equipment for People with Disabilities reconvene and continue its work following the adjournment
of the Second Regular Session of the 118th Legislature.
I. INTRODUCTION
Background
Title IV of the federal Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990 (ADA), which amended the Telecommunications Act
of 1934, authorized the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) to adopt regulations that would ensure that interstate
and intrastate relay services are available to hearing-impaired and speech-impaired individuals in the Unites States.
By July 1993, each common carrier providing telephone voice transmission services was required to provide telecommunications
relay services, in compliance with the federal statute and the FCC regulations.
Following the passage of the ADA, legislation was enacted in Maine to establish a telecommunications equipment
fund, a telecommunications equipment plan, and a statewide telecommunications relay system that would place the
State in compliance with the title IV requirements of ADA. While Maine has established a statewide telecommunications
relay system, members of the deaf community have reported concerns related to inadequate access to teletypewriters
and other telecommunications devices for the deaf (TTY). Advocates for the deaf community have also noted that
unmet needs exist across the State due to insufficient funding to fully implement the State’s telecommunications
equipment plan; and that gaps in services, including inconsistent distribution, repair and replacement of TTY equipment,
have left too many among Maine’s deaf, hard-of-hearing, and speech-impaired populations with inconsistent access
to telecommunications services.
Similar concerns were raised by individuals with disabilities who required special peripheral devices in order
to access and take advantage of the telecommunications network. Since title IV of the ADA did not specifically
address disabilities other than hearing and speech impairments, individuals with disabilities such as vision or
mobility impairment did not have the same level of access to the voice-level telephone service. Beginning with
California and Minnesota many years ago, state programs have now emerged in Massachusetts, New York, and many other
states and are typically funded through the same enabling legislation that established the state’s dual-party relay
services. These state programs provide a level playing field for individuals with disabilities who would otherwise
not be able to gain access to telecommunications service.
The federal Telecommunications Act of 1996, as amended, will require manufacturers of telecommunications and customer
premises equipment to ensure that equipment is designed, developed and fabricated to be accessible to and usable
by individuals with disabilities, if readily achievable. The “readily achievable” standard is defined by federal
law to mean “easily accomplishable and able to be carried out without much difficulty or expense” (47 U.S.C. 255(e),
Sec. 1193.3). Similarly, telecommunications service providers must ensure that services are accessible and readily
usable by individuals with disabilities, if readily achievable. Accessibility guidelines for telecommunications
and customer premises equipment were expected from the Architectural and Transportation Barriers Compliance Board
(or Access Board) in January 1998.
Enabling Legislation
The Commission to Study the Funding and Distribution of Teletypewriters and Other Telecommunications Equipment
for People with Disabilities was established in the First Special Session of the 118th Legislature by Resolve 1997,
chapter 72. A copy of the Resolve is attached as Appendix A.
The Commission consisted of twelve members: one appointed by the President of the Senate; one appointed by the
Speaker of the House; one appointed jointly by the President and Speaker; one representative of the Public Advocate;
one representative of the Public Protection Division of the Attorney General’s Office; one representative of a
deaf advocacy organization appointed by the Governor; one representative of a disability advocacy organization
appointed by the Governor; three representatives of telephone companies appointed by the Governor; and three members
of the general public who currently use or plan to use teletypewriters (TTY) or special telecommunications equipment
for persons with disabilities appointed by the Governor. The attorney general’s office did not appoint a representative
from the public protection division. The Commission’s enabling legislation required a chair to be selected from
among its members. Members selected Senator Sharon Treat as the chair. A list of Commission members is included
in Appendix B.
Charge to the Commission
The charge to the Commission was specified in the enabling legislation. The Commission was charged with studying
the following:
1. The current use and distribution of teletypewriters and other telecommunications equipment for persons with
disabilities in the State, including the current loaner program;
2. The use and distribution of teletypewriters and other telecommunications equipment for persons with disabilities
in other states, including, but not limited to, the financing of teletypewriters and other telecommunications equipment
and the type of equipment currently being used;
3. The compliance requirements of the federal Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990 regarding the use of teletypewriters
and other telecommunications equipment;
4. How to purchase specialized customer premise equipment or SCPE, such as artificial larynges, signaling devices,
amplified handsets, large number dial overlays, direct telephone dialing, telebraille, teletypewriters or telecommunications
equipment for persons with disabilities, and other devices that provide access to telephone networks for people
with hearing, speech, vision or mobility impairments;
5. Establishing a system of administration and record keeping as well as distribution, repair and replacement of
SCPE units for certified subscribers; and
6. Establishing a funding mechanism for expansion of the program that will include use of additional equipment.
II. COMMISSION PROCESS
Scope and Focus of Commission Meetings
Although the legislation which created the Commission had an effective date of September 19, 1997, due to a delay
in the appointment process, the Commission was not convened until December 5, 1997. In addition to this first meeting,
the Commission held three other meetings. These meetings occurred on December 16, 1997, January 6, 1998, and
February 4, 1998.
The first two Commission meetings focused on discussing the current use and distribution of telecommunications
equipment in Maine, including the current loaner program, as well as the use, distribution, and financing of telecommunications
equipment in other states. Invited guests included the State Coordinator of Deaf Services, the Maine Association
of the Deaf, and the former Director of Division of Deafness in the Department of Labor. A second panel discussion
was held at the Commission’s third meeting and its focus was on outreach, access, and funding mechanisms for the
use and distribution of telecommunications equipment. Invited guests included representatives from the Public Utilities
Commission, the Public Advocate’s office, the Department of Education, the Governor Baxter School for the Deaf
(GBSD), and the Maine Consumer Information Technology Exchange (CITE).
The Commission also held a public hearing at its third meeting and heard testimony from the Maine CITE program,
Alpha One, the Office of Deaf Services in the Department of Mental Health, Mental Retardation, and Substance Abuse
Services, the Maine Advocacy Services, the University of Maine System / GBSD Project Impact, and from members of
the public. At its final meeting, the Commission reviewed the information presented and formulated findings and
recommendations. Meeting summaries and the public hearing testimony summary are included in Appendix C.
Resolve 1997, chapter 85 established January 1, 1998 as the reporting date of the Commission to the Second Regular
Session of the 118th Legislature. Due to the abbreviated time period in which the Commission had to complete its
work, (December 5, 1997-
January 1, 1998), the Commission requested an extension of the reporting deadline to
February 6, 1998. An extension was approved by the Legislative Council.
III. RECOMMENDATIONS AND SUMMARY OF KEY FINDINGS
The Commission to Study the Funding and Distribution of Teletypewriters and Other Telecommunications Equipment
for People with Disabilities unanimously make the following recommendations and present them for the immediate
consideration of the Legislature.
1. The Commission recommends that the statutory provisions of the Telecommunications Equipment Fund and the
Telecommunications Equipment Plan be amended to include the purchase and distribution of adaptive customer premise
equipment appropriate to meet the telecommunications needs of hearing individuals with disabilities, as well as
those persons who are deaf, hard-of-hearing or speech-impaired.
Maine’s current telecommunications equipment distribution program is far smaller in scope than it should be. Approximately
300-350 certified users are currently being served by the State’s TTY loaner program (as established by Title 26,
section 1419-A, subsections 2 and 3). While it is difficult to determine the level of “unmet need” in the current
loaner program. Over 70% of the deaf or hard-of-hearing population in Maine require the assistance of telecommunications
equipment.
