NOTICE ********************************************************* NOTICE ********************************************************* This document was originally prepared in Word Perfect. If the original document contained-- * Footnotes * Boldface & Italics --this information is missing in this version The document format (spacing, margins, tabs, etc.) is changed too. If you need the complete document, download the Word Perfect version. For information about downloading documents (FTP) see file how2ftp. File how2ftp (.txt & .wp) is in directory \pub\Public_Notices\Miscellaneous. ***************************************************************** ******** FINAL REPORT OF THE FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION HEARING AID-COMPATIBILITY NEGOTIATED RULEMAKING COMMITTEE CC DOCKET NO. 87-124 AUGUST 1995 Table Of Contents Page Number I. Summary 5 II. Introduction 7 A. Background of Committee B. Operations of the Committee III. The Committee's Work Program 11 IV. Definition of HAC 13 V. Actions Subsequent to the Committee's Final Report 14 VI. Discussion of the Proposed Rules 14 A. Workplaces: Section 68.112(b)(1) 14 1. The Rules 14 2. Discussion of Key Workplace Provisions 16 a. HAC by the Year 2000 [Proposed  (b)(1)(B)] b. Purchased 1985 through 1989 [Proposed  (b)(1)(B)(ii)] c. Telephones Made Available to Persons With Hearing Disabilities For Use In Their Employment Duty [Proposed  (b)(1)(C)] d. Rebuttable Presumption [Proposed  (b)(1)(D)] e. Rebuttable on a Telephone-by-Telephone Basis [Proposed  (b)(1)(D)] f. Fewer Than Fifteen Employees [Proposed  (b)(1)(B)(i)] g. Newly Acquired Telephones HAC [Proposed  (b)(1)(E)] h. Replacements From Inventory Existing at Effective Date [Proposed  (b)(1)(F)] i. Newly Acquired/Replacement Telephone Volume Control [Proposed  (b)(1)(E) and (F)] Page Number j. Safe Harbor Provisions [Proposed  (b)(1)(G)] k. Headsets Exempt [(Proposed  (b)(1)(A) & (E)] 3. Discussion of Other Workplace Provision Changes 22 a. "All Areas of the Workplace" b. Tunnels [Proposed  (b)(1)(A)] B. Confined settings: Section 68.112(b)(3) 23 1. The Rules 23 2. Discussion of The Rules 24 a. 100% HAC [Proposed  (b)(3)(B)] b. One/Two Years After Date of Rules [Proposed  (b)(3)(B)] c. Small Establishments [Proposed  (b)(3)(B)] d. No Rebuttable Presumption for 1985-1989 Exemption e. Replacements [Proposed  (b)(3)(C)] f. Exceptions:Customer Premises Equipment and Alternative Signalling Means [Proposed  (b)(3)(D)] g. Prisons Not Included in "Confined Settings" [Proposed  (b)(3)(A)] C. Hotels and Motels: Section 68.112(b)(5) 26 1. The Rules 26 2. Discussion of The Rules 28 a. Hotels and Motels 100% HAC [Proposed  (b)(5)(A)] b. Guest Room Telephones [Proposed  (b)(5)(A)] c. Open to the General Public [Proposed  (b)(5)(A)] Page Number d. Eighty Guest Rooms [Proposed  (b)(5)(A)(i) & (ii)] e. Replacement, Repair, Renovation, New Construction [Proposed  (b)(5)(B)] f. Interim Availability of 20% of the Rooms [Proposed  (b)(5)(C)] g. Phase-out Schedule for Telephones Purchased 1985-1989 [Proposed  (b)(5)(D)] h. Deleted Provisions of Current Section [Proposed  (b)(5)] D. Volume Control: Section 68.319 31 1. Proposed Rule 2. Discussion of Proposed Rule 3. Statement of Principle: Manufacture and Importation of Telephones With Volume Control VII. Additional Committee Recommendations 33 VIII. Conclusions34 Appendices: 1. Committee Charter 2. Work Program 3. Committee Membership 4. Meeting Schedule 5. List of Documents 6. Proposed Rules 7. Press Release 8. Additional Views 9. Relevant Citations 10. Transmittal Letter I. Summary In 1992, the Federal Communications Commission ( Commission or FCC) promulgated regulations that, with minor exceptions, all telephones in hospitals and other health care facilities, in hotels and motels, in prisons, and in all workplaces be made hearing- aid compatible (HAC) by May 1, 1993, for establishments with twenty or more employees, and by May 1, 1994, for establishments with fewer than twenty employees. As the May 1, 1993 deadline approached, the Commission began receiving a large number of complaints from organizations indicating serious difficulties in their attempts to comply. Therefore, on April 13, 1993, the Commission suspended, until further notice, enforcement of the new rules scheduled to go into effect on May 1 of 1993 and 1994. This suspension left the previously applicable rules, requiring HAC telephones in workplace common areas, and at the workstations of hearing impaired employees, and at emergency locations in health care facilities, in place. The Hearing Aid Compatibility Act of 1988 (HAC Act) requires that all wireline telephones imported or manufactured for use in the United States (with certain exceptions, such as secure telephones) after August 16, 1989 (or August 16, 1991, for cordless telephones) be HAC. On May 12, 1993, the Alexander Graham Bell Association, on behalf of persons with hearing disabilities, filed a petition for reinstatement of the rules. In light of these events, the Commission established the Hearing Aid-Compatibility Negotiated Rulemaking Committee (Committee) to advise the Commission on whether or not to lift the suspension of the rules, and to recommend additional rules that the Committee thought appropriate. After meeting almost weekly for two months, the Committee proposed that a new set of rules for the workplace, for confined settings, and for hotels and motels be adopted in place of the suspended rules. The Committee also made several recommendations to the Commission. A summary of the key rules and recommendations proposed by the Committee are as follows: 1. 100% HAC The Committee proposed that all telephones in the workplace, in confined settings, and in hotels and motels be HAC by a date or time certain, with the exception of workplaces with fewer than fifteen employees. Consistent with the Americans With Disabilities Act of 1990 (ADA), the Committee exempted work establishments with fewer than fifteen employees. 2. Telephones Purchased in 1985-1989 The Committee proposed to delay the application of new regulations to workplace telephones purchased in the years 1985 through 1989, when establishments may have acquired new telephone systems without notice of the effective date of the HAC Act 3. Rebuttable Presumption The Committee adopted a rebuttable presumption for workplace telephones which states that, as of a certain date, an establishment may presume that its telephones are HAC. The presumption is rebuttable on a telephone-by-telephone basis. The presumption is intended to relieve an establishment from having to test and subsequently retrofit its inventory of telephones, and to relieve it of any liability that might result from providing a telephone that appears to comply with the HAC rules (such as one manufactured after 1989), but that, in fact, does not comply. 4. Newly Acquired and Replacement Telephones The Committee concluded that, in general, newly acquired and replacement telephones should be HAC and volume control, so long as the volume control requirements are adopted by the Commission. However, replacement telephones taken from an establishment's inventory of telephones existing prior to the effective date of these regulations are required to be HAC and volume control only as needed on a telephone-by-telephone basis. 5. Volume Control The Committee determined that newly acquired and replacement telephones should have a volume control feature that permits the user to adjust the level of sound emanating from the receiver. The Committee recommended that its volume control proposal go into effect a year after its proposed guidelines are adopted by the Commission. The Committee also submitted a draft volume control technical standard. However, the Committee left both timing and standards of volume control to the determination of the Commission through the rulemaking process. The Committee stressed that the volume control requirements should not go into effect until the Commission adopted a technical standard and determined that the manufacturing and distribution process would provide ample inventories of volume-controlled telephones. 6. Safe Harbor Until the HAC implementation dates, workplaces should make provision for emergency-use telephones outside of common areas and outside the private offices of employees with hearing disabilities. 7. Headsets Headsets are exempted from the proposed workplace rules, except in the case of a headset needed for employment duties and made available to employees with hearing disabilities. 8. Establishment Size Distinctions In addition to exempting workplaces with fewer than fifteen employees, the Committee also gave smaller confined setting and hotel/motel establishments extra time to comply with the HAC rules. In the case of confined settings, the cutoff is establishments with fewer than fifty beds. For hotels/motels, the cutoff is fewer than 80 guest rooms. 9. Confined Settings Exceptions The Committee proposes two exceptions to the HAC requirements that are unique to confined setting establishments. One exception is when the resident of a confined setting installs and maintains his or her own private telephone. The other is when the confined setting establishment provides an alternative emergency signalling device that is available, working and monitored. 10. Prisons Not Included in Confined Settings The Committee eliminated the word "prisons" from the types of confined settings to be covered by its proposed confined settings rule, since prisons are an unusual and special category of confined settings. The proposed workplace rules, however, would apply to the workplace areas of prisons. 11. Hotel/Motel Currently, ten percent of the guest rooms at hotels and motels must have HAC telephones. The Committee increased that figure to twenty percent, in light of the elapsed time since the Commission's 1992 order establishing the original percentage level. Hotels and motels with telephones purchased in the 1985-1989 time frame are given a schedule of additional percentages and additional time in which to provide HAC telephones. 12. Recommendations The Committee also made recommendations to the Commission with respect to such matters as telephone labelling, signage and consumer information packages about the Commission's actions and about hearing aids. II. Introduction A. Background of Committee The Committee was chartered by the Commission as part of the Commission's proceeding in CC Docket No. 87-124, entitled Access to Telecommunications Equipment and Services by the Hearing Impaired and Other Disabled Persons. The Committee was organized and chartered to provide recommendations to the Commission to be used in the formulation of requirements for HAC telephones in work places, hospitals, certain other health care facilities, prisons, hotels and motels. Included among the recommendations was 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 required that all telephones in all work places, hospitals, certain other health care facilities, prisons, hotels and motels be HAC by May 1, 1993, for establishments with 20 or more employees and by May 1, 1994, for establishments with fewer than 20 employees. Those sections of the Commission's rules were suspended because as the May 1, 1993, deadline approached, the Commission began receiving a large number of complaints from organizations indicating serious difficulties in their attempts to comply. The complaints stated that the prolonged recession slowed normal rates of equipment replacement such that the number of telephones still required to be retrofitted, and the costs of retrofitting, were far greater than the estimates relied on by the Commission in determining the implementation date of the new rules. Retrofitters reportedly had huge backlogs that made compliance by the May 1 deadline impossible for many firms. Some establishments asserted that they were being forced to remove some telephones from use altogether to avoid the HAC requirements, raising safety concerns. On February 22, 1993, the Commission placed on public notice the petition of Goodwill Industries of Seattle for waiver of the new rules. Written comments on the Goodwill petition and additional petitions for waiver were filed by 49 individuals and organizations representing a large number of businesses, government agencies, universities, hospitals and non-profit institutions. All commenters objected to the new HAC requirements in one or more respects. On April 2, 1993, the Tele-Communications Association filed an Emergency Request for Stay of the new HAC requirements. On April 13, to allow itself time to study assertions made in this Request and in the earlier complaints, the Commission suspended, until further notice, enforcement of the new rules scheduled to go into effect on May 1 of 1993 and 1994. This suspension left in place several previously applicable rules, as follows: Not suspended:  Telephones in workplace common areas.  Telephones made available to an employee with a hearing disability for use by that employee in his or her employment duty.  Telephones manufactured or imported for use in the United States (with certain exceptions, such as secure telephones) after August 16, 1989 (August 16, 1991 for cordless telephones).  Telephones in ten percent of the guest rooms in hotels and motels.  Telephones for emergency use, such as in elevators, tunnels and highways.  Telephones frequently needed by persons with hearing disabilities, such as closed circuit telephones, which must be made HAC upon replacement. Suspended:  Workplace non-common area telephones.  Telephones in confined settings, so long as an alternative means of signaling life-threatening situations is available.  