Commercial Mobile Alert System, 47550-47559 [E8-18144]

Agencies

• FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION

[Federal Register Volume 73, Number 158 (Thursday, August 14, 2008)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 47550-47559]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E8-18144]


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

FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION

47 CFR Part 10

[PS Docket No. 07-287; FCC 08-164]


Commercial Mobile Alert System

AGENCY: Federal Communications Commission.

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: In this document, the Federal Communications Commission 
(Commission or FCC) complies with section 602(c) of the Warning, Alert 
and Response Network (WARN) Act by adopting rules that require non-
commercial educational (NCE) and public broadcast television station 
licensees and permittees to install equipment and technologies that 
will provide these licensees/permittees with the ability to enable the 
distribution of geo-targeted Commercial Mobile Alert System (CMAS) 
alerts to participating Commercial Mobile Service (CMS)

[[Page 47551]]

providers. The Commission's stated goal is to implement section 602(c) 
in a manner consistent with the CMAS architecture and technologically 
neutral rules the Commission adopted in the CMAS First Report and 
Order. In this document, the Commission also complies with section 
602(f) of the WARN Act by adopting rules requiring technical testing 
for commercial mobile service providers that elect to transmit 
emergency alerts and for the devices and equipment used by such 
providers for transmitting such alerts.

DATES: Effective October 14, 2008, except for Sec.  10.350 (a)(7) and 
(b), which contain new or modified information collection requirements 
that have not been approved by OMB. After OMB has approved them, the 
Commission will publish a document in the Federal Register announcing 
the effective date.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Jeffery Goldthorp, Communications 
Systems Analysis Division, Public Safety and Homeland Security Bureau, 
Federal Communications Commission at (202) 418-1096.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This is a summary of the Commission's CMAS 
Second Report and Order in PS Docket No. 07-287, adopted and released 
on July 8, 2008. The complete text of this document is available for 
inspection and copying during normal business hours in the FCC 
Reference Information Center, Portals II, 445 12th Street, SW., Room 
CY-A257, Washington, DC 20554. This document may also be purchased from 
the Commission's duplicating contractor, Best Copy and Printing, Inc., 
in person at 445 12th Street, SW., Room CY-B402, Washington, DC 20554, 
via telephone at (202) 488-5300, via facsimile at (202) 488-5563, or 
via e-mail at FCC@BCPIWEB.COM. Alternative formats (computer diskette, 
large print, audio cassette, and Braille) are available to persons with 
disabilities by sending an e-mail to FCC504@fcc.gov or calling the 
Consumer and Governmental Affairs Bureau at (202) 418-0530, TTY (202) 
418-0432. This document is also available on the Commission's Web site 
at https://www.fcc.gov.

Synopsis of the Order

    1. Section 602(c) requires the Commission to require ``licensees 
and permittees of noncommercial educational broadcast stations or 
public broadcast stations (as those terms are defined in section 397(6) 
of the Communications Act of 1934 (47 U.S.C. 397(6))) to install 
necessary equipment and technologies on, or as part of, any broadcast 
television digital signal transmitter * * * '' Section 397(6) of the 
Communications Act defines the terms ``noncommercial educational 
broadcast station'' and ``public broadcast station'' to mean a 
television or radio broadcast station which: (1) Under the rules and 
regulations of the Commission in effect on November 2, 1978, is 
eligible to be licensed by the Commission as a noncommercial 
educational radio or television broadcast station and which is owned 
and operated by a public agency or nonprofit private foundation, 
corporation, or association; or (2) is owned and operated by a 
municipality and which transmits only noncommercial programs for 
education purposes.
    2. In the CMAS NPRM (73 FR 546, January 3, 2008) the Commission 
sought comment on the scope of section 602(c). The Commission noted 
that although the caption of section 602(c) refers to digital 
television transmissions, it mandates that the Commission impose any 
equipment requirements on licensees and permittees of NCE and public 
broadcast stations as those terms are defined under section 397(6) of 
the Communications Act. That provision references both radio and 
television broadcast stations. The Commission sought comment on this 
definition as it relates to section 602(c) of the WARN Act, and further 
asked whether it was a fair reading of the language to conclude that 
this section applies only to licensees and permittees of NCE and public 
broadcast television stations. The Association of Public Television 
Stations (APTS) noted in its comments that datacasting and the 
equipment required for it depends on the ``unique capabilities of 
digital television,'' and that accordingly, the section applies only to 
digital television transmission. DataFM asserted that section 602(c) 
requires installation of equipment at all NCE and public broadcast 
stations.
    3. The Commission concluded that Congress intended the equipment 
requirements set forth in section 602(c) of the WARN Act to apply only 
to licensees and permittees of NCE and public broadcast television 
stations and not radio stations. Section 602(c) requires that the 
Commission complete a proceeding to require licensees and permittees of 
NCE or public broadcast stations to install necessary equipment and 
technologies ``on, or as part of, any broadcast television digital 
signal transmitter'' (emphasis added) to enable the distribution of 
geographically targeted alerts by CMS providers. This language clearly 
shows that Congress intended that these equipment requirements apply 
only to NCE and public broadcast television stations. The use of the 
term ``any'' indicates that if a station lacks a television 
transmitter--e.g., if the station is a radio broadcast station--there 
is no installation requirement. Additionally, APTS has indicated that 
its ability to perform the functions contemplated by section 602(c), 
enabling the distribution of geographically targeted alerts by 
participating CMS providers, is dependent on capabilities unique to 
digital television. For these reasons, the Commission disagreed with 
DataFM's conclusion that section 602(c) requires installation of 
equipment at all NCE and public broadcast stations.

