WPC1 2MBVRKZ3|n 7jC:, Xj\  P6G;XP"i~'^:DPddDDDdp4D48dddddddddd88pppX|pDL|pp||D8D\dDXdXdXDdd88d8ddddDL8ddddX`(`lD4l\DDD4DDDDDDDDd8XXXXXX|X|X|X|XD8D8D8D8ddddddddddXdbdddpdXXXXXlX~|X|X|X|XdddldldD8DdDDDdplld|8|P|D|D|8dvddddDDDpLpLpLpl|T|8|\ddddddl|X|X|Xd|DdpL|Dd~4ddC$CWxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxNHxxH\dDXddddd8@d<@d<DDXXdDDxddzHxxHvppDXd<"dxtldpxxdHP LaserJet 4M (PCL)HPLA4MPC.PRSXj\  P6G;\&ZXP2  <K3|n Times New RomanTimes New Roman BoldTimes New Roman Italic"i~'^:DPddDDDdp4D48dddddddddd88pppX|pDL|pp||D8D\dDXdXdXDdd88d8ddddDL8ddddX`(`lD4l\DDD4DDDDDDDDd8XXXXXX|X|X|X|XD8D8D8D8ddddddddddXdbdddpdXXXXXlX~|X|X|X|XdddldldD8DdDDDdplld|8|P|D|D|8dvddddDDDpLpLpLpl|T|8|\ddddddl|X|X|Xd|DdpL|Dd~4ddC$CWxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxNHxxH\dDXddddd8@d<@d<DDXXdDDxddzHxxHvppDXd<"dxtldpxxd2w ZR Kv HP LaserJet 4M (PCL)HPLA4MPC.PRSXj\  P6G;\&ZXP"i~'^:DpddȨDDDdp4D48ddddddddddDDpppd|Ld|pȐD8DtdDdpXpXDdp8Dp8pdppXLDpdddXP,PhD4htDDD4DDDDDDdDp8dddddȐXXXXXJ8J8J8J8pddddppppddpddddzpdddXXhXXXXXdddhdptL8LpLDLpphhp8ZDP8pppddƐXXXpLpLpLphfDtppppppȐhXXXpDppLDd4ddC6CWxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxNHxxHjdDdddddda݅@  I.   X(# 2*"!#K#K&KM(SubheadingSubheading"0\ E A.  "i~'^#)0<)>F)))))))))<)C"VV5VYO5O5O5O5^<^<^<^>^<^C^F.".C.).CaC>>^CO"O6O)O0O"VCVVCVC^<^O=O)OFVCVCVCVCVCVCxVV>O5O5O5VCO)VCC.O)V<X<<( (WTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxN+HH+@<)<<<<$b R X-ԍ MO&O at paragraph 12.> Based on this reasoning, the Commission subsequently adopted rules expanding the requirement of hearing aidcompatible telephones not only to the workplace, but also to  X-confined settings and to hotels and motels.S% R XV"-ԍ R&O, 7 FCC Rcd 3472 (1992) at paragraph 1.S " 9%0*(("Ԍ X-ԙ19.xWe tentatively conclude that the Committee's recommendations are consistent with the statute and the Commission's previous decisions. In general, the Committee recommends that the Commission retain its rules regarding the types of telephones defined as "emergency use telephones." The Committee's recommendations, when compared with previous  X-regulations, generally do not change the types of telephones to be made hearing aid X-compatible, but change only  when those telephones are to be made hearing aidcompatible. The only other significant departure from the Commission's previous rules is that the Committee also proposes that, under certain circumstances, the Commission consider whether  XH-to require that newly acquired and replacement telephones have volume control.m&HR X -ԍ See paragraph 54 below for a discussion of volume control proposals.m  X -20.xIn considering the requirements for both hearing aidcompatibility and volume control, the Committee weighed the costs and benefits to all telephone users, including persons with  X -and without hearing disabilities.?' yR X-ԍ 47 U.S.C.  610(e).? Representatives of large and small purchasers of telephone equipment described to the Committee both the cost and effort that would be incurred as a result of the proposed regulations. Representatives of persons with hearing disabilities described the difficulties persons with hearing disabilities now experience when telephones are not hearing aidcompatible. Consumer representatives also described the increased access to telephone service such persons would receive if the Committee's proposed regulations were implemented. Representatives of equipment manufacturers and industry standardssetters reviewed for the Committee the cost and implementation issues posed by design, manufacture  X4-and distribution of equipment recommendations made by the Committee.d(4*R X-ԍ For a list of the Committee membership, see HACNRC9.d  X- 21. xThe HAC Act directs the Commission to take affirmative and specific steps to increase access to the public telephone network by persons with hearing disabilities. The Act states that "The Commission shall establish such regulations as are necessary to ensure reasonable  X-access to telephone service by persons with impaired hearing,"?)R XM-ԍ 47 U.S.C.  610(a).? and that "The Commission  X-shall establish or approve such technical standards as are required to enforce this section."B*R X -ԍ Id. at Section (c).B The House Report notes that the HAC Act "will allow the hearing impaired to eventually use  X|-virtually every telephone."@+|= R Xj$-ԍ House Report at page 3.@ The Congressional "findings" of the HAC Act state that "universal telephone service for hearingimpaired persons will lead to greater employment opportunities and increased productivity, " and that "to the fullest extent made possible by technology and medical science, hearingimpaired persons should have equal access to the"7 +0*(("  X-national telecommunications network.",R Xy-ԍ See Section 2 of Public Law 100394, the "Hearing Aid Compatibility Act of 1988," 102 Stat. 976, Aug. 16, 1988. Equivalent access also is discussed in the Senate Report, when it states that the Act "will help to eliminate the disparity between hearing aid  X-users and nonusers in obtaining access to the telephone network."A-bR X-ԍ Senate Report at page 7.A The Senate Report adds that "[P]assage of the Hearing Aid Compatibility Act of 1988 recognizes the policy established in the Communications Act of 1934 to 'make available, so far as possible, to all the people of the United States a rapid, efficient, . . . communication service with adequate  Xv-facilities at reasonable charges.' (47 U.S. C. 151)"2.vR X: -ԍ Id.2 The rules proposed here help fulfill the Commission's mandate under the HAC Act.  X1- B. xProposed Rule Regarding Workplaces  X -x 1. Proposed  68.112(b)(1)(A) General Language   xx x  X -22.x Discussion The first paragraph of the current Section 68.112(b)(1) states that telephones provided for emergency use, and hence required to be hearing aidcompatible, shall  X -include, inter alia, telephones in elevators, tunnels, and all workplace areas, including common areas. The Committee recommended modifying that language in several respects. First, workplace noncommon areas are addressed separately in recommended Section 68.112(b)(1)(B), discussed below at paragraph 24. Second, a new recommended Section 68.112(b)(1)(A) would generally exclude headsets from the category of wireline telephones covered by the hearing aidcompatibility rules. The Committee determined that headsets are a specialtyuse item which are less likely than the standard office telephones to be needed for emergency use. Some employees, however, such as airline reservation assistants, telemarketing employees, receptionists and telephone operators, need headsets to perform their duties. For this reason, the Committee further recommended that we amend Section 68.112(b)(1), to require that hearing aidcompatible headsets be provided to employees with hearing disabilities who need the headsets in their employment duty. Third, the Committee recommended other technical amendments to the existing language of Section 68.112(b)(1) to clarify the kinds of telephones to which it applies.  XN-23.x Comment Requested .  We tentatively agree with the Committee's reasoning that headsets are a specialtyuse item, not normally called upon for emergency use except when used by an employee in their employment. We tentatively find that, with the exception of the situation discussed in paragraph 22, headsets should not be included within the Section 68.112(b)(1) definition of "emergency use telephones." Therefore, we tentatively conclude  X-that the Committee's recommended Section 68.112(b)(1)(A), as stated in Appendix B, should be adopted as part of the Commission's rules. We seek comment on these proposed rules. In" .0*((" particular, we seek comment on whether to exclude headsets generally from the definition of wireline telephones.  X-x 2. Proposed  68.112(b)(1)(B) Implementation and Exemptions  X-24.x Discussion  The Committee recommended that we require that noncommon area workplace telephones generally be hearing aidcompatible by January 1, 2000. The Committee concluded that it is important to establish a date certain after which the public and persons with hearing disabilities could feel confident that most workplace telephones are hearing aidcompatible. The Committee recommended, however, that telephones purchased between January 1, 1985 through December 31, 1989, not be required to be hearing aidcompatible until January 1, 2005. The Committee concluded that this exception was needed to protect employers who purchased nonhearing aidcompatible telephones in the years immediately preceding the implementation of the Hearing Aid Compatibility Act of 1988 (HAC Act). The Committee determined that workplace establishment owners who purchased telephones immediately before the HAC Act should have more time to replace those telephones.  Xb-25.xThe Committee also recommended an exemption from coverage for workplace establishments with fewer than fifteen employees. The Committee noted that because small employers have smaller budgets, which can make installation of new telephones proportionately more burdensome for these employers, the burden of complying with the proposed hearing aidcompatibility regulations might fall disproportionately on them. Therefore, the Committee adopted the coverage cutoff standard used in the ADA, which requires compliance only by employers with fifteen or more employees. The total employment force of an establishment, not the number of employees an employer might have at a particular worksite, would determine whether that employer must comply with the proposed rules governing workplace telephones. While the Committee also adopted the  X|-ADA's definitions of "employee" and "employer,"/|R X-ԍ The ADA defines "employee" as "an individual employed by an employer," and "employer," in pertinent part, as "a person engaged in an industry affecting commerce who has 15 or more employees for each working day in each of 20 or more calendar weeks in the current or preceding calendar year, and any agent of such person...." 42 U.S.C.  12111. the Committee did not adopt the ADA's  Xe-exceptions to the definition of "employer."d0e4R XJ!-ԍ The ADA exempts "the United States, a corporation wholly owned by the government of the United States, or an Indian tribe; or a bonafide private membership club (other than a labor organization) that is exempt from taxation under section 501(c) of the Internal Revenue  X$-Code of 1986." Id.d Those exceptions would exempt, among others, the United States Government from compliance. The Committee believed that no employment organization, particularly the United States Government, should be excluded from an obligation to comply with the proposed rules if it has fifteen or more employees. "  00*((\"Ԍ X-ԙ26.x Comment Requested For the reasons given by the Committee, we tentatively  X-conclude that the Committee's recommended Section 68.112(b)(1)(B), as stated in Appendix B, should be adopted as part of the Commission's rules. Proposed Section 68.112(b)(1)(B) would set specific dates by which a workplace establishment's telephones generally must be hearing aidcompatible, but it would exempt workplace establishments with fewer than fifteen employees from the obligation to comply. Establishing specific dates would help employers know precisely when their obligations attach and to develop orderly plans for achieving compliance. The exemption for workplace establishments with fewer than fifteen employees appears reasonable because it acknowledges the potentially harsh burden compliance would impose on smaller workplace establishments; it would also make the proposed rule consistent with the treatment of small businesses in the ADA. We seek comment on these proposed rules. Specifically, we seek comment on whether requiring compliance in the years 2000 and 2005 reasonably balances the needs of both workplace establishments and the needs of persons with hearing disabilities. We also request comment on whether the fifteenemployee cutoff strikes a reasonable balance between the needs of persons with hearing disabilities and the burden compliance with our rules would impose on small businesses, and whether the definition of "employee" in this context is clear. We also seek comment on whether any employment establishment should be excluded from an obligation to comply with the proposed rules if it has fifteen or more employees.  