E-911 Grant Program, 57567-57580 [E8-23266]
Download as PDF
Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 193 / Friday, October 3, 2008 / Proposed Rules
3. Amend § 8360.0–5 by revising
paragraph (c) to read as follows:
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
§ 8360.0–5
National Highway Traffic Safety
Administration
Definitions.
*
*
*
*
*
(c) Developed recreation sites and
areas mean sites and areas that contain
structures or capital improvements
primarily used by the public for
recreation purposes. Such sites or areas
may include such features as:
Delineated spaces for parking, camping
or boat launching; sanitary facilities;
potable water; grills or fire rings; tables;
or controlled access.
*
*
*
*
*
4. Revise § 8365.1–5(b)(2) to read as
follows:
§ 8365.1–5
Property and resources.
*
*
*
*
*
(b) * * *
(2) Nonrenewable resources such as
mineral specimens, common
invertebrate and plant fossils, and
semiprecious gemstones;
*
*
*
*
*
5. Revise § 8365.2–3 to read as
follows:
jlentini on PROD1PC65 with PROPOSALS
§ 8365.2–3
Occupancy and use.
In developed camping and picnicking
areas, no person shall, unless otherwise
authorized:
(a) Pitch any tent, park any trailer,
erect any shelter or place any other
camping equipment in any area other
than the place designed for it within a
designated campsite;
(b) Leave personal property
unattended for more than 24 hours in a
day use area, or 72 hours in other areas.
Personal property left unattended
beyond such time limit is subject to
disposition under the Federal Property
and Administration Services Act of
1949, as amended (40 U.S.C. 484(m));
(c) Build any fire except in a stove,
grill, fireplace or ring provided for such
purpose;
(d) Enter or remain in campgrounds
closed during established night periods
except as an occupant or while visiting
persons occupying the campgrounds for
camping purposes;
(e) Occupy a site with more people
than permitted within the developed
campsite; or
(f) Move any table, stove, barrier, litter
receptacle or other campground
equipment.
[FR Doc. E8–23258 Filed 10–2–08; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4310–84–P
VerDate Aug<31>2005
18:05 Oct 02, 2008
Jkt 217001
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
National Telecommunications and
Information Administration
47 CFR Part 400
[Docket No. NHTSA–2008–0142]
RIN 2127–AK37
E–911 Grant Program
AGENCIES: National Highway Traffic
Safety Administration (NHTSA),
Department of Transportation (DOT);
National Telecommunications and
Information Administration (NTIA),
Department of Commerce (DOC).
ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking
(NPRM).
SUMMARY: This joint notice proposes
implementing regulations for the E–911
Grant Program authorized under the
Ensuring Needed Help Arrives Near
Callers Employing 911 (ENHANCE 911)
Act of 2004 (Pub. L. 108–494, codified
at 47 U.S.C. 942). The Act authorizes
grants for the implementation and
operation of Phase II enhanced 911
services and for migration to an IPenabled emergency network. This
NPRM proposes the application, award
and administrative requirements for the
E–911 grant program and seeks
comments thereon.
DATES: Written comments may be
submitted to this agency and must be
received by December 2, 2008.
ADDRESSES: You may submit comments
identified by DOT Docket ID Number
NHTSA–2008–0142 by any of the
following methods:
• Federal eRulemaking Portal: Go to
https://wwww.regulations.gov. Follow
the online instructions for submitting
comments.
• Fax: 202–493–2251.
• Mail: Docket Management Facility,
M–30, U.S. Department of
Transportation, West Building, Ground
Floor, Room W12–140, 1200 New Jersey
Avenue, SE., Washington, DC 20590.
• Hand Delivery or Courier: West
Building, Ground Floor, Room W12–
140, 1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE.,
Washington, DC, between 9 a.m. and
5 p.m., Eastern Time, Monday through
Friday, except Federal holidays.
Instructions: For detailed instructions
on submitting comments and additional
information on the rulemaking process,
see the ‘‘Public Participation’’ heading
in the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION
PO 00000
Frm 00014
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
57567
section of this document. Note that all
comments received will be posted
without change to https://
www.regulations.gov, including any
personal information provided. Please
see the ‘‘Privacy Act’’ heading below.
Privacy Act: Anyone is able to search
the electronic form of all comments
received into any of our dockets by the
name of the individual submitting the
comment (or signing the comment, if
submitted on behalf of an association,
business, labor union, etc.). You may
review DOT’s complete Privacy Act
Statement in the Federal Register
published on April 11, 2000 (65 FR
19476–78).
Docket: For access to the docket to
read background documents or
comments received, go to https://
www.regulations.gov at any time or to
West Building, Ground Floor, Room
W12–140, 1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE.,
Washington, DC, between 9 a.m. and
5 p.m., Eastern Time, Monday through
Friday, except Federal holidays.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For
program issues: Mr. Drew Dawson,
Director, Office of Emergency Medical
Services, National Highway Traffic
Safety Administration, 1200 New Jersey
Avenue, SE., NTI–140, Washington, DC
20590. Telephone: (202) 366–9966.
E-mail: Drew.Dawson@dot.gov.
For legal issues: Ms. Jin Kim,
Attorney-Advisor, Office of the Chief
Counsel, National Highway Traffic
Safety Administration, 1200 New Jersey
Avenue, SE., NCC–113, Washington, DC
20590. Telephone: (202) 366–1834.
E-mail: Jin.Kim@dot.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Table of Contents
I. Background
II. Summary of the ENHANCE 911 Act
III. Proposed Regulations
A. Definitions
B. Who May Apply
C. Application Requirements
1. State 911 Plan
2. Project Budget
3. Supplemental Project Budget
4. Designated E–911 Coordinator
5. Certifications
6. Due Date
D. Approval and Award
E. Distribution of Grant Funds
F. Eligible Uses for Grant Funds
G. Non-Compliance
H. Financial and Administrative
Requirements
I. Closeout
IV. Public Participation
V. Statutory Basis for This Action
VI. Regulatory Analyses and Notices
A. Executive Order 12866 and Regulatory
Policies and Procedures
B. Regulatory Flexibility Act
C. Executive Order 13132 (Federalism)
D. Executive Order 12988 (Civil Justice
Reform)
E:\FR\FM\03OCP1.SGM
03OCP1
57568
Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 193 / Friday, October 3, 2008 / Proposed Rules
E. Paperwork Reduction Act
F. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act
G. National Environmental Policy Act
H. Executive Order 13175 (Consultation
and Coordination With Indian Tribes)
I. Regulatory Identifier Number (RIN)
J. Privacy Act
jlentini on PROD1PC65 with PROPOSALS
I. Background
Trends in telecommunications
mobility and convergence have put the
nation’s 911 system at a crossroads. The
growing market penetration of both
wireless telephones (commonly known
as mobile or cell phones) and Voice over
Internet Protocol (VoIP) telephony have
underscored the limitations of the
current 911 infrastructure. The 911
system, based on decades-old
technology, cannot handle the text, data,
image and video that are increasingly
common in personal communications
and critical to emergency response.
Many of the limitations of the current
911 system stem from its foundation on
1970s circuit-switched network
technology. Each introduction of a new
access technology (e.g., wireless) or
expansion of system functions (e.g.,
location determination) requires
significant engineering and system
modifications. There appears to be
consensus within the 911 community
on the shortcomings of the present 911
system and the need for a new, more
capable system, based upon a digital,
Internet-Protocol (IP) based
infrastructure.
Today, there are approximately 255
million wireless telephones in use in
the United States. About 80 percent of
Americans now subscribe to wireless
telephone service and 14 percent of
American adults live in households
with only wireless telephones, i.e., no
landline telephones. Of the estimated
240 million 911 calls made each year,
approximately one-third originate from
wireless telephones. In many
communities, at least half of the 911
calls come from wireless telephones.
Unlike landline 911 calls, not all
wireless 911 calls are delivered to
dispatchers with Automatic Number
Information (ANI) and Automatic
Location Information (ALI), two pieces
of information that aid in identifying the
telephone number and geographic
location of the caller. The increasing use
of VoIP communications has
compounded this problem because the
location of the caller cannot
automatically be determined when a
911 call is made on some
interconnected VoIP services. Without
this information, emergency response
times may be delayed. Prompt and
accurate location information is critical
to delivering emergency assistance.
VerDate Aug<31>2005
18:05 Oct 02, 2008
Jkt 217001
Ensuring enhanced 911 (E–911) service
for each caller, i.e., telephone number
and location information of the caller, is
increasingly important to public safety,
given the vast number of 911 calls
originating from wireless and VoIP
telephones.
Successful E–911 service
implementation requires the
cooperation of multiple distinct entities:
Wireless carriers, wireline telephone
companies (also known as local
exchange carriers), VoIP providers, and
Public Safety Answering Points
(PSAPs). A PSAP is a facility that has
been designated to receive emergency
calls and route them to emergency
personnel. For example, when a 911 call
is made from a wireless telephone, the
wireless carrier must be able to
determine the location of the caller, the
local exchange carrier must transmit
that location information from the
wireless carrier to the PSAP, and the
PSAP must be capable of receiving such
information.
Currently, many PSAPs are not
technologically capable of receiving ANI
and ALI from wireless 911 calls. In
order to receive this information, PSAPs
must upgrade their operations centers
and make appropriate trunking
arrangements (i.e., establish a wired
connection between the PSAP and the
networks of the local wireline telephone
companies) to enable wireless E–911
data to pass from the wireless carrier to
the PSAP. Once a PSAP is
technologically capable of receiving this
information, the PSAP can submit
requests to wireless carriers for E–911
service. Under regulations of the Federal
Communications Commission (FCC),
this request triggers a wireless carrier’s
obligation to deploy E–911 service to a
PSAP.
Upgrading the 911 system to an IPenabled emergency network will enable
E–911 calls from more networked
communication devices, enable the
transmission of text messages,
photographs, data sets and video, enable
geographically independent call access,
transfer, and backup among and
between PSAPs and other authorized
emergency organizations, and support
an ‘‘interoperable internetwork’’ of all
emergency organizations.
Many PSAPs do not have the
resources to make the upgrades
necessary to request E–911 service.
Some PSAPs are able to fund upgrades
from their existing budgets, but other
PSAPs must rely on funds collected by
the State to maintain operation and
make capital improvements to 911
services. While most States collect some
type of wireless fee or surcharge on
consumers’ wireless telephone bills to
PO 00000
Frm 00015
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
help fund PSAP operations and
upgrades, not all State laws ensure that
such surcharges are dedicated to their
intended use. In fact, some States have
used E–911 surcharges to satisfy other
State obligations that may be marginally
related to public safety, even though
PSAPs remain unable to receive E–911
service. See, e.g., Government
Accountability Office (GAO), States’
Collection and Use of Funds for
Wireless Enhanced 911 Services, GAO–
06–338 (March 2006); see also GAO,
Survey on State Wireless E911 Funds,
GAO–06–400sp (2006).
Recognizing the need for dedicated
funding of E–911 services, the
ENHANCE 911 Act was enacted ‘‘to
improve, enhance, and promote the
Nation’s homeland security, public
safety, and citizen activated emergency
response capabilities through the use of
enhanced 911 services, to further
upgrade Public Safety Answering Point
capabilities and related functions in
receiving E–911 calls, and to support
the construction and operation of a
ubiquitous and reliable citizen activated
system[.]’’ The Act directs NHTSA and
NTIA to establish a joint program to
facilitate coordination and
communications among stakeholders
and to provide grants for the
implementation and operation of E–911
services. The provisions of the Act
expire on October 1, 2009. 47 U.S.C.
942(f)(2).
Section 3011 of the Deficit Reduction
Act of 2005 (Pub. L. 109–171)
authorized $43.5 million to NTIA for the
implementation of the ENHANCE 911
Act, to be derived from the proceeds of
an auction of analog television
spectrum. Thereafter, the Implementing
Recommendations of the 9/11
Commission Act of 2007 (Pub. L. 110–
53), as amended by the Consolidated
Appropriations Act, 2008 (Pub. L. 110–
161), authorized NTIA to borrow up to
$43.5 million in advance of the
spectrum auction and directed the
agencies to allow a portion of the funds
to be used to give priority to grants that
are requested by PSAPs that are not
capable of receiving 911 calls for the
incremental costs of upgrading from
Phase I to Phase II compliance. The New
and Emergency Technologies 911
Improvement Act of 2008 (NET 911
Improvement Act) (Pub. L. 110–283)
recently amended the Act to permit
grant funds to be used for migration to
an IP-enabled emergency network.
The agencies are now issuing this
NPRM to implement the grant program.
II. Summary of the ENHANCE 911 Act
The ENHANCE 911 Act requires
NHTSA and NTIA to ‘‘establish a joint
E:\FR\FM\03OCP1.SGM
03OCP1
jlentini on PROD1PC65 with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 193 / Friday, October 3, 2008 / Proposed Rules
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 ‘‘create an E–911 Implementation
Coordination Office [ICO] * * *.’’ 47
U.S.C. 942(a)(1). The Act charges the
ICO with three tasks related to E–911
grant program administration.
Specifically, the Act requires the ICO to:
(1) Advise and assist eligible entities in
the preparation of plans required under
the Act for the coordination and
implementation of E–911 services; (2)
receive and review grant applications
and recommend approval or
disapproval; and (3) oversee the use of
grant funds in fulfilling implementation
plans. 47 U.S.C. 942(a)(3). The agencies
have centralized the grant-related
administrative functions of the ICO
within NHTSA.
The Act directs NHTSA and NTIA,
acting through the ICO and after
consultation with the Department of
Homeland Security and the Federal
Communications Commission, to
provide grants to eligible entities for the
implementation and operation of Phase
II E–911 services, as defined by FCC
regulations. 47 U.S.C. 942(b)(1). (Phase
II E–911 service refers to providing
PSAPs with the location of all 911 calls
by latitude and longitude within 50 to
300 meters depending on the type of
technology used. See 47 CFR 20.18.)
The Act was amended by the NET 911
Improvement Act to permit grant funds
to be used for migration to an IP-enabled
emergency network.
The Act directs the agencies to issue
joint implementing regulations
prescribing the criteria for selection for
grant awards after a 60-day public
comment period. 47 U.S.C. 942(b)(4).
The Act requires an applicant to certify
that it has coordinated its application
with the public safety answering points
located within the jurisdiction; that the
State has designated a single officer or
governmental body to serve as the
coordinator of implementation of E–911
services; that it has established a plan
for the coordination and
implementation of E–911 services; and
that it has integrated
telecommunications services involved
in the implementation and delivery of
Phase II E–911 services. 47 U.S.C.
942(b)(3).
In addition, the Act requires each
applicant to certify that no portion of
any designated E–911 charges imposed
by the State or other taxing jurisdiction
VerDate Aug<31>2005
18:05 Oct 02, 2008
Jkt 217001
within the State is being or will be
obligated or expended for any purpose
other than E–911 purposes during the
period at least 180 days immediately
preceding the date of the application
and continuing throughout the time
grant funds are available to the
applicant. 47 U.S.C. 942(c). The Act
imposes a penalty for providing false
information on a certification.