Section 602(c)--Necessary Equipment to Support CMS Provider Geo-
Targeting

    4. In the CMAS NPRM the Commission sought comment regarding the 
equipment required by section 602(c) of the WARN Act. Specifically, the 
Commission asked how this digital television-based system would 
interface with the CMAS. The Commission also asked how the requirement 
regarding the geo-targeting of CMAS alerts would fit into a centrally 
administered CMAS as envisioned by the Commercial Mobile Service Alert 
Advisory Committee (CMSAAC). Further, the Commision sought comment 
regarding how the digital television-based system would implement the 
message formats defined by the ``C'' interface.
    5. Apart from APTS, no commenters addressed the specific type of 
equipment that would need to be installed to satisfy section 602(c) of 
the WARN Act. In its comments and reply comments, APTS argued that by 
including section 602(c) in the WARN Act, Congress required that 
datacasting, and the equipment necessary for its implementation, be 
part of the CMAS. APTS further noted that datacasting equipment would 
not be inconsistent with the CMAS as recommended by the CMSAAC, but 
rather would be ``one component of a comprehensive alert and warning 
system that includes necessary redundancies to ensure that the public 
receives essential information under any circumstances.'' Such 
redundancies, argued APTS, would enhance the effectiveness and security 
of the CMAS.
    6. APTS listed four types of equipment it says NCE/public broadcast 
television stations would need to install in order to transmit geo-
targeted alerts to participating CMS providers. In listing this 
equipment, APTS contemplated that the Public Broadcasting System (PBS) 
would receive CMAS alerts directly from the Alert Gateway and transmit 
the CMAS

[[Page 47552]]

alert data via national satellite feed to NCE/public broadcast 
television stations. NCE/public broadcast television stations would 
then transmit the geo-targeted CMAS alerts via their digital television 
transmitters to CMS Provider Gateways located in their television 
service areas, providing a redundant, alternate method of delivery of 
CMAS alerts to CMS Provider Gateways. APTS described the equipment 
needed as follows:
     ``Geo-targeting Systems.'' According to APTS, this 
equipment would have the capability to activate those NCE and public 
broadcast digital television transmitters necessary to transmit the 
CMAS alert to areas in which CMS Provider Gateways are located, while 
all other NCE and public broadcast digital television transmitters 
would ignore the CMAS alert transmission.
     ``Groomers.'' APTS stated that this equipment (also 
referred to as ``dynamic bitrate capability'') would automatically 
adjust a selected program service's video bitrate to make room for CMAS 
alert data when those data are present. APTS stated that such a 
capability would allow the licensee to have full use of its 
transmission capability when CMAS alert data are not present. APTS 
argued that installation of this equipment is necessary for each 
licensee's master control (with redundancy) as well as at each 
licensee's remote transmitter sites (also with redundancy).
     ``Data Receivers.'' APTS asserted that this equipment is 
necessary for the stations to receive the CMAS data from PBS. APTS 
proposed that each master control and each remote transmitter have 
redundant receivers. APTS also proposed that small satellite receive 
antennas be installed for each remote transmitter should the licensee's 
data distribution via its studio-to-transmitter links be unavailable.
     PBS Equipment. Additionally, according to APTS, PBS will 
require equipment to route the CMAS data around its other functions. 
APTS reported that PBS will receive the CMAS data from appropriate 
origination point(s), process and bridge the data around the master 
control systems, and transmit the data via satellite to all licensees, 
remote transmitters, and other selected receive locations. APTS stated 
that PBS will install redundant systems at both its main Network 
Operations Center (NOC) and its Disaster Recover Site (DRS), as well as 
install both data security and physical security at both locations.
     Back-up Power Equipment. Finally, APTS recommended that 
licensees of NCE and public broadcast television stations be required 
to install back-up power equipment.
    7. In order for NCE/public broadcast television station licensees/
permittees to enable geo-targeting by participating CMS providers, they 
must be able to interface with the CMAS in a manner consistent with the 
rules adopted in the CMAS First Report and Order (73 FR 43099, July 24, 
2008). According to the Commission, the most appropriate way for them 
to do this would be to install equipment that will allow them to 
receive CMAS alerts from the Alert Gateway over an interface and then 
to transmit such alerts to participating CMS providers. Under such an 
approach, licensees and permittees of NCE/public broadcast television 
stations would provide a redundant path by which participating CMS 
providers could receive geo-targeted alerts. Accordingly, the 
Commission required licensees and permittees of NCE/public broadcast 
television stations to install necessary equipment and technologies at, 
or as part of, their digital television transmitters that will provide 
them with the capability to receive CMAS alerts sent from the Alert 
Gateway over a secure interface and to transmit the alerts to the CMS 
Provider Gateways of participating CMS providers.
    8. As noted above, APTS contemplated that licensees and permittees 
of NCE/public broadcast television stations will use datacasting 
technology to receive and deliver CMAS alerts to participating CMS 
providers. While the Commission believed that datacasting technology 
and the associated equipment described above is one way of meeting this 
requirement, it did not want to foreclose other DTV transmitter-based 
technologies that may exist in the future. Accordingly, in keeping with 
the technologically neutral policy articulated in the CMAS First Report 
and Order, the Commission's rules will allow, but not require, the use 
of datacasting to fulfill the requirements of section 602(c) and the 
Commission's rules, as long as NCE and public broadcast television 
station licensees and permittees do so in a manner consistent with the 
Commission's CMAS rules, including the CMAS architecture previously 
adopted in the CMAS First Report and Order. The Commission also 
recognized APTS's proposed use of datacasting assumes that PBS will 
provide a feed from the Alert Gateway to the NCE/public broadcast 
station digital television transmitters and associated receivers. For 
purposes of this Order, the Commission assumed that PBS or a similarly 
situated entity will provide the interface feed between the Alert 
Gateway and the NCE/public broadcast television stations. PBS or a 
similarly situated entity must work with the Alert Gateway 
Administrator to establish the necessary interface by which CMAS alerts 
will be sent to NCE and public broadcast television stations.
    9. The Commission further noted that section 606(b) of the WARN Act 
provides that NCE and public broadcast station licensees and permittees 
shall be compensated by the Assistant Secretary of Commerce for 
Communications and Information for reasonable costs incurred in 
complying with the requirements imposed pursuant to section 602(c) of 
the WARN Act. The Commission noted that some, if not all, NCE and 
public broadcast television stations may need this funding to comply 
with the equipment requirements the Commission adopted in the CMAS 
Second Report and Order. Accordingly, the Commission required NCE and 
public broadcast television station licensees and permittees to install 
the required equipment no later than 18 months from the date of receipt 
of the funding permitted under section 606(b) of the WARN Act or 18 
months from the effective date of these rules, whichever is later. The 
Commission concluded that this should give NCE and public broadcast 
television stations adequate time to obtain any necessary funding, 
determine the specific equipment needed and acquire and install that 
equipment.
    10. According to the Commission, this approach satisfies section 
602(c) and serves the public interest in that it requires NCE and 
public broadcast television station licensees and permittees to install 
necessary equipment on, or as part of, their digital television 
transmitters to enable geo-targeting by participating CMS providers. 
The Commission concluded that its approach also ensures that NCE and 
public broadcast television station licensees and permittees fulfill 
this requirement in a way that complements the CMAS architecture 
envisioned by the CMSAAC and rules the Commission adopted in the CMAS 
First Report and Order. In adopting these rules in this Second Report 
and Order, the Commission provides participating CMS providers with a 
redundant, alternate distribution path by which they may choose to 
receive geo-targeted CMAS alerts from the Alert Gateway. As such, this 
action will provide an increased level of redundancy to the CMAS 
architecture.

