Senate Communications Subcommittee Chmn. Burns (R-Mont.) said he would introduce a bill to prevent states from misallocating E911 funds, which he called “a raw violation of citizens’ trust… This situation is irresponsible, dangerous and cannot be tolerated.”

Senate Commerce Committee will hold hearing on E911 March 5 and hearing in House Commerce Committee is likely to follow, members said at press conference to launch Congressional E-911 Caucus. Caucus is headed by: Senate Commerce Communications Chmn. Burns (R-Mont.), Sen. Clinton (D-N.Y.), Rep. Shimkus (R-Ill.), Rep. Eshoo (D-Cal.). Highlighting public safety and homeland security, members said caucus would focus on determining what steps now need to be taken to ensure that E-911, and E-911 services for wireless phones, are deployed nationally. Members cited need for increased cooperation and said different parts of country are providing different challenges for E-911 implementation. In some places, funding for E-911 services has been diverted in some states, members said. Burns said he recognizes financial difficulties in modernizing 911 for enhanced service and wireless. Burns also said other issues will have to be addressed, including privacy. Clinton said caucus was also focused on “getting the word out,” which would help legislators gauge how much funding is needed for localities to implement E-911. National Emergency Number Assn. (NENA) task force, called Strategic Wireless Action Team (SWAT), will likely help legislators determine where funding and other action is needed, said Shimkus, who was original sponsor of Wireless Communications and Public Safety Law of 1999, which legislated transition to E-911. Both CTIA and AT&T Wireless applauded launch of caucus. Witness list and time for March 5 Senate Commerce Committee hearing on E-911 hasn’t been announced.

FCC Comr. Martin said Mon. Commission must provide “greater clarity” to Enhanced 911 rules, calling order issued in response to request by Richardson, Tex., on what constituted valid public safety request for E-911 good start. At National Emergency Number Assn. (NENA) conference in Washington, Martin outlined role of states, including their need to spend E-911 funds on systems for which they were intended. He also said LECs weren’t explicitly covered in wireless E-911 rules, although FCC had made clear they have to facilitate its rollout. “If the LECs do not live up to their obligations, the Commission will pursue more formal action,” he said.

FCC approved $2 million consent decree with AT&T Wireless to resolve possible violation of Enhanced 911 Phase 2 rules in largest E911-related fine to date. Consent decree set timeline for carrier to deploy network-based location technology within its GSM network. Agreement doesn’t require Enhanced Observed Time Difference of Arrival (E-OTD) technology and carrier said Wed. it was setting its sights on another caller-location system. E-OTD has come under fire from public safety groups and others recently as beset with problems that were slowing E911 rollouts. AT&T Wireless spokeswoman said carrier planned to use same kind of time difference on arrival (TDOA) location technology in its GSM network as it used for its TDMA infrastructure. AT&T said it would continue to test E-OTD in some markets, but consent decree doesn’t stipulate particular network-based location technology, freeing carrier to use other systems to meet deployment deadlines.

Cingular Wireless told FCC this week it had suspended shipments of Enhanced 911 infrastructure equipment (E-OTD), technology whose readiness had been target of public safety concerns. Cingular said it was conducting field trial of alternative, network-based technology for GSM part of its network. E-OTD -- Enhanced Observed Time Difference of Arrival -- is hybrid handset network solution for locating wireless 911 callers. While public safety groups have questioned deployment track record of GSM carriers planning to use E-OTD for upcoming E911 deadlines, T-Mobile USA told FCC this week it was selling E-OTD capable handsets in its stores in R.I., St. Louis, Houston and Dallas, with plans to make it available soon on its Web site. T-Mobile, formerly VoiceStream Wireless, told FCC that results showed accuracy of E-OTD deployments was “very encouraging,” although it said some performance issues still needed to be addressed. “What you may have is 2 companies looking at uncertainty differently,” industry source said.

