Rule2023-07405
Targeting and Eliminating Unlawful Text Messages
Primary source
Metadata and text below are from the Federal Register, a public-domain U.S. government work. Always verify the official published version before relying on it for any legal matter.
Published
April 11, 2023
Effective
May 11, 2023
Issuing agencies
Federal Communications Commission
Abstract
In this document, the Federal Communications Commission (Commission) requires mobile wireless providers to block texts, at the network level, on a reasonable Do-Not-Originate (DNO) list, which include numbers that purport to be from invalid, unallocated, or unused North American Numbering Plan (NANP) numbers, and NANP numbers for which the subscriber to the number has requested that texts purporting to originate from that number be blocked. In addition, the Commission requires mobile wireless providers and other entities to maintain a point of contact for texters to report erroneously blocked texts.
Full Text
<html>
<head>
<title>Federal Register, Volume 88 Issue 69 (Tuesday, April 11, 2023)</title>
</head>
<body><pre>
[Federal Register Volume 88, Number 69 (Tuesday, April 11, 2023)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 21497-21500]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [<a href="http://www.gpo.gov">www.gpo.gov</a>]
[FR Doc No: 2023-07405]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION
47 CFR Part 64
[CG Docket No. 21-402; FCC 23-21; FR ID 134450]
Targeting and Eliminating Unlawful Text Messages
AGENCY: Federal Communications Commission.
ACTION: Final rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: In this document, the Federal Communications Commission
(Commission) requires mobile wireless providers to block texts, at the
network level, on a reasonable Do-Not-Originate (DNO) list, which
include numbers that purport to be from invalid, unallocated, or unused
North American Numbering Plan (NANP) numbers, and NANP numbers for
which the subscriber to the number has requested that texts purporting
to originate from that number be blocked. In addition, the Commission
requires mobile wireless providers and other entities to maintain a
point of contact for texters to report erroneously blocked texts.
DATES: Effective May 11, 2023.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mika Savir of the Consumer Policy
Division, Consumer and Governmental Affairs Bureau, at
<a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#cda0a4a6ace3beacbba4bf8dabaeaee3aaa2bb"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="f29f9b9993dc8193849b80b2949191dc959d84">[email protected]</span></a> or (202) 418-0384.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This is a summary of the Commission's Report
and Order, FCC 23-21, CG Docket No. 21-402, adopted on March 16, 2023,
and released on March 17, 2023. The full text of this document is
available online at <a href="https://docs.fcc.gov/public/attachments/FCC-23-21A1.pdf">https://docs.fcc.gov/public/attachments/FCC-23-21A1.pdf</a>. To request this document in accessible formats for people
with disabilities (e.g., Braille, large print, electronic files, audio
format) or to request reasonable accommodations (e.g., accessible
format documents, sign language interpreters, CART), send an email to
<a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#7c1a1f1f494c483c1a1f1f521b130a"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="c6a0a5a5f3f6f286a0a5a5e8a1a9b0">[email protected]</span></a> or call the FCC's Consumer and Governmental Affairs
Bureau at (202) 418-0530.
The compliance date of these rules is six months after Office of
Management and Budget (OMB) approval of the rules and subsequent notice
of publication in the Federal Register.
Congressional Review Act
The Commission sent a copy of document FCC 23-21 to Congress and
the Government Accountability Office pursuant to the Congressional
Review Act, 5 U.S.C. 801(a)(1)(A).
Final Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 Analysis
This document may contain new or modified information collection
requirements subject to the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (PRA),
Public Law 104-13. This document will be submitted to OMB for review
under section 3507(d) of the PRA. OMB, the general public, and other
federal agencies will be invited to comment on the new or modified
information collection requirements contained in this proceeding.
Synopsis
1. In the Report and Order, the Commission adopts a proposal in the
Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (NPRM), published at 87 FR 61271, on
October 11, 2022; specifically to require mobile wireless providers to
block texts, at the network level, on a reasonable Do-Not-Originate
(DNO) list, which include numbers that purport to be from invalid,
unallocated, or unused North American Numbering Plan (NANP) numbers,
and NANP numbers for which the subscriber to the number has requested
that texts purporting to originate from that number be blocked. These
are texts that no reasonable consumer would wish to receive because
they are highly likely to be illegal. In addition, the Commission is
requiring mobile wireless providers and other entities to maintain a
point of contact for texters to report erroneously blocked texts.