X4-x 3. Proposed  68.112(b)(1)(C) Workstation Requirements    X-27.x Discussion Our current rules governing access to hearing aid compatible phones in the workplace state that "telephones made available to a hearing impaired employee for use by  X-that employee in his or her employment duty . . . shall be hearing aidcompatible . . . ."F1R XQ-ԍ 47 C.F.R.  68.112 (b)(1).F The Committee proposed that these rules be modified in two ways. First, as stated above, it recommended that we require employers to provide hearing aid compatible headsets to employees needing such headsets to perform employment duties. Second, the Committee recommended that the proposed regulation apply to all workplace establishments, regardless of the number of employees. Thus, even employers with fewer than fifteen employees would have to comply with this provision.  X - 28.x Comment Requested We tentatively conclude that the Committee's recommended  X -Section 68.112(b)(1)(C), as set forth in Appendix B, should be adopted as part of the Commission's rules, because of the likelihood that an employee with a hearing disability might need his or her own work telephone for an emergency purpose, regardless of the number of employees at that workplace. We seek comment on this proposed rule. "h$y10*((F#"Ԍ X-x 4.` ` Proposed  68.112(b)(1)(D) Rebuttable Presumption  X-29.x Discussion  The Committee noted that employers may have serious difficulty determining whether a particular telephone is hearing aidcompatible. The Committee found  X-that, because the Commission's rules require manufacturers to stamp either a serial number or  X-date of manufacture on terminal equipment, such as telephones,C2R X-ԍ 47 C.F.R.  68.300(b).C many telephones are not stamped with a date of manufacture. Therefore, an employer may not be able to determine readily whether a telephone is hearing aidcompatible. Employers may be able to trace telephone model and serial numbers to a manufacturer's records, but such a step requires time and administrative expense. The Committee noted that even if a dateofmanufacture is plainly stamped on a telephone, some vendors may occasionally distribute allegedly "complying" equipment that does not, in fact, comply with our Part 68 rules. The Committee also determined that accurate, portable devices to test a telephone for hearing aidcompatibility are not currently available. Existing portable devices cannot test to the  X -technical detail required by the Commission's rules.@3 yR X-ԍ 47 C.F.R.  68.316.@ This lack of specificity in testing led the Committee to conclude that a strict compliance rule might force employers to send large inventories of telephones to laboratories for testing at great expense.  Xb-30.xTo relieve the employer of the need to make this determination, the Committee proposed that there be a presumption that, after a particular date, every telephone is hearing aidcompatible. This presumption could be rebutted, but only on a telephonebytelephone basis, by anyone who identifies a particular telephone as being nonhearing aidcompatible. Once such a telephone has been identified, the employer would have to replace the telephone within fifteen working days with a telephone meeting the Commission's compatibility requirements. The Committee specified that its proposal would create no new right of entry by third parties to workplace premises and that the person making the identification must be someone present in the normal course of the establishment's business, legitimately on the  X-premises as an employee or invitee of the establishment.64*R Xn-ԍ Report at 18.6 Under the Committee's proposed rebuttable presumption, if the identifying individual was not satisfied with the subsequent actions of the employer, the individual could file a complaint under the normal hearing aid XN-compatibility enforcement procedures.g5NR X"-ԍ See 47 C.F.R.  68.414 and 47 U.S.C.  503(b)(5).g In recommending this presumption, the Committee considered the fact that by the proposed dates by which the new workplace hearing aidcompatibility compliance obligations would attach, the normal turnover of telephones would ensure that most workplace telephones would have been manufactured or imported after" 50*((y"  X-August 16, 1989, and thus would be hearing aidcompatible.+6R Xy-ԍ Section 68.4 of our rules requires that except for "secure" telephones, all wireline telephones manufactured or imported for use in the United States be hearing aidcompatible after August 16, 1989 (or August 16, 1991, in the case of cordless telephones). +   X-x  X-31.x Comment Requested We tentatively conclude that the Committee's proposal, as set  X-forth in proposed Section 68.112(b)(1)(D), in Appendix B, should be adopted as part of the Commission's rules. That section would establish a rebuttable presumption that, as of particular dates, workplace telephones are hearing aidcompatible. Such a presumption appears reasonable, because by the projected dates, normal telephone system replacement cycles would assure in most cases that all existing workplace telephones would be replaced with hearing aidcompatible telephones. The presumption would appear to relieve the burden on workplace establishments to test each telephone, while also protecting the needs of employees with hearing disabilities. We request comment on this proposed rule section.  X -  X -x 5.` ` Proposed  68.112(b)(1)(E) é Newly Acquired Telephones  X -32.x Discussion  The Committee recognized that when an establishment adds a telephone or replaces a telephone currently in use, an opportunity is created to substitute hearing aidcompatible equipment for nonhearing aidcompatible equipment without requiring  Xy-retrofitting.c7yKR Xu-ԍ See proposed Section 68.112(b)(1)(E) in Appendix B.c For this reason, the Committee recommended that we require that any newly acquired telephone be hearing aidcompatible. The Committee defined "newly acquired" as new, refurbished or secondhand telephones, including telephones from an establishment's stored inventory. The Committee would create an exception to this requirement for a replacement telephone taken from an establishment's inventory existing prior to the time of  X-the effective date of the proposed regulations.r8R X-ԍ See proposed Section 68.112(b)(1)(F) in Appendix B. r In the case of the exception, the establishment would be required to provide a hearing aidcompatible telephone only upon a bona fide request from anyone legitimately on the premises of the establishment, as an employee, guest or other invitee. The Committee defined "replacement" as "substituted with something else."  X- 33.xAs discussed more fully in paragraphs 54 through 57, the Committee recommended adding a volume control requirement that would apply only to newly acquired and replacement telephones. The Committee recommended that this mandatory volume control feature be phased in, as new telephones are acquired and as telephones in existing inventories are replaced. An establishment's decision to replace existing telephones, or to purchase new telephones, however, would remain voluntary, except in the two cases specified in paragraph 57. "80*(("Ԍ X-!34.xThe Committee reasoned that once an employer has decided, for whatever reason, to augment its inventory of telephones, or to replace one telephone currently in use with another, the increase in cost or effort to assure that the new or replacement telephone is hearing aidcompatible is not great. The Committee was also concerned that, without this provision, nonhearing aidcompatible telephones could be replaced continuously with similar equipment, thus preventing the development of a fully hearing aidcompatible workplace, an outcome counter to the intent of the HAC Act. The Committee determined that this provision governing newly acquired and replacement telephones should apply to those telephones replaced under the rebuttable presumption provisions of proposed Section 68.112(b)(1)(D), discussed above. Finally, the Committee recommended that the Commission exempt workplace establishments with fewer than fifteen employees from this rule, because compliance would impose a disproportionate burden on smaller workplace establishments, and because such an exemption would be consistent with the small business exception in the ADA.  X -"35.x Comment Requested We tentatively conclude that the Committee's recommendation  X-that newly acquired and replacement telephones be hearing aid compatiblei9R X -ԍ See proposed Section 68.112(b)(1)(E), in Appendix B.i should be adopted as part of the Commission's rules. As applied to newly acquired and replacement telephones, hearing aidcompatible refers to both the magnetic induction coil and to the volume control methods of making telephones hearing aidcompatible, although the requirement of volume  X4-control is delayed one year.:4yR X^-ԍ The one year delay associated with the proposed volume control requirement is  XG-discussed infra at paragraph 54. The new acquisition or replacement of telephones is a natural opportunity to gradually convert the embedded base of workplace telephones from nonhearing aidcompatible to hearing aidcompatible. Without the rule, the nonhearing aidcompatible portions of an employer's inventory will be indefinitely perpetuated. We request comment on this proposed rule. x  X-x 6.` ` Proposed  68.112(b)(1)(F) é Replacements From Existing Stored Inventory  X-  X|-#36.x Discussion The Committee recommended that a different set of rules apply when replacement telephones are taken from an establishment's stored inventory of telephones existing at the time proposed regulations go into effect. Employer representatives on the Committee had expressed concern that without such provisions, an establishment's entire stored telephone inventory could become obsolete and unavailable for replacement use, even though the establishment, when it had accumulated the inventory, had no prior notice that replacement telephones had to be hearing aid compatible. "!:0*(( "Ԍ X-$37. The Committee recommended that an individual replacement telephone drawn from stored inventory, acquired prior to the effective date of the proposed rules, be hearing aidcompatible, but only if a person legitimately on the establishment's premises has made a  X-"bona fide" request that such a telephone be hearing aidcompatible.b;R X4-ԍ See proposed Section 68.112(b)(1)(F) in Appendix B.b The proposed rule would give no new third party a right to challenge the rebuttable presumption that a telephone  X-was hearing aidcompatible (i.e., that it has electromagnetic coil compatibility). The identification of the telephone and request for replacement by the individual must be "bona  X_-fide." The Committee added this requirement because Section 68.112(b)(1)(F) covers the period of time before the proposed dates by which time all workplace telephones must be  X1-hearing aidcompatible, i.e., from the effective date to January 1, 2000 or 2005, whichever  X -date is applicable.b< yR XD -ԍ See proposed Section 68.112(b)(1)(B) in Appendix B.b The words "bona fide" were added to help ensure that requests during  X -this period would be based on genuine need for a hearing aidcompatible telephone.2= *R X-ԍ Similar language was not added to Section 68.112(b)(1)(D) because by the time of the effective dates of that section, all workplace telephones presumably will be hearing aid X-compatible. See proposed Section 68.112(b)(1)(D) in Appendix B.2 As  X -with the recommended rules on newly acquired and replacement telephones,b> R XJ-ԍ See proposed Section 68.112(b)(1)(E) in Appendix B.b this section does not apply to workplace establishments with fewer than fifteen employees.  X -%38.x Comment Requested We tentatively conclude that the Committee's recommended  X-ruleb?^ R X-ԍ See proposed Section 68.112(b)(1)(F) in Appendix B.b for separate treatment of replacement telephones taken from stored inventory existing at the time the proposed rules become effective should be adopted as part of the Commission's rules. It appears that the cost of requiring an establishment to discard its inventory of telephones outweighs the benefit of early compliance with the hearing aidcompatibility requirement, unless there has been a bona fide need for such a telephone identified at the site of replacement. We request comment on this section.  X7-x` ` "7 ?0*(("Ԍ X-x 7.` ` Proposed  68.112(b)(1)(G) é Safe Harbor  x` `   X-&39.x Discussion  The Committee concluded that prior to January 1, 2000 (or January 1,  X-2005, in some cases),b@R X4-ԍ See proposed Section 68.112(b)(1)(B) in Appendix B.b the dates by which telephones must be hearing aid compatible, persons with hearing disabilities who are in the workplace still may need access to hearing aidcompatible telephones besides those in private offices or workplace common areas. Therefore, the Committee has recommended that we require the availability of at least one hearing aidcompatible telephone for emergency use on every floor of a workplace, whether that telephone is coinoperated, a common area telephone or a designated hearing aidcompatible telephone, wired or wireless. The manner of designation would be left to the employer, as would be the definition of what constitutes a workplace "floor."  