Reporting Requirements Governing Hearing Aid-Compatible Mobile Handsets, 63098-63106 [2018-26037]

Agencies

• FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION

[Federal Register Volume 83, Number 235 (Friday, December 7, 2018)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 63098-63106]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2018-26037]



[[Page 63098]]

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

FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION

47 CFR Part 20

[WT Docket No. 17-228; FCC 18-167]


Reporting Requirements Governing Hearing Aid-Compatible Mobile 
Handsets

AGENCY: Federal Communications Commission.

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: In this document, the Federal Communications Commission 
(``Commission'' or ``FCC'') revises its rules to require service 
providers to post on their publicly accessible websites information 
regarding the hearing aid compatibility of their offered handsets. 
Service providers are also required to retain information regarding the 
hearing aid compatibility of handsets previously offered. Through this 
information, consumers will have access to the most recent data about 
hearing aid-compatible handsets and the Commission will be able to 
ensure compliance with the hearing aid compatibility rules and 
requirements. In addition, the Commission no longer requires providers 
to file FCC Form 655 on an annual basis. Instead, providers must file 
an annual certification indicating whether or not they are compliant 
with the hearing aid compatibility rules.

DATES: Effective Date: January 7, 2019.
    Compliance Date: Compliance will not be required for Sec.  
20.19(e), (h), and (i), until after approval by the Office of 
Management and Budget. We will publish a document in the Federal 
Register announcing the compliance date.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Weiren Wang, Wireless 
Telecommunications Bureau, (202) 418-7275, email [email protected], 
and Michael Rowan, Wireless Telecommunications Bureau, (202) 418-1883, 
email [email protected].

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This is a summary of the Commission's Report 
and Order (Order), WT Docket No. 17-228; FCC 18-167, adopted November 
15, 2018 and released November 16, 2018. The full text of this document 
is available for inspection and copying during business hours in the 
FCC Reference Information Center, Portals II, 445 12th Street SW, Room 
CY-A257, Washington, DC 20554. Also, it 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 website, https://www.bcpiweb.com; or by calling (800) 378-3160, facsimile (202) 488-
5563, or email [email protected]. Copies of the Order also may be 
obtained via the Commission's Electronic Comment Filing System (ECFS) 
by entering the docket number WT Docket 17-228. Additionally, the 
complete item is available on the Federal Communications Commission's 
website at https://www.fcc.gov.

Synopsis

I. Report and order

    1. The Commission has witnessed unprecedented growth in the degree 
to which service providers offer handsets that are hearing aid-
compatible. In light of the growth in hearing aid-compatible handsets 
and decreasing public reliance on reports since they were first adopted 
by the Commission in 2003, the Commission takes two key steps to reform 
the hearing-aid compatibility reporting regime. First, the Commission 
revises its rules to require service providers to post on their 
websites the most critical information currently submitted on FCC Form 
655. By requiring all service providers to post this information on 
publicly accessible websites that they control, the Commission can 
ensure that consumers have access to information about the increased 
numbers of hearing aid-compatible handset models with less burden for 
both service providers and consumers. This website information also 
will allow the Commission to continue to evaluate rule compliance 
without collecting information directly from service providers. 
Consumers will benefit from having access to the most up-to-date 
information about each handset model being offered by service 
providers.
    2. Second, the Commission finds that many of the benefits of annual 
status reporting by service providers have become increasingly 
outweighed by the burdens that such information collection places on 
these entities. Instead of requiring providers to submit the FCC Form 
655 on an annual basis, the Commission will require providers to submit 
annual certifications that require only a statement that a service 
provider is or is not in full compliance with the Commission's hearing 
aid compatibility rules, and if not, explain why. The action the 
Commission takes here streamlines the Commission's collection of 
information while continuing to fulfill the underlying purposes of the 
current reporting regime.
    3. By using streamlined annual certifications combined with website 
reporting, the Commission ensures that it meets its objectives of 
monitoring industry and enforcing compliance with the relevant 
deployment benchmarks and other hearing aid compatibility provisions in 
the Commission's rules. This approach will ensure that consumers have 
better access to useful, current information about the hearing aid 
compatibility of the handset models being offered by service providers.
    4. The Commission notes that in a separate docket, it is 
considering broader changes to the hearing aid compatibility rules that 
may be appropriate in the event the Commission requires 100% of covered 
handsets to be hearing aid-compatible. Per the schedule established in 
that proceeding, which the Commission has no current plan to deviate 
from, the process through which the Commission would make a 
determination whether a 100 percent requirement is achievable would 
conclude at the end of 2022. Revisions to the existing deployment 
benchmarks and other related rules are outside of the scope of this 
proceeding, and therefore these requirements will remain in place 
unless and until the Commission takes further action in that docket. To 
that end, the Commission's decision here is not predicated on further 
changes that might be under consideration, and thus, does not prejudge 
any further steps it may take to modify its reporting rules in that 
proceeding.

A. Improvements to Service Provider Website Requirements

    5. The Commission amends its hearing aid compatibility website 
requirements for service providers to ensure that the objectives of the 
FCC Form 655 reporting requirement continue to be met. In doing so, the 
Commission adopts, in part, the proposal put forth by the Joint 
Consensus filers. Under the Commission's new rules, service providers 
will continue to comply with the existing website requirements 
supplemented with additional content that is useful to consumers. In 
addition, the Commission will carry over to the new website posting 
obligation limited content from the FCC Form 655 necessary to meet the 
Commission's information, monitoring, and enforcement goals.
    6. In addition to the current website requirements, all service 
providers that operate publicly accessible websites (other than de 
minimis service providers, which remain exempt from website 
requirements) will now be required to post to their websites the 
following additional information:

[[Page 63099]]