2. These rules apply to text messaging originating from NANP
numbers that use the wireless networks, e.g., Short Message Service
(SMS) and Multimedia Messaging Service (MMS).
3. The Commission recognizes that providers and others have adopted
measures to protect consumers from illegal text messages, such as
upfront vetting for bulk message senders, the CTIA Messaging Principles
and Best Practices, and providers' own requirements and guidance. The
Commission's actions complement those efforts while ensuring customers
of all providers get a baseline of protection. Industry efforts to date
are
[[Page 21498]]
important to protect consumers, the increases in consumer complaints
and consumer harm from robotext messages convinces the Commission to
take additional measures to protect consumers.
4. The Commission adopts the proposal to require mobile wireless
providers to block text messages at the network level (i.e., without
requiring consumer opt in or opt out). The rule adopted requires that
they block texts purporting to be from numbers on a reasonable DNO
list. No reasonable consumer would wish to receive text messages that
spoof a number that is not in operation or purports to be from a well-
known, trusted organization that does not send text messages and thus
is highly likely to be a scam. The requirement to block texts that
purport to be from numbers on a reasonable DNO list does not include
text messages from valid short codes.
5. The Commission finds it appropriate to adopt a mandatory rule
here for blocking texts that purport to be from numbers on a reasonable
DNO list for several reasons: (i) the texts from such numbers are
likely to be illegal; (ii) illegal text messages can have links to
malware, a problem that voice calls do not have; (iii) the volume of
unwanted and illegal text messages is increasing, particularly since
the Commission adopted measures to block such voice calls; (iv)
consumers expect to receive texts from unfamiliar numbers, e.g., as
appointment reminders and for double factor authentication, and
therefore are more likely to open such messages even when they do not
recognize the sending party; and (v) this approach provides benefits to
consumers while imposing minimal burden on mobile wireless providers.
6. The Commission finds that the rule adopted today will impose a
minimal burden on mobile wireless providers while providing a necessary
baseline level of protection to consumers. Many mobile wireless
providers already employ measures to block illegal text messages,
including DNO-based blocking. For providers that already employ such
measures, the rule imposes no additional burden. For the limited number
of providers that do not currently employ such measures, the rule will
provide consumers with a baseline level of protection against illegal
and fraudulent text messages. The rule adopted today strikes the best
balance between protecting consumers from illegal text messages while
imposing minimal burden on mobile wireless providers. These actions are
reasonable responses to the harm and specifically focused to mitigate
the ongoing damages consumers face from illegal, fraudulent text
messages that mobile wireless providers transmit today.
7. The requirement for mandatory blocking of texts that purport to
be from numbers on a reasonable DNO list is straightforward and does
not define ``highly likely to be illegal'' or ask mobile wireless
providers to determine whether particular messages are ``highly likely
to be illegal.'' The Commission disagrees that regulation of criteria
used by mobile wireless providers to determine which text messages are
``highly likely to be illegal'' would be inconsistent with the
classification of wireless messaging as Title I information service.
The rule adopted does not affect providers' ability to continue to
employ other methods to protect consumers. Mobile wireless providers
are now required to block texts that purport to be from numbers on a
reasonable DNO list; mobile wireless providers remain free to continue
the measures they are currently using to protect consumers from illegal
text messages.
8. Further, the Commission is requiring mobile wireless providers
and others to maintain a point of contact for senders to report
erroneously blocked texts. A point of contact will enable texters to
contact mobile wireless providers to swiftly resolve complaints of
unwarranted blocking of text messages.
9. The Commission declines to adopt rules for several of the other
topics raised in the Notice of Proposed Rulemaking. The Commission
declines to require text blocking notifications because the record
indicates that service providers are already providing adequate notice
when they block texts. The Commission declines to enact rules regarding
safeguarding against blocking of texts to 911 and other emergency
numbers based on the record. The Commission also declines to adopt
caller ID authentication requirements for text messages due to
uncertainty about the current feasibility of such a requirement.
10. With respect to legal authority to adopt the rules, the
Commission finds that it has authority to require mobile wireless
providers to block certain text messages originating from NANP numbers.
