# FCC-07-53: Implementation of a Grant Program for Remote Community Alert Systems Pursuant to Section 605(a) of the Warning, Alert, and Response Network (WARN) Act (04/11/07): Implementation of a Grant Program for Remote Community Alert Systems Pursuant to Section 605(a) of the Warning, Alert, and Response Network (WARN) Act

> Federal · Rulings · In force

URL: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/statutes/FCC_FCC_07_53

## Section

- **Citation:** FCC-07-53: Implementation of a Grant Program for Remote Community Alert Systems Pursuant to Section 605(a) of the Warning, Alert, and Response Network (WARN) Act (04/11/07)
- **Heading:** Implementation of a Grant Program for Remote Community Alert Systems Pursuant to Section 605(a) of the Warning, Alert, and Response Network (WARN) Act
- **Jurisdiction:** Federal
- **Kind:** Rulings
- **Status:** In force
- **Text as of:** August 14, 2026
- **Source:** Compiled text
- **Location:** FCC Declaratory Rulings / Implementation of a Grant Program for Remote Community Alert Systems Pursuant to Section 605(a) of the Warning, Alert, and Response Network (WARN) Act

## Text

Federal Communications Commission
FCC 07-53
Before the
Federal Conununications Commission
Washington, D.C. 20554
In the Matter of
)
)
Implementation of a Grant Program for Remote
)
PS Docket No. 07-8
Community Alert Systems Pursuant to Section
)
605(a) of the Warning, Alert, and Response
)
Network (WARN)
Act
)
DECLARATORY RULING
Adopted: April 11,2007
Released: April 11,2007
By the Commission:
1.
INTRODUCTION AND BACKGROUND
1.
In this Declaratory Ruling, we interpret the phrase "remote communities effectively
unserved by commercial mobile service," as required by Section 605(a) of the Warning, Alert, and
Response Network (WARN)
Act.'
2.
The WARN Act requires the Commission to establish an advisory committee to develop
recommendations regarding standards for commercial mobile service providers' transmission of
emergency alert messages on a voluntary basis to their customers, and to conduct a rulemaking, taking
into consideration such recommendations.^ The WARN Act also requires the establishment of a grant
program to fund outdoor alerting technologies for remote communities lacking commercial mobile
service, and requires the FCC to interpret the term "remote communities effectively unserved by
commercial mobile service." Specifically, Section 605(a) of the WARN Act provides:
The Under Secretary of Commerce for Oceans and Atmosphere, in consultation with the
Secretary of Homeland Security, shall establish a program under which grants may be
made to provide for outdoor alerting technologies in remote communities effectively
unserved by commercial mobile service (as determined by the Federal Communications
Commission within ISO days after the date of enactment of this Act) for the purpose of
enabling residents of those communities to receive emergency alerts.'
3
of Homeland Security, shall establish a program under which grants may be
made to provide for outdoor alerting technologies in remote communities effectively
unserved by commercial mobile service (as determined by the Federal Communications
Commission within ISO days after the date of enactment of this Act) for the purpose of
enabling residents of those communities to receive emergency alerts.'
3.
On January 23, 2007, the Commission released a public notice seeking comment on how
we should interpret the phrase "remote communities effectively unserved by commercial mobile service,"
as required by Section 605(a).'' For the reasons discussed below, we find that: (1) a "remote" area consists
of a county with a population density of 100 persons per square mile or less, based upon the most recently
available Census data; (2) "commercial mobile service" means those services that are required to provide
'
Warning, Alert, and Response Network (WARN)
Act, 47 U.S.C. §§ 1201-1205. The WARN Act was enacted as
Title VI of the Security and Accountability For Every Port Act of 2006 (SAFE Port Act), Pub. L. No. 109-347, 120
Stat. 1884 (2006), which was signed into law by President Bush on October 13, 2006.
^ See WARN Act, §§ 601 et seq.
^Id. § 605(a).
" The Commission Seeks Comment on Implementation of a Grant Program for Remote Community Alert Systems
Pursuant to Section 605(a) of the Warning, Alert, and Response Network (WARN)
Act, PS Docket No. 07-8, Public
Notice, 22 FCC Red 1045 (2007) (Public Notice). Comments were due on February 6, 2007, and reply comments
on February 22, 2007. Id. A list of commenters is provided in the Appendix.
7214
" The Commission Seeks Comment on Implementation of a Grant Program for Remote Community Alert Systems
Pursuant to Section 605(a) of the Warning, Alert, and Response Network (WARN)
Act, PS Docket No. 07-8, Public
Notice, 22 FCC Red 1045 (2007) (Public Notice). Comments were due on February 6, 2007, and reply comments
on February 22, 2007. Id. A list of commenters is provided in the Appendix.
7214

