[Federal Register Volume 72, Number 212 (Friday, November 2, 2007)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 62195-62198]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 07-5331]


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

FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION

47 CFR Part 11

[EB Docket No. 04-296, FCC 07-109]


Review of the Emergency Alert System

AGENCY: Federal Communications Commission.

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking.

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

SUMMARY: In this document the Commission seeks comment on several 
issues relating to the Emergency Alert System (EAS), in order to ensure 
that EAS rules better protect the life and property of all Americans. 
Recognizing the need of all Americans to be alerted in the event of an 
emergency, the Commission seeks comment on those whose primary language 
is not English, and persons with disabilities, to determine how these 
communities might best be served by EAS. The Commission also seeks 
comment on whether emergency alerts transmitted by local authorities 
should be transmitted, and various ways that performance of EAS 
operation may be assessed.

DATES: Written comments are due on or before December 3, 2007 and reply 
comments are due on or before December 17, 2007.

ADDRESSES: You may submit comments, identified by EB Docket No. 04-296, 
by any of the identified methods:

[[Page 62196]]

    <bullet> Federal eRulemaking Portal: http://www.regulations.gov. 
Follow the instructions for submitting comments.
    <bullet> Federal Communications Commission's Web Site: http://www.fcc.gov/cgb/ecfs/. Follow the instructions for submitting comments.
    <bullet> Mail: U.S. Postal Service first-class, Express, and 
Priority mail must be addressed to 445 12th Street, SW., Washington, DC 
20554.
    <bullet> People with Disabilities: Contact the FCC to request 
reasonable accommodations (accessible format documents, sign language 
interpreters, CART, etc.) by e-mail: <a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#0b4d48483e3b3f4b6d6868256c647d"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="b8fefbfb8d888cf8dedbdb96dfd7ce">[email protected]</span></a> or phone 202-418-
0530 or TTY: 202-418-0432.

For detailed instructions for submitting comments and additional 
information on the rulemaking process, see the SUPPLEMENTARY 
INFORMATION section of this document.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Thomas Beers, Policy Division, Public 
Safety and Homeland Security Bureau, (202) 418-1170, or TTY (202) 418-
7233.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This is a summary of the Federal 
Communications Commission's Further Notice of Proposed Rulemaking 
(FNPRM) in EB Docket No. 04-296, FCC 07-108, adopted on May 31, 2007, 
and released on July 12, 2007.

Non-English Speakers

    1. In the FNPRM, the Commission seeks comment on how non-English 
speakers may best be served by national, state and local EAS. In 
particular, we invite comment on how localities with non-English 
speakers should be identified. In which markets should special 
emergency alert rules apply? Should state and local EAS plans designate 
a ``Local Primary Multilingual'' station to transmit emergency 
information the relevant foreign language in local areas where a 
substantial proportion of the population has a fluency in a language 
other than English? How should we quantify the ``substantial 
proportion''? Should at least one broadcast station in every market, or 
some subset of markets, be required to monitor and rebroadcast 
emergency information carried by a ``Local Primary Multilingual'' 
station. And, should stations that remain on the air during an 
emergency be required to broadcast emergency information in the 
relevant foreign language to the extent that the ``Local Primary 
Multilingual'' station loses transmission capability. What criteria 
should the originator of an EAS message use in determining which 
languages to require EAS Participants to transmit? Should more than two 
languages be transmitted in certain areas? We seek comments on the 
technical, economic, practical, and legal issues, including the 
Commission's authority, involved in making emergency information 
accessible to persons whose primary language is not English. We would 
especially welcome comments on state-level or other efforts designed to 
address these issues. We note, for example, that Florida has 
implemented a program to promote the provision of emergency information 
to non-English speakers in that state, and that California and Texas 
have addressed the issue in their EAS plans filed with this Commission. 
We direct the Public Safety and Homeland Security Bureau to convene a 
meeting--or series of meetings--as soon as possible concerning EAS as 
it relates to the needs of non-English speakers. The Bureau should 
thereafter submit into the record a progress report on these 
discussions within 30 days of the Order's release.

Persons with Disabilities

    2. In the FNPRM we reexamine the best way to make EAS and other 
emergency information accessible to persons with disabilities. We 
request comments on this subject, including, but not necessarily 
limited to the following key issues: (i) Presentation of the audio feed 
in text format, and vice-versa; (ii) making emergency information 
available to various devices commonly used by persons with 
disabilities; and (iii) providing emergency messages in multiple 
formats to meet the needs of persons with disabilities. We also seek 
comment on the interaction between our part 11 rules and section 79.2 
of our rules. We welcome comments on the technical, economic, 
practical, and legal issues, including the Commission's authority, 
involved in making emergency information accessible to persons with 
disabilities.

