[Federal Register Volume 79, Number 43 (Wednesday, March 5, 2014)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 12442-12458]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2014-04731]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION
47 CFR Part 20
[PS Docket No. 10-255 and PS Docket No. 11-153; FCC 14-6]
Facilitating the Deployment of Text-to-911 and Other Next
Generation 911 Applications; Framework for Next Generation 911
Deployment
AGENCY: Federal Communications Commission.
ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: In this Second Further Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (Second
Further Notice) the Federal Communications Commission (Commission)
seeks comment on a proposed timeframe and several aspects of
implementation of text-to-911 service, particularly relating to the
technical ability of interconnected text providers to comply with a
text-to-911 mandate. Specifically, the Commission seeks comment on a
proposal that text-to-911 capability should be made available by all
text providers no later than December 31, 2014, and should be provided
within a reasonable time after a PSAP has made a valid request for
service, not to exceed six months. The Commission also seeks further
comment on several issues that we anticipate will be part of the long-
term evolution of text-to-911, though it does not propose to require
their implementation by a date certain. These include: Developing the
capability to provide Phase II-comparable location information in
conjunction with emergency texts; delivering text-to-911 over non-
cellular data channels; and supporting text-to-911 for consumers while
roaming on Commercial Mobile Radio Service (CMRS) networks. The Second
Further Notice is adopted with the goal of obtaining information from
the public on proposed rules for the implementation of text-to-911.
DATES: Submit comments on or before April 4, 2014 and reply comments by
May 5, 2014. Written comments on the Paperwork Reduction Act proposed
information collection requirements must be submitted by the public,
Office of Management and Budget (OMB), and other interested parties on
or before May 5, 2014.
ADDRESSES: You may submit comments, identified by PS Docket No. 10-255
and PS Docket No. 11-153, by any of the following methods:
Federal Communications Commission's Web site: http://fjallfoss.fcc.gov/ecfs2/. Follow the instructions for submitting
comments.
Mail: Federal Communications Commission, 445 12th Street
SW., Washington, DC 20554.
People with Disabilities: Contact the FCC to request
reasonable accommodations (accessible format documents, sign language
interpreters, CART, etc.) by email: [email protected] or phone: 202-418-
0530 or TTY: 202-418-0432.
For detailed instructions for submitting comments and additional
information on the rulemaking process, see the SUPPLEMENTARY
INFORMATION section of this document.
Parties wishing to file materials with a claim of confidentiality
should follow
[[Page 12443]]
the procedures set forth in Sec. 0.459 of the Commission's rules.
Confidential submissions may not be filed via ECFS but rather should be
filed with the Secretary's Office following the procedures set forth in
47 CFR 0.459. Redacted versions of confidential submissions may be
filed via ECFS.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Timothy May, Public Safety and
Homeland Security Bureau, (202) 418-1463 or [email protected]. For
additional information concerning the proposed Paperwork Reduction Act
information collection requirements contained in this document, contact
Benish Shah (202) 418-7866, or send an email to [email protected].
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This is a summary of the Commission's Second
Further Notice of Proposed Rulemaking, FCC 14-6; PS Docket Nos. 10-255
and 11-153; adopted on January 30, 2014 and released January 31, 2014.
The full text of this document is available for public inspection
during regular business hours in the FCC Reference Center, Room CY-
A257, 445 12th Street SW., Washington, DC 20554, or online at http://www.fcc.gov/document/text-911-policy-statement-and-second-fnprm.
This document will also be available at ECFS at http://fjallfoss.fcc.gov/ecfs. Documents will be available electronically in
ASCII, Microsoft Word, and/or Adobe Acrobat. The complete text may be
purchased from the Commission's copy contractor, 445 12th Street SW.,
Room CY-B402, Washington, DC 20554. Alternative formats are available
for people with disabilities (Braille, large print, electronic files,
audio format) by sending an email to [email protected] or calling the
Commission's Consumer and Governmental Affairs Bureau at (202) 418-0530
(voice) (202) 418-0432 (TTY).
Summary of the Second Further Notice of Proposed Rulemaking
I. Introduction
1. One of the core missions of the Federal Communications
Commission is promoting the safety of life and property of the American
public through the use of wire and radio communications. Consistent
with that overarching obligation, the Commission has specific statutory
responsibilities with respect to 911 service. As mobile wireless
communications are becoming increasingly central to the day-to-day
lives of Americans, a growing percentage of 911 calls originate on
wireless networks (one study found that 75 percent of 911 calls in
California came from wireless phones). At the same time, current trends
in mobile wireless usage have shown continued evolution from a
predominantly voice-driven medium of communication to one based more on
data transmissions; for example, from 2009 to 2011, average minutes of
use per subscriber per month, a measure of voice usage, continued to
decline, while U.S. mobile data traffic increased 270 percent from 2010
to 2011, having more than doubled each year. In light of these trends
and the importance of ensuring effective 911 service--particularly for
those who cannot access 911 call centers with a voice call--and as
articulated in the Commission's Report to Congress and Recommendations
on a Legal Framework for Next Generation 911 Services (NG911 Report),
we believe that text-to-911 capability is a necessary first step in the
development of Next Generation (NG) 911 capabilities.
2. At the broadest level, access to 911 is a core value that
translates across communications platforms, including text
applications, and should not be lost or devalued as technology changes.
In 2011, the Commission adopted a Notice of Proposed Rulemaking to
bridge the gap between the habits and needs of the texting public and
the services supported by wireless carriers and interconnected text
providers.\1\ In 2012, the Commission adopted a Further Notice of
Proposed Rulemaking, proposing a framework to ensure that all consumers
would be able to send emergency texts to 911 regardless of the texting
service provider they use.\2\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ In the Matter of Facilitating the Deployment of Text-to-911
and Other Next Generation 911 Applications, Framework for Next
Generation 911 Deployment, PS Docket No 11-153, PS Docket No. 10-
255, Notice of Proposed Rulemaking, 26 FCC Rcd 13615 (2011) (2011
Notice).
\2\ In the Matter of Facilitating the Deployment of Text-to-911
and Other Next Generation 911 Applications, Framework for Next
Generation 911 Deployment, PS Docket No 11-153, PS Docket No. 10-
255, Further Notice of Proposed Rulemaking, 26 FCC Rcd 15659 (2012)
(2012 Further Notice).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
3. This Second Further Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (Second
Further Notice) seeks further comment on the proposed timeframe and
several aspects of implementation, particularly relating to the
technical ability of interconnected text providers to comply with a
text-to-911 mandate. We also seek further comment on several issues
that we anticipate will be part of the long-term evolution of text-to-
911, though we do not propose to require their implementation by a date
certain. These include: (1) Developing the capability to provide Phase
II-comparable location information in conjunction with emergency texts;
(2) delivering text-to-911 over non-cellular data channels; and (3)
supporting text-to-911 for consumers while roaming on CMRS networks.
4. In seeking additional information in this Second Further Notice,
we recognize that there is already a robust record on many of the
issues and proposals that were presented in both the 2011 Notice and
the 2012 Further Notice. In posing these further questions, we seek to
supplement the record as to the specific issues identified herein.
II. Background
5. Americans are increasingly relying on text as an alternative to
voice for everyday communications. In general, ``text messaging''
refers to any service that allows a mobile device to send information
consisting of text to other mobile devices by using domestic telephone
numbers. Examples of text messaging include Short Message Service
(SMS), Multimedia Messaging Service (MMS), and ``interconnected text''
applications. SMS is a text messaging service component of
communications systems that uses standardized communications protocols
to enable wireless and fixed devices to exchange messages no longer
than 160 characters. MMS is a standard way to exchange messages that
include multimedia, such as photos and videos along with text, between
wireless devices. ``Interconnected text'' applications use IP-based
protocols to deliver text messages to a service provider and the
service provider then delivers the text messages to destinations
identified by a telephone number, using either IP-based or SMS
protocols.
6. Current reports indicate that 91 percent of American adults own
a cell phone, and that of those cell-phone owning consumers, 81 percent
use their phones to send and receive text messages. Texting ``continues
to be one of the most prevalent cell phone activities of all time'' and
is particularly ubiquitous among younger cell phone users. The median
number of texts sent by those 12-17 years of age in 2011 was 60 text
messages per day, with 63 percent of teens indicating texting as a
daily activity.
7. Moreover, ``over-the-top'' (OTT) texting applications are
growing increasingly popular and have already eclipsed short messaging
service (SMS) text messages provided by wireless carriers in terms of
volume.\3\ ``Over-the-
[[Page 12444]]
top'' generally refers to applications that operate on Internet
protocol (IP)-based mobile data networks and that consumers can
typically install on data-capable mobile devices. In contrast, SMS
requires use of an underlying carrier's SMS Center (SMSC) to send and
receive messages from other users. MMS-based messaging makes use of the
SMSC but also involves the use of different functional elements to
enable transport of the message over IP networks. Over-the-top text
applications enable consumers to send text messages using SMS, MMS or
directly via IP over a data connection to dedicated messaging servers
and gateways. Over-the-top texting applications may be provided by the
underlying mobile wireless provider or a non-affiliated third-party,
and may be ``interconnected'' or ``non-interconnected.'' In mid-2013,
one third-party text messaging application reported more than 250
million active users, transmitting more than 18 billion messages per
day. In mid-2013, the six most popular mobile chat applications
averaged nearly 19 billion messages each day, compared to 17.6 billion
SMS messages. In 2014, one report projected that over the top text
messaging will outpace SMS text messaging by 50 billion to 21 billion.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\3\ See Facilitating the Deployment of Text-to-911 and Other
Next Generation 911 Applications, PS Dockets No. 11-153, 10-255,
Report and Order, 28 FCC Rcd 7556 (2013) (Bounce-Back Order).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
8. In September 2011, the Commission released the 2011 Notice,
which sought comment on a number of issues related to the deployment of
Next Generation 911 (NG911), including how to facilitate the deployment
of text-to-911. In the 2011 Notice, the Commission observed that
sending text messages, photos, and video clips has become commonplace
for users of mobile devices on 21st century broadband networks, and
that adding non-voice capabilities to our 911 system will significantly
improve emergency response, save lives, and reduce property damage.
Moreover, the Commission stated that incorporating text and other media
into the 911 system will benefit: (1) The public in terms of the
ability to access emergency help, both for people with disabilities and
for people in situations where placing a voice call to 911 could be
difficult or dangerous; and (2) PSAPs by providing them with better
information that can be synthesized with existing databases to enable
emergency responders to assess and respond to emergencies more quickly
and effectively.
9. In December 2012, AT&T, Sprint Nextel, T-Mobile, and Verizon
entered into a voluntary agreement with the National Emergency Number
Association (NENA) and APCO International (APCO) in which each of the
four carriers agreed to provide text-to-911 service by May 15, 2014, to
PSAPs that are capable of, and request to receive, text-to-911 service
(Carrier-NENA-APCO Agreement). The signatory carriers made certain
commitments related to their text messaging services, including
implementation of the service to a PSAP ``within a reasonable amount of
time'' not to exceed six months after such PSAP makes a ``valid''
request of the carrier. The agreement also stated that, ``consistent
with the draft ATIS Standard for Interim Text-to-9-1-1, the PSAPs will
select the format for how messages are to be delivered'' with
incremental costs for delivery being the responsibility of the PSAP.
Under the terms of the agreement, carriers were to meet these
commitments ``independent of their ability to recover these associated
costs from state or local governments.'' The carriers committed to
working with NENA, APCO, and the Commission to develop outreach for
consumers and support efforts to educate PSAPs. The carriers'
commitments also did not extend to customers roaming on a network.