Federal Communications Commission
FCC 07-53
E911 service in accordance with Section 20.18 of the Commission's rules; and (3) "effectively unserved"
identifies "remote communities" that do not receive "commercial mobile service" as demonstrated by
coverage maps, technical analyses, field tests, or any other reasonable means.
II.
DISCUSSION
4.
In this section, we define the phrases "remote communities," "commercial mobile
service," and "effectively unserved" as used in Section 605(a) of the WARN Act.
5.
"Remote Communities." In the Public Notice, the Commission asked whether applying
the definition of "rural area," which the Commission had previously defined for purposes of facilitating
deployment of wireless services in rural areas, to the WARN Act's phrase "remote communities" would
satisfy the policy purposes envisioned by Congress in establishing the grant program under Section
605(a).^ The Commission previously defined "mral areas" as "those counties (or equivalent) with a
population density of 100 persons per square mile or less, based upon the most recently available Census
data."^ In the Public Notice, the Commission invited comment on this definition and other possible
interpretations of the term "remote communities."'
6.
Comments
ng the grant program under Section
605(a).^ The Commission previously defined "mral areas" as "those counties (or equivalent) with a
population density of 100 persons per square mile or less, based upon the most recently available Census
data."^ In the Public Notice, the Commission invited comment on this definition and other possible
interpretations of the term "remote communities."'
6.
Comments. AT&T and MC/LM support utilizing the Commission's definition of "rural
area" to define "remote communities."® AT&T notes that neither the WARN Act nor its legislative
history defines "remote communities."' TDI states that the Commission's definition of "remote
communities effectively unserved by commercial mobile service" should be read "as broadly as possible,
given the vital public interest served by policies associated with emergency alerting systems."" CCDTF
agrees that this phrase should be interpreted "broadly," and adds that the Commission's definition of
"rural area" is "too narrow in scope" and may cause the grant program "to miss serving households and
groups of persons, or persons living alone, with disabilities who due to their disability, may in fact live
remote lives but in higher density areas."''
Public Notice at 2.
® See Facilitating the Provision of Spectrum-Based Services to Rural Areas and Promoting Opportunities for Rural
Telephone Companies to Provide SpecUum-Based Services, WT Docket No. 02-381, 2000 Biennial Regulatory
Review Spectrum Aggregation Limits for Commercial Mobile Radio Services, WT Docket No. 01-14, Increasing
Flexibility to Promote Access to and the Efficient and Intensive Use of Spiectrum and the Widespread Deployment
of Wireless Services, and to Facilitate Capital Formation, WT Docket No. 03-202, Report and Order and Further
Notice of Proposed Rulemaking, 19 FCC Red 19078, 19087 i 11 (2004) {Rural R&O).
'
Public Notice at 2.
® Comments Filed by AT&T Inc. on behalf of its affiliate, AT&T Mobility LLC, PS Docket No. 07-8, at 1 (filed
Feb
the Efficient and Intensive Use of Spiectrum and the Widespread Deployment
of Wireless Services, and to Facilitate Capital Formation, WT Docket No. 03-202, Report and Order and Further
Notice of Proposed Rulemaking, 19 FCC Red 19078, 19087 i 11 (2004) {Rural R&O).
'
Public Notice at 2.
® Comments Filed by AT&T Inc. on behalf of its affiliate, AT&T Mobility LLC, PS Docket No. 07-8, at 1 (filed
Feb. 6, 2007) (AT&T Comments); Comments Filed by Maritime Communications/Land Mobile, LLC PS Docket
No. 07-8, at I (filed Feb. 6, 2007) (MC/LM Comments).
'
AT&T Comments at 2. MC/LM also points out that, as a provider of Automated Maritime Telecommunications
System services, its authorized service area includes areas with population densities of 100 persons per square mile
or less. MC/LM Comments at 1.
Reply Comments Filed by Telecommunications for the Deaf and Hard of Hearing, Inc.; Association of Late-
Deafened Adults; California Coalition of Agencies Serving the Deaf and Hard of Hearing; Deaf &
Hard of Hearing
Consumer Advocacy Network; Hearing Loss Association of America; and National Association for the Deaf, PS
Docket No. 07-8, at 2
(filed Feb. 22,2007) (TDI Reply Comments).
"
Comments Filed by Consortium for Citizens with Disabilities Task Force on Telecommunications and
Technology, PS Docket No. 07-8, at 1, 2
(filed Feb. 6,2007) (CCDTF Comments).
7215

