Amendment of the Commission's Rules Governing Hearing Aid-Compatible Mobile Handsets, 54508-54524 [2010-22253]

Agencies

• FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION

[Federal Register Volume 75, Number 173 (Wednesday, September 8, 2010)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 54508-54524]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2010-22253]


=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION

47 CFR Part 20

[WT Docket No.07-250; FCC 10-145]


Amendment of the Commission's Rules Governing Hearing Aid-
Compatible Mobile Handsets

AGENCY: Federal Communications Commission.

ACTION: Final rule.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: In this document, the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) 
adopts final rules governing wireless hearing aid compatibility that 
are intended to ensure that consumers with hearing loss are able to 
access wireless communications services through a wide selection of 
handsets without experiencing disabling interference or other technical 
obstacles.

DATES: Effective October 8, 2010, except for the amendments to Sec.  
20.19(f) which contain information collection requirements that have 
not been approved by the Office of Management and Budget (OMB). The 
Commission will publish a document in the Federal Register announcing 
the effective date of these amendments. On June 6, 2008 (73 FR 25566, 
May 7, 2008), the Director of the Federal Register approved the 
incorporation by reference of a certain publication listed in this 
final rule.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: John Borkowski, Wireless 
Telecommunications Bureau, (202) 418-0626, e-mail 
John.Borkowski@fcc.gov. For additional information concerning the 
Paperwork Reduction Act information collection requirements contained 
in this document, send an e-mail to PRA@fcc.gov or contact Judith B. 
Herman at 202-418-0214 or via the Internet at Judith-B.Herman@fcc.gov.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This is a summary of the Commission's Policy 
Statement and Second Report and Order in WT Docket No.07-250; FCC 10-
145, adopted August 5, 2010, and released on August 5, 2010. This 
summary should be read with its companion document, the further notice 
of proposed rulemaking summary published elsewhere in this issue of the 
Federal Register. The full text of the Policy Statement and Second 
Report and Order is available for public inspection and copying during 
business hours in the FCC Reference Information Center, Portals II, 445 
12th Street SW., Room CY-A257, Washington, DC 20554. It also may be 
purchased from the Commission's duplicating contractor at Portals II, 
445 12th Street SW., Room CY-B402, Washington, DC 20554; the 
contractor's Web site, https://www.bcpiweb.com; or by calling (800) 378-
3160, facsimile (202) 488-5563, or e-mail FCC@BCPIWEB.com. Copies of 
the public notice also may be obtained via the Commission's Electronic 
Comment Filing System (ECFS) by entering the docket number WT Docket 
No.07-250. Additionally, the complete item is available on the Federal 
Communications Commission's Web site at https://www.fcc.gov.

Synopsis of the Policy Statement and Second Report and Order

I. Introduction

    1. In this Policy Statement and Second Report and Order (Second 
R&O), the Commission affirms that our hearing aid compatibility rules 
must provide people who use hearing aids and cochlear implants with 
continuing access to the most advanced and innovative technologies as 
science and markets develop, while maximizing the

[[Page 54509]]

conditions for innovation and investment.
    2. The Commission also takes several actions to clarify its rules 
to keep pace with developments in technology and the market. The 
Commission clarifies that its hearing aid compatibility rules cover 
customer equipment that contains a built-in speaker and is designed to 
be typically held to the ear, adopts a streamlined procedure for 
amending its rules to incorporate an anticipated revision of the 
hearing aid compatibility technical standard that will make it 
generically applicable across frequency bands and interface modes, and 
extends its disclosure requirements to provide consumers with 
information about multi-band and multi-mode phones that operate in part 
over bands or modes for which technical standards have not been 
established.
    3. In order to ensure that people with hearing loss will have 
access to new and popular models, while continuing to protect the 
ability of small companies to compete and to foster innovation by new 
entrants, the Commission modifies the de minimis exception in its 
existing rule so that companies that are not small entities will be 
required to offer at least one hearing aid-compatible model after a 
two-year initial period. In recognition of specific challenges that 
this rule change will impose for handsets operating over the legacy GSM 
air interface in the 1900 MHz band, the Commission permits companies 
that will no longer qualify for the de minimis exception to meet 
hearing aid compatibility requirements by installing software that 
enables customers to reduce the power output by a limited amount for 
such operations. The Commission also amends its rules requiring 
manufacturers to deploy hearing aid-compatible handsets so that they 
apply to handsets sold through all distribution channels, and not only 
through service providers.
    4. The Commission also notes that later this year, the Commission 
intends to initiate a comprehensive review of the operation of our 
wireless hearing aid compatibility rules. In that review, the 
Commission will evaluate the success of our rules in making a broad 
selection of wireless phones accessible to individuals with hearing 
loss, and the Commission will consider whether further revisions to 
those rules are appropriate.

