Federal Communications Commission DA 11-1707

Before the

Federal Communications Commission

Washington, D.C. 20554

In the Matter of
Amendment of the Commission’s Rules Governing Hearing Aid-Compatible Mobile Handsets / )
)
)
)
) / WT Docket No. 07-250

SECOND FURTHER nOTICE OF PROPOSED RULEMAKING

Adopted: November 1, 2011Released: November 1, 2011

Comment Date: 30 days after publication in the Federal Register

Reply Comment Date: 45 days after publication in the Federal Register

By the Chief, Wireless Telecommunications Bureau and the Chief, Office of Engineering and Technology:

I.introduction

  1. The Commission’s wireless hearing aid compatibility rules ensure that consumers with hearing loss are able to access wireless communications services through a wide selection of handsets without experiencing disabling radio frequency (RF) interference or other technical obstacles. In order to ensure that the hearing aid compatibility rules cover the greatest number of wireless handsets and reflect recent technological advances, the Wireless Telecommunications Bureau (WTB) and Office of Engineering and Technology (OET) propose in this Notice, pursuant to authority delegated by the Commission, to adopt the most current hearing aid compatibility technical standard into the Commission’s rules.

II.background

  1. To define and measure hearing aid compatibility, the Commission’s rules reference the 2007 revision of American National Standards Institute (ANSI) technical standard C63.19 (the “2007 ANSI Standard”), formulated by the Accredited Standards Committee C63® – Electromagnetic Compatibility (ASC C63®).[1] A handset is considered hearing aid-compatible for acoustic coupling[2] if it meets a rating of at least M3 under the 2007 ANSI Standard.[3] A handset is considered hearing aid-compatible for inductive coupling[4] if it meets a rating of at least T3.[5] The 2007 ANSI Standard specifies testing procedures for determining the M-rating and T-rating of digital wireless handsets that operate over air interfaces[6] that, at the time it was promulgated, were commonly used for wireless services in the 800-950 MHz and 1.6-2.5 GHz bands.
  2. When service rules were established for the 700 MHz band, the Commission stated its expectation that hearing aid compatibility standards would be developed for that band.[7] It encouraged ASC C63® and others to work together to develop such standards in a timely manner. ASC C63® recently adopted an updated version of the standard, the 2011 ANSI Standard, which includes the 700 MHz band as well as other new frequencies and technologies. The new standard was published on May 27, 2011.[8] ASC C63® has requested the Commission to adopt this newer version of the standard.[9] Some of the features of the 2011 ANSI Standard that are different from the 2007 ANSI Standard include:[10]
  • The operating frequency range for wireless devices covered by the standard has been expanded to 698 MHz - 6 GHz.[11]
  • The RF interference level of wireless devices to hearing aids is measured directly. Under the 2007 ANSI Standard, the RF field intensity of a wireless device was measured and then an adjustment was applied to estimate its potential for hearing aid interference. The new measurement method, along with the introduction of a Modulation Interference Factor (MIF), allows testing procedures to be applied to operations over any RF air interface or protocol.[12]
  • Certain low power transmitters that are unlikely to cause unacceptable RF interference to hearing aids are exempted from RF emissions testing and are deemed to meet an acceptable M rating.[13]

ASC C63® states that the improved tests in the 2011 ANSI Standard “are more correlated to the desired result.” Thus, “[t]he new test methods are improved at measuring the potential for hearing aid interference.”[14]