Section 602(f)--Testing

    11. Section 602(f) of the WARN Act states that the Commission 
``shall

[[Page 47553]]

require by regulation technical testing for commercial mobile service 
providers that elect to transmit emergency alerts and for the devices 
and equipment used by such providers for transmitting such alerts.'' In 
the CMAS NPRM, the Commission sought comment on what type of testing 
regime the Commission should require. The Commission noted that the 
CMSAAC proposed that, in order to assure the reliability and 
performance of this new system, certain procedures for logging CMAS 
alerts at the Alert Gateway and for testing the system at the Alert 
Gateway and on an end-to-end basis should be implemented. The 
Commission sought comment on these proposed procedures, and asked 
whether they satisfied the requirements of section 602(f) of the WARN 
Act. The Commission also sought comment on whether there should be some 
form of testing of the CMAS that sends test messages to the mobile 
device and the subscriber. The Commission noted that it had a testing 
regime in place for the Emergency Alert System (EAS), and asked whether 
the EAS testing rules offered a model for CMAS testing. The Commission 
noted that in the EAS rules, internal system tests are combined with 
tests that are heard (or in some cases seen) by the public, and asked 
whether some similar form of test that alerts the public should be 
required for the CMAS. The Commission asked how subscribers should be 
made aware of such tests if testing were to involve subscribers.
    12. Commenters generally supported the testing regime recommended 
by the CMSAAC. They did not object to testing during development and 
internal testing, and assumed that some sort of logging of results will 
be part of the ultimate testing process. For example, the California 
Public Utilities Commission (CAPUC) supported the recommendations of 
the CMSAAC and endorsed thorough testing before deployment. Similarly, 
the National Emergency Numbering Association (NENA) endorsed testing 
and noted that there needs to be ample time devoted to testing the CMAS 
before its deployment. According to the Wireless RERC, there is a need 
to develop a thorough testing regime to ensure that the CMAS will be 
accessible and inclusive of all people, including those with 
disabilities and those who do not speak English.
    13. Although all parties that commented on the testing issue agree 
that a thorough testing regime is essential for an effective CMAS, the 
parties differ regarding the timing of tests, or whether testing should 
affect end-users. For example, T-Mobile, Nokia, and Alltel all 
supported testing, but recommended that the Commission follow the 
CMSAAC recommendations that end-to-end testing be defined as testing 
between the Alert initiator and the Alert Gateway, and that there be no 
testing that involves the end-user. According to Nokia, end-user 
testing would cause unnecessary network use and would result in 
customer confusion. AT&T agreed that any CMAS testing regime should 
follow the CMSAAC recommendations and asserted that ``the EAS testing 
rules do not provide an effective model for testing the CMAS.'' In its 
reply comments, Interstate Wireless supported testing to end-user 
``test units.'' Similarly, by supporting the EAS testing regime as a 
model for testing the CMAS, CAPUC inherently supported testing to end-
users. CellCast recommended a separate rulemaking for testing, and 
believes that testing to the end-user is appropriate. In its reply 
comments, CellCast also recommended that the Commission adopt a monthly 
end-to-end testing requirement.
    14. In ex parte comments submitted on May 23, 2008, CTIA submitted 
a proposal for testing requirements that were developed together with 
Alltel, AT&T, Sprint Nextel, T-Mobile and Verizon Wireless. Under 
CTIA's proposal, participating CMS providers would participate in 
monthly testing of the CMAS system. The monthly test would be initiated 
by the federally-administered Alert Gateway at a set day and time and 
would be distributed through the commercial mobile service provider 
infrastructure and by participating CMS providers over their networks. 
Upon receipt of the test message, participating CMS providers would 
have a 24-hour window to distribute the test message in their CMAS 
coverage areas in a manner that avoids congestion or other adverse 
effects on their networks. Under CTIA's proposal, mobile devices 
supporting CMAS would not be required to support reception of the 
required monthly test and participating CMS providers would not be 
required to deliver required monthly tests to subscriber handsets, but 
a participating CMS provider may provide mobile devices with the 
capability for receiving these tests. CTIA's testing proposal also 
featured regular testing from the ``C'' interface to ensure the ability 
of the Federal Alert Gateway to communicate with the CMS Provider 
Gateway.
    15. The Commission agreed with the CMSAAC and most commenters that 
periodic testing of all components of the CMAS, including the CMS 
provider's components would serve the public interest and is consistent 
with the WARN Act. Accordingly, as recommended by CTIA and several CMS 
providers, the Commission will require each participating CMS provider 
to participate in monthly testing of CMAS message delivery to the CMS 
Provider Gateway and within the CMS providers' infrastructure. CMS 
providers must receive these required monthly test messages and must 
also distribute those test messages to their coverage area within 24 
hours of receipt by the CMS Provider Gateway. CMS providers may 
determine how this delivery will be accomplished and may stagger the 
delivery of the required monthly test message over time and over 
geographic subsets of their coverage area to manage the traffic loads 
and accommodate maintenance windows. Participating CMS providers must 
keep an automated log of required monthly test messages received by the 
CMS Provider Gateway from the Federal Alert Gateway.
    16. CMAS required monthly tests will be initiated only by the 
Federal Alert Gateway Administrator using a defined test message; real 
event codes and alert messages may not be used for test messages. A 
participating CMS provider may forego these monthly tests if pre-empted 
by actual alert traffic or in the event of unforeseen conditions in the 
CMS provider's infrastructure, but shall indicate this condition by a 
response code to the Federal Alert Gateway. The Commission will not 
require that CMS providers make available mobile devices that support 
reception of the required monthly test. The Commission will, however, 
allow CMS providers to choose to do so. CMS providers that choose not 
to make the required monthly test available to subscribers must find 
alternate methods of ensuring that subscriber handsets will be able to 
receive CMAS alert messages.
    17. The Commision also adopted CTIA's recommendation that, in 
addition to the required monthly test, there should be periodic testing 
of the interface between the Federal Alert Gateway and each CMS 
Provider Gateway to ensure the availability and viability of both 
gateway functions. Additional periodic testing to ensure that the 
Federal Alert Gateway is able to deliver CMAS alerts to the CMS 
Provider Gateway will further strengthen the reliability of the CMAS. 
CMS Provider Gateways must send an acknowledgement upon receipt of 
these interface test messages. CMS providers must comply with these 
testing requirements no later than the date of deployment of the CMAS, 
which is the date that CMAS development is complete and the CMAS is 
functional and capable of providing alerts to the public. All of these 
testing requirements

