[Federal Register: September 16, 2003 (Volume 68, Number 179)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Page 54173-54176]
From the Federal Register Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov]
[DOCID:fr16se03-8]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION
47 CFR Parts 2 and 20
[WT Docket No. 01-309; FCC 03-168]
Hearing Aid-Compatible Telephones
AGENCY: Federal Communications Commission.
ACTION: Final rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: In this document, the Commission modifies the exemption for
wireless phones under the Hearing Aid Compatibility Act of 1988 (HAC
Act) to require that digital wireless phones be capable of being
effectively used with hearing aids. It finds that modifying the
exemption will extend the benefits of wireless telecommunications to
individuals with hearing disabilities--including emergency, business,
and social communications--thereby increasing the value of the wireless
network for all Americans.
DATES: Effective November 17, 2003.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mindy Littell, Policy Division,
Wireless Telecommunications Bureau, at (202) 418-0789 or Gregory Guice,
Policy Division, Wireless Telecommunications Bureau, at (202) 418-0095.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This is a summary of the Report and Order,
adopted on July 10, 2003, and released on August 14, 2003. The full
text of the Report and Order is available for public inspection and
copying during regular business hours at the FCC Reference Information
Center, Portals II, 445 12th Street, SW., Room CY-A257, Washington, DC
20554. This document may also be purchased from the Commission's
duplicating contractor, Qualex International, Portals II, 445 12th
Street, SW., Room CY-B402, Washington, DC 20554, telephone 202-863-
2893, facsimile 202-863-2898, or via e-mail qualexint@aol.com.
Overview
1. In the Report and Order, the Commission modifies the exemption
for wireless phones under the Hearing Aid Compatibility Act of 1988
(HAC Act) to require that digital wireless phones be capable of being
effectively used with hearing aids. It finds that modifying the
exemption will extend the benefits of wireless telecommunications to
individuals with hearing disabilities--including emergency, business,
and social communications--thereby increasing the value of the wireless
network for all Americans.
2. The Commission takes these actions to facilitate the
Congressional goal of ensuring access to telecommunications services
for individuals with hearing disabilities. In light of the rising
number of calls to emergency services placed by wireless phone users,
preserving access to wireless telecommunications for individuals with
hearing disabilities is critical. In addition to the public safety
benefits, these actions will also extend to individuals with hearing
disabilities the social, professional, and convenience benefits offered
by wireless telecommunications as well. In light of our society's
increased reliance on wireless phones and the growing trend among
wireless carriers to move away from analog services in favor of more
efficient, feature-rich digital services, these steps will ensure that
individuals with hearing disabilities continue to enjoy access to
wireless telecommunications devices and services.
Final Regulatory Flexibility Analysis
3. As required by the Regulatory Flexibility Act of 1980, as
amended (RFA), an Initial Regulatory Flexibility Analysis (IRFA) was
incorporated in the Sec. 68.4(a) of the Commission's Rules Governing
Hearing Aid-Compatible Telephones Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (NPRM),
66 FR 58703 (November 23, 2001). The Commission sought written public
comment on the proposal in the NPRM, including comment on the IRFA.
This present Final Regulatory Flexibility Analysis (FRFA) conforms to
the RFA.
A. Need for, and Objectives of, Adopted Rules
4. In the Report and Order, the Commission modifies the exemption
for wireless phones under the Hearing Aid Compatibility Act of 1988
(``HAC Act'') to require digital wireless phones to provide for
effective use with hearing aids. We find that modifying the exemption
in the manner described in the Report and Order will extend the
benefits of wireless telecommunication to persons with hearing
disabilities, thereby increasing the value of the wireless network for
all Americans. The Commission took the following actions:
i. Adopts certain performance levels set forth in a technical
standard established by the American National Standards Institute
(ANSI) as the applicable technical standard for compatibility of
digital wireless phones with hearing aids;
ii. requires certain digital wireless phone models to provide
reduced radio frequency (RF) interference (i.e., meet a ``U3''
rating under the ANSI standard), and requires certain digital
wireless phone models to provide telecoil coupling capability (i.e.