    (1) A list of all non-hearing aid-compatible handset models 
currently offered, including the level of functionality of those 
models;
    (2) among other pieces of data, the marketing model name/number(s) 
and FCC ID number of each hearing aid-compatible and non-hearing aid-
compatible handset model currently offered;
    (3) a link to a third-party website as designated by the Commission 
or Wireless Telecommunications Bureau, with information regarding 
hearing aid-compatible and non-hearing aid-compatible devices OR, 
alternatively, a clearly marked list of hearing aid-compatible devices 
that have been offered in the past 24 months but are no longer offered 
by that provider. For purposes of initial implementation, the 
Commission designates the Global Accessibility Reporting Initiative 
(GARI) website as the third party website referred to in this portion 
of the rule;
    (4) A link to the current FCC web page containing information about 
the wireless hearing aid compatibility rules and service providers' 
obligations; and
    (5) A ``date stamp'' on any website page containing the above 
referenced information that indicates when the page was last updated.
    7. Service providers must also retain internal records for 
discontinued models, to be made available upon Commission request of:
    (1) Handset model information, including the month year/each 
hearing aid-compatible and non-hearing aid-compatible handset model was 
first offered; and
    (2) the month/year each hearing aid-compatible handset model and 
non-hearing aid-compatible handset was last offered for all 
discontinued handset models until a period of 24 months has passed from 
that date.
    8. Retaining a trailing list of all handsets offered over the past 
24 months will ensure that the Commission can continue to monitor 
whether service providers meet numerical and percentage-based handset 
deployment obligations. The obligation to post a link to the GARI 
website, or alternatively, post a clearly marked list of hearing aid 
compatible devices that have been offered in the past 24 months (which 
at least one smaller provider has already voluntarily adopted) also 
permits consumers to locate information about a model they may have 
recently purchased that is no longer being offered. The Commission 
concludes that it can serve as a useful tool for consumers to obtain 
hearing aid compatibility information regarding past handsets offered. 
Past handset information is useful not only to consumers who purchase 
devices via re-sale, but also to consumers who, for instance, start 
using a hearing aid or change hearing aids and want to check on whether 
their current device is compatible. So that service providers have 
flexibility, the Commission will not prescribe a standard template for 
posting and retaining this information. In addition, service providers 
can rely on the information from device manufacturers' FCC Form 655 as 
a safe harbor, similar to the Commission's policy in the past for 
service providers' FCC Form 655 filings.
    9. The Commission does not anticipate that it will be difficult or 
burdensome for service providers to gather and post this additional 
information on their websites or to retain it. Service providers must 
continue to meet applicable deployment benchmarks and maintain 
compliance with all other hearing aid compatibility requirements. 
Therefore, service providers would likely need to track the information 
outlined above, some of which service providers need in order to run 
their businesses independent of the Commission's requirements (e.g., 
when a handset is first offered and no longer offered). Posting this 
information to their websites and/or retaining it for their records 
should impose on providers only a minimal additional burden. This 
conclusion is confirmed by the record in this proceeding showing that 
service providers already post some of this newly required information 
and the willingness of the Joint Consensus filers to endorse a similar 
approach.
    10. The Commission finds that its new website and record retention 
requirements should better serve the Commission's objectives because 
the information on websites will be more up-to-date than the data 
submitted on FCC Form 655. The current website rules require providers 
to update the website information within 30 days of any relevant 
changes. As the Commission stated when it adopted the website posting 
requirement, ``updated website postings are necessary . . . so that 
consumers can obtain up-to-date hearing aid compatibility information 
from their service providers.'' To ensure that providers are aware that 
their websites need to be kept up to date, the Commission codifies this 
requirement.
    11. The Commission will be able to use the information on a service 
provider's website to ensure that it is in compliance with the 
appropriate deployment benchmarks on a month-by-month basis. The 
Commission believes this is a better approach than other options, such 
as, for example, relying on informal complaints. The Commission also 
can use the posted information to monitor the state of the provision of 
hearing aid-compatible handsets by the wireless industry and the 
effectiveness of its hearing aid compatibility requirements. The 
Commission also believes that the proceeding in which the Commission is 
considering whether to require 100% of handsets to be hearing aid-
compatible allows the Commission to monitor industry progress without 
requiring individual hearing aid compatibility status data from service 
providers. These revisions to the Commission's website posting 
requirements will allow consumers better access to more current 
information about the hearing aid compatibility features of current 
handset models offered by their service providers, and the information 
will be in a clearer format than is currently possible on FCC Form 655.
    12. The website and record retention requirements the Commission 
adopts here differ slightly from the approach outlined in the Joint 
Consensus Letter and the separate request of HLAA-RERC. The requirement 
to post information about non-hearing aid-compatible handsets, for 
instance, is not addressed by the Joint Consensus filers. Nevertheless, 
the Commission concludes that requiring the posting of this 
information, along with information regarding currently offered hearing 
aid-compatible handsets on providers' websites, provides an easy means 
for the Commission and interested third parties to quickly derive a 
percentage of hearing aid-compatible handsets to determine whether the 
provider is meeting the relevant benchmarks. The Commission would not 
have to wait for the annual certification or make a request for 
internal data from the provider to determine whether the provider is 
currently compliant. Because the majority of handsets are hearing aid-
compatible, this requirement imposes a limited burden compared to the 
compliance benefit.

B. Adoption of Service Provider Certification Requirement To Replace 
Annual Reporting Requirements

    13. The Commission adopts a requirement that all service providers 
certify whether they are in compliance with all of the Commission's 
wireless hearing aid compatibility requirements. Service providers 
should affirmatively state their compliance with the hearing aid 
compatibility rules through an annual certification. The Commission 
adopts the Joint Consensus proposal with some modifications. This new 
annual certification requirement applies