[[Page 47554]]

are consistent with the testing procedures advocated by CTIA. The 
Commission declined to adopt some of the specific testing requirements 
that CTIA suggested, such as designating a specific day and time for 
the required monthly test and defining the exact parameters and content 
of the required monthly test, the expiration time for the required 
monthly test, and specific details of the periodic tests of the 
interface between the Federal Alert Gateway and participating CMS 
Provider Gateways. Because the CMAS must still undergo significant 
development and the Federal Alert Aggregator and Gateway have just 
recently been identified, the Commission believed it would be premature 
to adopt such specific testing requirements at this time.

Procedural Matters

A. Final Paperwork Reduction Act Analysis

    18. This Second Report and Order adopts a new or revised 
information collection requirement subject to the Paperwork Reduction 
Act of 1995 (PRA), Public Law 104-13. This requirement will be 
submitted to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) for review under 
section 3507 of the PRA. The Commission also will publish a separate 
notice in the Federal Register inviting comment on the new or revised 
information collection requirements adopted in this proceeding. The 
requirement will not go into effect until OMB has approved it and the 
Commission has published a notice announcing the effective date of the 
information collection requirement. In addition, the Commission noted 
that pursuant to the Small Business Paperwork Relief Act of 2002, 
Public Law 107-198, see 44 U.S.C. 3506(c)(4), it will seek specific 
comment on how the Commission might ``further reduce the information 
collection burden for small business concerns with fewer than 25 
employees.''

B. Report to Congress

    19. The Commission will send a copy of the CMAS Second Report and 
Order in a report to be sent to Congress and the Government 
Accountability Office pursuant to the Congressional Review Act, see 5 
U.S.C. 801(a)(1)(A).

