Human Rights Defense Center
DEDICATED TO PROTECTING HUMAN RIGHTS

December 20, 2013

Submitted Online Only

The Honorable Tom Wheeler, Chairman
Federal Communications Commission
445 12th Street, S.W.
Washington, DC 20554
Re: Comment in the Matter of Rates for Inmate Calling Services,
WC Docket No. 12-375 (Further Notice of Proposed Rulemaking)
Dear Chairman Wheeler:
The Human Rights Defense Center (HRDC), on behalf of the Campaign for Prison Phone Justice
and in conjunction with Campaign co-coordinators Working Narratives and the Center for Media
Justice / Media Action Grassroots Network (MAG-Net), submits this comment concerning the
FCC’s Further Notice of Proposed Rulemaking related to Inmate Calling Services (ICS).
First, we commend the Commission for its landmark decision to enact reforms related to ICS
services, including rate caps and safe harbor rates for interstate prison phone calls, to ensure that
ICS rates are just, reasonable and fair. We applaud the fact that the FCC has required ICS rates to
be cost-based, and that commissions can no longer be recovered as a cost of ICS services.
In April 2011, HRDC’s monthly publication, Prison Legal News, published a detailed exposé on
the prison phone industry that included state-by-state interstate ICS rates as well as commission
percentages and amounts, based on 2007-2008 data. We have since published an updated report
in the December 2013 issue of Prison Legal News based on 2012-2013 data that includes stateby-state interstate, intrastate interLATA and local ICS rates, plus commission percentages and
payments nationwide. This updated report, which includes new data analysis plus comparisons
with our previously-reported ICS data, is attached hereto as Exhibit A.
When the Commission’s final order on WC Docket No. 12-375 goes into effect it will impact 30
Departments of Corrections (DOCs) that currently charge more than the rate cap established for
collect interstate prison phone calls ($3.75 based on a 15-minute call); the same number of DOCs
currently charge more than the cap for debit and/or prepaid interstate calls ($3.15 based on a 15______________________________________________________________________________
P.O. Box 1151
Lake Worth, FL 33460
Phone: 561.360.2523 Fax: 866.735.7136
pwright@prisonlegalnews.org

Page | 2

minute call). Additionally, at least 41 DOCs charge collect interstate rates above the safe harbor
rates established by the Commission ($2.10 based on a 15-minute call), while 40 charge more
than the safe harbor rates for debit and/or prepaid interstate calls ($1.80 based on a 15-minute
call). The fact that so many DOCs charge interstate ICS rates above the caps set by the FCC
illustrates why the Commission’s order is necessary to ensure just and reasonable rates.
As set forth below, we submit that the Commission’s rate caps and other reforms applicable to
interstate ICS calls should be extended to intrastate calls. We also provide comments on other
issues addressed in the Further Notice of Proposed Rulemaking, including legal authority for the
Commission’s regulation of intrastate ICS rates, ancillary charges and quality of service.
Importance of ICS Reforms
Phone calls are the primary form of communication for prisoners who are housed at facilities
located so far from their families that in-person visits are impracticable. This is of particular
importance to federal prisoners, who can be housed at any Bureau of Prisons facility nationwide.
Further, according to a recent report by Grassroots Leadership, “Locked Up and Shipped Away,”
over 10,000 state prisoners from Vermont, Hawaii, California and Idaho are housed in out-ofstate facilities, often thousands of miles from their homes and families.1 Access to affordable
phone calls is also vitally important for immigrants held in detention.
Research has consistently found that prisoners who maintain close connections with their
families while incarcerated are less likely to commit crimes and return to prison following their
release. Even ICS providers acknowledge that maintaining family ties has a rehabilitative effect
on prisoners and results in reduced recidivism rates. For example, according to Global Tel*Link
(GTL): “Studies and reports continue to support that recidivism can be significantly reduced by
regular connection and communications between inmates, families and friends – 13% reduction
in felony reconviction and a 25% reduction in technical violations.” Telmate president Kevin
O’Neil agreed, stating, “The more inmates connect with their friends and family members the
less likely they are to be rearrested after they’re released.”2
However, excessively high prison phone rates continue to pose a barrier to communication
between prisoners and their family members and children. As the FCC noted in its final order,
an estimated 2.7 million children in the United States have an incarcerated parent.3
Current ICS Data
When considering the need for additional ICS reforms as described in the Further Notice of
Proposed Rulemaking, the below examination of current prison phone-related data should be
useful. More detailed information and analysis is included in Exhibit A.
1

http://grassrootsleadership.org/locked-up-and-shipped-away
Petitioners’ Opposition to Petition for Stay of Report and Order Pending Appeal, WC Docket No. 12-375, Exhibit
D, page 6 (October 29, 2013); www.telmate.com/oregon-doc-installatio
3
www.pewtrusts.org/uploadedFiles/wwwpewtrustsorg/Reports/Economic_Mobility/Collateral%20Costs%20
FINAL.pdf
2

Page | 3

Interstate ICS Rates
Alabama, Alaska, Georgia and Minnesota charge the highest collect interstate rates for prison
phone calls, at $17.30 for a 15-minute call. Other states with exceptionally high interstate rates
include Ohio, which charges $16.97 for a collect 15-minute call, and Idaho, which charges
$16.55. [See Exhibit A, page 17].
Based on a 15-minute interstate ICS call, thirteen states charge over $10.00 for collect calls,
eight charge more than $10.00 for prepaid calls and seven charge over $10.00 for a debit call.
Currently, the average rates for 15-minute interstate ICS calls are $7.18 for collect, $6.05 for
prepaid and $5.56 for debit calls, based on state DOC data.
In terms of the lowest interstate rates, three states charge less than $1.00 for collect, prepaid and
debit calls. New Mexico charges a flat $.65 for collect and debit calls, plus a flat $.59 for prepaid
calls. New York charges $.048 per minute for all types of calls, or $.72 for a 15-minute call. The
rates in South Carolina include a flat $.99 for a collect call and flat $.75 for prepaid/debit calls.
Intrastate ICS Rates
With respect to intrastate interLATA rates, based on a 15-minute prison phone call, eleven states
currently charge over $5.00 for collect calls, seven charge more than $5.00 for a prepaid call and
five charge over $5.00 for debit calls. The highest intrastate ICS rates are in Delaware, which
charges $10.70 for 15-minute calls of all types. Other high intrastate rates include $8.40 for a 15minute collect call in South Dakota, $6.75 for collect, debit and prepaid calls in Alabama, and
$6.45 for a collect call in Minnesota. [See Exhibit A, page 19].
The current average rates for 15-minute intrastate interLATA prison phone calls are $3.90 for
collect, $3.41 for prepaid and $3.42 for debit calls, based on data from state DOCs.
Four states charge less than $1.00 for a 15-minute intrastate call for collect, debit and prepaid
calls: New Mexico (flat $.65 for collect and debit calls, and flat $.59 for prepaid); Rhode Island
(flat $.70 for collect and prepaid, and flat $.63 for debit calls); New York ($.72 for all types
of calls based on a rate of $.048 per minute); and South Carolina (flat $.99 for collect and flat
$.75 for debit and prepaid calls).
Local ICS Rates
For local ICS calls, the highest rates (based on a 15-minute call) are $5.70 for all categories of
calls in Mississippi; $5.30 for collect and prepaid calls and $4.50 for debit calls in Maine; $5.00
for collect calls in Colorado; and $4.95 for all types of calls in New Jersey. Nine states charge
more than $3.00 for a 15-minute local ICS call for all categories of calls.
Average rates for 15-minute local ICS calls are currently $2.30 for collect, $2.08 for prepaid and
$1.98 for debit calls, based on data from state DOCs.

Page | 4

Twelve states provide local ICS calls for $1.00 or less for all types of calls, based on a 15-minute
call – including Alaska, which is the only state that offers free local calls. Other than Alaska, the
lowest local ICS rates include a flat $.50 in Florida for all calls; a flat $.50 for collect and prepaid
calls in North Dakota plus $.05 per minute for debit calls ($.75 for a 15-minute call); a flat $.66
for collect, $.59 for prepaid and $.65 for debit calls in New Mexico; a flat $.70 for collect and
prepaid calls and $.63 for debit calls in Rhode Island; a flat $.70 for collect calls and $.50 for
prepaid and debit calls in Nebraska; and a flat $.65 for collect calls and $.50 for prepaid and
debit calls in Maryland. [See Exhibit A, page 21].
ICS Commissions
The vast majority of state DOCs continue to receive commission kickbacks from their ICS
providers, usually in the form of a percentage of revenue generated from prisoners’ phone calls.
Based on full or partial commission data from 49 states, prison phone companies paid at least
$123.3 million in ICS kickbacks to DOCs in 2012. [See Exhibit A, page 23]. Notably, this does
not include commissions generated from phone services at federal prisons, jails, private prisons,
juvenile facilities and immigration detention centers.
Current state DOC commission rates range from a low of 7% in Alaska to a high of 76% in
Illinois (although Maryland receives an 87% commission on collect ICS calls). The average
commission rate for states that have a percentage-of-revenue commission is 47.79%, based on
2012-2013 data. This represents an increase of over five percent from the average commission
rate of 41.9% in 2007-2008.
Eight states have banned ICS commissions, mostly through legislation: California, Michigan,
Missouri, Nebraska, New Mexico, New York, Rhode Island and South Carolina.
Not surprisingly, since prison phone companies do not have to recoup commission payments
from the phone rates charged in non-commission states, those states have some of the lowest
ICS rates in the nation. For instance, of the ten lowest prison phone rates for interstate collect,
prepaid and debit calls, five are in states that have banned commissions. Of the ten lowest
intrastate rates, six are in states that do not accept commissions, while of the ten lowest local
rates, four are in states that prohibit commissions.
ICS Providers
Three ICS providers – GTL, Securus and CenturyLink – control approximately 90% of the state
DOC market, either directly or through their subsidiaries. This represents a slight increase since
HRDC reported prison phone data for 2007-2008; at that time, GTL, Securus and CenturyLink
or their subsidiaries had contracts with 43 (86%) of the state DOCs.
Fifteen DOC phone contracts changed hands over the five-year period from 2007-2008 to 20122013; however, most of the states (70%) continued to contract with the same company, and when
ICS contracts change it is usually from one of the three largest prison phone providers to another.
This fairly low rate of contract turnover, and the fact that just three firms dominate the market,
indicates that the prison phone industry is an oligopoly with little actual competition.

Page | 5

ICS Contracts
As HRDC noted in its March 25, 2013 comment, the initial terms of prison phone contracts for
three states – Connecticut, Texas and Arizona – extend for 7 years. Such long-term contracts
ensure that prison phone companies maintain a monopoly on providing ICS services within state
DOCs for prolonged periods of time. Prison phone contracts continue to have lengthy terms.
For example, when Florida rebid its ICS contract in 2013, the initial contract term was for five
years with five one-year renewal options. Similarly, the Illinois DOC’s recent contract with
Securus, which went into effect in September 2012, has an initial term through June 2015 plus
an option to renew for up to six more years. And when Oklahoma entered into an ICS contract
with VAC (GTL) in 2011, the initial term was for one year – with nine one-year renewals.
Additionally, our April 2011 report on the prison phone industry described how some state
DOCs evaluate bids for ICS contracts based primarily on the highest commission rate, in order
to maximize their kickback revenue. That practice also continues.
According to the Illinois DOC’s 2012 invitation for bids for its prison phone contract, the
commission percentage was given the greatest weight among factors used to evaluate the bids –
55%, or 550 of 1,000 total available “price points.”
Likewise, when the Oklahoma DOC asked for a final best offer for bids on the state’s ICS
contract in 2011, it specified, “The final award of this contract will be based upon the highest
revenue sharing offered to DOC for the life of the contract.”
These examples indicate that ICS commissions and the lucrative revenue they generate for
corrections agencies remain a compelling factor when selecting prison phone providers.

Necessity for Intrastate Rate Reform
The need for reform of intrastate ICS rates, including rate caps and safe harbor rates similar to
those imposed by the Commission on interstate rates, is manifest. One important indicator as to
why the Commission needs to regulate intrastate prison phone services is the number of states
with in-state rates that exceed the FCC’s cap and safe harbor rates for interstate calls.
At least 23 states charge intrastate rates and 8 states have local rates above the FCC’s cap for
collect interstate calls ($3.75 for a 15-minute call). Additionally, at least 23 states have intrastate
rates and 9 states charge local rates above the cap for debit and/or prepaid interstate calls ($3.15
for a 15-minute call), based on 2012-2013 data.
With respect to safe harbor rates, at least 39 states have intrastate rates and 23 states charge local
rates that exceed the safe harbor rate established by the Commission for collect interstate calls
($2.10 for a 15-minute call); similarly, 38 states have intrastate rates and 22 charge local rates
above the safe harbor rate for prepaid and/or debit interstate calls ($1.80 for a 15-minute call).

Page | 6

This indicates that unless rate caps are extended to intrastate and local calls, states can continue
to charge in-state rates that far exceed the caps and safe harbor rates the FCC has established for
interstate ICS calls. Examples of the disparities that currently exist between capped interstate
rates and non-capped intrastate rates include the Delaware DOC, which charges $10.70 for a 15minute intrastate call, and the Mississippi DOC, which charges $5.70 for a 15-minute local call.
[See Exhibit A, pages 19, 21].
Further, the need for reform of intrastate ICS rates is evidenced by the fact that the vast majority
of ICS calls are in-state calls; only around 15% of prison phone calls are interstate. Thus, absent
regulation of intrastate ICS rates by the Commission, the vast majority of prisoners’ families and
loved ones will continue to be subject to inflated, excessive prison phone rates on the intrastate
level – which is not just, reasonable or fair. Indeed, it would be grossly unfair and arbitrary if
prisoners have increased phone contact with their children who live in another state, due to the
rate caps and other reforms implemented by the Commission for interstate calls, while prisoners
with children who reside in the same state, who do not have the benefit of such reforms, suffer
less phone contact with their children due to unregulated intrastate ICS rates.
Note that the families of prisoners who make intrastate calls are sometimes just as affected by
high ICS rates as families of prisoners who make interstate calls. For example, Illinois prisoner
Chadwick Wallace wrote in a June 25, 2012 comment filed on CC Docket No. 96-128: “My
family lives in Alton, IL which is 250+ miles away from my facility, which is located in Joliet,
IL. It costs over $10.00 for me to make one phone call home, and due to financial hardship, I do
not get to call home much these days.” [See Exhibit B].
In another comment filed on CC Docket No. 96-128, Earl Harris, a prisoner housed “at SCIGreene on the western side of Pennsylvania,” wrote that “it costs $5.15 for me to make a fifteen
minute phone call to my family and friends. My grandmother [who resides in Philadelphia] is
ninety one years old and her age prevents her from visiting me, she suffers from [] a severe case
of arthritis and that prevents her from writing me, my one and only source of communication
with my grandmother is to call her but that is very difficult due to the high prices of the [ICS]
system here in Pennsylvania’s Department of Corrections.” [See Exhibit C].
Legal Authority for Intrastate Rate Regulation
The legal authority for the Commission to regulate intrastate ICS rates is based on the plain
language of 47 U.S.C. § 276(b), which grants the FCC authority to “prescribe regulations that
establish a per call compensation plan to ensure that all payphone service providers are fairly
compensated for each and every completed intrastate and interstate call....” Section 276(d)
specifies that payphone services include “the provision of inmate telephone service in
correctional institutions, and any ancillary services.”
Further, pursuant to 47 U.S.C. § 201(b), “All charges, practices, classifications, and regulations
for and in connection with such communication service, shall be just and reasonable, and any
such charge, practice, classification, or regulation that is unjust or unreasonable is declared to
be unlawful.” In addition, “The Commission may prescribe such rules and regulations as may

Page | 7

be necessary in the public interest to carry out the provisions of this chapter.” Although 201(b)
applies to “interstate and foreign” telecom services, the requirement for just and reasonable rates
is equally applicable to intrastate rates as part of the “fair compensation” that ICS providers are
entitled to receive. Consider that fair compensation is not limited to what is fair to the providers
but also what is fair to consumers – i.e., those who pay the costs of ICS calls.
As the Congressional Black Caucus remarked in its April 22, 2013 comment submitted on WC
Docket No. 12-375: “A plain reading of §§ 276 and 201 of the Act indicates that the FCC has
broad authority to regulate both interstate and intrastate inmate calling services to ensure that the
rates of inmate calling services are reasonable.”
The Caucus added, “The FCC has historically left the regulation of intrastate inmate calls to the
states, particularly non-inmate calls, and some may read the general guiding provisions in § 152
of the Act to bar FCC jurisdiction over intrastate calls. However, the plain language of §§ 276
and 201 leaves no doubt that, as to inmate calls, the FCC’s jurisdiction covers both interstate and
intrastate telephone calls. Moreover, Congress included a preemption clause (§ 276) to further
clarify FCC jurisdiction. This section provides, ‘To the extent that any State requirements are
inconsistent with the Commission’s regulations, the Commission’s regulations on such matters
shall preempt such State requirements.’”
Thus, §§ 276(b) and 201(b) give the Commission broad authority to regulate both intrastate and
interstate ICS rates, and to ensure that such rates are just, reasonable and fair while providing fair
compensation for prison phone service providers. Further, the FCC has authority to preempt state
requirements inconsistent with the Commission’s regulations pursuant to § 276(c).
Based on the foregoing, HRDC submits that the Commission has the legal authority to regulate
intrastate ICS phone rates, which encompasses the authority to impose rate caps and implement
other measures to ensure just, reasonable and fair intrastate rates.
Lack of Regulation by State Public Utilities Commissions
Some states lack regulation of intrastate ICS rates. For example, intrastate ICS rates in Colorado,
Tennessee and Virginia are wholly or partly unregulated. In 1998, the Colorado Supreme Court
affirmed that the state’s Public Utilities Commission lacked jurisdiction over the Colorado DOC
with respect to certain ICS charges, nor could it regulate the DOC’s ICS provider because the
charges at issue were related to a deregulated service.4
In Tennessee, state legislation has barred the Tennessee Regulatory Authority (TRA) – the
state’s equivalent of a public utilities commission – from regulating in-state telecom providers
that opt for market regulation. Pursuant to T.C.A. § 65-5-109(m), “Upon election of market
regulation by a certificated provider, the provider shall be exempt from all authority jurisdiction,
including, but not limited to, state-based regulation of retail pricing or retail operations....”

4

Powell v. Colorado Public Utilities Commission, 956 P.2d 608 (Colo. 1998).