[[Page 63100]]

to all service providers including de minimis service providers. It 
will assure the public and the Commission that service providers have a 
strong incentive to comply fully with all of the Commission's hearing 
aid compatibility requirements, including deployment, website, 
labeling, and disclosure requirements, among others. Under this new 
rule, service providers will be required to file a certification by 
January 15 of each calendar year using the existing electronic 
interface for the FCC Form 655 and stating as follows:
    I am a knowledgeable executive [of company x] regarding compliance 
with the Federal Communications Commission's wireless hearing aid 
compatibility requirements at a wireless service provider covered by 
those requirements.
    I certify that the provider was [(in full compliance/not in full 
compliance)] [choose one] at all times during the applicable time 
period with the Commission's wireless hearing aid compatibility 
deployment benchmarks and all other relevant wireless hearing aid 
compatibility requirements.
    The company represents and warrants, and I certify by this 
declaration under penalty of perjury pursuant to 47 CFR 1.16 that the 
above certification is consistent with 47 CFR 1.17, which requires 
truthful and accurate statements to the Commission. The company also 
acknowledges that false statements and misrepresentations to the 
Commission are punishable under Title 18 of the U.S. Code and may 
subject it to enforcement action pursuant to sections 501 and 503 of 
the Act.
    14. If the certification states that the provider is ``not in full 
compliance,'' it must include an explanation of which wireless hearing 
aid compatibility requirements the wireless service provider was not in 
full compliance with, and when non-compliance began and (if applicable) 
ended with respect to each requirement. In addition, as part of the 
certification, the service provider must submit the name of the signing 
executive, his or her contact information, the website address (if 
applicable) of pages(s) containing hearing aid compatibility 
information required by section 20.19(h), and the FCC FRN and the name 
of the company(ies) covered by the certification. The Commission 
expects to rely on this affirmative statement of compliance in any 
enforcement action.
    15. The service provider must also indicate on the certification 
form the percentage of hearing aid compatible wireless handsets it made 
available that year. Providers will derive this percentage by 
determining the number of hearing aid-compatible handsets offered 
across all air interfaces during the year divided by the total number 
of handsets offered during the year. This requirement, while not 
directly related to service providers' compliance, will help the 
Commission and consumers quickly determine the state of the hearing aid 
compatibility marketplace. The Commission will rely on website postings 
of current handsets and the document retention requirements it adopts 
here to monitor carrier compliance with the deployment benchmarks by 
air interface.
    16. The Commission does not adopt one element of the Joint 
Consensus Letter regarding the certification. Specifically, it does not 
adopt the Joint Consensus Letter request to state in the rules that 
providers may request confidentiality when submitting records to the 
Commission because providers already have the right to make such a 
request and such requests are typically ruled upon subsequent to the 
information submission. The Commission also adopts the requirement 
proposed by CTIA, CCA and TIA that a ``knowledgeable executive,'' 
rather than an officer, sign the certification in order to increase 
service providers' flexibility and consistency with the language of the 
Form FCC 655 certification. The Commission does not however, adopt 
their proposal that the knowledgeable executive certify only that the 
company has procedures in place to ensure compliance with the rules. 
Requiring the executive to certify that the company is in fact in 
compliance increases service providers' accountability and is necessary 
to provide the Commission and the public with a clear picture of each 
company's compliance as well as industry-wide compliance levels.
    17. Given the Commission's improved website posting obligations, 
the new, streamlined certification requirements, and manufacturers' 
continued submission of FCC Form 655s, it is no longer necessary to 
require service providers to file FCC Form 655. The revised website and 
certification requirements the Commission adopts in this Order fulfill 
the objectives underlying the filing requirement with increased 
consumer benefits and less burden. For example, service providers will 
no longer be required to list the air interface(s) and frequency 
band(s) over which an offered model operates, information that they say 
is particularly burdensome to gather and list in their filings. 
Moreover, this information duplicates what manufacturers are filing for 
the same handsets. As long as service providers correctly and clearly 
identify on their websites the models that they currently offer and 
retain historical handset information, the Commission will be able to 
use this information to compare the handsets offered to Commission 
databases and derive the relevant information for enforcement purposes, 
and consumers will have much simpler access to this data.
    18. Further, the Commission will be able to determine benchmark 
compliance by air interface by examining the data on service providers' 
websites by cross referencing that information on manufacturers' FCC 
Form 655. Service providers will not need to answer or provide a 
description in response to the several questions on the status of 
product labeling and outreach efforts. Service providers will no longer 
have the burden of identifying the total number of hearing aid-
compatible and non-hearing aid-compatible models they offer to 
customers for each air interface over which the service provider offers 
service by month, or answer company information questions regarding 
their status as it relates to the de minimis exception.
    19. Based on the record, the Commission therefore modifies its 
rules to eliminate the FCC Form 655 reporting requirement for all 
service providers. The Joint Consensus filers support eliminating the 
FCC Form 655 if other safeguards are put in place, and with minor 
deviations, the Commission is adopting the safeguards they propose. 
Moreover, small service providers, such as members of RWA, agree that 
the burden of reporting is not justified and that the costs saved by 
eliminating the requirement will allow them to maintain and improve 
their websites and other outreach materials that are more readily 
accessible to consumers. And CTIA/CCA state that a certification 
approach would not harm consumers' ability to obtain information about 
hearing aid-compatible handsets from other publicly available sources 
of information.
    20. For small, rural, and regional service providers, especially, 
the burden of reporting is substantial. The record indicates that such 
service providers must devote substantial time and resources to 
tracking and collecting the information necessary to fill out the form. 
These efforts are a strain on these providers' limited resources. The 
financial cost of the reporting requirement is disproportionate to the 
number of customers served by these providers. For example, in January

[[Page 63101]]

2018, compared to the reports from the four largest carriers (which 
serve more than 98% of wireless subscribers), 209 smaller providers 
filed annual Form 655 status reports. Even for nationwide carriers, the 
costs of reporting are no longer justified given their high level of 
compliance with deployment benchmarks and the information the 
Commission already collects from device manufacturers.
    21. The Commission expects that service providers' percentages of 
hearing aid-compatible handset models being offered, as well as their 
compliance levels with deployment benchmarks, are unlikely to decline 
for the foreseeable future because nearly all handsets offered by 
manufacturers are hearing aid-compatible, reducing the need for up-
front detailed information in FCC Form 655. The Commission recognizes 
that the implementation of new, unforeseen technologies could affect 
handset manufacturers' and providers' ability to offer hearing aid-
compatible handsets in the future. The Commission will therefore 
continue to monitor the wireless handset marketplace to assess the need 
for further amendments to its rules.
    22. The Commission notes that it is eliminating certain reporting 
requirements, such as reporting on the status of outreach efforts and 
product labelling, because they are no longer useful for the Commission 
or consumers, and the burden of these requirements outweighs the 
benefits.
    23. Finally, the Commission makes clear that its decision today 
does not affect its wireless hearing aid compatibility rules outside of 
its reporting and website requirements, including those designed to 
facilitate consumer access to hearing aid-compatible devices. Although 
service providers will no longer be required to complete the FCC Form 
655, the Commission's hearing aid compatibility rules still require 
service providers to comply with all labeling, disclosure, in-store 
testing, and level of functionality requirements. The Commission 
continues to encourage providers to continue engaging in outreach 
efforts to educate the public, audiologists, hearing aid dispensers, 
and retail personnel concerning the use of digital wireless phones with 
hearing aids.