meet a ``U3T'' rating under the ANSI standard);
iii. requires, within two years, each digital wireless phone
manufacturer to make available to carriers and require each carrier
providing digital wireless services to make available to consumers
at least two handset models for each air interface it offers which
provide reduced RF emissions (``U3'' rating);
iv. requires each Tier I wireless carrier providing digital
wireless services to make available to consumers within two years at
least two handset models for each air interface it offers to provide
reduced RF emissions (``U3'' rating) or 25 percent of the total
number of phone models it offers, whichever is greater;
v. requires, within three years, each digital wireless phone
manufacturer to make available to carriers and require each carrier
providing digital wireless services to make available to consumers
at least two handset models for each air interface it offers which
provide telecoil coupling (``U3T'' rating);
vi. adopts a de minimis exception for certain digital wireless
phone manufacturers and carriers;
vii. encourages digital wireless phone manufacturers and service
providers to offer at least one compliant handset that is a lower-
priced model and one that has higher-end features;
viii. requires 50 percent of all digital wireless phone models
offered by a manufacturer or carrier to be compliant with the
reduced RF emissions requirements by February 18, 2008;
ix. requires wireless carriers and digital wireless handset
manufacturers to report semiannually (every six months) on efforts
toward compliance during the first three years, then annually
thereafter through the fifth year of implementation;
x. requires manufacturers to label packages containing compliant
handsets and to make information available in the package or product
manual, and require service providers to make available to consumers
the performance ratings of compliant phones;
xi. commits the Commission staff to deliver a report to the
Commission shortly after three years from the effective date of this
Order to examine the impact of these requirements, and which will
form the basis for the Commission to initiate a proceeding soon
after the report is issued to evaluate whether to increase or
decrease the 2008 requirement to make 50 percent of phone models
with
[[Page 54174]]
reduced RF emissions, whether to adopt implementation benchmarks
beyond 2008, and whether to otherwise modify the implementation
requirements;
xii. encourages hearing aid manufacturers to label their pre-
customization products according to the ANSI standard; and
xiii. denies the petition of Myers Johnson, Inc., for revision
of Sec. 24.232 as it relates to directional wireless phone
antennas.
5. The Commission takes these actions to ensure that that the
Congressional goal of ensuring access to telecommunications services
for persons with hearing disabilities is met. In addition, in light of
our society's increased reliance on wireless phones and the growing
trend among wireless carriers to move away from analog services in
favor of more efficient, feature-rich digital services, these steps
will ensure that people with hearing disabilities continue to enjoy
access to wireless telecommunications devices and services.
B. Summary of Significant Issues Raised by Public Comments in Response
to the IRFA
6. We received no comments directly in response to the IRFA in this
proceeding. The Commission, however, considered the potential impact of
its rules on smaller handset manufacturers and service providers. To
ensure that the rules have a minimal impact on these entities, the
Commission, in recognition of the adverse effect its HAC compatibility
percentage requirements could have, modified the requirement for
manufacturers and service providers. Therefore, the requirement that
manufacturers and service providers must make 50 percent of their
handsets compliant with the reduced RF emissions level (``U3'') was
modified to provide that, by February 18, 2008, 50 percent of all
phones offered by the entity in the U.S. market must be compliant, or
two phones per air interface offered, whichever number of handsets is
greater.
C. Description and Estimate of the Number of Small Entities to Which
the Adopted Rules Will Apply
7. The RFA directs agencies to provide a description of and, where
feasible, an estimate of the number of small entities that may be
affected by the adopted rules, if adopted. The RFA generally defines
the term ``small entity'' as having the same meaning as the terms
``small business,'' ``small organization,'' and ``small governmental
jurisdiction.'' In addition, the term ``small business'' has the same
meaning as the term ``small business concern'' under section 3 of the
Small Business Act. Under the Small business Act, a ``small business
concern'' is one that: (i) Is independently owned and operated; (ii) is
not dominant in its field of operation; and (iii) satisfies any
additional criteria established by the Small Business Administration
(SBA). A small organization is generally ``any not-for-profit
enterprise which is independently owned and operated and is not
dominant in its field.''
8. Cellular and Other Wireless Telecommunications or Paging. The
SBA has developed a size standard for small businesses within the two
separate categories of Cellular and Other Wireless Telecommunications
or Paging. Under that standard, such a business is small if it has
1,500 or fewer employees. According to the FCC's Telephone Trends
Report data, 1,761 companies reported that they were engaged in the
provision of wireless service. Of these 1,761 companies, an estimated
1,175 have 1,500 or fewer employees and 586 have more than 1,500
employees. Consequently, we estimate that a majority of small wireless
service providers may be affected by the rules.
