Prison Phone Justice

PRISON LAW OFFICE
General Delivery, San Quentin, CA 94964
Telephone (510) 280-2621  Fax (510) 280-2704
www.prisonlaw.com

VIA ELECTRONIC SUBMISSION
http://fjallfoss.fcc.gov/ecfs2
March 20, 2013
Marlene H. Dortch, Secretary
Federal Communications Commission
Office of the Secretary
445 12th Street, SW
Room TW-B204
Washington, DC 20554
RE:

Director:
Donald Specter
Managing Attorney:
Sara Norman
Staff Attorneys:
Rana Anabtawi
Rebekah Evenson
Steven Fama
Warren George
Penny Godbold
Megan Hagler
Alison Hardy
Corene Kendrick
Kelly Knapp
Millard Murphy
Lynn Wu

FCC Proceeding: 12-375: In the Matter of Rates for Inmate Interstate Calling
Services
Comments on Paragraph 42: “Disabilities Access”

Dear Ms. Dortch:
The Prison Law Office hereby submits its comments on Paragraph 42 of the Notice of
Proposed Rulemaking for FCC proceeding 12-375. For more than thirty years, the Prison
Law Office has engaged in class action and other impact litigation to improve the conditions
of prisons and jails for adults and children, including prisoners with disabilities and serious
medical concerns. We have have successfully argued before the U.S. Supreme Court in
Pennsylvania Department of Corrections v. Yeskey, 524 U.S. 206 (1998) (unanimously
holding the Americans with Disabilities Act applies to state prisoners), and Brown v. Plata,
563 U.S. ___, 131 S. Ct. 1910 (2011) (holding the court-mandated population limit for
California prisons was necessary to remedy violations of prisoners’ constitutional rights to
adequate medical and mental health care). In 1994, we filed Armstrong v. Wilson, 124 F.3d
1019 (9th Cir. 1997), a statewide class action on behalf of disabled California prisoners,
including hearing-impaired and Deaf prisoners, under the Americans with Disabilities Act
and the Rehabilitation Act. We continue to monitor California’s provision of
accommodations to prisoners with disabilities, and have observed and been informed by deaf
prisoners of the challenges they face in staying in contact with their attorneys loved ones.
Communication between prisoners and their families outside of prison keeps families
strong, reduces recidivism, and improves a prisoner’s chances of successfully re-entering
society. The rates charged for inmate calling services are often prohibitively high. The high
rates for inmate calling services place a heavy financial burden on families because families
Board of Directors
Penelope Cooper, President  Michele WalkinHawk, Vice President
Marshall Krause, Treasurer  Christiane Hipps  Margaret Johns
Cesar Lagleva  Laura Magnani  Michael Marcum  Ruth Morgan  Dennis Roberts

Marlene H. Dortch, Secretary
Federal Communications Commission
RE: Comments of Prison Law Office
Regarding Proceeding 12-375, Paragraph 42
March 20, 2013
Page 2

are the ones that typically bear the burden of paying for the calls. For a variety of reasons
discussed below, the financial burdens are even greater on prisoners who are Deaf or hearing
impaired. The introduction of videophones to prisons and jails would greatly reduce the
disparity in cost between Deaf prisoners and their hearing counterparts.
California prisons limit Deaf prisoners to the use of TDD/TTYs. TDD/TTY
technology is rapidly becoming obsolete. Most people in the Deaf community communicate
using videophones and do not have TDD/TTY devices. This means that prisoners who are
restricted to TDD/TTY use often are unable to communicate with their families because their
families do not have TDD/TTY devices. Most in the Deaf community are not significantly
fluent in written English. Because TDD/TTYs rely on typed messages, many prisoners
report to us that they are not able to have any contact with their families or lawyers at all.
Regrettably, only a handful of prisons are equipped with videophones (e.g., Vermont,
Virginia, and Wisconsin) and no prison or jail is known to have installed captioned
telephones, many using security as an excuse for discrimination. Below are comments and
recommendations for new regulations regarding the inmate calling services afforded to Deaf
and hearing impaired people in prisons.
1.

Videophones Are Necessary Because ASL, Not English, Is the Primary Language
for Many Deaf People

Video phones are necessary to allow Deaf prisoners equal access to inmate calling
services. Most individuals in America who grow up deaf use American Sign Language
(“ASL”). These deaf individuals, who are often born deaf or lose their hearing before they
acquire language, are sometimes referred to as Deaf, with a capital D, to distinguish them
from those deaf individuals who do not use ASL. ASL is not a manual form of English. ASL
is its own language, with its own grammar and its own syntax. There is not a one-to-one
correspondence between English words and signs in ASL. ASL’s grammar and syntax is
quite different from English.
Most Deaf people are not fluent in written English. According to the Gallaudet
Research Institute, the median reading comprehension scores for deaf people corresponds to
about a 4.0 grade level. This means that half of the deaf and hard of hearing students scored
below the typical hearing student at the beginning of fourth grade. Of course there is
variation among members of the Deaf community, but as a whole, the literacy level is much
lower than it is for comparable hearing populations. These Deaf people, as a group, cannot
depend on written English as an effective means of communication. This means that
TDD/TTY devices, which require the user to type out their communications, are often an

Marlene H. Dortch, Secretary
Federal Communications Commission
RE: Comments of Prison Law Office
Regarding Proceeding 12-375, Paragraph 42
March 20, 2013
Page 3

inadequate and ineffective means for Deaf prisoners to communicate with their families.
The introduction of videophones to correctional institutions would enable Deaf prisoners to
use ASL and sign language interpreters during calls, greatly improving their ability to
communicate.
Many people who lose their hearing later in life, after learning a spoken language,
often do not become fully fluent in ASL. These people may still prefer to use TDD/TTYs
which rely upon English or other written languages. Thus, TDD/TTYs must remain
available for prisoners falling into this category.
2.

