Nondiscrimination on the Basis of Disability in State and Local Government Services; Accessibility of Next Generation 9-1-1, 43446-43452 [2010-18336]
Download as PDF
43446
*
*
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 142 / Monday, July 26, 2010 / Proposed Rules
*
*
*
Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 20th day
of July 2010.
For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
Annette Vietti-Cook,
Secretary of the Commission.
[FR Doc. 2010–18223 Filed 7–23–10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7590–01–P
DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY
Alcohol and Tobacco Tax and Trade
Bureau
27 CFR Part 9
[Docket No. TTB–2010–0003; Notice No.
107; Re: Notice No.105]
RIN 1513–AB41
Proposed Establishment of the Pine
Mountain-Mayacmas Viticultural Area;
Comment Period Extension
Alcohol and Tobacco Tax and
Trade Bureau, Treasury.
ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking;
extension of comment period.
AGENCY:
In response to a request from
a viticulture industry group, we are
extending the comment period for
Notice No. 105, Proposed Establishment
of the Pine Mountain-Mayacmas
Viticultural Area, a notice of proposed
rulemaking published in the Federal
Register on May 27, 2010, for an
additional 45 days.
DATES: Written comments on Notice No.
105 are now due or before September 9,
2010.
ADDRESSES: You may send comments on
this notice to one of the following
addresses:
• https://www.regulations.gov: Use the
comment form for this notice as posted
within Docket No. TTB–2010–0003 on
‘‘Regulations.gov,’’ the Federal erulemaking portal, to submit comments
via the Internet;
• Mail: Director, Regulations and
Rulings Division, Alcohol and Tobacco
Tax and Trade Bureau, P.O. Box 14412,
Washington, DC 20044–4412.
• Hand Delivery/Courier in Lieu of
Mail: Alcohol and Tobacco Tax and
Trade Bureau, 1310 G Street, NW., Suite
200–E, Washington, DC 20005.
See the ‘‘Public Participation’’ section
of this notice for specific instructions
and requirements for submitting
comments, and for information on how
to request a public hearing.
You may view copies of this notice,
the original notice of proposed
rulemaking (Notice No. 105), selected
supporting materials, and any
wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with PROPOSALS_PART 1
SUMMARY:
VerDate Mar<15>2010
15:19 Jul 23, 2010
Jkt 220001
comments we receive about the
proposed establishment of the Pine
Mountain-Mayacmas viticultural area
within Docket No. TTB–2010–0003 at
https://www.regulations.gov. A direct
link to this docket is posted on the TTB
Web site at https://www.ttb.gov/wine/
wine-rulemaking.shtml under Notice
No. 105. You also may view copies of
this notice, all supporting materials, and
any comments we receive about this
proposal by appointment at the TTB
Information Resource Center, 1310 G
Street, NW., Washington, DC 20220.
Please call 202–453–2270 to make an
appointment.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: N.A.
Sutton, Regulations and Rulings
Division, Alcohol and Tobacco Tax and
Trade Bureau, 925 Lakeville St., No.
158, Petaluma, CA 94952; phone 415–
271–1254.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: TTB
received a petition from Sara Schorske
of Compliance Service of American,
prepared and filed on her own behalf
and that of local wine industry members
to establish the 4,600-acre Pine
Mountain-Mayacmas viticultural area in
northern California. About two-thirds of
the proposed viticultural area lies in the
extreme southern portion of Mendocino
County, with the remaining one-third
located in the extreme northern portion
of Sonoma County.
The proposed Pine MountainMayacmas viticultural area is totally
within the multicounty North Coast
viticultural area (27 CFR 9.30) and it
overlaps the northernmost portions of
the established Alexander Valley
viticultural area (27 CFR 9.53) and the
Northern Sonoma viticultural area
(27 CFR 9.70).
In Notice No. 105 published in the
Federal Register (75 FR 29682) on
Thursday, May 27, 2010, we described
the petitioners’ rationale for the
proposed establishment of the Pine
Mountain-Mayacmas viticultural area
and requested comments on the
proposal on or before July 26, 2010.
