83 FR 2557 - Blue Alert EAS Event Code
FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION Federal Register Volume 83, Issue 12 (January 18, 2018)
Federal Register Volume 83, Issue 12 (January 18, 2018)
| Page Range | 2557-2563 | |
| FR Document | 2018-00595 |
[Federal Register Volume 83, Number 12 (Thursday, January 18, 2018)] [Rules and Regulations] [Pages 2557-2563] From the Federal Register Online [www.thefederalregister.org] [FR Doc No: 2018-00595] ----------------------------------------------------------------------- FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION 47 CFR Part 11 [PS Docket No. 15-94; FCC-17-170] Blue Alert EAS Event Code AGENCY: Federal Communications Commission. ACTION: Final rule. ----------------------------------------------------------------------- SUMMARY: In this document, the Federal Communications Commission (FCC or Commission) amends its regulations governing the Emergency Alert System (EAS) and Wireless Emergency Alerts (WEA) to add a new event code, B-L-U, to allow alert originators to issue an alert whenever a law enforcement officer is injured or killed, missing in connection with his or her official duties, or there is an imminent and credible threat to cause death or serious injury to law enforcement officers. DATES: This rule is effective January 18, 2018. Delivery of Blue Alerts over EAS will be implemented January 18, 2019. Delivery of Blue Alerts over WEA will be implemented July 18, 2019. This docket will remain open for comments until March 19, 2018. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Gregory Cooke, Deputy Division Chief, Policy and Licensing Division, Public Safety and Homeland Security Bureau, at (202) 418-2351, or by email at [email protected]; or Linda Pintro, Attorney Advisor, Policy and Licensing Division, Public Safety and Homeland Security Bureau, at (202) 418-7490, or by email at [email protected]. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This is a summary of the Commission's Order in PS Docket No. 15-94, FCC 17-170, adopted and released on December 14, 2017. The full text of this document is available for inspection and copying during normal business hours in the FCC Reference Center (Room CY-1257), [[Page 2558]] 445 12th Street SW, Washington, DC 20554, or online at: https://www.fcc.gov/document/fcc-adds-blue-alerts-nations-emergency-alert-systems-0. Synopsis 1. The Order adds to Part 11 EAS rules a new dedicated EAS event code, to advance the important public policy of protecting our nation's law enforcement officials and the communities they serve. This Order adopts the three-character B-L-U to enable the delivery of Blue Alerts over the EAS and WEA. This will promote the development of compatible and integrated Blue Alert plans throughout the United States, consistent with the Rafael Ramos and Wenjian Liu National Blue Alert Act of 2015 (Blue Alert Act), and support the need for a dedicated EAS event code for Blue Alerts identified by the Office of Community Oriented Policing Services (COPS Office) of the United States Department of Justice (DOJ). I. Background 2. The EAS is a national public warning system through which broadcasters, cable systems, and other service providers (EAS Participants) deliver alerts to the public to warn them of impending emergencies and dangers to life and property. Although the primary purpose of the EAS is to equip the President with the ability to provide immediate information to the public during periods of national emergency, the EAS is also used by the National Weather Service (NWS) and state and local governments to distribute voluntary alerts such as weather-related and child abduction (AMBER) alerts. EAS uses three- character event codes to identify the various elements, so that each can deliver accurate, secure, and geographically-targeted messages to the public, in text crawls and in the audio portion of EAS alerts (e.g., TOR for Tornado). 3. In 2015, Congress enacted the Blue Alert Act to ``encourage, enhance, and integrate Blue Alert plans throughout the United States,'' thus facilitating the dissemination of information in a consistent manner nationwide when a law enforcement officer is seriously injured, killed or missing in the line of duty. The Blue Alert Act directs the Attorney General to establish a national Blue Alert communications network within DOJ to issue Blue Alerts, using plans that would be adopted in coordination with ``States, units of local government, law enforcement agencies, and other appropriate entities.'' In September 2016, the Attorney General assigned the COPS Office within DOJ to be the National Blue Alert Coordinator. 4. The COPS Office filed two reports with Congress to demonstrate how it was implementing the Blue Alert Act's mandate. In its 2016 Report to Congress, the COPS Office identified ``the need to promote formal communication mechanisms between law enforcement agencies for Blue Alert information, the need for a dedicated Emergency Alert System (EAS) event code, and the need to increase public and law enforcement awareness of the Blue Alert Act.'' In its 2017 Report to Congress, the COPS Office noted that it had commenced outreach efforts with the FCC to pursue a dedicated Blue Alert EAS event code, and asked the FCC to consider conducting an expedited rulemaking to the extent feasible. 5. The COPS Office established voluntary guidelines for the issuance of Blue Alerts based on the criteria contained in the Blue Alert Act (Blue Alert Guidelines). The Blue Alert Guidelines identify who may request the issuance of a Blue Alert, when a Blue Alert may be issued, and the requisite content thereof. Specifically, a Blue Alert may be issued only when a request is made by a law enforcement agency having primary jurisdiction over the incident, and one the following three threshold criteria has been met: (1) Death or serious injury of a law enforcement officer in the line of duty; (2) threat to cause death or serious injury to a law enforcement officer; or (3) a law enforcement officer is missing in connection with official duties. If a Blue Alert is based upon the first of the criteria, the law enforcement agency must confirm that a law enforcement officer has been killed, seriously injured, or attacked, and there are indications of death or serious injury. If a Blue Alert is based upon the second of the criteria, the law enforcement agency must confirm that the threat is ``imminent and credible,'' and at the time of receipt of the threat, any suspect involved is wanted by a law enforcement agency. Finally, if a Blue Alert is based upon the third criteria, the agency must have concluded that there is indication of serious injury to, or death of the missing law enforcement officer. In all cases, the agency must confirm that any suspect involved has not been apprehended and there is sufficient descriptive information of the suspect, including any relevant vehicle and license tag information. The COPS Office also recommends that Blue Alerts be focused on the geographic areas most likely to facilitate the apprehension of the suspect, and the message include the suspect's last known location, direction of travel, and possible destination. 6. On June 22, 2017, the FCC released the Blue Alert NPRM, proposing to revise the EAS rules to adopt BLU to allow the transmission of Blue Alerts to the public over the EAS, satisfying the need articulated by the COPS Office for a dedicated EAS event code to facilitate broader dissemination of the requisite information. II. Discussion 7. The EAS is an Effective Mechanism to Deliver Blue Alerts. The Order finds--as supported by most commenters--that the EAS is an effective mechanism for the delivery of Blue Alerts. The City of New York (NYC) and the National Association of Broadcasters (NAB) observe that issuing a Blue Alert via the EAS will provide the public with the opportunity to protect themselves and their families and to report relevant information to law enforcement, thus facilitating the apprehension of suspects who are alleged to pose an imminent threat to law enforcement officers. NCTA--The internet & Television Association (NCTA) and the American Cable Association (ACA) agree that adding Blue Alerts to EAS will advance the important public policy of protecting our nation's law enforcement officials, as does the National Public Safety Telecommunications Council (NPSTC), which states that both the EAS and WEA should be available tools to help provide Blue Alerts to the public. 8. The Order also finds that it is technically feasible to send Blue Alerts using the EAS. As NYC and broadcaster engineer Sean Donelan (Donelan) observe, the information required by the Blue Alert Guidelines can be successfully communicated within the two-minute period to which EAS alerts are limited. Similarly, the Commission agrees with the Association of Public-Safety Communications Officials- International, Inc. (APCO) and NYC that EAS Blue Alerts should be focused to an appropriately narrow geographic area, and find that the transmission of EAS alerts satisfies the requirement that a Blue Alert be ``limited to the geographic areas most likely to facilitate the apprehension of the suspect involved or which the suspect could reasonably reach'' and ``[is] not . . . limited to state lines.'' The Order disagrees with the assertion of McCarthy Radio Enterprises, Inc. to the contrary. EAS alerts are issued using county-based Federal Information Processing Standards (FIPS) codes, and may be issued to include multiple counties within a state or across state borders, depending on the geographic scope of [[Page 2559]] the emergency prompting the alert. The Commission believes that this level of geographic targeting is consistent with effective delivery of Blue Alerts, given the type of potentially mobile suspect that would be the subject of many Blue Alerts. The Order agrees with Donelan that a suspect's movements in the circumstances that would give rise to a Blue Alert likely would be similar to that of a suspect in AMBER Alert circumstances, where suspects may travel hundreds of miles within a few hours. 