Facilitating the Deployment of Text to 911 and Other Next Generation 911 Applications; Framework for Next Generation 911 Deployment, 55367-55381 [2014-21851]

Agencies

• FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION

[Federal Register Volume 79, Number 179 (Tuesday, September 16, 2014)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 55367-55381]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2014-21851]


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

FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION

47 CFR Part 20

[PS Dockets No. 11-153, 10-255; FCC 14-118]


Facilitating the Deployment of Text to 911 and Other Next 
Generation 911 Applications; Framework for Next Generation 911 
Deployment

AGENCY: Federal Communications Commission.

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: In this Second Report and Order, the Federal Communications 
Commission (Commission) requires that Commercial Mobile Radio Service 
(CMRS) providers and other providers of interconnected text messaging 
applications (collectively, ``covered text providers'') be capable of 
supporting

[[Page 55368]]

text-to-911 service by December 31, 2014. Covered text providers will 
have until June 30, 2015, or six months from the date of a Public 
Safety Answering Point (PSAP) request, whichever is later, to implement 
text-to-911 for that PSAP. These rules will provide the public with an 
additional means through which individuals can reach emergency 
services.

DATES: This final rule is effective October 16, 2014 except for the 
amendments to Sec.  20.18(n)(10)(i) and (ii), (n)(10)(iii)(C), and 
(n)(11), which have new information collection requirements and will 
not be effective until approved by the Office of Management and Budget 
(OMB). The Commission will publish a document in the Federal Register 
announcing OMB approval and the relevant effective date.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Dana Zelman of the Policy and 
Licensing Division of the Public Safety and Homeland Security Bureau, 
(202) 418-0546 or dana.zelman@fcc.gov. For additional information 
concerning the Paperwork Reduction Act information collection 
requirements contained in this document, contact Benish Shah, (202) 
418-7866, or send an email to PRA@fcc.gov.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This is a summary of the Commission's Second 
Report and Order in PS Docket Nos. 10-255 and 11-153, released on 
August 13, 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 
https://www.fcc.gov/document/fcc-adopts-text-911-rules. The Third 
Further Notice of Proposed Rulemaking that was adopted concurrently 
with the Second Report and Order will be published elsewhere in this 
issue of the Federal Register.

Summary of the Second Report and Order

Introduction

    1. In this Second Report and Order, we affirm the Commission's 
commitment to ensuring access to emergency services for all Americans. 
The Commission's rules must evolve as legacy networks and services 
transition to next generation technologies, and as consumer 
expectations and needs evolve. Current trends in mobile wireless usage 
show the continued evolution from a predominantly voice-driven medium 
of communication to one based more on text and data transmissions. The 
need to provide text-to-911 service in a timely manner is made more 
pressing because many consumers believe text-to-911 is already an 
available service, because of the unique value of text-to-911 for the 
millions of Americans with hearing or speech disabilities, and because 
of the crucial role it can play in protecting life and property when 
making a voice call would be dangerous, impractical, or impossible due 
to transmission problems.
    2. In the Second Report and Order, we require that Commercial 
Mobile Radio Service (CMRS) providers and other providers of 
interconnected text messaging applications (collectively, ``covered 
text providers'') be capable of supporting text-to-911 service by 
December 31, 2014.\1\ Covered text providers will have until June 30, 
2015, or six months from the date of a Public Safety Answering Point 
(PSAP) request, whichever is later, to implement text-to-911 for that 
PSAP.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ 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 two-way interconnected text 
applications. ``Covered text providers'' includes all CMRS 
providers, as well as all providers of interconnected text messaging 
services that enable consumers to send text messages to and receive 
text messages from all or substantially all text-capable U.S. 
telephone numbers, including through the use of applications 
downloaded or otherwise installed on mobile phones. 47 CFR 
20.18(n)(1). For purposes of text-to-911, we divide text 
applications into two broad categories: (1) Interconnected text 
applications that 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, 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 limit 
initial application of our text-to-911 requirements to 
interconnected texts, as the term ``interconnected'' has been 
defined for purposes of text-to-911, and this definition should not 
be construed as affecting the definition of ``interconnected 
service'' in the context of section 332 of the Communications Act. 
47 U.S.C. 332(d)(2).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Background

    3. In September 2011, the Commission released a Notice of Proposed 
Rulemaking (NPRM), 26 FCC Rcd 13615, which sought comment on a number 
of issues related to the deployment of Next Generation 911 (NG911), 
including how to implement text-to-911. In the NPRM, the Commission 
stated that sending text messages, photos, and video clips has become 
an everyday activity for mobile device users on 21st century broadband 
networks, and that adding non-voice capabilities to our 911 system will 
substantially improve emergency response, save lives, and reduce 
property damage, as well as expand access to emergency help, both for 
people with disabilities and for people in situations where placing a 
voice call to 911 could be difficult or dangerous.
    4. In December 2012, AT&T, Sprint Nextel, T-Mobile, and Verizon 
Wireless 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 be capable of providing text-to-911 
service to requesting PSAPs by May 15, 2014 (Carrier-NENA-APCO 
Agreement). As part of the Carrier-NENA-APCO Agreement, the four major 
carriers committed to implementing text-to-911 service to a PSAP making 
a ``valid'' request of the carrier ``within a reasonable amount of 
time,'' not to exceed six months. Carriers promised to meet these 
commitments ``independent of their ability to recover these associated 
costs from state or local governments.'' The commitments specifically 
did not extend to customers roaming on a network.
    5. Also in December 2012, the Commission released a Further Notice 
of Proposed Rulemaking (Further Notice), 27 FCC Rcd 15659, which 
proposed, inter alia, to require all CMRS providers, as well as 
interconnected text messaging providers, to support text messaging to 
911 in all areas throughout the nation where PSAPs are capable of and 
prepared to receive the texts. The Commission defined interconnected 
text messaging applications as those using 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 Short Message Service (SMS) 
protocols. The Further Notice stated that ``the record indicates that 
text-to-911 is technically feasible and can be achieved in the near 
term at reasonable cost to PSAPs, CMRS providers, and providers of 
interconnected text.'' The Further Notice noted the extent to which 
consumers had begun to gravitate toward IP-based messaging applications 
as their primary means of communicating by text, that consumers may 
reasonably come to expect these applications to also support text-to-
911, and that consumer familiarity is critical in emergency situations 
where each second matters. To that end, the Further Notice sought to 
ensure consumers' access to text-to-911 capabilities on the full array 
of texting applications available today--regardless of provider or 
platform.
    6. Recognizing that text-to-911 would not be rolled out uniformly 
across the country or across text messaging

[[Page 55369]]

platforms, the Commission took steps to provide consumers with clarity 
regarding the availability of text-to-911. In May 2013, the Commission 
issued a Report and Order, 28 FCC Rcd 7556, requiring covered text 
providers to provide consumers attempting to send a text to 911 with an 
automatic bounce-back message when the service is unavailable. The 
Commission found a ``clear benefit and present need'' for persons who 
attempt to send text messages to 911 to know immediately if their text 
cannot be delivered to the proper authorities. The Commission noted 
specifically that, ``[a]s these applications proliferate, consumers are 
likely to assume that they should be as capable of reaching 911 as any 
other telephone number.''
    7. In January 2014, we adopted a Policy Statement, 29 FCC Rcd 1547, 
stating that the Commission believes that every provider of a text 
messaging service that enables a consumer to send text messages using 
numbers from the North American Numbering Plan (NANP) should support 
text-to-911 capabilities. The Commission clarified that it intends to 
take a technologically neutral approach to any rules adopted for text-
to-911 service, and it encouraged voluntary agreements to support text-
to-911.
    8. In 2014, we released a Second Further Notice of Proposed 
Rulemaking (Second Further Notice), 29 FCC Rcd 1547, seeking comment on 
technical issues for the implementation of text-to-911 service with 
respect to interconnected text providers, the provision of location 
information with texts to 911, and roaming support for text-to-911 
service.

Second Report and Order

    9. As we observed in the Second Further Notice, the progress 
already made by the four signatories to the Carrier-NENA-APCO Agreement 
by January 2014 ``illustrates the technical feasibility'' of text-to-
911 implementation for other CMRS providers, including small and rural 
providers, particularly in light of adoption of the ATIS standard for 
text-to-911 over the SMS platform. Subsequent progress reports by these 
four providers have served further to confirm that view, and over a 
year ago the Competitive Carriers Association (CCA) supported the 
proposed deadline of December 31, 2014, as an achievable goal. There is 
substantial evidence in the record supporting those views, as to both 
CMRS providers and interconnected text providers. Nor is there any 
serious question as to the overwhelming public interest benefits to be 
derived from prompt implementation of text-to-911 or the relatively 
minimal cost of such a requirement to covered providers and PSAPs.

Adoption of Text-to-911 Requirements

    10. In this Second Report and Order, the Commission requires that 
all CMRS and interconnected text providers (collectively, ``covered 
text providers'') must be capable of supporting text-to-911 by December 
31, 2014. ``Text-to-911'' refers to a service by which a consumer may 
send a text message to 911 in search of emergency assistance. A 911 
text message is a message, consisting of text characters, sent to the 
short code ``911'' and intended to be delivered to a PSAP by a covered 
text provider, regardless of the text messaging platform used.\2\ 
Covered text providers have six months from December 31, 2014--i.e., 
until June 30, 2015--to begin delivering 911 text messages to PSAPs 
that have submitted a valid request for text-to-911 service on or 
before December 31, 2014, unless another timeframe is mutually agreed 
upon by the individual PSAP and the covered text provider. Covered text 
providers have six months from any valid PSAP request received after 
December 31, 2014, to commence delivery of text-to-911 for that PSAP. 
In the sections to follow, we explain the basis for adopting text-to-
911 rules, including the significant and potentially life-saving 
benefits that text-to-911 affords, and set forth the scope and extent 
of our text-to-911 requirements. We also show that the deadlines 
adopted are achievable and technically feasible for covered text 
providers.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \2\ We clarify that legacy devices that are incapable of sending 
texts via three digit short codes are not subject to our text-to-911 
requirements, provided the software for these devices cannot be 
upgraded over the air to allow text-to-911. If the device's text 
messaging software can be upgraded over the air to support a text to 
911, however, then the covered text provider must make the necessary 
software upgrade available.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Public Policy Analysis

    11. In the Further Notice, the Commission sought comment on a case 
study concerning the costs and benefits associated with implementing 
text-to-911 service. It also observed that the four major CMRS 
providers had voluntarily agreed to implement text-to-911 capability 
without seeking recovery of such costs from state or local government, 
which suggested that the implementation costs associated with text-to-
911 are manageable. Subsequently, in the Second Further Notice, we 
sought comment on the cost of implementation for other covered text 
providers (including small and rural CMRS providers, as well as 
providers of interconnected text messaging services).
    12. Availability and Ease of Use. The effectiveness of the legacy 
voice 911 system is in large part derived from its ease of use. People 
faced with the stress of emergency situations can communicate more 
quickly and effectively when they are able to use the same ubiquitous 
technologies that they use for everyday communications. This principle, 
which has long been applicable to voice calling, is increasingly true 
for text messaging communication as well. CTIA estimates that 2.19 
trillion text messages were sent in 2012, and according to the Pew 
Center, more than 7 out of 10 cell phone users send or receive text 
messages. Another report suggests that 91 percent of smartphone owners 
actively use SMS. Moreover, the average in billable minutes of mobile 
voice use of the four major CMRS providers has declined steadily since 
2009, with evidence that the decline is due to substitution of mobile 
voice by mobile messaging and other mobile data services. Thus, as the 
Commission has stated before, expanding existing text technology to 
support 911 will provide the public with a familiar mode of 
communication for emergency use, and we anticipate that subscribers 
will continue to use text messaging at the same or a greater rate than 
in the past.
    13. Enhanced Access for People with Disabilities. Another benefit 
of widespread text-to-911 availability will be enhanced access to 
emergency services for people with disabilities. Currently, 
approximately 48 million people in the United States are deaf or hard 
of hearing, and approximately 7.5 million people have speech 
disabilities. Moreover, as people age, they become more likely to 
encounter hearing loss, with the result that such challenges are borne 
disproportionately by the elderly.
    14. In the Second Further Notice, we explained that people who are 
deaf, hard of hearing, or speech disabled have been consistently 
migrating away from specialized legacy devices, and towards more 
ubiquitous forms of text messaging communications because of the ease 
of access, wide availability, and practicability of modern text-capable 
devices. This migration has had the unique benefit of bringing these 
users into the mainstream of our nation's communications systems, but 
it also has led some commenters to suggest that it leaves people who 
are deaf, hard of hearing, or speech disabled without an effective, 
reliable and direct means of accessing 911 services in the event of an 
emergency.

[[Page 55370]]

    15. The Commission's Emergency Access Advisory Committee (EAAC) 
noted that individuals who are deaf, hard of hearing, or speech-
disabled and need to communicate with 911 via voice currently have no 
direct means of accessing 911 while mobile other than through attaching 
a separate teletype (TTY) device to their cellphone. However, the vast 
majority of people who are deaf, hard of hearing, or speech-disabled 
has discarded TTYs or has never acquired or used a ``mobile'' TTY, and 
thus no longer has a practicable means of directly accessing 911. 
Nevertheless, the EAAC found that many individuals who are deaf have 
service plans that include SMS. One key finding of the EAAC is that 
``individuals with disabilities should be able to call 9-1-1 using the 
same means they use for everyday telecommunication.''
    16. Today, in the absence of text-to-911, individuals who are deaf, 
hard of hearing, or speech disabled and who do not use TTYs have no 
other feasible option but to rely on telecommunications relay services 
(TRS) to access 911 emergency services, unless they are with another 
individual who can make a voice call on their behalf. Many have 
criticized TRS as serving only as an indirect means of emergency access 
that can result in delays and translation errors.
    17. Moreover, enabling direct text messaging to 911 by the many 
people who are deaf, hard of hearing, or speech disabled will allow 
them to use mass market communication devices that have more advanced 
and increasingly evolving capabilities. While some commenters have been 
less supportive of SMS-to-911 because it does not support real-time 
text--i.e., the ability to send and receive text simultaneously with 
the time that it is typed without having to press a ``send'' key--they 
have given some support to SMS as a viable near-term solution because 
of its ease of use for people with disabilities and ubiquity in 
mainstream society. Respondents to the EAAC survey expressed a clear 
preference for calling a PSAP using the same technology that they use 
on a daily basis. Furthermore, 87.7 percent of EAAC respondents 
reported having used SMS text messaging and 46.1 percent reported 
having used SMS text messaging ``almost every day.''
    18. Alternative Means of Emergency Communication for the General 
Public. The ability to send text messages to 911 also will provide 
important benefits as an alternative means of emergency communication 
for the general public. For example, in the 2007 shooting incident at 
Virginia Tech, a number of students attempted unsuccessfully to send 
SMS text messages to 911, so as not to be heard and located by the 
shooter. During the course of Black Hawk County, Iowa's text-to-911 
trial, text messaging has been used in domestic and child abuse 
situations in which the victim feared that the suspect would overhear 
the call to 911. Vermont's text-to-911 trial also demonstrated text-to-
911's efficacy in cases involving suicide and domestic violence.
    19. Text-to-911 can also provide a means of access to 911 when 
voice networks are compromised or congested. In large-scale disasters, 
for example, landline and mobile voice networks may become overloaded, 
making it difficult to place a 911 voice call. In such cases, it may be 
much more likely for SMS and IP-based text messages to 911 still to be 
successfully transmitted because they consume far less bandwidth than 
voice and, given the packet-switched nature of text messages, can take 
advantage of alternate spectrum resources and traffic channels. In 
other words, people in disaster areas may still be able to send text 
messages to 911 even if they cannot place a voice call.
    20. Estimated Valuation of Benefits Floor. In an effort to quantify 
the benefits associated with text-to-911, we conducted a cost-benefit 
analysis of the potential effect of text-to-911 specifically in the 
area of cardiac emergencies--a category that represents less than 10 
percent of 911 calls but for which detailed statistical information is 
available. As detailed in the Further Notice, even when we limit our 
analysis of benefits to this subset of total emergencies, we find that 
the potential benefits floor for text-to-911 for just this one category 
of 911 calls is $63.7 million annually, solely based on potential use 
by the population with the most severe hearing and speech disabilities. 
These life-saving benefits provide a useful reference point for 
assessing the importance of timely and effective 911 communications to 
response time and positive outcomes for medical emergencies.
    21. We emphasize that these benefits for cardiac emergencies 
represent only a subset of the total benefits that will be generated by 
text-to-911. And no commenter claims that text-to-911 will not yield 
these benefits. Moreover, the record reflects numerous other benefits 
that are less quantifiable but that may result in similar or even more 
substantial benefits. These benefits, though not specifically 
quantifiable, provide convincing evidence that the aggregate benefits 
of text-to-911 will significantly exceed the specific benefits 
quantified here.
    22. Few commenters questioned our cost-benefit analysis from the 
Further Notice. T-Mobile submitted that it is ``concerned about the 
Commission's reliance on the Cardiac Study,'' but offered no 
alternative calculation of benefits or evidence that the Commission's 
estimate was unreasonable. APCO has previously argued that cost-benefit 
analyses ``can obscure inherently qualitative social benefits'' and 
urged the Commission ``to resist the temptation to rely on [the Further 
Notice's] analysis in its final decision, as it could establish a 
dangerous precedent for future matters involving public safety.'' We 
agree with APCO that relying on cost-benefit analyses may result in the 
subordination of important public policy objectives to market forces. 
We recognize that public safety interests are not driven solely by 
economic considerations. However, in this instance, our cost-benefit 
analysis and public policy objectives dictate the same result.

Implementation Costs

    23. CMRS Providers. The record indicates that the cost for CMRS 
providers to implement a text-to-911 solution is significantly less 
than the benefits floor discussed herein. By one estimate, the total 
cost for all CMRS providers to implement text-to-911 nationwide will be 
approximately $4 million annually over a period of five years (totaling 
$20 million). At $20 million for the five year projection, this five 
year total cost is approximately one-third the annual potential 
benefits floor of $63.7 million. Thus, considering the total estimated 
$20 million implementation cost of text-to-911, we expect that this 
cost will be far exceeded by the program's estimated benefits floor in 
the first year of text-to-911 deployment alone.
    24. In the Second Further Notice, we sought comment on the specific 
costs of requiring CMRS providers--other than those that are a party to 
the Carrier-NENA-APCO Agreement--to support text-to-911 service. We 
noted that small and rural CMRS providers may be able to achieve cost 
savings in their implementation by leveraging some of the text-to-911 
infrastructure that would be in place by May 15, 2014, given that the 
four major CMRS providers would be providing text-to-911 by this date.
    25. We recognize that small and rural CMRS providers may face a 
comparatively larger financial burden in complying with our text-to-911 
requirements than larger CMRS providers, and would prefer not to make

[[Page 55371]]

the investment necessary for providing text-to-911 service until PSAPs 
have declared that they are ready for it. However, we believe that the 
deadline the Commission adopts in this Second Report and Order will 
encourage PSAPs to commit the necessary system upgrades necessary to 
make text-to-911 available more promptly. We also find that these costs 
are justified in light of the significant benefits. We expect, however, 
that once the initial implementation costs have been incurred to 
implement the system, CMRS providers' recurring costs of carrying text-
to-911 traffic will be negligible, because it is a relatively small 
part of the network and will place only negligible demands on network 
capacity that is designed to handle larger volumes of voice and data 
services. Moreover, given the magnitude of public benefits at stake 
compared to the costs, we believe that the minimal cost burden for 
small and rural CMRS providers to implement text-to-911 is justified.
    26. Interconnected Text Providers. In the Second Further Notice, we 
provided our own estimates and sought comment on the associated costs 
for implementing each of the four delivery models for interconnected 
text providers and any other potential initial or ongoing costs of 
implementation. In response, several commenters provided dollar 
estimates for the anticipated costs of implementation of text-to-911 by 
interconnected text providers that were relatively consistent with our 
estimates.
    27. While we recognize that the text-to-911 requirements we adopt 
today will impose costs on interconnected text providers, we believe 
those costs are reasonable, particularly in light of the significant 
public safety benefits of providing text-to-911 service. We find that 
our proposed cost estimates for implementation of text-to-911 by 
interconnected text providers are supported by the record. To the 
extent parties such as ITIC and textPlus disagree, they have failed to 
support their claims with any documented evidence. For example, ITIC 
does not reveal how comprehensive the price disclosures were, or who 
provided the estimates, or how they would scale over such a large 
volume of users. As such, we are unpersuaded by ITIC's unsubstantiated 
and vague estimates. Finally, neither ITIC nor textPlus explain why our 
methodology is unreasonable. Ultimately, we realize that imposing text-
to-911 requirements is not without a cost to these providers. At the 
same time, however, we find that these costs are justified and 
reasonable in light of the fundamental public interest benefits to be 
gained, the need to provision text-to-911 service to ensure that all 
Americans have access to emergency services, and the increasing 
reliance on OTT text applications.\3\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ ``Over-the-top'' (OTT) 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. Multi-media 
Messaging Service (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. OTT 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. OTT texting applications may be provided by the underlying 
mobile CMRS provider or a non-affiliated third-party, and may be 
``interconnected'' or ``non-interconnected.''
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    28. We also emphasize that costs likely will vary based on the 
particular text-to-911 solution an interconnected text provider chooses 
to implement. Because text traffic in the CMRS network-based delivery 
model would be routed over CMRS networks, there should be little cost 
to interconnected text providers to support text-to-911. However, we 
believe that the question of reasonable compensation may be resolved 
through direct billing of the underlying user through his or her SMS 
plan, or through business arrangements between interconnected text 
providers and CMRS providers. We remind CMRS providers of our 
fundamental view that text-to-911 will provide significant benefits to 
all consumers.
    29. Finally, we agree with parties who argue that supporting text-
to-911 must be factored into the general cost of doing business and 
that ``the provision of emergency services to their customers is not an 
optional feature, it is necessary infrastructure.'' Accordingly, we 
find that the costs of implementation by interconnected text providers 
are outweighed by the public interest benefits in ensuring that 
Americans have access to emergency services through interconnected text 
messaging.
    30. PSAPs. Based on the record in this proceeding, the success of 
various text-to-911 trials, and the recent modest increase in PSAP 
adoption, we find that our text-to-911 rules will not impose an undue 
burden on PSAP operations. First, PSAPs retain discretion as to whether 
it will accept text messages. We strongly encourage PSAPs to implement 
text-to-911 in their jurisdictions and expect that consumer demand and 
considerations of public safety will drive this investment. Investments 
made now by PSAPs and covered text providers to support text-to-911 can 
also be leveraged to support future NG911 deployments and, accordingly, 
serve as building blocks towards an IP-based emergency network. Second, 
PSAPs have several options for the receipt of text messages, including 
options that will impose minimal costs on the PSAP. For example, while 
some PSAPs may choose to implement text-to-911 using existing 
equipment, such as existing NG911 customer-premises equipment (CPE), 
web browsers, or TTY terminals, other PSAPs may choose to upgrade their 
equipment to receive text messages in a manner that will also support 
additional data once in an NG911 environment. Third, PSAPs that have 
already implemented text-to-911 or participated in text trials have 
provided anecdotal evidence that texts to 911 will not likely overwhelm 
any PSAP and that text-to-911 service saves lives.
    31. We conclude that the benefits floor for the first year of text-
to-911 is $63.7 million. Balanced against the cost estimates in the 
record, the implementation of text-to-911 will provide substantial 
benefits both for people with disabilities and the general public in a 
variety of scenarios. In addition to the life-saving benefits, 
implementing text-to-911 could yield other benefits, such as reduced 
property losses and increased probability of apprehending criminal 
suspects. We note that text-to-911 is not a market-driven service. 
However, we find that there is demand for the service from deaf, hard 
of hearing, and speech-disabled individuals, and to date, the 
marketplace has not responded to this demand. Accordingly, we find that 
adopting text-to-911 requirements for covered text providers is 
justified given this cost-benefit analysis.

Delivery of Text-to-911 by All Covered Text Providers

    32. We adopt a two-step obligation for covered text providers to 
implement text-to-911. All covered text providers must be capable of 
supporting text-to-911, independent of whether they have received a 
PSAP request, by December 31, 2014. Then, covered text providers would 
have six months from the date that an individual PSAP provides notice 
that it is ``text-ready'' to undertake necessary network and protocol 
configuration to deliver texts to an individual PSAP.
    33. Scope. As in the Bounce-Back Order, 28 FCC Rcd 7556, we define 
``covered text providers'' to include all CMRS providers, as well as 
all providers of interconnected text messaging services that enable 
consumers to send text messages to and receive text messages from all 
or substantially all text-capable U.S. telephone numbers,

[[Page 55372]]

including through the use of applications downloaded or otherwise 
installed on mobile phones.\4\ We find that imposing the same 
requirements and deadlines to both CMRS and interconnected text 
messaging service providers is necessary to serve the public interest. 
The scope we adopt today is particularly important given existing and 
predicted future trends toward greater use of non-CMRS applications for 
texting, and in light of our recognition that the transition to NG911 
``is still in the early stages.'' Thus, as NENA has noted, the 
Commission's proposals ``represent the logical next steps aimed at 
sustaining this momentum and minimizing consumer confusion about the 
availability and functionality'' of text-to-911.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ We exclude text messaging services that use U.S. telephone 
numbers for administrative or identification purposes only, but that 
are not interconnected. We also exclude relay service providers, 
mobile satellite service (MSS), and in-flight text messaging 
services from the scope of our requirements at this time. Sprint, a 
major IP relay provider, states that ``relay services are not 
delivered via SMS and should remain separate until a more robust, 
reliable text-to-911 messaging service becomes available . . . 
Likewise, disability groups oppose incorporating relay services into 
a text-to-911 mandate. We also agree that airborne text-to-911 
communications presents particular challenges, due to the unique 
nature of in-flight service, and that MSS is a specialized offering 
with a focus on enterprise and government users. We therefore 
exclude these services from the scope of our text-to-911 
requirements. Finally, we exclude from our requirements at this time 
911 text messages that originate from Wi-Fi only locations or that 
are transmitted from devices that cannot access the CMRS network. We 
defer consideration of whether to extend text-to-911 requirements to 
these services until a future time.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    34. One of the Commission's mandates under the Twenty-First Century 
Communications and Video Accessibility Act of 2010, Pub. L. 111-260, 
Oct. 8, 2010, 124 Stat. 2751 (CVAA), is to expand access to emergency 
communications for individuals with disabilities. In order for the 
Commission to achieve this goal, it is necessary to include both CMRS 
and providers of interconnected text messaging services within the 
scope of the requirement. Many interconnected text providers offer the 
same functions as CMRS-provided text messaging; for this reason, 
individuals with disabilities may opt for such a service in lieu of a 
CMRS-based text messaging plan or may rarely or never use the built-in 
CMRS text messaging capability. In such cases, if interconnected text 
providers are not required to support text-to-911, these individuals 
may remain unaware of the potential availability of this capability 
through CMRS providers, or find it difficult to navigate to any such 
capability during emergency situations where time is critical.
    35. Second, imposing the same requirements on both CMRS and 
interconnected text providers will respond to consumers' reasonable 
expectations and reduce consumer confusion. As noted earlier, consumers 
may incorrectly assume that unavailability of text-to-911 through OTT 
texting services upon which they rely would be replicated on the CMRS 
native text platform, or face critical delays in determining how to 
migrate to that platform in an emergency.

Technical Feasibility and the ``Text-Capable'' Deadline

    36. We find that it is technically feasible for all covered text 
providers to be capable of supporting text-to-911. Given that all 
covered text providers have at least one technically feasible and 
achievable path to implementation, we establish a single, uniform 
deadline of December 31, 2014 for all covered text providers to be 
``text-capable.'' We believe that this deadline achieves our goal of 
ensuring that text-to-911 is implemented as swiftly as feasibly 
possible. We also believe there are benefits to adopting a uniform 
deadline for all covered text providers. By this ``text-capable'' 
deadline, a covered text provider should have made any preparations 
necessary to provide text-to-911, including, for example: (1) 
Determining the particular solution it will use for delivering texts to 
911, including the capability to obtain location information sufficient 
to route texts to 911 to the appropriate PSAP; (2) identifying and/or 
entering into any necessary contractual arrangements with other 
stakeholders to implement text-to-911, including, but not limited to, 
arrangements for routing interconnected text-to-911 traffic; and (3) 
adopting requisite budgetary and other resource allocation plans to 
provide for delivery of text-to-911 in accordance with our 
requirements.\5\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ While we do not require each of these steps nor intend for 
this list to be exhaustive, a covered text provider that has 
completed each of these steps will be considered text-capable under 
our rules. We further note that satisfying this text-capable 
requirement does not necessarily entail the expenditure of funds, 
provided the covered text provider takes all necessary steps to be 
able to provide text-to-911 within six months of receiving a PSAP 
request. Whether the expenditure of funds is necessary to comply 
with our requirements is a business and operational decision that 
may vary by individual covered text provider.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    37. Based on the record, adoption of the ATIS/TIA J-STD-110 
standard, and existing text-to-911 deployments by AT&T, Sprint, T-
Mobile, and Verizon Wireless, it is clear that it is technically 
feasible for CMRS providers to support text-to-911. In the Second 
Further Notice, we proposed to require all covered text providers be 
capable of supporting text-to-911 service by December 31, 2014. In 
response, a number of public safety and technology vendors express 
support for this proposed deadline with regard to CMRS providers.
    38. We are unpersuaded by arguments by some small and rural CMRS 
providers that, absent a PSAP request for service, covered text 
providers should not be required to develop text-to-911 capability. CCA 
supported the December 31, 2014 deadline over a year ago. CCA does not 
challenge the feasibility of meeting that deadline, but argues that 
such a deadline is not likely to help the Commission achieve its goal 
because ``PSAPs are the gatekeepers for this service, and until the 
Commission finds a way to increase PSAP adoption, the deadline imposed 
on carriers will not further the Commission's objectives.'' We agree 
that the Commission needs to encourage PSAP adoption, but we believe 
that establishing a set deadline is the best means by which to do so. 
As APCO argues, absent a date certain by which covered text providers 
will make text-to-911 available, PSAPs will not have any incentive to 
commit to necessary system upgrades for text-to-911. We believe that 
the ``text-capable'' deadline we adopt today will serve to encourage 
PSAPs to plan for and request text-to-911 service. Furthermore, the 
implementation of text-to-911 is already underway. We recognize that 
there may be a number of factors that PSAPs must address before 
implementing text-to-911 and that might result in a later deployment 
timeframe, including funding or other resource issues, determining how 
best to integrate their chosen delivery method (TTY, web browser, or i3 
ESinet/IP interface) with their existing PSAP infrastructure, or 
assessing how to incorporate text-to-911 as part of a larger migration 
to NG911.
    39. We are also unpersuaded by other arguments in the record that 
we should adopt a different deadline. For example, CCA suggests that 
``the Commission should benchmark smaller wireless providers' 
implementation deadline from adoption of a final order, rather than the 
predetermined December 31, 2014 date.'' Adopting a December 31, 2014 
deadline, consistent with our proposal in the Second Further Notice, is 
based on our evaluation of the comments in the record, as well as the 
demonstrated ability of CMRS providers to deliver texts to 911, given 
text-to-911 deployments already in existence. And

[[Page 55373]]

small and rural CMRS providers should be able to leverage some of the 
text-to-911 databases and other infrastructure that text-to-911 vendors 
have had in place since May 15, 2014 to support provision of text-to-
911 by AT&T, Sprint, T-Mobile, and Verizon Wireless. We therefore 
believe that a December 31, 2014 text-capable deadline should be 
achievable and technically feasible.
    40. The record also demonstrates that there is at least one 
technically feasible approach that exists today for interconnected text 
providers to support text-to-911 by December 31, 2014, with additional 
solutions under development. The record shows that interconnected text 
providers could feasibly implement at least one proposed text-to-911 
delivery model--the CMRS network-based model \6\--by December 31, 2014. 
In light of the fact that multiple interconnected text providers filed 
comments in the record indicating that a December 31, 2014 deadline is 
technically feasible, we are unpersuaded by other parties who suggest 
interconnected text providers will need additional time, or that 
adopting a deadline for interconnected text providers would be 
inappropriate at this time. We also disagree that certain technical 
issues justify a later deadline for interconnected text providers. 
Based on consideration of the record as a whole, we believe a December 
31, 2014 deadline is reasonable.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ The ``CMRS network-based model'' is premised upon a texting 
application's use of the wireless device's native SMS application 
programming interface (API) after recognizing that the user is 
sending a text message to the text short code ``911.'' 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 CMRS provider, i.e., the text will be 
routed through the CMRS provider's (or its agent's) TCC, which is 
the functional element of the Short Message Service Center (SMSC) 
dedicated to routing texts to the appropriate PSAP.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    41. In light of our commitment to technologically neutral rules, as 
the Commission emphasized in the Policy Statement, we do not mandate 
any particular model for implementing text-to-911. Because SMS is the 
most common texting technology in use today, and virtually all wireless 
consumers already have access to it and are familiar with its use, we 
expect that most CMRS providers will initially support SMS-based text-
to-911. However, we acknowledge that CMRS providers may eventually seek 
to migrate customers away from SMS.\7\ We do not require CMRS providers 
to support SMS-based text-to-911 indefinitely, so long as they provide 
their customers with at least one text-to-911 option per device that 
works across the provider's entire network coverage area. CMRS 
providers may select any reliable method or methods (e.g., SMS, IP-
based) for text routing and delivery.\8\ Although covered text 
providers may utilize a messaging platform that can support multiple 
addresses or enable sending images and video, covered text providers 
must ensure that these features do not interfere with the delivery of 
the text portion of the message to a PSAP.\9\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \7\ For example, T-Mobile notes its plan to migrate former 
MetroPCS subscribers from their legacy CDMA network to its HSPA and 
LTE networks. It argues that ``the Commission should exempt networks 
that will be decommissioned within eighteen months of the effective 
date of the new mandate . . . To do otherwise would mandate wasteful 
investment in a capability that will be soon discarded along with 
the rest of that network.'' We agree and, accordingly, will exempt 
networks that will be decommissioned before June 30, 2016, on the 
condition that subscribers are migrated by that date to networks 
with the required text-to-911 capability.
    \8\ We expect parties will take other necessary measures to 
facilitate text-to-911, such as ensuring the interconnection of 
various TCCs. TCC interconnection is addressed in the revised J-STD-
110.a. We will continue to monitor the progress of text-to-911 
implementation, including the status of interconnection between TCCs 
and whether additional action may be necessary.
    \9\ For example, a consumer may send a text message to 911 and 
include other telephone numbers in the address field in addition to 
the short code ``911.'' The covered text provider must ensure that 
processing of the text for delivery to the non-911 addresses does 
not affect the delivery of the text to the PSAP and any subsequent 
two-way text exchange between the texter and the PSAP. Likewise, if 
a consumer attaches multimedia to a text message to 911, the covered 
text provider must ensure delivery of the text portion of the 
message without interference or alteration of the text and subject 
to the requirements for text delivery set forth by the PSAP.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    42. With respect to interconnected text providers, we anticipate 
that many will choose the CMRS network-based solution to deliver texts-
to-911, at least as an interim measure. We expect CMRS providers will 
continue to allow access to capabilities necessary for transmission of 
text-to-911 communications by other covered text providers. In order to 
facilitate the use of this method, CMRS providers shall allow access to 
capabilities necessary for transmission of text-to-911 communications 
by other covered text providers. We incorporate this requirement into 
our rules.\10\ We make clear, however, that we do not require CMRS 
providers to reconfigure any SMS text-to-911 platforms in order to 
facilitate the ability of other covered text providers to access the 
CMRS providers' networks, and that CMRS providers' obligation to allow 
access to CMRS networks is limited to the extent that the CMRS 
providers offers SMS. It is the responsibility of the covered text 
provider selecting the CMRS network-based solution to ensure that its 
text messaging service is technically compatible with the CMRS 
provider's SMS networks and devices, and in conformance with any 
applicable technical standards.\11\ Further, we find that it is 
reasonable for CMRS providers to receive commercially reasonable 
compensation for the delivery of 911 text messages. We do not require 
CMRS providers to allow text-to-911 traffic over their SMS networks 
from end users that do not have an SMS plan (an SMS plan may include a 
bulk messaging plan, a pre-paid messaging plan, or a per-message 
plan).\12\ In this way, CMRS providers may receive commercially 
reasonable compensation for delivery of texts to 911 directly from the 
end user. All covered text providers using the CMRS network-based 
delivery model for text-to-911 must clearly inform consumers that, 
absent an SMS plan with the consumer's underlying CMRS provider, the 
covered text provider may be unable to deliver 911 text messages. As 
noted earlier, CMRS providers may choose to migrate away from SMS 
platforms in favor of newer technologies; we therefore limit the scope 
of this access requirement to the extent that CMRS providers offer 
SMS.\13\

[[Page 55374]]

CMRS providers are not subject to any obligation to maintain the SMS 
network for use by other covered text providers. In this manner, we do 
not establish ``an open-ended obligation to third-party competitors.'' 
We do, however, require that the CMRS provider must provide reasonable 
advance notice to the affected covered text providers about its choice 
to migrate to a new technology not less than 90 days prior to the 
migration to such technology. We believe this framework will spur 
innovation from interconnected text providers to actively develop 
solutions to support text-to-911 without reliance on CMRS providers' 
underlying networks. We nevertheless encourage parties to negotiate 
solutions to facilitate continued compliance with our text-to-911 
requirements, including solutions whereby CMRS providers would continue 
to carry other covered text providers' texts to 911 over their new 
networks where technically feasible, again pursuant to commercially 
reasonable business arrangements negotiated on an individualized basis.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \10\ Some commenters argue that it is device manufacturers or 
the device's operating system (OS)--not the CMRS provider--that 
affects whether a text message originating in a non-native text 
application will be able to access the CMRS network. In the event 
covered text provider cannot deliver texts to 911 for a particular 
device due to that device's OS, they should seek a waiver of our 
rules.
    \11\ We expect CMRS providers to make any necessary 
specifications for accessing their SMS networks available to other 
covered text providers upon request, and to inform such covered text 
providers in advance of any changes to these specifications.
    \12\ Rather than directly billing the end user, CMRS providers 
and interconnected text messaging providers may choose to negotiate 
an agreement, pursuant to commercially reasonable price and other 
terms, that may address questions relating to compensation. Parties 
are not required to enter into any such arrangement. Regardless of 
how the CMRS provider receives reasonable compensation, however, the 
CMRS provider's obligation to carry text-to-911 traffic is limited 
to end users with an SMS plan, as noted above.
    \13\ Even if a covered text provider chooses to implement the 
CMRS network-based approach for delivery of 911 text messages, we 
affirm that each individual covered text provider is individually 
responsible for its compliance with the text-to-911 requirements set 
forth herein, including responsibility for educating its users 
regarding how text-to-911 might work for their particular 
interconnected text messaging applications. Furthermore, we do not 
specify or require any terms or conditions governing the 
relationships between covered text providers and CMRS providers, 
beyond specifying that, to the extent they enter into business 
agreements regarding access to SMS networks, the terms of such 
agreements should be commercially reasonable.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    43. Finally, any covered text provider that is unable to meet the 
text-capable deadline may seek waiver relief. We decline to adopt a 
waiver standard that would be specific to our text-to-911 requirements. 
The Commission may grant relief pursuant to the waiver standards set 
forth in Sections 1.3 and 1.925 of its rules, and we believe these 
provisions are sufficient to address any requests for relief of the 
text-to-911 requirements, which we will evaluate based on the facts and 
circumstances of the particular request.

Six-Month Implementation Period To Deliver Texts To Text-Ready PSAPs

    44. Subsequent to the ``text-capable'' deadline, we require covered 
text providers to commence delivery of texts to 911 within six months 
of a valid PSAP request. For all PSAP requests received on or before 
December 31, 2014, covered text providers must commence text-to-911 
service to such PSAPs by June 30, 2015. We find that a six-month 
implementation window for all covered text providers to begin 
delivering text-to-911 service to requesting PSAPs is both technically 
and economically feasible.
    45. The Second Further Notice proposed to require covered text 
providers to implement text-to-911 service within six months of a 
``valid PSAP request.'' In response, several commenters agree that a 
six-month implementation period is sufficient for all CMRS providers, 
including small and rural CMRS providers.
    46. On the other hand, Rural Wireless Association (RWA) argues for 
permitting CMRS providers up to one year after a PSAP request to begin 
delivering text messages to that PSAP. RWA states that ``[f]or carriers 
deploying LTE-only networks, texting cannot be provided absent the 
integration of IP Multimedia Subsystem (IMS) software into the LTE 
core, which is dependent on the release of IMS software by major 
equipment and software vendors.'' On balance, we believe that the 
December 31, 2014 initial ``text-capable deadline,'' combined with a 
subsequent six-month period to deliver texts to requesting PSAPs, 
provides covered text providers with a sufficient amount of time to 
implement our requirements.\14\ We disagree with RWA that small and 
rural CMRS providers need more time to become capable of supporting 
text-to-911 traffic from covered text providers utilizing the CMRS 
network-based model. CMRS providers need not play an active role in the 
routing of such traffic and need only refrain from interfering with 
access to necessary CMRS capabilities. Further, RWA's argument with 
respect to obtaining IMS software represents a business concern that 
should be addressed through marketplace negotiations. Accordingly, with 
regard to PSAPs making valid requests for service by December 31, 2014, 
all covered text providers should commence delivery of texts no later 
than June 30, 2015.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \14\ We note that the requirements adopted herein do not suspend 
the timelines agreed upon in the Carrier-NENA-APCO Voluntary 
Agreement.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    47. For the purposes of our rules, a ``valid PSAP request'' means 
that: (1) The requesting PSAP is, and certifies that it is, technically 
ready to receive 911 text messages in the format requested; (2) the 
appropriate local or State 911 service governing authority has 
specifically authorized the PSAP to accept and, by extension, the 
covered text provider to provide, text-to-911 service; and (3) the 
requesting PSAP has notified the covered text provider that it is both 
technically ready to receive 911 text messages and has been authorized 
to accept such messages. We note that the elements of a ``valid PSAP 
request,'' which we describe here, are generally consistent with the 
terms of the Carrier-NENA-APCO Agreement. The requesting PSAP may 
notify a covered text provider by either registering in the 
Commission's database, or providing the covered text provider with any 
other written notification that is reasonably acceptable to the covered 
text provider. Additionally, while we decline to extend the six-month 
implementation period for small and rural carriers as RWA suggests, we 
will allow PSAPs and covered text providers the opportunity to mutually 
consent to an alternative implementation timeframe, beyond the standard 
six-month implementation window, as suggested by Verizon. We agree with 
Verizon that this will ``enable service providers to flexibly handle 
unforeseen delays on an informal basis with individual PSAPs, without 
the need to burden the Commission with waiver requests.'' We require 
covered text providers to notify the Commission of any such alternative 
arrangements and deployment schedules within 30 days of entering into 
such an agreement.\15\ We anticipate that any PSAPs requesting text-to-
911 service will want to deploy the service as swiftly as possible, and 
therefore, that PSAPs will not agree to an alternative timeframe unless 
there is a legitimate reason for doing so.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \15\ The covered text provider must file such notification in PS 
Docket Nos. 10-255 and 11-153, and may request confidential 
treatment of its filing or a portion of the filing pursuant to Sec.  
0.459 of the Commission's rules. 47 CFR 0.459.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Notification to Covered Text Providers

    48. In order to facilitate implementation of our text-to-911 
requirements, we will implement a centralized database, to be 
administered by the Commission, that will reflect the text-readiness of 
individual PSAPs. We find that a centralized approach would best serve 
the interests of both PSAPs and covered text providers in the 
implementation process, rather than requiring PSAPs to make individual 
requests for text-to-911 service. For example, a PSAP registry will 
address concerns raised in the record by public safety entities 
regarding the volume of covered entities that might be subject to our 
text-to-911 requirements, and the associated burden of reaching out to 
each of them to request text-to-911. Utilizing a centralized database 
would allow PSAPs to indicate their readiness to receive texts to 911 
in one place, which would in turn serve as notice to all covered text 
providers, regardless of whether the PSAP has a previous relationship 
with the covered text provider.
    49. Accordingly, the Commission will establish and maintain a 
centralized database so as to provide PSAPs with an option to register 
their text-readiness. Registration in the Commission's PSAP database 
will commence the six-month implementation timeframe for covered text 
providers in their area. In order for a PSAP to register in our 
database as

[[Page 55375]]

``text-ready,'' the requesting PSAP must certify that it is technically 
ready to receive 911 text messages in the format requested, and the 
appropriate local or State 911 service governing authority has 
specifically authorized the PSAP to accept and, by extension, the 
covered text provider to provide, text-to-911 service. The database 
will include contact information so that covered text providers may 
coordinate with PSAPs regarding the specific implementation criteria, 
like the PSAP's selected method of receiving texts. PSAPs that are 
already accepting texts as of December 31, 2014 will be presumed to be 
``text-ready'' and will be automatically registered in the database, 
unless they inform the Commission otherwise.
    50. A centralized database addresses requests from public safety 
entities seeking a more streamlined process to request text-to-911 
service. Covered text providers should periodically review the text-
readiness of PSAPs in their service areas and reach out to these PSAPs 
as necessary to coordinate implementation of text-to-911 service. To 
the extent possible, we encourage PSAPs and covered text providers to 
follow the processes recommended by CSRIC in its recent report, CSRIC 
IV WG1, Final Report on PSAP Best Practices, (rel. June 18, 2014) 
(CSRIC PSAP Best Practices Report), available at https://
transition.fcc.gov/pshs/advisory/csric4/CSRICIVWG-
1Task-2Final061814.pdf, outlining best 
practices and guidelines for PSAPs making requests for text-to-911 
service.\16\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \16\ In its PSAP Best Practices Report, CSRIC includes an ``SMS 
Text-to-9-1-1 Readiness Questionnaire'' for PSAPs to complete and 
return to covered text providers as part of the text-to-911 
implementation process, in order to provide full and consistent 
information regarding the PSAP's technical and operational 
capabilities to receive texts to 911. We anticipate that covered 
text providers may seek a waiver of the implementation deadline 
because a PSAP that requests text messages is not, in fact, text-
ready. To the extent the PSAP has undertaken the best practices 
referenced in CSRIC's report, we will adopt a rebuttable presumption 
that a PSAP is text-ready and has submitted a valid PSAP request, 
thereby placing the burden on carriers to show otherwise.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    51. We direct the Public Safety and Homeland Security Bureau 
(PSHSB) to develop, implement, and maintain the centralized database 
for purposes of implementing our text-to-911 requirements. PSHSB should 
provide additional information regarding the database, including the 
availability of the database for PSAP registration, in a subsequent 
Public Notice. In the interim, PSAPs that are text-ready before the 
database is publicly available may file notifications with the 
Commission.\17\ We also direct PSHSB to maintain and regularly update 
its Web site to identify any new PSAPs that have provided notice of 
their text readiness, and to supplement updates to the Web site with 
regular Public Notices.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \17\ Parties should file in PS Docket Nos. 10-255 and 11-153.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    52. While registration in the database is one way by which PSAPs 
may trigger text-to-911 obligations by covered text providers, and the 
record suggests that it is the most efficient mechanism, we do not 
require its use. The obligations of covered text providers may also be 
triggered by any other written notification to them by PSAPs. Finally, 
we note that PSAPs retain the choice of whether to receive texts to 
911, as well as whether to participate in registering as ``text-ready'' 
in our centralized database. Not registering in the database will not 
preclude PSAPs from being able to obtain text-to-911 service. That is, 
covered text providers still must provide text-to-911 service within 
six months of receiving a valid PSAP request, irrespective of whether a 
PSAP has registered as ``text-ready'' with the Commission.

Routing of Text Messages to 911

    53. We require covered text providers to route texts to 911 using 
coarse location (cell ID and cell sector) or other equivalent means 
that allows the covered text provider to route a text to the 
appropriate PSAP. The record in this proceeding, as well as the current 
ATIS/TIA Joint Standard 110 (J-STD-110), demonstrate that coarse 
location is currently feasible for text-to-911 purposes, and it is 
already being used to route texts to the proper PSAP in active text-to-
911 deployments. The ATIS/TIA J-STD-110 defines coarse location 
information as ``typically the initial location estimate of the mobile 
device,'' consisting of ``the Latitude/Longitude (X/Y) coordinates 
representing the geographic center (centroid) of the cell site/cell 
site sector area currently associated with the mobile device where the 
emergency communication dialogue was initiated.''
    54. On June 18, 2014, CSRIC IV WG1 released a report, CSRIC IV WG1, 
Final Report--Investigation into Location Improvements for Interim SMS 
(Text) to 9-1-1 (rel. June 19, 2014) (CSRIC Enhanced Location Report), 
available at https://transition.fcc.gov/pshs/advisory/csric4/
CSRICIVWG-1Task-
1Final061814.pdf, evaluating the ability of covered 
text providers to generate and deliver enhanced--that is, more granular 
than coarse--location information with text to 911. CSRIC concludes 
that ``there is no solution for generating enhanced location in an SMS 
text to 9-1-1 session for any currently deployed systems that does not 
require user equipment (`UE') changes, network changes, or both.'' 
CSRIC further notes that ``some existing technologies, upon which the 
SMS text to 9-1-1 service is based, face challenges and provide for 
extremely limited additional standards development.'' CSRIC recommends 
that the Commission ``refrain from wireless E9-1-1 Phase II-like 
mandates for SMS text to 9-1-1 service and instead encourage further 
development and implementation of more robust . . . solutions.'' CSRIC 
also stated in its PSAP Best Practices Report that, under the J-STD-
110, ``only coarse location is required, any rebid functionality is 
OPTIONAL.''
    55. The CSRIC report and the consensus in the record lead us to 
conclude that enhanced location information cannot be supported by all 
currently available location technologies or all devices and operating 
systems. However, to wait for the capability to support more granular 
location data--rather than adopting a coarse location requirement now--
would delay the implementation of text-to-911. We note that some form 
of location information is necessary in order to route a text message 
to the appropriate PSAP and to implement text-to-911 rules. Thus, based 
on CSRIC's findings and other record support that coarse location is 
currently feasible, and except with respect to interconnected text 
providers that do not access the CMRS network, we require that covered 
text providers must obtain location information sufficient to route 
texts to the appropriate PSAP, using coarse location information or an 
equivalent means. The Commission has previously noted that J-STD-110 
permits a CMRS provider to provide enhanced location information where 
possible. To the extent it is feasible, we encourage them to do so.
    56. In the event a covered text provider implements a text-to-911 
solution that does not access the CMRS network--and therefore cannot 
provide coarse location--the covered text provider must obtain 
sufficient location information through some other means (e.g., through 
commercial location-based services or through the device's location 
application programming interface) to route the text to the appropriate 
PSAP. All covered text providers using device-based location 
information that requires consumer activation must clearly inform 
consumers that they must grant permission for the text messaging 
application to access the wireless

[[Page 55376]]

device's location information in order to enable text-to-911. If a 
consumer does not permit this access, then the application must provide 
an automated bounce-back message.
    57. Finally, we emphasize that this approach is only an interim 
solution, and that we intend to require the delivery of enhanced 
location information with texts to 911 as soon as it is technically 
feasible to do so.

Liability Protection

    58. In the Further Notice, the Commission recognized that adequate 
liability protection is needed for PSAPs, CMRS providers, 
interconnected text providers, and technology vendors to proceed with 
implementation of text-to-911. The Commission noted that the New and 
Emerging Technologies 911 Improvement Act, Public Law 110-283, July 23, 
2008, 122 Stat. 2620 (NET 911 Act); 47 U.S.C. 615a, 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, 
Public Law 112-96, Feb. 22, 2012, 126 Stat. 156; 47 U.S.C. 1472, 
section 6506 (NG911 Advancement Act), Congress further extended these 
parity provisions to providers of NG911 services. The 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 CMRS providers 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 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.
    59. In January 2014, the Commission sought further comment on 
whether adopting the proposed text-to-911 requirements would assist in 
mitigating liability concerns by establishing standards of conduct that 
could be invoked by covered text providers in defense against state 
tort liability or similar claims. In response, several commenters argue 
that liability protection for 911 market participants should be 
established on a national scale. For example, AT&T argues that ``[Text-
to-911] . . . demands a national plan and . . . clear and unambiguous, 
comprehensive, standardized, nationwide liability protection that 
applies equally to all parties in the stream of commerce that support 
it.''
    60. With regard to parity of liability protection for 
interconnected text providers, VON Coalition urges the Commission to 
expand liability protection for these providers and notes that 
``exposing interconnected text providers to unlimited liability for 911 
texts will chill investment, research and development in these 
important services.'' However, two commenters suggest that the NET 911 
Act provides a sufficiently flexible definition of ``other emergency 
communication service provider,'' such that any new entrants to this 
market--i.e., non-CMRS covered text providers--would be entitled to the 
parity of liability protection set forth in the NET 911 and NG911 
Advancement Acts, and therefore, would not be exposed to unlimited 
liability.
    61. Based on our interpretation of the statute, we conclude that 
covered text providers subject to our text-to-911 requirements fall 
within the scope of ``other emergency communications service 
providers'' under section 201(a) of the NET 911 Act. Under section 
201(a), ``other emergency communications service providers'' include 
``an entity other than a local exchange carrier, wireless carrier, or 
an IP-enabled voice service provider that is required by the Federal 
Communications Commission consistent with the Commission's authority 
under the Communications Act of 1934 to provide other emergency 
communications services.'' \18\ We find interconnected text providers 
within the scope of our jurisdiction and require them to support text-
to-911 service. We also find that text-to-911 service, as we require in 
this Second Report and Order, satisfies the definition of ``other 
emergency communications services,'' because it clearly provides 
``emergency information'' to a PSAP via radio communications. 
Accordingly, we conclude that Congress intended that all covered text 
providers should be given parity of liability protection for the 
provision of text-to-911.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \18\ The Commission noted in the Further Notice that the 
Carrier-NENA-APCO Agreement does not address liability protection, 
indicating that the four CMRS provider parties were willing to 
proceed with the implementation of Text-to-911 under the existing 
law at the time, including the NET 911 Act. The NET 911 Act 
alternatively defines ``other emergency communication service 
providers'' to include, in the absence of a Commission requirement, 
``an entity that voluntarily elects to provide other emergency 
communications services and is specifically authorized by the 
appropriate local or State 9-1-1 service governing authority to 
provide other emergency communications services.'' We find that the 
voluntary provision of text-to-911 service, in response to an 
authorized PSAP request, falls within the scope of ``other emergency 
communication services,'' and accordingly, would also receive parity 
of liability protection for such service under the NET 911 Act.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Treatment of Voluntary Agreement

    62. In the Second Further Notice, we sought comment on whether and 
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. Several commenters state that such an approach 
would be appropriate for covered text providers who have entered into 
voluntary agreements to support text-to-911.
    63. We find it unnecessary to adopt any ``safe harbor'' provisions 
at this time. The only parties to date that have entered into a 
voluntary agreement to support text-to-911 are the CMRS provider 
parties to the Carrier-NENA-APCO agreement. Because the scope of the 
rules adopted in this Second Report and Order is consistent with the 
scope of their obligations under the voluntary agreement, there is no 
need for a ``safe harbor.'' Since no other parties would be eligible 
for safe harbor status, we decline to adopt any such provision here.

Consumer Education

    64. The Commission has already committed PSHSB and the Consumer and 
Governmental Affairs Bureau (CGB) to implement a comprehensive consumer 
education program concerning text-to-911, and to coordinate their 
efforts with state and local 911 authorities, other federal and state 
agencies, public safety organizations, industry, disability 
organizations, and consumer groups, consistent with those voluntary 
measures taken under the Carrier-NENA-APCO Agreement. We find that the 
Commission's Web site, together with the continued efforts of PSHSB and 
CGB, should continue to serve as a leading means of consumer education, 
and direct the Bureaus to continue their collaborative efforts.
    65. We also expect that relevant text-to-911 stakeholders will join 
in and enhance these educational efforts. As we implement a 
comprehensive plan for educating the public on the availability and 
features of text-to-911, we must consider all angles of engaging and 
educating the public, including those who are deaf, hard of hearing or 
have speech disabilities. An effective public education campaign should 
invest not only in traditional methods of outreach,

[[Page 55377]]

such as Web sites and targeted education for more vulnerable segments 
of the population (including people with disabilities and children), 
but also in new forms of media--specifically, text messaging. We 
therefore encourage covered text providers to use text messaging to 
inform consumers of the availability of text-to-911 once this service 
has commenced in a given area.

Legal Authority

    66. In the Bounce-Back Order, the Commission closely examined our 
legal authority in connection with text-to-911 service and identified 
multiple, independent bases of legal authority to support action in 
that context. In particular, the Commission found that several 
provisions of Title III provide the Commission with direct authority to 
impose text-to-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 interconnected text providers was 
reasonably ancillary to the Commission's Title III mandate regarding 
the use of spectrum, to its CVAA mandate regarding the migration to 
fully NG911 capable systems, and to the Commission's statutory 
authority to adopt 911 regulations that ensure that consumers can reach 
emergency services so as to promote the safety of life and property.
    67. In response to the Second Further Notice, no commenter objects 
to the Commission's authority to require CMRS providers to support 
text-to-911. On the other hand, several commenters question the 
Commission's authority over interconnected text providers. For example, 
VON Coalition does not dispute that the Commission's direct authority 
under the CVAA extends to the regulation of interconnected text 
providers. However, it raises two separate questions about the use of 
that direct authority here. First, it argues that the CVAA precludes 
any requirement for the use of proprietary technology, and that the 
``network and server-based models'' would violate this mandate. Second, 
it suggests that these two models--in contrast to the ``SMS-API 
model''--``may'' violate the CVAA's mandate that they be 
``achievable.'' Although Verizon does not assert that the Commission 
does not have jurisdiction, it similarly cautions that ``the 
Commission's authority to regulate OTT text messaging services and 
applications is limited,'' and that the Commission should therefore 
ensure that any rule adopted under the CVAA is both technically 
feasible and achievable.
    68. VON Coalition's assertion that we are mandating the use of 
proprietary technologies, systems, or services, contrary to the CVAA, 
is incorrect. We recognize that most covered text providers may well 
use the interim SMS standard initially; indeed, VON Coalition appears 
to have no objection to its implementation by December 31, 2014, 
assuming the cooperation of CMRS providers. However, we do not require 
the use of any specific technology or text messaging protocol, as long 
as the technology or protocol utilized is capable of properly routing 
and delivering a text to 911. Finally, we determine that the text-to-
911 rules are achievable and technically feasible.
    69. As to the alternate basis for authority over interconnected 
text providers (i.e., as ancillary to the Commission's direct sources 
of statutory authority), VON Coalition seeks to cabin the ancillary 
authority outlined in the Bounce-Back Order as designed solely ``to 
ensure that misleading messages are not sent via radio spectrum.'' We 
disagree. Although we need not rely on such ancillary authority given 
the direct authority provided by the CVAA, there are multiple reasons 
why mandating text-to-911 capability by interconnected text providers 
is within the broad scope of the Commission's ancillary authority.
    70. As outlined in the Bounce-Back Order, the Commission has broad 
authority under Title III to prescribe the nature of the service 
provided by CMRS providers, and it is undisputed that such authority 
extends to requiring text-to-911 capability. Given the growing use of 
third-party text applications over CMRS networks by their customers, 
ensuring that those applications provide text-to-911 capability is 
reasonably necessary to promote that capability over spectrum 
authorized for use under Title III. Moreover, as the Commission 
discussed at length in the Bounce-Back Order, consumer confusion over 
which texting services would offer text-to-911 would undermine the 
Commission's ability to implement text-to-911 effectively. Similarly, 
the purpose of the CVAA was to expand access to emergency services for 
consumers with disabilities, and if our work is undermined by consumer 
confusion, we will not be able to fulfill our statutory grant of 
authority pursuant to the CVAA. As applied here, extending text-to-911 
requirements to interconnected text providers as well as CMRS providers 
will support the widespread availability of text-to-911 to those who 
are deaf, hard of hearing, or speech-disabled, serve to eliminate 
consumer confusion about the reliability of text-to-911, and thereby 
assist the Commission in achieving its mandate under the CVAA. This is 
particularly true in situations where voice calls are dangerous, 
impractical, or simply incapable of being transmitted, or where time is 
too critical to require a consumer to determine whether or how she 
might rely on an alternative CMRS voice or texting capability.
    71. We also find that adopting text-to-911 rules is reasonably 
ancillary to the purpose of 911-related statutes. Ensuring that 
consumers can rely on increasingly popular and data-rich texting 
applications to obtain access to 911 service promotes the availability 
and effectiveness of 911 service consistent with the central purpose of 
these statutes.
    72. We do not interpret these sources of authority as granting the 
Commission unbounded authority to adopt regulations. Our exercise of 
ancillary authority here falls squarely within the core of general 
grant of jurisdiction in Title I with respect to ``all interstate and 
foreign communication by wire and radio.'' This limited but important 
context is one where Congress has consistently acted and directed the 
Commission to ensure that consumers using advanced services, including 
those provided by entities that the Commission has not classified as 
telecommunications carriers, and particularly those who are deaf, hard 
of hearing, or speech disabled, can reach emergency services. Indeed, 
one of the principal purposes of the Commission, as set forth by 
Congress in section 1 of the Communications Act, 47 U.S.C. 151, is to 
ensure that we exercise our substantive grants of authority in a manner 
that ``promot[es] safety of life of property.'' We thus find that the 
exercise of our authority in this case is not only directly authorized 
by but also reasonably ancillary to the effective performance of our 
statutorily mandated responsibilities. We find that we could not fully 
realize those responsibilities if consumers do not view text-to-911 as 
a reliable means of reaching 911.

Task Force on Optimal PSAP Architecture

    73. We find that further examination is needed, in cooperation with 
state, local, and tribal jurisdictions and their

[[Page 55378]]

associated PSAPs, on the current structure and architecture of our 
nation's PSAPs. The large number of PSAPs, now nearing 6800, 
potentially increases the costs and resources needed from the 
communications industry, public safety community, and state, local, and 
tribal governments. In particular, we are interested in determining 
whether additional consolidation of PSAP facilities and architecture 
would promote greater efficiency of operations, safety of life, and 
cost containment, while retaining needed integration with local first 
responder dispatch and support. This issue is especially timely as 
public safety communications systems are converting to NG911 in the 
coming years. It is also important because a number of states continue 
to divert critical E911 funding from its intended purposes to unrelated 
functions. Specifically, the most recent annual FCC report to Congress 
on this issue found that four states are still diverting such funds 
and, equally troubling, one state and four territories declined to even 
respond to our inquiry.
    74. CSRIC last updated the Commission on this subject with the 
issuance of its 2010 final report on public safety consolidation, CSRIC 
I, WG 1-A, Final Report--Key Findings and Effective Practices for PSAP 
Consolidation (rel. Oct. 2010), available at https://transition.fcc.gov/pshs/docs/csric/CSRIC-1A-Report.pdf. In its report, CSRIC's working 
group stated that ``[r]ecent trends toward regional, multi-
jurisdictional and multi-disciplinary solutions with standards based 
shared systems have demonstrated that they can lead to technical, 
operational, and financial advantages for the participants.'' While 
that report is useful, a new review and updated data, given the 
numerous changes in technology, would be informative. Accordingly, we 
direct PSHSB, consistent with any and all requirements of the Federal 
Advisory Committee Act, to convene a task force that includes 
representatives from state, local and tribal authorities and the 
currently constituted CSRIC to study and report findings and 
recommendations on the following issues by April 30, 2015: (1) Optimal 
PSAP system and network configuration in terms of emergency 
communications efficiency, performance, and operations functionality; 
(2) cost projections for conversion to and annual operation of PSAPs 
that incorporate such optimal system design; (3) comparative cost 
projections for annual maintenance of all existing PSAPs annually and 
upgrading them to NG911; (4) recommendations on ways to prevent states 
from diverting E911 funding to other purposes; and (5) whether states 
that divert E911 funds should be ineligible to participate on various 
FCC councils, committees, and working groups. These recommendations 
will provide a benchmark for the Commission, state, local, and tribal 
authorities, PSAPs and others to compare approaches for improving the 
effectiveness and efficiency of the nation's current and future 911 
system.

Procedural Matters

    75. Accessible Formats. To request materials in accessible formats 
for people with disabilities (braille, large print, electronic files, 
audio format), send an email to fcc504@fcc.gov or call the Consumer & 
Governmental Affairs Bureau at 202-418-0530 (voice), 202-418-0432 
(TTY).
    76. Regulatory Flexibility Act. As required by the Regulatory 
Flexibility Act of 1980, as amended (RFA) the Commission incorporated 
an Initial Regulatory Flexibility Analysis (IRFA) of the possible 
significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities 
by the policies and rules proposed in the Second Further Notice of 
Proposed Rulemaking (Second Further Notice). No comments were filed 
addressing the IRFA regarding the issues raised in the Second Further 
Notice. Because the Commission amends the rules in this Second Report 
and Order, the Commission has included this Final Regulatory 
Flexibility Analysis (FRFA). This present FRFA conforms to the RFA.

Final Regulatory Flexibility Analysis

A. Need for, and Objectives of, the Adopted Rules

    77. 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 CMRS provider-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.
    78. In this Second Report and Order, we adopt rules that set 
timeframes that will enable Americans to send text messages to 911 
(text-to-911) across platforms. Specifically, we require all CMRS 
providers and providers of interconnected text messaging applications 
(collectively, ``covered text providers'') to be able to support the 
ability of consumers to send text messages to 911 no later than 
December 31, 2014. We also require that covered text providers must 
begin delivering text-to-911 service by June 30, 2015, or within six 
months from the date it receives a valid PSAP request, whichever is 
later, unless the PSAP and covered text provider mutually agree to an 
alternate timeframe and the covered text provider timely notifies the 
Commission within 30 days of the agreement.
    79. Our requirements build on the voluntary commitment by the four 
largest CMRS providers--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 
requirements we adopt here are largely consistent with the Carrier-
NENA-APCO Agreement.
    80. Establishing timeframes for the addition of text capability to 
the 911 system for all consumers will vastly enhance the system's 
accessibility for over 40 million Americans who are deaf, hard of 
hearing, or speech-disabled. 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.
    81. Our 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. The four major CMRS providers have 
been using SMS-based text for their initial text-to-911

[[Page 55379]]

deployments, and we expect other initial deployments to be similarly 
SMS-based.
    82. 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 
CMRS provider. 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 Report and Order, we ensure 
that consumers have access to the same text-to-911 capabilities on the 
full array of interconnected texting applications that they use 
ubiquitously within a reasonable timeframe.

B. Summary of Significant Issues Raised by Public Comments in Response 
to the IRFA

    83. No commenter raised issues in response to the IRFA included in 
the Second Further Notice. The Commission concludes that the mandates 
adopted here provide covered text providers and PSAPs with a sufficient 
measure of flexibility to account for technical and cost-related 
concerns. In the event that small entities face unique circumstances 
that restrict their ability to comply with the Commission's rules, the 
Commission can address them through the waiver process. The Commission 
has determined that implementing text-to-911 is technically feasible 
and the cost of implementation is small.

C. Description and Estimate of the Number of Small Entities to Which 
the Adopted Rules Would Apply

    84. 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 SBA. Below, we 
describe and estimate the number of small entity licensees that may be 
affected by the adopted rules.
    85. Small Businesses, Small Organizations, and Small Governmental 
Jurisdictions. Our action may, over time, affect small entities that 
are not easily categorized at present. The Commission's current Master 
PSAP registry indicates that there are more than 6,000 active PSAPs, 
which we conclude fall into this category. Should a PSAP choose to 
implement text-to-911, they will be affected by the adopted rules. We 
emphasize, however, that PSAPs retain the choice of whether to 
implement text-to-911; any PSAP that chooses not to implement text-to-
911 will not be affected by the adopted rules. As of 2009, small 
businesses represented 99.9% of the 27.5 million businesses in the 
United States, according to the SBA. Additionally, 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, counties, towns, 
townships, villages, school districts, or special districts, with a 
population of less than fifty thousand.'' Census Bureau data for 2007 
indicate that there were 89,527 governmental jurisdictions in the 
United States. We estimate that, of this total, as many as 88,761 
entities may qualify as ``small governmental jurisdictions.'' Thus, we 
estimate that most governmental jurisdictions are small.
    85. Other Small Entities to Which the Adopted Rules Would Apply. 
The following small entities may be affected by the adopted rules: 
Wireless Telecommunications Carriers (except satellite); Incumbent 
Local Exchange Carriers (Incumbent LECs); Competitive Local Exchange 
Carriers (Competitive LECs), Competitive Access Providers (CAPs), 
Shared-Tenant Service Providers, and Other Local Service Providers; 
Broadband Personal Communications Service; Narrowband Personal 
Communications Services; Rural Radiotelephone Service; Wireless 
Communications Services; 220 MHz Radio Service--Phase I Licensees; 220 
MHz Radio Service--Phase II Licensees; Wireless Telephony; Satellite 
Telecommunications Providers; Radio and Television Broadcasting and 
Wireless Communications Equipment Manufacturing; Semiconductor and 
Related Device Manufacturing; Software Publishers; Internet Service 
Providers; Internet Publishing and Broadcasting and Web Search Portals; 
All Other Information Services; and All Other Telecommunications.
    The full Final Regulatory Flexibility Analysis (FRFA), which 
includes descriptions and estimates of these small entities, can be 
found in the Second Report and Order, available at https://www.fcc.gov/document/fcc-adopts-text-911-rules. The Second Report and Order and its 
accompanying FRFA can also be accessed through the Commission's 
Electronic Document Management System (EDOCS) by searching for FCC No. 
14-118.