10. The Carrier-NENA-APCO Agreement followed on a number of
successful trials of text-to-911, and voluntary reports submitted to
the Commission since the agreement detail the ongoing activities of the
four carrier-signatories in this regard. As of December 31, 2013,
Verizon Wireless reports ``some 46 different jurisdictions are using
one of the text-to-911 options that Verizon currently supports (up from
37 in October 2013), and several additional deployments are currently
scheduled through 2014.'' AT&T has reported that it is in the process
of launching a standards-based trial service for text-to-911 in the
state of Tennessee for the end of the first quarter of 2014, and also
reports a statewide six-month trial with the state of Vermont, which
launched on August 23, 2013.
11. Shortly after the signing of the Carrier-NENA-APCO Agreement,
the Commission adopted the 2012 Further Notice, which proposed, inter
alia, to require all CMRS providers, as well as other providers of
interconnected text messaging services, to support the ability of
consumers to send text messages to 911 in all areas throughout the
nation where PSAPs are also prepared to receive the texts. The 2012
Further Notice's baseline requirements were modeled on the Carrier-
NENA-APCO Agreement, and the Commission sought comment on whether all
carriers, including regional, small and rural carriers, and all
``interconnected text'' providers can achieve these milestones in the
same or similar timeframes. In this respect, the 2012 Further Notice
recognized prevalence of SMS-based messaging, but also noted the trend
towards IP-based messaging platforms. The 2012 Further Notice proposed
that the Commission apply any text-to-911 rules it may adopt to both
SMS and IP-based text messaging services. The Commission noted that, to
the extent that consumers are gravitating to such IP-based applications
as their primary means of communicating by text, they may reasonably
come to expect that these applications support text-to-911. The
Commission also recognized the public interest benefits associated with
enabling IP-based messaging users to send texts to 911 from those
applications--applications with which the user is familiar--as consumer
familiarity is vital in emergency situations where seconds matter. To
that end, the 2012 Further Notice sought to ensure that consumers
ultimately have access to the same text-to-911 capabilities on the full
array of texting applications that they use for everyday
communication--regardless of provider or platform.
12. In May 2013, the Commission issued a Report and Order (Bounce-
Back Order) requiring CMRS providers and interconnected text providers
to supply consumers attempting to send a text to 911 an automatic
``bounce back'' message when the service is unavailable. In requiring
this bounce back messaging, the Commission found a ``clear benefit and
present need'' for persons who attempt to send emergency text messages
to know immediately if their text cannot be delivered to the proper
authorities, citing evidence that many consumers already believe they
can send text messages to 911. The Commission further determined that
in emergency situations, where call volumes can spike and networks
become congested, consumers are often unable to place voice calls, and
that in these instances it is particularly important that consumers
seeking emergency assistance by text receive a notification when text-
to-911 functionality is not available. Evidence in the record further
compelled the Commission to extend the bounce back obligation to
providers of interconnected text messaging service, citing the
proliferation of smartphones and significant volume of messages using
non-SMS or non-MMS applications that ride on cellular data networks.
The Commission noted specifically that, ``[a]s these applications
proliferate, consumers are likely to assume that they should be as
capable
[[Page 12445]]
of reaching 911 as any other telephone number.''
III. Discussion
A. Timeframe for Implementation of Text-to-911 Capability
13. We seek comment on a proposal that text-to-911 capability
should be made available by all text providers no later than December
31, 2014, and should be provided within a reasonable time after a PSAP
has made a valid request for service, not to exceed six months. We seek
specific comments on this tentative conclusion, particularly with
respect to small or rural CMRS carriers and interconnected text
providers, none of whom are parties to the Carrier-NENA-APCO Agreement.
Would PSAPs and consumers benefit from our establishment of a uniform
deadline of December 31, 2014, for both CMRS and interconnected text
providers?
14. With respect to CMRS providers other than the four signatories
to the Carrier-NENA-APCO Agreement, we believe that implementation by
December 31, 2014, is achievable. First, the progress made by the four
major providers illustrates the technical feasibility of text-to-911
implementation for other CMRS providers, including small and rural
providers. The adoption of the ATIS standard for text-to-911 over the
SMS platform also satisfies a condition that some small carriers cited
as a pre-condition to their ability to implement text-to-911. Indeed,
small and rural providers may be able to achieve cost savings in their
implementation by leveraging some of the text-to-911 databases and
other infrastructure that text-to-911 vendors will have in place by May
15, 2014 to support provision of text-to-911 by the four major
providers. Thus, providing small and rural providers with a small
amount of additional time beyond the May 2014 timeframe should provide
an opportunity for them to undertake the necessary preparatory action
and spread their costs over a longer period, while still providing
timely and tangible consumer benefits. The Competitive Carriers
Association (CCA) also suggests that smaller carriers can meet a
December 31, 2014 deadline for responding to a valid PSAP request for
text-to-911 service. We seek comment on these views.
B. Timeframe for Interconnected OTT Text Providers
15. With respect to interconnected text providers, however, we also
must take into account the unique technical complexities they may face
in implementing text-to-911. We therefore seek comment on whether such
factors weigh in favor of interconnected text providers being subject
to an alternative timeframe. In general, interconnected over-the-top
text providers can function both when a connection to an underlying
CMRS network is present and when it is not. However, those technical
issues that arise from the routing of texts from Wi-Fi locations need
not be resolved at this time because we do not propose that they be
implemented as part of this initial phase of text-to-911
implementation. Commenters indicate that interconnected text providers
will likely have to resolve other issues, such as OTT client
identifiers that would enable ``callback'' from PSAPs, IP addressing,
security challenges, and operating system (OS) service layer access to
enable routing 911 texts through different functional components in the
existing SMS architecture.
16. Comments to date from public safety entities argue that, even
considering the technical challenges, ``interconnected text providers
should be capable of meeting newly-imposed text-to-9-1-1 obligations on
relatively short timeframes.'' Nevertheless, NENA recommends a two-
tiered approach to compliance deadlines for ``two classes of
[originating service providers (OSPs)], interconnected and integrated
text providers, aimed at accommodating differences in interconnected
text OSPs' platforms.'' NENA further recommends that the Commission
``strictly limit the additional time granted to interconnected text
OSPs to emphasize the public interest and necessity embodied by these
new obligations, and to minimize the extent of consumer confusion that
could arise during the period between the two deadlines.'' Also, APCO
encourages the Commission to establish firm dates ``to ensure
meaningful progress and ultimate compliance'' for these entities.
17. Other commenters take a contrary view and assert that too many
technical considerations remain to be resolved before the consideration
of any deadline. Comcast contends that it is ``premature for the
Commission to establish a deadline for interconnected text message
providers to equip their services with a text-to-911 mechanism.'' The
VON Coalition contends that generating accurate location information
requires the input of multiple participants in the network ecosystem,
particularly for third-party texting applications that do not have
access or control of the underlying network. The VON Coalition also
contends that GPS alone and commercial location based services are not
sufficient in the 911 context, noting that manual mapping of Wi-Fi
routers, for example, may not be routinely updated or audited. VON does
not view these challenges as ``necessarily insurmountable'' and notes
that its ``members already are participating in industry working groups
. . . to find avenues to attempt to overcome them.'' VON submits that
such approaches ``will require significant cooperation across a broad
set of entities (e.g., providers of Wi-Fi access, wireless services,
OTT application developers, emergency services vendors and providers)
and standardized global approaches.'' ITI asserts that ``[m]andating
any technology requirements in application design would be difficult
and costly for companies that design one application to run across
multiple devices and platforms.''
18. A critical factor affecting the feasibility of the timeframe
for interconnected text providers to implement text-to-911 at the same
level of functionality as CMRS providers is how quickly interconnected
text providers can implement a technical solution that will support
``coarse'' location of application users so that their texts can be
routed to the correct PSAP. As discussed below, there are several
technical models exist that could support providing coarse location of
interconnected text users in the near-term when an underlying
connection to a CMRS network is present.
C. OTT Text-to-911 Message Delivery Models
19. While these models are not the only architectural approaches
that interconnected text providers might take, we describe the key
aspects of three approaches to solicit comment on them and other
potential technological solutions that support imposing a near-term
time frame for interconnected text providers. We seek comment on the
technical feasibility for interconnected text providers to implement
these models by the proposed deadline and request comment on how other
factors, such as necessary software changes, handset development
cycles, and security issues may affect the timeframes that we would
adopt.
1. Access CMRS Messaging Platform via API
20. We recognize that interconnected text providers face an array
of choices in considering methods to relay a text to a PSAP. As an
initial matter, although OTT providers' applications are primarily
designed to use IP-based protocols to deliver text messages to
[[Page 12446]]
destinations identified by a telephone number, they can, however,
utilize SMS-based protocols and route the text over the underlying
carrier's SMS network. (While we use the term ``OTT'' in discussing the
technical protocols that an application may use to route a text message
to a PSAP, in terms of feasibility for implementation by December 31,
2014, our proposal remains focused on the subset of OTT providers that
meet the definition of interconnected text providers.) An OTT texting
application can be programmed to recognize that the user is sending a
text message to the text short code ``911'' and automatically invoke
the wireless device's native SMS application programming interface
(API) for sending SMS messages. This functionality is distinct from the
application's normal operating mode which is generally designed to
route a text via a means other than the native SMS capability of the
device. Upon invoking the native SMS texting application, the text-to-
911 message will be handled by the underlying wireless carrier, i.e.,
the text will be routed through the carrier's (or its agent's) Text
Control Center (TCC), which is the functional element of the Short
Message Service Center (SMSC) dedicated to routing texts to the
appropriate Public Safety Answering Point (PSAP).
21. In this model an SMSC cannot distinguish generally between a
SMS message generated by an OTT application and the native SMS API.
Consistent with the SMS-to-911 standard, the carrier's TCC would then
forward the text along with coarse location information to the PSAP.
Because of this, we consider it unlikely that consumers in the near
term will expect text-to-911 to work in those circumstances where
cellular network connectivity is not available. We believe this method
is available to OTT providers today and that it can be implemented by
December 31, 2014, through relatively minor enhancements to their APIs.
We seek comment on this view.
22. We note that our view on the feasibility of interconnected text
providers using this method to support text-to-911 is premised on the
continued availability of CMRS providers' SMS networks to handle texts
from OTT providers. We note that the model described here assumes that
CMRS providers would provide access to their SMS networks for texts to
911 generated on OTT applications. Some CMRS providers already afford
this access to some OTT applications, and the model posits that CMRS
providers could receive requests from other OTT providers for similar
access to the CMRS provider's native texting application APIs. CMRS
providers would need to devote technical and product management
resources to meeting such requests and to ongoing maintenance and
performance issues. We also note that the average CMRS provider offers
a wide range of wireless devices to consumers, each having somewhat
distinct technical parameters and programming to support third party
applications. Thus, a CMRS provider would have to coordinate with each
handset manufacturer and associated operating system provider to ensure
that each device model that is capable of supporting an interconnected
text messaging application would also be capable of interfacing with
the CMRS provider's underlying native texting application and SMS or
messaging platform. We seek comment on these observations. What
specific considerations should we take into account regarding how CMRS
providers would implement a requirement to support OTT provider's use
of their native messaging application? Beyond what we have described
herein, what specific actions must a CMRS provider take to afford
access to its underlying SMS or messaging platform? Are there any
specific industry best practices or guidelines presently in place that
may serve to provide a framework for the coordination between CRMS
providers and OTT providers?
