[ Text Format | Word Format ]
>>: Good morning. Welcome to the April 2nd, 1998 meeting of the Federal Communications Commission. We have a big an important agenda today. We'll be considering four items, a range of items today, including a very important item on insuring accessibility of telecommunication services for the disabled community and some very important streamlining in electronic filing items today. We've got a great agenda this morning. One housekeeping item. The OSS item that had been sunshine will not be considered at the meeting today. We plan to address that item very very shortly on circulation.
>>: The first item that we will consider today is a draft order to implement one of the most important provisions of the telecommunications act of 1996, Section 255. That is the provision in the law that requires telecommunications equipment and services to be accessible to persons with disabilities.
>>: As I've talked about this issue since I've become chairman, people often ask me, well, what does it mean to make telecommunications equipment and services accessible to the disability community? And so today we are going to have a little demonstration of some telecommunications products that insure that disabled people have access to technology.
>>: Before we begin that I want to acknowledge first the presence of Pam Gregory who is signing there. You don't have to wave, Pam. I know you are busy. And I'd also like to acknowledge three very important guests who are here today with us from the architectural and transportation barriers compliance board also known as the Access Board. That is the board that we have been working closely with at the FCC on implementing Section 255. I'd like to acknowledge the folks today from the Access Board. I understand that Pall Holmes, David Capozi and Dennis Cannon are here from the architectural board. Workgroup stand up so that we could acknowledge you. Thank you for being here. Thank you for all your work. I only saw one hand go up. Maybe they are shy this morning.
>>: On to the demonstration. Dan Phythyon who is Chief of the Wireless Telecommunications Bureau will lead the demonstration.
>>: Thank you. We have four people joining us today to demonstrate just a few of the products that are already on the market to provide accessibility for persons with disabilities. Joining us today to demonstrate these products are Scott Marshall from the American Foundation for the Blind, Claude stout from telecommunications for the deaf, Gus Estrella from united cerebral palsy association and John Nelson from the rehabilitation services at DOE. I think we'll start this morning with Claude.
>>: Hello. My name is Claude stout and I'm the executive director of Telecommunications for the Deaf, Inc. . I'm very pleased to be part of this demonstration with you this morning. I happen to be deaf and I don't use a regular telephone, and I use a TTY. What's interesting about the TTY itself, the TTY is a machine which transmits tones from one TTY device to another. It sends signal from what I type to someone else who is another TTY user who send signals back to me which I read.
>>: Not only do we make calls to others who have TTY but we make TTY calls to the telecommunications relay service which serves people who do not have TTYs. When we call the relay service they make the TTY call for us to someone who does not have a TTY and uses voice. When the other person speaks, they speak to a relay center which communicates to me by TTY signals what the other person is speaking by voice. It's a very wonderful service.
>>: The TTY comes in different sizes. It comes in different colors, and depending on the variety of TTYs, it comes with also a variety of different features. The TTY that I'm using today is great. It's a very small TTY. You can carry it. It's very portable. You can travel with it. It's not as cumbersome as some other TTYs.
>>: The person to whom I'll place a call in the booth and that person has a built-in phone which has amplification as well. And this is for your experience. I'm going to place a call to him in the booth.
>>: Hello, GA.
>>: Hi, Fred. This is Claude. How are you this morning? GA.
>>: I'm good. Glad you are okay. GA. (or go ahead.).
>>: Yes, I'm fine, thanks. And neat that you and I are participating in this demonstration. For all benefit. Increases sensitivity and awareness for disabled Americans' needs in telecommunications. GA.
>>: I'm happy to be a part of it. GA.
>>: Okay. Let's end this demonstration and thanks. SK.
>>: SK.
>>: Also you will notice that when I typed GA, that means go ahead, and if I say at the end of a conversation, I end with SK which is the abbreviation for stop keying, so that's neat. It's part of TTY etiquette. So it was nice to be with you all and now I'll turn the floor over to Gus.
>>: .
>>: Hello. My name is Gus and I'm a policy fellow with united cerebral palsy association. At the national office in Washington DC.
>>: Hello, my name is Gus Estrella, and I am a policy fellow with the United Cerebral Palsy association at the national office in Washington DC. I have cerebral palsy and use an augmentative communication device called the liberator so my voice is digital output. I have cerebral palsy and use an augmentative communication device called the liberator so my voice is digital output because I need my hands to input my thoughts into my liberator, I'm forced to use a speaker phone whenever I use the telephone. Unlike the average person who can use the regular telephone because I use my hands to input my thoughts into my liberator I'm forced to use a speaker phone whenever I use a telephone. Unlike the average person who can use a regular telephone. Unlike most machines, most telephones know this particular telephone. I'm using today another accessibility feature such as wireless remote control that allows me to transfer and make calls, voice translated transferring large key pad. Unlike most telephones this particular telephone I'm using today has other accessibility features such as remote control that allows me to answer and make calls, voice activated answering and large key pad items. I am now going to call someone very special. I am now going to call someone very special. (dial tone.) (ringing.).
>>: My phone is ringing. Hello.
>>: Hello.
>>: Is this my friend Gus?
>>: Yes and good morning and thank you for depending on me like many people do when they first hear my voice. I think they think I want to sell them summing. I think they think I want to sell them something. Well, what do you think of my ability to talk to you over the telephone? Without any help. Well, what do you think about my ability to talk to you over the telephone without any help?
>>: Gus, I think it's wonderful and I thank you for being here and making what we do here at the FCC so relevant. Thank you very much.
>>: Thank you. (applause). .
>>: I'm so glad I got through that. I think we have another demonstration.
>>: Glad that I dialed the right phone number, and I'm just glad that I dialed the right number. And now here is Scott. And now here is Scott. Q. (BY
>>) Good morning, Mr. Chairman and members of the commission, staff, and my friends at the access board as well. I'm Scott Marshall with the American Foundation for the Blind. As I was telling, Gus, Mr. Chairman before the meeting began, I was quite envious that he has your cell phone number already programmed into his telephone. How many of us in the room would love to have that number? I've been playing with telephones, I must confess, since I was a kid. I remember the old 10-button touch tone phones of the '60s that had to be black and did one thing. They allowed you to talk on the telephone.
>>: As you've mentioned, though, Mr. Chairman, some of the technologies that were originally developed for people with disabilities like the speaker phone that Gus was just using, now are indeed common place in the general market. In fact, I have a speaker phone in every room of my house, if there is a vendor in the audience, and you'll find out why in just a moment. But the good news is that these mass market devices have a lot of accessibility features already built into them for people who are blind or visually impaired. For example, the little knob on the key pad number five for orientation, the ability to use that palm key or the star key to dial in particular system functions right from the key pad without having to look at a visual display, for example, this sort of thing.