On July 16, 2010, we received a letter
request from attorney Richard
Mendelson on behalf of the Napa Valley
Vintners (NVV), a wine industry trade
association. The request explained that
due to the periodic scheduling of the
NVV’s committee and board of directors
meetings, the group would be unable to
meet the original July 26, 2010,
comment deadline for Notice No. 105.
The letter therefore requested a 45-day
extension to the comment period for
Notice No. 105 to allow the NVV to
complete and thoroughly vet its
comments on the proposed viticultural
area.
PO 00000
Frm 00022
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
In response to this request we extend
the comment period for Notice No. 105
an additional 45 days. Therefore, the
comments on Notice No. 105 are now
due on or before September 9, 2010.
Drafting Information
Michael Hoover of the Regulations
and Rulings Division drafted this notice.
Signed: July 20, 2010.
John J. Manfreda,
Administrator.
[FR Doc. 2010–18177 Filed 7–23–10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4810–31–P
DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE
28 CFR Part 35
[CRT Docket No. 111]
RIN 1190–AA62
Nondiscrimination on the Basis of
Disability in State and Local
Government Services; Accessibility of
Next Generation 9-1-1
Department of Justice, Civil
Rights Division.
ACTION: Advance notice of proposed
rulemaking.
AGENCY:
The Department of Justice
(Department) is considering revising the
regulation implementing title II of the
Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA)
to address in what manner public
entities that operate 9-1-1 call-taking
centers (also known as Public Safety
Answering Points (PSAPs)) should be
required to make changes in
telecommunication technology to reflect
developments that have occurred since
the publication of the Department’s
1991 regulation. Under its existing title
II regulation, the Department requires
that PSAPs provide direct, equal access
to telephone emergency centers for
individuals with disabilities who use
analog text telephones (TTYs).1 Many
individuals with disabilities now use
the Internet and wireless text devices as
their primary modes of
telecommunications. At the same time,
PSAPs are considering and planning to
shift from analog telecommunications
technology to new Internet-Protocol
(IP)-enabled Next Generation 9-1-1
services (NG 9-1-1) that will provide
voice and data (such as text, pictures,
and video) capabilities. This ANPRM
seeks information on possible revisions
to the Department’s regulation to ensure
SUMMARY:
1 TTYs are also known as ‘‘telecommunications
devices for the deaf’’ (TDDs).
E:\FR\FM\26JYP1.SGM
26JYP1
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 142 / Monday, July 26, 2010 / Proposed Rules
direct access to NG 9-1-1 services for
individuals with disabilities.
DATES: The Department invites written
comments from members of the public.
Written comments must be postmarked
and electronic comments must be
submitted on or before January 24, 2011.
Commenters should be aware that the
electronic Federal Docket Management
System would not accept comments
after Midnight Eastern Time on the last
day of the comment period.
ADDRESSES: You may submit comments,
identified by RIN 1190–AA62 (or Docket
ID No. 111), by any one of the following
methods:
• Federal eRulemaking Web site:
https://www.regulations.gov. Follow the
Web site instructions for submitting
comments. The Regulations.gov Docket
ID is DOJ–CRT–0111.
• Regular U.S. mail: Disability Rights
Section, Civil Rights Division, U.S.
Department of Justice, P.O. Box 2885,
Fairfax, VA 22031–0885.
• Overnight, courier or hand delivery:
Disability Rights Section, Civil Rights
Division, U.S. Department of Justice,
1425 New York Avenue, NW., Suite
4039, Washington, DC 20005.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Robert Mather, Attorney, Disability
Rights Section, Civil Rights Division,
U.S. Department of Justice, at (202) 307–
0663 (voice or TTY). This is not a tollfree number. Information may also be
obtained from the Department’s toll-free
ADA Information Line at (800) 514–
0301 (voice) or (800) 514–0383 (TTY).
You may obtain copies of this
ANPRM in large print or Braille or on
audiotape or computer disk by calling
the ADA Information Line at (800) 514–
0301 (voice) and (800) 514–0383 (TTY).
This ANRPM is also available on the
ADA Home Page at https://www.ada.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with PROPOSALS_PART 1
I. Electronic Submission of Comments
and Posting of Public Comments
You may submit electronic comments
to https://www.regulations.gov. When
submitting comments electronically,
you must include DOJ–CRT 0111 in the
search field, and you must include your
full name and address. Electronic files
should avoid the use of special
characters or any form of encryption
and should be free of any defects or
viruses.