9. The Order also agrees with commenters such as NYC that EAS Blue Alerts sent via the Integrated Public Alert and Warning System (IPAWS) can support transmission of the detailed information required by the Blue Alert Guidelines. As the Commission acknowledged in the Blue Alerts NPRM, EAS alerts delivered over IPAWS use the IP-based Common Alerting Protocol (CAP) to deliver alerts with detailed text files, non-English alerts, or other content-rich data that would not be available to EAS alerts delivered via the broadcast-based daisy chain. As NYC and NPSTC note, EAS-based Blue Alerts that provide such detailed information will greatly improve the ability of the public to recognize and avoid an unsafe situation. The Order accordingly urges alert originators to initiate Blue Alerts via IPAWS and recommends that alert originators include detailed information as part of each Blue Alert for which it is available. The Order notes that EAS Participants are required to create video crawls based upon the enhanced text contained within the CAP message. The Order agrees with the COPS Office's recommendation that the last known location, direction of travel, and possible destinations of the suspect be included as part of the alert message. The Commission believes that these steps, in combination with training, will allow Blue Alert originators to address the concerns raised by the Boulder Regional Emergency Telephone Service Authority (BRETSA) and other commenters that frequent, repeated, misused, or overly long alerts can result in recipients ``tuning out'' alerts and even disabling alerts on their devices. 10. The Commission believes that Blue Alerts delivered via the broadcast EAS continues to be an effective mechanism for the delivery of Blue Alerts. Concerns about the relative value of IPAWS-based, as opposed to daisy chain-based, EAS alerts are not unique to Blue Alerts. For example, AMBER Alerts are subject to the same technical limitations, potentially providing the public with an alert from the daisy chain that lacks the descriptive information about the victim that an IPAWS-based alert would provide. The Order agrees with commenters that concerns that arise from these technical limitations are mitigated because the public is likely to learn adequate information about an emergency and, as needed, check other media for additional information after receiving an alert. Further, EAS messages delivered via the broadcast daisy chain can supply life-saving information and may act as a source of redundancy for portions of the EAS that draw on the advanced capability of CAP. Accordingly, the Order concludes that the mere fact of any discrepancy between the information provided by an IPAWS-based EAS Blue Alert and a broadcast-based EAS Blue Alert is not sufficient reason to deny potentially life-saving information to all members of the public. 11. Nonetheless, the Order encourages EAS manufacturers and EAS Participants to take technical steps to facilitate the delivery of IPAWS-based EAS Blue Alerts to the public where an alert is first delivered to an EAS Participant via broadcast. The Order notes that Monroe Electronics, Inc. (Monroe) and other commenters propose that the Commission permit ``triggered CAP polling,'' by which the EAS device would automatically poll IPAWS upon receipt of a broadcast EAS message to verify whether a corresponding CAP message exists, and if it does, use the CAP message instead of the broadcast EAS message. The part 11 EAS rules do not bar EAS Participants from triggered CAP polling.\1\ Because triggered CAP polling is estimated to require a ``few seconds'' to complete, the Order finds that its use in these instances is consistent with Section 11.51(n) of the EAS rules, which allows EAS Participants to employ a delay of up to 15 minutes before interrupting their programming and retransmitting EAS voluntary event codes. 12. A Dedicated Blue Alert EAS Event Code is in the Public Interest. The Commission determined that it would serve the public interest and promote the purpose of the Blue Alert Act to adopt a dedicated EAS event code for Blue Alerts. Accordingly, the Order amends Section 11.31(e) of the EAS rules to create and add the dedicated BLU event code to the EAS Protocol for Blue Alerts. The Commission agrees with the COPS Office that a dedicated EAS event code would ``convey the appropriate sense of urgency'' and ``galvanize the public awareness necessary to protect law enforcement officers and the public from extremely dangerous offenders.'' The Commission also agrees with the COPS Office that no existing EAS event code is adequate or acceptable to accomplish the objectives of the Blue Alert Act. 13. The conclusion in the Order is supported by the NPSTC and others that agree that a dedicated BLU event code is well suited to serve as the central organizing element for Blue Alert plans nationally. As APCO notes, a dedicated code would facilitate consistent operations and terminology within the National Blue Alert Network, as called for by the Blue Alert Act. Similarly, NYC and NAB agree that establishing this dedicated EAS event code to deliver Blue Alerts would help facilitate the delivery of Blue Alerts to the public in a uniform and consistent manner. The Commission also agrees with NYC that a dedicated code would lead state and local alert originators to engage relevant stakeholders to operationalize the steps necessary to issue a Blue Alert. 14. Further, the Commission is persuaded by the COPS Office that an EAS event code solely dedicated to Blue Alerts would ``facilitate and streamline the adoption of new Blue Alert plans throughout the nation and would help to integrate existing plans into a coordinated national framework.'' The recommendation by the COPS Office is supported by its extensive outreach to U.S. States and territories. According to the COPS Office, twenty-eight states operate Blue Alert systems, and twenty-eight states and territories do not. In its 2017 Report to Congress, the COPS Office noted the inconsistency of plans from state to state and the negative consequences that have arisen as a result. Specifically, according to the 2017 Report to Congress, ``the lack of such a resource [i.e., a dedicated EAS event code] affected jurisdictions' ability to communicate within states and across the country. Even in states with established Blue Alert plans, it was often difficult to identify important points of contact necessary for alert activation or interstate coordination.'' The Commission thus agrees with the COPS Office that implementation of a dedicated Blue Alert EAS code could ease the burden of designing a consistent model for Blue Alert plans, and thus encourage states that do not have Blue Alert plans to establish one. 15. The Order also concludes that the three-character BLU EAS event code, rather than a currently existing EAS code, would help ensure that both Blue Alerts and related outreach and training are undertaken in a consistent manner nationally. The Commission agrees with NYC that using the BLU code would allow for pre-scripted, standardized on- [[Page 2560]] screen text that is more descriptive than the existing categories, and would serve to socialize the Blue Alert concept with the public, much like the AMBER Alerts have done for years. The Commission is also persuaded that a dedicated event code with consistent national standards would allow Federal, state, and local authorities to create consistent training programs for alert originators, as well as public service announcements, ad campaigns, and informational material that would serve to educate the public ahead of time. 16. The Order disagrees with commenters that Blue Alerts should extend beyond law enforcement officers to include all uniformed first responders, including firefighters and paramedics. The stated purpose of the Blue Alert Act is to ``encourage, enhance, and integrate Blue Alert plans throughout the United States to disseminate information when a law enforcement officer is seriously injured or killed in the line of duty, is missing in connection with the officer's official duties, or an imminent and credible threat that an individual intends to cause the serious injury or death of a law enforcement officer is received.'' The Commission agrees with the COPS Office that Commission action should not extend beyond the Congressional mandate by including parties other than law enforcement officers. Such action would fall outside the scope of the Blue Alert Act, which limits Blue Alerts to a ``law enforcement officer.'' 17. Similarly, the Order finds that existing EAS codes LEW (Law Enforcement Warning), LAE (Local Area Emergency), and CEM (Civil Emergency Message) would not be as effective as a BLU event code. The Commission agrees with the COPS Office that the absence of a dedicated BLU event code requires states and local law enforcement agencies to use one of the existing generic event codes in an ad hoc manner and that existing event codes such as LEW are inadequate. NAB also notes that there is confusion about the true nature or severity of an emergency when LEW is used. The record supports the conclusion by the COPS Office that there is a lack of urgency associated with the existing LEW, LAE and CEM event codes because they are sometimes used for matters that do not suggest the need for immediate action. For example, the COPS Office observes that LEW alerts address a broad array of matters including police activity, weather-related incidents, road hazards, missing persons, and other miscellaneous alerts. Similarly, LAE and CEM alerts are more varied than LEW, as they additionally include alerts addressing utility issues and fire hazards. The Order does not address the efficacy of such multiple uses for LEW, LAE, and CEM, but do agree with the COPS Office that the broad use of these event codes make them inappropriate for use as the Blue Alert event code. The Commission agrees with the COPS Office that using LEW, LAE, or CEM for Blue Alerts would create confusion, as instructions for different situations can be contradictory and the public would not know what kind of action to take based on the event code alone. As the Commission found in the NWS Report and Order proceeding, the public interest is not served by relying on inadequate warnings that might provide incorrect or even opposite remedial advice to the public. The Order finds that Blue Alerts have a purpose that is sufficiently unique and well defined (as compared to the circumstances that have prompted the use of other codes) to warrant a unique dedicated BLU event code, which could serve as a vital tool'' for ``protect[ing] law enforcement officers and the communities they serve.'' 