X -'40.x Comment Requested We tentatively conclude that the Committee's recommended  X -ruleiA yR X-ԍ See proposed Section 68.112(b)(1)(F), in Appendix B.i to provide additional, interim hearing aidcompatible telephones to employees with hearing disabilities should be adopted as part of the Commission's rules, because without this requirement employees needing hearing aidcompatible telephones may be limited for several years to the use of only their workstation telephones in the case of emergencies. The requirement of an additional hearing aidcompatible telephone on each workplace floor appears to serve all employees in emergency situations, particularly employees with hearing disabilities. We request comment on this proposed rule.  X- C. xProposed Rule Regarding Confined Settings  X-x  X-(41.x Discussion  The Committee determined that it was important that confined setting  X-residents7B*R X-ԍ Confined settings are settings such as rooms in hospitals, residential health care facilities for senior citizens, and convalescent homes, in which the residents are not able to  X-come and go at their discretion. See existing  68.112(b)(3). 7 be able to rely on having room telephones, when provided by the establishment, that are hearing aidcompatible telephones. The Committee recommended that for confined setting establishments with fifty or more beds, the room telephones provided by the establishment must be hearing aidcompatible one year after the proposed rules are adopted. For confined setting establishments with fewer than fifty beds, the time period for compliance  Xe-is two years. The Committee did not recommend reliance on a rebuttable presumption in the case of confined settings because the residents are, by definition, confined to the setting, and therefore generally more vulnerable than employees in a workplace. In addition, confined setting occupants may be elderly or in ill health, which increases their vulnerability. "B0*(("Ԍ X-)42.xFor these same reasons, the Committee also did not recommend extending the date by which confined setting telephones purchased during the years 19851989 must be replaced  X-with hearing aidcompatible telephones.CR XK-ԍ Compare with proposed section 68.112(b)(1)(B)(ii) (noncommon area workplace telephones, purchased between 1985 and 1989, not required to be hearing aidcompatible until January 1, 2005). The Committee did not recommend that we exempt smaller confined setting establishments from compliance, as it had smaller workplace establishments. It did, however, recommend giving smaller confined setting establishments,  X-i.e., those with fewer than fifty beds, an extra year to comply. The Committee determined that smaller confined setting establishments are more likely to have smaller operating budgets and older telephone systems, making earlier compliance more difficult. The Committee reviewed and discussed confined setting industry information before reaching consensus that only confined setting establishments with fewer than fifty beds should have more time to comply.  X -*43.xThe Committee recommended that we require all newly acquired and replacement telephones in confined settings to be hearing aidcompatible (electromagnetic coil compatible) and have volume control, if the replacements or new acquisitions occur more than a year after the effective date of the proposed volume control rules. The Committee defined "newly acquired" as new, refurbished or secondhand telephones, including telephones from an  Xy-establishment's stored inventory.dDyKR Xu-ԍ See workplace discussion supra at paragraph 32.d  XK-+44.xThe Committee did not include "prisons" in its definition of confined settings because it found prisons to be distinct from other confined settings in their telecommunications requirements. Thus its recommendations concerning availability of hearing aidcompatible telephones in confined settings do not cover prisons. The workplace requirements of proposed Section 68.112(b)(1), however, would continue to apply to prisons. Thus, for example, replacement telephones in the workplace of prison employees would have to be hearing aidcompatible under the Committee's recommended rules.  X- x` `  hh  X-,45.x  The Committee determined that a confined setting establishment should not be responsible for assuring that a telephone installed and maintained by a patient or resident is hearing aidcompatible. The Committee recommended that, in this particular case, the patient or resident can better determine whether his or her telephone needs to be hearing aidcompatible. Similarly, the Committee excluded from its recommendations confined setting establishments that offer an alternative emergency signalling device, so long as the device is "available, working and monitored." The Committee added these words after reviewing the wording in provisions governing resident emergency call systems in health care facilities in the regulations of the U.S. Health and Human Services Department Health Care Finance"D0*(("  X-Administration.IER Xy-ԍ See 42 C.F.R.  483.70.I Enforcement of the recommended rules regarding confined settings would  X-be handled in the same manner as enforcement of other hearing aidcompatibility rules.gFyR X-ԍ See 47 C.F.R.  68.414 and 47 U.S.C.  503 (b)(5).g (#(#X  X--46.x Comment Requested We tentatively conclude that the Committee's recommendations governing telephones in confined settings, set forth in proposed Section 68.112(b)(3) in Appendix B, should be adopted as part of the Commission's rules because it is in the public interest to give confined setting residents with hearing disabilities the ability to make emergency communications afforded by the telephone. We request comment on the proposed rule and its underlying rationale. We seek comment on whether the cutoff at fifty beds is reasonable, whether omitting prisons from confined settings treatment is appropriate, and whether an alternative means of signalling lifethreatening or emergency situations provides reasonable access to emergency help. We also seek comment on whether the exemption for telephones installed and maintained by a patient or resident is appropriate.  X -  X -D. xProposed Rule Regarding Hotels and Motels  X- .47.x Discussion The Committee determined that all telephones in all hotel and motel rooms should be hearing aidcompatible, because occupants of hotel and motel rooms often are alone and dependent on telephones in their rooms in an emergency. Because hotel and motel occupants also are transient, they may be unfamiliar with other alert systems, or unable to hear or see them. The Committee determined that it would not recommend a rebuttable presumption that telephones in hotel or motel rooms were hearing aid compatible because someone who has legitimately requested a change in telephones might not be in position to determine if a change has been made, or to benefit from that change. Enforcement of the recommended rules regarding hotels and motels would be handled in the same manner as  X-enforcement of other hearing aidcompatibility rules.gG*R X-ԍ See 47 C.F.R.  68.414 and 47 U.S.C.  503 (b)(5).g  X-/48.xAs in the case of workplace and confined setting establishments, the Committee recommended that we set different implementation time tables for smaller and larger hotels and motels. The Committee again reasoned that smaller hotel and motel establishments, more likely to have smaller budgets and older telephone systems, would find early compliance more difficult. After reviewing industry information, the Committee established eighty guest rooms the cutoff for distinguishing between large and small establishments. The Committee also restricted its recommendations on hotel and motel regulations to guest rooms, rather than all rooms, which might otherwise have included general purpose rooms, such as banquet rooms. The Committee also confined its recommendations to establishments open to the general public for paid overnight accommodation. This latter clarification would include bed and breakfast establishments, but exclude hotel and motel accommodations open only to the"!G0*(( " military, or employment conference and training center accommodations. Military and civilian employment facilities, however, would be covered by the Committee's recommendations governing workplace establishments, addressing telephones used in an employee's line of duty.  X-049.xThe Committee recommended that the same general policy govern telephone replacement for hotel and motel establishments as for workplace and confined setting establishments, because telephone replacement offers an opportunity to install a telephone that is hearing aidcompatible. In the case of hotels and motels, however, the Committee adapted its recommendations to take into account the kinds of repair, renovation and new construction  X -activities that commonly occur in hotels and motels. The recommended rulebH R X -ԍ See proposed Section 68.112(b)(5)(B) in Appendix B.b states that a hearing aidcompatible telephone is required "if a hotel or motel room is renovated or newly constructed." The Committee determined that the rule should be interpreted in a manner similar to the public accommodation replacement, repair, renovation and construction  X -provisions of the ADA.HI yR X-ԍ See 42 U.S.C.  12183.H Thus, a general room renovation would require that the telephone in the room be made hearing aidcompatible, whether or not the hotel or motel had planned to upgrade or replace the telephone during the room renovation. However, for compliance requirements to apply, room changes need to involve more than painting the walls or changing pictures. The proposed rule also states that hearing aidcompatibility is required if a  XK-room telephone is replaced or is "substantially, internally repaired."bJK*R X&-ԍ See proposed Section 68.112(b)(5)(b) in Appendix B.b Internal telephone repairs require opening the instrument (either headset, handset or base) and repairing either the mechanical or electrical parts.  X-150.x  The current provision that requires ten percent of hotel and motel rooms to have  X-hearing aidcompatible telephonesEKR Xd-ԍ 47 C.F.R.  68.112(b)(5).E was not suspended by the Commission's 1993 Order. The Committee determined that sufficient time has elapsed since this requirement went into effect in 1992 to raise the percentage of hotel and motel room telephones that are hearing aid compatible to twenty percent. Thus it recommends that we require that at least twenty percent of all rooms in a hotel or motel have a hearing aid compatible telephone as soon as the rules we now propose would become effective. For most hotel and motel room telephones, the twenty percent requirement eventually would be superseded by the recommended requirement that all guest room telephones must be hearing aidcompatible. The Committee recommended an exception for hotel and motel establishments that have purchased telephones immediately before the effective date of the HAC Act. Instead, the Committee recommended that these hotel and motel establishments start with the standard twenty percent requirement, but increase the percentage of rooms with compliant telephones,"K0*((;" with full compliance achieved between the years 2000 to 2003, depending on the size of the establishment. The rules pertain to percentage of guest rooms, not to telephones. The Committee reached consensus on the year 2003, instead of, as in the case of workplace establishments, the year 2005, because it determined that hotel and motel occupants generally are more vulnerable in emergency circumstances, and that the recommended rules should reflect this difference.  X_-251.xCommittee members representing organizations of individuals with hearing disabilities stated that the current hotel and motel provision of rooms for individuals with hearing disabilities often are inadequate. They stated that the rooms containing hearing aidcompatible telephones often are already reserved or occupied, and that it is difficult to locate hotels and motels with adequate facilities to accommodate conference facilities for organizations representing persons with hearing disabilities. In light of this information, the Committee determined that the ten percent provision should be increased, and that hotels and motels should be required to reach one hundred percent guest room compatibility by the deadlines recommended by the Committee.  