Still, there is a continuing need for both TTY and other specialized telecommunication equipment to meet the needs
of persons with hearing- or speech-impairments and individuals with disabilities in the State. According to a statewide
survey of Maine households conducted by the Bureau of Economic Research at Rutgers University, 13.5% of Maine’s
population have a disability that affects their ability to function in one or more life activities. For these individuals,
access to telecommunications is a safety concern, as well as a basic necessity for full participation in the economic,
social and civic spheres of contemporary life. Expert testimony indicated that people with special needs in other
states have greater access to voice-level telecommunication services than do disabled individuals in Maine. Providing
adequate resources for the purchase and distribution of special telecommunications equipment is a fundamental need
for these persons.
2. The Commission recommends that the Division of Deafness, in consultation with TTY advisory council established
in the Department of Labor’s Bureau of Rehabilitation Services and other advisory councils representing individuals
with disabilities, should develop a plan that provides for the expenditure of money from the Telecommunications
Equipment Fund to ensure that specific equipment will be readily achievable solutions to individual barriers to
telecommunications as defined by the accessibility guidelines to be established by the federal Access Board in
March 1998.
The Commission also reviewed other states programs to distribute telecommunications equipment as possible models
for Maine. Approximately 35 states have some type of assistive equipment loan programs that provides special telephone
equipment free to persons with hearing, speech, or other disabilities (see Appendix D). These programs vary in
their source of funding, range of equipment provided, and eligibility criteria for participation.
Assistive equipment provided by the various states include:
· For partial hearing loss: amplified headsets, loud ringers
· For the deaf: TTYs, light signalers
· For the blind: Braille TTYs
· For the mobility-disabled: hands-free telephones
A majority of these state programs are predominately funded by an excise tax or surcharge on telephone lines.
These surcharges are typically assessed at a monthly rate of between five cents and 50 cents per access line, including
cellular phones. For example, Massachusetts has an agreement with Bell Atlantic (NYNEX) to establish a directory
assistance surcharge for residential customers to subsidize TTY programs. Funding for these programs in several
other states comes from general fund revenues, as well as grants and donations. Some states only offer equipment
to facilitate telephone access by persons with hearing and speech impairments, while others, (including California),
extend the service to a broad range of people, based on the existence of a functional disability that limits telephone
use.
Other states establish a list of assistive devices that are available for distribution, while a few base their
distribution methods on predefined eligibility criteria, including physician certification of the disability, minimum
age requirements, financial need, and other financial eligibility criteria (including sliding fee scales based
on income or eligibility cutoffs when certain income levels are exceeded). State programs also operate under different
administrative structures, ranging from independent boards to state public utility commissions. In some states,
like California, telephone companies administer the assistive equipment program directly. Additional information
on other states’ assistive equipment loan programs is included in Appendix E.
Specific equipment will be readily achievable solutions to individual barriers to communications and telecommunications
as defined by the final accessibility guidelines established by the federal Architectural and Transportation Barriers
Compliance Board (pursuant to section 255 of the federal Telecommunications Act of 1996).
3. The Commission recommends that representatives from the Telecommunications Relay Services Advisory Council,
the TTY advisory council established in the Department of Labor’s Bureau of Rehabilitation Services, other advisory
councils representing the interests of persons with disabilities, and the State’s 24 telephone companies work together
to develop a comprehensive plan that, when implemented, will provide deaf, hard-of-hearing or hearing-impaired
persons and individuals with disabilities with direct access to TTY and SCPE throughout the state; and that the
comprehensive plan shall be presented to the 119th Legislature for approval by January 1, 1999.
Maine’s current telecommunications equipment distribution program is less effective in practice than it should
be. The average time it takes to apply for and receive a TTY in Maine is three weeks to a month. Another existing
problem with access to telecommunications equipment is the lack of TTY repair centers in the state. Because there
are no repair centers in Maine, inoperable equipment is sent to Massachusetts for repair. There is usually a one
month turn around time for broken equipment.
With the downsizing of State government and the shifting of the Division of Deafness across state agencies, the
staffing and resources necessary to enhance public awareness and outreach programs has taken a back seat to maintaining
access to equipment. In addition, outreach efforts rely on regional vocational rehabilitation counselors for the
deaf in five regions of the State, to ties with the Governor Baxter School for the Deaf, and on the coordination
of volunteer service providers across the State. The Commission heard testimony that there is a void in providing
awareness and outreach programs in rural regions of state where public schools and human service organizations
may be reluctant to respond to outreach efforts due to privacy concerns and insufficient resources.
To combat these service gaps, the Commission suggests that integrated intake techniques, distribution methods and
training programs available in other states, (often through telecommunications providers), may provide useful models
for Maine to consider. The Commission members also believe that extending ongoing outreach efforts of the TTY relay
service may serve to enhance awareness of TTY cost-sharing and distribution programs. Commission members further
suggested that an integral part of providing more effective accessibility for TTY phone customers would be to have
TTY information listed in the phone book and connected via use of an extensive data base that can identify TTY
clients and an 800 number that also serves to enhance awareness of and access to telecommunications services.
The Telecommunications Relay Services Advisory Council, the Division of Deafness within the Department of Labor’s
Bureau of Rehabilitation and the State’s 24 phone companies, represented by the Telephone Association of Maine,
shall jointly develop a systematic network of services that will provide individuals with disabilities direct access
to TTY and other customer premise equipment. The plan should include a request-for-proposal (RFP) that must include
bid specifications and performance standards for the following contract provisions: public awareness and outreach
programs, customer intake and connection procedures, statewide distribution and storage capacity, customer access
to network services on a 24-hours per day, seven days per week basis, including equipment installation and training,
and the maintenance and repair of TTY and other customer premise equipment.
The Commission briefly discussed the need to grant oversight authority to an advisory body to ensure that this
comprehensive plan is implemented. There was general consensus among Commission members that the Telecommunications
Relay Services Advisory Council might be the appropriate entity to oversee the implementation of this comprehensive
plan.
4. The Commission recommends a three-tiered approach to funding the purchase and distribution of TTY and specialized
customer premise equipment (SCPE) as determined by the expanded Telecommunications Equipment Plan and in anticipation
that the State will enact legislation enabling the establishment of a State Universal Service Fund (USF):
The federal Telecommunications Act of 1996 continued to support the public policy principle of “universal service”
in providing telecommunications services. The Act also changed the pricing methods and standards for providing
services which will result in requiring that telecommunications subsidies are explicitly listed in telecommunications
rates. To accomplish this “service-based” policy, the federal government is considering legislation that would
establish a federal Universal Service Fund (USF). As regulations are promulgated to implement this legislation,
details surrounding federal funding and standards for State USF will become more apparent for state policymakers.
To establish adequate funding for the purchase of TTY and specialized customer telecommunications equipment in
fiscal year 1998-99, the Commission submits the following funding recommend for immediate consideration by the
Legislature:
Tier 1: Fiscal Year 1998-99. The Commission recommends that the Legislature appropriate an additional $85,000
in fiscal year 1998-99 to the Telecommunications Equipment Fund to provide greater accessibility for deaf, hard-of-hearing
or speech-impaired persons and to expand the program to include the purchase and distribution of adaptive equipment
for individuals with disabilities.