9. Wireless Communications Equipment Manufacturers. The SBA has
established a small business size standard for radio and television
broadcasting and wireless communications equipment manufacturing. Under
the standard, firms are considered small if they have 750 or fewer
employees. Census Bureau data for 1997 indicates that, for that year,
there were a total of 1,215 establishments in this category. Of those,
there were 1,150 that had employment under 500, and an additional 37
that had employment of 500 to 999. The percentage of wireless equipment
manufacturers in this category is approximately 61.35%, so the
Commission estimates that the number of wireless equipment
manufacturers with employment under 500 was actually closer to 706,
with an additional 23 establishments having employment of between 500
and 999. The Commission estimates that the great majority of wireless
communications equipment manufacturers are small businesses.
D. Description of Reporting, Recordkeeping, and Other Compliance
Requirements for Small Entities
10. The reporting, recordkeeping, or other compliance requirements
adopted require that any and all of the affected entities to which the
Commission's adopted rules apply must comply with the Commission's
hearing aid compatibility rules adopted in the Report and Order. The
Commission has detailed the timeframes for compliance and was mindful
of the needs of manufacturers and service providers. The timeframes,
therefore, reflect the Commission's balancing of the competing
interests. We ensure that access to wireless phones for persons with
hearing disabilities is maintained, and also to ensure that
manufacturers and service providers are afforded a reasonable amount of
time within which to comply with our rules.
11. In the Report and Order, the Commission requires wireless
carriers and handset manufacturers to report every six months on
efforts toward compliance with the requirements of the Report and Order
during the first three years, then annually thereafter through the
fifth year of implementation. These reports will serve dual purposes:
They will assist us in monitoring the progress of implementation, and
they will provide valuable information to the public concerning
compatible handsets. The reporting requirement will extend through the
end of the fifth year following the effective date of the Report and
Order to assist in verifying compliance with the requirement to make at
least 50 percent of all phone models offered compatible by February 18,
2008. Digital wireless phone manufacturers and service providers may
submit joint reports, if they wish, in order to minimize the reporting
burden. The reports should describe manufacturer and carrier efforts
aimed at complying with the requirements of the Report and Order.
Specifically, the reports should include (i) digital wireless phones
tested; (ii) laboratory used; (iii) test results for each phone tested;
(iv) identification of compliant phone models and ratings according to
ANSI C63.19; (v) report on the status of product labeling; (vi) report
on outreach efforts; (vii) information related to retail availability
of compliant phones; (viii) information related to incorporating
hearing aid compatibility features into newer models of digital
wireless phones; (ix) any activities related to ANSI C63.19 or other
standards work intended to promote compliance with the Report and
Order; (x) total numbers of compliant and non-compliant phone models
offered as of the time of the report; and (xi) any ongoing efforts for
interoperability testing with hearing aid devices.
E. Steps Taken To Minimize Significant Economic Impact on Small
Entities, and Significant Alternatives Considered
12. The RFA requires an agency to describe any significant
alternatives that it has considered in reaching its adopted
[[Page 54175]]
approach, which may include the following four alternatives (among
others): (i) The establishment of differing compliance or reporting
requirements or timetables that take into account the resources
available to small entities; (ii) the clarification, consolidation, or
simplification of compliance or reporting requirements under the rule
for small entities; (iii) the use of performance, rather than design,
standards; and (iv) an exemption from coverage of the rule, or any part
thereof, for small entities.
13. The critical nature of hearing aid compatibility with wireless
phones limits the Commission's ability to provide small manufacturers
of wireless handsets and wireless service providers with a
substantially less burdensome set of regulations than that placed on
large entities. In the Report and Order, the Commission concludes that
continuing the exemption afforded wireless phones under the HAC Act
would have an adverse effect on individuals with hearing disabilities.
Consumers who use hearing aids or cochlear implants indicate they have
had difficulty finding either wireless phones they can use without
suffering from annoying and sometimes painful interference, or without
resorting to expensive and cumbersome external attachments. Consumers
state that it is becoming very difficult to find analog wireless phones
and services, and they are unable to use most digital wireless phones
because of the resulting interference. By not being able to take
advantage of most newer, digital wireless phones and services, hearing
aid users assert they cannot take advantage of the attractive pricing
and service plans available to other consumers, many of which include
free or reduced-price phones, because the phones offered do not work
with their hearing aids. Some consumers point out that their lack of
ability to use a digital wireless phone causes them problems in their
employment, particularly since many employers now rely on digital
phones and services to stay in contact with employees in the field. A
few consumers reported difficulty in finding a phone that works with
their hearing aids because they were unable to test the phone before
purchasing it. Some consumers expressed a desire to use a wireless
phone for emergency use while away from home. However, because they are
unable to find one they can use, they are forced to accept greater
risks than non-hearing aid users since they are unable to call 911 even
if they have access to a digital wireless phone.