Telephones in hotel and motel guest rooms, but maintaining the ten percent provision. On May 12, 1993, the Alexander Graham Bell Association for the Deaf filed an Emergency Request to Reinstate Enforcement of the Hearing Aid Compatibility Rules. Final determination on the Request is pending. In light of these events, the Commission asked, by Public Notice on November 7, 1994, for comments and nominations for membership regarding the establishment of an advisory committee that would consider both the suspended rules, and whether or not to propose new rules. The comments were overwhelmingly in favor of establishing a negotiated rulemaking committee, and thirty-nine nominations were received. On March 27, 1995, the Commission announced the formation of the nineteen-member Committee. The Commission made the membership selection based on broad representation from all interested parties, and on the physical and operational limits in servicing a large committee. Later, one Committee member (Hearing Industries Association) withdrew from the deliberations when it became clear that the Committee would be addressing wireline, not wireless, issues. (See Membership List, Appendices) B. Operations of the Committee The Committee held eight full Committee meetings in its 63-day negotiations. (See Schedule in Appendices) Six of the meetings were on the premises of the Commission, and two meetings were held outside of the District of Columbia. One of the two outside meetings was held at a Maryland high school that has a large program for students with hearing disabilities. Students and faculty were able to observe the negotiations of the Committee. All meetings were accessible to persons with disabilities. In addition, many meetings were held by caucuses and by an informal working group (IWG) set up by the Committee to draft regulations. At its first meeting, the Committee unanimously selected William A. Luther as its Facilitator. Mr. Luther is Chief of the Radiocommunication Policy Branch of the Satellite and Radiocommunication Division of the International Bureau at the Commission. The IWG drafting group was chaired by Ms. Linda Dubroof, Deputy Chief of the Domestic Facilities Division of the Common Carrier Bureau at the Commission. The Committee's Designated Federal Officer, responsible for administrative details, was Greg Lipscomb, an attorney in the Domestic Facilities Division of the Common Carrier Bureau. The meetings of the Committee and the IWG were open to the public, as noted in the Commission public notices and the three Federal Register notices issued regarding the Committee. The recommendations of the Committee and the text of the proposed rules are stated and discussed below. All Committee recommendations represent the consensus view of the participants. No Committee member objected to the recommendations, although some Committee members abstained. See Additional Comments in Appendices. The Committee did not have a chance to review this final version of the Report. Committee members were able to review an earlier draft of the report, and to submit comments within three working days. This final version incorporates these comments and was completed by Commission staff. The Committee endorses the negotiated rulemaking process as a means of reaching a consensus on difficult issues of large public importance. The Committee urges the Commission to act expeditiously to complete the regulatory actions necessary to make the accessible technologies contained in these proposed regulations available to the public. III. The Committee's Work Program Early in its deliberations the Committee adopted a statement of objectives that constituted its work program. (See Work Program in Appendices) The key elements of that program are as follows: 1. Recommend to the Commission whether or not to lift the suspension of the current rules and, if not, whether new rules should be proposed. 2. If new rules are to be proposed, develop those proposed rules, together with key definitions and a proposed time line for implementation of the rules. 3. Assess the costs and benefits of implementing the rules, including the impact on the economy and on the public's access to telecommunications. 4. Analyze time and technology alternatives to HAC retrofitting. 5. Draft a Final Report for the Commission reflecting the Committee's consensus on issues and recommendations. Early in the Committee's deliberations the Facilitator announced that the Committee would be addressing only issues related to wireline telephones, and that the Committee could address wireless telephone issues at the end of its deliberations, if time permitted. The reason for this limitation, the Facilitator explained, is that a new bureau at the Commission, the Wireless Telecommunications Bureau, was preparing to address hearing aid compatibility and wireless telephone issues separately. Throughout this report, the word "telephone" means "wireline telephone." Wireline telephones do include cordless telephones, but do not include wireless telephones, cellular telephones, and PCS telephones. The Committee did not change the definition of "telephone." Further, throughout this report, and throughout the work of the Committee, it is and has been implicit that the "telephones" the Committee discusses are telephones "provided for emergency use." The Committee made no proposal that would require retrofitting of equipment. The Committee reached consensus on the principle that all workplace, confined setting, and hotel and motel telephones should be one hundred percent hearing aid-compatible at some appropriate time in the future. The Committee did, however, exempt from its proposed regulations all workplaces with fewer than fifteen employees. The Committee determined that the economic burdens of the proposed HAC regulations would fall disproportionately on small employers, because their operating budgets are smaller, and improvements in telephones may be more burdensome. The Committee concluded that the probability of voluntary replacement of telephones is very high between 1989, when the HAC Act required that most wireline telephones manufactured or imported for use in the United States had to be hearing aid-compatible, and the dates by which the Committee's draft rules require hearing aid-compatibility. After reviewing available data, the Committee determined that the average life-cycle of telephones is approximately seven years. In reaching this determination, the Committee considered widely varying replacement practices. The Committee noted that among the forces driving telephone life-cycles are advances in telephone technology, the decreasing cost of new telephones, the availability of value-added telephone services, and the general improvement in telephone service. The Committee reasoned that these forces apply to all telephones, whether or not in non-common workplace areas, confined settings, hotels and motels, or elsewhere. The Committee further determined that eleven to fifteen years will have gone by since 1989 (or 1991 in the case of cordless telephones), when all new wireline telephones in the marketplace became HAC. The Committee created a rebuttable presumption that telephones are HAC, and did not recommend retrofitting. In some cases, under the Committee's proposed rules, an existing telephone must eventually be replaced with a HAC, or HAC and volume controlled, telephone. An example would be a workplace telephone identified as of January 1, 2005, or thereafter as being non- HAC. That telephone must be replaced with a HAC telephone within fifteen working days. IV. Definition of HAC HAC telephones are defined in the Commission's rules at Section 68.4(3), as follows: A telephone is hearing aid-compatible if it provides internal means for effective use with hearing aids that are designed to be compatible with telephones which meet established technical standards for hearing aid compatibility. The HAC definition refers to a device internal to a telephone that complements an analogous device in certain hearing aids. The device in today's hearing aids is called a telecoil, or T-Coil, which enables the hearing-aid wearer to flip a switch on the hearing aid so that the hearing aid will pick up a magnetic field. Telephones that are HAC have a wire coil which generates a magnetic field that can be detected by the T-Coil. Older telephones contained magnetic devices as part of their normal handset construction, but as alternate technology (called electrostatic transducers) were developed, enabling handsets to become lighter, the magnetic feature was eliminated. This elimination, however, also eliminated the ability of hearing-aid wearers with T-Coils from using the telephone. The HAC Act required that, as of certain dates, wireline telephones (except for telephones used with private radio services and public mobile services, and secure telephones), including cordless telephones, manufactured or imported for use in the United States, have to include the required device to make them HAC. The technical standards for HAC telephones are specified in two documents, ANSI/EIA-504-1989, "Magnetic Field Intensity Criteria For Telephone Compatibility With Hearing Aids," and ANSI/TIA/EIA-504-1-1944, an addendum to EIA-504 which adds the HAC requirements for Integrated Services Digital Network (ISDN) telephones. The Commission's rules state the technical standard at 47 C.F.R.  68.316. The Committee does not recommend a change in the definition of HAC. It is clear, however, that "HAC" currently refers to technology that generates a magnetic field, not an acoustic field. Volume control, however, is useful to many other hearing aid users, and other persons with hearing disabilities. As discussed below, the Committee recommends that the Commission include volume control, along with HAC, in the Commission's Rulemaking. The Committee also noted that other means of coupling hearing aids to telephones are being considered by the International Telecommunication Union (ITU). V. Actions Subsequent to the Committee's Final Report Upon receiving this Final Report from the Committee, the Commission will initiate a Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (NPRM), incorporating the Committee's proposed rules in its proposed regulations. After a period of public comment, and reply comment, the Commission will draft, review and adopt an Order implementing the rules that result from the NPRM process. VI. Discussion of the Proposed Rules A. Workplaces: Section 68.112(b)(1) 1. The Rules The existing Commission rule regarding hearing aid-compatibility telephones in the workplace reads as follows: (b) Emergency use telephones. Telephones "provided for emergency use" include the following: (1) Telephones in places where a person with impaired hearing might be isolated in an emergency, including, but not limited to, elevators, automobile, railway or subway tunnels, highways and all areas of the workplace including common areas (libraries, reception areas and similar locations where employees are reasonably expected to congregate). With respect to the workplace, non-common area telephones are not required to be hearing aid- compatible until May 1, 1993, for establishments with twenty or more employees, and until May 1, 1994, for all other establishments, except for telephones made available to a hearing impaired employee for use by that employee in his or her employment duty. Such telephones shall be hearing aid- compatible by May 1, 1992. The language proposed by the Committee reads as follows : Emergency use telephones. Telephones "provided for emergency use" include the following: (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 (libraries, reception areas and similar locations where employees are reasonably expected to congregate). (B) Non-common area telephones, except headsets, in workplaces are required to be hearing aid-compatible by January 1, 2000, except for: (i) Establishments with fewer than fifteen employees; and (ii) Telephones purchased between January 1, 1985 through December 31, 1989, which are not required to be hearing aid-compatible until January 1, 2005. (C) However, telephones, including headsets, made available to an employee with a hearing disability for use by that employee in his or her employment duty, shall be hearing aid-compatible. (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 aid-compatible. This presumption may be rebutted by any person who identifies a telephone as non-hearing aid-compatible; such telephone must be replaced with a hearing aid-compatible telephone within fifteen working days. (E) Telephones, except headsets, that are purchased, or replaced with newly acquired telephones, must be: (i) Hearing aid-compatible after the effective date of this regulation; (ii) Hearing aid-compatible and with volume control, as defined at Section 68.113, after one year after the effective date of this regulation. (Footnote) (F) When a telephone under Subsection (E) is replaced with a telephone from inventory existing before the effective date of this regulation, any person may make a bona fide request that such telephone be hearing aid-compatible, and after one year after the effective date of this regulation, with volume control, as defined at Section 68.113.(Footnote) The telephone shall be provided within fifteen working days. (G) During the period from the effective date of this order 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: (i) By having at least one coin-operated telephone, one common area telephone or one other designated hearing aid-compatible telephone on every floor of the workplace; or (ii) By providing emergency use-only hearing aid-compatible wireless telephones for use by employees in their employment duty outside common areas and outside the offices of employees with hearing disabilities. Footnote: Possible requirements for volume control are subject to a Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (NPRM) proceeding by the Commission. 