Emergency Alerting and Other FCC Items Approved Last Week Saw Changes

Commissioners added several questions to the alerting NPRM, which launches a “ground-up re-examination of the national alert and warning systems,” the emergency alert system (EAS) and wireless emergency alerts (WEAs). It was approved by commissioners 3-0 on Thursday. The changes appear to reflect, in part, concerns raised by Commissioner Anna Gomez (see 2508070037).

The final version asks about multilingual alerting, a recurring concern for Gomez. How can the alerting systems “better serve communities by delivering alerts in the languages they understand?” it asks. “Should the Commission take additional steps to ensure alerts effectively reach non-English-speaking populations? We invite input on how multilingual capabilities should inform the design and modernization of EAS and WEA.”

The NPRM also now seeks comment on “whether there are resources, such as training materials or best practices, that could be made available to alert originators to promote alert message quality, uniformity, and consistency.” A section on alternatives to the current alerting systems asks “what minimum requirements would be necessary to preserve consumer trust.” Another new paragraph asks about the need for increased training for alert originators, public education and "collaboration among all alerting stakeholders.”

The notice added questions about whether there are gaps in training or best practices available to message originators. “Is there sufficient and meaningful public outreach and education about how alerts are received, alert system capabilities, the purpose of alerts, and the action the public should take if it receives an alert?” it now asks.

The NPRM includes statements from all three commissioners as well.

BDS

The final BDS NPRM was tweaked to put more focus on time-division multiplexing (TDM). It was approved in a unanimous vote ahead of the meeting (see 2508050056).

“Why do some users continue to purchase TDM-based BDS?” the NPRM asks in an added paragraph. “Do any industry standard practices or regulatory requirements encourage or mandate the purchase of TDM-based services?” Commenters should “identify the public interest purpose of those rules," the notice says. "In the absence of such a showing, we tentatively conclude that any such rules should be eliminated to accelerate the IP Transition."

Other added text asks whether the commission should “continue a staged transition for rate-of-return carriers that need to exit” the National Exchange Carrier Association “traffic-sensitive pool for their BDS, such as requiring them to exit the pool within 12 months, subject to permissive detariffing, and mandatory detariffing after 24 months.”

Only Chairman Brendan Carr attached a statement to the BDS NPRM. Many businesses and government agencies “subscribe to broadband services for things like cloud access, backhaul, and creating private networks,” he said.

The market was dominated by incumbent carriers “who enjoyed local monopolies,” Carr added. “As the market evolved and competition moved in, the Commission’s rules were slow to keep pace.” The FCC has “over-regulated this market, propping up legacy technologies and crushing the incentives for private operators to make network upgrades.”

Satellite Licensing

The order on streamlined licensing for satellites and earth stations, also approved by commissioners 3-0, contains some relatively minor changes from the draft. In the section allowing non-geostationary orbit (NGSO) satellite operators to modify some equipment without prior FCC authorization, the finalized order makes clearer that those changes can’t change an antenna’s gain characteristics beyond the technical parameters in the underlying authorization.

The final order also clarifies that those permitted NGSO changes are for antennas, sensors and microelectronics specifically. The three commissioners attached statements.

The FCC also posted an order deleting broadcast rules, done as part of the commission’s “Delete” proceeding in a direct final rule, without the normal comment period. Gomez partly concurred and partly dissented. One change of note: Rather than allowing 10 days for comment once the order is published in the Federal Register, as proposed in the draft, the FCC agreed to allow 20 days. All three commissioners included statements.