Implementation of the National Suicide Hotline Act of 2018, 88890-88905 [2024-25912]

Agencies

• FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION

[Federal Register Volume 89, Number 218 (Tuesday, November 12, 2024)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 88890-88905]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2024-25912]



[[Page 88890]]

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

FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION

47 CFR Part 52

[WC Docket No. 18-336; FCC 24-111; FR ID 258492]


Implementation of the National Suicide Hotline Act of 2018

AGENCY: Federal Communications Commission.

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: In this document, the Federal Communications Commission 
(Commission) adopted a Third Report and Order that requires wireless 
providers to implement a georouting solution for calls to the 988 
Suicide & Crisis Lifeline (988 Lifeline or Lifeline) to facilitate 
access to critical local intervention services. The majority of calls 
to the 988 Lifeline are made from wireless phones. However, the 988 
Lifeline's system was originally designed to route calls to crisis 
centers based on a caller's area code and exchange, which may not 
correspond to the caller's physical location. With georouting data, the 
988 Lifeline will be able to route wireless calls to local crisis 
centers based on the geographic area where the handset is located at 
the time the 988 call is initiated while maintaining privacy by not 
identifying the caller's precise location. The Third Report and Order 
also revises the Commission's existing 988 voice and texting rules to 
permit routing to the 988 Lifeline without translation to a toll free 
access number, giving wireless providers flexibility in implementing 
georouting solutions.

DATES: 
    Effective date: This rule is effective December 12, 2024.
    Compliance dates: Compliance with the addition of 47 CFR 52.202 is 
required for nationwide Commercial Mobile Radio Service (CMRS) 
providers by 30 days after December 12, 2024 and compliance is required 
for all CMRS providers by 24 months after December 13, 2024.

ADDRESSES: Federal Communications Commission, 445 12th Street SW, 
Washington, DC 20554.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For further information, contact Merry 
Wulff at [email protected] or at (202) 418-1084.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This is a summary of the Commission's Third 
Report and Order in WC Docket No. 18-336, FCC 24-111, adopted on 
October 17, 2024 and released on October 18, 2024. The full text of the 
document is available on the Commission's website at https://docs.fcc.gov/public/attachments/FCC-24-111A1.pdf. To request materials 
in accessible formats for people with disabilities (e.g., Braille, 
large print, electronic files, audio format, etc.), send an email to 
[email protected] or call the Consumer & Governmental Affairs Bureau at 
(202) 418-0530 (voice).

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 sent a copy of this Third Report & 
Order to Congress and the Government Accountability Office pursuant to 
the Congressional Review Act, see 5 U.S.C. 801(a)(1)(A).

Synopsis

    1. In this Third Report and Order, and consistent with our proposal 
in the Implementation of the National Suicide Hotline Act of 2018, 
Second Further Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (SFNPRM), 89 FR 46340 (May 
29, 2024), we adopt a rule that would require wireless providers to 
implement a georouting solution for calls to the 988 Lifeline. We find 
that a georouting mandate will strengthen and improve access to the 
critical benefits of the 988 Lifeline for callers in crisis. We then 
define the type of location data that qualifies as georouting data. 
Next, we require nationwide and non-nationwide Commercial Mobile Radio 
Service (CMRS) providers to have the capability to provide georouting 
data with 988 calls to the Lifeline Administrator in a format that is 
compatible with the 988 Lifeline's routing platform to allow routing of 
calls by generating location data using cell-based location technology. 
We require CMRS providers to aggregate the cell-based location data to 
a level that will not identify the location of the cell site or base 
station receiving the 988 call or otherwise identify the precise 
location of the handset, thereby protecting the privacy of the caller.
    2. To give wireless providers flexibility for this mandate, we do 
not specify a particular method for aggregating the location data and 
allow providers to use technically feasible options for meeting this 
requirement to the extent that they are compatible with the systems 
used by the 988 Lifeline. This approach is consistent with solutions 
deployed or being deployed by the three nationwide CMRS providers. We 
then establish an implementation timeline for georouting calls to the 
988 Lifeline of 30 days following the effective date of the rule for 
nationwide CMRS providers, which is supported by the nationwide 
providers' representations that they will have already deployed 
compliant 988 georouting solutions by the compliance deadline. This 
action will ensure that as soon as possible, the vast majority of 
callers to the 988 Lifeline in the United States have access to support 
and resources most closely connected to their location with appropriate 
privacy safeguards. We expect that non-nationwide CMRS providers will 
be able to leverage the solutions implemented by the nationwide 
providers, and for that reason, we require non-nationwide providers to 
implement georouting 24 months after the effective date of the rule. 
Finally, we revise our existing 988 voice and texting rules to allow 
for routing to the national suicide prevention and mental health crisis 
hotline system maintained by the U.S. Department of Health and Human 
Services' (HHS) Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services 
Administration (SAMHSA) and the U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs 
(VA) without need for translation to the toll free number. Overall, we 
find that the reasonable and flexible georouting mandate and rule 
revisions we adopt will provide certainty that 988 callers will be 
connected to the crisis center nearest to them.

Georouting Will Improve Access and Efficiency of the 988 Lifeline

    3. Under our current rules, calls to 988 must first be routed to 
the existing toll free ten-digit access number for the 988 Lifeline, 
from which they are then routed to one of over 200 regional crisis 
centers based on the area code and exchange of the caller's telephone 
number supplied by the originating service provider. The Commission's 
rules also require covered 988 text messages to be routed to the 988 
Lifeline's current toll free ten-digit access number. The Wireline 
Competition Bureau granted a waiver to allow covered text providers to 
route covered 988 text messages to the 988 Lifeline using the short 
code protocol without translation to the Lifeline's current toll free 
access number. This allows return texts from the 988 Lifeline to appear 
on consumer devices as coming from 988 rather than 1-800-273-TALK. As 
technology trends have shifted from landline phones to mobile phones, 
many callers now rely on wireless devices with area codes that may not 
correspond to their physical

[[Page 88891]]

locations when contacting the 988 Lifeline, complicating their access 
to vital local services. In the SFNPRM, we explained that the majority 
of calls placed to the 988 Lifeline are from wireless phones, and the 
area codes of those phones often do not correspond to the location of 
the caller. The Lifeline Administrator estimates that 80% of calls 
placed to the 988 Lifeline are from wireless phones. While 988 call 
takers can provide support regardless of a caller's location, they may 
not be able to connect callers in crisis to local resources. We 
proposed to adopt a rule that would require wireless providers to 
implement one or more georouting solutions for calls to the 988 
Lifeline in order to ensure more accurate routing of calls. After 
reviewing the record in this proceeding, we find that requiring 
wireless providers to support georouting for wireless 988 calls is 
essential to improve the public's access to the 988 Lifeline's critical 
mental health crisis and suicide prevention services.
    4. The record demonstrates near-unanimous agreement for the 
assertion that there is a need to improve routing of wireless 988 calls 
to help ensure that callers are routed to geographically appropriate 
crisis centers. Commenters, including industry and mental health 
advocates, agree that georouting for 988 wireless calls will improve 
access to critical local resources and help connect callers to 
counselors who may be more knowledgeable about unique community 
stressors and other regional, cultural, and economic factors impacting 
callers in distress. As several mental health advocates emphasize, 
access to local resources and support can mean the ``difference between 
life and death for hundreds of thousands of individuals annually.'' 
Commenters also highlight that georouting for 988 calls will improve 
access to referral and follow-up services that may reduce the risk of 
future mental health crises and suicidality. For example, Mental Health 
America states that connecting callers to ``support based on their 
physical location can enable crisis contact centers to provide 
connections to local resources and follow-up services, reducing the 
risk of suicidality for individuals in crisis.'' Several commenters 
also assert that follow-up services are ``more meaningful when a caller 
is connected to local crisis support.''
    5. Mental health and crisis counselors also emphasize that 
connecting callers with local crisis centers may avert unnecessary 
dispatch of emergency services and law enforcement. For example, Mental 
Health America states that ``the ability for 988 callers to be routed 
to local crisis centers allows counselors to better respond to unique 
factors and situations, which may also help avoid unnecessary use of 
emergency services and law enforcement.'' Similarly, as the current 
Lifeline Administrator explains, connecting callers to trained 
counselors who can offer ``emotional support and local care resources'' 
can avert ``unnecessary use of emergency services and law 
enforcement,'' which is paramount. Moreover, many commenters assert 
that implementing georouting solutions for wireless 988 calls will 
enhance the ability of crisis centers to respond effectively to 
emergency situations and facilitate the dispatch of mobile crisis 
services.
    6. The record also demonstrates that a georouting mandate for 
wireless 988 calls will advance digital equity by helping to ensure 
that at-risk populations can more easily access resources in their 
communities. As the Lifeline Administrator explains, certain 
populations with a higher risk of suicide are disproportionately 
impacted by the Lifeline's area code-based routing system, including 
older adults, youth and young adults, non-Hispanic Black, American 
Indian, and Alaska Native communities.

Georouting Mandate for Wireless 988 Voice Calls

    7. Based on the record presented and in furtherance of the policy 
goals articulated above, we require nationwide and non-nationwide CMRS 
providers to implement georouting solutions for calls to the 988 
Lifeline. Specifically, we require that all CMRS providers have the 
capability to provide georouting data with 988 calls to the Lifeline 
Administrator in a format compatible with the Lifeline's routing 
platform, to allow routing of 988 calls by the Lifeline Administrator 
to the appropriate crisis center based on the geographic area where the 
handset is located at the time the 988 call is initiated. We further 
require that all CMRS providers must provide georouting data, when 
available, with 988 calls to the Lifeline Administrator sufficient to 
allow routing of the 988 call by the Lifeline Administrator. In 
conjunction with our mandate, we recognize the Lifeline Administrator's 
commitment to continue to ``safeguard user privacy and 
confidentiality'' as georouting is implemented.
    8. Georouting. We define ``georouting data,'' for purposes of these 
rules, as location data generated from cell-based location technology 
that is aggregated to a level that will not identify the location of 
the cell site or base station receiving the 988 call or otherwise 
identify the precise location of the handset. We find that this 
definition of ``georouting data'' most appropriately balances the need 
to maintain the privacy of 988 callers while ensuring the 988 Lifeline 
has the information needed to route calls to geographically appropriate 
crisis centers. The record reflects significant support for georouting 
solutions that provide geographic routing information to the Lifeline 
without identifying a caller's precise location. Indeed, we received 
over 1,500 comments from National Alliance on Mental Illness (NAMI) 
advocates representing nearly every State expressing support for 
requiring wireless providers to implement georouting solutions for 988 
calls while protecting privacy. Many commenters emphasized the 
importance of not disclosing more precise location information to 
maintain callers' privacy and ensure trust in the 988 Lifeline. Several 
commenters also highlight that the expectations of 988 callers differ 
from the context of 911 calls, where callers generally expect an 
immediate, location-specific medical or police response.
    9. To ensure the privacy of 988 callers, we decline, at this time, 
to require wireless providers to provide more precise geolocation data 
with 988 calls. Commenters, including mental health advocates and 
crisis counseling experts, express significant privacy concerns about 
including geolocation information with wireless 988 calls, which, 
unlike georouting data, does involve the transmission of a caller's 
precise location. The Commission previously considered the potential 
benefits of including geolocation information with calls to the 988 
Lifeline. In this regard, in April 2021, as directed by Congress 
pursuant to the National Suicide Hotline Designation Act of 2020, the 
Commission submitted a report that examined the costs and feasibility 
of transmitting dispatchable location information with calls to 988. As 
the Wireline Competition Bureau explained in the 988 Geolocation 
Report, transmitting geolocation information with calls to the 988 
Lifeline raised a variety of important privacy concerns, legal issues, 
and technical complexities that require extensive investigation and 
time to resolve. Several commenters highlight that the challenges 
identified in the 988 Geolocation Report remain relevant today. 
Moreover, the record does not evidence a need to include geolocation 
information with wireless 988 calls to facilitate routing to the 
appropriate local crisis center.

