[Federal Register Volume 88, Number 69 (Tuesday, April 11, 2023)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 21497-21500]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2023-07405]


=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION

47 CFR Part 64

[CG Docket No. 21-402; FCC 23-21; FR ID 134450]


Targeting and Eliminating Unlawful Text Messages

AGENCY: Federal Communications Commission.

ACTION: Final rule.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: In this document, the Federal Communications Commission 
(Commission) requires mobile wireless providers to block texts, at the 
network level, on a reasonable Do-Not-Originate (DNO) list, which 
include numbers that purport to be from invalid, unallocated, or unused 
North American Numbering Plan (NANP) numbers, and NANP numbers for 
which the subscriber to the number has requested that texts purporting 
to originate from that number be blocked. In addition, the Commission 
requires mobile wireless providers and other entities to maintain a 
point of contact for texters to report erroneously blocked texts.

DATES: Effective May 11, 2023.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mika Savir of the Consumer Policy 
Division, Consumer and Governmental Affairs Bureau, at 
[email protected] or (202) 418-0384.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This is a summary of the Commission's Report 
and Order, FCC 23-21, CG Docket No. 21-402, adopted on March 16, 2023, 
and released on March 17, 2023. The full text of this document is 
available online at https://docs.fcc.gov/public/attachments/FCC-23-21A1.pdf. To request this document in accessible formats for people 
with disabilities (e.g., Braille, large print, electronic files, audio 
format) or to request reasonable accommodations (e.g., accessible 
format documents, sign language interpreters, CART), send an email to 
[email protected] or call the FCC's Consumer and Governmental Affairs 
Bureau at (202) 418-0530.
    The compliance date of these rules is six months after Office of 
Management and Budget (OMB) approval of the rules and subsequent notice 
of publication in the Federal Register.

Congressional Review Act

    The Commission sent a copy of document FCC 23-21 to Congress and 
the Government Accountability Office pursuant to the Congressional 
Review Act, 5 U.S.C. 801(a)(1)(A).

Final Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 Analysis

    This document may contain new or modified information collection 
requirements subject to the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (PRA), 
Public Law 104-13. This document will be submitted to OMB for review 
under section 3507(d) of the PRA. OMB, the general public, and other 
federal agencies will be invited to comment on the new or modified 
information collection requirements contained in this proceeding.

Synopsis

    1. In the Report and Order, the Commission adopts a proposal in the 
Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (NPRM), published at 87 FR 61271, on 
October 11, 2022; specifically to require mobile wireless providers to 
block texts, at the network level, on a reasonable Do-Not-Originate 
(DNO) list, which include numbers that purport to be from invalid, 
unallocated, or unused North American Numbering Plan (NANP) numbers, 
and NANP numbers for which the subscriber to the number has requested 
that texts purporting to originate from that number be blocked. These 
are texts that no reasonable consumer would wish to receive because 
they are highly likely to be illegal. In addition, the Commission is 
requiring mobile wireless providers and other entities to maintain a 
point of contact for texters to report erroneously blocked texts.
    2. These rules apply to text messaging originating from NANP 
numbers that use the wireless networks, e.g., Short Message Service 
(SMS) and Multimedia Messaging Service (MMS).
    3. The Commission recognizes that providers and others have adopted 
measures to protect consumers from illegal text messages, such as 
upfront vetting for bulk message senders, the CTIA Messaging Principles 
and Best Practices, and providers' own requirements and guidance. The 
Commission's actions complement those efforts while ensuring customers 
of all providers get a baseline of protection. Industry efforts to date 
are

[[Page 21498]]