Xy-352.xSection 68.112(b)(5) of our unsuspended rules specifies a type of equipment that hotels  Xb-and motels can provide to fulfill the hearing aidcompatibility requirements.ZLbR X-ԍ 47 C.F.R.  68.112(b)(5)(ii), (iii).Z The suspended portions of Section 68.112(b)(5) categorize a hotel and motel establishment as small based upon the number of their employees. The Committee determined that the focus of the proposed regulations should be on accessibility, not particular technology, and that the number of guest rooms is a better measure of a hotel's size than is the number of employees. For these reasons, the Committee recommended that we delete references in our existing rules to particular types of technology, and that we not define a hotel or motel as small based upon the number of employees.  X-453.x Comment Requested We tentatively conclude that the Committee's  X|-recommendations governing hotels and motels, set forth in 68.112(b)(5), in Appendix B, should be adopted as part of the Commission's rules, because it would be in the public interest for travelers with hearing disabilities to have access to telephones in their rooms, particularly in emergencies. We also request comment on the cost of implementing this  X -proposed rule. "h$yL0*((F#"Ԍ X-ԙE. xProposed Rules Regarding Volume Control  X-x1. ` ` Committee Recommendations  X-554.x During its negotiations, the Committee determined that discussions and  X-recommendations concerning a volume control feature were within its CharterEMR X-ԍ  See Appendix A.E and Work  Xv-Program.?NvyR X -ԍ Report at Appendix 2.? Specifically, the Committee's Work Program required the Committee to analyze technology alternatives to electromagnetic coil hearing aidcompatibility retrofitting, and to  XH-define "Hearing Aid Compatible" and "telephones that should be HAC."MOH*R X# -ԍ Report at Appendix 2, items 3 and 8.M Central to the consensus reached by the Committee was its recommendation that the Commission would consider volume control in the same rulemaking as electromagnetic coil hearing aid X -compatibility.OP R X-ԍ See 47 C.F.R.  68.316.O Prior to considering volume control, the Committee was unable to reach consensus with respect to implementation dates for proposed hearing aidcompatibility requirements. By agreeing to recommend that the Commission propose volume control, however, industry representatives on the Committee were able to come to an agreement with representatives of persons with disabilities on a timetable for hearing aidcompatibility. The Committee also strongly recommended combining the issues of hearing aidcompatibility and volume control into a single proceeding because the Committee sought to provide establishments that would be affected by new hearing aidcompatibility or volume control requirements with sufficient notice of proposed rules, and with the opportunity to submit comments on the two issues within the same proceeding. Finally, the Committee considered the different types of hearing aid users who would benefit from volume control and the electromagnetic induction coil. The Committee sought to develop a balanced set of recommendations that would serve multiple groups of hearing aid wearers, without unduly favoring one group over another, and determined that a single rulemaking proceeding would best achieve this result. "P0*((;"Ԍ X-655.xThe Committee recommended that all newly acquired and all replacement telephones have a volume control feature that permits the user to adjust the level of sound emanating from the handset or headset receiver. The Committee recognized that phasedin accessibility regulation was utilized in the ADA with regard to architectural barriers for persons with disabilities. Pursuant to the ADA, existing structures are not required to comply with accessibility standards. Rather, new and modified facilities must comply with the ADA's  Xv-accessibility standards.QvR X-ԍ See HACNRC Document 47, ADA Handbook, Analysis of ADA Section 36.402  X-Alternations. See also 42 U.S.C.  12183. The Committee left to the Commission's consideration, however, the details of implementing this recommendation, and provided the Commission with a sample  XH-volume control technical standard and a sample manufacturing and importation requirement.hRHbR X[ -ԍ See suggested Sections 68.6 and 68.319, Appendix B.h In reaching its determination to recommend that a volume control requirement be adopted, the Committee strongly advocated that the Commission solicit a full record on the costs and availability of a volume control feature. With regard to implementation, the Committee recommended that the volume control requirements become effective one year after volume control technical standards become effective. The Committee stressed, however, that sufficient inventories of volume control telephones must be available for establishments to  X -comply with the new hearing aidcompatibility and volume control rules.9S R Xk-ԍ Report at 6, 31.9 The proposed rules for volume control for newly acquired and replacement telephones would apply to  Xy-workplace, confined setting and hotel and motel establishments.TyR X-ԍ See proposed Sections 68.112(b)(1)(E) and (F), 68.112(b)(3)(C) and 68.112(b)(5)(B) in Appendix B.  XK-756.xThe Committee also recommended that, in the case of newly acquired and replacement telephones, both a volume control feature and electromagnetic coil compatibility be required. For newly acquired and replacement telephones, the definition of hearing aidcompatibility would be expanded to include both types of technology, not as alternatives to each other, but in combination with each other. An establishment's decision to replace existing workplace telephones, or to purchase new workplace telephones, however, would remain at the establishment's discretion, with two exceptions: (1) in the case where a telephone is identified  X-as nonhearing aidcompatible (i.e., without an electromagnetic coil) after January 1, 2000 (or 2005, whichever date is applicable), in which case the telephone must be replaced within fifteen working days, under the rebuttable presumption provision, with a telephone that has  Xe-both an electromagnetic coil and a volume control feature;iUe^ R Xt%-ԍ  See proposed Section 68.112(b)(1)(D) in Appendix B.i and (2) in the case where a telephone is voluntarily replaced by a telephone taken from stored inventory that existed at the time of the effective date of proposed Section 68.112(b)(1), and the replacement telephone is"7 U0*(("  X-identified as nonhearing aidcompatible (i.e., without an electromagnetic coil), that replacement telephone must be replaced within fifteen working days with a telephone that has an electromagnetic coil and, one year after the effective date of the volume control rules,  X-with volume control.bVR X4-ԍ See proposed Section 68.112(b)(1)(F) in Appendix B.b In each of these two exceptions, the precipitating event that would require replacement would be the identification of a telephone that lacks an electromagnetic coil, not the identification of a telephone that lacks volume control. x  X_-857.xThe volume control requirements would not operate retroactively to require volume control on telephones that have been acquired or replaced prior to the date the volume control rules become effective. A telephone replaced after the effective date of the proposed regulations, but before the date that volume control is required, would have to be replaced with a telephone that has electromagnetic coil compatibility. For example, assuming  X -arguendo, that rules for volume control are released and effective January 1, 1996, and that there is a one year delay, until January 1, 1997, until the volume control rules are applicable to workplace establishments, the requirements would be as follows: (1) If a telephone is voluntarily replaced with a telephone from stored inventory (which inventory existed as of January 1, 1996), and the replacement telephone is identified by someone as not having an electromagnetic coil, the replacement telephone must be replaced with a telephone with an electromagnetic coil, if the replacement date is prior to January 1, 1997. (2) In the prior case, beginning January 1, 1997 the replacement telephone must have electromagnetic coil compatibility and volume control. (3) If a telephone is voluntarily replaced from a source other than stored inventory that existed as of January 1, 1996, and the date is prior to January 1, 1997, the replacement telephone must have electromagnetic coil compatibility, whether or not an individual has identified the replacement telephone as not having electromagnetic coil compatibility. (4) In situation number three, as of January 1, 1997, the replacement telephone also must have volume control, whether or not an individual has identified the replacement telephone as not having electromagnetic coil compatibility, and even though the purchase for the replacement telephone was made prior to January 1, 1977. (5) If, prior to January 1, 2000, a telephone without electromagnetic coil compatibility is in use, and is not voluntarily replaced, the establishment is not required to replace that telephone, even if someone has identified the telephone as not having electromagnetic coil compatibility, or as not having volume control. (6) After January 1, 2000 (or 2005, whichever date is applicable), if a telephone in use does not have electromagnetic coil compatibility, but no one identifies the telephone as lacking electromagnetic coil compatibility, the establishment does not have to replace the telephone. (7) In the prior situation, if the telephone does have electromagnetic coil compatibility, but not volume control, the establishment does not have to replace the telephone, even if someone identifies the telephone as not having volume control. (8) In situation number six, if the telephone in use is identified by someone as not having electromagnetic coil compatibility, the establishment must replace the telephone with a telephone that has both electromagnetic coil compatibility and volume control.  Xh$- "h$yV0*((F#"Ԍ X-ԙx 2.` ` Statutory Basis for Requiring Volume Control  X-958.xThe general language of the HAC Act encourages the application of other technologies, such as volume control, to the challenge of making telephones hearing aidcompatible. The first section of the HAC Act states that "[t]he Commission shall establish such regulations as are necessary to ensure reasonable access to telephone service by persons  Xv-with impaired hearing."?WvR X-ԍ 47 U.S.C.  610(a).? The breadth of this section is emphasized by the introductory "Findings" to the HAC Act, namely, that Xx(1) to the fullest extent made possible by technology and medical science, hearingimpaired persons should have equal access to the national telecommunications network; (2) present technology provides effective coupling of telephones to hearing aids used by some severely hearingimpaired persons for communicating by voice telephone; (3) anticipated improvements in both telephone and hearing aid technologies promise greater access in the future; and (4) universal telephone service for hearingimpaired persons will lead to greater  X-employment opportunities and increased productivity.XyR X-ԍ Hearing Aid Compatibility Act of 1988, Pub. L. 100394, 102 Stat. 976, Section 2 (1988).  The Commission also is required to "periodically review the regulations established pursuant  XK-to this section,"?YKR X-ԍ 47 U.S.C.  610(f).? and is charged with ensuring that "regulations adopted to implement this section encourage the use of currently available technology and do not discourage or impair  X-the development of improved technology."HZR X-ԍ Id. at  610(e).H The HAC Act strongly encourages the implementation of new technologies that can increase access to the public network by persons with hearing disabilities. "uZ0*((Z"Ԍ X-ԙ:59.xThe HAC Act describes hearing aid compatible telephones generically as telephones that "provide internal means for effective use with hearing aids that are designed to be compatible with telephones which meet established technical standards for hearing aid  X-compatibility."[R X4-ԍ 47 U.S.C.  610(b)(1)(B). This definition is adopted as the definition of hearing aidcompatible telephones in our rules at Section 68.4. This definition can accommodate more than one type of technology that is "internal" to the telephone, such as the electromagnetic induction coil and volume control. At the time of the passage of the HAC Act, the electromagnetic induction coil was the principal means for providing hearing aidcompatibility, and its technical requirements were  X_-then, and are now, specified in our rules.E\_bR Xr -ԍ 47 C.F.R.  68.316.E Neither Congressional committee, however, tied the definition of "compatibility" only to the telecoil. The House Report stated that the definition in the HAC Act "does not require induction as the sole method of telephone/hearing  X -aid coupling. It is flexible and allows for other methods of compatibility."