23. In suggesting that a SMS default for interconnected text
providers can provide a viable near term solution for text-to-911, we
emphasize that we are not proposing that such a relationship would
occur absent reasonable compensation to the underlying network provider
or similar arrangements. Nor do we propose to constrain CMRS providers
from transitioning their SMS platforms to new technologies if they
choose to do so at some point in the future. Rather than requiring CMRS
providers to maintain their SMS platforms in perpetuity for the sole
purpose of supporting text-to-911 for third-party interconnected text
providers, we expect that interconnected text providers will need to
develop alternative text-to-911 delivery methods as technology evolves.
We seek comment on these views. We believe that, if interconnected text
providers have access to the API on CMRS carrier devices, those issues
may be resolvable for interconnected text applications riding over the
SMS platform. We finally note that resolving such issues may be
dependent on CMRS carriers not impeding interconnected text providers'
capability to deliver text-to-911 messages. We therefore propose
adopting a requirement that CMRS carriers not block the access to
capabilities that would enable interconnected text providers to provide
consumers using their OTT applications to send texts to 911. We seek
comment on these views. We also invite comment on whether this proposal
and the measures necessary for interconnected text providers to take
would require timeframes other than the uniform one that we propose. If
so, what would alternative timeframes would be reasonable?
2. Network and Server Based Models
24. We also present three additional models by which an OTT
provider could deliver a text message using APIs that route the text
via an Internet connection, either over a wireless carrier's data
network or a non-CMRS Wi-Fi network, to the interconnected text
provider's server.\4\ In these scenarios, the OTT provider's text
handling server recognizes that the text message is addressed to 911
and then interacts with a third-party TCC to route the text to a PSAP.
In each model, it is assumed that the user has a phone number assigned
to the user by the wireless carrier. Generally, and consistent with our
definition of a covered text provider, when a user subscribes to an
interconnected text messaging service, the OTT provider will provision
the user with a ten digit phone number to enable the user to send and
receive texts from other texting application users. In doing so, the
OTT provider enables the user to avoid relying on the wireless
carrier's SMS network to route text messages.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\4\ For a graphical representation of the models discussed, see
Second Further Notice at paragraphs 24 through 33, available at
http://www.fcc.gov/document/text-911-policy-statement-and-second-fnprm.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
25. In our basic server-based model for routing a text message to
911, we assume that the OTT application uses the same phone number as
the device itself. In this case, the OTT service provider receives the
text at its server and passes the originating phone number and message
to a third-party TCC. It could use a number of messaging protocols to
effectuate the delivery to the TCC, such as Short Message Peer-to-Peer
(SMPP), Session Initiation Protocol (SIP) MESSAGE, or Message Session
Relay Protocol (MSRP). The TCC draws location from a commercial
location service, just as for the CMRS SMS service, to acquire the
location of the mobile device.
[[Page 12447]]
26. A second model relies on using the number assigned by the OTT
provider to route the text to 911. In this model, the texting
application invokes a system call on the API, such as on wireless
devices using the Android Operating System, the system call would be
the line of code ``getLine1Number()'', which would retrieve the phone
number string, for example, the MSISDN for a GSM phone, and obtains the
phone number of the mobile device and conveys it via the protocol
message sent to the OTT provider's server. The provider, as before,
then sends the message through a third party TCC, which in turn invokes
the commercial location service and routes the text to the appropriate
PSAP.
27. The third server-based solution relies on the location API in
the mobile device, rather than a commercial location service, to obtain
the user's location. Many OTT text applications already obtain the
user's location for non-emergency purposes. The OTT text application
includes GPS-based location information with the text content and
routes the text through its server to the TCC. The use of device
location would likely offer higher accuracy in many cases and may meet
the Commission's location accuracy requirements for handset-based
location delivery. In addition, this solution does not rely on cellular
data connectivity and continues to work as long as the OTT text
application can connect to the Internet. These models are not
exhaustive of those available to OTT providers to route texts to PSAPs;
in fact, an application could implement both a mobile-based solution
and a server-based solutions. This would ensure that text messages to
911 can reach the TCC whether SMS or Internet data service is
available. We seek comment on whether the models described above are
consistent with a commercial implementation to support text-to-911.
What other models might an OTT provider consider using to route a text
to 911? Which functions are OTT providers capable of handling within
their servers and which functions are they most likely going to have to
secure access to third party providers to support routing a text to a
PSAP?
D. Costs
28. As discussed above, interconnected text providers face a number
of technical issues in being able to send text messages from its users
to PSAPs. Specifically, the VON Coalition notes:
Resolving these third-party gateway technical challenges would
not only take time, but once resolved, would impose significant
costs on providers of software applications--many of which are small
businesses offering innovative IP-based capabilities at little or no
cost to consumers. The introduction of third-party gateways and
vendors (and, thus ongoing payments to and coordination with those
vendors) into the application provider's service--something that
would be necessary only if providers were required to try to
bootstrap the legacy TDM 911 system onto Next Generation IP
services--introduces complexities and points of possible failure, as
well as costs the developer did not anticipate. VON understands that
many third-party vendors typically charge monthly per-subscriber
fees (regardless of whether or how many subscribers ever use the
application to try to reach 911), in addition to upfront set-up
costs. Such per-subscriber costs, or even per-transaction costs,
could quickly tip an otherwise successful business model on its head
as the costs approach the revenues (if any) made by the application
provider.''
On a related note, Sprint notes that ``[w]hile interconnected text
providers will incur costs associated with compliance, CMRS carriers
are also likely to incur additional costs because CMRS carriers will
need to provide network and device capabilities to interconnected text
providers.'' Sprint also argues that ``CMRS carriers should not be
expected to incur such costs without reimbursement from interconnected
text providers, since any such costs will be undertaken to facilitate
compliance by a third-party.''
29. We recognize that a requirement on interconnected text
providers would impose additional costs. We seek comment on the
implementation costs associated with the models discussed above. For
example, with respect to the mobile-based model, we estimate that a
requirement would impose an implementation cost of approximately $4,500
per provider per platform, for an industry-wide cost of approximately
$555,000. We came to this conclusion using the Constructive Cost Model
II (COCOMO II), which can provide an estimate of the cost, effort, and
schedule for planning new software development activity.\5\ The model
analyzes a number of variables concerning software size, specifically
source lines of code, whether new, reused, modified, or some
combination thereof; software scale drivers; software cost drivers
related to product, personnel, operating system platform specifics, and
project specifics; and software labor rates.\6\ We seek comment on this
analysis, and we encourage those who disagree with this analysis to
present their own methodology, analysis, and conclusions. Similarly, we
seek comment on the costs for CMRS providers to enable OTT application
interfacing with native text messaging applications. What software
changes, if any, must a CMRS provider make to its underlying text
messaging application to support the OTT application? Finally, what
reoccurring expenses would there be that are not accounted for by
COCOMO II, such as compliance and operating costs, including payments
to acquire network and device capabilities from CMRS providers or
others, depending on solution?
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\5\ See University of Southern California, Center for Systems
and Software Engineering, COCOMO II, available at http://csse.usc.edu/csse/research/COCOMOII/cocomo_main.html (last viewed
Jan. 8, 2014).
\6\ The COCOMO II web-based tool requires one to enter the total
new source lines of code and the cost per person-month in dollars
and to set a number of software scale and cost drivers at subjective
levels (e.g., very low, low, nominal, high, very high, extra high).
See COCOMO II, Constructive Cost Model, available at http://csse.usc.edu/tools/COCOMOII.php (last viewed Jan. 8, 2014). This
model estimates that a one-time cost of $4,541 will be incurred,
assuming that (a) 100 new source lines of code must be added to an
existing application in order to meet the a text-to-911 mandate
(which we believe is a high estimate, based on our own research),
(b) the software labor rate is $19,435 per person-month, and (c) all
cost drivers in the model are set to ``nominal.'' Cost per Person-
Month is estimated as follows: average software engineer/developer/
programmer total mean annual salary of $93,280 (Bureau of Labor
Statistics (BLS), May 2012); a cost per person-month of
approximately 173 hours; mean hourly rate of $44.85 (BLS, May 2012)
plus an estimated overhead factor of 2.5, or $112.13 per person
hour. ($93,280 x 2.5)/12 = $19,435 cost per person-month. For mean
annual wage of a software developer of applications, see Bureau of
Labor Statistics, Occupational Employment Statistics, Occupational
Employment and Wages, May 2012, available at http://bls.gov/oes/current/oes151132.htm (last viewed Jan. 8, 2014). In general,
overhead costs are between 150-250 percent of the cost of a direct
labor hour. See Cynthia R. Cook, John C. Graser, RAND, Military
Airframe Acquisition Costs (2001) available at http://www.rand.org/content/dam/rand/pubs/monograph_reports/MR1325/MR1325.ch9.pdf (last
viewed Jan. 8, 2014). Moreover, we estimate that at present, there
are approximately thirty interconnected text messaging services,
offering their services on anywhere from one to five different
operating system platforms. To account for future proliferation of
platform offerings, we estimate that all service providers would
offer their service across four main operating system platforms and
that each of them would incur a one-time cost of $4,541 to add 100
new source lines of code to an existing application, as discussed
above. The resulting nationwide implementation cost for these
affected applications would therefore be approximately $544,920
(i.e., 30 x 4 x $4,541).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
30. Beyond the estimated costs identified herein related to the
mobile-based model, are there other initial and ongoing costs that
interconnected text providers would incur to support text-to-911
service, particularly the server-based models that we have identified?
For text routing purposes, would
[[Page 12448]]
interconnected text providers be able to use the same vendors that CMRS
providers use? If so, would their routing costs be similar to those
involved for CMRS providers? Would a per-incident service model be
feasible for smaller interconnected text providers, and if so, would it
be preferable to other alternatives? What costs would be associated
with a consumer outreach effort from interconnected text providers to
educate consumers about text-to-911? What other potential costs to
interconnected text providers should the Commission consider, if any?
Since many interconnected text providers offer their services at no
charge and they may incur significant costs to implement text-to-911,
will interconnected text providers have to start charging for these
services or are there other ways to obtain revenues to cover these
costs? What effect will this have on future innovation and competition?
E. Relay Services
31. Individuals who are deaf, hard of hearing, or have speech
disabilities may elect to use existing text-to-voice relay services
(e.g., IP relay) to contact 911 when they need to communicate with
PSAPs. IP Relay is a form of telecommunications relay service that
permits an individual with a hearing or a speech disability to
communicate in text using an Internet Protocol-enabled device via the
Internet, rather than using a TTY and the public switched telephone
network. These existing relay services do not provide direct delivery
of text to PSAPs. Moreover, many commenters have asserted, and we
agree, that relay services have distinct limitations and are not an
acceptable substitute for direct text access once text-to-911
capabilities become available in a jurisdiction. Nevertheless, relay
providers are uniquely situated to ensure that deaf, hard of hearing,
or speech-impaired individuals can reach emergency personnel because
only relay providers have the capability to ensure that if a consumer
attempts to text a PSAP that is not text-to-911 ready, the message will
still be delivered (as a relay message). We seek comment on whether
relay service providers--to the extent they offer applications that can
send text messages to North American Numbering Plan numbers--should
develop direct text-to-text services to support communication with
PSAPs that are text-capable, while expediting text-to-voice relay calls
where the PSAP is not capable of receiving text messages directly from
a caller. Is it technically possible for current relay technologies to
support pass-through of a text to a PSAP without relaying the call?