important to protect consumers, the increases in consumer complaints 
and consumer harm from robotext messages convinces the Commission to 
take additional measures to protect consumers.
    4. The Commission adopts the proposal to require mobile wireless 
providers to block text messages at the network level (i.e., without 
requiring consumer opt in or opt out). The rule adopted requires that 
they block texts purporting to be from numbers on a reasonable DNO 
list. No reasonable consumer would wish to receive text messages that 
spoof a number that is not in operation or purports to be from a well-
known, trusted organization that does not send text messages and thus 
is highly likely to be a scam. The requirement to block texts that 
purport to be from numbers on a reasonable DNO list does not include 
text messages from valid short codes.
    5. The Commission finds it appropriate to adopt a mandatory rule 
here for blocking texts that purport to be from numbers on a reasonable 
DNO list for several reasons: (i) the texts from such numbers are 
likely to be illegal; (ii) illegal text messages can have links to 
malware, a problem that voice calls do not have; (iii) the volume of 
unwanted and illegal text messages is increasing, particularly since 
the Commission adopted measures to block such voice calls; (iv) 
consumers expect to receive texts from unfamiliar numbers, e.g., as 
appointment reminders and for double factor authentication, and 
therefore are more likely to open such messages even when they do not 
recognize the sending party; and (v) this approach provides benefits to 
consumers while imposing minimal burden on mobile wireless providers.
    6. The Commission finds that the rule adopted today will impose a 
minimal burden on mobile wireless providers while providing a necessary 
baseline level of protection to consumers. Many mobile wireless 
providers already employ measures to block illegal text messages, 
including DNO-based blocking. For providers that already employ such 
measures, the rule imposes no additional burden. For the limited number 
of providers that do not currently employ such measures, the rule will 
provide consumers with a baseline level of protection against illegal 
and fraudulent text messages. The rule adopted today strikes the best 
balance between protecting consumers from illegal text messages while 
imposing minimal burden on mobile wireless providers. These actions are 
reasonable responses to the harm and specifically focused to mitigate 
the ongoing damages consumers face from illegal, fraudulent text 
messages that mobile wireless providers transmit today.
    7. The requirement for mandatory blocking of texts that purport to 
be from numbers on a reasonable DNO list is straightforward and does 
not define ``highly likely to be illegal'' or ask mobile wireless 
providers to determine whether particular messages are ``highly likely 
to be illegal.'' The Commission disagrees that regulation of criteria 
used by mobile wireless providers to determine which text messages are 
``highly likely to be illegal'' would be inconsistent with the 
classification of wireless messaging as Title I information service. 
The rule adopted does not affect providers' ability to continue to 
employ other methods to protect consumers. Mobile wireless providers 
are now required to block texts that purport to be from numbers on a 
reasonable DNO list; mobile wireless providers remain free to continue 
the measures they are currently using to protect consumers from illegal 
text messages.
    8. Further, the Commission is requiring mobile wireless providers 
and others to maintain a point of contact for senders to report 
erroneously blocked texts. A point of contact will enable texters to 
contact mobile wireless providers to swiftly resolve complaints of 
unwarranted blocking of text messages.
    9. The Commission declines to adopt rules for several of the other 
topics raised in the Notice of Proposed Rulemaking. The Commission 
declines to require text blocking notifications because the record 
indicates that service providers are already providing adequate notice 
when they block texts. The Commission declines to enact rules regarding 
safeguarding against blocking of texts to 911 and other emergency 
numbers based on the record. The Commission also declines to adopt 
caller ID authentication requirements for text messages due to 
uncertainty about the current feasibility of such a requirement.
    10. With respect to legal authority to adopt the rules, the 
Commission finds that it has authority to require mobile wireless 
providers to block certain text messages originating from NANP numbers. 
First, under the Telephone Consumers Protection Act (TCPA), the 
Commission has authority over the unsolicited text messages that fall 
within the scope of the Report and Order. The Commission has found 
that, for the purposes of the TCPA, texts are included in the term 
``call.'' Because the Commission has authority to regulate certain text 
messages under the TCPA, particularly regarding messages sent using an 
autodialer and without the consent of the called party, the Commission 
has the legal authority for the adopted rule.
    11. The Commission finds that it has authority under the Truth in 
Caller ID Act to adopt a blocking requirement. That Truth in Caller ID 
Act makes unlawful the spoofing of caller ID information ``in 
connection with any voice service or text messaging service . . . with 
the intent to defraud, cause harm, or wrongfully obtain anything of 
value.'' The Commission finds that adopting this requirement is 
necessary to block calls that unlawfully spoof numbers on reasonable 
DNO lists, and thus is authorized by the Truth in Caller ID Act.
    12. Finally, the Commission has authority under Title III of the 
Communications Act to adopt these measures. As courts have recognized, 
Title III ``endow[s] the Commission with `expansive powers' and a 
`comprehensive mandate to ``encourage the larger and more effective use 
of radio in the public interest.'' ' Section 303 of the Communications 
Act grants the Commission authority to establish operational 
obligations for licensees that further the goals and requirements of 
the Communications Act if such obligations are necessary for the 
``public convenience, interest, or necessity'' and are not inconsistent 
with other provisions of law. In particular, Sec.  303(b) of the 
Communications Act authorizes the Commission to ``[p]rescribe the 
nature of the service to be rendered by each class of licensed stations 
and each station within each class,'' and that is what our mandatory 
blocking rule addresses here. In addition, Sec. Sec.  307 and 316 of 
the Communications Act allow the Commission to authorize the issuance 
of licenses or adopt new conditions on existing licenses if such 
actions will promote public interest, convenience, and necessity. The 
Commission finds the requirements adopted for mobile wireless providers 
are necessary to protect the public from unwanted and illegal text 
messages and that such a requirement is in the public interest.