2. Discussion of Key Workplace Provisions Most of the revisions above are based on the following key principles adopted by the Committee: a. HAC by the Year 2000 [Proposed  (b)(1)(B)] That all telephones in the workplaces covered by this provision should be HAC by the year 2000 . The Committee felt it was important to establish an outside date by which the public could be confident that telephones in most workplaces are HAC. b. Purchased 1985 through 1989 [Proposed  (b)(1)(B)(ii)] That telephones purchased in the years 1985 through 1989 should be able to be used through the year 2004 before they must be replaced with HAC telephones . This provision was included to protect employers who purchased non-HAC telephones in the years immediately preceding the effective date of the statutory requirement that all telephones imported or manufactured for use in the United States after August 16, 1989 (or August 16, 1991, depending on the type of telephone) be HAC. The Committee concluded that it would be unfair to require these employers to replace their telephones with HAC telephones when they had originally purchased their telephones without notice of the HAC Act. In selecting the dates 1985, 1989 and 2004, the Committee took into account various forces that affect decisions to change telephones, such as advances in telephone technology, the cost of new telephones, the availability of value-added telephone services, and the general improvement in telephone service. c. Telephones Made Available to Persons With Hearing Disabilities For Use In Their Employment Duty [Proposed  (b)(1)(C)] That the requirement that telephones made available to persons with hearing disabilities for use in their employment duty be applicable to all workplaces. This subsection requires HAC telephones, for example, in the work stations of employees with hearing disabilities. The subsection applies to all workplace establishments, regardless of the size. The general workplace exemption recommended by the Committee for establishments with under fifteen employees does not apply to this subsection. d. Rebuttable Presumption [Proposed  (b)(1)(D)] That there should be a rebuttable presumption that telephones in the workplace after the applicable effective changeover date are HAC. Employers cannot always tell whether or not a particular telephone is HAC. Many telephones are stamped with a serial number, rather than the date of manufacture, so there is no ready indication as to whether or not the instrument was manufactured or imported after August 16, 1989. Model or serial numbers sometimes can be traced to manufacturers, but in some cases the manufacturer is no longer in business or able to be contacted. Moreover, until a particular telephone is tested, there cannot be a 100% confidence level that even a telephone manufactured or imported after August 16, 1989 is HAC. The Committee determined that unscrupulous vendors can and do distribute allegedly "complying" equipment which may not comply. Finally, the Committee concluded that there does not now exist inexpensive testing equipment that could be used at the employer's worksite. Some portable testing devices exist, but they do not necessarily test whether or not a telephone fulfills all of the technical specifications of HAC. The Committee concluded that, if there were a testing requirement, most employers would have to send their telephones to a laboratory for testing. To relieve employers of the burden of testing and replacing, or retrofitting, inventories of telephones before the date the telephones are required to be HAC, the Committee adopted the provision of a rebuttable presumption that, as of the applicable deadline, all workplace telephones are HAC. This approach also is intended to relieve an employer of the liability that might result from providing a telephone that appears to comply with the HAC rules (such as one manufactured after 1989), but that, in fact, does not comply. The Committee adopted the rebuttable presumption provision, in part, because by the date of the implementation of the requirement, the anticipated replacement cycle of telephones in workplaces would result in a workplace telephone inventory that was purchased after 1989 and, therefore, presumably HAC. e. Rebuttable on a Telephone-by-Telephone Basis [Proposed  (b)(1)(D)] That the presumption can be rebutted by anyone who identifies a particular telephone as non-HAC. The Committee felt that the presumption should be only a presumption, and that it could be rebutted in a particular case involving a particular telephone. Therefore, the Committee added the provision that the presumption can be rebutted on a telephone-by-telephone basis by anyone who demonstrates that a particular telephone is not HAC. In such a case, the employer must replace the telephone within fifteen working days. The replacement telephone must comply with the replacement telephone rules, described below [ 68.112(b)(1)(E), (F)], which require the replacement telephone to be HAC and, eventually, according to Commission rules, volume controlled. Under the rebuttable presumption an employer is not required to replace a telephone unless that telephone specifically has been identified as non-hearing aid compatible. The requesting person must be someone legitimately on the premises, such as an employee or invitee of the establishment, present in the normal conduct of business of the establishment. Subsection 68.112(b)(1)(D) creates no new right-of-access by third parties to an employer's premises. If a complaining party is not satisfied that an identified telephone has been replaced by a complying telephone, the party may file a complaint with the Commission. f. Fewer Than Fifteen Employees [Proposed  (b)(1)(B)(i)] That except for existing regulations regarding common areas and the offices of employees with hearing disabilities, establishments with fewer than fifteen employees are exempt from these requirements. The Committee adopted the coverage cutoff standard used in the Americans With Disabilities Act of 1990 (ADA), which regulates, inter alia, employers with fifteen or more employees. The Committee determined that the economic burdens of the proposed HAC regulations would fall disproportionately on small employers, because their operating budgets are smaller, and improvements in telephones may be more burdensome. The fewer-than-fifteen cutoff refers to the total employment force of an establishment, not to the number of employees an employer might locate at a particular worksite. The Committee also adopts the ADA's definitions of "employee" and "employer," except the Committee does not adopt the ADA's exceptions to the definition of "employer." The Committee felt strongly that no employment organization, particularly the United States Government, should be excluded from the definition of "employer," so long as it has fifteen or more employees. g. Newly Acquired Telephones HAC [Proposed  (b)(1)(E)] That newly acquired telephones should be HAC. The Committee felt that the acquisition of a telephone offers an opportunity to provide equipment that is HAC. The new telephone should be HAC regardless of whether it is an addition to, or a replacement of, currently used telephones. "Newly acquired" includes new, refurbished or second-hand telephones, including telephones from an establishment's stored inventory of telephones. The only exception is if a newly acquired telephone is from an establishment's inventory existing prior to the time of the effective date of these regulations, in which case Section 68.112(b)(1)(F) applies. "Replacement" was interpreted by the Committee as "substituted with something else." If an employer is undertaking the cost or effort of acquiring a telephone, for whatever reason, the Committee determined that the incremental cost or effort to ensure that the new telephone is HAC will be very small. Thus, although an employer does not have an affirmative duty, except as described above (e.g., for the telephone of an employee who is hearing disabled), to replace a non-HAC telephone with a HAC telephone, if a replacement decision has otherwise been made, the employer must provide a HAC telephone as a replacement. Otherwise, the Committee felt, the life span of non-HAC telephones could be endlessly extended with non-HAC replacements. The requirements of this subsection do not apply to establishments with fewer than fifteen employees. h. Replacements From Inventory Existing at Effective Date [Proposed  (b)(1)(F)] That replacements from inventory that predates these regulations should be required to be HAC only upon an as-requested basis. The Committee determined that replacement telephones taken from an establishment's inventory that existed prior to the effective date of these regulations should not have to be automatically HAC. Otherwise, an establishment's entire existing telephone inventory may be instantly outmoded and unavailable for replacement use upon the effective date of these regulations. An establishment should, however, retain some obligation to provide a HAC telephone if the establishment has otherwise made its own decision to replace a telephone. The compromise struck was that, on a telephone-by-telephone basis, persons legitimately on the premises of an establishment may make a bona fide request that a replacement telephone be HAC, even though the replacement telephone is from inventory that predates the effective date of these regulations. The as-requested rule would not apply if the replacement telephone is from inventory subsequent to the effective date of these regulations. In such a case, the language "or replaced with newly acquired telephones" in subsection (b)(1)(E) applies. The request under Subsection (F) must be bona fide, that is, in good faith. The "bona fide" language was added by the Committee because the period of time covered by Section 68.112(b)(1)(F) is prior to the Section 68.112(b)(1)(B) deadlines, and the Committee wanted to emphasize that requests during this interim period must be need-based. Similar language was not included in Section 68.112(b)(1)(D) because that section pertains to dates after which all telephones are presumably HAC. As with Section 68.112(b)(1)(D), the requesting party under Section 68.112(b)(1)(F) must be legitimately on the premises of the establishment, and no new right- of-access is created by this subsection. Again, the requirements of this subsection do not apply to establishments with fewer than fifteen employees. i. Newly Acquired/Replacement Telephone Volume Control [Proposed  (b)(1)(E) and (F)] That newly acquired telephones, including replacement telephones, must have a volume control. The Committee added a draft provision that, in addition to being HAC, newly acquired telephones, including replacement telephones, must have volume control. The requirement also applies to telephones from inventory predating the effective date of these regulations, where a legitimate request has been made for a volume controlled telephone a year after the effective date of these regulations. The Committee determined that while the HAC features of telephones would assist a significant percentage of hearing-aid wearers who have Telecoil-equipped hearing aids, a volume control, or audio amplification, feature would assist an even greater percentage of hearing-aid wearers and other individuals with hearing loss, as well as to many persons with speech disabilities. In addition, amplification would benefit parties in high noise environments. After reviewing its Work Program, which covered the definition of HAC and technological alternatives to HAC retrofitting, the Committee determined that under its charter it could recommend that the Commission consider a provision for volume control in the FCC Rulemaking. The Committee also noted that the FCC representative to the Committee advised that, under the provisions of the HAC Act, the Commission has the authority to add volume control requirements to Part 68 of the Commission's rules. In adopting the volume control provision, the Committee specified that newly acquired or replacement telephones should not be required to have volume control until Commission rules regarding volume control are well in place. The Committee also determined that the rules should consider the availability of volume control telephones, particularly manufacturing schedules and importation rules. Anticipating these conditions, the Committee permits an additional year for compliance after the effective date of the proposed rule. The Committee also determined that both the Committee's recommended modifications of the HAC rules and in volume control should be encompassed into a single Commission rulemaking proceeding. The Committee viewed both the HAC and the volume control recommendations as being paired into one and the same set of mutually dependent and mutually complimentary recommendations. Finally, the Committee determined that by "volume control," it was referring to the ability of a telephone user to adjust the volume of acoustic sound as that sound emanates from the handset receiver. The Committee stated that it was not referring to the ability of a user to adjust the volume of the telephone's "speaker phone." The Committee also suggested one volume control standard as an example of what the Commission should consider. See Volume Control below. j. Safe Harbor Provisions [Proposed  (b)(1)(G)] That until the effective date in 2000 or 2005, there should be "safe harbor" emergency-use provisions to cover areas outside of workplace common areas and the private offices of employees with hearing disabilities. The Committee determined that there needs to be bridging provisions between the regulations currently in force and the effective date of those being proposed by the Committee. Employees