Verizon Wireless told FCC that problem of unintentional 911 calls wasn’t widespread on its network, in part because it asked its vendors that used one-touch calling feature to deactivate it for emergency calls. FCC Wireless Bureau Chief Thomas Sugrue asked AT&T Wireless, Verizon Wireless and VoiceStream recently to provide information on steps they were taking to cut down on problem of inadvertent 911 calls. Those calls can occur when preprogrammed 911 buttons on wireless phones are pressed accidentally and emergency dispatcher is dialed automatically. National Emergency Numbering Assn. (NENA) has estimated that significant percentage of 911 calls are unintentional and it asked carriers in Dec. to provide information on what they had done or were willing to do to address problem. Verizon told Sugrue in Aug. 21 response it agreed “most if not all” accidental 911 calls occurred when 1 or 9 key on phones preprogrammed with emergency 911 “one-touch” dialing were pressed by accident. “We believe this problem is not widespread among Verizon Wireless’ equipment base,” carrier said. Company said it hadn’t required handset vendors to provide that one-touch feature. Some vendors included it in handful of models several years ago, but they comprised “only 8 of the 32 models we offer for purchase,” Verizon said. To follow up on Jan. deactivation request, company said it sent letter to vendors in March to make sure they shipped handsets with that feature turned off. It said all vendors confirmed they had done so, with exception of model by Samsung, which manufacturer said had one-touch feature that couldn’t be disabled. Samsung told Verizon it was developing software to turn feature off. Finally, Verizon said it had decided not to offer any new handset model that had one-touch 911 feature. “We have thus modified our product specifications so that they prohibit manufacturers from including the one- touch emergency 911 dialing feature in future models,” carrier said. Separately, VoiceStream told FCC in Aug. 22 letter that it had responded to NENA request for information in March and was trying to raise consumer awareness to prevent inadvertent 911 calls. VoiceStream informed NENA that all of its handsets came from manufacturer without 911 speed dialing being enabled. Carrier said it was working with CTIA on industrywide subscriber awareness program. It also said it was modifying guides for new subscribers to address issue. “Additionally, we will be putting a message directly on customers’ bills and also providing bill inserts specifically addressing the issue of unintentional 911 calling,” VoiceStream said. Carrier said it also listed 911 calls on customer bills so they could see whether they were making such calls by accident.

FCC Wireless Bureau Chief Thomas Sugrue asked AT&T Wireless, Verizon Wireless and VoiceStream to provide information on what steps they were taking to reduce problem of unintentional 911 calls. In separate letters Wed., Sugrue said those calls could occur when preprogrammed 911 buttons on wireless phones were pressed accidentally and emergency dispatcher was dialed automatically. “Although preprogrammed 911 keys were initially considered to be a useful public safety feature for wireless phones, the number of unintentional calls and the burden they place on PSAP [public safety answering point] officials suggests that more harm than good has been brought about by this feature,” Sugrue wrote. National Emergency Numbering Assn. (NENA) has estimated that significant percentage of wireless 911 calls are unintentional. Problem, Sugrue wrote, is that typical PSAP practice is to remain on line to try to ascertain whether call is intentional. If E911 Phase 2 location capability is in place, dispatcher also may have to send emergency services to caller’s location if it can’t be determined over phone whether call was inadvertent. NENA sent letter to several wireless carriers in Dec. asking for information on what each had done or was willing to do to control problem and outlined several solutions for carriers and PSAPs to address together. “We support NENA’s efforts to address the unintentional calls problem and would urge that all wireless carriers, to the extent they have not done so already, take steps to eliminate the problem,” Sugrue wrote. He told each carrier that it hadn’t responded to NENA or provided information on what steps were needed to tackle problem. Sugrue asked for replies within 15 days of company’s receiving letter on information including: (1) Whether carrier had “communicated to its handset manufacturers its desire that mobile phones not be preprogrammed to dial 911 by pushing a single button on the keypad.” (2) Whether it had instructed its employees to deactivate auto-dial 911 feature if it came preprogrammed on certain phones. (3) Whether it provided subscribers with information on problem of unintentional 911 calls for existing and new handsets. (4) Whether it itemized 911 calls on customers’ bills to highlight problem. NENA raised such issues as possible solutions in its Dec. 12 letter to carriers.

Assn. of Public Safety Communications Officials (APCO) and National Emergency Number Assn. (NENA) wrote to FCC Chmn. Powell on group’s continuing concerns about pace of Enhanced 911 rollout, citing LEC upgrades as “the last remaining hurdle in many instances.” FCC Wireless Bureau Chief Thomas Sugrue recently directed largest ILECs to make publicly available certain information on interconnections needed for E911 deployment by Aug. 28. APCO and NENA also told Powell: “We urge the Commission to take affirmative action regarding carriers that are clinging to questionable location technologies and, as a result, are falling well short of implementation deadlines and accuracy requirements.” APCO and NENA said “most troubling problems” that remained for E911 implementation included failure of many LECs to cooperate with public safety answering points and wireless carriers or to provide on-time upgrades to their automatic location information (ALI) databases. Groups recently lauded Wireless Bureau letter to LECs asking for detailed information on their E911 deployment. “However, we believe that the Commission will need to consider taking further action, including adoption of provisions requiring LECs to proceed in a timely manner to provide necessary elements of Phase 2 operation,” groups said. They also urged Commission to take “a hard look” at Phase 2 rollout of E911 by GSM carriers using Enhanced Observed Time Difference (E-OTD) of Arrival technology. APCO said it still had petition of reconsideration pending on agency’s grant 2 years ago of waiver to VoiceStream Wireless. That waiver had extended certain Phase 2 implementation deadlines for carrier and allowed use of E-OTD technology. APCO and NENA raised concerns about implementation progress of VoiceStream, Cingular and AT&T Wireless. They said Cingular and AT&T Wireless recently submitted reports to FCC “indicating major E-OTD test failures, raising further questions regarding its deployment schedule and ultimate accuracy levels.” APCO and NENA called on FCC to resolve its petition for reconsideration and “to require VoiceStream to consider alternative technologies as possible replacements for E-OTD.”