Other Local Official Alerts

    3. Our action enables state governors (or their designees) to 
initiate state-level and geo-targeted alerts for mandatory transmission 
by EAS Participants. Since EAS activations to date have been 
overwhelmingly related to weather and state and local alerts, we seek 
comment on whether EAS Participants should be required to receive and 
transmit alerts initiated by government entities other than a state 
governor. Should local, county, tribal, or other state governmental 
entities be allowed to initiate mandatory state and local alerts? How 
should the Commission decide which public officials should be permitted 
to activate the alert? Should the expansion of mandatory state and 
local alerts be limited to certain types of alerts? We seek comment on 
whether the Commission should specify the types of emergency alerts 
that these local officials should be permitted to activate? Should only 
certain classes of EAS Participants be required to transmit such alerts 
by entities other than the governor? Does CAP allow for proper delivery 
of such alerts, or should such alerts be mandatory only in the context 
of Next Generation EAS? What other considerations should govern the 
appropriate use of a mandatory alerting process by entities other than 
a governor? We seek comment generally on how this type of requirement 
should be implemented.

Assessing EAS Operation

    4. We seek comment on several options for ensuring that EAS 
operates as designed in an emergency, including whether we should 
require: (i) Additional testing of the EAS, and specifically CAP; (ii) 
station certification of compliance; and (iii) assessments of EAS 
performance after an alert has been triggered. We will revisit the 
issue of performance standards if it appears that they are warranted. 
In particular, we seek comments on the technical, economic, practical, 
and legal issues involved.

I. PROCEDURAL MATTERS

A. Ex-Parte Rules--Permit-but-Disclose Proceeding

    5. This proceeding shall be treated as a ``permit-but-disclose'' 
proceeding in accordance with the Commision's ex parte rules. Persons 
making oral ex parte presentations are reminded that memoranda 
summarizing the presentations must contain summaries of the substance 
of the presentations and not merely a listing of the subjects 
discussed. More than a one- or two-sentence description of the views 
and arguments presented is generally required. Other rules pertaining 
to oral and written presentations are set forth in section 1.1206(b) of 
the Commission's rules.

B. Comment Dates

    6. Pursuant to Sec. Sec.  1.415 and 1.419 of the Commission's 
rules, 47 CFR 1.415, 1.419, interested parties may file comments and 
reply comments on or before the dates indicated on the first page of 
this document. Comments may be filed using (1) the FCC's Electronic 
Comment Filing System (ECFS), (2) the Federal Government's eRulemaking 
Portal, or (3) by filing paper copies. See

[[Page 62197]]

Electronic Filing of Documents in Rulemaking Proceedings, 63 FR 24,121 
(1998).
    7. Electronic Filers: Comments may be filed electronically using 
the Internet by accessing the ECFS: http://www.fcc.gov/cgb/ecfs or the 
Federal eRulemaking Portal: http://www.regulations.gov. Filers should 
follow the instructions provided on the website for submitting 
comments.
    8. For ECFS filers, if multiple dockets or rulemaking numbers 
appear in the caption of this proceeding, filers must transmit one 
electronic copy of the comments for each docket or rulemaking number 
referenced in the caption. In completing the transmittal screen, filers 
should include their full name, U.S. Postal Service mailing address, 
and the applicable docket or rulemaking number. Parties may also submit 
an electronic comment by Internet e-mail. To get filing instructions, 
filers should send an e-mail to <a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#3154525742715752521f565e47"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="fd989e9b8ebd9b9e9ed39a928b">[email protected]</span></a>, and include the following 
words in the body of the message, ``get form.'' A sample form and 
directions will be sent in response.
    9. Paper Filers: Parties who choose to file by paper must file an 
original and four copies of each filing. If more than one docket or 
rulemaking number appears in the caption of this proceeding, filers 
must submit two additional copies for each additional docket or 
rulemaking number.
    10. Filings can be sent by hand or messenger delivery, by 
commercial overnight courier, or by first-class or overnight U.S. 
Postal Service mail (although we continue to experience delays in 
receiving U.S. Postal Service mail). All filings must be addressed to 
the Commission's Secretary, Office of the Secretary, Federal 
Communications Commission.
    11. The Commission's contractor will receive hand-delivered or 
messenger-delivered paper filings for the Commission's Secretary at 236 
Massachusetts Avenue, NE., Suite 110, Washington, DC 20002. The filing 
hours at this location are 8 a.m. to 7 p.m. All hand deliveries must be 
held together with rubber bands or fasteners. Any envelopes must be 
disposed of before entering the building.
    12. Commercial overnight mail (other than U.S. Postal Service 
Express Mail and Priority Mail) must be sent to 9300 East Hampton 
Drive, Capitol Heights, MD 20743.
    13. U.S. Postal Service first-class, Express, and Priority mail 
must be addressed to 445 12th Street, SW., Washington, DC 20554.
    14. To request materials in accessible formats for people with 
disabilities (braille, large print, electronic files, audio format), 
send an e-mail to <a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection" class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="b1d7d2d2848185f1d7d2d29fd6dec7">[email protected]</a> or call the Consumer & Governmental 
Affairs Bureau at 202-418-0530 (voice), 202-418-0432 (TTY).