with hearing disabilities, for example, may find themselves situated in areas of the workplace that are far removed from the nearest HAC telephone in a common area or in a private office. To remedy this, the Committee drafted language requiring the availability of at least one HAC telephone on each workplace floor, whether or not that telephone be coin-operated, in a common area or in another designated location, or by providing employees with hearing disabilities with emergency-use-only HAC wireless telephones. The Committee did not designate what constitutes a workplace "floor," or whether each employee with a hearing disability must be provided with a separate wireless HAC telephone. The Committee leaves these matters up to the good faith interpretation of the employer and their employees with hearing disabilities. The wireless telephones must be available for use by employees "in their employment duty." The Committee did acknowledge that not all wireless telephones are HAC, and so the Committee specified that the wireless telephones used to fulfill these requirements must be HAC. Establishments were given the option of fulfilling the requirement of having a HAC telephone on every floor through the provision of a "designated hearing aid-compatible telephone" on the floor. The Committee did not specify the particular designation requirements. k. Headsets Exempt [(Proposed  (b)(1)(A) & (E)] That telephone headsets generally should be exempt from HAC requirements. The Committee determined that the general workplace HAC requirements did not need to cover telephone headsets typically used by airline reservation assistants and telemarketing employees. The Committee felt that so long as there is a requirement [(pursuant to Section 68.112(b)(1)(C)] that headsets provided to employees with hearing disabilities are HAC, sufficient coverage of headsets is provided. In doing so, the Committee determined that headsets are a specialty-use item, and not nearly as likely as the standard office telephone to be as available or needed for spontaneous or random emergency- use purposes by other persons with hearing disabilities. 3. Discussion of Other Workplace Provision Changes a. "All Areas of the Workplace" The existing rule language states that telephones shall be HAC in "all areas of the workplace including common areas," and then proceeds to carve out non-common areas as an exception, and telephones provided for individual employees as an exception to the exception. To avoid the "exception to the exception" situation, the Committee determined that it would be clearer to divide workplaces into common areas [the proposed Section (1)(A)] and non-common areas [the proposed Section (1)(B)], and then appropriately treat modifications for each of these general categories. b. Tunnels [Proposed  (b)(1)(A)] The Committee also found the existing Section (b)(1) language designating telephones in "elevators, automobile, railway or subway tunnels, highways" confusing, in that some interpretations might conclude that all telephones in automobiles have to be HAC. To avoid this confusion, the Committee redrafted the provision to read "elevators; highways; and tunnels for automobile, railway, or subway...." B. Confined settings: Section 68.112(b)(3) 1. The Rules The existing Commission rule regarding hearing aid-compatibility telephones in confined settings reads as follows: (b) Emergency use telephones. Telephones "provided for emergency use" include the following: (3) 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, convalescent homes, and prisons. If an alternative means of signalling life-threatening or emergency situations is available, a hearing aid-compatible telephone is not required until May 1, 1993, for establishments with twenty or more employees, and until May 1, 1994, for all other establishments, unless replaced before that time. The Committee's proposed rule reads as follows: (b) Emergency use telephones. Telephones "provided for emergency use" include the following: (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. (B) A hearing aid-compatible telephone is not required: (i) Until one year after the effective date of this regulation, for establishments with fifty or more beds, unless replaced before that time; and (ii) Until two years after the effective date of this regulation for all other establishments with fewer than fifty beds, unless replaced before that time. (C) Telephones that are purchased, or replaced with newly acquired telephones, must be: (i) Hearing aid-compatible after the effective date of this regulation; (ii) Hearing aid-compatible and with volume control, as defined at Section 68.113, after one year after the effective date of this regulation. (Footnote) (D) However, unless a telephone in a confined setting is replaced pursuant to Section 68.112(b)(3)(C), a hearing aid-compatible telephone shall not be required where: (i) A telephone is both purchased and maintained by a resident for use in that resident's room in the establishment; or (ii) The confined setting has an alternative means of signalling life- threatening or emergency situations that is available, working and monitored. Footnote: Possible requirements for volume control are subject to a Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (NPRM) proceeding by the Commission. 2. Discussion of The Rules a. 100% HAC [Proposed  (b)(3)(B)] The Committee determined that it was important that confined setting residents be assured that at some point in time, all of the resident telephones supplied and maintained by confined setting establishments are HAC. The Committee reasoned that because confined setting residents are, by definition, confined to their setting, they are particularly vulnerable to, and reliant upon, that setting's provision of equipment for use in an emergency. In addition, confined setting residents may be older and/or in ill health, and may have special need of emergency alert systems. b. One/Two Years After Date of Rules [Proposed  (b)(3)(B)] The Committee recommended a more expeditious enactment time for confined settings than for workplaces because a confined setting occupant spends more time in the setting than an occupant of a workplace, and the confined setting occupant by definition is more of a captive than someone in a workplace. Therefore, the Committee recommended implementation dates of one and two years after the effective date of the rule, rather than the year 2000. (However, a confined setting establishment's workplace telephones, such as those in a nurse's station, would be governed by the proposed workplace rules discussed above in Section 68.112(b)(1).) c. Small Establishments [Proposed  (b)(3)(B)] As in the workplace setting, the Committee determined that some distinction based on the size of an establishment should be made in the application of the HAC rules to confined settings. Smaller establishments, the Committee determined, are more likely to have smaller budgets and older telephone systems, and it would be more difficult for them to comply with the rules. Therefore, smaller establishments are given an extra year to comply. The Committee also decided that for purposes of determining emergency access to telephones for persons in confined settings, the key factor is the not the number of employees or rooms, but the number of patient or resident beds. Generally, telephones are allocated to residents based on the number of beds. There also may be several beds to a room, but it is the safety of the residents in this setting that is the focus of the HAC rules. Based on information available, the Committee designated fifty or more beds as the dividing line between large and small establishments. d. No Rebuttable Presumption or 1985-1989 Exemption The Committee did not make the HAC telephone requirements for confined settings subject to a rebuttable presumption. The Committee determined that it was especially important that confined settings, often involving elderly residents or residents in ill health, have emergency signalling devices in the form of either HAC telephones or alternate signalling devices. The proposed rules provide for both. Because confined settings often have alternative signalling devices, the Committee concluded that the rebuttable presumption should not apply to confined settings. For the same reason, the Committee did not extend conditions for telephones purchased in 1985-1989. e. Replacements [Proposed  (b)(3)(C)] In the case of voluntary replacement of telephones in confined settings, the exemptions do not apply, and the requirement for a HAC telephone is accelerated. No retrofitting is required. The replacement requirement for confined settings begins as of the effective date of the rule, and extends for one or two years, whichever date is applicable, after which all of the confined setting telephones are required to be HAC. The reasons for the replacement exception are the same as those described above under the workplace discussion. As with the workplace provision, volume control is a requirement. f. Exceptions: Customer Premises Equipment and Alternative Signalling Means [Proposed  (b)(3)(D)] An exception to the general HAC rule for confined settings is made where a resident brings in his or her own telephone. The Committee decided that under such circumstances, the particular resident could best decide whether or not a HAC telephone was needed, and that the confined setting establishment should not be required to determine whether telephones brought to the establishment by residents are HAC. The Committee also carved an exemption if the confined setting establishment provides an alternative emergency signalling device, so long as that device is available, working and monitored. The Committee included the words "available, working and monitored" after reviewing the U.S. Health and Human Services Department Health Care Finance Administration's requirements for resident call systems in long-term care facilities, as stated at 42 C.F.R.  483.70. g. Prisons Not Included in "Confined Settings" [Proposed  (b)(3)(A)] The Committee eliminated the word "prisons" from the text of the previously suspended Section 68.112(b)(3). The Committee decided that none of its newly proposed confined setting rules should apply to prisons, for the reason that prisons are a special category of confined setting to which a different availability of telecommuncations equipment applies. As a workplace with employees, however, prisons are covered by the requirements of section 68.112(b)(1). C. Hotels and Motels: Section 68.112(b)(5) 1. The Rules The existing Commission rule regarding hearing aid-compatibility telephones in hotels and motels reads as follows: (b) Emergency use telephones. Telephones "provided for emergency use" include the following: (5) Until May 1, 1993, for establishments with twenty or more employees, and until May 1, 1994, for all other establishments telephones in hotel and motel rooms replaced after January 1, 1985, must be hearing aid-compatible unless at least ten percent of the rooms in a hotel or motel are equipped to accommodate a hearing impaired customer. A room is equipped to accommodate a hearing impaired customer if i) It contains a permanently installed hearing aid-compatible telephone; or (ii) It contains a telephone which will accept a plugin hearing aid-compatible handset, which shall be provided to the hearing impaired customer by the hotel or motel; or iii) The room contains a jack into which a hearing aid-compatible telephone provided to the customer by the hotel or motel may be plugged (i.e, in addition to a permanently installed telephone which is not hearing aid-compatible.) If fewer than ten percent of the rooms in a hotel or motel are hearing aid- compatible, when replacing a telephone the hotel or motel must, until the ten percent minimum is reached: (A) Replace it with a hearing-aid compatible telephone; or (B) Procure and maintain a plug-in hearing aid-compatible telephone handset which it will provide to a hearing impaired customer upon request at check-in. For establishments with twenty or more employees, all telephones in hotel and motel rooms are required to be hearing aid-compatible by May 1, 1993. For establishments with fewer than twenty employees, all telephones in hotel and motel rooms are required to be hearing aid-compatible by May 1, 1994. The Committee's proposed rule reads as follows: (b) Emergency use telephones. Telephones "provided for emergency use" include the following: (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 aid-compatible. Except, (i) For establishments with eighty or more guest rooms, hearing aid- compatible telephones are not required until two years after the effective date of this regulation; and (ii) For establishments with fewer than eighty guest rooms, hearing aid-compatible telephones are not required until three years after the effective date of this regulation. (B) Anytime after the effective date of this regulation, as appropriate (see Section 68.112(b)(5)(A)), if a hotel or motel room is renovated or newly constructed, or the telephone in a hotel or motel room is replaced or substantially, internally repaired, the telephone in that room must be: (i) Hearing aid-compatible after the effective date of this regulation; (ii) Hearing aid-compatible and with volume control, as defined at Section 68.113, after one year after the effective date of this regulation. (Footnote) (C) The telephones in at least twenty percent of the guest rooms in a hotel or motel must be hearing aid-compatible, upon the effective date of this regulation. (D) Notwithstanding the requirements of Section (b)(5)(A), hotels and motels whose telephones were purchased during the period January 1, 1985 through December 31, 1989 may provide hearing aid-compatible telephones in guest rooms according to the following schedule: (i) The telephones in at least twenty percent of the guest rooms in a hotel or motel must be hearing aid-compatible upon the effective date of this regulation; (ii) The telephones in at least twenty-five percent of the guest rooms in a hotel or motel must be hearing aid-compatible by three years after the effective date of this regulation; and (iii) The telephones in one-hundred percent of the guest rooms in a hotel or motel must be hearing aid-compatible 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. Footnote: Possible requirements for volume control are subject to a Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (NPRM) proceeding by the Commission. 