National Emergency Number Assn. (NENA) told FCC this week that several “open issues” on role that LECs played in supplying 911 services to public safety authorities could slow wireless Enhanced 911 rollout. NENA cited issues such as: (1) How LECs recover costs of 911 services supplied to public safety answering points (PSAPs). (2) Extent to which LECs are authorized to offer E911 Phase 2 refinements of such services. (3) “Regulatory interface” between FCC authority over wireless 911 implementation and state PUC authority over rates, terms and conditions of LEC intrastate service. “NENA representatives expressed concern that these and other open issues threatened to slow the pace of wireless E911 implementation,” group said in ex parte filing Tues. Filing said “wireless E911 cannot become ubiquitous until the wire facilities essential to its offering, such as selective routing switches, are available throughout the country.” NENA plans to develop proposal for early fall on how to make wireline network infrastructure more available for providing wireless E911 to less populated areas. LEC-related 911 issue is among those under examination as part of FCC technical inquiry led by former Office of Engineering & Technology Chief Dale Hatfield on E911 implementation issues. Wireless carriers, in some cases, have contended they have had difficulty obtaining necessary LEC facility upgrades for E911 Phase 1 deployment and fear issue also could emerge under Phase 2 rollouts. Wireless carriers such as Sprint PCS have stressed role of LECs in closing E911 connection among wireless subscribers, carriers, databases and public safety answering points. NENA said it had requests pending at FCC for clarification of identification of nonservice initialized phones, which include phones donated to domestic abuse programs. While requests cover how to treat harassing calls from such phones, “the issue also extends to the matter of ‘congestion control’ when, for example, large numbers of wireless calls to 911 report the same emergent incident at the same time.” NENA also expressed concern that development of wireless location technology for E911 called Enhanced Observed Time Difference (E-OTD) equipment for GSM networks “seemed to have stalled.” It said “predictions for its superior accuracy, relative to network location solutions, had retrenched.” Group said: “At some point, the holders of GSM Phase 2 waivers must be called on their promises to look at alternative location solutions if their initial E-OTD choice is not viable under the applicable waiver deadlines.”

FCC Comr. Copps said Wed. that while current economy didn’t appear to be ideal time to hold 700 MHz auction, Congress was “pretty specific that there needs to be an auction.” He said at press breakfast that he was researching legislative record to see whether there were countervailing statutory mandates that FCC needed to take into consideration on timing issue. Commission now faces statutory deadline of Sept. 30 to deposit proceeds of Ch. 52-59 auction in U.S. Treasury. It’s considering CTIA request for review of Wireless Bureau decision last month to keep June 19 date for both Ch. 60-69 and Ch. 52-59. If auction were held on time, “I'm not terribly optimistic that huge sums of money would be raised,” Copps said. He also said he wasn’t “thrilled” about Ch. 52-59 and Ch. 60-69 spectrum “being thrown together in the same auction.” But he said his examination of statutory issues on auction didn’t mean he was backing delay. “I'm supposed to be implementing laws passed by Congress,” he said, and he’s in mode of looking at merits of various statutory requirements. While Copps said he had personal opinion about timing of auctions, he said “I'm not here to implement my personal opinion.” Meanwhile, National Emergency Number Assn. (NENA) weighed in on timing of 700 MHz auction, saying availability of 24 MHz in that band for public safety was “a reason worth some delay.” FCC already has allocated 24 MHz at 700 MHz for public safety, although availability of that spectrum also is subject to efforts to clear band of analog broadcasters as part of DTV transition. “We would not wish to put the already allocated 24 MHz at risk, but so far as we can tell, it is already at risk of tardy availability, given the slow pace of DTV implementation,” NENA told FCC in filing Wed. It said Commission’s Public Safety Wireless Advisory Committee projected in 1996 that almost 100 MHz would be needed by 2010, although only 24 MHz had been allocated in former UHF TV spectrum. “With the Administration, the Congress and the FCC all recognizing that there are reasonable arguments for delay, it is unseemly and unnecessary for this issue to remain unresolved beyond the May 8 deadline for submission of notice of intent to bid at auction,” NENA said. It also urged FCC not to allow issue to remain in “limbo” even closer to June 19 auction date.