  1. The Commission has recognized that revisions to the ANSI Standard may be necessary over time to improve hearing aid compatibility technical standards and accommodate technological advances and that the Commission’s rules should evolve to reflect such revisions.[15] In particular, to ensure that the hearing aid compatibility standard codified in the rules would remain current, the Commission delegated to the Chief of WTB and the Chief of OET the authority, by notice-and-comment rulemaking, to approve the use of future versions of the standard that do not raise major compliance issues.[16] In addition, the Commission delegated authority to the Chief of WTB and the Chief of OET to initiate a rulemaking proceeding to adopt future versions of the ANSI Standard that add frequency bands or air interfaces not covered by previous versions, if the new version does not impose materially greater obligations than those imposed on services already subject to the hearing aid compatibility rules.[17] Under Section 20.19(k)(1), new obligations imposed on manufacturers and Commercial Mobile Radio Service (CMRS) providers as a result of WTB’s and OET’s adoption of technical standards for additional frequency bands and air interfaces shall become effective no less than one year after release of the order for manufacturers and Tier I carriers[18] and no less than 15 months after release for other service providers.[19]
  2. This Second Further Notice is limited in scope and does not address all pending issues regarding hearing aid compatibility. Specifically, on August 5, 2010, the Commission released the 2010 Further Notice, which sought comment on extending the scope of the hearing aid compatibility rules beyond the current category of CMRS, extending the in-store testing requirement beyond retail stores owned or operated by service providers, and permitting a user-controlled reduction of power as a means to meet the hearing aid compatibility standard for all operations over the GSM air interface in the 1900 MHz band.[20] In addition, on December 28, 2010, WTB released a Public Notice (2010 Review PN) seeking comment on the operation and effectiveness of the Commission’s hearing aid compatibility rules.[21] The issues raised in these notices will be addressed separately from this Second Further Notice.[22]

III.DISCUSSION

  1. We propose to adopt the 2011 ANSI Standard into the Commission’s rules as an applicable technical standard for evaluating the hearing aid compatibility of wireless phones. We believe doing so would serve the public interest by aligning the Commission’s rules with advances in technology and by bringing additional frequency bands and air interfaces under the hearing aid compatibility regime. We further tentatively conclude that adoption of this new technical standard would not raise any major compliance issues or impose materially greater obligations with respect to newly covered frequency bands and air interfaces than those already imposed under Commission rules. We seek comment on these tentative conclusions and whether adoption of the 2011 ANSI Standard would impose new or additional costs on handset manufacturers.
  2. Under the rules that we propose, a manufacturer would be permitted to submit handsets for certification using either the 2007 or 2011 version of the ANSI Standard. Consistent with the Commission’s direction and the Multi-Band Principles agreed to by representatives of industry and consumer groups, a multi-band and/or multi-mode handset model would be considered hearing aid-compatible for operations covered under the 2007 ANSI Standard if it obtains certification as meeting at least an M3 or T3 rating for those operations and is launched within 12 months of Federal Register publication of rules adopting the 2011 ANSI Standard. This will apply even if the handset model has not obtained certification as hearing aid-compatible for operations not covered under the 2007 ANSI Standard.[23] As under the existing rules,[24] we propose to continue requiring that a handset model meet ANSI technical standards over all frequency bands and air interfaces over which it operates in order to be considered hearing aid-compatible over any air interface for (1) multi-band and/or multi-mode handset models launched later than 12 months after Federal Register publication of rules adopting the 2011 ANSI Standard and (2) handset models that only include operations covered under the 2007 ANSI Standard. We further note that the Commission’s procedures do not permit a handset model to be tested and certified partly under one revision and partly under another.[25] Therefore, if the proposed rule is adopted, during the 12-month transition period, a manufacturer that chooses to test the hearing aid compatibility of those operations within a handset that are only covered by the 2011 ANSI Standard and not covered under the 2007 ANSI Standard[26] would have to test all of the operations in the handset using the 2011 ANSI Standard.[27] We seek comment on these proposals.
  3. Under the existing rules, the Commission’s benchmarks for manufacturers and service providers to deploy hearing aid-compatible handsets apply to operations over those frequency bands that are covered under the 2007 ANSI Standard.[28] Upon adoption of the proposed rules, a transition period would commence to apply these benchmarks to operations covered under the 2011 ANSI Standard. In the 2010 Further Notice, the Commission sought comment on a two-year transition period for applying hearing aid compatibility benchmarks and other requirements to wireless handsets that fall outside the subset of CMRS that is currently covered by Section 20.19(a).[29] We seek comment on whether a similar transition period would appropriately balance the design, engineering, and marketing requirements of manufacturers and service providers with the needs of consumers with hearing loss in the context of this rulemaking. Would a shorter transition period, but no less than 12 months for manufacturers and Tier I carriers and 15 months for other service providers,[30] better serve the public interest in expediting the availability of hearing aid-compatible phones while affording manufacturers sufficient time to test, produce, and ship such handsets? Alternatively, is a period longer than two years necessary? Consistent with the Commission’s current rules and the minimum periods permitted under our delegated authority, should non-Tier I service providers be given an additional three months to meet deployment benchmarks to account for the difficulties they face in timely obtaining new handset models? Or, based on experience under the existing rules, do these service providers need more than three months additional time?[31]
  4. Finally, the Commission’s rules provide that whenever a manufacturer or service provider discloses the hearing aid compatibility rating of a handset that has not been tested for hearing aid compatibility over a newly covered air interface, the disclosure shall include the language stated in Section 20.19(f)(2).[32] Handsets that have been tested and received certification as hearing aid-compatible shall be labeled as such. Handsets launched within 12 months of Federal Register publication of rules adopting the 2011 ANSIStandard that meet hearing aid compatibility criteria under previously covered air interfaces, but that have been tested and found not to meet such criteria under one or more newly covered air interfaces, shall include adequate disclosure of this fact under rules to be promulgated by WTB and OET.[33] In the absence of any suggestions as to specific language to be used for handsets that have been tested under newly covered air interfaces and found not to meet hearing aid compatibility criteria, we propose not to prescribe disclosure language in this situation but to rely on a general disclosure requirement backed by case-by-case resolution in the event of disputes. We understand that most handsets are expected to have little difficulty meeting the hearing aid compatibility rating criteria over Wi-Fi and other currently existing or imminently expected air interfaces that are outside the 2007 ANSI Standard. We seek comment on this proposal and invite alternative proposals, including any proposed disclosure language.

