[Senate Report 110-142]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
110th Congress
1st Session SENATE Report
110-142
_______________________________________________________________________
Calendar No. 327
IP-ENABLED VOICE COMMUNICATIONS AND PUBLIC SAFETY ACT OF 2007
__________
R E P O R T
OF THE
COMMITTEE ON COMMERCE, SCIENCE, AND TRANSPORTATION
on
S. H.R. deg. 428
DATE deg.August 3, 2007.--Ordered to be printed
SENATE COMMITTEE ON COMMERCE, SCIENCE, AND TRANSPORTATION
one hundred tenth congress
first session
DANIEL K. INOUYE, Hawaii, Chairman
TED STEVENS, Alaska, Vice-Chairman
JOHN D. ROCKEFELLER IV, West JOHN McCAIN, Arizona
Virginia TRENT LOTT, Mississippi
JOHN F. KERRY, Massachusetts KAY BAILEY HUTCHISON, Texas
BYRON L. DORGAN, North Dakota OLYMPIA J. SNOWE, Maine
BARBARA BOXER, California GORDON H. SMITH, Oregon
BILL NELSON, Florida JOHN ENSIGN, Nevada
MARIA CANTWELL, Washington JOHN E. SUNUNU, New Hampshire
FRANK R. LAUTENBERG, New Jersey JIM DeMINT, South Carolina
MARK PRYOR, Arkansas DAVID VITTER, Louisiana
THOMAS CARPER, Delaware JOHN THUNE, South Dakota
CLAIRE McCASKILL, Missouri
AMY KLOBUCHAR, Minnesota
Margaret Cummisky, Staff Director and Chief Counsel
Lila Helms, Deputy Staff Director and Policy Director
Jean Toal Eisen, Senior Professional Staff
Christine Kurth, Republican Staff Director and General Counsel
Kenneth Nahigian, Republican Deputy Staff Director and Chief Counsel
Calendar No. 327
110th Congress Report
SENATE
1st Session 110-142
======================================================================
IP-ENABLED VOICE COMMUNICATIONS AND PUBLIC SAFETY ACT OF 2007
_______
August 3, 2007.--Ordered to be printed
_______
Mr. Inouye, from the Committee on Commerce, Science, and
Transportation, submitted the following
R E P O R T
[To accompany S. 428]
The Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation, to
which was referred the bill joint resolution deg. (S.
H.R. deg. 428) TITLE deg. to amend the
Wireless Communications and Public Safety Act of 1999, and for
other purposes, having considered the same, reports favorably
thereon with an amendment (in the nature of a substitute) and
recommends that the bill joint resolution deg. (as
amended) do pass.
Purpose of the Bill
The purpose of S. 428 is to provide authority and guidance to
the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) to ensure that 911
and enhanced 911 (E-911) services are made available to
consumers of IP-enabled voice services. The bill does not
reverse the FCC's actions to date. To ensure the deployment of
911 and E-911 capability, the bill grants IP-enabled voice
service providers access to necessary components of the 911 and
E-911 network and directs the FCC to issue any new rules as may
be necessary to comply with this requirement within 120 days of
the date of enactment of the Act. The bill provides IP-enabled
911 and E-911 calls with the same level of liability protection
provided to local exchange carriers. The bill also clarifies
State authority with respect to fees imposed for the support of
911 or E-911 on IP-enabled voice services. To improve future
911 and E-911 services, a national plan is required for
migrating the 911 and E-911 network to an IP-enabled emergency
network that would be able to offer additional capabilities.
Background and Needs
Dialing 911 is the most effective, efficient, and familiar
means for American citizens to call for emergency service. 911
service was first introduced in 1968. Nearly 40 years later, it
has been estimated that there are on average over 200 million
911 calls a year. Calls to 911 are typically routed by wireline
local exchange carriers (LECs) to public safety answering
points (PSAPs) staffed by professionally-trained individuals
who assist callers and direct calls to police, fire, and health
emergency response providers. There are over 6,000 PSAPs in the
United States.
Over the last decade, many PSAPs and 911 systems have been
upgraded to facilitate the transmission of E-911 data. E-911
calls provide the PSAP dispatcher with the callback number of
the caller as well as the caller's geographic location, even if
the caller is unable to speak. As new communications
technologies and services have developed, new challenges have
arisen in the context of providing 911 and E-911 service, and
most recently, have manifested themselves with respect to IP-
enabled voice services.
In May 2005, the FCC adopted a Report and Order requiring IP-
enabled voice service providers to register a subscriber's
location and offer 911 and E-911 service and to provide the
appropriate PSAP with location information based on that
registered location. IP-enabled voice service providers
expressed concern that the FCC had not required access to
certain critical components of the E-911 network controlled by
incumbent phone companies that are needed to complete 911 and
E-911 calls. Additionally, the Order did not extend the
liability protections afforded to wireline and wireless for the
provision of 911 and E-911 capability to IP-enabled voice
service providers in light of the FCC's conclusion that it
lacked the authority to provide such equivalent protections.
This conclusion raised concerns in both the public safety
community and industry and led to calls for legislative action.