First, under the Telephone Consumers Protection Act (TCPA), the
Commission has authority over the unsolicited text messages that fall
within the scope of the Report and Order. The Commission has found
that, for the purposes of the TCPA, texts are included in the term
``call.'' Because the Commission has authority to regulate certain text
messages under the TCPA, particularly regarding messages sent using an
autodialer and without the consent of the called party, the Commission
has the legal authority for the adopted rule.
11. The Commission finds that it has authority under the Truth in
Caller ID Act to adopt a blocking requirement. That Truth in Caller ID
Act makes unlawful the spoofing of caller ID information ``in
connection with any voice service or text messaging service . . . with
the intent to defraud, cause harm, or wrongfully obtain anything of
value.'' The Commission finds that adopting this requirement is
necessary to block calls that unlawfully spoof numbers on reasonable
DNO lists, and thus is authorized by the Truth in Caller ID Act.
12. Finally, the Commission has authority under Title III of the
Communications Act to adopt these measures. As courts have recognized,
Title III ``endow[s] the Commission with `expansive powers' and a
`comprehensive mandate to ``encourage the larger and more effective use
of radio in the public interest.'' ' Section 303 of the Communications
Act grants the Commission authority to establish operational
obligations for licensees that further the goals and requirements of
the Communications Act if such obligations are necessary for the
``public convenience, interest, or necessity'' and are not inconsistent
with other provisions of law. In particular, Sec. 303(b) of the
Communications Act authorizes the Commission to ``[p]rescribe the
nature of the service to be rendered by each class of licensed stations
and each station within each class,'' and that is what our mandatory
blocking rule addresses here. In addition, Sec. Sec. 307 and 316 of
the Communications Act allow the Commission to authorize the issuance
of licenses or adopt new conditions on existing licenses if such
actions will promote public interest, convenience, and necessity. The
Commission finds the requirements adopted for mobile wireless providers
are necessary to protect the public from unwanted and illegal text
messages and that such a requirement is in the public interest.
Final Regulatory Flexibility Analysis
13. As required by the Regulatory Flexibility Act of 1980, as
amended, an Initial Regulatory Flexibility Analysis (IRFA) was
incorporated in the Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (NPRM). The
Commission sought written public comment on the proposals in the NPRM,
including comment on the IRFA. The Commission received no comments in
[[Page 21499]]
response to the IRFA. This present Final Regulatory Flexibility
Analysis (FRFA) conforms to the RFA.
14. Need for, and Objectives of, the Report and Order. The Order
requires mobile wireless providers to block texts, at the network
level, that purport to be from numbers on a reasonable Do-Not-Originate
(DNO) list. Such texts are highly likely to be illegal and for that
reason the Commission is adopting a requirement to block at the network
level. The Order also requires providers and other entities to maintain
a point of contact for texters to report erroneously blocked texts.
15. Summary of Significant Issues Raised by Public Comments in
Response to the IRFA. There were no comments filed that specifically
addressed the proposed rules and policies presented in the IRFA.
16. Response to Comments by the Chief Counsel for Advocacy of the
Small Business Administration. Pursuant to the Small Business Jobs Act
of 2010, which amended the RFA, the Commission is required to respond
to any comments filed by the Chief Counsel for Advocacy of the Small
Business Administration (SBA), and to provide a detailed statement of
any change made to the proposed rules as a result of those comments.
The Chief Counsel did not file any comments in response to the proposed
rules in this proceeding.
17. Description and Estimate of the Number of Small Entities to
Which the Rules Will Apply. The RFA directs agencies to provide a
description of and, where feasible, an estimate of the number of small
entities that may be affected by the proposed rules and policies, if
adopted. The RFA generally defines the term ``small entity'' as having
the same meaning as the terms ``small business,'' ``small
organization,'' and ``small governmental jurisdiction.'' In addition,
the term ``small business'' has the same meaning as the term ``small
business concern'' under the Small Business Act. A ``small business
concern'' is one which: (1) is independently owned and operated; (2) is
not dominant in its field of operation; and (3) satisfies any
additional criteria established by the SBA.
18. Small Businesses, Small Organizations, Small Governmental
Jurisdictions. Our actions, over time, may affect small entities that
are not easily categorized at present. We therefore describe, at the
outset, three broad groups of small entities that could be directly
affected herein. First, while there are industry specific size
standards for small businesses that are used in the regulatory
flexibility analysis, according to data from the Small Business
Administration's (SBA) Office of Advocacy, in general a small business
is an independent business having fewer than 500 employees. These types
of small businesses represent 99.9% of all businesses in the United
States, which translates to 32.5 million businesses.