Could relay service providers re-use some or all of text control center
(TCC) infrastructure being built for text-to-911 services? Are there
other ways in which relay providers could improve or augment their
services to support text-to-911 and the broader transition to NG911?
What avenues might relay providers use to recoup their costs for
providing this service?
F. PSAP Implementation
32. In the 2012 Further Notice, the Commission acknowledged the
disparate capabilities of PSAPs in terms of accepting and processing
text messages to 911, and the need for the Commission to take these
differing capabilities into account. The Commission also proposed a set
of near-term solutions that would allow non-NG 911 capable PSAPs to
handle text messages without requiring significant up-front investments
or upgrades, including the use of web browsers, gateway centers,
conversion of text messages to TTY calls, and state or regional
aggregation of text-to-911 processing.
33. Commenters confirmed that significant differences persist in
PSAP readiness. Fairfax County, for example, asserts that it ``cannot
currently accept 9-1-1 messages sent via text'' and that it ``cannot
predict when a transition from current 9-1-1 to NG9-1-1 will occur
because the initial planning for a transition to NG9-1-1 is just
beginning in Virginia.'' Some commenters oppose action by the
Commission to compel carriers to support text-to-911 absent a parallel
mandate for PSAPs, or otherwise urge the Commission to condition the
timing of any mandate on a PSAP's ability to accept text messages.
34. We expect that broad support of text-to-911 will aid PSAPs that
are beginning the NG911 transition or considering implementation of
text-to-911, and that PSAPs may be more willing to do so given the
availability on the provider side of this important service, in that
budgeting authorities for states and localities will have more
certainty to help justify expenditure of public funds. However, we
recognize that barriers to PSAP implementation of these functionalities
remain. We are interested in learning more about what those barriers
are and what additional measures we can take consistent with our
authority that may encourage more rapid uptake by PSAPs or other
emergency response authorities to ensure that the all participants in
the 911 ecosystem are meeting consumer expectations. How can the
Commission assist in promoting action by PSAPs and others to overcome
funding or other implementation obstacles? Is there outreach or other
activities that the Commission or other organizations can undertake to
facilitate this?
G. Phase II-Equivalent Location for Covered Text Providers
35. CMRS Providers. We appreciate the advocacy of public safety
entities for the delivery of Phase II level location information and
recognize that with currently available technology CMRS carriers face
technical difficulties in providing Phase II equivalency for text-to-
911 messages. The Carrier-NENA-APCO Agreement, the ATIS standard J-STD-
110, and a large part of the record suggest that only coarse (cell
sector) location should be used for current text-to-911 purposes.
However, in the long term cell sector information alone neither offers
optimal public safety benefits nor resolves the discrepancy in the
ability of first responders to locate persons with hearing and speech
disabilities compared to the ability to locate persons making voice 911
calls. Recent submissions to the record and the capability of smart
phones to access and transmit precise Phase II level location
information offer promise that text-to-911 message can be sent with
more accurate location information to PSAPs. For example, at least one
CMRS carrier offers subscribers ``thin-client'' applications that they
can download on their CMRS-capable devices. Potentially, the
application can acquire the Phase II level information from the
smartphone's user plane platform and send the more precise location
through the text control center (TCC) to the appropriate PSAP. However,
the PSAP may have to ``re-bid'' to obtain the Phase II longitude-
latitude information. We seek comment on this and similar capabilities
to provide Phase II equivalent location information.
36. Several commenters submit that the Commission ``should leave
the development of precise location information capability for text-to-
911 to further product and application development and related
standards work using LTE and NG911 technologies.'' Nevertheless, we
continue to emphasize that the long-term objective is for text
messaging services, whether from CMRS carriers or interconnected text
providers, to provide for Phase II equivalent location information with
text-to-911 calls. We believe that a combination of Commission
initiatives and industry efforts can achieve this goal. For example,
concerning the capabilities of CMRS providers to deliver Phase II
quality location with text-to-911, the
[[Page 12449]]
current CSRIC IV Working Group 1--NG-911 is studying and is due to
report in March 2014 on the technical feasibility of including enhanced
location information in text messages sent to PSAPs. In addition, as
noted below, the NENA i3Message Session Relay Protocol (MSRP) could be
re-used to retrieve GPS-derived latitude-longitude information. We seek
comment on these and similar efforts of standards-bodies pursuing such
solutions and look forward to further input from public safety entities
and industry that will foster those efforts. At the same time, we
invite comment on what might be reasonable timeframes to achieve more
precise location capabilities in sending text messages to 911. We
stress that one of the critical long term goals to enable PSAPs to
dispatch first responders more directly to a consumer texting 911 is
for voice and text service providers to meet the same 911 location
accuracy requirements.
37. Interconnected Text Providers. In seeking comment to establish
such a time frame for interconnected text applications to provide
coarse location information, we also have a long-term concern for the
need to ensure that interconnected text messages to 911 have more
accurate location information routed to PSAPs. One of the described
server-based solutions, using the location application programming
interface (API) in the mobile device rather than a commercial location
service, promises the capability to meet the Commission's Phase II
location accuracy requirements for handset-based location delivery.
While the selection of anyone solution by interconnected text providers
should remain technologically neutral, we seek comment on what
technological developments need to occur for interconnected text
providers to implement a solution that provides Phase II equivalent
location information. Further, we find that the record indicates other
possible interconnected text-to-911 models that could deliver a more
precise location. We request comment on the timeframe in which
interconnected text providers could reasonably adopt and implement such
approaches. What factors would we need to consider in establishing this
timeframe? For example, should different timeframes be established,
depending on whether the text provider is an interconnected or an
integrated text provider?
38. Also, we seek comment on what technological developments are
occurring that would allow interconnected text providers to either
access a wireless carrier network for cellular data connectivity or
connect to an IP-based network to provide Phase II equivalent location
information. Although the CSRIC Working Group's focus is on the
capability of using the wireless carrier network, we find that to
address consumer concerns to have the ability to seamlessly reach 911,
that there should be no distinction between the capabilities of CMRS
carriers and interconnected service providers to provide Phase II
equivalent location information. We seek comment on this view.
Specifically, we request comment on whether there are any technical
issues that arise for CMRS carriers and not for interconnected text
providers or vice versa.
H. Roaming
39. In the 2012 Further Notice, the Commission suggested that it is
critical for consumers who are roaming to have access to text-to-911 in
an emergency. However, the Commission acknowledged that the Carrier-
NENA-APCO Agreement does not provide for text-to-911 support for
roaming subscribers, and that because ``sending and receiving texts
while roaming involves two networks, the consumer's home network and
the visited roaming network, roaming may create issues for text-to-911
because of the greater technical complexity of routing the message to
the correct PSAP based on the consumer's location.'' The Commission
sought specific comment on the mechanics required for home and roaming
network operators to identify and communicate the location of a texting
consumer to PSAPs, as well as other asserted technical limitations.
40. Carriers including AT&T and Verizon state that a roaming
obligation is not technically feasible, and encourage the Commission to
allow industry stakeholders to address this issue and defer
consideration of any rules at this time. CTIA similarly characterizes
the ability of roaming subscribers to send a text to 911 as being
``considerabl[y] uncertain'' and encourages more study of the issue.
CTIA also notes the views of the Emergency Access Advisory Committee
(EAAC), which suggests that text-to-911 by a roaming subscriber would
require ``require significant modifications to the wireless originator
network and core infrastructure that will ultimately delay the
deployment of SMS-to-9-1-1 services.'' Sprint and T-Mobile inform that
their networks do not currently have the technological capability to
support roaming subscriber because ``while location information (in the
form of cell sector information) is available in the visited network
(onto which the subscriber has roamed), it is not normally available to
the home CMRS network.'' Both Sprint and T-Mobile encourage the
Commission to ``allow for eventual adoption of standards that would
contemplate roaming in the NG911 environment.'' Also, carriers urge the
Commission to wait for standards to be adopted to address roaming in
the NG-911 environment.
41. On the other hand, public safety entities advocate pushing
forward in the face of the technical complexities. BRETSA suggests that
if transmitting text messages from a roaming user to a PSAP is not
currently achievable, it is better to implement text-to-9-1-1 without
roaming capability than to delay text-to-9-1-1 implementation
altogether. NENA concedes that the complexity of transmission exists,
and it supports mirroring the roaming exclusion contained in the
Carrier-NENA-APCO Agreement. However, NENA supports the reevaluation of
this exclusion at regular intervals, beginning no later than one year
after the Commission's initial text-to-9-1-1 rules come into force.
42. As a general policy matter, we continue to believe that access
to 911 via text is just as critical for roaming consumers as it is for
consumers utilizing a home carrier's network. Indeed, consumers may not
even be aware when they are roaming, and carrier coverage maps may
reflect coverage where they may only have roaming agreements. In an
emergency, being able to distinguish which carrier is providing a
signal should not be the responsibility of the consumer when seconds
may matter. Roaming is also particularly critical for customers of
small or rural carriers, who rely on roaming when traveling outside the
regional footprint of these carriers. We seek comment on this view.
43. At the outset, however, we seek comment on the volume of text-
to-911 calls that can reasonably be anticipated when roaming--and
reflected in data that carriers might be collecting or consumer surveys
by research or industry groups. Telecom RERC asserts that the record
indicates a lack of sufficient data on how serious the problem might
be. Telecom RERC ``suggests that it is necessary for carriers to submit
statistics on the number of times users attempted to text 9-1-1 during
a roaming situation to the FCC.'' We invite comment on approaches we
could adopt to collect such roaming data.
44. We also seek comment on the costs of requiring roaming text-to-
911 calls to be routed to the correct, nearest
[[Page 12450]]
PSAPs on the roaming carrier's network. For example, Sprint asserts
that there would be a significant impact on mobile devices were we to
adopt a roaming requirement. Sprint further submits that ``for the
visited network to support roaming the visited network would need to be
capable of determining when a text is attempting to reach a local
emergency service via 9-1-1, and then this system would need to send
the text message to the local text-to-911 gateway, ignoring all normal
SMS routing rules. SMS servers would need to be modified to accomplish
this. Any responses from the PSAP would also need to somehow be
intercepted, so they are not sent back to the home network's Short
Message Service Center (`SMSC'), which would require further routing
modifications.''
45. We further recognize that additional technical issues may
require resolution before we would set a date certain for CMRS
providers to meet this proposed obligation. Some commenters suggest
that CMRS networks cannot currently support roaming and the delivery of
location information because while the cell sector information is
available in the visited network, it is not available in the home
network. For instance, commenters note that the current ATIS standard
for text-to-911 over the SMS platform does not support a roaming
capability. Further, Sprint adds that mobile ``devices . . . would need
to be capable of interacting with multiple SMSCs (both the home and
serving SMSCs)'' and that ``[s]torage and delivery of undeliverable SMS
messages would also need to be addressed.''
46. Given the technological complexities for routing roaming text-
to-911 calls, we seek comment on what measures we could take to either
facilitate or mandate within a reasonable timeframe a roaming text-to-
911 requirement prior to wide-spread implementation of NG911. For
example, what standards, if any, would need to be adopted before a
requirement would be appropriate? We also seek specific information on
what the cost burden would be for carriers to make the necessary
changes to their SMS platforms. What timeframe would be required for
carriers to make such changes? Would the costs to make CMRS network
modifications outweigh the public safety benefit of text-to-911
roaming; and if so, what would the magnitude of those costs be, e.g.,
compared to the potential call volume for text-to-911? Further, do any
of the mobile-based, server-based solutions, or other similar potential
solutions described above in this Second Further Notice provide a
technically feasible pathway for implementing a roaming text-to-911
requirement either over SMS platforms or, alternatively, IP-based
platforms before implementation of NG911 makes text-to-911 roaming more
feasible? If so, what standards, if any, would have to be adopted to
implement those solutions? What would a reasonable timeframe be to
adopt those standards and test such for implementation? Additionally,
what further educational measures or coordination can the Commission
take to make consumers aware of the limitations in trying to send a
text-to-911 message while roaming?