Please note that all comments
received are considered part of the
public record and made available for
public inspection online at https://
www.regulations.gov. Submission
postings will include any personal
identifying information (such as your
name, address, etc.) included in the text
VerDate Mar<15>2010
15:19 Jul 23, 2010
Jkt 220001
of your comment. If you include
personal identifying information (such
as your name, address, etc.) in the text
your comment, but do not want it to be
posted online, you must include the
phrase ‘‘PERSONAL IDENTIFYING
INFORMATION’’ in the first paragraph
of your comment. You must also
include all the personal identifying
information you want redacted along
with this phrase. Similarly, if you
submit confidential business
information as part of your comment but
do not want it posted online, you must
include the phrase ‘‘CONFIDENTIAL
BUSINESS INFORMATION’’ in the first
paragraph of your comment. You must
also prominently identify confidential
business information to be redacted
within the comment. If a comment has
so much confidential business
information that it cannot be effectively
redacted, all or part of that comment
may not be posted on https://
www.regulations.gov.
Comments on this ANPRM will also
be made available for public viewing by
appointment at the Disability Rights
Section, located at 1425 New York
Avenue, NW., Suite 4039, Washington,
DC 20005, during normal business
hours. To arrange an appointment to
review the comments, please contact the
ADA Information Line at (800) 514–
0301 (voice) or (800) 514–0383 (TTY).
The reason that the Civil Rights
Division is requesting electronic
comments before Midnight Eastern
Time on the day the comment period
closes is because the inter-agency
Regulations.gov/Federal Docket
Management System (FDMS) which
receives electronic comments terminates
the public’s ability to submit comments
at Midnight on the day the comment
period closes. Commenters in time
zones other than Eastern may want to
take this fact into account so that their
electronic comments can be received.
The constraints imposed by the
Regulations.gov/FDMS system do not
apply to U.S. postal comments, which
will be considered as timely filed if they
are postmarked before Midnight on the
day the comment period closes.
II. Public Hearing
The Department will hold at least one
public hearing to solicit comments on
the issues presented in this notice. The
Department plans to hold the public
hearing during the 180-day public
comment period. The date, time, and
location of the public hearing will be
announced to the public in the Federal
Register and on the Department’s ADA
Home Page, https://www.ada.gov/.
PO 00000
Frm 00023
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
43447
III. Background
A. Statutory and Rulemaking History
On July 26, 1990, President George
H.W. Bush signed into law the ADA, a
comprehensive civil rights law
prohibiting discrimination on the basis
of disability. The ADA broadly protects
the rights of individuals with
disabilities in employment, access to
State and local government services,
places of public accommodation,
transportation, and other important
areas of American life. The ADA also
requires newly designed and
constructed or altered State and local
government facilities, public
accommodations, and commercial
facilities to be readily accessible to and
usable by individuals with disabilities.
42 U.S.C. 12101 et seq. Section 204(a) of
title II and section 306(b) of title III
direct the Attorney General to
promulgate regulations to carry out the
provisions of titles II and III, other than
certain provisions dealing specifically
with transportation. 42 U.S.C. 12134; 42
U.S.C. 12186(b).
Title II applies to State and local
government entities, and, in Subtitle A,
protects qualified individuals with
disabilities from discrimination on the
basis of disability in services, programs,
and activities provided by State and
local government entities. Title II
extends the prohibition on
discrimination established by section
504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973, as
amended, 29 U.S.C. 794 (section 504), to
all activities of State and local
governments regardless of whether these
entities receive Federal financial
assistance. 42 U.S.C. 12131–65.
Title III prohibits discrimination on
the basis of disability in the activities of
places of public accommodation
(private entities whose operations affect
commerce and that fall into one of
twelve categories listed in the ADA,
such as restaurants, movie theaters,
schools, day care facilities, recreational
facilities, and doctors’ offices) and
requires newly constructed or altered
places of public accommodation––as
well as commercial facilities (privately
owned, nonresidential facilities such as
factories, warehouses, or office
buildings)––to comply with the ADA
Standards. 42 U.S.C. 12181–89.