At the Executive Session for S. 428, Chairman Inouye and Vice
Chairman Stevens offered an amendment in the nature of a
substitute making a number of changes including provisions
clarifying the FCC's authority to require communications
providers to offer 911 services, providing liability
protections to IP-enabled voice service providers and providers
of emergency communications service, and providing access to
the key components of the 911 and E-911 system.
Summary of Provisions
S. 428, the IP-enabled Voice Communications and Public Safety
Act of 2007, aims to improve 911 communications by codifying
the obligation of IP-enabled voice service providers to provide
911 and E-911 services and by extending the liability
protections enjoyed by wireless carriers and local exchange
companies to IP-enabled voice service providers.
The bill would not alter existing obligations imposed by the
FCC on IP-enabled voice service providers. The bill would
establish an explicit statutory duty obligating IP-enabled
voice service providers to offer 911 and E-911 services in
accordance with Commission rules, provide such entities with
liability protections equivalent to those enjoyed by wireless
and local exchange carriers, reaffirm the authority of States
and localities to impose 911 fees on providers of IP-enabled
voice service, and advance work currently being done by the E-
911 Implementation Coordination Office to develop a national
plan for migrating to a national IP-enabled emergency network.
In addition, S. 428 would direct the FCC to compile a list of
critical information related to the provisioning of 911
services, including a list of PSAP and selective router contact
information. Where appropriate, the FCC would be authorized to
make such information available to the public if such
availability would improve public safety. S. 428 also would
encourage the FCC to work cooperatively with public safety
organizations, industry participants, and the E-911
Implementation Coordination Office to develop best practices
that promote greater consistency among PSAPs with respect to
911 systems.
Finally, the bill would extend the FCC's general enforcement
powers to violations of the Wireless Communications and Public
Safety Act of 1999 and order the FCC to remit amounts promised
for services by Dale N. Hatfield to complete an update to Mr.
Hatfield's 2002 Report on Technical and Operational Issues
Impacting the Provision of Wireless Enhanced 911 Services. Mr.
Hatfield would be required to submit the update to his report
within 60 days of receiving payment.
Legislative History
The IP-Enabled Voice Communications and Public Safety Act of
2007 (S. 428) was introduced by Senator Bill Nelson on January
30, 2007, and referred to the Senate Committee on Commerce,
Science, and Transportation. The bill is cosponsored by
Senators Clinton, Snowe, and Lautenberg. On April 10, 2007, the
Committee held a hearing on ``Voice over Internet Protocol and
the Future of 911 Services.'' On April 25, 2007, the Committee
considered the bill in an open Executive Session. Chairman
Inouye offered an amendment in the nature of a substitute to
clarify the FCC's authority, provide liability protection, and
provide access to the key components of the 911 and E-911
system. Chairman Inouye, with Senators Nelson and Snowe, also
offered a managers' package to the substitute. The substitute
and managers' package were both adopted by voice vote. The
Committee, without objection, ordered that S. 428 be reported.
Estimated Costs
In accordance with paragraph 11(a) of rule XXVI of the
Standing Rules of the Senate and section 403 of the
Congressional Budget Act of 1974, the Committee provides the
following cost estimate, prepared by the Congressional Budget
Office:
U.S. Congress,
Congressional Budget Office,
Washington, DC, May 25, 2007.
Hon. Daniel K. Inouye,
Chairman, Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation,
U.S. Senate, Washington, DC.
Dear Mr. Chairman: The Congressional Budget Office has
prepared the enclosed cost estimate for S. 428, the IP-Enabled
Voice Communications and Public Safety Act of 2007.
If you wish further details on this estimate, we will be
pleased to provide them. The CBO staff contact is Susan Willie.
Sincerely,
Peter R. Orszag,
Director.
Enclosure.
S. 428--IP-Enabled Voice Communications and Public Safety Act of 2007
Summary: S. 428 would amend current law to require
companies offering Voice-over-Internet-Protocol (VoIP) services
to provide emergency 911 telephone service. The bill would
direct the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) to develop
regulations granting VoIP providers access to the network and
systems needed to complete 911 or enhanced-911 calls. Enhanced-
911 (E-911) service automatically associates a physical address
with the calling party's telephone number. The bill also would
direct the federal E-911 Implementation Coordination Office to
create a plan for a transition to an Internet-based emergency
network.
Based on information from the FCC, CBO estimates that
implementing the bill would cost about $1 million over the
2008-2012 period, assuming appropriation of the necessary
amounts. CBO expects that enacting the bill would not have a
significant effect on revenues and would not affect direct
spending.
S. 428 contains several intergovernmental mandates as
defined in the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act (UMRA), including
limitations on the imposition and use of certain fees that
state and local governments can charge VoIP providers. CBO
estimates that the costs of those provisions to state, local,
and tribal governments would be small; while they would grow
over time, they would not exceed the threshold established in
UMRA ($66 million in 2007, adjusted annually for inflation) in
any of the first five years that the mandates are in effect.
S. 428 would impose private-sector mandates, as defined in
UMRA, on certain entities in the telecommunications industry.