C. Transition and Implementation Issues

    24. In order that service providers focus future efforts toward an 
orderly transition to the new website and annual certification 
requirements that the Commission adopted in this Report and Order, it 
waived, on its own motion, the requirement that service providers file 
the hearing aid status report currently due by January 15, 2019. This 
waiver will last from public release of the Report and Order until its 
effective date whereupon this reporting requirement will be deleted 
from the rules. The first annual certification will cover calendar year 
2018, the same period that would be covered by the FCC Form 655 for 
which the Commission is providing a waiver. Subsequent annual 
certifications starting in 2020 will be due by January 15 each year.
    25. The Commission finds good cause to grant a waiver under the 
circumstances presented. The Commission intends to relieve providers of 
the current reporting burden as soon as possible and a limited waiver 
both effectuates this purpose as efficiently as possible and avoids 
duplicate collections of the same 2018 calendar-year handset 
information. The certification that would substitute for the January 
2019 report fully satisfies the Commission's goals. And although the 
certification will occur somewhat later than January in order to obtain 
the necessary OMB approval, this minor delay will not significantly 
undercut the purpose underlying the certification in part because the 
revisions the Commission adopts here require posting and retention of 
data for the 2018 calendar year, not just data from approval of the 
information collection requirements onward. Service providers will 
still have an affirmative obligation to confirm compliance with all of 
the Commission's hearing aid-compatibility requirements, including the 
handset deployment benchmarks, and the Commission and public will have 
an opportunity to evaluate that statement against the Commission's 
revised website deployment obligations. In addition, because 
manufacturers will continue to file even more detailed handset 
information on their Form 655 to which consumers may refer, the 
Commission believes that any harm from this limited waiver would be 
minimal. Finally, while the Commission does not choose to eliminate the 
existing reporting rule immediately upon publication of this Report and 
Order in the Federal Register, it observes that the exception to the 
Administrative Procedure Act to adopt a ``substantive rule which . . . 
relieves a restriction'' supports its recognition of the public 
interest served by its grant of this waiver. The Commission therefore 
finds it in the public interest to waive the annual reporting 
requirements for service providers.
    26. The Commission also provides for a transition for the revised 
website and data retention obligations. Thirty days following 
publication in the Federal Register of a notice that OMB has approved 
the information collection requirements related to the new website 
posting rule, service providers will be required to post and retain the 
prescribed handset model information. This information will include 
posting information on all handsets currently offered, retaining 
information on handsets previously offered starting January 1, 2018 and 
thereafter, as well as either posting information on handsets 
previously offered starting on January 1, 2018 or providing a link to 
the GARI website with previously offered handset information.
    27. Per the new 24-month handset history rule, the number of months 
of historical handset information providers must post to the website 
and retain will increase until it reaches 24 months in January 2020, at 
which time providers will no longer have an obligation to retain or 
post data from January 2018. Until the revised rule takes effect, 
providers must still meet current website requirements and post an 
ongoing list of all hearing aid-compatible models that they currently 
offer, the ratings of those models, and an explanation of the rating 
system, as well as other information about handset functionality 
levels, and update the website information within thirty days of any 
relevant change.
    28. The Commission finds that this website and data retention 
transition period and the FCC Form 655 waiver affords service providers 
time to compile the requisite information and make the necessary 
changes to their websites and internal compliance processes. This 
schedule appropriately balances service providers' need for time to 
collect the information that will be required with the public's 
interest in maintaining a steady flow of handset information. By having 
the revised certification and website rule become effective at the same 
time, they work in tandem to ensure compliance with the Commission's 
wireless hearing aid compatibility rules in 2018 and subsequent years.
    29. Amendments to Sec.  20.19(e), Sec.  20.19(h), and Sec.  
20.19(i) contain new or modified information collection requirements 
subject to the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, Public Law 104-13, that 
are not effective until approved by the Office of Management and Budget 
(OMB). The Commission will publish a document in the Federal Register 
announcing the effective date once OMB approves.

[[Page 63102]]