>>: But really, the true value of technology is not how Scott Marshall or his friends might be able to play with it, but what it can do for people. I'd like to demonstrate a service to you this morning from the Washington metropolitan ear of silver spring, Maryland which provides reading of newspapers and magazines over the telephone. I don't know about you, this morning you probably had your cup of coffee and the Washington post, and I did the same thing. Let me show you why, you also know why I have a speaker phone in every room of my house.
>>: (dial tone.).
>>: Outside line, the commission must have paid this bill. That's good news. (dialing.).
>>: (ringing.).
>>: You have reached the metropolitan ear dial in read newspapers magazine serving Maryland, Virginia and the District of Columbia. Please enter your ID number. Now enter your security number.
>>: Welcome to dial in news for Thursday, April 2nd. Press 1 for the Washington post and selections from the Wall Street journal. Press 2 for time magazine and public service announcements. Press 3 for the Washingtonian. For people magazine press 4, or for yesterday's Washington post press 5.
>>: Let's try the Post.
>>: This is the Washington post. Enter your two digit category number now. If you don't know the category number you want here is a complete list. Washington post categories. 10, index, 11, front page, 12, front section, 13, editorial.
>>: It will go through the entire paper including sections of advertising. Let's go to the front page.
>>: You are in the front page section.
>>: Jones versus Clinton is dismissed.
>>: You knew that had to be the headline, didn't you.
>>: The secretary --
>>: I'm going to go to the next article.
>>: That ends this category. Enter your two digit category number now.
>>: We could go on to other sections of the paper but you get the point.
>>: Now if they could only do something about Monica we'd be in business, but thank you very much for your attention. I hope you found this demonstration useful. I can tell you that I spend now with access to both the times, Washington post and a few things like fun things, like the Washingtonian, a good hour to an hour and a half day reading a newspaper, and for anyone working in Washington, you know how critical that can be. Thank you very much. (applause).
>>: Now, now John will demonstrate some new technology that if he's not careful I'm going to take home with me.
>>: Thank you very much, Scott. My name is John Nelson. I'm Chief of the independent living branch at the rehab services administration. I'm responsible for administering title 7 of the rehabilitation act, 1973. That's not what brings he here today. What brings me here is 30 years' experience with quadriplegia and trying to encourage change for people with disabilities.
>>: One basic concept in independent living, there is nothing wrong with having a disability. The problem occurs when a person with a disability wants to do something and can't due to the limitation of the disability and barriers in the environment.
>>: Focus of the independent living program is trying to change the environment by eliminating barriers to people with disabilities. That's what this technology here does. It's a lightweight hands free voice activated phone. It changes the environment where people, everyone, first of all, and then also people with physical, memory, vision and hearing disabilities. That's because one doesn't have to punch in the numbers, with a physical disability that can be tricky, as Gus demonstrated. You don't have to remember the numbers. You can log them in ahead of time. You just have to remember who you want to call.
>>: You don't have to read the small little LCD display because it will talk to you using this little Mike and ear piece. And it allowed you to hear in a crowded room, for example, you can put it next to a hearing aid if you happen to use a hearing aid. It will speak directly into the hearing aid that allows you to hear better.
>>: For me personally, I have a boat and if I'm piloting the boat it's a small thing, but, you know, I want to call ahead to a marina for slippage or gas or something like that, I always use the cell phone because it's better than I think the deal with the radios and so forth, a lot easier. It would allow me to keep piloting the boat and call the next marina. I could easily log that in ahead of time.
>>: The other really nice feature is here is a wheelchair and I always believe in using the latest technology, and sometimes wheelchairs can run out of energy or break down or you can get a flat tire, just a number of emergencies that could occur. It would be real handy to just with this hands free program you could just call home. That's all you'd have to do. You could call home and I could tell my wife that I had a flat tire or whatever. She could bring the van and pick me up and I wouldn't have to worry about where is the nearest phone, is there somebody around. It's very liberating concept.
>>: Now, I just want to demonstrate this thing. When you flip the phone open or punch a talk" it prompts you with what number do you want to dial. "Dan."
>>: It allowed me to do it. Let me try that again. There is a mike right here.
>>: "Dan." It fed me my own voice with the program Dan so I know it's connected. It gives me the telephone number.
>>: Hi, Dan here.
>>: Hi, Dan.
>>: How are you?
>>: Thrilled this works well.
>>: Me, too, frankly.
>>: That's the end of the demonstration. We have FCC behind me, it somehow really didn't like calling Dan today. Thank you very much.
>>: Thank you, Scott, and Claude and Gus and John for demonstrating that wonderful technology for us today. Fifty-four million Americans, 54 million Americans in this country have some sort of disability, and the technology that you saw today can dramatically improve the lives of 54 million Americans in this country. Now I'd like to turn over to Dan Phythyon who is going to tell us some of the proposals that we have in the works to bring this technology to many of those Americans.
>>: Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and thank you again to all of our demonstrators. I think this was very useful in highlighting the importance of the notice of proposed rule making to implement Section 255 that we have in front of the commission today. The implementation rules that we propose never lose sight of the end goal of this legislation which is to insure that consumers have access to telecommunication services and equipment. We are seeking to implement this legislation in a very practical and common sense manner. We provide incentives for the industry to consider disabilities issues at the very front end of their development and design process and on an ongoing basis. We afford the industry a great deal of flexibility to innovate and Marshall it's resources towards that critical end goal rather than focusing on compliance with detailed implementation rules, and we spend a lot of time focusing the commission's resources very efficiently by handling complaints in a streamlined consumer friendly manner, again with the eye towards that critical end goal.
>>: The center piece of our implementation proposal today is a fast track process which is designed to resolve accessibility complaints informally and provide consumers with very quick solutions and which also freeze manufacturers and service providers from the burden of much more structured complaints procedures.
>>: I'm going to turn over to John Spencer now in our policy division, the author of the item, to describe our proposal in more detail. Joining us at the table today is John Simka who is the Chief of our policy division.
>>: Good morning, Mr. Chairman, commissioners. The draft notice of proposed rule making before you today, the next major step in the commissions implementation of Section 255. It builds upon the notice of inquiry the commission adopted in September, 1996.