TDD/TTY Calls Cost Significantly More than Standard Voice Calls

The inherent limitations of TDD/TTY technology mean that TDD/TTY calls take
longer to complete than voice calls, and thus Deaf prisoners must pay significantly more than
their hearing counterparts to communicate with their families. TDD/TTYs use a language or
communication code called Baudot to transmit signals over phone lines at the speed of 25
words per minute. The TDD/TTY translates typed messages into signals and sends them
though the phone lines to the receiving party’s TDD/TTY machine. That machine then
converts the signals back into letters and displays them on the screen. No matter how fast a
person types, the TDD/TTY transmits tones at the rate of 45 characters per minute. Thus
300-400% more time is needed when using a TDD/TTY device as opposed to making a
voice call.
In some facilities, where TDD/TTYs are available on the general phones, prisoners
are charged the same per minute charge as hearing prisoners, resulting in what is in effect a
surcharge for the TDD/TTY user. In other facilities, where TDD/TTYs are available on
phones not connected to the general phones, prison administrators charge an arbitrary fee.
Furthermore, for security reasons, most prisons and jails block access to toll-free numbers
with no exception for calling relay numbers. This prevents Deaf residents from using relay
and thus prevents them from communicating with friends, family, attorneys, and court
personnel.
3.

Prisons and Jails Frequently Limit Access to TDD/TTYs

Although some facilities have TDD/TTYs available on the general phones accessible
to all prisoners, many facilities keep TDD/TTY equipment in a staff member’s office or
some other generally inaccessible location. In contrast, pay phones for hearing prisoners are
located in public areas such as dayrooms or recreation yards. As a result, many Deaf
prisoners can only get access to TDD/TTY machines during working hours, during

Marlene H. Dortch, Secretary
Federal Communications Commission
RE: Comments of Prison Law Office
Regarding Proceeding 12-375, Paragraph 42
March 20, 2013
Page 4

weekdays, and when staff members are available and don’t have other pressing duties. This
means that Deaf prisoners cannot contact friends and family who are out of their homes
during the work day. It also means that Deaf prisoners are limited to far fewer possible
hours of communication than hearing prisoners have. In states where rates are cheaper
during the evenings and on the weekends, deaf prisoners cannot take advantage of these rates
because staff may be unavailable during those times.
4.

Videophones Are the Preferred Method of Communication in the Deaf
Community Because They Rely on Visual Communication

Videophones and captioned telephones are the better telecommunication option for
many deaf people. Typewritten communication is not the equivalent of voice communication
for individuals who communicate in sign language, and prisoners with residual hearing can
follow telephone conversations on their own with some assistance. With the advent of new
technology and relay services, including internet-based relay services and videophone
technology that allows sign language users to communicate in sign language in real-time,
most TDD/TTY users have migrated to other forms of communication to access the
telephone network.
Many Deaf prisoners report to us that their families do not have TDD/TTY devices at
all, having migrated to videophones. According to the FCC’s TTY Transition Subgroup,
TDD/TTY use is declining on average 10% per year and has dropped by half over the last
seven years. 1 Because there is no way to call a videophone from a TDD/TTY, Deaf
prisoners are left with no way to communicate with their families at all. The introduction of
videophones to correctional facilities would enable these prisoners to have the same access
to inmate calling services that hearing inmates have.
Recommendations
For the foregoing reasons, the Prison Law Office recommends that the FCC mandate
the following:
1. Prisoners need access to both video phones and TDD/TTYs to ensure that deaf and
hard of hearing prisoners have adequate and equal access to inmate calling
services. This is because prisoners who have a late-in-life hearing impairment and
were not born deaf may not sign well, or prisoners whose families do not sign, will
still need to use TDD/TTYs.
1

http://eaac-recommendations.wikispaces.com/file/view/EAAC+TTY+transition+report+Dec-10-2012.pdf

Marlene H. Dortch, Secretary
Federal Communications Commission
RE: Comments of Prison Law Office
Regarding Proceeding 12-375, Paragraph 42
March 20, 2013
Page 5

2. Time limits on telephone calls should be longer for deaf prisoners using
videophones or TDD/TTYs.
3. Because it takes longer to complete a TDD/TTY call, the rates charged for
videophones and TDD/TTY calls should be reduced to at least one half or one
quarter, respectively, of the charges for voice calls.
4. Relay numbers should be accessible from all inmate calling services.
We thank you for the opportunity to comment on this issue.
Sincerely yours,
/s/
Corene Kendrick, Staff Attorney
Sheena Green, Law Clerk