To implement the comprehensive plan addressed above to expand access to specialized telecommunications equipment,
and in anticipation of the enactment of State USF legislation in either fiscal year 1999-2000 or fiscal year 2000-01,
the Commission submits the following funding recommends for immediate consideration by the Legislature and the
Public Utilities Commission:
Tier 2: Fiscal Year 1999-2000. The Commission recommends that if legislation authorizing a State USF is
not enacted in time for fiscal year 1999-2000, the annual budget for the Telecommunications Equipment Plan should
be $140,000; and that legislation should be presented to the 119th Legislature authorizing this amount to be allocated
from a required annual assessment based on the gross revenues of the interexchange carriers, cellular and personal
communications services (PCS) carriers, and local exchange carriers that provide telephone service in the State.
The consensus of panelists reviewing funding mechanisms with the Commission indicated that the surcharge to these
telecommunications carriers to raise such an amount would be infinitesimal.
Tier 3: Fiscal Year 2000-01. The Commission recommends that should legislation authorizing a State USF be
enacted, the Public Utilities Commission shall adopt rules that require providers of interstate and intrastate
telecommunications services to contribute to the State USF to support access to specialized customer premise equipment
under the provisions of the Telecommunications Equipment Plan; and that if the funding mechanism recommended under
Tier 2 is in effect at the time that a State USF is created, it will be merged with the State USF, otherwise the
this funding mechanism must be added to the other provisions of the State USF.
5. The Commission recommends that the Department of Education should make every reasonable effort to ensure
that Maine school children have access to TTY and other augmentative communication devices in schools. The department
shall report their findings and disclose any ongoing efforts to address conditions that limit access to telecommunications
for public school students to Joint Standing Committee on Labor no later that January 1, 1999.
Under the ADA, the Department of Education has the responsibility for providing TTY and other specialized equipment
to school children. Testimony received by the Commission indicated that Maine students who are deaf or hard-of-hearing
may not have adequate access to TTY and other augmentative communication devices. There are approximately 350 deaf
children in Maine public schools, and another 88 deaf students at the Governor Baxter School for the Deaf. While
department representatives reported that some schools have TTY equipment “co-located” in the district’s superintendent’s
office, the extent to which the public school are in compliance with the ADA was not determined. Individuals familiar
with the Governor Baxter School for the Deaf (GBSD) also reported that the availability of equipment at the GBSD
was inadequate for students in residence, and that public awareness and outreach efforts to some of Maine’s rural
schools may be insufficient.
Given that the Department of Education is unable to determine the number of TTYs or other adaptive equipment in
Maine public schools; and since outreach and training available to public school staff on how to use this equipment
appears to be inadequate, the Commission recommends that the department, in consultation with the GBSD, the Maine
Consumer Information Technology Exchange and the Maine Center on Deafness, should annually conduct a survey of
the public schools and report their findings to the Joint Standing Committee on Labor on the following items: (1)
the number of deaf and hard-of-hearing students and their needs for telecommunications equipment, (2) the availability
of TTY and other augmentative communication devices, (3) the number of requests made for TTY and other augmentative
communication devices, and (4) the status of staff training for teachers and other school personnel in the use
of TTY equipment and other augmentative communication devices. The department’s report should disclose ongoing
efforts to remedy conditions that limit students’ access to telecommunications equipment in the public schools.
6. The Commission recommends that the Commission to Study the Funding and Distribution of Teletypewriters and
Other Telecommunications Equipment for People with Disabilities reconvene and continue its work following the adjournment
of the Second Regular Session of the 118th Legislature.
The Commission members were charged with studying six charges related to the accessibility and usability of telecommunications
equipment. Due to the relatively short time frame in which the Commission was given to work, (December 5, 1997
through
February 6, 1998), and to accommodate the needs of Commission members and other people with hearing- or speech-impairments,
the Commission meetings were limited to only three hours (which is the maximum time that interpreters are able
to provide interpretation services). Due to these circumstances, as well as the fact that critical federal rulemaking
-- that will have a profound impact on the State’s telecommunications policies and programs -- will become effective
in early March 1998, the Commission was not able to give its full attention to each of these important and related
charges.
Specifically, the Commission was unable to fully address issues related to ADA compliance and issues surrounding
the purchase and distribution of specialized customer premise equipment. In addition, the U.S. Architectural and
Transportation Barriers Compliance Board (known as the Access Board) will issue its final guidelines for telecommunications
products and specialized customer premises equipment for people with disabilities in March 1998. The Telecommunications
Act of 1996 required the Access Board to issue these guidelines in conjunction with the FCC (these guidelines are
included in Appendix F). These new guidelines will further specify the telecommunication requirements mandated
to the states. The Commission would like to consider these regulations, as well as the impact of federal USF legislation,
in reviewing and further formulating its recommendations for telecommunications in the State.
For these reasons, the Commission members unanimously request that the Legislature reconvene the Commission to
complete its work during the interim after the Second Regular Session of the 118th Legislature. A reporting deadline
of November 1, 1998 will permit Commission members with the time necessary to more thoroughly address the complex
issues before them, including the Americans with Disabilities Act, federal Telecommunications Act regulations and
the status of proposed Public Utilities Commission rate regulation related to a State USF, before submitting a
final report for consideration by the 119th Legislature.
CHAPTER 72
S.P. 293 - L.D. 944
Resolve, Establishing a Commission to Study the Funding and
Distribution of Teletypewriters and Other Telecommunications
Equipment for People with Disabilities
Sec. 1. Commission established. Resolved: That the Commission to Study the Funding and Distribution of Teletypewriters
and Other Telecommunications Equipment for People with Disabilities, referred to in this resolve as the "commission,"
is established; and be it further
Sec. 2. Commission membership. Resolved: That the commission consists of the following 13 members:
1. One member of the Senate, appointed by the President of the Senate;
2. One member of the House of Representatives, appointed by the Speaker of the House of Representatives;
3. One member jointly appointed by the President of the Senate and the Speaker of the House;
4. One representative of the Public Advocate;
5. One representative of the Public Protection Division within the Office of the Attorney General;
6. One representative of a deaf advocacy organization, appointed by the Governor;
7. One representative of a disability advocacy organization, appointed by the Governor;
8. Three representatives of telephone companies providing phone service within the State including one representative of independent telephone companies, appointed by the Governor; and
9. Three members of the general public who currently use or plan to use teletypewriters or special telecommunications equipment for persons with disabilities, appointed by the Governor; and be it further
Sec. 3. Convening of commission. Resolved: That all appointments must be made no later than 30 days after
the effective date of this resolve. The Chair of the Legislative Council shall call the first meeting within 14
days after all appointments are made. The commission shall elect a chair from among its members; and be it further
Sec. 4. Duties. Resolved: That the commission shall study the following:
1. The current use and distribution of teletypewriters and other telecommunications equipment for persons with disabilities in the State, including the current loaner program;
2. The use and distribution of teletypewriters and other telecommunications equipment for persons with disabilities in other states, including, but not limited to, the financing of teletypewriters and other telecommunications equipment and the type of equipment currently being used;
3. The compliance requirements of the federal Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990 regarding the use of teletypewriters and other telecommunications equipment;
4. How to purchase specialized customer premise equipment or SCPE, such as artificial larynges, signaling devices, amplified handsets, large number dial overlays, direct telephone dialing, telebraille, teletypewriters or telecommunications equipment for persons with disabilities, and other devices that provide access to telephone networks for people with hearing, speech, vision or mobility impairments;
5. Establishing a system of administration and record keeping, as well as distribution, repair and replacement of SCPE units for certified subscribers; and
6. Establishing a funding mechanism for expansion of the program that will include use of additional equipment; and be it further
Sec. 5. Report. Resolved: That the commission shall prepare a written report of its findings and submit
the report, together with any necessary implementing legislation, to the Second Regular Session of the 118th Legislature
by January 1, 1998. If the commission requires an extension, it may apply to the Legislative Council, which may
grant the extension; and be it further
Sec. 6. Staff assistance. Resolved: That the commission shall request staff assistance from the Legislative
Council; and be it further
Sec. 7. Compensation. Resolved: That the legislative members of the commission are entitled to per diem
and reimbursement for travel and other necessary expenses upon application to the Legislative Council. The Executive
Director of the Legislative Council shall administer the commission's budget; and be it further
Sec. 8. Meetings. Resolved: That the commission may meet up to four times; and be it further
Sec. 9. Appropriation. Resolved: That the following funds are appropriated from the General Fund to carry
out the purposes of this resolve.