14. In the Report and Order, however, the Commission recognizes
that certain manufacturers and service providers may have only a small
presence in the market. For those manufacturers and service providers,
the Commission adopted a de minimis exception. Specifically, if a
manufacturer or carrier offers two or fewer digital wireless handset
models in the U.S., it is exempt from the compatibility requirements in
this Report and Order. If a manufacturer or carrier offers three
digital wireless handset models, it must make at least one compliant
phone model available in two years. Furthermore, to the extent there
are digital wireless providers that obtain handsets only from
manufacturers that offer two or fewer digital wireless phone models in
the U.S., the service provider would likewise be exempt from the rules.
Similarly, if a service provider obtains handsets only from
manufacturers that offer three digital wireless phone models in the
U.S., that service provider would only have to offer one compliant
handset model.
15. In addition, in considering the possible impact of our rules on
the many small business owners that act as agents for service
providers, the Commission crafted its labeling rules to allow these
entities flexibility in how they convey the information persons with
hearing disabilities will need to make an informed purchase.
F. Report to Congress
16. The Commission will send a copy of the Report and Order,
including this FRFA, in a report to be sent to Congress pursuant to the
Congressional Review Act. In addition, the Commission will send a copy
of the Report and Order, including the FRFA, to the Chief Counsel for
Advocacy of the Small Business Administration.
G. Effective Date of Adopted Rules
17. Pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 553(d), the rules adopted herein shall
become effective November 17, 2003.
Ordering Clauses
18. Pursuant to the authority of sections 1, 4(i), 7, 10, 201, 202,
208, 214, 301, 303, 308, 309(j), 310, and 710 of the Communications Act
of 1934, as amended, 47 U.S.C. 151, 154(i), 157, 160, 201, 202, 208,
214, 301, 303, 308, 309(j), 310, and 610, the rule changes are amended
as set forth below and shall become effective November 17, 2003.
List of Subjects in 47 CFR Parts 2 and 20
Communications common carriers.
Federal Communications Commission.
Marlene H. Dortch,
Secretary.
Final Rules
0
For the reasons discussed in the preamble, the Federal Communications
Commission amends 47 CFR Parts 2 and 20 as follows:
PART 2--FREQUENCY ALLOCATIONS AND RADIO TREATY MATTERS; GENERAL
RULES AND REGULATIONS
0
1. The authority citation for part 2 continues to read as follows:
Authority: 47 U.S.C. 154, 302a, 303, and 336, unless otherwise
noted.
0
2. Amend Sec. 2.1033 by adding paragraph (d) to read as follows:
Sec. 2.1033 Application for certification.
* * * * *
(d) Applications for certification of equipment operating under
part 20, that a manufacturer is seeking to certify as hearing aid
compatible, as set forth in Sec. 20.19 of that part, shall include a
statement indicating compliance with the test requirements of Sec.
20.19 and indicating the appropriate U-rating for the equipment. The
manufacturer of the equipment shall be responsible for maintaining the
test results.
PART 20--COMMERCIAL MOBILE RADIO SERVICES
0
3. The authority citation for part 20 continues to read as follows:
Authority: 47 U.S.C. 154, 160, 251-254, 303, and 332 unless
otherwise noted.
0
4. Amend part 20 by adding Sec. 20.19 to read as follows:
Sec. 20.19 Hearing aid-compatible mobile handsets.
(a) Scope of section. This section is applicable to providers of
Broadband Personal Communications Services (part 24, subpart E of this
chapter), Cellular Radio Telephone Service (part 22, subpart H of this
chapter), and Specialized Mobile Radio Services in the 800 MHz and 900
MHz bands (included in part 90, subpart S of this chapter) if such
providers offer real-time, two-way switched voice or data service that
is interconnected with the public switched network and utilizes an in-
network switching facility that enables the provider to reuse
frequencies and accomplish seamless hand-offs of subscriber calls. This
section also applies to the manufacturers of the wireless phones used
in delivery of these services.