Specifically, an applicant providing
false information on a certification will
not be eligible to receive an E–911 grant,
must return any grant awarded during
the time that the certification is not
valid, and is ineligible to receive
subsequent E–911 grants. 47 U.S.C.
942(c)(4).
III. Proposed Regulations
As directed by the ENHANCE 911
Act, today’s notice sets forth
application, award and administrative
procedures to implement the E–911
grant program.
A. Definitions (47 CFR 400.2)
Generally, terms used in this part are
terms defined by the ENHANCE 911
Act. The NET 911 Improvement Act,
which amended the ENHANCE 911 Act
to allow grant funds to be used for
migration to an ‘‘IP-enabled emergency
network,’’ does not define that term. IP,
or Internet Protocol, is one method or
protocol by which data is sent from one
computer to another. See RFC 791,
‘‘Internet Protocol, DARPA Internet
Program Protocol Specification’’ (Sept.
1981), available at https://rfc.net/
rfc0791.html; see also STD 5 ‘‘Internet
Protocol, DARPA Internet Program
Protocol Specification’’ (Sept. 1981),
available at https://rfc.net/std0005.html.
Because the agencies believe that such
emergency communications should be
transmitted securely, the agencies
propose defining ‘‘IP-enabled
emergency network’’ as an emergency
communications network based on an
infrastructure allowing secured
transmission of data among computers
that use the Internet Protocol.
B. Who May Apply (47 CFR 400.3)
The ENHANCE 911 Act directs
NHTSA and NTIA to make grants to
‘‘eligible entities’’ for the
implementation and operation of Phase
II E–911 services. 47 U.S.C. 942(b)(1).
The Act defines an eligible entity as ‘‘a
State or local government or a tribal
organization’’ and includes ‘‘public
authorities, boards, commissions, and
similar bodies created by [a State or
local government or a tribal
organization] to provide E–911
services.’’ 47 U.S.C. 942(f)(3)(A), (B).
Based on this broad statutory definition,
PO 00000
Frm 00016
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
57569
the agencies estimate that such entities
number in the thousands. To minimize
administrative costs and to streamline
the grant process, the agencies propose
to permit only States to apply for grant
funds on behalf of all eligible entities
located within their borders. We believe
that this limitation on the number and
identity of applicants is also necessary
to properly address the certification
requirements under the Act, as States
are the only eligible entities capable of
certifying that their E–911 charges were
not diverted to other uses and capable
of designating a single officer or
governmental body to serve as the
coordinator of implementation of E–911
services. For purposes of this program,
a State includes any of the 50 United
States, the District of Columbia, Puerto
Rico, American Samoa, Guam, the
Northern Mariana Islands, and the U.S.
Virgin Islands.
The agencies also believe that the
amount of available grant funds
supports limiting the applicant pool to
States. While the Act authorizes a fiveyear grant program totaling $1.25 billion
($250 million per year), the amount
appropriated, on a one-time basis, was
only $43.5 million. The agencies believe
that $43.5 million would not have a
meaningful impact on E–911 services if
the funds were divided into small grants
among a large number of grantees.
Therefore, we believe that limiting the
applicant pool is necessary to ensure
that benefits are realized, and that States
are best positioned to make wise
resource deployment decisions within
their borders.
The agencies propose to require
assurances from States in their
applications to ensure adequate
participation by local governments,
tribal organizations, and PSAPs,
consistent with the Act. Specifically, the
State would be required to coordinate
its application with PSAPs and to
ensure that 90 percent of the grant funds
would be used for the direct benefit of
PSAPs. In addition, consistent with the
statute, the proposed regulation would
require States to identify the amount
designated for the benefit of PSAPs
without the capability to receive 911
calls or provide an explanation as to
why such designation is not practicable.
C. Application Requirements (47 CFR
400.4)
The proposed rule outlines the
requirements for States to apply for a
grant under this program. In order to
qualify to receive an E–911 grant, the
agencies propose that States must
submit an application containing the
following components: a State 911 plan,
a project budget, a supplementary
E:\FR\FM\03OCP1.SGM
03OCP1
57570
Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 193 / Friday, October 3, 2008 / Proposed Rules
jlentini on PROD1PC65 with PROPOSALS
project budget, designation of the State
E–911 Coordinator, and a certification of
compliance with statutory and
programmatic requirements. These
components are consistent with the
application requirements of the Uniform
Administrative Requirements for Grants
and Cooperative Agreements to State
and Local Governments. See 49 CFR
18.10; Office of Management and Budget
(OMB) Circular A–102.
1. State 911 Plan (47 CFR 400.4(a)(1))
The ENHANCE 911 Act requires
applicants to certify that they have
established a plan for the coordination
and implementation of E–911 services.
The agencies propose that States would
submit a State 911 Plan as part of their
application for a grant. As further
detailed below, the minimum
components of a State 911 plan would
incorporate the statutory provisions
related to coordination with PSAPs
within the State’s jurisdiction, giving
priority to communities without 911
capability, and the involvement of
integrated telecommunications service
providers in the implementation and
delivery of Phase II E–911 services or in
the migration to an IP-enabled
emergency network. In addition, a State
911 Plan would be required to provide
details about how the State intends to
employ technology to achieve
compliance with the FCC description of
Phase II E–911 services and/or how it
intends to migrate to an IP-enabled
emergency network.
The Act requires applicants to
coordinate their applications with
PSAPs within their jurisdiction. To
address this requirement, the agencies
propose that States would detail in the
State 911 Plan the steps they have taken
to coordinate their applications with
local governments, tribal organizations,
and PSAPs within their borders. We
believe that requiring States to
coordinate their applications with these
entities will ensure that the State 911
Plan takes into account the needs of
these stakeholders. To ensure that grant
funds are used predominantly where
their impact is most significant—in the
communities—the agencies propose
requiring States to demonstrate in the
State 911 Plan that at least 90 percent
of the grant funds will be used for the
direct benefit of PSAPs.
The Act directs the agencies to allow
a portion of the E–911 grant funds to be
used to give priority to PSAPs that were
not capable of receiving 911 as of
August 3, 2007. 47 U.S.C. 942(b)(4). To
effectuate this provision, the agencies
propose that States would identify in
their application the percentage of grant
funds that will be designated for those
VerDate Aug<31>2005
18:05 Oct 02, 2008
Jkt 217001
communities. The agencies are stopping
short of proposing this as an absolute
requirement, however. Based on the
amount of grant funds available, we
recognize that such a designation may
not always be practicable for efficient
use of the limited funds. Therefore, if
the State chooses not to so designate a
portion of the funds, the State would be
required to provide an explanation. The
agencies believe that the States are best
situated to make these difficult resource
decisions.
The proposed regulation also would
require that the State 911 plan describe
how the State has integrated
telecommunications service providers
involved in the implementation and
delivery of Phase II E–911 services and
in the migration to an IP-enabled
emergency network. 47 U.S.C.
942(b)(3)(A)(iv). The term ‘‘integrated
telecommunications service providers’’
refers to local exchange carriers,
wireless carriers and Internet Protocol
(IP)-enabled voice service providers. It
is necessary to detail how integrated
telecommunications service providers
are involved in the State 911 Plan
because they provide essential network
functions for consumer delivery of E–
911 services.
The agencies also propose that States
describe in the State 911 Plan how they
plan to use technology to allow a PSAP
to meet the functionality required by the
FCC’s description of Phase II E–911
services or to migrate to an IP-enabled
emergency network. Such an approach
is consistent with the Act’s citation to
47 CFR 20.18 of the FCC’s regulations
for the meaning of Phase II E–911
services. 47 U.S.C. 942(f)(5). According
to 47 CFR 20.18, Phase II E–911 services
are described as location information of
all 911 calls by longitude and latitude
with a specific degree of accuracy. For
States interested in using grant funds to
migrate to an IP-enabled emergency
network, the agencies propose that
States provide details about how the
State intends to employ technology
toward that end.
Finally, because the level of Phase II
E–911 services and IP-enabled
emergency networks differs significantly
from State to State, the agencies propose
that States establish performance
metrics and timelines for grant project
implementation, subject to the ICO’s
review and the agencies’ approval.
2. Project Budget (47 CFR 400.4(a)(2);
Appendix A)
The agencies propose that a State
would submit a project budget for the
projects and activities that it seeks to
fund with E–911 grant funds and the
required State matching funds. See 49
PO 00000
Frm 00017
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
CFR 18.10; OMB Circular A–102.
Elsewhere in this notice, the agencies
propose to distribute grant funds based
on a formula. See discussion under
Section III.E., below. Based on that
proposed formula, we have identified in
an appendix to this part the minimum
award each State would receive if all
States qualified for a grant. A State’s
project budget would need to account
for all funds (those identified in
Appendix A for the State and State
matching funds) in describing the
projects or activities for which it seeks
funding, and describe the non-Federal
sources that will fund 50 percent of the
cost. The non-Federal sources must be
consistent with the requirements set out
in the matching provision of 49 CFR
part 18, DOT’s implementation of the
government-wide common grant rule for
State and local governments. As
provided in 48 U.S.C. 1469a, the
requirement for non-Federal matching
funds under $200,000 (including inkind contributions) is waived for the
Territorial governments in American
Samoa, Guam, the Northern Mariana
Islands, and the U.S. Virgin Islands.
3. Supplemental Project Budget (47 CFR
400.4(a)(3))
It is possible that some States may
choose not to apply or may not qualify
for an E–911 grant because they are
unable to make the required
certifications. To address these
contingencies, the agencies propose to
distribute all remaining available funds
to the pool of qualifying grant
recipients, in accordance with the same
formula used for the initial distribution.
See discussion under Section III.E.,
below. In order to expedite the award of
these grant funds, the agencies propose
that States would include a
supplemental project budget in
anticipation of the potential availability
of additional grant funds. Specifically,
the agencies propose that States identify
in their supplemental project budget the
maximum amount that the State would
be able to match from non-Federal
sources and include proposed projects
or activities for those grant and
matching funds, up to the same total
amount and to the same level of detail
as required for the project budget under
proposed § 400.4(a)(2). The agencies
propose that the supplemental project
budget meet the same requirements
identified for the project budget in
§ 400.4(a)(2) and be consistent with the
State 911 Plan in § 400.4(a)(1).
E:\FR\FM\03OCP1.SGM
03OCP1
Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 193 / Friday, October 3, 2008 / Proposed Rules
jlentini on PROD1PC65 with PROPOSALS
4. Designated E–911 Coordinator (47
CFR 400.4(a)(4); Appendix B; Appendix
C)
The Act requires States to designate a
single officer or governmental body to
serve as the coordinator of
implementation of E–911 services. 47
U.S.C. 942(b)(3)(A)(ii). To implement
this provision, the agencies propose that
this officer or governmental body would
be designated by the Governor, and that
the State would document the
designation of the E–911 Coordinator by
the Governor through the use of a
certification. See discussion under the
next heading. We are identifying the E–
911 Coordinator as the proposed
certifying official on the certifications.
In the event that a governmental body
is designated as the State’s E–911
Coordinator, the agencies propose that
States affirmatively identify an official
representative of the governmental body
to serve as the certifying official on the
certifications. The agencies also propose
that the State notify NHTSA in writing
within 30 days of a change in
appointment of the E–911 Coordinator.
The E–911 Coordinator would act as the
liaison between the agencies and the
State.
5. Certifications (47 CFR 400.4(a)(5);
Appendix B; Appendix C)
The Act requires applicants to certify
that they meet certain conditions to
qualify for a grant. An applicant must
certify that it has: (1) Coordinated its
application with the PSAPs located
within the jurisdiction; (2) designated a
single officer or government body to
serve as the E–911 Coordinator; (3)
established a plan for the coordination
and implementation of E–911 services;
and (4) integrated telecommunications
involved in the implementation and
delivery of Phase II E–911 services. 47
U.S.C. 942(b)(3). The Act also requires
that applicants certify at the time of
application and annually thereafter that
no portion of any designated E–911
charges imposed by the State or other
taxing jurisdiction within the State is
being diverted for any other purpose
during the period at least 180 days
before the application date and
continuing throughout the period of
time for which grant funds are available.
47 U.S.C. 942(c). To meet these statutory
requirements, the agencies propose that
States submit a certification as part of
their application. To meet the statutory
requirement for annual certification
concerning the diversion of funds, the
agencies propose that States submit an
annual certification 30 days after the
end of each fiscal year. (In this annual
certification, States would also certify
VerDate Aug<31>2005
18:05 Oct 02, 2008
Jkt 217001
that they have appointed a single officer
or governmental body as the E–911
Coordinator.)
The agencies also propose that States
would certify that they have
coordinated their application with local
governments, tribal organizations, and
PSAPs, and certify that at least 90
percent of the grant funds will be used
for the direct benefit of PSAPs. While
these certifications go beyond those
required by the statute, we believe they
will help to ensure that the intent and
purposes of the Act are met. Finally, as
discussed under the previous heading,
the agencies propose that States would
certify that the Governor has appointed
a single officer or governmental body to
serve as the E–911 Coordinator. The
agencies have set forth the proposed
certifications in appendices to the
NPRM.
6. Due Date (47 CFR 400.4(b))
The agencies’ proposal establishes an
application due date of 60 days after
publication of the final rule in the
Federal Register. This proposed date
balances the need to provide the States
appropriate time to prepare proposals
with the agencies’ need for review time
prior to award, taking into account that
awards must be made by September 30,
2009.
D. Approval and Award (47 CFR 400.5)
The Act established the ICO to
receive, review and recommend the
approval or disapproval of applications
for grants. 47 U.S.C. 942(a)(3)(D). The
agencies’ proposal incorporates this
statutory requirement, and would allow
the ICO, upon review of a State’s
application, to request additional
information from the State prior to
making a determination of award in
order to clarify compliance with the
statutory and programmatic
requirements. As provided by statute,
the Administrator of NHTSA and the
Assistant Secretary for Communications
and Information of the Department of
Commerce will jointly approve and
announce grant award recipients. The
proposal specifies that this approval
will be in writing.
E. Distribution of Grant Funds (47 CFR
400.6; Appendix A)
The ENHANCE 911 Act does not
specify how the grants are to be
awarded. In order to distribute grant
funds on an equitable and
administratively expedient basis for this
one-time grant program, the agencies
propose to distribute grants to States in
accordance with a formula. Specifically,
the agencies propose to distribute grant
funds as follows: (1) 50 percent in the
PO 00000
Frm 00018
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
57571
ratio which the population of each State
bears to the total population of all the
States, as shown by the latest available
Federal census, and (2) 50 percent in the
ratio which the public road mileage in
each State bears to the total public road
mileage in all States, as shown by the
latest available Federal Highway
Administration data.