II. Procedural Matters

A. Final Regulatory Flexibility Analysis

    30. As required by the Regulatory Flexibility Act of 1980, as 
amended (RFA), an Initial Regulatory Flexibility Analysis (IRFA) was 
incorporated in the Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (NPRM), released in 
September 2017. The Commission sought written public comment on the 
proposals in the NPRM, including comment on the IRFA. The comments 
received are addressed below in section 2. This present Final 
Regulatory Flexibility Analysis (FRFA) conforms to the RFA.
1. Need for, and Objectives of, the Proposed Rules
    31. In the Report and Order, the Commission modifies its wireless 
hearing aid compatibility rules, eliminates unnecessary and outdated 
reporting requirements, and improves its collection of information 
regarding the status of hearing aid-compatible handsets. The Commission 
finds that many of the benefits of annual status reporting by service 
providers have been realized and increasingly have become outweighed by 
the burdens that such information collection places on these entities. 
The Commission's new streamlined approach will continue to serve the 
underlying purposes of the Commission's annual reporting requirements 
without the burdens associated with that filing.
    32. Specifically, the Commission waives the requirement for service 
provides to file the FCC Form 655 annual filing by January 15, 2019 and 
eliminates the requirement in subsequent years. Under the Commission's 
new approach, only wireless device manufacturers will continue to be 
obligated to file FCC Form 655 by July 15 of each calendar year. Next, 
the Commission amends its existing website requirements to ensure that 
consumers have access to the most up-to-date and useful information 
about the hearing aid compatibility of the handset models offered by 
service providers, and the Commission has sufficient information to 
verify compliance with the benchmark requirements. Only the most 
critical pieces of information currently submitted as part of the FCC 
Form 655 must continue to be made available on service providers' 
websites. The Commission will also require the service providers to 
file a simple, new, annual certification to enhance the ability of the 
Commission to enforce the hearing aid compatibility rules. The 
Commission also requires service providers to retain data regarding 
handsets no longer offered to verify compliance with its rules.
    33. This new light-touch regulatory approach will enable the 
Commission to fulfill its responsibilities and objectives for wireless 
hearing aid compatibility. By requiring all service providers to post 
consistent content and information on their publicly available 
websites, the Commission ensures that consumers can access the 
information they need about the hearing aid compatibility of the 
handsets being offered. This website information will also allow the 
Commission to evaluate compliance with the relevant benchmarks and 
other hearing aid compatibility provisions in its rules. In addition to 
being able to verify compliance with its rules when necessary, the 
Commission will also be able to monitor the overall status of access to 
hearing aid-compatible handsets. The Commission's ability to verify and 
enforce compliance and monitor industry developments will also be 
served by requiring all service providers to annually file a 
certification stating whether or not they are in compliance with the 
Commission's hearing aid compatibility provisions.
2. Summary of Significant Issues Raised by Public Comments in Response 
to the IRFA
    34. There were no comments filed that specifically addressed the 
rules and policies proposed in the IRFA.
3. Response to Comments by the Chief Counsel for Advocacy of the Small 
Business Administration
    35. Pursuant to the Small Business Jobs Act of 2010, which amended 
the RFA, the Commission is required to respond to any comments filed by 
the Chief Counsel for Advocacy of the Small Business Administration 
(SBA), and to provide a detailed statement of any change made to the 
proposed rules as a result of those comments.
    36. The Chief Counsel did not file any comments in response to the 
proposed rules in this proceeding.
4. Description and Estimate of the Number of Small Entities to Which 
the Rules Will Apply
    37. 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 rules adopted herein. 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 the Small Business 
Act. A ``small business concern'' is one which: (1) Is independently 
owned and operated; (2) is not dominant in its field of operation; and 
(3) satisfies any additional criteria established by the SBA.
    38. Small Businesses, Small Organizations, Small Governmental 
Jurisdictions. The Commission's actions, over time, may affect small 
entities that are not easily categorized at present. The Commission 
therefore describe here, at the outset, three broad groups of small 
entities that could be directly affected herein. First, while there are 
industry specific size standards for small businesses that are used in 
the regulatory flexibility analysis, according to data from the SBA's 
Office of Advocacy, in general a small business is an independent 
business having fewer than 500 employees. These types of small 
businesses represent 99.9% of all businesses in the United States which 
translates to 28.8 million businesses.
    39. Next, the type of small entity described as a ``small 
organization'' is generally ``any not-for-profit enterprise which is 
independently owned and operated and is not dominant in its field.'' 
Nationwide, as of August 2016, there were approximately 356,494 small 
organizations based on registration and tax data filed by nonprofits 
with the Internal Revenue Service (IRS).
    40. Finally, the small entity described as a ``small governmental 
jurisdiction'' is defined generally as ``governments of cities, 
counties, towns, townships, villages, school districts, or special 
districts, with a population of less than fifty thousand.'' U.S. Census 
Bureau data from the 2012 Census of Governments indicate that there 
were 90,056 local governmental jurisdictions consisting of general 
purpose governments and special purpose governments in the United 
States. Of this number there were 37,132 General purpose governments 
(county, municipal and town or township) with populations of less than 
50,000 and 12,184 Special purpose governments (independent school 
districts and special districts) with populations of less than 50,000. 
The 2012 U.S. Census Bureau data for most types of governments in the 
local government category show that the majority of these governments 
have populations of less than 50,000. Based on this data the Commission 
estimates that at least 49,316 local government jurisdictions fall in 
the category of ``small governmental jurisdictions.''
    41. Radio and Television Broadcasting and Wireless Communications 
Equipment Manufacturing. This industry comprises

[[Page 63103]]