I. Liability Protection
47. In the 2012 Further Notice, the Commission recognized that
adequate liability protection is needed for PSAPs, CMRS providers,
interconnected service providers, and vendors to proceed with
implementation of text-to-911. The Commission noted that the 2008 New
and Emerging Technologies 911 Improvement Act (NET 911 Act) expanded
the scope of state liability protection by requiring states to provide
parity in the degree of protection provided to traditional and non-
traditional 911 providers. In the Next Generation 9-1-1 Advancement Act
of 2012 (NG911 Advancement Act), Congress further extended these parity
provisions to providers of NG911 service. The 2012 Further Notice
sought comment on whether providers of text-to-911 service have
sufficient liability protection under current law to provide text-to-
911 services to their customers. The Commission observed that under the
Carrier-NENA-APCO Agreement, the four major wireless carriers have
committed to deploy text-to-911 capability without any precondition
requiring additional liability protection other than the protection
afforded by current law. Nevertheless, the 2012 Further Notice sought
comment on whether the Commission could take additional steps--
consistent with our regulatory authority--to provide additional
liability protection to text-to-911 service providers.
48. In February 2013, pursuant to the NG911 Advancement Act,
Commission staff submitted a report to Congress addressing the legal
and regulatory framework for NG911 services. With respect to liability,
the NG911 Report recognized that tort liability standards are
traditionally a matter of state law, and recommended that Congress
consider incentives for states to revise their liability regimes to
provide appropriate protections for entities providing or supporting
NG911 services. The NG911 Report also suggested that Congress include
appropriate liability protection as a part of any federal law that
imposes NG911 requirements or solicits voluntary NG911 activity.
49. In response to the 2012 Further Notice, numerous parties
submitted comments on liability issues. We do not address these
comments here, but encourage parties to provide any additional or
updated information relevant to our consideration of this issue
including the possible risks and costs of implementing text-to-911
without liability protections in place. In addition, we seek comment on
whether adopting text-to-911 requirements as proposed in this
proceeding would assist in mitigating liability concerns by
establishing standards of conduct that could be invoked by text-to-911
providers in defense against state tort liability or similar claims.
J. Waivers
50. Should the Commission adopt mandatory obligations to support
text-to-911, we seek comment on to what extent, and under what
circumstances, the Commission should consider waivers. The Commission
has a generally articulated waiver standard under Sec. Sec. 1.3 and
1.925 of our rules. The Commission has also from time to time provided
guidance on how applicants may demonstrate that the waiver standard has
been met in a particular circumstance. Under certain statutes, Congress
has also directed the Commission to consider waivers in particular
circumstances. For example, section 716(h)(1) of the Communications and
Video Accessibility Act (CVAA) allows the Commission to grant waivers
of the CVAA's accessibility requirements for features or functions of
devices capable of accessing advanced communications services but which
are, in the judgment of the Commission, designed primarily for purposes
other than accessing advanced communications. The Commission sought
comment on how to implement this provision, and subsequently provided
guidance on the substantive factors impacting the Commission's waiver
analysis.
51. Recognizing that to some extent it may depend on the rule
adopted, we seek comment on what factors or other considerations would
be relevant to the Commission in evaluating whether a wavier would be
appropriate. Given the significance of the public benefits of
supporting text-to-911, is a showing of financial difficulty or
technical infeasibility in complying sufficient on its own? What amount
of financial challenge or information regarding technical difficulties
should be demonstrated? If the waiver is related to
[[Page 12451]]
any mandatory timeframe, what circumstances should be considered?
Should additional time be limited in availability? What other factual
considerations should the Commission take into account?
K. Treatment of Voluntary Agreements
52. In this rulemaking, we seek comment on a framework for
encouraging voluntary industry commitments that will benefit the public
interest. The voluntary commitment that AT&T, Sprint, T-Mobile, and
Verizon Wireless have entered into with NENA and APCO could serve as a
model for further industry action on such issues. We seek comment on
how any rules adopted in this proceeding could provide a ``safe
harbor'' option for companies that have entered into voluntary
agreements with public safety that the Commission has determined serves
the public interest. Under a safe harbor approach, should companies be
given the option to either be bound by their voluntary commitments or
to be subject to the rules? If companies choosing to abide by their
voluntary commitments would be afforded safe harbor treatment, then if
such a company was alleged to have violated its voluntary commitment,
should it be afforded an opportunity to correct its behavior without
fear of enforcement action? Conversely, for companies that elect to be
subject to the rules, would they be subject to standard enforcement
mechanisms?
53. We also seek comment on what should happen if a company
violates its voluntary commitment after being afforded an opportunity
to correct. Should failure to abide by the voluntary commitment after
opportunity to correct lead to termination of the safe harbor? Should
the company be required to switch to the rules track or subject to
enforcement action for sustained violations of its commitment? Should
certain violations, e.g., willful misconduct, void the safe harbor
protections and deprive the company of the opportunity to correct? We
seek comment how ensuring accountability under and the enforceability
of voluntary commitments under any of these frameworks would impact the
incentives for industry to enter into voluntary commitments that are in
the public interest.
54. We seek comment on the potential risks as well as benefits of
this approach to voluntary commitments. Are there circumstances in
which the safe harbor option should not be made available? What should
the Commission do if such voluntary agreements go beyond the
Commission's rules in a particular area? In this context, do the
interests of private parties negotiating voluntary agreements align
with the Commission's or the public's interests? Should such an
approach be time-limited or subject to re-evaluation based on changed
circumstances, e,g., where the Commission determines that additional
regulatory action on a given issue may be warranted? Should we solicit
public comment on such voluntary commitments before granting
signatories a safe harbor?
55. We also seek comment on several ancillary issues. We seek
comment on the nature of an ``election,'' and whether parties must join
a voluntary agreement at its inception, or may join such an agreement
at a later time. Would such a situation provide the opportunity for
regulatory arbitrage? Another important aspect of voluntary commitments
is the ability to measure and monitor industry compliance with such
commitments. The Carrier-NENA-APCO Agreement included voluntary
quarterly reporting, whereby parties to the commitment provide updated
information to the Commission regarding the extent of their compliance
with the commitment. We seek comment on whether for future voluntary
commitments to qualify for the treatment described above, they must
include a robust reporting requirement that provides the Commission
with sufficient data to make informed decisions about the effectiveness
of the voluntary commitment and, additionally, what the implications of
such a voluntary information collection might be for purposes of the
Paperwork Reduction Act and any other relevant legal requirements.
L. Future Evolution of Texting Services
56. In the 2012 Further Notice, the Commission divided text
applications into two broad categories: (1) interconnected text
applications that use IP-based protocols to deliver text messages to a
service provider, which the service provider then delivers the text
messages to destinations identified by a telephone number, and (2) non-
interconnected applications that only support communication with a
defined set of users of compatible applications but do not support
general communication with text-capable telephone numbers. We note that
our definition of interconnected text, as codified in the Bounce-Back
Order, encompasses applications ``that enable a consumer to send text
messages to all or substantially all text-capable U.S. telephone
numbers and receive text messages from the same.'' We seek comment
whether the definition of interconnected text should also be
interpreted to include a service that utilizes IP-based protocols for
outgoing text and SMS-based protocols for the return text and request
that commenters discuss any potential problems with such an
interpretation.
57. As discussed above, our initial proposals remain focused on the
subset of ``over-the-top'' applications that constitute interconnected
text applications. The division of text applications into
interconnected and non-interconnected remains appropriate given the
record in this proceeding. We recognize, however, there are many
varieties of text messaging applications, and many more varieties are
likely to develop.
58. As these applications continue to grow in popularity, however,
we expect that consumer habits will change, and with them, their
expectations as to the functionality of these applications may also
change. We seek comment on the varieties of messaging applications.
Under what conditions would consumers expect that text messaging via an
application that is not connected to the PSTN and does not allow direct
texting to a phone number would enable a connection to 911? Do
consumers expect that text messaging services generally have the
ability to connect to text-capable telephone numbers? Do consumer
expectations vary based on the nature of a particular application?
Could such text messaging applications also create consumer
expectations that they can reach emergency services? If so, should we
require them to do so? What costs would be associated with doing so?
For instance, would imposing text-to-911 requirements on non-
interconnected text applications raise the cost of such services that
would diminish innovation and investment? Should we extend the bounce-
back requirement to such applications? Does the Commission have
adequate bases of authority to impose such a mandate on such text
providers?
M. Legal Authority
59. The Commission's 2012 Further Notice sought comment on the
FCC's authority to apply both a bounce-back requirement and more
comprehensive text-to-911 rules to CMRS providers and other entities
that offer interconnected text messaging services, including third-
party providers of OTT text messaging applications. The 2012 Further
Notice discussed the scope of the Commission's authority under Title
III, the CVAA, and the agency's ancillary authority.
60. Subsequently, in the 2013 Bounce-Back Order, the Commission
[[Page 12452]]
determined that numerous provisions of Title III provide the FCC with
direct authority to impose 911 bounce-back requirements on CMRS
providers, that the CVAA vests the Commission with direct authority to
impose 911 bounce-back requirements on both CMRS providers and other
providers of interconnected text messaging applications, including OTT
providers, and that the agency has ancillary authority to apply 911
bounce-back requirements to providers of interconnected text messaging
services, including OTT providers. The Commission explained, inter
alia, that imposing 911 bounce back rules on OTT providers was
reasonably ancillary to the Commission's Title III mandate regarding
the use of spectrum and the Commission's statutory authority to adopt
911 regulations that ensure that consumers can reach emergency
services. We invite parties to comment on whether there are any reasons
why the Commission's previous determinations regarding the scope of our
authority do not apply in the context of the foregoing proposals,
including whether the CVAA provides authority to implement regulations
mandating text-to-911 on a telecommunications network that is not on an
IP-enabled emergency network. Further, we seek comment on whether text-
to-911 is ``achievable and technically feasible'' for interconnected
text providers. To the extent the Commission adopts rules that cover
relay providers or other recipients of Interstate TRS funding, we
believe we have authority to adopt such rules under sections 201(b) and
225 of the Communications Act. We seek comment on the extent of this
authority.
IV. Initial Regulatory Flexibility Analysis
61. As required by the Regulatory Flexibility Act of 1980, as
amended (RFA), the Commission has prepared this present Initial
Regulatory Flexibility Analysis (IRFA) of the possible significant
economic impact of the proposal described in the attached Second
Further Notice of Proposed Rulemaking on small entities. Written public
comments are requested on this IRFA. Comments must be identified as
responses to the IRFA and must be filed by the deadlines for comments
in the Second Further Notice of Proposed Rulemaking. The Commission
will send a copy of the Second Further Notice of Proposed Rulemaking,
including this IRFA, to the Chief Counsel for Advocacy of the Small
Business Administration (SBA). In addition, the Second Further Notice
of Proposed Rulemaking and IRFA (or summaries thereof) will be
published in the Federal Register.