[[Page 88892]]

    10. The rules we adopt allow CMRS providers and the Lifeline 
Administrator flexibility in developing and implementing technical 
solutions, for example, aggregating georouting data at the county or 
wire center level, while protecting privacy interests by prohibiting 
the transmission of more granular cell site data or the precise 
location of the caller. In its comments, the Lifeline Administrator 
explains that the georouting solutions developed by the nationwide 
wireless providers, in conjunction with SAMHSA and the Lifeline 
Administrator were designed to ``minimize[ ] user-specific data to 
simply route the user to the nearest crisis center based on cell phone 
tower data, rather than using a callers' exact phone location.'' 
Similarly, T-Mobile asserts that its georouting solution ``protects the 
privacy interest of callers by not providing precise geolocation 
information.'' CX360 also states that the georouting solutions ``never 
capture[ ] a help seeker's precise location.'' We anticipate that the 
definition of ``georouting data'' that we adopt will give nationwide 
CMRS providers the flexibility to continue their efforts to implement 
georouting solutions and comply with their obligations to protect user 
location information. Additionally, we believe these privacy safeguards 
included in the definition alleviate record concerns that georouting 
rules may ``inadvertently suppress use of the 988 Lifeline'' due to 
concerns about disclosing geolocation information.
    11. Voluntary Implementation by Nationwide CMRS Providers. We 
recognize that certain commenters contend that mandating georouting for 
wireless 988 calls is unnecessary at this time. Some telecommunications 
industry commenters oppose adoption of rules requiring CMRS providers 
to implement georouting solutions for wireless 988 calls, arguing that 
georouting solutions will soon be available through the voluntary 
efforts of nationwide CMRS providers. They also claim that mandating 
georouting may introduce uncertainty, potentially delaying or 
complicating the deployment of georouting solutions. While we recognize 
industry's assertions, these providers also acknowledge the importance 
of promptly implementing georouting solutions for wireless 988 calls. 
In mandating georouting, we carefully balance the request to proceed 
more cautiously, as voiced by providers, with the significant record 
support calling for the need for a georouting mandate that enhances 
access to critical local services for callers in crisis without delay, 
while giving providers the flexibility to develop georouting solutions 
that fit with their network capabilities to the extent that those 
solutions are compatible with the systems used by the Lifeline.
    12. As we noted in the SFNPRM, certain stakeholders have already 
engaged with SAMHSA and the Lifeline Administrator to develop 
georouting solutions for 988 calls. The record reflects that the three 
nationwide wireless providers have already implemented georouting for 
wireless 988 calls or are in the process of deploying georouting 
solutions in their networks. We support the voluntary efforts by 
wireless providers and our Federal partners to deploy georouting 
solutions for 988 calls in their wireless networks. We decline, 
however, to allow deployment of georouting solutions on a purely 
voluntary basis. Given the clear public interest benefits of supporting 
georouting for wireless 988 calls, we find that deployment and 
implementation of georouting solutions for wireless 988 calls should 
not be optional.
    13. We disagree with CTIA's contention that no commenters have 
offered ``a reason why rules are needed to ensure that 988 georouting 
solutions are implemented.'' As the Lifeline Administrator states, a 
georouting mandate is needed to ensure consistent access to the 988 
Lifeline's localized resources, prevent variations in support based on 
an individual's service provider, and to allow the 988 Lifeline to 
better serve individuals in crisis. The nation's mental health and 
substance use disorder community also supports immediate action to 
require wireless providers to implement georouting solutions for 
wireless 988 calls, emphasizing the urgency of connecting individuals 
in crisis to local services. For these reasons, we conclude that 
allowing wireless providers to implement georouting solutions on a 
purely voluntary basis would undermine our goal of ensuring that the 
benefits of georouting are realized nationwide in a timely manner.
    14. We further disagree with commenters that our georouting 
requirements would interfere with the efforts of the three major 
nationwide wireless providers to implement and deploy georouting 
solutions. The rules we adopt give wireless providers the flexibility 
to continue their efforts to implement the georouting solutions 
developed with SAMHSA and the Lifeline Administrator, ensuring that the 
benefits of improved 988 call routing can be realized without delay. 
ATIS asserts that ``[a] more flexible, requirements-based approach 
would facilitate the timely deployment of 988 routing solutions'' and 
allow wireless providers to ``continue their deployments.'' Further, as 
AT&T states, a general requirement will ``not interfere with existing 
efforts between wireless providers'' and will provide ``flexibility to 
adapt to changing technologies.''
    15. Georouting Required for all CMRS Providers. We find that 
requiring all CMRS providers to have the capability to provide 
georouting data with 988 calls is necessary to ensure that wireless 988 
callers receive the demonstrated benefits of georouting, regardless of 
the providers' network configurations. We define nationwide CMRS 
providers as those providers whose service extends to a majority of the 
population and land area of the United States. Non-nationwide CMRS 
providers include all CMRS providers other than a nationwide CMRS 
provider. We agree with Reimagine Crisis Response that ``[c]onnecting 
more people to timely and local crisis support and services through 
accurately routed 988 calls will save lives.'' For that reason, we 
decline to limit application of our rules to voice calls carried end-
to-end on IP networks, as advocated by some commenters. However, we 
recognize that current georouting solutions may rely on the IP-based 
capabilities of the Lifeline and wireless providers' networks, which 
may impact wireless providers' ability to transmit georouting data with 
wireless 988 calls over non-IP networks. Therefore, the rules we adopt 
require nationwide and non-nationwide providers to provide georouting 
data when available and offer flexibility for wireless providers to 
work with the Lifeline Administrator on a case-by-case basis to address 
any individualized network considerations. We also provide non-
nationwide providers an ample compliance deadline, as discussed below, 
to allow time for development of technical solutions. We conclude that 
this approach appropriately balances the public interest in providing 
critical improvements to life-saving services with CMRS providers' 
needs to develop technical solutions to implement the new requirements. 
We find that the targeted requirements we adopt give wireless providers 
sufficient flexibility to capitalize on their current technology and 
network configurations to ensure that the maximum number of wireless 
988 callers benefit from georouting as quickly as possible. The 
Commission will take further action, if necessary, to ensure that 
wireless providers are providing the Lifeline Administrator

[[Page 88893]]

with georouting data when available to ensure the Administrator is 
capable of routing wireless 988 calls.
    16. We are unpersuaded by arguments that non-nationwide CMRS 
providers should be exempt from implementing georouting for wireless 
988 calls. Rural Wireless Association (RWA) claims that georouting 
solutions have not ``been tested in a real-world application and 
implemented by any CMRS provider.'' Southern Linc also claims that non-
nationwide CMRS providers have not yet participated in the georouting 
``solutions development process.'' The record reflects, however, that 
the nationwide providers have developed and implemented or are in the 
process of implementing georouting solutions for wireless 988 calls. 
While we acknowledge that non-nationwide CMRS providers may face 
operational limitations when implementing georouting solutions for 
wireless 988 calls, we agree with commenters that non-nationwide CMRS 
providers will be able to leverage the georouting solutions developed 
and implemented by nationwide providers in collaboration with SAMHSA 
and the Lifeline Administrator. Further, several commenters highlight 
the importance of implementing georouting solutions to improve access 
to the 988 Lifeline's crisis intervention services for people in rural 
areas, who face a disproportionate risk of suicide and may need to be 
aware of limited mental healthcare resources available near their 
communities. We encourage non-nationwide CMRS providers to collaborate 
with SAMHSA and the Lifeline Administrator in developing and 
implementing georouting solutions. To further reduce the burden on non-
nationwide entities under the rules we adopt, we grant longer 
compliance timelines to non-nationwide CMRS providers, as discussed 
below.

Georouting Data Format Compatible With the Lifeline

    17. In the SFNPRM, we described our goal to ``undertake a holistic 
review to ensure that any georouting solution deployed is compatible 
with the needs and systems of the 988 Lifeline, as determined by 
SAMHSA, and successfully connects callers in crisis with the local 
support they need.'' The requirements we adopt will ensure that the 
vast majority of wireless 988 callers receive the benefits of 
georouting as expeditiously as possible by ensuring that georouting 
data is provided in a format that is compatible with the Lifeline's 
routing platform, maintaining the centralized routing system of the 988 
Lifeline, and giving wireless providers sufficient flexibility to 
implement and deploy georouting solutions.
    18. Capability to Provide Georouting Data. Consistent with the 
SFNPRM, we require all CMRS providers to have the capability to provide 
georouting data with 988 calls to the Lifeline Administrator in a 
format that is compatible with the Lifeline's routing platform. The 
record evinces support for this requirement. For example, CX360 states 
that georouting solutions that leverage the Lifeline's existing 
infrastructure ``create technical efficiencies'' and align with the 
Lifeline's efforts to provide ``community-based support with national-
level support for specific at-risk communities.'' T-Mobile asserts that 
compatibility with the Lifeline will avoid the significant costs 
incurred for network or system changes and ``minimize[ ] the risk of 
technological errors'' in efficiently delivering 988 calls. Several 
commenters also indicate that georouting data in a format that is 
compatible with the Lifeline's routing platform will prevent delays in 
deploying georouting solutions. Moreover, the Lifeline Administrator 
emphasizes, and we agree, that implementing georouting solutions that 
are compatible with the 988 Lifeline's ``existing infrastructure and a 
uniform standard developed in partnership with SAMHSA and the 
Administrator [will] allow the 988 Lifeline to better serve individuals 
in crisis.'' We emphasize that our rules create an ongoing obligation 
for wireless providers to ensure that georouting data is in a format 
that is compatible with the Lifeline's routing platform. We encourage 
wireless providers to collaborate with SAMHSA and the Lifeline 
Administrator in developing and testing georouting solutions that meet 
these compatibility requirements.
    19. The record reflects that the three nationwide wireless 
providers have already developed and implemented, or are in the process 
of implementing georouting solutions, that are compatible with the 
needs and systems of the 988 Lifeline. As the Lifeline Administrator 
notes, these georouting solutions are the preferred solution for the 
Lifeline, were designed to be compatible with the Lifeline's existing 
routing structure, and do not require ``creation of an entirely new 988 
Lifeline framework and architecture.'' We anticipate that the approach 
we adopt will allow wireless providers to build on the success of the 
efforts of the nationwide wireless providers, streamlining 
implementation and costs while facilitating faster deployment of 
georouting solutions.
    20. Given the importance of providing meaningful support to help-
seekers reaching out to the 988 Lifeline, we recognize that our Federal 
partners may choose to expand the functionality of the Lifeline's 
system in the future to support additional georouting data formats. We 
direct the Wireline Competition Bureau to routinely consult with our 
Federal partners at SAMHSA regarding the format of georouting data that 
is compatible with the Lifeline's system. We further direct the 
Wireline Competition Bureau to monitor the development of compatible 
georouting solutions and, if necessary, propose and seek comment on 
implementation parameters for wireless providers for any compatible 
georouting data that is substantially modified from the georouting rule 
adopted herein.
    21. Centralized Routing. Today, routing to the appropriate crisis 
call center is handled by a centralized routing system overseen by the 
Lifeline Administrator and supported by a grant from SAMHSA, and we 
find it is critical to retain this structure. We agree with commenters 
that our rules should preserve the role of the Lifeline Administrator 
in routing 988 calls to geographically appropriate local crisis 
centers. Consistent with the SFNPRM, we recognize that SAMHSA and the 
Lifeline Administrator are best suited to ensure that calls are 
properly routed and ultimately answered by a crisis center once the 
call is received by the Lifeline Administrator from the originating 
wireless provider. The record highlights that the Lifeline 
Administrator, under the direction of SAMHSA, plays a critical role in 
managing the 988 Lifeline's system by balancing call volume, ensuring 
calls are efficiently routed to appropriate and available crisis 
centers, and minimizing the technical burdens placed on crisis centers 
so they can focus on saving lives. As USTelecom emphasizes, the 
challenges associated with routing calls to the Lifeline are not 
limited to directing calls to the ``correct crisis center,'' but also 
ensuring they reach available crisis centers, given that many have 
varying operating hours.
    22. We find that the success of the Lifeline system in helping 
individuals in crisis underscores the importance of maintaining the 
centralized routing system. As the Lifeline Administrator notes, 
``[e]valuations of the 988 Lifeline service have found that the 
majority of callers were significantly more likely to feel less 
depressed, less suicidal, less overwhelmed, and more hopeful after 
speaking with a 988 Lifeline crisis