<] R X-ԍ House Report at 12.< The Senate Report states that "this language is intended to avoid impeding the development of new technology which can provide benefits similar to those currently achieved through inductive  X -means."=^ R XJ-ԍ Senate Report at 10.= In another section, the Senate Report adds: XxTelephones may also be "compatible" without a telecoil. Some telephones, for instance, contain internal amplifiers. If the voice signal is sufficiently amplified, the telephone can be placed far enough away from the hearing aid to avoid any "feedback." It is also possible that other means of "compatibility" may be developed  XK-in the future.?_KuR Xq-ԍ Id. at 2. ?(#  X-;60. xCommission rules do not currently regulate the volume of sound emanating from the handset or headset receiver of a terminal. A volume control feature would make telephones more accessible for persons with hearing disabilities who do not use a hearing aid with a telecoil, but who use other types of hearing aids, or who do not have a hearing aid. Persons with hearing disabilities have a wide range of disabilities. For a few, the disability is so severe that a hearing aid, with or without a telecoil, is of no assistance. For a larger percentage of people with hearing disabilities, the disability is relatively less, and volume control, or volume control plus a hearing aid, would meet their needs. Volume control allows many hearingaid users to adjust the sound coming from a receiver to accommodate the capabilities of their individual hearing aid. The Committee determined that volume control would benefit hearing aid users and other individuals with hearing loss, as well as many individuals with"7& _0*(("  X-speech disabilities.6`R Xy-ԍ Report at 32.6 Volume control also would benefit telephone users who have a need for  X-amplification to overcome highnoise environments.2ayR X-ԍ Id.2  X-<61.xIn light of the foregoing, we propose volume control rules that require workplace, confined setting and hotel and motel establishments to provide volume control for replacement or new telephones, in certain circumstances, and that prescribe technical, manufacturing and  Xv-importation requirements for those telephones. h ""*a0*((!"Ԍ X-x 3.` ` Implementation  X-x ` ` a. Technical Standard @  X-=62.x Discussion The Committee did not have the time or resources to review fully the technical requirements for a volume control standard. Therefore, the Committee submitted language for a proposed rule based upon the Architectural and Transportation Barriers  X_-Compliance Board's (ATBCB) volume control standard for public telephones.b _R X-ԍ Id. The ATBCB language reads: "Volume controls capable of a minimum of 12 dbA and a maximum of 18 dbA above normal [the telephone's normal telephone volume level], shall be provided in accordance with 4.1.3 [section of the ATBCB's Guidelines, designating which public telephones must have volume control]. If an automatic reset [of the gain level, after a telephone call is terminated, back to the nominal gain level] is provided then 18 dbA  Xe -may be exceeded." Id. See Americans With Disabilities Act Accessibility Guidelines for Buildings and Facilities (ADAAG), at  4.31.5, 56 FR 35455, at  4.1.3 (17)(b)(pp. 35615 X7-35616) and  4.30 (2)(p. 35660) and  4.31.5 (p. 35661), July 26, 1991. The guidelines are available through the United States Architectural and Transportation Barriers Compliance Board, 1331 F Street, N.W., Suite 1000, Washington, D.C. 200041111, 202/2725434. The Committee modified the ATBCB standard so that it is clear that the proposed provision refers to the volume of sound received through a handset or headset. The Committee also modified  X -the ATBCB language to make the proposed regulation more technically accurate. :c1 R Xu-ԍ In particular, the Committee substantially adopted the language in Committee Document HACNRC56.1, a February 26, 1994 letter from the Telecommunications Industry Association (TIA) to the ATBCB. In that letter, TIA stated that the current ATBCB section "describes its amplified receive acoustic sound output requirements in terms of dBA units of measurement." TIA states, however, that dBA units are not generally used for Objective Loudness rating measurements, and that it believes that "amplified Receive Objective Loudness Rating ('ROLR') in dB units was intended." Since HACNRC56.1 was submitted to the Committee, the TIA TR41.3 Subcommittee has further modified the language of the standard, and those modifications are included in suggested Section 68.319 in Appendix B.: "c0*(("Ԍ X->63.xThe resulting revised standard applies a weighted average across the frequency range of a telephone's voice frequency band. This standard has been shown to correlate well with  X-human perception of the loudness of speech on a telephone connection.dR XK-ԍ J.L. Sullivan, "A Laboratory System for Measuring Loudness Loss of Telephone Connections," Bell System Technical Journal, Vol. 50, No. 8, October 1971, pp. 26632739. As a means of measuring loudness, the proposed standard uses Receive Objective Loudness Rating (ROLR),  X-a rating system for expressing the "receive response" of a telephone."evbR X-ԍ The "receive response" of a telephone is defined at paragraph 4.1.2.1 of ANSI/EIA X -470A1987 as "a measure of (the telephone's) electricaltoacoustic transfer characteristics. To define the receive response, the acoustic output or loudness level, the frequency response, the regulation over a given set of loop conditions and the distortion are specified." ROLR is discussed at Paragraphs 4.1.2.2 and 4.1.2.3.1. Paragraph 4.1.2 of ANSI/EIA470A1987 is stated at Appendix D." In proposed Section 68.317, ROLR is used to measure dBgain, which is a numerical rating for loudness. This methodology of rating voice loudness has been widely used in the telecommunications industry for at least twenty years, and the calculation procedures are included in Section 6 of  XH-Standard 661 of the Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers (IEEE).fH R X-ԍ IEEE Standard 6611979 (R1992), "Method for Determining Objective Loudness Ratings of Telephone Connections." The use of ROLR as a measure of loudness encourages equal levels of gain to be applied across the entire frequency range, because the contribution to apparent volume from each octave band, or fraction of an octave band, is given equal weight in determining the overall loudness of the  X -received signal.g : R X-ԍ It should be noted that loudness ratings such as ROLR are expressed in dB of loudness loss. Thus, more positive values of ROLR represent lower volume levels. For example, a telephone may have a ROLR of 48 dB with its receive volume control set to its nominal unamplified level. If it provides 12 dB of gain at its maximum volume control setting, it will have an ROLR of 36 dB. Application of this standard should help persons with hearing disabilities who may have hearing problems at different frequencies of the spectrum of the telephone frequency band. " g0*(("Ԍ X-?64.xIn order to reduce the volume of material published in the Federal Register and the  X-Code of Federal Regulations, we propose to incorporate by referencehR Xb-ԍ See 5 U.S.C.  552(a) and 1 C.F.R. Part 1. See also Office of the Federal Register,  XK-National Archives and Records Administration, Federal Register Drafting Handbook, 3739 (1991). As proposed Section 68.317(d) indicates, the Commission would need approval of the Director of the Federal Register before any such incorporation by reference becomes effective. into proposed Section  X-68.317 a standard of the American National Standards Institute (ANSI).xi4R X-ԍ See proposed Section 68.317 in Appendix B. See also Paragraph 4.1.2 of ANSI/EIA470A1987 in Appendix D. Copies of paragraph 4.1.2 of ANSI/EIA470A1987 may be purchased from the American National Standards Institute (ANSI), Sales Department, 11 West 42nd Street, 13th Floor, New York, NY 10036, (212) 6424900. x The standard defines ROLR. To update our rules with minor changes to this standard, we propose that the Commission delegate to the Chief, Common Carrier Bureau, the authority to issue a public notice of the minor changes. We also propose that the Commission delegate to the Chief, Common Carrier Bureau, the authority to adopt the minor changes into our rules, if the comments responding to the public notice are favorable. More significant modifications to the standards would continue to require a formal rulemaking proceeding.  X - @65.xThe Committee stressed that, in considering a technical standard for volume control, it believed the focus should be on the end result. Therefore, the Committee suggested that whatever technical standard is adopted, the standard should be one that can be applied to different kinds of equipment at a variety of locations in the network. In some cases, Committee members indicated, the volume control mechanism could be in the terminal equipment, either in the body of the telephone or in the receiver handset or headset. In other cases, the mechanism might be placed in Private Branch Exchange (PBX) equipment or in network switches. Other locations for the technology might also be possible. In its recommendations, the Committee suggested a one year delay in the requirement that newly  XK-acquired and replacement telephones have volume control.jK R X-ԍ See proposed Sections 68.112(b)(1)(E) and (F), 68.112(b)(3)(C), and 68.112(b)(5)(B), Appendix B. However, in making this suggestion, the Committee also expressed the opinion that newly acquired and replacement telephones should not be required to have volume control until Commission rules and specifications regarding volume control were in place. The Committee further stated that any  X-proposed rules should take into account the availability from manufacturers of volume control, and provide a transition period for manufacturers to comply with volume control requirements. The Committee's recommendation included a oneyear phasein period, to allow manufacturers to manufacture the specified equipment, and to allow wholesalers and retailers to distribute and stock the required equipment. Similarly, it would allow workplace, confined setting and hotel and motel establishments the same one year period to order, purchase and install the required equipment. "N!: j0*(("Ԍ X-A66.xWe accept the Committee's suggestion to consider the adoption of rules on volume control. Several technical issues require resolution, however. A technical standard to establish volume control compatibility between hearing aids and telephones should consider the potential problem of "feedback" between hearing aids and telephones. Some individuals with hearing aids encounter problems of feedback between their hearing aid and a telephone receiver. Both telephones and hearing aids contain microphones and amplifiers, and the electronic signals of these instruments can conflict and cause a characteristic feedback noise. Any technical specification considered by the Commission should be designed to minimize or prevent feedback noise.  X -B67.xTo promote the potential public interest benefits that might result from a volume control requirement, we seek comment on proposed rules that would require volume control in the case of replacement and newly acquired telephones, and that would define the technical  X -standards for volume control.k R XN-ԍ See proposed rule Sections 68.6, 68.112(1)(E) and (F), 68.112(3)(C), 68.112(5)(B) and 68.317 in Appendix B.  X -  X -x ` ` b. Manufacturing and Importation pp  X-  Xy-C68.x Discussion  The Committee also adopted a statement of principle regarding volume control, asking the Commission to consider adopting rules concerning the manufacture and importation of hearing aidcompatible telephones with volume control. Such rules would be similar to those governing the manufacture and importation of telephones that meet the current definition of hearing aidcompatibility and would cover all wireline telephones, except  X-secure telephones.lbR X-ԍ Secure telephones are defined as "telephones that are approved by the United States Government for the transmission of classified or sensitive voice communications" at Section 68.3, and are exempted from the hearing aidcompatibility requirements by the HAC Act.  X-47 U.S. C.  610(b)(2)(A), 610(b)(4)(D).