Final Regulatory Flexibility Analysis

    13. As required by the Regulatory Flexibility Act of 1980, as 
amended, an Initial Regulatory Flexibility Analysis (IRFA) was 
incorporated in the Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (NPRM). The 
Commission sought written public comment on the proposals in the NPRM, 
including comment on the IRFA. The Commission received no comments in

[[Page 21499]]

response to the IRFA. This present Final Regulatory Flexibility 
Analysis (FRFA) conforms to the RFA.
    14. Need for, and Objectives of, the Report and Order. The Order 
requires mobile wireless providers to block texts, at the network 
level, that purport to be from numbers on a reasonable Do-Not-Originate 
(DNO) list. Such texts are highly likely to be illegal and for that 
reason the Commission is adopting a requirement to block at the network 
level. The Order also requires providers and other entities to maintain 
a point of contact for texters to report erroneously blocked texts.
    15. Summary of Significant Issues Raised by Public Comments in 
Response to the IRFA. There were no comments filed that specifically 
addressed the proposed rules and policies presented in the IRFA.
    16. Response to Comments by the Chief Counsel for Advocacy of the 
Small Business Administration. Pursuant to the Small Business Jobs Act 
of 2010, which amended the RFA, the Commission is required to respond 
to any comments filed by the Chief Counsel for Advocacy of the Small 
Business Administration (SBA), and to provide a detailed statement of 
any change made to the proposed rules as a result of those comments. 
The Chief Counsel did not file any comments in response to the proposed 
rules in this proceeding.
    17. Description and Estimate of the Number of Small Entities to 
Which the Rules Will Apply. 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 and policies, if 
adopted. 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 SBA.
    18. Small Businesses, Small Organizations, Small Governmental 
Jurisdictions. Our actions, over time, may affect small entities that 
are not easily categorized at present. We therefore describe, at the 
outset, three broad groups of small entities that could be directly 
affected herein. First, while there are industry specific size 
standards for small businesses that are used in the regulatory 
flexibility analysis, according to data from the Small Business 
Administration's (SBA) Office of Advocacy, in general a small business 
is an independent business having fewer than 500 employees. These types 
of small businesses represent 99.9% of all businesses in the United 
States, which translates to 32.5 million businesses.
    19. Next, the type of small entity described as a ``small 
organization'' is generally ``any not-for-profit enterprise which is 
independently owned and operated and is not dominant in its field.'' 
The Internal Revenue Service (IRS) uses a revenue benchmark of $50,000 
or less to delineate its annual electronic filing requirements for 
small exempt organizations. Nationwide, for tax year 2020, there were 
approximately 447,689 small exempt organizations in the U.S. reporting 
revenues of $50,000 or less according to the registration and tax data 
for exempt organizations available from the IRS.
    20. Finally, the small entity described as a ``small governmental 
jurisdiction'' is defined generally as ``governments of cities, 
counties, towns, townships, villages, school districts, or special 
districts, with a population of less than fifty thousand.'' U.S. Census 
Bureau data from the 2017 Census of Governments indicate there were 
90,075 local governmental jurisdictions consisting of general purpose 
governments and special purpose governments in the United States. Of 
this number, there were 36,931 general purpose governments (county, 
municipal, and town or township) with populations of less than 50,000 
and 12,040 special purpose governments--independent school districts 
with enrollment populations of less than 50,000. Accordingly, based on 
the 2017 U.S. Census of Governments data, we estimate that at least 
48,971 entities fall into the category of ``small governmental 
jurisdictions.''
    21. 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 services, paging 
services, wireless internet access, and wireless video services. The 
SBA size standard for this industry classifies a business as small if 
it has 1,500 or fewer employees. U.S. Census Bureau data for 2017 show 
that there were 2,893 firms in this industry that operated for the 
entire year. Of that number, 2,837 firms employed fewer than 250 
employees. Additionally, based on Commission data in the 2021 Universal 
Service Monitoring Report, as of December 31, 2020, there were 797 
providers that reported they were engaged in the provision of wireless 
services. Of these providers, the Commission estimates that 715 
providers have 1,500 or fewer employees. Consequently, using the SBA's 
small business size standard, most of these providers can be considered 
small entities.
    22. All Other Telecommunications. This industry is comprised of 
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. Providers of 
internet services (e.g. dial-up ISPs) or voice over internet protocol 
(VoIP) services, via client-supplied telecommunications connections are 
also included in this industry. The SBA small business size standard 
for this industry classifies firms with annual receipts of $35 million 
or less as small. U.S. Census Bureau data for 2017 show that there were 
1,079 firms in this industry that operated for the entire year. Of 
those firms, 1,039 had revenue of less than $25 million. Based on this 
data, the Commission estimates that the majority of ``All Other 
Telecommunications'' firms can be considered small.
    23. Description of Projected Reporting, Recordkeeping and Other 
Compliance Requirements for Small Entities. This Order may include new 
or modified information collection requirements. The Order adopts a 
requirement that mobile wireless providers block texts purporting to be 
from NANP numbers on a reasonable DNO list, which include numbers that 
purport to be from invalid, unallocated, or unused numbers, and NANP 
numbers for which the subscriber to the number has requested that texts 
purporting to originate from that number be blocked. In addition, the 
Order requires providers to establish a point of contact for senders to 
resolve issues of erroneously blocked texts. To the extent the new 
requirements constitute an information collection, such collection will 
not present a substantial burden for small business concerns with fewer 
than 25 employees; any such burdens would be far outweighed by the 
benefits to