>>: Since that time the bureau and the staff of the disabilities issues task force in particular have engaged in extensive discussion with representatives of the disability community as well as with telecommunications service providers and equipment manufacturers who are subject to Section 255. Our objective, as Dan indicated, is to find practical and effective ways to bring the benefits of the nation's telecommunications resources, modern technology to people with disabilities. Proposals in the draft MPRM are drawn from these consultations as well as from our analysis of the comments submitted by a wide range of interested parties in response to the NOI. The staff has also worked closely with the staff of the access board because of the board's responsibilities under Section 255, regarding the accessibility of telecommunications equipment and customer premises equipment. The NPRM seeks to take into account the access board's equipment guidelines in effect just four weeks ago. The NPRM itself addresses three broad areas important to the commission's implementation of Section 255.
>>: First, it explores the commission's legal authority to implement the section, including the relationship between the commission's authority under the statute and the guidelines the access board established.
>>: Second, the MPR M seeks comment on interpretation of statutory terms used in Section 255. For example, Congress imported several items such as accessibility readily achievable into Section 255 from the Americans with disabilities act. The NPRN seeks comments on how these terms can be made workable in the context of telecommunications services and equipment. In particular, the NPRN proposes to establish specific telecommunications related factors that would be considered in evaluating whether the test of making a telecommunications product accessible is readily achievable.
>>: Third, the NPRM proposes problem solving processes designed to resolve accessibility issues informally. As Dan indicated, the fast track process at the heart of this proposal would give consumers quick solutions and free manufacturers and service providers from the burdens of more structured complaint procedures. The NPRM also proposes in assessing whether service providers and equipment manufacturers have met their accessibility obligations under the statute, the commission would give weight showings that a company has made good faith efforts to achieve accessibility throughout the development process. The bureau recommend this commission adopt the notice of proposed rule making and we request editorial privileges. Thank you.
>>: Thank you. I drafted a statement that I was going to read about highlighting some of the important aspects of this item and why I think it's so important and why it is a personal priority for me and I believe for this commission but I'm not going to read that statement because I think that I really could not amplify in a more meaningful way the importance of this item than to just recall the demonstration that we saw this morning.
>>: So I will forgo the statement and thank again you, Gus, and Claude, and John and Scott for coming here to demonstrate for us, I think in the best way that we can, how important this item is to the commission. And decided to name this item the liberator, the liberator order.
>>: In honor of you, Gus. And I also want to thank, of course, the wireless bureau and you, Dan, for your leadership in bringing this item before us, and also Merrill eye cove and Pam Gregory for their consistent commitment and leadership on these issues. I don't think that we would have the item in the shape it is in today without both of you and your hard work. Thank you very much. Commissioner Ness?
>>: thank you, Mr. Chairman. I, too, want to extend my thanks and appreciation to Gus and Claude and John and Scott for their demonstration, and underscore what the chairman just said about how important this item is. I recently saw a maid for television document try by ABC entitled "Eugene" which was the story of a young man, 13-year-old, who had cerebral palsy, and he used the same sort of equipment, the liberator, to be able to communicate. He moved laboriously with his foot to be able to punch all of those letters, and was able with the help of community and just incredible spirit ultimately to become Barmitzva using this equipment. It was just an extraordinary story, if you ever have a chance to see this, I hope they run it again at some point in time.
>>: In our daily lives telecommunications has become an essential part of everything that we do, and we have benefited richly from the telecommunications revolution and all of the little aids that come through. We have voicemail and we have call forwarding and we have this and we have that.
>>: As we go through our day, let's all think about what we are doing and how each piece has in effect an impact on those of us in this community who have disabilities. It really is an enormous opportunity as well as a barrier. So I am delighted to be supportive of Section 255 actions that we take today. I particularly want to thank the Access Board that worked extraordinarily hard to come up with its recommendations. It was a magnificent effort on the part of so many people who deserve to be recognized and applauded as well.
>>: And I look forward to further discussions about issues within this order as we plow through to determine what is readily achievable. I certainly intend to do everything I can to facilitate communications from which we all, every one of us richly benefit. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
>>: Thank you, commissioner. Commissioner Furchtgott-Roth.
>>: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. The past several minutes I've been trying to scribble over here and edit my prepared statement. While it was a very good statement as the demonstrations were going on I thought it increasingly less adequate to fully capture the importance of this proceeding.
>>: Mr. Chairman, I think you summed it up very well. I would like to commend the staff for doing just an outstanding job on I know a lot of very hard work has gone in over the past many months to get this item in shape, and I think it's -- it has -- it's done just an outstanding job. It's an excellent item. I've looked forward to final rules being able to come out later this year. Thank you very much.
>>: Thank you,
>>: I think chairman Kennard and chairman Furchtgott-Roth that I could use but not forgo my statement which I won't. It is the law and it should be the law that manufacturers of telecommunication equipment and customer premises equipment and providers of telecommunications services shall insure that such equipment and services are accessible to and usable by individuals with disabilities. In my mind it is only right that Congress included this provision, Section 255 in the act. It understood that as it unleashed a largely unregulated and highly competitive telecommunications industry, it needed to insure that people with disabilities were not strewn aside in the battle for customers and subscribers.
>>: It is only right that manufacturers and service providers should be ready, willing, and able to step up to welcome and accept this task, to insure that a significant portion of their customers are properly accommodated. I fully expect and will demand that every industry participant will comply with the letter and spirit of this law. I know that this is an area where free market force loan are unlikely to address the specific needs of individuals who, solely because of life's unpredictability and randomness find themselves restricted by physical adversity. This is an area where government can help this community enjoy the fruits of independence, that the seeds of telecommunications can yield and that the act envisions. The principle of universal service is ultimately inclusion and the disabled community should not be overlooked. This is a personal matter for me because I know the frustrations personally of being relegated to the outskirts of normal society because of the inability to access the necessary instruments of daily life. I suffer from physical limitations rutting from serious accident. I recall vividly the feeling of helplessness brought on by the inability to help myself with basic life functions. I recall during my year long convalescence preferring the hospital over my own home. Home was where the real world of difficult stair ways to navigate rather than ramps of the hospital. It was bathrooms that were a nightmare to get to and use, and I was inhospitable beds and chairs. It was a place where I watched fully functional people move easily in and out of every day, living normal, unencumbered lives. I can easily imagine how it must feel to be unable to even make a phone call.
>>: As the commission seeks to accommodate the needs of the disabled we need to be careful in our squeal not to stigmatize those which Section 255 was designed to help and be careful not to create disincentives in an industry that can help. I look forward to reviewing the comments in this proceeding and welcome any and all suggestions on how the commission can improve upon the enforcement procedures we propose so that this important law we are tasked with enforcing will be subject to the fullest compliance. Thank you.
>>: Thank you, commissioner Powell. Commissioner Tristani?