2. Discussion of The Rules a. Hotels and Motels 100% HAC [Proposed  (b)(5)(A)] The Committee decided that travelers with hearing disabilities need to be assured that at some point in time, all hotel and motel guest room telephones will be HAC. The Committee felt that travelers in general are at the mercy of available emergency- use equipment in their hotel and motel rooms, because travelers are generally unfamiliar with the rooms where they are staying. In addition, travelers are transient, so the opportunity to request changes in equipment based on repeated experiences is less likely than, for example, in the workplace. For travelers with and without hearing disabilities, these uncertainties and limitations are compounded, and the telephone in a hotel or motel room is the only emergency use telephone available. b. Guest Room Telephones [Proposed  (b)(5)(A)] The Committee emphasized that the provisions of the proposed Section 68.112(b)(5) apply only to guest room telephones, that is, telephones in rooms for the purpose of staying overnight, and not to the workplace telephones of a hotel or motel. Thus, the telephones in a hotel or motel banquet or conference room generally would be considered for use by employees, and not by guests, and would be subject to the HAC workplace rules. For guests, hotels and motels generally have pay telephones or house telephones near a banquet or conference room. Telephones in hotel lobbies would be subject to the workplace rules, by the specific provisions of the Commission's rules at Section 68.112(c), and by the public access rules of the ADA. c. Open to the General Public [Proposed  (b)(5)(A)] The Committee intends that Section (b)(5) pertain to hotel and motel overnight guest accommodations, including bed and breakfast establishments. This application would exclude, however, hotel and motel accommodations open only to the military, or employment conference and training center accommodations. These accommodations, however, may be covered under the HAC workplace rules, where telephones an employee uses are part of his or her employment. d. Eighty Guest Rooms [Proposed  (b)(5)(A)(i) & (ii)] For reasons similar to those discussed under the proposed workplace and confined setting rules, the Committee recommends a distinction between large and small hotel and motel establishments. The Committee reviewed and discussed industry lodging statistics before arriving at the consensus view for a breakpoint at eighty rooms. e. Replacement, Repair, Renovation, New Construction [Proposed  (b)(5)(B)] The Committee intends that proposed Section (b)(5)(B) track the reasoning and interpretation of the public accommodation replacement, repair, renovation and construction section of the ADA. The Committee determined that the changes to a room would need to be more than changing the pictures on the walls, or painting the walls. Internal repairs to a telephone would need to be more than replacing an external handset cord or changing the labels on a telephone. Internal repairs would require opening the instrument (either headset, handset or base) and conducting repairs to either mechanical or electrical parts. As with replacement telephones, discussed above under workplaces, the Committee agreed that the reason to include a HAC telephone requirement in the cases of renovation, repair and new construction is that, once the decision to undertake these changes has been made, there is an opportunity to upgrade a telephone to HAC and volume control compliance, and make the telephone accessible to all Americans. In addition, the increment of cost to do so as part of a larger construction project generally is very small. f. Interim Availability of 20% of the Rooms [Proposed  (b)(5)(C)] Currently ten percent of the guest rooms of a hotel or motel, in addition to the common areas and the telephones of employees with hearing disabilities, must be HAC. The Committee recommended that the guest room figure be raised to twenty percent because the ten percent requirement has been in effect since 1992, as part of the Implementing Order, and the Committee felt that the nation's hotels and motels have had sufficient time to make a larger percentage of their rooms available to guests with hearing disabilities. g. Phase-out Schedule for Telephones Purchased 1985-1989 [Proposed  (b)(5)(D)] The Committee determined that hotels and motels that purchased telephones in the years immediately before the enactment of the HAC Act would need extra time to phase-out those telephones, particularly in light of the different sizes and locations of establishments. Thus, as with telephones purchased during other periods, upon enactment of these regulations twenty percent of the guest rooms for hotels and motels with these particular telephones must be HAC. However, instead of achieving one hundred percent HAC within two or three years, the Committee recommended a graduated schedule extending to the year 2003. The applicable percentage applies to the number of guest rooms, not to the number of telephones. h. Deleted Provisions of Current Section [Proposed  (b)(5)] The Committee deleted from its proposed rules provisions in the current Section (b)(5) that relate to describing when a guest room is adequately equipped to accommodate a guest with hearing disabilities. The Committee determined that attempts to describe particular technologies that fulfill the rules are destined to be made obsolete by new technology. Rather, the Committee recommended that the rules focus on the accessibility that must be provided. Similarly, the Committee deleted the references to hotel and motel establishments in terms of the number of employees employed by the establishments. The Committee determined that, for Section (b)(5), the applicable determinant of establishment size is the number of guest rooms, not the number of employees. D. Volume Control: Section 68.319 1. Proposed Rule The Committee did not have the time or resources to fully review the technical requirements for a volume control standard. The Committee submitted the following as an example of the kind of rule the Commission should propose in an NPRM:  68.319 Volume Control 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/EIA-470-A-1987, or subsequent revisions thereto. The ROLR for each loop condition is first measured with the receive volume control set to its nominal gain setting by positioning the receive volume control to its minimum gain setting (unless the manufacturer identifies a different nominal gain position), followed by measuring the ROLR with the receive volume control at its maximum setting. The ROLR shall increase by no less than 12 dB or more than 18 dB. The ROLRs shall be determined over the frequency range of 300 to 3,300 Hz. 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 on-hook transition. 2. Discussion of Proposed Rule The proposed volume control section is modeled on similar language in the guidelines of The Architectural and Transportation Barriers Compliance Board (ATBCB), an independent Federal agency. The ATBCB language defines standards for and requires volume control for public telephones. The Committee modified the ATBCB standards to achieve a more technically specific rule, and the Committee added the phrase "through the receiver in the handset or headset of the telephone," so that it is clear that the proposed provision does not refer to the volume control that affects only the loud speaker of a "speaker phone." Some Committee members also noted that volume control could be provided in PBX (Private Branch Exchange) equipment or in network switches, and the Committee recommended that the Commission consider these alternatives in its NPRM. The Committee stressed that it was the end result of volume control, not the means, that is important. The Committee reiterated that HAC is not achieved by a volume control feature on a telephone. The volume control and HAC requirements serve different groups of consumers with hearing disabilities, although there may be some overlap. Statistically, many more persons with hearing disabilities may be able to take advantage of volume control telephones than HAC telephones. The Committee determined that it is important to take the opportunity of a proposed change in the HAC rules to consider how to provide accessibility to the large group of consumers -- both persons with and without disabilities -- who could benefit from volume control. As discussed in the workplace discussion on volume control, the Committee determined that volume control was within the scope of its charter, and that the FCC has the authority to propose volume control regulations. In adopting the volume control provision, the Committee specified that replacement telephones should not be required to have volume control until Commission rules and specifications regarding volume control are adopted. The Committee also determined that the proposed rules should consider the availability from manufacturers of volume control telephones, and provide a transition period for manufacturers that need to redesign equipment and build inventory. 3. Statement of Principle: Manufacture and Importation of Telephones With Volume Control The Committee also recommended that, as a matter of principle, the Commission should propose rules relative to the manufacture and importation of hearing aid- compatible telephones with volume control (as defined at the proposed Section 68.319) in the Commission's NPRM. These new rules would, in principle, parallel similar provisions for the manufacture and importation of telephones with hearing aid compatibility, as stated at 47 C.F.R.  68.4(a)(1). VII. Additional Committee Recommendations The Committee also submits the following additional recommendations to the Commission:  Press release, and possibly a press conference, about the Committee's report and recommendations. The Commission also should consider electronic distribution, including the Internet.  Development of a standard consumer information package, possibly with a "Q&A" section, to be disseminated after the new rules are released.  Equipment labelling by manufacturers to indicate hearing aid compatibility and compliance with any Commission volume control requirement. The Committee recommends that Section 68.300(b) be modified from stating that equipment can be identified by either the serial number or the date of manufacture to read that the date of manufacture is required and the serial number is optional. The reason is that serial number alone has proven to be insufficient to determine whether a telephone is HAC.  Information that could be included with hearing aid packaging. The Committee recommended that the Chairman of the Commission write a letter to the Chairman of the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA), outlining possible information to be included in packaging that would be useful to consumers of hearing aids. An example would be information about the availability and functioning of a Tele-Coil, and the existence of the FCC's HAC requirements.  Voluntary public signage to indicate the location of HAC telephones in workplaces. VIII.Conclusions The Committee's principal recommendations are that the Commission should propose in a NPRM four new sections to Part 68 of the Commission's rules. The Committee also adopted a statement of principle, at Appendix 6, regarding a recommended Commission rule requiring the manufacture and importation of telephones with volume control. The Committee further recommended that the Commission pursue the adoption of these proposed sections as expeditiously as possible, and in a single rulemaking proceeding. APPENDICES APPENDIX 1 HACNRC-1 CHARTER FOR THE NEGOTIATED RULEMAKING COMMITTEE A. The Committee's Official Designation The official designation of the advisory committee will be the "Hearing Aid Compatibility Negotiated Rulemaking Committee" (Committee). B. The Committee's Objective and Scope of its Activity The 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, 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 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 94-280. C. Period of Time Necessary for the Committee to Carry Out Its Purpose The Committee will require 65 days to carry out its purpose. D. Official to Whom the Committee Reports Chief, Common Carrier Bureau, Federal Communications Commission. E. Agency Responsible for Providing Necessary Support The 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 subsistence allowance. Committee members may choose to support a facilitator for the Committee. F. Description of the Duties for Which the Committee is Responsible The 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. G. Estimated Operating Costs in Dollars and Staff Years Estimated 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 consensus-building procedures. H. Estimated Number and Frequency of Committee Meetings Six meetings of the full Committee, with additional meetings of informal subcommittees, are expected. I. Committee's Termination Date The Committee will terminate 65 days from date of charter approval and/or by September 30, 1995. J. Date Original Charter Filed April 11, 1995. APPENDIX 2 HACNRC-7(Rev. 2) April 27, 1995 WORK PROGRAM HEARI NG AID COMPATIBILITY NEGOTIATED RULEMAKING COMMITTEE 1. The primary issue to be addressed: Whether to lift the suspension of enforcement of Section 68.112(b)(1), (3), and (5) of the FCC Rules and require that all telephones in all workplaces, hospitals, certain other health care facilities, prisons, hotels and motels be hearing aid compatible (HAC) by a specific date. 2. Develop specific proposed rules using Section 68.112(b)(1), (3), and (5), as amended by the FCC May 1992 Order (Document HACNRC-10), as a basis. Analyze the scope and extent of the proposed rules and show how the benefits of these proposed regulations outweigh other options that are identified. 