[[Page 88894]]

counselor.'' We find that the requirements we adopt appropriately 
maintain the critical role of the Lifeline in routing calls to crisis 
centers. Additionally, we believe that this approach alleviates record 
concern about the roles of CMRS providers and the Lifeline in the 988 
call path.
    23. Although some commenters argue that alternative georouting 
solutions that bypass the Lifeline's centralized routing system may 
offer some benefits for 988 callers, we find that the benefits of 
centralized routing greatly exceed the costs of localized routing. In 
the 988 Report and Order, 85 FR 57767 (Sept. 16, 2020), the Commission 
found that the Lifeline's centralized routing process offered numerous 
benefits for both the providers that route calls to the 988 Lifeline 
and the Lifeline itself, including faster implementation, lower costs 
to maintain 988 routing, and better Lifeline service. We are convinced 
by the record that these benefits still remain true today. In 
particular, we believe that maintaining the Lifeline's centralized 
routing process will simplify administration of the Lifeline and allow 
for faster implementation of georouting solutions. For example, the 
Lifeline Administrator states that the georouting solutions developed 
with the nationwide wireless providers using the Lifeline's centralized 
routing process ``would be cost-effective'' for both the Lifeline and 
providers, and would allow for faster deployment of georouting 
solutions.
    24. Specialized Services. We decline, at this time, to take 
specific action to apply our georouting requirements to the Lifeline's 
specialized services. In the SFNPRM, we sought comment on whether 
georouting is necessary for specialized services, and whether there are 
any unique considerations for routing such calls that may impact our 
proposals. As discussed above, the 988 Lifeline's interactive voice 
response (IVR) system currently provides callers the opportunity to 
connect with specialized services by selecting ``1'' for the Veterans 
Crisis Line, ``2'' for a Spanish language line, and ``3'' for a 
specialized LGBTQI+ line.
    25. We recognize that several commenters assert that georouting 
data may provide benefits for individuals who use the Lifeline's 
specialized services, such as the LGBTQI+ community and veterans. 
However, the record demonstrates that there are unique considerations 
for specialized services, including the need for access to specially 
trained counselors, resource constraints, and increased privacy 
concerns. For example, Trevor Project explains that while ``geographic 
location can provide a strong cultural connection for many 988 
callers,'' research has shown that ``competency with LGBTQ+ youth 
issues is the critical element necessary to effectively support LGBTQ+ 
young people in crisis.'' We believe our Federal partners at SAMHSA and 
the VA are best positioned to evaluate the benefits and challenges of 
using georouting data provided with 988 calls for the Lifeline's 
subnetworks. We anticipate that maintaining the existing centralized 
routing process will provide the Lifeline flexibility to use its 
expertise in deciding the most geographically appropriate crisis 
centers to direct callers who select specialized services. We also 
anticipate that our rules will better allow the Lifeline to adapt and 
expand as necessary to meet the unique needs of 988 callers who select 
specialized services.

Cell-Based Location for Georouting

    26. The definition of ``georouting data'' we adopt specifies that 
location data is generated using cell-based location technology. This 
aspect of the georouting rule is central to allowing the nationwide 
providers' solutions to proceed and maintain compatibility with the 
Lifeline's centralized routing platform. Mental health and crisis 
counseling experts emphasize the importance of connecting callers to 
local resources while still protecting the privacy of callers. As 
Trevor Project states, ``it is vital that a georouting solution is 
adopted so that those reaching out to 988 can trust it will not 
jeopardize their privacy.'' After considering the record, we find that 
generating location information using cell-based location technology 
will best identify a caller's location to enable routing of 988 calls 
to geographically appropriate crisis centers, while maintaining the 
privacy interests of callers. We anticipate that this approach will 
also provide nationwide providers flexibility to deploy current 
georouting solutions developed with the SAMHSA and the Lifeline 
Administrator. As discussed throughout this Third Report and Order, 
although there are commenters that argue an alternative routing 
solution is preferable, we decline to stray from the Lifeline's current 
routing structure and we encourage stakeholders and our Federal 
partners to continue to coordinate on the best way to get callers to 
the geographically appropriate crisis center.

Aggregation of Cell-Based Location Data

    27. We require CMRS providers to aggregate location data generated 
from cell-based technology to a level that will not identify the 
location of the cell site or base station receiving the 988 call or 
otherwise identify the precise location of the handset. In the SFNPRM, 
we sought comment on whether the Commission should mandate the use of 
one or more particular geographic boundaries that would be applied for 
georouting solutions and asked commenters to address whether certain 
boundaries are sufficiently granular to achieve the goal of connecting 
callers with local resources during a time of crisis. Our decision 
carefully balances two core objectives of georouting: ensuring the 
location data is sufficiently granular to connect the caller with local 
resources and maintaining the caller's privacy.
    28. We agree with commenters that CMRS providers need flexibility 
to facilitate timely deployment of 988 georouting solutions and account 
for providers' network capabilities. To give CMRS providers 
flexibility, we do not specify a particular method for ensuring that 
location data is aggregated to a sufficiently granular level and allow 
providers to use technically feasible options for meeting this 
requirement. Similarly, we decline to mandate the use of one or more 
particular geographic boundaries. We do, however, require wireless 
providers to aggregate location data to a level that does not identify 
the location of the cell site or base station receiving the 988 call or 
otherwise identify the precise location of the handset.
    29. We observe that the georouting solutions the three nationwide 
wireless providers have deployed or are currently implementing employ 
different geographic boundaries. For example, T-Mobile's georouting 
solution obtains caller location information using cell-based 
technology, aggregates that location data using Federal Information 
Processing Series (``FIPS'') code boundaries, and transmits the 
georouting data as a 6-digit code in the P-Asserted-Identity (PAI) 
header of a Session Initiation Protocol (SIP) invite message to the 
Lifeline. The Federal FIPS codes are maintained and assigned by the 
Census Bureau to identify geographic areas. Whereas, AT&T's georouting 
solution aggregates location data using wire center boundaries 
correlating to the originating cell site. A wire center, as defined in 
47 CFR 51.5, is the location of an incumbent Local Exchange Carrier 
(LEC) switching facility containing one or more central offices. The 
wire center boundaries define the area in which all customers served by 
a given wire center are located. The Lifeline Administrator has 
confirmed that these solutions are

[[Page 88895]]

compatible with the Lifeline's network configuration and centralized 
routing system. Commenters generally agree that county level or wire-
center boundaries are sufficiently generalized to protect callers' 
privacy while still enabling the Lifeline to effectively route calls to 
geographically appropriate crisis centers.
    30. NACO requests that we provide sufficient flexibility to allow 
State and local authorities ``to define the boundaries within their 
jurisdiction that are most suitable'' for georouting purposes. While we 
recognize the role that counties play in addressing the nationwide 
mental health crisis, we decline at this time to require wireless 
providers to aggregate location data based on a particular State or 
local authority's definition of appropriate geographic boundaries. 
Washington Department of Health claims that allowing wireless providers 
to use multiple geographic boundaries ``would negatively impact crisis 
centers' ability to accurately predict the volume of need and provide 
services,'' which would be particularly challenging ``in areas where 
multiple languages are spoken by different communities.'' As the 
Lifeline Administrator notes, states and localities are already 
involved in the ``operational decision making process with SAMHSA and 
Vibrant'' regarding routing of 988 calls and coverage areas of crisis 
centers. We acknowledge that wireless providers' geographic boundaries 
must align with the 988 network parameters of the Lifeline 
Administrator and encourage SAMHSA and the Lifeline Administrator to 
continue their collaborative efforts with stakeholders, and we believe 
that preserving the Lifeline's centralized routing process provides our 
Federal partners flexibility to develop and expand georouting solutions 
to meet the Lifeline's needs.
    31. We anticipate that our flexible approach toward adopting a 
georouting mandate strikes the right balance between ensuring that 
location data is sufficiently granular to achieve the goal of 
connecting wireless 988 callers with local resources without delay, 
aligning with the requirements delineated by SAMHSA and the Lifeline 
Administrator, and maintaining the privacy of 988 callers. We believe 
that the requirement to aggregate georouting data to a level that does 
not identify the location of the cell site or base station receiving 
the 988 call or a more precise location of the handset alleviates 
record concern about protecting privacy of callers in more densely 
populated areas. We also anticipate that our approach gives wireless 
providers discretion to aggregate georouting data using technically 
feasible methods that are best suited for their networks.

Technical Considerations

    32. In the SFNPRM, we recognized that there could be technological 
limitations associated with some georouting solutions and sought 
comment on whether solutions would work if, for instance, a caller is 
roaming or if a particular wireless call is out-of-scope for a 
georouting solution or presents with unreadable routing data. We find 
that the limitations commenters raised are addressable without 
jeopardizing the georouting rule we adopt, and which is so critical to 
further improve the 988 Lifeline for callers in crisis.
    33. Roaming. Some commenters state technical limitations associated 
with georouting solutions may arise when individuals call 988 while 
roaming. CTIA asserts that the ``home network operator'' may not 
receive location information, such as the originating cell ID, or may 
not be able to ``correlate the visited provider's cell ID'' to 
geographic boundaries to generate georouting data. AT&T states that 
``4G and newer wireless networks,'' as designed, do ``not support 
georouting a 988 call made while roaming.'' Although we acknowledge the 
substantial public interest benefits in requiring georouting for all 
wireless 988 calls, we exclude calls transmitted using roaming 
capabilities from application of the requirements we adopt to account 
for the technical limitations identified in the record. We anticipate 
that our targeted approach will give providers sufficient flexibility 
to maximize their current technology and network configurations to 
ensure that the vast majority of wireless 988 callers benefit from 
georouting as quickly as possible. Calls using roaming capabilities may 
be routed to qualified crisis counselors using the area code and 
exchange, as they are today. Upon development of a further record 
pertaining to the technical feasibility of transmitting georouting data 
with roaming calls, the Commission may further consider extending the 
georouting requirements to these calls. Issues raised in the SFNPRM 
that are not addressed in this Third Report and Order remain pending.
    34. Default Routing. In the SFNPRM, we sought comment on whether 
988 calls with unreadable routing data would default to routing by area 
code or be redirected to a national back-up center. The record 
demonstrates that, while the benefits of georouting for 988 calls are 
clear, it is critical that callers still have access to the Lifeline's 
vital services if georouting data is unavailable or unreadable. CX360, 
a service provider that contracts with the Lifeline Administrator to 
provide voice and SMS-based information services after calls reach the 
Lifeline, explains that the Lifeline's IVR system has ``built-in backup 
routing logic that routes the call based on the caller's area code.'' 
Several commenters that addressed this issue support defaulting to 
routing by area code and exchange when georouting data is unreadable. 
We agree, and we view retaining the centralized routing process will 
enable the Lifeline to route callers to crisis centers based on area 
code and exchange in the event that georouting data is unavailable or 
unreadable, and such calls will not be disconnected.