Federal Communications Commission
FCC 07-53
7.
AAPC states that the definition of "rural area" is "the proper starting point," but believes
that actual applicants under the grant program will more likely be political subdivisions of rural areas,
"such as incorporated villages, towns or cities, or townships or their equivalent," as opposed to the
counties themselves.'^ Accordingly, AAPC suggests that "remote communities" should be defined as
these political subdivisions.'^
8.
Discussion. We adopt our Public Notice proposal to apply the definition of "rural area"
for the purpose of determining whether a "community" is "remote" under the WARN Act
as incorporated villages, towns or cities, or townships or their equivalent," as opposed to the
counties themselves.'^ Accordingly, AAPC suggests that "remote communities" should be defined as
these political subdivisions.'^
8.
Discussion. We adopt our Public Notice proposal to apply the definition of "rural area"
for the purpose of determining whether a "community" is "remote" under the WARN Act. In reaching
the definition of "rural area" in the context of the Rural R&O,
the Commission recognized that a
comprehensive definition of "rural area" may not be appropriate for all purposes.''' The Commission
therefore decided to treat the definition of "rural area" as "a presumption that will apply for current and
future Commission . .. rules, policies and analyses for which the term ... has not been expressly
defined."'^ The Commission stated that the presumption would "maintain continuity with respect to
existing definitions of 'rural' that have been tailored to apply to specific policies, while also providing a
practical guideline."'^ The policy principles underlying the Commission's definition of "rural area" are
equally relevant for purposes of implementing Section 605(a) of the WARN Act. Accordingly, we find
that it is appropriate to apply the same definition of "rural area" to define a "community" that is "remote."
9.
Although the Commission considered several potential definitions for "rural area," in the
Rural R&O,^^ it adopted the current definition because it was neither difficult to administer nor "so
narrowly tailored to only include what many refer to as the most rural areas."'® Specifically, the
Commission noted that a definition based on county boundaries is "easy to administer and understand,
population data based on county boundfiries are widely available to the public, and county boundaries
rarely change."'^ The Commission also noted that "the total population of the counties that fall within
this definition of 'rural area' closely tracks the Census Bureau's overall population for non-urban areas.
ted that a definition based on county boundaries is "easy to administer and understand,
population data based on county boundfiries are widely available to the public, and county boundaries
rarely change."'^ The Commission also noted that "the total population of the counties that fall within
this definition of 'rural area' closely tracks the Census Bureau's overall population for non-urban areas."^°
10.
While AAPC may be correct that grant applicants could include the political subdivisions
of counties, we are not persuaded that the nature of the potential grant applicant should be determinative
Reply Comments Filed by American Association of Paging Carriers, PS Docket No. 07-8, at 2
(filed Feb. 22,
2007) (AAPC Reply Comments).
Id.
"
Rural R&O, 19 FCC Red at 19087 ? 12.
''Id.
''Id.
See id. at 19085-86 19. The Commission sought comment on the following potential definitions: (1) counties
with a population density of 100 persons or fewer per square mile; (2) Rural Service Areas (RSAs); (3) non-nodal
counties within an Economic Area (EA)
as defined by the Department of Commerce's Bureau of Economic
Analysis; (4) the definition for "rural" used by the Rural Utilities Service for its broadband loan program; (5) the
definition for "rural area" used by the Commission in connection with universal service support for schools,
libraries, and rural health care providers; (6) the definition of "rural" based on census tracts as outlined by the
Economic Research Service of the USDA;
Bureau of Economic
Analysis; (4) the definition for "rural" used by the Rural Utilities Service for its broadband loan program; (5) the
definition for "rural area" used by the Commission in connection with universal service support for schools,
libraries, and rural health care providers; (6) the definition of "rural" based on census tracts as outlined by the
Economic Research Service of the USDA;
(7) the Census Bureau definition of "rural" counties; and (8) any census
tract that is not within 10 miles of any incorporated or census-designated place containing more than 2,500 people,
and is not within a county or county equivalent that has an overall population density of more than 500 persons per
square mile of land. Id.
Sec id. at 190871 11.
"Id.
^'Id.
7216

Federal Communications Commission
FCC 07-53
of the definition of "remote community." As explained above, the definition of "rural area" is clear, and
thus readily applied. AAPC's proposal, on the contrary, would lead to a "definition" that would
encompass as many variables as there are political subdivisions within the United States, leading to a
standard that would be difficult to apply. Because AAPC provides no specifics, quantitative data or other
criteria to support its position, we must reject AAPC's proposal.
11.
We also disagree with TDI's and CCDTF's arguments that we should interpret this
phrase more broadly. Employing a county-sized basis for defining "remote" areas affords a sufficiently
wide enough scope to carry out the objectives of Section 605(a). While we understand that persons with
disabilities can be "isolated" even when located in an area not considered "remote,"^' these concerns are
unrelated to the specific issue of defining "remote communities" for purposes of the WARN Act.
Generally, the grant program is targeted to ensure that alerts can be provided in the absence of alternative
commercial mobile communications means
ction 605(a). While we understand that persons with
disabilities can be "isolated" even when located in an area not considered "remote,"^' these concerns are
unrelated to the specific issue of defining "remote communities" for purposes of the WARN Act.
Generally, the grant program is targeted to ensure that alerts can be provided in the absence of alternative
commercial mobile communications means. CCDTF addresses "higher density areas" that have
altemative commercial mobile communications options for alerts, and are thus by definition are beyond
the scope of what constitutes a remote community.
12.
We recognize, however, that persons with disabilities have unique needs concerning
emergency alerts that should be addressed, whether located in "remote communities" or otherwise. In
this regard, we note that the Commission's Commercial Mobile Service Alert Advisory Committee
(CMSAAC), which was formed pursuant to Section 603(c) of the WARN Act, is in the process of
formulating recommendations on technical standards and protocols to facilitate the ability of commercial
mobile service providers to transmit emergency alerts to their subscribers.^^ We therefore direct the
Chief, Public Safety and Homeland Security Bureau, to place the comments filed by TDI and CCDTF in
this proceeding into the CMSAAC record, so that the issues raised by these commenters may be
considered in that docket.
13.
For the foregoing reasons, we conclude that communities are "remote" under the WARN
Act where those communities are located in "counties (or equivalent) with a population density of 100
persons per square mile or less, based upon the most recently available Census data."^^ This decision
strikes the appropriate public interest balance and best ensures that the benefits of the grant program are
achieved consistent with the WARN Act.
14
e that communities are "remote" under the WARN
Act where those communities are located in "counties (or equivalent) with a population density of 100
persons per square mile or less, based upon the most recently available Census data."^^ This decision
strikes the appropriate public interest balance and best ensures that the benefits of the grant program are
achieved consistent with the WARN Act.
14.
"Commercial Mobile Service." In the Public Notice, the Commission asked whether it
should define "commercial mobile service" as "commercial mobile radio service" (CMRS)
for purposes
of implementing Section 605(a).^'* The Public Notice also sought comment on other possible
See CCDTF Comments at 2.
The WARN Act requires the Commission to establish an advisory committee to develop and submit to the
Commission system-critical recommendations. WARN Act, § 603(c). On December 5, 2006, pursuant to Section
603(c) of the WARN Act, the Public Safety and Homeland Security Bureau released a public notice announcing the
appointment of persons to serve as members of the Commission's Commercial Mobile Service Alert Advisory
Committee. See Notice of Appointment of Members to the Commercial Mobile Service Alert Advisory Committee;
Agenda for December 12, 2006 Meeting, Public Notice, 21 FCC Red 14175 (2006).
Rural R&0.\9 FCC Red at 190871II.
Public Notice at 2. Section 20.3,47 C.F.R. § 20.3, defines a commercial mobile radio service as a mobile service
that is;
(a)(1) Provided for profit, i.e., with the intent of receiving compensation or monetary gain;
(2) An interconnected service; and
(3) Available to the public, or to such classes of eligible users as to be effectively available to a substantial
portion of the public; or
190871II.
Public Notice at 2. Section 20.3,47 C.F.R. § 20.3, defines a commercial mobile radio service as a mobile service
that is;
(a)(1) Provided for profit, i.e., with the intent of receiving compensation or monetary gain;
(2) An interconnected service; and
(3) Available to the public, or to such classes of eligible users as to be effectively available to a substantial
portion of the public; or
(b) The functional equivalent of such mobile service described in paragraph (a) of this section.
7217

