Senate Bill 654 modernizes North Carolina’s audiology and hearing-aid licensing laws in two main ways. First, it removes a dual-licensure requirement in the audiology statutes so that certain audiologists, audiology assistants, and certified technicians are no longer required to hold both an audiology-related credential and a separate permanent unrestricted license under Chapter 90 in order to be exempt from licensure under Chapter 93D. The bill also preserves existing exemptions for physicians and audiology students in accredited programs.
Second, the bill adds new consumer-protection rules for the sale of “locked hearing aids,” meaning devices that can only be programmed or serviced through proprietary or otherwise restricted software. Before a sale is completed, sellers and audiologists must give purchasers a written disclosure explaining that the device can only be serviced at specific facilities or locations, obtain the purchaser’s signature, provide a detailed receipt, and keep specified records for at least seven years. The bill authorizes the relevant licensing boards to adopt rules to implement these disclosure and recordkeeping requirements.
Impact
The bill would amend Chapter 93D of the General Statutes and Article 22 of Chapter 90, changing who is exempt from audiology licensure requirements and creating new statutory duties for hearing aid dealers, fitters, and audiologists who sell locked hearing aids. It would impose notice, receipt, and record-retention obligations, and it would allow the North Carolina State Hearing Aid Dealers and Fitters Board and the Board of Examiners for Speech and Language Pathologists and Audiologists to adopt implementing rules. The act becomes effective October 1, 2025, except for the licensure exemption change, which is effective when the bill becomes law.
Sentiment
The bill’s stated purpose and structure suggest generally favorable sentiment toward reducing regulatory burden while updating professional standards to reflect current audiology practices. Its consumer-disclosure provisions also indicate an effort to balance deregulation with transparency and patient protection. No committee transcripts or recorded votes were provided, so there is no direct evidence of opposition or support beyond the bill text itself.
Contention
The main policy tension in the bill is between easing licensure requirements for audiology professionals and maintaining oversight of hearing-aid sales. Supporters would likely view the dual-licensure change as a modernization measure that reduces unnecessary barriers for practitioners, while the locked-hearing-aid provisions respond to concerns that consumers may be unaware of service restrictions tied to proprietary software. Potential points of contention include whether the disclosure requirements are sufficient to protect consumers, whether the seven-year recordkeeping burden is too heavy, and whether the bill’s changes could affect competition or access to hearing-aid services.