II. Background

    5. The Commission is required by law to ensure that persons with 
hearing loss have access to telephone service. The Hearing Aid 
Compatibility Act of 1988 required all telephones manufactured or 
imported for use in the United States to meet established technical 
standards for hearing aid compatibility, with certain exceptions, among 
them an exception for telephones used with mobile wireless services. 
The statute required the Commission to revoke or limit the exemption if 
it determined that:
     Such revocation or limitation is in the public interest;
     Continuation of the exemption without such revocation or 
limitation would have an adverse effect on people with hearing loss;
     Compliance with the requirements adopted is 
technologically feasible for the telephones to which the exemption 
applies; and
     Compliance with the requirements adopted would not 
increase costs to such an extent that the telephones to which the 
exemption applies could not be successfully marketed.
    6. Current Hearing Aid Compatibility Requirements. The Commission's 
requirements apply generally to providers of digital commercial mobile 
radio services (CMRS) ``to the extent that they 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,'' as well as to manufacturers of 
wireless phones used in the delivery of such services. The 
applicability of the requirements is further limited to those air 
interfaces and frequency bands (800-950 MHz and 1.6-2.5 GHz) for which 
technical standards are stated in the most recent revision of the 
American National Standards Institute (ANSI) standard governing 
wireless hearing aid compatibility (ANSI C63.19-2007).
    7. The Commission's hearing aid compatibility requirements address 
hearing aids that operate in either of two modes--acoustic coupling or 
inductive coupling. Hearing aids operating in acoustic coupling mode 
receive sound through a microphone and then amplify all sounds 
surrounding the user, including both desired sounds, such as a 
telephone's audio signal, and unwanted ambient noise. Hearing aids 
operating in inductive coupling mode turn off the microphone to avoid 
amplifying unwanted ambient noise, instead using a telecoil to receive 
only audio signal-based magnetic fields generated by inductive 
coupling-capable telephones.
    8. The rules codify the ANSI C63.19 performance levels as the 
applicable technical standard for hearing aid compatibility. Beginning 
January 1, 2010, new applications for certification must use the 2007 
version of the ANSI standard, although earlier grants of certification 
using prior versions of the standard remain valid. The Commission has 
delegated to the Wireless Telecommunications Bureau (WTB) and Office of 
Engineering and Technology (OET) authority to adopt by rulemaking 
future revisions of ANSI C63.19, including extensions of the technical 
standards to new frequency bands and air interfaces, provided the 
revisions do not raise major compliance issues.
    9. The Commission generally requires each covered manufacturer to 
offer to service providers, and each service provider to offer to its 
customers, specific numbers of handset models per air interface in its 
product line that meet, at a minimum, an M3 rating for reduction of 
radio frequency (RF) interference between handsets and hearing aids 
operating in acoustic coupling mode and a T3 rating to enable inductive 
coupling with hearing aids operating in telecoil mode. These minimum 
deployment requirements vary depending on the total number of models 
that the manufacturer or service provider offers over the air 
interface, and they increase over time from February 15, 2009, to May 
15, 2011.
    10. The rules also contain a de minimis exception to the deployment 
benchmarks for certain digital wireless handset manufacturers and 
wireless service providers. Specifically, manufacturers or providers 
that only offer one or two handset models per air interface are exempt 
from all hearing aid compatibility requirements, other than the 
reporting requirements; those that only offer three models are required 
to offer one that is hearing aid-compatible.
    11. In addition, the rules require service providers to make 
hearing aid-compatible models available for consumer testing in their 
owned or operated retail stores. The rules also require service 
providers and manufacturers to disclose in their packaging materials 
certain information about hearing aid-compatible handsets. 
Manufacturers and service providers must report annually on efforts 
toward compliance with the hearing aid compatibility requirements. In 
addition, manufacturers and service providers that operate publicly 
accessible Web sites are required to list on their Web sites all 
hearing aid-compatible models that they offer along with the ratings of 
those models and an explanation of the ratings.

III. Policy Statement

    12. Consistent with Congressional intent to afford equal access to

[[Page 54510]]

communications networks to the fullest extent feasible and longstanding 
Federal Communications Commission precedent, it is the policy of the 
Commission that our hearing aid compatibility rules provide people who 
use hearing aids and cochlear implants with continuing access to the 
most advanced and innovative technologies as science and markets 
develop. The Commission believes that following three principles will 
ensure that all Americans, including Americans with hearing loss, will 
reap the full benefits of new technologies as they are introduced into 
the marketplace. To maximize the number of accessible products for this 
population, our policies must adhere to these principles:
     First, given that consideration of accessibility from the 
outset is more efficient than identifying and applying solutions 
retroactively, the Commission intends for developers of new 
technologies to consider and plan for hearing aid compatibility at the 
earliest stages of the product design process;
     Second, the Commission will continue to account for 
technological feasibility and marketability as the Commission 
promulgates rules pertaining to hearing aid compatibility, thereby 
maximizing conditions for innovation and investment; and
     Third, the Commission will provide industry with the 
ability to harness innovation to promote inclusion by allowing the 
necessary flexibility for developing a range of solutions to meet 
consumers' needs while keeping up with the rapid pace of technological 
advancement.

IV. Second Report and Order

A. Handsets and Services Covered

1. Handsets Covered by the Rule
    13. As an initial matter, the Commission amends our rules to 
clarify that hearing aid compatibility requirements apply to otherwise 
covered handsets that contain a built-in speaker and are typically held 
to the ear. This determination is consistent with the first of the 
Multi-Band Principles filed on September 11, 2008, by a working group 
of industry and consumer representatives, which states that those 
principles apply to ``handsets operating in a normal voice mode and 
typically held to the ear.'' In the order in which we first adopted 
wireless hearing aid compatibility rules (2003 Hearing Aid 
Compatibility Order), the Commission stated that devices that do not 
have any built-in speaker or ear piece would not be required to meet 
hearing aid compatibility requirements because they were unlikely to 
cause RF interference to hearing aids and they could not be feasibly 
equipped with a functioning telecoil. Consistent with that observation, 
the Commission amends our rules to define a covered ``handset'' as a 
device that contains a built-in speaker and is typically held to the 
ear in any of its ordinary uses. Thus, if a wireless device is not 
designed to be typically held to the ear in any ordinary use, but only 
provides voice communication through a speakerphone, headphone or other 
instrument that carries voice communications from the handset to the 
ear, or other means that does not involve holding it to the ear, it is 
not subject to our hearing aid compatibility requirements. The 
Commission clarifies that in this respect, ``typically'' encompasses 
any intended or anticipated ordinary use, and does not mean ``usually'' 
or ``most often.'' If a device is configured so as to enable a user to 
hold it to the ear to receive voice communications in any ordinary 
anticipated application, it is a ``handset'' covered by the rule even 
if the manufacturer or service provider expects that most users will 
operate it in a speakerphone or other mode.
    14. In the Notice in this proceeding, the Commission asked ``[w]hat 
constitutes a telephone in the context of devices that more closely 
resemble mobile computers but have voice communications capabilities'' 
and whether the Commission should broaden or otherwise modify the scope 
of its hearing aid compatibility rules in order to maintain technology 
neutrality and ensure the continuing availability of a selection of 
wireless services and features that is comparable to that available to 
the general population. Consistent with our general determination, a 
device that includes both computing and covered voice communication 
capabilities is subject to hearing aid compatibility requirements so 
long as it has a built-in speaker and is designed to be typically held 
to the ear. This scope is necessary to ensure that people with hearing 
loss will have access to all means of voice communication as devices 
become increasingly multifunctional and the lines among device 
categories continue to blur.
2. Application of Technical Standard to New Bands and Air Interfaces
    15. Background. ANSI Standard C63.19-2007 provides hearing aid 
compatibility tests for wireless handsets that use voice communications 
technologies that are in common use in the 800 MHz to 950 MHz and 1600 
MHz to 2500 MHz bands. Accordingly, our rules impose hearing aid 
compatibility requirements only on handsets that provide service over 
these frequency bands using any air interface for which technical 
standards exist in the ANSI C63.19 standard. The Commission has 
delegated to WTB and OET limited authority by rulemaking to adopt new 
technical standards for additional frequency bands and air interfaces 
as they are established by the ANSI Accredited Standards Committee 
C63\TM\ and to approve new hearing aid compatibility standards adopted 
subsequently to ANSI C63.19-2007.
    16. The Multi-Band Principles filed on September 11, 2008, to 
address the hearing aid compatibility of handsets that operate over 
multiple frequency bands or voice technology modes, some of which have 
no established hearing aid compatibility standards. The Multi-Band 
Principles propose a sequence of events to be followed when a new 
service is developed over a frequency band or air interface that is not 
yet subject to a hearing aid compatibility technical standard. 
Specifically, the Multi-Band Principles propose that a preliminary 
predictive analysis method should be employed to determine the 
likelihood of hearing aid compatibility issues for handsets when they 
operate over new frequency bands or air interfaces. If no issues are 
identified by this analysis and the handset is otherwise hearing aid-
compatible, then the handset would be deemed hearing aid-compatible 
over all frequencies and bands in which it operates, including new 
technologies, and no further testing would be required. If a potential 
hearing aid compatibility issue is identified, then an ANSI-accredited 
body would devise a hearing aid compatibility standard within a 
timeframe to be set by the Commission. Beginning 12 months after 
standards for hearing aid compatibility have been developed and adopted 
by the Commission, a new handset model that operates in a new frequency 
band or air interface could not be labeled or counted as hearing aid-
compatible if it does not meet the newly adopted hearing aid 
compatibility standard, although handsets certified prior to that point 
could continue to be counted as hearing aid-compatible.
    17. More recently, ANSI Committee C63 has developed a new draft 
standard that would revise the current ANSI C63.19-2007 standard. The 
new draft standard provides for a testing method that could be used for 
handsets using any air interface and operating over any frequency 
between 698 MHz and 6 GHz. Under this testing method, a product testing 
threshold has been established based on certain RF power levels and