However, we believe that a strict
application of the formula would result
in many jurisdictions receiving too few
funds to make any meaningful progress
in deploying Phase II technologies or
migrating to an IP-based emergency
network. Accordingly, the agencies
propose to modify the formula to
distribute a minimum of $500,000 to
each State, except that the four
territories—American Samoa, Guam, the
Northern Mariana Islands, and the
Virgin Islands—would each receive a
minimum of $250,000. The agencies
believe that a lower minimum amount
for these four territories is equitable and
appropriate due to their vastly lower
populations and road miles. The
agencies have applied the formula to the
total grant funds available ($41,325,000,
after deduction of the five percent for
administering the grant program) and
calculated the minimum amounts that
each State would receive if all States
applied for and qualified for a grant
award. See Appendix A to this part.
As discussed under Section III.C.3, it
is possible that some States may not
apply for grant funds or may not qualify
for grant funds because they cannot
make the required certifications. To
address this possibility, the agencies
propose to redistribute any remaining
grant funds to those States that have
qualified for grant funds and have
submitted supplemental project budgets
as described in proposed § 400.4(a)(3).
The agencies propose to distribute these
funds in accordance with the same
formula discussed above.
F. Eligible Uses for Grant Funds (47 CFR
400.7)
The ENHANCE 911 Act provides that
the grants are intended for the
implementation and operation of Phase
II E–911 services or for migration to an
IP-enabled emergency network. To
implement this requirement, the
agencies propose that grant funds and
matching funds be used either for the
acquisition and deployment of hardware
and software that enables compliance
with Phase II E–911 services or that
enables migration to an IP-enabled
emergency network, or for training in
the use of such hardware and software.
The agencies believe that limiting grant
funds to these identified uses will
maximize progress toward
E:\FR\FM\03OCP1.SGM
03OCP1
57572
Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 193 / Friday, October 3, 2008 / Proposed Rules
implementing Phase II E–911 services
and IP-enabled 911 services, and would
best effectuate the purposes of the Act.
G. Non-Compliance (47 CFR 400.8)
The Act requires that grant funds be
returned to the government if a State
makes a false certification concerning
the diversion of E–911 charges. 47
U.S.C. 942(c)(4). The proposal
incorporates this statutory requirement.
H. Financial and Administrative
Requirements (47 CFR 400.9)
The agencies’ proposal specifies that
the requirements of 49 CFR part 18,
DOT’s implementation of the
government-wide common grant rule for
State and local governments, including
applicable cost principles in circulars of
the Office of Management and Budget,
will apply to E–911 grants. In addition,
the agencies propose that grant
recipients submit annual performance
reports and quarterly financial reports,
following the procedures of 49 CFR
18.40 and 18.41, respectively.
I. Closeout (47 CFR 400.10)
The Act provides that enhanced 911
is a national priority. To effectuate the
Act’s intent, the agencies believe that
the States should use grant funds in an
expeditious manner to implement E–
911 services in their communities.
According to industry estimates,
upgrading the average PSAP takes
approximately three years. Accordingly,
the agencies propose that the total
duration of the grant program be three
years. The agencies also propose that
grant recipients submit a final voucher
for costs incurred within 90 days after
the completion of projects and activities
funded under this part, but in no event
later than three years after grant award.
Finally, the proposal specifies that the
final reporting requirements of 49 CFR
18.50 would apply to E–911 grants, and
that any funds remaining unexpended at
the end of fiscal year 2012 will no
longer be available to the State and must
be returned to the government.
jlentini on PROD1PC65 with PROPOSALS
IV. Public Participation
A. How do I prepare and submit
comments?
Your comments must be written and
in English. To ensure that your
comments are correctly filed in the
Docket, please include the docket
number of this document in your
comments.
Your primary comments must not be
more than 15 pages long. 49 CFR 553.21.
However, you may attach additional
documents to your primary comments.
There is no limit on the length of the
attachments.
VerDate Aug<31>2005
18:05 Oct 02, 2008
Jkt 217001
Please submit two copies of your
comments, including the attachments,
to Docket Management at the address
given above under ADDRESSES.
Comments may also be submitted to
the docket electronically on the Federal
eRulemaking Portal at https://
www.regulations.gov. Follow the online
instructions for submitting comments.
B. How can I be sure my comments were
received?
If you wish Docket Management to
notify you upon its receipt of your
comments, enclose a self-addressed,
stamped postcard in the envelope
containing your comments. Upon
receiving your comments, Docket
Management will return the postcard by
mail.
C. Will the agencies consider late
comments?
We will consider all comments that
Docket Management receives before the
close of business on the comment
closing date indicated above under
DATES. To the extent possible, we will
also consider comments that Docket
Management receives after that date.
D. How can I read the comments
submitted by other people?
You may read the comments received
by the Docket Management at the
address given under ADDRESSES. The
hours of the Docket are indicated above
in the same location. To read the
comments on the Internet, go to
https://www.regulations.gov. Follow the
online instructions for accessing the
docket.
Please note that even after the
comment closing date, we will continue
to file relevant information on the
docket as it becomes available. Further,
some people may submit late comments.
Accordingly, we recommend that you
periodically check the docket for new
material.
V. Statutory Basis for This Action
The agencies’ proposal would
implement the grant program created by
section 104 of the ENHANCE 911 Act of
2004, as amended (Pub. L. 108–494,
codified at 47 U.S.C. 942), which
requires the Administrator and the
Assistant Secretary to issue joint
implementing regulations prescribing
the criteria for grant awards.
VI. Regulatory Analyses and Notices
A. Executive Order 12866 and
Regulatory Policies and Procedures
Executive Order 12866, ‘‘Regulatory
Planning and Review,’’ provides for
making determinations whether a
regulatory action is ‘‘significant’’ and
PO 00000
Frm 00019
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
therefore subject to OMB review and to
the requirements of the Executive Order.
58 FR 51735, Oct. 4, 1993. The Order
defines a ‘‘significant regulatory action’’
as one that is likely to result in a rule
that may:
(1) Have an annual effect on the
economy of $100 million or more or
adversely affect in a material way the
economy, a sector of the economy,
productivity, competition, jobs, the
environment, public health or safety, or
State, local, or Tribal governments or
communities;
(2) Create a serious inconsistency or
otherwise interfere with an action taken
or planned by another agency;
(3) Materially alter the budgetary
impact of entitlements, grants, user fees,
or loan programs or the rights and
obligations of recipients thereof; or
(4) Raise novel legal or policy issues
arising out of legal mandates, the
President’s priorities, or the principles
set forth in the Executive Order.
This rulemaking document was not
reviewed by the Office of Management
and Budget under Executive Order
12866. The rulemaking action is not
considered to be significant within the
meaning of Executive Order 12866 or
the agencies’ regulatory policies and
procedures.
The agencies’ proposal would not
affect amounts over the significance
threshold of $100 million each year. The
proposal sets forth application
procedures and showings to be made to
be eligible for a grant. The funds to be
distributed under the procedures
developed in the proposal total $43.5
million, well below the annual
threshold of $100 million. The agencies’
proposal would not adversely affect in
a material way the economy, a sector of
the economy, productivity, competition,
jobs, the environment, public health or
safety, or State, local, or Tribal
governments or communities. The
agencies’ proposal would not create an
inconsistency or interfere with any
actions taken or planned by other
agencies. The agencies’ proposal would
not materially alter the budgetary
impact of entitlements, grants, user fees,
or loan programs or the rights and
obligations of recipients thereof. Finally,
the agencies’ proposal would not raise
novel legal or policy issues arising out
of legal mandates, the President’s
priorities, or the principles set forth in
the Executive Order.
In consideration of the foregoing, the
agencies have determined that if it is
made final, this rulemaking action
would not be economically significant.
The impacts of the rule would be so
minimal that a full regulatory evaluation
is not required.
E:\FR\FM\03OCP1.SGM
03OCP1
Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 193 / Friday, October 3, 2008 / Proposed Rules
B. Regulatory Flexibility Act
Pursuant to the Regulatory Flexibility
Act, whenever an agency publishes a
notice of rulemaking for any proposed
or final rule, it must prepare and make
available for public comment a
regulatory flexibility analysis that
describes the effect of the rule on small
entities (i.e., small businesses, small
organizations, and small governmental
jurisdictions). 5 U.S.C. 601 et seq. The
Small Business Administration’s
regulations at 13 CFR part 121 define a
small business, in part, as a business
entity ‘‘which operates primarily within
the United States.’’ 13 CFR 121.105(a).
No regulatory flexibility analysis is
required if the head of an agency
certifies the rulemaking action would
not have a significant economic impact
on a substantial number of small
entities. SBREFA amended the
Regulatory Flexibility Act to require
Federal agencies to provide a statement
of the factual basis for certifying that an
action would not have a significant
economic impact on a substantial
number of small entities.
NHTSA and NTIA have considered
the effects of this proposal under the
Regulatory Flexibility Act. States are the
recipients of funds awarded under the
section 2010 program and they are not
considered to be small entities under
the Regulatory Flexibility Act.
Therefore, we certify that this notice of
proposed rulemaking would not have a
significant economic impact on a
substantial number of small entities.
jlentini on PROD1PC65 with PROPOSALS
C. Executive Order 13132 (Federalism)
Executive Order 13132, ‘‘Federalism,’’
requires NHTSA and NTIA to develop
an accountable process to ensure
‘‘meaningful and timely input by State
and local officials in the development of
regulatory policies that have federalism
implications.’’ 64 FR 43255, Aug. 10,
1999. ‘‘Policies that have federalism
implications’’ are defined in the
Executive Order to include regulations
that have ‘‘substantial direct effects on
the States, on the relationship between
the national government and the States,
or on the distribution of power and
responsibilities among the various
levels of government.’’ Under Executive
Order 13132, an agency may not issue
a regulation with Federalism
implications that imposes substantial
direct compliance costs and that is not
required by statute unless the Federal
government provides the funds
necessary to pay the direct compliance
costs incurred by State and local
governments or the agency consults
with State and local governments in the
process of developing the proposed
VerDate Aug<31>2005
18:05 Oct 02, 2008
Jkt 217001
regulation. An agency also may not
issue a regulation with Federalism
implications that preempts a State law
without consulting with State and local
officials.
The agencies have analyzed this
rulemaking action in accordance with
the principles and criteria set forth in
Executive Order 13132, and have
determined that this proposed rule
would not have Federalism implications
as defined in the order.
D. Executive Order 12988 (Civil Justice
Reform)
Pursuant to Executive Order 12988,
‘‘Civil Justice Reform,’’ the agencies
have considered whether this
rulemaking would have any retroactive
effect. 61 FR 4729, Feb. 7, 1996. This
rulemaking action would not have any
retroactive effect. This action meets
applicable standards in sections 3(a)
and 3(b)(2) of Executive Order 12988,
Civil Justice Reform, to minimize
litigation, eliminate ambiguity, and
reduce burden.
E. Paperwork Reduction Act
Under the Paperwork Reduction Act
of 1995, a person is not required to
respond to a collection of information
by a Federal agency unless the
collection displays a valid Office of
Management and Budget (OMB) control
number. This NPRM, if made final,
would result in a new collection of
information that would require OMB
clearance pursuant to 5 CFR part 1320.
Before an agency submits a proposed
collection of information to OMB for
approval, it must first publish a
document in the Federal Register
providing a 60-day comment period and
otherwise consult with members of the
public and affected agencies concerning
each proposed collection of information.
OMB has promulgated regulations
describing what must be included in
such a document. Under OMB’s
regulation (at 5 CFR 1320.8(d)), an
agency must ask for public comment on
the following:
(i) Whether the proposed collection of
information is necessary for the proper
performance of the functions of the
agency, including whether the
information will have practical utility;
(ii) The accuracy of the agency’s
estimate of the burden of the proposed
collections of information, including the
validity of the methodology and
assumptions used;
(iii) How to enhance the quality,
utility, and clarity of the information to
be collected;
(iv) How to minimize the burden of
the collections of information on those
who are to respond, including the use
PO 00000
Frm 00020
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
57573
of appropriate automated, electronic,
mechanical, or other technological
collection techniques or other forms of
information technology, e.g., permitting
electronic submission of responses.
In compliance with these requirements,
the agencies ask for public comments on
the following proposed collections of
information:
Title: E–911 Grant Program.
OMB Control Number: N/A
Requested Expiration Date of
Approval: Three years from the
approval date.
Type of Request: New collection.
Affected Public: State Governments
Form Number: N/A
Abstract: The Ensuring Needed Help
Arrives Near Callers Employing 911
(ENHANCE 911) Act of 2004 (Pub. L.
108–494, codified at 47 U.S.C. 942)
authorizes a joint grant program
between the National Highway Traffic
Safety Administration (NHTSA) of the
U.S. Department of Transportation and
the National Telecommunications and
Information Administration (NTIA) of
the Department of Commerce to
facilitate coordination among all parties
involved in the organization of E–911
services.
The Act requires an applicant to
certify to several conditions in its
application in order to qualify for a
grant. Specifically, an applicant must
certify that (1) it has coordinated its
application with the public safety
answering points (PSAP’s); (2) it has
designated a single officer or
governmental body to serve as the
coordinator of implementation of E–911
services; (3) it has established a plan for
the coordination of and implementation
of E–911 services; (4) it has integrated
telecommunications services involved
in the implementation of E–911
services; and (5) no portion of any
designated E–911 charges imposed by
the State or other taxing jurisdiction
within the State is being diverted for
any other purpose during the period at
least 180 days before the application
date and continuing throughout the
period of time for which grant funds are
available. In addition, the Act requires
grantees to match at least 50 percent
from non-Federal sources.
The information collected for this
grant program is to include an
application consisting of a State 911
Plan, project budget information and
certifications. This information is
necessary to determine whether a State
satisfies the criteria for a grant award.
In a Federal Register document
published on March 11, 2008, NHTSA
sought public comment on a proposed
collection of information for the E–911
E:\FR\FM\03OCP1.SGM
03OCP1
57574
Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 193 / Friday, October 3, 2008 / Proposed Rules
jlentini on PROD1PC65 with PROPOSALS
grant program. See 73 FR 13068. In that
notice, NHTSA inadvertently identified
HS–217 (Highway Safety Program Cost
Summary) for submission in the
application instead of SF–424
(Application for Federal Assistance),
including SF–424a and SF–424b, which
have been approved by OMB. The
agencies intend to use the SF–424 forms
as part of the application for the E–911
grant program. Accordingly, the
agencies are not required to obtain OMB
approval for the use of these forms.
A State must also submit a State 911
Plan as part of its application. This plan
must detail the projects and activities
proposed to be funded for the
implementation of Phase II E–911
services or migration to an IP-enabled
emergency network, establish metrics
and a time table for grant
implementation, and describe the steps
that the State has take to meet the grant
criteria. It is important for the agencies
to review each applicant’s plan to
confirm that the applicant has met
certain statutory requirements—a plan
for the coordination of and
implementation of E–911 services,
coordination of its application with
PSAPs, involvement of integrated
telecommunications services in the
implementation of E–911 services, and
priority funding to communities
without 911 capability.
Estimated Annual Burden: 2240 hours
(for State 911 plans).