Federal Communications Commission
FCC
07-53
interpretations of "commercial mobile service."^^ In the Public Notice, the Commission noted that
Section 602(b)(1)(A) of the WARN Act specifically defines "commercial mobile service" by cross-
reference to Section 332(d)(1) of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended.^^
15.
Comments. AT&T argues that, because the Commission has "long defined 'commercial
mobile service' for purposes of Section 332 as CMRS," the Commission should also define "commercial
mobile service" as CMRS for purposes of Section 605(a),^^ However, noting that the definition of CMRS
encompasses mobile satellite service (MSS),^^ which may have nationwide coverage, AT&T and AAPC
argue that, for purposes of Section 605(a), MSS should be excluded from the definition of "commercial
mobile service" because its inclusion would mean that few, if any, "remote communities" would be
deemed "effectively unserved."^' AAPC also contends that CMRS providers licensed under the Air-
Ground Radiotelephone Service and Offshore Radio Telephone Service should be excluded from the
definition of commercial mobile service.^"
16
605(a), MSS should be excluded from the definition of "commercial
mobile service" because its inclusion would mean that few, if any, "remote communities" would be
deemed "effectively unserved."^' AAPC also contends that CMRS providers licensed under the Air-
Ground Radiotelephone Service and Offshore Radio Telephone Service should be excluded from the
definition of commercial mobile service.^"
16.
On the other hand, MC/LM opposes use of the definition of CMRS,
arguing that, because
the WARN Act "specifically directs the Commission to use the definition of Section 332(d)(1)," the
Commission should "use only the exact definition of Section 332(d)(l)."^' MC/LM also opposes use of
the definition of CMRS contained in Section 20.3 of the Commission's rules because that definition
includes radio services that are the "functional equivalent" of CMRS and is thus broader than Section
332(d)(l)'s definition.^^
17.
Discussion. For purposes of Section 605(a) of the WARN Act only, we define the phrase
"commercial mobile service" to include only those services that are required to provide E911 service in
accordance with Section 20.18 of the Commission's rules.^^ This interpretation of the statutory language
Public Notice at 2.
Id.
-, WARN Act, § 602(b)(1)(A) (citing 47 U.S.C. § 332(d)(1) ("commercial mobile service means any mobile
service [
]
that is provided for profit and makes interconnected service available (A) to the public or (B) to such
classes of eligible users as to be effectively available to a substantial portion of the public, as specified by regulation
by the Commission")).
AT&T Comments at 2-3; see also AAPC Comments at 3
(arguing that the definition of CMRS in Section 20.9 of
the Commission's rules should be the starting point for defining "commercial mobile service").
AT&T Comments at 3
(A) to the public or (B) to such
classes of eligible users as to be effectively available to a substantial portion of the public, as specified by regulation
by the Commission")).
AT&T Comments at 2-3; see also AAPC Comments at 3
(arguing that the definition of CMRS in Section 20.9 of
the Commission's rules should be the starting point for defining "commercial mobile service").
AT&T Comments at 3. Mobile Satellite Service is defined as a radiocommunication service: (1) Between mobile
earth stations and one or more space stations, or between space stations used by this service; or (2) Between mobile
earth stations by means of one or more space stations. This service may also include feeder links necessary for its
operation. 47 C.F.R. § 25.201.
AT&T Comments at 3 (referring to the inclusion of MSS as specifically enumerated in 47 C.F.R. § 20.9); AAPC
Reply Comments at 3.
AAPC Reply Comments at 3-4.
MC/LM Comments at 2.
Id. (citing 47 C.F.R. § 20.3(b)). We note that rather than offering specific comments in regard to the appropriate
definition of "commercial mobile service," CCDTF and TDI stress that the methods by which emergency
notifications are provided should be made available to as many persons as possible. In particular, TDI states that
reliance on a single audible warning "will provide little or no warning to persons with hearing loss that are unable to
hear such warnings." TDI Reply Comments at 2, 3. CCDTF states that the devices should be interoperable to
enable persons with all kinds of disabilities to access and understand emergency alert systems. CCDTF Comments
at 2. Because the issues raised by CCDTF and TDI are related to the ongoing work of the CMSAAC, we
incorporate their comments in the record being developed by the CMSAAC. See supra para. 12.
See 47 C.F.R. § 20.18(a) (identifying the services that are subject to the Commission's wireless 911 rules).
7218
with all kinds of disabilities to access and understand emergency alert systems. CCDTF Comments
at 2. Because the issues raised by CCDTF and TDI are related to the ongoing work of the CMSAAC, we
incorporate their comments in the record being developed by the CMSAAC. See supra para. 12.
See 47 C.F.R. § 20.18(a) (identifying the services that are subject to the Commission's wireless 911 rules).
7218

