The FCC and the National Communications System (NCS) opened a national campaign Thurs. to urge public safety answering points (PSAPs) to register in the Telecom Service Priority (TSP) program. The FCC said joint research conducted with NCS indicated less than 10% of 7,500 PSAPs in the U.S. now participated. The program, created in 1988, gives govts. and key industries priority over other telecom users in emergencies. In case of a national emergency, the program ensures certain dedicated voice, backbone and access circuits for priority users can operate despite severe network congestion or disruption. The FCC said 911 centers “readily qualify” because they offer services essential to health and safety. NCS Deputy Mgr. Brenton Greene and FCC Office of Engineering & Technology Chief Edmond Thomas wrote to the National Emergency Number Assn. (NENA), National Assn. of State 911 Administrators (NASNA) and the Assn. of Public Safety Communications Officials (APCO), which are part of the campaign on TSP. “Lack of participation could jeopardize the restoration of essential service provided by the PSAP administrators during times of disaster and could put citizens at substantial risk of injury or loss of property at times when they are most vulnerable,” they wrote. The FCC said it would be the federal TSP sponsor for all PSAP administrators because, under the program, all non-federal organizations seeking coverage must have a federal sponsor. The Commission developed initial guidelines to help PSAPs enroll. It said in an attachment to the letters to the public safety community that since Sept. 11, 2001, the agencies had been reviewing the “scope and effectiveness” of the TSP program. While they found it operated well in disasters, certain groups were underrepresented, particularly PSAPs. “This lack of participation by certain key organizations represents a serious vulnerability in our homeland security,” FCC and NCS said. The current lag in PSAP participation “could jeopardize the restoration of essential services provided by the PSAP administrators during times of disaster and, therefore, put citizens at substantial risk of injury or loss of property at times when they are most vulnerable.” NCS and the FCC said PSAPs might not join the program because they mistakenly believed telecom service providers automatically gave a high priority to restoring their lines in emergencies. NCS said it would expedite its processing of TSP applications by PSAPs. Current rules give NCS up to 30 days to do so, but it pledged to process valid PSAP TSP applications within 14 days -- only 3 days for most of them. APCO said that, along with industry standards bodies, it would develop additional “industry-specific guidelines” for PSAPs to assist in their enrollments. The FCC stressed Thurs. that a PSAP user didn’t have to purchase TSP coverage for all its lines. Typically, there’s a one- time charge of $100 for a local line and a monthly charge of about $3, but it said most TSP users sought coverage for only a portion of their lines to keep costs down. NASNA said it would provide information to its members to help enroll in the program and do follow-up with 911 center administrators. NENA said it also would provide information to its members and propose revisions in its standards to reflect adequate levels of TSP participation by PSAPs.

The National Emergency Number Assn. (NENA) and National Assn. of State Nine One One Administrators (NASNA) urged the FCC to “look ahead” and ensure that new services built 911 calling capabilities early in their development cycle. The Commission in Dec. adopted a further notice to study whether mobile satellite service operators, multiline phone systems, IP telephony providers, telematics operators and others should have to meet Enhanced 911 mandates. Several filings in the initial round of comments urged the FCC to exercise care before expanding basic and E911 rules beyond the wireless operators now covered. NENA and NASNA acknowledged in reply comments filed this week that the rollout of E911 Phase 1 and 2 was a “complex task.” They said: “If we fail to look ahead to new services and products offering the promise or expectation of emergency calling and response, we risk discrediting 911 and inhibiting its use in conventional and wireless telephony.” The threshold question for whether a service is covered under 1999 legislation on 911 is whether it meets the law’s application of 911 obligations to wireless and wireline service, the groups said. “We must be forward- looking and address telematics as an E911 issue before it becomes a crisis for the 911 community,” NENA and NASNA said. “Assuring a well-designed interface of telematics with E911 should be a Commission priority.” In earlier comments, some automakers told the FCC that privately run call centers associated with services such as OnStar were well equipped for emergency communications. NENA and NASNA said there were “cost-effective” ways to further integrate telematics call center operations with public safety networks for handing off emergency calls initially received by private call centers. The groups said the record before the FCC was “mixed” on who should bear responsibility for ensuring E911 access vis resale, prepaid calling and disposable phones. “We apply to these and to other new and emerging services the fundamental principle that any reasonable facsimile of basic wire or wireless calling should be presumed capable of Enhanced 911 access, with the provider bearing the burden of showing why that presumption cannot or should not be met,” the groups said.

The Assn. of Public Safety Communications Officials (APCO) and the National Emergency Number Assn. (NENA) opposed petitions for reconsideration filed last month by T-Mobile USA, Nextel and Cingular Wireless on an aspect of Enhanced 911 rules. The carriers, in separate filings, challenged an FCC order that set guidelines for requesting information about the E911 Phase 2 readiness of public safety answering points (PSAPs). They argued that the order didn’t adequately consider the complexities of when a PSAP or wireless operator was “ready” to roll out Phase 2. NENA and APCO said the latest rule they were challenging provided “necessary balance” to the requirement that carriers need offer Phase 2 data only if requested by a PSAP and only if the PSAP was, or would be, ready to receive and use that information. “Rather than accepting the rules and moving on, some carriers appear to have adopted a strategy of challenging every minute detail and requesting clarification to address every conceivable circumstance,” the opposition filing said. “The public safety community has moved past FCC rulemaking disputes and is focusing on making E911 a reality. The carriers should do the same.” The petitions for reconsideration embody a “misguided view” that the Phase 2 deployment responsibilities of carriers and PSAPs should be sequential instead of simultaneous, the groups said. “They would have PSAPs do everything necessary to receive and process Phase 2 data, and only then would carriers be obligated to fulfill their responsibilities,” they said. The underlying premise of the rule is that all stakeholders have to move ahead at the same time toward Phase 2, they said. “If both parties are waiting for the other to move, nothing will happen, at least not within a reasonable time frame,” NENA and APCO said. AT&T Wireless said in separate comments that it supported the challenges by T-Mobile, Cingular and Nextel. AT&T Wireless said it agreed with those petitions that the procedural rules at issue had “added unnecessary complexity to the E911 deployment process and will frustrate, not advance, the Commission’s objectives.” AT&T Wireless said the framework also denied the rights of carriers to seek documentation from PSAPs as to their readiness.

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.