19. Next, the type of small entity described as a ``small
organization'' is generally ``any not-for-profit enterprise which is
independently owned and operated and is not dominant in its field.''
The Internal Revenue Service (IRS) uses a revenue benchmark of $50,000
or less to delineate its annual electronic filing requirements for
small exempt organizations. Nationwide, for tax year 2020, there were
approximately 447,689 small exempt organizations in the U.S. reporting
revenues of $50,000 or less according to the registration and tax data
for exempt organizations available from the IRS.
20. Finally, the small entity described as a ``small governmental
jurisdiction'' is defined generally as ``governments of cities,
counties, towns, townships, villages, school districts, or special
districts, with a population of less than fifty thousand.'' U.S. Census
Bureau data from the 2017 Census of Governments indicate there were
90,075 local governmental jurisdictions consisting of general purpose
governments and special purpose governments in the United States. Of
this number, there were 36,931 general purpose governments (county,
municipal, and town or township) with populations of less than 50,000
and 12,040 special purpose governments--independent school districts
with enrollment populations of less than 50,000. Accordingly, based on
the 2017 U.S. Census of Governments data, we estimate that at least
48,971 entities fall into the category of ``small governmental
jurisdictions.''
21. Wireless Telecommunications Carriers (except Satellite). This
industry comprises establishments engaged in operating and maintaining
switching and transmission facilities to provide communications via the
airwaves. Establishments in this industry have spectrum licenses and
provide services using that spectrum, such as cellular services, paging
services, wireless internet access, and wireless video services. The
SBA size standard for this industry classifies a business as small if
it has 1,500 or fewer employees. U.S. Census Bureau data for 2017 show
that there were 2,893 firms in this industry that operated for the
entire year. Of that number, 2,837 firms employed fewer than 250
employees. Additionally, based on Commission data in the 2021 Universal
Service Monitoring Report, as of December 31, 2020, there were 797
providers that reported they were engaged in the provision of wireless
services. Of these providers, the Commission estimates that 715
providers have 1,500 or fewer employees. Consequently, using the SBA's
small business size standard, most of these providers can be considered
small entities.
22. All Other Telecommunications. This industry is comprised of
establishments primarily engaged in providing specialized
telecommunications services, such as satellite tracking, communications
telemetry, and radar station operation. This industry also includes
establishments primarily engaged in providing satellite terminal
stations and associated facilities connected with one or more
terrestrial systems and capable of transmitting telecommunications to,
and receiving telecommunications from, satellite systems. Providers of
internet services (e.g. dial-up ISPs) or voice over internet protocol
(VoIP) services, via client-supplied telecommunications connections are
also included in this industry. The SBA small business size standard
for this industry classifies firms with annual receipts of $35 million
or less as small. U.S. Census Bureau data for 2017 show that there were
1,079 firms in this industry that operated for the entire year. Of
those firms, 1,039 had revenue of less than $25 million. Based on this
data, the Commission estimates that the majority of ``All Other
Telecommunications'' firms can be considered small.
23. Description of Projected Reporting, Recordkeeping and Other
Compliance Requirements for Small Entities. This Order may include new
or modified information collection requirements. The Order adopts a
requirement that mobile wireless providers block texts purporting to be
from NANP numbers on a reasonable DNO list, which include numbers that
purport to be from invalid, unallocated, or unused numbers, and NANP
numbers for which the subscriber to the number has requested that texts
purporting to originate from that number be blocked. In addition, the
Order requires providers to establish a point of contact for senders to
resolve issues of erroneously blocked texts. To the extent the new
requirements constitute an information collection, such collection will
not present a substantial burden for small business concerns with fewer
than 25 employees; any such burdens would be far outweighed by the
benefits to
[[Page 21500]]
consumers from blocking text messages that are highly likely to be
illegal.
