HOUSE E911 BILL PLANNED, INCLUDING FEDERAL BLOCK GRANTS

Upton told reporters after the hearing he wanted to work on bipartisan legislation with Democrats such as E911 congressional caucus members Eshoo (D-Cal.) and Shimkus (R- Ill.), who have raised concerns about lagging deployment. Shimkus said much of the bill would be based on the findings of the report that former Office of Engineering & Technology Chief Dale Hatfield delivered to the FCC. Hatfield’s inquiry concluded, in part, that the infrastructure for emergency calls was seriously antiquated and that coordination efforts would be bolstered by a program office in the federal govt., possibly at DHS. In the hearing, Upton said his bill would link federal E911 grants to assist public safety answering points (PSAPs) to states not raiding 911 funds for other purposes. He suggested funds only for states that certified they didn’t dip into those funds for other programs and that had an E911 coordinator. “The evidence suggests that those states with such coordinators have made greater progress than those without,” he said.

“To think that we are paying for this service as part of our bill and yet the money is going to someplace, who knows where,” Upton said of the depleted state funds. He acknowledged federal lawmakers couldn’t dictate such funding issues to states, but he suggested a scenario along the lines of the federal Highway Trust Fund, which rewards states for using collected monies for their intended purposes.

One common theme was that significant progress had been made in implementing wireless E911 beyond a subcommittee hearing 2 years ago, but that much remained to be done. Several panel members spoke passionately against states’ drawing down E911 cost recovery funds to shore up budget shortfalls elsewhere. “Every decision to raid those funds is directly related to somebody’s loss of life on the highway,” Commerce Committee Chmn. Tauzin (R-La.) said. “The bottom line is we can’t wait much longer for E911 to be fully implemented,” he said, praising the FCC for being “as tough as it has been on the wireless carriers to move them along.” At the start of the hearing, Tauzin said many of the promises of E911 technology had yet to be realized and stressed the need for PSAP funding to buy E911 services from LECs. He said the House soon would take up spectrum trust fund legislation, which also is designed to make sure the money isn’t used for purposes other than relocating displaced incumbents.

Subcommittee members on both sides of the political aisle expressed concerns that resources wireless carriers had to expend in rolling out wireless local number portability could dilute efforts to introduce E911 services, echoing concerns raised by CTIA. Like other members, Tauzin said he supported the idea of wireless LNP but had “concerns about its implementation at a time when we are asking wireless carriers to make E911 their top priority.” Shimkus also raised this issue, saying he hoped “we could move on prioritizing our needs.” Rep. Boucher (D-Va.) said: “Frankly, I question for a costly number portability mandate for wireless. Wireless is already a fully competitive telecommunications sector.” He called number portability a “consumer convenience,” saying it wasn’t needed to carry out the higher goal of promoting competition among carriers. “I have no doubt that a regulatory insistence on wireless number portability will detract from the more urgent need to deploy E911 services.” Upton said he supported wireless LNP. “The question is what do we want first,” he told reporters. “We want the resources for both,” he said, and E911 is a bigger priority. Upton said it wasn’t clear whether LNP would be part of the E911 legislation.

Ranking subcommittee Democrat Markey (Mass.) chastised wireless carriers for complaining that they would hard- pressed to move toward wireless LNP and E911 implementation at the same time. “It’s like running a wireless network and chewing gum at the same time is so hard,” Markey said. Carriers face a Nov. 24 deadline for implementing wireless LNP in the top 100 metropolitan areas. CTIA and Verizon Wireless are challenging in the U.S. Appeals Court, D.C., an FCC decision to not exercise forbearance on wireless LNP in a decision that extended the deadline by one year until this Nov. “I would point out that right now there are absolutely no implementation problems when it comes to the billing operations of these companies,” Markey said. He acknowledged that both wireless LNP and E911 involved costs. “Some carriers are fearful of the repercussions to their bottom line if consumers are finally permitted to keep their phone numbers while shopping around for better service,” Markey said. “But public safety and consumer protection are not competing goals.”

While agreeing that E911 “needs a federal champion,” Rep. Green (D-Tex.) said he was concerned DHS already might be overburdened with other policy areas to take on this one. “In an agency that size, such an office can easily be lost,” he said. Hatfield, who said he was testifying as a private citizen and not on behalf of the FCC, said when he finalized his E911 report for the agency, his thought was that a proposed office in DHS could be a “focus of E911 activity in the Executive Branch.” He told the panel it could serve as an advocate for first responders on those issues. “I am even now even more convinced of the need for such an office,” Hatfield said.

The trend that states such as N.Y. could raid E911 state funds for other purposes is relatively recent, National Emergency Number Assn. (NENA) Pres. John Melcher said. Only “in the last few months” have LECs gotten their tariffs in order so that PSAPs could start buying services. But in the time that it took to get other systems in place, many of those funds dwindled as states diverted them to other programs, he said. “So that now that the tariffs are in place, the technology is in place and everything is ready to go, now the money is gone,” Melcher said.

Hatfield also stressed the need to address longer term issues, in part through a federal advisory committee the FCC could create to look at the overall framework and future evolution of E911 systems. The report’s conclusion was based on the wide range of stakeholders and jurisdictions with purview for that network architecture, he said, and he has sensed reluctance by some stakeholders to pursue such a panel. “I still have serious concerns in this area,” he said. He said that reluctance to develop such an advisory committee might be due to concerns over logistics, including timing and support. “My real concern is not the exact form of the institutional arrangements as long as the decision- making takes place in an open and transparent process.”

Upton said his subcommittee also expected to hold a hearing on the universal service fund, he hoped before the Aug. break, “but it may slip until September.” On plans for a Telecom Subcommittee hearing on the FCC’s new ownership rules (CD June 4 p4), Upton said a likely date was just after the July congressional recess. Asked about another upcoming hearing, on the state of the telecom sector, Upton said one was likely before the Aug. break, with some expected after that break, as well.

MobileTel CEO James Callahan said the FCC’s existing E911 Phase 2 requirements didn’t adequately consider the unique requirements of rural carriers. He said his Larose, La., company and other Rural Cellular Assn. members must make tough choices between expanding their service footprint to areas that currently are unserved or completing E911 upgrades. Callahan said many carriers in rural areas used analog and TDMA technology, meaning their Phase 2 E911 solutions used network-based technology that depended on triangulation of cell sites to obtain caller location data. He said in areas where cell sites had service footprints that overlapped only enough to allow hand-off between sites, the only way to meet location identification requirements would be to build more sites. “Relaxation of the current accuracy requirements would enable carriers to deploy a solution that meets the public safety needs of rural consumers,” Callahan said. He said the FCC’s accuracy requirements were unrealistic for rural areas.

FCC Wireless Bureau Chief John Muleta told the panel E911 implementation never had been envisioned as a “hot-cut process.” Although progress has been made, “we still have a long way to go,” he said, citing steps the FCC has taken on enforcement, implementation, probing operational and technical challenges and outreach. The latest round of E911 progress reports submitted to the FCC by the national carriers show Phase 2 has been deployed in 25 states to 40 localities and more than 800 unique PSAPs, he said.