[[Page 54511]]

modulation characteristics. The new draft standard provides that 
handsets operating at or below the testing threshold will be exempt 
from further testing and will be considered to have an M4 rating. 
Handsets incorporating air interfaces and frequency bands that fail the 
testing threshold criteria will be required to undergo full testing in 
accordance with the revised ANSI C63.19 standard. ANSI states that the 
revised standard has completed an initial round of balloting and round-
robin testing, and that it expects final balloting to be completed by 
the fourth quarter of 2010.
    18. Discussion. In anticipation that ANSI will adopt the draft 
standard or something similar, the Commission finds it unnecessary to 
adopt the full regime set forth in the Multi-Band Principles for 
handsets operating over air interfaces or frequency bands that lack 
standards. Rather, the ANSI draft standard enables testing over 
frequency bands or air interfaces expected to be incorporated in 
wireless handsets in the near future. Consistent with Sections 
20.19(k)(1) and (2) of our rules, the Commission delegates to WTB and 
OET the authority to adopt a new standard similar to the draft revision 
by rulemaking, and the Commission directs them to complete such a 
proceeding promptly following the adoption of such a standard by ANSI. 
In the event ANSI has not adopted a standard similar to the draft 
revision by March 31, 2011, the Commission will revisit its decision to 
withhold action on this portion of the Multi-Band Principles.
    19. Under Section 20.19(k)(1), new obligations imposed on 
manufacturers and service providers as a result of WTB's and OET's 
adoption of technical standards for additional frequency bands and/or 
air interfaces shall become effective no less than one year after 
release of the adopting order for manufacturers and CMRS providers with 
nationwide footprints (Tier I carriers) and no less than 15 months 
after release for other service providers. Consistent with this 
delegation of authority, the Commission expects that rules implementing 
the ANSI draft standard, if adopted, will apply as follows: No less 
than 12 months after release of the order adopting the standard, but at 
a later date if WTB and OET determine that a longer transition period 
is warranted, the benchmarks then in effect for other air interfaces 
will apply to manufacturers and Tier I carriers offering handsets using 
newly covered frequency bands or air interfaces. No less than 15 months 
after release of the order adopting the standard, but at a later date 
if WTB and OET determine that a longer transition period is warranted, 
the same benchmarks will apply to other service providers. These rules 
will apply to all handsets and services within the scope of the rule 
unless otherwise specified by the Commission. The authority delegated 
to WTB and OET does not permit any actions that depart substantially 
from this regime.
    20. While the Commission finds it unnecessary to adopt the Multi-
Band Principles in whole, the Commission focuses special attention on 
Principle 3, which encourages wireless carriers and manufacturers to 
consider hearing aid compatibility and identify issues early in the 
design and development of handsets. Early identification of hearing aid 
compatibility issues enables their resolution earlier and, in many 
cases, less expensively than when interference is identified in the end 
stages of handset development. Addressing hearing aid compatibility 
early on also ensures that handsets that operate over new frequency 
bands or voice technology modes will be made available to consumers 
with hearing loss as closely as possible to their availability to the 
general public.
3. Multi-Band and Multi-Mode Handsets
    21. Background. Under the Commission's rules, in order to be 
offered as hearing aid-compatible, a handset must meet hearing aid 
compatibility standards for every frequency band and air interface that 
it uses for which standards have been adopted by the Commission. In the 
Notice, the Commission tentatively concluded that, consistent with this 
principle, multi-band and multi-mode phones should not be counted as 
compatible in any band or mode if they operate over any air interface 
or frequency band for which technical standards have not been 
established. The Commission reasoned that this limitation would conform 
to consumers' expectation that a phone labeled ``hearing aid-
compatible'' is compatible in all its operations, and also that it 
would create incentives to develop new compatibility standards more 
quickly. In the First Report and Order in February 2008, the Commission 
recognized that multi-mode handsets were already on the market that 
included Wi-Fi capability, and it adopted an interim rule to address 
their status. Under the interim rule, such handsets may be counted as 
hearing aid-compatible if they meet hearing aid compatibility standards 
over all frequency bands and air interfaces for which standards exist, 
but the manufacturer and service provider must clearly disclose to 
consumers that the handset has not been rated for hearing aid 
compatibility with respect to Wi-Fi operation.
    22. The Multi-Band Principles propose that operations over 
frequency bands or air interfaces for which standards do not exist be 
tested using either the nearest existing approved standard or a 
preliminary predictive analysis method that the parties would work with 
ANSI to develop. If the preliminary predictive analysis determines that 
such operations raise no hearing aid compatibility issues, it would not 
be necessary to develop a measurement procedure for the operations, and 
handsets operating over these frequency bands or air interfaces would 
be considered hearing aid-compatible if they meet hearing aid 
compatibility standards over all frequency bands and air interfaces for 
which such standards exist. If hearing aid compatibility issues are 
identified, then during the period until a measurement procedure is 
developed and adopted by the Commission, such handsets that otherwise 
meet hearing aid compatibility standards would be considered hearing 
aid-compatible, but information that they have not been tested for all 
operations would have to be conveyed in writing to consumers at the 
point of sale and through company Web sites. Beginning 12 months after 
the new standard is adopted by the Commission, a newly produced model 
could not be counted as hearing aid-compatible for any of its 
operations unless it meets the hearing aid compatibility standard for 
the new operation; however, handsets previously counted as hearing aid-
compatible could continue to be so counted.
    23. Discussion. As discussed previously, if the expected draft 
revision of Standard C63.19 is adopted by ANSI and the Commission, the 
treatment of multi-band and multi-mode handsets will become moot 
because there will be no operations without technical standards in the 
foreseeable future. Nonetheless, the Commission expects it will take a 
minimum of two years until any such standards have been adopted and 
compliance becomes mandatory for all services. Meanwhile, handsets that 
incorporate new frequency bands and air interfaces capable of 
supporting voice services other than Wi-Fi are already coming on the 
market. Therefore, for this interim period, the Commission extends to 
all handsets that incorporate these new frequency bands and air 
interfaces the same counting and disclosure rules that currently apply 
to handsets with Wi-Fi. In other words, a handset that meets hearing 
aid

