FCC Record, Volume 27, No. 5, Pages 3728 to 4696, April 9 - April 27, 2012 Page: 3,740
The following text was automatically extracted from the image on this page using optical character recognition software:
event sufficient testing guidance has not been completed by the end of the 12-month period, we will
recommend that the Commission address this issue.
18. The Commission's existing rules require manufacturers and service providers to inform
consumers, using specific prescribed language, when handsets designated as hearing aid-compatible have
not been tested over some of their operations.49 This requirement will continue to apply to handsets
introduced during the 12-month transition period that the manufacturer has not tested for newly covered
operations.50 However, during the 12-month transition period, there may be handsets that the
manufacturer tests and finds not to meet hearing aid compatibility requirements for newly covered
operations under the 2011 ANSI Standard. The manufacturer may submit such handsets for certification
based on hearing aid compatibility ratings under the 2007 ANSI Standard for operations covered by that
standard. We proposed in the Second Further Notice to require manufacturers and service providers to
disclose to consumers that operations in these handsets had been tested and found not to be hearing aid-
compatible. We further proposed not to require specific language for this disclosure, but to rely on a
general disclosure requirement backed by case-by-case resolution of disputes.5" In their comments,
Consumer Groups and HIA each propose specific disclosure language that they say should be required.52
These parties argue that we should prescribe language to fully inform consumers and to remove any
possibility of inconsistent information. Other commenters, however, oppose prescribing language so as
to maintain their flexibility to disclose the most relevant information about a particular handset model."S
19. While we recognize that uniform disclosure language can provide benefits of certainty to
both regulated entities and consumers, we decline to prescribe such language here. Instead, we require
generally that manufacturers and service providers inform users by clear and effective means about any
operations in a hearing aid-compatible handset model that they tested under the 2011 ANSI Standard and
found not to meet hearing aid compatibility requirements under that standard. We recognize that the
Commission already requires specific disclosure language for handset models that have not been tested
for some of their operations, and we continue to require such disclosure for these handsets, including
handsets introduced during the 12-month transition period that the manufacturer has not tested for newly
covered operations.s4 Unlike that case, however, there is no consensus in the record on specific language
to be used for handset models that the manufacturer has tested and found to be non-compliant under the
2011 ANSI Standard for some of their operations, and indeed several commenters oppose prescribing
49 See 47 C.F.R. 20.19(f)(2).
50 We find that this language will also constitute sufficient disclosure for multi-band and/or multi-mode handsets
tested under the 2011 ANSI Standard during the 12-month transition period that have not been tested for inductive
coupling capability over VoLTE transmissions. Alternatively, manufacturers or service providers may develop
more descriptive and informative disclosure language for these handsets. We advise manufacturers and service
providers to consult with WTB staff before using any alternative language.
s See Second Further Notice, 26 FCC Red at 14996 9.
52 See Consumer Groups Comments at 3; HliA Comments at 5. Consumer Groups also propose requirements
regarding the font and location of the disclosure. Consumer Groups Comments at 3. These matters are outside the
scope of the Second Further Notice, and they will be addressed separately by the Commission. See Second Further
Notice, 26 FCC Rcd at 14994 5.
53 See AT&T Reply Comments at 5-6; CTIA Reply Comments at 10-12; TIA Comments at 6.
4 See 47 C.F.R. 20.19(f)(2).
" Compare Second R&O and Further Notice, 25 FCC Red at 11179-80 32 (2010) (relating that disclosure
language for handsets with untested operations was derived from Multi-Band Principles developed by
representatives of industry and consumer groups) with supra para. 18.
Federal Communications Commission
Here’s what’s next.
This book can be searched. Note: Results may vary based on the legibility of text within the document.
Tools / Downloads
Get a copy of this page or view the extracted text.
Citing and Sharing
Basic information for referencing this web page. We also provide extended guidance on usage rights, references, copying or embedding.
Reference the current page of this Book.
United States. Federal Communications Commission. FCC Record, Volume 27, No. 5, Pages 3728 to 4696, April 9 - April 27, 2012, book, April 2012; Washington D.C.. (digital.library.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metadc102307/m1/29/: accessed April 25, 2018), University of North Texas Libraries, Digital Library, digital.library.unt.edu; crediting UNT Libraries Government Documents Department.