The bill would require entities that own 911 components
necessary to transmit VoIP emergency 911 services over their
networks. CBO estimates that the direct cost of complying with
this mandate would be small and fall below the annual threshold
for private-sector mandates established by UMRA ($131 million
in 2007, adjusted annually for inflation). The bill also would
impose a mandate on certain consumers and third-party users of
VoIP services by providing VoIP service providers, users, and
PSAPs liability protection against improperly distributed 911
calls. Due to the lack of information about both the value of
awards in such cases and the number of claims that would be
filed in the absence of this legislation, CBO cannot predict
the level of potential damage awards, if any. Thus, CBO cannot
determine whether the aggregate cost of all the mandates in the
bill would exceed the annual threshold for private-sector
mandates.
Estimated cost to the Federal Government: Under FCC rules,
VoIP providers were required to connect their customers to
emergency 911 services by November 28, 2005. S. 428 would
codify this regulation. The bill also would require the E-911
Implementation Coordination Office to create a plan to create a
national 911 communications system that is Internet-based.
Based on information provided by the FCC, CBO estimates
that administrative costs for various rulemakings called for in
the bill would cost about $1 million in 2008. We estimate that
planning for an Internet-based 911 system would cost less than
$500,000 over the 2008-2012 period.
Enacting S. 428 could increase federal revenues as the
result of the collection of additional civil and forfeiture
penalties assessed for violations of FCC laws and regulations.
Collections of such penalties are recorded in the budget as
revenues. CBO estimates that any additional revenues that would
result from enacting S. 428 would not be significant because of
the relatively small number of cases likely to be involved.
Estimated impact on state, local, and tribal governments:
S. 428 contains several intergovernmental mandates as defined
in UMRA, including limitations on certain fees that state and
local governments impose on providers of VoIP, and a preemption
of state liability laws. CBO estimates that the costs of those
provisions to state, local, and tribal governments would be
small; while they would grow over time, they would not exceed
the threshold established in UMRA ($66 million in 2007,
adjusted annually for inflation) in any of the first five years
that the mandates are in effect.
Limitations on fees
Section 4 would prohibit state, local, and tribal
governments from imposing fees on VoIP providers that exceed
those imposed on other telecommunications providers. The bill
also would require that intergovernmental entities spend 911
fees collected from VoIP providers only for support of
emergency communications.
Thirteen states currently levy 911 fees on VoIP providers.
Nine of those states impose fees that are lower than or equal
to the lowest fee charged to wireless and wireline providers;
CBO expects that fees in those states would not be affected by
the bill's limitation. One state currently charges a VoIP 911
fee that is higher than the residential wireline fee but lower
than the business wireline fee, and presumably that state's fee
also would be allowed under this provision. The remaining three
states allow local governments to set fees; CBO cannot estimate
the extent to which the bill would result in lost fees in those
three states because information on the level of local fees is
not readily available. CBO believes however, that the costs to
state and local governments from the bill's limitation on fees
would likely be small because the number of VoIP users in those
three states is not likely to be large, and local governments
are not likely to levy fees on VoIP users that are
significantly different from those levied on users of other
telecommunications services.
It also is possible that some state and local governments
would choose in the future to impose such fees at a rate higher
than those charged on other telephone services, but CBO has no
information upon which to make such an assumption at this time.
Most states impose 911 fees on wireline and wireless services
that are similar, implying the likelihood that such fees on
VoIP also would be similar. In total, CBO estimates that the
costs to state and local governments from the bill's limitation
on fees, while they might grow over time, would likely be small
over the next five years.
In 2005, four states used 911 fees, including wireless and
wireline fees, for purposes other than 911 or emergency
communications services. Two of those states currently levy 911
fees on VoIP and would be prevented by S. 428 from using those
fees for nonemergency communications purposes. One additional
state that currently has a 911 fee on VoIP allows counties and
local governments to collect and use revenue from 911 fees. CBO
cannot estimate the extent to which counties and local
governments use that revenue for nonemergency communications
purposes because that information is not maintained by the
states. CBO believes, however, that the costs to state and
local governments from the bill's limitation on the use of
fees, while they might grow over time, would likely be small
over the next five years.
Preemption of state liability laws and requirements on public safety
access points (PSAPs)
Section 3 would preempt state liability laws covering PSAPs
and other governmental entities that answer 911 calls connected
using VoIP. This provision would give PSAPs, a provider, or a
user of VoIP, the same protection from liability claims granted
to wireless and wireline entities, and ultimately would benefit
intergovernmental entities by protecting them from such claims.
Estimated impact on the private sector: S. 428 contains
private-sector mandates, as defined in UMRA, on certain
entities in the telecommunications industry. The bill also
would impose a private-sector mandate on certain consumers and
third-party users of VoIP services filing claims for injury.