(b) Technical standard for hearing aid compatibility. A wireless
phone used for
[[Page 54176]]
public mobile radio services is hearing aid compatible for the purposes
of this section if it meets, at a minimum:
(1) For radio frequency interference: U3 as set forth in the
standard document ANSI C63.19-2001 ``American National Standard for
Methods of Measurement of Compatibility between Wireless Communication
Devices and Hearing Aids, ANSI C63.19-2001'' (published October 8,
2001--available for purchase from the American National Standards
Institute); and
(2) For inductive coupling: U3T rating as set forth in the standard
document ANSI C63.19-2001 ``American National Standard for Methods of
Measurement of Compatibility between Wireless Communication Devices and
Hearing Aids, ANSI C63.19-2001'' (published October 8, 2001--available
for purchase from the American National Standards Institute).
(3) Manufacturers must certify compliance with the test
requirements and indicate the appropriate U-rating for the wireless
phone as set forth in Sec. 2.1033(d) of this chapter.
(c) Phase-in for public mobile service handsets concerning radio
frequency interference.
(1) Each manufacturer of handsets used with public mobile services
for use in the United States or imported for use in the United States
must:
(i) Offer to service providers at least two handset models for each
air interface offered that comply with Sec. 20.19(b)(1) by September
16, 2005; and
(ii) Ensure at least 50 percent of their handset offerings for each
air interface offered comply with Sec. 20.19(b)(1) by February 18,
2008.
(2) And each provider of public mobile service must:
(i) Include in their handset offerings at least two handset models
per air interface that comply with Sec. 20.19(b)(1) by September 16,
2005 and make available in each retail store owned or operated by the
provider all of these handset models for consumers to test in the
store; and
(ii) Ensure that at least 50 percent of their handset models for
each air interface comply with Sec. 20.19(b)(1) by February 18, 2008,
calculated based on the total number of unique digital wireless handset
models the carrier offers nationwide.
(3) Each Tier I carrier must:
(i) Include in their handset offerings at least two handset models
or 25 percent of the total number of unique digital wireless handset
models offered by the carrier nationwide (calculated based on the total
number of unique digital wireless handset models the carrier offers
nationwide), whichever is greater, for each air interface that comply
with Sec. 20.19(b)(1) by September 16, 2005, and make available in
each retail store owned or operated by the carrier all of these handset
models for consumers to test in the store; and
(ii) Ensure that at least 50 percent of their handset models for
each air interface comply with Sec. 20.19(b)(1) by February 18, 2008,
calculated based on the total number of unique digital wireless phone
models the carrier offers nationwide.
(d) Phase-in for public mobile service handsets concerning
inductive coupling.
(1) Each manufacturer of handsets used with public mobile services
for use in the United Sates or imported for use in the United States
must offer to service providers at least two handset models for each
air interface offered that comply with Sec. 20.19(b)(2) by September
18, 2006.
(2) And each provider of public mobile service must include in
their handset offerings at least two handset models for each air
interface that comply with Sec. 20.19(b)(2) by September 18, 2006 and
make available in each retail store owned or operated by the provider
all of these handset models for consumers to test in the store.
(e) De minimis exception.
(1) Manufacturers or mobile service providers that offer two or
fewer digital wireless handsets in the U.S. are exempt from the
requirements of this section. For mobile service providers that obtain
handsets only from manufacturers that offer two or fewer digital
wireless phone models in the U.S., the service provider would likewise
be exempt from the requirements of this section.
(2) Manufacturers or mobile service providers that offer three
digital wireless handset models, must make at least one compliant phone
model in two years. Mobile service providers that obtain handsets only
from manufacturers that offer three digital wireless phone models in
the U.S. would be required to offer at least one compliant handset
model.
(f) Labeling requirements. Handsets used with public mobile
services that are hearing aid compatible, as defined in Sec. 20.19(b)
of this chapter, shall clearly display the U-rating, as defined in
20.19(b)(1), (2) on the packaging material of the handset. An
explanation of the ANSI C63.19-2001 U-rating system shall also be
included in the owner's manual or as an insert in the packaging
material for the handset.
(g) Enforcement. Enforcement of this section is hereby delegated to
those states which adopt this section and provide for enforcement. The
procedures followed by a state to enforce this section shall provide a
30-day period after a complaint is filed, during which time state
personnel shall attempt to resolve a dispute on an informal basis. If a
state has not adopted or incorporated this section, or failed to act
within 6 months from the filing of a complaint with the state public
utility commission, the Commission will accept such complaints. A
written notification to the complainant that the state believes action
is unwarranted is not a failure to act. The procedures set forth in
part 68, subpart E of this chapter are to be followed.
[FR Doc. 03-23527 Filed 9-15-03; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6712-01-U