Ă  X-D69.xA change in the Commission's rule regulating the manufacturing and importation of telephones for use in the United States is essential for a volume control requirement to be implemented by workplace, confined setting and hotel and motel establishments required to provide this type of telephone. The current rule requires that such telephones be hearing aidcompatible, but the current definition of hearing aidcompatible does not require that the  Xe-telephone have a volume control feature.SmeR X#-ԍ See 47 C.F.R.  68.4, 68.316.S The definition of hearing aidcompatibility sets the requirements and standards under which hearing aidcompatible telephones are manufactured in the United States. Without a change in the definition of hearing aidcompatible and a modified manufacturing and importation requirement, complying telephones would not be manufactured, and workplace, confined setting and hotel and motel" " m0*(([" establishments would not be able to acquire telephones that comply with volume control  X-requirements. The Committee limited its volume control recommendationsnR Xb-ԍ See proposed rule Sections 68.112(1)(E) and (F), 68.112(3)(C), and 68.112(5)(B) in Appendix B. to newly acquired and replacement telephones because this strategy phases volume controlled telephones into the embedded base of telephones over time as replacements and new  X-acquisitions occur in the normal course of commerce. The HAC Act requiredEobR X-ԍ 47 U.S.C.  610(b)(1)(B).E that telephones manufactured or imported for use in the United States more than a year after the HAC Act was enacted had to be hearing aidcompatible, then defined by the Commission as incorporating an electromagnetic induction coil that is compatible with hearing aid tele XH-coils.EpHR X -ԍ 47 C.F.R.  68.316.E Proposed Section 68.6 would impose as an additional manufacturing and importation requirement that wireline and cordless hearing aidcompatible telephones include a volume control feature. Telephones used with public mobile services and telephones used with private  X -radio services would be excluded from the coverage of proposed Section 68.6.Wq R Xx-ԍ See proposed Section 68.6 in Appendix B.W  X -E70.x Comment Requested We seek comment on proposed rules that would require newly acquired and replacement telephones in workplace, confined setting and hotel and motel  X -establishments to have volume control,r uR X-ԍ See proposed Sections 68.112(1)(E) and (F), 68.112(3)(C), and 68.112(5)(B) in Appendix B. in addition to electromagnetic coil hearing aidcompatibility. We seek comment on the estimated cost to manufacturers to make telephones that comply with our proposals. We specifically seek comment on how the proposed rules would affect manufacturing costs, on whether the proposed rules would substantially raise the costs of telephones, and on how the proposed rules would affect manufacturers' inventory of telephones. We seek comment on the benefits of volume control to all telephone users, including persons with and without hearing disabilities. We seek comment on what equipment with volume control is available today and whether newly acquired and replacement telephones are the best means of phasing in volume control requirements. Additionally, we seek comment on whether the requirement for volume control in replacement telephones also should include telephones, except headsets, in emergency locations, such as in elevators, highways and tunnels for automobiles, railways or subways, and in workplace  X-common areas, such as in libraries and reception areas.bs R XS%-ԍ See proposed Section 68.112(b)(1)(A) in Appendix B.b "e# s0*((1"Ԍ X-F71.xWe seek comment on our proposal establishing technical standards for volume control that apply a weighted average across the frequency range of a telephone's voice frequency  X-band. YtR XK-ԍ See proposed Section 68.317 in Appendix B.Y We also seek comment on our proposal that would require telephones manufactured or imported for use in the United States beginning one year after the adoption of technical  X-standards for volume control to include such volume control.WuyR X-ԍ See proposed Section 68.6 in Appendix B.W We request specific comment on the feasibility of a one year phasein period for manufacturers, and for wholesalers, retailers and other distributors to provide the product to purchasers. We also ask commenters to discuss potential problems of "feedback" between telephone receivers with volume control and hearing aids (both those with and without a telecoil) and to recommend technical solutions if feedback poses a problem. We also specifically seek comment on proposed Section 68.317(b) regarding the appropriate complex impedance to simulate the specified lengths of unloaded cable. We understand that a complex impedance standard is under development by industry and, if so, we seek comment on such a standard and on when such a standard might be approved by ANSI. We also seek comment on the proposal to delegate to the Chief, Common Carrier Bureau, the authority to give public notice of minor changes to the ANSI standards, and, if comments on the minor changes are favorable, to adopt the minor changes into our rules.  Xb-G72.xWe seek comment on whether, under the proposed technical standard, it would be possible to locate the volume control feature in places other than in the telephone itself, such as in the network, in a PBX, or in other terminal equipment. If not, we seek comment on alternative technical standards that would accommodate these alternative locations for the volume control feature. We seek comment on how a telephone user would control receiver volume, even though the volume control technology is not located in the receiver. We also seek comment on how volume control technology could be incorporated into headsets that are required to be hearing aidcompatible, and whether that technology would be located in the headset or in the telephone console base. ""$*u0*((!"Ԍ X- F.xProposed Rule Regarding Equipment Labelling  X-H73.x Discussion As discussed above,MvR XK-ԍ See paragraph 29, infra.M the Commission's rules currently permit a manufacturer to display on terminal equipment either the serial number or the date of manufacture. If the date is not stamped, and if, for whatever reason, the serial number cannot be traced to the manufacturer's records, an establishment may be unable to determine if a particular telephone is hearing aidcompatible. Therefore, the Committee recommended that  X_-Section 68.300(b)(3)]w_yR X -ԍ See proposed Section 68.300(b)(3), Appendix B.] be changed to require the display of the date of manufacture, and to make the display of the serial number optional.  X -I74.x Comment Requested We tentatively conclude that Section 68.300(b)(3) should be changed to read that a terminal's identifying information shall include "Date of manufacture,  X -and, at the registrant's option, serial number,"Yx *R X-ԍ See proposed Section 68.300 in Appendix B.Y because having the date of manufacture appear on terminal equipment might help enable an establishment to determine whether the equipment is hearing aidcompatible. We request comment on this proposed change. We also seek comment on whether we should consider requiring manufacturers to stamp or emboss a symbol or set of letters, such as "HAC," on terminal equipment in addition to, or as an alternative of, the date of manufacture.  XK- G.xAdditional Committee Recommendations  X-J75.x Discussion  In addition to recommending rule changes, the Committee recommended that the Commission take several actions that the Committee believed would facilitate the  X-implementation of those rule changes. These include the following:@yR X{-ԍ See Report at 33.@  X-  X-x` ` That the Commission issue a press release, hold a press conference about the Committee's Report and recommendations, and distribute the Report electronically.  X|-x` ` That the Commission develop a standard consumer information package about the hearing aidcompatibility rules, including a questionandanswer section, to be  XN-disseminated after the new rules are released. h  X -x ` ` That the Commission encourage the development of information that could be included with hearing aid packaging.  X-x` ` That the Commission encourage voluntary public signage to indicate the"%y0*((;"  X-location of hearing aidcompatibility telephones in workplace establishments.zR Xy-#Xj\  P6G; XP#э See Committee document HACNRC43 for signage recommendations by the International Telecommunication Union. x  X-K76.xThe Commission has already taken several of the steps the Committee recommended.  X-Upon the release of the Committee's Report, a press release was issued.{bR X-ԍ FCC Press Release, Report No. CC9542, August 3, 1995, "Commission Releases  X-Negotiated Committee Recommendation for Telephone Hearing Aid Compatibility"; see also FCC Press Release, Report No. DC 9590, June 22, 1995, "Negotiated Rulemaking Committee Reaches Full Consensus on Proposed FCC Rules for Wireline Telephone Hearing Aid Compatibility and Volume Control."  Commission staff  X-presented the Report|R X -ԍ Final Report of the Federal Communication Commission Hearing Aid Compatibility Negotiated Rulemaking Committee, CC Docket No. 87124, August, 1995. to the Commission at the Commission's August 3, 1995, meeting, and a press conference followed the Commission meeting. Finally, the Report is available on the Internet.  XH-L77.x Comment Requested  We tentatively conclude that we should implement the Committee's remaining recommendations, and we seek comment on the most efficient way to accomplish this implementation. For example, we seek comment on what information should be included in hearing aid packaging, how the Commission might implement a voluntary signage program for workplace establishments, and what additional consumer education initiatives might be effective.  X - H.xAmendments to Other Sections For Clarification  Xy-M78.xIn light of the Committee's recommendation that hearing aidcompatibility be defined, in some circumstances, by both Sections 68.316 (electromagnetic coil compatibility) and proposed Section 68.317 (volume control), we propose amendments to existing sections of Parts 64 and 68 that discuss hearing aidcompatibility. These amendments specify the definition of hearing aidcompatibility being referred to in the existing section. These amendments are stated in Appendix B under proposed Sections 64.607, 68.3, 68.4, 68.112(b)(4), 68.112(c), 68.224, and 68.316.  X-N79.x Comment Requested We tentatively conclude that the proposed amendments to Sections 64.607, 68.3, 68.4, 68.112(b)(4), 68.112(c), 68.112 and 68.316 should be made for clarification. We request comment on these proposed amendments. "7&Q |0*(("Ԍ X-} IV. CONCLUSION ĐTTP  X-O80.xThe Hearing Aid Compatibility Negotiated Rulemaking Committee reached a consensus on its recommendations to the Commission. The Committee's recommendations strike a balance among the many interests represented on the Committee. If adopted by the Commission, the recommendations would appear to increase significantly the access to telecommunications by persons with hearing disabilities, and move the Commission significantly further towards its goal to fully implement the HAC Act. The Committee's recommendations are submitted for public comment in this NPRM as rules proposed by the Commission. We request comment on these proposed rules, and encourage participation by  X -interested parties.  X -  X -z V. PROCEDURAL MATTERS TP  X - A.xEx Parte  X -  X- P81. x This NPRM is a nonrestricted notice and comment rulemaking proceeding.  Ex parte presentations are permitted, except during the Sunshine Agenda period, provided they are  Xb-disclosed as provided in the Commission's Rules. See generally 47 C.F.R. Sections 1.1202, 1.1203, and 1.1206(a).  X4-  X-B.xInitial Regulatory Flexibility Analysis  X-   X- Q82. x As required by Section 603 of the Regulatory Flexibility Act, the Commission has prepared an Initial Regulatory Flexibility Analysis ("IRFA") of the expected impact on small entities of the proposals suggested in this document. The IRFA is set forth in Appendix C. Written public comments are requested in the IRFA. These comments must be filed in accordance with the same filing procedures as other comments in this proceeding, but they also must have a separate and distinct heading designating them as responses to the Initial  Xe-Regulatory Flexibility Analysis. The Secretary shall send a copy of the NPRM, including the Initial Regulatory Flexibility Analysis, to the Chief Counsel for Advocacy of the Small Business Administration in accordance with paragraph 603(a) of the Regulatory Flexibility  X -Act. Pub. L. No. 96354, 94 Stat. 1164, 5 U.S.C. Section 601 et seq (1981).   