>>: Mr. Chairman, I, too, am going to depart from my written statement. But I do want to make a couple of points. First of all, I want to thank Congress for making this the law. Without their wise acknowledgment that this is so important, we wouldn't be doing this today.
>>: Second I want to say that this NPRM is long overdue. It should have happened sooner, but it is happening so it's a good start. I want to thank the participants today, the demonstrators. You've made it so real. You've demonstrated in such a meaningful way what it means in your lives and so many other lives of Americans with disabilities.
>>: I have no idea or no conception of what it is to be in your shoes but I have a relative who has a disability, a young God son who was recently diagnosed with MS. And I'm so happy that in some small way I'm perhaps helping his life and so many other Americans' lives be better with this. I don't need to say much more but thank you, participants, all of you. Mr. Chairman, I'm more than happy to forward this.
>>: Unless there is any further discussion we'll proceed to a vote. All those in favor of adopting this order say aye,
>>: Aye.
>>: Oh posed? The ayes have it. So ordered. Thank you all.
>>: Okay, we'll proceed now to the next item on the agenda. There is commissioner Furchtgott-Roth just mentioned to me, Chris, you have kind of a tough act to follow. The next item on the agenda is the -- an item to adopt rules permitting electronic filing of comments and commissions rule making proceeding. This item will be presented jointly by the Office of General Counsel and the Office of Public Affairs. So our able general counsel is here to present the item.
>>: Chairman and commissioners, yes, I predict our item will not receive applause, although it is an important item. Barry Schecter from our administrative law division will present it.
>>: Thank you, good morning Mr. Chairman, commissioners. I'm pleased to be able to present on behalf of the Office of General Counsel and the Office of Public Affairs an important order that will help move the commission's processes into the 21st century. With me is Sheryl Segal of OPA who has been overseeing the process for OPA. The rule changes contained in the draft before you today will allow the public to file comments and other pleadings electronically by the Internet, and most notice of inquiry proceeding, reconsideration in such proceedings. Electronic comment filing system will accept comments filed electronically by the public and paper documents scanned by commission staff into electronic form. Public and commission staff will be able to retrieve documents in the ECFS through the Internet. They can review them on their computers, print out copies of the documents on their own printers, rather than relying on paper copies available through the FCC reference rooms or through the copy contract. Shortly, the documents in the commission's record imaging processing system will be transferred into the ECFS making all documents since 1992 available over the Internet for the public. With this new filing system the commission takes a significant step toward breaking down print barriers that prevent people with disabilities from participating fully in our rule making process. Electronic filing will also reduce the cost and complications from paper filing. In short our processes will be more accessible to public and in particular persons with disabilities. The commission initially proposed electronic comment filing for rule makings only. In response to public comments we have recommended that the initial implementation also include comments and notices inquiry proceedings, petitions for rule making and proceedings, and petitions for rule making proceedings. The ECFS will accept. Required summaries of oral ex parte presentations ECFS is up and running now and become effective in June. Until then electronic comment filing will be permitted as specified by the commission in individual proceedings. A public notice will be issued when the ECFS becomes the official system of record replacing rip. The ECFS will be monitored and evaluated by staff to determine whether there is any need to make modification, whether it's feasible to expand further the applicability of the system beyond rule making proceedings, possible to require electronic filing in the future. The commission wide ECFS will compliment individual bureau and office electronic filing initiatives such as the Common Carrier Bureau electronic tariff filing system, the wireless electronic licensing, . Streamline mass media applications rules, processes, and to move toward electronic filing. I want to note that the ECFS will be demonstrated in room 415 until 3 o'clock this afternoon. The ECFS is a great step forward for the commission. We recommend adoption of the report and order and request editorial privileges.
>>: Thank you, Larry. Actually, Chris, I think a lot of people will applaud this item because this is a really significant step toward having an all electronic filing system for the FCC. I know that there are people around town who, young associates who are certainly applauding this item. I practiced law in this town, communications law for a dozen years, and I had the distinction in my law firm of being the fastest associate, meaning that I could get to the commission from the law offices at 15th and I street faster than anybody else in the law firm. When we were running late, even if I wasn't working on the filing, any time someone would come to my office and say we are really late, we need you to run this over to the FCC, so much so, that at the end of my first year as an associate I was presented with a brand new pair of running shoes in honor of my quickness is getting filings into the FCC. Well, rules that we are adopting today obviously will greatly improve the ability of people to get filings into this agency, and I'm sure this will be applauded by people around the country, including people in the disabilities community who will be able to interface with this agency in ways that will make it so much easier for them to have input.
>>: We are continuing to transform the way that the public interacts with our agency, and in talking to people around the country it's clear that many more people are involved in our agency because of technology. As Cheryl knows, we get 227,000 hits on our Internet Web site a day. That's a lot of people interfacing with us in ways that they never could before. So, this is a significant item. I am very pleased to support it.
>>: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. This report will do three very important things. First it will make the commission more efficient. Second, it will make comments and pleadings already on file electronically more user friendly, and third, it will make the commission's processes more accessible to all members of the public, and it's not just members of the public in the United States. This is members of the public globally who have tremendous interest in what we do here. Indeed, we have been advocates for transparency of process around the world, as all of these new commissions are up and running as a result of the world Telecom Act, we now have an opportunity to demonstrate clearly what transparency means. They will have an opportunity to follow more closely the activities of this commission.
>>: As with any new system there are always glitches that have to be worked out and I'm sure we'll have our share of those. But I'm also sure that the staff is responsible for the filing system, will watch for these problems, and make corrections as quickly as possible.
>>: As the chairman pointed out, those physically disabled will also have an enormous opportunity to participate in our deliberations. They won't have to find ways of getting -- or anyone will not have to hire expensive Washington DC counsel to deliver items to the commission. Now they can hire pensive counsel in Anchorage and Omaha and Oahu to file their documents for them. I think that's particularly helpful for those in the far reaches of this country who by virtue of the fact that they can now file until midnight eastern time, will be able to participate more meaningfully in our docket. I'm very pleased that we are taking this step and I want to applaud all of you who have worked on this item for your efforts. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
>>: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. This again has been a very great staff effort. I understand that members of each of the bureaus worked on it and have put in a lot of effort to come up with the fine work.
>>: I must say, Mr. Chairman, that someone should speak up for the young associates in law firms around the country. While before it was just the fleet footed in Washington who were going to get called on at the last moment, I suspect that life being life, that things will always be held up to the last minute and at five minutes before the filing deadline some senior partner is going to walk into a young associate's office, whether in Anchorage or Omaha or Oahu and say we are running late. We got to get this filed, and you are the fastest at it. And it won't be because they have the best running shoes or the best athletic prowess. It will be because they know how to make the keyboard Sing, and they know the right keys to enter to get into the FCC filing system. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
>>: Thank you.