[[Page 54512]]

compatibility requirements over all air interfaces and frequency bands 
for which technical standards have been established, but that is also 
capable of supporting voice operations in new frequency bands and air 
interfaces for which standards do not exist, may be counted as hearing 
aid-compatible, provided consumers are clearly informed that it has not 
been tested for the operations for which there are no standards. This 
is consistent with the proposal in the Multi-Band Principles, which 
informs consumers that the handset has not been tested and rated in all 
wireless technologies incorporated in the phone, and that the consumer 
should thoroughly test all phone features to determine whether the 
consumer experiences any interfering noise.
    24. As recommended in the Multi-Band Principles, the Commission 
requires that for newly manufactured handsets covered by this rule, the 
following disclosure language be clearly and effectively conveyed to 
consumers wherever the hearing aid compatibility rating for the handset 
is provided, including at the point of sale and on company Web sites: 
``This phone has been tested and rated for use with hearing aids for 
some of the wireless technologies that it uses. However, there may be 
some newer wireless technologies used in this phone that have not been 
tested yet for use with hearing aids. It is important to try the 
different features of this phone thoroughly and in different locations, 
using your hearing aid or cochlear implant, to determine if you hear 
any interfering noise. Consult your service provider or the 
manufacturer of this phone for information on hearing aid 
compatibility. If you have questions about return or exchange policies, 
consult your service provider or phone retailer.'' The Commission has 
slightly revised the language proposed in the Multi-Band Principles in 
recognition that not all handsets are obtained from service providers. 
The Commission concludes that a uniform text will ensure that consumers 
are provided with consistent and sufficient information. However, 
handsets that are already on the market with other disclosure language 
that complies with our current rule will not be required to replace 
this with the newly prescribed language.
    25. This disclosure rule will apply to all handsets that operate in 
part over an air interface or frequency band that is not covered by the 
ANSI C63.19-2007 standard until the date when rules adopting any new 
standard become effective. The rule will also apply after rules 
adopting a new standard become effective to the extent that a handset 
model in fact has not been tested for previously uncovered operations 
under the new standard. However, a handset that has actually completed 
testing and been found to meet hearing aid compatibility standards 
under the new standard should not be described as not tested, but 
should be labeled with its hearing aid compatibility rating. Consistent 
with the recommendation in the Multi-Band Principles, a handset model 
launched earlier than 12 months after publication in the Federal 
Register of rules adopting any new standard could continue to be 
counted as hearing aid-compatible for operations covered under ANSI 
C63.19-2007 even if it does not meet the newly adopted standard for all 
other operations. Rather than describing such handsets as not fully 
tested, the disclosure should indicate that the phone does not meet 
hearing aid compatibility standards for some new technologies. WTB and 
OET shall promulgate rules to implement this modified disclosure 
requirement in their proceeding to consider adopting any revision of 
the ANSI standard.
    26. Finally, the Commission clarifies that the disclosure 
requirement includes handsets that are capable of supporting software 
that can activate additional voice capability. For example, some 
handsets that transmit and receive data over a Wi-Fi air interface do 
not contain within them the software to use Wi-Fi for voice 
communications, but will accommodate commercially available software to 
enable voice transmissions over Wi-Fi. Other air interfaces such as LTE 
and WiMAX, while not currently used for voice transmissions, may 
accommodate software that would enable them to be used for voice 
communication without any change to the hardware in the underlying 
handset. Unless they are informed to the contrary, consumers may 
reasonably expect that handsets which are labeled as hearing aid-
compatible will function properly with their hearing aids in all modes 
of operation for voice communication that can be reasonably 
anticipated. The Commission therefore finds that this disclosure 
requirement will afford consumers with hearing loss the opportunity to 
inquire further about their ability to use the device in all voice 
modes and make an informed choice about whether the device meets the 
consumer's needs and expectations.