Final Regulatory Flexibility Analysis

    20. As required by the Regulatory Flexibility Act of 1980, as 
amended (RFA), an Initial Regulatory Flexibility Analysis (IRFA) was 
incorporated in the Notice of Proposed Rulemaking in PSHSB Docket 07-
287 (CMAS NPRM). The Commission sought written public comments on the 
proposals in the CMAS NPRM, including comment on the IRFA. Comments on 
the IRFA were to have been explicitly identified as being in response 
to the IRFA and were required to be filed by the same deadlines as that 
established in section IV of the CMAS NPRM for other comments to the 
CMAS NPRM. The Commission sent a copy of the CMAS NPRM, including the 
IRFA, to the Chief Counsel for Advocacy of the Small Business 
Administration (SBA). In addition, the CMAS NPRM and IRFA were 
published in the Federal Register. This present Final Regulatory 
Flexibility Analysis (FRFA) conforms to the RFA.
    21. Need for, and Objectives of, the Order. Section 602(c) of the 
WARN Act requires the Commission to, ``[w]ithin 90 days after the date 
on which the Commission adopts relevant technical standards based on 
recommendations of the Commercial Mobile Service Alert Advisory 
Committee . . . complete a proceeding to require licensees and 
permittees of noncommercial educational broadcast stations or public 
broadcast stations (as those terms are defined in section 397(6) of the 
Communications Act of 1934 (47 U.S.C. 397(6))) to install necessary 
equipment and technologies on, or as part of, any broadcast television 
digital signal transmitter to enable the distribution of geographically 
targeted alerts by commercial mobile service providers that have 
elected to transmit emergency alerts under this section.'' Although the 
CMAS NPRM solicited comment on issues related to section 602(a) (CMAS 
Technical requirements) and 602(b) (CMS provider election to the CMAS), 
this Second Report and Order only addresses issues raised by sections 
602(c) and 602(f) of the WARN Act. Accordingly, this FRFA only 
addressees the manner in which any commenters to the IRFA addressed the 
Commission's adoption of rules regarding NCE and public television 
licensee's installation of digital television transmission towers 
retransmission equipment, as required by section 602(c) of the WARN 
Act, and the Commission's adoption of rules for testing the CMAS as 
required by section 602(f) of the WARN Act.
    22. This Second Report and Order adopts further rules necessary to 
enable CMS alerting capability for CMS providers who elect to transmit 
emergency alerts to their subscribers. Specifically, the Order adopts 
rules that require NCE and public television stations to install on, or 
as part of, any broadcast television digital signal transmitter 
equipment to enable the distribution of geographically targeted alerts 
by commercial mobile service providers that have elected to transmit 
CMAS alerts. This equipment will interface with the CMAS Alert Gateway 
and enable the transmission of the national CMAS alert feed from the 
CMAS Alert Gateway to all covered broadcast television digital towers. 
As the Commission discussed in greater detail below, it is necessary 
that NCE and public broadcast television stations install this 
equipment to further enable the distribution of geographically targeted 
alerts by CMS providers that participate in the CMAS. The installation 
and operation of this equipment is consistent with the technologically 
neutral requirements adopted in the CMAS First Report and Order.
    23-24. Summary of Significant Issues Raised by Public Comments in 
Response to the IRFA. There were no comments filed that specifically 
addressed the IRFA. The only commenter that explicitly identified 
itself as a small business was Interstate Wireless, Inc., whose 
comments addressed only the technical requirements and protocols 
relevant to section 602(a) of the WARN Act. Interstate Wireless Inc.'s 
comments were addressed in the CMAS First Report and Order.
    25. Description and Estimate of the Number of Small Entities to 
Which 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 rules adopted herein. 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).
    26. Wireless Telecommunications Carriers (except Satellite). Since 
2007, the SBA has recognized wireless firms within this new, broad, 
economic census category. Prior to that time, the SBA had developed a 
small business size standard for wireless firms within the now-
superseded census categories of ``Paging'' and ``Cellular and Other 
Wireless Telecommunications.'' Under the present and prior categories, 
the SBA has deemed a wireless business to be small if it has 1,500 or 
fewer employees. Because Census Bureau data are not yet available for 
the new

[[Page 47555]]

category, the Commission will estimate small business prevalence using 
the prior categories and associated data. For the first category of 
Paging, data for 2002 show that there were 807 firms 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. For the second category of Cellular and Other Wireless 
Telecommunications, data for 2002 show that there were 1,397 firms 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, using the prior categories and the available 
data, the Commission estimates that the majority of wireless firms can 
be considered small.
    27. Cellular Radiotelephone Service. As noted, the SBA has 
developed a small business size standard for small businesses in the 
category ``Wireless Telecommunications Carriers (except satellite).'' 
Under that SBA category, a business is small if it has 1,500 or fewer 
employees. Since 2007, the SBA has recognized wireless firms within 
this new, broad, economic census category. Prior to that time, the SBA 
had developed a small business size standard for wireless firms within 
the now-superseded census categories of ``Paging'' and ``Cellular and 
Other Wireless Telecommunications.'' Accordingly, the pertinent data 
for this category is contained within the prior Wireless 
Telecommunications Carriers (except Satellite) category. For the 
category of Cellular and Other Wireless Telecommunications, data for 
2002 show that there were 1,397 firms 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, using the prior category and the available data, the Commission 
estimated that the majority of wireless firms can be considered small.
    28. Auctions. Initially, the Commission notes 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.
    29. Broadband Personal Communications Service. The broadband 
Personal Communications Service (PCS) spectrum is divided into six 
frequency blocks designated A through F, and the Commission has held 
auctions for each block. The Commission has created a small business 
size standard for Blocks C and F as an entity that has average gross 
revenues of less than $40 million in the three previous calendar years. 
For Block F, 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 qualified as small entities in 
the C Block auctions. A total of 93 ``small'' and ``very small'' 
business bidders won approximately 40 percent of the 1,479 licenses for 
Blocks D, E, and F. On March 23, 1999, the Commission reauctioned 155 
C, D, E, and F Block licenses; there were 113 small business winning 
bidders. On January 26, 2001, the Commission completed the auction of 
422 C and F PCS licenses in Auction 35. Of the 35 winning bidders in 
this auction, 29 qualified as ``small'' or ``very small'' businesses. 
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.
    30. Narrowband Personal Communications Service. The Commission held 
an auction for narrowband Personal Communications Service (PCS) 
licenses that commenced on July 25, 1994, and closed on July 29, 1994. 
A second commenced on October 26, 1994 and closed on November 8, 1994. 
For purposes of the first two narrowband PCS auctions, ``small 
businesses'' were entities with average gross revenues for the prior 
three calendar years of $40 million or less. Through these auctions, 
the Commission awarded a total of forty-one licenses, 11 of which were 
obtained by four small businesses. To ensure meaningful participation 
by small business entities in future auctions, the Commission 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. A third auction commenced on October 3, 2001 and closed 
on October 16, 2001. Here, five bidders won 317 (MTA and nationwide) 
licenses. Three of these claimed status as a small or very small entity 
and won 311 licenses.
    31. Wireless Communications Service. 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 service 
(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.
    32. 700 MHz Guard Bands Licenses. In the 700 MHz Guard Bands 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. An auction of 
52 Major Economic Area (MEA) licenses for each of two spectrum blocks 
commenced on September 6, 2000, and closed on September 21, 2000. 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 remaining 700 MHz Guard Bands licenses commenced on 
February 13, 2001, and closed on February 21, 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. Subsequently, in the 
700 MHz Second Report and Order, the Commission reorganized the