>>: The chairman apparently hasn't been an associate in a long time. What this means is you will be there at midnight when you used to be done at 5:30. There is nothing about this associates applauding. There are partners applauding, however, all over America because it's at least seven more billable hours.
>>: Anyway, I just had two areas of questions, not so much questions, but probably points of emphasis that I'm concerned about. Technical matters, and I'll sort of throw them out to you rather than pose them as questions. One of the things that I discovered recently with Internet based applications is that a lot of them are actually not accessible to disabilities because of their heavy reliance on graphical format that don't get translated easily into devices that allow you to hear or interpret the content. I discovered that on my own Web page and took some efforts to have it redesigned in order to be more accessible because it contained graphics and JAVA applications that we heard from disabled communities didn't work for them. I just want to insure that when we go to Internet based applications, particularly documents that are scanned which are essentially graphics, that we make sure that they are in fact disability accessible rather than seemingly so. Rather than a question I'll leave that as an emphasis.
>>: A similar related concern and maybe it is a question, is that the item talks about documents being in the .pdf format. For those of you who are somewhat familiar with this, this certainly provides accessibility of printing but it does provide problem with downloading documents for further use, and I would just emphasize that most sites also usually have a pure text format, either WordPerfect or ASCII that allows people to translate and move the comments or edit them or mark them up in some way that I would encourage us to look into and give some thought to insure that these things will be useful to the maximum. But most government sites you'll usually note that have both ac crow bat.pdf performance but also text only version so that the documents can be more usable. Again I won't make it a question, but I would really ask you all to sort of make an effort so those things are taken care of.
>>: Thank you, commissioner Powell. Commissioner Tristani.
>>: Mr. Chairman, I strongly support the thrust of today's action to permit parties to file documents with the commission electronically. There is, however, one aspect of today's order that I cannot support because in my mind it makes the playing field unequal. The order establishes two different deadlines. A midnight deadline for electronic filings and a 5:30 PM deadline for paper filings. This extra six and a half hours will give electronic filers an advantage over paper filers. Indeed, the order states that it is adopting a midnight deadline because it wishes to encourage electronic filing. A midnight filing deadline will only encourage parties to file electronically if the extra time gives them a clear benefit.
>>: Moreover, the advantage for electronic filers could be far greater than simply the additional time involved. It is very possible that electronic filers would be able to obtain copies of paper filings that were filed before the 5:30 deadline and then incorporate responses by midnight. Essentially this would give electronic filers an additional reply opportunity permitting them to address arguments raised by the paper filers that had not been anticipated.
>>: Where electronic filing an option available to everyone these concerns are not significant. But millions of Americans do not have Internet access. These are the people who will be most disadvantaged by the midnight filing deadline. Meanwhile those with the resources to file electronically, especially those Washington insiders know how to quickly obtain copies of paper filings will be the biggest winners. It is already difficult enough for average citizens to make their voices heard at this commission. I believe that today's decision setting separate deadlines for electronic and paper filings only increases that difficulty. I therefore decent from that aspect of the order.
>>: Thank you. Mr. General counsel, did you want to respond to Mr. Powell's earlier question about format? I wasn't sure if someone wanted to respond.
>>: The electronic filing comment filing team has made every effort to make the pages, all the pages accessible to the disabled community. As a matter of fact, that came about after we realized you had problems with your pages. We checked up on our pages and I thank you for that check up.
>>: As far as the PBF format, we do make FCC documents available in WordPerfect and ASCII and will begin to make them available in PDF and will continue to do that.
>>: The system is a work in progress and we will definitely be making judgments to the system to make sure that the comments will be downloadable and be able to be manipulated by the readers.
>>: Mr. Ness?
>>: when we have a midnight deadline, that's actual receipt at the commission. Is that not the case?
>>: That's correct.
>>: So it doesn't matter when you sent the document, it's when we received the document because we all know that Internet is wonderful but sometimes it is not instantaneous in its delivery. Those who are relying on filing using the Internet must make sure that they allow ample time for the document to be received.
>>: That's true. If the receive date is as of the date received at the commission, we have experimented with submitting documents, very large documents, 100 or 125 pages, and typically find that the transmission time is less than a minute.
>>: I had a question, and maybe it's more food for thought for later, because I'm not sure if this was done for our general counsel.
>>: Did we look at how courts are establishing deadlines? Are they establishing different deadline, whether the filing is paper, electronically, or do you know?
>>: I don't know the answer to that. Most courts require physical delivery.
>>: I'm aware that the federal district court in New Mexico allows for electronic filing but I don't know if it has a different deadline so I'd appreciate it if we could look into that and see how the courts do it.
>>: If there are no further questions or discussion from the bench, we'll proceed to a vote. Before that I'd like to echo the comments of commissioner Furchtgott-Roth in congratulating the of in working together so well to get this item presented. And I'd like to extend a special thank you to the electronic comment filing system working group, and also the Internet working group, a group of people from various offices and bureaus that came together and made this possible. Thank you, Chris Wright, general counsel, and Liz Rose in absentia, head of OPA, and you Larry and Cheryl, thank you very much for making this item happen. (applause).
>>: Well deserved. Okay. All those in favor of adopting this order, please say aye.
>>: Aye.
>>: Opposed?
>>: the ayes have it. So ordered. Thank you.
>>: The next item we will consider today is an item from the Mass Media Bureau which proposes ways to streamline the bureau's processing function. This item is part of a larger streamlining effort by the Mass Media Bureau. This particular item will be presented by Chief of the Mass Media Bureau.
>>: Good morning Mr. Chairman and commissioners. Joining me this morning are Linda blare, Chief of the Audio Services Division, Barbara Chrisman, Chief of the Video Services Division, Nita Doyle, assistant division Chief, Audio Services Division, and Minia Bagadi, Assistant Chief of Policy and Rules Division.
>>: The bureau presents today a notice for proposed rule making that is intended to substantially streamline Mass Media Bureau applications and processing policies, as well as eliminate certain rules and restrictions on broadcast licensees and permittees that we believe are no longer necessary. Before discussing these proposals in detail, however, I think it is useful to put them in the context of the bureau's broader approach to regulatory review and streamlining, Mass Media Bureau is moving on many fronts in this area, and I'd like to briefly cover some of them with you.