B. De Minimis Exception

    27. Background. Section 20.19 of the Commission's rules provides a 
de minimis exception to hearing aid compatibility obligations for those 
manufacturers and mobile service providers that only offer a small 
number of handset models. Specifically, Section 20.19(e)(1) provides 
that manufacturers and mobile service providers offering two handset 
models or fewer in the United States over an air interface are exempt 
from the requirements of Section 20.19, other than the reporting 
requirement. Section 20.19(e)(2) provides that manufacturers or mobile 
service providers that offer three handset models over an air interface 
must offer at least one compliant model.
    28. Discussion. In order to ensure that consumers who use hearing 
aids have access to a variety of phones, while preserving competitive 
opportunities for small companies as well as opportunities for 
innovation and investment, the Commission modifies the de minimis rule 
as applied to companies that are not small entities. Specifically, the 
Commission decides that beginning two years after it offers its first 
handset model over an air interface, a manufacturer or service provider 
that is not a small entity, as defined herein, must offer at least one 
model that is rated M3 or higher and at least one model that is rated 
T3 or higher if it offers one, two or three total handset models. In 
order to maintain parity and to allow entities that have been relying 
on the de minimis rule a reasonable period for transition, this 
obligation will become effective for manufacturers and service 
providers that offer one or two handset models over an air interface 
two years after the latest of the following: The date the manufacturer 
or service provider began offering handsets over the air interface, the 
date this Order is published in the Federal Register, the date a 
hearing aid compatibility technical standard is adopted for the 
relevant operation, or the date a previously small entity no longer 
meets our small entity definition. In addition, the Commission permits 
manufacturers and service providers that would have come under the 
amended de minimis rule but for their size to satisfy hearing aid 
compatibility deployment requirements for the legacy GSM air interface 
by relying on a handset that allows consumers to reduce the maximum 
power output only for operations over the GSM air interface in the 1900 
MHz band by no more than 2.5 decibels (dB) in order to meet the RF 
interference standard.
    29. In conjunction with these modifications to the de minimis rule, 
the Commission also revises our ``refresh'' rule to clarify its 
application to manufacturers that will be newly subject to hearing aid 
compatibility requirements. The refresh rule states

[[Page 54513]]

that if a manufacturer offers any new models for a particular air 
interface, it must offer in each calendar year a number of new models 
rated M3 or higher that is equal to at least half of its total required 
number of models rated M3 or higher, except that a manufacturer that 
offers three models over an air interface must offer at least one new 
model rated M3 or higher every other calendar year. Consistent with the 
purposes of this rule, the Commission now requires manufacturers that 
are not small entities that offer two models over an air interface, 
after the first two years, to introduce at least one new model rated M3 
or higher every other year.
    30. Retention of de minimis rule for small entities. The de minimis 
rule serves two purposes. One purpose is to ensure that small 
manufacturers and service providers have an opportunity to compete in 
the market. When the Commission first adopted the de minimis exception 
in 2003, it stressed the disproportionate impact that hearing aid 
compatibility requirements could have on small manufacturers or those 
that sell only a small number of digital wireless handset models in the 
United States, as well as on service providers that offer only a small 
number of digital wireless handset models. In order to further this 
procompetitive interest, the Commission retains the de minimis 
exception in full for small entities. The Commission concludes that the 
benefits to competition outweigh any consumer harm from not requiring 
these small entities to offer hearing aid-compatible telephones.
    31. For purposes of this rule, the Commission defines ``small 
entity'' by adopting size standards consistent with those of the Small 
Business Administration (SBA). The relevant SBA categories are: (1) 
Wireless communications service providers (except satellite), and (2) 
radio and television broadcasting and wireless communications equipment 
manufacturing. A wireless communications service provider is small if 
it is independently owned and operated, is not dominant in its field of 
operation, and has 1,500 or fewer employees. Independently owned and 
operated, non-dominant firms in the category of radio and television 
broadcasting and wireless communications equipment manufacturers are 
considered small if they have 750 or fewer employees. Accordingly, the 
Commission will use 1,500 or fewer employees for wireless 
communications service providers and 750 or fewer employees for 
wireless communications equipment manufacturers as the size standards 
for applying the de minimis rule.
    32. Limitation of the de minimis rule for companies that are not 
small entities. In addition to preserving competitive opportunities for 
small entities, the de minimis rule also helps ensure that new entrants 
to the market have the opportunity to innovate. In the First Report and 
Order, the Commission expressed its concern that the de minimis rule 
``not be limited in a manner that would compromise its effectiveness in 
promoting innovation and competition.'' Several commenters contend that 
the de minimis rule allows new entrants to the handset manufacturing 
marketplace to develop innovative handsets and expeditiously bring them 
to market.
    33. The Commission recognizes that new entrants may bring 
innovations to the wireless handset market, and that they may be 
discouraged from doing so if their first products are required to meet 
specific technical mandates. Thus, the Commission continues to apply 
the existing de minimis rule during the first two years that a 
manufacturer or service provider of any size is offering handsets, and 
during the first two years that an established entity is offering 
handsets over a particular air interface. The Commission is not 
persuaded, however, that the interest in innovation requires preserving 
the de minimis exception for large entities indefinitely. Once an 
entity with substantial resources is established as a manufacturer or 
service provider, it should be able to offer some handsets that meet 
the needs of consumers with hearing aids at the same time as it is 
innovating and investing.
    34. The Commission notes that while several commenters argue that 
the de minimis rule is necessary to allow new entrants to innovate, 
they generally do not specifically argue that this requires the 
exception to be maintained indefinitely. To the contrary, they contend 
that manufacturers will typically expand their product offerings and 
meet hearing aid compatibility requirements after an initial period. 
Indeed, some parties have recently proposed a limitation of the de 
minimis exception to two years as a possible alternative to the current 
rule. The Commission notes that Apple, Inc. (Apple) has used the de 
minimis rule over the past three years to continue offering its iPhone 
without full hearing aid compatibility. However, Apple's stated need 
for the de minimis exception is due to technical circumstances 
surrounding GSM operation over the 1900 MHz band by products with thin 
form configurations, which the Commission addresses below. To the 
extent other unique circumstances may arise in the future, the 
Commission finds they would be better addressed through case-by-case 
consideration, rather than by retaining an overly broad de minimis rule 
that potentially denies access to handsets by people with hearing loss.
    35. The Commission is not persuaded by arguments that market forces 
render modification of the de minimis rule unnecessary. Several 
commenters argue that after a period of time, manufacturers will 
naturally expand their product offerings and thereby become subject to 
hearing aid compatibility requirements. While such an expansion of 
portfolios occurs in many instances, it has not occurred, for example, 
with Apple. Other commenters argue that in light of the large number of 
hearing aid-compatible handsets that are currently on the market, it is 
unnecessary to apply hearing aid compatibility requirements to large 
entities with limited product lines. This argument overlooks that each 
company that offers a hearing aid-compatible handset adds to the 
diversity of choices on the market, and therefore there is a public 
interest benefit to defining the exception no more broadly than 
necessary to promote competition and innovation.
    36. The two-year entry period. In order to preserve the opportunity 
for new entrants to develop innovative products and services, the de 
minimis rule will continue to be available during the first two years 
that a manufacturer or service provider is in the relevant business. 
Similarly, a manufacturer or service provider of any size may continue 
to use the de minimis rule during the first two years that it offers 
handsets that operate over a particular air interface. The Commission 
finds that, in light of typical industry product cycles, two years is 
an appropriate period for a company that is not a small entity to 
introduce a hearing aid-compatible handset. For example, Apple 
introduced its third iPhone model within approximately two years after 
bringing the original iPhone to market. While the interest in 
innovation counsels in favor of permitting any company to introduce its 
first handset model over an air interface without meeting hearing aid 
compatibility standards, the public interest requires that a sizable 
company, once it is on its second or third generation of handsets, 
place a high enough priority on hearing aid compatibility to meet these 
standards for at least one model.
    37. The Commission also allows a similar two-year transition period 
in other circumstances where an entity