Alternative Georouting Solutions

    35. We emphasized in the SFNPRM that we believe implementing a 
georouting solution without delay to connect callers to 988 with 
geographically appropriate crisis call centers provides better care. 
With this urgency in mind, we sought comment on the feasibility of 
requiring alternative georouting solutions that have not yet been 
tested, developed, or presented to SAMHSA or the Lifeline Administrator 
and asked whether such solutions would expedite or slow deployment of 
georouting. After reviewing the record, we decline, at this time, to 
adopt commenters' alternative georouting proposals that would bypass 
the Lifeline's centralized routing system or require CMRS providers to 
route directly to crisis centers. Several commenters argue that the 
Commission should consider adopting rules that allow routing of 988 
calls directly to NG911 networks upon request from states that can 
manage 988 calls directly and have defined ``geospatial boundaries'' 
for 988 crisis centers. Intrado Life & Safety asks the Commission to 
adopt rules that support direct routing of 988 calls to ``state-
designated IP Protocol (IP) points of interconnection (POI),'' such as 
the ``Emergency Services IP Network (ESInet)'' in alignment with Next 
Generation 911 (NG911), upon request from a state. Similarly, Comtech 
urges the Commission to adopt rules that provide ``state 988 
authorities the flexibility to develop their own direct, dedicated, IP-
based 988 call paths and system architecture to meet their local 
needs.'' The National Emergency Number Association (NENA) also urges 
the Commission to consider the use of NG911 technologies to support 
georouting for 988 calls and argues that

[[Page 88896]]

a 988 call should ``be treated as an emergency call.''
    36. We do not adopt these proposals at this time as we work to 
expeditiously improve routing for 988 calls within the 988 Lifeline's 
system. Nevertheless, recognizing the importance of developing 
solutions capable of connecting callers to the most geographically 
appropriate resources, we encourage parties to continue exploring 
alternative localized georouting solutions. In the SFNPRM, we stated 
that the ultimate goal of the coordination between SAMHSA, the Lifeline 
Administrator, and the Commission was to identify one or more 
georouting solutions that are compatible with the 988 Lifeline's system 
and achieve the policy objectives of connecting callers in crisis with 
local support. We further stated that our goal was to build on the 
progress made by all stakeholders to identify a georouting solution to 
enhance the support and resources available to callers in crisis. The 
record reflects support for this approach.
    37. We are also concerned that implementing a localized routing 
model at this time would be contrary to our goal of ensuring that 
georouting is available without delay to connect the majority of 
callers to 988 with geographically appropriate crisis centers that 
enhance the services available to those in crisis. CTIA asserts that 
proposals that require modification of the centralized routing process 
for 988 calls are inconsistent with the georouting solutions that have 
been developed by the nationwide wireless providers, major 
stakeholders, SAMHSA, and the Lifeline Administrator. The Lifeline 
Administrator and CX360 point to necessary infrastructure changes that 
could delay implementation of georouting solutions. Additionally, the 
Lifeline Administrator states that ``reliance on technologies, such as 
NG911, can impact the ability . . . to carry out its duties as 
Administrator, including responsibility for routing of contacts to the 
988 Lifeline.'' Overall, we do not have the full and detailed record 
necessary to adopt a rule that requires providers to bypass the 
existing centralized routing system, and we find that doing so would 
jeopardize the important next step that we are taking by implementing 
georouting as soon as possible.
    38. We decline NENA's request to establish an expiration date for 
mandatory georouting requirements. NENA emphasizes the potential 
benefits of implementing georouting solutions for wireless 988 calls 
that leverage NG911 technologies. While parties claim that NG911 
technology could provide benefits for georouting calls to the 988 
Lifeline, those benefits do not negate the current need for the 
requirements that we adopt in this Third Report and Order. Given the 
significant public interest benefits of supporting georouting for 
wireless 988 calls, we decline to set an end date for our rules, but we 
may consider further technological developments in the future.

Implementation Time Frame for Georouting 988 Calls to the Lifeline

    39. Recognizing the urgency of the need to continue the 
Commission's work to provide meaningful access to the 988 Lifeline, we 
sought comment in the SFNPRM on the appropriate timeline for deployment 
of a georouting solution, and specifically asked commenters to identify 
technical, financial, operational, legal, or other factors that could 
influence a mandated time frame. Thanks in large part to the work of 
SAMHSA and nationwide CMRS providers to date, the record indicates that 
implementation of solutions for sending georouting data along with 
wireless calls is attainable in the near term. We therefore establish 
an implementation time frame following the effective date of the 
georouting rule of 30 days for nationwide CMRS providers and 24 months 
for all non-nationwide CMRS providers. As we define them above, 
nationwide CMRS providers are those providers whose service extends to 
a majority of the population and land area of the United States. Non-
nationwide CMRS providers include all CMRS providers other than a 
nationwide CMRS provider.
    40. The implementation time frame we provide nationwide CMRS 
providers corresponds to these providers' own solution-completion 
timelines. T-Mobile, for example, began sending georouting information 
to the 988 Lifeline even before the publication of our rules and has 
since announced that its customers now ``have their calls routed to 
crisis centers close to their actual location.'' All three nationwide 
providers have implemented, or are in the process of implementing, 
their georouting solutions for wireless 988 calls. Consistent with 
these expectations, we find sufficient a 30-day period after the 
effective date of our rules to require nationwide CMRS providers to 
begin sending georouting data with wireless 988 calls. Establishing 
such a time frame represents a critical first step toward ensuring that 
callers--a vast majority of whom subscribe to a nationwide CMRS 
provider--will be routed to a geographically appropriate call center.
    41. Simultaneously, we conclude that 24 months provides sufficient 
time for non-nationwide CMRS providers to begin sending georouting 
information to the 988 Lifeline. Commenters agree that non-nationwide 
CMRS providers require more time to implement a georouting solution. 
For example, Intrado Life & Safety proposes that their solution could 
be completed within a year but acknowledge that additional time may be 
needed for non-nationwide CMRS providers. We find that 24 months 
strikes an appropriate balance between giving these providers the 
necessary time to come into compliance and the pressing need to 
expeditiously connect callers to a geographically appropriate call 
center. A 24-month period for implementation, as noted by CCA and 
Southern Linc, also accords with our decision to give providers 24 
months to implement location-based routing for 911 call solutions.
    42. RWA asserts that small rural CMRS providers lack the resources 
to implement a georouting solution before 36 months. Although we 
understand RWA's contention that a lack of funding and personnel 
comparable to the nationwide providers warrants additional time for 
small rural CMRS providers, RWA has not demonstrated the need for the 
additional 12 months beyond the two years we are providing. Recognizing 
that their 36-month recommendation exceeds the 24 months that were 
given for 911 location-based call solutions to be implemented, RWA 
contends that with 911, ``large nationwide CMRS providers had already 
begun implementing location-based solutions, which was an influential 
factor in . . . adopting a shorter implementation timeline,'' but that 
``[i]n this case, such early implementation has not occurred.'' RWA 
argues then that the ``untested nature of the available 988 georouting 
solutions and lack of real-world implementation by any CMRS provider'' 
merits an additional 12 months for implementation of a georouting 
solution. Yet, as observed above, nationwide CMRS providers have 
implemented or are in the process of implementing their georouting 
solutions. And RWA does not otherwise justify their recommended 
timeline of 36 months, which--at minimum--adds two years beyond the 
time frames cited as necessary by existing proposals that account for 
small CMRS providers. INCOMPAS also argues, and CTIA agrees, that 
additional time would be needed--up to four years--for sending 
georouting information with text

[[Page 88897]]

messages. However, as we do not mandate that text messages send 
georouting information at this time, we need not address this argument. 
Additionally, we note that the Commission previously established a 
uniform 24-month implementation time frame for 988 itself, which 
involved implementing 10-digit dialing in 87 area codes as well as 
reprogramming, translating, or replacing telephone switches that would 
not otherwise support 988 as a three-digit dialing code. We do not 
anticipate, by comparison, that implementation of a georouting solution 
will prove more burdensome. It is our predictive judgment that 24 
months accounts for the technical and cost-related challenges non-
nationwide CMRS providers will face in implementing this lifesaving 
change to the 988 system.

Routing Voice Calls and Texts to 988

    43. In the SFNPRM, we asked whether our existing 988 voice and 
texting rules should be broadened to allow for implementing a 
georouting solution. We conclude that it's appropriate to revise these 
rules to permit routing to the national suicide prevention and mental 
health crisis hotline system without need for translation to the toll 
free access number. In so doing, we better futureproof the use of 988, 
including by enabling georouting solutions that may require broader 
routing parameters. In making these changes, we also codify our 2022 
waiver order permitting covered text providers to route covered 988 
text messages to the 988 Lifeline without translation to the toll free 
number. We previously acknowledged that ``as implementation has 
progressed, providers have found that, in practice, translating 988 
text messages to the current toll free access number for the Lifeline . 
. . may negatively impact the experience of individuals texting the 
Lifeline.'' Problems identified as arising from the current requirement 
included potential confusion when a number different than 988 appears 
on an individual's device when receiving responses, possibly resulting 
in delayed, frustrated, or abandoned efforts to seek help. Our 
revisions provide greater flexibility so as to avoid any similar such 
problems. Individuals will still be able to dial the toll free ten-
digit access number to reach the 988 Lifeline.
    44. We do not adopt iCERT's proposal to amend our rule to require 
providers to route directly to a State or local 988 call center. The 
amendment we adopt resolves the issues identified above without 
potential delay to the implementation of georouting solutions. We 
therefore decline at this time to adopt alternative approaches that 
would bypass the Lifeline's centralized routing platform.

Legal Authority

    45. As we tentatively concluded in the SFNPRM, we find that Title 
II and Title III of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended (Act), 
provide us with the authority to adopt the rules we promulgate. The 
Supreme Court has previously recognized that Title III grants the 
Commission a ``comprehensive mandate'' in regulating spectrum usage, 
and lower courts have routinely determined that Title III confers broad 
authority to manage spectrum in the public interest. Consistent with 
these decisions, we find significant public interest benefits will 
likely inure as a result of our georouting mandate by connecting 
individuals in crisis with geographically appropriate public safety and 
counseling resources.
    46. In the SFNPRM, we asked whether section 251(e), which provides 
the Commission its numbering authority, acts as an additional source of 
authority. Section 251(e)(4), specifically, designates 988 as the 
universal telephone number for the national suicide prevention and 
mental health crisis hotline system. We agree with commenters that our 
authority extends to mandating that a georouting solution be 
implemented. We also agree with commenters that in so doing, we further 
the goals of previous congressional directives, including to adopt 
regulations that will ease access to suicide prevention and mental 
health services. In mandating that a georouting solution be implemented 
and in modifying our voice and text routing rules, we thus exercise our 
numbering authority pursuant to Congress's direction and therefore find 
that 251(e) provides us authority to promulgate the rules we adopt.

Benefits and Costs of 988 Georouting

    47. By reducing the geographic mismatch between caller locations 
and area codes and moving 988's life-saving interventions closer in 
time and space to those in distress, georouting will generate 
mortality-reduction and other benefits far exceeding implementation 
costs.