On July 26, 1991, the Department
issued its final rules implementing title
II and title III, which are codified at 28
CFR part 35 (title II) and part 36 (title
III). Appendix A of the title III
regulation, at 28 CFR part 36, app. A,
contains the ADA Standards for
Accessible Design. On September 30,
2004, the Department published an
advance notice of proposed rulemaking
E:\FR\FM\26JYP1.SGM
26JYP1
43448
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 142 / Monday, July 26, 2010 / Proposed Rules
(2004 ANPRM) to begin the process of
updating the 1991 regulations to adopt
revised ADA Standards based on the
relevant parts of the 2004 ADA/ABA
Guidelines. 69 FR 58768. On June 17,
2008, the Department issued a Notice of
Proposed Rulemaking (2008 NPRM) to
adopt the revised ADA Standards and
revise the title II and title III regulations.
73 FR 34466. The NPRM addressed the
issues raised in the public’s comments
to the ANPRM and sought additional
comment.
Although the Department did not
propose to include NG 9-1-1
accessibility provisions in the 2008
NPRM, the Department received
comments urging it to amend the title II
rule to mandate that PSAPs move
towards the implementation of NG 9-11 services that will provide voice and
data (such as text, pictures, and video)
capabilities so that they will be able to
directly receive various kinds of voice, text- and video-based ‘‘calls.’’ Several
commenters, including the National
Emergency Number Association (NENA)
and the National Association of the
Deaf, requested the development of
standards for direct access to NG 9-1-1.
Based on these comments and the
reasons detailed below, the Department
has decided to begin the process of
soliciting comments and suggestions
with respect to what an NPRM regarding
NG 9-1-1 access should contain.
wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with PROPOSALS_PART 1
B. Legal Foundation for Access to
NG 9-1-1
The Department’s current title II
regulation, as interpreted and
administered by the Department,
requires that PSAPs provide direct
access to individuals with disabilities
who use TTYs. 28 CFR 35.162. The
Department has interpreted title II so as
to require that PSAPs provide ‘‘direct,
equal access’’ to 9-1-1 for individuals
with disabilities who use TTYs. Direct
access means that PSAPs must be able
to directly receive TTY calls without
relying on an outside relay service or
third-party services, i.e., the PSAP must
be able to engage in TTY-to-TTY calls.
Equal access requires that 9-1-1 services
provided for individuals who use TTYs
be as effective as those provided for
individuals who make voice calls, in
terms of response time, response
quality, hours of operation, and all other
features offered (e.g., automatic number
identification, automatic location
identification, automatic call
distribution). PSAPs also must follow
proper procedures and practices when
TTY calls are received, including Voice-
VerDate Mar<15>2010
15:19 Jul 23, 2010
Jkt 220001
Carry Over (VCO) and Hearing-Carry
Over (HCO).2
The Department recognizes that many
individuals with disabilities now rely
on Internet Protocol (IP)-based and
digital wireless devices, rather than
analog-based TTYs, as their primary
modes of telecommunications and
9-1-1 call-taking centers are shifting
from existing traditional telephone
emergency services to new IP-enabled
NG 9-1-1 services. Therefore, this
ANPRM seeks comments from members
of the public and covered entities on
possible revisions to the title II rule to
establish new requirements and
guidance to ensure that NG 9-1-1
services are made accessible to, and
usable by, individuals with disabilities.
This ANPRM identifies specific issues
on which the Department solicits
comment. The Department is also
interested in comments on any other
issues that affect access to NG 9-1-1
services. The Department will consider
all comments before deciding whether
to propose revisions to the title II
regulation.
The Department requests comments
regarding appropriate steps to provide
individuals with disabilities with access
to NG 9-1-1 technology at 9-1-1
emergency call-taking centers, including
converging 3 IP 9-1-1 technologies that
are as effective as those provided for
individuals without disabilities. In this
ANPRM, the Department is asking two
key questions: (1) What devices and
modes of communication (voice, text,
video, and data) are individuals with
disabilities using to make ‘‘calls,’’
including emergency calls?, and (2)
what steps should the Department take
to ensure that any new IP-based PSAP
platforms can receive direct calls from
these devices?