[[Page 47556]]

licenses pursuant to an agreement among most of the licensees, 
resulting in a spectral relocation of the first set of paired spectrum 
block licenses, and an elimination of the second set of paired spectrum 
block licenses (many of which were already vacant, reclaimed by the 
Commission from Nextel). A single licensee that did not participate in 
the agreement was grandfathered in the initial spectral location for 
its two licenses in the second set of paired spectrum blocks. 
Accordingly, at this time there are 54 licenses in the 700 MHz Guard 
Bands.
    33. 700 MHz Band Commercial Licenses. There is 80 megahertz of non-
Guard Band spectrum in the 700 MHz Band that is designated for 
commercial use: 698-757, 758-763, 776-787, and 788-793 MHz Bands. With 
one exception, the Commission adopted criteria for defining two groups 
of small businesses for purposes of determining their eligibility for 
bidding credits at auction. These two categories are: (1) ``Small 
business,'' which is defined as an entity that has attributed average 
annual gross revenues that do not exceed $15 million during the 
preceding three years; and (2) ``very small business,'' which is 
defined as an entity with attributed average annual gross revenues that 
do not exceed $40 million for the preceding three years. In Block C of 
the Lower 700 MHz Band (710-716 MHz and 740-746 MHz), which was 
licensed on the basis of 734 Cellular Market Areas, the Commission 
adopted a third criterion for determining eligibility for bidding 
credits: an ``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 has approved these small size standards.
    34. An auction of 740 licenses for Blocks C (710-716 MHz and 740-
746 MHz) and D (716-722 MHz) of the Lower 700 MHz Band commenced on 
August 27, 2002, and closed on September 18, 2002. Of the 740 licenses 
available for auction, 484 licenses were sold to 102 winning bidders. 
Seventy-two of the winning bidders claimed small business, very small 
business, or entrepreneur status and won a total of 329 licenses. A 
second auction commenced on May 28, 2003, and closed on June 13, 2003, 
and included 256 licenses: five EAG licenses and 251 CMA licenses. 
Seventeen winning bidders claimed small or very small business status 
and won 60 licenses, and nine winning bidders claimed entrepreneur 
status and won 154 licenses.
    35. The remaining 62 megahertz of commercial spectrum is currently 
scheduled for auction on January 24, 2008. As explained above, bidding 
credits for all of these licenses will be available to ``small 
businesses'' and ``very small businesses.''
    36. Advanced Wireless Services. In the AWS-1 Report and Order, the 
Commission adopted rules that affect applicants who wish to provide 
service in the 1710-1755 MHz and 2110-2155 MHz bands. The Commission 
did not know precisely the type of service that a licensee in these 
bands might seek to provide. Nonetheless, the Commission anticipated 
that the services that will be deployed in these bands may have capital 
requirements comparable to those in the broadband Personal 
Communications Service (PCS), and that the licensees in these bands 
will be presented with issues and costs similar to those presented to 
broadband PCS licensees. Further, at the time the broadband PCS service 
was established, it was similarly anticipated that it would facilitate 
the introduction of a new generation of service. Therefore, the AWS-1 
Report and Order adopts the same small business size definition that 
the Commission adopted for the broadband PCS service and that the SBA 
approved. In particular, the AWS-1 Report and Order defines 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. The AWS-1 Report and 
Order also provides small businesses with a bidding credit of 15 
percent and very small businesses with a bidding credit of 25 percent.
    37. Common Carrier Paging. As noted, the SBA has developed a small 
business size standard for wireless firms within the broad economic 
census category of ``Wireless Telecommunications Carriers (except 
Satellite).'' Under this category, the SBA deems a business to be small 
if it has 1,500 or fewer employees. Since 2007, the SBA has recognized 
wireless firms within this new, broad, economic census category. Prior 
to that time, the SBA had developed a small business size standard for 
wireless firms within the now-superseded census categories of 
``Paging'' and ``Cellular and Other Wireless Telecommunications.'' 
Under the present and prior categories, the SBA has deemed a wireless 
business to be small if it has 1,500 or fewer employees. Because Census 
Bureau data are not yet available for the new category, the Commission 
estimates small business prevalence using the prior categories and 
associated data. For the first category of Paging, data for 2002 show 
that there were 807 firms 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. For the second 
category of Cellular and Other Wireless Telecommunications, data for 
2002 show that there were 1,397 firms 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, using the prior categories and the available data, the Commission 
estimates that the majority of wireless firms can be considered small. 
Thus, under this category, the majority of firms can be considered 
small.
    38. In the Paging Third Report and Order, the Commission developed 
a small business size standard 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'' is an entity that, together with its affiliates and 
controlling principals, has average gross revenues not exceeding $15 
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 $3 million for the preceding three years. The SBA has approved 
these small business size standards. An auction of Metropolitan 
Economic Area licenses commenced on February 24, 2000, and closed on 
March 2, 2000. Of the 985 licenses auctioned, 440 were sold. Fifty-
seven companies claiming small business status won. Also, according to 
Commission data, 365 carriers reported that they were engaged in the 
provision of paging and messaging services. Of those, the Commission 
estimates that 360 are small, under the SBA-approved small business 
size standard.
    39. Wireless Communications Service. This service can be used for 
fixed, mobile, radiolocation, and digital audio broadcasting satellite 
uses. The Commission established small business size standards for the 
wireless communications service (WCS) auction. A ``small business'' is 
an entity with average gross revenues of $40 million for each of the 
three preceding years, and a ``very small business'' is an entity with 
average gross revenues of $15 million for each of the three preceding 
years. The SBA has approved these small business size standards. The 
Commission auctioned geographic area licenses in the WCS service. In 
the