[[Page 21500]]

consumers from blocking text messages that are highly likely to be 
illegal.
    24. Steps Taken To Minimize Significant Economic Impact on Small 
Entities, and Significant Alternatives Considered. The RFA requires an 
agency to describe any significant alternatives that it has considered 
in reaching its 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 and 
reporting requirements under the rule for such small entities; (3) the 
use of performance rather than design standards; and (4) an exemption 
from coverage of the rule, or any part thereof, for small entities.''
    25. The Order requires mobile wireless providers to block texts, at 
the network level, that purport to be from numbers on a reasonable Do-
Not-Originate list. Such texts are highly likely to be illegal and for 
that reason the Commission is adopting a requirement to block at the 
network level. The Commission recognizes that mobile wireless 
providers, including small entities, already take measures to block 
illegal text messages from reaching their customers' phones and this 
requirement should not be burdensome. The Order also requires providers 
and other entities to establish a point of contact for texters to 
report erroneously blocked texts. Because many of these providers and 
entities maintain a point of contact for call blocking purposes, and 
because the Order states that providers and entities may use the same 
point of contact for the text blocking requirement, the requirement 
should not be burdensome.
    26. Report to Congress. The Commission will send a copy of the 
Report and Order, including this FRFA, in a report to be sent to 
Congress pursuant to the Congressional Review Act. In addition, the 
Commission will send a copy of the Report and Order, including this 
FRFA, to the Chief Counsel for Advocacy of the SBA. The Order and FRFA 
(or summaries thereof) will also be published in the Federal Register.

List of Subjects in 47 CFR Part 64

    Communications common carriers, Telecommunications, Telephone.


Federal Communications Commission.
Marlene Dortch,
Secretary, Office of the Secretary.

Final Rules

    For the reasons discussed in the preamble, the Federal 
Communications Commission amends 47 part 64 as follows:

PART 64--MISCELLANEOUS RULES RELATING TO COMMON CARRIERS

0
1. The authority citation for part 64 continues to read as follows:

    Authority: 47 U.S.C. 151, 152, 154,201, 202, 217, 218, 220, 222, 
225, 226, 227, 227b, 228, 251(a), 251(e), 254(k), 255, 262, 276, 
403(b)(2)(B), (c), 616, 620, 716, 1401-1473, unless otherwise noted; 
Pub. L. 115-141, Div. P, sec. 503, 132 Stat. 348, 1091.

Subpart L--Restrictions on Telemarketing, Telephone Solicitation, 
and Facsimile Advertising

0
2. Amend Sec.  64.1200 by adding paragraphs (p), (q), and (r) to read 
as follows:


Sec.  64.1200  Delivery restrictions.

* * * * *
    (p) A mobile wireless provider must block a text message purporting 
to originate from a North American Numbering Plan number on a 
reasonable do-not-originate list. A list so limited in scope that it 
leaves out obvious North American Numbering Plan numbers that could be 
included with little effort may be deemed unreasonable. The do-not-
originate list may include only:
    (1) North American Numbering Plan Numbers for which the subscriber 
to the number has requested that texts purporting to originate from 
that number be blocked;
    (2) North American Numbering Plan numbers that are not valid;
    (3) Valid North American Numbering Plan numbers that are not 
allocated to a provider by the North American Numbering Plan 
Administrator; and
    (4) Valid North American Numbering Plan numbers that are allocated 
to a provider by the North American Numbering Plan Administrator, but 
are unused, so long as the provider blocking the message is the 
allocatee of the number and confirms that the number is unused or has 
obtained verification from the allocatee that the number is unused at 
the time of blocking.
    (q) Paragraph (p) of this section may contain an information-
collection and/or recordkeeping requirement. Compliance with paragraph 
(p) will not be required until this paragraph (q) is removed or 
contains a compliance date, which will not occur until after the Office 
of Management and Budget completes review of such requirements pursuant 
to the Paperwork Reduction Act or until after the Consumer and 
Governmental Affairs Bureau determines that such review is not 
required.
    (r) A mobile wireless provider must provide a point of contact or 
ensure its aggregator partners or blocking contractors that block text 
messages on its network provide a point of contact to resolve 
complaints about erroneous blocking from message senders that can 
document that their messages have been blocked. Such point of contact 
may be the same point of contact for voice call blocking error 
complaints.

[FR Doc. 2023-07405 Filed 4-10-23; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6712-01-P