2 Many persons who became deaf or hard of
hearing later in life prefer to speak instead of type.
They use what is called voice carryover (VCO).
With VCO, the caller speaks directly into the phone,
and the call taker types back via TTY to the caller.
VCO can be accomplished with standard standalone TTY equipment simply by having the call
taker alternate between listening on the handset
when the caller is speaking and placing the handset
in the TTY couplers to type a response. People with
speech impairments who are not deaf or hard of
hearing often prefer HCO. HCO allows them to type
their words on a TTY to call takers and hear call
takers’ spoken responses through their handset.
HCO can be accomplished by a call taker using
standard stand-alone TTY equipment by alternating
speaking into the handset and placing the handset
in the TTY when the caller types a response. For
more information about the title II requirements for
PSAPs, you may consult the Department’s ADA
technical assistance manual, https://www.usdoj.gov/
crt/ada/911ta.pdf (last visited July 12, 2010).
3 ‘‘Convergence’’ is the integration of traditional
telecommunications and newer information
technology services.
PO 00000
Frm 00024
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
C. Major Migration in Communications
Devices and 9-1-1 Services
As communication technologies are
developing, individuals with disabilities
are transitioning from analog or legacy
devices to digital and IP-based devices.
Among these devices are both wired and
mobile videophones, text messaging
wireless devices, including ‘‘smart’’
phones, as well as computers (including
computers with Web cams) and
captioned telephones. Many PSAPs or
emergency 9-1-1 call-taking centers are
not yet equipped to directly receive
video calls or text calls over the
Internet. As a result, individuals who
have to call 9-1-1 using their IP-based
videophone or texting device must call
through third-party telecommunications
relay services (TRS). TRS uses a relay
operator called a communication
assistant (CA) who relays the call
between the caller using text or video
and the PSAP.4 In most IP-based videoor text-relay services, the CA receives
the call from the person originating the
call, places the call to the PSAP, and
then relays the conversation between
the caller and the PSAP.5 Relay services
are under the jurisdiction of the Federal
Communications Commission (FCC).6
The 9-1-1 number has been
designated for public use throughout the
United States to report an emergency,
request emergency assistance, or both.
The original 9-1-1 system is based on
traditional telephone technology, which
cannot process text, data, image, and
video sent from handheld devices and
computers (e.g., personal digital
assistant (PDA), cellular phone, portable
media player, video phone, or camera).
To address the changing technology,
State and local governments are working
to improve their 9-1-1 emergency
communications systems and are
moving towards an IP-enabled network.
The ultimate goal is to have an
emergency network that will enable the
general public to make a 9-1-1 ‘‘call’’ via
voice, text, or video from wired and
wireless devices and directly
communicate with personnel at the
4 See generally Telecommunications Relay
Services and Speech-to-Speech Services for
Individuals with Hearing and Speech Disabilities;
E911 Requirements for IP–Enabled Service
Providers, CG Docket No. 03–1123, WC Docket No.
05–196, Report and Order and Further Notice of
Proposed Rulemaking, 23 FCC Rcd 11591 (June 24,
2008) (adopting new emergency call handling
requirements).
5 Captioned telephone relay calls are set up
somewhat differently, with the caller placing the
call directly to the party being called (the PSAP) at
the same time that the call is connected to the CA.
The CA does not need to place the call separately
to the PSAP.
6 See generally 47 CFR 64.601 et seq. (the TRS
regulations).
E:\FR\FM\26JYP1.SGM
26JYP1
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 142 / Monday, July 26, 2010 / Proposed Rules
wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with PROPOSALS_PART 1
PSAP. Several States, regions, and
counties, including Indiana, Montana,
Vermont, Texas, Florida, Minnesota,
Allegheny County, Pennsylvania and
the District of Columbia, are either
considering or implementing an IP
network or next generation related
components in preparation for NG
9-1-1. https://www.nena.org/ng911project/state-status (last visited July 12,
2010).