The bill would provide VoIP service providers, users, and PSAPs
the same liability protection against improperly distributed
911 calls that wireline and wireless providers, users, and
PSAPs currently possess. Because the bill would eliminate
existing rights to seek compensation for injury caused by
negligent acts, it would impose a private-sector mandate. The
direct cost of the mandate would be the forgone net value of
the awards and settlements in such claims. CBO has found no
pending lawsuit with a claim that would be barred if the bill
were enacted and has no basis for estimating the number of
claims that would be filed in the future in the absence of this
legislation. Furthermore, CBO cannot predict the level of
potential damage awards in such cases, if any. Thus, CBO cannot
estimate the cost of this mandate or whether the cost would
exceed the annual threshold established by UMRA for private-
sector mandates ($131 million in 2007, adjusted annually for
inflation).
The bill also would direct FCC to issue new regulations
relating to VoIP access to 911 and E-911 infrastructure. The
new regulations would impose a new mandate on all private
entities that own 911 components necessary to transmit VoIP
emergency 911 services over their networks by requiring them to
allow VoIP providers to have full access to the necessary 911
components. Although the details of such regulations are not
specified in the bill, CBO expects that owners of 911
components would be able to charge VoIP providers a fee for
using their network components, but would be mandated to enter
into such agreements with those providers. Large private
entities that own 911 components have most of the
infrastructure in place to comply with the mandate. Some
smaller owners of 911 components may not have such capacity and
would incur costs to comply with the mandate. Based on
information provided by industry sources, CBO expects that the
direct costs of complying with this mandate would be minimal.
Estimate prepared by: Federal Costs: Susan Willie; Impact
on State, Local, and Tribal Governments: Elizabeth Cove; Impact
on the Private Sector: Craig Cammarata.
Estimate approved by: Peter H. Fontaine, Deputy Assistant
Director for Budget Analysis.
Regulatory Impact Statement
In accordance with paragraph 11(b) of rule XXVI of the
Standing Rules of the Senate, the Committee provides the
following evaluation of the regulatory impact of the
legislation, as reported:
NUMBER OF PERSONS COVERED
S. 428 is intended to extend 911 and E-911 requirements to
IP-enabled voice service providers. The bill would affect IP-
enabled voice service providers and other entities already
subject to 911 and E-911 regulations. Most IP-enabled voice
service subscribers either transition from existing voice
services for which 911 and E-911 requirements already apply or
use IP-enabled voice services in addition to other voice
services. While the bill also would extend liability
protections in certain circumstances for a new class of service
providers known as a alternative emergency communications
providers, such protections would not apply until after the FCC
requires or the appropriate state or local PSAP authorizes such
entity to provide alternative emergency communications
services. As such, there would not be a significant increase in
the number of persons subject to 911 or E-911 regulations.
ECONOMIC IMPACT
S. 428 would not have an adverse economic impact on the
Nation's economy.
PRIVACY
The reported bill would have no impact on the personal
privacy of U.S. citizens.
PAPERWORK
The reported bill should not significantly increase paperwork
requirements for individuals and businesses.
Section-by-Section Analysis
Section 1. Short title
The short title is the ``IP-Enabled Voice Communications and
Public Safety Act of 2007''.
Sec. 2. Duty to provide 911 and E-911 service
Subsection (a) would add a new section 7 to the Wireless
Communications and Public Safety Act of 1999. New section 7(a)
would impose a statutory duty on IP-enabled voice service
providers to provide 911 and E-911 service to their subscribers
in accordance with the orders of the FCC in effect on the date
of enactment of this Act as such orders may be amended from
time to time.
New section 7(b) would provide IP-enabled voice service
providers with rights of access to necessary 911 components
that are comparable to those enjoyed by wireless carriers. In
providing such rights of access, the Commission would take into
account any technical network security or privacy issues
specific to IP-enabled voice services. The Commission would be
required to have IP-enabled voice service providers register
and establish a point of contact for public safety and
government officials for 911 purposes. The FCC also would have
the authority to delegate the enforcement of this subsection to
State commissions or other State agencies with jurisdiction
over emergency communications.
New section 7(c) would clarify that the Act does not alter
existing FCC regulations obligating IP-enabled voice service
providers to provide 911 or E-911 service.
New section 7(d) would clarify that the section does not
permit the FCC to issue regulations that require or impose a
specific technology or technological standard. This section
would not limit or otherwise preclude action by the Commission
in adopting performance-based standards or requirements.
New section 7(e) would reiterate the FCC's authority to
require other providers of communications services to provide
911 and E-911 service. The Committee believes that this
specific authority is consistent with the Commission's general
authority under section 1 of the Communications Act to promote
``safety of life and property'' through the use of wire and
radio communication.
Subsection (b) defines a number of new terms contained in the
bill. The term ``IP-Enabled Voice Service'' would be given the
meaning provided by the Commission under 47 C.F.R. 9.3, as that
regulation may be amended from time to time. The term ``IP-
enabled 911 service'' would be defined to mean any 911 service
provided by an IP-enabled voice service provider, including
Enhanced IP-enabled 911 service. The term ``Enhanced IP-enabled
911 service'' would be defined to mean the enhanced 911 service
designated by the Commission in the Report and Order issued in
its Wireline Competition Docket Nos. 04-36 and 05-96, or any
successor proceeding. The section also includes a definition of
``911 component'' identifying a descriptive list of elements
that, as determined by the Commission, would be necessary to
provide 911 services.