X- C.xInitial Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 Analysis  X -R83.xThis NPRM contains either a proposed or modified information collection. As part of its continuing effort to reduce paperwork burdens, we invite the general public and the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) to take this opportunity to comment on the information collections contained in this NPRM, as required by the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, Pub. L. 104-13. Public and agency comments are due at the same time as other comments on this NPRM; OMB comments are due 60 days from date of publication of this NPRM in the Federal Register. Comments should address: (a) whether the proposed collection of information is necessary for the proper performance of the functions of the Commission,"#''|0*((%" including whether the information shall have practical utility; (b) the accuracy of the Commission's burden estimates; (c) ways to enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information collected; and (d) ways to minimize the burden of the collection of information on the respondents, including the use of automated collection techniques or other forms of  X-information technology.  X-  Xv- D.xNotice and Comment Provisions   X_-  XH- S84. x Pursuant to applicable procedures set forth in Sections 1.415 and 1.419 of the Commission's Rules, 47 C.F.R. Sections 1.415 and 1.419, interested parties may file comments on or before January 12, 1996, and reply comments are due on or before February 16, 1996. To file formally in this proceeding, you must file an original and four copies of all comments, reply comments, and supporting comments. If you want each Commissioner to receive a personal copy of your comments, you must file an original plus nine copies. You should send comments and reply comments to the Office of the Secretary, Federal Communications Commission, Washington, D.C. 20554. Comments and reply comments will be available for public inspection during regular business hours in the FCC Reference Center (Room 239) of the Federal Communications Commission, 1919 M Street, N.W., Washington, D.C. 20554.  XK-  X4-T85.xWritten comments by the public on the proposed and/or modified information collections are due at the same time as other comments on this NPRM. Written comments must be submitted by the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) on the proposed and/or modified information collections on or before 60 days after date of publication in the Federal Register. In addition to filing comments with the Secretary, a copy of any comments on the information collections contained herein should be submitted to Dorothy Conway, Federal Communications Commission, Room 234, 1919 M Street, N.W., Washington, DC 20554, or via the Internet to dconway@fcc.gov and to Timothy Fain, OMB Desk Officer, 10236 NEOB, 725 - 17th Street, N.W., Washington, DC 20503 or via the Internet to fain_t@al.eop.gov. "#'(|0*((%"Ԍ X-H VI. ORDERING CLAUSE Đ X-TP  X- U86. x Accordingly, pursuant to Sections 1, 201205, 218 of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended, 47 U.S.C 151, 154, 201205, 218, IT IS ORDERED that this NOTICE OF PROPOSED RULEMAKING is hereby provided to amend Sections 64.607, 68.3, 68.4, 68.112 , 68.224, 68.300 and 68.316, and to add Sections 68.6 and 68.317, of the Commission's rules, 47 C.F.R.  64.607, 68.3, 68.4, 68.6, 68.112, 68.224, 68.300, 68.316 and 68.317, as indicated above and in Appendix B hereof. x` `  hhFEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION x` ` hhWilliam F. Caton x` ` hhActing Secretary" )|0*((m "  X-0 Appendix A ĐTP  X- CHARTER FOR THETP  X- NEGOTIATED RULEMAKING COMMITTEE ĐTP  XH-A. xThe Committee's Official Designation xThe official designation of the advisory committee will be the "Hearing Aid Compatibility Negotiated Rulemaking Committee" (Committee).  X -B.xThe Committee's Objective and Scope of its Activity xThe purpose of the Committee is to provide recommendations to the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) to be used in the formulation of requirements for hearing aid compatible (HAC) telephones in work places, hospitals, certain other health care facilities,  Xb-prisons, hotels and motels.  Included among the recommendations will be one on whether to lift the suspension of enforcement of Sections 68.112(b)(1), (3), and (5) of the Commission's Rules. 47 C.F.R.  68.112(b)(1), (3), (5). Those sections require that all telephones in all work places, hospitals, certain other health care facilities, prisons, hotels and motels be hearing aid compatible by May 1, 1993 for establishments with 20 or more employees and by May 1, 1994 for establishments with fewer than 20 employees. The scope of the activity of  X-the Committee will include all steps necessary to assemble data, perform analyses, and provide advice to the FCC concerning all of the issues required to address the regulation of HAC telephones, as discussed in the Commission's public notice of November 7, 1994, FCC 94280.  Xe-C.xPeriod of Time Necessary for the Committee to Carry Out Its Purpose xThe Committee will require 65 days to carry out its purpose.  X -D.xOfficial to Whom the Committee Reports xChief, Common Carrier Bureau, Federal Communications Commission.  X!-E.xAgency Responsible for Providing Necessary Support xThe Federal Communications Commission will provide the necessary staff support for the Committee. The Federal Communications Commission will provide facilities needed to conduct the meetings, if the Commission has meeting facilities available. Otherwise, private sector members will provide facilities. Private sector members of the Committee will serve without any government compensation, and will not be entitled to travel expenses or per diem"#'*|0*((%" subsistence allowance. Committee members may choose to support a facilitator for the Committee.  X-F.xDescription of the Duties for Which the Committee is Responsible xThe duties of the Committee will be to gather and discuss information necessary to develop recommendations to the FCC for requirements for hearing aid compatible (HAC) telephones in work places, hospitals, certain other health care facilities, prisons, hotels and motels.  X -G.xEstimated Operating Costs in Dollars and Staff Years xEstimated staff years that will be expended by the Committee are 0.75 for the FCC staff and 1.5 for the private sector and other governmental representatives. The estimated cost to the FCC of operating the Committee is $79,000, which includes FCC staff time and funds for training Committee members on negotiated rulemaking and consensusbuilding procedures.  Xy-H.xEstimated Number and Frequency of Committee Meetings xSix meetings of the full Committee, with additional meetings of informal subcommittees, are expected.  X-I.xCommittee's Termination Date xThe Committee will terminate 65 days from date of charter approval and/or by September 30, 1995.  X-J.xDate Original Charter Filed xApril 11, 1995. "N+|0*((^"  X-0 Appendix B ĐTP  X-] PROPOSED RULES ĐTP Part 64 of Title 47 of the Code of Federal Regulations is proposed to be amended as follows:  Xv-   X_- PART 64 MISCELLANEOUS RULES RELATING TO COMMON CARRIERS  X1-1.xThe authority citation for Part 64 continues to read as follows: AUTHORITY: Sec. 4, 48 Stat. 1066, as amended; 47 U.S.C. 154, unless otherwise noted. Interpret or apply secs. 201, 218, 226, 228, 48 Stat. 1070, as amended, 1077; 47 U.S.C.  201, 218, 226, 228, unless otherwise noted.  X-2.xSection 64.607 is proposed to be amended to read as follows:  Xb-  64.607 Provision of hearing aidcompatible telephones by exchange carriers xIn the absence of alternative suppliers in an exchange area, an exchange carrier must provide a hearing aidcompatible telephone, as defined in  68.316, and provide related installation and maintenance services for such telephones on a detariffed basis to any customer with a hearing disability who requests such equipment or services. Part 68 of Title 47 of the Code of Federal Regulations is proposed to be amended as follows:  X|-  PART 68 CONNECTION OF TERMINAL EQUIPMENT TO THE TELEPHONE  XN-NETWORK  X -1.xThe authority citation for Part 68 continues to read as follows: AUTHORITY: Secs. 1, 4, 5, 2015, 208, 215, 218, 226, 227, 303, 313, 314, 403, 404, 410, 602 of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended, 47 U.S.C.  151, 154, 155, 2015, 208, 215, 218, 226, 227, 303, 313, 314, 403, 404, 410, 602.  "#',|0*((%"Ԍ X-ԙ2.xSection 68.3 is proposed to be amended by adding the following definition to the terms used in Part 68: * * * * *  X-xHearing aidcompatible:hhExcept as used at  68.4(a)(3) and 68.414 of these rules, the terms hearing aidcompatible or hearing aidcompatibility are used as defined in  68.316, unless it is specifically stated that hearing aidcompatibility volume control, as defined in  68.317, is intended or is included in the definition.  X -3. xSection 68.4 is proposed to be amended to read as follows:  X -  68.4 Hearing aidcompatible telephones .h x(a)(1) Except for telephones used with public mobile services, telephones used with private radio services, and cordless and secure telephones, every telephone manufactured in the United States (other than for export) or imported for use in the United States after August 16, 1989, must be hearing aidcompatible, as defined in  68.316. Every cordless telephone manufactured in the United States (other than for export) or imported into the United States after August 16, 1991, must be hearing aidcompatible, as defined in  68.316. x(2) Unless otherwise stated and except for telephones used with public mobile services, telephones used with private radio services and secure telephones, every telephone listed in  68.112 must be hearing aidcompatible, as defined in  68.316. * * * * *  Xg-4.xA new Section 68.6 is proposed to be added as follows:TP  X9-  68.6 Telephones with volume control. As of one year after the adoption by the Commission of this section, all telephones, including cordless telephones, as defined in Section 15.3(j) of these rules, manufactured in the United States (other than for export) or imported for use in the United States, must have volume control in accordance with Section 68.317 of these rules. Secure telephones, as defined by Section 68.3 of these rules, are exempt from this section, as are telephones used with public mobile services or private radio services. "%'-|0*((%"Ԍ X-ԙ5.xSection 68.112 is proposed to be amended by revising paragraphs (b)(1), (b)(3), (b)(4) and (b)(5), and by revising paragraph (c), to read as follows:  X- (b) Emergency use telephones. Telephones "provided for emergency use" include the following: x` ` (1) (A) Telephones, except headsets, in places where a person with a hearing disability might be isolated in an emergency, including, but not limited to, elevators, highways, and tunnels for automobile, railway or subway, and workplace common areas. Note: Examples of workplace common areas include libraries, reception areas and similar locations where employees are reasonably expected to congregate. x` ` (B) Noncommon area workplace telephones, except headsets, in workplaces are required to be hearing aidcompatible, as defined in Section 68.316, by January 1, 2000, except for: x` `  (i) Those located in establishments with fewer than fifteen employees; and x` `  (ii) Telephones purchased between January 1, 1985 through December 31, 1989, which are not required to be hearing aidcompatible, as defined in Section 68.316,  X-until January 1, 2005.hh@ x` ` (C) Telephones, including headsets, made available to an employee with a hearing disability for use by that employee in his or her employment duty, shall, however, be  X-hearing aidcompatible, as defined in Section 68.316.pp  X-x` ` (D) As of January 1, 2000 or January 1, 2005, whichever date is applicable, there shall be a rebuttable presumption that all telephones located in the workplace are hearing aidcompatible, as defined in Section 68.316. This presumption may be rebutted by any  XN-person who identifies a telephone as nonhearing aidcompatible; such telephone must be replaced with a hearing aidcompatible telephone, as defined in Section 68.316, including, after one year after the effective date of amended Section 68.112(b), with volume control, as defined in Section 68.317, within fifteen working days. x` ` (E) Telephones, except headsets (but not excluding headsets furnished under Section 68.112(b)(1)(C)), that are purchased, or replaced with newly acquired telephones, must be: x` `  (i) Hearing aidcompatible, as defined in Section 68.316, after the effective date of amended Section 68.112 (b)(1); x` `  (ii) Hearing aidcompatible, including volume control, as defined in Sections 68.316 and 68.117, after one year after the effective date of amended Section"#'.