The Department is aware of two
PSAPs’ efforts to provide access to
individuals with disabilities who use
smart phones as texting devices. For
example, in 2003, the police department
in Sacramento, California began to
accept ‘‘9-1-1’’ e-mails from individuals
with disabilities. That police
department also has accepted e-mails
from as far away as Los Angeles and
Texas asking Sacramento police to relay
emergency information to their local
authorities. https://
www.helpkidshear.org/news/media/
2003/2003–11–21-cbs.htm (last visited
July 12, 2010). Another PSAP, Black
Hawk County, Iowa, recently started to
receive and respond to short message
service (SMS) messages from cell
phones or pagers. See Enforcing the
ADA, Update April, September 2009,
page 12, available at https://
www.ada.gov/aprsep09.pdf (last visited
July 12, 2010). With these additional
services, individuals with disabilities
are able to report an accident or other
emergency quickly using their PDAs,
without the necessity of locating and
using a TTY or relying on another
person to report the incident
D. Other Federal Efforts
The Department is familiar with
ongoing efforts by other Federal
agencies to ensure that advances in
telecommunications systems, including
NG 9-1-1 services, are accessible for all
Americans, including individuals with
disabilities. The National E–911
Implementation Coordination Office
(National 9-1-1 Office) issued in
September 2009, a national plan (Plan)
for migrating to IP-enabled 9-1-1
Systems. See National Plan for
Migrating to IP–Enabled 9-1-1 Systems,
available at https://www.ntis.gov/search/
product.aspx?ABBR=PB2010102716
(last visited June 5, 2010). As required
by the NET 911 Improvement Act, 47
U.S.C. 942(d), the Plan identified and
analyzed 9-1-1 system migration issues
and assessed potential options to
resolve them. The Plan drew heavily
from the United States Department of
Transportation’s (DOT) NG 9-1-1
Initiative work and findings. DOT had
concluded that IP-enabled systems
provide the optimal technical solution
VerDate Mar<15>2010
15:19 Jul 23, 2010
Jkt 220001
for future 9-1-1 networks. One of the
requirements of the NET 9-1-1
Improvement Act is to identify solutions
for providing 9-1-1 and enhanced 9-1-1
access to individuals with disabilities
and needed steps to implement such
solutions. 47 U.S.C. 942(d)(I). In
addressing policy barriers and issues,
the National 9-1-1 Office stated that ‘‘to
foster the migration to IP-enabled 9-1-1,
Federal * * * regulatory agencies will
need to review current * * * regulations
to keep pace with the rapidly changing
9-1-1 marketplace.’’ Plan, at 5–10.
Last year, DOT’s National Highway
Traffic Safety Administration and the
United States Department of
Commerce’s National
Telecommunications and Information
Administration announced more than
$40 million in grants to help PSAPs
nationwide implement next-generation
technologies.
Another Federal agency has called for
action to ensure that IP technology is
accessible to individuals with
disabilities. The National Council on
Disability, in its 2006 report, The Need
for Federal Legislation and Regulation
Prohibiting Telecommunications and
Information Services Discrimination, 7
calls for such Federal action because
experience has shown that market forces
are not sufficient to ensure individuals
with disabilities equal access to
emerging technologies. As the
responsible agency for writing
regulations to ensure that 9-1-1 services
are accessible to individuals with
disabilities,8 in this ANPRM the
Department is seeking comments from
the public, including 9-1-1 stakeholders,
in addressing barriers to NG 9-1-1 and
ensuring access to NG 9-1-1 services.
The FCC has recently undertaken a
number of broadband 9 initiatives. One
of these initiatives seeks to improve the
nation’s current 9-1-1 system by
establishing the foundation for the
transmission of voice, data, or video to
PSAPs during emergency calls.
Broadband & Public Safety and
Homeland Security, https://www.fcc.gov/
pshs/broadband.html (last visited July
12, 2010). In another NG 9-1-1 matter,
the FCC’s Communications Security,
Reliability and Interoperability
Council’s working group is considering
ways that NG 9-1-1 architectures and
technologies can provide access for
individuals with disabilities. See
https://www.fcc.gov/pshs/advisory/csric/
7 https://www.ncd.gov/newsroom/publications/
2006/discrimination.htm (last visited June 5, 2010).
8 See 42 U.S.C. 12134(a).
9 The term ‘‘broadband’’ refers to advanced
communications systems capable of providing highspeed transmission of services such as data, voice,
and video over the Internet and other networks.