Page | 8

According to TRA executive director Earl Taylor, intrastate prison phone rates in Tennessee are
unregulated since the DOC’s ICS provider, Global Tel*Link, opted for market regulation. This
is ironic because there is little market “regulation” in the prison phone industry; three providers
control around 90% of the state DOC market for ICS services, and once a prison phone company
wins an ICS contract it enjoys a monopoly on the provision of phone services during the contract
term – which, as noted previously, can extend for up to a decade. Thus, the notion of “market
regulation” with respect to ICS providers is a misnomer, moreso when it is used to justify the
lack of intrastate regulation by state public utilities commissions.
And in Virginia, after the State Corporation Commission (SCC) held in 2001 that “collect call
service from state prison facilities is not being offered on a competitive basis,” the legislature
amended Virginia Code § 56-234(B) to remove the SCC’s jurisdiction over telecom contracts
with government agencies, including the DOC’s ICS contract.5 Senator Thomas Norment, who
sponsored the bill to eliminate the SCC’s jurisdiction, reportedly received almost $3,000 in
campaign contributions from MCI Worldcom, the state’s ICS provider at the time.6
Section 56-234(B) states, “It shall be the duty of every public utility to charge uniformly therefor
all persons, corporations or municipal corporations using such service under like conditions....
The charge for such service shall be at the lowest rate applicable for such service in accordance
with schedules filed with the Commission pursuant to § 56-236.” However, “[N]othing contained
herein ... shall apply to (i) schedules of rates for any telecommunications service provided to the
public by virtue of any contract with, (ii) for any service provided under or relating to a contract
for telecommunications services with, or (iii) contracts for service rendered by any telephone
company to, the state government or any agency thereof, or by any other public utility to any
municipal corporation or to the state or federal government.”
The amendment to § 56-234(B) was challenged, but in March 2003 the Virginia Supreme Court
held – in an unpublished ruling – that the statute precluded the SCC from exercising jurisdiction
over “contracts for services rendered by any telephone company to the state government.”7
Therefore, absent regulatory action by the FCC, in some states there is a lack of regulation of
intrastate ICS phone rates – and this problem will be exacerbated as more states move toward
deregulation of in-state telecom services.
According to a report by the National Regulatory Research Institute, “Between 2010 and April
30, 2012, 21 state legislatures enacted laws that limit what [Public Utilities Commissions] can
regulate. Nine of these states severely limited or completely eliminated COLR obligations and
the requirement that carriers provide a tariffed basic local service product.... As of the end of
April 2012, deregulation legislation was pending in an additional 14 states.” The report further
stated that “Many of the new laws cite competition as the reason for deregulation”; however,
as noted previously, the ICS market is largely non-competitive.8
5

http://www.etccampaign.com/progress.php
http://groups.yahoo.com/neo/groups/patrickcrusade/conversations/topics/21505?var=1
7
MCI WorldCom Network Services, Inc., v. Jones, Record Nos. 021262, 021247 and 020859 (Vir. 2003).
8
“The Year in Review: The Status of Telecommunications Deregulation in 2012” (National Regulatory Research
Institute, June 2012); available at: https://prodnet.www.neca.org/publicationsdocs/wwpdf/61912nrri.pdf
6

Page | 9

Interstate and Intrastate Rate Parity
Lastly, it should be noted that almost half the states currently charge the same rates for interstate
ICS calls and intrastate interLATA calls. This indicates that there is little difference in the cost
between the provision of intrastate vs. interstate calls. Twenty-two states have collect, prepaid
and debit rates for interstate ICS calls that are identical to collect, prepaid and debit rates for
intrastate interLATA calls, respectively. In fact, at least 8 states have identical collect, prepaid
and/or debit rates for interstate, intrastate interLATA and local calls: IL, IN, MS, MT, NJ, NY,
OK and OR. [See Exhibit A, pages 17, 19 and 21].
This parity between interstate and intrastate prison phone calls indicates that ICS providers are
able to provide in-state and interstate calling services at the same rates (and thus presumably the
same costs), and that regulation of intrastate rates by the Commission – including an all-distance
rate cap – would therefore not impose an unfair burden on prison phone companies.
Ancillary Charges
A report by the Prison Policy Initiative released in May 2013, titled “Please Deposit all of Your
Money: Kickbacks, Rates and Hidden Fees in the Jail Phone Industry,” examined ancillary ICS
charges in detail.9 Most prison phone companies impose fees to fund prepaid and debit accounts
using a credit card; for instance, the report notes that ICS providers “charge up to $9.50 to pay
over the internet, up to $10 to pay by phone and up to $12.45 to pay via Western Union.”
As HRDC argued in its March 25, 2013 comment, if such fees are not regulated, ICS providers
could circumvent the Commission’s rate caps “by simply increasing the extra fees or adding new
account-related fees that effectively raise the overall costs of ICS calls.” Revenue from ancillary
fees, which are not subject to commissions, goes directly to ICS providers; thus, providers have
an incentive to maximize fees as a means of maximizing their non-commissionable income.
For example, after the FCC voted to cap interstate prison phone rates in August 2013, Securus
raised its processing fee for credit card payments made by phone from $7.95 to $9.95; it also
increased its monthly Wireless Administration Fee from $2.99 to $3.99. The company added a
State Cost Recovery Fee, which may apply “as a per-call surcharge of up to five percent (5%)
and associated applicable taxes” for intrastate calls, plus a Location Validation Fee, which may
apply “as a per-call surcharge of up to four percent (4%) and associated applicable taxes” for
calls made from facilities that use certain ICS security features.10 As an example of the many
extra fees that ICS providers charge, see Exhibit D (from the Delaware DOC’s contract).
Due to the excessive and abusive nature of ancillary fees charged by ICS providers, the FCC
should utilize close scrutiny when determining whether such fees are cost-based, and limit or
prohibit ancillary charges that are not. The Commission’s authority to regulate ancillary fees is
set forth in § 276(d), which specifies that payphone services include “the provision of inmate
telephone service in correctional institutions, and any ancillary services.” Fees related to the
management of ICS phone accounts fall within the scope of “ancillary services.”
9

http://www.prisonpolicy.org/phones/pleasedeposit.html
https://securustech.net/ac-terms-and-conditions

10

Page | 10

In addition, ancillary charges can be considered an inherent part of the cost of ICS services and
thus construed as a portion of ICS phone rates. For example, before a prisoner can make a debit
ICS call, funds must be placed on their debit phone account. The fee to fund the account (e.g., a
$5.95 fee to place $25 on the account using a credit card) results in less money available to pay
for ICS calls, which effectively increases the per-minute rate. Using this example, if a prisoner
places $25 on his debit account with no fee to fund the account, and calls cost $.25 per minute,
he could make calls totaling 100 minutes. However, if a $5.95 fee is charged to deposit $25 into
the account (resulting in a balance of $19.05), he could make calls totaling only 76.2 minutes –
which equates to an effective ICS rate of $.328 per minute.

Quality of Service for ICS
Numerous commenters to CC Docket No. 96-128 and WC Docket No. 12-375 cited problems
with the quality of ICS calls. Such problems add insult to injury, since consumers of ICS calls
typically pay excessive phone rates for low-quality service yet have no other alternative because
ICS providers enjoy a monopoly on prison phone services for a given facility or prison system
pursuant to their exclusive contracts with corrections agencies. Absent other options, consumers
cannot take their business to another provider that offers higher quality service – which again
illustrates the fictional notion of competitive “market regulation” in the ICS context.
Quality issues noted by prisoners and ICS call recipients include poor line quality, dropped calls
that necessitate call-backs (thus having to pay another connection charge) and inaccurate billing
by ICS providers. According to a July 13, 2012 comment filed by Anna Lednum, whose son
is incarcerated in Massachusetts, the voice quality is “always very poor.” The “volume [is]
weak with a ‘cave’ effect often during calls. The words are often garbled and his sentences are
obliterated or interrupted by static, clicking and announcements.” Mrs. Lednum further wrote
that “occasionally our call is simply dropped/cut off, or ended one or two minutes early,” and
“[d]ue to the poor phone service, often we must drop a call and try again.... Having to repeat
the call is expensive, and especially troublesome when due to Poor Service.” She also stated
that “[v]ery frequently erroneous remaining debit amounts are quoted; this results in difficulty
budgeting and replenishing [her son’s] phone fund in a timely manner.” [See Exhibit E].
In a February 21, 2013 comment filed on WC Docket No. 12-375, Florida prisoner Antonio
Hernandez wrote concerning his frustration with dropped calls. “[O]ver time my calls have been
dropped quite frequently after only like two minutes. I feel that is GTL doing it on purpose to
recharge the $1.25-$1.50 first minute fee? And yes, they charge that when the call is dropped
and I call right back.” [See Exhibit F].
Poor voice quality and dropped calls are not limited to prisoners and their families; they also
affect communication between prisoners and their legal counsel. Many attorneys who represent
prisoners at federal, state and county facilities experience problems when trying to communicate
with their clients by phone. Patricia Garin, with the law firm of Stern, Shapiro, Weisberg and
Garin, LLP in Massachusetts, voiced her concerns in an April 20, 2010 affidavit: “Our office
receives between approximately 40 and more than 70 telephone calls per month from clients

Page | 11

in Massachusetts correctional institutions.... The sound quality of telephone calls received from
incarcerated clients varies.... I estimate that one in every six or seven calls had a connection or
reception problem. But connection problems with calls from incarcerated clients that I received
at home on my personal cellular phone were markedly worse: at least one call in three received
at home had a terrible connection ... versus one in six or seven problem calls in the office.”
She added, “With respect to dropped or cut-off calls, I had a similar experience: calls at home on
my personal cellular phone from incarcerated clients ... were much more likely to be dropped or
cut-off prematurely than calls received at the office. Very few calls are dropped or prematurely
cut off in the office. But calls received on my personal phone at home were frequently dropped,
generally preceded by a message that an attempt to make a three-way call was detected. I never
attempted to add a third party to such a call nor did I ever attempt to forward such a call to a third
party.”11 [See Exhibit G].
Patricia C. Voorhies, Managing Director of Clinical and Experimental Education at Northeastern
University in Boston, shared similar experiences in a May 3, 2010 affidavit. She wrote: “On the
main telephone line, which receives 30-40 calls per week, it is frequently very difficult to hear
what the prisoner is saying unless he or she shouts. On the second line to the clinic administrator,
with about 10 calls per week, about one-in-ten calls have other voices on the line, static or
echoes.”12 [See Exhibit H].
Beverly Chorbajian, another Massachusetts attorney, stated in a May 4, 2010 affidavit that based
on her conservative estimate, “half the calls we receive from correctional institutions have poor
reception and that one out of five calls are dropped prematurely. The calls dropped by Evercom
every month are almost all preceded by a recorded message that the system detected an attempt
to add a third party. Neither I nor anyone in my office has ever attempted to add a third party or
forward a call from an incarcerated client.”13 [See Exhibit I].
Additionally, HRDC Associate Director Alex Friedmann receives phone calls from prisoners
housed in Tennessee state prisons. “The calls are uniformly of poor quality,” he states. “The
quality issues often relate to the low sound volume of the ICS system, which makes it difficult
to hear the caller even when I maximize the volume level on my phone.”
Notably, the experiences of Mrs. Lednum, Mr. Hernandez, Ms. Garin and Ms. Chorbajian are
not unusual or atypical with respect to dropped calls or calls that are terminated due to alleged
three-way connections.
As just one example, the Florida Public Service Commission (PSC) found in 2008 that TCG
Public Communications, a subsidiary of AT&T Communications of the Southern States, had
improperly disconnected calls made by prisoners at the Miami-Dade Pretrial Detention Center
due to a faulty system that incorrectly detected three-way connections. Each time a call was
improperly disconnected and the prisoner called back, the recipient incurred another connection

11

Reply Comments of Martha Wright, et al., WC Docket No. 12-375, Exhibit A-30 (April 22, 2013).
Ibid, Exhibit A-29.
13
Ibid, Exhibit A-24.
12

Page | 12

charge of $1.75 to $2.25. The PSC estimated that the faulty three-way call detection software
resulted in $6.3 million in improper charges over a six-year period, and found that TCG was
aware of the problem but failed to correct it.
The PSC further held that TCG should be assessed a penalty for “willful violation” and “refusal
to comply” with Rule 25-24.515(21), Florida Administrative Code, which prohibits terminating
prisoner calls “until after a minimum elapsed time of ten minutes.” PSC officials determined that
TCG “had the ability to and did not change the three-way detection software’s sensitivity levels
at its discretion.” TCG was acquired by Global Tel*Link in 2005.
Although the PSC initially recommended that TCG pay $6.3 million in refunds to consumers
who had been overcharged, that recommendation was later dropped. Rather, the PSC approved
a $1.25 million fine, which was paid by TCG on September 30, 2009. The fine reverted to the
State of Florida; call recipients who were overcharged due to the improperly disconnected ICS
calls resulting from TCG’s faulty software received no compensation.14
Thus, with respect to dropped calls, as stated in HRDC’s March 25, 2013 comment, we support a
protocol whereby if a call is dropped or ends unexpectedly before the expiration of the maximum
duration of the call due to no fault of the calling parties, and a prisoner calls the same number
again within a specified period of time (such as 2 to 3 minutes), then the connection charge for
the second call is automatically waived. We oppose protocols in which call recipients must file
a refund request for connection charges incurred when subsequent calls are made after a call is
dropped, as this places the burden on the call recipient rather than the ICS provider.
Additionally, due to state-level deregulation, issues related to quality of service increasingly are
being removed from the jurisdiction of state public utilities commissions. For example, based on
a 2012 report by the National Regulatory Research Institute, “One of the key components of the
deregulation legislation enacted between 2010 and April 2012 is the elimination of quality-ofservice metrics and oversight. Thirteen state legislatures eliminated quality-of-service oversight
as part of the legislation passed during this timeframe.” Further, “In states where quality-ofservice regulation has been eliminated, the commission’s role in responding to customer
complaints regarding billing, installation, and other issues has also been diminished.”15
Based on the foregoing, HRDC submits that it is necessary for the Commission to promulgate
minimum quality of service standards for ICS providers, given 1) the consistent and repeated
quality complaints expressed by prisoners and ICS call recipients, 2) the history of abuse by ICS
providers relative to dropped calls, 3) deregulation on the state level that bars public utilities
commissions from addressing service quality issues, and 4) the lack of alternatives available to
consumers who want to switch to a different service provider due to quality issues but are unable
to do so due to the monopoly model of ICS services within a facility or prison system. Therefore,
national standards are necessary in regard to quality of service for prison phone calls.16

14

Florida Public Service Commission, Docket No. 060614-TC.
“The Year in Review: The Status of Telecommunications Deregulation in 2012” (National Regulatory Research
Institute, June 2012); available at: https://prodnet.www.neca.org/publicationsdocs/wwpdf/61912nrri.pdf
16
Cf., “Evaluating Telecommunications Service Quality” (National Regulatory Research Institute, February 2011);
available at: www.nrri.org/documents/317330/02274032-4254-40d2-8831-e5f71611e03c
15

Page | 13

ICS for the Deaf and Hard of Hearing Community
HRDC endorses and adopts the comment filed by Helping Education to Advance the Rights of
the Deaf (HEARD) on WC Docket No. 12-375 in response to the Further Notice of Proposed
Rulemaking, relative to ICS for deaf and hard of hearing prisoners and those with whom they
communicate. Specifically, we endorse and adopt HEARD’s comment concerning the provision
of videophones, captioned telephones, TTYs and other auxiliary aids for prisoners who are deaf
and hard of hearing, and the need to ensure that rates charged for such accommodations do not
exceed the rates charged for ICS for non-deaf or hard of hearing prisoners.

Regulation of Non-voice Communication Services
HRDC endorses and adopts the comment filed by the Prison Policy Initiative (PPI) on WC
Docket No. 12-375 in response to the Further Notice of Proposed Rulemaking, with respect
to non-voice-based methods of communication in prisons, jails and other detention facilities.
Specifically, we endorse and adopt PPI’s comment regarding the need for the Commission to
regulate, to the extent possible, the provision of non-voice communication services by ICS
providers, including fee-based video visitation and email services.

Conclusions and Recommendations
Based on HRDC’s extensive research into ICS services, and data obtained from state DOCs and
other agencies concerning current ICS contracts, phone rates, calling options and commissions,
it is our conclusion that:
•

Intrastate ICS calls, like interstate calls before the Commission implemented rate caps
and safe harbor rates, result in excessive costs that place a financial burden on prisoners
and their family members, who are often unable to afford the high costs required to
maintain phone contact on a regular basis.

•

Almost half the state DOCs currently charge intrastate ICS rates above the rate caps
established by the Commission for interstate ICS calls, and almost 40 states charge
intrastate ICS rates above the safe harbor rates established by the Commission for
interstate ICS calls.

•

The Commission has legal authority for intrastate ICS rate regulation.

•

Most ICS calls are intrastate calls, and in-state calling rates are not subject to regulation
by public utilities commissions in a growing number of states due to deregulation. Thus,
absent action by the FCC, the majority of ICS calls will not be subject to regulation to
ensure just, reasonable and fair rates.

Page | 14

•

In addition to excessive intrastate ICS rates, prisoners’ families have been negatively
impacted by ancillary charges such as fees to fund ICS accounts, cancel accounts and
receive refunds from accounts.

•

There are significant problems with ICS quality of service, including issues related to
line quality, dropped calls, sound volume and billing practices by ICS providers.

In summary and based on the foregoing, we recommend that the Commission take the following
remedial actions to ensure just, reasonable and fair ICS phone rates and services:
1. Extend to intrastate ICS phone rates and services the same types of reforms the FCC
established for interstate ICS rates and services in its September 26, 2013 final order,
including rate caps, safe harbor rates, data reporting, and a requirement that intrastate
ICS rates and ancillary charges be cost-based.
2. Establish national standards for ICS providers related to quality of service, including
standards concerning line quality and dropped calls. In the latter regard, the standards
should address connection charges for subsequent calls following dropped calls.
3. Require periodic reviews of ICS providers to ensure that intrastate ICS rates remain just
and reasonable, and to verify that ICS providers are complying with the Commission’s
mandates.
4. Require compliance with the Commission’s mandates by a date certain – not to exceed
six months from the date the mandates become effective.
Thank you for your consideration of this comment, and please feel free to contact us should you
require any additional information that we may be able to provide.
Sincerely,

Paul Wright
Executive Director, HRDC
Attachments

EXHIBIT A

Prison Legal News
VOL. 24 No. 12
ISSN 1075-7678

Dedicated to Protecting Human Rights

December 2013

FCC Order Heralds Hope for Reform of Prison Phone Industry
by John E. Dannenberg and Alex Friedmann
“After a long time – too long – the Commission takes action to finally address the high
cost that prison inmates and their families
must pay for phone service. This is not just an
issue of markets and rates; it is a broader issue
of social justice.” – FCC Commissioner Jessica
Rosenworcel

O

n August 9, 2013, the Federal
Communications Commission (FCC),
in a landmark decision, voted to cap the cost
of long distance rates for phone calls made
by prisoners and enact other reforms related
to the prison phone industry. [See: PLN,
Sept. 2013, p.42].
The FCC’s 131-page final order was
released in September and published in the
Federal Register on November 13, 2013. It
has not yet gone into effect due to a 90-day

Inside
FL DOC Phone Contract Fight 	

24

From the Editor 	

26

Habeas Hints 	

28

FCI Danbury Controversy 	

32

Telemedicine Behind Bars 	

34

BOP Solitary Confinement 	

36

Correctional Health Care Costs 	

38

9th Circuit: Walkaway not Escape 	

47

Expungement in Minnesota 	

48

Iowa Eases Voting Restoration 	

50

Elder Abuse in Prisons 	

52

Extradition to U.S. Blocked 	

54

News in Brief 	

56

waiting period following publication in the
Register, plus legal challenges have since
been filed by the nation’s two largest prison
phone companies.
The order, entered in response to a
petition for rulemaking submitted to the
FCC, is the result of a decade-long effort
to lower prison phone rates and implement
much-needed changes in the prison phone
industry.