18. WEA Delivery of Blue Alerts. Although the COPS Office limited its request to an EAS event code for Blue Alerts, Blue Alerts are also capable of delivery over WEA as that system is currently configured. Moreover, incidents that qualify for the initiation of a Blue Alert under the Blue Alert Guidelines would also satisfy the minimum requirements for initiation of an ``Imminent Threat'' Alert via WEA. Accordingly, the Order permits Blue Alerts to be deployed via WEA using existing alerting methodologies and consistent with our WEA rules. 19. NYC suggests that Blue Alerts use the Imminent Threat Alert classification only as a temporary measure until such time that a dedicated WEA message classification for Blue Alerts can be developed and deployed. NYC is concerned that the existing pre-scripted text for Imminent Threat Alert is ``overly vague,'' lacks capabilities for ``alert originators entering free form text'' or ``Blue Alert-specific pre-scripted text,'' and ``can lead to public confusion and/or panic.'' Although NYC's concerns are somewhat mitigated by the evidence in the record that alert originators can use message ``templates'' that could be used for different Blue Alert scenarios, the Commission believes the issue merits further study. The Commission sought comment in the Blue Alert NPRM on the extent to which additional guidance or direction would be helpful regarding how Blue Alerts should be classified for purposes of WEA. Although the Commission declines to adopt a separate classification for WEA Blue Alerts at this time, the Order leaves this aspect of the issue teed up in the Blue Alert NPRM pending, and keeps the above-captioned docket open, to help gather additional information on this issue beyond what the record currently contains, including further comment from those interested on potential implementation steps, time frame, and costs, until sixty days after the date of publication of this Order in the Federal Register. In the meantime, the Order finds that issuance of Blue Alerts using WEA's existing standards and structures at least as a temporary measure will be effective, will reduce the necessary time for Blue Alerts to become available on WEA, and will reduce the costs to WEA stakeholders. 20. Implementation Schedule. In the Blue Alert NPRM, the Commission sought comment on the proposal that EAS equipment manufacturers should integrate the Blue Alert event code into equipment yet to be manufactured or sold, and make necessary software upgrades available to EAS Participants, no later than six months from the effective date of the final rule. This proposal was based on the Commission's experience with the NWS Report and Order proceeding, in which the Commission required a similar schedule for implementation of severe weather- related EAS event codes. In the Blue Alert NPRM, the Commission likewise noted that adding a BLU EAS event code would trigger technical and public safety requirements regarding equipment readiness that were similar to those discussed in the NWS Report and Order proceeding. 21. The Order encourages stakeholders to work together voluntarily to implement Blue Alerts as swiftly as possible in light of the important public safety objectives involved. The Commission recognizes, however, the record reflects that some time is necessary for equipment manufacturers and Participating Commercial Mobile Service (CMS) Providers to prepare their equipment and networks to be able to process any Blue Alerts that are sent over EAS and WEA, as well as for alert originators, EAS Participants, and other stakeholders to have the necessary training and resources to deliver Blue Alerts to the public if they choose to do so. Accordingly, the Order allows a period of 12 months from the effective date of this rule to enable the delivery of Blue Alerts over EAS, and a period of 18 months from the effective date of this rule to enable the delivery of Blue [[Page 2561]] Alerts over WEA. This implementation schedule will ensure all stakeholders have sufficient time to address any technical, resource, and training needs they may require to ensure the successful delivery of Blue Alerts. 22. Although NYC states that six months is sufficient time for EAS equipment manufacturers to release the necessary software upgrades for a dedicated Blue Alert event code, other commenters suggest more time is warranted for implementation of Blue Alerts for both EAS and WEA. NCTA states that the Commission should work with EAS manufacturers to determine the adequacy of the time allocated for software upgrades to equipment. EAS equipment manufacturers Monroe and Sage Alerting Systems (Sage) state that 12 months is sufficient to allow for the new event code to be deployed within a scheduled in-version equipment software update, resulting in no incremental cost to EAS Participants, rather than as a scheduled major version upgrade that would have to be separately purchased. Broadcaster Adrienne Abbott (Abbott) states that EAS stakeholders have additional needs that must be met to ensure the successful delivery of Blue Alerts (e.g., the updating of EAS Plans to accommodate the use of the new code, time for Councils of Governments (COGs) to add the Blue Alert Event Code to their list of approved codes, and public awareness campaigns to be conducted to raise awareness and understanding of Blue Alerts). The record, however, does not support Abbott's contention that this entire process will require two years to complete. For the reasons described in this Order and the earlier NWS Report and Order, the Commission's experience tells us that this process can occur in parallel with the development and deployment of EAS equipment software updates and can be accommodated within a 12- month period. Participating CMS Providers have requested 18 months to complete the incorporation of pending standards into their networks and devices that will enable the delivery of Blue Alerts as Imminent Threats over WEA, such as modification of the ``C-interface,'' the secure interface that exists between IPAWS and commercial mobile service provider gateways. In connection, NYC acknowledges that ``a longer implementation timeframe is likely necessary for the wireless industry.'' Based on the record, the Commission believes that a 12- month implementation period for EAS and an 18-month implementation period for WEA will provide all stakeholders adequate time to ensure that the necessary equipment upgrades, software updates, development, and testing are completed to enable the delivery of Blue Alerts over EAS and WEA as contemplated by this Order. 23. The Blue Alert NPRM proposed to allow EAS Participants to upgrade their equipment to add a designated Blue Alert event code on a voluntary basis until their equipment is replaced, which is the same approach the Commission has taken when it has adopted other new EAS event codes in the past. The Order adopts a modified version of this proposal and permit EAS Participants to update their software to add the BLU event code on a voluntary basis. All EAS Participants should be able to add the BLU event code using a software upgrade because, as of July 30, 2016, all EAS Participants should have equipment in place that is capable, at the minimum, of being upgraded by software to accommodate EAS modifications, and thus, the need to upgrade existing equipment no longer appears to be necessary. The Order also agrees with NCTA that permitting software upgrades on a voluntary basis is a ``sensible and effective'' approach to adopting a new event code, and with ACA, which notes that this approach ``appropriately balances the public's interest in the safety and well-being of law enforcement officials against the costs of implementing new EAS codes.'' The Order disagrees with the NYC argument that allowing EAS Participants to upgrade their software on a voluntary basis undermines the creation of a cohesive national Blue Alert system. As the Commission observed in the NWS Report and Order, the use by EAS Participants of these codes is and has always been voluntary, and ``it would be contrary to the voluntary nature of state and local EAS to mandate upgrades to existing EAS equipment to incorporate new optional event codes.'' As the Order discusses below, the Commission also finds that this approach will significantly reduce the costs to EAS Participants. 24. Cost and Benefit Analysis. The Order concludes that the benefits of implementing BLU outweigh its cost. The Commission acknowledges as it did in the Blue Alert NPRM, the COPS Office's guidance and expertise regarding the potential benefits of Blue Alerts. The Order also draws on the Commission's experience with the implementation of new EAS codes. The Order finds that most of the potential costs of implementation arise from software updates made outside of the normal course of planned upgrades. The Order allows sufficient time and flexibility to allow manufacturers and EAS Participants make upgrades, and to conduct associated testing in tandem with general software upgrades installed during the regular course of business, thus minimizing costs. The rule adopted in the Order presents many potential benefits by keeping the public informed, out of harm's way, and enlisting their aid to more quickly apprehend dangerous suspects as well as reducing the cost for 911 call centers and emergency responders. 