PUBLIC NOTICE
Federal Communications Commission
445 12th St., S.W.
Washington, D.C. 20554
News Media Information 202 / 418-0500
Internet: http://www.fcc.gov
TTY: 1-888-835-5322
DA 07-102
January 18, 2007
MODIFICATION OF EX PARTE STATUS OF PENDING PETITIONS FOR WAIVER 
OF HEARING AID COMPATIBILITY REQUIREMENTS
WT Docket No. 01-309
By this Public Notice, the Wireless Telecommunications Bureau announces that, effective today, 
presentations in connection with the petitions for waiver listed in the attached appendices are subject to 
the “permit-but-disclose” requirements set forth in § 1.1206 of the Commission's ex parte rules.  These 
petitions all seek waivers of obligations or deadlines imposed under the Commission’s hearing aid 
compatibility rules.  More specifically, the petitions addressed by this Public Notice fall into three 
categories:
(1) Petitions for extension of September 16, 2005 deadline:  Eighteen petitions were filed in 2005 
seeking an extension of the September 16, 2005 deadline by which public mobile service providers and 
digital wireless handset manufacturers not subject to the de minimis exception were required to include in 
their handset offerings at least two handset models per air interface that comply with § 20.19(b)(1) of the 
Commission’s rules.1  Section 20.19(b)(1) provides that a wireless handset is deemed hearing aid-
compatible if it receives, for radio frequency interference, at least a U3 rating as set forth in American 
National Standards Institute (ANSI) standard document C63.19, “American National Standard for 
Methods of Measurement of Compatibility between Wireless Communications Devices and Hearing 
Aids.”2 Petitioners seeking an extension of this deadline are listed in Appendix A.  
  
1 See 47 C.F.R. § 20.19(c)(2)(i)(A).
2 47 C.F.R. § 20.19(b)(1). We note that, since its 2005 draft version, the ANSI C63.19 technical standard has used 
a new nomenclature for hearing aid compatibility compliance in place of the original “U” and “UT” ratings, in order 
to make the ratings easier for consumers to understand.  See Letter from Thomas Goode, counsel for The Alliance 
for Telecommunications Industry Solutions, to Marlene H. Dortch, Secretary, FCC, WT Docket No. 01-309 (filed 
May 6, 2005) (ATIS Letter); Public Notice, “OET Clarifies Use of Revised Wireless Phone Hearing Aid 
Compatibility Standard Measurement Procedures and Rating Nomenclature,” 20 FCC Rcd 8188 (OET 2005) 
(Revised Standard Public Notice).  Specifically, the standard now uses an “M” rating for radio frequency 
interference immunity (rather than “U”) and a “T” rating for coupling capability (rather than “UT”). See ATIS 
Letter. The Commission has approved the use of the “M” and “T” nomenclature and considers the M/T and U/U3 
nomenclatures as synonymous.  See Revised Standard Public Notice; Section 68.4(a) of the Commission’s Rules 
Governing Hearing Aid-Compatible Telephones, WT Docket no. 01-309, Order on Reconsideration and Further 
Notice of Proposed Rulemaking, 20 FCC Rcd 11194, ¶ 33 (2005);  Section 68.4(a) of the Commission’s Rules 
Governing Hearing Aid-Compatible Telephones, Cingular Wireless LLC Petition for Waiver of Section 
2
(2) Petitions for extension of August 1, 2006 deadline: Twelve petitions were filed in 2006 
seeking an extension of the relief granted in the Cingular Waiver Order.3  In that Order, the Commission 
provided a measure of relief from the hearing aid-compatible wireless handset deployment deadlines for 
entities that offer dual-band GSM digital wireless handsets that operate in both the 850 MHz and 1900 
MHz bands.4 Pursuant to its waiver authority, the Commission ruled that it would accept, until August 1, 
2006, the hearing aid compatibility compliance rating of the handsets for 1900 MHz operation as the 
overall compliance rating for the handsets.5  Petitioners seeking an extension of this deadline are listed in 
Appendix B.
(3) Petitions for extension of September 18, 2006 deadline:  Thirty-nine petitions were filed in 
2006 seeking an extension of the September 18, 2006 deadline by which public mobile service providers 
and digital wireless handset manufacturers not subject to the de minimis exception are required to include 
in their handset offerings at least two handset models for each air interface that comply with § 20.19(b)(2) 
of the Commission’s rules.6 Section 20.19(b)(2) provides that that a wireless handset is deemed hearing 
aid-compatible if it receives, for inductive coupling, at least a U3T rating as set forth in ANSI standard 
document C63.19.7 Petitioners seeking an extension of this deadline are listed in Appendix C.