Prison Phone Services: A Primer
The billion-dollar prison phone
industry is comprised of companies that
provide phone services for prisoners and
detainees held in state, federal and privately-operated prisons, county and municipal
jails, juvenile facilities, immigration detention centers and other correctional facilities.
Such services are commonly referred to as
Inmate Calling Services (ICS).
Five companies, known as ICS providers, dominate the prison phone market;
Global Tel*Link (GTL), Securus Technologies, CenturyLink, Telmate and
ICSolutions provide phone services for 49
of the 50 state Departments of Corrections.
A number of other companies, such as PayTel, NCIC, Legacy and EagleTel, provide
ICS services primarily to jails.
When prisoners make phone calls they
typically have three payment options – collect, prepaid or debit. Collect calls are paid
by the call recipient, prepaid calls are paid
from a pre-funded account established by
the call recipient and debit calls are funded
from a prisoner’s institutional debit account. Prisoners can usually call only a
small number of people on a specified list,
and calls are frequently limited to 15 or 20
minutes per call.
There are three types of phone calls
within the telecommunications industry

– local, intrastate and interstate. Local
calls are made to numbers within a local calling area, such as the same city or
county. Intrastate calls are made within the
boundaries of a state, either within a local
access and transport area (LATA), called an
intraLATA call, or across LATAs, known
as an interLATA call. Interstate (long distance) calls are made across state lines and
are generally the most expensive.
Prisoners’ family members and friends
pay for the vast majority of ICS calls, either by accepting collect calls, establishing
prepaid accounts or sending money to their
incarcerated loved ones to place on their
debit phone accounts.
ICS rates are much higher than
non-prison rates, in large part because
prison phone companies pay “commission”
kickbacks to the corrections agencies with
which they contract. Such commissions
are usually based on a percentage of the
revenue generated from prisoners’ calls and
have nothing to do with the actual cost of
providing the phone service. Because ICS
providers factor commission payments –
which currently average 47.79% for state
Departments of Corrections (DOCs) – into
the phone rates they charge, the rates are
artificially inflated. Absent commission
kickbacks, which are received by 42 state
DOCs, the rates could be considerably
lower. ICS providers paid at least $123.3
million to state prison systems in 2012.
Phone calls are the primary form of
communication for prisoners who are
housed at facilities located far from their
families and thus do not receive in-person
visits. Research has shown that prisoners
who maintain close connections with their
families while incarcerated are less likely to
commit crimes and return to prison following their release.

Prison Legal News

a publication of the
Human Rights Defense Center

www.humanrightsdefensecenter.org
EDITOR

Paul Wright
MANAGING EDITOR

Alex Friedmann
COLUMNISTS

Michael Cohen, Kent Russell,
Mumia Abu Jamal
CONTRIBUTING WRITERS

Mike Brodheim, Matthew Clarke,
John Dannenberg, Derek Gilna,
Gary Hunter, David Reutter, Mike Rigby,
Brandon Sample, Mark Wilson,
Joe Watson, Christopher Zoukis
research associate

Mari Garcia

advertising director

Susan Schwartzkopf
LAYOUT

Lansing Scott
HRDC litigation project

Lance Weber—General Counsel
Monique Roberts—Staff Attorney
Robert Jack—Staff Attorney
PLN is a monthly publication.
A one year subscription is $30 for prisoners,
$35 for individuals, and $90 for lawyers and
institutions. Prisoner donations of less than
$30 will be pro-rated at $3.00/issue. Do not
send less than $18.00 at a time. All foreign
subscriptions are $100 sent via airmail.
PLN accepts Visa and Mastercard orders by
phone. New subscribers please allow four
to six weeks for the delivery of your first
issue. Confirmation of receipt of donations
cannot be made without an SASE. PLN is
a section 501 (c)(3) non-profit organization. Donations are tax deductible. Send
contributions to:
Prison Legal News
PO Box 1151
Lake Worth, FL 33460
561-360-2523
info@prisonlegalnews.org
www.prisonlegalnews.org
PLN reports on legal cases and news stories
related to prisoner rights and prison conditions of confinement. PLN welcomes all news
clippings, legal summaries and leads on
people to contact related to those issues.
Article submissions should be sent to - The
Editor - at the above address. We cannot
return submissions without an SASE. Check
our website or send an SASE for writer
guidelines.
Advertising offers are void where prohibited by law and constitutional detention
facility rules.
PLN is indexed by the Alternative Press Index,
Criminal Justice Periodicals Index and the
Department of Justice Index.

Prison Legal News

Hope for Prison Phone Reform (cont.)
Even prison phone companies acknowledge the fact that maintaining family
ties has a beneficial effect on prisoners and
results in reduced recidivism. For example,
according to GTL, “Studies and reports
continue to support that recidivism can be
significantly reduced by regular connection
and communications between inmates,
families and friends – [a] 13% reduction
in felony reconviction and a 25% reduction
in technical violations.” Telmate president
Kevin O’Neil agreed, saying, “The more
inmates connect with their friends and
family members the less likely they are to
be rearrested after they’re released.”
High prison phone rates, however,
create a financial barrier to communication
between prisoners and their families due to
the costs associated with ICS calls.
“These rates discourage communication between inmates and their families and
larger support networks, which negatively
impact the millions of children with an
incarcerated parent, contribute to the high
rate of recidivism in our nation’s correctional facilities, and increase the costs of our
justice system,” the FCC observed.
As stated by the Human Rights
Defense Center (HRDC), the parent organization of Prison Legal News, “When
families cannot pay the cost of phone calls
from their incarcerated loved ones, those
same families and their communities pay
a different kind of price: isolation, stress,
decreased rehabilitation and increased
recidivism rates. The costs are also literal;
many families of people held in prisons,
jails and immigration detention centers pay
high phone bills at the expense of groceries,
medical bills and other necessities.”
Notably, the FCC’s recent order establishes a rate cap of $.25 per minute for
collect interstate calls and $.21 per minute
for prepaid and debit interstate calls, which
equates to a cap of $3.75 for a 15-minute
collect call and $3.15 for a 15-minute debit
or prepaid call. This is a significant reduction from the highest prison phone rates,
which currently range up to $17.30 for a
15-minute call (or more than $275 a month
for a one-hour call once a week).
PLN and HRDC played an active and
instrumental role in the FCC’s decision to
reduce the costs of prison phone calls and
implement other reforms; exorbitant prison

3

phone rates have been a focus of HRDC,
and PLN has reported on ICS-related issues since 1990.

History Behind the FCC’s Order
The high costs of prison phone calls
and the practice of commission kickbacks
were presented to the FCC in 2003, in the
form of a petition for rulemaking filed by
attorneys representing Martha Wright, a
District of Columbia resident, who filed a
lawsuit challenging the phone rates she had
to pay to stay in touch with her incarcerated
grandson. The federal court referred the
matter to the FCC since that agency has
primary jurisdiction over interstate phone
rates. See: Wright v. Corrections Corporation
of America, U.S.D.C. (D. DC), Case No.
1:00-cv-00293-GK.
An alternative petition for rulemaking,
commonly known as the “Wright petition,”
which requested a cap on prison phone
rates, was filed with the FCC in 2007. See:
In the Matter of Rates for Interstate Inmate
Calling Services, WC Docket No. 96-128.
Little action was taken on the Wright petition for the next four years.
In April 2011, following extensive
research initially funded by a small grant
from the Funding Exchange, PLN published a damning exposé on the prison
phone industry that included detailed
information on prison phone rates and
commission percentages and amounts,
based on 2007-2008 data. PLN exposed the
exorbitant rates that ICS providers charge,
reporting that state DOCs received an
average kickback of 41.9% of prison phone
revenue, that over $143 million in commission kickbacks had been paid in one year
alone under state DOC phone contracts
and that eliminating ICS commissions
demonstrably resulted in lower phone rates.
[See: PLN, April 2011, p.1].
As a result of the interest generated
by PLN’s report on the prison phone industry, which was filed with the FCC
on the Wright petition’s docket, HRDC
co-founded the national Campaign for
Prison Phone Justice in conjunction with
the Center for Media Justice/Media Action Grassroots Network (MAG-Net) and
Working Narratives.
The Campaign, which grew to include
55 supporting organizations and thousands
of individual members, coordinated actions
to pressure the FCC to act on the Wright
petition and reduce the cost of prison phone
December 2013

Hope for Prison Phone Reform (cont.)
calls – such as letter-writing and email
campaigns, plus a rally outside the Commission’s Washington, D.C. headquarters.
Tens of thousands of people submitted
comments to the FCC or signed petitions,
including over 1,700 prisoners and dozens
of civil rights, faith-based, immigration
reform and prisoners’ rights organizations.
[See: PLN, July 2013, p.34; Dec. 2012, p.44;
Nov. 2012, p.20].
In December 2012, under the direction of then-Acting Chairwoman Mignon

Corcoran Sun

Full Color Prison Yard Monthly
News ♦ Entertainment ♦ Resources
3 M on t h Sp e c i al Su b s c r ip t ion

$5 or1 Book of FCS
COLOR NEW 16 PAGES

Expanded full color format
with exciting episodes of
thrilling novels and sexy
pics. Many how-to articles on
writing, art and health. Filled
with entertainment: puzzles,
trivia, jokes, poetry... Submit
your writing, art, poetry etc.
See your submission, name
New books only
and contact info in print.
No singles
Specials
CandyonCane
Special 1/2 Year Subscription ($10 or 2 Books FCS)
Special Full Year Subscription ($20 or 4 Books FCS)
Payments to: Freebird Publishers
Box 541– Dept. BK, North Dighton, MA 02764

Email: Diane@FreebirdPublishers.com

Clyburn, the FCC issued a Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (NPRM) on the Wright
petition (Docket No. 12-375). [See: PLN,
Feb. 2013, p.46]. In response to the Notice,
HRDC filed additional comments with
the FCC on March 25, 2013 that included
updated data on state-by-state ICS rates
and commissions, plus specific recommendations for reforms.
The FCC held a workshop on prison
phone-related issues on July 10, 2013,
which included testimony f rom PLN
managing editor Alex Friedmann as well
as Virginia state delegate Patrick Hope
and representatives from public utility
commissions, prison phone companies and
organizations such as the Prison Policy
Initiative and National CURE. [See: PLN,
Aug. 2013, p.26].
Finally, in August 2013, nearly a decade after Martha Wright filed her initial
petition for rulemaking with the FCC,
the Commission voted to cap the cost of
interstate prison phone calls and institute
other reforms. The rate caps were very close
to those requested in the Wright petition,
which had sought benchmark rates (caps)
of $.25 per minute for collect calls and $.20
per minute for debit and prepaid calls.
The data provided by HRDC was so
important to the FCC’s deliberations that
the Commission’s final order referenced
PLN or HRDC at least 46 times, including
references to PLN’s April 2011 report on
the prison phone industry.
The FCC’s order is more than a
mechanical implementation of rate caps,

however. In an unusual show of compassion
for the plight of those who have suffered as
a result of price gouging by prison phone
companies and the corrections agencies
they contract with, two of the FCC Commissioners included personal remarks in
the order that amounted to a public apology for not having stemmed such abuses
long ago.
The FCC-mandated cap on prison
phone rates threatens the profit margins of
ICS providers. With existing contracts that
require prison phone companies to continue
paying commission kickbacks while they
must reduce their rates to comply with the
FCC’s order, ICS providers face a financial dilemma unless they renegotiate their
contracts. Which should not be difficult, as
most contracts have provisions for amendments – particularly when there are changes
in relevant statutes or regulations.
The order does not threaten the
monopolistic nature of the prison phone
industry, though, because once a company
wins a bid to provide ICS services it enjoys
a monopoly during the contract term. Such
monopolies discourage competition in the
prison phone market and contribute to
higher rates. [See: PLN, Oct. 2012, p.20;
Jan. 2007, p.1].
Two prison phone companies, GTL
and Securus, filed petitions for a stay of
the FCC’s order until they could bring
a legal challenge, then filed lawsuits in
federal court seeking review of the order
in November 2013. In other words, they
want to continue price-gouging prisoners

Serving
Serving You
You with
with
Excellence
Excellence Since
Since 2009
2009

We make it simple.

You reach your loved ones by calling a local number.

Any
Any time
time you
you refer
refer
aa new
new customer
customer
and
and they
they sign
sign up,
up, you
you
both
both get
get 300
300 free
free minutes!
minutes!
Some restrictions apply.
Details upon request.

December 2013

That’s a lot cheaper than calling long distance. It’s that simple!
‡ We charge $2.50 per month for the number.
‡ For Calls to anywhere in the U.S., we charge you 5¢ per minute
‡7R0H[LFR„WR&DQDGD„WRMXVWDERXWDQ\ZKHUHHOVHLQWKHZRUOG„
‡1R&RQWUDFW1R&UHGLW&KHFN1R6HWXS)HH1R&DQFHOODWLRQ)HH1R(DUO\7HUPLQDWLRQ)HH
‡ Cancel anytime; any money left on the account is refunded
Tell Your Folks to Sign Up at www.freedomline.net
Or Mail: FreedomLine
PO Box 7 - SCA
Connersville, IN 47331

4

Also see our long-running
Classified Ad in this and every issue

FCC Reg. No. 0021217047

Prison Legal News

and their families by postponing the FCCmandated reforms for as long as possible
while using revenue from prisoners’ phone
calls to subsidize the cost of their litigation
in the interim.
On a brighter note, one California
county responded to the FCC’s order
by proposing to manage its own jail and
juvenile detention facility phone systems
– simply dispensing with ICS providers as
an unnecessary anachronism.

An Updated Look at the
Prison Phone Industry
PLN’s April 2011 exposé on the prison
phone industry included a chart with stateby-state ICS rates, commission percentages
and annual commission payments for state
DOCs. PLN focused on state prison systems due to the impracticality of obtaining
similar data from the thousands of jails in
cities and counties across the U.S.
The chart with state-by-state prison
phone data, included as an exhibit to
HRDC’s comments submitted to the FCC,
was the result of extensive research over a
two-year period. As it reflected data from
2007-2008, however, HRDC continued to

collect updated information on prison phone
rates as well as commission percentages and
payments, plus copies of state DOC phone
contracts – most of which have been posted
on HRDC’s Prison Phone Justice website,
www.prisonphonejustice.org.
The updated prison phone data is
presented in four charts included with
this cover story: Chart A (interstate rates),
Chart B (intrastate interLATA rates), Chart
C (local rates) and Chart D (commission
kickback percentages and amounts).

lect, prepaid and debit calls. New Mexico
charges a flat $.65 for collect and debit
calls, plus a flat $.59 for prepaid calls. New
York charges $.048 per minute for all types
of calls, or $.72 for a 15-minute call. The
rates in South Carolina include a flat $.99
for a collect call and flat $.75 for prepaid
and debit calls.
Currently, the average rates for 15minute interstate ICS calls are $7.18 for
collect, $6.05 for prepaid and $5.56 for
debit calls.

Interstate Rates

Intrastate Rates

Alabama, Alaska, Georgia and Minnesota
charge the highest collect interstate rates for
prison phone calls, at $17.30 for a 15-minute
call. Other states with exceptionally high
interstate rates include Ohio, which charges
$16.97 for a collect 15-minute call, and Idaho,
which charges $16.55. [See Chart A].
Based on a 15-minute interstate ICS
call, 13 states charge over $10.00 for collect calls, 8 charge more than $10.00 for
prepaid calls and 7 charge over $10.00 for
a debit call.
In terms of the lowest interstate rates,
three states charge less than $1.00 for col-

For intrastate interLATA rates, based on
a 15-minute prison phone call, 11 states
currently charge over $5.00 for collect calls,
7 charge more than $5.00 for a prepaid call
and 5 charge over $5.00 for debit calls. [See
Chart B].
The highest intrastate ICS rates are in
Delaware, which charges $10.70 for 15minute calls of all types under a contract
with GTL. Other high rates include $8.40
for a 15-minute collect call in South Dakota, $6.75 for collect, debit and prepaid
calls in Alabama, and $6.45 for a collect
call in Minnesota.

APRIL
October2013
2013, California:
FRESNO,
CALIFORNIA
• $90,000 settlement
with CDCR and

-CONFIDENTIAL
SETTLEMENT
LA Sheriff
WITH
CDCR settlement with CDCR
• Confidential
-$540,000
SETTLEMENT
• $600,000 injury
recovery FOR A CALIFORNIA
CLIENT
• $150,000 bad
faith settlement
-2
PROP 36
CLIENTS
RELEASED
• Federal
action
dismissed
without
agency THROUGH
-2 penalty
LIFERS by
RELEASED
• Parole
dates granted by BPH
BPH
HEARINGS

911CIVILRIGHTS@GMAIL.COM

559.261.2222

CIVIL RIGHTS-SECTION 1983-FEDERAL AND STATE
APPEALS AND WRITS- ONLY COMPLEX AND UNIQUE CASES
PRISON-TRANSFER-DISCIPLINE-VISITING-CLASSIFICATION-HOUSING
PROP. 36 RE-SENTENCING-3 STRIKES-MEDICAL-PAROLE HEARINGS

----------------OUR CLIENTS GO HOME, HOW ABOUT YOU? ----------------Please submit a single page summary of your case. Due to the volume, we
cannot return documents or respond to all inquires. We are not a low cost or
pro bono law firm, but if you want results, contact us.

Prison Legal News

5

PO
Box
25001
P.O.
BOX
Fresno,
25001CA
93729
FRESNO, CA
93729
December 2013

Hope for Prison Phone Reform (cont.)
Four states charge less than $1.00 for
a 15-minute intrastate call for all types of
calls: New Mexico (flat $.65 for collect and
debit calls, and flat $.59 for prepaid); Rhode
Island (flat $.70 for collect and prepaid,
and flat $.63 for debit calls); New York
($.72 for all types of calls based on a rate
of $.048 per minute); and South Carolina
(flat $.99 for collect and flat $.75 for debit
and prepaid calls).
The current average rates for 15minute intrastate interLATA prison phone
calls are $3.90 for collect, $3.41 for prepaid
and $3.42 for debit calls.