>>: Settlement. As a result of the Bechtel decision and the subsequent freeze on practicing mutually exclusive application, the bureau had a back log of 339 groups for competing apply cants for television facilities. The balanced budget act of 1997 which describes an auction based selection process also established a settlement window to permit existing MX apply cants to settlement. 207 settlement proposals were filed in response to this window. Because the audio and video services division have focused their resources so intently on processing these settlement agreements we have already granted 38 settlement agreements involving radio and television stations, and expect to be able to grant an additional 149 by mid-April.
>>: Another area involves main studio and public file rule making that's outstanding. The bureau has submitted to the commission a draft report and order to relax the main stood Yo and public file rule and to streamline public filing retirements and retention periods. These changes are designed to give broadcasters greater flexibility in meeting their core retirement. EEO annual employment report. The commission recently amended the rules to change the filing date to September 30 for FCC form 395, the annual employment report. And this change will permit licensees that file similar information with the equal employment opportunity commission to use the same payroll data in their FCC and EEOC filing.
>>: Public access to data. The bureau's continued to expand the databases and information available to the public through its highly successful Web pages. Recent improvements now permit applications, consulting engineers and the bar to access technical data on pending applications and authorize facility to retrieve public notices of applications received, accepted, granted and denied, and obtain status information about where their facility applications fall in the processing line.
>>: Technical streamlining, MCRM. The bureau is currently working on a companion technical NPRM which will attempt to identify ways to provide broadcasters greater flexibility to upgrade and relocate their technical facilities and to server additional viewers and listeners consistent with this agency's core responsibility to maintain the technical integrity of the broadcast spectrum.
>>: One more. Automated call sign reservation system. The bureau has developed and will shortly recommend adoption of an online system that will permit the electronic reservation of new and modified call signs for radio and television broadcast stations. This automated system will allow Internet users to determine the availability of any particular call sign and to complete the reservation upon request providing substantially greater certitude and faster service to the current manual system.
>>: Let me make one final observation concerning the streamlining item that the bureau is presenting today. This item has the potential to significantly change the way the bureau does business, and to alter, therefore, the mix and skills of the personnel the bureau employs. My objective, indeed my obligation as Chief of the bureau, is to insure that these changes which I believe will benefit the public, also provide opportunities for growth and advancement for the employees of the bureau. New skills will be needed, new challenges will be encountered, new approaches to our work will be necessary, and training will certainly be required so that the bureau's existing personnel can adapt and take advantage of the new environment. I look forward to working with you, Mr. Chairman, and the commissioners, in achieving this result.
>>: I now ask Peter Doyle to present the bureau's recommendation.
>>: Good morning, Mr. Chairman and commissioners. This notice of proposed rule making poses fundamental changes in the Mass Media Bureau's broadcast applications and licensing procedures. It is a broad based streamlining effort undertaken in conjunction with the bureau's 1998 biennial review. This proceeding is closely tied to the bureau's electronic filing initiative to further computer eyes bureau processing. We anticipate that within the next 12 months the bureau will have the ability to initiate electronic filing and processing on a broad scale. The NPRM would invite comment on whether the commission should implement a system of mandatory electronic filing for 16-key broadcast form, and whether this approach is necessary to achieve meaningful process efficiency.
>>: It also seeks comments on whether the commission should exempt certain categories of applicants from mandatory electronic filing and whether we should phase in these new procedures.
>>: At an early stage of this project, the bureau recognized that it needed to radically change its application forms to realize fully the benefits of electronic filing and processing. We have taken a fresh look at the information that is required and the form in which it is submitted. The notice would propose to eliminate or narrow significantly numerous application questions. The new forms are shorter, simpler and better organized; steps we believe will less en applicant filing version. The form revision reflect a basic change in regulatory approach. They are premised on the belief the commission can prudently increase it's reliance on applicant certification. Electronic edit checks and business validations, standard application instructions and new detailed work sheets should reduce application error rate while increasing the reliability of the information submitted and the ability of the staff to promptly complete their legal and technical review.
>>: In addition, the bureau would propose to establish a vigorous enforcement program that includes random audits and severe sanctions where violations are found, to inart~ full compliance with our rules and policies.
>>: The notice also proposes substantive rule changes tied to the implementation of competitive bidding procedures in broadcast areas. These include the elimination of payment restrictions on the sales of unbuilt stations and a new construction permit extension policy. With regard to the latter, the notice proposes to extend the initial construction period for radio and television stations to three years, to narrow the grounds for construction permit extension to the extent permitted by section 319 of the communications act, and to provide for the automatic forfeiture of expired CCs. The NPRM would reduce processing related burdens Oren licenses. It would consider options for streamlining pro forma, assignment and application processing consistent with statutory requirements. It proposes to less en ownership report filing retirements to four year intervals in following the consummation of approved license assignments and transfers.
>>: Finally the notice recognizes that these streamlining initiatives must preserve the public's ability to fully and meaningfully participate in the broadcast licensing process. Some changes, such as electronic filing will enhance access to application information and thus will promote public comment and review.
>>: In the case of license assignment the notice also proposes that licenses place in their public files copies of sales agreements and where applicable copies of radio ownership contour studies to safeguard the public's statutory condition to dyna rights. We request editorial privilege on the items.
>>: Thank you. The Mass Media Bureau, in my opinion, does a great job processing the thousands of applications that are filed with this agency. I think given the process that we have in place, Roy, under your leadership that bureau has probably expedited that process about the best we can do, given the current rules.
>>: But with this item we have a proposal that will transform the processing function so that we can do an even better job for the public that we serve.
>>: In looking through this item, it's clear that many of the forms are going to be reduced or could be reduced to a fraction of their length today. That's what this item proposes to do. I'll tell you what it does not propose to do. It does not propose to change in any way our bedrock obligation to insure that public interest is served, and I believe that we can simplify the licensing process without undermining in any way our responsibility to insure that every application we grant serves the public interest. Peter said something very important. We are going to be relying on our enforcement procedures. We are going to trust license sees because most license sees want to do the right thing. They file one applications. Most of them are not contested. Most of them are accurate. We are going to keep people honest. We propose to have an enforcement regime in place so that we'll have some random audits, make sure that we can verify that people are in fact filing accurate applications.
>>: I have personally filed thousands of these applications that are subject to this notice. I have spent many thousands of hours dealing with some of these paperwork versions. I have spent hours explaining to people why they have to file some of these forms and applications and sometimes it's been hard to explain. I am very proud and happy that as chairman we are able to put some proposals on the table to find ways to make this process work better. I congratulate you Roy and I'm delighted we've got this item up today.
>>: Commissioner Ness.