PO 00000
Frm 00025
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
43449
wg-4b.pdf (last visited July 12, 2010).
With respect to emergency calls made
via TRS (i.e., through a relay operator),
the FCC has implemented new
numbering and E9-1-1 requirements for
Video Relay Services and IP-Relay
Services. New Numbering and E911
Requirements for VRS and IP Relay
Video In American Sign Language
(ASL), https://www.fcc.gov/cgb/dro/
numbering_and_e911_for_vrs_ip.html
(last visited June 5, 2010). Access to
PSAPs via TRS is not addressed in this
ANPRM.
IV. Request for Public Comments
The Department is seeking public
comment on the issues discussed below.
In addition to seeking comments in
response to the specific questions raised
in this ANPRM, the Department is
particularly interested in receiving
comments from all of those who have a
stake in ensuring that NG 9-1-1 is
accessible to individual people with
disabilities, advocacy groups,
representatives from Tribal, local, State,
and Federal governments, public safety
organizations, and industry
professionals, about the potential
application of the new requirements to
plans for migration to, and deployment
of, NG 9-1-1 services.
The prospect of developing new title
II requirements for access to NG 9-1-1
raises a number of general issues,
including determining which
performance-based standards or
technical specifications would better
ensure access to NG 9-1-1 to
determining the effective date for the
application of the new provisions.
Responses should clearly identify the
specific question being addressed
according to the numbered questions in
this document.
A. Direct, Equal Access to NG 9-1-1
Question 1. What modes of
communication (e.g., voice, text, video,
or data) do (or will) individuals with
disabilities use to make direct calls to a
PSAP, and from what types of devices
would the calls be made?
i. Text Communications
IP allows several formats of text
communications, divided into two
types: real-time, and non-real-time.
Real-time text communications refer to
those that are sent and received on a
character-by-character basis; the
characters are sent immediately once
typed and also displayed immediately
to the receiving person. In an
emergency, sending text
communications to a PSAP in real-time
may save valuable time that is needed
to effectively respond to the emergency.
E:\FR\FM\26JYP1.SGM
26JYP1
wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with PROPOSALS_PART 1
43450
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 142 / Monday, July 26, 2010 / Proposed Rules
Non-real-time communications rely on
messaging capabilities where users
‘‘type-enter-wait-read-respond-reply’’—
e.g., short messages service (SMS) texts,
multimedia messaging service (MMS),
instant messaging (IM), text chat, and email. When this type of messaging is
used, messages can overlap one another.
In an emergency, this could result in the
caller or PSAP personnel responding to
each other out of the order in which
their communications were sent,
creating some confusion or delay. The
agenda for the FCC’s National
Broadband Plan states that this year, the
FCC will open a proceeding to identify
a reliable, interoperable, real-time text
standard to enable consumers to
communicate in a digital and IP-based
environment. Broadband Action
Agenda, https://www.broadband.gov/
plan/national-broadband-plan-actionagenda.pdf at 4.10 (last visited July 12,
2010).10
Currently, telephone 9-1-1
technologies support TTYs, which
provide text communications in an
analog environment. Using IP-based
devices, PSAPs would require a text
gateway in order to converse with
individuals using analog-based devices.
Question 2. Should the Department
issue a requirement for NG 9-1-1
technologies to support text
communications along with analogbased TTY communications? If so,
should NG 9-1-1 text technologies be
backward compatible with analog-based
TTYs or should the two communication
methods be available side by side?
Question 3. Which, if any, of the
following text options should the
Department designate as essential
accessibility features of NG 9-1-1 to be
incorporated into the initial deployment
of an NG 9-1-1 system to assure equal
access to emergency call-taking centers
for individuals with disabilities?
a. Real-time text.
b. Short message service (SMS).
c. Instant messaging (IM).
d. E-mail.
e. Analog gateway.
f. Other modes of text
communication.
The Department recognizes that all of
these text options will benefit not only
individuals who are deaf or hard of
hearing, but also individuals with other
disabilities who require an alternative
mean to making a voiced 9-1-1 call due
to their disabilities. The Department
10 In addition, the United States Access Board
recently proposed draft guidelines for real-time text
functionality for adoption by Federal agencies. Draft
Information and Communication technology (ICT)
Standards and Guidelines https://www.accessboard.gov/sec508/refresh/draft-rule.htm at Section
902 (last visited July 12, 2010).