Local Rates
Twelve states provide local ICS calls for
$1.00 or less for all types of calls, based on
a 15-minute call; however, another 9 states
charge more than $3.00 for a 15-minute
local call for all categories of calls. Alaska
is the only state that offers free local calls.
[See Chart C].
Other than Alaska, the lowest local
ICS rates include a flat $.50 in Florida for
all calls; a flat $.50 for collect and prepaid
calls in North Dakota plus $.05 per minute
for debit calls ($.75 for a 15-minute call);
a flat $.66 for collect, $.59 for prepaid and
$.65 for debit calls in New Mexico; a flat
$.70 for collect and prepaid calls and $.63
for debit calls in Rhode Island; a flat $.70
for collect calls and $.50 for prepaid and
debit calls in Nebraska; $.048 per minute
for all types of calls in New York; and a flat

$.65 for collect calls and $.50 for prepaid
and debit calls in Maryland.
The highest rates for 15-minute local
calls are $5.70 for all categories of calls in
Mississippi; $5.30 for collect and prepaid
calls and $4.50 for debit calls in Maine;
$5.00 for collect calls in Colorado; and
$4.95 for all types of local calls in New
Jersey.
Average rates for 15-minute local ICS
calls are currently $2.30 for collect, $2.08
for prepaid and $1.98 for debit calls.

Commission Kickbacks
The vast majority of state DOCs receive
commission kickbacks from their ICS providers, usually in the form of a percentage
of revenue generated from prisoners’ phone
calls. Based on full or partial commission
data from 49 states, prison phone companies paid at least $123.3 million in ICS
kickbacks to DOCs in 2012. [See Chart D].
Notably, this doesn’t include commissions
generated from phone services at federal
prisons, jails, privately-operated prisons,
juvenile facilities, immigration detention
centers and other correctional facilities.
Current state DOC commission rates
range from a low of 7% in Alaska to a
high of 76% in Illinois (though Maryland
receives an 87% commission on collect ICS
calls while Maine gets a 100% kickback on
debit calls). The average commission rate
for states that have a percentage-of-revenue
commission is 47.79%, based on 2012-2013
data. (For states that receive commissions
within a range of percentages, the lowest
rate in the range was used when calculating

the average).
Some states, including Ohio, Oregon and New Hampshire, receive a flat
commission amount; Oregon receives an
additional commission percentage based
on the amount of prison phone revenue.
Oklahoma receives a payment of $2.30 for
each ICS call, which equates to a 76.6%
commission based on the state’s current flat
rate of $3.00 per call.
Alabama uses a per-diem rate, in
which the state’s prison phone provider,
CenturyLink, pays $.572 times the average
prisoner population, per month. Idaho has a
hybrid model consisting of flat commission
amounts for collect, prepaid and debit calls
made from prisons, plus 20% of revenue for
calls made from Community Work Centers.
The commission rate for the Alaska DOC
is based on a sliding scale according to the
amount of revenue generated by prison
phone calls during the preceding year, while
Kansas, Washington and several other states
receive a percentage commission with a
minimum annual guaranteed payment.
Iowa is unique in that it provides ICS
services through a government agency, the
Iowa Communications Network (ICN),
in conjunction with a private contractor,
Public Communications Services (PCS)
– a subsidiary of Global Tel*Link. Rather
than receiving a traditional commission,
the state retains all revenue generated from
prison phone calls after paying ICN and
PSC/GTL’s costs for providing the phone
service.
Beyond commission payments, some
states receive other perks from prison

Experienced Civil Rights Attorney dedicated to seeking
justice for those who are incarcerated
Law Offices of Elmer Robert Keach, III, PC
1040 Riverfront Center
P. O. Box 70
Amsterdam, NY 12010
518.434.1718
www.keachlawfirm.com
Attorney Bob Keach
NITA Master Advocate
Member, Multi-Million Dollar Advocates Forum
Outside Counsel, Prison Legal News
National Practice

December 2013

Custodial Death Cases • Wrongful Arrest and Incarceration
Medical Indifference Cases • Corrections and Police Brutality
Sexual Abuse and Assault • Illegal Strip Searches
Class Actions • First Amendment Litigation (Northeast Only)
Reasonable Hourly Rates for: Criminal Defense, Appeals,
Post-Conviction Relief, Habeas Corpus
WHEN YOU OR A LOVED ONE HAVE BEEN WRONGED,
YOU HAVE A VOICE.
Attorney Keach prefers all inquiries by mail to be typed, and limited to five pages.
DO NOT SEND ORIGINAL DOCUMENTS OR ORIGINAL MEDICAL RECORDS.
Make sure to exhaust your administrative remedies and comply with state law notice
requirements, if applicable, to preserve state law intentional tort/negligence claims.

6

Prison Legal News

phone companies. For example, under its
contract with the California Department of
Corrections and Rehabilitation, GTL provides cell phone blocking technology at all
California state prisons. (Not incidentally,
by limiting access to contraband cell phones
the company anticipates greater use of, and
thus greater revenue from, the prison phone
system). GTL also pays an $800,000 annual
fee to the California Technology Agency.
[See: PLN, Oct. 2013, p.40].
In Virginia, in addition to a 35% commission, GTL pays the state a minimum
$150,000 annual fee for “DOC technology
initiatives,” and the fee increases if GTL
receives annual prison phone revenue that
exceeds $13 million.
Eight states have banned ICS commission kickbacks, mostly through legislation:
California, Michigan, Missouri, Nebraska,
New Mexico, New York, Rhode Island and
South Carolina.
Unsurprisingly, since prison phone
companies don’t have to recoup commission
payments from the phone rates charged in
non-commission states, those states have
some of the lowest ICS rates in the nation.
For instance, of the 10 lowest interstate
prison phone rates for collect, prepaid and
debit calls, 5 are in states that have banned
commissions. Of the 10 lowest intrastate
rates, 6 are in states that do not accept commissions, while of the 10 lowest local rates, 4
are in states that prohibit commissions.
In its comments submitted to the FCC,
HRDC cited several examples of states that
have banned commissions and achieved
much lower prison phone rates as a result.
Prior to banning commissions in 2001, New
Mexico charged $10.50 for a 15-minute
collect interstate call. The state’s current rate
for the same type of call is $.65 – a 93.8%
decrease. After South Carolina banned
prison phone commissions in April 2008,
the cost of a 15-minute collect interstate
call dropped from $5.19 to $.99, a reduction of 80.9%. And in New York, which
prohibited commissions in 2008, the cost
of a 15-minute prison phone call fell from
$2.30 to $.72 – a 68.6% decrease (previously, the New York DOC received a 57.5%
commission that generated annual kickback
payments of about $20 million).
As the FCC noted in its Notice of Proposed Rulemaking for the Wright petition,
“under most contracts, the commission is
the single largest component affecting the
rates for inmate calling service.” Or as stated
Prison Legal News

by HRDC, “Absent having to pay commissions to contracting government agencies,
ICS providers could offer significantly
lower phone rates.”

Prison Phone Companies
Three companies dominate the prison
phone industry: Global Tel*Link, which
has DOC contracts in 30 states; Securus
Technologies, which provides DOC phone
services in 10 states; and CenturyLink,
which contracts with DOCs in 5 states.
These companies and their subsidiaries

Stay Connected with

thus control 90% of the state DOC phone
market. Other companies with DOC
phone contracts include Hawaiian Telcom
(Hawaii), Telmate (Missouri and Oregon),
and ICSolutions (New Hampshire and
Wyoming).
• The nation’s largest prison phone
service provider, GTL, was purchased by
American Securities, LLC in October 2011
in a deal reportedly valued at $1 billion.
American Securities, a private equity firm,
owns 18 other companies in addition to
GTL – such as the restaurant chain Potbelly

myJailbird.com

Tell your friends and family to go to www.myjailbird.com
to create a FREE support community just for you!
MESSAGE WALL
Family and friends post updates,
reminders and news to keep
everyone involved.

PROFILE
Displays inmate name,
ID and exact contact
information to make
communication easy
for everyone.

PRIVATE,
CONFIDENTIAL
PROFILE
Pages are secure and
private to sponsors
and invited friends
only. Nothing is visible
to the general public.

COMMUNICATION
CENTER
Family and friends
can easily send
greeting cards,
custom photo cards,
wire money, get
low-cost phone
service or order
books and magazines
for an inmate.

My Jailbird is a free, confidential,
support page that makes it easy for
family and friends to stay connected
to you during your incarceration.
r
 *U
JT
OPU
B
QFO
QBM
TFSWJDF

r
 8F
EP
OPU
TFMM
BOZUIJOH
EJSFDUMZ


UP
JONBUFT
r
 /P
NPOUIMZ
GFFT

Call or write your family and friends and
ask them to go to www.myjailbird.com
to TJHO
VQ
UPEBZ

7

MJB-030-DA Half Page PLN Ad.indd 1

51 Harvey Road, Unit C
Londonderry, NH 03053

www.myjailbird.com
8/1/12 12:22
PM
December
2013

Hope for Prison Phone Reform (cont.)
Sandwich Works. Previously, GTL was
owned by Veritas Capital and GS Direct,
the latter being a subsidiary of Goldman,
Sachs & Co. [See: PLN, Feb. 2012, p.23].
GTL operates several subsidiary ICS
companies which include Value Added
Communications (VAC), Public Communications Services (PCS), Conversant
Technologies and DSI-ITI.
• Securus Technologies was formed
through a merger of T-Netix and Evercom
Systems in 2004. The company was acquired
by Castle Harlan, Inc., a New York-based
private equity corporation, on May 31,
2011; the sale was valued at $440-450 million. Castle Harlan owns 4 other companies
in addition to Securus, including Caribbean
Restaurants, LLC, which operates 171
Burger Kings in Puerto Rico.
• CenturyLink is the rebranded name
of CenturyTel after that firm acquired
Embarq Corporation, another telecommunications company, in 2009. CenturyLink
bills itself as the “third largest telecommunications company” in the U.S. and primarily
provides non-prison Internet, phone and
wireless services. It supplies ICS services
to a number of jails and 5 state prison systems through CenturyLink Correctional
Markets, plus conducts business through
its wholly-owned subsidiary, Embarq Payphone Services, Inc.
• Prison phone company ICSolutions
was acquired by Centric Group in January
2011 as an affiliate of Keefe Group, which
is also owned by Centric. Keefe Group provides commissary, video visitation and other
services to prisons and jails nationwide.
• Telmate, according to a company

spokesman, “provides telecommunications,
video visitation, messaging and photo
sharing services to hundreds of facilities in
nearly every U.S. state and several Canadian
provinces, serving facilities of every size
ranging from local jails to state prisons and
federal ICE facilities.”
An analysis of the nation’s highest prison phone rates charged by ICS
providers found that one company is overrepresented among state DOCs with the
highest rates. For interstate, intrastate and
local rates, GTL had 6 or 7 of the highest
10 rates in all categories of calls – collect,
prepaid and debit. However, since GTL has
60% of DOC phone contracts (in 30 of 50
states), it is not greatly overrepresented in
states that have the highest rates.
Rather, that distinction goes to CenturyLink, which has 2 of the 10 highest interstate
ICS rates for prepaid and debit calls, and 2
of the 10 highest rates for local debit calls.
Thus, although the company has just 10% of
DOC phone contracts (in 5 of 50 states), it
is responsible for 20% of the highest rates for
those categories of prison phone calls.

BOP, ICE and Private Prisons
Phone services at federal Bureau of Prisons
(BOP) facilities are provided by Sprint
through a GSA Networx contract. The
BOP uses an Inmate Telephone System
(ITS) known as TRUFONE; the system is
primarily debit-based (termed direct-dial),
and federal prisoners are limited to 300
minutes of calling time per month.
A September 2011 report by the U.S.
Government Accountability Office (GAO)
noted that the “BOP’s rates for inmate telephone calls typically are lower than selected
states and military branch systems.” [See:
PLN, Dec. 2012, p.22].

Unlike in most state DOCs, the majority of calls from BOP facilities are interstate
(long distance); this is mainly due to the
fact that federal prisoners can be housed at
any BOP prison nationwide, far from their
families. The percentage of long distance
calls has recently dropped, though, which
the GAO attributed to “technology that
allows inmates’ friends and family who do
not live within the inmates’ local calling area
to acquire telephone numbers local to the
inmates’ prison locations.”
Indeed, a cottage industry has developed in which numerous services, some of
which advertise in PLN, provide prisoners’ families with local forwarding phone
numbers for the purpose of skirting more
expensive long distance ICS rates.
According to the GAO report, “In
fiscal year 2010, BOP’s inmate telephone
system generated approximately $74 million in revenue, cost approximately $39
million to operate, and showed a profit of
approximately $34 million” (emphasis added). In terms of gross revenue, the BOP’s
phone system generated $69.6 million in
fiscal year (FY) 2011, $65.3 million in FY
2012 and $60.25 million in FY 2013; net
profits were not available.
Revenue from the Bureau of Prisons’
phone services are deposited in the BOP’s
Trust Fund, which manages income and pays
expenses related to the ITS system. The Trust
Fund is primarily used to pay wages for BOP
prisoners, and to provide educational and
recreational services and programs.
The GAO observed that lowering the
BOP’s phone rates could have both positive
and negative implications. “The primary
advantage would be that inmates would
incur lower costs for making calls. This could
possibly encourage greater communication

Law Offices of Bruce Zucker


Post-Conviction Matters in California
F BPH Hearings (Lifer, MDO, SVP)
F Criminal Appeals
F Habeas Corpus Writs
F Custody Issues
F Reasonable Rates

Experienced and Qualified
F Former U.S. Probation Officer
F Graduated Top 15%, Loyola Law School
F Author, Lecturer, and Professor on
Post-Conviction Law
F Licensed California Attorney for 20 Years

Post Office Box 436 F Agoura Hills, CA 91376 F www.zuckerlaw.net
California Cases Only — Unsolicited Documents Will Not Be Returned
This is an Advertisement for Legal Services

December 2013

8

Prison Legal News

The Immigration and Customs Enforcement agency (ICE) specifies in its
2011 revised standards for detention
facilities that “Each facility shall provide
detainees with access to reasonably priced
telephone services. Contracts for such services shall comply with all applicable state
and federal regulations and be based on
rates and surcharges comparable to those
charged to the general public. Any variations shall reflect actual costs associated
with the provision of services in a detention
setting.”
The standards further require that
detainees be allowed to “make direct or
free calls” to local immigration courts, the
Executive Office for Immigration Review,
the Board of Immigration Appeals, federal
and state courts, consular officials, legal
representatives and service providers, the
Office of the Inspector General of the
Department of Homeland Security, the
U.N. High Commissioner for Refugees,
government offices to obtain documents for
immigration cases, the ICE/OPR Joint Intake Center and immediate family members
for detainees facing emergencies or who
“demonstrate a compelling need.”

between inmates and their families, which
BOP has stated facilitates the reintegration
of inmates into society upon release from
prison,” the report said. “In contrast, reducing
inmate telephone rates could also have some
disadvantages....With fewer profits, BOP
would have less Trust Fund money to spend
on inmate amenities. As a result, unless BOP
recouped these revenues from other sources,
BOP would have to reduce the wages it pays
inmates for their labor and/or scale back the
number and type of other educational and
recreational activities it currently offers using
revenue from the Trust Fund. According to
BOP officials, such reductions could make
prisons more dangerous to manage and more
expensive to operate.”
In regard to ICS services at immigration detention facilities, the ability to make
affordable phone calls is vitally important
for immigrant detainees who are facing
deportation hearings or seeking asylum.
Approximately 84% of detainees are not
represented by counsel; they therefore rely
heavily on phone calls to obtain evidence
needed in immigration proceedings by
calling their families, consulates, legal representatives and human rights organizations.

ICE’s revised standards for detention
facilities will hopefully resolve problems
related to detainees’ access to phone services
that were cited in a 2010 report by the Office of Inspector General of the Department
of Homeland Security. The report concluded that “additional controls are needed
to ensure contractor compliance” with ICS
systems in facilities housing ICE detainees,
and that some detainees “had, in the past,
been inappropriately charged an additional
fee to obtain access to a local telephone
service.” [See: PLN, Feb. 2011, p.33].
With respect to privately-operated
prisons, jails and detention centers, it is
difficult to obtain ICS-related information
from such facilities because they are typically exempt from public records laws and
the Freedom of Information Act. [See, e.g.:
PLN, Feb. 2013, p.14]. Regardless, PLN
managed to collect prison phone data for
several private prisons.
For example, a contract between
Corrections Corporation of America and
Evercom (Securus) specifies the following
collect calling rates for CCA’s Whiteville
Correctional Facility (WCF) in Tennessee: $.85 for local calls, $1.94 + $.06-.15/

NEW FRIENDS, HIGHER EDUCATION, AND EMPLOYMENT & HOUSING
UPON RELEASE THROUGH WRITEAPRISONER.COM PROFILES
Contact WriteAPrisoner.com &

S

tart Looking Forward
To Mail Call!

AS SEEN ON

CNN, 20/20, Fox News,
Dr. Phil, O Magazine,
E! True Hollywood,
and hundreds more!

WriteAPrisoner.com...

Simply the largest, highest ranked, &
most visited website of its kind!*

Pen-pal Profiles are affordably priced at $40 for the first year, $30 for renewing year
Features a comprehensive search that allows viewers to find your profile by age,
race, location, keywords, & more - 32 search options in all
Your new friends can email their first message to you along with a photo
Advertises non-stop on every major search engine with thousands of websites
linking back to us
Offers free Reintegration Profiles for inmates seeking employment and housing
upon release and education during incarceration
Translated into 51 languages & geared for international search engines
Viewers can "subscribe" to your profile to be notified when your profile is updated,
blog is added, artwork is posted, poetry is added, your release is near & much more
Pen-pals have the option of helping you with a broad range of topics using
WriteAPrisoner.com’s free Self-Help Series

Get Started Today!
Friends & family can submit your
entire 250 word profile, photo, and
payment for you online by visiting

R

www.writeaprisoner.com/post

Or for a FREE Brochure, Send a
S.A.S.E. to:

WriteAPrisoner.com
PO Box 10- PLN
Edgewater, FL 32132 USA

BBB

ACCREDITED
BUSINESS

Proud member of the Better Business Bureau of Central Florida & the Southeast Volusia Chamber of Commerce.
*Our website traffic can be independently verified at www.quantcast.com/writeaprisoner.com

Prison Legal News

9

December 2013

Hope for Prison Phone Reform (cont.)
minute for intrastate calls and $3.00 +
$.35/minute for interstate calls (the latter
costing $8.25 for a 15-minute call). The
contract includes a 58.4% commission,
which generated $347,855.52 in kickbacks
at WCF in 2012.
A 2012 prison phone contract for
the South Bay Correctional Institution in
Florida, operated by the GEO Group, the
nation’s second-largest for-profit prison
company, includes a commission of 35%
and phone rates of $.50 for collect local
calls and $1.20 + $.04/minute for collect
interstate and intrastate calls. The contract,
with ICSolutions, generated $125,600 in
commission kickbacks during FY 2012.
This represents the worst of both
worlds, with private prison companies profiting not only from housing prisoners but
also from ICS commissions paid by prison
phone providers.