A. Need for, and Objectives of, the Proposed Rules
62. Wireless consumers are increasingly using text messaging as a
means of everyday communication on a variety of platforms. The legacy
911 system, however, does not support text messaging as a means of
reaching emergency responders, leading to potential consumer confusion
and even to possible danger. As consumer use of carrier-based and third
party-provided texting applications expands and evolves, the 911 system
must also evolve to enable wireless consumers to reach 911 in those
emergency situations where a voice call is not feasible or appropriate.
63. In this Second Further Notice of Proposed Rulemaking, we
propose rules that set timeframes that will enable Americans to send
text messages to 911 (text-to-911) across platforms, and seek comment
on consumers' use of text-to-911 while roaming. We also seek comment on
the transmission to a PSAP of more specific information as to the
location of a texting party. Specifically, we propose to require all
wireless carriers and providers of ``interconnected'' text messaging
applications to support the ability of consumers to send text messages
to 911 in all areas throughout the nation where 911 Public Safety
Answering Points (PSAPs) are also prepared to receive the texts no
later than December 31, 2014. We also seek comment on requiring
carriers to support text-to-911 when consumers are roaming on their
networks, and to provide ``Phase II'' equivalent location information
regarding the location from which a text is sent to 911. We also seek
comment on enhancing liability protection for text providers within the
Next Generation 911 (NG911) ecosystem, how relay services may support
text-to-911, and how we should consider any waiver standards that may
apply.
64. Our proposals build on the voluntary commitment by the four
largest wireless carriers--in an agreement with the National Emergency
Number Association (NENA), and the Association of Public Safety
Communications Officials (APCO) (Carrier-NENA-APCO Agreement)--to make
text-to-911 available to their customers by May 15, 2014. The baseline
requirements we propose in this Second Further Notice for
interconnected text providers are modeled on the Carrier-NENA-APCO
Agreement, and we seek additional comment how all ``interconnected
text'' providers can achieve these milestones in the same or similar
timeframes.
65. Seeking comment on establishing timeframes for the addition of
text capability to the 911 system for interconnected text providers and
for all consumers when roaming on a CMRS network will vastly enhance
the system's accessibility for over 40 million Americans with hearing
or speech disabilities. It will also provide a vital and lifesaving
alternative to the public in situations where 911 voice service is
unavailable or placing a voice call could endanger the caller. Indeed,
as recent history has shown, text messaging is often the most reliable
means of communications during disasters where voice calls cannot be
completed due to capacity constraints. Finally, implementing text-to-
911 represents a crucial next step in the ongoing transition of the
legacy 911 system to a NG911 system that will support not only text but
will also enable consumers to send photos, videos, and data to PSAPs,
enhancing the information available to first responders for assessing
and responding to emergencies.
66. Our proposed approach to text-to-911 is also based on the
presumption that consumers in emergency situations should be able to
communicate using the text applications they are most familiar with
from everyday use. Currently, the most commonly used texting technology
is Short Message Service (SMS), which is available, familiar, and
widely used by virtually all wireless consumers. In the Carrier-NENA-
APCO Agreement, the four major carriers have indicated that they intend
to use SMS-based text for their initial text-to-911 deployments, and we
expect other initial deployments to be similarly SMS-based.
67. At the same time, have not limited our focus to SMS-based text.
As a result of the rapid proliferation of smartphones and other
advanced mobile devices, some consumers are beginning to move away from
SMS to other IP-based text applications, including downloadable
software applications provided by parties other than the underlying
carrier. To the extent that consumers gravitate to such applications as
their primary means of communicating by text, they may reasonably come
to expect these applications to also support text-to-911, as consumer
familiarity is vital in emergency situations where seconds matter.
Therefore, in this Second Further Notice, we seek to ensure that
consumers have access to the same text-to-911 capabilities on the full
array of
[[Page 12453]]
texting applications that they use for ubiquitous on a reasonable
timeframe.
B. Legal Basis
68. The legal basis for any action that may be taken pursuant to
this Second Further Notice of Proposed Rulemaking is contained in
sections 1, 2, 4(i), 7, 10, 201, 201(b), 214, 222, 225, 251(e), 301,
302, 303, 303(b), 303(r), 307, 307(a), 309, 309(j)(3), 316, 316(a),
332, 615a, 615a-1, 615b, 615c(a), 615c(c), 615c(g), and 615(c)(1) of
the Communications Act of 1934, 47 U.S.C. 151, 152(a), 154(i), 157,
160, 201, 201(b), 214, 222, 225, 251(e), 301, 302, 303, 303(b), 303(r),
307, 307(a), 309, 309(j)(3), 316, 316(a), 332, 615a, 615a-1, 615b,
615c, 615c(c), 615c(g), and 615(c)(1).
C. Description and Estimate of the Number of Small Entities to Which
the Proposed Rules Would Apply
69. The RFA directs agencies to provide a description of and, where
feasible, an estimate of the number of small entities that may be
affected by the proposed rules. The RFA generally defines the term
``small entity'' as having the same meaning as the terms ``small
business,'' ``small organization,'' and ``small governmental
jurisdiction.'' In addition, the term ``small business'' has the same
meaning as the term ``small business concern'' under the Small Business
Act. A small business concern is one which: (1) is independently owned
and operated; (2) is not dominant in its field of operation; and (3)
satisfies any additional criteria established by the Small Business
Administration (SBA).
70. Small Businesses, Small Organizations, and Small Governmental
Jurisdictions. Our action may, over time, affect small entities that
are not easily categorized at present. We therefore describe here, at
the outset, three comprehensive, statutory small entity size standards.
First, nationwide, there are a total of approximately 27.9 million
small businesses, according to the SBA. In addition, a ``small
organization'' is generally ``any not-for-profit enterprise which is
independently owned and operated and is not dominant in its field.''
Nationwide, as of 2007, there were approximately 1,621,315 small
organizations. Finally, the term ``small governmental jurisdiction'' is
defined generally as ``governments of cities, towns, townships,
villages, school districts, or special districts, with a population of
less than fifty thousand.'' Census Bureau data for 2011 indicate that
there were 89,476 local governmental jurisdictions in the United
States. We estimate that, of this total, as many as 88,506 entities may
qualify as ``small governmental jurisdictions.'' Thus, we estimate that
most governmental jurisdictions are small.
1. Telecommunications Service Entities
(a) Wireless Telecommunications Service Providers
71. Pursuant to 47 CFR 20.18(a), the Commission's 911 service
requirements are only applicable to Commercial Mobile Radio Service
(CMRS) ``[providers], excluding mobile satellite service operators, to
the extent that they: (1) Offer real-time, two way switched voice
service that is interconnected with the public switched network; and
(2) Utilize an in-network switching facility that enables the provider
to reuse frequencies and accomplish seamless hand-offs of subscriber
calls. These requirements are applicable to entities that offer voice
service to consumers by purchasing airtime or capacity at wholesale
rates from CMRS licensees.''
72. Below, for those services subject to auctions, we note that, as
a general matter, the number of winning bidders that qualify as small
businesses at the close of an auction does not necessarily represent
the number of small businesses currently in service. Also, the
Commission does not generally track subsequent business size unless, in
the context of assignments or transfers, unjust enrichment issues are
implicated.
73. Wireless Telecommunications Carriers (except satellite). This
industry comprises establishments engaged in operating and maintaining
switching and transmission facilities to provide communications via the
airwaves. Establishments in this industry have spectrum licenses and
provide services using that spectrum, such as cellular phone services,
paging services, wireless Internet access, and wireless video services.
The appropriate size standard under SBA rules is for the category
Wireless Telecommunications Carriers. The size standard for that
category is that a business is small if it has 1,500 or fewer
employees. For this category, census data for 2007 show that there were
11,163 establishments that operated for the entire year. Of this total,
10,791 establishments had employment of 999 or fewer employees and 372
had employment of 1000 employees or more. Thus under this category and
the associated small business size standard, the Commission estimates
that the majority of wireless telecommunications carriers (except
satellite) are small entities that may be affected by rules proposed in
the Second Further Notice.
74. Wireless Service Providers. The SBA has developed a small
business size standard for wireless firms within the two broad economic
census categories of ``Paging'' and ``Cellular and Other Wireless
Telecommunications.'' Under both categories, the SBA deems a wireless
business to be small if it has 1,500 or fewer employees. For the census
category of Paging, Census Bureau data for 2002 show that there were
807 firms in this category that operated for the entire year. Of this
total, 804 firms had employment of 999 or fewer employees, and three
firms had employment of 1,000 employees or more. Thus, under this
category and associated small business size standard, the majority of
firms can be considered small. For the census category of Cellular and
Other Wireless Telecommunications, Census Bureau data for 2002 show
that there were 1,397 firms in this category that operated for the
entire year. Of this total, 1,378 firms had employment of 999 or fewer
employees, and 19 firms had employment of 1,000 employees or more.
Thus, under this second category and size standard, the majority of
firms can, again, be considered small.
75. Incumbent Local Exchange Carriers (Incumbent LECs). Neither the
Commission nor the SBA has developed a small business size standard
specifically for incumbent local exchange services. The appropriate
size standard under SBA rules is for the category Wired
Telecommunications Carriers. Under that size standard, such a business
is small if it has 1,500 or fewer employees. Census Bureau data for
2007, which now supersede data from the 2002 Census, show that there
were 3,188 firms in this category that operated for the entire year. Of
this total, 3,144 had employment of 999 or fewer, and 44 firms had had
employment of 1000 or more. According to Commission data, 1,307
carriers reported that they were incumbent local exchange service
providers. Of these 1,307 carriers, an estimated 1,006 have 1,500 or
fewer employees and 301 have more than 1,500 employees. Consequently,
the Commission estimates that most providers of local exchange service
are small entities that may be affected by the rules and policies
proposed in the Second Further Notice. Thus under this category and the
associated small business size standard, the majority of these
incumbent local exchange service providers can be considered small.
76. Competitive Local Exchange Carriers (Competitive LECs),
Competitive Access Providers (CAPs), Shared-Tenant Service Providers,
and
[[Page 12454]]
Other Local Service Providers. Neither the Commission nor the SBA has
developed a small business size standard specifically for these service
providers. The appropriate size standard under SBA rules is for the
category Wired Telecommunications Carriers. Under that size standard,
such a business is small if it has 1,500 or fewer employees. Census
Bureau data for 2007, which now supersede data from the 2002 Census,
show that there were 3,188 firms in this category that operated for the
entire year. Of this total, 3,144 had employment of 999 or fewer, and
44 firms had had employment of 1,000 employees or more. Thus under this
category and the associated small business size standard, the majority
of these Competitive LECs, CAPs, Shared-Tenant Service Providers, and
Other Local Service Providers can be considered small entities.
According to Commission data, 1,442 carriers reported that they were
engaged in the provision of either competitive local exchange services
or competitive access provider services. Of these 1,442 carriers, an
estimated 1,256 have 1,500 or fewer employees and 186 have more than
1,500 employees. In addition, 17 carriers have reported that they are
Shared-Tenant Service Providers, and all 17 are estimated to have 1,500
or fewer employees. In addition, 72 carriers have reported that they
are Other Local Service Providers. Of the 72, seventy have 1,500 or
fewer employees and two have more than 1,500 employees. Consequently,
the Commission estimates that most providers of competitive local
exchange service, competitive access providers, Shared-Tenant Service
Providers, and Other Local Service Providers are small entities that
may be affected by rules proposed in the Second Further Notice.