Estimated Number of Respondents: 56
(50 States, District of Columbia, Puerto
Rico, American Samoa, Guam, the
Northern Mariana Islands, and the U.S.
Virgin Islands).
Comments are invited on: Whether
the proposed collection of information
is necessary for the proper performance
of the functions of the agencies,
including whether the information will
have practical utility; the accuracy of
the agencies’ estimate of the burden of
the proposed information collection;
ways to enhance the quality, utility and
clarity of the information to be
collected; and ways to minimize the
burden of the collection of information
on respondents, including the use of
automated collection techniques or
other forms of information technology.
Comments must refer to the docket and
notice numbers cited at the beginning of
this NPRM and be submitted to one of
the addresses identified at the beginning
of this NPRM.
F. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act
Section 202 of the Unfunded
Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (UMRA)
requires Federal agencies to prepare a
written assessment of the costs, benefits,
and other effects of proposed or final
VerDate Aug<31>2005
18:05 Oct 02, 2008
Jkt 217001
rules that include a Federal mandate
likely to result in the expenditure by
State, local, or tribal governments, in the
aggregate, or by the private sector, of
more than $100 million annually. This
proposed rule would not meet the
definition of a Federal mandate because
the resulting annual State expenditures
would not exceed the $100 million
threshold. The program is voluntary and
States that choose to apply and qualify
would receive grant funds.
G. National Environmental Policy Act
NHTSA and NTIA have reviewed this
rulemaking action for the purposes of
the National Environmental Policy Act.
The agencies have determined that this
proposal would not have a significant
impact on the quality of the human
environment.
H. Executive Order 13175 (Consultation
and Coordination With Indian Tribes)
The agencies have analyzed this
proposed rule under Executive Order
13175, and have determined that the
proposed action would not have a
substantial direct effect on one or more
Indian tribes, would not impose
substantial direct compliance costs on
Indian tribal governments, and would
not preempt tribal law. Therefore, a
tribal summary impact statement is not
required.
I. Regulatory Identifier Number (RIN)
The Department of Transportation
assigns a regulation identifier number
(RIN) to each regulatory action listed in
the Unified Agenda of Federal
Regulations. The Regulatory Information
Service Center publishes the Unified
Agenda in April and October of each
year. You may use the RIN contained in
the heading at the beginning of this
document to find this action in the
Unified Agenda.
J. Privacy Act
Please note that anyone is able to
search the electronic form of all
comments received into any of our
dockets by the name of the individual
submitting the comment (or signing the
comment, if submitted on behalf of an
association, business, labor union, etc.).
You may review DOT’s complete
Privacy Act Statement in the Federal
Register. 65 FR 19477, Apr. 11, 2000.
List of Subjects in 47 CFR Part 400
Grant programs, Telecommunications,
Emergency response capabilities (911).
In consideration of the foregoing, the
National Highway Traffic Safety
Administration, Department of
Transportation, and the National
Telecommunications and Information
PO 00000
Frm 00021
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
Administration, Department of
Commerce propose to establish a new
Chapter IV consisting of Part 400 in
Title 47 of the Code of Federal
Regulations to read as follows:
CHAPTER IV—NATIONAL
TELECOMMUNICATIONS AND
INFORMATION ADMINISTRATION,
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE, AND
NATIONAL HIGHWAY TRAFFIC SAFETY
ADMINISTRATION, DEPARTMENT OF
TRANSPORTATION
PART 400—E–911 GRANT PROGRAM
Sec.
400.1 Purpose.
400.2 Definitions.
400.3 Who may apply.
400.4 Application requirements.
400.5 Approval and award.
400.6 Distribution of grant funds.
400.7 Eligible uses for grant funds.
400.8 Non-compliance.
400.9 Financial and administrative
requirements.
400.10 Closeout.
Appendix A to Part 400: Minimum Grant
Awards Available to Qualifying States
Appendix B to Part 400: Certification for E–
911 Grant Applicants
Appendix C to Part 400: Annual Certification
for E–911 Grant Recipients
Authority: 47 U.S.C. 942.
§ 400.1
Purpose.
This part establishes uniform
application, approval, award, financial
and administrative requirements for the
grant program authorized under the
‘‘Ensuring Needed Help Arrives Near
Callers Employing 911 Act of 2004’’
(ENHANCE 911 Act), as amended.
§ 400.2
Definitions.
As used in this part—
Administrator means the
Administrator of the National Highway
Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA),
U.S. Department of Transportation.
Assistant Secretary means the
Assistant Secretary for Communications
and Information, U.S. Department of
Commerce, and Administrator of the
National Telecommunications and
Information Administration (NTIA).
Designated E–911 charges mean 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.
E–911 Coordinator means a single
officer or governmental body of the
State that is responsible for
implementing E–911 services in the
State.
E–911 services mean both phase I and
phase II enhanced 911 services, as
described in 47 CFR 20.18.
Eligible entity means a State or local
government or tribal organization,
E:\FR\FM\03OCP1.SGM
03OCP1
Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 193 / Friday, October 3, 2008 / Proposed Rules
including public authorities, boards,
commissions, and similar bodies created
by such governmental entities to
provided E–911 services.
ICO means the National E–911
Implementation Coordination Office
established under 47 U.S.C. 942 for the
administration of the E–911 grant
program, located at the National
Highway Traffic Safety Administration,
U.S. Department of Transportation, 1200
New Jersey Avenue, SE., NTI–140,
Washington, DC 20590.
IP-enabled emergency network means
an emergency communications network
based on an infrastructure allowing
secured transmission of data among
computers that use the Internet
Protocol.
Phase II E–911 services mean phase II
enhanced 911 services, as described
in47 CFR 20.18.
PSAP means a public safety
answering point, a facility that has been
designated to receive emergency calls
and route them to emergency personnel.
State includes any State of the United
States, the District of Columbia, Puerto
Rico, American Samoa, Guam, the
Northern Mariana Islands, and the U.S.
Virgin Islands.
§ 400.3
Who may apply.
In order to apply for a grant under this
part, an applicant must be a State
applying on behalf of all eligible entities
within its jurisdiction.
jlentini on PROD1PC65 with PROPOSALS
§ 400.4
Application requirements.
(a) Contents. A State’s application for
funds for the E–911 grant program must
consist of the following components:
(1) State 911 Plan. A plan that details
the projects and activities proposed to
be funded for the implementation and
operation of Phase II E–911 services or
migration to an IP-enabled emergency
network, establishes metrics and a time
table for grant implementation, and
describes the steps the State has taken
to—
(i) Coordinate its application with
local governments, tribal organizations,
and PSAPs within the State;
(ii) Ensure that at least 90 percent of
the grant funds will be used for the
direct benefit of PSAPs;
(iii) Give priority to communities
without 911 capability as of August 3,
2007 to establish Phase II coverage by
identifying the percentage of grant funds
designated for those communities or
providing an explanation why such
designation would not be practicable in
successfully accomplishing the
purposes of the grant;
(iv) Involve integrated
telecommunications services in the
implementation and delivery of Phase II
VerDate Aug<31>2005
18:05 Oct 02, 2008
Jkt 217001
E–911 services or in the migration to an
IP-enabled emergency network; and
(v) Employ the use of technologies to
achieve compliance with Phase II E–911
services or for migration to an IPenabled emergency network.
(2) Project budget. A project budget
for all proposed projects and activities
to be funded by the grant funds
identified for the State in Appendix A
to this part and matching funds.
Specifically, for each project or activity,
the State must:
(i) Demonstrate that the project or
activity meets the eligible use
requirement in § 400.7; and
(ii) Identify the non-Federal sources,
which meet the requirements of49 CFR
18.24, that will fund at least 50 percent
of the cost; except that as provided in
48 U.S.C. 1469a, the requirement for
non-Federal matching funds (including
in-kind contributions) is waived for
American Samoa, Guam, the Northern
Mariana Islands, and the U.S. Virgin
Islands for grant amounts up to
$200,000.
(3) Supplemental project budget. To
be eligible for additional grant funds
that may become available in
accordance with § 400.6, a State must
submit, with its application, a
supplemental project budget that
identifies the maximum dollar amount
the State is able to match from nonFederal sources meeting the
requirements of 49 CFR 18.24, and
includes projects or activities for those
grant and matching amounts, up to the
total amount in the project budget
submitted under paragraph (a)(2) of this
section. This information must be
provided to the same level of detail as
required under paragraph (a)(2) of this
section and be consistent with the State
911 Plan required under paragraph
(a)(1) of this section.
(4) Designated E–911 Coordinator.
The identification of a single officer or
government body appointed by the
Governor of the State to serve as the E–
911 Coordinator of implementation of
E–911 services and to sign the
certifications required under this part. If
the Governor appoints a governmental
body to serve as the E–911 Coordinator,
an official representative of the
governmental body shall be identified to
sign the certifications for the E–911
Coordinator. The State must notify
NHTSA in writing within 30 days of any
change in appointment of the E–911
Coordinator.
(5) Certifications.
(i) The certification in Appendix B to
this part, signed by the E–911
Coordinator, certifying that the State has
complied with the required statutory
and programmatic conditions in
PO 00000
Frm 00022
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
57575
submitting its application, including
that the State and all other taxing
jurisdictions within the State have not,
during the time period 180 days
preceding the application date, diverted
any portion of designated E–911 charges
imposed by the State or any other taxing
jurisdiction within the State to any
purpose other than the purposes for
which such charges are designated, and
will not do so throughout the time
period during which grant funds are
available.
(ii) Submitted on an annual basis 30
days after the end of each fiscal year
during which grant funds are available,
the certification in Appendix C to this
part, signed by the E–911 Coordinator,
making the same certification as
required under paragraph (a)(5)(i) of this
section concerning the diversion of
designated E–911 charges.
(b) Due date. The State must submit
the application documents identified in
this section so that they are received by
the ICO no later than 60 days after
publication of the Final Rule in the
Federal Register. Failure to meet this
deadline will preclude the State from
receiving consideration for an E–911
grant award.
§ 400.5
Approval and award.
(a) The ICO will review each
application for compliance with the
requirements of this part.
(b) The ICO may request additional
information from the State, with respect
to any of the application submission
requirements of § 400.4, prior to making
a determination of award.
(c) The Administrator and Assistant
Secretary will jointly approve and
announce, in writing, grant awards to
qualifying States no later than
September 30, 2009.
§ 400.6
Distribution of grant funds.
(a) Initial distribution. Subject to
paragraph (b) of this section, grant funds
for each State that meets the
requirements in § 400.4 will be
distributed—
(1) 50 percent in the ratio which the
population of the State bears to the total
population of all the States, as shown by
the latest available Federal census; and
(2) 50 percent in the ratio which the
public road mileage in each State bears
to the total public road mileage in all
States, as shown by the latest available
Federal Highway Administration data.
(b) Minimum distribution. The
distribution to each qualifying State
under paragraph (a) of this section shall
not be less than $500,000, except that
the distribution to American Samoa,
Guam, the Northern Mariana Islands,
E:\FR\FM\03OCP1.SGM
03OCP1
57576
Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 193 / Friday, October 3, 2008 / Proposed Rules
and the U.S. Virgin Islands shall not be
less than $250,000.
(c) Supplemental distribution. Grant
funds that are not distributed under
paragraph (a) of this section will be
redistributed among qualifying States
that have met the requirements of
§ 400.4, including the submission of a
supplemental project budget as
provided § 400.4(a)(3), in accordance
with the formula in paragraph (a) of this
section.
§ 400.7
Eligible uses for grant funds.
Grant funds awarded under this part
may be used only for the acquisition
and deployment of hardware and
software that enables the
implementation and operation of Phase
II E–911 services, for the acquisition and
deployment of hardware and software to
enable the migration to an IP-enabled
emergency network, or for the training
in the use of such hardware and
software, provided such uses have been
identified in the State 911 Plan.
§ 400.8
Non-compliance.
In accordance with 49 U.S.C. 942(c),
where a State provides false or
inaccurate information in its
certification related to the diversion of
E–911 charges, the State shall be
required to return all grant funds
awarded under this part.
§ 400.9 Financial and administrative
requirements.
jlentini on PROD1PC65 with PROPOSALS
(a) General. The requirements of 49
CFR part 18, the Uniform
Administrative Requirements for Grants
and Cooperative Agreements to State
and Local Governments, including
applicable cost principles referenced at
49 CFR 18.22, govern the
implementation and management of
grants awarded under this part.
(b) Reporting requirements.
(1) Performance reports. Each grant
recipient shall submit an annual
performance report to NHTSA,
following the procedures of 49 CFR
18.40, within 90 days after each fiscal
year that grant funds are available,
VerDate Aug<31>2005
18:05 Oct 02, 2008
Jkt 217001
except when a final report is required
under § 400.10(b)(ii).
(2) Financial reports. Each grant
recipient shall submit quarterly
financial reports to NHTSA, following
the procedures of 49 CFR 18.41, within
30 days after each fiscal quarter that
grant funds are available, except when
a final voucher is required under
§ 400.10(b)(i).
§ 400.10
Closeout
(a) Expiration of the right to incur
costs. The right to incur costs under this
part expires on September 30, 2012. The
State and its subgrantees and
contractors may not incur costs for
Federal reimbursement past the
expiration date.
(b) Final submissions. Within 90 days
after the completion of projects and
activities funded under this part, but in
no event later than the expiration date
identified in paragraph (a) of this
section, each grant recipient must
submit—
(i) A final voucher for the costs
incurred. The final voucher constitutes
the final financial reconciliation for the
grant award.
(ii) A final report to NHTSA,
following the procedures of 49 CFR
18.50(b).
(c) Disposition of unexpended
balances. Any funds that remain
unexpended by the end of fiscal year
2012 shall cease to be available to the
State and shall be returned to the
government.
Appendix A to Part 400
MINIMUM GRANT AWARDS AVAILABLE
TO QUALIFYING STATES
Minimum E–911
grant award
State name
Alabama ............................
Alaska ...............................
American Samoa ..............
Arizona ..............................
Arkansas ...........................
California ...........................
Colorado ...........................
Connecticut .......................
PO 00000
Frm 00023
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
$686,230.25
500,000.00
250,000.00
627,067.26
594,060.05
2,841,352.77
662,637.98
500,000.00
MINIMUM GRANT AWARDS AVAILABLE
TO QUALIFYING STATES—Continued
State name
Minimum E–911
grant award
Delaware ...........................
District of Columbia ..........
Florida ...............................
Georgia .............................
Guam ................................
Hawaii ...............................
Idaho .................................
Illinois ................................
Indiana ..............................
Iowa ..................................
Kansas ..............................
Kentucky ...........................
Louisiana ..........................
Maine ................................
Maryland ...........................
Massachusetts ..................
Michigan ...........................
Minnesota .........................
Mississippi ........................
Missouri ............................
Montana ............................
Northern Mariana Islands
Nebraska ..........................
Nevada .............................
New Hampshire ................
New Jersey .......................
New Mexico ......................
New York ..........................
North Carolina ..................
North Dakota ....................