Current and Former
Data Compared
There have been some notable changes
in the prison phone industry since PLN
compiled and analyzed 2007-2008 stateby-state data related to ICS phone rates and
commissions, though other aspects of ICS
services have remained the same.

Phone Rates
In regard to rates, the average cost of prison
phone calls has generally declined from
2007-2008 to 2012-2013. For example,
during that time period the rates for interstate collect calls dropped in 22 state DOCs
and remained the same in most others.
Of the states that experienced de-

clines in interstate collect ICS costs, the
most notable, based on 15-minute calls,
included Colorado (from $17.30 to $5.25);
Connecticut (from $17.30 to $4.87); New
Mexico (from $10.50 to $.65); North
Carolina (from $17.30 to $3.40); Oregon
(from $17.30 to $2.40); and Vermont (from
$10.75 to $3.50).
Further, the 2007-2008 average cost
of a 15-minute collect interstate call was
$10.23, compared with a current (20122013) average cost of $7.18. The average
cost of a 15-minute collect intrastate call
in 2007-2008 was $4.87, compared with a
current average cost of $3.90. However, the
cost of a 15-minute local collect call, which
averaged $2.28 in 2007-2008, increased
very slightly to $2.30 in 2012-2013. (When
calculating these averages, where there is a
range of phone rates for certain categories
of calls, the lowest rate was used to produce
a conservative average).
An examination of collect ICS rates
for 2007-2008 found that 25 states charged
over $10.00 for a 15-minute interstate
call; of those, 10 charged $17.30 or more.
Twenty-two states charged more than $5.00
for a 15-minute collect intrastate call and
11 states charged over $3.00 for a collect
local call.
Based on current prison phone rate
data, the number of states charging over
$10.00 for a 15-minute collect interstate
call has dropped to 13 (including just 4
that charge $17.30); states that charge over
$5.00 for a collect intrastate call dropped
to 11, and a dozen states charge more
than $3.00 for a local collect call (a slight
increase).
Washington State previously had the
highest collect interstate rate in 2007-2008,
at $4.95 + $.89/minute, or $18.30 for a

15-minute call. Washington’s current collect interstate rate is $3.50 + $.50/minute
($11.00 for a 15-minute call), which, although still unreasonably high, represents
a significant decrease.
One notable difference in prison
phone services between 2007-2008 and
2012-2013 relates to a shift in the use of
flat rates – i.e., when a fixed amount is
charged regardless of the call duration. In
2007-2008, with respect to collect calls,
only one state offered a flat interstate rate
while 4 had flat intrastate rates and 34 used
flat local rates. According to current data,
5 states now have flat interstate rates, 8
states offer flat intrastate rates and at least
26 have flat local rates, for all types of calls.
Flat rates tend to be associated with lower
calling costs, but since they incur the full
rate whether the call is for one minute or
15 minutes, per-minute costs are higher for
flat rate calls of short duration.

Commissions
The average ICS commission kickback rate
has increased by over five percent, from
41.9% in 2007-2008 to a current average of
47.79%. (When calculating these averages,
only states with a commission percentage
were included, not those that receive commissions based on a flat fee or per-diem
basis; where states receive commissions
within a range of percentages, the lowest
rate was used to produce a conservative
average).
As one example of this increase, only
one state received a prison phone commission above 60% in 2007-2008 – Alaska
(although Idaho received 66% at the upper
end of a range of commissions). Current
data indicates that seven states receive commissions in excess of 60% (Connecticut,

MARILEE MARSHALL & ASSOCIATES, ATTORNEYS AT LAW
State and Federal Appeals and Writs,
Lifer Parole Hearings and Related Writs

California State Bar Board of Specialization

Certified Criminal Law and
Appellate Law Specialist

29 years of success
523 West Sixth Street, Suite1109
Los Angeles, CA. 90014
marileemarshallandassociates.com

If you have a California case
you need a California lawyer!
(213) 489-7715
December 2013

10

Prison Legal News

Illinois, Kansas, Louisiana, Maryland, Mississippi and Wyoming). Whereas previously
the highest commission rate among state
DOCs was 61.5%, the current highest percentage rate is 78%, for the Illinois DOC.
The total amount of prison phone commissions paid to DOCs in 2007-2008 was
$143.49 million, based on full or partial data
from 49 states (the total amount originally
reported by PLN in April 2011 was slightly
higher; that data was corrected in October
2012). Total commission kickbacks paid
to state DOCs during 2012 were at least
$123.3 million.
This reflects a decline of around
$20.2 million in annual commissions paid
to DOCs over the past five-year period,
though that decline is mainly attributable
to California’s decision to phase out ICS
commissions starting in 2007-2008 (California received commission payments of
$19.5 million that year). Excluding the loss
of prison phone kickbacks in California, the
total amount of ICS commissions received
by state DOCs in 2012 was essentially the
same since comparable data was collected
for 2007-2008.
As another example of things remain-

WE
NEED
YOUR
HELP!

ing the same in the prison phone industry, at
the time PLN reported nationwide prison
phone-related data in April 2011, only eight
states had banned commissions or were in
the process of doing so. Currently, no other
states have banned commissions and 42
states continue to receive kickbacks from
ICS providers.

Prison Phone Companies
As indicated above, three companies –
GTL, Securus and CenturyLink – currently
control 90% of the state DOC market,
either directly or through their subsidiaries.
This represents a slight increase since PLN
reported prison phone data for 2007-2008;
at that time, GTL, Securus and CenturyLink or their subsidiaries had contracts with
43 (86%) of the state DOCs.
Fifteen DOC phone contracts changed
hands over the five-year period from 20072008 to 2012-2013; however, most of the
states (70%) continued to contract with the
same company, and when ICS contracts
change it is usually from one of the three
largest prison phone providers to another.
This fairly low rate of contract turnover,
and the fact that just three firms dominate

the market, indicate that the prison phone
industry is an oligopoly with little actual
competition.
“ W hile the process of awarding
contracts to provide ICS may include competitive bidding such competition in many
instances benefits correctional facilities, not
necessarily ICS consumers – inmates and
their family and friends who pay the ICS
rates, who are not parties to the agreements,
and whose interest in just and reasonable
rates is not necessarily represented in bidding or negotiation,” the FCC noted in its
September 2013 final order.
Further, Consolidated Communications Public Services (CCPS) and FSH
Communications no longer provide prison
phone services to state DOCs; CCPS lost
its sole state contract with Illinois in 2012,
while FSH sold its prison phone business
to VAC, a subsidiary of Global Tel*Link.
Additionally, GTL acquired two smaller
companies that provide ICS-related services, Conversant Technologies and 3V
Technologies, in October 2011.
This reflects the continued consolidation of providers within the prison phone
industry – although Telmate, which mostly

We are updating the Disciplinary Self Help Litigation
Manual (Manville 2007) to help guide prisoners through
the misconduct and disciplinary litigation process.
To effectively help inmates, we need case law and opinions
from state courts that affect this process at the state level.
Please send us a copy of any decisions entered by a state
court relating to prisoner misconduct/disciplinary actions.
(if copy cannot be made, please send original and we will return it at your request)

send all material to:

Professor Daniel Manville, MSU College of Law
610 Abbot Rd., East Lansing, MI 48823
(please do not send summaries, memos, or requests for representation)
Prison Legal News

11

December 2013

Hope for Prison Phone Reform (cont.)
supplies phone services to jails, has won
two state DOC contracts since 2007-2008
(Montana in 2010 and Oregon in 2012).

ICS Contracts
Prison phone contracts continue to have
lengthy terms. For example, when Florida
rebid its ICS contract in 2013, the initial
contract term was for five years with five
one-year renewal options. Similarly, the Illinois DOC’s recent contract with Securus,
which went into effect in September 2012,
had an initial term through June 2015 plus
an option to renew for up to six more years.
And when Oklahoma entered into an ICS
contract with VAC (GTL) in 2011, the
initial term was for one year – with nine
one-year renewals.
As HRDC noted in its comments
submitted to the FCC, the initial terms of
prison phone contracts for three states –
Connecticut, Texas and Arizona – extend
for 7 years. Such long-term contracts ensure
that prison phone companies maintain
a monopoly on providing ICS services
within state DOCs for prolonged periods
of time.
Additionally, PLN’s April 2011 report
on the prison phone industry described how
some state DOCs evaluated bids for ICS
contracts based on the highest commission
rate, in order to maximize their kickback
revenue. That practice also continues.
According to the Illinois DOC’s 2012
invitation for bids for its prison phone

contract, the commission rate was given
the greatest weight among factors used to
evaluate the bids – 55%, or 550 of 1,000
total available “price points.”
The contract was awarded to Securus,
which offered an 87.1% commission and
flat phone rates of $4.10 per call for all
call types. The contract was subsequently
amended in September 2013 to reduce
the phone rates to a flat $3.55 per call and
lower the commission to 76%; the amendment was due to a ruling by the Illinois
Commerce Commission related to the
maximum phone rates that can be charged
under state law.
Further, the Florida DOC issued
an invitation to negotiate for its ICS
contract in April 2013. When selecting
Embarq (CenturyLink) as the company
that “demonstrate[d] the best value” and
was “the most advantageous,” the DOC
remarked that CenturyLink’s bid “increases
the department’s commission rate by approximately 27%” while lowering the cost
of collect calls. In submitting its best and
final offer, CenturyLink asked for “special
consideration” of the company’s revenue
performance, noting that its “billing &
customer service program consistently ...
generates 25% or more commissionable
revenue than other providers.” Securus,
bidding for the same contract, stated that its
bid addressed the DOC’s “requirement for
both low rates and high commissions.”
Likewise, when the Oklahoma DOC
asked for a final best offer for bids on the
state’s ICS contract in 2011, it specified,
“The final award of this contract will be

based upon the highest revenue sharing offered to DOC for the life of the contract.”
These examples indicate that ICS
commissions and the lucrative revenue they
generate for corrections agencies remain a
compelling factor when selecting prison
phone providers.

HRDC’s Recommendations
to the FCC
HRDC’s research focused on core
issues related to the prison phone industry:
the cost of ICS calls, the impact of commission kickbacks on those costs, extra fees
charged by prison phone companies and
how to best address those issues.
HRDC recommended that the FCC
“impose rate caps not to exceed $.05/minute
for collect, prepaid and debit interstate calls
from prisons, jails and detention centers,
with no per-call charges.” The proposed
cap was based on current interstate prison
phone rates in New York and New Mexico,
which are below $.05 per minute, as examples of rates that can be achieved even
without regulatory oversight. Both New
Mexico and New York have banned ICS
commissions.
While prison phone companies complained that a rate cap would be arbitrary
and capricious, HRDC demonstrated that
the opposite was true – that the unregulated
ICS rates currently in effect are themselves
arbitrary and capricious.
“Prisoners in different states, or even
the same state, pay extremely divergent
phone charges that range from $.65 (New
Mexico) to $17.30 (Alabama, Alaska,

(Void in New York)

Airway Heights, WA.)

December 2013

12

Prison Legal News

interstate collect calling rates, such as New
Mexico ($.043/min.), New York ($.048/
min.), South Carolina ($.066/min.) and
Nebraska ($.0966/min.), then there is no
reason why the same ICS providers cannot
offer comparable rates in other jurisdictions.”
HRDC further argued for the elimination of prison phone kickbacks in order to
facilitate lower rates: “Although prohibiting
ICS providers from paying commissions
is not essential to reducing prison phone
rates, commissions are closely correlated
with high rates.”
In addition, HRDC recommended
that extra fees charged by prison phone
companies, such as fees to fund, maintain
and close prepaid
phone accounts, be
prohibited. A May
2013 report by the
Prison Policy Initiative examined
ancillary ICS fees in
great detail, noting
that Securus charges
$4.95 to close an
account while GTL

Georgia and Minnesota) for a 15-minute
interstate collect phone call,” HRDC wrote
in its comments to the FCC. “This is particularly true given that the same ICS provider
can offer wildly fluctuating rates in different
jurisdictions, which is also arbitrary and
capricious. For example, Global Tel*Link
charges $.99 for a 15-minute interstate collect call in South Carolina while charging
$17.30 for the same type of call in Georgia
(a neighboring state). Securus charges $1.75
for a 15-minute interstate collect call in
Missouri while charging $17.30 for the
same type of call in Alaska.”
Additionally, HRDC observed in
March 2013 that “current data indicates that
at least 16 states have interstate collect and/
or debit call rates that are below the proposed
benchmark rates of $.25/min. and $.20/min.
for collect and debit calls, respectively” – i.e.,
the rate caps requested in the Wright petition. Thus, it was readily apparent that states
can adopt ICS rates below the proposed
caps while still addressing necessary security
concerns in their prison systems.
“Basically,” HRDC concluded, “if
some states that contract with the largest
ICS providers are able to offer reasonable

charges $5.00. Most prison phone companies charge fees to fund prepaid accounts
using a credit card; according to the Prison
Policy Initiative report, ICS providers
“charge up to $9.50 to pay over the internet,
up to $10 to pay by phone and up to $12.45
to pay via Western Union.”
If such fees are not banned, HRDC
argued, then prison phone companies could
circumvent the FCC’s rate caps “by simply
increasing the extra fees or adding new
account-related fees that effectively raise
the overall costs of ICS calls.” Revenue from
ancillary fees goes directly to ICS providers,
as the fees are not subject to commission
payments.
Some companies, anticipating the



Learn The Law!

It’s a POWERFUL influence in your life.

Choose education to help yourself and others.
Blackstone’s Independent Study Paralegal Program
offers you the opportunity to be
productive while serving time.
Only
�
�
�
�
�

Learn Civil & Criminal Law
Learn Legal Research
110 Years of Legal Training Experience
Study in Your Spare Time
Affordable Tuition, Easy Payment Plan





� Yes! I’d like to learn more

Please rush me FREE course information.

Per Month

� Paralegal Course

Name ____________________________________Doc#_________________
Address_____________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________
City___________________________________State______Zip___________

Blackstone
SI NC E 1890

Career Institute

Your tuition cost covers your entire
program including all textbooks, study
guides, exam and homework evaluation
services, and your certificate.

P.O. Box 3717 • Allentown, PA 18106
Prison Legal News

13

December 2013

Hope for Prison Phone Reform (cont.)
reduced phone rates that would result
from the FCC’s order, have enhanced their
account-related fees in an apparent effort
to maximize fee revenue to compensate for
the lower rates.
For example, after the FCC voted to
cap interstate prison phone rates in August
2013, Securus raised its processing fee for
credit card payments made by phone from
$7.95 to $9.95; it also increased its monthly
Wireless Administration Fee from $2.99
to $3.99. The company added a State Cost
Recovery Fee, which may apply “as a percall surcharge of up to five percent (5%) and
associated applicable taxes” for intrastate
calls, plus a Location Validation Fee, which
may apply “as a per-call surcharge of up to
four percent (4%) and associated applicable
taxes” for calls made from facilities that
use certain security features provided by
Securus.
In order to promote competition and
provide flexibility in terms of payment
options for ICS calls, HRDC further suggested that the FCC require or encourage

debit and prepaid calls in all prison phone
systems.
HRDC did not limit its recommendations to the FCC to just the mundane
aspects of how to achieve reductions in
prison phone rates. It also argued that prisoners should receive a “minimum number
of free calling minutes per month,” noting
that this would be particularly important
for juvenile offenders, to ensure they can
maintain contact with their families, and
for immigrant detainees, who rely on phone
calls to contact foreign consulates and human rights and legal organizations.
Providing prisoners and detainees
with a minimum number of free calling
minutes “would address a long-standing
concern with ICS services: that they are
socio-economically biased because they
condition the ability to make phone calls on
the ability of prisoners and call recipients to
pay high prison phone rates. Thus, prisoners
and family members with sufficient financial resources can maintain phone contact
while those who are impoverished cannot.”
HRDC noted that Alaska provides free local ICS calls, and that the first five minutes
of local calls from New Hampshire prisons

The Drug Policy Alliance (DPA) is the nation’s leading
organization promoting drug policies grounded in
science, compassion, health and human rights.

www.drugpolicy.org
DPA is putting out a call for drug war stories. If you would like to be profiled in the media your
story would be entered in a data base for possible use. Please fill out the information below:
Name of the incarcerated individual
Current prison he/she is in
Ethnicity				

Kind of drug involved

Length of sentence			

Weapon involved (yes or no)

Contact information on behalf of imprisoned individual (email/phone number)
Short story of your case (use additional paper if needed)

Send to:
Drug War Stories, Drug Policy Alliance, 15th Floor, 131 West 33rd Street, NY, NY 10001

December 2013

14

do not incur per-minute rates.
Lastly, HRDC recommended in its
comments to the FCC that prison phone
systems be subject to periodic reviews “to
ensure that prison phone rates remain just
and reasonable,” and that ICS providers
be required to comply with the FCC’s
mandates related to prison phone services
within six months after the date the Commission’s order goes into effect.

The FCC’s Order: What it Does
As a prefatory matter, the FCC’s
order only applies to interstate prison phone
calls and not to local or intrastate calls.
Interstate calls “constitute no more than 15
percent of all ICS traffic,” according to the
Commission. Further, the FCC explained
that in imposing rate caps for interstate
ICS calls, it was not asserting authority over
existing contracts between prison phone
companies and corrections agencies.
“The reforms we adopt today are
not directed at the contracts between
correctional facilities and ICS providers.
Nothing in this Order directly overrides
such contracts,” the FCC wrote. “Rather,
our reforms relate only to the relationship
between ICS providers and end users, who,
as noted, are not parties to these agreements. Our statutory obligations require
us to ensure that rates and practices are just
and reasonable, and to ensure that payphone
compensation is fair both to end users and
to providers of payphone services, including
ICS providers.”
Accordingly, the FCC’s final order incorporated the following key provisions:
• All rates charged for ICS calls and
ancillary charges or fees must be based on
costs that are reasonably and directly related
to the provision of prison phone services
(i.e., cost-based). Thus, for example, the
costs of ICS calls can not include expenses
related to the payment of commissions. The
FCC did not ban commissions, however –
only ordered that they can not be factored
into the cost of interstate prison phone calls.
“We do not conclude that ICS providers
and correctional facilities cannot have arrangements that include site commissions,”
the FCC stated. “We conclude only that ...
such commission payments are not costs
that can be recovered through interstate
ICS rates.”
• ICS rates are capped at a maximum
of $.25 per minute for interstate collect calls
and $.21 per minute for interstate prepaid
Prison Legal News

and debit calls, or $3.75 and $3.15 for
15-minute collect and debit/prepaid calls,
respectively, inclusive of any connection
charges. Prison phone companies can seek
waivers to charge rates above the caps in
“rare occasions” where they serve “extremely
high cost facilities.”
• An ICS provider’s rates are presumptively lawful and in compliance with
the FCC’s order if they are set at or below
“safe harbor” limits of $.14 per minute for
interstate collect calls and $.12 per minute
for interstate debit and prepaid calls, inclusive of any connection charges. This equates
to $2.10 for a 15-minute collect call and
$1.80 for a 15-minute debit or prepaid call.
ICS providers that set rates above the safe
harbor limits but below the rate caps will
have to justify the reasonableness of their
rates to the FCC if they are the subject of
consumer complaints.
• Prison phone companies shall not
levy or collect any charges in addition to
or in excess of regular ICS rates for calls
made through a Telecommunications Relay
Service (TRS) – e.g., calling services for prisoners with hearing or speech disabilities.
• ICS providers must file annual reports

with the FCC disclosing their prison phone
rates and fees, as well as additional data that
will help the Commission evaluate whether
they are in compliance with the order. This
reporting requirement will not go into effect
until approval is obtained from the Office
of Management and Budget.
The FCC’s order applies to all correctional facilities nationwide, including
prisons, immigration detention centers and
jails, and, once implemented and enforced,
will significantly reduce the costs of interstate ICS calls.
When the Commission’s order goes
into effect it will affect 30 state DOCs
that currently charge more than the rate
cap established for collect interstate calls
($3.75 based on a 15-minute call). The
same number of DOCs currently charge
more than the rate cap for debit and/or
prepaid interstate calls ($3.15 based on a
15-minute call).
Additionally, at least 41 state DOCs
have collect interstate rates above the safe
harbor limit set by the FCC ($2.10 based on
a 15-minute call), while 40 charge more than
the safe harbor for debit and/or prepaid calls
($1.80 based on a 15-minute call).