1997-98
LEGISLATURE
Commission to Study the Funding and
Distribution of Teletypewriters and
Other Telecommunications Equipment
for People with Disabilities
Personal Services $660
All Other 2,350
Provides funds for the per diem and expenses of legislative members, contracted interpreter services and miscellaneous
costs of the Commission to Study the Funding and Distribution of Teletypewriters and Other Telecommunications Equipment
for People with Disabilities.
LEGISLATURE
TOTAL $3,010
Commission Membership
Jonathan A. Connick Representing a Deaf Advocacy Organization
Executive Director
Maine Center on Deafness
83 Preble Street, Suite 22
Portland, Maine 04101
Kim Wallace Representing a Disability Advocacy
127 Main Street Organization
South Portland, Maine 04106
Daniel B. Breton Representing a Telephone Company
Bell Atlantic that Provides Services in Maine
1 Davis Farm Road
Portland, Maine 04103
Larry Sterrs Representing Telephone Companies
Unity Telephone
Unity, Maine 04988
Kathi Wall Representing Telephone Companies
PO Box 101
Bristol, Maine 04539
Elinor Brown Representing Public Use or Plan to Use
39 Central Street Telecommunications Equipment
Gardiner, Maine 04345
April McAfee Representing Public Use or Plan to Use
12 Bangor Street Place Telecommunications Equipment
Augusta, Maine 04330
Patti Brown Representing Public Use or Plan to Use
PO Box 4815 Telecommunications Equipment
Portland, Maine 04112
Rep. Joseph Taylor House Member
14 Lawn Avenue
Cumberland, Maine 04201
Sen. Sharon Treat Senate Member
28 Kingsbury Street
Gardiner, Maine 04345
Rep. Sharon Libby-Jones House Member
PO Box 1191
Greenville, Maine 04441
William C. Black Representing the Public Advocate
General Counsel
Public Advocate Office
112 State House Station
Augusta, Maine 04333-0112
To be appointed by the Attorney General Representing the Public Protection Division
Staff:
Phillip D. McCarthy
Legislative Analyst
Office of Policy and Legal Analysis
13 State House Station
Augusta, Maine 04333-0013
APPENDIX C
COMMISSION TO STUDY THE FUNDING AND DISTRIBUTION OF TELETYPEWRITERS AND OTHER TELECOMMUNICATION EQUIPMENT
FOR PEOPLE WITH DISABILITIES
Meeting Summary from the December 5, 1997 Meeting
Commission Members Present: Jonathan Connick, Kim Wallace, Daniel Breton, Larry Sterrs, Kathi Wall, Eleanor
Brown, Patti Brown, Rep. Joseph Taylor, Sen. Sharon Treat, Rep. Sharon Libby-Jones, William Black
Others present: Betsy Reifman and Polly Lawson, interpreters; Phil McCarthy, Commission Staff
1. Convening of Commission by Sally Tubbesing, Executive Director of the Legislative Council
· Ms. Tubbesing welcomed the Commission members and thanked them for their willingness to participate in
this legislative study. She then asked the Commission members to introduce themselves to establish that there was
a quorum.
· Ms. Tubbesing called for nominations for the Commission chairperson. Rep. Taylor nominated Sen. Treat.
His nomination was seconded by Jonathan Connick. Commission members unanimously approved Sen. Treat as the Commission
chair by acclamation.
2. Overview of Legislative History of Telecommunications Devices for the Hearing and Speech-Impaired
· Phil McCarthy, Commission staff, reviewed the legislative provisions and the enabling legislation that
created this study commission. The Commission then reviewed the six charges presented to them in the authorizing
legislation and discussed the deadline for presenting the report and any recommended legislation.
· The Commission members agreed that an extension request would be made to the Legislative Council that
would provide an extension through the middle of February to enable the Commission to accomplish its review of
the six duties charged in this legislation.
3. Discussion of Current Use and Distribution of Teletypewriters and Other Telecommunications Equipment for Persons
with Disabilities, Including the Current Loaner Program
· Commission members and staff reviewed data that was presented by William Black and the Telecommunications
Services Relay Advisory Council as part of their program review report (Maine Relay Services Total Call Volumes,
including annual data related to the Maine Relay Service for 1996, as well as the TTY Call Traffic Report for January
1997).
· After brief discussion the Commission members recommended that a panel be convened at the next study commission
meeting to review the current use and distribution of TTY and TDD equipment. Staff was directed to contact Alice
Johnson, the State Coordinator of Deaf Services; Norman Perrin, former director of the Division of Deafness; regional
rehabilitation counselors, Lois Morin, from the Pine Tree Society; and Bonnie Snow, from the Maine Association
of the Deaf. The Commission members would like to discuss the following issues with the panel:
· How the General Fund appropriations for the TTY plan are spent;
· NYNEX’ annual expenditures for TTY, TDD and LifeLine programs, including the amount of rate reductions
allowed;
· Eligibility qualifications for the TTY Loaner Program, (for example, the type of certification required
for eligibility and any financial criteria established to determine eligibility); as well as demand for and the
availability of TTY and TDD equipment for the deaf, hard-of-hearing, and speech-impaired;
· The number of TTY users in Maine (Division of Deafness is required by statute to keep an annual census);
· The break down rate of TTY loaner equipment and the turn-around time necessary before TTY equipment is
replaced or repaired; and
· Data related to TTY rates, usage and any estimates regarding the demand for TTY service by other disabled
populations in Maine (Kim Wallace has some resources regarding the types of TDD and the barriers related to these
populations).
4. Discussion of Use and Distribution of Teletypewriters and Other Telecommunications Equipment for Persons
with Disabilities in Other States, Including Financing Mechanisms and Types of Equipment Currently Being Used
Commission staff presented analysis of the state telecommunication provision of 16 states with respect to TTY and
TDD. This handout covered the purpose of the various state plans, the funding mechanisms that were established
for telecommunication services in those states, as well as the eligibility criteria that were included in the statutory
provisions. Following discussion by Commission members, the following information was requested for discussion
purposes at the next commission meeting:
· Do other state statutes also include provisions related to equipment obsolescence or state of the art
equipment;
· Could we get the details of the Bell Atlantic (NYNEX) arrangement with the state of Massachusetts related
to telecommunications equipment for persons with disabilities and
· Would we get further data on how TTY is financed in other states. More specifically, how much is expended
in those states and is there any data related to per capita costs for providing TTY equipment.
