Broadcast Alerts, Robocall Rules for Carriers Top FCC's February Agenda
The FCC released draft items set for votes at the commissioners' Feb. 15 open meeting, including an NPRM aimed at simplifying the process for alert originators to send multilingual emergency alerts over TV and radio. Also released Thursday was a second draft item that codifies some robocall rules while asking about applying protections in the Telephone Consumer Protection Act to robocalls and robotexts from wireless carriers to their own subscribers.
An in-space servicing, assembly and manufacturing NPRM proposes licensing ISAM missions under existing FCC processes, rather than crafting different rules for various ISAM missions, but it also would exempt ISAM from some satellite system rules. The FCC will also take up long-awaited wireless multichannel audio system (WMAS) rules of special interest to wireless mic companies and users.
The Multilingual EAS NPRM would seek comment on creating multilingual emergency alert system messages using scripted templates. The item seeks comment on using alert messages and prerecorded audio that have been pre-translated into the 13 most commonly spoken non-English languages in the U.S. “These pre-translated template-based scripts and audio files would be produced by the Commission, and would be pre-installed in the EAS equipment operated by EAS Participants,” said a fact sheet included with the draft item.
The NPRM would also seek comment on developing American Sign Language versions of the templates, and on whether to require EAS participants to issue the template alert only in the language that corresponds to the programming content of their channel or additional languages as well. “By largely eliminating translation difficulties currently associated with issuing multilingual EAS alerts, this model potentially should make issuing multilingual EAS alerts simpler and more accessible for alert originators, which should lead to increased multilingual alert issuance,” the draft item said.
A draft order would “codify” the commission’s 2015 ruling that consumers can revoke consent under the TCPA “through any reasonable means while providing additional clarification on what ‘reasonable’ means in this context.” Robocallers and robotexters would be required to honor do-not-call and consent revocation requests “as soon as practicable, and no longer than 10 business days from receipt.”
On the wireless side, the draft would codify a 2012 ruling clarifying that a one-time text message confirming a consumer’s request that no further text messages be sent doesn’t violate the TCPA provided it merely confirms the opt-out request and doesn’t include marketing information.
The draft also includes a Further NPRM asking about texts and calls by wireless carriers to their customers. “We seek comment on whether wireless providers satisfy the TCPA’s consent obligation pursuant to the unique nature of the relationship and service that they provide to their subscribers,” the proposed FNPRM says: Do wireless providers “require additional consent beyond that provided by … this relationship with their subscribers to satisfy this requirement.”
The ISAM NPRM proposes exempting ISAM vehicles from FCC processing round rules for non-geostationary orbit satellites and the first-come, first-served process for geostationary orbit satellites, as long as their operations are compatible with existing operations in the requested frequency bands. Those proposed exemptions reflect that ISAM missions “seem more capable of spectrum sharing” than other commercial satellites that have been authorized under Part 25 rules and generally need shorter duration of intensive communications operations, according to the draft ISAM NPRM.
The NPRM also would have ISAM missions subject to the same orbital debris mitigation requirements as other space missions. Pointing to concerns about some ISAM missions possibly posing particular debris risks, it asks for comment on whether current orbital debris mitigation rules are sufficient. It proposes that debris removal missions seek authorization through the ISAM process. It also tentatively concludes that ISAM missions can use existing spectrum allocations, rather than look at making ISAM-specific allocations.
Wireless mics
The WMAS order follows up on a 2021 NPRM on the technology, which is designed to allow more mics to use the same amount of spectrum (see 2104220056). “No parties specifically object to allowing WMAS, but there is disagreement on a number of technical and operational issues,” the WMAS draft notes. The order is intended to “advance an important Commission goal to promote efficient spectrum use.”
The draft proposes to allow wireless mic users to operate WMAS on frequencies already available for Part 74 licensed wireless microphones in the TV bands, the 653-657 segment of the 600 MHz duplex gap and in the 941.5-944, 944-952, 952.850-956.250, 956.45-959.85, 1435-1525, 6875-6900 and 7100-7125 MHz bands. The FCC would permit the use of up to 6 MHz channels in the TV bands, up to 4 MHz in the 600 MHz duplex gap and up to 20 MHz channels in other bands, “but allow smaller channels when less spectrum is available in a band or is sufficient for an application.”
The order also would permit unlicensed wireless mic users to operate WMAS on frequencies already available for Part 15 unlicensed wireless microphones in the UHF and VHF TV bands and in the 657-663 MHz segment of the 600 MHz duplex gap, using up to 6 MHZ channels. The FCC would require Part 15 and 74 WMAS “to be capable of operating with at least three audio channels per megahertz of spectrum to ensure that spectrum is used efficiently.” The rules are based on the 2021 European Telecommunications Standards Institute wireless microphone standard.
In addition, commissioners will consider a restricted adjudicatory matter from the Media Bureau and a proposed Enforcement Bureau action.