Ohio ..................................
Oklahoma .........................
Oregon ..............................
Pennsylvania ....................
Puerto Rico .......................
Rhode Island ....................
South Carolina ..................
South Dakota ....................
Tennessee ........................
Texas ................................
Utah ..................................
Vermont ............................
Virgin Islands ....................
Virginia ..............................
Washington .......................
West Virginia ....................
Wisconsin .........................
Wyoming ...........................
500,000.00
500,000.00
1,579,728.30
1,063,089.13
250,000.00
500,000.00
500,000.00
1,343,670.10
783,700.36
668,545.47
770,896.23
584,385.38
511,974.11
500,000.00
500,000.00
527,000.57
1,108,704.89
874,841.32
500,000.00
891,711.03
500,000.00
250,000.00
508,655.45
500,000.00
500,000.00
666,876.13
500,000.00
1,603,343.25
971,280.91
500,000.00
1,203,583.60
700,339.78
500,000.00
1,242,455.97
500,000.00
500,000.00
541,705.79
500,000.00
751,822.46
2,702,727.44
500,000.00
500,000.00
250,000.00
758,028.12
734,176.40
500,000.00
820,409.48
500,000.00
Total Available E–911
Grant Funds ...........
41,325,000.00
BILLING CODE 4910–59–P
E:\FR\FM\03OCP1.SGM
03OCP1
VerDate Aug<31>2005
18:05 Oct 02, 2008
Jkt 217001
PO 00000
Frm 00024
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4725
E:\FR\FM\03OCP1.SGM
03OCP1
57577
EP03oc08.026
jlentini on PROD1PC65 with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 193 / Friday, October 3, 2008 / Proposed Rules
VerDate Aug<31>2005
Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 193 / Friday, October 3, 2008 / Proposed Rules
18:05 Oct 02, 2008
Jkt 217001
PO 00000
Frm 00025
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4725
E:\FR\FM\03OCP1.SGM
03OCP1
EP03oc08.027
jlentini on PROD1PC65 with PROPOSALS
57578
VerDate Aug<31>2005
18:05 Oct 02, 2008
Jkt 217001
PO 00000
Frm 00026
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4725
E:\FR\FM\03OCP1.SGM
03OCP1
57579
EP03oc08.028
jlentini on PROD1PC65 with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 193 / Friday, October 3, 2008 / Proposed Rules
57580
Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 193 / Friday, October 3, 2008 / Proposed Rules
Issued on: September 29, 2008.
David Kelly,
Acting Administrator, National Highway
Traffic Safety Administration.
Meredith Attwell Baker,
Acting Assistant Secretary for
Communications and Information.
[FR Doc. E8–23266 Filed 10–2–08; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910–59–C
GENERAL SERVICES
ADMINISTRATION
48 CFR Parts 501, 515, and 552
[GSAR Case 2008–G506; Docket 2008–0007;
Sequence 23]
RIN 3090–AI76
General Services Acquisition
Regulation; GSAR Case 2008–G506;
Rewrite of GSAR Part 515, Contracting
by Negotiation
Office of the Chief Acquisition
Officer, General Services
Administration (GSA).
ACTION: Proposed rule.
jlentini on PROD1PC65 with PROPOSALS
AGENCY:
SUMMARY: The General Services
Administration (GSA) is proposing to
amend the General Services Acquisition
Regulation (GSAR) to revise language
that provides requirements for
contracting by negotiation.
DATES: Interested parties should submit
written comments to the Regulatory
Secretariat on or before December 2,
2008 to be considered in the
formulation of a final rule.
ADDRESSES: Submit comments
identified by GSAR Case 2008–G506 by
any of the following methods:
• Regulations.gov: https://
www.regulations.gov. Submit comments
via the Federal eRulemaking portal by
inputting ‘‘GSAR Case 2008–G506’’
under the heading ‘‘Comment or
Submission’’. Select the link ‘‘Send a
Comment or Submission’’ that
corresponds with GSAR Case 2008–
G506. Follow the instructions provided
to complete the ‘‘Public Comment and
Submission Form’’. Please include your
name, company name (if any), and
‘‘GSAR Case 2008–G506’’ on your
attached document.
• Fax: 202–501–4067.
• Mail: General Services
Administration, Regulatory Secretariat
(VPR), 1800 F Street, NW, Room 4041,
ATTN: Laurieann Duarte, Washington,
DC 20405.
Instructions: Please submit comments
only and cite GSAR Case 2008–G506 in
all correspondence related to this case.
All comments received will be posted
without change to https://
VerDate Aug<31>2005
18:05 Oct 02, 2008
Jkt 217001
www.regulations.gov, including any
personal and/or business confidential
information provided.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT For
clarification of content, contact Mr.
Michael O. Jackson at (202) 208–4949.
For information pertaining to the status
or publication schedules, contact the
Regulatory Secretariat (VPR), Room
4041, GS Building, Washington, DC
20405, (202) 501–4755. Please cite
GSAR Case 2008–G506.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
A. Background
The General Services Administration
(GSA) is amending the General Services
Administration Acquisition Regulation
(GSAR) to revise sections of GSAR part
515 that provide requirements for
contracting by negotiation.
This rule is a result of the General
Services Administration Acquisition
Manual (GSAM) Rewrite initiative
undertaken by GSA to revise the GSAM
to maintain consistency with the FAR
and to implement streamlined and
innovative acquisition procedures that
contractors, offerors, and GSA
contracting personnel can utilize when
entering into and administering
contractual relationships. The GSAM
incorporates the GSAR as well as
internal agency acquisition policy.
GSA will rewrite each part of the
GSAR and GSAM, and as each GSAR
part is rewritten, will publish it in the
Federal Register.
This rule covers the rewrite of GSAR
Part 515. The specific changes are as
follows:
• GSAR 501.106 - Added Control
Number 3090–0163 as a cross reference
for 515.201–1.
• GSAR 515.204—Added a paragraph
to specify that the senior procurement
executive is the designee per FAR
15.204(e).
• GSAR 515.204–1—Moved
paragraph (a) to 515.204. Renumbered
remaining paragraphs and references
accordingly.
• GSAR 515.205—Added ‘‘or unless
the incumbent contractor is otherwise
ineligible for the award’’ to advise
contracting officers that they are not
obligated to include an offeror in the
competition if they are not eligible to
compete.
• GSAR 515.209–70, Examination of
records by GSA clause—
a. In paragraph (b), changed ‘‘You’’ to
‘‘The contracting officer’’ eliminated the
dashes in ‘‘Assistant Inspector GeneralAuditing’’ and ‘‘Regional Inspector
General-Auditing’’; and replaced each
dash with a ‘‘for’’; and
b. Paragraphs (c) and (d) were
trasferred to Part 538 because they only
PO 00000
Frm 00027
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
pertain to Federal Supply Schedule
(FSS) Multiple Award Schedule (MAS).
• 515.305, Proposal evaluation—
a. Transferred paragraph (a),
renumbered it 515.208–70 and made it
non-regulatory;
b. Transferred paragraph (b),
renumbered it 515.305–71 and made it
non-regulatory;
c. Made 515.305–70 non-regulatory;
and
d. The text made non-regulatory and
renumbered to 515.208–70 and
515.305–71, as well as the text that was
formerly regulatory at 515.305–70, the
team decided that it did not affect the
public and was only applicable
internally to GSA.
• 515.408, Solicitation provisions
and contract clauses—Transferred to
GSAM Part 538 because it is only
applicable to the Multiple Award
Schedules Program. This proposed
revision also includes the CSP–1 form.
• 515.7002, Procedures—
a. Replaced ‘‘You’’ with ‘‘Contracting
Officer’’ throughout the clause. Also
changed ‘‘Base your determination’’ to
‘‘This determination should be based’’;
b. In paragraph (a) changed FAR
reference ‘‘14.202–4(g)’’ to ‘‘14.202–4(f)’’
and changed ‘‘However, qualifications’’
to ‘‘Samples are not requested. Any
samples submitted with’’. This is to
include minor editorial changes
suggested by the Advanced Notice of
Public Rulemaking; and
c. In paragraph (b)(1) deleted
‘‘52.214–20’’ and replaced it with
‘‘552.214–72’’. Deleted the remainder of
the paragraph.
• 552.215–71—Transferred to Part
538 because of the proposed move in
515.209–70(c) and (d).
• 552.215–72—Transferred to Part
538 because of the proposed move in
515.408.
As a result of the rewrite of GSAM
Part 515, certain text and clauses such
as 552.215–71, Examination of Records
by GSA (Multiple Award Schedule), and
552.215–72, Price Adjustment—Failure
to Provide Accurate Information, were
transferred to the GSAM rewrite team
handling the rewrite of GSAM Part 538.
The 538 team was assembled with GSA
personnel who have experience in
dealing with GSAM Part 538, including
personnel from GSA’s Federal
Acquisition Service, which is the GSA
component responsible for GSA’s
Multiple Award Schedules. GSA
established a process in the rewrite
initiative where text and clauses that
were found more suited to be allocated
to other parts of the GSAM were sent to
the other rewrite teams for their analysis
and incorporation into their assigned
rewrite parts.
E:\FR\FM\03OCP1.SGM
03OCP1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 73, Number 193 (Friday, October 3, 2008)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 57567-57580]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E8-23266]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
National Highway Traffic Safety Administration
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
National Telecommunications and Information Administration
47 CFR Part 400
[Docket No. NHTSA-2008-0142]
RIN 2127-AK37
E-911 Grant Program
AGENCIES: National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA),
Department of Transportation (DOT); National Telecommunications and
Information Administration (NTIA), Department of Commerce (DOC).
ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM).
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: This joint notice proposes implementing regulations for the E-
911 Grant Program authorized under the Ensuring Needed Help Arrives
Near Callers Employing 911 (ENHANCE 911) Act of 2004 (Pub. L. 108-494,
codified at 47 U.S.C. 942). The Act authorizes grants for the
implementation and operation of Phase II enhanced 911 services and for
migration to an IP-enabled emergency network. This NPRM proposes the
application, award and administrative requirements for the E-911 grant
program and seeks comments thereon.
DATES: Written comments may be submitted to this agency and must be
received by December 2, 2008.
ADDRESSES: You may submit comments identified by DOT Docket ID Number
NHTSA-2008-0142 by any of the following methods:
Federal eRulemaking Portal: Go to https://
wwww.regulations.gov. Follow the online instructions for submitting
comments.
Fax: 202-493-2251.
Mail: Docket Management Facility, M-30, U.S. Department of
Transportation, West Building, Ground Floor, Room W12-140, 1200 New
Jersey Avenue, SE., Washington, DC 20590.
Hand Delivery or Courier: West Building, Ground Floor,
Room W12-140, 1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE., Washington, DC, between 9
a.m. and 5 p.m., Eastern Time, Monday through Friday, except Federal
holidays.
Instructions: For detailed instructions on submitting comments and
additional information on the rulemaking process, see the ``Public
Participation'' heading in the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section of
this document. Note that all comments received will be posted without
change to https://www.regulations.gov, including any personal
information provided. Please see the ``Privacy Act'' heading below.
Privacy Act: Anyone is able to search the electronic form of all
comments received into any of our dockets by the name of the individual
submitting the comment (or signing the comment, if submitted on behalf
of an association, business, labor union, etc.). You may review DOT's
complete Privacy Act Statement in the Federal Register published on
April 11, 2000 (65 FR 19476-78).
Docket: For access to the docket to read background documents or
comments received, go to https://www.regulations.gov at any time or to
West Building, Ground Floor, Room W12-140, 1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE.,
Washington, DC, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Eastern Time, Monday through
Friday, except Federal holidays.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For program issues: Mr. Drew Dawson,
Director, Office of Emergency Medical Services, National Highway
Traffic Safety Administration, 1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE., NTI-140,
Washington, DC 20590. Telephone: (202) 366-9966. E-mail:
Drew.Dawson@dot.gov.
For legal issues: Ms. Jin Kim, Attorney-Advisor, Office of the
Chief Counsel, National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, 1200 New
Jersey Avenue, SE., NCC-113, Washington, DC 20590. Telephone: (202)
366-1834. E-mail: Jin.Kim@dot.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Table of Contents
I. Background
II. Summary of the ENHANCE 911 Act
III. Proposed Regulations
A. Definitions
B. Who May Apply
C. Application Requirements
1. State 911 Plan
2. Project Budget
3. Supplemental Project Budget
4. Designated E-911 Coordinator
5. Certifications
6. Due Date
D. Approval and Award
E. Distribution of Grant Funds
F. Eligible Uses for Grant Funds
G. Non-Compliance
H. Financial and Administrative Requirements
I. Closeout
IV. Public Participation
V. Statutory Basis for This Action
VI. Regulatory Analyses and Notices
A. Executive Order 12866 and Regulatory Policies and Procedures
B. Regulatory Flexibility Act
C. Executive Order 13132 (Federalism)
D. Executive Order 12988 (Civil Justice Reform)
[[Page 57568]]
E. Paperwork Reduction Act
F. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act
G. National Environmental Policy Act
H. Executive Order 13175 (Consultation and Coordination With
Indian Tribes)
I. Regulatory Identifier Number (RIN)
J. Privacy Act
I. Background
Trends in telecommunications mobility and convergence have put the
nation's 911 system at a crossroads. The growing market penetration of
both wireless telephones (commonly known as mobile or cell phones) and
Voice over Internet Protocol (VoIP) telephony have underscored the
limitations of the current 911 infrastructure. The 911 system, based on
decades-old technology, cannot handle the text, data, image and video
that are increasingly common in personal communications and critical to
emergency response.
Many of the limitations of the current 911 system stem from its
foundation on 1970s circuit-switched network technology. Each
introduction of a new access technology (e.g., wireless) or expansion
of system functions (e.g., location determination) requires significant
engineering and system modifications. There appears to be consensus
within the 911 community on the shortcomings of the present 911 system
and the need for a new, more capable system, based upon a digital,
Internet-Protocol (IP) based infrastructure.
Today, there are approximately 255 million wireless telephones in
use in the United States. About 80 percent of Americans now subscribe
to wireless telephone service and 14 percent of American adults live in
households with only wireless telephones, i.e., no landline telephones.
Of the estimated 240 million 911 calls made each year, approximately
one-third originate from wireless telephones. In many communities, at
least half of the 911 calls come from wireless telephones. Unlike
landline 911 calls, not all wireless 911 calls are delivered to
dispatchers with Automatic Number Information (ANI) and Automatic
Location Information (ALI), two pieces of information that aid in
identifying the telephone number and geographic location of the caller.
The increasing use of VoIP communications has compounded this problem
because the location of the caller cannot automatically be determined
when a 911 call is made on some interconnected VoIP services. Without
this information, emergency response times may be delayed. Prompt and
accurate location information is critical to delivering emergency
assistance. Ensuring enhanced 911 (E-911) service for each caller,
i.e., telephone number and location information of the caller, is
increasingly important to public safety, given the vast number of 911
calls originating from wireless and VoIP telephones.