3. Agree to the definitions of: (a) Hearing Aid Compatible; (b) Telephones that should be HAC under this proceeding (c) Workplace; non-common workplace area; and establishments - - in the context of this proceeding (d) Confined settings 4. Provide the proposed time line for implementing requirements of the proposed rules, including whether and how establishments with fewer than X* employees should be given additional time to comply with the requirements. 5. Give the costs and benefits of implementation of the proposed rules. 6. Provide any other available data concerning the effects on economic growth expected to result from the implementation of the proposed regulations. 7. Explain the impact of recommendations for any proposed rules addressing access to telecommunications services, including to the extent possible, unintended consequences or benefits. 8. Analyze technological and time frame alternatives to HAC retrofitting. * The number of employees is subject to discussion. APPENDIX 3 HACNRC-9 (Rev. 6) HAC Negotiated Rulemaking Committee: Key Names/Numbers Telecommunications Relay Service Wash. D.C.: Standard Phone, 202/855-1000; TTD, 202/855-1234 Md: Standard Phone and TTD, 800/735-2258 Va: Standard Phone, 800/828-1120, TTD, 800-828-1140 FCC TTY Phones: o Office of Public Affairs, Room 254, 1919 M Street NW, 202/418-2555 o Office of the Common Carrier Bureau, Domestic Facilities Division, Room 6008, 2025 M Street, NW, 202/418-0484 o Office of the Common Carrier Bureau, Enforcement Division, Room 6202, 2025 M Street, NW, 202/418-0485 Committee Facilitator: Mr. William A. Luther International Bureau Federal Communications Commission 2000 M Street, N.W., Room 804 Washington, D.C. 20554 Ph: 202/739-0514 Fax: 202/887-6121, 6124, 6126 202/418-2813 Internet: wluther@fcc.gov Committee Members: 1. Aeronautical Radio, Inc. (ARINC) Mr. Lawrence F. Chesto, Director Telecommunications Systems 2551 Riva Road Annapolis, MD 21401 Ph: 301/858-4167 Fax: 410/266-2047 Internet: lfc@arinc.com Alternate: Mr. Benjamin C. Levitan Address same as above Ph: 410/266-4111 2. Alexander Graham Bell Association for the Deaf, Inc. Dr. J. Tilak Ratnanather c/o Dept. of Biomedical Engineering The Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine Traylor Research Building # 613 720 Rutland Avenue Baltimore, MD 21205-2195 Ph: 410/955-1787 Fax: 410/955-0549 Internet: tratnana@bme.jhu.edu 3. American Hotel & Motel Association Mr. Kevin L. Maher Director, Governmental Affairs 1201 New York Avenue, N.W., Suite 600 Washington, D.C. 20005-3931 Ph: 202/289-3120 Fax: 202/289-3185 Internet: Guignol@aol.com Alternates: Mr. William Poe c/o Choice Hotels 10750 Columbia Pike Silver Spring, MD 20901 Ph: 301/622-6166 Fax: 301/681-4563 Mr. Ardith Collins c/o Choice Hotels 10750 Columbia Pike Silver Spring, MD 20901 Ph: 301/236-6111 Fax: 301/681-4563 4. American Health Care Association Ms. Priscilla L. Shoemaker Associate Director of Legal Services 1201 L Street, N.W. Washington, D.C. 20005-4014 Ph: 202/898-2850 Fax: 202/842-3860 Alternate: Mr. Kenneth L. Burgess, Senior Director Legal Services and Facility Facility Operations Address same as above Ph: 202/898-6305 Fax: 202/842-3860 Ms. Marcia Richards 1201 L Street Washington, D.C. 2005 Ph: (202) 898-2845 Fax: (202)842-3860 5. American Speech-Language-Hearing Association Ms. Jo Ellen Williams 10801 Rockville Pike Rockville, MD 20852 Ph: 301/897-5700 (V/TTD) Fax: 301/897-7354 Internet: jwilliams@asha.org 6. Communications Workers of America Mr. John T. Morgan 501 Third Street, N.W. Washington, D.C. 20001-2797 Ph: 202/434-1315 Fax: 202/434-1318 7. Equal Employment Advisory Council Ms. Ann Elizabeth Reesman 1015 Fifteenth Street, N.W., Suite 1200 Washington, D.C. 20005 Ph: 202/789-8650 TTY: 202/789-8645 Fax: 202/789-2291 Alternates: Ms. Lorence L. Kessler Ms. Ellen J. Duffy 8. Federal Communications Commission Ms. Linda Dubroof Common Carrier Bureau Room 6008 2025 M Street, N.W. Washington, D.C. 20554 Ph: 202/634-1808 Fax: 202/634-6625 9. General Services Administration Mr. Mark Langsam GSA - KT 18th & F Streets, N.W. Washington, D.C. 20405 Ph: 202/606-9027 Fax: 202/606-9149 Internet: Mark.Langsam@gsa.gov 10. IBM Corporation Mr. Tim Hackman 1301 K Street, N.W. Washington, D.C. 20005 Ph: 202/515-5115 Fax: 202/515-5087 Internet: hackman@vnet.ibm.com Alternates: Mr. Nat Clarke Ph: 202/515-5106 Mr. William Warner Ph: 202/515-5134 Mr. Steve Stewart 1301 K Street Ph : 202/515-5054 11. League for the Hard of Hearing Mr. Joe Gordon 71 West 23rd Street New York, New York 10010 Ph: 212/741-7650 TTY: 212/255-1932 Fax: 212/255-4413 Home Ph: 212/724-4856 Alternatives: Ms. Ruth Shapiro Advocates for Better Communication c/o League for the Hard of Hearing 71 West 23rd Street New York, NY 10010 Ph: 212/595-2853 Fax: 212/255-4413 Mr. Keith D. Muller, ACSW Executive Director Address same as above New York, NY 10010 Ph: 212/741-3140 TTY: 212/255-1932 Fax: 212/255-4413 12. National Association of the Deaf Ms. Pam Ransom c/o Issue Dynamics, Suite 230 901 15th Street, N.W. Washington, D.C. 20005 Ph: 202/408-1132 Fax: 202/408-1134 Internet: ransom@idi.net Alternates: Ms. Nancy Bloch Executive Director National Association of the Deaf 814 Thayer Silver Spring, MD 20910 TTY: (301) 587-1789 Ph: (301) 587-1788 Mr. Harvey Goodstein Vice President, Board of Directors National Association of the Deaf address same as above Ph: (202) 651-5315 13. National Center for Law and Deafness Ms. Karen Peltz Strauss Gallaudet University 800 Florida Avenue, N.E. Washington, D.C. 20002 Ph: 202/651-5373 Fax: 202/651-5381 Internet: kpstrauss@gallua.gallaudet.edu Alternative: Mr. Andrew Firth Gallaudet University 800 Florida Avenue, N.E. Washington, D. C. 20002 Ph: 202/651-5373 TTY: 202/651-5373 Fax: 202/651-5381 14. Self Help for Hard of Hearing People Ms. Brenda Battat 7910 Woodmont Ave., Suite 1200 Bethesda, MD 20814 Ph: 301/657-2248 TTY: 301/657-2249 Fax: 301/913-9413 Internet: "71162.634@compuserve.com" Alternate: Ms. Donna Sorkin, Executive Director, SHHH Address same as above Ph: 301/657-2248 Fax: 301/913-9413 Mr. Jack O'Keeffe, Chair, SHHH Board of Trustees Technical Committee 3306 Cleveland Avenue Aliquippa, PA 15001 Ph: 412/378-2309 15. Tele-Communications Association Mr. A.A. "Scoop" Sairanen State of California Department of General Services Telecommunications Division 601 Sequoia Pacific Boulevard Sacramento, CA 95814 Ph: 916/657-9166 Fax: 916/657-9231 Alternates: Ms. Jodi Kobosko Wiley, Rein & Fielding 1776 K Street, N.W. Washington, D.C. 20006 Ph: 202/429-7353 Fax: 202/429-7049 Mr. Clarence Meyer Navy Federal Credit Union 16. Telecommunications for the Deaf, Inc. Mr. Alfred Sonnenstrahl 8719 Colesville Road, Suite 300 Silver Spring, MD 20910 Ph: 301/589-3786 TTY: 301/589-3006 Fax: 301/589-3797 Internet: zztdias@gallua.gallaudet.edu Home TTY: 301/552-2110 Alternate: Ms. Paula Holbrook 17. Telecommunications Industry Association Mr. Dan Bart 2500 Wilson Boulevard, Suite 300 Arlington, VA 22201 Ph: 703/907-7703 Fax: 703/907-7727 Internet: "TIASTDS@aol.com" Home Phone: 301/929-1043 Home Fax: 301/929-3024 Alternates: Ms. Roberta Breden Director, Technical and Regulatory Affairs Ph: 703/907-7705 Mr. Thanos Kipreos Director, Techinical and Regulatory Affairs Ph: 703/907-7708 18. United States Telephone Association Mr. Norbert Lucash 1401 H Street, N.W., Suite 600 Washington, D.C. 20005-2136 Ph: 202/326-7297 Fax: 202/326-7333 Alternate: Ms. Kathleen M. Woods Director, Regulatory Relations Ph: 202/326-7254 Committee Staff: Mr. Greg Lipscomb, Designated Federal Officer HAC Negotiated Rulemaking Committee, 2025 M Street, N.W., Room 6008, Mail Stop 1600B2 Federal Communications Commission, Washington D.C. 20554 Ph: 202/634-4216 Fax: 202/634-6625 TTY: 202/418-0484 Internet: glipscom@fcc.gov Ms. Lisa Boehley, Attorney Domestic Facilities Division, Common Carrier Bureau 2025 M Street, N.W., Room 6008, Mail Stop 1600B2 Federal Communications Commission, Washington D.C. 20554 Ph: 202/634-1627 Fax: 202/634-6625 TTY: 202/418-0484 Internet: lboehley@fcc.gov APPENDIX 4 HAC Calendar: All meetings begin at 9:30 a.m. and go to 5 p.m. Session # Day/Date Room/Location 0(Training) Mon, April 10 Room 825, 8th floor, 2000 M St. NW 1 Thurs, April 13 Room 856, 8th floor, 1919 M St. NW 2 Thurs, April 20 TIA, 2500 Wilson Blvd, Suite 300, Arlington, VA Phone: 703/907-7700 3 Thurs, April 27 Room 856, 8th floor, 1919 M St. NW 4 Thurs, May 11 Room 856, 8th floor, 1919 M St. NW 5 Thurs, May 18 Room 856, 8th floor, 1919 M St. NW 6 Thurs, May 25 Room 856, 8th floor, 1919 M St. NW 7 Tues, May 30 Eleanor Roosevelt High School, 7601 Hanover Parkway at Greenbelt Road, Greenbelt, MD, 301/513-5400 (enter from Hanover Parkway); check-in with Main Office for approval to go to Cafeteria Conference Center. 8 Thurs, June 15 Federal Communications Commission, Office of Administrative Law Judges, Room 234, Courtroom 3, 2000 L Street, NW, Wash., DC 20554, 202/418-2299 APPENDIX 5 HACNRC-6(Rev. 8) June 15, 1995 LIST OF DOCUMENTS 1. Charter - Hearing Aid Compatibility Negotiated Rulemaking Committee 2. Public Notice - Regarding the Establishment of an Advisory Committee, November 7, 1994 3. FCC Rules, 47 C.F.R.  68.112 4. Hearing Aid Compatibility Act of 1988 5(Rev. 1) Organizational Protocols 6(Rev. 6) List of Documents 7(Rev. 2) Work Program 8. Quotation from Neisser 9(Rev. 5) List of Committee Members 10. Implementing Order for HAC Rules; CC Docket No. 87-124, May 14, 1992 11. Suspension Order for HAC Rules; April 13, 1993 12(Rev. 3) Purpose and Intended Outcomes 13. Pertinent Extracts from Relevant Acts 14. TCA Background Material 15. FCC Rules, 47 C.F.R.  68.3 and 68.4 15.1 FCC Rules, 47 C.F.R.  68.4 and 68.5 16. Key Suspended Sections with Definitions 17. EIA Standard RS-504 18. TIA/EIA Standard (addendum No. 1 to EIA-504) 19. Brief History of Part 68 20. Definition of "Harm" 21. Part 68 Application Processing Flow Chart 22. AHCA Presentation 23. AHMA Presentation 23.1 Lodging Industry Statistics - Supplement to Doc. 23 24. Final Report Outline 25. Requirement (ARINC) 25.1 ITU-T Recommendation P.37 (Magnetic Field Strength...) 26. Sign: T-Coil 26.1 Sign: T-Coil Compatible Telephone 26.2 Sign Text: T-Coil Compatible Telephone 26.3 Signage Issues 27. Alternative Technologies for Coupling Hearing Aids 28. Labeling Issues 29. FCC Rules, 47 C.F.R.  68.300 Labelling requirements 29.1 Drafting Subcommittee Proposal: Part 68.300 30(Rev.1) HAC Drafting Matrix 31(Rev.1) Summary, Drafting Subcommittee Language 32. Drafting Subcommittee Draft HAC Language, Part 68.112(b)(1) 32.1 Part 68.112(b)(1) Combined Proposal 32.2 Drafting Subcommittee Draft HAC Language, Part 68.112(b)(1) 32.3 Restatement of Consumers Consensus Flip Chart re (b)(1) 32.4 Drafting Subcommittee Draft HAC Language, Part 68.112(b)(1) 32.5 Part 68.112(b)(1), as approved by the Committee 33. Drafting Subcommittee Draft HAC Language, Part 68.112(b)(3) 33.1 Drafting Subcommittee Revised Draft HAC Language, Part 68.112(b)(3) 33.2 Drafting Subcommittee Revised Draft HAC Language, Part 68.112(b)(3) 33.3 Drafting Subcommittee Revised Draft HAC Language, Part 68.112(b)(3) 33.4 Part 68.112(b)(3), as approved by the Committee 34. Drafting Subcommittee Draft HAC Language, Part 68.112(b)(5) 34.1 Drafting Subcommittee Draft HAC Language, Part 68.112(b)(5) 34.2 Drafting Subcommittee Draft HAC Language, Part 68.112(b)(5) 34.3 Part 68.112(b)(5), as approved by the Committee 35. ARINC's Proposed Revision to Part 68.112(b)(1) 36. EEAC Proposed Draft 5/3/95 37. EEAC Talking Points 38. EEAC Presentation 39. IBM Presentation - - Introduction 39.1 Replacement page 7.bis for Doc. 39 39.2 Supplementary page to Doc. 39 40. IBM Speech Viewer 41. Revised Text for Draft Recommendation E.135 (ITU-T Doc. COM 1-67-E) 42. Definition of "Compatible" 43. ITU-T Recommendation E.121 (Pictograms...) 