Sec. 3. Parity of protection for provision or use of IP-enabled voice
service
Subsection (a) would amend section 4 of the Wireless
Communications and Public Safety Act of 1999 to extend the
liability protections related to the provision of 911 service
that currently apply to local exchange companies, wireless
carriers, PSAPs, and users of wireless services, to similarly
cover IP-enabled voice service providers, alternative
communications providers, PSAPs, and users of IP-enabled voice
services and alternative emergency communications services.
Subsection (b) would amend section 6 of the Wireless
Communications and Public Safety Act of 1999 by adding
additional definitions of terms used in amended section 4.
Section 4. State authority of fees
Section 4 would clarify that nothing prevents States,
localities, or Indian tribes from imposing or collecting 911 or
E-911 fees if the fee is obligated for the support of 911 or E-
911 services, enhancements to such services or other emergency
communications services as specified in the relevant State or
local law and, with respect to IP-enabled voice services, does
not exceed the amount imposed on or collected by a provider of
telecommunications services. The Committee strongly encourages
States and localities to equitably apply 911 fees among
communications providers, to the extent possible. In
particular, the Committee urges States and localities to study
fee structures that accommodate pre-paid telecommunications
services.
Section 5. Migration to IP-enabled emergency network
Subsection (a) would amend Section 158 of the National
Telecommunications and Information Administration Organization
Act (47 U.S.C. 942).
New section (d) would direct the E-911 Implementation
Coordination Office to develop and report to Congress on a
national plan for migrating to an IP-enabled emergency network
within 270 days of the date of enactment of the Act. It would
set forth specific requirements as to items that must be
included in the migration plan and require the Office to
consult with members of the public safety community, groups
representing those with disabilities, technology and
telecommunications providers, and others as appropriate.
Subsection (b) would authorize the FCC to compile a list of
PSAP contact information, testing procedures, classes and types
of services supported, or other information concerning
necessary 911 components and make that information available to
the public if such availability would improve public safety.
Subsection (c) would require the FCC to work cooperatively
with public safety organizations, industry participants and the
Office to develop best practices that promote consistency,
where appropriate, for PSAP procedures.
Sec. 6. Enforcement
Section 6 would direct the FCC to enforce the Wireless
Communications and Public Safety Act of 1999 as if it were part
of the Communications Act (47 U.S.C. 151 et seq.).
Sec. 7. Completion of the Hatfield Report
Subsection (a) would direct the FCC to remit the amounts
promised for services by Dale N. Hatfield in connection with
the completion of an update to the Report on Technical and
Operational Issues Impacting the Provision of Wireless Enhanced
911 Services filed at the Commission on October 15, 2002, in WT
Docket No. 02-46 within 30 days of enactment of the Act.
Subsection (b) would require Mr. Hatfield to submit his
written findings as of May 1, 2006, to the FCC within 60 days
of receiving the payment described in subsection (a).
Changes in Existing Law
In compliance with paragraph 12 of rule XXVI of the Standing
Rules of the Senate, changes in existing law made by the bill,
as reported, are shown as follows (existing law proposed to be
omitted is enclosed in black brackets, new material is printed
in italic, existing law in which no change is proposed is shown
in roman):
In compliance with paragraph 12 of rule XXVI of the
Standing Rules of the Senate, the Committee states that, in its
opinion, it is necessary to dispense with the requirements of
that paragraph in order to expedite the business of the
Senate. deg.
Wireless Communications and Public Safety Act of 1999
[47 U.S.C. 615 et seq.]
SEC. 4. PARITY OF PROTECTION FOR PROVISION OF USE OF WIRELESS SERVICE.
Sec. 615A. PARITY OF PROTECTION FOR PROVISION OR USE OF WIRELESS
SERVICE
(a) Provider Parity.--A wireless [carrier,] carrier, IP-
enabled voice service provider, or alternative emergency
communications service provider, and [its] their officers,
directors, employees, vendors, and agents, shall have immunity
or other protection from liability in a State of a scope and
extent that is not less than the scope and extent of immunity
or other protection from liability that any local exchange
company, and its officers, directors, employees, vendors, or
agents, have under Federal and State law (whether through
statute, judicial decision, tariffs filed by such local
exchange company, or otherwise) applicable in such State,
including in connection with an act or omission involving the
release to a PSAP, emergency medical service provider or
emergency dispatch provider, public safety, fire service or law
enforcement official, or hospital emergency or trauma care
facility of subscriber information related to [emergency calls
or emergency services.] emergency calls, emergency services, or
alternative emergency communications services.
(b) User Parity.--A person using wireless 9-1-1 [service
shall] service, or IP-enabled voice service, shall have
immunity or other protection from liability of a scope and
extent that is not less than the scope and extent of immunity
or other protection from liability under applicable law in
similar circumstances of a person using 9-1-1 service that is
not [wireless.] wireless, IP-enabled, or alternative emergency
communications.