In further discussion the Commission members decided to request the following information:
1. The compliance provisions of the recently re-authorized Telecommunications Act of 1997, particularly those provisions
related to providing access for a variety of disabled populations to telecommunications services;
2. Summary information and a description of the adaptive equipment loan board, including information on the loan
programs available throughout Alpha-One (Kim Wallace will provide information at the next meeting);
3. Related to the distribution repair and replacement of SCPE units for certified subscribers, what are the current
regulations in place regarding administration and record keeping of the Division of Deafness’ telecommunications
plan and telecommunications program;
4. What are the benefits and disadvantages of the various funding mechanisms that other states have established
with respect to Maine’s provisions and the need for increased access to TTY and TDD equipment and services.
5. The Commission and staff members reviewed the discussion and established meeting times for the next two Commission
meetings.
The next Commission meeting will be held on Tuesday, December 16th from 2 - 5 pm. The third Commission meeting
will be held on January 6th from am - 12 noon. Commission staff will schedule interpreters and notify Commission
members about the room assignment for those two meetings.
6. Adjournment. The Commission meeting was adjourned at 4 pm.
COMMISSION TO STUDY THE FUNDING AND DISTRIBUTION OF TELETYPEWRITER AND OTHER TELECOMMUNICATIONS EQUIPMENT FOR PEOPLE WITH DISABILITIES
Meeting Summary - December 16, 1997
Commission Members Present: Jonathan Connick, Kim Wallace, Daniel Breton, Larry Sterrs, Kathi Wall, Eleanor
Brown, Patti Brown, Rep. Joseph Taylor, Sen. Sharon Treat, Rep. Sharon Libby-Jones, and William Black
Others present: Alice Johnson, Norman Perrin, and Bonnie Snow (Invited guests); Betsy Reifman and Polly
Lawson, (Interpreters); and Phil McCarthy, (Commission staff)
1. Review of the meeting summary from December 5th and preview of the agenda
and expectations for this meeting
The Commission reviewed and accepted the meeting summary as presented; Sen. Treat reviewed the meeting agenda /
expectations and welcomed the panelists.
2. Panel discussion of the current use and distribution of TTY and other
telecommunications equipment for persons with disabilities in the State
Panelists introduced themselves and made some brief remarks:
Alice Johnson, State Coordinator of Deaf Services
· presented a brochure describing the TTY Distribution Program and the joint application for the Lending
Program and Cost-sharing Program;
· reviewed the TTY program, including the addition of new equipment available through the program, a “voice
carryover phone” (VCO) and a FAX pilot program (in (cooperation with DMHMRSAS).
Bonnie Snow, Maine Association of the Deaf
· presented an overview of information distributed on the TTY Distribution and Loaner Programs, including
the history of the TTY program, policy & procedures established for the TTY Distribution and Loaner Programs,
data related to equipment and other expenditures of TTY programs and the number of clients served, and information
on TTY programs in other states.
Norman Perrin, former Director of the Division of Deafness
· provided an historical overview of the evolution of TTY programs in Maine;
· described the reluctance of the phone company to become involved in a social welfare program; the establishment
of the 70% rebate for calls made through the telecommunications relays services was implemented after the passage
of ADA and the intervention of the PUC; sees some possibility for Maine to follow lead of other states which have
authorized phone companies to establish various surcharges.
The Commission members and panelists discussed the following issues:
A. Expenditure of General Fund appropriations for TTY programs
· the TTY cost-sharing program was started in 1980 and 30-40 TTY units were purchased with minimal General
Fund appropriations ($7,500 per year in Fiscal Years 1981-82 and 1982-83);
· the Bureau of Rehabilitation has requested increased appropriations over the years to support increased
demand; $40,000 was appropriated in 1984 to expand beyond the cost-sharing program by adding a TTY lending program;
· $55,440 have been appropriated for TTY contract for last 4-5 years
B. Demand for and the availability of TTY and TDD equipment for the deaf, hard-of-hearing, and speech-impaired,
and the number of TTY users in Maine
· after having a waiting list for equipment for the first few years, recent demand has leveled out and the
amount of funds and equipment appears to be adequate;
· AT&T/Bell Atlantic refer requests for equipment; Division of Deafness fields 15-20 calls per week
and usually receives 5-6 applications since not all deaf or hard-of-hearing people are interested or eligible for
programs; it’s difficult to quantify the level of “unmet need”;
· overall, roughly 300-350 total clients are being served now; TTY is for deaf people who must use visual
means to access TDD and that’s 10% of 10% of the population, or roughly 600 people; hard of hearing population
is much more difficult to estimate, and these folks can use visual and/or auditory equipment; elderly population
with hearing problems is increasing but most refuse and are not using equipment;
· public facilities have been required to have TDD since 1987, but it’s difficult to know how many places
actually have equipment available
· with the downsizing and shifting of the Division of Deafness across state agencies, awareness and outreach
programs may have taken a back seat; outreach efforts rely on regional vocational rehabilitation counselors for
the deaf in 5 regions, ties with Gov. Baxter School for the Deaf, and the service of volunteers;
· there is a void in providing awareness and outreach programs in rural regions of state where schools and
human service organizations are resistant to outreach efforts; a recommendation was made to extend ongoing outreach
efforts of the relay service to create awareness of TTY distribution programs;
· invite Department of Education staff to next meeting to review the status of outreach and awareness programs
in the public schools;
· distribution techniques and training programs for TTY users in other states may provide models for Maine
to consider;
· while a TTY regional directory is available, there appears to be some need for TTY phone customers to
have TTY information listed in the phone book; some states use of an extensive data base that can identify TTY
clients and that also serve to enhance awareness of and access to telecommunications services.
C. The break down rate of TTY loaner equipment and the turn-around time necessary before TTY equipment is replaced
or repaired:
· there are no TTY repair centers in Maine, inoperable equipment must be sent to a Massachusetts factory;
turnaround time depends on the specific repairs necessary and other logistics;
· average turnaround time from application to getting TTY loaner in home requires 3 weeks to 1 month for
most TTY loaners; Division of Deafness checks information (within a week), mailing new information takes time,
getting directions to people’s homes, getting family members together for training, and coordinating volunteers
also takes time;
· TTY Loaner Program has 6 large screen phones, 5 FAX, 4 VCO phones, and 3 Telebraille; there is usually
a 1-month turnaround time for broken-down TTY equipment; an advisory committee tests a variety of models and selects
the most durable and reliable equipment available;
· answering machines are available through the TTY cost-sharing program, but not through the TTY loaner
program as they are considered an “add-on” that goes beyond access to telecommunications service, and are therefore,
a private choice and individual responsibility (or for eligible folks can be subsidized through the cost-sharing
program);
3. Discussion of use and distribution of TTY and other telecommunications
equipment for persons with disabilities in other states, including financing
mechanisms and types of equipment currently being used
The Commission reviewed data presented on the following issues:
A. An overview of Bell Atlantic’s (NYNEX) most recent annual expenditures for TTY, TDD, and LifeLine programs
· Daniel Breton reported that data was not readily available on the amount of foregone revenue involved
with the 70% rate reduction on relay service calls.
B. Summary of Massachusetts’s arrangement with Bell Atlantic (NYNEX)
· Phil McCarthy presented information on Massachusetts’ regulations and the state’s arrangement with Bell
Atlantic (NYNEX) to establish a directory assistance surcharge for residence customers to subsidize TTY programs;
· the pros and cons of public subsidization mechanisms for telecommunications services for the disabled
were reviewed, including any known correlation between deafness and an ability to pay, the economic circumstances
of multiply-disabled people or the elderly facing expensive TTY equipment costs, and the need to receive information
from the Public Advocate and the Public Utilities Commission on emerging issues involved with various funding mechanisms
and subsidizing access to telecommunications equipment.