The fact that so many DOCs have interstate prison phone rates above the caps set by
the FCC demonstrates why the Commission’s
order was necessary and long overdue.

FNPRM on Intrastate Rates
In its final order, the FCC also announced
that it would issue an invitation for comments on proposed rulemaking related to
intrastate (in-state) prison phone rates;
video, email and voicemail services for
prisoners; international calling rates; how to
ensure that costs of ICS services are “just,
reasonable and cost-based”; how the FCC
can enforce rules prohibiting companies
from blocking calls to cell phones; how
to foster competition within the prison
phone market; quality issues related to ICS
calls; and whether additional measures are
needed to protect the communication rights
of prisoners with hearing disabilities and
those with whom they communicate.
“We seek comment on additional measures we could take to ensure that interstate
and intrastate ICS are provided consistent
with the statute and public interest, the
Commission’s authority to implement these
measures, and the pros and cons of each

OUR SIMPLE POLICIES:

Save on Prescription
Eyeglasses & Shades
Send for a FREE Catalog
Money Back Guarantee

Prism Optical, Inc.
10954 NW 7th Ave
Dept: LN1213
LN0812
Miami, FL 33168
Inquiries from Friends
and Family Welcome
1-800-637-4104
www.prismoptical.com
contact@prismoptical.com

SPECIAL REQUESTS ARE NOT PERMITED AND ALL MODELS ARE OF LEGAL AGE (BOP-FRIENDLY).
DUE TO TREMENDOUS TIME AND COST ANSWERING LETTERS, UNLESS YOU ARE PLACING AN ORDER
OR A QUESTION REGARDING YOUR ORDER, WE WILL NOT REPLY TO ANY OTHER QUESTIONS.
SASE ARE REQUIRED FOR ANY INQURIES OR CONCERNS!

Save on Prescription
Save on Prescription
Eyeglasses
& ASShades
& Shades
KNOW YOUR
INSTITUTIONS POLICIES
TO WHAT IMAGE CONTENT IS ALLOWED.Eyeglasses
RETURNED
YOU AND YOU ALONG ARE RESPONSIBLE FOR YOUR SELECTIONS BEING ALLOWED INTO YOUR FACILITY:

ORDERS ARE NON-REFUNDABLE. THEY WILL BE HELD FOR 14 CALENDAR DAYS IN ORDER FOR YOU
TO SENDSend
SELF-ADDRESSED
3 FIRST
CLASS STAMPS PER ENVELOPE, WITH
A STREET
a STAMPED;
FREE
Catalog
Send
for
ADDRESS FOR
EVERYfor
20 PICTURES.
ALL RETURNED
IMAGES HELD AFTER TWO WEEKS
WILL BE
RE- a FREE Catalog
SOLD
AND
WE
WILL
RETURN
TO
OUR
STOCK.
Money Back Guarantee
Money Back Guarantee

ALL PAYMENTS ARE BY INSTITUTIONAL CHEACKS OR U.S. POSTAL SERVICE OR WESTERN UNION MONEY ORDERS.

THESE PAYMENTS ARE PROCESSED IMMEDIATELY AND SHIPPED IN LESS THAN 3-4 WEEKS. ANY
OTHER COMPANY MONEY ORDERS DELAY SHIPMENT 8-10 WEEKS OR UNTIL THAT MONEY CLEARS
OUR BANK. YES,
WE DEALNW
WITH PEOPLE
NICKEL
10954
7th THAT
AveARE, WHILE IN PRISON, STILL TRYING 10954
AND DIME SCAMS...

Prism Optical, Inc.

OUR PRICES ARE SIMPLE:

SHIPPING & HANDLING:

VARIOUS PRISON POLICIES
Inquiries from FriendsREGARDINGDUEHOWTO MANY
Inquiries from Friends
PICTURES CAN BE SENT IN ONE
1-4999 PHOTOS
=
0.45
CENTS
EACH
ENVELOPE, OUR POLICY IS AS FOLLOWS:
and Family Welcome01 - 5 PHOTOS----$1.00 PER ENVELOPE
and Family Welcome
5000+ PHOTOS = 20% DISCOUNT
1-800-637-4104
06 - 15 PHOTOS---$1.50 PER ENVELOPE
1-9 CATALOGS1-800-637-4104
: $3.00 EACH ( +SASE )
ENVELOPE
10 CATALOGS:
$25.00+SASE (4 STAMPS ) 16 -25 PHOTOS—$2.00 PER www.prismoptical.com
www.prismoptical.com
contact@prismoptical.com
contact@prismoptical.com

BRANLETTES BEAUTIES

WHITE CATALOGS (50 VOLUMES)
BLACK CATALOGS (50 VOLUMES)
ASIAN&LATINO CATALOGS (50 VOLUMES)

Prison Legal News

Prism Optical, Inc.

NW 7th Ave
Dept:
LN0812
Dept:
LN0812
ALL SALES ARE FINAL! EACH CATALOG HAS 84 GORGEOUS LADIES TO CHOOSE FROM
QUALITY
PRINTS
ON
4X6
GLOSSY
PHOTO
PAPER
HIGH
Miami, FL 33168
Miami, FL 33168

SELECT YOUR FAVORITE:

Since 1959

BRANLETTES BREATHLESS BEAUTIES BAG A RANDOM SELECTION OF 50 OF THE
RARE AND EXOTIC ***YES, FIFTY BEAUTIES ALL POSING JUST FOR YOU!***
PLUS TWO OF OUR FINEST COLOUR CATALOGS ONLY $19.95 DID YOU READ THAT
RIGHT???
***$19.95???*** YES, ONLY $19.95 FOR 50 0F BRANLETTES
BREATHLESS BEAUTIES (PLEASE SPECIFY NUDE OR BOP-FRIENDLY) +++PLUS+++
TWO OF OUR FINEST COLOUR CATALOGS FREE (YOU PICK A VOLUMES)
OUR REGULAR SHIPPING AND HANDLING POLICIES APPLY.

BRANLETTES BEAUTIES

PLEASE STATE WHAT STYLE PHOTOS’S:

SinceOR1959
PROVOCATIVE POSES
NUDE

15

FREE CATALOG???

YOU READ IT RIGHT!
BRANLETTES
JUST SEND A SELF ADDRESSED ENVELOPE TO US.
AND WE WILL SEND TO YOU ONE BOP-FRIENDLY
P.O.BOX 5765
SAMPLE CATALOG (ONE PER CUSTOMER) WITH 84
BALTIMORE, MD
GORGEOUS GIRLS IN FULL COLOR.
ACT NOW AS THIS OFFER
21282
Since 1959
WILL NOT BE AROUND LONG!!

December 2013

LEARN TO
PROTECT
YOUR
RIGHTS
YOU HAVE A RIGHT TO
Adequate medical care
Protection from assault
Humane living conditions
Safety from officer abuse
Learn how to defend your
basic human rights with
the comprehensive litigation guide, Protecting Your
Health and Safety, 2nd edition, written specifically for
prisoners who are unable to
receive help from a lawyer.
Written by Robert E. Toone
Edited by Dan Manville
A Project of the Southern
Poverty Law Center*
COST $16 total
($10 + $6 shipping/handling)
FREE shipping/handling for orders
from Prison Legal News over $50

ORDER A COPY
Send a check
or money order to:
Prison Legal News
PO
PO Box
Box1151
2420
WestWorth,
Brattleboro,
VT 05303
Lake
FL 33460
(802) 257-1342
561-360-2523
Be sure to include your name,
identification number (if any), and
mailing address. We also accept
VISA and Mastercard. If using a
credit card, please include the
type of card (VISA or Mastercard),
card number, and expiration date.
This book does not deal with legal
defense against criminal charges or
challenges to convictions that are on
appeal. Edition last revised in 2009.
*Please do not send orders to the
Southern Poverty Law Center.

December 2013

Hope for Prison Phone Reform (cont.)
measure,” the FCC stated.
The Commission released a Further
Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (FNPRM)
concerning the above issues on November
13, and a 30-day public comment period
ended on December 13, 2013.
The most significant aspect of the
FNPRM is the FCC’s interest in extending
to in-state prison phone calls the Commission’s reforms related to interstate calls.
For most state DOCs, as well as most jails,
ICS services are mainly intrastate because
prisoners generally make calls to family
members and friends who reside in the
same state. There are exceptions, such as
federal prisoners, who can be housed at
any BOP facility nationwide, and prisoners held in private prisons in other states
(California, Hawaii, Vermont and Idaho
currently house some of their prisoners in
out-of-state contract facilities).
By far, though, most of the nation’s 2.2
million prisoners are incarcerated in their
home states and make calls within those
states. Thus, extending the FCC’s final order
to intrastate prison phone calls – including
rate caps and safe harbor limits – would
significantly reduce the financial burden
that intrastate calls impose on prisoners
and their families.
As argued by PLN managing editor
Alex Friedmann when he testified at the
FCC’s workshop in July 2013, since virtually all phone calls are routed electronically
across state lines, even local and intrastate
calls, there is little remaining distinction between “interstate” and “intrastate.” Thus all
ICS calls, both within a state and to other
states, should be regulated by the FCC to
the same extent.
One indicator why the Commission
needs to extend rate caps to intrastate prison
phone calls is the number of states with instate ICS rates that exceed the FCC’s cap
and safe harbor limits for interstate calls.
Currently, at least 23 states charge
intrastate rates and 8 states have local rates
above the FCC’s cap for collect interstate
calls ($3.75 for a 15-minute call). Additionally, at least 23 states charge intrastate
rates and 9 states have local rates above the
cap for debit and/or prepaid interstate calls
($3.15 for a 15-minute call).
With respect to the safe harbor limits,
at least 39 states have intrastate rates and

16

23 charge local rates that exceed the safe
harbor for collect interstate calls ($2.10
for a 15-minute call); similarly, at least 38
states have intrastate rates and 22 charge
local rates above the safe harbor for prepaid
and/or debit interstate calls ($1.80 for a
15-minute call).
Therefore, unless rate caps are extended
to intrastate and local calls, states can
continue to charge in-state ICS rates that
far exceed the caps and safe harbor limits
the FCC has established for interstate
prison phone calls. The Delaware DOC, for
example, currently charges $10.70 for a 15minute intrastate call, while in Mississippi
a 15-minute local call costs $5.70.
The Commission’s FNPRM, and thus
any future action on intrastate ICS rates
and other prison phone reforms, remains
pending.

Comments by the Commissioners
When the FCC decided to cap the
cost of interstate ICS calls in August 2013,
it did so on a 2-to-1 vote. Then-Acting
Chairwoman Mignon Clyburn – who had
championed reform of the prison phone
industry – and Commissioner Jessica
Rosenworcel voted for the rate caps and
related measures to curb the worst abuses
of ICS providers. Commissioner Ajit Pai,
appointed to the FCC in 2012 by President
Obama, cast the dissenting vote.
In an unusual epilogue, the Commissioners appended statements reflecting their
personal thoughts and comments to the
FCC’s final order released on September
26, 2013.
Commissioner Rosenworcel wrote:
“When I step back from the record in
this proceeding, there is one number that
simply haunts me – perhaps because I am a
parent. Across the country, 2.7 million children have at least one parent in prison. That
is 2.7 million children who do not know
what it means to talk regularly with their
mother or father. After all, families with an
incarcerated parent are often separated by
hundreds of miles. They may lack the time
and means to make regular visits. So phone
calls may be the only way to stay in touch.
Yet when the price of a single phone call can
be as much as you and I spend for unlimited
monthly plans, it is hard to keep connected.
Reaching out can be an impossible strain
on the household budget. This harms the
families and children of the incarcerated.
But it goes far beyond that. It harms all of
Prison Legal News

CHARTAͲInterstateICSRates
State
AL
AK
AZ
AR
CA
CO
CT
DE
FL
GA
HI
ID
IL
IN
IA
KS
KY
LA
ME
MD
MA
MI
MN
MS
MO
MT
NE
NV
NH
NJ
NM
NY
NC
ND
OH
OK
OR
PA
RI
SC
SD
TN
TX
UT
VT
VA
WA
WV
WI
WY
BOP

Company
Embarq(CenturyLink)*
Securus
Securus
GTL
GTL
VAC(GTL)
Securus
GTL
TͲNETIX(Securus)
GTL
HawaiianTelcom
PCS(GTL)
Securus
PCS(GTL)
PCS(GTL)
Embarq(CenturyLink)*
Securus
Securus
PCS(GTL)
GTL
GTL
PCS(GTL)
GTL
GTL
Securus
Telmate
PCS(GTL)
CenturyLink*
ICSolutions
GTL
Securus
VAC(GTL)
GTL
Evercom(Securus)
GTL
VAC(GTL)
Telmate
GTL
GTL
GTL
VAC(GTL)
GTL
Embarq(CenturyLink)+
VAC(GTL)
PCS(GTL)
GTL
VAC(GTL)
GTL
Embarq(CenturyLink)+
ICSolutions
Sprint

Collect
$3.95+.89/min.
3.95+.89/min.
2.40+.40/min.
3.95+.45/min.
.44/min.
3.00+.15/min.
.3245/min.
1.55+.61/min.
1.20+.06/min.
3.95+.89/min.
?
3.80+.85/min.
3.55flat
.24/min.
N/A
.18/min.
2.00+.30/min.
2.15+.17Ͳ.27/min.
3.00+.69/min.
.95+.30/min.
.86+.10/min.
.23/min.
3.95+.89/min.
2.10+.24/min.
1.00+.05/min.
.24+.12/min.
.70+.05/min.
2.50+.49/min.
1.20+.10/min.
.33/min.
.65flat
.048/min.
3.40flat
2.40+.24/min.
3.90+.871/min.
3.00flat
.16/min.
3.50+.50/min.
1.30+.30/min.
.99flat
3.15+.43/min.
3.535+.6175/min.
.43/min.
3.00+.45/min.
1.25+.15/min.
2.40+.43/min.
3.50+.50/min.
.85+.50/min.
.18/min.
2.80+.55/min.
2.45+.40/min.

Rates(2012Ͳ2013)
PreͲPaid
$3.95+.89/min.
3.95+.89/min.
2.00+.40/min.
N/A
.44/min.
1.50+.13/min.
.2433/min.
1.55+.61/min.
1.02+.06/min.
N/A
?
3.60+.80/min.
3.55flat
.24/min.
N/A
.18/min.
2.00+.30/min.
1.93+.15Ͳ.24/min.
3.00+.69/min.
.30/min.
.86+.10/min.
.23/min.
N/A
2.10+.24/min.
.05/min.
.24+.12/min.
.50+.05/min.
2.50+.49/min.
.15/min.
.33/min.
.59flat
.048/min.
3.40flat
2.40+.24/min.
3.12+.697/min.
3.00flat
.16/min.
2.45+.46/min.
1.30+.30/min.
.75flat
1.35+.09/min.
3.1817+.5558/min.
.43/min.
3.00+.45/min.
1.00+.10/min.
2.40+.40/min.
3.50+.50/min.
.75+.44/min.
.18/min.
2.40+.50/min.
1.50+.23/min.