establishments primarily engaged in manufacturing radio and television 
broadcast and wireless communications equipment, including unlicensed 
devices. Examples of products made by these establishments are: 
Transmitting and receiving antennas, cable television equipment, GPS 
equipment, pagers, cellular phones, mobile communications equipment, 
radio and television studio and broadcasting equipment. The Small 
Business Administration has established a size standard for this 
industry of 750 employees or less. U.S. Census data for 2012, shows 
that 841 establishments operated in this industry in that year. Of that 
number, 828 establishments operated with fewer than 1,000 employees, 7 
establishments operated with between 1,000 and 2,499 employees and 6 
establishments operated with 2,500 or more employees. Based on this 
data, the Commission concludes that a majority of manufacturers in this 
industry is small.
    42. Part 15 Handset Manufacturers. The Commission has not developed 
a definition of small entities applicable to unlicensed communications 
handset manufacturers. The SBA category of Radio and Television 
Broadcasting and Wireless Communications Equipment Manufacturing is the 
closest NAICS code category for Part 15 Handset Manufacturers. The 
Radio and Television Broadcasting and Wireless Communications Equipment 
Manufacturing industry is comprised of establishments primarily engaged 
in manufacturing radio and television broadcast and wireless 
communications equipment. Examples of products made by these 
establishments are: Transmitting and receiving antennas, cable 
television equipment, GPS equipment, pagers, cellular phones, mobile 
communications equipment, and radio and television studio and 
broadcasting equipment.'' The SBA has developed a small business size 
standard for Radio and Television Broadcasting and Wireless 
Communications Equipment Manufacturing, as firms having 750 or fewer 
employees. U.S. Census data for 2012, shows that 841 establishments 
operated in this industry in that year. Of that number, 828 
establishments operated with fewer than 1,000 employees, 7 
establishments operated with between 1,000 and 2,499 employees and 6 
establishments operated with 2,500 or more employees. Thus, under this 
size standard, the majority of firms can be considered small.
    43. Wireless Telecommunications Carriers (except Satellite). This 
industry comprises establishments engaged in operating and maintaining 
switching and transmission facilities to provide communications via the 
airwaves. Establishments in this industry have spectrum licenses and 
provide services using that spectrum, such as cellular phone services, 
paging services, wireless internet access, and wireless video 
services.'' The appropriate size standard under SBA rules is for the 
category Wireless Telecommunications Carriers (except Satellite) is 
that a business is small if it has 1,500 or fewer employees. For this 
industry, U.S. Census data for 2012 shows that there were 967 firms 
that operated for the entire year. Of this total, 955 firms had 
employment of 999 or fewer employees and 12 had employment of 1000 
employees or more. Thus, under this category and the associated size 
standard, the Commission estimates that the majority of wireless 
telecommunications carriers (except satellite) are small entities.
    44. The Commission's own data--available in its Universal Licensing 
System--indicate that, as of October 25, 2016, there are 280 Cellular 
licensees that will be affected by the Commission's actions here. The 
Commission does not know how many of these licensees are small, as the 
Commission does not collect that information for these types of 
entities. Similarly, according to Commission data, 413 carriers 
reported that they were engaged in the provision of wireless telephony, 
including cellular service, Personal Communications Service (PCS), and 
Specialized Mobile Radio (SMR) Telephony services. Of these, an 
estimated 261 have 1,500 or fewer employees and 152 have more than 
1,500 employees. Thus, using available data, the Commission estimates 
that the majority of wireless firms can be considered small.
    45. Also included in this classification is Personal Radio 
Services, which provide short-range, low power radio for personal 
communications, radio signaling, and business communications not 
provided for in other services. The Personal Radio Services include 
spectrum licensed under part 95 of the Commission's rules. These 
services include Citizen Band Radio Service (``CB''), General Mobile 
Radio Service (``GMRS''), Radio Control Radio Service (``R/C''), Family 
Radio Service (``FRS''), Wireless Medical Telemetry Service (``WMTS''), 
Medical Implant Communications Service (``MICS''), Low Power Radio 
Service (``LPRS''), and Multi-Use Radio Service (``MURS''). The 
Commission notes that many of the licensees in these services are 
individuals, and thus are not small entities. In addition, due to the 
mostly unlicensed and shared nature of the spectrum utilized in many of 
these services, the Commission lacks direct information upon which to 
base a more specific estimation of the number of small entities under 
an SBA definition that might be directly affected by its action.
    46. Wireless Resellers. The SBA has not developed a small business 
size standard specifically for Wireless Resellers. The SBA category of 
Telecommunications Resellers is the closest NAICS code category for 
wireless resellers. The Telecommunications Resellers industry comprises 
establishments engaged in purchasing access and network capacity from 
owners and operators of telecommunications networks and reselling wired 
and wireless telecommunications services (except satellite) to 
businesses and households. Establishments in this industry resell 
telecommunications; they do not operate transmission facilities and 
infrastructure. Mobile virtual network operators (MVNOs) are included 
in this industry. Under the SBA's size standard, such a business is 
small if it has 1,500 or fewer employees. U.S. Census data for 2012 
shows that 1,341 firms provided resale services during that year. Of 
that number, all operated with fewer than 1,000 employees. Thus, under 
this category and the associated small business size standard, the 
majority of these resellers can be considered small entities.
5. Description of Projected Reporting, Recordkeeping, and Other 
Compliance Requirements for Small Entities
    47. In the Report and Order, the Commission is eliminating a 
substantial reporting requirement that all service providers--large and 
small--argue is burdensome and unnecessary. The Commission finds that 
as the percentage of hearing aid-compatible handsets offered by service 
providers increases, the burden of the annual reporting requirement 
outweighs its usefulness as a monitoring and compliance tool. The 
Commission has determined that annual hearing aid compatibility status 
reports show a near universal compliance with the Commission's hearing 
aid compatibility requirements. Further, the Commission finds that the 
information that service providers submit as part of their FCC Form 655 
filing requirement is duplicative of information that wireless device 
manufacturers are already providing and will continue to provide to the 
Commission in their annual filings. By eliminating the FCC

[[Page 63104]]

Form 655 filing requirement for all service providers, the Commission 
eliminates an unnecessary and outdated reporting requirement and 
streamlines its collection of information regarding the status of 
hearing aid-compatible handsets. In addition, the Commission finds that 
the elimination of the reporting requirement will allow service 
providers to utilize the cost savings in time and money to maintain and 
improve their websites and other outreach materials that are more 
readily accessible to consumers.
    48. While the Commission is eliminating a reporting requirement 
that all service providers argue should be eliminated, the Commission's 
new light-touch regulatory approach will continue to allow it to 
fulfill its responsibilities and objectives for wireless hearing aid 
compatibility. Service providers will continue to have to meet relevant 
hearing aid compatibility handset benchmarks and comply with product 
labeling and disclosure requirements. Further, service providers will 
have to continue to post certain information about their handsets on 
their publicly accessible websites along with certain information that 
they previously included as part of their FCC Form 655 annual reporting 
requirement. The Commission is not prescribing a standard template for 
posting this information on their websites and the Commission finds 
that service providers may rely on information that device 
manufacturers included in their FCC Form 655 filings as a safe harbor. 
The record in this proceeding shows that some service providers already 
post some of this information to their websites and both large and 
small service providers support the use of web posting as an 
alternative to the FCC Form 655 filing requirement. Service providers 
will also be required to retain information regarding past handsets 
offered.
    49. In addition to web posting and data retention requirements, the 
Commission is requiring all service providers to certify whether or not 
the provider is in full compliance with the Commission's hearing aid 
compatibility provisions and if they are not, a requirement to explain 
why. This requirement includes a short statement and information about 
who is making the certification. Commenters in the proceeding supported 
replacing the annual filing requirement with a certification 
requirement. The Commission does not anticipate that it will be 
difficult or burdensome for service providers to gather and post 
information on their website or to make the required certification. 
While the Commission is eliminating FCC Form 655 reporting requirements 
for all service providers, the Commission is not eliminating the 
requirement that they continue to meet applicable deployment benchmarks 
and maintain compliance with all other hearing aid compatibility 
provisions. Therefore, all service providers would likely need to 
maintain information demonstrating compliance with the rules in the 
normal course of business and posting this information to their 
websites and making the required certification should only impose a 
minimal additional incremental burden and, and, be substantially less 
than the burden associated with filing FCC Form 655 each year.
6. Steps Proposed To Minimize Significant Economic Impact on Small 
Entities, and Significant Alternatives Considered
    50. The RFA requires an agency to describe any significant 
alternatives that it has considered in reaching its approach, which may 
include the following four alternatives (among others): ``(1) the 
establishment of differing compliance or reporting requirements or 
timetables that take into account the resources available to small 
entities; (2) the clarification, consolidation, or simplification of 
compliance and reporting requirements under the rule for such small 
entities; (3) the use of performance rather than design standards; and 
(4) an exemption from coverage of the rule, or any part thereof, for 
such small entities.''
    51. The Commission considered but rejected more burdensome 
compliance requirements. For instance, the Commission considered 
retaining but streamlining the information that is collected in the FCC 
Form 655. The Commission found that this approach would only result in 
a minimal reduction of regulatory burdens for service providers. Given 
the passage of time and the current state of availability of 
information about handset hearing aid compatibility, the burden of 
collecting the information necessary to fill out the form and file it, 
the Commission found that even in a streamlined format the benefit of 
filing the form was not outweighed by any benefit to consumers or the 
Commission. The Commission determined that streamlining the form will 
only result in a minimal reduction of regulatory burden with no 
corresponding benefit to the public interest. As a result, the 
Commission rejected the solution of streamlining the form and 
continuing the requirement that service providers file the form on an 
annual basis.
    52. The Commission also chose to make the elimination of the FCC 
Form 655 reporting requirement for service providers effective 30 days 
after publication of the rule in the Federal Register. Therefore, 
service providers will benefit from the Commission's new rules almost 
immediately while the new website posting, and certification 
requirements will be effective 30 days following notice of OMB approval 
of the relevant information collection requirements. This approach 
affords service providers sufficient time to make any necessary 
preparations required by the new certification approach.
7. Report to Congress
    53. The Commission will send a copy of the Report and Order, 
including this FRFA, in a report to Congress pursuant to the 
Congressional Review Act. In addition, the Commission will send a copy 
of the Report and Order, including this FRFA, to the Chief Counsel for 
Advocacy of the SBA. A copy of the Report and Order and FRFA (or 
summaries thereof) also will be published in the Federal Register.