Federal Communications Commission
FCC
07-53
is consistent with the purposes of the WARN Act and with the record in this proceeding. We agree with
commenters that certain services that satisfy the Commission's definition of CMRS -
particularly MSS -
should not be included in the WARN Act's definition of "commercial mobile service."^ Compared to
terrestrial-based systems, MSS can offer nationwide coverage, or, by some accounts "complete coverage
of the earth."^^ As a result, it would be difficult, if not impossible, for a grant applicant to prove that none
of its community members have access to "commercial mobile service." We thus find that the objectives
of the grant program could not be achieved if current MSS offerings were included in the definition of
commercial mobile service.'^
18.
Because including current MSS offerings in the definition of "commercial mobile
service" could render meaningless the grant program of Section 605(a), we cannot equate "commercial
mobile service" with the Commission's definition of CMRS for purposes of the WARN Act.^^ By
contrast, defining "commercial mobile service" to include only those services identified in Section
20.18(a) of the Commission's rules addresses commenters' concerns and creates a reasonable burden of
proof for grant applicants. Furthermore, defining "commercial mobile service" to include only carriers
that are obligated to provide E911 service focuses limited resources on communities that need them most:
namely, those communities that have no access to wireless E911 service
dentified in Section
20.18(a) of the Commission's rules addresses commenters' concerns and creates a reasonable burden of
proof for grant applicants. Furthermore, defining "commercial mobile service" to include only carriers
that are obligated to provide E911 service focuses limited resources on communities that need them most:
namely, those communities that have no access to wireless E911 service. For all of these reasons, we
believe that the most reasonable interpretation of "commercial mobile service" for purposes of the
WARN Act is those services that are identified in Section 20.18(a) of the Commission's rules.
19.
We reject MC/LM's argument that the Commission must employ the exact definition
contained in Section 332(d)(1) of the Act. Like Section 20.9 of our rules, the Section 332(d)(1) definition
also includes the type of ubiquitous MSS service that, if included in the Section 605(a) definition of
"commercial mobile service," would render the grant program authorized by Section 605 a nullity.'*
''' Section 20.9 enumerates several mobile services that are regulated as CMRS, including MSS. 47 C.F.R. § 20.9.
"
See AT&T Comments at 3 n. 12 (citing website materials of MSS operators Iridium and Globalstar).
MSS carriers currently provide 911 services primarily for hand held telephones. These services do not involve
"enhanced" 911 functionalities. The question of E911 requirements for MSS carriers is the subject of a separate
proceeding. See Revision of the Commission's Rules to Ensure Compatibility with Enhanced 911 Emergency
Calling Systems, CC Docket No. 94-102, IB Docket No. 99-67, Report and Order and Second Further Notice of
Proposed Rulemaking, 18 FCC Red 25340 (2003) {"E9U Scope Report and Order and Second Further Notice").
"
Our interpretation of "commercial mobile services" also addresses AAPC's argument that Air-Ground
Radiotelephone Service and Offshore Radiotelephone Service should be excluded from the definition of
"commercial mobile service" for purposes of implementing Section 605(a)
econd Further Notice of
Proposed Rulemaking, 18 FCC Red 25340 (2003) {"E9U Scope Report and Order and Second Further Notice").
"
Our interpretation of "commercial mobile services" also addresses AAPC's argument that Air-Ground
Radiotelephone Service and Offshore Radiotelephone Service should be excluded from the definition of
"commercial mobile service" for purposes of implementing Section 605(a). AAPC Reply Comments at 3-4. The
Air-Ground Radiotelephone Service allows CMRS providers to offer wireless services to subscribers on board
aircraft. See Amendment of Part 22 of the Commission's Rules to Benefit the Consumers of Air-Ground
Telecommunications Services, WT Docket No. 03-103, Report and Order and Notice of Proposed Rule Making, 20
FCC Red 4403 (2005). The Offshore Radiotelephone Service provides telephone service to subscribers located on
oil exploration and production platforms in the Gulf of Mexico. See 41 C.F.R. § 22.99. Accordingly, neither of
these services would typically be available in the areas targeted by the grant program, and thus are appropriately
excluded from the definition of "commercial mobile service."
See Establishment of Policies and Service Rules for the Mobile Satellite Service in the 2 GHz Band, Report and
Order in IB Docket No. 99-81, 15 FCC Red 16127, 16173 (2000) (stating that if MSS "is offered to the public as
described in [Section 332(d)(1) of] the Communications Act, service to the end user of the service would fall within
the statutory definition of CMRS"
(footnotes omitted)); Flexibility for Delivery of Communications by Mobile
Satellite Service Providers in the 2 GHz Band, the L-Band, and the 1.6/2.4 GHz Bands, Report and Order and
Notice of Proposed Rulemaking in IB Docket Nos. 01-185 and 02-364, 18 FCC Red 1962, 2073-75 (2003)
(reiterating that MSS service would meet the Section 332(d)(1) definition of "commercial mobile service" if the
service was an interconnected, for-profit service made available to a substantial portion of the public).
7219
in the 2 GHz Band, the L-Band, and the 1.6/2.4 GHz Bands, Report and Order and
Notice of Proposed Rulemaking in IB Docket Nos. 01-185 and 02-364, 18 FCC Red 1962, 2073-75 (2003)
(reiterating that MSS service would meet the Section 332(d)(1) definition of "commercial mobile service" if the
service was an interconnected, for-profit service made available to a substantial portion of the public).
7219

