What This Bill Does
Lulu’s Law directs the Federal Communications Commission to issue an order, within 180 days of enactment, so that a shark attack can qualify as an event for a wireless emergency alert. The bill uses the FCC’s existing Alert Message system under 47 C.F.R. 10.10(a), meaning it changes what kinds of emergencies may trigger alerts rather than creating a new alert network. In practical terms, it would mainly affect people on or near beaches and coastal waters, plus local authorities that may seek to warn them quickly.
- Requires the FCC to issue an order within 180 days after enactment.
- Adds shark attacks to the events that may trigger a wireless emergency alert.
- Uses the existing Alert Message definition in 47 C.F.R. 10.10(a).
- Creates no new grant program or funding amount.
- Applies through FCC emergency alert rules, not a new federal agency.
Who This Bill Affects
For the average person, this bill would have little day-to-day effect, but it could matter if you are at a beach, surfing, swimming, or otherwise near coastal waters when a shark attack occurs. In that situation, your phone could receive a wireless emergency alert faster and more directly through the FCC’s existing alert system, potentially helping you leave the area or avoid danger. Outside coastal emergency situations, the bill would not change your benefits, taxes, or eligibility for any federal program.
See how this bill affects you — sign in for a personalized analysisCBO Cost Estimate
June 11, 2025S. 1003, Lulu’s Law, as ordered reported by the Senate Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation on April 30, 2025, would require the Federal Communications Commission to issue a rule allowing shark attacks to be treated as an event for wireless emergency alerts. CBO estimates the administrative costs to implement the bill would be insignificant and the net cost to the FCC would be negligible, assuming appropriation actions consistent with the FCC’s fee authority. The estimate shows no change in direct spending, revenues, or deficit over 2025, 2025-2030, or 2025-2035. CBO also says the bill contains no intergovernmental mandates and would create a private-sector mandate with costs well below UMRA’s annual threshold.
Full CBO report →Who Supports & Opposes This
- Coastal residents and beachgoers They may want faster, broader warnings when a shark attack occurs so people can get out of the water and avoid the area. The existing emergency-alert system already reaches many phones, so adding this event could improve safety without building a new system.
- Local emergency managers and lifeguard agencies A federal rule allowing shark-attack alerts could give them a clearer tool during a fast-moving incident. It may help coordinate evacuation or warning messages across a crowded shoreline.
- Families of victims and water-safety advocates They may view the bill as a sensible response to a rare but serious danger. If a shark attack is underway, even a short warning window can reduce the chance of additional harm.
- Wireless carriers and alert administrators They may worry about adding another category to a system that already has to balance urgency with message fatigue. If alerts are used too broadly, people may start ignoring emergency notifications.
- Local officials in tourist areas They could be concerned about pressure to send alerts for incidents that are uncertain or quickly evolving. A broad alert might discourage beach use even when the actual risk is limited to a small area or short time.
- Public-safety practitioners focused on alert precision They may argue that shark attacks are so rare and localized that existing local warning methods are enough. They could prefer tighter criteria to avoid overloading an emergency-alert system designed for the most severe threats.
Key Implications
-
““Not later than 180 days after the date of enactment... the Federal Communications Commission shall issue an order””
The FCC would have a fixed deadline to act, so this is not merely a suggestion. If enacted, the agency would need to update alert rules on a specific timetable.
-
““a shark attack is an event for which an Alert Message may be transmitted””
This is the core policy change: shark attacks would become a recognized trigger for wireless emergency alerts. That could let officials notify people near the danger area through phones and other alert-capable devices.
-
““the term ‘Alert Message’ has the meaning given... in section 10.10(a) of title 47””
The bill plugs into an existing FCC framework rather than creating a new alert platform. Real-world implementation would therefore depend on current emergency-alert rules and FCC follow-through.
Latest Status
June 15, 2026
Presented to President.
Related Bills
Take Action
Get more from BillBoard
Free tools to understand, respond to, and track this bill.
Ask AI about this billData sourced from api.congress.gov.