B. Paperwork Reduction Act

    54. The requirements in revised section 20.19(e), (h) and (i) 
constitute new or modified collections subject to the Paperwork 
Reduction Act of 1995 (PRA), Public Law 104-13. They will be submitted 
to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) for review under section 
3507(d) of the PRA. OMB, the general public, and other Federal agencies 
are invited to comment on the new information collection requirements 
contained in this proceeding. This document will be submitted to OMB 
for review under section 3507(d) of the PRA. In addition, the 
Commission notes that, pursuant to the Small Business Paperwork Relief 
Act of 2002, it previously sought, but did not receive, specific 
comment on how the Commission might further reduce the information 
collection burden for small business concerns with fewer than 25 
employees. The Commission describes impacts that might affect small 
businesses, which includes more businesses with fewer than 25 
employees, in the Final Regulatory Flexibility Analysis in Appendix C.

C. Congressional Review Act

    55. The Commission will include a copy of this Report and Order in 
a report to be sent to Congress and the Government Accountability 
Office

[[Page 63105]]

pursuant to the Congressional Review Act, see 5 U.S.C. 801(a)(1)(A).

III. Ordering Clauses

    56. Accordingly, it is ordered, pursuant to sections 4(i), 303(r), 
and 710 of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended, 47 U.S.C. 
154(i), 303(r), and 610, this Report and Order is hereby adopted.
    57. It is further ordered that Part 20 of the Commission's rules is 
amended as set forth in Appendix B.
    58. It is further ordered that the amendments of the Commission's 
rules as set forth in Appendix B are adopted, effective thirty days 
from the date of publication in the Federal Register. Section 20.19, 
paragraphs (e), (h) and (i) contain new or modified information 
collection requirements that require review by the OMB under the PRA. 
The Commission directs the Bureau to announce the compliance date for 
those information collections in a document published in the Federal 
Register after the Commission receives OMB approval and directs the 
Bureau to cause section 20.19(m) to be revised accordingly.
    59. It is further ordered that, pursuant to the authority of 
section 4(i) of the Communications Act, as amended, 47 U.S.C. 154(i), 
and section 1.3 of the Commission's rules, 47 CFR 1.3, the requirements 
of section 20.19(i) of the Commission's rules, 47 CFR 20.19(i), are 
waived to the extent described herein.
    60. It is further ordered that the Commission's Consumer & 
Governmental Affairs Bureau, Reference Information Center, shall send a 
copy of this Report and Order, including the Final Regulatory 
Flexibility Analysis, to the Chief Counsel for Advocacy of the SBA.

List of Subjects in 47 CFR Part 20

    Communications common carriers, Communications equipment, Radio.

Federal Communications Commission.
Katura Jackson,
Federal Register Liaison, Office of the Secretary.

Final Rules

    For the reasons set forth in the preamble, part 20 of title 47 of 
the Code of Federal Regulations is amended as follows:

PART 20--COMMERCIAL MOBILE RADIO SERVICES

0
1. The authority citation for part 20 continues to read as follows:

    Authority:  47 U.S.C. 151, 152(a), 154(i), 157, 160, 201, 214, 
222, 251(e) 301, 302, 303, 303(b), 303(r), 307, 307(a), 309, 
309(j)(3), 316, 316(a), 332, 610, 615, 615a, 615b, 615c, unless 
otherwise noted.


0
2. Section 20.19 is amended by revising paragraphs (c)(4)(ii), 
(d)(4)(ii), (e)(1)(i), (h), (i)(1), (i)(3), and (i)(4), and adding 
paragraph (m) to read as follows:


Sec.  20.19  Hearing aid-compatible mobile handsets.