IV.procedural matters

A.Initial Regulatory FlexibilityAnalysis

  1. As required by the Regulatory Flexibility Act, see 5 U.S.C. § 603, the Commission has prepared an Initial Regulatory Flexibility Analysis (IRFA) of the possible significant economic impact on small entities of the policies and rules addressed in this Notice. The IRFA is set forth in Appendix B. Written public comments are requested on the IRFA. These comments must be filed in accordance with the same filing deadlines as comments filed in response to this Notice and must have a separate and distinct heading designating them as responses to the IRFA. The Commission’s Consumer and Governmental Affairs Bureau, Reference Information Center, will send a copy of this Notice, including the IRFA, to the Chief Counsel for Advocacy of the Small Business Administration.

B.Initial Paperwork Reduction Act Analysis

  1. This document does not contain proposed information collection(s) subject to the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (PRA), Public Law 104-13. In addition, therefore, it does not contain any new or modified information collection burden for small business concerns with fewer than 25 employees, pursuant to the Small Business Paperwork Relief Act of 2002, Public Law 107-198, see 44 U.S.C. 3506(c)(4).

C.Other Procedural Matters

1.Ex Parte Rules – Permit-But-Disclose

  1. The proceeding this Notice initiates shall be treated as a “permit-but-disclose” proceeding in accordance with the Commission’s ex parte rules.[34] Persons making ex parte presentations must file a copy of any written presentation or a memorandum summarizing any oral presentation within two business days after the presentation (unless a different deadline applicable to the Sunshine period applies). Persons making oral ex parte presentations are reminded that memoranda summarizing the presentation must (1) list all persons attending or otherwise participating in the meeting at which the ex parte presentation was made, and (2) summarize all data presented and arguments made during the presentation. If the presentation consisted in whole or in part of the presentation of data or arguments already reflected in the presenter’s written comments, memoranda or other filings in the proceeding, the presenter may provide citations to such data or arguments in his or her prior comments, memoranda, or other filings (specifying the relevant page and/or paragraph numbers where such data or arguments can be found) in lieu of summarizing them in the memorandum. Documents shown or given to Commission staff during ex parte meetings are deemed to be written ex parte presentations and must be filed consistent with rule 1.1206(b). In proceedings governed by rule 1.49(f) or for which the Commission has made available a method of electronic filing, written ex parte presentations and memoranda summarizing oral ex parte presentations, and all attachments thereto, must be filed through the electronic comment filing system available for that proceeding, and must be filed in their native format (e.g., .doc, .xml, .ppt, searchable .pdf). Participants in this proceeding should familiarize themselves with the Commission’s ex parte rules.