77. Broadband Personal Communications Service. The broadband
personal communications services (PCS) spectrum is divided into six
frequency blocks designated A through F, and the Commission has held
auctions for each block. The Commission initially defined a ``small
business'' for C- and F-Block licenses as an entity that has average
gross revenues of $40 million or less in the three previous calendar
years. For F-Block licenses, an additional small business size standard
for ``very small business'' was added and is defined as an entity that,
together with its affiliates, has average gross revenues of not more
than $15 million for the preceding three calendar years. These small
business size standards, in the context of broadband PCS auctions, have
been approved by the SBA. No small businesses within the SBA-approved
small business size standards bid successfully for licenses in Blocks A
and B. There were 90 winning bidders that claimed small business status
in the first two C-Block auctions. A total of 93 bidders that claimed
small business status won approximately 40 percent of the 1,479
licenses in the first auction for the D, E, and F Blocks. On April 15,
1999, the Commission completed the reauction of 347 C-, D-, E-, and F-
Block licenses in Auction No. 22. Of the 57 winning bidders in that
auction, 48 claimed small business status and won 277 licenses.
78. On January 26, 2001, the Commission completed the auction of
422 C and F Block Broadband PCS licenses in Auction No. 35. Of the 35
winning bidders in that auction, 29 claimed small business status.
Subsequent events concerning Auction 35, including judicial and agency
determinations, resulted in a total of 163 C and F Block licenses being
available for grant. On February 15, 2005, the Commission completed an
auction of 242 C-, D-, E-, and F-Block licenses in Auction No. 58. Of
the 24 winning bidders in that auction, 16 claimed small business
status and won 156 licenses. On May 21, 2007, the Commission completed
an auction of 33 licenses in the A, C, and F Blocks in Auction No. 71.
Of the 12 winning bidders in that auction, five claimed small business
status and won 18 licenses. On August 20, 2008, the Commission
completed the auction of 20 C-, D-, E-, and F-Block Broadband PCS
licenses in Auction No. 78. Of the eight winning bidders for Broadband
PCS licenses in that auction, six claimed small business status and won
14 licenses.
79. Narrowband Personal Communications Services. To date, two
auctions of narrowband personal communications services (PCS) licenses
have been conducted. For purposes of the two auctions that have already
been held, ``small businesses'' were entities with average gross
revenues for the prior three calendar years of $40 million or less.
Through these auctions, the Commission has awarded a total of 41
licenses, out of which 11 were obtained by small businesses. To ensure
meaningful participation of small business entities in future auctions,
the Commission has adopted a two-tiered small business size standard in
the Narrowband PCS Second Report and Order. A ``small business'' is an
entity that, together with affiliates and controlling interests, has
average gross revenues for the three preceding years of not more than
$40 million. A ``very small business'' is an entity that, together with
affiliates and controlling interests, has average gross revenues for
the three preceding years of not more than $15 million. The SBA has
approved these small business size standards.
80. Specialized Mobile Radio. The Commission adopted small business
size standards for the purpose of determining eligibility for bidding
credits in auctions of Specialized Mobile Radio (SMR) geographic area
licenses in the 800 MHz and 900 MHz bands. The Commission defined a
``small business'' as an entity that, together with its affiliates and
controlling principals, has average gross revenues not exceeding $15
million for the preceding three years. The Commission defined a ``very
small business'' as an entity that, together with its affiliates and
controlling principals, has average gross revenues not exceeding $3
million for the preceding three years. The SBA has approved these small
business size standards for both the 800 MHz and 900 MHz SMR Service.
The first 900 MHz SMR auction was completed in 1996. Sixty bidders
claiming that they qualified as small businesses under the $15 million
size standard won 263 licenses in the 900 MHz SMR band. In 2004, the
Commission held a second auction of 900 MHz SMR licenses and three
winning bidders identifying themselves as very small businesses won 7
licenses. The auction of 800 MHz SMR licenses for the upper 200
channels was conducted in 1997. Ten bidders claiming that they
qualified as small or very small businesses under the $15 million size
standard won 38 licenses for the upper 200 channels. A second auction
of 800 MHz SMR licenses was conducted in 2002 and included 23 BEA
licenses. One bidder claiming small business status won five licenses.
81. The auction of the 1,053 800 MHz SMR licenses for the General
Category channels was conducted in 2000. Eleven bidders who won 108
licenses for the General Category channels in the 800 MHz SMR band
qualified as small or very small businesses. In an auction completed in
2000, a total of 2,800 Economic Area licenses in the lower 80 channels
of the 800 MHz SMR service were awarded. Of the 22 winning bidders, 19
claimed small or very small business status and won 129 licenses. Thus,
combining all four auctions, 41 winning bidders for geographic licenses
in the 800 MHz SMR band claimed to be small businesses.
[[Page 12455]]
82. In addition, there are numerous incumbent site-by-site SMR
licensees and licensees with extended implementation authorizations in
the 800 and 900 MHz bands. We do not know how many firms provide 800
MHz or 900 MHz geographic area SMR pursuant to extended implementation
authorizations, nor how many of these providers have annual revenues
not exceeding $15 million. One firm has over $15 million in revenues.
In addition, we do not know how many of these firms have 1500 or fewer
employees. We assume, for purposes of this analysis, that all of the
remaining existing extended implementation authorizations are held by
small entities, as that small business size standard is approved by the
SBA.
83. AWS Services (1710-1755 MHz and 2110-2155 MHz bands (AWS-1);
1915-1920 MHz, 1995-2000 MHz, 2020-2025 MHz and 2175-2180 MHz bands
(AWS-2); 2155-2175 MHz band (AWS-3)). For the AWS-1 bands, the
Commission has defined a ``small business'' as an entity with average
annual gross revenues for the preceding three years not exceeding $40
million, and a ``very small business'' as an entity with average annual
gross revenues for the preceding three years not exceeding $15 million.
In 2006, the Commission conducted its first auction of AWS-1 licenses.
In that initial AWS-1 auction, 31 winning bidders identified themselves
as very small businesses. Twenty-six of the winning bidders identified
themselves as small businesses. In a subsequent 2008 auction, the
Commission offered 35 AWS-1 licenses. Four winning bidders identified
themselves as very small businesses, and three of the winning bidders
identified themselves as a small business. For AWS-2 and AWS-3,
although we do not know for certain which entities are likely to apply
for these frequencies, we note that the AWS-1 bands are comparable to
those used for cellular service and personal communications service.
The Commission has not yet adopted size standards for the AWS-2 or AWS-
3 bands but has proposed to treat both AWS-2 and AWS-3 similarly to
broadband PCS service and AWS-1 service due to the comparable capital
requirements and other factors, such as issues involved in relocating
incumbents and developing markets, technologies, and services.
84. Wireless Communications Services. This service can be used for
fixed, mobile, radiolocation, and digital audio broadcasting satellite
uses in the 2305-2320 MHz and 2345-2360 MHz bands. The Commission
defined ``small business'' for the wireless communications services
(WCS) auction as an entity with average gross revenues of $40 million
for each of the three preceding years, and a ``very small business'' as
an entity with average gross revenues of $15 million for each of the
three preceding years. The SBA has approved these definitions. The
Commission auctioned geographic area licenses in the WCS service. In
the auction, which commenced on April 15, 1997 and closed on April 25,
1997, there were seven bidders that won 31 licenses that qualified as
very small business entities, and one bidder that won one license that
qualified as a small business entity.
85. 700 MHz Guard Band Licenses. In the 700 MHz Guard Band Order,
the Commission adopted size standards for ``small businesses'' and
``very small businesses'' for purposes of determining their eligibility
for special provisions such as bidding credits and installment
payments. A small business in this service is an entity that, together
with its affiliates and controlling principals, has average gross
revenues not exceeding $40 million for the preceding three years.
Additionally, a ``very small business'' is an entity that, together
with its affiliates and controlling principals, has average gross
revenues that are not more than $15 million for the preceding three
years. SBA approval of these definitions is not required. In 2000, the
Commission conducted an auction of 52 Major Economic Area (``MEA'')
licenses. Of the 104 licenses auctioned, 96 licenses were sold to nine
bidders. Five of these bidders were small businesses that won a total
of 26 licenses. A second auction of 700 MHz Guard Band licenses
commenced and closed in 2001. All eight of the licenses auctioned were
sold to three bidders. One of these bidders was a small business that
won a total of two licenses.
86. Upper 700 MHz Band Licenses. In the 700 MHz Second Report and
Order, the Commission revised its rules regarding Upper 700 MHz
licenses. On January 24, 2008, the Commission commenced Auction 73 in
which several licenses in the Upper 700 MHz band were available for
licensing: 12 Regional Economic Area Grouping licenses in the C Block,
and one nationwide license in the D Block. The auction concluded on
March 18, 2008, with 3 winning bidders claiming very small business
status (those with attributable average annual gross revenues that do
not exceed $15 million for the preceding three years) and winning five
licenses.
87. Lower 700 MHz Band Licenses. The Commission previously adopted
criteria for defining three groups of small businesses for purposes of
determining their eligibility for special provisions such as bidding
credits. The Commission defined a ``small business'' as an entity that,
together with its affiliates and controlling principals, has average
gross revenues not exceeding $40 million for the preceding three years.
A ``very small business'' is defined as an entity that, together with
its affiliates and controlling principals, has average gross revenues
that are not more than $15 million for the preceding three years.
Additionally, the lower 700 MHz Service had a third category of small
business status for Metropolitan/Rural Service Area (MSA/RSA)
licenses--``entrepreneur''--which is defined as an entity that,
together with its affiliates and controlling principals, has average
gross revenues that are not more than $3 million for the preceding
three years. The SBA approved these small size standards. An auction of
740 licenses (one license in each of the 734 MSAs/RSAs and one license
in each of the six Economic Area Groupings (EAGs)) was conducted in
2002. Of the 740 licenses available for auction, 484 licenses were won
by 102 winning bidders. Seventy-two of the winning bidders claimed
small business, very small business or entrepreneur status and won
licenses. A second auction commenced on May 28, 2003, closed on June
13, 2003, and included 256 licenses. Seventeen winning bidders claimed
small or very small business status, and nine winning bidders claimed
entrepreneur status. In 2005, the Commission completed an auction of 5
licenses in the Lower 700 MHz band. All three winning bidders claimed
small business status.
88. In 2007, the Commission reexamined its rules governing the 700
MHz band in the 700 MHz Second Report and Order. An auction of A, B and
E block 700 MHz licenses was held in 2008. Twenty winning bidders
claimed small business status (those with attributable average annual
gross revenues that exceed $15 million and do not exceed $40 million
for the preceding three years). Thirty three winning bidders claimed
very small business status (those with attributable average annual
gross revenues that do not exceed $15 million for the preceding three
years).
89. Wireless Telephony. Wireless telephony includes cellular,
personal communications services, and specialized mobile radio
telephony carriers. As noted, the SBA has developed a small business
size standard for Wireless Telecommunications Carriers (except
[[Page 12456]]
Satellite). Under the SBA small business size standard, a business is
small if it has 1,500 or fewer employees. According to Trends in
Telephone Service data, 413 carriers reported that they were engaged in
wireless telephony. Of these, an estimated 261 have 1,500 or fewer
employees and 152 have more than 1,500 employees. Therefore, more than
half of these entities can be considered small.
90. Satellite Telecommunications Providers. Two economic census
categories address the satellite industry. The first category has a
small business size standard of $15 million or less in average annual
receipts, under SBA rules. The second has a size standard of $25
million or less in annual receipts.