(c) PSAP Parity.--In matters related to wireless 9-1-1
[communications,] communications, IP-enabled voice service
communications, or alternative emergency communications, a
PSAP, and its employees, vendors, agents, and authorizing
government entity (if any) shall have immunity or other
protection from liability of a scope and extent that is not
less than the scope and extent of immunity or other protection
from liability under applicable law accorded to such PSAP,
employees, vendors, agents, and authorizing government entity,
respectively, in matters related to 9-1-1 communications that
are not [wireless.] wireless, IP-enabled, or alternative
emergency communications.
(d) Basis for Enactment.--This section is enacted as an
exercise of the enforcement power of the Congress under section
5 of the Fourteenth Amendment to the Constitution [USCS
Constitution, Amendment 14, Sec. 5] and the power of the
Congress to regulate commerce with foreign nations, among the
several States, and with Indian tribes.
* * * * * * *
SEC. 6. DEFINITIONS.
Sec. 615B. DEFINITIONS APPLICABLE TO 47 USCS Sec. Sec. 615, 615 NOTE,
615A, AND 615B
As used in this Act:
(1) Secretary.--The term ``Secretary'' means the
Secretary of Transportation.
(2) State.--The term ``State'' means any of the
several States, the District of Columbia, or any
territory or possession of the United States.
(3) Public safety answering point; PSAP.--The term
``public safety answering point'' or ``PSAP'' means a
facility that has been designated to receive 9-1-1
calls and route them to emergency service personnel.
(4) Wireless carrier.--The term ``wireless carrier''
means a provider of commercial mobile services or any
other radio communications service that the Federal
Communications Commission requires to provide wireless
9-1-1 service.
(5) Enhanced wireless 9-1-1 service.--The term
``enhanced wireless 9-1-1 service'' means any enhanced
9-1-1 service so designated by the Federal
Communications Commission in the proceeding entitled
``Revision of the Commission's Rules to Ensure
Compatibility with Enhanced 9-1-1 Emergency Calling
Systems'' (CC Docket No. 94-102; RM-8143), or any
successor proceeding.
(6) Wireless 9-1-1 service.--The term ``wireless 9-1-
1 service'' means any 9-1-1 service provided by a
wireless carrier, including enhanced wireless 9-1-1
service.
(7) Emergency dispatch providers.--The term
``emergency dispatch providers'' shall include
governmental and nongovernmental providers of emergency
dispatch services.
(8) IP-enabled voice service.--The term ``IP-enabled
voice service'' has the meaning given that term by
section 9.3 of the Commission's regulations (47 C.F.R.
9.3), as those regulations may be amended by the
Commission from time to time.
(9) IP-enabled 9-1-1 service.--The term ``IP-enabled
9-1-1 service'' means any 9-1-1 service provided by an
IP-enabled voice service provider, including enhanced
IP-enabled 9-1-1 service.
(10) Enhanced ip-enabled 9-1-1 service.--The term
``enhanced IP-enabled 9-1-1 service'' means any
enhanced 9-1-1 service so designated by the Federal
Communications Commission in its Report and Order in WC
Docket Nos. 04-36 and 05-196, or any successor
proceeding.
(11) 911 component.--The term ``911 component'' means
any equipment, network, databases (including automatic
location information databases and master street
address guides), interface, selective router,
trunkline, non-dialable p-ANI's, or other related
facility necessary for the delivery and completion of
911 or E-911 calls and information related to such
calls, as determined by the Commission.
(12) Alternative emergency communications service.--
The term ``alternative emergency communications
service'' means the provision of emergency information
to a public safety answering point via wire or radio
communications, and may include 9-1-1 and enhanced 9-1-
1 Services.
(13) Alternative emergency communications service
provider.--The term ``alternative emergency
communications service provider'' means an entity other
than a local exchange carrier, wireless carrier, or an
IP-enabled voice service provider that is required by
the Commission or, in the absence of any such
requirement, is specifically authorized by the
appropriate local or State 9-1-1 governing authority,
to provide alternative emergency communications
services.
SEC. 7. IP-ENABLED VOICE SERVICE PROVIDERS.
(a) In General.--It shall be the duty of every IP-enabled
voice service provider engaged in interstate or foreign
communication to provide 9-1-1 service, including enhanced 9-1-
1 service, to its subscribers in accordance with orders of the
Commission in effect on the date of enactment of the IP-Enabled
Voice Communications and Public Safety Act of 2007, as such
orders may be modified by the Commission from time to time.
(b) Access to 911 Components.--
(1) Regulations.--Within 90 days after the date of
enactment of the IP-Enabled Voice Communications and
Public Safety Act of 2007, the Commission shall issue
regulations granting IP-enabled voice service providers
right of access to 911 components that are necessary to
provide 911 service, on the same rates, terms, and
conditions that are provided to commercial mobile
service providers. In promulgating the regulations, the
Commission shall take into account any technical,
network security, or information privacy issues that
are specific to IP-enabled voice services, including
the security of 9-1-1 networks. The Commission shall
require IP-enabled voice service providers to which the
regulations apply to register with the Commission and
to establish a point of contact for public safety and
government officials relative to 9-1-1 service and
access.
(2) Delegation of enforcement to state commissions.--
The Commission may delegate authority to enforce the
regulations issued under paragraph (1) to State
commissions or other State agencies or programs with
jurisdiction over emergency communications.