C. A summary of the access provisions of the 1997 Telecommunications Act
· Kim Wallace reported that a summary of the Telecommunications Act provisions were not easy to come by,
yet he is trying to get a copy of the recommendations developed for Maine by the Telecommunications Access Advisory
Committee at the CITE conference this past summer.
· Sen. Treat requested that another resource could be contacted to provide an overview of ADA and Telecommunications
Act provisions related to access to telecommunications equipment for the disabled.
D. A summary of the loan programs available through the Adaptive Equipment Loan Board.
Kim Wallace distributed information on the loan program, which is a revolving loan fund created in 1988 that provides
reasonable terms and rates for the purchase of adaptive equipment.
E. Data related to any estimates regarding the demand for TTY service by other disabled populations in Maine
· while the deaf and hard-of-hearing population in Maine has been estimated to be 10% of 1 million, or roughly
10,000, good data is hard to come by; this is also true for other disabled populations;
· Kim Wallace reported also indicated that data on disabled populations is difficult to come by; census
data is insufficient; an even data from a recent Alpha-One/Unum study has limitations (e.g., specific information
related to individuals who need adaptive telecommunications equipment may not be extrapolated); 1 in 7 Mainers
may be disabled, and this population appears to use Personal Computers and modems at the same rate as the general
population;
· Jonathan Connick suggested contacting phone companies in other states to look at funding mechanisms and
see if some comparisons can be made regarding TDD use by disabled populations.
4. Recap discussion and issues for next meeting
· Sen. Treat suggested the focus of the January 6th meeting would include funding mechanisms and subsidization,
ADA and Telecommunications Act provisions related to access to telecommunications equipment for the disabled, and
inviting testimony from the public.
5. Adjourn
· Meeting was adjourned at 5:07 pm.
Respectfully submitted,
Phil McCarthy, Commission Staff
COMMISSION TO STUDY THE FUNDING AND DISTRIBUTION OF TELETYPEWRITER AND OTHER TELECOMMUNICATIONS EQUIPMENT FOR PEOPLE WITH DISABILITIES
Meeting Summary - January 6, 1998
Commission Members Present: Jonathan Connick, Kim Wallace, Daniel Breton, Eleanor Brown, Rep. Joseph Taylor,
Sen. Sharon Treat, Rep. Sharon Libby-Jones, and William Black
Others present: Joel Schifman, David Stockford, Barbara Keefe and Kathy Fries, (Invited guests); Betsy Reifman
and Polly Lawson, (Interpreters); Alice Johnson, (Division of Deafness); and Phil McCarthy, (Commission staff)
1. Review of the meeting summary from December 5th and preview of the
agenda and expectations for this meeting.
The Commission reviewed and accepted the meeting summary as presented; Sen. Treat reviewed the meeting agenda /
expectations and welcomed the panelists.
2. Panel discussion on outreach, access, and funding mechanisms for the use
and distribution of TTY and other telecommunications equipment for
persons with disabilities.
Panel #1:
Joel Schifman, Public Utilities Commission
William Black, Public Advocate Office
· presented an overview of funding mechanisms and subsidy practices in telecommunications and suggested
that the commission should consider the following issues: (1) competitive neutrality, (the L.L. Bean problem -
a telecommunications customer can move or change their business practices in response to explicit surcharges; (2)
jurisdictional neutrality, consequences for inter- and intra-state exchange customers and providers and customers,
and (3) implicit vs. explicit subsidies; (General Fund appropriation is better than establishing explicit charges
on customer’s telephone bills);
· suggested that any commission recommendation involving a subsidy or surcharge, should utilize an implicit
subsidy that: (1) targets a source of funding that telecommunications customers can’t reach, and (2) is competitively-neutral
and affects all parties equally;
· particularly likes Vermont’s “state universal service fund” approach where charges apply to the inter-
and intra-state revenues of local exchange carriers on calls originating in-state or 800 calls terminating in VT;
· impact of surcharge on intra- / inter-state carriers to generate $200,000 would be minuscule; but surcharge
should also apply to cellular customers who could replace phone carrier; and
· to avoid obsolescence of telecommunications technology, language of proposed legislation should be “technology-neutral.”
Panel #2:
David Stockford, Director of Special Services, Department of Education (DOE)
Barbara Keefe, Director of Project Impact, Governor Baxter School for the Deaf (GBSD)
Kathy Fries, Maine Consumer Information Technology Exchange (CITE)
· described Maine’s public schools as key community-based resources that can increase awareness and outreach
to rural areas across the state, as well as provide access to assistive equipment;
· roughly 350 deaf children in Maine public schools, while GBSD has 88 residential students; under ADA,
DOE has responsibility for providing equipment and conducting training in public schools; TTY access is child-driven
as not all deaf children need TTY; due to lack of funds, equipment may be “co-located” in the school administrative
unit’s superintendent office;
· only half of schools with deaf children have TTY equipment; in many cases staff doesn’t know how to operate
TTY equipment and some ignore TTY calls; GBSD has responsibility to conduct training for local schools, but not
to distribute equipment
· GBSD outreach staff are disappointed with lack of TTY equipment at GBSD, which used to have a state-of-the-art
sound lab; believe that every room should have TTY or a personal computer acting as a TTY;
· suggested that the evolving School and Library Network, which has two-way audio and video capacity through
16 Asynchronous Transfer Mode (ATM) sites, also has the potential to facilitate providing services to disabled
populations (e.g., speech therapist could conduct assessment via the ATM system in concert with the regional Child
Development Service system);
· TTY distribution in public schools is not where it should be; while ATM / E-mail may help outreach, these
systems are expensive; hope that Federal Universal Service Fund subsidies will support rural outreach; and
· requested DOE / GBSD / Maine CITE to use ATM network / E-mail to survey schools regarding: (1) number
of deaf and hard-of-hearing students, (2) availability of TTY and other TDD equipment, (3) number of requests made
for TTY and TDD equipment, and (4) the status of staff training and use by teachers and report back to Commission.
3. Public Hearing
· see enclosed public hearing summary
4. Recap discussion and issues for next meeting
· Sen. Treat suggested the focus of the next commission meeting should be establishing short-term and longer-term
recommendations. Another extension request will be presented to the Legislative council to re-convene the commission
following the adjournment of the 118th Legislature’s 2nd Regular Session. Members were asked to review the materials
distributed and come to the next meeting prepared to discuss recommendations.
5. Adjournment
· Meeting was adjourned at 12:07 pm.
Respectfully submitted,
Phil McCarthy, Commission Staff
The Commission held a public hearing on Tuesday, January 6, 1998, from 10:30 am to noon in State House Room 134.
The public hearing was held to receive public comment and gather further information related to the current status
of telecommunications programs for the deaf, hearing-impaired, or speech-impaired persons, as well as testimony
regarding the steps necessary to extend telecommunications programs and services to other disabled populations.
TESTIMONY
·Frank Bowe, Professor of Counseling, Research, Special Education, and Rehabilitation, Hofstra Univ.