Under the Commission’s rules, these petitions for waiver are subject to treatment by the Commission as 
restricted proceedings for ex parte purposes under § 1.1208 of the Commission’s rules, unless otherwise 
provided.8 Because these petitions implicate broadly applicable policy issues, we find, pursuant to Note 2 
to § 1.1208 and consistent with § 1.1200(a), that these petitions should be treated as permit-but-disclose
proceedings under the ex parte rules.9 Therefore, the petitions listed in Appendices A, B, and C will 
hereinafter be subject to the provisions of § 1.1206 governing permit-but-disclose proceedings.10
Specifically, ex parte presentations that are made with respect to the issues involved in the petitions will 
be allowed but must be disclosed in accordance with the requirements of § 1.1206(b).11 Commenters 
seeking to protect the confidentiality of information produced shall follow the procedures set forth in 
Commission rule § 0.459.12
      
20.19(c)(3)(i)(A) of the Commission’s Rules, Memorandum Opinion and Order, WT Docket No. 01-309, 20 FCC 
Rcd 15108, n.14 (2005).  
3 See Section 68.4(a) of the Commission’s Rules Governing Hearing Aid-Compatible Telephones, Cingular 
Wireless LLC Petition for Waiver of Section 20.19(c)(3)(i)(A) of the Commission’s Rules, Memorandum Opinion 
and Order, WT Docket No. 01-309, 20 FCC Rcd 15108 (2005) (Cingular Waiver Order).
4 Id.  
5 Id.
6 See 47 C.F.R. § 20.19(d)(2).
7 47 C.F.R. § 20.19(b)(2). As noted above, the C63.19 standard now uses a “T” rating for coupling capability (rather 
than “UT”).  See supra, n.2. 
8 47 C.F.R. § 1.1208.
9 47 C.F.R. § 1.1208 Note 2; see also 47 C.F.R. §§ 1.1200(a), 1.1206.
10 47 C.F.R. § 1.1206.
11 47 C.F.R. § 1.1206(b).
12 47 C.F.R. § 0.459.
3
Parties making oral ex parte presentations in these proceedings are reminded that memoranda 
summarizing the presentation must contain the presentation’s substance and not merely list the subjects 
discussed.13 More than a one-or two-sentence description of the views and arguments presented is 
generally required.14
Alternate formats of this public notice (computer diskette, large print, audio recording, and Braille) are 
available to persons with disabilities by contacting Brian Millin at (202) 418-7426 (voice), (202) 418-
7365 (TTY), or send an e-mail to access@fcc.gov.
For questions regarding this public notice, please contact Christina Clearwater or Peter Trachtenberg, 
Spectrum & Competition Policy Division, Wireless Telecommunications Bureau, (202) 418-1310.
  
13 See “Commission Emphasizes the Public's Responsibilities in Permit-But-Disclose Proceedings,” Public Notice, 
15 FCC Rcd 19945 (2000).
14 See 47 C.F.R. § 1.1206(b)(2). For further guidance regarding the requirements and content of ex parte 
submissions, see also Fact Sheet, “FCC’s Ex Parte Rules,” July 2001, 
http://www.fcc.gov/ogc/admain/ex_parte_factsheet.html.  Other rules pertaining to oral and written presentations are 
set forth in § 1.1206(b) as well. Id. § 1.1206(b).
4
APPENDIX A.  
PETITIONS FOR WAIVER OF SEPTEMBER 16, 2005 DEADLINE
AST Telecom, LLC dba Blue Sky Communications (filed Sept. 16, 2005)
CC Communications (filed Sept. 16, 2005)
Cellular Phone of Kentucky, Inc. (filed Sept. 16, 2005)
C.T. Cube, L.P. dba West Central Wireless (filed Sept. 16, 2005)
Dobson Communications Corp. (filed Sept. 8, 2005)
Iowa Wireless Services, LLC dba i wireless (filed Sept. 15, 2005)
IT&E Overseas, Inc. (filed Sept. 16, 2005)
Leaco Rural Telephone Cooperative, Inc. (filed Sept. 16, 2005)
Litchfield County Cellular, Inc. dba Ramcell of Kentucky LLC (filed Sept. 16, 2005)
Pine Cellular, Inc. (filed Sept. 16, 2005)
SLO Cellular, Inc. d/b/a Cellular One of San Luis Obispo, and Entertainment Unlimited, Inc. (filed Sept. 
16, 2005)
South Central Utah Telephone Association, Inc. (filed Sept. 15, 2005)
South Slope Cooperative Telephone Company d/b/a South Slope Wireless (filed Sept. 16, 2005)
SunCom Wireless, Inc. (filed Sept. 14, 2005)
Uintah Basin Electronic Telecommunications d/b/a UBET Wireless (filed Sept. 16, 2005)
Virgin Mobile, USA LLC (filed Sept. 16, 2005)
WUE, Inc. (filed Sept. 16, 2005)
XIT Telecommunications & Technology, LTD d/b/a XIT Cellular (filed Sept. 16, 2005)
5
APPENDIX B.  