24. Steps Taken To Minimize Significant Economic Impact on Small
Entities, and Significant Alternatives Considered. The RFA requires an
agency to describe any significant alternatives that it has considered
in reaching its approach, which may include the following four
alternatives, among others: ``(1) the establishment of differing
compliance or reporting requirements or timetables that take into
account the resources available to small entities; (2) the
clarification, consolidation, or simplification of compliance and
reporting requirements under the rule for such small entities; (3) the
use of performance rather than design standards; and (4) an exemption
from coverage of the rule, or any part thereof, for small entities.''
25. The Order requires mobile wireless providers to block texts, at
the network level, that purport to be from numbers on a reasonable Do-
Not-Originate list. Such texts are highly likely to be illegal and for
that reason the Commission is adopting a requirement to block at the
network level. The Commission recognizes that mobile wireless
providers, including small entities, already take measures to block
illegal text messages from reaching their customers' phones and this
requirement should not be burdensome. The Order also requires providers
and other entities to establish a point of contact for texters to
report erroneously blocked texts. Because many of these providers and
entities maintain a point of contact for call blocking purposes, and
because the Order states that providers and entities may use the same
point of contact for the text blocking requirement, the requirement
should not be burdensome.
26. Report to Congress. The Commission will send a copy of the
Report and Order, including this FRFA, in a report to be sent to
Congress pursuant to the Congressional Review Act. In addition, the
Commission will send a copy of the Report and Order, including this
FRFA, to the Chief Counsel for Advocacy of the SBA. The Order and FRFA
(or summaries thereof) will also be published in the Federal Register.
List of Subjects in 47 CFR Part 64
Communications common carriers, Telecommunications, Telephone.
Federal Communications Commission.
Marlene Dortch,
Secretary, Office of the Secretary.
Final Rules
For the reasons discussed in the preamble, the Federal
Communications Commission amends 47 part 64 as follows:
PART 64--MISCELLANEOUS RULES RELATING TO COMMON CARRIERS
0
1. The authority citation for part 64 continues to read as follows:
Authority: 47 U.S.C. 151, 152, 154,201, 202, 217, 218, 220, 222,
225, 226, 227, 227b, 228, 251(a), 251(e), 254(k), 255, 262, 276,
403(b)(2)(B), (c), 616, 620, 716, 1401-1473, unless otherwise noted;
Pub. L. 115-141, Div. P, sec. 503, 132 Stat. 348, 1091.
Subpart L--Restrictions on Telemarketing, Telephone Solicitation,
and Facsimile Advertising
0
2. Amend Sec. 64.1200 by adding paragraphs (p), (q), and (r) to read
as follows:
Sec. 64.1200 Delivery restrictions.
* * * * *
(p) A mobile wireless provider must block a text message purporting
to originate from a North American Numbering Plan number on a
reasonable do-not-originate list. A list so limited in scope that it
leaves out obvious North American Numbering Plan numbers that could be
included with little effort may be deemed unreasonable. The do-not-
originate list may include only:
(1) North American Numbering Plan Numbers for which the subscriber
to the number has requested that texts purporting to originate from
that number be blocked;
(2) North American Numbering Plan numbers that are not valid;
(3) Valid North American Numbering Plan numbers that are not
allocated to a provider by the North American Numbering Plan
Administrator; and
(4) Valid North American Numbering Plan numbers that are allocated
to a provider by the North American Numbering Plan Administrator, but
are unused, so long as the provider blocking the message is the
allocatee of the number and confirms that the number is unused or has
obtained verification from the allocatee that the number is unused at
the time of blocking.
(q) Paragraph (p) of this section may contain an information-
collection and/or recordkeeping requirement. Compliance with paragraph
(p) will not be required until this paragraph (q) is removed or
contains a compliance date, which will not occur until after the Office
of Management and Budget completes review of such requirements pursuant
to the Paperwork Reduction Act or until after the Consumer and
Governmental Affairs Bureau determines that such review is not
required.
(r) A mobile wireless provider must provide a point of contact or
ensure its aggregator partners or blocking contractors that block text
messages on its network provide a point of contact to resolve
complaints about erroneous blocking from message senders that can
document that their messages have been blocked. Such point of contact
may be the same point of contact for voice call blocking error
complaints.
[FR Doc. 2023-07405 Filed 4-10-23; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6712-01-P
</pre><script data-cfasync="false" src="/cdn-cgi/scripts/5c5dd728/cloudflare-static/email-decode.min.js"></script></body>
</html>Indexed from Federal Register on April 11, 2023.
This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.