[[Page 47557]]

auction, there were seven winning bidders that qualified as ``very 
small business'' entities, and one that qualified as a ``small 
business'' entity.
    40. Wireless Communications Equipment Manufacturers. While these 
entities are merely indirectly affected by the Commission's action, the 
Commission described them to achieve a fuller record. 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 2002, there 
were a total of 1,041 establishments in this category that operated for 
the entire year. Of this total, 1,010 had employment of under 500, and 
an additional 13 had employment of 500 to 999. Thus, under this size 
standard, the majority of firms can be considered small.
    41. 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 2002, there 
were a total of 1,041 establishments in this category that operated for 
the entire year. Of this total, 1,010 had employment of under 500, and 
an additional 13 had employment of 500 to 999. Thus, under this size 
standard, the majority of firms can be considered small.
    42. Software Publishers. While these entities are merely indirectly 
affected by the Commission's action, it is describing them to achieve a 
fuller record. These companies may design, develop or publish software 
and may provide other support services to software purchasers, such as 
providing documentation or assisting in installation. The companies may 
also design software to meet the needs of specific users. The SBA has 
developed a small business size standard of $23 million or less in 
average annual receipts for the category of Software Publishers. For 
Software Publishers, Census Bureau data for 2002 indicate that there 
were 6,155 firms in the category that operated for the entire year. Of 
these, 7,633 had annual receipts of under $10 million, and an 
additional 403 firms had receipts of between $10 million and $24, 
999,999. For providers of Custom Computer Programming Services, the 
Census Bureau data indicate that there were 32,269 firms that operated 
for the entire year. Of these, 31,416 had annual receipts of under $10 
million, and an additional 565 firms had receipts of between $10 
million and $24,999,999. Consequently, the Commission estimates that 
the majority of the firms in this category are small entities that may 
be affected by the Commission's action.
    43. NCE and Public Broadcast Stations. The Census Bureau defines 
this category as follows: ``This industry comprises establishments 
primarily engaged in broadcasting images together with sound. These 
establishments operate television broadcasting studios and facilities 
for the programming and transmission of programs to the public.'' The 
SBA has created a small business size standard for Television 
Broadcasting entities, which is: such firms having $13 million or less 
in annual receipts. According to Commission staff review of the BIA 
Publications, Inc., Master Access Television Analyzer Database as of 
May 16, 2003, about 814 of the 1,220 commercial television stations in 
the United States had revenues of $12 (twelve) million or less. The 
Commission notes, however, that in assessing whether a business concern 
qualifies as small under the above definition, business (control) 
affiliations must be included. The Commission's estimate, therefore, 
likely overstates the number of small entities that might be affected 
by the Commission's action, because the revenue figure on which it is 
based does not include or aggregate revenues from affiliated companies.
    44. In addition, an element of the definition of ``small business'' 
is that the entity not be dominant in its field of operation. The 
Commission is unable at this time to define or quantify the criteria 
that would establish whether a specific television station is dominant 
in its field of operation. Accordingly, the estimate of small 
businesses to which rules may apply do not exclude any television 
station from the definition of a small business on this basis and are 
therefore over-inclusive to that extent. Also as noted, an additional 
element of the definition of ``small business'' is that the entity must 
be independently owned and operated. The Commission notes that it is 
difficult at times to assess these criteria in the context of media 
entities and the Commission's estimates of small businesses to which 
they apply may be over-inclusive to this extent. There are also 2,117 
low power television stations (LPTV). Given the nature of this service, 
the Commission will presume that all LPTV licensees qualify as small 
entities under the above SBA small business size standard.
    45. The Commission has, under SBA regulations, estimated the number 
of licensed NCE television stations to be 380. The Commission notes, 
however, that, in assessing whether a business concern qualifies as 
small under the above definition, business (control) affiliations must 
be included. The Commission's estimate, therefore, likely overstates 
the number of small entities that might be affected by the Commission's 
action, because the revenue figure on which it is based does not 
include or aggregate revenues from affiliated companies. The Commission 
does not compile and otherwise does not have access to information on 
the revenue of NCE stations that would permit it to determine how many 
such stations would qualify as small entities.
Description of Projected Reporting, Recordkeeping, and Other Compliance 
Requirements
    46. This Report and Order may contain new information collection 
requirements subject to the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (PRA), 
Public Law 104-13. If the Commission determines that the Report and 
Order contains collection subject to the PRA, it will be submitted to 
the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) for review under section 
3507(d) of the PRA at an appropriate time. At that time, 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. In addition, the Commission notes that pursuant to the 
Small Business Paperwork Relief Act of 2002, Public

[[Page 47558]]

Law 107-198, see 44 U.S.C. 3506(c)(4), the Commission previously sought 
specific comment on how the Commission might ``further reduce the 
information collection burden for small business concerns with fewer 
than 25 employees.
Steps Taken To Minimize the Significant Economic Impact on Small 
Entities, and Significant Alternatives Considered
    47. The RFA requires an agency to describe any significant 
alternatives that it has considered in developing 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 
such small entities.''
    48. As noted in paragraph 2 above, this Second Report and Order 
deals only with the WARN Act section 602 (c) requirement that the 
Commission complete a proceeding to require licensees and permittees of 
noncommercial educational broadcast stations or public broadcast 
stations to install necessary equipment and technologies on, or as part 
of, any broadcast television digital signal transmitter to enable the 
distribution of geographically targeted alerts by commercial mobile 
service providers that have elected to transmit emergency alerts under 
this section.'' Many of the entities affected by this Second Report and 
Order are the member stations for the Association of Public 
Broadcasters (APTS), which was a member of the CMSAAC. Further, in its 
formation of the CMSAAC, the Commission made sure to include 
representatives of small businesses among the advisory committee 
members. The CMAS NPRM also sought comment on a number of alternatives 
to the recommendations of the CMSAAC, such as the Digital EAS. In its 
consideration of this and other alternatives the CMSAAC 
recommendations, the Commission has attempted to impose minimal 
regulation on small entities to the extent consistent with the goal of 
advancing its public safety mission by adopting technical requirements, 
standards and protocols for a CMAS that CMS providers would elect to 
provide alerts and warnings to their customers. The Commission's action 
in this Second Report and Order neither requires nor forecloses the 
exact outcome requested by the entities most affected, as represented 
by APTS.
Federal Rules That May Duplicate, Overlap, or Conflict With the 
Proposed Rules
    49. None.
Report to Congress
    50. The Commission will send a copy of the CMAS Second 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 Second Report and Order, including this FRFA, to the 
Chief Counsel for Advocacy of the SBA. A copy of the Second Report and 
Order and FRFA is also hereby published in the Federal Register.