PETITIONS FOR WAIVER OF AUGUST 1, 2006 DEADLINE
Advantage Cellular Systems, Inc. (filed July 25, 2006)
AST Telecom, LLC dba Blue Sky Communications (filed July 25, 2006)
CT Cube, Inc. d/b/a West Central Wireless (filed July 26, 2006)
Farmers Cellular Telephone, Inc. (filed May 16, 2006)
Kaplan Telephone Company, Inc. (filed July 25, 2006)
Mid-Tex Cellular, Ltd. (filed July 25, 2006)
Missouri RSA No. 5 Partnership d/b/a Chariton Valley Wireless Services (filed July 25, 2006)
Pine Telephone Company (filed July 25, 2006)
PinPoint Wireless, Inc. (filed July 26, 2006)
Plateau Telecommunications, Incorporated et al. (filed July 25, 2006)
Texas RSA-1 Limited Partnership d/b/a XIT Wireless (filed July 25, 2006)
TMP Corp. and TMP Jacksonville, LLC (filed July 31, 2006)
6
APPENDIX C.  
PETITIONS FOR WAIVER OF SEPTEMBER 18, 2006 DEADLINE
Advantage Cellular Systems, Incorporated (filed Sept. 18, 2006)
Airadigm Communications, Inc. (filed Sept. 20, 2006)
Blanca Telephone Company (filed Sept. 18, 2006)
Brown County MSA, LP, Wisconsin RSA #4 LP, Wisconsin RSA #10, LP et al. (filed Sept. 18, 2006)
Buffalo-Lake Erie Wireless Systems Co., L.L.C. (filed Sept. 18, 2006)
Centennial Communications Corp. (filed Sept. 18, 2006) 
CTC Telcom, Inc. (filed Sept. 18, 2006)
Dobson Communications Corporation (filed Sept. 20, 2006)
Farmers Cellular Telephone, Inc. (filed Sept. 18, 2006)
Farmers Mutual Telephone Company (filed Sept. 18, 2006)
Farmers Mutual Telephone Company dba FMTC Mobile Services (filed Sept. 13, 2006)
Inland Cellular Telephone Company (filed Sept. 18, 2006)
Iowa 15 Wireless LLC dba Cellular One and Long Lines Wireless LLC (filed Sept. 18, 2006)
Iowa Wireless Services, LLC  (filed Sept. 20, 2006)
IT&E Overseas, Inc. (filed Sept. 13, 2006)
Kyocera Wireless Corp. (filed Sept. 18, 2006)
Leap Wireless International, Inc. (filed Sept. 18, 2006)
Litchfield County Cellular, Inc. d/b/a Ramcell of Oregon (filed Sept. 18, 2006)
Mid-Tex Cellular, Ltd.  (filed Sept. 15, 2006)
MTPCS, LLC d/b/a Chinook Wireless (filed Sept. 21, 2006)
North Carolina RSA 1 Partnership (filed Sept. 18, 2006)
North Dakota Network Co. (filed Sept. 15, 2006)
Northwest Missouri Cellular Limited Partnership (filed Sept. 14, 2006)
NTCH, Inc. and IAT Communications, Inc. (filed Sept. 14, 2006)
Panhandle Telecommunication Systems, Inc. (filed Sept. 14, 2006)
Plateau Telecommunications, Incorporated et al. (filed Sept. 15, 2006)
Punxsutawney Communications, LLC (filed Sept. 18, 2006)
RSA 1 Limited Partnership d/b/a Cellular 29 Plus and Iowa RSA 2 Limited Partners (filed Sept. 15, 2006)
Sagebrush Cellular, Inc. & Triangle Communication System, Inc. (filed Sept. 18, 2006)
SLO Cellular, Inc. & Entertainment Unlimited, Inc. (filed Sept. 14, 2006)
SLO Cellular, Inc. d/b/a Cellular One of San Luis Obispo (filed Nov. 17, 2006)15
South Central Utah Telephone Association, Inc. (filed Nov. 17, 2006)
South No. 5 RSA LP d/b/a Brazos Cellular Communications, LTD (filed Sept. 15, 2006)
South Slope Cooperative Telephone Co., Inc. d/b/a South Slope Wireless (filed Sept. 18, 2006)
SunCom Wireless, Inc. (filed Sept. 18, 2006)
Texas RSA-1 Limited Partnership d/b/a XIT Wireless (filed Sept. 14, 2006)
Uintah Basin Electronic Telecommunications d/b/a UBET Wireless (filed Sept. 18, 2006) 
Virgin Mobile USA, LLC  (filed Nov. 7, 2006)
Wilkes Cellular, Inc. (filed Sept. 18, 2006)
  
15 In addition to seeking relief from the September 18, 2006 deadline, SLO Cellular, Inc. d/b/a Cellular One of San 
Luis Obispo seeks an extension of the partial relief granted to carriers operating TDMA networks and codified at 47 
C.F.R. § 20.19(c)(2)(i)(B).