Source:PrisonLegalNewsresearchdata2012Ͳ2013

Debit
$3.95+.89/min.
3.95+.89/min.
2.00+.40/min.
3.95+.45/min.
N/A
1.50+.10/min.
.3245/min.
1.55+.61/min.
1.20+.06/min.
N/A
?
3.40flat
N/A
.24/min.
3.00+.30/min.
.17/min.
1.60+.25/min.
1.93+.15Ͳ.24/min.
.30/min.
.30/min.
.65+.075/min.
.21/min.
.32/min.
2.10+.24/min.
.05/min.
.24+.12/min.
.50+.05/min.
2.50+.49/min.
.15/min.
.33/min.
.65flat
.048/min.
3.06flat
.34/min.
3.12+.697/min.
N/A
.16/min.
2.33+.43/min.
1.17+.27/min.
.75flat
1.35+.09/min.
3.1817+.5558/min.
.387/min.
2.55+.35/min.
.50+.10/min.
2.40+.40/min.
3.50+.50/min.
N/A
N/A
2.00+.25/min.
.23/min.
Averages:

Costof15ͲMinuteCall
Collect
PreͲPaid
Debit
$17.30
17.30
8.40
10.70
6.60
5.25
4.87
10.70
2.10
17.30
?
16.55
3.55
3.60
N/A
2.70
6.50
4.70Ͳ6.20
13.35
5.45
2.36
3.45
17.30
5.70
1.75
2.04
1.45
9.85
2.70
4.95
0.65
0.72
3.40
6.06
16.97
3.00
2.40
11.00
5.80
0.99
9.60
12.80
6.45
9.75
3.50
8.85
11.00
8.35
2.70
11.05
8.45

$17.30
17.30
8.00
N/A
6.60
3.45
3.65
10.70
1.92
N/A
?
15.60
3.55
3.60
N/A
2.70
6.50
4.18Ͳ5.53
13.35
4.50
2.36
3.45
N/A
5.70
0.75
2.04
1.25
9.85
2.25
4.95
0.59
0.72
3.40
6.06
13.58
3.00
2.40
9.35
5.80
0.75
2.70
11.52
6.45
9.75
2.50
8.40
11.00
7.35
2.70
9.90
4.95

$17.30
17.30
8.00
10.70
N/A
3.00
4.87
10.70
2.10
N/A
?
3.40
N/A
3.60
7.50
2.55
5.35
4.18Ͳ5.53
4.50
4.50
1.78
3.15
4.80
5.70
0.75
2.04
1.25
9.85
2.25
4.95
0.65
0.72
3.06
5.10
13.58
N/A
2.40
8.78
5.22
0.75
2.70
11.52
5.81
7.80
2.00
8.40
11.00
N/A
N/A
5.75
3.45

$7.18

$6.05

$5.56

1

2
3

4

5

6

*ICSprovidedbyCenturyLink,withprepaidaccountsprovidedbyICSolutions
+ICSprovidedbyCenturyLink,withprepaidaccountsprovidedbySecurus
BoldedstateshavebannedICScommissions

Prison Legal News

17

December 2013

Hope for Prison Phone Reform (cont.)
us because we know that regular contact
between prisoners and family members
reduces recidivism.
“Today, this changes. After a long
time – too long – the Commission takes
action to finally address the high cost that
prison inmates and their families must pay
for phone service. This is not just an issue
of markets and rates; it is a broader issue of
social justice. We establish a framework that
will immediately reduce interstate inmate
calling service rates.... This effort has my
unequivocal support.”
Commissioner Rosenworcel also
thanked Martha Wright, whose petition for
rulemaking submitted to the FCC a decade
ago was the genesis of and impetus for the
Commission’s order mandating reform of
the prison phone industry.
Commissioner Clyburn expressed her
appreciation for Mrs. Wright too, and for
the many people who had encouraged the
FCC to take action.
“For ten years, family, friends and legal
representatives of inmates have been urging

December 2013

the courts and waiting for the FCC to ease
the burden of an exorbitant inmate calling
rate structure,” she wrote. “Their wait is
at long last over. Borrowing from a 1964
anthem inspired by challenges of his time,
the immortal songwriter Sam Cooke sang
that it’s been a long, long time in coming,
but change has finally come.
“Today’s Order reforms the rates and
charges for interstate inmate calling services
and provides immediate and meaningful
relief, particularly for low income families
across this nation. This Order fulfills our
obligation to ensure just, reasonable and fair
phone rates for all Americans, including the
millions with loved ones in prison.
“This all began with one Washington,
D.C. grandmother, Mrs. Martha Wright,
who spoke truth to power in 2003, and
reminded us that one voice can still spur a
movement and drive meaningful change....
In 2003, she filed a petition with the FCC
asking for help. Others who were paying a
high toll for interstate inmate calls would
follow her lead and after many twists and
turns – we are finally here.”
Commissioner Clyburn also acknowledged the burden that exorbitant prison

18

phone rates place on prisoners’ families.
“Too often, families are forced to choose
between spending scarce resources to stay
in touch with their loved ones or covering
life’s basic necessities,” she said. “One family member described how communicating
with her husband is a ‘great hardship,’ but
that the few minutes that they are able
to talk each week, ‘have changed his life.’
Another parent told us how he has spent
significant amounts of money to receive
collect calls from his son – calls that he
‘cannot afford,’ but accepts because his son’s
‘emotional health and survival in prison is
important’ to him.
“These are not isolated anecdotes.
There are 2.7 million children with at least
one parent in prison and they often want
and need to maintain a connection. In addition to coping with the anxiety associated
with a parent who is not there on a daily
basis, these young people are often suffering severe economic hardships, which are
exacerbated by unaffordable inmate calling
costs. In the meantime, 700,000 inmates are
released from correctional facilities each
year. It’s critical for them to have strong
support structures in order to re-assimilate

Prison Legal News

CHARTBͲIntrastateICSRates
State
AL
AK
AZ
AR
CA
CO
CT
DE
FL
GA
HI
ID
IL
IN
IA
KS
KY
LA
ME
MD
MA
MI
MN
MS
MO
MT
NE
NV
NH
NJ
NM
NY
NC
ND
OH
OK
OR
PA
RI
SC
SD
TN
TX
UT
VT
VA
WA
WV
WI
WY
BOP

Company
Embarq(CenturyLink)*
Securus
Securus
GTL
GTL
VAC(GTL)
Securus
GTL
TͲNETIX(Securus)
GTL
HawaiianTelcom
PCS(GTL)
Securus
PCS(GTL)
PCS(GTL)
Embarq(CenturyLink)*
Securus
Securus
PCS(GTL)
GTL
GTL
PCS(GTL)
GTL
GTL
Securus
Telmate
PCS(GTL)
CenturyLink*
ICSolutions
GTL
Securus
VAC(GTL)
GTL
Evercom(Securus)
GTL
VAC(GTL)
Telmate
GTL
GTL
GTL
VAC(GTL)
GTL
Embarq(CenturyLink)+
VAC(GTL)
PCS(GTL)
GTL
VAC(GTL)
GTL
Embarq(CenturyLink)+
ICSolutions
Sprint

Collect

InterLATARates(2012Ͳ2013)
PreͲPaid

$2.25+.30/min.
1.55+.065Ͳ.39/min.
2.00+.20/min.
3.00+.12/min.
.135/min.
2.75+.15/min.
.3245/min.
1.55+.61/min.
1.20+.06/min.
2.00+.19/min.
1.45+.09Ͳ.14/min.
3.80flat
3.55flat
.24/min.
N/A
.18/min.
1.50+.20/min.
2.15+.15Ͳ.21/min.
1.55+.25/min.
.95+.30/min.
.86+.10/min.
.20/min.
3.00+.23/min.
2.10+.24/min.
1.00+.05/min.
.24+.12/min.
.70+.05/min.
1.00+.13/min.
1.20+.10/min.
.33/min.
.65flat
.048/min.
3.40flat
2.40+.24/min.
1.04+.322/min.
3.00flat
.16/min.
2.35+.26/min.
.70flat
.99flat
2.70+.38/min.
1.853+.116/min.
.26/min.
2.80+.12/min.
1.25+.15/min.
2.25+.25/min.
3.50flat
.85+.20/min.
.12/min.
1.17+.17/min.
?

$2.25+.30/min.
1.55+.065Ͳ.39/min.
1.60+.20/min.
N/A
.135/min.
1.25+.13/min.
.2433/min.
1.55+.61/min.
1.02+.06/min.
N/A
?
3.60flat
3.55flat
.24/min.
N/A
.18/min.
1.50+.20/min.
1.93+.14Ͳ.19/min.
1.55+.25/min.
.30/min.
.86+.10/min.
.20/min.
N/A
2.10+.24/min.
.05/min.
.24+.12/min.
.50+.05/min.
1.00+.13/min.
.15/min.
.33/min.
.59flat
.048/min.
3.40flat
2.40+.24/min.
.832+.257/min.
3.00flat
.16/min.
2.15+.20/min.
.70flat
.75flat
1.35+.09/min.
1.667+.105/min.
.26/min.
2.80+.12/min.
1.00+.10/min.
1.75+.23/min.
3.15flat
.75+.18/min.
.12/min.
.98+.14/min.
?

Source:PrisonLegalNewsresearchdata2012Ͳ2013

Debit

$2.25+.30/min.
1.55+.065Ͳ.39/min.
1.60+.20/min.
3.00+.12/min.
N/A
1.25+.10/min.
.3245/min.
1.55+.61/min.
1.20+.06/min.
N/A
?
3.40flat
N/A
.24/min.
2.00+.19Ͳ.27/min.
.17/min.
1.20+.16/min.
1.93+.14Ͳ.19/min.
.30/min.
.30/min.
.65+.075/min.
.18/min.
.32/min.
2.10+.24/min.
.05/min.
.24+.12/min.
.50+.05/min.
1.00+.13/min.
.15/min.
.33/min.
.65flat
.048/min.
3.06flat
.34/min.
.832+.257/min.
N/A
.16/min.
2.04+.19/min.
.63flat
.75flat
1.35+.09/min.
1.667+.105/min.
.234/min.
2.25+.10/min.
.50+.10/min.
1.75+.23/min.
3.15flat
N/A
N/A
.50+.05/min.
?
Averages:

Costof15ͲMinuteCall
Collect
PreͲPaid
Debit
$6.75
2.63Ͳ7.61
5.00
4.80
2.03
5.00
4.87
10.70
2.10
4.85
2.80Ͳ3.55
3.80
3.55
3.60
N/A
2.70
4.50
4.40Ͳ5.30
5.30
5.45
2.36
3.00
6.45
5.70
1.75
2.04
1.45
2.95
2.70
4.95
0.65
0.72
3.40
6.06
5.87
3.00
2.40
6.25
0.70
0.99
8.40
3.60
3.90
4.60
3.50
6.00
3.50
3.85
1.80
3.72
?

$6.75
2.63Ͳ7.61
4.60
N/A
2.03
3.20
3.65
10.70
1.92
N/A
?
3.60
3.55
3.60
N/A
2.70
4.50
4.03Ͳ4.78
5.30
4.50
2.36
3.00
N/A
5.70
0.75
2.04
1.25
2.95
2.25
4.95
0.59
0.72
3.40
6.06
4.69
3.00
2.40
5.15
0.70
0.75
2.70
3.24
3.90
4.60
2.50
5.20
3.15
3.45
1.80
3.08
?

$6.75
2.63Ͳ7.61
4.60
4.80
N/A
2.75
4.87
10.70
2.10
N/A
?
3.40
N/A
3.60
4.85Ͳ6.05
2.55
3.60
4.03Ͳ4.78
4.50
4.50
1.78
2.70
4.80
5.70
0.75
2.04
1.25
2.95
2.25
4.95
0.65
0.72
3.06
5.10
4.69
N/A
2.40
4.89
0.63
0.75
2.70
3.24
3.51
3.75
2.00
5.20
3.15
N/A
N/A
1.25
?

$3.90

$3.41

$3.42

1

7
2
3

4

5

6

*ICSprovidedbyCenturyLink,withprepaidaccountsprovidedbyICSolutions
+ICSprovidedbyCenturyLink,withprepaidaccountsprovidedbySecurus
BoldedstateshavebannedICScommissions

Prison Legal News

19

December 2013

Hope for Prison Phone Reform (cont.)
successfully. Studies have shown that having meaningful contact beyond prison walls
can make a real difference in maintaining
community ties, promoting rehabilitation,
and reducing recidivism. Making these calls
more affordable can facilitate all of these
objectives and more.”
She concluded by emphasizing, “change
has finally come.”

Reaction to the FCC’s Order
The FCC’s order was well-received by
the many organizations and individuals who
had long urged the Commission to redress
the abuses of the prison phone industry.
While some felt the order did not go far
enough, it is arguably more than any other
government agency has done to protect
prisoners and their families from exploitation by profit-driven companies and greedy
corrections officials.
One community has already taken
the FCC’s order as a signal for positive
change. In October 2013, Santa Clara
County, California Supervisor Joe Simitian
introduced a proposal to let offenders held
in the county’s juvenile detention facility
make free calls to their families and friends,
“ending exorbitant phone rates at least 23
times higher than normal,” according to the
Mercury News.
Under the proposal the county would
terminate its contract with GTL, the current ICS provider which gives the county a
61% commission, and supply phone services

at the juvenile facility internally. As a result,
phone rates would drop from $.70 a minute
to $.03 per minute. “It was institutional
price gouging. We had a captive audience in
every sense of the word,” Simitian observed.
A similar proposal is being made for the
county’s jails.
“Santa Clara County is setting a wonderful example that the rest of the country
should follow,” said Peter Wagner, executive
director of the Prison Policy Initiative.
Not everyone was happy with the
FCC’s final order, though.
Global Tel*Link and Securus filed
petitions to stay the order in October 2013
and requested that the FNPRM be held
in abeyance. Securus’ petition complained
that the Commission’s order was onerous,
requiring the company to renegotiate over
1,700 ICS contracts within 90 days to be in
compliance – a task it said was impossible
to complete. Securus also claimed that it
would be unable to recover commission
payments it must continue to pay under its
existing contracts.
Additionally, the company argued
that the rate caps will require it to provide
below-cost phone services – despite the fact
that 18 states already charge rates within the
FCC’s cap on collect interstate calls, and
15 states have rates at or below the cap on
prepaid and debit interstate calls. In fact, 7
states currently charge ICS rates for collect,
debit and/or prepaid calls that are at or
below the FCC’s safe harbor limits.
Incongruously taking the position that
it now somehow represents the interests of
prisoners and their families, Securus further

Support Prison Legal News
with these beautiful gifts!

argued that the rate caps “could lead correctional facilities to deny inmates access to
telecommunications services.” More telling
is the company’s complaint that the caps
would “deprive state and county governments
of funds used for salutary purposes such as
victims’ rights funds and inmate welfare”; i.e.,
services that are funded by commission kickbacks from ICS providers, which in turn are
mostly paid by recipients of prisoners’ phone
calls – primarily their family members.
GTL’s petition for a stay of the FCC’s
order emphasized the company’s bottom
line, including the “millions of dollars in
unrecoverable losses” that would “create
disruption and uncertainty in the industry.”
Presumably with a poker face, GTL argued
that staying the order would not harm the
petitioners. Attorney Lee G. Petro, who represents Martha Wright, the lead petitioner
before the FCC, responded that GTL’s
argument was “almost laughable,” noting the
company was simply trying to safeguard its
profit margins. “The FCC is there to protect
the public interest, not to protect a company’s
bottom line,” he observed, dryly.
Weighing in on the side of Securus
and GTL was the National Sheriffs’ Association, which filed a comment with the
FCC contending that a “one size fits all”
approach to prison phone services fails
to account for “the realities of how these
services are provided.” Stated another way,
because many sheriffs receive commission
kickbacks from ICS providers, and have
become accustomed to padding their jail
budgets with those funds, they will suffer
financially under the FCC’s order.

Hand Embroidered Greeting Cards
Made by women prisoners in Cochabamba,
Bolivia. Each card is individually made, no
two are identical. The prisoners are paid a
fair wage for each card and keep 100% of
the pay to support themselves and their
families. Local fair trade non-profits in Bolivia
supply the materials for the cards. $6.

call 802-257-1342,
561-360-2523, mail order or use web form
http://www.prisonlegalnews.org/

Hand Made Hemp Tote Bag All natural hemp tote bag

hand made in Vermont with the Prison Legal News logo
on both sides, in red and black. Great for carrying books,
groceries, and more! Stamped on the inside that no sweatshop, prison or child labor was used in its manufacture. $12.
$6 shipping and handling for orders under $50.

December 2013

20

Prison Legal News

CHARTCͲLocalICSRates
State
AL
AK
AZ
AR
CA
CO
CT
DE
FL
GA
HI
ID
IL
IN
IA
KS
KY
LA
ME
MD
MA
MI
MN
MS
MO
MT
NE
NV
NH
NJ
NM
NY
NC
ND
OH
OK
OR
PA
RI
SC
SD
TN
TX
UT
VT
VA
WA
WV
WI
WY
BOP

Company
Embarq(CenturyLink)*
Securus
Securus
GTL
GTL
VAC(GTL)
Securus
GTL
TͲNETIX(Securus)
GTL
HawaiianTelcom
PCS(GTL)
Securus
PCS(GTL)
PCS(GTL)
Embarq(CenturyLink)*
Securus
Securus
PCS(GTL)
GTL
GTL
PCS(GTL)
GTL
GTL
Securus
Telmate
PCS(GTL)
CenturyLink*
ICSolutions
GTL
Securus
VAC(GTL)
GTL
Evercom(Securus)
GTL
VAC(GTL)
Telmate
GTL
GTL
GTL
VAC(GTL)
GTL
Embarq(CenturyLink)+
VAC(GTL)
PCS(GTL)
GTL
VAC(GTL)
GTL
Embarq(CenturyLink)+
ICSolutions
Sprint

Collect
$2.75flat
free
1.84flat
3.00+.12/min.
.096/min.
2.75+.15/min.
.32/min.
1.22flat
.50flat
2.70flat
1.95flat
3.80flat
3.55flat
.24/min.
N/A
.18/min.
1.85flat
.98flat
1.55+.25/min.
.65flat
.86+.10/min.
.20/min.
1.00+.05/min.
2.10+.24/min.
1.00+.05/min.
.24+.12/min.
.70flat
1.00+.13/min.
1.20+.10/min.
.33/min.
.66flat
.048/min.
1.25flat
.50flat
1.14flat
3.00flat
.16/min.
1.65flat
.70flat
.99flat
2.70flat
.895flat
.26/min.
3.15flat
1.25+.07/min.
1.00flat
3.50flat
.85flat
.12/min.
.70+.08/min.
varies

Rates(2012Ͳ2013)
PreͲPaid
$2.75flat
free
1.60flat
N/A
.096/min.
1.25+.13/min.
.24/min.
1.22flat
.50flat
N/A
?
3.60flat
3.55flat
.24/min.
N/A
.18/min.
1.85flat
.88flat
1.55+.25/min.
.50flat
.86+.10/min.
.20/min.
N/A
2.10+.24/min.
.05/min.
.24+.12/min.
.50flat
1.00+.13/min.
.50+.10/min.
.33/min.
.59flat
.048/min.
1.25flat
.50flat
.911flat
3.00flat
.16/min.
1.60flat
.70flat
.75flat
.90flat
.8055flat
.26/min.
3.15flat
1.00+.06/min.
.90flat
3.15flat
.75flat
.12/min.
.60+.07/min.
1.50+.06/min.