Successful E-911 service implementation requires the cooperation of
multiple distinct entities: Wireless carriers, wireline telephone
companies (also known as local exchange carriers), VoIP providers, and
Public Safety Answering Points (PSAPs). A PSAP is a facility that has
been designated to receive emergency calls and route them to emergency
personnel. For example, when a 911 call is made from a wireless
telephone, the wireless carrier must be able to determine the location
of the caller, the local exchange carrier must transmit that location
information from the wireless carrier to the PSAP, and the PSAP must be
capable of receiving such information.
Currently, many PSAPs are not technologically capable of receiving
ANI and ALI from wireless 911 calls. In order to receive this
information, PSAPs must upgrade their operations centers and make
appropriate trunking arrangements (i.e., establish a wired connection
between the PSAP and the networks of the local wireline telephone
companies) to enable wireless E-911 data to pass from the wireless
carrier to the PSAP. Once a PSAP is technologically capable of
receiving this information, the PSAP can submit requests to wireless
carriers for E-911 service. Under regulations of the Federal
Communications Commission (FCC), this request triggers a wireless
carrier's obligation to deploy E-911 service to a PSAP.
Upgrading the 911 system to an IP-enabled emergency network will
enable E-911 calls from more networked communication devices, enable
the transmission of text messages, photographs, data sets and video,
enable geographically independent call access, transfer, and backup
among and between PSAPs and other authorized emergency organizations,
and support an ``interoperable internetwork'' of all emergency
organizations.
Many PSAPs do not have the resources to make the upgrades necessary
to request E-911 service. Some PSAPs are able to fund upgrades from
their existing budgets, but other PSAPs must rely on funds collected by
the State to maintain operation and make capital improvements to 911
services. While most States collect some type of wireless fee or
surcharge on consumers' wireless telephone bills to help fund PSAP
operations and upgrades, not all State laws ensure that such surcharges
are dedicated to their intended use. In fact, some States have used E-
911 surcharges to satisfy other State obligations that may be
marginally related to public safety, even though PSAPs remain unable to
receive E-911 service. See, e.g., Government Accountability Office
(GAO), States' Collection and Use of Funds for Wireless Enhanced 911
Services, GAO-06-338 (March 2006); see also GAO, Survey on State
Wireless E911 Funds, GAO-06-400sp (2006).
Recognizing the need for dedicated funding of E-911 services, the
ENHANCE 911 Act was enacted ``to improve, enhance, and promote the
Nation's homeland security, public safety, and citizen activated
emergency response capabilities through the use of enhanced 911
services, to further upgrade Public Safety Answering Point capabilities
and related functions in receiving E-911 calls, and to support the
construction and operation of a ubiquitous and reliable citizen
activated system[.]'' The Act directs NHTSA and NTIA to establish a
joint program to facilitate coordination and communications among
stakeholders and to provide grants for the implementation and operation
of E-911 services. The provisions of the Act expire on October 1, 2009.
47 U.S.C. 942(f)(2).
Section 3011 of the Deficit Reduction Act of 2005 (Pub. L. 109-171)
authorized $43.5 million to NTIA for the implementation of the ENHANCE
911 Act, to be derived from the proceeds of an auction of analog
television spectrum. Thereafter, the Implementing Recommendations of
the 9/11 Commission Act of 2007 (Pub. L. 110-53), as amended by the
Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2008 (Pub. L. 110-161), authorized
NTIA to borrow up to $43.5 million in advance of the spectrum auction
and directed the agencies to allow a portion of the funds to be used to
give priority to grants that are requested by PSAPs that are not
capable of receiving 911 calls for the incremental costs of upgrading
from Phase I to Phase II compliance. The New and Emergency Technologies
911 Improvement Act of 2008 (NET 911 Improvement Act) (Pub. L. 110-283)
recently amended the Act to permit grant funds to be used for migration
to an IP-enabled emergency network.
The agencies are now issuing this NPRM to implement the grant
program.
II. Summary of the ENHANCE 911 Act
The ENHANCE 911 Act requires NHTSA and NTIA to ``establish a joint
[[Page 57569]]
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 ``create an E-911 Implementation
Coordination Office [ICO] * * *.'' 47 U.S.C. 942(a)(1). The Act charges
the ICO with three tasks related to E-911 grant program administration.
Specifically, the Act requires the ICO to: (1) Advise and assist
eligible entities in the preparation of plans required under the Act
for the coordination and implementation of E-911 services; (2) receive
and review grant applications and recommend approval or disapproval;
and (3) oversee the use of grant funds in fulfilling implementation
plans. 47 U.S.C. 942(a)(3). The agencies have centralized the grant-
related administrative functions of the ICO within NHTSA.
The Act directs NHTSA and NTIA, acting through the ICO and after
consultation with the Department of Homeland Security and the Federal
Communications Commission, to provide grants to eligible entities for
the implementation and operation of Phase II E-911 services, as defined
by FCC regulations. 47 U.S.C. 942(b)(1). (Phase II E-911 service refers
to providing PSAPs with the location of all 911 calls by latitude and
longitude within 50 to 300 meters depending on the type of technology
used. See 47 CFR 20.18.) The Act was amended by the NET 911 Improvement
Act to permit grant funds to be used for migration to an IP-enabled
emergency network.
The Act directs the agencies to issue joint implementing
regulations prescribing the criteria for selection for grant awards
after a 60-day public comment period. 47 U.S.C. 942(b)(4). The Act
requires an applicant to certify that it has coordinated its
application with the public safety answering points located within the
jurisdiction; that the State has designated a single officer or
governmental body to serve as the coordinator of implementation of E-
911 services; that it has established a plan for the coordination and
implementation of E-911 services; and that it has integrated
telecommunications services involved in the implementation and delivery
of Phase II E-911 services. 47 U.S.C. 942(b)(3).
In addition, the Act requires each applicant to certify that no
portion of any designated E-911 charges imposed by the State or other
taxing jurisdiction within the State is being or will be obligated or
expended for any purpose other than E-911 purposes during the period at
least 180 days immediately preceding the date of the application and
continuing throughout the time grant funds are available to the
applicant. 47 U.S.C. 942(c). The Act imposes a penalty for providing
false information on a certification. Specifically, an applicant
providing false information on a certification will not be eligible to
receive an E-911 grant, must return any grant awarded during the time
that the certification is not valid, and is ineligible to receive
subsequent E-911 grants. 47 U.S.C. 942(c)(4).
III. Proposed Regulations
As directed by the ENHANCE 911 Act, today's notice sets forth
application, award and administrative procedures to implement the E-911
grant program.
A. Definitions (47 CFR 400.2)
Generally, terms used in this part are terms defined by the ENHANCE
911 Act. The NET 911 Improvement Act, which amended the ENHANCE 911 Act
to allow grant funds to be used for migration to an ``IP-enabled
emergency network,'' does not define that term. IP, or Internet
Protocol, is one method or protocol by which data is sent from one
computer to another. See RFC 791, ``Internet Protocol, DARPA Internet
Program Protocol Specification'' (Sept. 1981), available at https://
rfc.net/rfc0791.html; see also STD 5 ``Internet Protocol, DARPA
Internet Program Protocol Specification'' (Sept. 1981), available at
https://rfc.net/std0005.html. Because the agencies believe that such
emergency communications should be transmitted securely, the agencies
propose defining ``IP-enabled emergency network'' as an emergency
communications network based on an infrastructure allowing secured
transmission of data among computers that use the Internet Protocol.
B. Who May Apply (47 CFR 400.3)
The ENHANCE 911 Act directs NHTSA and NTIA to make grants to
``eligible entities'' for the implementation and operation of Phase II
E-911 services. 47 U.S.C. 942(b)(1). The Act defines an eligible entity
as ``a State or local government or a tribal organization'' and
includes ``public authorities, boards, commissions, and similar bodies
created by [a State or local government or a tribal organization] to
provide E-911 services.'' 47 U.S.C. 942(f)(3)(A), (B). Based on this
broad statutory definition, the agencies estimate that such entities
number in the thousands. To minimize administrative costs and to
streamline the grant process, the agencies propose to permit only
States to apply for grant funds on behalf of all eligible entities
located within their borders. We believe that this limitation on the
number and identity of applicants is also necessary to properly address
the certification requirements under the Act, as States are the only
eligible entities capable of certifying that their E-911 charges were
not diverted to other uses and capable of designating a single officer
or governmental body to serve as the coordinator of implementation of
E-911 services. For purposes of this program, a State includes any of
the 50 United States, the District of Columbia, Puerto Rico, American
Samoa, Guam, the Northern Mariana Islands, and the U.S. Virgin Islands.
The agencies also believe that the amount of available grant funds
supports limiting the applicant pool to States. While the Act
authorizes a five-year grant program totaling $1.25 billion ($250
million per year), the amount appropriated, on a one-time basis, was
only $43.5 million. The agencies believe that $43.5 million would not
have a meaningful impact on E-911 services if the funds were divided
into small grants among a large number of grantees. Therefore, we
believe that limiting the applicant pool is necessary to ensure that
benefits are realized, and that States are best positioned to make wise
resource deployment decisions within their borders.
The agencies propose to require assurances from States in their
applications to ensure adequate participation by local governments,
tribal organizations, and PSAPs, consistent with the Act. Specifically,
the State would be required to coordinate its application with PSAPs
and to ensure that 90 percent of the grant funds would be used for the
direct benefit of PSAPs. In addition, consistent with the statute, the
proposed regulation would require States to identify the amount
designated for the benefit of PSAPs without the capability to receive
911 calls or provide an explanation as to why such designation is not
practicable.
C. Application Requirements (47 CFR 400.4)
The proposed rule outlines the requirements for States to apply for
a grant under this program. In order to qualify to receive an E-911
grant, the agencies propose that States must submit an application
containing the following components: a State 911 plan, a project
budget, a supplementary
[[Page 57570]]
project budget, designation of the State E-911 Coordinator, and a
certification of compliance with statutory and programmatic
requirements. These components are consistent with the application
requirements of the Uniform Administrative Requirements for Grants and
Cooperative Agreements to State and Local Governments. See 49 CFR
18.10; Office of Management and Budget (OMB) Circular A-102.
1. State 911 Plan (47 CFR 400.4(a)(1))
The ENHANCE 911 Act requires applicants to certify that they have
established a plan for the coordination and implementation of E-911
services. The agencies propose that States would submit a State 911
Plan as part of their application for a grant. As further detailed
below, the minimum components of a State 911 plan would incorporate the
statutory provisions related to coordination with PSAPs within the
State's jurisdiction, giving priority to communities without 911
capability, and the involvement of integrated telecommunications
service providers in the implementation and delivery of Phase II E-911
services or in the migration to an IP-enabled emergency network. In
addition, a State 911 Plan would be required to provide details about
how the State intends to employ technology to achieve compliance with
the FCC description of Phase II E-911 services and/or how it intends to
migrate to an IP-enabled emergency network.
The Act requires applicants to coordinate their applications with
PSAPs within their jurisdiction. To address this requirement, the
agencies propose that States would detail in the State 911 Plan the
steps they have taken to coordinate their applications with local
governments, tribal organizations, and PSAPs within their borders. We
believe that requiring States to coordinate their applications with
these entities will ensure that the State 911 Plan takes into account
the needs of these stakeholders. To ensure that grant funds are used
predominantly where their impact is most significant--in the
communities--the agencies propose requiring States to demonstrate in
the State 911 Plan that at least 90 percent of the grant funds will be
used for the direct benefit of PSAPs.
The Act directs the agencies to allow a portion of the E-911 grant
funds to be used to give priority to PSAPs that were not capable of
receiving 911 as of August 3, 2007. 47 U.S.C. 942(b)(4). To effectuate
this provision, the agencies propose that States would identify in
their application the percentage of grant funds that will be designated
for those communities. The agencies are stopping short of proposing
this as an absolute requirement, however. Based on the amount of grant
funds available, we recognize that such a designation may not always be
practicable for efficient use of the limited funds. Therefore, if the
State chooses not to so designate a portion of the funds, the State
would be required to provide an explanation. The agencies believe that
the States are best situated to make these difficult resource
decisions.
The proposed regulation also would require that the State 911 plan
describe how the State has integrated telecommunications service
providers involved in the implementation and delivery of Phase II E-911
services and in the migration to an IP-enabled emergency network. 47
U.S.C. 942(b)(3)(A)(iv). The term ``integrated telecommunications
service providers'' refers to local exchange carriers, wireless
carriers and Internet Protocol (IP)-enabled voice service providers. It
is necessary to detail how integrated telecommunications service
providers are involved in the State 911 Plan because they provide
essential network functions for consumer delivery of E-911 services.
The agencies also propose that States describe in the State 911
Plan how they plan to use technology to allow a PSAP to meet the
functionality required by the FCC's description of Phase II E-911
services or to migrate to an IP-enabled emergency network. Such an
approach is consistent with the Act's citation to 47 CFR 20.18 of the
FCC's regulations for the meaning of Phase II E-911 services. 47 U.S.C.
942(f)(5). According to 47 CFR 20.18, Phase II E-911 services are
described as location information of all 911 calls by longitude and
latitude with a specific degree of accuracy. For States interested in
using grant funds to migrate to an IP-enabled emergency network, the
agencies propose that States provide details about how the State
intends to employ technology toward that end.
Finally, because the level of Phase II E-911 services and IP-
enabled emergency networks differs significantly from State to State,
the agencies propose that States establish performance metrics and
timelines for grant project implementation, subject to the ICO's review
and the agencies' approval.
2. Project Budget (47 CFR 400.4(a)(2); Appendix A)
The agencies propose that a State would submit a project budget for
the projects and activities that it seeks to fund with E-911 grant
funds and the required State matching funds. See 49 CFR 18.10; OMB
Circular A-102. Elsewhere in this notice, the agencies propose to
distribute grant funds based on a formula. See discussion under Section
III.E., below. Based on that proposed formula, we have identified in an
appendix to this part the minimum award each State would receive if all
States qualified for a grant. A State's project budget would need to
account for all funds (those identified in Appendix A for the State and
State matching funds) in describing the projects or activities for
which it seeks funding, and describe the non-Federal sources that will
fund 50 percent of the cost. The non-Federal sources must be consistent
with the requirements set out in the matching provision of 49 CFR part
18, DOT's implementation of the government-wide common grant rule for
State and local governments. As provided in 48 U.S.C. 1469a, the
requirement for non-Federal matching funds under $200,000 (including
in-kind contributions) is waived for the Territorial governments in
American Samoa, Guam, the Northern Mariana Islands, and the U.S. Virgin
Islands.