Benefits

    48. Reduced Suicide Mortality. The number of Americans who are at 
risk of having their wireless 988 calls routed to a faraway 988 
Lifeline call center is vast. Approximately 80% of calls to 988 are 
from wireless devices. In a mobile society where people hold on to 
familiar wireless phone numbers, there is often no connection between 
the geographic origins of 988 calls and the area codes of the callers' 
phone numbers. According to a study conducted by Pew Research Center, 
``each year about 36 million Americans move residences and nearly half 
of adults living in urban areas have a cellphone number from somewhere 
else. Additionally, nationwide at least 10% of all adult Americans have 
a cellphone number from somewhere other than where they reside.'' While 
we recognize that 988 is a critical resource of growing importance for 
younger people, for the purposes of our analysis we focus on all 
adults, that is, individuals 18 years or older.
    49. We use a three-step process to estimate reduced suicide 
mortality risk. First, we identify suicide victims who could have tried 
to summon 988 assistance and been misrouted. After the launch of 988 on 
July 16, 2022, a total of 2,395 American adult suicide victims 18 and 
older could have sought a 988 emergency intervention but had cellphone 
numbers prone to misrouting. Total suicides for adults 18 years or 
older in 2022 were 47,891. If we allocate by months, then there were 
~23,946 in the latter half of the year (i.e., 6/12 = 0.5). We can 
alternatively allocate by total suicides for July-December (i.e., 
24,742/49,746 = 0.500008085), which gives the same result. Polling 
results tell us that 431 (i.e., 18% of 2,395) of these suicide victims 
could have been aware of 988 and possibly called. Kaiser Family 
Foundation polling indicates that as of mid-2023, only 18% of adults 
reported familiarity with 988. Second, we identify those victims 
subject to possible emergency-response delays: Nearly 13 (i.e., 3% of 
431) would have required the sort of immediate and follow-up care that 
could be more effectively provided by georouting 988 calls to the 
locality in which the caller resides without revealing the caller's 
precise location or otherwise compromising their privacy. We estimate 
that 2.2 (i.e., 17% of 13) of these suicides could have been avoided by 
988 georouting. Our rationale is that wireless call misrouting is 
suboptimal: localities have first-responder and follow-up resources 
tailored to local settings and circumstances to optimize their 
effectiveness; such resources can often only be deployed by local 
crisis centers. The delays, frictions, and mismatches triggered by 
misrouting increase response time, and every minute saved in a suicide 
intervention reduces suicide mortality. The Commission previously 
estimated that a one-minute reduction in emergency-

[[Page 88898]]

response time reduces mortality by 17%. Thus, while the rules 
promulgated do not impose a dispatchable location requirement--that is, 
a caller's exact location cannot be identified--by connecting callers 
to geographically appropriate crisis centers, we anticipate that better 
response times, and the benefits thereof, will result. Third, we 
estimate that Americans would have been collectively willing to pay 
$27.5 million annually and nearly $130 million over a five-year period 
for a mortality-risk reduction of this size. Using a recent Value of 
Reduced Mortality Risk (VRMR) of $12.5 million, a mortality-risk 
reduction equivalent to 2.2 lives is worth 2.20 * $12,500,000 = 
$27,500,000. The present value of five annual payments discounted at 2% 
according to Office of Management and Budget Circular A-4 is 
$129.620,136.
    50. Other Benefits and Possible Benefits Underestimation. Our 
estimate of $120 million in benefits over five years is an 
underestimate because it excludes youth age 17 and under, who rely 
heavily on wireless devices and 6,542 of whom committed suicide in 
2022. Studies indicate 53% of children in the United States have a 
smartphone by age 11, with over 95% of teens between 13 and 17 years of 
age having access to a cellphone. In addition, suicide attempts--more 
broadly acts of self-harm--demand medical treatment, put people out of 
work, and diminish survivors' quality of life. Yet, we have not 
estimated the savings from reduced medical expenses, lost work, and 
lost quality of life. We also do not count the benefits of less 
property damage attributable to suicide attempts and savings of 988 
Lifeline call center resources from fewer misrouted calls. In addition, 
misrouted 988 callers often resort to calling 911. A reduction in these 
calls would likely save further costs. Lastly, we have neglected to 
estimate the devasting emotional toll 988 wireless call georouting 
would spare suicide victims' families, friends, and communities.

Costs

    51. We estimate that the implementation costs of georouting 988 
wireless calls will be relatively small. RWA claims ``RWA carrier 
members, all of whom are small rural non-nationwide CMRS providers, 
estimate that 988 georouting solutions could cost them at least $50,000 
for implementation and over $15,000 per month for third-party services, 
not including continual labor costs for testing. Such a cost is an 
immense burden for a small rural non-nationwide CMRS provider.'' Some 
commenters propose cost-effective 988 routing solutions: CX360 that 
``[t]here are no incremental service costs to wireless providers for 
CX360's georouting solution beyond the initial development expense for 
call header configuration by each wireless provider. All other parties 
in the existing 988 Lifeline call flow are already configured to 
support this model.'' Vibrant indicates that ``[t]he georouting 
solution developed in conjunction with Vibrant's partners for the 988 
Lifeline telephony infrastructure and major wireless providers 
represents the preferred solution that would allow real-time routing 
updates without the creation of an entirely new 988 Lifeline framework 
and architecture. This solution would be cost-effective not only for 
the 988 Lifeline but for providers as well and is able to be deployed 
faster than other proposed solutions.'' In the nearer term, 
``nationwide wireless providers AT&T, T-Mobile, and Verizon have 
achieved consensus with the Lifeline Administrator, Vibrant, on the 
contours of georouting solutions and are working to implement them as 
quickly as practicable.'' The georouting solutions rely on geographic 
information associated with call origination, such as the cell-site 
identification number, which the provider can translate into a county 
identifier. Based the record, we conclude that cost-effective 988 
wireless call georouting solutions exist in theory and in practice. To 
minimize their financial burden, non-nationwide wireless providers 
facing greater financial constraints have been granted a full 24 months 
to find and implement a solution.

Additional Proposals

    52. We appreciate the opportunity, as the expert regulatory agency 
on telecommunications in the United States, to help facilitate access 
to the 988 Lifeline's critical mental health and suicide prevention 
services. It is also important that we recognize the important role 
that our Federal partners and others play in operating the 988 
Lifeline. In response to the SFNPRM, some commenters raised important 
issues that are more appropriately addressed by other parties or may 
fall outside the scope of this proceeding. We address these issues 
below and encourage interested parties to collaborate with our Federal 
partners at SAMHSA and the VA, along with other stakeholders, to 
continue their efforts in enhancing the effectiveness of the 988 
Lifeline.
    53. Transparency. Several commenters emphasized the importance of 
transparent communication and education about how georouting data is 
used for wireless 988 calls. For example, NAMI asserts that 
transparency regarding the use of georouting data will help ``build 
trust in the 988 Lifeline'' and alleviate fears about sharing location 
information, which may have resulted from factors such as a ``historic 
distrust'' of emergency response systems or misinformation about the 
use of such data. The Electronic Privacy Information Center (EPIC) also 
argues that transparently acknowledging the harms of non-consensual 
interventions for 988 callers can help mitigate ``the chilling effects 
of implementing mandated georouting on would-be 988 callers.'' We 
recognize the importance of transparent communication and believe that 
the Commission's website, together with continued collaboration with 
our Federal partners at SAMHSA, will serve as a valuable means of 
consumer education. We also expect that relevant 988 stakeholders will 
help contribute to these educational efforts.
    54. EPIC also urges the Commission to be transparent about the 
actions taken in the rare instances when a 988 call is transferred to 
911. The Lifeline Administrator states that ``[i]n rare situations, a 
988 crisis counselor may contact a public safety answering point 
dispatcher because of concerns about an immediate risk of life, 
pursuant to the 988 Lifeline Suicide Safety policy.'' While we 
recognize harms can occur from a non-consensual interventions, the 
georouting requirements we adopt apply only to CMRS providers routing 
calls to the 988 Lifeline, which is distinct from the functions 
performed by the Lifeline Administrator or individual crisis centers 
after the Lifeline receives the calls. The Commission has had no role 
in establishing, maintaining, or operating the 988 Lifeline's routing 
system or the facilities and systems that enable it, and is not a party 
to any agreement that the Lifeline Administrator and/or SAMHSA has 
entered to establish, structure, operate, govern, or fund the system.
    55. 988 Lifeline Funding and Services. We also received comments 
regarding the need for adequate funding to ensure that the 988 Lifeline 
and crisis centers can effectively support georouting, as well as other 
recommendations that commenters claim would improve the general 
effectiveness of the 988 Lifeline. While these recommendations fall 
outside of our jurisdiction, we note that our Federal partners at 
SAMHSA are ``planning for anticipated operational, training and 
procedural updates [that] will require active engagement with partners 
including states, territories, tribes and crisis centers.'' We also 
encourage stakeholders to work with

[[Page 88899]]

Congress to ensure appropriate funding for the 988 Lifeline.
    56. 911 Interoperability. We received several comments urging the 
Commission to consider issues pertaining to the interoperability 
between the 988 Lifeline and 911 services. For example, NENA argues 
that ``988 must technically and operationally interoperate with [911] 
and first responder operations.'' Similarly, the National Association 
of State 911 Administrators (NASNA) argues that as the 988 system 
evolves, successful interoperability with NG911 will be essential 
``when there is a crisis that requires an escalated response.'' We 
agree with commenters that facilitating interoperability between 988 
and 911 services is an important goal, however these proposals are 
beyond the scope of this proceeding, and we decline to address them 
further here. We also note that the Lifeline Administrator is currently 
``involved in ongoing efforts at the local, state, and national 
levels'' to address the interoperability between 988 and 911 services. 
We, therefore, encourage stakeholders to collaborate with our Federal 
partners.
    57. Coordination with American Indian and Alaska Native 
Communities. Northwest Portland Area Indian Health Board (NPAIHB) 
recommends that the Commission, SAMHSA, and wireless providers consult 
with Tribal communities to ensure that American Indian and Alaska 
Native communities are ``able to utilize the 988 Lifeline and be 
connected to locally centralized suicide prevention and crisis service 
centers when using a wireless device.'' We support NPAIHB's suggestion 
and believe connecting Tribal community members with local crisis 
centers is crucial to providing these communities with the meaningful 
help they need. As such, we stand ready to work with our Federal 
partners and industry to assist American Indian and Alaska Native 
communities' access the life-saving resources of the 988 Lifeline.
    58. Opt-Out, website, and Call Disclosure Requirements. We received 
comments urging the Commission to consider whether 988 callers will 
have the opportunity to opt out of sharing georouting data. The 
Massachusetts Association for Mental Health (MAMH) and EPIC urge the 
Commission to ``require 988 websites to indicate that georouting is 
used'' and provide information about accessing the Lifeline's national 
backup center or individual crisis centers. EPIC also argues that 
``disclosure about georouting and non-georouted alternatives needs to 
occur during a call.'' To the extent that commenters raise concerns 
regarding disclosures about the use of georouting data on 988 websites 
or after the Lifeline's centralized routing system receives a call, 
such issues address actions by entities that are beyond the scope of 
this proceeding. Additionally, the georouting rules we adopt do not 
require wireless providers to transmit more precise geolocation 
information with wireless 988 calls, but rather require aggregated 
georouting data that maintains caller privacy in order to enhance the 
Lifeline's routing mechanism. Therefore, we decline, at this time, to 
require wireless providers to include specific disclosures regarding 
the use of georouting data.
    59. Cost Recovery. RWA argues that the Commission should ``allocate 
funds to subsidize'' implementation efforts by non-nationwide CMRS 
providers to comply with a georouting mandate. RWA further argues that 
small rural non-nationwide CMRS providers ``cannot pass the costs of 
988 georouting compliance onto their customers without jeopardizing 
their [Universal Service Fund] support.'' RWA's cost estimates lack any 
specificity or detail for us to determine whether those costs, which 
are also provided in isolation, would indeed jeopardize their universal 
service support. Further, we did not propose any cost recovery 
mechanisms in the SFNPRM and we will not adopt any here. As explained 
in the analysis of benefits and costs section, the benefits of 
implementing georouting for wireless 988 calls significantly outweigh 
the costs to CMRS providers. Moreover, the rules we adopt are flexible 
and we encourage non-nationwide CMRS providers to develop the most cost 
effective georouting solution with the technical parameters set forth 
herein.
    60. Customer Proprietary Network Information (CPNI) and Third Party 
Vendor Issues. EPIC asks the Commission to prohibit wireless providers 
from ``sharing 988-related data even if the subscriber has opted in to 
sharing their CPNI'' and to ensure that wireless providers and ``their 
vendors meet basic cybersecurity requirements.'' EPIC argues that the 
Commission has authority under Sec.  222 of the Communications Act, as 
amended ``to hold carriers responsible for safeguarding'' CPNI. We 
agree that protecting the privacy and security of callers is 
imperative. The rules we adopt make clear that wireless providers must 
aggregate location data generated from cell-based technology to a 
sufficiently granular level to maintain caller privacy.