91. The category of Satellite Telecommunications ``comprises
establishments primarily engaged in providing telecommunications
services to other establishments in the telecommunications and
broadcasting industries by forwarding and receiving communications
signals via a system of satellites or reselling satellite
telecommunications.'' Census Bureau data for 2007 show that 607
Satellite Telecommunications firms that operated for that entire year.
Of this total, 533 firms had annual receipts of under $10 million, and
74 firms had receipts of $10 million to $24,999,999. Consequently, the
Commission estimates that the majority of Satellite Telecommunications
firms are small entities that might be affected by rules proposed in
the Second Further Notice.
92. The second category, i.e., ``All Other Telecommunications'',
comprises ``establishments primarily engaged in providing specialized
telecommunications services, such as satellite tracking, communications
telemetry, and radar station operation. This industry also includes
establishments primarily engaged in providing satellite terminal
stations and associated facilities connected with one or more
terrestrial systems and capable of transmitting telecommunications to,
and receiving telecommunications from, satellite systems.
Establishments providing Internet services or Voice over Internet
Protocol (VoIP) services via client-supplied telecommunications
connections are also included in this industry.'' For this category,
Census Bureau data for 2007 show that there were a total of 2,623 firms
that operated for the entire year. Consequently, the Commission
estimates that the majority of All Other Telecommunications firms are
small entities that might be affected by rules proposed in the Second
Further Notice.
(b) Equipment Manufacturers
93. Radio and Television Broadcasting and Wireless Communications
Equipment Manufacturing. The Census Bureau defines this category as
follows: ``This industry comprises establishments primarily engaged in
manufacturing radio and television broadcast and wireless
communications equipment. Examples of products made by these
establishments are: transmitting and receiving antennas, cable
television equipment, GPS equipment, pagers, cellular phones, mobile
communications equipment, and radio and television studio and
broadcasting equipment.'' The SBA has developed a small business size
standard for Radio and Television Broadcasting and Wireless
Communications Equipment Manufacturing which is: all such firms having
750 or fewer employees. According to Census Bureau data for 2007, there
were a total of 939 establishments in this category that operated for
part or all of the entire year. Of this total, 784 had less than 500
employees and 155 had more than 100 employees. Thus, under this size
standard, the majority of firms can be considered small.
94. Semiconductor and Related Device Manufacturing. These
establishments manufacture ``computer storage devices that allow the
storage and retrieval of data from a phase change, magnetic, optical,
or magnetic/optical media. The SBA has developed a small business size
standard for this category of manufacturing; that size standard is 500
or fewer employees storage and retrieval of data from a phase change,
magnetic, optical, or magnetic/optical media.'' According to data from
the 2007 U.S. Census, in 2007, there were 954 establishments engaged in
this business. Of these, 545 had from 1 to 19 employees; 219 had from
20 to 99 employees; and 190 had 100 or more employees. Based on this
data, the Commission concludes that the majority of the businesses
engaged in this industry are small.
(c) Information Service and Software Providers
95. Software Publishers. Since 2007 these services have been
defined within the broad economic census category of Custom Computer
Programming Services; that category is defined as establishments
primarily engaged in writing, modifying, testing, and supporting
software to meet the needs of a particular customer. The SBA has
developed a small business size standard for this category, which is
annual gross receipts of $25 million or less. According to data from
the 2007 U.S. Census, there were 41,571 establishments engaged in this
business in 2007. Of these, 40,149 had annual gross receipts of less
than $10,000,000. Another 1,422 establishments had gross receipts of
$10,000,000 or more. Based on this data, the Commission concludes that
the majority of the businesses engaged in this industry are small.
96. Internet Service Providers. Since 2007, these services have
been defined within the broad economic census category of Wired
Telecommunications Carriers; that category is defined as follows:
``This industry comprises establishments primarily engaged in operating
and/or providing access to transmission facilities and infrastructure
that they own and/or lease for the transmission of voice, data, text,
sound, and video using wired telecommunications networks. Transmission
facilities may be based on a single technology or a combination of
technologies.'' The SBA has developed a small business size standard
for this category, which is: all such firms having 1,500 or fewer
employees. According to Census Bureau data for 2007, there were 3,188
firms in this category, total, that operated for the entire year. Of
this total, 3,144 firms had employment of 999 or fewer employees, and
44 firms had employment of 1000 employees or more. Thus, under this
size standard, the majority of firms can be considered small. In
addition, according to Census Bureau data for 2007, there were a total
of 396 firms in the category Internet Service Providers (broadband)
that operated for the entire year. Of this total, 394 firms had
employment of 999 or fewer employees, and two firms had employment of
1000 employees or more. Consequently, we estimate that the majority of
these firms are small entities that may be affected by rules proposed
by the Second Further Notice.
97. Internet Publishing and Broadcasting and Web Search Portals.
The Commission's action may pertain to interconnected Voice over
Internet Protocol (VoIP) services, which could be provided by entities
that provide other services such as email, online gaming, web browsing,
video conferencing, instant messaging, and other, similar IP-enabled
services. The Commission has not adopted a size standard for entities
that create or provide these types of services or applications.
However, the Census Bureau has identified firms that ``primarily
engaged in (1) publishing and/or broadcasting content on the Internet
exclusively or (2) operating Web sites that use a search engine to
generate and maintain extensive
[[Page 12457]]
databases of Internet addresses and content in an easily searchable
format (and known as Web search).
D. Description of Projected Reporting, Recordkeeping, and Other
Compliance Requirements for Small Entities
98. The Second Further Notice proposes that carriers and
interconnected text providers that enter into voluntary agreements to
provide text-to-911 should be required to submit reports to the
Commission on their adherence to their commitments in order to qualify
for a safe harbor with respect to any adopted rules. The Commission
proposes that any reporting should be robust enough to provide the
Commission with data sufficient for it to make informed decisions about
the effectiveness of the voluntary commitment. Small entities opting
for this path would do so voluntarily, and assume any costs associated
with such option. Alternatively, they may opt to comply with mandatory
rules which may be adopted, and which do not include a proposal for
reporting.
E. Steps Taken to Minimize Significant Economic Impact on Small
Entities, and Significant Alternatives Considered
99. The RFA requires an agency to describe any significant,
specifically small business alternatives that it has considered in
reaching its proposed approach, which may include the following four
alternatives (among others): ``(1) the establishment of differing
compliance or reporting requirements or timetables that take into
account the resources available to small entities; (2) the
clarification, consolidation, or simplification of compliance or
reporting requirements under the rule for small entities; (3) the use
of performance, rather than design, standards; and (4) and exemption
from coverage of the rule, or any part thereof, for small entities.''
100. The Second Further Notice analyzes a variety of possible means
of implementing text-to-911 for interconnected text providers in a
timely fashion and costs thereof, and seeks comment on these issues. We
are also seeking comment on what waiver standards may apply and
circumstances that may warrant a waiver of any rules we may adopt,
including how financial constraints should be considered. Our proposals
build on the recently filed voluntary commitment by the four largest
wireless carriers--in an agreement with the National Emergency Number
Association (NENA), and the Association of Public Safety Communications
Officials (APCO) (Carrier-NENA-APCO Agreement) to make text-to-911
available to their customers by May 15, 2014, and the previously
submitted record suggesting that all CMRS providers can support text-
to-911 by December 31, 2014.
101. Additionally, the Second Further Notice seeks comment
implementing text-to-911 for roaming consumers, enhancing location
accuracy for consumers sending texts to 911, and the evolution of
texting applications and how consumers use them.
F. Federal Rules That May Duplicate, Overlap, or Conflict With the
Proposed Rules
102. None.
Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995
This document contains no new or modified information collection
requirements subject to the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (PRA),
Public Law 104-13.
Ex Parte Presentations
The proceedings initiated by this Second Further Notice of Proposed
Rulemaking shall be treated as a ``permit-but-disclose'' proceedings in
accordance with the Commission's ex parte rules. Persons making ex
parte presentations must file a copy of any written presentation or a
memorandum summarizing any oral presentation within two business days
after the presentation (unless a different deadline applicable to the
Sunshine period applies). Persons making oral ex parte presentations
are reminded that memoranda summarizing the presentation must: (1) List
all persons attending or otherwise participating in the meeting at
which the ex parte presentation was made; and (2) summarize all data
presented and arguments made during the presentation. If the
presentation consisted in whole or in part of the presentation of data
or arguments already reflected in the presenter's written comments,
memoranda, or other filings in the proceeding, the presenter may
provide citations to such data or arguments in his or her prior
comments, memoranda, or other filings (specifying the relevant page
and/or paragraph numbers where such data or arguments can be found) in
lieu of summarizing them in the memorandum. Documents shown or given to
Commission staff during ex parte meetings are deemed to be written ex
parte presentations and must be filed consistent with rule Sec.
1.1206(b). In proceedings governed by rule Sec. 1.49(f) or for which
the Commission has made available a method of electronic filing,
written ex parte presentations and memoranda summarizing oral ex parte
presentations, and all attachments thereto, must be filed through the
electronic comment filing system available for that proceeding, and
must be filed in their native format (e.g., .doc, .xml, .ppt,
searchable .pdf). Participants in this proceeding should familiarize
themselves with the Commission's ex parte rules.
List of Subjects in 47 CFR Part 20
Communications common carriers, Communications equipment, Radio.
Federal Communications Commission.
Marlene H. Dortch,
Secretary.
Proposed Rules
For the reasons discussed in the preamble, the Federal
Communications Commission proposes to amend 47 CFR Part 20 as follows:
PART 20--COMMERCIAL MOBILE RADIO SERVICES
0
1. The authority for Part 20 is revised to read as follows:
Authority: 47 U.S.C. 151, 152, 154(i), 157, 160, 201, 214, 222,
251(e), 301, 302, 303, 307, 308, 309, 310, 316, 319, 324, 332, 333,
615(a), 615(a) through 1, and 615(b).
0
2. Section 20.18 paragraph (n) is amended by adding paragraphs (9)
through (12) to read as follows
Sec. 20.18 911 Service.
* * * * *
(n) * * *
(9) 911 Text Message. A 911 text message is a message, consisting
entirely of text characters, intended to be delivered to a PSAP by a
Covered Text Provider.
(10) 911 Short Code. The 911 Short Code is the designated short
code to identify a 911 Text Message to be sent to a designated PSAP.
(11) No later than December 31, 2014, all covered text providers
must have the capability to route a 911 text message to a PSAP. In
complying with this requirement, covered text providers must route text
messages to the same PSAP to which a 911 voice call would be routed,
unless the responsible local or state entity designates a different
PSAP to receive 911 text messages and informs the carrier of that
change.
(i) Covered text providers must begin routing all 911 texts
messages to a PSAP making a valid request of the carrier within a
reasonable amount of time, not to exceed six months.
(ii) PSAPs may begin making valid requests prior to the December
31, 2014, deadline for the capability to route 911 texts to PSAPs but
covered text
[[Page 12458]]
providers are not obligated to begin providing such service until
December 31, 2014.
(iii) Valid Request means that:
(A) The requesting PSAP represents that it is technically ready to
receive 911 text messages in the format requested; and
(B) The appropriate local or State 911 service governing authority
has specifically authorized the PSAP to accept and, by extension, the
signatory service provider to provide, text-to-911 service (and such
authorization is not subject to dispute).
(12) Covered Devices and Network Connection. Third party
interconnected text providers that meet the definition of a ``covered
text provider'' must offer the capability described in paragraph
(n)(11) of this section during time periods when the mobile device is
connected to a CMRS network.
[FR Doc. 2014-04731 Filed 3-4-14; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6712-01-P