44. SHHH Presentation (May/June 1995 article) 44.1 SHHH Membership Survey 44.2 Information Paper re: Survey (March/April 1995) 45. Time Issue - Hotels/Motels 46. ITU-T Study Group 12 Documents on Electrical Coupling and End-to-end Performance 47. ADA Language on "Alterations" 48. AHCA Proposed Language, Part 68.112(b)(3) 49. Mark Langsam's Draft Language, Part 68.112(b)(1) 50. AHCA Long-Term Care Survey 51. Article, "Telecoil Inclusion in Devices Increases Yearly, Survey Says" 52. Users' Proposed Language, Part 68.112(b)(1) 53. Report of Senate Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation - HAC Act of 1988 54. TIA Questionnaire Summary 55. Kathleen Wallman's Speech Eleanor Roosevelt High School - May 30, 1995 56. Letter from TIA to ATBCB, dated February 26, 1994, regarding volume control 56.1 Proposed Part 68 Section on Volume Control 56.2 Statement of Principle of the FCC's Hearing Aid Compatibility Negotiated Rulemaking Committee 57. Draft Final Report 58. Ad Hoc Telecommunications Users Committee 59. June 15, 1995 Letter From EEAC to William Luther APPENDI X 6 -- PROPOSED RULES 47 C.F.R.  68.112 Emergency use telephones. Telephones "provided for emergency use" include the following: (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 (libraries, reception areas and similar locations where employees are reasonably expected to congregate). (B) Non-common area telephones, except headsets, in workplaces are required to be hearing aid-compatible by January 1, 2000, except for: (i) Establishments with fewer than fifteen employees; and (ii) Telephones purchased between January 1, 1985 through December 31, 1989, which are not required to be hearing aid-compatible until January 1, 2005. (C) However, telephones, including headsets, made available to an employee with a hearing disability for use by that employee in his or her employment duty, shall be hearing aid-compatible. (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 aid-compatible. This presumption may be rebutted by any person who identifies a telephone as non-hearing aid-compatible; such telephone must be replaced with a hearing aid-compatible telephone within fifteen working days. (E) Telephones, except headsets, that are purchased, or replaced with newly acquired telephones, must be: (i) Hearing aid-compatible after the effective date of this regulation; (ii) Hearing aid-compatible and with volume control, as defined at Section 68.113, after one year after the effective date of this regulation. (Footnote) (F) When a telephone under Subsection (E) is replaced with a telephone from inventory existing before the effective date of this regulation, any person may make a bona fide request that such telephone be hearing aid-compatible, and after one year after the effective date of this regulation, with volume control, as defined at Section 68.113. (Footnote) The telephone shall be provided within fifteen working days. (G) During the period from the effective date of this order 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: (i) By having at least one coin-operated telephone, one common area telephone or one other designated hearing aid-compatible telephone on every floor of the workplace; or (ii) By providing emergency use-only hearing aid-compatible wireless telephones for use by employees in their employment duty outside common areas and outside the offices of employees with hearing disabilities. Footnote: Possible requirements for volume control are subject to a Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (NPRM) proceeding by the Commission. (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. (B) A hearing aid-compatible telephone is not required: (i) Until one year after the effective date of this regulation, for establishments with fifty or more beds, unless replaced before that time; and (ii) Until two years after the effective date of this regulation for all other establishments with fewer than fifty beds, unless replaced before that time. (C) Telephones that are purchased, or replaced with newly acquired telephones, must be: (i) Hearing aid-compatible after the effective date of this regulation; (ii) Hearing aid-compatible and with volume control, as defined at Section 68.113, after one year after the effective date of this regulation. (Footnote) (D) However, unless a telephone in a confined setting is replaced pursuant to Section 68.112(b)(3)(C), a hearing aid-compatible telephone shall not be required where: (i) A telephone is both purchased and maintained by a resident for use in that resident's room in the establishment; or (ii) The confined setting has an alternative means of signalling life- threatening or emergency situations that is available, working and monitored. Footnote: Possible requirements for volume control are subject to a Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (NPRM) proceeding by the Commission. (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 aid-compatible. Except, (i) For establishments with eighty or more guest rooms, hearing aid- compatible telephones are not required until two years after the effective date of this regulation; and (ii) For establishments with fewer than eighty guest rooms, hearing aid-compatible telephones are not required until three years after the effective date of this regulation. (B) Anytime after the effective date of this regulation, as appropriate (see Section 68.112(b)(5)(A)), if a hotel or motel room is renovated or newly constructed, or the telephone in a hotel or motel room is replaced or substantially, internally repaired, the telephone in that room must be: (i) Hearing aid-compatible after the effective date of this regulation; (ii) Hearing aid-compatible and with volume control, as defined at Section 68.113, after one year after the effective date of this regulation. (Footnote) (C) The telephones in at least twenty percent of the guest rooms in a hotel or motel must be hearing aid-compatible, upon the effective date of this regulation. (D) Notwithstanding the requirements of Section (b)(5)(A), hotels and motels whose telephones were purchased during the period January 1, 1985 through December 31, 1989 may provide hearing aid-compatible telephones in guest rooms according to the following schedule: (i) The telephones in at least twenty percent of the guest rooms in a hotel or motel must be hearing aid-compatible upon the effective date of this regulation; (ii) The telephones in at least twenty-five percent of the guest rooms in a hotel or motel must be hearing aid-compatible by three years after the effective date of this regulation; and (iii) The telephones in one-hundred percent of the guest rooms in a hotel or motel must be hearing aid-compatible 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. Footnote: Possible requirements for volume control are subject to a Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (NPRM) proceeding by the Commission. 47 C.F.R.  68.319 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/EIA-470-A-1987, or subsequent revisions thereto. The ROLR for each loop condition is first measured with the receive volume control set to its nominal gain setting by positioning the receive volume control to its minimum gain setting (unless the manufacturer identifies a different nominal gain position), followed by measuring the ROLR with the receive volume control at its maximum setting. The ROLR shall increase by no less than 12 dB or more than 18 dB. The ROLRs shall be determined over the frequency range of 300 to 3,300 Hz. 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 on-hook transition. Statement of Principle of the FCC's Hearing Aid-Compatibility Negotiated Rulemaking Committee Statement of Principle: The FCC will propose rules relative to the manufacture and importation of hearing aid-compatible telephones with volume control (as defined at the proposed  68.319) in the Commission's Notice of Proposed Rulemaking. APPENDIX 7 PRE SS RELEASE NEWS Report No. DC 95-90 ACTION IN DOCKET CASE June 22, 1995 NEGOTIATED RULEMAKING COMMITTEE REACHES FULL CONSENSUS ON PROPOSED FCC RULES F OR WIRELINE TELEPHONE HEARING AID COMPATIBILITY AND VO LUME CONTROL (CC DOCKET NO. 87-124) An FCC advisory committee has reached agreement on new rules to govern wireline telephone hearing aid compatibility and volume control. This Committee, including employer, health care, and hotel/motel representatives, as well as representatives from the disability community and telephone equipment manufacturers, deliberated only two months to reach full consensus on this new proposal. The FCC now will submit the proposed rules for public comment in a Notice of Proposed Rulemaking. Chartered in April, the 18-member Hearing Aid Compatibility (HAC) Negotiated Rulemaking Committee last week concluded two months of negotiation by proposing to the Commission rules that, in general, provide that eventually all wireline telephones in the workplace, in confined settings (e.g. hospitals, nursing homes), and in hotels and motels be hearing aid compatible. In addition, those telephones eventually also will have volume control. No testing or retrofitting of existing workplace telephones is required. The Committee noted that the volume control feature would be of assistance to many telephone users, whether they have hearing disabilities, and whether they rely on telephones that are hearing aid compatible. A volume control feature refers to the telephone's acoustic capabilities, while hearing aid compatibility refers to a telephone's ability to generate a magnetic field that is detectable by many hearing aids. "This is a real success story, " said FCC Chairman Reed Hundt. "The Commission brought these parties together, in one room, around one table, and we avoided a protracted paper process. They worked around that table and through these issues until they reached an agreement, and they did it in record time. This is truly a new way of doing the people's business in the public interest." This is the Commission's fourth negotiated rulemaking committee since the Negotiated Rulemaking Act was passed in 1990. Current FCC rules require hearing aid compatible wireline telephones for emergency telephones (elevators, tunnels), common areas (reception areas, libraries) and for the use of employees with hearing disabilities, such as a telephone in an employee's private office. In addition, ten percent of hotel and motel guest rooms must be hearing aid compatible. A major issue before the HAC Committee was whether to extend the requirement to all non-common area telephones in the workplace, confined settings such as hospitals and nursing homes, and hotel/motel guest rooms. An additional issue was whether to require that these wireline telephones have a means to control the sound volume coming through the handset or headset. A previous set of hearing aid compatibility rules, adopted by the Commission in 1992 pursuant to the Hearing Aid Compatibility Act of 1988 (HAC Act), were suspended in 1993 when establishments found them difficult to implement. The HAC Committee set aside the suspended rules and came up with entirely new approaches. Workplace Under the proposed rules, most workplace telephones would be required to be hearing aid compatible by January 1, 2000. Because some establishments purchased telephones in the years just before the HAC Act was enacted in 1988, workplace establishments with telephones purchased between 1985 and 1989 are given until January 1, 2005 to make those telephones hearing aid compatible. In harmony with the provisions of the Americans With Disabilities Act of 1990, establishments with fewer than fifteen employees would be exempt from the requirements. Until the applicable date for the telephones to be hearing aid compatible, employees with hearing disabilities would be given access to hearing-aid- compatible emergency-use-only telephones, such as wireless telephones. Headsets are exempt unless specifically needed by an employee with a hearing disability. At all times, however, replacement telephones would have to be hearing aid compatible and, one year after the effective date of the regulations, to have volume control. An employer is allowed to presume that a replacement telephone taken from an establishment's inventory of telephones that existed before the effective date of these new rules is hearing aid compatible. Although the HAC Act requires telephones manufactured or imported for use in the United States after 1989 or 1991, depending on the type of telephone, to be hearing aid compatible, it is not always clear, without testing, whether a specific telephone is hearing aid compatible. Under the HAC Committee proposal, employers are not required to test or retrofit their inventory of telephones, as they would have had to do under the suspended rules. Instead, after the applicable date for having hearing aid compatible telephones, employers are allowed to presume that their telephones are hearing aid compatible. In turn, an employee or a guest of the establishment can challenge this presumption with a good faith request for a hearing aid compatible telephone. The employer then has fifteen working days to provide a hearing aid compatible telephone. This gives the employer a period of time to replace a particular telephone that turns out not to be not hearing aid compatible. The volume control requirement is proposed to apply only as telephones are replaced. Although the Committee suggested that the volume control requirement for replacement telephones apply one year after the effective date of the new rules, the Committee asked the Commission to develop specifications, rules and a time table that would allow manufacturers sufficient time to provide telephones with volume controls. Confined Settings For confined settings, the Committee recommended that establishments with fifty or more beds comply by making their telephones hearing aid compatible within one year of the effective date of the new regulations, while those with fewer than fifty beds comply within two years. Telephones in all establishments are exempt if there is an alternate signalling device that is available, monitored and working, or if a resident brings in and maintains his or her own telephone equipment. As with workplaces, replacement telephones must be hearing aid compatible, and volume control is required pursuant to a schedule and specifications to be set by the Commission. The rebuttable presumption attached to workplace telephones does not apply to confined settings. Hotels and Motels The Committee recommended that hotels and motels with eighty or more beds be required to provide hearing aid compatible telephones within two years, while those with fewer than eighty beds have three years to do so. Telephones purchased between 1985 and 1989 are given additional time to be replaced with hearing aid compatible telephones. The Committee also recommended that, upon the effective date of the new regulations, twenty percent of the guest rooms must be hearing aid compatible. Finally, the Committee recommended that replacement telephones, and