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 in this Third Report and Order on small 
entities.
    62. Paperwork Reduction Act Analysis. The Third Report and Order 
does not contain proposed information collection(s) subject to the 
Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (PRA), Public Law 104-13. In addition, 
therefore, it does not contain any new or modified information 
collection burden for small business concerns with fewer than 25 
employees, pursuant to the Small Business Paperwork Relief Act of 2002, 
Public Law 107-198, see 44 U.S.C. 3506(c)(4).
    63. 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 to 5 U.S.C. 
801(a)(1)(A).

Final Regulatory Flexibility Analysis

    64. As required by the Regulatory Flexibility Act of 1980, as 
amended (RFA), an Initial Regulatory Flexibility Analysis (IRFA) was 
incorporated in the Implementation of the National Suicide Hotline Act 
of 2018, Second Further Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (SFNPRM), 89 FR 
46340 (May 29, 2024). The Commission sought written public comment on 
the proposals in the SFNPRM, including comments on the IRFA. The 
comments received are discussed below. This Final Regulatory 
Flexibility Analysis (FRFA) conforms to the RFA.

Need for, and Objectives of, the Report and Order

    65. In the Third Report and Order, the Commission adopts rules to 
facilitate access to life-saving services for people in suicidal, 
mental health, and substance use crises by improving the routing of 
wireless calls to the 988 Lifeline. The 988 Lifeline was originally

[[Page 88900]]

designed to route calls to crisis centers based on the area code and 
exchange associated with a caller's device. However, as technology 
trends have shifted from landline phones to mobile phones, many callers 
now seek help from the 988 Lifeline using wireless devices with area 
codes that may not correspond to their physical locations. Although the 
988 Lifeline provides meaningful support for help-seekers regardless of 
their location, discrepancies between callers' physical locations and 
the area codes associated with their wireless devices can complicate 
access to local resources, which mental health advocates emphasize are 
critical to achieving the full life-saving potential of the 988 
Lifeline.
    66. The rules adopted in the Third Report and Order aim to 
facilitate access to critical local resources for the vast majority of 
wireless 988 callers by requiring wireless providers to implement 
georouting solutions for 988 calls. Specifically, the Third Report and 
Order requires that all Commercial Mobile Radio Service (CMRS) 
providers have the capability to provide georouting data with 988 calls 
to the Lifeline Administrator in a format that is compatible with the 
Lifeline's routing platform. The Commission defines ``Lifeline 
Administrator'' as the entity that ``controls the 988 call routing 
platform pursuant to contract with the Substance Abuse Mental Health 
Services Administration.'' The Third Report and Order also requires 
that all CMRS providers must provide georouting data, when available, 
with 988 calls to the Lifeline Administrator. These requirements will 
enable the 988 Lifeline to route wireless calls to appropriate crisis 
centers based on the geographic area associated with the origin of a 
988 call, rather than by area code and exchange. With ``georouting 
data'' as defined under the Commission's rule, CMRS providers must 
aggregate location data generated from cell-based technology to a level 
that does not identify the location of the cell site and base station 
receiving the 988 call or otherwise specify the caller's precise 
location. The Third Report and Order adopts a 30 day timeline for 
nationwide CMRS providers to implement georouting for wireless 988 
calls and provides 24 months for implementation by non-nationwide CMRS 
providers. Finally, the Third Report and Order revises the Commission's 
existing 988 voice and texting rules to permit routing to the national 
suicide prevention and mental health crisis hotline system without need 
for translation to the toll free access number. This revision will 
provide greater flexibility and help futureproof the use of 988 by 
enabling wireless providers to implement georouting solutions that may 
require broader routing parameters.

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

    67. There were no comments filed that specifically addressed the 
proposed rules and policies presented in the 988 Georouting Further 
Notice IRFA. However, several commenters discussed the potential impact 
of rules on non-nationwide CMRS providers.
    68. The Competitive Carriers Association (CCA), Southern 
Communications Services, Inc. (Southern Linc), and the Rural Wireless 
Association (RWA) advocated for the Commission to give providers 
flexibility to account for their individual networks, the limitations 
of current georouting solutions, or the challenges faced by non-
nationwide providers. In addition, RWA advocated for the Commission to 
allow small rural non-nationwide CMRS providers to implement georouting 
solutions on a voluntary basis. Alternatively, RWA called for the 
Commission to allow small rural non-nationwide CMRS providers 
additional time, funds to subsidize efforts, and flexibility in 
developing georouting solutions. Several commenters also urged the 
Commission to give non-nationwide CMRS providers sufficient time to 
implement georouting solutions. The approach taken by the Third Report 
and Order addresses these comments by adopting rules that allow 
wireless providers to build on the success of georouting solutions that 
have been developed with SAMHSA and the Lifeline Administrator, while 
also providing the flexibility for small and other providers to 
implement georouting solutions that account for their network 
capabilities and are compatible with the Lifeline's routing platform.

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

    69. Pursuant to the Small Business Jobs Act of 2010, which amended 
the RFA, the Commission is required to respond to any comments filed by 
the Chief Counsel for Advocacy of the Small Business Administration 
(SBA), and to provide a detailed statement of any change made to the 
proposed rules as a result of those comments. The Chief Counsel did not 
file any comments in response to the proposed rules in this proceeding.

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

    70. The RFA directs agencies to provide a description of, and where 
feasible, an estimate of the number of small entities that may be 
affected by the rules adopted herein. The RFA generally defines the 
term ``small entity'' as having the same meaning as the terms ``small 
business,'' ``small organization,'' and ``small governmental 
jurisdiction.'' In addition, the term ``small business'' has the same 
meaning as the term ``small business concern'' under the Small Business 
Act. A ``small business concern'' is one which: (1) is independently 
owned and operated; (2) is not dominant in its field of operation; and 
(3) satisfies any additional criteria established by the SBA.
    71. Small Businesses, Small Organizations, Small Governmental 
Jurisdictions. Our actions, over time, may affect small entities that 
are not easily categorized at present. We therefore describe, at the 
outset, three broad groups of small entities that could be directly 
affected herein. First, while there are industry specific size 
standards for small businesses that are used in the regulatory 
flexibility analysis, according to data from the Small Business 
Administration's (SBA) Office of Advocacy, in general a small business 
is an independent business having fewer than 500 employees. These types 
of small businesses represent 99.9% of all businesses in the United 
States, which translates to 33.2 million businesses.
    72. Next, the type of small entity described as a ``small 
organization'' is generally ``any not-for-profit enterprise which is 
independently owned and operated and is not dominant in its field.'' 
The Internal Revenue Service (IRS) uses a revenue benchmark of $50,000 
or less to delineate its annual electronic filing requirements for 
small exempt organizations. Nationwide, for tax year 2022, there were 
approximately 530,109 small exempt organizations in the U.S. reporting 
revenues of $50,000 or less according to the registration and tax data 
for exempt organizations available from the IRS.
    73. Finally, the small entity described as a ``small governmental 
jurisdiction'' is defined generally as ``governments of cities, 
counties, towns, townships, villages, school districts, or special 
districts, with a population of less than fifty thousand.'' U.S. Census 
Bureau data from the 2022 Census of Governments indicate there were 
90,837 local governmental jurisdictions consisting of general purpose

[[Page 88901]]

governments and special purpose governments in the United States. Of 
this number, there were 36,845 general purpose governments (county, 
municipal, and town or township) with populations of less than 50,000 
and 11,879 special purpose governments (independent school districts) 
with enrollment populations of less than 50,000. Accordingly, based on 
the 2022 U.S. Census of Governments data, we estimate that at least 
48,724 entities fall into the category of ``small governmental 
jurisdictions.''
    74. Wireless Carriers and Service Providers. Wireless 
Telecommunications Carriers (except Satellite) is the closest industry 
with a SBA small business size standard applicable to these service 
providers. The SBA small business size standard for this industry 
classifies a business as small if it has 1,500 or fewer employees. U.S. 
Census Bureau data for 2017 show that there were 2,893 firms that 
operated in this industry for the entire year. Of this number, 2,837 
firms employed fewer than 250 employees. Additionally, based on 
Commission data in the 2022 Universal Service Monitoring Report, as of 
December 31, 2021, there were 594 providers that reported they were 
engaged in the provision of wireless services. Of these providers, the 
Commission estimates that 511 providers have 1,500 or fewer employees. 
Consequently, using the SBA's small business size standard, most of 
these providers can be considered small entities.
    75. Wireless Communications Services. Wireless Communications 
Services (WCS) can be used for a variety of fixed, mobile, 
radiolocation, and digital audio broadcasting satellite services. 
Wireless spectrum is made available and licensed for the provision of 
wireless communications services in several frequency bands subject to 
part 27 of the Commission's rules. Wireless Telecommunications Carriers 
(except Satellite) is the closest industry with an SBA small business 
size standard applicable to these services. The SBA small business size 
standard for this industry classifies a business as small if it has 
1,500 or fewer employees. U.S. Census Bureau data for 2017 show that 
there were 2,893 firms that operated in this industry for the entire 
year. Of this number, 2,837 firms employed fewer than 250 employees. 
Thus under the SBA size standard, the Commission estimates that a 
majority of licensees in this industry can be considered small.
    76. The Commission's small business size standards with respect to 
WCS involve eligibility for bidding credits and installment payments in 
the auction of licenses for the various frequency bands included in 
WCS. When bidding credits are adopted for the auction of licenses in 
WCS frequency bands, such credits may be available to several types of 
small businesses based average gross revenues (small, very small and 
entrepreneur) pursuant to the competitive bidding rules adopted in 
conjunction with the requirements for the auction and/or as identified 
in the designated entities section in part 27 of the Commission's rules 
for the specific WCS frequency bands.
    77. In frequency bands where licenses were subject to auction, the 
Commission notes that as a general matter, the number of winning 
bidders that qualify as small businesses at the close of an auction 
does not necessarily represent the number of small businesses currently 
in service. Further, the Commission does not generally track subsequent 
business size unless, in the context of assignments or transfers, 
unjust enrichment issues are implicated. Additionally, since the 
Commission does not collect data on the number of employees for 
licensees providing these services, at this time we are not able to 
estimate the number of licensees with active licenses that would 
qualify as small under the SBA's small business size standard.
    78. Wireless Telephony. Wireless telephony includes cellular, 
personal communications services, and specialized mobile radio 
telephony carriers. The closest applicable industry with an SBA small 
business size standard is Wireless Telecommunications Carriers (except 
Satellite). The size standard for this industry under SBA rules is that 
a business is small if it has 1,500 or fewer employees. For this 
industry, U.S. Census Bureau data for 2017 show that there were 2,893 
firms that operated for the entire year. Of this number, 2,837 firms 
employed fewer than 250 employees. Additionally, based on Commission 
data in the 2022 Universal Service Monitoring Report, as of December 
31, 2021, there were 331 providers that reported they were engaged in 
the provision of cellular, personal communications services, and 
specialized mobile radio services. Of these providers, the Commission 
estimates that 255 providers have 1,500 or fewer employees. 
Consequently, using the SBA's small business size standard, most of 
these providers can be considered small entities.
    79. Wireless Telecommunications Carriers (except Satellite). This 
industry comprises establishments engaged in operating and maintaining 
switching and transmission facilities to provide communications via the 
airwaves. Establishments in this industry have spectrum licenses and 
provide services using that spectrum, such as cellular services, paging 
services, wireless internet access, and wireless video services. The 
SBA size standard for this industry classifies a business as small if 
it has 1,500 or fewer employees. U.S. Census Bureau data for 2017 show 
that there were 2,893 firms in this industry that operated for the 
entire year. Of that number, 2,837 firms employed fewer than 250 
employees. Additionally, based on Commission data in the 2022 Universal 
Service Monitoring Report, as of December 31, 2021, there were 594 
providers that reported they were engaged in the provision of wireless 
services. Of these providers, the Commission estimates that 511 
providers have 1,500 or fewer employees. Consequently, using the SBA's 
small business size standard, most of these providers can be considered 
small entities.
    80. Wired Telecommunications Carriers. The U.S. Census Bureau 
defines this industry as establishments primarily engaged in operating 
and/or providing access to transmission facilities and infrastructure 
that they own and/or lease for the transmission of voice, data, text, 
sound, and video using wired communications networks. Transmission 
facilities may be based on a single technology or a combination of 
technologies. Establishments in this industry use the wired 
telecommunications network facilities that they operate to provide a 
variety of services, such as wired telephony services, including VoIP 
services, wired (cable) audio and video programming distribution, and 
wired broadband internet services. By exception, establishments 
providing satellite television distribution services using facilities 
and infrastructure that they operate are included in this industry. 
Wired Telecommunications Carriers are also referred to as wireline 
carriers or fixed local service providers.
    81. The SBA small business size standard for Wired 
Telecommunications Carriers classifies firms having 1,500 or fewer 
employees as small. U.S. Census Bureau data for 2017 show that there 
were 3,054 firms that operated in this industry for the entire year. Of 
this number, 2,964 firms operated with fewer than 250 employees. 
Additionally, based on Commission data in the 2022 Universal Service 
Monitoring Report, as of December 31, 2021, there were 4,590 providers 
that reported they were engaged in the provision of fixed local 
services. Of these providers, the Commission

[[Page 88902]]

estimates that 4,146 providers have 1,500 or fewer employees. 
Consequently, using the SBA's small business size standard, most of 
these providers can be considered small entities.
    82. Local Exchange Carriers (LECs). Neither the Commission nor the 
SBA has developed a size standard for small businesses specifically 
applicable to local exchange services. Providers of these services 
include both incumbent and competitive local exchange service 
providers. Wired Telecommunications Carriers is the closest industry 
with an SBA small business size standard. Wired Telecommunications 
Carriers are also referred to as wireline carriers or fixed local 
service providers. The SBA small business size standard for Wired 
Telecommunications Carriers classifies firms having 1,500 or fewer 
employees as small. U.S. Census Bureau data for 2017 show that there 
were 3,054 firms that operated in this industry for the entire year. Of 
this number, 2,964 firms operated with fewer than 250 employees. 
Additionally, based on Commission data in the 2022 Universal Service 
Monitoring Report, as of December 31, 2021, there were 4,590 providers 
that reported they were fixed local exchange service providers. Of 
these providers, the Commission estimates that 4,146 providers have 
1,500 or fewer employees. Consequently, using the SBA's small business 
size standard, most of these providers can be considered small 
entities.
    83. Incumbent Local Exchange Carriers (Incumbent LECs). Neither the 
Commission nor the SBA have developed a small business size standard 
specifically for incumbent local exchange carriers. Wired 
Telecommunications Carriers is the closest industry with an SBA small 
business size standard. The SBA small business size standard for Wired 
Telecommunications Carriers classifies firms having 1,500 or fewer 
employees as small. U.S. Census Bureau data for 2017 show that there 
were 3,054 firms in this industry that operated for the entire year. Of 
this number, 2,964 firms operated with fewer than 250 employees. 
Additionally, based on Commission data in the 2022 Universal Service 
Monitoring Report, as of December 31, 2021, there were 1,212 providers 
that reported they were incumbent local exchange service providers. Of 
these providers, the Commission estimates that 916 providers have 1,500 
or fewer employees. Consequently, using the SBA's small business size 
standard, the Commission estimates that the majority of incumbent local 
exchange carriers can be considered small entities.
    84. Competitive Local Exchange Carriers (CLECs). Neither the 
Commission nor the SBA has developed a size standard for small 
businesses specifically applicable to local exchange services. 
Providers of these services include several types of competitive local 
exchange service providers. Wired Telecommunications Carriers is the 
closest industry with a SBA small business size standard. The SBA small 
business size standard for Wired Telecommunications Carriers classifies 
firms having 1,500 or fewer employees as small. U.S. Census Bureau data 
for 2017 show that there were 3,054 firms that operated in this 
industry for the entire year. Of this number, 2,964 firms operated with 
fewer than 250 employees. Additionally, based on Commission data in the 
2022 Universal Service Monitoring Report, as of December 31, 2021, 
there were 3,378 providers that reported they were competitive local 
service providers. Of these providers, the Commission estimates that 
3,230 providers have 1,500 or fewer employees. Consequently, using the 
SBA's small business size standard, most of these providers can be 
considered small entities.
    85. Interexchange Carriers (IXCs). Neither the Commission nor the 
SBA have developed a small business size standard specifically for 
Interexchange Carriers. Wired Telecommunications Carriers is the 
closest industry with a SBA small business size standard. The SBA small 
business size standard for Wired Telecommunications Carriers classifies 
firms having 1,500 or fewer employees as small. U.S. Census Bureau data 
for 2017 show that there were 3,054 firms that operated in this 
industry for the entire year. Of this number, 2,964 firms operated with 
fewer than 250 employees. Additionally, based on Commission data in the 
2022 Universal Service Monitoring Report, as of December 31, 2021, 
there were 127 providers that reported they were engaged in the 
provision of interexchange services. Of these providers, the Commission 
estimates that 109 providers have 1,500 or fewer employees. 
Consequently, using the SBA's small business size standard, the 
Commission estimates that the majority of providers in this industry 
can be considered small entities.
    86. Local Resellers. Neither the Commission nor the SBA have 
developed a small business size standard specifically for Local 
Resellers. Telecommunications Resellers is the closest industry with a 
SBA small business size standard. The Telecommunications Resellers 
industry comprises establishments engaged in purchasing access and 
network capacity from owners and operators of telecommunications 
networks and reselling wired and wireless telecommunications services 
(except satellite) to businesses and households. Establishments in this 
industry resell telecommunications; they do not operate transmission 
facilities and infrastructure. Mobile virtual network operators (MVNOs) 
are included in this industry. The SBA small business size standard for 
Telecommunications Resellers classifies a business as small if it has 
1,500 or fewer employees. U.S. Census Bureau data for 2017 show that 
1,386 firms in this industry provided resale services for the entire 
year. Of that number, 1,375 firms operated with fewer than 250 
employees. Additionally, based on Commission data in the 2022 Universal 
Service Monitoring Report, as of December 31, 2021, there were 207 
providers that reported they were engaged in the provision of local 
resale services. Of these providers, the Commission estimates that 202 
providers have 1,500 or fewer employees. Consequently, using the SBA's 
small business size standard, most of these providers can be considered 
small entities.
    87. Toll Resellers. Neither the Commission nor the SBA have 
developed a small business size standard specifically for Toll 
Resellers. Telecommunications Resellers is the closest industry with a 
SBA small business size standard. The Telecommunications Resellers 
industry comprises establishments engaged in purchasing access and 
network capacity from owners and operators of telecommunications 
networks and reselling wired and wireless telecommunications services 
(except satellite) to businesses and households. Establishments in this 
industry resell telecommunications; they do not operate transmission 
facilities and infrastructure. Mobile virtual network operators (MVNOs) 
are included in this industry. The SBA small business size standard for 
Telecommunications Resellers classifies a business as small if it has 
1,500 or fewer employees. U.S. Census Bureau data for 2017 show that 
1,386 firms in this industry provided resale services for the entire 
year. Of that number, 1,375 firms operated with fewer than 250 
employees. Additionally, based on Commission data in the 2022 Universal 
Service Monitoring Report, as of December 31, 2021, there were 457 
providers that

[[Page 88903]]

reported they were engaged in the provision of toll services. Of these 
providers, the Commission estimates that 438 providers have 1,500 or 
fewer employees. Consequently, using the SBA's small business size 
standard, most of these providers can be considered small entities.
    88. Other Toll Carriers. Neither the Commission nor the SBA has 
developed a definition for small businesses specifically applicable to 
Other Toll Carriers. This category includes toll carriers that do not 
fall within the categories of interexchange carriers, operator service 
providers, prepaid calling card providers, satellite service carriers, 
or toll resellers. Wired Telecommunications Carriers is the closest 
industry with a SBA small business size standard. The SBA small 
business size standard for Wired Telecommunications Carriers classifies 
firms having 1,500 or fewer employees as small. U.S. Census Bureau data 
for 2017 show that there were 3,054 firms in this industry that 
operated for the entire year. Of this number, 2,964 firms operated with 
fewer than 250 employees. Additionally, based on Commission data in the 
2022 Universal Service Monitoring Report, as of December 31, 2021, 
there were 90 providers that reported they were engaged in the 
provision of other toll services. Of these providers, the Commission 
estimates that 87 providers have 1,500 or fewer employees. 
Consequently, using the SBA's small business size standard, most of 
these providers can be considered small entities.
    89. All Other Telecommunications. This industry is comprised of 
establishments primarily engaged in providing specialized 
telecommunications services, such as satellite tracking, communications 
telemetry, and radar station operation. This industry also includes 
establishments primarily engaged in providing satellite terminal 
stations and associated facilities connected with one or more 
terrestrial systems and capable of transmitting telecommunications to, 
and receiving telecommunications from, satellite systems. Providers of 
internet services (e.g. dial-up ISPs) or Voice over Internet Protocol 
(VoIP) services, via client-supplied telecommunications connections are 
also included in this industry. The SBA small business size standard 
for this industry classifies firms with annual receipts of $40 million 
or less as small. U.S. Census Bureau data for 2017 show that there were 
1,079 firms in this industry that operated for the entire year. Of 
those firms, 1,039 had revenue of less than $25 million. Based on this 
data, the Commission estimates that the majority of ``All Other 
Telecommunications'' firms can be considered small.
    90. Radio and Television Broadcasting and Wireless Communications 
Equipment Manufacturing. This industry comprises establishments 
primarily engaged in manufacturing radio and television broadcast and 
wireless communications equipment. Examples of products made by these 
establishments are: transmitting and receiving antennas, cable 
television equipment, GPS equipment, pagers, cellular phones, mobile 
communications equipment, and radio and television studio and 
broadcasting equipment. The SBA small business size standard for this 
industry classifies businesses having 1,250 employees or less as small. 
U.S. Census Bureau data for 2017 show that there were 656 firms in this 
industry that operated for the entire year. Of this number, 624 firms 
had fewer than 250 employees. Thus, under the SBA size standard, the 
majority of firms in this industry can be considered small.
    91. Semiconductor and Related Device Manufacturing. This industry 
comprises establishments primarily engaged in manufacturing 
semiconductors and related solid state devices. Examples of products 
made by these establishments are integrated circuits, memory chips, 
microprocessors, diodes, transistors, solar cells and other 
optoelectronic devices. The SBA small business size standard for this 
industry classifies entities having 1,250 or fewer employees as small. 
U.S. Census Bureau data for 2017 show that there were 729 firms in this 
industry that operated for the entire year. Of this total, 673 firms 
operated with fewer than 250 employees. Thus under the SBA size 
standard, the majority of firms in this industry can be considered 
small.
    92. Software Publishers. This industry comprises establishments 
primarily engaged in computer software publishing or publishing and 
reproduction. Establishments in this industry carry out operations 
necessary for producing and distributing computer software, such as 
designing, providing documentation, assisting in installation, and 
providing support services to software purchasers. These establishments 
may design, develop, and publish, or publish only. The SBA small 
business size standard for this industry classifies businesses having 
annual receipts of $47 million or less as small. U.S. Census Bureau 
data for 2017 indicate that 7,842 firms in this industry operated for 
the entire year. Of this number 7,226 firms had revenue of less than 
$25 million. Based on this data, we conclude that a majority of firms 
in this industry are small.

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

    93. The Third Report and Order adopts rules that require small and 
other wireless providers to implement georouting solutions for wireless 
988 calls. Specifically, the Third Report and Order requires providers 
to have the capability to provide georouting data with 988 calls to the 
Lifeline Administrator in a format that is compatible with the 
Lifeline's routing platform. Additionally, small and other providers 
must provide georouting data, when available, with 988 calls sufficient 
to allow routing of the 988 call by the Lifeline Administrator to the 
appropriate crisis center based on the geographic area where the 
handset is located at the time the 988 call is initiated. The Third 
Report and Order also adopts a definition of georouting data that 
requires wireless providers to aggregate location data generated from 
cell-based location technology to a level that will not identify the 
location of the cell site or base station receiving the 988 call or 
otherwise identify the precise location of the handset.
    94. In the SFNPRM, the Commission sought comment on the costs and 
benefits of deploying georouting solutions to help the Commission 
evaluate the impact of relevant proposals on small entities. We 
recognize that small providers may face operational limitations and 
costs when implementing georouting solutions for wireless 988 calls. 
However, the record reflects that nationwide CMRS providers have 
already developed and implemented or are in the process of implementing 
georouting solutions for wireless 988 calls, which can minimize cost 
implications for small entities by serving as models for georouting 
solutions. The Third Report and Order adopts rules that allow wireless 
providers flexibility to leverage these georouting solutions, and we 
expect that our approach will reduce compliance costs for wireless 
providers, including small entities. Moreover, we estimate that the 
public safety benefits resulting from the requirements adopted in the 
Third Report and Order far exceed implementation costs.

[[Page 88904]]

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

    95. The RFA requires an agency to provide, ``a description of the 
steps the agency has taken to minimize the significant economic impact 
on small entities . . . including a statement of the factual, policy, 
and legal reasons for selecting the alternative adopted in the final 
rule and why each one of the other significant alternatives to the rule 
considered by the agency which affect the impact on small entities was 
rejected.''
    96. The Third Report and Order adopts rules that are designed to 
give flexibility where appropriate to ensure that wireless providers, 
including small providers, can determine the best approach for 
compliance based on the needs of their networks. The Third Report and 
Order considers comments advocating for allowing the deployment of 
georouting solutions for wireless 988 calls on a purely voluntary 
basis. We conclude, however, that purely voluntary implementation 
undermines our goal of ensuring that the clear public interest benefits 
of georouting are realized nationwide in a timely manner. The Third 
Report and Order also declines to exempt non-nationwide CMRS providers 
as requested by RWA, but instead adopts flexible requirements that 
allow small and other wireless providers to leverage the georouting 
solutions that have been developed by nationwide providers in 
collaboration with SAMHSA and the Lifeline Administrator to implement 
technically feasible solutions that are compatible with the Lifeline's 
routing platform.
    97. With respect to ``georouting data,'' the Third Report and Order 
adopts a definition that balances the need to maintain callers' privacy 
by not requiring wireless providers to transmit more precise 
geolocation data with wireless 988 calls, while still ensuring that the 
988 Lifeline has sufficient aggregated location data to route wireless 
988 calls to geographically appropriate crisis centers. We decline to 
require wireless providers to use a specific method for aggregating 
cell-based location data or to mandate one particular geographic 
boundary for georouting solutions, minimizing potential burdens by 
allowing small and other wireless providers flexibility to employ 
technically feasible options that are best suited for their networks to 
meet this requirement.
    98. The Third Report and Order further minimizes the potential 
burdens of wireless providers, including small providers, by excluding 
988 calls transmitted using roaming capabilities from application of 
the georouting requirements to account for technical limitations 
identified in the record. The Third Report and Order declines, however, 
to limit the application of georouting rules to voice calls carried 
end-to-end on IP networks, as requested by some commenters. Instead, we 
adopt requirements that minimize potential burdens by giving wireless 
providers the flexibility to work with the Lifeline Administrator on a 
case-by-case basis to address any individualized network considerations 
and by providing non-nationwide providers with an ample compliance time 
frame to develop technical solutions.
    99. The Third Report and Order considers alternative georouting 
solutions that bypass the 988 Lifeline's centralized routing system but 
concludes that the benefits of centralized routing far outweigh the 
costs of localized routing. Specifically, we find that maintaining the 
988 Lifeline's centralized routing process will help preserve the 
Lifeline Administrator's critical role in routing 988 calls to crisis 
centers, simplify the administration of the Lifeline, and allow for 
faster implementation of georouting solutions.
    100. With respect to compliance timelines, the Third Report and 
Order adopts an implementation time frame for nationwide CMRS providers 
that aligns with the timelines identified for deploying the georouting 
solutions developed in coordination with SAMHSA and the Lifeline 
Administrator. To further reduce the burden on small entities and 
address technical and resource challenges, we grant a longer compliance 
timeline to non-nationwide CMRS providers. Specifically, we establish 
an implementation time frame following the effective date of the 
georouting rule of 30 days for nationwide CMRS providers and 24 months 
for all non-nationwide CMRS providers.
    101. Further, the Third Report and Order gives wireless providers 
flexibility to implement georouting solutions that may require broader 
routing requirements by revising existing 988 voice and texting rules 
to permit routing to the national suicide prevention and mental health 
crisis hotline system without need for translation to the toll free 
access number. Finally, we decline the National Emergency Number 
Association's (NENA) request to establish an expiration date for the 
georouting requirements set forth in the Third Report and Order, but 
may consider technological developments in the future.

Report to Congress

    102. 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.

Ordering Clauses

    103. Accordingly, it is ordered that, pursuant to the authority 
found in Sec. Sec.  1, 2, 4, 201, 218, 251(e), 301, 303, 307, 309(a), 
316, 332 of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended, 47 U.S.C. 151, 
152, 154, 154, 201, 218, 251(e), 301, 303, 307, 309(a), 316, and 332, 
this Report and Order is adopted and will become effective 30 days 
after publication in the Federal Register.
    104. It is further ordered that part 52 of the Commission's rules 
is amended as set forth in appendix A, and such rule amendment will 
become effective 30 days after publication in the Federal Register.
    105. It is further ordered that the Commission's Office of the 
Secretary, shall send a copy of this Third Report and Order, including 
the Final Regulatory Flexibility Analysis, to the Chief Counsel for 
Advocacy of the Small Business Administration.
    106. It is further ordered that the Office of the Managing 
Director, Performance and 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, see 5 U.S.C. 801(a)(1)(A).

List of Subjects in 47 CFR Part 52

    Communications common carriers, Telecommunications, Telephone.


Federal Communications Commission.
Marlene Dortch,
Secretary.

Final Rules

    For the reasons discussed in the preamble, the Federal 
Communications Commission amends 47 CFR part 52 as follows:

PART 52--NUMBERING

0
1. The authority citation for part 52 continues to read as follows:


[[Page 88905]]


    Authority:  47 U.S.C. 151, 152, 153, 154, 155, 201-205, 207-209, 
218, 225-227, 251-252, 271, 303, 332, unless otherwise noted.


0
2. Amend Sec.  52.200 by revising paragraph (b) to read as follows:


Sec.  52.200   Designation of 988 for a National Suicide Prevention and 
Mental Health Crisis Hotline.

* * * * *
    (b) All covered providers shall transmit all calls initiated by an 
end user dialing 988 to the national suicide prevention and mental 
health crisis hotline system maintained by the Assistant Secretary for 
Mental Health and Substance Use and the Secretary of Veterans Affairs.
* * * * *

0
3. Amend Sec.  52.201 by revising paragraph (a) to read as follows:


Sec.  52.201   Texting to the National Suicide Prevention and Mental 
Health Crisis Hotline.

    (a) Support for 988 text message service. Beginning July 16, 2022, 
all covered text providers must route a covered 988 text message to the 
national suicide prevention and mental health crisis hotline system 
maintained by the Assistant Secretary for Mental Health and the 
Secretary of Veterans Affairs.
* * * * *

0
4. Add Sec.  52.202 to read as follows:


Sec.  52.202   Georouting of Wireless Calls to the National Suicide 
Prevention and Mental Health Crisis Hotline.

    (a) Georouting. All CMRS providers must:
    (1) Have the capability to provide georouting data with 988 calls 
to the Lifeline Administrator in a format that is compatible with the 
Lifeline's routing platform, to allow routing of the 988 call by the 
Lifeline Administrator to the appropriate crisis center based on the 
geographic area where the handset is located at the time the 988 call 
is initiated.
    (2) Provide georouting data, when available, with 988 calls to the 
Lifeline Administrator sufficient to allow routing of the 988 call by 
the Lifeline Administrator to the appropriate crisis center based on 
the geographic area where the handset is located at the time the 988 
call is initiated.
    (b) Scope of section. The requirements of this section are only 
applicable to CMRS providers, excluding mobile satellite service (MSS) 
operators, to the extent that they:
    (1)(i) Offer real-time, two way switched voice service that is 
interconnected with the public switched network; and
    (ii) Use an in-network switching facility that enables the provider 
to reuse frequencies and accomplish seamless hand-offs of subscriber 
calls. These requirements are applicable to entities that offer voice 
service to consumers by purchasing airtime or capacity at wholesale 
rates from CMRS licensees.
    (2) The requirements of this section do not apply to 988 calls 
transmitted using roaming capabilities.
    (c) Compliance. (1) By 30 days after December 12, 2024: Nationwide 
CMRS providers shall provide georouting data with wireless 988 calls.
    (2) By 24 months after December 12, 2024: All CMRS providers shall 
provide georouting data with wireless 988 calls.
    (d) Definitions. For purposes of this section:
    Commercial mobile radio service (CMRS). A mobile service that is:
    (i)(A) Provided for profit, i.e., with the intent of receiving 
compensation or monetary gain;
    (B) An interconnected service; and
    (C) Available to the public, or to such classes of eligible users 
as to be effectively available to a substantial portion of the public; 
or
    (ii) The functional equivalent of such a mobile service described 
in paragraph (i)(A) of this definition.
    (iii) A variety of factors may be evaluated to make a determination 
whether the mobile service in question is the functional equivalent of 
a commercial mobile radio service, including: Consumer demand for the 
service to determine whether the service is closely substitutable for a 
commercial mobile radio service; whether changes in price for the 
service under examination, or for the comparable commercial mobile 
radio service, would prompt customers to change from one service to the 
other; and market research information identifying the targeted market 
for the service under review.
    (iv) Unlicensed radio frequency devices under part 15 of this 
chapter are excluded from this definition of Commercial mobile radio 
service.
    Georouting data. Location data generated from cell-based location 
technology that is aggregated to a level that will not identify the 
location of the cell site or base station receiving the 988 call or 
otherwise identify the precise location of the handset.
    Lifeline Administrator. The Lifeline Administrator controls the 988 
call routing platform pursuant to contract with the Substance Abuse 
Mental Health Services Administration.
    Nationwide CMRS provider. A CMRS provider whose service extends to 
a majority of the population and land area of the United States.
    Non-nationwide CMRS provider. Any CMRS provider other than a 
nationwide CMRS provider.

[FR Doc. 2024-25912 Filed 11-8-24; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6712-01-P