|0*((%"  X-68.112(b).` `  x` `  x` ` (F) When a telephone under Subsection (E) is replaced with a telephone from inventory existing before the effective date of amended Section 68.112(b)(1), any person may  X-make a bona fide request that such telephone be hearing aidcompatible, as defined in Section 68.316, and after one year after the effective date of amended Section 68.112(b)(1), with volume control, as defined in Section 68.317. The telephone shall be provided within fifteen working days. x` ` (G) During the period from the effective date of amended Section 68.112(b)(1) until the applicable date of January 1, 2000 or January 1, 2005, workplaces of fifteen or more employees also must provide and designate telephones for emergency use by employees with hearing disabilities through one or more of the following means: x` `  (i) By having at least one coinoperated telephone, one common area telephone or one other designated hearing aidcompatible telephone on every floor of the workplace; or x` `  (ii) By providing wireless telephones that meet the definition for hearing aidcompatible for wireline telephones, as defined in Section 68.316, for use by employees in their employment duty outside common areas and outside the offices of employees with hearing disabilities. * * * * * x` ` (3) (A) Telephones needed to signal life threatening or emergency situations in confined settings, including but not limited to, rooms in hospitals, residential health care facilities for senior citizens, and convalescent homes.  Xe-x` ` (B) A telephone that is hearing aidcompatible, as defined in Section 68.316, is not required: x` `  (i) Until one year after the effective date of amended Section 68.112(b)(3), for establishments with fifty or more beds, unless replaced before that time; and x` `  (ii) Until two years after the effective date of amended Section 68.112(b)(3), for all other establishments with fewer than fifty beds, unless replaced before that time. x` ` (C) Telephones that are purchased, or replaced with newly acquired telephones, must be: x` `  (i) Hearing aidcompatible, as defined in Section 68.116, after the"#'/|0*((%" effective date of amended Section 68.112(b)(3); x` `  (ii) Hearing aidcompatible, including volume control, as defined in Sections 68.116 and 68.117, after one year after the effective date of amended Section  X-68.112(b)(3).` ` x` `  x` ` (D) Unless a telephone in a confined setting is replaced pursuant to Section 68.112(b)(3)(C), a hearing aidcompatible telephone shall not be required if: x` ` (i) A telephone is both purchased and maintained by a resident for use in that resident's room in the establishment; or x` ` (ii) The confined setting has an alternative means of signalling lifethreatening or emergency situations that is available, working and monitored. * * * * * x` ` (4) All credit card operated telephones, whether located on public property or in a semipublic location (e.g. drugstore, gas station, private club), unless a hearing aidcompatible (as defined in  68.316) coinoperated telephone providing similar services is nearby and readily available. However, regardless of coinoperated telephone availability, all credit card operated telephones must be made hearing aidcompatible, as defined in  68.316, when replaced, or by May 1, 1991, which ever comes sooner. * * * * * TPx` ` (5) (A) All telephones in hotel and motel guest rooms, and in any other establishment open to the general public for the purpose of overnight accommodation for a fee, are required to be hearing aidcompatible, as defined in Section 68.316. x x` `  (i) Those located in establishments with eighty or more guest rooms, telephones that are hearing aidcompatible, as defined in Section 68.316, are not required until two years after the effective date of amended Section 68.112(b)(5); and x` `  (ii) For establishments with fewer than eighty guest rooms, telephones that are hearing aidcompatible, as defined in Section 68.316, are not required until three  X -years after the effective date of amended Section 68.112(b)(5). x x` ` (B) Anytime after the effective date of amended Section 68.112(b)(5), if a hotel or motel room is renovated or newly constructed, or the telephone in a hotel or motel room is  Xh$-replaced or substantially, internally repaired, the telephone in that room must be: 0 x` `  (i) Hearing aidcompatible, as defined in Section 68.316, after the effective date of amended Section 68.112(b)(5); "#'0|0*((%"Ԍx` `  (ii) Hearing aidcompatible, including volume control, as defined in Sections 68.316 and 68.317, after one year after the effective date of amended Section  X-68.112(b)(5).` ` x` ` (C) The telephones in at least twenty percent of the guest rooms in a hotel or motel must be hearing aidcompatible, as defined in Section 68.316, upon the effective date of amended Section 68.112(b)(5). x` ` (D) Notwithstanding the requirements of Section (b)(5)(A), hotels and motels for which telephones were purchased during the period January 1, 1985 through December 31, 1989 may provide telephones that are hearing aidcompatible, as defined in Section 68.316, in guest rooms according to the following schedule: x x` ` (i) The telephones in at least twenty percent of the guest rooms in a hotel or motel must be hearing aidcompatible, as defined in Section 68.316, upon the effective date of amended Section 68.112(b)(5); x` ` (ii) The telephones in at least twentyfive percent of the guest rooms in a hotel or motel must be hearing aidcompatible, as defined in Section 68.316, by three years after the effective date of amended Section 68.112(b)(5); and x` ` (iii) The telephones in onehundred percent of the guest rooms in a hotel or motel must be hearing aidcompatible, as defined in Section 68.316, by January 1, 2000 for establishments with eighty or more guest rooms, and by January 1, 2003 for establishments with fewer than eighty guest rooms. * * * * *  Xe-x(c) Telephones frequently needed by the hearing impaired. Closed circuit telephones, i.e., telephones which cannot directly access the public switched network, such as telephones located in lobbies of hotels or apartment buildings; telephones in stores which are used by patrons to order merchandise; telephones in public transportation terminals which are used to call taxis or to reserve rental automobiles, need not be hearing aidcompatible, as defined in  68.316, until replaced. * * * * * "%'1|0*((%"Ԍ X-6.xSection 68.224 is proposed to be amended at subsection (a) to read as follows:  X-  68.224 ` ` Notice of nonhearing aidcompatibility. xEvery nonhearing aid compatible telephone offered for sale to the public on or after August 17, 1989, whether previouslyregistered, newly registered or refurbished, shall: x x(a) Contain in a conspicuous location on the surface of its packaging a statement that the telephone is not hearing aidcompatible, as is defined in  68.4(a)(3) and 68.316 of these rules, or if offered for sale without a surrounding package, shall be affixed with a written statement that the telephone is not hearing aidcompatible, as defined in  68.4(a)(3) and 68.316 of these rules; and x(b) * * * * * * * *  Xb-7.xSection 68.300 is proposed to be amended by revising paragraph (b)(3) to read as follows:  X-  68.300 Labelling requirements.@  X- * * * * * (b) * * * x(3) Date of manufacture, and, at the registrant's option, serial number. TP* * * * * TP  X -8.xSection 68.316 is proposed to be amended in its title and its introductory paragraph to read as follows:  X-  68.316 ` ` Hearing aidcompatibility magnetic field intensity requirements: technical  X -standards. xA telephone handset is hearing aidcompatible for the purposes of this section of Part 68 if it complies with the following standard, published by Electronic Industries Association, copyright 1983, and reproduced by permission of Electronic Industries Association: x * * * * * "#'2|0*((%"Ԍ X-ԙ9.xA new Section 68.317 is proposed to be added as follows:  X-  X- 68.317 Hearing aid compatibility volume control: technical standards.  X- (a) A telephone complies with the Commission's volume control requirements if the telephone is equipped with a receive volume control that provides, through the receiver in the handset or headset of the telephone, 12 dB of gain minimum and up to 18 dB of gain maximum, when measured in terms of Receive Objective Loudness Rating (ROLR), as defined in paragraph 4.1.2 of ANSI/EIA470A1987. The 12 dB of minimum gain must be achieved without significant clipping of the test signal. (b) The ROLR shall be determined over the frequency range from 300 to 3300 HZ for short, average, and long loop conditions represented by 0, 2.7, and 4.6 km of 26 WG nonloaded cable, respectively. The specified length of cable will be simulated by a complex impedance.  X -The input level to the cable simulator shall be 10 dB with respect to 1 V open circuit from a 900 ohm source. (c)The ROLR for each loop condition shall first be determined with the receive volume control at its normal unamplified level. The minimum volume control setting shall be used for this measurement unless the manufacturer identifies a different setting for the nominal volume level. The ROLR shall then be determined with the receive volume control at its maximum volume setting. Since ROLR is a loudness rating value expressed in dB of loss, more positive values of ROLR represent lower receive levels. Therefore, the ROLR value determined for the maximum volume control setting should be subtracted from that determined for the nominal volume control setting to determine compliance with this requirement. The 18 dB of receive gain may be exceeded provided that the amplified receive capability automatically resets to nominal gain when the telephone is caused to pass through a proper onhook transition in order to minimize the likelihood of damage to individuals with normal hearing. (d) This incorporation by reference of paragraph 4.1.2 of ANSI/EIA470A1987 was approved by the Director of the Federal Register in accordance with 5 U.S.C. 552(a) and 1 CFR part 51. Copies of this publication may be purchased from the American National Standards Institute (ANSI), Sales Department, 11 West 42nd Street, 13th Floor, New York, NY 10036, (212) 6424900. Copies also may be inspected during normal business hours at the following locations: Federal Communications Commission, 2025 M Street, N.W., Public Reference Room, Room 6218, Washington, D.C. 20554; and Office of the Federal Register, 800 N. Capitol Street, N.W., suite 700, Washington, D.C. 20002. "h$3|0*(((#"  X-) APPENDIX CTP  INITIAL REGULATORY FLEXIBILITY ANALYSISTP  Xv-Reason for Action:  This Notice of Proposed Rulemaking responds to the recommendations of the Hearing Aid Compatibility Negotiated Rulemaking Committee. Pursuant to the Negotiated Rulemaking Act, the Commission is obligated to initiate this rulemaking proceeding.  X - Objectives:` ` The objective of this proposal is to provide greater access to the telephone network by persons with hearing disabilities, while at the same time balancing the needs of establishments that must provide hearing aidcompatible telephones.  X - Legal Basis:` ` The proposed action is authorized under Sections 1, 201205, and 218 of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended, 47 U.S.C. Sections 151, 154, 201205,and 218.  Xb- Reporting, Record Keeping and Other Compliance Requirements:   The proposed rules would require manufacturers and importers of telephones for use in the United States to provide volume control with their equipment after a certain date. Such telephone equipment manufacturers and importers also would be required to display on their equipment the date of manufacture. In addition, workplaces with fifteen or more employees, confined setting establishments and hotels and motels would have to provide hearing aidcompatible telephones after certain dates.  X- Federal Rules Which Overlap, Duplicate, or Conflict with These Rules:xx None.  X|- Description, Potential Impact and Number of Small Entities Involved:xx The proposals set forth in this Notice may have an economic impact on workplaces with fifteen or more employees, confined setting establishments and hotels and motels. These establishments eventually may be required to replace some or all of their existing telephones with telephones that are hearing aidcompatible, including telephones that have volume control. These proposals also may make it easier for these establishments to acquire employees and generate business.  X - Any Significant Alternatives Minimizing the Impact on Small Entities, Consistent with  X!-Stated Objectives:  None."!4|0*(( "  X-'] APPENDIX D ĐTP x` `  X -$  PARAGRAPH 4.1.2 of ANSI/EIA470A1987 ĐTP