>>: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Sometimes the most important actions that we take are not headline grabbers. Today's launch of this streamlining item may perhaps be one of those. It may look like we are simply. Proposing to change how we handle paperwork but I believe that the effect of the changes proposed may significantly reduce the yoke of regulatory burden on the broadcast licensees and applicants and I think this is a major step forward. I won't go through all the details as to what you are doing, but I will underscore what the chairman has just said. Together we believe that broadcasters take their responsibilities very seriously to serve the public interest, and that they take their applications very seriously, and thus the assumption is made that their filings are accurate. However, any move toward regulatory streamlining and self-certification has to be accompanied by rigorous enforcement. And I know that the bureau is committed to rigorous enforcement with spot checks and the like. I hope this is not simply a commitment that we make today, as many of us who periodically go on diets and are committed for a week or two, to reduce caloric intake. And then later on go back to old ways.
>>: It is vitally important for the integrity of the process that we stay the course, that we stay to this diet, and truly put in place an enforcement process that has meaning and is effective.
>>: . I'd like to thank the Mass Media Bureau, and Peter, your team, for putting together really what is an outstanding item. I look forward to hearing the comments back as we work through this to insure that our broadcasters don't have to endure more regulatory procedures than are necessary, and that we bring everybody into the modern electronic age. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman.
>>: Thank you, commissioner Ness. Commissioner Furchtgott-Roth.
>>: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I'd like to commend you for your leadership as well as Mr. Stewart and the entire Mass Media Bureau. Anything that can be done to make the process at the commission a little less painful, a little less costly is a step in the right direction, and I think that it's a sign, it very much does that. It takes advantage of new technologies that are available today. I think this item paired with the electronic filing item we just voted on is an example of moving the commission in the right direction, reflecting new technologies that are available today. Thank you.
>>: Thank you, commissioner.
>>: Commissioner Powell?
>>: I only have two brief comments. First, I applaud the bureau for understanding and recognizing and moving forward on an item in which we try to shift more of our focus from prescriptive regulations in which people are prevented from doing things without the Grace of prior approval, more toward enforcement. And I applaud that sort of thinking. I also applaud something that I think often goes unrecognized, compliment Roy for recognizing, which is importance of instilling the culturalship in the way we work to really make this tough work. None of this ever works if we can't get our staffs, our employees and the industries to truly embrace and understand the differences in the ways they are going to have to perform, or you will do exactly what commissioner Ness talked about and that's slipping back to the same old way it's always been. I particularly wish to recognize that.
>>: Thank you.
>>: Mr. Chairman, I'm happy to support this item but I would like to reinforce a point that has already been made by -- I use my colleagues, and that's the vital role that enforcement will have the more we move to a streamlined scheme.
>>: It reminded me a little bit about -- well, let me backtrack. I agree that most of our broadcasters are good players just like most of us I think are good drivers and would not go over the speed limit. But if we know that no one is policing the certain street where we want to go fast in the morning because we are late to work, we may be more likely to go five, 10 miles over the speed limit. But if we know there is a cop waiting at the corner every morning watching out for speeders, I guess my point would be to make sure that these random audits, spot checks, whatever you may call them, are regular. Because otherwise broadcasters are human like all of us and they may start slacking off.
>>: Thank you.
>>: Thank you. Any other comments or questions from the bench? If not, we will proceed to a vote. But before I do that I'd like to thank you, Roy, for your leadership in the Mass Media Bureau and your fine team assembled there, some of whom are assembled with you there today for their work on this item of which I am very proud. All those in favor of this item please say aye.
>>: Aye.
>>: Opposed? Ayes have it. Thank you very much.
>>: The next item is another streamlining item. This item, it's a draft order which would streamline the equipment certification process of the commission. The item will be presented by Dick Smith, head of our Office of Engineering and Technology. Welcome, Dick.
>>: Good morning Mr. Chairman and commissioners. The radio spectrum is wonderful and valuable natural resource. Many of the services and functions we saw demonstrated this morning are directly dependent on its availability. Protecting this resource has been a major responsibility of the commission for many years. One of the ways we protect the spectrum is our equipment authorization program. This program has been very successful. Today's item before you makes several improvements to insure continued protection of the radio spectrum with minimum burden on the electronic products industry.
>>: With me at the table is Julius Knapp, Chief of the policy rules division and Hugh Van Tuyl, an engineer. Hugh will make the presentation.
>>: Good morning Mr. Chairman and commissioners. The item before you is a report and order that stream lines the commission's authorization procedures. This order is the first step in an ongoing process to improve those procedures. We expect to initiate another rule making in the future to further streamline the authorization process. The report and order makes three changes to the rules. First, it simplifies the existing equipment authorization procedures.
>>: Second, it deregulates the authorization requirements for certain types of equipment.
>>: Third, it implements an electronic filing system for equipment authorization application. The rules currently specify three different authorization procedures for equipment requiring commission approval. The three current approval procedures are called certification, notification, type acceptance.
>>: Having three different procedures for approving equipment makes the rules unnecessarily complicated and can be a source of confusion for manufacturers. Therefore, this report and order eliminates the notification of type access answer authorization procedures. A single revised certification procedure will be used for all equipment requiring commission approval. The existing procedures are not changed for products that are self-approved by the manufacturer.
>>: The report and order deregulates the equipment authorization requirements for many types of equipment, certain equipment which requires an approval from the commission will now be self-approved by the manufacturer. The types of equipment covered by this change include receivers, VCRs, microwave ovens, RF light bulbs and certain license transmitters. The record of compliance for these devices is excellent and we do not believe that deregulating the authorization requirements of these devices will result in any degradation of appliance. Scanning receivers will require commission approval since our oversight is necessary to enforce the congressional mandate that they not receive cellular telephone conversations. Report and order makes the rule changes necessary to implement an electronic filing system for equipment authorization application. The electronic filing system will make it easier to file applications and substantially improve the application processing time. The use of the electronic filing system will be mandatory after one year. We do not believe that this will be a burden on applicants since the equipment required to file electronically is readily available. All parts filing applications will benefit from the reduced processing time. The actions in this report and order will reduce the number of applications that manufacturers must file with the commission by approximately 1700 each year. These actions will also reduce the processing time for the remaining applications required to be filed. We believe that the changes will save manufacturers at least $100 million each year. The resources that the commission saves on processing applications will be refocused on enforcement, thereby improving compliance of products on the market. Accordingly the staff recommends adoption of this item and requests editorial privileges.
>>: Granted. Thank you very much.