Ordering Clauses

    51. It is ordered, that pursuant to sections 1, 4(i) and (o), 201, 
303(r), 403, and 706 of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended, 47 
U.S.C. 151, 154(i) and (o), 201, 303(r), 403, and 606, as well as by 
sections 602(a), (b), (c), (f), 603, 604 and 606 of the WARN Act, this 
Second Report and Order is hereby adopted. The rules adopted in this 
Second Report and Order shall become effective October 14, 2008, except 
that Sec.  10.350 (a)(7) and (b) contain new or modified information 
collection requirements which will not become effective prior to OMB 
approval.
    52. It is further ordered that the Commission's Consumer and 
Governmental Affairs Bureau, Reference Information Center, shall send a 
copy of this Second Report and Order, including the Final Regulatory 
Flexibility Analysis, to the Chief Counsel for Advocacy of the Small 
Business Administration.

List of Subjects in 47 CFR Part 10

    Alert and Warning, Commercial Mobile Alert System, noncommercial 
educational broadcast stations, public broadcast stations.

Federal Communications Commission.
Marlene H. Dortch,
Secretary.

Final Rules

0
For the reasons discussed in the preamble, the Federal Communications 
Commission amends 47 CFR chapter 1 part 10 as follows:

PART 10--COMMERCIAL MOBILE ALERT SYSTEM

0
1. The authority citation for part 10 continues to read as follows:

    Authority: 47 U.S.C. 151, 154(i) and (o), 201, 303(r), 403, and 
606, as well as by sections 602(a), (b), (c), (f), 603, 604 and 606 
of the WARN Act.


0
2. Add a new Sec.  10.340 to subpart C to read as follows:


Sec.  10.340  Digital Television Transmission Towers Retransmission 
Capability.

    Licensees and permittees of noncommercial educational broadcast 
television stations (NCE) or public broadcast television stations (to 
the extent such stations fall within the scope of those terms as 
defined in section 397(6) of the Communications Act of 1934 (47 U.S.C. 
397(6))) are required to install on, or as part of, any broadcast 
television digital signal transmitter, equipment to enable the 
distribution of geographically targeted alerts by commercial mobile 
service providers that have elected to transmit CMAS alerts. Such 
equipment and technologies must have the capability of allowing 
licensees and permittees of NCE and public broadcast television 
stations to receive CMAS alerts from the Alert Gateway over an 
alternate, secure interface and then to transmit such CMAS alerts to 
CMS Provider Gateways of participating CMS providers. This equipment 
must be installed no later than eighteen months from the date of 
receipt of funding permitted under section 606(b) of the WARN Act or 18 
months from the effective date of these rules, whichever is later.

0
3. Add a new Sec.  10.350 to subpart C to read as follows:


Sec.  10.350  CMAS Testing Requirements.

    This section specifies the testing that will be required, no later 
than the date of deployment of the CMAS, of CMAS components.
    (a) Required Monthly Tests. Testing of the CMAS from the Federal 
Alert Gateway to each Participating CMS Provider's infrastructure shall 
be conducted monthly.
    (1) A Participating CMS Provider's Gateway shall support the 
ability to receive a required monthly test (RMT) message initiated by 
the Federal Alert Gateway Administrator.
    (2) Participating CMS Providers shall schedule the distribution of 
the RMT to their CMAS coverage area over a 24 hour period commencing 
upon receipt of the RMT at the CMS Provider Gateway. Participating CMS 
Providers shall determine the method to distribute the RMTs, and may 
schedule over the 24 hour period the delivery of RMTs over geographic 
subsets of their coverage area to manage traffic loads and to 
accommodate maintenance windows.

[[Page 47559]]

    (3) A Participating CMS Provider may forego an RMT if the RMT is 
pre-empted by actual alert traffic or if an unforeseen condition in the 
CMS Provider infrastructure precludes distribution of the RMT. A 
Participating CMS Provider Gateway shall indicate such an unforeseen 
condition by a response code to the Federal Alert Gateway.
    (4) The RMT shall be initiated only by the Federal Alert Gateway 
Administrator using a defined test message. Real event codes or alert 
messages shall not be used for the CMAS RMT message.
    (5) A Participating CMS Provider shall distribute an RMT within its 
CMAS coverage area within 24 hours of receipt by the CMS Provider 
Gateway unless pre-empted by actual alert traffic or unable due to an 
unforeseen condition.
    (6) A Participating CMS Provider may provide mobile devices with 
the capability of receiving RMT messages.
    (7) A Participating CMS Provider must retain an automated log of 
RMT messages received by the CMS Provider Gateway from the Federal 
Alert Gateway.
    (b) Periodic C Interface Testing. In addition to the required 
monthly tests, a Participating CMS Provider must participate in 
periodic testing of the interface between the Federal Alert Gateway and 
its CMS Provider Gateway. This periodic interface testing is not 
intended to test the CMS Provider's infrastructure nor the mobile 
devices but rather is required to ensure the availability/viability of 
both gateway functions. Each CMS Provider Gateway shall send an 
acknowledgement to the Federal Alert Gateway upon receipt of such an 
interface test message. Real event codes or alert messages shall not be 
used for this periodic interface testing.
[FR Doc. E8-18144 Filed 8-13-08; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6712-01-P