[[Page 54514]]

that offers one or two handsets over an air interface becomes newly 
required to offer hearing aid-compatible handsets. The Commission 
recognizes that companies, and particularly manufacturers, that until 
now have not been required to offer hearing aid-compatible handsets 
will need a transition period to begin doing so. Accordingly, the new 
requirements will not become applicable to entities that are currently 
in the relevant business until two years after this Order is published 
in the Federal Register. Similarly, the Commission provides a two-year 
transition when a previously small business first exceeds the small 
business size standard. In addition, when hearing aid compatibility 
standards are newly adopted for an air interface or frequency band, 
manufacturers and service providers that offer one or two handset 
models over that air interface or frequency band will not be required 
to offer a hearing aid-compatible model until two years after rules 
adopting the technical standard are published in the Federal Register. 
While the Commission recognizes that manufacturers are typically aware 
of proposed standards well before they are adopted, the Commission is 
persuaded that businesses with small product lines, because they have 
less flexibility to work with multiple form factors and other design 
features, may need more time to introduce hearing aid-compatible 
products under these circumstances than the minimum of one year 
afforded to other manufacturers and service providers. The two-year 
transition period places companies in all of these circumstances on an 
equal footing with companies that are newly entering the market.
    38. GSM in the 1900 MHz band. In recognition of the special 
technical challenges of meeting hearing aid compatibility standards for 
handsets with certain desirable form factors operating over the legacy 
2G GSM air interface in the 1900 MHz band, the Commission permits 
companies that would come under the amended de minimis rule but for 
their size to satisfy the hearing aid-compatible handset deployment 
requirement for GSM using a handset that allows the customer to reduce 
the maximum output power for GSM operations in the 1900 MHz band by up 
to 2.5 dB in order to meet the RF interference standard.
    39. The Commission finds that a special allowance to meet hearing 
aid compatibility standards for handsets operating over the 2G GSM 
network at 1900 MHz, in the narrow context of companies that but for 
their size would be eligible for the amended de minimis exception, is 
in the public interest. Achieving hearing aid compatibility for GSM 
handsets in the 1900 MHz band implicates special technological 
challenges. The Commission has noted that ``technological issues make 
it difficult to produce a wide variety of [GSM] handsets that both meet 
the M3 standard for reduced RF interference for acoustic coupling and 
include certain popular features.'' For example, based on the hearing 
aid compatibility status reports filed by handset manufacturers in July 
2010 for the reporting period from July 1, 2009, to June 30, 2010, 121 
out of 122 handsets operating over the CDMA air interface, or 99%, were 
rated M3 or better, whereas only 82 of 153 GSM handsets, or 54%, were 
rated M3 or better. Certain technological choices in handset form and 
function, such as thin form factors and touch screens, increase the 
difficulty of meeting the ANSI standard for these handsets while 
bringing unique benefits to consumers. If the Commission were to apply 
hearing aid compatibility technical standards strictly to manufacturers 
that narrowly specialize in phones with these features, the Commission 
is concerned that such handsets might become unavailable to consumers 
with and without hearing loss alike. Alternatively, such manufacturers 
may choose to produce additional models with no unique features that 
are not demanded by the market simply to meet the new benchmarks that 
will apply to them two years following the release of this Order. A 
targeted approach that allows some flexibility in the hearing aid 
compatibility technical standards, to accommodate this narrow 
situation, will avoid these consequences and better promote access for 
people with hearing loss.
    40. The Commission further finds that allowing hearing aid-
compatible phones to incorporate a limited user-controlled power 
reduction option under such circumstance is an appropriate means to 
address these concerns. A 2.5 dB reduction in power will have limited 
impact on the ability of people with hearing loss to use the affected 
phones. For one thing, any impact would be limited to those times when 
a handset is operating on GSM and at 1900 MHz. Furthermore, the 
diminution in power that occurs from a 2.5 dB loss should generally 
have an effect only when a handset is operated near the edge of 
reliable service coverage. Handsets usually operate at no more power 
than needed in order to prolong the battery charge and minimize 
potential interference, and they typically transmit at full power only 
to overcome signal fading in areas where there are obstructions or a 
large distance between the handset and the nearest base station. In 
addition, the modified rule applies only to 2G GSM technology, which is 
being phased out in favor of 3G alternatives. Also, as described by 
ANSI ASC C63\TM\, the new version of the ANSI C63.19 standard that is 
currently under consideration, because it will measure RF interference 
potential directly and eliminate the need for certain conservative 
assumptions, will make it approximately 2.2 dB easier for a GSM phone 
to achieve an M3 rating. The Commission expects that if the new 
standard is adopted, manufacturers will find it in their interest to 
abandon the power reduction if possible, or diminish it to the extent 
they can, in order to make their phones most attractive to people with 
hearing loss.
    41. The Commission recognizes, as certain parties have argued, that 
the Commission has previously disfavored reduction in output power as a 
means of meeting hearing aid compatibility requirements. Consistent 
with these prior holdings, the Commission affirms that the requirement 
to test for hearing aid compatibility at full power generally serves 
the important goal of ensuring that people with hearing loss have equal 
access to all of the service quality and performance that a given 
wireless phone provides. The Commission finds, however, in this narrow 
context, that the interest in fully equal access is outweighed by the 
importance of preserving the availability of a small category of phones 
that have desirable and beneficial features, and that will be made 
substantially accessible to people with hearing loss, from companies 
that specialize in producing only such phones. In the Further Notice of 
Proposed Rulemaking, issued together with this Second Report and Order, 
the Commission requests comment on whether to extend this exception to 
the full power testing requirement beyond companies that offer only one 
or two handset models. In addition, as proposed by HLAA, the Commission 
will monitor the impact of this rule and revisit the need for it in the 
future. In particular, in the event a new ANSI technical standard is 
adopted, the Commission will initiate a review of this rule shortly 
thereafter.
    42. Accordingly, subject to the conditions set forth below, the 
Commission amends its rules so that a company offering one or two 
handset models over the GSM air interface that would have been eligible 
for the amended de minimis exception rule but for its size may satisfy 
its obligation to