25. Costs. The Order finds, as suggested in the Blue Alert NPRM, that the main cost to EAS Participants that elect to install BLU will be the cost involved in downloading the software updates into their devices, and conducting associated testing. The Blue Alert NPRM found that adopting a Blue Alert EAS event code presents similar technical issues to those raised in the NWS Report and Order, and, accordingly, tentatively concluded that the costs for adding a dedicated Blue Alert EAS event code would not exceed a one-time $3.5 million implementation ceiling. In the NWS Report and Order proceeding, Monroe Electronics indicated that the new event codes could be implemented through a software update downloaded from its website, while Sage Alerting Systems indicated that end users could implement event codes in 10 minutes or less, at no cost other than labor. The NWS Report and Order used a worst-case cost figure of $125.00 per device, allowing five hours of labor to be spent by each of the 28,058 broadcasters and cable companies, resulting in a cost ceiling of $3.5 million. The Order adopts the Commission's tentative conclusion in the Blue Alert NPRM, and find that a dedicated Blue Alert EAS event code would not exceed a one-time $3.5 million implementation cost. The Order notes that EAS Participants can avoid most incremental implementation costs by downloading the new Blue Alert code in conjunction with a scheduled software update. Although the Order recognizes that EAS equipment manufacturers will incur some costs in making the new event code available to all EAS Participants, the Commission believes that 12 months will provide sufficient time to dovetail the BLU upgrade with other scheduled upgrades, posing minimal expense to equipment manufacturers. The Commission believes that the costs for implementation of WEA will be similarly low, because Blue Alerts will be delivered over the existing Imminent Threat WEA classification, using WEA [[Page 2562]] in its current configuration. As such, the Commission believes there will be no incremental costs associated with the delivery of Blue Alerts over WEA, and that the 18 months granted in the Order to Participating CMS Providers is sufficient to allow providers to minimize the costs of deployment. 26. Benefits. The Order anticipate that establishing the BLU event code will improve emergency alerting during events described in the Blue Alert Guidelines, thereby helping to keep people safe from harm. The Order agrees with the COPS Office that existing codes, such as LEW, cannot effectively identify Blue Alerts to the public. While precise numerical estimation is not possible, the Commission expects that the BLU event code will improve public safety by saving lives and preventing injuries. One way of measuring the value of lives saved is the value of a statistical life (VSL), currently estimated at $9.6 million. Accordingly, if the BLU code is expected to save at least one life, its value would be at least $9.6 million, which far exceeds the one-time $3.5 million implementation cost ceiling. This expected benefit is consistent with statistics from the Federal Bureau of Investigation's Uniform Crime Reporting Program, which state that 66 officers were killed in the line of duty in 2016. The Commission believes that at least some portion of these crimes would have qualified for a Blue Alert and could have led to lives saved, quicker apprehension of the suspect, or both. The Order notes the success of AMBER Alerts, where 43 out of the 179 abducted children reported in 2017 were saved as a direct result of AMBER Alerts. It is reasonable to expect that the life of at least one police officer or other member of the public will be saved due to the issuance of an EAS Blue Alert that uses the BLU event code. Injury prevention is another benefit of the BLU event code. The value of injury prevention provides an independent, quantitative metric to express the minimum benefit our rules could produce. Like fatalities, it is difficult to predict the specific number of injuries that the BLU event code will prevent. However, according to the Department of Transportation, nonfatal injuries are far more common than fatalities, and vary widely in severity, as well as probability. Accordingly, the Commission reasons that the public benefit of the rule adopted in this Order is heightened by its role in preventing injuries. 27. The establishment of a dedicated Blue Alert code will also provide the benefit of generating assistance from the public and cost savings for emergency responders. According to NYC, threats and/or violent crimes, including those covered by Blue Alerts, have an economic impact on jurisdictions that should be counted among the benefits of Blue Alerts. Blue Alerts can provide an immediate warning to the public in an area where an extremely dangerous suspect is thought to be. As the Commission noted in the WEA Report and Order and FNPRM, when people can avert situations where they need emergency assistance and therefore do not need to call 911, Public Safety Answering Points are able to avert the cost of resource deployment. NYC also argues that Blue Alerts will help major visitor destinations like NYC provide information to and elicit support from non-residents. The Commission agrees with the COPS Office, that the public has repeatedly played a critical role in assisting law enforcement in maintaining safety; but to assist and avoid danger, the public must be informed. According to the COPS Office, there are clear and significant differences between states' handling of Blue Alerts, which could limit or complicate coordination efforts when a suspect flees, or is thought to have fled, to another jurisdiction. The Commission agrees with the COPS Office that widespread, uniform adoption of the BLU event code, would arm law enforcement officers with the information necessary to rapidly apprehend those who remain a threat to law enforcement and our communities. The Commission concludes that the minor burdens associated with adopting the BLU code will be more than offset by its benefits. III. Procedural Matters A. Accessible Formats 28. To request materials in accessible formats for people with disabilities (Braille, large print, electronic files, audio format), send an email to [email protected] or call the Consumer & Governmental Affairs Bureau at 202-418-0530 (voice), 202-418-0432 (TTY). B. Final Regulatory Flexibility Act Analysis 29. Pursuant to the Regulatory Flexibility Act of 1980, as amended (RFA), see 5 U.S.C. 603, an Initial Regulatory Flexibility Analysis (IRFA) was included in the NPRM in PS Docket No. 15-94. The Commission sought written comment on the proposals in this docket, including comment on the IRFA. This Final Regulatory Flexibility Analysis conforms to the RFA. C. Paperwork Reduction Analysis 30. This document does not contain proposed information collection(s) subject to the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (PRA), Public Law 104-13. Therefore, it also 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). D. Congressional Review Act 31. The Commission will send a copy of this 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). IV. Ordering Clauses 32. Accordingly, it is ordered that pursuant to sections 1, 4(i), 4(o), 303(r), 624(g), and 706 of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended, 47 U.S.C. 151, 154(i), 154(o), 303(r), 544(g), 606, as well as by sections 602(a),(b),(c), (f), 603, 604 and 606 of the Warning, Alert and Response Network Act, 47 U.S.C. 1202(a),(b),(c), (f), 1203, 1204 and 1206, that this Order is adopted. 33. It is further ordered that the Commission's rules are hereby amended as set forth in Appendix A of the full Order. 34. It is further ordered that the rules and requirements adopted herein, including at Appendix A of the full Order, to enable the delivery of Blue Alerts over EAS will be implemented January 18, 2019. 35. It is further ordered that the rules and requirements adopted herein, including at Appendix A of the full Order, to enable the delivery of Blue Alerts over WEA will be implemented July 18, 2019. List of Subjects in 47 CFR Part 11 Radio, Television. Federal Communications Commission. Marlene H. Dortch, Secretary, Office of the Secretary. Final Rules For the reasons discussed in the preamble, the Federal Communications Commission amends 47 CFR part 11 as follows: PART 11--EMERGENCY ALERT SYSTEM (EAS) 0 1. The authority citation for part 11 continues to read as follows: Authority: 47 U.S.C. 151, 154 (i) and (o), 303(r), 544(g) and 606. [[Page 2563]] 0 2. Amend Sec. 11.31 by: 0 a. In the table in paragraph (e), adding an entry under ``State and Local Codes (Optional)'' for ``Blue Alert'', and 0 b. Removing the first paragraph (f). The addition reads as follows: Sec. 11.31 EAS protocol. * * * * * (e) The following Event (EEE) codes are presently authorized: ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Event Nature of activation codes ------------------------------------------------------------------------ * * * * * State and Local Codes (Optional):........................... .......... * * * * * Blue Alert.................................................. BLU. * * * * * ------------------------------------------------------------------------ * * * * * [FR Doc. 2018-00595 Filed 1-17-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6712-01-P
![Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 12 / Thursday, January 18, 2018 / Rules and Regulations 2557
(2) If no fee payment is submitted, the consistent with the technical § 61.20 Method of filing publications.
request should be filed electronically requirements of the Electronic Tariff * * * * *
through the Commission’s Electronic Filing System. (b) In addition, all tariff publications
Comment Filing System or with the (c) Tariff publications which must be requiring fees as set forth in part 1,
Commission’s Secretary. filed in hard copy format should be subpart G of this chapter, shall be
* * * * * submitted according to the procedures submitted electronically if practicable in
set forth on the web page of the FCC’s accordance with § 1.1105 of this chapter
PART 51—INTERCONNECTION Office of the Secretary, https:// along with the electronic submission of
www.fcc.gov/secretary. the payment online form. Petitions
■ 13. The authority citation for part 51 which must be filed in hard copy format
■ 17. Amend § 61.14 by revising
is revised to read as follows: should be submitted according to the
paragraphs (a) and (b) to read as follows:
Authority: 47 U.S.C. 151–55, 201–05, 207– procedures set forth on the web page of
09, 218, 220, 225–27, 251–54, 256, 271, § 61.14 Method of filing publications. the FCC’s Office of the Secretary,
303(r), 332, 1302. https://www.fcc.gov/secretary.