telephones that undergo significant repairs, or are in newly constructed or renovated rooms, be required to be hearing aid compatible whenever the changes are made, and to have volume control according to a schedule and specifications to be set by the Commission. The rebuttable presumption attached to workplace telephones also does not apply to hotels and motels. The Committee did not address wireless telephone hearing aid compatible issues, because those are being addressed by the Commission's Wireless Telecommunications Bureau. -FCC- News media contact: Susan Lewis Sallet, (202) 418-1573. Common Carrier Bureau contact: Greg Lipscomb at (202)634-4216 APPENDIX 8 Additional Views The following are the additional views submitted by members of the Committee: TELECOMMUNICATIONS INDUSTRY ASSOCIATION Statement to Accompany HACNRC Report The Telecommunications Industry Association (TIA) appreciated the opportunity to be a part of this FCC Hearing Aid Compatibility Negotiated Rulemaking Committee (HACNRC). TIA's primary reasons for involvement were to provide its historical knowledge of legislative and regulatory events that have led up to this Committee, as well as to provide a link to industry history and technical personnel knowledgeable in the design of telecommunications equipment and standards related to that equipment. TIA is responsible for the standards used to define HAC in this country. Since TIA was not representing telephone equipment owners who might bear any costs of HAC retrofitting or users with hearing impairments who might derive the benefits of HAC retrofitting, TIA abstained from any decisions related to such issues. TIA provided survey data from manufacturers when requested by the Committee, a technical demonstration of HAC, and took an active part in all discussions. Since the telephone equipment owners and representatives of the disabled reached consensus on the proposed rules and this report, as the TIA representative I do not object to this report being finalized. The HACNRC was advised that this is the first Negotiated Rulemaking Committee sponsored by the FCC that reached a consensus position on all issues and issued a final report. I am proud to have been part of this success. In large measure the success of this effort goes to the excellent FCC Staff that supported this Committee including Bill Luther, the Committee Facilitator; Linda Dubroof, the FCC's representative on the Committee; and Committee Staff, Greg Lipscomb and Lisa Boehley. In addition, the other Committee members competently advocated the views of their interest groups in what was often spirited debate, but did so in a way that demonstrated professionalism and good faith towards reaching compromise. If the FCC amends its rules in line with the recommendations of the Committee, this should lead to improved accessibility to telecommunications for individuals with disabilities. Hopefully the FCC will consider the success of this Committee and the process of Negotiated Rulemakings in future efforts to revise the FCC's Part 68 rules so that the industry and the consumers it serves do not have to wait many years for FCC Decisions regarding the registration program. TIA looks forward to being an active participant in the Rulemaking to be initiated by the FCC to consider the recommendations of the HACNRC. Dan Bart Vice President, Standards and Technology Telecommunications Industry Association Electronic Industries Association Member HACNRC 2500 Wilson Boulevard Suite300 Arlington, VA 22201 7031907-7700 o FAX 7031907-7727 Representing the telecommunications industry in association with the Electronic Industries Association WILEY, REIN & FIELDING 1776 K STREET, N. W. WASHINGTON, D. C. 20006 (202) 429-7000 Jeffrey S. Linder Facsmile (202) 429-7384 (202) 429-7049 Telex 248349 WYRN UR June 19, 1995 William A. Luther Facilitator Hearing Aid Compatibility Negotiated Rulemaking Committee Federal Communications Commission 2000 M Street, N.W. Room 804 Washington, D.C, 20554 Re: Separate Statement of Tele-Communications Association ("TCAII) Dear Mr. Luther: TCA is pleased to have served on the Hearing Aid Compatibility Negotiated Rulemaking Committee ("Committee"), and greatly appreciates your leadership and the good faith, flexibility, and dedication of the other representatives. The Committee's recommended revisions to 47 C.F.R.  68.112(b)(1) -- the provision of greatest concern to TCA's members -- incorporate significant concessions from all affected interests and appear to strike a reasonable balance between costs and benefits. Accordingly, TCA concurs in the proposal and, with three reservations, will support its adoption by the Commission. First, the Committee has suggested that the Commission seek comment on a volume control requirement. TCA agrees that such a requirement could be beneficial to both hearing impaired and non-hearing impaired individuals,. At the same time, however, no evidence was presented to the Committee regarding the cost of volume control capabilities. TCA therefore will urge the Commission to adopt a volume control requirement only if reliable evidence demonstrates that it can be implemented without significant, unwarranted costs to consumers. Moreover, any volume control requirement must be prospective only, not retroactive, and must not take effect until compliant equipment is reasonably available. Second, TCA wishes to highlight the Committee's understanding, reflected in the Report, that nothing in the proposed rules creates any new or separate right of access by third parties to the premises of employers. That is, while "any person" can request replacement of a non-HAC phone under recommended 47 C.F.R., 68.112(b)(1)(D), persons may not enter a work place for the purpose of surveying or auditing the telephones and demanding replacement of any that are found non-compliant. Third, TCA will strongly urge the Commission to heed the Committee's recommendation that the new requirements be widely publicized, using both traditional and electronic means. Because the HAC rules will apply to every employer with more than 15 employees, many of the affected entities would not normally be aware of the Commission's actions. Accordingly, to assure the highest possible level of compliance, notice must be pervasive. Once again, TCA is gratified for the opportunity to have served on the Committee. Please assure that this separate statement is included in the Committee's Report, and feel free to contact me if you have any questions. Respectfully submitted, \s\ Jeffrey S. Linder Counsel for Tele-Communications Association cc: Greg Lipscomb Linda Dubroof IBM STATEMENT ON THE FCC HEARING AID COMPATIBILITY NEGOTIATED RULEMAKING COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION IBM believes the proposed rule would cause the FCC to exceed its statutory authority by requiring that, in effect, all telephones in the workplace be retrofitted to be hearing-aid compatible (HAC). IBM strongly believes in the ability of hearing impaired individuals to use HAC telephones at the workplace. Any known IBM employee requiring HAC telephones as an accommodation will get one immediately. IBM also provides accommodation through other means, including computers, telecommunications, and captioning. IBM would have preferred that each company be given a chance to look at its employee population and evaluate how HAC telephones could best be placed and used. EQUAL EMPLOYMENT SUITE 1200 TEL 202/789-8650 ADVISORY COUNCIL 1015 Fifteenth Street, NW FAX 202/789-2291 Washington, DC 20005 TDD 202/789-8645 Statement of the Equal Employment Advisory Council (for inclusion in the Final Report of the Hearing Aid Compatibility Negotiated Rulemaking Committee) The Equal Employment Advisory Council (EEAC) abstains from the consensus reached by the HAC Negotiated Rulemaking Committee, for the reasons set forth below. EEAC is a voluntary association of employers organized in 1976 to promote sound approaches to the elimination of employment discrimination. Its membership includes nearly 300 major U.S. corporations, as well as several associations which themselves have hundreds of corporate members. In EEAC's view, the negotiations of the Committee with respect to Section 68.112(b)(1) consistently have focused on when, not if, all workplace telephones should be made hearing aid compatible. Any such deadline would require retrofitting of existing systems. At the May 11, 1995 meeting, EEAC presented to the Committee its views that (1) the Americans with Disabilities Act, 42 U.S.C.  12101 et seq. fully addresses the needs of hearing aid users in the workplace; and (2) the FCC lacks statutory authority to require retrofitting of all workplace telephones. Indeed, the governing statutory language states specifically that "[e]xcept for coin-operated telephones and telephones provided for emergency use, the Commission may not require the retrofitting of equipment to achieve the purposes of this section. 47 U.S.C.  610 (f). The clear language of the statutes and their legislative history do not support an interpretation that would characterize all workplace telephones as "provided for emergency use. " See Presentation of the Equal Employment Advisory Council, HACNRC-37 and HACNRC-38 (May 11, 1995). These remain EEAC's views. At the same time, it appears to EEAC that the Commission intends to require retrofitting of all workplace telephones within one year if the Committee is unable to reach consensus. Thus, the consensus recommendation of the Committee offers more generous terms than the FCC is inclined to provide, yet exceeds the FCC's authority. This issue, and EEAC's position, were discussed in detail by EEAC's Board of Directors, and it is the consensus of the Board that EEAC must abstain from the consensus recommendation of the HAC Negotiating Committee. APPENDIX 9 RELEVANT CITATIONS Access to Telecommunications Equipment by the Hearing Impaired and other Disabled Persons, Order, CC Docket No. 83-427, 49 Fed. Reg. 1352 (January 11, 1984) modified, 49 Fed. Reg. 19666 (May 9, 1984), further modified, FCC 84-382 (released August 13, 1984). Access to Telecommunications Equipment and Services by the Hearing Impaired and Other Persons with Disabilities, CC Docket No. 87-124, First Report and Order, 4 FCC Rcd 4596 (1989); Memorandum Opinion and Order and Further Notice of Proposed Rule Making, 5 FCC Rcd 3434 (1990), recon. denied, 6 FCC Rcd 4799 (1991); Report and Order, 7 FCC Rcd 3472 (1992); Order, 8 FCC Rcd 4958 (1993). Public Notice, Emergency Request to Reinstate Enforcement of the Hearing Aid Compatibility Rules, CC Docket No. 87-124, May 25, 1993. Public Notice, FCC Asks for Comments and Nominations for Membership Regarding the Establishment of an Advisory Committee to Negotiate Regulations, CC Docket No. 87-124 (Nov. 7, 1994). Notice of Advisory Committee Establishment, 60 FR 15739, March 27, 1995. Federal Advisory Committee Act , 5 U.S.C. App. 2; Negotiated Rulemaking Act of 1990, Pub. L. 101-648 ( 1990). 47 C.F.R.  64.607, 68.3 ("Essential Telephones"), 68.4, 68.112, 68.218(5), 68.224, 68.316, 68.414. Americans With Disabilities Act of 1990, Pub. L. No. 101-336, 104 Stat. 327. Hearing Aid Compatibility Act of 1988, 47 U.S.C.  610. APPENDIX 10 Transmittal Letter FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION WASHINGTON, D.C. 20554 August 3, 1995 Kathleen M.H. Wallman Chief, Common Carrier Bureau Federal Communications Commission Washington, D.C. 20554 Dear Ms. Wallman: It is a pleasure to transmit to you the Report of the FCC Advisory Committee which was charged with formulating recommended requirements for hearing aid-compatible (HAC) telephones in work places, hospitals, health care facilities, prisons, hotels and motels. The Hearing Aid-Compatibility Negotiated Rulemaking Committee worked conscientiously for nine-weeks, concluding deliberations on June 15, 1995. The Committee was completely successful in its negotiations reaching full consensus on the proposed regulations and the draft Report. The Report contains the language of specific rules proposed to replace those HAC rules which were suspended by the Commission in 1993. As a result of its negotiations, the Committee also recommends proposed rules on volume control for telephones. The Committee defined "volume control" according to an appropriate, developing industry standard, and asked that the FCC conduct a Notice of Proposed Rulemaking proceeding leading to the requirement for manufacture and importation of volume- controlled telephone equipment by one-year after the date of a new Commission order. Inclusion of volume control with telephone equipment would be a new prescription that would greatly assist not only persons with hearing disabilities, but an untold number of senior citizens and others who could benefit from adjustable volume. The Committee heard that telephones with volume control are widely available today as part of advancement in telecommunication technology. However, it was unanimously agreed that the volume control issue must be fully explored in an FCC proceeding, including costs, benefits, availability, and efficacy, before related rules are adopted. I would be remiss if I did not acknowledge the hard work of Ms. Linda Dubroof, the FCC representative on the Committee, and of Mr. Greg Lipscomb, the Designated Federal Officer. Ms. Dubroof toiled between Committee meetings, chairing an ad-hoc working group that examined specific issues as they arose, and preparing documentation for subsequent consideration. The input documentation and attached Committee Report would not have been possible without long, extra hours of work by Mr. Lipscomb. Dedication by these two individuals was crucial to the success of the Committee and they are to be highly commended for their exemplary efforts. Sincerely, \s\ William A. Luther Facilitator