3. Supplemental Project Budget (47 CFR 400.4(a)(3))
It is possible that some States may choose not to apply or may not
qualify for an E-911 grant because they are unable to make the required
certifications. To address these contingencies, the agencies propose to
distribute all remaining available funds to the pool of qualifying
grant recipients, in accordance with the same formula used for the
initial distribution. See discussion under Section III.E., below. In
order to expedite the award of these grant funds, the agencies propose
that States would include a supplemental project budget in anticipation
of the potential availability of additional grant funds. Specifically,
the agencies propose that States identify in their supplemental project
budget the maximum amount that the State would be able to match from
non-Federal sources and include proposed projects or activities for
those grant and matching funds, up to the same total amount and to the
same level of detail as required for the project budget under proposed
Sec. 400.4(a)(2). The agencies propose that the supplemental project
budget meet the same requirements identified for the project budget in
Sec. 400.4(a)(2) and be consistent with the State 911 Plan in Sec.
400.4(a)(1).
[[Page 57571]]
4. Designated E-911 Coordinator (47 CFR 400.4(a)(4); Appendix B;
Appendix C)
The Act requires States to designate a single officer or
governmental body to serve as the coordinator of implementation of E-
911 services. 47 U.S.C. 942(b)(3)(A)(ii). To implement this provision,
the agencies propose that this officer or governmental body would be
designated by the Governor, and that the State would document the
designation of the E-911 Coordinator by the Governor through the use of
a certification. See discussion under the next heading. We are
identifying the E-911 Coordinator as the proposed certifying official
on the certifications. In the event that a governmental body is
designated as the State's E-911 Coordinator, the agencies propose that
States affirmatively identify an official representative of the
governmental body to serve as the certifying official on the
certifications. The agencies also propose that the State notify NHTSA
in writing within 30 days of a change in appointment of the E-911
Coordinator. The E-911 Coordinator would act as the liaison between the
agencies and the State.
5. Certifications (47 CFR 400.4(a)(5); Appendix B; Appendix C)
The Act requires applicants to certify that they meet certain
conditions to qualify for a grant. An applicant must certify that it
has: (1) Coordinated its application with the PSAPs located within the
jurisdiction; (2) designated a single officer or government body to
serve as the E-911 Coordinator; (3) established a plan for the
coordination and implementation of E-911 services; and (4) integrated
telecommunications involved in the implementation and delivery of Phase
II E-911 services. 47 U.S.C. 942(b)(3). The Act also requires that
applicants certify at the time of application and annually thereafter
that no portion of any designated E-911 charges imposed by the State or
other taxing jurisdiction within the State is being diverted for any
other purpose during the period at least 180 days before the
application date and continuing throughout the period of time for which
grant funds are available. 47 U.S.C. 942(c). To meet these statutory
requirements, the agencies propose that States submit a certification
as part of their application. To meet the statutory requirement for
annual certification concerning the diversion of funds, the agencies
propose that States submit an annual certification 30 days after the
end of each fiscal year. (In this annual certification, States would
also certify that they have appointed a single officer or governmental
body as the E-911 Coordinator.)
The agencies also propose that States would certify that they have
coordinated their application with local governments, tribal
organizations, and PSAPs, and certify that at least 90 percent of the
grant funds will be used for the direct benefit of PSAPs. While these
certifications go beyond those required by the statute, we believe they
will help to ensure that the intent and purposes of the Act are met.
Finally, as discussed under the previous heading, the agencies propose
that States would certify that the Governor has appointed a single
officer or governmental body to serve as the E-911 Coordinator. The
agencies have set forth the proposed certifications in appendices to
the NPRM.
6. Due Date (47 CFR 400.4(b))
The agencies' proposal establishes an application due date of 60
days after publication of the final rule in the Federal Register. This
proposed date balances the need to provide the States appropriate time
to prepare proposals with the agencies' need for review time prior to
award, taking into account that awards must be made by September 30,
2009.
D. Approval and Award (47 CFR 400.5)
The Act established the ICO to receive, review and recommend the
approval or disapproval of applications for grants. 47 U.S.C.
942(a)(3)(D). The agencies' proposal incorporates this statutory
requirement, and would allow the ICO, upon review of a State's
application, to request additional information from the State prior to
making a determination of award in order to clarify compliance with the
statutory and programmatic requirements. As provided by statute, the
Administrator of NHTSA and the Assistant Secretary for Communications
and Information of the Department of Commerce will jointly approve and
announce grant award recipients. The proposal specifies that this
approval will be in writing.
E. Distribution of Grant Funds (47 CFR 400.6; Appendix A)
The ENHANCE 911 Act does not specify how the grants are to be
awarded. In order to distribute grant funds on an equitable and
administratively expedient basis for this one-time grant program, the
agencies propose to distribute grants to States in accordance with a
formula. Specifically, the agencies propose to distribute grant funds
as follows: (1) 50 percent in the ratio which the population of each
State bears to the total population of all the States, as shown by the
latest available Federal census, and (2) 50 percent in the ratio which
the public road mileage in each State bears to the total public road
mileage in all States, as shown by the latest available Federal Highway
Administration data.
However, we believe that a strict application of the formula would
result in many jurisdictions receiving too few funds to make any
meaningful progress in deploying Phase II technologies or migrating to
an IP-based emergency network. Accordingly, the agencies propose to
modify the formula to distribute a minimum of $500,000 to each State,
except that the four territories--American Samoa, Guam, the Northern
Mariana Islands, and the Virgin Islands--would each receive a minimum
of $250,000. The agencies believe that a lower minimum amount for these
four territories is equitable and appropriate due to their vastly lower
populations and road miles. The agencies have applied the formula to
the total grant funds available ($41,325,000, after deduction of the
five percent for administering the grant program) and calculated the
minimum amounts that each State would receive if all States applied for
and qualified for a grant award. See Appendix A to this part.
As discussed under Section III.C.3, it is possible that some States
may not apply for grant funds or may not qualify for grant funds
because they cannot make the required certifications. To address this
possibility, the agencies propose to redistribute any remaining grant
funds to those States that have qualified for grant funds and have
submitted supplemental project budgets as described in proposed Sec.
400.4(a)(3). The agencies propose to distribute these funds in
accordance with the same formula discussed above.
F. Eligible Uses for Grant Funds (47 CFR 400.7)
The ENHANCE 911 Act provides that the grants are intended for the
implementation and operation of Phase II E-911 services or for
migration to an IP-enabled emergency network. To implement this
requirement, the agencies propose that grant funds and matching funds
be used either for the acquisition and deployment of hardware and
software that enables compliance with Phase II E-911 services or that
enables migration to an IP-enabled emergency network, or for training
in the use of such hardware and software. The agencies believe that
limiting grant funds to these identified uses will maximize progress
toward
[[Page 57572]]
implementing Phase II E-911 services and IP-enabled 911 services, and
would best effectuate the purposes of the Act.
G. Non-Compliance (47 CFR 400.8)
The Act requires that grant funds be returned to the government if
a State makes a false certification concerning the diversion of E-911
charges. 47 U.S.C. 942(c)(4). The proposal incorporates this statutory
requirement.
H. Financial and Administrative Requirements (47 CFR 400.9)
The agencies' proposal specifies that the requirements of 49 CFR
part 18, DOT's implementation of the government-wide common grant rule
for State and local governments, including applicable cost principles
in circulars of the Office of Management and Budget, will apply to E-
911 grants. In addition, the agencies propose that grant recipients
submit annual performance reports and quarterly financial reports,
following the procedures of 49 CFR 18.40 and 18.41, respectively.
I. Closeout (47 CFR 400.10)
The Act provides that enhanced 911 is a national priority. To
effectuate the Act's intent, the agencies believe that the States
should use grant funds in an expeditious manner to implement E-911
services in their communities. According to industry estimates,
upgrading the average PSAP takes approximately three years.
Accordingly, the agencies propose that the total duration of the grant
program be three years. The agencies also propose that grant recipients
submit a final voucher for costs incurred within 90 days after the
completion of projects and activities funded under this part, but in no
event later than three years after grant award. Finally, the proposal
specifies that the final reporting requirements of 49 CFR 18.50 would
apply to E-911 grants, and that any funds remaining unexpended at the
end of fiscal year 2012 will no longer be available to the State and
must be returned to the government.
IV. Public Participation
A. How do I prepare and submit comments?
Your comments must be written and in English. To ensure that your
comments are correctly filed in the Docket, please include the docket
number of this document in your comments.
Your primary comments must not be more than 15 pages long. 49 CFR
553.21. However, you may attach additional documents to your primary
comments. There is no limit on the length of the attachments.
Please submit two copies of your comments, including the
attachments, to Docket Management at the address given above under
ADDRESSES.
Comments may also be submitted to the docket electronically on the
Federal eRulemaking Portal at https://www.regulations.gov. Follow the
online instructions for submitting comments.
B. How can I be sure my comments were received?
If you wish Docket Management to notify you upon its receipt of
your comments, enclose a self-addressed, stamped postcard in the
envelope containing your comments. Upon receiving your comments, Docket
Management will return the postcard by mail.
C. Will the agencies consider late comments?
We will consider all comments that Docket Management receives
before the close of business on the comment closing date indicated
above under DATES. To the extent possible, we will also consider
comments that Docket Management receives after that date.
D. How can I read the comments submitted by other people?
You may read the comments received by the Docket Management at the
address given under ADDRESSES. The hours of the Docket are indicated
above in the same location. To read the comments on the Internet, go to
https://www.regulations.gov. Follow the online instructions for
accessing the docket.
Please note that even after the comment closing date, we will
continue to file relevant information on the docket as it becomes
available. Further, some people may submit late comments. Accordingly,
we recommend that you periodically check the docket for new material.
V. Statutory Basis for This Action
The agencies' proposal would implement the grant program created by
section 104 of the ENHANCE 911 Act of 2004, as amended (Pub. L. 108-
494, codified at 47 U.S.C. 942), which requires the Administrator and
the Assistant Secretary to issue joint implementing regulations
prescribing the criteria for grant awards.
VI. Regulatory Analyses and Notices
A. Executive Order 12866 and Regulatory Policies and Procedures
Executive Order 12866, ``Regulatory Planning and Review,'' provides
for making determinations whether a regulatory action is
``significant'' and therefore subject to OMB review and to the
requirements of the Executive Order. 58 FR 51735, Oct. 4, 1993. The
Order defines a ``significant regulatory action'' as one that is likely
to result in a rule that may:
(1) Have an annual effect on the economy of $100 million or more or
adversely affect in a material way the economy, a sector of the
economy, productivity, competition, jobs, the environment, public
health or safety, or State, local, or Tribal governments or
communities;
(2) Create a serious inconsistency or otherwise interfere with an
action taken or planned by another agency;
(3) Materially alter the budgetary impact of entitlements, grants,
user fees, or loan programs or the rights and obligations of recipients
thereof; or
(4) Raise novel legal or policy issues arising out of legal
mandates, the President's priorities, or the principles set forth in
the Executive Order.
This rulemaking document was not reviewed by the Office of Management
and Budget under Executive Order 12866. The rulemaking action is not
considered to be significant within the meaning of Executive Order
12866 or the agencies' regulatory policies and procedures.
The agencies' proposal would not affect amounts over the
significance threshold of $100 million each year. The proposal sets
forth application procedures and showings to be made to be eligible for
a grant. The funds to be distributed under the procedures developed in
the proposal total $43.5 million, well below the annual threshold of
$100 million. The agencies' proposal would not adversely affect in a
material way the economy, a sector of the economy, productivity,
competition, jobs, the environment, public health or safety, or State,
local, or Tribal governments or communities. The agencies' proposal
would not create an inconsistency or interfere with any actions taken
or planned by other agencies. The agencies' proposal would not
materially alter the budgetary impact of entitlements, grants, user
fees, or loan programs or the rights and obligations of recipients
thereof. Finally, the agencies' proposal would not raise novel legal or
policy issues arising out of legal mandates, the President's
priorities, or the principles set forth in the Executive Order.
In consideration of the foregoing, the agencies have determined
that if it is made final, this rulemaking action would not be
economically significant. The impacts of the rule would be so minimal
that a full regulatory evaluation is not required.
[[Page 57573]]
B. Regulatory Flexibility Act
Pursuant to the Regulatory Flexibility Act, whenever an agency
publishes a notice of rulemaking for any proposed or final rule, it
must prepare and make available for public comment a regulatory
flexibility analysis that describes the effect of the rule on small
entities (i.e., small businesses, small organizations, and small
governmental jurisdictions). 5 U.S.C. 601 et seq. The Small Business
Administration's regulations at 13 CFR part 121 define a small
business, in part, as a business entity ``which operates primarily
within the United States.'' 13 CFR 121.105(a). No regulatory
flexibility analysis is required if the head of an agency certifies the
rulemaking action would not have a significant economic impact on a
substantial number of small entities. SBREFA amended the Regulatory
Flexibility Act to require Federal agencies to provide a statement of
the factual basis for certifying that an action would not have a
significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities.
NHTSA and NTIA have considered the effects of this proposal under
the Regulatory Flexibility Act. States are the recipients of funds
awarded under the section 2010 program and they are not considered to
be small entities under the Regulatory Flexibility Act. Therefore, we
certify that this notice of proposed rulemaking would not have a
significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities.
C. Executive Order 13132 (Federalism)
Executive Order 13132, ``Federalism,'' requires NHTSA and NTIA to
develop an accountable process to ensure ``meaningful and timely input
by State and local officials in the development of regulatory policies
that have federalism implications.'' 64 FR 43255, Aug. 10, 1999.
``Policies that have federalism implications'' are defined in the
Executive Order to include regulations that have ``substantial direct
effects on the States, on the relationship between the national
government and the States, or on the distribution of power and
responsibilities among the various levels of government.'' Under
Executive Order 13132, an agency may not issue a regulation with
Federalism implications that imposes substantial direct compliance
costs and that is not required by statute unless the Federal government
provides the funds necessary to pay the direct compliance costs
incurred by State and local governments or the agency consults with
State and local governments in the process of developing the proposed
regulation. An agency also may not issue a regulation with Federalism
implications that preempts a State law without consulting with State
and local officials.
The agencies have analyzed this rulemaking action in accordance
with the principles and criteria set forth in Executive Order 13132,
and have determined that this proposed rule would not have Federalism
implications as defined in the order.
D. Executive Order 12988 (Civil Justice Reform)
Pursuant to Executive Order 12988, ``Civil Justice Reform,'' the
agencies have considered whether this rulemaking would have any
retroactive effect. 61 FR 4729, Feb. 7, 1996. This rulemaking action
would not have any retroactive effect. This action meets applicable
standards in sections 3(a) and 3(b)(2) of Executive Order 12988, Civil
Justice Reform, to minimize litigation, eliminate ambiguity, and reduce
burden.