C. Paperwork Reduction Act

    15. This document 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).

II. INITIAL REGULATORY FLEXIBILITY ANALYSIS

    16. As required by the Regulatory Flexibility Act of 1980, as 
amended (RFA), the Commission has prepared this present Initial 
Regulatory Flexibility Analysis (IRFA) of the possible significant 
economic impact on a substantial number of small entities by the 
policies and rules proposed in this FNPRM. Written public comments are 
requested on this IRFA. Comments must be identified as responses to the 
IRFA and must be filed by the deadlines for comments on the first page 
of the FNPRM. The Commission will send a copy of the FNPRM, including 
this IRFA, to the Chief Counsel for Advocacy of the Small Business 
Administration (SBA). In addition, the FNPRM and IRFA (or summaries 
thereof) will be published in the Federal Register.

Need for, and Objectives of, the Proposed Rules

    17. In the FNPRM, we seek comment on four areas where the EAS rules 
might be amended. Recognizing the need of all Americans to be alerted 
in the event of an emergency, the Commission invites comments first on 
non-English speakers and second on persons with disabilities to 
determine how these communities might best be served by EAS. Third, the 
Commission invites comment on whether emergency alerts transmitted by 
local authorities should be transmitted. Fourth, the Commission invites 
comment on various ways that the performance of EAS operations may be 
assessed.

Legal Basis

    18. Authority for the actions proposed in this FNPRM may be found 
in sections 1, 4(i), 4(o), 303(r), 403, 624(g) and 706 of the 
Communications Act of 1934, as amended, (Act) 47 U.S.C. 151, 154(i), 
154(j), 154(o), 303(r), 544(g) and 606.

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

    19. The RFA directs agencies to provide a description of, and, 
where feasible, an estimate of, the number of small entities that may 
be affected by the rules adopted herein. The RFA generally defines the 
term ``small entity'' as having the same meaning as the terms ``small 
business,'' ``small organization,'' and ``small governmental 
jurisdiction.'' In addition, the term ``small business'' has the same 
meaning as the term ``small business concern'' under the Small Business 
Act. A ``small business concern'' is one which: (1) Is independently 
owned and operated; (2) is not dominant in its field of operation; and 
(3) satisfies any additional criteria established by the Small Business 
Administration (SBA).

Description of Projected Reporting, Recordkeeping, and Other Compliance 
Requirements

    20. There are potential reporting or recordkeeping requirements 
proposed in the FNPRM. For example, the Commission is considering 
whether to adopt performance standards and reporting obligations for 
EAS participants. The proposals set forth in the FNPRM are intended to 
advance our public safety mission and enhance the performance of the 
EAS while reducing regulatory burdens wherever possible.

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

    21. The RFA requires an agency to describe any significant 
alternatives that it has considered in developing its approach, which 
may include the following four alternatives (among others): ``(1) The 
establishment of differing compliance or reporting requirements or 
timetables that take into account the resources available to small 
entities; (2) the clarification, consolidation, or simplification of 
compliance and reporting requirements under the rule for such small 
entities; (3) the use of performance rather than design standards; and 
(4) an exemption from coverage of the rule, or any part thereof, for 
such small entities.''
    22. The FNPRM seeks comment on how the Commission may better 
protect the lives and property of Americans. In commenting on this 
goal, commenters are invited to propose steps that the Commission may 
take to minimize any significant economic impact on small entities. 
When considering proposals made by other parties, commenters are

[[Page 62198]]

invited to propose significant alternatives that serve the goals of 
these proposals. We expect that the record will develop to demonstrate 
significant alternatives.

Federal Rules That May Duplicate, Overlap, or Conflict With the 
Proposed Rules

    23. None.

III. ORDERING CLAUSES

    24. The Commission's Consumer and Governmental Affairs Bureau, 
Reference Information Center, shall send a copy of this Further Notice 
of Proposed Rulemaking including the Initial Regulatory Flexibility 
Analysis, to the Chief Counsel for Advocacy of the Small Business 
Administration.

Federal Communications Commission.
Marlene H. Dortch,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 07-5331 Filed 11-1-07; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6712-01-P


</pre><script data-cfasync="false" src="/cdn-cgi/scripts/5c5dd728/cloudflare-static/email-decode.min.js"></script></body>
</html>