2.Comment Filing Procedures

  1. Pursuant to sections 1.415 and 1.419 of the Commission’s rules, 47 CFR §§ 1.415, 1.419, interested parties may file comments and reply comments on or before the dates indicated on the first page of this document. Comments may be filed using the Commission’s Electronic Comment Filing System (ECFS). See Electronic Filing of Documents in Rulemaking Proceedings, 63 FR 24121 (1998).
  • Electronic Filers: Comments may be filed electronically using the Internet by accessing the ECFS:
  • Paper Filers: Parties who choose to file by paper must file an original and one copy of each filing. If more than one docket or rulemaking number appears in the caption of this proceeding, filers must submit two additional copies for each additional docket or rulemaking number.

Filings can be sent by hand or messenger delivery, by commercial overnight courier, or by first-class or overnight U.S. Postal Service mail. All filings must be addressed to the Commission’s Secretary, Office of the Secretary, Federal Communications Commission.

  • All hand-delivered or messenger-delivered paper filings for the Commission’s Secretary must be delivered to FCC Headquarters at 445 12th St., SW, Room TW-A325, Washington, DC 20554. The filing hours are 8:00 a.m. to 7:00 p.m. All hand deliveries must be held together with rubber bands or fasteners. Any envelopes and boxes must be disposed of before entering the building.
  • Commercial overnight mail (other than U.S. Postal Service Express Mail and Priority Mail) must be sent to 9300 East Hampton Drive, Capitol Heights, MD 20743.
  • U.S. Postal Service first-class, Express, and Priority mail must be addressed to 445 12th Street, SW, Washington DC 20554.
  1. People with Disabilities: To request materials in accessible formats for people with disabilities (braille, large print, electronic files, audio format), send an e-mail to or call the Consumer & Governmental Affairs Bureau at 202-418-0530 (voice), 202-418-0432 (tty).
  2. For further information regarding the Notice, contact Michael Rowan, Wireless Telecommunications Bureau, (202) 418-1883, e-mail , or Saurbh Chhabra, Wireless Telecommunications Bureau, (202) 418-2266, e-mail .

V.ORDERING CLAUSES

  1. Accordingly, IT IS ORDERED, pursuant to sections 4(i), 303(r), and 710 of the Communications Act of 1934, 47 U.S.C. §§ 154(i), 303(r) and 610, that this Second Further Notice of Proposed Rulemaking IS hereby ADOPTED.
  2. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that pursuant to applicable procedures set forth in Sections 1.415 and 1.419 of the Commission’s Rules, 47 C.F.R. §§ 1.415, 1.419, interested parties may file comments on this Second Further Notice of Proposed Rulemaking on or before 30 days after publication of the Second Further Notice of Proposed Rulemaking in the Federal Register and reply comments on or before 45 days after publication in the Federal Register.
  3. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the Commission’s Consumer & Governmental Affairs Bureau, Reference Information Center, SHALL SEND a copy of this Second Further Notice of Proposed Rulemaking, including the Initial Regulatory Flexibility Analysis, to the Chief Counsel for Advocacy of the Small Business Administration.
  4. This action is taken under delegated authority pursuant to Sections 0.241(a)(1), 0.331(d), and 20.19(k) of the Commission’s rules, 47 C.F.R §§ 0.241(a)(1), 0.331(d), and 20.19(k).

FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION

Rick Kaplan

Chief, Wireless Telecommunications Bureau

Julius P. Knapp

Chief, Office of Engineering and Technology

APPENDIX A

Proposed Rules

Part 20 of Title 47 of the Code of Federal Regulations is amended as follows:

  1. The authority citation for Part 20 reads as follows:

AUTHORITY: 47 U.S.C. 154, 160, 201, 251-254, 303, 332, and 710 unless otherwise noted.