E. Paperwork Reduction Act
Under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, a person is not required
to respond to a collection of information by a Federal agency unless
the collection displays a valid Office of Management and Budget (OMB)
control number. This NPRM, if made final, would result in a new
collection of information that would require OMB clearance pursuant to
5 CFR part 1320. Before an agency submits a proposed collection of
information to OMB for approval, it must first publish a document in
the Federal Register providing a 60-day comment period and otherwise
consult with members of the public and affected agencies concerning
each proposed collection of information. OMB has promulgated
regulations describing what must be included in such a document. Under
OMB's regulation (at 5 CFR 1320.8(d)), an agency must ask for public
comment on the following:
(i) Whether the proposed collection of information is necessary for
the proper performance of the functions of the agency, including
whether the information will have practical utility;
(ii) The accuracy of the agency's estimate of the burden of the
proposed collections of information, including the validity of the
methodology and assumptions used;
(iii) How to enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the
information to be collected;
(iv) How to minimize the burden of the collections of information
on those who are to respond, including the use of appropriate
automated, electronic, mechanical, or other technological collection
techniques or other forms of information technology, e.g., permitting
electronic submission of responses.
In compliance with these requirements, the agencies ask for public
comments on the following proposed collections of information:
Title: E-911 Grant Program.
OMB Control Number: N/A
Requested Expiration Date of Approval: Three years from the
approval date.
Type of Request: New collection.
Affected Public: State Governments
Form Number: N/A
Abstract: The Ensuring Needed Help Arrives Near Callers Employing
911 (ENHANCE 911) Act of 2004 (Pub. L. 108-494, codified at 47 U.S.C.
942) authorizes a joint grant program between the National Highway
Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) of the U.S. Department of
Transportation and the National Telecommunications and Information
Administration (NTIA) of the Department of Commerce to facilitate
coordination among all parties involved in the organization of E-911
services.
The Act requires an applicant to certify to several conditions in
its application in order to qualify for a grant. Specifically, an
applicant must certify that (1) it has coordinated its application with
the public safety answering points (PSAP's); (2) it has designated a
single officer or governmental body to serve as the coordinator of
implementation of E-911 services; (3) it has established a plan for the
coordination of and implementation of E-911 services; (4) it has
integrated telecommunications services involved in the implementation
of E-911 services; and (5) no portion of any designated E-911 charges
imposed by the State or other taxing jurisdiction within the State is
being diverted for any other purpose during the period at least 180
days before the application date and continuing throughout the period
of time for which grant funds are available. In addition, the Act
requires grantees to match at least 50 percent from non-Federal
sources.
The information collected for this grant program is to include an
application consisting of a State 911 Plan, project budget information
and certifications. This information is necessary to determine whether
a State satisfies the criteria for a grant award.
In a Federal Register document published on March 11, 2008, NHTSA
sought public comment on a proposed collection of information for the
E-911
[[Page 57574]]
grant program. See 73 FR 13068. In that notice, NHTSA inadvertently
identified HS-217 (Highway Safety Program Cost Summary) for submission
in the application instead of SF-424 (Application for Federal
Assistance), including SF-424a and SF-424b, which have been approved by
OMB. The agencies intend to use the SF-424 forms as part of the
application for the E-911 grant program. Accordingly, the agencies are
not required to obtain OMB approval for the use of these forms.
A State must also submit a State 911 Plan as part of its
application. This plan must detail the projects and activities proposed
to be funded for the implementation of Phase II E-911 services or
migration to an IP-enabled emergency network, establish metrics and a
time table for grant implementation, and describe the steps that the
State has take to meet the grant criteria. It is important for the
agencies to review each applicant's plan to confirm that the applicant
has met certain statutory requirements--a plan for the coordination of
and implementation of E-911 services, coordination of its application
with PSAPs, involvement of integrated telecommunications services in
the implementation of E-911 services, and priority funding to
communities without 911 capability.
Estimated Annual Burden: 2240 hours (for State 911 plans).
Estimated Number of Respondents: 56 (50 States, District of
Columbia, Puerto Rico, American Samoa, Guam, the Northern Mariana
Islands, and the U.S. Virgin Islands).
Comments are invited on: Whether the proposed collection of
information is necessary for the proper performance of the functions of
the agencies, including whether the information will have practical
utility; the accuracy of the agencies' estimate of the burden of the
proposed information collection; ways to enhance the quality, utility
and clarity of the information to be collected; and ways to minimize
the burden of the collection of information on respondents, including
the use of automated collection techniques or other forms of
information technology. Comments must refer to the docket and notice
numbers cited at the beginning of this NPRM and be submitted to one of
the addresses identified at the beginning of this NPRM.
F. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act
Section 202 of the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (UMRA)
requires Federal agencies to prepare a written assessment of the costs,
benefits, and other effects of proposed or final rules that include a
Federal mandate likely to result in the expenditure by State, local, or
tribal governments, in the aggregate, or by the private sector, of more
than $100 million annually. This proposed rule would not meet the
definition of a Federal mandate because the resulting annual State
expenditures would not exceed the $100 million threshold. The program
is voluntary and States that choose to apply and qualify would receive
grant funds.
G. National Environmental Policy Act
NHTSA and NTIA have reviewed this rulemaking action for the
purposes of the National Environmental Policy Act. The agencies have
determined that this proposal would not have a significant impact on
the quality of the human environment.
H. Executive Order 13175 (Consultation and Coordination With Indian
Tribes)
The agencies have analyzed this proposed rule under Executive Order
13175, and have determined that the proposed action would not have a
substantial direct effect on one or more Indian tribes, would not
impose substantial direct compliance costs on Indian tribal
governments, and would not preempt tribal law. Therefore, a tribal
summary impact statement is not required.
I. Regulatory Identifier Number (RIN)
The Department of Transportation assigns a regulation identifier
number (RIN) to each regulatory action listed in the Unified Agenda of
Federal Regulations. The Regulatory Information Service Center
publishes the Unified Agenda in April and October of each year. You may
use the RIN contained in the heading at the beginning of this document
to find this action in the Unified Agenda.
J. Privacy Act
Please note that anyone is able to search the electronic form of
all comments received into any of our dockets by the name of the
individual submitting the comment (or signing the comment, if submitted
on behalf of an association, business, labor union, etc.). You may
review DOT's complete Privacy Act Statement in the Federal Register. 65
FR 19477, Apr. 11, 2000.
List of Subjects in 47 CFR Part 400
Grant programs, Telecommunications, Emergency response capabilities
(911).
In consideration of the foregoing, the National Highway Traffic
Safety Administration, Department of Transportation, and the National
Telecommunications and Information Administration, Department of
Commerce propose to establish a new Chapter IV consisting of Part 400
in Title 47 of the Code of Federal Regulations to read as follows:
CHAPTER IV--NATIONAL TELECOMMUNICATIONS AND INFORMATION ADMINISTRATION,
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE, AND NATIONAL HIGHWAY TRAFFIC SAFETY
ADMINISTRATION, DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
PART 400--E-911 GRANT PROGRAM
Sec.
400.1 Purpose.
400.2 Definitions.
400.3 Who may apply.
400.4 Application requirements.
400.5 Approval and award.
400.6 Distribution of grant funds.
400.7 Eligible uses for grant funds.
400.8 Non-compliance.
400.9 Financial and administrative requirements.
400.10 Closeout.
Appendix A to Part 400: Minimum Grant Awards Available to Qualifying
States
Appendix B to Part 400: Certification for E-911 Grant Applicants
Appendix C to Part 400: Annual Certification for E-911 Grant
Recipients
Authority: 47 U.S.C. 942.
Sec. 400.1 Purpose.
This part establishes uniform application, approval, award,
financial and administrative requirements for the grant program
authorized under the ``Ensuring Needed Help Arrives Near Callers
Employing 911 Act of 2004'' (ENHANCE 911 Act), as amended.
Sec. 400.2 Definitions.
As used in this part--
Administrator means the Administrator of the National Highway
Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA), U.S. Department of
Transportation.
Assistant Secretary means the Assistant Secretary for
Communications and Information, U.S. Department of Commerce, and
Administrator of the National Telecommunications and Information
Administration (NTIA).
Designated E-911 charges mean 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.
E-911 Coordinator means a single officer or governmental body of
the State that is responsible for implementing E-911 services in the
State.
E-911 services mean both phase I and phase II enhanced 911
services, as described in 47 CFR 20.18.
Eligible entity means a State or local government or tribal
organization,
[[Page 57575]]
including public authorities, boards, commissions, and similar bodies
created by such governmental entities to provided E-911 services.
ICO means the National E-911 Implementation Coordination Office
established under 47 U.S.C. 942 for the administration of the E-911
grant program, located at the National Highway Traffic Safety
Administration, U.S. Department of Transportation, 1200 New Jersey
Avenue, SE., NTI-140, Washington, DC 20590.
IP-enabled emergency network means an emergency communications
network based on an infrastructure allowing secured transmission of
data among computers that use the Internet Protocol.
Phase II E-911 services mean phase II enhanced 911 services, as
described in47 CFR 20.18.
PSAP means a public safety answering point, a facility that has
been designated to receive emergency calls and route them to emergency
personnel.
State includes any State of the United States, the District of
Columbia, Puerto Rico, American Samoa, Guam, the Northern Mariana
Islands, and the U.S. Virgin Islands.
Sec. 400.3 Who may apply.
In order to apply for a grant under this part, an applicant must be
a State applying on behalf of all eligible entities within its
jurisdiction.
Sec. 400.4 Application requirements.
(a) Contents. A State's application for funds for the E-911 grant
program must consist of the following components:
(1) State 911 Plan. A plan that details the projects and activities
proposed to be funded for the implementation and operation of Phase II
E-911 services or migration to an IP-enabled emergency network,
establishes metrics and a time table for grant implementation, and
describes the steps the State has taken to--
(i) Coordinate its application with local governments, tribal
organizations, and PSAPs within the State;
(ii) Ensure that at least 90 percent of the grant funds will be
used for the direct benefit of PSAPs;
(iii) Give priority to communities without 911 capability as of
August 3, 2007 to establish Phase II coverage by identifying the
percentage of grant funds designated for those communities or providing
an explanation why such designation would not be practicable in
successfully accomplishing the purposes of the grant;
(iv) Involve integrated telecommunications services in the
implementation and delivery of Phase II E-911 services or in the
migration to an IP-enabled emergency network; and
(v) Employ the use of technologies to achieve compliance with Phase
II E-911 services or for migration to an IP-enabled emergency network.
(2) Project budget. A project budget for all proposed projects and
activities to be funded by the grant funds identified for the State in
Appendix A to this part and matching funds. Specifically, for each
project or activity, the State must:
(i) Demonstrate that the project or activity meets the eligible use
requirement in Sec. 400.7; and
(ii) Identify the non-Federal sources, which meet the requirements
of49 CFR 18.24, that will fund at least 50 percent of the cost; except
that as provided in 48 U.S.C. 1469a, the requirement for non-Federal
matching funds (including in-kind contributions) is waived for American
Samoa, Guam, the Northern Mariana Islands, and the U.S. Virgin Islands
for grant amounts up to $200,000.
(3) Supplemental project budget. To be eligible for additional
grant funds that may become available in accordance with Sec. 400.6, a
State must submit, with its application, a supplemental project budget
that identifies the maximum dollar amount the State is able to match
from non-Federal sources meeting the requirements of 49 CFR 18.24, and
includes projects or activities for those grant and matching amounts,
up to the total amount in the project budget submitted under paragraph
(a)(2) of this section. This information must be provided to the same
level of detail as required under paragraph (a)(2) of this section and
be consistent with the State 911 Plan required under paragraph (a)(1)
of this section.
(4) Designated E-911 Coordinator. The identification of a single
officer or government body appointed by the Governor of the State to
serve as the E-911 Coordinator of implementation of E-911 services and
to sign the certifications required under this part. If the Governor
appoints a governmental body to serve as the E-911 Coordinator, an
official representative of the governmental body shall be identified to
sign the certifications for the E-911 Coordinator. The State must
notify NHTSA in writing within 30 days of any change in appointment of
the E-911 Coordinator.
(5) Certifications.
(i) The certification in Appendix B to this part, signed by the E-
911 Coordinator, certifying that the State has complied with the
required statutory and programmatic conditions in submitting its
application, including that the State and all other taxing
jurisdictions within the State have not, during the time period 180
days preceding the application date, diverted any portion of designated
E-911 charges imposed by the State or any other taxing jurisdiction
within the State to any purpose other than the purposes for which such
charges are designated, and will not do so throughout the time period
during which grant funds are available.
(ii) Submitted on an annual basis 30 days after the end of each
fiscal year during which grant funds are available, the certification
in Appendix C to this part, signed by the E-911 Coordinator, making the
same certification as required under paragraph (a)(5)(i) of this
section concerning the diversion of designated E-911 charges.
(b) Due date. The State must submit the application documents
identified in this section so that they are received by the ICO no
later than 60 days after publication of the Final Rule in the Federal
Register. Failure to meet this deadline will preclude the State from
receiving consideration for an E-911 grant award.
Sec. 400.5 Approval and award.
(a) The ICO will review each application for compliance with the
requirements of this part.
(b) The ICO may request additional information from the State, with
respect to any of the application submission requirements of Sec.
400.4, prior to making a determination of award.
(c) The Administrator and Assistant Secretary will jointly approve
and announce, in writing, grant awards to qualifying States no later
than September 30, 2009.
Sec. 400.6 Distribution of grant funds.
(a) Initial distribution. Subject to paragraph (b) of this section,
grant funds for each State that meets the requirements in Sec. 400.4
will be distributed--
(1) 50 percent in the ratio which the population of the State bears
to the total population of all the States, as shown by the latest
available Federal census; and
(2) 50 percent in the ratio which the public road mileage in each
State bears to the total public road mileage in all States, as shown by
the latest available Federal Highway Administration data.
(b) Minimum distribution. The distribution to each qualifying State
under paragraph (a) of this section shall not be less than $500,000,
except that the distribution to American Samoa, Guam, the Northern
Mariana Islands,
[[Page 57576]]
and the U.S. Virgin Islands shall not be less than $250,000.
(c) Supplemental distribution. Grant funds that are not distributed
under paragraph (a) of this section will be redistributed among
qualifying States that have met the requirements of Sec. 400.4,
including the submission of a supplemental project budget as provided
Sec. 400.4(a)(3), in accordance with the formula in paragraph (a) of
this section.
Sec. 400.7 Eligible uses for grant funds.
Grant funds awarded under this part may be used only for the
acquisition and deployment of hardware and software that enables the
implementation and operation of Phase II E-911 services, for the
acquisition and deployment of hardware and software to enable the
migration to an IP-enabled emergency network, or for the training in
the use of such hardware and software, provided such uses have been
identified in the State 911 Plan.
Sec. 400.8 Non-compliance.
In accordance with 49 U.S.C. 942(c), where a State provides false
or inaccurate information in its certification related to the diversion
of E-911 charges, the State shall be required to return all grant funds
awarded under this part.
Sec. 400.9 Financial and administrative requirements.
(a) General. The requirements of 49 CFR part 18, the Uniform
Administrative Requirements for Grants and Cooperative Agreements to
State and Local Governments, including applicable cost principles
referenced at 49 CFR 18.22, govern the implementation and management of
grants awarded under this part.
(b) Reporting requirements.
(1) Performance reports. Each grant recipient shall submit an
annual performance report to NHTSA, following the procedures of 49 CFR
18.40, within 90 days after each fiscal year that grant funds are
available, exce