(c) Savings Clause.--Nothing in the IP-Enabled Voice
Communications and Public Safety Act of 2007 shall be construed
as repealing or otherwise altering, modifying, affecting, or
superseding Federal regulations obligating an IP-enabled voice
service provider to provide 9-1-1 service or enhanced 9-1-1
service.
(d) Limitation on Commission.--Nothing in this section shall
be construed to permit the Commission to issue regulations that
require or impose a specific technology or technological
standard.
(e) FCC Authority to Require 911 Service.--The Federal
Communications Commission is authorized to require other
providers of communications services using wire or radio
communication in interstate or foreign commerce to provide 911
service, including enhanced 911 service, to users for the
purpose of promoting safety of life and property.''.
National Telecommunications and Information Administration Organization
Act
[47 U.S.C. 942]
SEC. 158. COORDINATION OF E-911 IMPLEMENTATION.
Sec. 942. COORDINATION OF E-911 IMPLEMENTATION
(a) E-911 Implementation Coordination Office.--
(1) Establishment.--The Assistant Secretary and the
Administrator of the National Highway Traffic Safety
Administration shall--
(A) establish a joint program to facilitate
coordination and communication between Federal,
State, and local emergency communications
systems, emergency personnel, public safety
organizations, telecommunications carriers, and
telecommunications equipment manufacturers and
vendors involved in the implementation of E-911
services; and
(B) create an E-911 Implementation
Coordination Office to implement the provisions
of this section.
(2) Management plan.--The Assistant Secretary and the
Administrator shall jointly develop a management plan
for the program established under this section. Such
plan shall include the organizational structure and
funding profiles for the 5-year duration of the
program. The Assistant Secretary and the Administrator
shall, within 90 days after the date of enactment of
this Act [enacted Dec. 23, 2004], submit the management
plan to the Committees on Energy and Commerce and
Appropriations of the House of Representatives and the
Committees on Commerce, Science, and Transportation and
Appropriations of the Senate.
(3) Purpose of office.--The Office shall--
(A) take actions, in concert with
coordinators designated in accordance with
subsection (b)(3)(A)(ii), to improve such
coordination and communication;
(B) develop, collect, and disseminate
information concerning practices, procedures,
and technology used in the implementation of E-
911 services;
(C) advise and assist eligible entities in
the preparation of implementation plans
required under subsection (b)(3)(A)(iii);
(D) receive, review, and recommend the
approval or disapproval of applications for
grants under subsection (b); and
(E) oversee the use of funds provided by such
grants in fulfilling such implementation plans.
(4) Reports.--The Assistant Secretary and the
Administrator shall provide a joint annual report to
Congress by the first day of October of each year on
the activities of the Office to improve coordination
and communication with respect to the implementation of
E-911 services.
(b) Phase II E-911 implementation grants.--
(1) Matching grants.--The Assistant Secretary and the
Administrator, after consultation with the Secretary of
Homeland Security and the Chairman of the Federal
Communications Commission, and acting through the
Office, shall provide grants to eligible entities for
the implementation and operation of Phase II E-911
[services.] services, and for migration to an IP-
enabled emergency network.
(2) Matching requirement.--The Federal share of the
cost of a project eligible for a grant under this
section shall not exceed 50 percent. The non-Federal
share of the cost shall be provided from non-Federal
sources.
(3) Coordination required.--In providing grants under
paragraph (1), the Assistant Secretary and the
Administrator shall require an eligible entity to
certify in its application that--
(A) in the case of an eligible entity that is
a State government, the entity--
(i) has coordinated its application
with the public safety answering points
(as such term is defined in section
222(h)(4) of the Communications Act of
1934) located within the jurisdiction
of such entity;
(ii) has designated a single officer
or governmental body of the entity to
serve as the coordinator of
implementation of E-911 services,
except that such designation need not
vest such coordinator with direct legal
authority to implement E-911 services
or manage emergency communications
operations;
(iii) has established a plan for the
coordination and implementation of E-
911 services; and
(iv) has integrated
telecommunications services involved in
the implementation and delivery of
phase II E-911 services; or
(B) in the case of an eligible entity that is
not a State, the entity has complied with
clauses (i), (iii), and (iv) of subparagraph
(A), and the State in which it is located has
complied with clause (ii) of such subparagraph.
(4) Criteria.--The Assistant Secretary and the
Administrator shall jointly issue regulations within
180 days after the date of enactment of the ENHANCE 911
Act of 2004 [enacted Dec. 23, 2004], after a public
comment period of not less than 60 days, prescribing
the criteria for selection for grants under this
section, and shall update such regulations as
necessary. The criteria shall include performance
requirements and a timeline for completion of any
project to be financed by a grant under this section.
(c) Diversion of E-911 charges.--
(1) Designated e-911 charges.--For the purposes of
this subsection, the term ``designated E-911 charges''
means any taxes, fees, or other charges imposed by a
State or other taxing jurisdiction that are designated
or presented as dedicated to deliver or improve E-911
services.