Source:PrisonLegalNewsresearchdata2012Ͳ2013

Debit
$2.75flat
free
1.60flat
3.00+.12/min.
N/A
1.25+.10/min.
.32/min.
1.22flat
.50flat
N/A
?
3.40flat
N/A
.24/min.
2.00flat
.17/min.
1.50flat
0.88flat
.30/min.
.50flat
.65+.075/min.
.18/min.
.35flat
2.10+.24/min.
.05/min.
.24+.12/min.
.50flat
1.00+.13/min.
.50+.10/min.
.33/min.
.65flat
.048/min.
1.13flat
.05/min.
.911flat
N/A
.16/min.
1.52flat
.63flat
.75flat
1.00flat
.8055flat
.234/min.
2.50flat
.25+.05/min.
.90flat
3.15flat
N/A
N/A
.50+.05/min.
.06/min.
Averages:

Costof15ͲMinuteCall
Collect
PreͲPaid
Debit
$2.75
free
1.84
4.80
1.44
5.00
4.87
1.22
0.50
2.70
1.95
3.80
3.55
3.60
N/A
2.70
1.85
0.98
5.30
0.65
2.36
3.00
1.75
5.70
1.75
2.04
0.70
2.95
2.20
4.95
0.66
0.72
1.25
0.50
1.14
3.00
2.40
1.65
0.70
0.99
2.70
0.90
3.90
3.15
2.30
1.00
3.50
0.85
1.80
1.90
.95Ͳ5.70

$2.75
free
1.60
N/A
1.44
3.20
3.65
1.22
0.50
N/A
?
3.60
3.55
3.60
N/A
2.70
1.85
0.88
5.30
0.50
2.36
3.00
N/A
5.70
0.75
2.04
0.50
2.95
1.50
4.95
0.59
0.72
1.25
0.50
0.91
3.00
2.40
1.60
0.70
0.75
0.90
0.81
3.90
3.15
1.90
0.90
3.15
0.75
1.80
1.65
2.40

$2.75
free
1.60
4.80
N/A
2.75
4.87
1.22
0.50
N/A
?
3.40
N/A
3.60
2.00
2.55
1.50
0.88
4.50
0.50
1.78
2.70
0.35
5.70
0.75
2.04
0.50
2.95
1.50
4.95
0.65
0.72
1.13
0.75
0.91
N/A
2.40
1.52
0.63
0.75
1.00
0.81
3.51
2.50
1.00
0.90
3.15
N/A
N/A
1.25
0.90

$2.30

$2.08

$1.98

1

7
2
3

4

8

6

*ICSprovidedbyCenturyLink,withprepaidaccountsprovidedbyICSolutions
+ICSprovidedbyCenturyLink,withprepaidaccountsprovidedbySecurus
BoldedstateshavebannedICScommissions

Prison Legal News

21

December 2013

Hope for Prison Phone Reform (cont.)
Both GTL and Securus filed petitions
for review in the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals on November 14, 2013 – just one day
after the final order was published in the
Federal Register. The companies are seeking
review of the order on the grounds that it
exceeds the FCC’s jurisdiction or authority and is “arbitrary, capricious, an abuse
of discretion” or otherwise contrary to the
law or violative of their rights. See: Securus
Technologies v. FCC, U.S. Court of Appeals
(D.C. Circuit), Case No. 13-1280; Global
Tel*Link v. FCC, U.S. Court of Appeals
(D.C. Circuit), Case No. 13-1281.
However, when drafting the final order
the Commission specifically addressed its
authority and jurisdiction to regulate prison
phone rates, principally under Section 201
of the Communications Act of 1934, which
requires that all telecom carriers’ interstate
rates be “just and reasonable.”
Pursuant to 47 U.S.C. § 201(b), “All
charges, practices, classifications, and regulations for and in connection with such
communication service, shall be just and
reasonable, and any such charge, practice,
classification, or regulation that is unjust or
unreasonable is declared to be unlawful.”
Further, “[t]he Commission may prescribe
such rules and regulations as may be necessary
in the public interest to carry out the provisions of this chapter.” While 47 U.S.C. § 276
requires all payphone providers to be “fairly
compensated,” that does not preclude the
FCC from promulgating rules to ensure ICS
rates are concurrently just and reasonable.
Most provisions of the FCC’s final
order will go into effect on February 11,
2014 with the exception of data reporting
Webster’s Spanish/
English Dictionary
It’s a quick and easy language
reference for avid readers.
Provides English and Spanish
abbreviations with a clear and
easy-to-read typeface. Contains
valuable pronunciation tables and
guides. 194 pages. Published by
Kappa Books, 2011
edition. $5.99 ea.
(or 13 Forever stamps)
FREE SHIPPING
U.S. Territories.

requirements, though the petitions for review filed by GTL and Securus may result
in delays depending on when the D.C.
Circuit enters a ruling. Ironically, while
both companies have filed petitions seeking to overturn the FCC’s order, Securus is
simultaneously suing GTL in federal court
on a patent infringement claim.

Conclusion: The Bell Tolls
PLN and HRDC have invested decades of work into confronting the injustice
of exorbitant prison phone rates and their
impact on prisoners, prisoners’ families
and our communities. The FCC’s order
represents a major milestone. While the
reforms mandated by the FCC face legal
challenges from ICS providers that rightly
fear the impact they will have on their profit
margins, the conclusion is inescapable: The
evils of the prison phone industry have been
exposed and are being remedied – slowly,
perhaps, but surely.
On November 21, 2013, the FCC
denied Securus’ and GTL’s petitions to
stay the Commission’s order and to hold
the FNPRM in abeyance. “Justice delayed
is justice denied,” Commissioner Clyburn
stated. “Families and loved ones have already been waiting ten long years for relief
from unlawfully high and unaffordable
rates.... I look forward to working with
Chairman [Tom] Wheeler and my fellow
Commissioners to adopt permanent rate
caps to ensure that inmate calling service
phone calls are just and reasonable as required by the statute.”
Upon denying the petitions to stay, the
FCC wrote that “delay of implementation
of the reforms adopted in the Order will
perpetuate the significant harms that third
parties are currently subject to in the form

of unjust, unreasonable and unfair ICS
rates and the various secondary harms that
those excessive rates cause, such as a higher
rate of recidivism and emotional harm to
prisoners’ children.”
Thus, ICS providers should not ask for
whom the bell tolls, as it has tolled for them.
Prison phone companies have for too long
price-gouged prisoners and their loved ones
in collusion with corrections agencies that
profit from such exploitation through commission kickbacks. If ICS providers want to
continue providing prison phone services,
they must do so within the new paradigm of
regulation, rate caps and public scrutiny.
Lady Justice may be blind, but judging
from the FCC’s order she is not deaf – and
the pleas of prisoners and their families for
reform of the abusive prison phone industry
are finally being heard, loud and clear.
Sources: FCC Order (WC Docket No. 12375, 9/26/13); FCC Order Denying Petitions
to Stay (WC Docket No. 12-375, 11/21/13);
transcript from FCC Workshop (7/10/2013);
San Jose Mercury News; Securus’ Motion for
Stay (WC Docket No. 12-375, 9/17/2013)
and Petitioners’ Response; National Sheriffs’
Association Comment (WC Docket No. 12375, October 2013); Huffington Post; www.
icsolutions.com; https://securustech.net; www.
gtl.net; www.telmate.com; http://qwest.
centurylink.com/corrections; www.thedeal.
com; www.prisonpolicy.org; www.paytel.
com; www.castleharlan.com; www.americansecurities.com; www.prisonphonejustice.org;
www.phonejustice.org; www.epsicare.com;
www.bloomberg.com; www.buzzfeed.com;
“Bureau of Prisons: Improved Evaluations and
Increased Coordination Could Improve Cell
Phone Detection,” Government Accountability
Office, GAO-11-893 (Sept. 2011)

Reading Glasses with Metal Frame:
Full-size lens, spring template, soft-coated nose
pads for better fit and comfort, full frame. Use: Good
for everyday use. Material: Steel frame & templated
and glass lens. Unisex. Color: Gold-finish frame
/ Black temple covers. Length: 2.1/8” each lens.
Width: 1.5/16” each lens.
Magnifications available:
1.0x, 1.25x, 1.5x, 1.75x, 2.0x,
2.25x, 2.5x, 2.75x, 3.0x, 3.25x, 3.5x,
3.75x, 4.0x. $7.95 for 3 pairs assorted (or 17 Forever
stamps).
For complete BROCHURE
FREE SHIPPING
send 2 forever stamps or
get it free with order
U.S. Territories.

ORDER TO: MARA WORLDWIDE, 115 W. CALIFORNIA BLVD. STE. 424-P, PASADENA, CA 91105

December 2013

22

Prison Legal News

CHARTDͲICSCommissions
State

Company

AL
Embarq (CenturyLink)*
AK
Securus
AZ
Securus
AR
GTL
CA
GTL
CO
VAC (GTL)
CT
Securus
DE
GTL
FL
T-NETIX (Securus)
GA
GTL
HI
Hawaiian Telcom
ID
PCS (GTL)
IL
Securus
IN
PCS (GTL)
IA
ICN/PCS (GTL)
KS
Embarq (CenturyLink)*
KY
Securus
LA
Securus
ME
PCS (GTL)
MD GTL
MA GTL
MI
PCS (GTL)
MN GTL
MS
GTL
MO Securus
MT
Telmate
NE
PCS (GTL)
NV
CenturyLink *
NH
ICSolutions
NJ
GTL
NM Securus
NY
VAC (GTL)
NC
GTL
ND
Evercom (Securus)
OH
GTL
OK
VAC (GTL)
OR
Telmate
PA
GTL
RI
GTL
SC
GTL
SD
VAC (GTL)
TN
GTL
TX
Embarq (CenturyLink)+
UT
VAC (GTL)
VT
PCS (GTL)
VA
GTL
WA VAC (GTL)
WV GTL
WI
Embarq (CenturyLink)+
WY ICSolutions
STATE TOTALS:

2009
$4,463,686.90
84,125.08
3,723,046.36
2,394,900.77
13,000,000.00
3,017,759.33
3,590,667.50
1,310,401.78
5,383,690.20
7,445,914.55
106,013.36
1,248,804.57
10,392,626.00
1,693,965.32
1,231,000.00
1,814,693.80
3,333,168.18
3,602,686.75
234,329.79
?
1,972,546.06
NONE
3,388,860.00
2,788,922.59
NONE
252,121.02
NONE
3,033,941.22
252,000.00
5,106,355.00
NONE
NONE
7,578,956.67
126,245.62
13,531,849.15
1,240,396.00
3,000,000.00
7,174,942.65
NONE
NONE
241,839.00
2,991,100.00
224,228.00
798,429.40
303,160.50
4,524,329.69
5,100,000.00
903,735.30
2,039,339.45
347,512.83
$134,992,290.39

CommissionPayments
2010
2011
$4,124,126.47
74,503.59
3,884,803.26
2,475,527.50
6,500,000.00
2,658,759.15
3,797,824.40
1,144,827.32
5,374,083.28
7,695,712.76
97,598.47
1,368,425.38
10,940,246.00
1,547,481.77
1,231,000.00
1,876,165.29
2,706,767.18
3,303,407.37
225,504.10
?
1,870,044.28
NONE
3,470,898.00
2,262,203.71
NONE
226,095.50
NONE
2,747,336.97
284,000.00
3,734,512.00
NONE
NONE
7,217,875.33
114,110.95
17,236,087.91
1,218,429.88
3,000,000.00
7,250,923.88
NONE
NONE
154,767.00
2,916,310.00
4,276,006.00
699,489.59
467,295.94
4,033,303.82
5,100,000.00
890,005.21
2,052,346.15
475,976.21
$132,724,781.62

$3,530,496.70
83,393.95
4,120,894.06
2,447,253.75
NONE
2,656,328.07
4,032,757.64
1,195,151.36
5,205,803.74
6,284,715.76
103,493.08
1,495,963.54
12,649,898.00
1,929,932.14
750,000.00
1,769,540.31
2,880,166.42
3,289,038.16
171,379.45
?
1,706,889.43
NONE
3,767,811.00
1,945,008.21
NONE
227,834.67
NONE
2,736,802.16
300,000.00
3,633,197.00
NONE
NONE
7,464,539.07
107,516.94
15,000,000.00
1,167,318.18
3,000,000.00
7,361,264.77
NONE
NONE
229,398.76
2,635,599.00
5,673,568.00
745,155.88
410,513.74
4,104,977.98
5,100,000.00
919,726.80
2,171,279.29
532,305.11
$125,536,912.12

2012

Percentage
2012Ͳ2013

$3,038,002.18
see note
85,438.58
7-32.1%
4,314,062.50
53.70%
2,010,223.57
45.00%
NONE
NONE
2,029,186.79
49.00%
4,212,201.86
68.75%
998,380.04
30.00%
5,156,269.19
35.00%
5,316,672.82
60.00%
100,325.32
?
1,441,051.81
see note
12,946,806.00
76.00%
1,696,977.76
43.50%
650,972.00
see note
1,839,450.64
68.20%
2,796,139.46
54.00%
3,044,009.33
70.00%
367,231.71
60-100%
?
65-87%
1,714,972.89
15-30%
NONE
NONE
3,690,953.00
59.00%
1,651,805.23
60.50%
NONE
NONE
220,617.00
25.00%
NONE
NONE
2,706,372.51
54.20%
308,000.00
see note
3,877,997.00
41.00%
NONE
NONE
NONE
NONE
6,881,021.44
58.00%
97,856.12
40.00%
15,000,000.00
see note
1,017,657.90
see note
3,000,000.00
see note
7,620,897.51
44.40%
NONE
NONE
NONE
NONE
520,332.05
33-38%
2,595,417.00
50.10%
6,760,593.15
40.00%
765,858.16
55.00%
482,292.11
37.00%
3,401,139.48
35.00%
5,100,000.00
51.00%
931,637.16
46.00%
2,344,085.34
30.00%
604,859.00
65.50%
$123,337,765.61 Avg. 47.79%

9

10

11

12
2
3
13
14
15
4

16

8

5
17
18
19

20

21
22
23

Source:PrisonLegalNewsresearch2012/2013(commissionamountsareforcalendarorfiscalyears,dependingonhowthedatawasreported).
*ICSprovidedbyCenturyLink,prepaidaccountsprovidedbyICSolutions
+ICSprovidedbyCenturyLink,prepaidaccountsprovidedbySecurus

Prison Legal News

23

December 2013

Consolidated Footnotes – Charts A to D
1 Alaska provides free local calls, plus free calls
to the state’s Public Defender Agency, Office of Public
Advocacy and Ombudsman’s Office. First-minute rates
for intrastate calls range from $.17 to $.60, with subsequent minutes as indicated in Chart B.
2 Illinois’ ICS contract changed to Securus in late
2012; the charts reflect current (2013) rates. The state’s
prior contract was with Consolidated Communications
Public Services (CCPS). Illinois’ contract with Securus
initially had a commission rate of 87.1%, later reduced
to 76%; the commission amounts in Chart D are pursuant to the state’s prior contract with CCPS, which had
a commission rate of 56%.
3 Iowa only allows debit calls, with a maximum
charge of $9.00 for interstate calls and $7.40 for intrastate calls. The Iowa DOC’s phone service is provided
through the Iowa Communications Network (ICN), a
state government agency, and PCS/GTL. The state does
not receive a commission but rather retains all revenue
in excess of the cost of providing prison phone services,
which is termed “revenue” or “rebates.”
4 Maryland’s ICS contract changed to GTL in
early 2013; the charts reflect current (2013) rates. The
commission rate in Chart D (65-87%) is based on documents provided by the MD DOC; the commission for
debit/prepaid calls is 65% and the commission for collect calls is 87%. The MD DOC’s previous ICS contract
with Securus had a commission rate of 48-60%.
5 In North Dakota, the rates are $.30 for the
first minute then $.24/min. thereafter for collect and
prepaid interstate and intrastate calls (plus the connection/per-call charge).
6 Phone rates were obtained from the BOP
and from a 2011 report by the General Accountability
Office: “Bureau of Prisons: Improved Evaluations and
Increased Coordination Could Improve Cell Phone
Detection,” GAO-11-893 (Sept. 2011).
7 Rates are based on a 2011 email from the Hawaii Department of Public Safety, which confirmed on
November 20, 2013 that those rates are still in effect.
8 Under New Hampshire’s ICS contract, the first
5 minutes of local calls (all types) do not incur perminute charges, though the connection/per-call charge
applies. The state receives flat commission payments
on a monthly basis ($27,000 per month beginning in
September 2012).
9 The Alabama DOC receives a “per diem” commission; commission payments are calculated based
on a per diem rate multiplied by the average prisoner
population, per month. Under the state’s 2012 contract
with CenturyLink, the per diem rate is $.572.
10 California phased out commissions in 2011,
but the California Technology Agency receives an
$800,000 annual fee from GTL, plus GTL provides
cell phone detection technology at California state
prisons at no cost.

December 2013

11 The FY 2009 and FY 2010 commission
amounts for Delaware include combined commission
payments for ICS and public payphone services. The
state’s ICS contract specifies a declining commission
rate of 50% in FY 2010 and 2011, 40% in FY 2012 and
30% in FY 2013.
12 Idaho receives a commission of $2.25 per
debit call, $2.00 per prepaid collect call and $1.75 per
collect call. Community Work Centers have a 20%
commission.
13 Kansas receives a minimum guaranteed annual
commission of $2.36 million plus a “signing bonus” of
$250,000 pursuant to its 2013 ICS contract. The commission amounts are from the state’s prior ICS contract,
which had a commission of 41.3%.
14 In addition to the commission amounts,
Kentucky receives an $80,000 annual technology grant
from Securus.
15 Under a contract with PCS/GTL that expired
in early 2013, Maine received a 60% commission on
collect and prepaid calls plus a 100% commission on
debit calls. The Maine DOC currently uses an in-house
debit calling system with no collect calls.
16 Montana receives minimum monthly commission payments of $23,000 or 25% of ICS revenue,
whichever is greater.
17 Ohio receives a flat annual commission of
$15 million under a contract that began in 2010. The
commission amount for 2009 reflects 11 monthly
deposits under the prior contract, while 2010 reflects
14 monthly deposits under both the prior and current contract.
18 Oklahoma receives a flat commission of $2.30
per call, which equates to a 76.6% commission based
on the state’s flat ICS rate of $3.00 per call.

19 Oregon receives a base annual commission
of $3 million, paid quarterly, plus “an additional commission ... of 50% of quarterly gross revenue on all
Contractor provided inmate telephone equipment
and of quarterly profits on all Enhanced Services over
$1.5 million.”
20 South Dakota receives a 38% commission on
collect and prepaid local and intraLATA calls, 33% on
collect and prepaid interLATA and interstate calls, and
$1.00 commission per debit call (all call types).
21 In addition to ICS commissions, Utah receives
a quarterly administrative fee in “an amount equal to 1%
of the net sales ... under this Contract for the period.”
Utah DOC halfway houses that use coin payphones
have a 45% commission rate.
22 In addition to ICS commissions, GTL pays
Virginia a minimum $150,000 annual fee “towards
DOC technology initiatives,” and such fees increase
if GTL receives annual ICS revenue that exceeds $13
million.
23 Washington receives a 51% commission with a
minimum annual payment of $5.1 million. The amounts
in Chart D reflect the minimum commissions received
by the state; actual amounts may be higher.
For all charts: ICS rates and providers may have changed
since this data was compiled by Prison Legal News in
2012-2013. Securus rates were checked with the online Securus rate calculator (https://securustech.net/
call-rate-calculator); CenturyLink rates were checked
on the company’s website: (http://qwest.centurylink.
com/corrections). Data in the charts was obtained from
corrections agencies via public records requests or their
websites, or from ICS providers; most source documents
are posted on www.prisonphonejustice.org.

Prison Phone Companies Fight for
Lucrative Florida DOC Contract
by David Ganim

I

n April 2013, the Florida Department of Corrections (FDOC) issued an
invitation for companies to bid on the department’s coveted prison phone contract.
The FDOC evaluated responses to the
bid invitation and conducted negotiations with
three companies: Global Tel*Link (GTL),
Securus Technologies, Inc., which currently
holds the department’s phone contract, and
CenturyLink – the nation’s three largest prison
phone service providers. The FDOC then issued a request for best and final offers (BAFO),
and each company responded by June 18, 2013.
After reviewing the final bids, the FDOC

24

selected CenturyLink as the company that
demonstrated the best value and service.
CenturyLink was able to woo the FDOC
by offering an unusual proposition – increasing the department’s “commission” kickback
to 62.6% of gross prison phone revenue from
the current rate of 35%, while lowering the
cost of a 15-minute call by approximately
25%. The 62.6% commission would be in effect for the initial contract term of five years,
then change to 63.6% for the first two oneyear renewals and increase to 64.1% for the
third, fourth and fifth-year renewals.
CenturyLink indicated that its proPrison Legal News

EXHIBIT B

EXHIBIT C

EXHIBIT D

EXHIBIT E

EXHIBIT F

EXHIBIT G

EXHIBIT H

EXHIBIT I