* * * * *
    (c) * * *
    (4) * * *
    (ii) Offering models with differing levels of functionality. Each 
service provider must offer its customers a range of hearing aid-
compatible models with differing levels of functionality (e.g., 
operating capabilities, features offered, prices). Each provider may 
determine the criteria for determining these differing levels of 
functionality.
    (d) * * *
    (4) * * *
    (ii) Offering models with differing levels of functionality. Each 
service provider must offer its customers a range of hearing aid-
compatible models with differing levels of functionality (e.g., 
operating capabilities, features offered, prices). Each provider may 
determine the criteria for determining these differing levels of 
functionality.
    (e) De minimis exception. (1)(i) Manufacturers or service providers 
that offer two or fewer digital wireless handsets in an air interface 
in the United States are exempt from the requirements of this section 
in connection with that air interface, except with regard to the 
reporting and certification requirements in paragraph (i) of this 
section. Service providers that obtain handsets only from manufacturers 
that offer two or fewer digital wireless handset models in an air 
interface in the United States are likewise exempt from the 
requirements of this section other than paragraph (i) of this section 
in connection with that air interface.
* * * * *
    (h) Website and record retention requirements--(1) Each 
manufacturer and service provider that operates a publicly-accessible 
website must make available on its website a list of all hearing aid-
compatible models currently offered, the ratings of those models, and 
an explanation of the rating system. Each service provider must also 
specify on its website, based on the levels of functionality and rating 
that the service provider has defined, the level that each hearing aid-
compatible model falls under, as well as an explanation of how the 
functionality of the handsets varies at the different levels. Each 
service provider must also include on its website: A list of all non-
hearing aid-compatible models currently offered, including the level of 
functionality that each of those models falls under, an explanation of 
how the functionality of the handsets varies at the different levels as 
well as a link to the current FCC web page containing information about 
the wireless hearing aid compatibility rules and service providers' 
obligations. Each service provider must also include the marketing 
model name/number(s) and FCC ID number of each hearing aid-compatible 
and non-hearing aid-compatible model currently offered.
    (2) Service providers must maintain on their website either:
    (i) A link to a third-party website as designated by the Commission 
or Wireless Telecommunications Bureau with information regarding 
hearing aid-compatible and non-hearing aid-compatible handset models; 
or
    (ii) A clearly marked list of hearing aid-compatible handset models 
that are no longer offered if the calendar month/year that model was 
last offered is within 24 months of the current calendar month/year and 
was last offered in January 2018 or later along with the information 
listed in paragraph (h)(1) of this section for each hearing aid-
compatible handset.
    (3) If the Wireless Telecommunications Bureau determines that the 
third-party website has been eliminated or is not updated in a timely 
manner, it may select another website or require service providers to 
comply with paragraph (h)(2)(ii) of this section.
    (4) The information on the website must be updated within 30 days 
of any relevant changes, and any website pages containing information 
so updated must indicate the day on which the update occurred.
    (5) Service providers must maintain internal records including the 
ratings, if applicable, of all hearing aid-compatible and non-hearing 
aid-compatible models no longer offered (if the calendar month/year 
that model was last offered is within 24 months of the current calendar 
month/year and was last offered in January 2018 or later); for models 
no longer offered (if the calendar month/year that model was last 
offered is within 24 months of the current calendar month/year), the 
calendar months and years each hearing aid-compatible and non-hearing 
aid-compatible model was first and last offered; and the marketing 
model name/number(s) and FCC ID number of each hearing aid-compatible 
and non-hearing aid-compatible model no longer offered (if the calendar 
month/year that model was last offered is within 24 months of

[[Page 63106]]

the current calendar month/year and was last offered in January 2018 or 
later).
    (i) Reporting and certification requirements--(1) Reporting and 
certification dates. Manufacturers shall submit reports on efforts 
toward compliance with the requirements of this section on an annual 
basis on July 15. Service providers shall submit certifications on 
their compliance with the requirements of this section by January 15 of 
each year. Information in each report and certification must be up-to-
date as of the last day of the calendar month preceding the due date of 
each report and certification.
* * * * *
    (3) Content of service provider certifications. Certifications 
filed by service providers must include:
    (i) The name of the signing executive and contact information;
    (ii) The company(ies) covered by the certification;
    (iii) The FCC Registration Number (FRN);
    (iv) If the service provider is subject to paragraph (h) of this 
section, the website address of the page(s) containing the required 
information regarding handset models;
    (v) The percentage of handsets offered that are hearing aid-
compatible (providers will derive this percentage by determining the 
number of hearing aid-compatible handsets offered across all air 
interfaces during the year divided by the total number of handsets 
offered during the year); and
    (vi) The following language:

    I am a knowledgeable executive [of company x] regarding 
compliance with the Federal Communications Commission's wireless 
hearing aid compatibility requirements at a wireless service 
provider covered by those requirements.
    I certify that the provider was [(in full compliance/not in full 
compliance)] [choose one] at all times during the applicable time 
period with the Commission's wireless hearing aid compatibility 
deployment benchmarks and all other relevant wireless hearing aid 
compatibility requirements.
    The company represents and warrants, and I certify by this 
declaration under penalty of perjury pursuant to 47 CFR 1.16 that 
the above certification is consistent with 47 CFR 1.17, which 
requires truthful and accurate statements to the Commission. The 
company also acknowledges that false statements and 
misrepresentations to the Commission are punishable under Title 18 
of the U.S. Code and may subject it to enforcement action pursuant 
to Sections 501 and 503 of the Act.

    (vii) If the company selected that it was not in full compliance, 
an explanation of which wireless hearing aid compatibility requirements 
it was not in compliance with, when the non-compliance began and (if 
applicable) ended with respect to each requirement.
    (4) Format. The Wireless Telecommunications Bureau is delegated 
authority to approve or prescribe formats and methods for submission of 
the reports and certifications required by this section. Any format 
that the Bureau may approve or prescribe shall be made available on the 
Bureau's website.
* * * * *
    (m) Compliance date. Paragraphs (e), (h), and (i) of this section 
contain new or modified information-collection and recordkeeping 
requirements adopted in FCC 18-167. Compliance with these information-
collection and recordkeeping requirements will not be required until 
after approval by the Office of Management and Budget. The Commission 
will publish a document in the Federal Register announcing that 
compliance date and revising this paragraph accordingly.
[FR Doc. 2018-26037 Filed 12-6-18; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 6712-01-P