(2) Certification.--Each applicant for a matching
grant under this section shall certify to the Assistant
Secretary and the Administrator at the time of
application, and each applicant that receives such a
grant shall certify to the Assistant Secretary and the
Administrator annually thereafter during any period of
time during which the funds from the grant are
available to the applicant, that no portion of any
designated E-911 charges imposed by a State or other
taxing jurisdiction within which the applicant is
located are being obligated or expended for any purpose
other than the purposes for which such charges are
designated or presented during the period beginning 180
days immediately preceding the date of the application
and continuing through the period of time during which
the funds from the grant are available to the
applicant.
(3) Condition of grant.--Each applicant for a grant
under this section shall agree, as a condition of
receipt of the grant, that if the State or other taxing
jurisdiction within which the applicant is located,
during any period of time during which the funds from
the grant are available to the applicant, obligates or
expends designated E-911 charges for any purpose other
than the purposes for which such charges are designated
or presented, all of the funds from such grant shall be
returned to the Office.
(4) Penalty for providing false information.--Any
applicant that provides a certification under paragraph
(1) knowing that the information provided in the
certification was false shall--
(A) not be eligible to receive the grant
under subsection (b);
(B) return any grant awarded under subsection
(b) during the time that the certification was
not valid; and
(C) not be eligible to receive any subsequent
grants under subsection (b).
(d) Migration Plan Required.--
(1) National plan required.--No more than 270 days
after the date of the enactment of the IP-Enabled Voice
Communications and Public Safety Act of 2007, the
Office shall develop and report to Congress on a
national plan for migrating to a national IP-enabled
emergency network capable of receiving and responding
to all citizen activated emergency communications and
improving information sharing among all emergency
response entities.
(2) Contents of plan.--The plan required by paragraph
(1) shall--
(A) outline the potential benefits of such a
migration;
(B) identify barriers that must be overcome
and funding mechanisms to address those
barriers;
(C) provide specific mechanisms for ensuring
the IP-enabled emergency network is available
in every community and is coordinated on a
local, regional, and Statewide basis;
(D) identify location technology for nomadic
devices and for office buildings and multi-
dwelling units;
(E) include a proposed timetable, an outline
of costs and potential savings;
(F) provide specific legislative language, if
necessary, for achieving the plan;
(G) provide recommendations on any
legislative changes, including updating
definitions, to facilitate a national IP-
enabled emergency network;
(H) assess, collect, and analyze the
experiences of the PSAPs and related public
safety authorities who are conducting trial
deployments of IP-enabled emergency networks as
of the date of enactment of the IP-Enabled
Voice Communications and Public Safety Act of
2007;
(I) document solutions that a national IP-
enabled emergency network will provide for 9-1-
1 access to those with disabilities and needed
steps to implement such solutions, including a
recommended timeline for such implementation;
and
(J) analyze technologies and efforts to
provide automatic location capabilities and
provide recommendations on needed regulatory or
legislative changes necessary to implement
automatic location solutions for 911 purposes.
(3) Consultation.--In developing the plan required by
paragraph (1), the Office shall consult with
representatives of the public safety community, groups
representing those with disabilities, technology and
telecommunications providers, and others it deems
appropriate.
[(d)] (e) Authorization; Termination.--
(1) Authorization.--There are authorized to be
appropriated to the Department of Transportation, for
the purposes of grants under the joint program operated
under this section with the Department of Commerce, not
more than $ 250,000,000 for each of the fiscal years
2005 through 2009, not more than 5 percent of which for
any fiscal year may be obligated or expended for
administrative costs.
(2) Termination.--The provisions of this section
shall cease to be effective on October 1, 2009.
[(e)] (f) Definitions.--As used in this section:
(1) Office.--The term ``Office'' means the E-911
Implementation Coordination Office.
(2) Administrator.--The term ``Administrator'' means
the Administrator of the National Highway Traffic
Safety Administration.
(3) Eligible entity.--
(A) In general.--The term ``eligible entity''
means a State or local government or a tribal
organization (as defined in section 4(l) of the
Indian Self-Determination and Education
Assistance Act (25 U.S.C. 450b(l))).
(B) Instrumentalities.--Such term includes
public authorities, boards, commissions, and
similar bodies created by one or more eligible
entities described in subparagraph (A) to
provide E-911 services.
(C) Exception.--Such term does not include
any entity that has failed to submit the most
recently required certification under
subsection (c) within 30 days after the date on
which such certification is due.
(4) E-911 services.--The term ``E-911 services''
means both phase I and phase II enhanced 911 services,
as described in section 20.18 of the Commission's
regulations (47 C.F.R. 20.18), as in effect on the date
of enactment of the ENHANCE 911 Act of 2004 [enacted
Dec. 23, 2004], or as subsequently revised by the
Federal Communications Commission.
(5) Phase II E-911 services.--The term ``phase II E-
911 services'' means only phase II enhanced 911
services, as described in such section 20.18 (47 C.F.R.
20.18), as in effect on such date, or as subsequently
revised by the Federal Communications Commission.
(6) State.--The term ``State'' means any State of the
United States, the District of Columbia, Puerto Rico,
the Northern Mariana Islands, and any territory or
possession of the United States.