>>: This is an important item. This is one of many steps that the commission plans to take to streamline this equipment certification process. We have to do this. In a competitive marketplace it's essential that manufacturers have control over the timing of getting their products to market, and to make sure that the marketplace and the manufacturing community decide the timing of introducing products to the market and not government. And this item is an important step in that direction. Dick, I had a couple of questions for you because I've been talking about this being one of a number of steps and it would be great if you could outline for us some of the other things that you are working on in this area.
>>: Very soon we'll be present a notice of proposed rule making to take another step toward streamlining this process. It will have two elements, at least, one of which will be to propose permission of outside entities doing the certification work, other than FCC, and it also will begin the implementation of the mutual recognition agreement now being negotiated around the world. This will be an extremely important step towards facilitating the global marketing of U.S. products. I look forward to bringing that to you very soon.
>>: Great. What is the current processing time for these product improvements.
>>: We are under 30 days. In fact I think Monday my report was that processing was running about 24 days on average. We hope to get that down, especially with the electronic filing. We think we can get that down to a 10-day range, it would be a great improvement.
>>: That's great. Dick, it's a great item. I'm happy to support it. Commissioner Ness.
>>: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. The predecessor of the FCC was the federal radio commission which was established in 1927, and it was needed to prevent harmful interference. Managing this spectrum has from that day to today been one of the most important functions of this agency. Within that, certainly the prevention of interference, so that we can all enjoy the products that are out there. And in the digital age there is an extraordinary number of devices that have the potential to cause harmful interference be it reception with air traffic control systems or any one of a number of systems that we have that contribute to the quality of our lives.
>>: It's amazing how many items are out there. For example, I know when we were looking at PCFs and the PCF bans, I was amazed to learn that a certain portion of the particular hertz spectrum was not available for us because during the late rush hour from 5 to 7 in the evening there was the ambient noise level became unacceptable because people were using their microwave ovens. You don't realize this, but these are some of the things that our engineers at the commission address and think about every day. But worse are the issues of harmful interference and that is through enforcement we've been able to locate and stop situations, for example, in a flight test center in Wichita, Kansas, we had.
>>:.
>>: We had interference with the flight frequencies that was placed to an employee's vehicle alarm system that was malfunctioning. These are the kinds of things that we have to address. The item today is helpful because it helps once again to distinguish those products where we truly need to be very careful about their certification, and eliminates the more rigorous procedures on a host of items that we know now have typically been properly compliant with our procedures to be able to be less cumbersome in the application. I'm delighted about that.
>>: We are extending that liberalization today. We are crediting third party laboratories in another proceeding that will help to perform the testing and certify products, and I commend you for proceeding with that item.
>>: But it's critical that as we eliminate some of the items that have to go through our testing, that those that do remain, that we move very swiftly as the chairman commented. Time is money, and to the extent that we have delays in getting those certifications out, that's harmful to the industry, the computer industry in particular where new products come on the line every six months. If we have a delay in certifying a compliant, we may miss the product's cycle. So that's vitally important. And then lastly, manufacturers who comply with our rules are significantly harmed when cheaper products come on the market that do not comply, that evade our rule. Therefore, once again, as we did with the last item, it is vitally important that we beef up our enforcement and ability to remove from the marketplace nonconforming products when we uncover them. So we need to focus once again on the ability to enforce.
>>: Have we looked at putting additional resources into the enforcement side of this operation?
>>: I would hope that we could shift some of the resources out of the paperwork application processing into the enforcement arena, it would be much more productive. And also in working with the CID with field offices to assist with the enforcement effort.
>>: Very good. Again, I commend you for your efforts and I'm in favor of the item, Mr. Chairman. Thank you.
>>: Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
>>: I must note, Mr. Chairman, that you've put together four items today that reflect applying new technologies to problems faced by American citizens and just folks here at the commission, and I think all four of these items together represent the appropriate use of new technologies to help everyone out. New technologies, technologies serve people and not the other way around. And I think that this is a very good package of orders today. This particular order which I commend OET for brings ragsality to our equipment authorization rules which were both confusing and overly burr DOM some in the past.
>>: I am especially pleased that many types of equipment no longer will need to go through the lengthy FCC certification process which has introduced intolerable delays into the equipment design, manufacturing and marketing cycle. I am particularly pleased that the FCC will soon undertake another proceeding to determine whether our equipment certification process will be fully privatized. Thank you very much.
>>: Thank you, commissioner. Commissioner Powell?
>>: I just want to take a second to plug what I think is one of the most important functions of the commission and that's the engineering section. I think that it has not been highlighted to the degree that it should be in the context of a world that's becoming increasingly technologically dependent and in a world in which convergence is creating all kinds of important new policy questions that rest ultimately on engineering and technical decisions. I support streamlining, only -- if for no other reason that it creates an efficiency so that OET and the great folks up at the lab can do more with their dwindling resources. But I would also take an opportunity for us to keep focusing on this function and make sure that it continues to not only have the efficiency that it needs to operate, but whatever resources it takes, left we find ourselves an agency full of lawyers without the technological independence.
>>: , underlying it to make rational decisions. So that's all I want to take my time to say.
>>: Thank you, commissioner Powell. Commissioner Tristani.
>>: Mr. Chairman, about 10 days ago I finally got to visit our labs in Columbia, and I got a little bit of a preview of what the electronic filing is going to look like, and I'm very impressed. I think it's wonderful. It will speed up your process. But I also got a real good demonstration of why we need to test and authorize some products because of the very real interference that some products, and some products I never would in my life imagine, cause interference of. You probably know this better than I but there is wonderful little product that they used to make a point. It's a baby monitor that's in a lamp that has a cute little Teddy bear, and it caused the TV, I think to practically blank out and the radio to become totally garbled. I was amazed. Perhaps the most interesting thing is that this wasn't something we went and found, but a consumer sent it out to the FCC, a consumer who bought it at an air force base which makes me think I'm hoping it didn't interfere with the flights there.
>>: But in any event, it's a good item. It's a wonderful thing to be doing. I'll also echo that what you are going to be doing in the future is also good. Particularly the international mutual recognition agreement, the MRAs, because this is not just a national issue that we need to look at. So many of our products are manufactured elsewhere which is particularly important. So it's good for industry, it's good for consumers. Keep up the good work.
>>: Thank you, commissioner. If there are no further comments or questions from the bench we'll proceed to a vote. All those in favor of this item, signify by saying aye.
>>: Aye.
>>: Opposed? I didn't say aye. I support the item. And thank you very much, Dick, and your fine team in OET for bringing this item to us today.
>>: And I don't have any announcements. Do any of the other commissioners have announcements before we adjourn? Very good. The next meeting will be May 14th. Thank you very much.