Federal Communications Commission
FCC 07-53
While Congress required the Commission to use the Section 332(d)(1) definition of commercial mobile
service for purposes of Section 602 of the WARN Act, such a requirement is nowhere to be found in
Section 605. Rather, Congress specifically directed the Commission to define the term "remote
communities effectively unserved by commercial mobile service," thus providing the Commission with
the authority to develop an appropriate definition of, among other terms, "commercial mobile service."
This difference is not surprising in light of the different objectives of Sections 602 and 605. Our charge is
to interpret the entire phrase in Section 605 that is under consideration in this Declaratory Ruling
holistically, and with the purpose of the grant program in mind. Accordingly, we believe we must
exercise our expertise in identifying which services falling under the Commission's CMRS definition are
appropriately included in the definition of "commercial mobile services" for purposes of Section 605(a).
20
ret the entire phrase in Section 605 that is under consideration in this Declaratory Ruling
holistically, and with the purpose of the grant program in mind. Accordingly, we believe we must
exercise our expertise in identifying which services falling under the Commission's CMRS definition are
appropriately included in the definition of "commercial mobile services" for purposes of Section 605(a).
20.
"Effectively Unserved." In the Public Notice, the Commission sought comment on
possible interpretations of "effectively unserved" and whether "effectively unserved" means that
commercial mobile services are not available to any consumers in a "remote community," a significant
portion of consumers, or some portion of consumers.^' The Commission also asked how applicants
should demonstrate the unavailability of commercial mobile services, and whether a variety of means
should be used, such as coverage maps from service providers, technical analyses, field tests, or
subscriber levels.""
21.
Comments. MC/LM proposes that a remote community should be considered
"effectively unserved" if fewer than two competing CMRS providers offer service or if 100 subscriber
units or less are actually receiving service."' AAPC argues that a remote community served by a CMRS
provider that does not in fact distribute emergency alerts should be deemed "effectively unserved" for
purposes of the WARN Act."^
22.
Regarding evidence of service, AT&T argues that the grantor should determine the
unavailability of CMRS based on marketing maps made available on carrier websites."^ AAPC further
requests that CMRS providers, particularly smaller carriers, should be able to demonstrate that they serve
a remote community with traditional coverage maps in addition to web-based maps."" In addition to
coverage maps, CCDTF believes that a wide variety of means such as "technical analyses, field tests, and
subscriber levels or other available information" should be used."^ AAPC argues that the grantor should
post lists of communities seeking grants so that
hould be able to demonstrate that they serve
a remote community with traditional coverage maps in addition to web-based maps."" In addition to
coverage maps, CCDTF believes that a wide variety of means such as "technical analyses, field tests, and
subscriber levels or other available information" should be used."^ AAPC argues that the grantor should
post lists of communities seeking grants so that carriers in those areas have an opportunity to demonstrate
that they do in fact serve those communities."^
23.
Discussion. We conclude that the phrase "effectively unserved" modifies "remote
communities," and that this language identifies "remote communities" that do not receive "commercial
Public Notice at 2.
""Id.
"' MC/LM Comments at 2.
AAPC Reply Comments at 5-6.
AT&T Comments at 3-4; see also AAPC Reply Comments at 5.
"" AAPC Reply Comments at 5.
CCDTF Comments at 3. CCDTF adds that, because many persons with hearing disabilities lack broadband
connections, "information from relay services providers may be useful in aggregating the unserved." Because
CCDTF's comments are more appropriately addressed by the CMSAAC, we specifically refer its comments in this
section to the CMSAAC record consistent with our treatment of other portions of its comments filed in this docket.
See supra para. 12.
AAPC Reply Comments at 5-6.
7220