(a) Publications filed electronically
■ 14. Amend § 51.329 by revising must be captioned to ‘‘Secretary, [FR Doc. 2018–00596 Filed 1–17–18; 8:45 am]
paragraph (c)(2) as follows: Federal Communications Commission, BILLING CODE 6712–01–P
§ 51.329 Notice of network changes: Washington, DC 20554.’’ The Electronic
Methods for providing notice. Tariff Filing System will accept filings
24 hours a day, seven days a week. The FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS
* * * * *
official filing date of a publication COMMISSION
(c) * * *
(2) The incumbent LEC’s public received by the Electronic Tariff Filing
System will be determined by the date 47 CFR Part 11
notice and any associated certifications
shall be filed through the Commission’s and time the transmission ends. If the [PS Docket No. 15–94; FCC–17–170]
Electronic Comment Filing System transmission ends after the close of a
(ECFS), using the ‘‘Submit a Non- business day, as that term is defined in Blue Alert EAS Event Code
Docketed Filing’’ module. All § 1.4(e)(2) of this chapter, the filing will
AGENCY: Federal Communications
subsequent filings responsive to a notice be date and time stamped as of the
Commission.
may be filed using the Commission’s opening of the next business day.
ACTION: Final rule.
ECFS under the docket number set forth (b) Carriers are strongly encouraged to
in the Commission’s public notice for submit publications electronically if SUMMARY: In this document, the Federal
the proceeding. If necessary, subsequent practicable. Carriers need only transmit Communications Commission (FCC or
filings responsive to a notice also may one set of files to the Commission. No Commission) amends its regulations
be filed by sending one paper copy of other copies to any other party are governing the Emergency Alert System
the filing to ‘‘Secretary, Federal required. Publications which must be (EAS) and Wireless Emergency Alerts
Communications Commission, filed in hard copy format should be (WEA) to add a new event code, B–L–
Washington, DC 20554’’ and one paper submitted according to the procedures U, to allow alert originators to issue an
copy of the filing to ‘‘Federal set forth on the web page of the FCC’s alert whenever a law enforcement
Communications Commission, Wireline Office of the Secretary, https:// officer is injured or killed, missing in
Competition Bureau, Competition www.fcc.gov/secretary. connection with his or her official
Policy Division, Washington, DC * * * * * duties, or there is an imminent and
20554.’’ For notices filed using the ■ 18. Amend § 61.17 by revising credible threat to cause death or serious
Commission’s ECFS, the date on which paragraph (d) to read as follows: injury to law enforcement officers.
the filing is received by that system will DATES: This rule is effective January 18,
be considered the official filing date. For § 61.17 Applications for special 2018. Delivery of Blue Alerts over EAS
notices filed via paper copy, the date on permission.
will be implemented January 18, 2019.
which the filing is received by the * * * * * Delivery of Blue Alerts over WEA will
Secretary or the FCC Mailroom is (d) In addition, for special permission be implemented July 18, 2019. This
considered the official filing date. All applications requiring fees as set forth docket will remain open for comments
subsequent filings responsive to a notice in part 1, subpart G of this chapter, until March 19, 2018.
shall refer to the ECFS docket number carriers shall submit the appropriate fee FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
assigned to the notice. and associated payment form Gregory Cooke, Deputy Division Chief,
electronically through the process set Policy and Licensing Division, Public
PART 61—TARIFFS forth in § 1.1105 of this chapter and, if Safety and Homeland Security Bureau,
practicable, the application and at (202) 418–2351, or by email at
■ 15. The authority citation for part 61 associated documents electronically in
is revised to read as follows: Gregory.Cooke@fcc.gov; or Linda Pintro,
accordance with the procedures set Attorney Advisor, Policy and Licensing
Authority: Secs. 1, 4(i), 4(j), 201–205 and forth on the Commission’s website,
403 of the Communications Act of 1934, as
Division, Public Safety and Homeland
www.fcc.gov/licensing-databases/fees. Security Bureau, at (202) 418–7490, or
amended; 47 U.S.C. 151, 154(i), 154(j), 201– Applications which must be filed in
205 and 403, unless otherwise noted. by email at Linda.Pintro@fcc.gov.
hard copy format should be submitted
■ 16. Revise § 61.13 to read as follows: SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This is a
according to the procedures set forth on
sradovich on DSK3GMQ082PROD with RULES
summary of the Commission’s Order in
§ 61.13 Scope. the web page of the FCC’s Office of the
PS Docket No. 15–94, FCC 17–170,
Secretary, https://www.fcc.gov/
(a) All issuing carriers that file tariffs adopted and released on December 14,
secretary.
are required to file tariff publications 2017. The full text of this document is
electronically, if practicable. * * * * * available for inspection and copying
(b) All tariff publications shall be filed ■ 19. Amend § 61.20 by revising during normal business hours in the
in a manner that is compatible and paragraph (b) to read as follows: FCC Reference Center (Room CY–1257),
VerDate Sep<11>2014 15:51 Jan 17, 2018 Jkt 244001 PO 00000 Frm 00033 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\18JAR1.SGM 18JAR1](https://thefederalregister.org/doc/83_FR_2569/page/1.svg)
![2558 Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 12 / Thursday, January 18, 2018 / Rules and Regulations
445 12th Street SW, Washington, DC assigned the COPS Office within DOJ to direction of travel, and possible
20554, or online at: https://www.fcc.gov/ be the National Blue Alert Coordinator. destination.
document/fcc-adds-blue-alerts-nations- 4. The COPS Office filed two reports 6. On June 22, 2017, the FCC released
emergency-alert-systems-0. with Congress to demonstrate how it the Blue Alert NPRM, proposing to
was implementing the Blue Alert Act’s revise the EAS rules to adopt BLU to
Synopsis mandate. In its 2016 Report to Congress, allow the transmission of Blue Alerts to
1. The Order adds to Part 11 EAS the COPS Office identified ‘‘the need to the public over the EAS, satisfying the
rules a new dedicated EAS event code, promote formal communication need articulated by the COPS Office for
to advance the important public policy mechanisms between law enforcement a dedicated EAS event code to facilitate
of protecting our nation’s law agencies for Blue Alert information, the broader dissemination of the requisite
enforcement officials and the need for a dedicated Emergency Alert information.
communities they serve. This Order System (EAS) event code, and the need
II. Discussion
adopts the three-character B–L–U to to increase public and law enforcement
enable the delivery of Blue Alerts over awareness of the Blue Alert Act.’’ In its 7. The EAS is an Effective Mechanism
the EAS and WEA. This will promote 2017 Report to Congress, the COPS to Deliver Blue Alerts. The Order finds—
the development of compatible and Office noted that it had commenced as supported by most commenters—that
integrated Blue Alert plans throughout outreach efforts with the FCC to pursue the EAS is an effective mechanism for
a dedicated Blue Alert EAS event code, the delivery of Blue Alerts. The City of
the United States, consistent with the
New York (NYC) and the National
Rafael Ramos and Wenjian Liu National and asked the FCC to consider
conducting an expedited rulemaking to Association of Broadcasters (NAB)
Blue Alert Act of 2015 (Blue Alert Act),
the extent feasible. observe that issuing a Blue Alert via the
and support the need for a dedicated
5. The COPS Office established EAS will provide the public with the
EAS event code for Blue Alerts
voluntary guidelines for the issuance of opportunity to protect themselves and
identified by the Office of Community
Blue Alerts based on the criteria their families and to report relevant
Oriented Policing Services (COPS
contained in the Blue Alert Act (Blue information to law enforcement, thus
Office) of the United States Department
Alert Guidelines). The Blue Alert facilitating the apprehension of suspects
of Justice (DOJ).