[[Page 54515]]

offer one hearing aid-compatible handset over the GSM air interface 
through a handset that lets the consumer reduce maximum transmit power 
for GSM operations in the 1900 MHz band by up to 2.5 decibels and that 
then meets the ANSI criteria for an M3 rating after such power 
reduction. The power reduction must affect only 2G GSM operations in 
the 1900 MHz band, and the phone's default setting must be for full 
power operation. Once a handset meeting these criteria has been 
introduced in order to satisfy this hearing aid compatibility 
deployment requirement, the manufacturer or service provider may 
continue to count it as a hearing aid-compatible handset even if it 
increases its number of handset models operating over the GSM air 
interface beyond two.
    43. The Commission does find that two conditions on this rule are 
necessary in the public interest. First, through software or other 
programming, the Commission requires these handsets to operate at full 
transmit power when calling 911 on GSM at 1900 MHz. Although some 
parties have argued that powering the phone back up in this 
circumstance would raise consumer awareness and education issues, the 
Commission finds that the public interest is better served by 
maximizing the coverage for a 911 call even if some interference is 
experienced by consumers who use hearing aids. In addition, the 
Commission requires that consumers be adequately informed of the need 
to select the power reduction option to achieve hearing aid 
compatibility and of the consequences of doing so. Specifically, 
wherever a manufacturer or service provider provides the hearing aid 
compatibility rating for such a handset, it shall indicate that user 
activation of a special mode is necessary to meet the hearing aid 
compatibility standard. In addition, the handset manual or a product 
insert must explain how to activate the special mode and that doing so 
may result in a diminution of coverage.
    44. Other circumstances. In recent filings, Research in Motion 
Limited (RIM) has urged the Commission to retain a de minimis rule that 
would apply in situations where handsets are being phased out of 
production or retail sales portfolios. RIM states that ``if a 
manufacturer or service provider is phasing out a particular air 
interface but still offers two or three handsets for a particular air 
interface, absent the current de minimis exception or a similar 
provision it would be compelled (regardless of carrier or consumer 
demand) to either discontinue all of the models concurrently with the 
HAC model, or maintain the HAC model solely for the purposes of 
enabling it to continue offering the non-HAC model(s).'' RIM suggests a 
possible rule under which if a manufacturer or service provider offers 
four or more handsets over an air interface during a given calendar 
year, in the next calendar year offers three or fewer handsets, and in 
subsequent calendar years offers one or two of those remaining 
handsets, it would not need to offer any hearing aid-compatible 
handsets beginning in the third year.
    45. The Commission declines to take action on RIM's proposal in the 
absence of a developed record or concrete evidence of a problem that 
needs to be addressed. While the scenario that RIM poses is plausible 
on its face, it provides no example of any instance where a 
manufacturer or service provider has actually used or will use the de 
minimis rule to manage its phasing out of a portfolio in which it 
previously offered hearing aid-compatible handsets. In the event a 
situation arises where retaining a hearing aid-compatible offering over 
an air interface that is being discontinued would cause hardship to a 
manufacturer or service provider, and discontinuing the handset would 
not unduly disadvantage people with hearing loss, the Commission would 
entertain a request for waiver.
    46. Review of the de minimis rule. Hearing Loss Association of 
America (HLAA) proposes that whatever actions the Commission takes, it 
should revisit any changes to the de minimis rule in a timely manner to 
see what impact they have in the real world. While the Commission 
believes the actions it takes today will best balance the interests of 
industry and consumers, it recognizes that these rules are complex and 
their consequences over time cannot be predicted with certainty. The 
Commission therefore will undertake a comprehensive review of the de 
minimis rule no later than 2015.

C. New Distribution Channels

    47. Background. Under current rules, manufacturers are required to 
produce a certain number or percentage of handset models that meet the 
Commission's hearing aid compatibility standards. These hearing aid 
compatibility deployment benchmarks for manufacturers, however, are 
codified in terms of the handsets that they offer to service providers. 
Thus, the rules apply only to handsets that manufacturers offer to 
service providers and that service providers then offer to consumers. 
If handsets are not offered to service providers, then the benchmarks 
in Section 20.19 do not apply.
    48. Discussion. Based on the record in this proceeding, the 
Commission updates our rules and amend Section 20.19(c) and (d) to 
apply the deployment benchmarks to all handsets that a wireless handset 
manufacturer produces for distribution in the United States that are 
within the scope of Section 20.19(a) of the rule. This rule change will 
address new handset manufacturer distribution models in existing 
networks and ensure that wireless handsets will be covered by our 
hearing aid compatibility obligations regardless of distribution and 
sales channels.
    49. The Commission finds this rule change will serve the public 
interest as a better and more proactive approach to ensure the 
availability of hearing aid-compatible handsets in the developing 
handset marketplace. Whatever may have been the case in 2007, it is not 
now premature to apply hearing aid compatibility requirements to all 
distribution channels. To the contrary, a variety of phones is readily 
available to consumers through outlets ranging from online retailers to 
convenience stores to electronics specialty outlets, as well as 
directly from manufacturers. Indeed, Google recently experimented with 
selling its Nexus One handset only directly to consumers. While the 
Commission cannot predict how the market will develop, extending the 
scope of the manufacturer requirement to all handsets will ensure that 
wireless handsets are available to people with hearing loss regardless 
of distribution and sales channels. Moreover, no commenter has 
identified, and the Commission cannot conceive, any reason why meeting 
deployment benchmarks for hearing aid-compatible handsets might be more 
difficult or burdensome as a result of the method of distribution.
    50. The Commission recognizes that manufacturers may need time to 
meet the requirements of the changed rule. For example, a manufacturer 
that does not produce any handsets for sale through service providers 
is not currently required to offer any hearing aid-compatible handsets, 
and therefore may need to make technological adjustments to meet these 
requirements. Therefore, the Commission concludes that manufacturers 
will have until 12 months from publication of the rule in the Federal 
Register to come into compliance with this new provision. This is the 
same as the minimum compliance period that our rules currently provide 
when the Commission adopts hearing aid compatibility standards for a 
new frequency band or air interface.