Federal Communications Commission
FCC 07-53
mobile service." We find that a remote community can demonstrate that it is "effectively unserved" by
using coverage maps from service providers, technical analyses, field tests or any other reasonable means.
24.
Determining whether a community is "effectively unserved" necessarily will be a fact-
specific exercise in many cases. As AT&T notes, this phrase is not defined in the WARN Act or in the
legislative history.''^ However, we offer certain guidelines that will assist in making such determinations.
We find that the number of commercial mobile service providers in a given remote area should not serve
as a metric
g whether a community is "effectively unserved" necessarily will be a fact-
specific exercise in many cases. As AT&T notes, this phrase is not defined in the WARN Act or in the
legislative history.''^ However, we offer certain guidelines that will assist in making such determinations.
We find that the number of commercial mobile service providers in a given remote area should not serve
as a metric. Even a single carrier should suffice. Further, the number of subscribers should not be
determinative. While the number and location of commercial mobile service subscribers could serve as
an indicator of where commercial mobile service coverage may be available, there are reasons other than
coverage, including individual consumer choices, that could influence subscribers levels within a given
remote area.
25.
Coverage maps provided by carriers, whether for marketing purposes such as those
displayed on a website, or prepared specifically for grant program purposes, would be a useful source of
information on service availability. First, coverage maps can be easily obtained or produced, and also
would serve as a simple, yet effective and objective means to immediately identify areas that are
"effectively unserved." Second, as suggested by CCDTF and as proposed in the Public Notice, we find
that other means, such as technical analyses and field tests, also are useful tools, and can be employed
when creating coverage maps. We otherwise find no basis to develop bright line tests, such as by percent
of population or land area served. Rather, we find that the better course of action would be to first
determine, following analysis of data describing where coverage exists in a given community, the number
of consumers that live, work, or travel in areas without coverage. Decisions concerning applications for
grants could then be made on a case-by-case basis, based on the relative needs of the "effectively
unserved" areas so identified.
26
we find that the better course of action would be to first
determine, following analysis of data describing where coverage exists in a given community, the number
of consumers that live, work, or travel in areas without coverage. Decisions concerning applications for
grants could then be made on a case-by-case basis, based on the relative needs of the "effectively
unserved" areas so identified.
26.
We conclude that the guidance we provide above best fulfills our obligations under
Section 605(a). With regard to whether procedural requirements or other conditions may be required to
implement the grant program under Section 605(a), we note that Section 605(b)(2) expressly provides the
Under Secretary of Commerce for Oceans and Atmosphere (Under Secretary) with discretionary authority
to "establish such conditions, and require such assurances, as may be appropriate to ensure the efficiency
and integrity of the grant program."'* Because the WARN Act gives this authority to the Under
Secretary, not to the Commission, we find it is not appropriate to address here CCDTF's suggestion that
grantees of the program should be required to work with state and local entities serving people with
disabilities,"*^ or AAPC and MC/LM's requests that lists of communities seeking grants under Section
605(a) be posted.'" At this juncture, we take this opportunity to underscore our long-standing and
ongoing commitment to ensuring that persons with disabilities have equal access to public warnings and
are considered in emergency preparedness planning."
AT&T Comments at 3.
WARN Act, § 605(b)(2).
CCDTF Comments at 3-4.
50 AAPC Reply Comments at 5; MC/LM Comments at 3.
"
See Review of Emergency Alert System, First Report and Order and Further Notice
of Proposed Rulemaking, EB Docket No. 04-296, 20 FCC Red 18625, 18654 ^74 (2(X)5); 47 C.F.R
ith disabilities have equal access to public warnings and
are considered in emergency preparedness planning."
AT&T Comments at 3.
WARN Act, § 605(b)(2).
CCDTF Comments at 3-4.
50 AAPC Reply Comments at 5; MC/LM Comments at 3.
"
See Review of Emergency Alert System, First Report and Order and Further Notice
of Proposed Rulemaking, EB Docket No. 04-296, 20 FCC Red 18625, 18654 ^74 (2(X)5); 47 C.F.R. §§ 73.1250,
79.1, 79.2,79.3; see also Obligation of Video Programming Distributors to Make Emergency Information
Accessible to Persons With Hearing Disabilities Using Closed Captioning, Public Notice, 21 FCC Red 15084
(2006).
7221

Federal Communications Conunisston
FCC 07-53
III.
ORDERING CLAUSES
27.
Accordingly, IT IS ORDERED that, pursuant to Sections 1 and 4(i) of the
Communications Act of 1934, as amended, 47 U.S.C. §§ 151 and 154(i), and Section 605(a) of the
Warning, Alert, and Response Network Act, 47 U.S.C. § 1204(a), this Declaratory Ruling IS HEREBY
ADOPTED as described herein.
FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION
Marlene H. Dortch
Secretary
7222

Federal Communications Commission
FCC 07-53
APPENDIX
LIST OF COMMENTERS
Comments filed in Response to the Public Notice in PS Docket No. 07-8
Comments
AT&T Inc., on behalf of its affiliate, AT&T Mobility LLC (AT&T)
Consortium for Citizens with Disabilities Task Force on Telecommunications and Technology (CCDTF)
Maritime Communications/Land Mobile, LLC (MC/LM)
Reply Comments
American Association of Paging Carriers (AAPC)
Telecommunications for the Deaf and Hard of Hearing, Inc.; Association of Late-Deafened Adults;
California Coalition of Agencies Serving the Deaf and Hard of Hearing; Deaf &
Hard of Hearing
Consumer Advocacy Network; Hearing Loss Association of America; and National Association for the
Deaf (collectively, TDI)
7223
U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFHCE; 2007-330-214-40030
ation of Paging Carriers (AAPC)
Telecommunications for the Deaf and Hard of Hearing, Inc.; Association of Late-Deafened Adults;
California Coalition of Agencies Serving the Deaf and Hard of Hearing; Deaf &
Hard of Hearing
Consumer Advocacy Network; Hearing Loss Association of America; and National Association for the
Deaf (collectively, TDI)
7223
U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFHCE; 2007-330-214-40030