(written testimony)
ADA’s Title IV requirement for dual-party relay services is the basis for state laws which provide that a modest sum is charged to all business and residential phone customers in the state (usually a hidden charge not identified on monthly phone bills)
· Maine’s existing program is far smaller in scope and less effective in practice than it should be; people with special needs in other states enjoy far greater access to voice-level telecommunications services than do such individuals who reside in Maine· Section 255 of Telecommunications Act of 1996 (PL 104-104), contains a very important section which requires that new telecommunications products and services be designed so as to be accessible to and useable by Americans with disabilities, if readily achievable
· U.S. Architectural and Transportation Barriers Compliance Board (known as the "Access Board") has sent "guidelines" for telecommunications products and customer premises equipment to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) for review. After this review, the Access Board will incorporate any OMB changes and will make the "guidelines" public some time in January, 1998
Kathleen Powers, Project Director, Maine CITE Coordinating Center, University of Maine System, Augusta, ME (written testimony)
· according to a statewide survey of Maine households by the Bureau of Economic Research at Rutgers University, 13/5% of Maine’s population have a disability that affects their ability to function in one or more life activity
· Maine CITE sponsored a September, 1997 conference that examined the ways that universal access and design can be systematically incorporated into the planning, policies and practices of Maine’s telecommunications infrastructure; a paper detailing recommended principles will be published some time in January, 1998
William Pierce, citizen activist
· supports technology-neutral legislation to invest in future
· involve high technology sector to discuss new equipment· lack of TTY public payphones (even in State House) discriminates against hearing- and speech-impaired citizens
· expand DMH citizen Local Area Network access program· include access for elderly populations
Phil Almy, Hallowell (Alpha-One)
· uses voice-activated PC, TTY devices and other assistive equipment
· would like public accommodation to voice-activated phones
· access is a safety concern· supports funding of assistive device to provide equal access
Merrill Troup, Director, Office of Deaf Services, DMHMRSAS
· need an aggressive outreach program; audiologists aren’t aware of TTY program
· 70% of deaf / hard-of-hearing population are late-deafened and non-signing· access for elderly becoming critical - 80% hearing loss in elderly home patients
· shortage of professional service providers with American sign language skills
· ATM Network or Ed. Net of Maine not accessible to at-risk populations
· group homes / psychiatric centers need two-way video phones ($400 at Staples)
· no group homes specifically for deaf people; have 30 deaf clients in region 1, 83 in region 2; and at least 10 in region 3
· for elderly or impaired populations that don’t use TTY, FAX is important means of communication· advantage of current TTY / TDD system is level of personal attention and care, but home-based system is ineffective for people in crises
· phone company could still contract with volunteers across state and set up outreach / training· can provide data on recommendations for mentally retarded populations
· agency doesn’t have TTY equipment and would welcome used TTY equipment ·
Linda Dowell, Advocate, Maine Advocacy Services and E-911 Advisory Board
· use and appreciate TTY services...concerned that non-deaf / hard-of-hearing personnel running TTY program would be less effective
· concerned about mis-diagnosis of hearing loss in students· personnel at regional “one-stop shopping” offices require TTY / TDD training· Dept. Of Public Safety training also needed for volunteer firefighters in E-911 system
· existing TTY equipment could become a back-up system for E-911
Barbara Keefe, University of Maine System and Director, GBSD Project Impact
· training must be systemic and should be included in any bill since people and staff change· expanded access can enrich state’s economic development (e.g., tourism)·
Kathy Fries, Maine Consumer Information Technology Exchange (CITE)
·keep in mind other disabled populations across state· school children also need augmentative communication devices
· CITE can put info together on needs and range of elderly and other disabled populations
APPENDIX D
State Assistive Equipment Loan Provisions Chart
Assistive Equipment Loan Programs in
California, Oregon, and Minnesota
(Numbers participating and Numbers of Equipment Loaned)
California
Pacific Bell, the phone company which operates the assistive loan equipment program, estimates that of the more
than 5 million residents of California that would be eligible for some type of assitive equipment, they are currently
only serving approximately 130,000 residents (38%). They feel that there are a couple of reasons for this relatively
low number: 1) some residents who are eligible prefer to buy their own assistive equipment; 2) some residents believe
the program requires a low-income status 3) some individuals who have a disability do not consider themselves disabled
enough to require assistive equipment. Over the past several years, Pacific Bell has expanded its outreach program
to eligible residents. They have developed a database of 600 agencies in California that work with disabled individual.
Pacific bell sends these agencies mailings and videos about the Assistive Loan Equipment program to disperse to
their clients.
California Population with Functional Limitations Making Telephone Use Difficult
| Functional Limitation | Segment of the Population with this limitation | Individuals whose Impairment Limits Telephone Use |
| Hard of Hearing |
2.3M |
957K |
| Mobility |
5.5M |
2.3M |
| Deaf |
216K |
216K |
| Vision Impairment |
1.6M |
1.5M |
| Speech impairment |
300K |
300K |
| Cognitive Impairment |
456K |
456K |
| Total |
10.4M |
5.7M |
Equipment Number loaned
voice activated
cellular phones 79
flip style cellular phones 175
speaker phones 79
telebraille machines 4
TTYs 2,088
There was an increase of 300 pieces of equipment loaned during 1996 from the previous year. The largest need
for equipment continues to be TTY machines. The TDAP estimates that it is serving approximately 60% of the disabled
population in Oregon that would be eligible for assistive equipment loans.
Minnesota
The Minnesota Equipment Distribution Program (EDP) estimates that it has loaned approximately 20,000 devices to
its residents who are hearing or speech disabled or mobility impaired since its start up in 1987. EDP estimates
that around 3,000 residents applied for the program in 1995. In 1995, the program distibuted approximately 2,250
assistive devices to approximately 1,650 disabled residents. Based on these numbers, approximately 55% of those
residents who applied for the program actually received assistive equipment through EDP. Those who did not receive
equipment either had income above the program cut-off amount or did not meet one of the other eligibility requirements.
Individuals determined ineligible for the program are given information on where they can purchase or lease assistive
equipment. The EDP spent $863,230 on the program in 1995 and $931,000 in 1996.
APPENDIX F
February 4, 1998
TO: Sen. Sharon A. Treat, Chair
Commission to Study the Funding and Distribution of Teletypewriters and Other Telecommunications Equipment for
People with Disabilities
FROM: Margaret J. Reinsch, Legislative Analyst
re: Compliance requirements for telecommunications equipment
One of the duties with which Resolve 1997, chapter 72 charges the Commission is to study the compliance requirements
of the federal Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990 regarding the use of teletypewriters and other telecommunications
equipment. This memo is intended to provide a broad overview of the requirements concerning telecommunications
for individuals with disabilities. Please keep in mind that to the extent the federal laws reviewed address telecommunications
for individuals with disabilities, the focus is almost always on individuals with hearing or speech impairments.
Case law provides no additional guidance for telecommunications requirements for other disabilities.
Part I of this memo outlines the telecommunication requirements contained in the ADA. It is broken into requirements
governing employment, public entities and public accommodations, as well as the telecommunications requirements
added to the Telecommunications Act. Part II outlines other federal legislation as it relates to telecommunications
requirements for individuals with disabilities, even though this is beyond the basic charge to the Commission.
I The Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990
The ADA (PL 101-336) was enacted by Congress to eliminate discrimination against individuals with disabilities
by providing “clear, strong, consistent, enforceable standards addressing discrimination against individuals with
disabilities.” The Act itself is broken into four "titles." Title I covers discrimination in employment,
Title II specifies the duties of public entities, Title III prohibits discrimination by public accommodations,
Title IV addresses specific telecommunications requirements and Title V collects the miscellaneous provisions,
such as enforcement language.
“Disability” is defined, with respect to an individual, as a physical or mental impairment that substantially limits
one or more of the major life activities of the individual. The legislative history describes major life activities
as including caring for one’s self, performing manual tasks, walking, seeing, hearing, speaking, breathing, learning,
working and participating in community activities. The definition of disability also includes a record of such
impairment or being regarded as having such an impairment.
A. Title I - Employment
Title I, codified at 42 USC §§121001-12117 prohibits discrimination against a qualified individual with
a disability because of the disability in regard to the terms, conditions and privileges of employment, including
job application procedures. A "qualified individual with a disability” is an individual with a disability
who, with or without reasonable accommodation, can perform the essential functions of the employment position.
Consideration is given to the employer's judgment as to what functions of a job are essential. A reasonable accommodation
may include making existing facilities readily accessible, acquisition or modification of equipment or devices,
the provision of qualified readers or interpreters, or other similar accommodations. An employer must make reasonable
accommodations to the known physical or mental limitations of an otherwise qualified individual with a disability
who is an applicant or employee, unless the employer can demonstrate that the accommodation would impose an "undue
hardship" on the operation of the business of the employer. "Undue hardship" means an action requiring
significant difficulty or expense.
The statute itself does not specifically mention requirements concerning telecommunications. Although there is
little discussion in the legislative history concerning communications for persons with disabilities other than
hearing impairments, the Committee reports include as examples of reasonable accommodations: electronics visual
aids; telephone headset amplifiers; telephones with compatible hearing aids; telecommunications devices for the
deaf; and goose neck telephone headsets. The emphasis in this Title is on reasonable accommodations that enable
an individual with a disability to perform the essential functions of the job. If an essential function of the
position involves telecommunications, then the employer has an obligation to provide reasonable accommodation of
known disabilities of otherwise qualified employees and applicants.
B. Title II - Public Services
Title II, codified at 42 USC §§12131-12165, prohibits public entities from excluding, denying the participation
of, or discriminating against a qualified individual with a disability. A qualified individual may not be denied
the benefits of the services, programs or activities of a public entity. A public entity is any state or local
government, including departments, agencies, or other instrumentalities. It also includes Amtrak and any commuter
rail authority.
Other than the prohibition against discrimination itself, there is nothing in Title II that speaks directly to
communication or telecommunications. Most of Title II, in fact, is devoted to ensuring access to public transportation
systems for people with disabilities that affect their personal mobility.
The general prohibition against discrimination is sufficient to require public entities to provide telecommunications
access to all services and activities to all individuals with disabilities. The U.S. Attorney General has adopted
regulations governing the communications requirements under Title II. 28 CFR 35.160-35.164. The central obligation
of a public entity is to ensure that its communications with individuals with disabilities are as effective as
communications with others. This does not require a public entity to take any action that it can demonstrate would
result in a fundamental alteration in the nature of its services, programs or activities, or in undue financial
or administrative burdens. A public entity must provide auxiliary aids and services where necessary to afford individuals
with disabilities an equal opportunity to participate in or benefit from a service, program or activity offered
by the public entity. When determining what kinds of auxiliary aids and services are necessary, a public entity
must give primary consideration to the request of the person who is disabled.
Focusing on telephone communications, the regulations require public entities that communicate by telephone to
provide equally effective communication to individuals with disabilities, including hearing and speech impairments.
Telephone relay services generally may be used to meet this requirement. Public entities must ensure that the telephone
emergency services, including 911 services, provided by that entity are accessible to persons with impaired hearing
and speech. Direct access must be provided to individuals who rely on a TDD or computer modem for telephone access.
No examples are given for communication requirements to accommodate disabilities other than speech or hearing impairments.
C. Title III - Public Accommodations
Title III is codified at 42 USC §§12181-12189. It covers public accommodations and services operated
by private entities. Again, there is a general prohibition on discrimination based on disability.
Covered entities are required to provide auxiliary aids and services necessary to ensure that disabled persons
are not excluded, denied services, segregated or otherwise treated differently from other individuals. However,
the entity is not required to provide auxiliary aids or services that would fundamentally alter the nature of the
goods, services, facilities, privileges, advantages or accommodations being offered or would result in an undue
burden. A public accommodation has the ability to decide which auxiliary aids and services will be offered, as
long as the accommodation makes its goods, services, and facilities available to individuals with disabilities
generally.
The regulations include a few specific requirements concerning communications. Public accommodations that normally
allow customers, clients, patients or participants to make outgoing phone calls on more than an incidental basis
must provide TDDs for individuals with hearing impairments. 28 CFR 36.303. However, telecommunication requirements
for persons with disabilities other than hearing impairments are not specifically addressed.
D. Title IV - Communications
Title IV of the ADA, covering communications, is codified at 47 USC §225 as an amendment to the Telecommunications
Act, initially enacted in 1934. The 1934 Act established the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) and assigned
it the responsibility of "regulating interstate and foreign commerce by wire and radio so as to make available,
so far as possible, to all people of the United States a rapid, efficient, nation-wide and world-wide wire and
radio communication service with adequate facilities at reasonable charges." 47 USC §151. This responsibility
has come to be known as the "universal service" obligation.
Title IV of the ADA requires the FCC to adopt regulations to "ensure that interstate and intrastate relay
services are available, to the extent possible and in the most efficient manner, to hearing-impaired and speech-impaired
individuals in the Unites States." As of July 23, 1993, each common carrier providing telephone voice transmission
services must provide telecommunications relay services, in compliance with the statute and the regulations. Section
225 does not address disabilities other than hearing and speech impairments.
II Other federal legislation
A. Telecommunications for the Disabled Act of 1982
The Telecommunications for the Disabled Act of 1982 (PL 97-410, codified at 47 USC §610) expressly allowed
states to require carriers to continue providing subsidies for specialized equipment needed by persons with impaired
hearing, speech, vision or mobility. The Act granted the FCC broad authority to establish regulations necessary
"to ensure reasonable access to telephone service by people with impaired hearing."
B. The Hearing Aid Compatibility Act of 1988
The Hearing Aid Compatibility Act of 1988, known as "the HAC Act" (PL 100-394) is codified at 47 USC
§610. It required nearly all telephones made in or imported into the United States after August 16, 1989 to
be compatible for use with telecoil-equipped hearing aids. The requirements applied to cordless phones two years
later.
C. The Telecommunications Accessibility Enhancement Act of 1988
The Telecommunications Accessibility Enhancement Act of 1988 (PL 100-542) is codified at 40 USC §762. It focused
on improving access for persons who use TDDs. The legislation established a federal relay system for calls to,
from and within the federal government. Congress required the General Services Administration to develop a logo
to identify TDDs used by federal agencies and ordered publication of federal TDD numbers in a government-wide directory.
The Senate and House were required to develop policies governing placement of TDDs in members' offices.
D. The Telecommunications Act of 1996
The Telecommunications Act of 1996 (PL 104-104) amended, among other sections, 47 USC §255, and added §262.
The law requires manufacturers of telecommunications and customer premises equipment to ensure that the equipment
is designed, developed and fabricated to be accessible to and usable by individuals with disabilities, if readily
achievable. Similarly, providers of telecommunications service must ensure that telecommunications services are
accessible and readily usable by individuals with disabilities, if readily achievable. If accessibility and usability
are not readily achievable, the manufacturer or provider is required to ensure that the equipment or service is
compatible with existing peripheral devices or specialize customer premises equipment commonly used by individuals
with disabilities to achieve access, if readily achievable. New guidelines for accessibility of telecommunications
and customer premises equipment and telecommunications were expected from the Architectural and Transportation
Barriers Compliance Board in January of 1998.