Guidelines identify who may request the who are alleged to pose an imminent
I. Background issuance of a Blue Alert, when a Blue threat to law enforcement officers.
Alert may be issued, and the requisite NCTA—The internet & Television
2. The EAS is a national public Association (NCTA) and the American
content thereof. Specifically, a Blue
warning system through which Cable Association (ACA) agree that
Alert may be issued only when a request
broadcasters, cable systems, and other adding Blue Alerts to EAS will advance
is made by a law enforcement agency
service providers (EAS Participants) the important public policy of
having primary jurisdiction over the
deliver alerts to the public to warn them protecting our nation’s law enforcement
incident, and one the following three
of impending emergencies and dangers threshold criteria has been met: (1) officials, as does the National Public
to life and property. Although the Death or serious injury of a law Safety Telecommunications Council
primary purpose of the EAS is to equip enforcement officer in the line of duty; (NPSTC), which states that both the EAS
the President with the ability to provide (2) threat to cause death or serious and WEA should be available tools to
immediate information to the public injury to a law enforcement officer; or help provide Blue Alerts to the public.
during periods of national emergency, (3) a law enforcement officer is missing 8. The Order also finds that it is
the EAS is also used by the National in connection with official duties. If a technically feasible to send Blue Alerts
Weather Service (NWS) and state and Blue Alert is based upon the first of the using the EAS. As NYC and broadcaster
local governments to distribute criteria, the law enforcement agency engineer Sean Donelan (Donelan)
voluntary alerts such as weather-related must confirm that a law enforcement observe, the information required by the
and child abduction (AMBER) alerts. officer has been killed, seriously Blue Alert Guidelines can be
EAS uses three-character event codes to injured, or attacked, and there are successfully communicated within the
identify the various elements, so that indications of death or serious injury. If two-minute period to which EAS alerts
each can deliver accurate, secure, and a Blue Alert is based upon the second are limited. Similarly, the Commission
geographically-targeted messages to the of the criteria, the law enforcement agrees with the Association of Public-
public, in text crawls and in the audio agency must confirm that the threat is Safety Communications Officials-
portion of EAS alerts (e.g., TOR for ‘‘imminent and credible,’’ and at the International, Inc. (APCO) and NYC that
Tornado). time of receipt of the threat, any suspect EAS Blue Alerts should be focused to an
3. In 2015, Congress enacted the Blue involved is wanted by a law appropriately narrow geographic area,
Alert Act to ‘‘encourage, enhance, and enforcement agency. Finally, if a Blue and find that the transmission of EAS
integrate Blue Alert plans throughout Alert is based upon the third criteria, alerts satisfies the requirement that a
the United States,’’ thus facilitating the the agency must have concluded that Blue Alert be ‘‘limited to the geographic
dissemination of information in a there is indication of serious injury to, areas most likely to facilitate the
consistent manner nationwide when a or death of the missing law enforcement apprehension of the suspect involved or
law enforcement officer is seriously officer. In all cases, the agency must which the suspect could reasonably
injured, killed or missing in the line of confirm that any suspect involved has reach’’ and ‘‘[is] not . . . limited to state
duty. The Blue Alert Act directs the not been apprehended and there is lines.’’ The Order disagrees with the
Attorney General to establish a national sufficient descriptive information of the assertion of McCarthy Radio
sradovich on DSK3GMQ082PROD with RULES
Blue Alert communications network suspect, including any relevant vehicle Enterprises, Inc. to the contrary. EAS
within DOJ to issue Blue Alerts, using and license tag information. The COPS alerts are issued using county-based
plans that would be adopted in Office also recommends that Blue Alerts Federal Information Processing
coordination with ‘‘States, units of local be focused on the geographic areas most Standards (FIPS) codes, and may be
government, law enforcement agencies, likely to facilitate the apprehension of issued to include multiple counties
and other appropriate entities.’’ In the suspect, and the message include within a state or across state borders,
September 2016, the Attorney General the suspect’s last known location, depending on the geographic scope of
VerDate Sep<11>2014 15:51 Jan 17, 2018 Jkt 244001 PO 00000 Frm 00034 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\18JAR1.SGM 18JAR1](https://thefederalregister.org/doc/83_FR_2569/page/2.svg)
![Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 12 / Thursday, January 18, 2018 / Rules and Regulations 2559
the emergency prompting the alert. The information about the victim that an dangerous offenders.’’ The Commission
Commission believes that this level of IPAWS-based alert would provide. The also agrees with the COPS Office that no
geographic targeting is consistent with Order agrees with commenters that existing EAS event code is adequate or
effective delivery of Blue Alerts, given concerns that arise from these technical acceptable to accomplish the objectives
the type of potentially mobile suspect limitations are mitigated because the of the Blue Alert Act.
that would be the subject of many Blue public is likely to learn adequate 13. The conclusion in the Order is
Alerts. The Order agrees with Donelan information about an emergency and, as supported by the NPSTC and others that
that a suspect’s movements in the needed, check other media for agree that a dedicated BLU event code
circumstances that would give rise to a additional information after receiving an is well suited to serve as the central
Blue Alert likely would be similar to alert. Further, EAS messages delivered organizing element for Blue Alert plans
that of a suspect in AMBER Alert via the broadcast daisy chain can supply nationally. As APCO notes, a dedicated
circumstances, where suspects may life-saving information and may act as a code would facilitate consistent
travel hundreds of miles within a few source of redundancy for portions of the operations and terminology within the
hours. EAS that draw on the advanced National Blue Alert Network, as called
9. The Order also agrees with capability of CAP. Accordingly, the for by the Blue Alert Act. Similarly,
commenters such as NYC that EAS Blue Order concludes that the mere fact of NYC and NAB agree that establishing
Alerts sent via the Integrated Public any discrepancy between the this dedicated EAS event code to deliver
Alert and Warning System (IPAWS) can information provided by an IPAWS- Blue Alerts would help facilitate the
support transmission of the detailed based EAS Blue Alert and a broadcast- delivery of Blue Alerts to the public in
information required by the Blue Alert based EAS Blue Alert is not sufficient a uniform and consistent manner. The
Guidelines. As the Commission reason to deny potentially life-saving Commission also agrees with NYC that
acknowledged in the Blue Alerts NPRM, information to all members of the a dedicated code would lead state and
EAS alerts delivered over IPAWS use public. local alert originators to engage relevant
the IP-based Common Alerting Protocol 11. Nonetheless, the Order encourages stakeholders to operationalize the steps
(CAP) to deliver alerts with detailed text EAS manufacturers and EAS necessary to issue a Blue Alert.
files, non-English alerts, or other Participants to take technical steps to 14. Further, the Commission is
content-rich data that would not be facilitate the delivery of IPAWS-based persuaded by the COPS Office that an
available to EAS alerts delivered via the EAS Blue Alerts to the public where an EAS event code solely dedicated to Blue
broadcast-based daisy chain. As NYC alert is first delivered to an EAS Alerts would ‘‘facilitate and streamline
and NPSTC note, EAS-based Blue Alerts Participant via broadcast. The Order the adoption of new Blue Alert plans
that provide such detailed information notes that Monroe Electronics, Inc. throughout the nation and would help
will greatly improve the ability of the (Monroe) and other commenters to integrate existing plans into a
public to recognize and avoid an unsafe propose that the Commission permit coordinated national framework.’’ The
situation. The Order accordingly urges ‘‘triggered CAP polling,’’ by which the recommendation by the COPS Office is
alert originators to initiate Blue Alerts EAS device would automatically poll supported by its extensive outreach to
via IPAWS and recommends that alert IPAWS upon receipt of a broadcast EAS U.S. States and territories. According to
originators include detailed information message to verify whether a the COPS Office, twenty-eight states
as part of each Blue Alert for which it corresponding CAP message exists, and operate Blue Alert systems, and twenty-
is available. The Order notes that EAS if it does, use the CAP message instead eight states and territories do not. In its
Participants are required to create video of the broadcast EAS message. The part 2017 Report to Congress, the COPS
crawls based upon the enhanced text 11 EAS rules do not bar EAS Office noted the inconsistency of plans
contained within the CAP message. The Participants from triggered CAP from state to state and the negative
Order agrees with the COPS Office’s polling.1 Because triggered CAP polling consequences that have arisen as a
recommendation that the last known is estimated to require a ‘‘few seconds’’ result. Specifically, according to the
location, direction of travel, and to complete, the Order finds that its use 2017 Report to Congress, ‘‘the lack of
possible destinations of the suspect be in these instances is consistent with such a resource [i.e., a dedicated EAS
included as part of the alert message. Section 11.51(n) of the EAS rules, which event code] affected jurisdictions’
The Commission believes that these allows EAS Participants to employ a ability to communicate within states
steps, in combination with training, will delay of up to 15 minutes before and across the country. Even in states
allow Blue Alert originators to address interrupting their programming and with established Blue Alert plans, it was
the concerns raised by the Boulder retransmitting EAS voluntary event often difficult to identify important
Regional Emergency Telephone Service codes. points of contact necessary for alert
Authority (BRETSA) and other 12. A Dedicated Blue Alert EAS Event activation or interstate coordination.’’
commenters that frequent, repeated, Code is in the Public Interest. The The Commission thus agrees with the
misused, or overly long alerts can result Commission determined that it would COPS Office that implementation of a
in recipients ‘‘tuning out’’ alerts and serve the public interest and promote dedicated Blue Alert EAS code could
even disabling alerts on their devices. the purpose of the Blue Alert Act to ease the burden of designing a
10. The Commission believes that adopt a dedicated EAS event code for consistent model for Blue Alert plans,
Blue Alerts delivered via the broadcast Blue Alerts. Accordingly, the Order and thus encourage states that do not
EAS continues to be an effective amends Section 11.31(e) of the EAS have Blue Alert plans to establish one.
mechanism for the delivery of Blue rules to create and add the dedicated 15. The Order also concludes that the
Alerts. Concerns about the relative value BLU event code to the EAS Protocol for three-character BLU EAS event code,
sradovich on DSK3GMQ082PROD with RULES
of IPAWS-based, as opposed to daisy Blue Alerts. The Commission agrees rather than a currently existing EAS
chain-based, EAS alerts are not unique with the COPS Office that a dedicated code, would help ensure that both Blue
to Blue Alerts. For example, AMBER EAS event code would ‘‘convey the Alerts and related outreach and training
Alerts are subject to the same technical appropriate sense of urgency’’ and are undertaken in a consistent manner
limitations, potentially providing the ‘‘galvanize the public awareness nationally. The Commission agrees with
public with an alert from the daisy necessary to protect law enforcement NYC that using the BLU code would
chain that lacks the descriptive officers and the public from extremely allow for pre-scripted, standardized on-
VerDate Sep<11>2014 15:51 Jan 17, 2018 Jkt 244001 PO 00000 Frm 00035 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\18JAR1.SGM 18JAR1](https://thefederalregister.org/doc/83_FR_2569/page/3.svg)
![2560 Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 12 / Thursday, January 18, 2018 / Rules and Regulations
screen text that is more descriptive than include alerts addressing utility issues WEA. Although the Commission
the existing categories, and would serve and fire hazards. The Order does not declines to adopt a separate
to socialize the Blue Alert concept with address the efficacy of such multiple classification for WEA Blue Alerts at
the public, much like the AMBER Alerts uses for LEW, LAE, and CEM, but do this time, the Order leaves this aspect of
have done for years. The Commission is agree with the COPS Office that the the issue teed up in the Blue Alert
also persuaded that a dedicated event broad use of these event codes make NPRM pending, and keeps the above-
code with consistent national standards them inappropriate for use as the Blue captioned docket open, to help gather
would allow Federal, state, and local Alert event code. The Commission additional information on this issue
authorities to create consistent training agrees with the COPS Office that using beyond what the record currently
programs for alert originators, as well as LEW, LAE, or CEM for Blue Alerts contains, including further comment
public service announcements, ad would create confusion, as instructions from those interested on potential
campaigns, and informational material for different situations can be implementation steps, time frame, and
that would serve to educate the public contradictory and the public would not costs, until sixty days after the date of
ahead of time. know what kind of action to take based publication of this Order in the Federal
16. The Order disagrees with on the event code alone. As the Register. In the meantime, the Order
commenters that Blue Alerts should Commission found in the NWS Report finds that issuance of Blue Alerts using
extend beyond law enforcement officers and Order proceeding, the public WEA’s existing standards and structures
to include all uniformed first interest is not served by relying on at least as a temporary measure will be
responders, including firefighters and inadequate warnings that might provide effective, will reduce the necessary time
paramedics. The stated purpose of the incorrect or even opposite remedial for Blue Alerts to become available on
Blue Alert Act is to ‘‘encourage, advice to the public. The Order finds WEA, and will reduce the costs to WEA
enhance, and integrate Blue Alert plans that Blue Alerts have a purpose that is stakeholders.
throughout the United States to sufficiently unique and well defined (as 20. Implementation Schedule. In the
disseminate information when a law compared to the circumstances that Blue Alert NPRM, the Commission
enforcement officer is seriously injured have prompted the use of other codes) sought comment on the proposal that
or killed in the line of duty, is missing to warrant a unique dedicated BLU EAS equipment manufacturers should
in connection with the officer’s official event code, which could serve as a vital integrate the Blue Alert event code into
duties, or an imminent and credible tool’’ for ‘‘protect[ing] law enforcement equipment yet to be manufactured or
threat that an individual intends to officers and the communities they sold, and make necessary software
cause the serious injury or death of a serve.’’ upgrades available to EAS Participants,
law enforcement officer is received.’’ 18. WEA Delivery of Blue Alerts. no later than six months from the
The Commission agrees with the COPS Although the COPS Office limited its effective date of the final rule. This
Office that Commission action should request to an EAS event code for Blue proposal was based on the
not extend beyond the Congressional Alerts, Blue Alerts are also capable of Commission’s experience with the NWS
mandate by including parties other than delivery over WEA as that system is Report and Order proceeding, in which
law enforcement officers. Such action currently configured. Moreover, the Commission required a similar
would fall outside the scope of the Blue incidents that qualify for the initiation schedule for implementation of severe
Alert Act, which limits Blue Alerts to a of a Blue Alert under the Blue Alert weather-related EAS event codes. In the
‘‘law enforcement officer.’’ Guidelines would also satisfy the Blue Alert NPRM, the Commission
17. Similarly, the Order finds that minimum requirements for initiation of likewise noted that adding a BLU EAS
existing EAS codes LEW (Law an ‘‘Imminent Threat’’ Alert via WEA. event code would trigger technical and
Enforcement Warning), LAE (Local Area Accordingly, the Order permits Blue public safety requirements regarding
Emergency), and CEM (Civil Emergency Alerts to be deployed via WEA using equipment readiness that were similar
Message) would not be as effective as a existing alerting methodologies and to those discussed in the NWS Report
BLU event code. The Commission consistent with our WEA rules. and Order proceeding.
agrees with the COPS Office that the 19. NYC suggests that Blue Alerts use 21. The Order encourages
absence of a dedicated BLU event code the Imminent Threat Alert classification stakeholders to work together
requires states and local law only as a temporary measure until such voluntarily to implement Blue Alerts as
enforcement agencies to use one of the time that a dedicated WEA message swiftly as possible in light of the
existing generic event codes in an ad classification for Blue Alerts can be important public safety objectives
hoc manner and that existing event developed and deployed. NYC is involved. The Commission recognizes,
codes such as LEW are inadequate. NAB concerned that the existing pre-scripted however, the record reflects that some
also notes that there is confusion about text for Imminent Threat Alert is time is necessary for equipment
the true nature or severity of an ‘‘overly vague,’’ lacks capabilities for manufacturers and Participating
emergency when LEW is used. The ‘‘alert originators entering free form Commercial Mobile Service (CMS)
record supports the conclusion by the text’’ or ‘‘Blue Alert-specific pre- Providers to prepare their equipment
COPS Office that there is a lack of scripted text,’’ and ‘‘can lead to public and networks to be able to process any
urgency associated with the existing confusion and/or panic.’’ Although Blue Alerts that are sent over EAS and
LEW, LAE and CEM event codes NYC’s concerns are somewhat mitigated WEA, as well as for alert originators,
because they are sometimes used for by the evidence in the record that alert EAS Participants, and other
matters that do not suggest the need for originators can use message ‘‘templates’’ stakeholders to have the necessary
immediate action. For example, the that could be used for different Blue training and resources to deliver Blue
sradovich on DSK3GMQ082PROD with RULES
COPS Office observes that LEW alerts Alert scenarios, the Commission Alerts to the public if they choose to do
address a broad array of matters believes the issue merits further study. so. Accordingly, the Order allows a
including police activity, weather- The Commission sought comment in the period of 12 months from the effective
related incidents, road hazards, missing Blue Alert NPRM on the extent to which date of this rule to enable the delivery
persons, and other miscellaneous alerts. additional guidance or direction would of Blue Alerts over EAS, and a period
Similarly, LAE and CEM alerts are more be helpful regarding how Blue Alerts of 18 months from the effective date of
varied than LEW, as they additionally should be classified for purposes of this rule to enable the delivery of Blue
VerDate Sep<11>2014 15:51 Jan 17, 2018 Jkt 244001 PO 00000 Frm 00036 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\18JAR1.SGM 18JAR1](https://thefederalregister.org/doc/83_FR_2569/page/4.svg)
![Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 12 / Thursday, January 18, 2018 / Rules and Regulations 2563
■ 2. Amend § 11.31 by: FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: OMB Approval Date: January 5, 2018.
■ a. In the table in paragraph (e), adding Michele Levy Berlove, Attorney OMB Expiration Date: January 31,
an entry under ‘‘State and Local Codes Advisor, Wireline Competition Bureau, 2021.
(Optional)’’ for ‘‘Blue Alert’’, and at (202) 418–1477, or by email at Title: Part 63, Application and
■ b. Removing the first paragraph (f). Michele.Berlove@fcc.gov. Supplemental Information
The addition reads as follows: SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This Requirements; Technology Transitions
document announces that, on January 5, et al., GN Docket No. 13–5 et al.
§ 11.31 EAS protocol.
2018, OMB approved, for a period of Form Number: N/A.
* * * * * Respondents: Business or other for-
(e) The following Event (EEE) codes three years, the information collection
requirements relating to certain of the profit entities.
are presently authorized: Number of Respondents and
discontinuance rules contained in the
Commission’s Technology Transitions Responses: 60 respondents; 60
Event responses.
Nature of activation Declaratory Ruling, Second Report and
codes
Order, and Order on Reconsideration, Estimated Time per Response: 6
FCC 16–90, published at 81 FR 62632, hours.
* * * * * September 12, 2016, as specified above. Frequency of Response: One-time
State and Local Codes (Op- The OMB Control Number is 3060– reporting requirement and third-party
tional): ..................................... ..................
0149. The Commission publishes this disclosure requirements.
document as an announcement of the Obligation to Respond: Required to
* * * * * obtain or retain benefits. Statutory
Blue Alert .................................... BLU. effective date of the rules. If you have authority for this collection of
any comments on the burden estimates
* * * * * listed below, or how the Commission information is contained in 47 U.S.C.
can improve the collections and reduce 214 and 402 of the Communications Act
any burdens caused thereby, please of 1934, as amended.
* * * * * Total Annual Burden: 360 hours.
[FR Doc. 2018–00595 Filed 1–17–18; 8:45 am] contact Nicole Ongele, Federal
Communications Commission, Room A– Total Annual Cost: No cost(s).
BILLING CODE 6712–01–P Nature and Extent of Confidentiality:
C620, 445 12th Street SW, Washington,
The Commission is not requesting that
DC 20554. Please include the OMB
the respondents submit confidential
FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS Control Number, 3060–0149, in your
information to the FCC. Respondents
COMMISSION correspondence. The Commission will
may, however, request confidential
also accept your comments via email at
47 CFR Part 63 treatment for information they believe to
PRA@fcc.gov.
To request materials in accessible be confidential under 47 CFR 0.459 of
[GN Docket No. 13–5, RM–11358; WC the Commission’s rules.
Docket No. 13–3; FCC 16–90] formats for people with disabilities
Privacy Act: No impact(s).
(Braille, large print, electronic files,
Needs and Uses: The Commission is
Technology Transitions, USTelecom audio format), send an email to fcc504@
seeking Office of Management and
Petition for Declaratory Ruling That fcc.gov or call the Consumer and
Budget (OMB) approval for a revision to
Incumbent Local Exchange Carriers Governmental Affairs Bureau at (202)
a currently approved collection. Section
Are Non-Dominant in the Provision of 418–0530 (voice), (202) 418–0432
214 of the Communications Act of 1934,
Switched Access Services, Policies (TTY).
as amended, requires that a carrier first
and Rules Governing Retirement of Synopsis obtain FCC authorization either to (1)
Copper Loops by Incumbent Local construct, operate, or engage in
Exchange Carriers and Special Access As required by the Paperwork
transmission over a line of
for Price Cap Local Exchange Carriers Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3507), communications, or (2) discontinue,
the FCC is notifying the public that it
AGENCY: Federal Communications received final OMB approval on January reduce or impair service over a line of
Commission. 5, 2018, for the information collection communications. Part 63 of title 47 of
ACTION: Final rule; announcement of requirements contained in the the Code of Federal Regulations (CFR)
effective date. modifications to the Commission’s rules implements Section 214. Part 63 also
in 47 CFR part 63. Under 5 CFR part implements provisions of the Cable
SUMMARY: In this document, the Communications Policy Act of 1984
1320, an agency may not conduct or
Commission announces that the Office pertaining to video which was approved
sponsor a collection of information
of Management and Budget (OMB) has under this OMB Control Number 3060–
unless it displays a current, valid OMB
approved, for a period of three years, the 0149. In 2009, the Commission modified
Control Number.
information collection associated with No person shall be subject to any Part 63 to extend to providers of
the Commission’s discontinuance rules. penalty for failing to comply with a interconnected Voice of internet
This document is consistent with the collection of information subject to the Protocol (VoIP) service the
Technology Transitions Declaratory Paperwork Reduction Act that does not discontinuance obligations that apply to
Ruling, Second Report and Order, and display a current, valid OMB Control domestic non-dominant
Order on Reconsideration, FCC 16–90, Number. The OMB Control Number is telecommunications carriers under
which stated that the Commission 3060–0149. Section 214 of the Communications Act
would publish a document in the The foregoing notice is required by of 1934, as amended. In 2014, the
sradovich on DSK3GMQ082PROD with RULES
Federal Register announcing the the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, Commission adopted improved
effective date of those rules. Public Law 104–13, October 1, 1995, administrative filing procedures for
DATES: The amendments to 47 CFR and 44 U.S.C. 3507. domestic transfers of control, domestic
63.71(a) introductory text, (b), (g), and The total annual reporting burdens discontinuances and notices of network
(i) published at 81 FR 62632, September and costs for the respondents are as changes, and among other adjustments,
12, 2016, are effective on January 18, follows: modified Part 63 to require electronic
2018. OMB Control Number: 3060–0149. filing for applications for authorization
VerDate Sep<11>2014 15:51 Jan 17, 2018 Jkt 244001 PO 00000 Frm 00039 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\18JAR1.SGM 18JAR1](https://thefederalregister.org/doc/83_FR_2569/page/7.svg)
Document Created: 2018-01-18 00:42:36
Document Modified: 2018-01-18 00:42:36
| Category | Regulatory Information | |
| Collection | Federal Register | |
| sudoc Class | AE 2.7: GS 4.107: AE 2.106: | |
| Publisher | Office of the Federal Register, National Archives and Records Administration | |
| Section | Rules and Regulations | |
| Action | Final rule. | |
| Dates | This rule is effective January 18, 2018. Delivery of Blue Alerts over EAS will be implemented January 18, 2019. Delivery of Blue Alerts over WEA will be implemented July 18, 2019. This docket will remain open for comments until March 19, 2018. | |
| Contact | Gregory Cooke, Deputy Division Chief, Policy and Licensing Division, Public Safety and Homeland Security Bureau, at (202) 418-2351, or by email at [email protected]; or Linda Pintro, Attorney Advisor, Policy and Licensing Division, Public Safety and Homeland Security Bureau, at (202) 418-7490, or by email at [email protected] | |
| FR Citation | 83 FR 2557 | |
| CFR Associated | Radio and Television |
2025 Federal Register | Disclaimer | Privacy Policy
USC | CFR | eCFR