UnKad Statai Oovcnimcnt
INFORMATION
CMw PPDcauuig Cotfc
*5707
I
I YES, please send .
T)M total coat of my ordarn S.
OrtcW card ordarx art wafcoma/
Fax your ordara (202) S12-22S0
Phone your orders (202) 512-ltOO
Pric* ineluSM rasuiar llapping S handling iM it lutiact a
cHanga
NamawMa
(Plaaaa typa or pnnQ
Campany nama
Room,
floof. auda
Seaal addiaii
/
/
W»
Stala
Zipcoda^a
□ayama ihana mcawnfl iiaa coda
Piachaaa aidar Mimkar logeanai)
subscriptions to.
FCC Record
(FCRCD) at $469 each ($586.25 foreign) per year.
.
For privacy protection, check the tx>x beknir;
I
I
Do not make my name available to other mailers
Ctiack mettwd of payment:
I
I
Check payatka to.
Superintendent of Documents
I
I GPO Deposit Account
I
I
VISA
Q MasterCard
Q Discover
I
Aulhianiiinp signalure
t/97
Mali to: Superintendent of Documents, PO Box 371954, Pittsburgh PA 15250-7954
knpoftsnt: Pfasse ttMdude tt>ls completed orrter form with your remittance.
Thank you tor your ordmri

## Nearby sections

- [DA-00-1341: A&E Television Networks For Declaratory Ruling (06/20/00) A&E Television Networks For Declaratory Ruling](https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/statutes/FCC_DA_00_1341.md)
- [DA-01-2234: Request for Declaratory Ruling Removing the Commission's Minimum Carrier Tone Requirement for OFDM Modulation in the Multipoint Distribution and Instructional Television Fixed Services (09/26/01) Request for Declaratory Ruling Removing the Commission's Minimum Carrier Tone Requirement for OFDM Modulation in the Multipoint Distribution and Instructional Television Fixed Services](https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/statutes/FCC_DA_01_2234.md)
- [DA-01-2871: Multi-Association Group (MAG) Plan (12/11/01) Multi-Association Group (MAG) Plan](https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/statutes/FCC_DA_01_2871.md)
- [DA-02-765: NATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF BROADCASTERS AND ASSOCIATION OF LOCAL TELEVISION STATIONS' EMERGENCY PETITION FOR MODIFICATION OR CLARIFICATION OF BROADCAST CARRIAGE RULES FOR SATELLITE CARRIERS, 47 C.F.R. SECTION 76.66 (04/04/02) NATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF BROADCASTERS AND ASSOCIATION OF LOCAL TELEVISION STATIONS' EMERGENCY PETITION FOR MODIFICATION OR CLARIFICATION OF BROADCAST CARRIAGE RULES FOR SATELLITE CARRIERS, 47 C.F.R. SECTION 76.66](https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/statutes/FCC_DA_02_765.md)
- [DA-02-2078: Time-Telepictures Television (08/26/02) Time-Telepictures Television](https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/statutes/FCC_DA_02_2078.md)
- [DA-03-2865: INFINITY BROADCASTING OPERATIONS INC (09/09/03) INFINITY BROADCASTING OPERATIONS INC](https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/statutes/FCC_DA_03_2865.md)
- [DA-03-4108: Comcast Cable Communications, Inc., Petition for Declaratory Ruling Petition for Revocation of Certification Request for Expedited Consideration (01/06/04) Comcast Cable Communications, Inc., Petition for Declaratory Ruling Petition for Revocation of Certification Request for Expedited Consideration](https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/statutes/FCC_DA_03_4108.md)
- [DA-04-970: List of Foreign Telecommunications Carriers that Are Presumed to Possess Market Power in Foreign Telecommunications Markets (04/08/04) List of Foreign Telecommunications Carriers that Are Presumed to Possess Market Power in Foreign Telecommunications Markets](https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/statutes/FCC_DA_04_970.md)
- [DA-04-3201: Amendment of the Commission's Space Station Licensing Rules and Policies (10/06/04) Amendment of the Commission's Space Station Licensing Rules and Policies](https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/statutes/FCC_DA_04_3201.md)
- [DA-04-3576: Thrifty Call, Inc. Petition for Declaratory Ruling Concerning BellSouth Tariff F.C.C. No. 1 (11/12/04) Thrifty Call, Inc. Petition for Declaratory Ruling Concerning BellSouth Tariff F.C.C. No. 1](https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/statutes/FCC_DA_04_3576.md)
- [DA-05-140: Telecommunications Relay Services and Speech-to-Speech Services for Individuals with Hearing and Speech Disabilities (01/26/05) Telecommunications Relay Services and Speech-to-Speech Services for Individuals with Hearing and Speech Disabilities](https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/statutes/FCC_DA_05_140.md)
- [DA-05-148: CLARIFICATION OF RECONSIDERATION PERIOD AND EFFECTIVE DATE FOR TERMINATIONS OF WIRELESS RADIO SERVICE AUTHORIZATIONS (01/21/05) CLARIFICATION OF RECONSIDERATION PERIOD AND EFFECTIVE DATE FOR TERMINATIONS OF WIRELESS RADIO SERVICE AUTHORIZATIONS](https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/statutes/FCC_DA_05_148.md)
- [DA-05-1618: Implementation of the Subscriber Carrier Selection Changes Provisions of the Telecommunications Act of 1996 (06/09/05) Implementation of the Subscriber Carrier Selection Changes Provisions of the Telecommunications Act of 1996](https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/statutes/FCC_DA_05_1618.md)
- [DA-05-1667: Rules and Regulations Implementing the Telephone Consumer Protection Act of 1991 (06/15/05) Rules and Regulations Implementing the Telephone Consumer Protection Act of 1991](https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/statutes/FCC_DA_05_1667.md)

---

Source: Frix Law Library, https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/statutes/FCC_FCC_07_53. Check the current official text before relying on it. Not legal advice.