[[Page 54516]]

    51. The Commission clarifies that handsets covered by this rule 
include handsets that manufacturers sell to businesses for distribution 
to their employees. For example, a business may distribute handsets to 
its employees that are intended primarily for internal communications 
or for data tracking, but that also incorporate external voice 
communications capability within the scope of Section 20.19(a). If the 
handset incorporates a built-in speaker and is typically held to the 
ear, then the manufacturer must count that handset in determining 
whether it meets the benchmarks for deploying hearing aid-compatible 
handsets.
    52. Finally, the Commission clarifies that the manufacturer of a 
phone is the party that produces it. The Commission expects to consider 
this issue further in the 2010 review.

D. Volume Controls

    53. Background. In the Notice, the Commission urged all interested 
parties to specifically look into adding volume controls to wireless 
handsets. The Commission noted earlier statements by some in the deaf 
and hard of hearing community that one of hearing aid users' most 
important concerns regarding wireless devices is the lack of adequate 
volume control on handsets. The Notice sought comment on whether any 
volume control requirements should be incorporated into our rules, and 
if so what they should be.
    54. Discussion. As several commenters have noted, the Alliance for 
Telecommunications Industry Solutions (ATIS) Incubator Solutions 
Program 4--Hearing Aid Compatibility (AISP.4-HAC) has formed a 
working group, denominated WG-11, to investigate the interaction of 
wireless handsets and digital hearing aids. The findings of this 
investigation, including recommendations for achieving adequate 
listening levels for consumers who wear hearing aids while using 
wireless phones, will be shared with the Commission upon the completion 
of this group's efforts. As the Commission is awaiting input from the 
AISP.4-HAC working group, the Commission is taking no action in this 
Second Report and Order. The Commission will further consider this 
issue as part of the 2010 review.

E. Display Screens

    55. Background. The Notice noted that the Technology Access Program 
of Gallaudet University had pointed out that the display screens on 
smart phones emit electromagnetic energy that may interfere with the 
operation of hearing aids. It therefore invited comment on this issue, 
including whether any measures are appropriate to promote the 
deployment of phones that enable users to turn off their screens.
    56. Discussion. The Commission finds that the existing record does 
not establish a need for Commission action at this time. The Commission 
will seek further comment on this issue in the 2010 review.

V. Procedural Matters

A. Final Regulatory Flexibility Analysis

    57. As required by the Regulatory Flexibility Act of 1980, as 
amended (RFA),\1\ the Federal Communications Commission (Commission) 
included an Initial Regulatory Flexibility Analysis (IRFA) of the 
possible significant economic impact on a substantial number of small 
entities of the policies and rules considered in the Notice in WT 
Docket No. 07-250.\2\ The Commission sought written public comment on 
the Notice in this docket, including comment on the IRFA. This Final 
Regulatory Flexibility Analysis (FRFA) conforms to the RFA.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ See 5 U.S.C. 603. The RFA, see 5 U.S.C. 601-612, has been 
amended by the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 
1996 (SBREFA), Public Law 104-121, Title II, 110 Stat. 857 (1996).
    \2\ Amendment of the Commission's Rules Governing Hearing Aid-
Compatible Mobile Handsets, WT Docket No. 07-250, Section 68.4(a) of 
the Commission's Rules Governing Hearing Aid Compatible Telephones, 
WT Docket No. 01-309, Petition of American National Standards 
Institute Accredited Standards Committee C63 (EMC) ANSI ASC 
C63[supreg], Notice of Proposed Rulemaking, 22 FCC Rcd 19760 (2007) 
(Notice).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

1. Need for, and Objectives of, the Proposed Rules
    58. In the Second Report and Order, the Commission makes several 
changes to its existing hearing aid compatibility requirements so that 
they will continue effectively to ensure in an evolving marketplace of 
new technologies and services that consumers with hearing loss are able 
to access wireless communications services through a wide selection of 
handsets without experiencing disabling interference or other technical 
obstacles. First, the Commission provides that multi-band and multi-
mode handsets that meet hearing aid compatibility requirements over all 
air interfaces and frequency bands for which technical standards have 
been established, but that also accommodate voice operations for which 
standards do not exist, may be counted as hearing aid-compatible, 
provided consumers are informed that they have been tested for the 
operations for which there are not standards. This rule change extends 
to all such handsets the same regulatory regime that currently applies 
to handsets that incorporate Wi-Fi capability, and it ensures that 
consumers will have the information they need to best evaluate how a 
handset will operate with their hearing aids. In order to further 
ensure that consumers are provided with consistent and sufficient 
information, the Commission also prescribes specific language to be 
used in the disclosure.
    59. Second, the Commission refines the de minimis exception in its 
existing rule so that companies that are not small entities will be 
required to offer at least one hearing aid-compatible model after a 
two-year initial period. Manufacturers subject to this rule will also 
be required to offer at least one new model that is hearing aid-
compatible for acoustic coupling every other calendar year. The 
Commission thereby helps ensure that people with hearing loss will have 
access to new and popular models, while continuing to protect the 
ability of small companies to compete and to foster innovation by new 
entrants. Further, in recognition of specific challenges that this rule 
change will impose for handsets operating over the legacy GSM air 
interface in the 1900 MHz band, the Commission permits companies that 
will no longer qualify for the de minimis exception under this rule 
change to meet hearing aid compatibility requirements by installing 
software that enables customers to reduce the power output by a limited 
amount for such operations.
    60. Third, the Commission extends the hearing aid-compatible 
handset deployment requirements applicable to manufacturers to include 
handsets distributed by the manufacturer through channels other than 
service providers. This action ensures that consumers will continue to 
experience the benefits of hearing aid compatibility as innovative 
business plans give rise to a diversity of distribution channels.
2. Summary of Significant Issues Raised by Public Comments in Response 
to the IRFA
    61. No comments specifically addressed the IRFA. Nonetheless, small 
entity issues raised in comments are addressed in this FRFA in Sections 
D and E.
3. Description and Estimate of the Number of Small Entities to Which 
the Proposed Rules Would Apply
    62. 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

[[Page 54517]]

proposed rules, if adopted.\3\ The RFA generally defines the term 
``small entity'' as having the same meaning as the terms ``small 
business,'' ``small organization,'' and ``small governmental 
jurisdiction.'' \4\ In addition, the term ``small business'' has the 
same meaning as the term ``small business concern'' under the Small 
Business Act.\5\ A ``small business concern'' is one which: