Emergency Alert System; Wireless Emergency Alerts, 86824-86837 [2023-27236]

Agencies

• FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION

[Federal Register Volume 88, Number 240 (Friday, December 15, 2023)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 86824-86837]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2023-27236]



[[Page 86824]]

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

FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION

47 CFR Part 10

[PS Docket Nos. 15-94, 15-91; FCC 23-88; FR ID 189576]


Emergency Alert System; Wireless Emergency Alerts

AGENCY: Federal Communications Commission.

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: In this document, the Federal Communications Commission 
(Commission) adopts rules for commercial mobile service providers that 
have elected to participate in the Wireless Emergency Alert system 
(WEA) (Participating CMS Providers) to support WEA messages in the 13 
most commonly spoken languages in the U.S. as well as English and 
American Sign Language. Participating CMS Providers are to support this 
expanded multilingual alerting by enabling mobile devices to display 
message templates that will be pre-installed and stored on the mobile 
device. The Commission also directs its Public Safety and Homeland 
Security Bureau to seek comment on various implementation details of 
the multilingual alerting requirements and future expansion to 
additional languages. In addition, to help personalize emergency 
alerts, the Commission requires participating wireless providers to 
support the inclusion of maps in WEA messages that show the alert 
recipient's location relative to the geographic area where the 
emergency is occurring, and establishes a Commission-hosted database to 
provide the public with easy-to-access information on WEA availability. 
Wireless providers will be required to supply information on whether 
they participate in WEA and, if so, the extent of WEA availability in 
their service area and on the mobile devices that they sell. Last, to 
support more effective WEA performance and public awareness, the 
amended rules enable alerting authorities to send two local WEA tests 
per year that the public receives by default, provided that the 
alerting authority takes steps to ensure that the public is aware that 
the test is, in fact, only a test.

DATES: Effective December 15, 2026, except for the amendments to 47 CFR 
10.210(b), (c), and (d)), 10.350(d), 10.480(a) and (b), and 10.500(e), 
which are delayed indefinitely. The Federal Communications Commission 
will announce the effective dates of the delayed amendments by 
publishing documents in the Federal Register.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For further information regarding this 
Further Notice, please contact Michael Antonino, Cybersecurity and 
Communications Reliability Division, Public Safety and Homeland 
Security Bureau, (202) 418-7965, or by email to 
[email protected]. For additional information concerning the 
Paperwork Reduction Act information collection requirements contained 
in this document, send an email to [email protected] or contact Nicole 
Ongele, Office of Managing Director, Performance and Program 
Management, 202-418-2991, or by email to [email protected].

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This is a summary of the Commission's Third 
Report and Order, FCC 23-88, adopted on October 19, 2023, and released 
on October 20, 2023. The full text of this document is available by 
downloading the text from the Commission's website at: https://docs.fcc.gov/public/attachments/FCC-23-88A1.pdf.
    This Third Report and Order addresses Wireless Emergency Alerts 
(WEA). Though this Third Report and Order is not specifically changing 
our Part 11 rules regarding the Emergency Alert System (EAS), the 
document references both the EAS and WEA dockets and we have 
historically sought comment on WEA in both dockets, including the 
underlying FNPRM and NPRM to which this Third Report and Order 
connects. The rules adopted here amend only Part 10 concerning WEA. We 
will consider improvements for the Emergency Alert System (EAS)--to 
include support for multilingual EAS--in a forthcoming item that will 
amend Part 11 of our rules.

Final Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 Analysis

    This document contains new and modified 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 will be invited to comment 
on the new or modified information collection requirements contained in 
this proceeding. In addition, we note that pursuant to the Small 
Business Paperwork Relief Act of 2002, Public Law 107-198, see 44 
U.S.C. 3506(c)(4), we previously sought specific comment on how the 
Commission might further reduce the information collection burden for 
small business concerns with fewer than 25 employees.

Synopsis

I. Third Report and Order

    1. It is essential that the public be able to receive in accessible 
language and format WEA Messages that are intended for them. It is also 
important that those who initiate these messages and those who rely 
upon them can access information about WEA's availability and 
performance. Through the requirements the Commission adopts in the 
Third Report and Order, the Commission intends to help the millions of 
people with access and functional needs, including people who primarily 
speak a language other than English or Spanish and those with 
disabilities, better understand and take protective actions in response 
to WEA messages; improve people's ability to understand and quickly 
take protective actions in response to WEAs that they receive; and 
provide the nation's alerting authorities with the information they 
need to plan for resilient communications during disasters and use WEA 
with confidence and foreknowledge. These requirements will meaningfully 
improve WEA. The Commission also recognizes that even more can be done 
and to that end, will consider improvements for the Emergency Alert 
System (EAS)--to include support for multilingual EAS--in a forthcoming 
item.

A. Making WEA Available to Millions of People Who Primarily Speak a 
Language Other Than English or Spanish and Accessible to People With 
Disabilities

    2. To expand WEA's reach to millions of people who primarily speak 
a language other than English or Spanish who may not be able to 
understand the potentially life-saving alerts they receive, the 
Commission requires Participating CMS Providers to support multilingual 
WEA through the use of Alert Messages translated into the most common 
languages (referred to in this item as ``templates''). These templates 
would be pre-installed and stored on the mobile device itself. As 
described below, where an alerting authority chooses to send a 
multilingual Alert Message, the WEA-capable mobile device must be able 
to extract and display the relevant template in the subscriber's 
default language, if available. See, 47 CFR 10.500(e). If the default 
language for a WEA-capable mobile device is set to a language that is 
not among those supported by templates, the WEA-capable device must 
present the English-language version of the Alert Message.
    3. The weight of the record supports expanding WEA's language 
capabilities

[[Page 86825]]

through the use of templates. Some alerting authorities are already 
using templates to deliver alerts in multiple languages. The approach 
the Commission adopts in the Third Report and Order improves upon other 
available methods of multilingual WEA messages (e.g., through the use 
of an embedded reference that takes the recipient to a website with 
content in multiple languages), because the multilingual Alert Message 
will be displayed to the user by default.
    4. The implementation of multilingual WEA through the use of 
templates, as described in the Third Report and Order, integrates two 
features that are available today. First, it requires the establishment 
of templates. Letters from some of the largest Participating CMS 
Providers indicate that implementing template-based WEAs in multiple 
languages is feasible. Second, it requires templates to be stored in 
the device and triggered upon receipt of a WEA. As the Commission noted 
in the 2023 WEA FNPRM, Wireless Emergency Alerts, Amendments to Part 11 
of the Commission's Rules Regarding the Emergency Alert System, PS 
Docket No. 15-91, 15-94, Further Notice of Proposed Rulemaking, FCC 23-
30 (rel. Apr. 21, 2023) (2023 WEA FNPRM), through a partnership between 
ShakeAlert and Google, Android mobile devices are already able to 
display alert content pre-installed on mobile devices upon receipt of a 
signal from a network of seismic sensors. This application demonstrates 
how a template can be ``activated'' by a data element included in Alert 
Message metadata, which would prompt the mobile device to display the 
relevant template alert message in the mobile device's default language 
chosen by the consumer.
    5. Promoting multilingual WEA through templates will enhance the 
flexibility that alerting authorities have in communicating with their 
communities. There may be times where the benefit of delivering an 
Alert Message to the public as soon as possible outweighs the need for 
additional context that freeform text could provide. The Commission 
does not require alerting authorities to use templates, but require CMS 
Providers to support them should alerting authorities wish to use them 
at their discretion. The Commission defers to alerting authorities on 
how best to utilize these new WEA functions for their communities.
    6. The Commission further declines to require Participating CMS 
Providers to implement multilingual WEA using machine translation at 
this time. The Commission will continue to examine the feasibility of 
machine translation technologies and its application in connection with 
multilingual alerting.
    7. As a baseline, the Commission requires Participating CMS 
Providers' WEA-capable mobile devices support templates in the 13 most 
commonly spoken languages in the United States, based on U.S. Census 
data, in addition to English templates. These languages include: 
Spanish, Chinese, Tagalog, Vietnamese, Arabic, French, Korean, Russian, 
Haitian Creole, German, Hindi, Portuguese, and Italian. This action is 
consistent with the request of numerous members of Congress who wrote a 
letter urging the Commission to make WEA capable of multilingual 
alerting, noting that, without sending WEAs in languages beyond English 
and Spanish, ``[l]ives are put at stake without this crucial 
information about impending inclement weather events, stay-at-home 
orders, AMBER alerts, and other emergencies.'' The Commission agrees 
that that the 13 languages for which we require support today would 
help make WEA content available to people who primarily speak a 
language other than English or Spanish for the first time, and that 
this change will most directly benefit those who have historically been 
underserved by WEA. The Commission believes that this action will 
mitigate a risk observed by researchers that individuals who primarily 
speak a language other than English or Spanish may not understand 
evacuation notices or instructions, raising the risk of harm.
    8. In addition, the Commission requires Participating CMS 
Providers' WEA-capable mobile devices to support templates in ASL. The 
Commission received a robust record demonstrating that ASL templates 
would increase the effectiveness and accessibility of WEAs for people 
who are deaf and hard of hearing who use ASL. The Commission believes 
there is no adequate substitute for ASL for many individuals in the 
deaf and hard of hearing community, and unlike the other languages for 
which we require support, however, ASL is not a language to which a 
mobile device can be set. Because of this, the Commission requires 
Participating CMS Providers' WEA-capable mobile devices to provide 
subscribers with the ability to opt-in to receive ASL alerts. The 
Commission recognizes that, unlike textual translations, English 
language Alert Messages would be translated into ASL by video. To avoid 
the risk that ASL templates could unnecessarily consume mobile device 
resources for individuals that do not need them, the rules allow the 
user's voluntary selection of the option to receive WEAs in ASL to 
trigger the mobile device to download ASL templates to the device. WEA-
capable mobile devices need not be sold with ASL templates pre-
installed on them, so long as the templates are available to download 
in the manner described here
    9. A consumer's choice to receive Alert Message templates in ASL 
should override the preferred language setting and the Alert Message 
should be extracted in ASL. This approach is necessary to give meaning 
to the consumer's choice. Template-based ASL Alert Messages would 
function like other template-based Alert Messages in other respects.
    10. The Commission directs the Public Safety and Homeland Security 
Bureau (Bureau) to develop the specific implementation parameters for 
template-based multilingual alerting. In this regard, the Third Report 
and Order directs the Bureau to propose and seek comment on a set of 
emergency alert messages for support via template as they would be 
written in English, the 13 most commonly spoken languages in the U.S. 
(Spanish, Chinese, Tagalog, Vietnamese, Arabic, French, Korean, 
Russian, Haitian Creole, German, Hindi, Portuguese, and Italian), and 
ASL. In identifying this set of emergency alert messages for support 
via templates, the Bureau should seek comment on which messages are 
most commonly used by alerting authorities, as the 2023 WEA FNPRM 
contemplated, as well as those which may be most time-sensitive and 
thus critical for immediate comprehension. The Third Report and Order 
also directs the Bureau to seek comment on whether this functionality 
can be made available on all devices.
    11. The Third Report and Order further directs the Bureau to seek 
comment on whether the English version of the alert should be displayed 
in addition to the multilingual version of the alert, and whether 
templates can be customizable to incorporate event-specific 
information. The Commission recognizes commenters in the record who 
suggest that the multilingual template-based alert be displayed 
together with the English-language alert that includes additional 
details, to promote a fuller understanding of the nature of the 
emergency. Through the incorporation of event-specific information into 
templates, we also seek to address concerns that static template-based 
alerts may not be flexible enough to be useful, and would reduce an 
alerting authority's ability to create regionally and culturally 
relevant messages. The Third Report and Order directs the Bureau to 
assess and determine the parameters for what is

[[Page 86826]]

feasible and would best serve the public interest in this regard.
    12. The Third Report and Order also directs the Bureau to seek 
comment on the costs of supporting additional languages after the 13 we 
identify today, as well as English and ASL. The Commission believes 
that, after the relevant stakeholders standardize and develop the 
technology necessary to support template-based multilingual WEA 
messages, the costs for adding additional language support via this 
process would be negligible, while the countervailing public interest 
benefits would be significant. There may be many large immigrant 
communities nationwide including some whose members have limited 
English proficiency, that are not included in these 13 languages. There 
is general agreement that additional languages should be supported, but 
there are different approaches for identifying those additional 
languages and the record did not coalesce around any particular 
languages or methods. The Third Report and Order directs the Bureau to 
seek comment on the best approach to determine which additional 
languages should be supported and what those languages should be.
    13. If minimally burdensome to implement, the Third Report and 
Order directs the Bureau to designate additional languages--beyond 
English, ASL, and the 13 most commonly spoken languages in the United 
States--that should be supported through templates. The Third Report 
and Order also directs the Bureau to seek comment on the timeframe in 
which these additional languages could be supported. The Commission 
also delegate authority to the Bureau to ask any additional questions 
relating to the development and deployment of template-based 
multilingual alerting that would clarify the technical processes by 
which such alerts would be developed, updated, and delivered.
    14. After an opportunity for comment, the Bureau will publish an 
Order in the Federal Register that establishes the specific 
implementation parameters for template-based multilingual alerting, 
including identification of the final set of emergency messages for 
multilingual WEA support, as well as their accompanying pre-scripted 
templates. By proceeding in this manner, the Commission creates an 
opportunity for interested parties to take an active role in ensuring 
we have selected the correct messages to support through templates and 
that we have accurately translated them. The Third Report and Order 
requires Participating CMS Providers to comply with the requirements to 
support template-based alerting, as well as English, ASL, and the 13 
most common languages (Spanish, Chinese, Tagalog, Vietnamese, Arabic, 
French, Korean, Russian, Haitian Creole, German, Hindi, Portuguese, and 
Italian) within 30 months after the Bureau publishes its Order in the 
Federal Register. The Third Report and Order also directs the Bureau to 
identify the corresponding timeframe for supporting additional 
languages.
    15. The Commission believes that 30 months is reasonable to 
implement the templates for the 13 languages, as well as English and 
ASL. As the Third Report and Order notes, both alert templates and the 
extraction of pre-loaded content on a mobile device to display an alert 
are functionalities that are already in use today. The Commission 
recognizes that additional work is necessary to combine these 
functionalities to support multilingual WEA templates and that 
implementation of this requirement will require updates to standards, 
design development, and deployment efforts. The Commission observes 
that mobile device manufacturers and OS vendors have previously proven 
capable of developing new functionalities for WEA that required 
standards development, design development, and additional deployment 
efforts within 30 months. The Third Report and Order does not adopt all 
the requirements that the 2023 WEA FNPRM proposed, including the 
proposed performance reporting requirements.
    16. Applying the 30-month compliance timeframe to all Participating 
CMS Providers affords sufficient time to comply. Irrespective of 
whether small and rural carriers choose to allocate resources to 
participate in the standards process in which wireless industry has 
routinely engaged to support compliance with the Commission's WEA 
requirements, the record suggests that this process can be completed 
within 12 months and will benefit all Participating CMS Providers 
equally. The remaining 18 months in the 30-month compliance timeframe 
include 12 months for software development and testing and 6 months for 
deployment in regular business cycles. The Commission believes that any 
delays that small and rural carriers may encounter in accessing the 
network equipment or mobile devices needed to support the requirements 
adopted today can be accommodated within the 6-month flexibility that 
we offer to all Participating CMS Providers. In proposing to require 
compliance within 30 months of the rule's publication in the Federal 
Register, the Commission used the same record-supported analysis as it 
has relied upon since 2016. The Third Report and Order also notes that 
the Commission has historically not provided small businesses extra 
time to comply with its WEA rules.
    17. The Commission also agrees that languages should be maintained 
and reassessed to keep pace with evolving communities and technological 
capabilities. The Commission therefore anticipates that, in the years 
to come, as technology evolves and as language needs change, the 
Commission will continue to examine these issues to assess whether 
further adjustments are warranted.
    18. For a multilingual WEA to reach the intended recipient, the 
subscriber must first set the phone to the default language of their 
choice. Raising public awareness about this critical step is an 
important component of ensuring consumers are able to take advantage of 
multilingual alerts. Equally important is helping consumers understand 
how to set a WEA-capable device to a default language that enables them 
to receive multilingual alerts. The Commission encourages all 
stakeholders involved in the distribution of WEA (CMS providers, device 
retailers, alerting authorities, and consumer advocates) to conduct 
outreach to educate the public about setting their WEA-capable devices 
to their preferred language to receive multilingual alerts. The Third 
Report and Order also directs the Bureau to work with the Consumer and 
Governmental Affairs Bureau in creating a consumer guide that helps 
consumers learn about how to set their WEA-enabled devices to their 
preferred language and making the guide available in the 13 languages 
that we are requiring for WEA today and ASL.

B. Integrating Location-Aware Maps Into Alert Messages

    19. To help people personalize threats that potentially affect 
them, the Third Report and Order requires WEA-capable mobile devices to 
support the presentation of Alert Messages that link the recipient to a 
native mapping application on their mobile device to depict the 
recipient's geographic position relative to the emergency incident. The 
map must include the following features: the overall geographic area, 
the contour of the area subject to the emergency alert within that 
geographic area, and the alert recipient's location relative to these 
geographic areas. The Third Report and Order requires this 
functionality only on devices that have access to a mapping 
application, where the Alert Message's target area is specified by a 
circle or

[[Page 86827]]

polygon, and where the device has enabled location services and has 
granted location permissions to its native mapping application.
    20. The record demonstrates a compelling public safety need for WEA 
messages to include location-aware maps. Location-aware maps will 
personalize threats so recipients will more quickly understand whether 
an alert applies to them and hasten protective actions. Providing such 
maps will spur people to take actions to protect their lives and 
property more quickly than they otherwise might, including in 
situations where a timely response can save lives. The Commission also 
agrees with commenters that location-aware maps could mitigate the 
effects of target area overshoot.
    21. The Third Report and Order finds that it is technically 
feasible to present location-aware maps, provided location services are 
enabled and permissions for its use are granted to the native mapping 
application. Notably, the Commission's Communications Security, 
Reliability and Interoperability Council (CSRIC) VIII finds that it is 
technically feasible to integrate location-aware maps into WEA, stating 
that ``if the Alert Area is defined [by a circle or polygon,] the WEA 
text could be displayed on the device along with a map of the Alert 
Area and an indication on the map of the recipient's location.'' 
Further, the Third Report and Order requires this feature only where 
the target area is described as a circle or polygon because, as CSRIC 
VIII noted in its recent report on the feasibility of location-aware 
maps in connection with WEA, pursuant to our rules and relevant 
standards, these are the only target area descriptions that are 
transmitted to mobile devices. Mobile devices will need these target 
area descriptions to graphically depict the Alert Message's target area 
within the native mapping application. Such a mapping capability should 
only be required where location services are enabled and permissions 
for its use are granted to the native mapping application, because most 
modern devices require user permission for locations services to work. 
The Commission defers to industry to specify through the standards 
process exactly how WEA-capable mobile devices may connect the end user 
to the WEA-enabled map. The Third Report and Order only requires that 
Participating CMS Providers' WEA-capable mobile devices clearly present 
the map or the option to access the map concurrent with the Alert 
Message. A few ways this might be achieved are for WEA-capable mobile 
devices to display a WEA-enabled map within the WEA message itself, to 
display a clickable link to a native mapping application within the WEA 
message, or to provide a link via a separate pop-up message that 
directs the user to the WEA-enabled map. No additional information 
would need to be broadcast over CMS Provider infrastructure to enable 
this functionality under any of these approaches. Accordingly, whereas 
the Commission proposed to codify this requirement as an Alert Message 
requirement for Participating CMS Providers, the record shows that the 
only changes needed to effectuate this functionality are in the mobile 
device, so the Third Report and Order codifies it as an equipment 
requirement instead. See Figure 1 below for an example of how a WEA 
location-aware map could look.

[[Page 86828]]

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR15DE23.017

    22. Figure 1 is based on the look and feel of a common native 
mapping application using default settings. The large circle represents 
the Alert Message's geographic target area and the small dot with a 
lighter shaded uncertainty area around it represents the user's 
location. Consumers regularly use the mapping applications in which the 
WEA target areas will be presented and are already familiar with how 
those applications display user location relative to geographic 
features.
    23. The Third Report and Order requires Participating CMS Providers 
to comply with this requirement 36 months from the rule's publication 
in the Federal Register, as proposed. The Commission finds that 36 
months allows more than sufficient time for Participating CMS Providers 
to complete of all necessary steps to make location-aware maps 
available to their subscribers, including technical design, standards 
development, testing, and deployment. No commenter demonstrated that 
compliance in this timeframe would be a technological impossibility. 
Because the Alliance for Telecommunications Industry Solutions (ATIS) 
has already begun this work and the Commission believes this 
requirement is less complex than others the Third Report and Order has 
required to be implemented in similar timeframes, the Commission 
believe that 30 months would be sufficient, however, the Third Report 
and Order grants Participating CMS Providers an additional six months 
to implement mapping to accommodate their concerns.
    24. A WEA-enabled map may not be accessible to screen readers, 
which means the map may not be useful to blind and low vision 
individuals. To ensure that this mapping capability is accessible to as 
many people as possible and that the inclusion of maps enhances the 
effectiveness of WEA, the Third Report and Order encourages alerting 
authorities to continue to include a text-based description of the 
Alert Message's target area in their Alert Message. This is of service 
to a broad range of users, including those individuals who choose not 
to enable location services or grant location permissions to their 
device's native mapping application, or those who use legacy devices 
without such an application. This will contribute to the overall 
clarity of the Alert Message and enable those with vision impairments 
and other access and function needs to understand the geographic area 
affected by an emergency by using screen readers to understand the 
Alert Message's text. The Commission also expects industry to consult 
with mobile accessibility experts in the process of standardizing and 
developing this functionality to determine whether there are advances 
in technology that would allow location information in the map, as well 
as the user's location, to be accessible to screen readers.

C. WEA Performance and Public Awareness Testing

    25. To allow alerting authorities to develop a better understanding 
of how WEA operates within their unique jurisdictions and circumstances 
and to engage in important public awareness exercises, the Third Report 
and Order requires Participating CMS Providers to support up to two 
end-to-end WEA tests, per county (or county equivalent),

[[Page 86829]]

per year, that consumers receive by default. Alerting authorities may 
continue to use any Alert Message classification for these tests. A WEA 
Performance and Public Awareness Test is not a new or discrete Alert 
Message classification. In advance of conducting such a ``WEA 
Performance and Public Awareness Test,'' an alerting authority must do 
the following: (1) conduct outreach and notify the public in advance of 
the planned WEA test and that no emergency is, in fact, occurring; (2) 
include in its test message that the alert is ``only a test''; (3) 
coordinate the test among Participating CMS Providers that serve the 
geographic area targeted by the test, State, local, and Tribal 
emergency authorities, relevant State Emergency Communications 
Committees (SECCs), and first responder organizations and (4) provide 
notification to the public in widely accessible formats that the test 
is only a test and is not a warning about an actual emergency. 
Participating CMS Providers and alerting authorities should consider 
notifying domestic violence support organizations, so that these 
organizations can in turn advise those at risk who may have secret 
phones to turn off their phones in advance of the test. The Third 
Report and Order observes that these conditions also attend alerting 
authorities' conduct of EAS ``Live Code'' Tests, which the public 
receives by default. Commenters state that these conditions are also 
reasonable to apply in the WEA context. Permitting alerting authorities 
to conduct limited WEA Performance and Public Awareness Testing as a 
matter of course will boost alerting authority and consumer confidence 
in WEA, allow alerting authorities to determine if the communications 
tools they wish to use, such as website hyperlinks embedded in WEA 
messages, will function as intended when needed, and provide WEA 
stakeholders with a way to assess Participating CMS Providers' 
performance of WEA. WEA Performance and Public Awareness Tests will 
also allow alerting authorities to raise awareness about the types of 
disasters to which a region is susceptible and provide alerting 
authorities with the ability to verify how changes in wireless 
providers' service offerings affect the local availability of WEA. By 
making it easier for alerting authorities to conduct effective WEA 
tests, this action will make WEA more effective overall.
    26. The Third Report and Order limits the number of WEA Performance 
and Public Awareness Tests that Participating CMS Providers must 
support each year by county or county equivalent (for example, by 
Tribal land), rather than by alerting authority, as proposed. 
Incidental overshoot into a county due to another county's test does 
not count against the number of tests a county is allowed to conduct 
that intentionally cover that county.
    27. However, limiting the number of permissible tests by alerting 
authority may be insufficient to mitigate the risk of alerting fatigue 
because people in counties over which alerting authorities have 
overlapping jurisdictions could receive a large number of additional 
WEA tests each year. The Third Report and Order recognizes that public-
facing tests can potentially result in consumers opting out of WEA or 
diminish the perceived urgency of responding to emergency alerts. The 
outreach that the Third Report and Order requires alerting authorities 
to undertake in advance of issuing a WEA Performance and Public 
Awareness Test also helps to address commenters' concerns about alert 
fatigue. The Third Report and Order distinguishes the negative affect 
that erroneous WEA tests can have on public confidence in WEA from WEA 
Performance and Public Awareness Tests issued pursuant to the 
requirements adopted today. Alerting authorities have the discretion 
and judgment to test WEA in a way that serves the interests of their 
communities.
    28. With these revisions, the Commission removes regulatory 
obstacles to WEA performance testing and reduce time and cost burdens 
on alert originators by eliminating the need to obtain a waiver. Today, 
alerting authorities may conduct end-to-end tests of the WEA system 
only using a State/Local WEA Test, which the public does not receive by 
default. Instead, only those people who affirmatively opt in to receive 
State/Local WEA tests will receive them. Alerting authorities currently 
must obtain a waiver to conduct WEA tests that the public receives by 
default, which can be cumbersome and place an unnecessary 
administrative burden on alerting authorities and CMS Providers. By 
doing away with this paperwork requirement, the Third Report and Order 
enables alerting authorities to more easily access this important tool.
    29. The Commission's experience with ``Live Code'' EAS tests over 
the years suggests that two WEA Performance and Public Awareness Tests 
per year is sufficient to meet alerting authorities' public safety 
objectives and that the preconditions pursuant to which they are issued 
are effective at limiting the potential for public confusion. The 
Commission has found that effective public awareness testing helps the 
public to understand how to respond to WEAs in the event of an actual 
emergency. Verizon states that public-facing tests can be a valuable 
public education tool. Alert originators who wish to conduct additional 
testing may continue to utilize the State/Local WEA test code, which 
allows alert originators to send test messages only to those who 
proactively opt in to receive them. As the Commission noted in the 2023 
WEA FNPRM, the Commission continues to believe that State/Local WEA 
Tests are valuable tools for system readiness testing and proficiency 
training. To the extent State/Local WEA Tests are used for proficiency 
training and alerting authorities' system checks, the fact that the 
public does not receive State/Local WEA Tests by default is beneficial.
    30. Alerting authorities can use WEA Performance and Public 
Awareness Tests as a tool to gather data about how WEA works in 
practice, as the Commission has done repeatedly over the years. 
Multiple alerting authorities highlight the importance of receiving 
data about how WEA performs in their local jurisdictions. State/Local 
WEA Tests may be less effective than WEA Performance and Public 
Awareness Tests for this purpose because the amount of data that 
transmission of a State/Local WEA Test can generate is limited by the 
number of people within the target area that have affirmatively opted 
in to receive tests of this type. To further facilitate WEA testing for 
this purpose, the Commission offers alerting authorities access to a 
Commission survey instrument that has proven effective at gathering 
data about WEA's reliability, accuracy, and speed. The Third Report and 
Order directs the Bureau to develop translations of the survey 
materials in the 13 languages we require Participating CMS Providers to 
support for multilingual alerting as well as ASL.
    31. While the Commission continues to evaluate the record on our 
proposed performance reporting requirements, the Commission believe 
that this revision of our testing rules will at least help address 
alerting authorities' immediate needs for WEA performance information 
in their jurisdictions.
    32. The Third Report and Order requires Participating CMS Providers 
to comply with this requirement within 30 days of the Federal Register 
publication of notice that OMB has completed its review of these 
information collection requirements, as proposed. No commenter objected 
to this proposal.

[[Page 86830]]

D. Establishing a WEA Database for Availability Reporting

    33. To equip alerting authorities with information that allows them 
to prepare for reliable emergency communications during disasters, the 
Third Report and Order requires all CMS Providers to refresh their WEA 
election status by filing this information in an electronic database 
hosted by the Commission. The WEA Database will be an interactive 
portal where CMS Providers submit information about the availability of 
WEA on their networks. CMS Providers are required to attest whether 
they participate in WEA ``in whole'' (meaning that they have ``agreed 
to transmit WEA Messages in a manner consistent with the technical 
standards, protocols, procedures, and other technical requirements 
implemented by the Commission in the entirety of their geographic 
service area,'' and that all mobile devices that they offer at the 
point of sale are WEA-capable), ``in part'' (meaning that that they 
offer WEA but the geographic service area condition does not apply, the 
mobile device condition does not apply, or both), or they may elect not 
to participate. Currently, CMS Providers have filed their WEA election 
attestations in a static format in a Commission docket, and many have 
not been updated since they were first filed over a decade ago.
    34. The WEA Database will aggregate WEA participation information 
in one location for ease of access and understanding, increasing its 
utility for emergency planning purposes and for the public. Alerting 
authorities believe they need nuanced information about WEA's 
availability, specifically if WEA is not available in every CMS network 
in their alert and warning jurisdiction or in every geographic area in 
their alert and warning jurisdiction, so that they can make alternative 
arrangements to deliver emergency communications. While the Third 
Report and Order acknowledges that much of the information that the WEA 
Database will contain is already publicly available, the record shows 
that we can significantly increase this information's utility by 
aggregating it in one place. To the extent that this information is 
already publicly available, however, the Commission agrees that it will 
be minimally burdensome to provide. Aggregating this information in the 
WEA Database will also directly benefit consumers. Accordingly, the 
Commission finds that this requirement has potential to help people to 
protect their lives and property by encouraging and promoting the use 
of smartphones as emergency preparedness tools.
    35. The Third Report and Order requires each CMS Provider to 
disclose the entities on behalf of which it files its election, 
irrespective of whether it elects to participate in WEA. WEA election 
attestation disclosures must include (a) the name and WEA participation 
of the CMS Provider; (b) the name and WEA participation status of any 
subsidiary companies on behalf of which the CMS Provider's election is 
filed, including when the subsidiary company is a Mobile Virtual 
Network Operator (MVNO) or wireless reseller wholly-owned or operated 
by the CMS Provider; (c) any ``doing business as'' names under which 
the CMS Provider or its subsidiaries offer wireless service to the 
public. The Commission agrees with the King County Emergency Management 
that disclosing all of the names under which a CMS Provider does 
business is necessary for consumers to meaningfully access the 
information that the WEA Database contains because consumers will often 
only know a corporate entity by the name under which it markets 
service. Similarly, the Commission finds that requiring CMS Providers 
to separately identify its WEA participation status and that of each of 
its subsidiary entities is necessary to allow consumers to understand 
potential nuances in WEA participation among subsidiary entities owned 
or controlled by the same parent company (i.e., when the CMS Provider's 
participation status is different from an entity on behalf of which 
they file (e.g., where one participates in WEA ``in whole'' and the 
other ``in part'')).
    36. To empower alerting authorities with information about where 
WEA is and is not available within their communities, the Third Report 
and Order requires Participating CMS Providers to disclose the 
geographic areas in which they offer WEA. CMS Providers that offer WEA 
in an area that is geographically coextensive with their wireless voice 
coverage area may satisfy this requirement by simply attesting to that 
fact. For each such provider, the Commission will use the Graphical 
Information System (GIS) voice coverage area map that the provider has 
already submitted to the Commission in furtherance of their obligations 
to the Commission's Broadband Data Collection. We agree with AT&T that 
``[t]he use of the voice GIS coverage areas would minimize the 
reporting burden on CMSPs while providing Alert Originators with 
relevant information about the availability of WEA'' because many CMS 
Providers likely already maintain information about their network 
coverage in GIS format. Verizon believes that most Participating CMS 
Providers do offer WEA in a geographic area that is coextensive with 
their wireless voice coverage area. For all such providers, the burden 
of compliance with this requirement will be negligible.
    37. CMS Providers that offer WEA in an area that is not co-
extensive with their wireless voice coverage area must submit a 
geospatial data file compatible with the WEA Database describing their 
WEA coverage area to satisfy this requirement. The Commission disagrees 
with Verizon and AT&T that the information about Participating CMS 
Providers' wireless coverage areas that is publicly available today, 
including via the Commission's National Broadband Map, is sufficient to 
inform alerting authorities' use of WEA. CMS Providers that choose to 
participate in WEA in part do not attest that their WEA service area is 
coextensive with their wireless voice coverage area. Without the 
additional attestation that the WEA Database will elicit, it would 
therefore be unreasonable for an alerting authority to infer that any 
information that these CMS Providers make available about their 
wireless voice coverage area is representative of their WEA service 
area.
    38. The Third Report and Order requires Participating CMS Providers 
to complete their WEA election attestation by submitting to the WEA 
Database a list of all the mobile devices they offer at the point of 
sale, indicating for each such device whether it is WEA-capable. 
Participating CMS Providers will be able to fulfil this obligation by 
listing the devices that they sell and their WEA capabilities via the 
WEA Database's online interface.
    39. Communities can only benefit from the many WEA enhancements 
that the Commission has required Participating CMS Providers to support 
to the extent that deployed mobile devices support them. Creating an 
aggregated account of the WEA capabilities of the mobile devices that 
Participating CMS Providers sell will allow alerting authorities to 
understand the extent to which their communities will benefit from 
messages crafted to take advantage of modern WEA functionalities, such 
as a longer, 360-character version of an Alert Message, a Spanish-
language version of an Alert Message, or clickable hyperlinks. 
According to New York City Emergency Management (NYCEM), this 
information would ``allow for jurisdictions to supplement the alert 
with additional messaging as needed.'' The Association of Public-Safety 
Communications

[[Page 86831]]

Officials, Inc. (APCO) observes that this, in turn, will enable 
alerting authorities to use WEA more effectively as one emergency 
communications tool among many at their disposal. For these reasons, 
the Commission does not share AT&T's concern that ``the Commission's 
WEA Database is likely to suffer from the same underutilization as the 
Commission's database of hearing-aid compatible devices.'' Further, 
whereas the Hearing-Aid Compatible database is primarily intended to be 
consumer-facing (and each consumer is likely most concerned with the 
compatibility of devices that they are personally considering for 
purchase from a particular provider), the publication of the WEA data 
that will be collected in the WEA Database is primarily intended for 
use by alerting authorities that need to have the wholistic view of the 
WEA capabilities of mobile devices in use in their communities that the 
WEA Database will provide.
    40. The Third Report and Order directs the Bureau, in coordination 
with the Wireless Telecommunications Bureau and the Office of Economics 
and Analytics, to implement the requirements of this collection and the 
publication of the data collected. The Third Report and Order further 
directs the Bureau to publish information about how Participating CMS 
Providers will be able to submit their data and to announce when the 
WEA Database is ready to accept filings. The Third Report and Order 
requires all CMS Providers, irrespective of whether they have already 
submitted a WEA election attestation in the WEA election docket, to 
refresh their elections to participate in WEA using the WEA Database 
within 90 days of the Bureau's publication of a public notice 
announcing (1) OMB approval of any new information collection 
requirements or (2) that the WEA Database is ready to accept filings, 
whichever is later.
    41. Most CMS Providers have not updated their election to transmit 
alert messages since filing their initial election in 2008. As a 
result, the Commission is concerned that many WEA elections could now 
be outdated and do not accurately reflect WEA's current availability. 
The Commission agrees with Verizon that ``refreshing service provider 
elections are sensible, given the time that has lapsed since service 
providers submitted their elections over a decade ago and the many 
intervening changes in the wireless industry.'' The Third Report and 
Order also allows Participating CMS Providers to use the WEA Database 
to notify the Commission of any change of their election to participate 
in WEA, whether that change be an increase or decrease in WEA 
participation. Participating CMS Providers must continue to notify new 
and existing subscribers of their withdrawal using the specific 
notification language required by the rules, which triggers a 
subscriber's right to terminate their subscription without penalty or 
early termination fee. A CMS Provider withdraws from WEA if its 
participation status changes from ``in whole'' to ``in part'' or ``no'' 
or if it changes its participation status from ``in part'' to ``no.'' 
The Commission proposed to require compliance with this requirement 
within 30 days of the publication of this public notice. On our own 
initiative, however, the Third Report and Order extends this compliance 
timeframe to 90 days to allow Participating CMS Providers the 60-days' 
notice that our rules require them to provide to their subscribers in 
advance of any withdrawal of their WEA participation. After refreshing 
their elections, the Third Report and Order requires Participating CMS 
Providers to update their WEA election information in the WEA Database 
biannually as with the Commission's Broadband Data Collection (BDC). 
The Third Report and Order directs the Bureau to assess, in 
coordination with the Commission's Wireless Telecommunications Bureau 
and Office of Economics and Analytics the extent to which updates to 
geospatial voice coverage data in the Broadband Data Collection can 
automatically populate in the WEA Database, reducing the potential 
burden of compliance with this requirement. While the FNPRM proposed 
for this information to be updated within 30 days of any change to a 
Participating CMS Provider's WEA coverage areas or the WEA capabilities 
of the mobile devices it sells, the Commission is persuaded that filing 
every 6 months (biannually) is consistent with our BDC requirements 
would accomplish our goals without unduly burdening Participating CMS 
Providers.
    42. The Commission is persuaded not to require Participating CMS 
Providers to provide an account of their roaming partners via the WEA 
Database at this time. The Commission agrees that ``given the 
comprehensive roaming arrangements across the industry, maintaining 
this information would be too unwieldy for individual providers and 
result in confusing, duplicative information for consumers.''
    43. The Commission is also persuaded not to require CMS Providers 
to attest to the WEA capabilities of resellers of their facilities-
based services at this time, unless those resellers are wholly-owned or 
controlled by the CMS Provider. The Third Report and Order agrees that 
Participating CMS Providers should not be required to provide 
information to which they may not have access, such as participation 
information for entities they do not control. The record demonstrates 
that Participating CMS Providers may not have access to WEA 
participation information about Mobile Virtual Network Operators 
(MVNOs) or wireless resellers, even when they have a direct business 
relationship with such entities. According to Verizon, ``[f]acilities-
based providers do not directly control and may not have direct 
visibility into the WEA capabilities of . . . MVNO/resellers' customer 
devices, or all the particular facilities-based providers with whom the 
MVNO/reseller has a business relationship,'' and that ``CMS Providers 
do not ordinarily have visibility into whether a MVNO/reseller's mobile 
devices are WEA-capable or the extent to which an MVNO/reseller is 
provisioning its own wireless RAN facilities, for example through CBRS 
spectrum.''
    44. The Third Report and Order also agrees with Verizon, however, 
that ``it is reasonable and appropriate for MVNO/resellers to publicly 
disclose the WEA capabilities of the devices and the facilities-based 
services they directly offer to their own customers'' because of their 
significant role in the wireless marketplace. The Third Report and 
Order observe that many MVNOs and wireless resellers have elected to 
participate in WEA. The Commission encourages these entities to use the 
WEA Database to keep their WEA election information up to date so that 
alerting authorities and consumers can be informed about the extent to 
which they should expect WEAs to be delivered via their networks.
    45. The Third Report and Order determines that information 
submitted to the WEA Database under the rules does not warrant 
confidential treatment and should be available to the public, as 
proposed. The Commission observes that the WEA availability information 
that Participating CMS Providers would submit to the WEA Database is 
already publicly available, although not aggregated with other WEA 
information. The information that Participating CMS Providers would 
supply to the WEA Database about their WEA coverage area is already 
publicly available through the National Broadband Map, which makes 
available for download the mobile voice coverage areas collected 
through the Broadband Data Collection. Similarly, many Participating 
CMS Providers already make publicly available

[[Page 86832]]

information about the WEA-capable mobile devices that they offer at the 
point of sale. The Commission does not believe that the public 
availability of this information raises any concerns about national 
security or competitive sensitivity, and it would not include any 
personally identifiable information or consumer proprietary network 
information. No commenter objected to this proposal.

E. Legal Authority

    46. The Third Report and Order finds that the Commission has ample 
legal basis to adopt the targeted revisions to the rules adopted that 
are designed to make WEA more accessible to a wider range of people, 
including members of the public who primarily speak a language other 
than English or Spanish and people with disabilities. These amendments 
are grounded in the Commission's authority under the Communications Act 
of 1934, as amended, as well as the WARN Act. The Third Report and 
Order rejects commenters' assertions to the contrary.
    47. The Competitive Carrier Association (CCA) contends that there 
are limits on the Commission's authority to adopt enhancements to the 
system given the timing specifications in the WARN Act and its 
provision that the Commission ``shall have no rulemaking authority 
under this chapter, except as provided in paragraphs (a), (b), (c), and 
(f).'' See 47 U.S.C. 1201(a) and (d).
    48. Consistent with the WARN Act, WEA ``enable[s] commercial mobile 
service alerting capability for commercial mobile service providers 
that voluntarily elect to transmit emergency alerts.'' The WEA system 
is a voluntary program designed to deliver life-saving emergency 
information to the public, and the Commission has worked hard to build 
enhancements into the system since it was created. The system now 
includes embedded links to additional information, Spanish-language 
alerts, and geotargeting designed to help messages reach the intended 
audience that needs the information to act in an emergency. Today's 
improvements, which will help reach audiences that speak additional 
languages or that have disabilities that could limit WEA's utility in 
its present form, build on these prior efforts. Those providers opting 
to support the system must be prepared to accommodate these 
enhancements and to follow the rules that the Commission adopts.
    49. With that important context in mind, the Commission finds no 
merit in CCA's contentions. Contrary to CCA's view, the time periods 
set out in paragraphs (a), (b), and (c) only established deadlines for 
initial actions on the directives described in those provisions. 
Moreover, paragraph (f), which is also referenced in paragraph (d), 
contains no deadline for the Commission's regulatory authority over WEA 
technical testing. Under CCA's interpretation of the statute, the 
Commissoin's WEA rulemaking authority would have lapsed after 
establishing initial rules in 2008; yet this reading is inconsistent 
with Congress's amendment of the WARN Act in 2021, when it directed the 
Commission to examine the feasibility of expanding the reach of 
emergency alerts using new technologies. In fact, a bipartisan group of 
lawmakers representing both chambers of Congress has expressed keen 
interest in continuing to upgrade WEA to support multilingual 
capabilities. Over time, the Commission's enhancements to WEA and 
Congress's recognition of the importance of the system, including those 
enhancements, reflect Congress's endorsement of how the Commission was 
exercising its authority under the WARN Act.
    50. In any event, however, the Commission's legal authority 
concerning emergency alerts is based not solely on the provisions of 
the WARN Act but also on several provisions of the Communications Act, 
which is the backdrop against which Congress adopted the WARN Act. In 
particular, section 303(b) directs the Commission to ``[p]rescribe the 
nature of the service to be rendered'' by licensees. The rule changes 
in the Third Report and Order do just that--lay down rules about the 
nature of services to be rendered by Participating CMS Providers. They 
do so pursuant to the Commission's finding that the ``public 
convenience, interest, or necessity requires'' doing so and in 
fulfillment of the statutory purpose of ``promoting safety of life and 
property through the use of wire and radio communications.'' To the 
extent that section 602(d) of the WARN Act limits the Commission's 
rulemaking authority, it does so only as to the authority granted under 
that Act and does not limit the Commission's preexisting and well-
established authority under the Communications Act. To be clear, the 
phrase ``this chapter'' in 47 U.S.C. 1201 refers to chapter 11 of title 
47 of the United States Code and corresponds to the phrase ``this 
title'' in the original Security and Accountability for Every Port Act, 
which referred to title VI thereof, i.e., the WARN Act.

F. Assessing the Benefits and Costs

    51. The Commission finds that the benefits from the improvements 
made to WEA by the Third Report and Order exceed their cost. In the 
2023 WEA FNPRM, the Commission estimated that the proposed rules would 
result in an industry-wide, one-time compliance cost of $39.9 million 
and an annually recurring cost of $422,500 to update the WEA standards 
and software necessary to comply with the rules adopted in this Report 
and Order. While the Third Report and Order does not adopt all the 2023 
WEA FNPRM's proposals, such as including thumbnail images, modifying 
the attention signal and vibration cadence capabilities, or requiring 
any performance-related benchmarking or reporting, the Commission 
believes that the 2023 WEA FNPRM's estimate remains a reasonable 
ceiling for the cost of compliance with the rules adopted in the Third 
Report and Order. The activities in which industry will engage to 
comply with the requirements we adopt today (the creation and revision 
of standards and the development and testing of software) are not 
easily amenable to subdivision based on lines of text written or lines 
of code programmed. While the WEA standards will undoubtedly require 
less revision and less code will need to be written to comply with the 
requirements adopted by the Third Report and Order, the Commission does 
not attempt to quantify the extent of cost reduction that will result. 
The record reflects the significant benefits arising from WEA support 
for additional functionalities, including enhancing language support 
and providing location-aware maps. These enhanced functionalities of 
WEA will make WEAs comprehensible for some language communities for the 
first time, helping to keep these vulnerable communities safer during 
disasters. These enhancements will also encourage consumers to remain 
opted-in to receiving WEA messages and incentivize emergency managers 
that are currently not alerting authorities to become authorized with 
FEMA to use WEA as a tool for providing information in times of 
emergencies. With increased participation by both consumers and 
emergency managers, WEAs will be more likely to be both sent and 
received, leading to an incremental increase in lives saved, injuries 
prevented, and reductions in the cost of deploying first responders. 
The Commission bases its assessment of costs on the quantitative 
framework on which the Commission relied in the 2023 WEA FNPRM. The 
Commission sought comment on the costs and benefits of our proposed 
rules

[[Page 86833]]

in the 2023 WEA FNPRM, but received a sparse record in response, 
including no dollar figure estimates. Although most of the benefits are 
difficult to quantify, the Commission believes they outweigh the 
overall costs of the adopted rules.
    52. The Commission believes that the rules adopted will result in 
benefits measurable in terms of lives saved and injuries and property 
damage prevented. The Commission agrees with Verizon that these rule 
changes could offer ``tangible safety benefits to consumers and alert 
originators.'' According to CTIA and Southern Communications Services, 
Inc. d/b/a Southern Linc (Southern Linc), WEA has become one of the 
most effective and reliable alert and warning tools for public safety 
and the public. The requirements adopted in the Third Report and Order 
will both promote the availability of those benefits for a greater 
number of people and enhance their benefit for those for whom they were 
already available. The Commission also recognizes that it is difficult 
to assign precise dollar values to changes to WEA that improve the 
public's safety, life, and health.
    53. Making WEA Accessible to Millions of People Who Primarily Speak 
a Language Other Than English or Spanish. Currently, the 76 CMS 
Providers participating in WEA send alerts to 75% of mobile phones in 
the country. Among the 26 million people who do not primarily speak 
English or Spanish, nearly 15.4 million speak primarily one of the 12 
languages that we integrate into the WEA system in addition to English 
and Spanish. Assuming 66% of these individuals are covered by the WEA 
system, approximately 11.5 million people who have been receiving WEA 
messages in languages they may have difficulty comprehending would 
understand the content of WEA messages under the proposed WEA language 
support. The Commission agrees with Verizon that ``the public safety 
benefits to non-English-speaking consumers and communities by improving 
access to life-saving information are self-evident.'' Even if alerts 
reach just 1% of this population per year (i.e., roughly 150,000 
people) the potential of WEA to prevent property damage, injuries, and 
deaths could be enormous. Further, over 12 million people are with a 
hearing difficulty. Requiring Participating CMS Providers to provide 
subscribers with the ability to opt-in to receive ASL alerts would help 
effectively prevent property damages, injuries, and loss of life for 
these individuals who are deaf or hard-of-hearing.
    54. Integrating Location-Aware Maps into Alert Messages. Alert 
messages that link the recipient to a native mapping application would 
help the public to personalize alerts, allowing them to better 
understand the geographic area under threat and their location relative 
to it. The Commission agrees with ATIS and NYCEM that location-aware 
maps will provide the public with a better understanding of the 
emergency alerts they receive. It follows that this will likely cause 
recipients to take protective action more quickly than they otherwise 
would. This requirement will yield particular benefits in the most 
time-sensitive emergencies, such as earthquakes and wildfires, where 
every second can count.
    55. WEA Performance and Public Awareness Tests. The Commission 
agrees with AT&T and Verizon, among others, that adopting rules to 
permit alerting authorities to conduct up to two WEA Performance and 
Public Awareness Tests per year may improve alerting authorities' 
awareness of and confidence in WEA and provide alerting authorities 
with a tool to improve consumer education about and confidence in WEA. 
This awareness and education will result in more prompt and effective 
public response to WEAs when issued, potentially saving lives, 
protecting property, and reducing the cost of deploying first 
responders. Further, this rule may encourage more alerting authorities 
to participate in WEA due to promoting a better understanding of it, 
and with increased participation by alerting authorities, more of the 
public will benefit from the lifesaving information conveyed by WEA. 
The Commission also agrees with APCO that ``[t]esting is fundamental to 
public safety communications and will improve the system's 
trustworthiness and effectiveness.'' The Commission further believes 
harmonizing WEA and EAS test rules would simplify alerting authorities' 
efforts to test and exercise their public alert and warning capability 
and allow EAS and WEA tests to be more closely and easily coordinated.
    56. Establishing a WEA Database for Availability Reporting. The 
Third Report and Order determines that the rules establishing a WEA 
Database and requiring CMS Providers to refresh their WEA participation 
election will equip alerting authorities with information they need to 
plan for reliable communications during disasters and raise their 
confidence in WEA. The Commission agrees with alerting authorities that 
the WEA Database will allow them to know both where WEA is and is not 
available within their alert and warning jurisdictions, allowing them 
to maximize the public safety value derived from other emergency 
communications tools. Creating an aggregated account of the WEA 
capabilities of the mobile devices that Participating CMS Providers 
sell will also allow alerting authorities to understand the extent to 
which their communities will benefit from messages crafted to take 
advantage of modern WEA functionalities, such as a longer, 360-
character version of an Alert Message, a Spanish-language version of an 
Alert Message, or clickable hyperlinks. The Commission also agrees with 
T-Mobile that ``this information will help the public and alert 
originators understanding which wireless providers support WEA, where 
the service is available, and what handsets can be obtained to reap the 
full benefits of WEA.''
    57. The Third Report and Order estimates that the rules adopted in 
the Third Report and Order could result in an industry-wide, one-time 
compliance cost of, at most, $42.4 million to update the WEA standards 
and software necessary to comply with the rules adopted in this Third 
Report and Order and an annually recurring cost of $422,500 for 
recordkeeping and reporting. In the Third Report and Order, the 
Commission takes appropriate steps to ensure that these costs are not 
unduly burdensome. At the same time, as the Commission observed in the 
2023 WEA FNPRM, CMS Providers' participation in WEA is voluntary. Any 
Participating CMS Provider that does not wish to comply with the rules 
we adopt today may withdraw their election to participate in WEA 
without penalty, and incur no implementation costs as a result.
    58. Consistent with prior estimates, the one-time cost of $42.4 
million to update the WEA standards and software necessary to comply 
with the proposals in the Further Notice includes approximately a 
$845,000 to update applicable WEA standards and approximately a $41.5 
million to update applicable software. The Third Report and Order 
quantifies the $845,000 cost of modifying standards as the annual 
compensation for 30 network engineers compensated at the national 
average wage for their field ($$62.25/hour), plus a 45% mark-up for 
benefits ($28.01/hour) working for the amount of time that it takes to 
develop a standard (one hour every other week for one year, 26 hours) 
for 12 distinct standards. The $41.5 million cost estimate for software 
updates consists of $12.2 million for software modifications and $29.3 
million for software testing. The Commission quantified the cost of

[[Page 86834]]

modifying software as the annual compensation for one software 
developer compensated at the national average wage for their field 
($132,930/year), plus a 45% mark-up for benefits ($59,819/year), 
working for the amount of time that it takes to develop software (ten 
months) at each of the 76 CMS Providers that participate in WEA. The 
Commission quantified the cost of testing these modifications 
(including integration testing, unit testing and failure testing) to 
require 12 software developers compensated at the national average for 
their field working for two months at each of the 76 CMS Providers that 
participate in WEA. In quantifying costs for software development, the 
Commission has used the same framework since 2016 for changes to 
software ranging from expanding WEA's maximum character limit to 
enhanced geo-targeting. Because the Commission received no comment to 
the aforementioned costs framework that specifies a different 
analytical framework or dollar figure estimate, the Third Report and 
Order finds that it remains accurate to describe the costs attendant to 
the rules the Commission proposed. Because the Commission does not 
adopt all the rules the Commission proposed in the 2023 WEA FNPRM, the 
Commission believes the rules we adopted in the Third Report and Order 
will cost less than what was proposed in the 2023 WEA FNPRM, but do not 
quantify how much less here.
    59. The Commission determines that costs associated with our 
adopted rules related to WEA availability reporting to be relatively 
low for Participating CMS Providers that participate in WEA in whole or 
that otherwise offer WEA in the entirety of their geographic service 
area because such Participating CMS Providers have already provided the 
Commission with the geospatial data needed to fulfill a significant 
aspect of their reporting obligation in furtherance of their 
obligations to support the Commission's Broadband Data Collection. The 
Commission agrees with T-Mobile that ``[w]here WEA is available 
throughout a wireless provider's network, the GIS files used for the 
biannual Broadband Data Collection should serve this purpose. If a 
wireless provider does not offer WEA throughout its network, it should 
be allowed to submit a different GIS depicting WEA coverage.'' The 
Commission determines that in the Supporting Document of Study Area 
Boundary Data Reporting in Esri Shapefile Format, the Office of 
Information and Regulatory Affairs estimates that it takes an average 
of 26 hours for a data scientist to modify a shapefile. The Commission 
believes submitting WEA availability information in geospatial data 
format should require no more time than modifying a shapefile. 
Therefore, the Commission believes 26 hours would be an upper bound of 
the time required for a Participating CMS Provider to report its WEA 
availability in geospatial data format. Given that the average wage 
rate is $55.40/hour for data scientists, with a 45% markup for 
benefits, we arrive at $80.33 as the hourly compensation rate for a 
data scientist. The Commission estimates an aggregate cost of WEA 
availability reporting to be approximately $$160,000 ([ap] $80.33 per 
hour x 26 hours x 76 providers = $158,732, rounded to $160,000), which 
may be recurring on an annual basis since availability may change and 
need to be updated over time. Within these 26 hours, the Commission 
believes that Participating CMS Providers will also be able to provide 
the availability information required by the rules adopted today, 
including lists of all the mobile devices the Participating CMS 
Provider offers at the point of sale, list of the Participating CMS 
Provider's DBAs and subsidiaries, and any changes of WEA service. Many 
Participating CMS Providers already create and maintain this 
information, and therefore, the Commission believes that providing this 
information to the WEA Database would require minimal time burdens and 
would be within the cost estimates.
    60. No commenter objected to the belief that CMS Providers would 
not incur any cost to comply with our proposal to allow alerting 
authorities to conduct two public awareness tests per year. Based on 
the foregoing analysis, the Commission finds it reasonable to expect 
that these improvements will result in lives saved, injuries avoided, 
and a reduced need to deploy first responders. The Commission concludes 
that the expected public safety benefits exceed the costs imposed by 
the rules adopted today.

G. Procedural Matters

    61. Regulatory Flexibility Act. The Regulatory Flexibility Act of 
1980, as amended (RFA) requires that an agency prepare a regulatory 
flexibility analysis for notice and comment rulemakings, unless the 
agency certifies that ``the rule will not, if promulgated, have a 
significant economic impact on a substantial number of small 
entities.'' Accordingly, the Commission has prepared a Final Regulatory 
Flexibility Analysis (FRFA) concerning the potential impact of the rule 
and policy changes adopted and proposed in the Third Report and Order, 
on small entities.
    62. Congressional Review Act. The Commission has determined, and 
the Administrator of the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs, 
Office of Management and Budget, concurs, that this rule is non-major 
under the Congressional Review Act, 5 U.S.C. 804(2). The Commission 
will send a copy of this Third Report and Order to Congress and the 
Government Accountability Office pursuant 5 U.S.C. 801(a)(1)(A).
    63. People With Disabilities. To request materials in accessible 
formats for people with disabilities (braille, large print, electronic 
files, audio format), send an email to [email protected] or call the 
Consumer & Governmental Affairs Bureau at 202-418-0530 (voice).
    64. Additional Information. For additional information on this 
proceeding, contact Michael Antonino, Cybersecurity and Communications 
Reliability Division, Public Safety and Homeland Security Bureau (202) 
418-7965, or by email to [email protected].

H. Ordering Clauses

    65. Accordingly it is ordered, pursuant to the authority contained 
in sections 1, 2, 4(i), 4(n), 301, 303(b), 303(e), 303(g), 303(j), 
303(r), 307, 309, 316, 403, and 706 of the Communications Act of 1934, 
as amended, 47 U.S.C. 151, 152, 154(i), 154(n), 301, 303(b), 303(e), 
303(g), 303(j), 303(r), 307, 309, 403, and 606, as well as by sections 
602(a), (b), (c), (f), 603, 604 and 606 of the Warning Alert and 
Response Network (WARN) Act, 47 U.S.C. 1201(a), (b), (c), (f), 1203, 
1204 and 1206, that this Third Report and Order is hereby adopted.
    66. It is further ordered that Part 10 of the Commission's rules is 
amended as specified, and such rules will become effective thirty-six 
(36) months after publication of this Third Report and Order in the 
Federal Register, changes to 47 CFR 10.210 and 10.350, which may 
contain new or modified information collection requirements, and will 
not become effective until the completion of any review by the Office 
of Management and Budget under the Paperwork Reduction Act that the 
Public Safety and Homeland Security Bureau (PSHSB) determines is 
necessary, and changes to 47 CFR 10.480 and 10.500(e), which are the 
subject of a further Bureau-level rulemaking, and will not become 
effective until thirty (30) months after the Bureau publishes a 
subsequent Order in the Federal Register. PSHSB

[[Page 86835]]

will publish a notice in the Federal Register announcing the relevant 
effective date for each of these sections.
    67. It is further ordered that the Office of the Managing Director, 
Performance & Program Management, shall send a copy of this Third 
Report and Order in a report to be sent to Congress and the Government 
Accountability Office pursuant to the Congressional Review Act, 5 
U.S.C. 801(a)(1)(A).

Final Regulatory Flexibility Analysis

    68. As required by the Regulatory Flexibility Act of 1980, as 
amended (RFA), an Initial Regulatory Flexibility Analysis (IRFA) was 
incorporated into the FNPRM released in June 2023 in this proceeding. 
The Commission sought written public comment on the proposals in the 
NPRM, including comment on the IRFA. Comments filed addressing the IRFA 
are discussed below. This present Final Regulatory Flexibility Analysis 
(FRFA) conforms to the RFA.

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

    69. In this proceeding, the Commission adopts rules to enhance the 
utility of the Wireless Emergency Alert (WEA) system by making it more 
accessible and enabling WEAs to provide more personalized alerts. 
Specifically, the Commission requires Participating Commercial Mobile 
Service Providers (Participating CMS Providers) to enable alerting 
authorities to display translated Alert Message content via the use of 
emergency alert message templates. In addition, these efforts to make 
WEA messages more accessibility extend to the deaf and hard of hearing 
community pursuant to the requirement that Participating CMS Providers' 
WEA-capable mobile devices support templates in American Sign Language 
(ASL). The Commission concludes that enabling the display of translated 
Alert Message content via the use of emergency alert message templates 
will allow alert originators to inform those communities that primarily 
speak a language other than English or Spanish of emergencies and save 
more lives. The Commission also adopts rules to require Participating 
CMS Providers' WEA-capable mobile devices to support the presentation 
of WEA messages that link the recipient to a native mapping 
application. This requirement will allow alert originators to 
personalize alerts, spurring people to take protective action more 
quickly and to understand whether an alert applies to their them. 
Further, to allow alerting authorities to understand WEA's reliability, 
speed, and accuracy and to promote the use of WEA as a tool for raising 
public awareness about emergencies likely to occur, the Commission 
requires Participating CMS Providers to support up to two end-to-end 
WEA tests, per county or county equivalent, per year, that consumers 
receive by default, subject to the conditions described in the Third 
Report and Order. The adoption of this rule promotes compliance and 
presents a minimal burden for Participating CMS Providers. Finally, the 
Commission adopts rules to require Participating CMS Providers to 
submit certain information in the WEA Database. Requiring the 
disclosure of data outlined in the Third Report and Order will allow 
alert originators and consumers more insight into WEA's availability 
and enable a transparent understanding of WEA.
    70. In light of the significant public safety benefits, which 
include the capacity to save lives, mitigate and prevent injuries, the 
Commission believes that the actions taken in the Third Report and 
Order further the public interest.

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

    71. Three commenters specifically addressed the proposed rules and 
policies presented in the IRFA. The Competitive Carriers Association 
(CCA) argued that flexibility of implementing the proposed rules would 
promote participation in WEA by smaller and regional carriers because 
the supply chain and level of support for handsets for smaller and 
regional carriers generally lags behind nationwide carriers. Further, 
CCA stated the additional requirements would disproportionately burden 
smaller and regional carriers that operate with small teams and limited 
resources. CCA suggested increased time for compliance for non-
nationwide carriers.
    72. Southern Communications Services, Inc. d/b/a Southern Linc 
(Southern Linc) raised concerns similar to those raised by CCA, namely, 
that the Commission should account for the disproportionate impact that 
the proposed requirements in the 2023 WEA FNPRM would have on smaller 
and regional carriers and the Commission should provide small and 
medium-sized mobile service providers additional time to comply.
    73. CTIA--The Wireless Association (CTIA) argued that to the extent 
the proposals made in the 2023 WEA FNPRM would require a complete 
overhaul of the WEA System, that such changes to the WEA system also 
may disproportionately impact regional and smaller, rural carriers, who 
often rely on third-party vendors to implement WEA functions and may 
not be able to bear the additional technical and financial burdens, 
rendering their ongoing voluntary participation in WEA infeasible.
    74. The Commission considered the potential impact of the rules 
proposed in the IRFA on small entities and we concluded that these 
mandates provide Participating CMS Providers with a sufficient measure 
of flexibility to account for any technical and/or cost-related 
concerns. The Commission has determined that implementing these 
improvements to WEA are technically feasible for small entities and 
other Participating CMS Providers and the cost of implementation is 
reasonable. To help facilitate compliance with the requirements in the 
Third Report and Order, the Commission adopted a compliance timeframe 
that is longer than the timeframe necessary to complete the 
requirements based on the record. The 30-month timeframe allows 12 
months for the appropriate industry bodies to finalize and publish 
relevant standards, 12 months for Participating CMS Providers and 
device manufacturers to develop and integrate software upgrades 
consistent with those standards, and an additional 6 months to deploy 
this technology in WEA-capable-mobile devices. The Commission believes 
that the public interest benefits of expanding the reach and 
accessibility of WEA significantly outweigh the costs that small and 
other providers will incur to implement the requirements adopted in the 
Third Report and Order.

C. Response to Comments by Chief Counsel for Advocacy of the Small 
Business Administration

    75. The Chief Counsel did not file any comments in response to the 
proposed rules in this proceeding.

D. Description and Estimate of the Number of Small Entities to Which 
the Rules Will Apply

    76. 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:

[[Page 86836]]

(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. The types of entities that will be affected 
include Wireless Communications Services, Radio and Television 
Broadcasting and Wireless Communications Equipment Manufacturing, 
Software Publishers, Noncommercial Educational (NCE) and Public 
Broadcast Stations, Cable and Other Subscription Programming, All Other 
Telecommunications providers (primarily engaged in providing 
specialized telecommunications services, such as satellite tracking, 
communications telemetry, and radar station operation).

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

    77. The Third Report and Order will adopt new or additional 
reporting, recordkeeping and/or other compliance obligations on small 
entities to report information about WEA availability in the WEA 
Database. Specifically, the rules require all CMS Providers to: (1) 
refresh their WEA election of whether to participate in WEA ``in 
whole'' or ``in part'' or not to participate in a Commission-hosted, 
publicly available WEA Database; (2) disclose the entities on behalf of 
which it files its election, irrespective of whether it elects to 
participate in WEA, including names of subsidiary companies and the 
``doing business as'' names under which a CMS Provider offer wireless 
service; (3) disclose the geographic areas in which they offer WEA; (4) 
submit to the WEA Database a list of all the mobile devices they offer 
at the point of sale; and (5) use the WEA Database as a means of 
providing notice of withdrawing their election to Participating in WEA.
    78. The Commission determined that costs associated with the 
adopted rules related to WEA availability reporting to be minimal for 
small entities that participate in WEA in whole or that otherwise offer 
WEA in the entirety of their geographic service area because such small 
entities may have already provided the Commission with the geospatial 
data needed to fulfill a significant aspect of their reporting 
obligation in furtherance of their obligations to support the 
Commission's Broadband Data Collection. Where WEA is available 
throughout a wireless provider's network, the GIS files used for the 
biannual Broadband Data Collection should serve this purpose. If a 
wireless provider does not offer WEA throughout its network, it should 
be allowed to submit a different GIS depicting WEA coverage. The 
Commission determined that in the Supporting Document of Study Area 
Boundary Data Reporting in Esri Shapefile Format, the Office of 
Information and Regulatory Affairs estimates that it takes an average 
of 26 hours for a data scientist to modify a shapefile. The Commission 
believes submitting WEA availability information in geospatial data 
format should require no more time than modifying a shapefile. 
Therefore, the Commission believes 26 hours would be an upper bound of 
the time required for a Participating CMS Provider to report its WEA 
availability in geospatial data format.
    79. The Commission reasons that no additional, ongoing or 
annualized burdens will result from this reporting obligation for small 
entities and other Participating CMS Providers because the requirement 
that we adopt today does not change the approach that Participating CMS 
Providers must take to updating their elections once this one-time 
renewed election is completed. For example, the rules adopted in the 
Third Report and Order do not impose annual certification of a CMS 
Provider's participation in WEA, but rather require reporting in the 
WEA Database only in event of a change of a CMS Provider's 
participation in WEA. The Commission is not currently in a position to 
determine whether the rules adopted in the Third Report and Order will 
require small entities to hire attorneys, engineers, consultants, or 
other professionals to comply.

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

    80. The Commission continues to adopt measures to improve WEA and 
continues to meet its obligation to develop the nation's emergency 
preparedness and response infrastructure by making WEA more accessible 
by adding multilingual (including ASL) functionality, integrating 
location-aware maps, enabling Performance and Public Awareness tests, 
and establishing a WEA Database for Participating CMS Providers to 
report information about WEA availability. While doing so, the 
Commission is mindful that small entities may incur costs; the 
Commission weighed these costs against the public interest benefits of 
the new obligations and determined the benefits outweigh the costs. The 
specific steps the Commission has taken to minimize costs and reduce 
the economic impact for small entities and alternatives considered are 
discussed below.
    81. In adopting the rule to enable alerting authorities to display 
translated Alert Message content via the use of emergency alert message 
templates, the Commission found the record demonstrates that machine 
translation is not yet ripe for use today in WEA. The use of alert 
message templates should minimize the impact of the adopted 
requirements for small entities because it will limit developing 
software and standards to enable machine translations. Because the 
alert message templates will be produced by the Public Safety and 
Homeland Security Bureau after taking into account public feedback, 
small entities will not need to expend resources to translate emergency 
messages and develop template alert messages.
    82. In response to concerns about our proposed compliance 
timeframe, the Third Report and Order provided additional time. The 
Commission believes the additional time will help minimize the burden 
on small entities. Additionally, the rules adopted in the Third Report 
and Order are technologically neutral to provide small entities the 
flexibility to comply with our rules using technologies offered by a 
variety of vendors.

G. Report to Congress

    83. The Commission will send a copy of the Third Report and Order, 
including this FRFA, in a report to be sent to Congress pursuant to the 
Congressional Review Act. In addition, the Commission will send a copy 
of the Third Report and Order, including this FRFA, to the Chief 
Counsel for Advocacy of the SBA. A copy of the Third Report and Order 
and FRFA (or summaries thereof) will also be published in the Federal 
Register.

List of Subjects in 47 CFR Part 10

    Communications common carriers, Radio.

Federal Communications Commission.
Marlene Dortch,
Secretary.

Final Rules

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

PART 10--WIRELESS EMERGENCY ALERTS

0
1. Effective December 15, 2026, the authority citation for part 10 is 
revised to read as follows:

    Authority:  47 U.S.C. 151, 152, 154(i), 154(n), 201, 301, 
303(b), 303(e), 303(g),

[[Page 86837]]

303(j), 303(r), 307, 309, 316, 403, 544(g), 606, 1201, 1202, 1203, 
1204, and 1206.


0
2. Delayed indefinitely, amend Sec.  10.210 by revising paragraph (a) 
introductory text, redesignating paragraph (b) as paragraph (d), adding 
new paragraph (b), revising paragraph (c), and revising the newly 
redesignated paragraph (d).
    The revisions and addition read as follows:


Sec.  10.210  WEA participation election procedures.

    (a) A CMS provider that elects to transmit WEA Alert Messages must 
elect to participate in part or in whole, as defined by Sec.  10.10(l) 
and (m), and shall electronically file in the Commission's WEA Database 
attesting that the Provider:
* * * * *
    (b) A CMS Provider that elects to participate in WEA must disclose 
the following information in their election filed in the Commission's 
WEA Database:
    (1) The entities on behalf of which the Participating CMS Provider 
files its election, including the subsidiary companies (whether those 
subsidiaries are wholly owned or operated CMS Providers, Mobile Virtual 
Network Operators, or wireless resellers) on behalf of which their 
election is filed and the ``doing business as'' names under which a 
Participating CMS Provider offers WEA;
    (2) The geographic area in which the Participating CMS Provider 
agrees to offer WEA alerts, either as:
    (i) An attestation that they offer WEA in the entirety of their 
voice coverage area as reported to the Commission in the Broadband Data 
Collection or any successors; or
    (ii) Geospatial data submitted to the Commission through the WEA 
Database.
    (3) The extent to which all mobile devices that the Participating 
CMS Provider offers at the point of sale are WEA-capable, as 
demonstrated by the following:
    (i) The mobile devices, as defined in Sec.  10.10(j), that the 
Participating CMS Provider offers at their point of sale; and
    (ii) The WEA-capable mobile devices, as defined in Sec.  10.10(k), 
that the Participating CMS Provider offers at their point of sale.
    (c) If the terms of a CMS Provider's WEA participation change in 
any manner described by paragraph (b) of this section, it must update 
the information promptly such that the information in the WEA Database 
accurately reflects the terms of their WEA participation. Updates (if 
any) for the period from August 16 through February 15 must be filed by 
the following March 1, and updates for the period from February 16 
through August 15 must be filed by the following September 1 of each 
year.
    (d) A CMS Provider that elects not to transmit WEA Alert Messages 
shall file electronically in the Commission's WEA Database attesting to 
that fact. Their filing shall include any subsidiary companies on 
behalf of which the election is filed and the CMS Provider's ``doing 
business as'' names, if applicable.


0
3. Delayed indefinitely, amend Sec.  10.350 by adding paragraph (d) to 
read as follows:


Sec.  10.350  WEA testing and proficiency training requirements.

* * * * *
    (d) Performance and Public Awareness Tests. Participating CMS 
Providers may participate in no more than two (2) WEA tests per county 
(or county equivalent), per calendar year that the public receives by 
default, provided that the entity conducting the test:
    (1) Conducts outreach and notifies the public before the test that 
live event codes will be used, but that no emergency is, in fact, 
occurring;
    (2) To the extent technically feasible, states in the test message 
that the event is only a test;
    (3) Coordinates the test among Participating CMS Providers and with 
State and local emergency authorities, the relevant SECC (or SECCs, if 
the test could affect multiple States), and first responder 
organizations, such as PSAPs, police, and fire agencies); and
    (4) Provides in widely accessible formats the notification to the 
public required by this paragraph that the test is only a test and is 
not a warning about an actual emergency.


0
4. Delayed indefinitely, revise Sec.  10.480 to read as follows:


Sec.  10.480  Language support.

    (a) Participating CMS Providers are required to transmit WEA Alert 
Messages that are issued in the Spanish language or that contain 
Spanish-language characters.
    (b) Participating CMS Providers are required to support the display 
of a pre-scripted alert pre-installed and stored in the mobile device 
that corresponds to the default language of the mobile device.


0
5. Effective December 15, 2026, amend Sec.  10.500 by adding paragraph 
(i) to read as follows:


Sec.  10.500  General requirements.

* * * * *
    (i) For Alert Messages with a target area specified by a circle or 
polygon, when a device has location services enabled and has granted 
location permissions to its native mapping application, Participating 
CMS Providers must support the presentation of a map along with an 
emergency alert message that includes at least
    (1) The shape of the target area,
    (2) The user's location relative to the target area, and
    (3) A geographical representation of a target area in which both 
the targeted area and user are located.


0
6. Delayed indefinitely, further amend Sec.  10.500 by revising 
paragraph (e) to read as follows:


Sec.  10.500  General requirements.

* * * * *
    (e) Extraction of alert content in English and the subscriber-
specified default language, if applicable.
    (1) Storing pre-scripted alerts in English, Spanish, Chinese, 
Tagalog, Vietnamese, Arabic, French, Korean, Russian, Haitian Creole, 
German, Hindi, Portuguese, and Italian.
    (2) Allowing the subscriber to choose to receive pre-scripted Alert 
Messages in American Sign Language (ASL) instead of or in addition to 
their mobile device's subscriber-specified default language setting.
* * * * *
[FR Doc. 2023-27236 Filed 12-14-23; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6712-01-P