D. Description of Projected Reporting, Recordkeeping, and Other 
Compliance Requirements for Small Entities

    86. In the Second Report and Order, the Commission amends its Part 
20 rules to require CMRS providers and interconnected text providers 
(collectively, ``covered text providers'') to be capable of supporting 
text-to-911 by December 31, 2014. Specifically, the rules apply to all 
CMRS providers subject to the Commission's Part 20 rules as well as all 
providers of interconnected text messaging services that enable 
consumers to send text messages to and receive text messages from all 
or substantially all text-capable U.S. telephone numbers, including 
through the use of applications downloaded or otherwise natively 
installed on a mobile device. Covered text providers must commence 
delivery of 911 text messages to requesting PSAPs by June 30, 2015, or 
six months from the date of receipt of a valid PSAP request, whichever 
is later. Covered text providers and PSAPs may mutually agree to an 
alternate implementation timeframe, but covered text providers must 
notify the Commission within 30 days of such agreement. A PSAP may make 
a valid request for text-to-911 service by certifying that it is 
``text-ready,'' and we encourage PSAPs to register in the Commission's 
PSAP registry once it is available. Covered text providers may utilize 
a messaging platform that can support multiple addresses or enable 
sending images and video, but they must ensure that these features do 
not interfere with the delivery of the text portion of the message to a 
PSAP.
    87. The Second Report and Order also requires covered text 
providers to route text messages to the appropriate PSAP using coarse 
location information or some other equivalent means. In the event a 
covered text provider implements a text-to-911 solution that does not 
access the CMRS network--and therefore cannot provide coarse location--
the covered text provider

[[Page 55380]]

must obtain sufficient location information through some other means to 
route the text to the appropriate PSAP. All covered text providers 
using device-based location information that requires consumer 
activation must clearly inform consumers that they must grant 
permission for the text messaging application to access the wireless 
device's location information in order to enable text-to-911. If a 
consumer does not permit this access, then the application must provide 
an automated bounce-back message.
    88. We anticipate that many interconnected text providers will 
choose the CMRS network-based delivery model for text-to-911, at least 
as an interim measure. In order to facilitate the use of this method, 
the Second Report and Order requires that CMRS providers shall allow 
access to capabilities necessary for transmission of text-to-911 
communications by other covered text providers. However, CMRS providers 
need not reconfigure any SMS text-to-911 platforms in order to 
facilitate other covered text providers' use of their networks, and the 
obligation to allow access to CMRS networks is limited to the extent 
that the CMRS providers offers SMS. A covered text provider selecting 
the CMRS network-based solution must ensure that its service is 
technically compatible with the CMRS provider's SMS networks and 
devices, and in conformance with any applicable technical standards.
    89. The Second Report and Order also states that CMRS providers may 
receive commercially reasonable compensation for the delivery of 911 
text messages, but it does not require CMRS providers to allow text-to-
911 traffic over their SMS networks from any end users that do not have 
an underlying SMS plan. All covered text providers using the CMRS 
network-based delivery model for text-to-911 must clearly inform 
consumers that, absent an SMS plan with the consumer's underlying CMRS 
provider, the covered text provider may be unable to deliver 911 text 
messages. The Second Report and Order also permits CMRS providers to 
migrate away from SMS platforms in favor of newer technologies. CMRS 
providers are not required to maintain the SMS network for use by other 
covered text providers, but if they choose to migrate to another 
technology, they must provide reasonable advance notice to the affected 
covered text providers about not less than 90 days prior to the 
migration.
    90. The compliance requirements in the Second Report and Order will 
apply to all entities in the same manner. The Commission believes that 
applying the same rules equally to all entities in this context is 
necessary to alleviate potential consumer confusion from adopting 
different rules for different covered text providers. The Commission 
finds, and the record in this proceeding confirms, that the costs and/
or administrative burdens associated with the rules will not unduly 
burden small entities.
    91. Based on the record, CMRS providers and interconnected text 
providers have agreed that these changes are technically and 
financially feasible, with relatively small costs to the covered text 
provider. Compliance costs for interconnected text providers will be 
small, requiring only minor coding and/or server changes. Additionally, 
covered text providers can operate using the ATIS/TIA J-STD-110, which 
serves to reduce potential administrative, legal and technical costs of 
compliance.

E. Steps Taken To Minimize Significant Economic Impact on Small 
Entities, and Significant Alternatives Considered

    92. 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) an exemption 
from coverage of the rule, or any part thereof, for small entities.''
    93. Based on the Commission's review of the record, the Commission 
finds that it is practicable for all CMRS providers, including small 
and rural CMRS providers, to implement text-to-911 by December 31, 2014 
without incurring unduly burdensome costs. The record also reflects 
that it is not unduly burdensome for interconnected text providers to 
implement text-to-911 in the same timeframe. The Second Report and 
Order recognizes the technical and operational issues that must be 
addressed before commencing text-to-911 service, and allows six months 
from the date of a valid PSAP request for covered text providers to 
achieve text-to-911 capability.
    94. In considering the record received in response to the Second 
Further Notice, the Commission has examined alternatives to ease the 
burden on small and rural CMRS providers. These alternatives included 
extending the implementation deadline, or exempting small and rural 
CMRS providers. However, the record in this proceeding indicates that 
the technical and financial costs for implementing text-to-911 are not 
unduly burdensome. The rules adopted in the Second Report and Order 
also allow for alternate timeframes if both the PSAP and the covered 
text provider mutually agree to the adjusted timeline and the covered 
text provider notifies the Commission within 30 days of the agreement, 
which should alleviate the burdens of smaller covered text providers. 
The Commission has also examined ways in which the burden may be eased 
for interconnected text providers, including extending the 
implementation deadline. The Second Report and Order also describes a 
PSAP database, to be administered by the Commission, in which covered 
text providers can identify which PSAPs are ``text ready,'' thereby 
reducing the amount of time and resources that would be dedicated to 
reaching out to PSAPs and handling PSAP requests.
    95. Further, the Second Report and Order contains a detailed Cost-
Benefit Analysis which finds that the life-saving public safety 
benefits of imposing a text-to-911 requirement on covered text 
providers far outweigh the costs of such a rule. Finally, in the event 
that small entities face unique circumstances with respect to these 
rules, such entities may request waiver relief from the Commission. 
Accordingly, the Commission finds that it has discharged its duty to 
consider the burdens imposed on small entities.
    96. Paperwork Reduction Analysis. The Second Report and Order 
contains new information collection requirements subject to the 
Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (PRA), Public Law 104-13. It will be 
submitted to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) for review under 
section 3507(d) of the PRA. OMB, the general public, and other Federal 
agencies are invited to comment on the new information collection 
requirements contained in this proceeding.
    97. Congressional Review Act. The Commission will send a copy of 
this Second Report and Order in a report to be sent to Congress and the 
Government Accountability Office pursuant to the Congressional Review 
Act (CRA), see 5 U.S.C. 801(a)(1)(A).

Ordering Clauses

    98. Accordingly, it is ordered, pursuant to sections 1, 2, 4(i), 
4(j), 4(o), 251(e), 303(b), 303(g), 303(r), 316, and 403 of the 
Communications Act of 1934, as amended, 47 U.S.C. 151, 152, 154(i),

[[Page 55381]]

154(j), 154(o), 251(e), 303(b), 303(g), 303(r), 316, 403, and section 4 
of the Wireless Communications and Public Safety Act of 1999, Public 
Law 106-81, sections 101 and 201 of the New and Emerging Technologies 
911 Improvement Act of 2008, Public Law 110-283, and section 106 of the 
Twenty-First Century Communications and Video Accessibility Act of 
2010, Public Law 111-260, 47 U.S.C. 615a, 615a-1, 615b, 615c, that the 
Second Report and Order and Third Further Notice of Proposed Rulemaking 
in PS Docket No. 11-153 and PS Docket No. 10-255 Is Adopted and shall 
become effective thirty (30) days after publication of the text or 
summary thereof in the Federal Register, except for those rules and 
requirements that require approval by the Office of Management and 
Budget (OMB) under the Paperwork Reduction Act, which shall become 
effective after the Commission publishes a notice in the Federal 
Register announcing such approval and the relevant effective date.
    99. 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 and Third Further Notice of 
Proposed Rulemaking, including the Final Regulatory Flexibility 
Analysis and Initial Regulatory Flexibility Analysis, to the Chief 
Counsel for Advocacy of the Small Business Administration.

List of Subjects in 47 CFR Part 20

    Communications common carriers, Communications equipment, Radio.

Federal Communications Commission.
Marlene H. Dortch,
Secretary.

Final Rules

    For the reasons discussed in the preamble, the Federal 
Communications Commission amends 47 CFR part 20 as follows:

PART 20--COMMERCIAL MOBILE RADIO SERVICES

0
1. The authority citation for part 20 is revised to read as follows:


    Authority: 47 U.S.C. 151, 152, 154(i), 201(b), 225, 301, 303(b), 
303(g), 303(r), 316, 403, 615a, 615a-1, 615b, and 47 U.S.C. 615c.


0
2. Section 20.18 is amended by adding paragraphs (n)(9) through (11) to 
read as follows:


Sec.  20.18  911 Service.

* * * * *
    (n) * * *
    (9) 911 text message. A 911 text message is a message, consisting 
of text characters, sent to the short code ``911'' and intended to be 
delivered to a PSAP by a covered text provider, regardless of the text 
messaging platform used.
    (10) Delivery of 911 text messages. (i) 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 obtain location information sufficient to 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 covered 
text provider of that change. All covered text providers using device-
based location information that requires consumer activation must 
clearly inform consumers that they must grant permission for the text 
messaging application to access the wireless device's location 
information in order to enable text-to-911. If a consumer does not 
permit this access, the covered text provider's text application must 
provide an automated bounce-back message as set forth in paragraph 
(n)(3) of this section.
    (ii) Covered text providers must begin routing all 911 text 
messages to a PSAP by June 30, 2015, or within six months of the PSAP's 
valid request for text-to-911 service, whichever is later, unless an 
alternate timeframe is agreed to by both the PSAP and the covered text 
provider. The covered text provider must notify the Commission of the 
dates and terms of the alternate timeframe within 30 days of the 
parties' agreement.
    (iii) Valid Request means that:
    (A) The requesting PSAP is, and certifies that it is, technically 
ready to receive 911 text messages in the format requested;
    (B) The appropriate local or state 911 service governing authority 
has specifically authorized the PSAP to accept and, by extension, the 
covered text provider to provide, text-to-911 service; and
    (C) The requesting PSAP has provided notification to the covered 
text provider that it meets the foregoing requirements. Registration by 
the PSAP in a database made available by the Commission in accordance 
with requirements established in connection therewith, or any other 
written notification reasonably acceptable to the covered text 
provider, shall constitute sufficient notification for purposes of this 
paragraph.
    (iv) The requirements set forth in paragraphs (n)(10)(i) through 
(iii) of this section do not apply to in-flight text messaging 
providers, MSS providers, or IP Relay service providers, or to 911 text 
messages that originate from Wi-Fi only locations or that are 
transmitted from devices that cannot access the CMRS network.
    (11) Access to SMS networks for 911 text messages. To the extent 
that CMRS providers offer Short Message Service (SMS), they shall allow 
access by any other covered text provider to the capabilities necessary 
for transmission of 911 text messages originating on such other covered 
text providers' application services. Covered text providers using the 
CMRS network to deliver 911 text messages must clearly inform consumers 
that, absent an SMS plan with the consumer's underlying CMRS provider, 
the covered text provider may be unable to deliver 911 text messages. 
CMRS providers may migrate to other technologies and need not retain 
SMS networks solely for other covered text providers' 911 use, but must 
notify the affected covered text providers not less than 90 days before 
the migration is to occur.

[FR Doc. 2014-21851 Filed 9-15-14; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6712-01-P