VerDate Mar<15>2010
15:19 Jul 23, 2010
Jkt 220001
recognizes that a State or local
government’s NG 9-1-1 system may
eventually provide all of these options
in the future. However, the Department
is interested in learning how each of the
options would benefit individuals with
disabilities in order to determine
whether they should be designated as
‘‘essential’’ to providing access to NG 91-1.
Individuals with disabilities are
increasingly using smart phones since
they are currently the only accessible
mobile devices available for text
messaging (e.g., e-mail, SMS, or IM).
Until NG 9-1-1 services are
implemented, PSAPs will not be able to
receive text messages sent directly to 91-1 from these devices.
Question 4. For this period, should a
PSAP develop and implement an
interim plan to receive text messages
directly or via a third party? How
should a PSAP develop an interim plan?
What solutions should PSAPs consider
as part of their interim plan?
Question 5. Are there significant
issues related to the interoperability of
messages sent by text that need to be
addressed in any final regulation?
ii. Video Communications
A technology that has emerged since
publication of the original title II rule
allows individuals who use sign
language to communicate by video. An
individual who communicates by
American Sign Language (ASL) may use
a videophone or other video device (e.g.,
a Web cam connector to a computer) to
directly communicate in sign language
with either another videophone user or
a voice telephone user. In the latter case,
videophones can be used to make TRS
calls (Video Relay Service) or to use
remote sign language interpreting
services (video remote interpreting or
VRI) when an in-person interpreter is
not available. VRI is generally a feebased service. NG 9-1-1 technologies
will allow video phone users to make
direct video calls to a PSAP and allow
the callers and the emergency personnel
to engage in virtual face-to-face
communication.
The Department is seeking comments
on what steps a PSAP, in providing
video services, should take to ensure
effective communication with a 9-1-1
caller who uses sign language for
communication. One possible method of
communication for handling a direct
video-to-video call between the
individual with disabilities and the
PSAP would be through the use of VRI.
Upon receipt of a request for sign
language services, the PSAP would
make a call to a VRI service center and
connect the interpreter so that the
PO 00000
Frm 00026
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
interpreter appears on both the caller’s
and PSAP’s video phone screens. The
call would then become a 3-way video
call between the caller and PSAP, both
using the interpreter. The PSAP would
see both the interpreter and caller on the
PSAP’s screen, and both the interpreter
and the caller would see each other on
their screens. Using this method, the
PSAP would have the ability to
‘‘conference in’’ (virtually
instantaneously) a qualified interpreter
(in-house or in a remote facility)
Question 6. In implementing NG 9-11, should the Department amend its title
II regulation to require each PSAP to
provide VRI service? If so, should the
Department regulate how to provide
such service?
With NG 9-1-1, call routing allows the
sharing of networks to route calls for
multiple numbers (e.g., 2-1-1, 3-1-1, 8–
1–1, suicide hotline, poison control).
Also, NG 9-1-1 enables call access,
transfer, and backup between and
among 9-1-1 call-taking centers and
between these centers and specialized
emergency services.
Question 7. Should a center also be
allowed to transfer a caller’s call to a
particular center where call takers are
trained and fluent in oral/sign language
interpreting services or where call takers
are trained in working with individuals
with speech impairments? If so, should
a final rule address call routing policies
that restrict or prohibit such transfers?
The title II rule requires that when an
oral or sign language interpreter is
necessary for effective communication,
the interpreter must be ‘‘qualified.’’ The
rule has defined ‘‘qualified interpreter’’
as ‘‘an interpreter who is able to
interpret effectively, accurately, and
impartially both receptively and
expressively, using any necessary
specialized vocabulary.’’ 28 CFR 35.104.
Although the definition does not require
‘‘certified’’ interpreters, it does require
interpreters with the necessary skills to
interpret accurately in the particular
context.
Question 8. In the context of NG 9-11, the Department is asking for public
views on whether PSAPs should use
only those interpreters who are
specifically trained to handle emergency
calls in using interpreting services onsite or via VRI.
Question 9. The Department also
seeks comments on any other methods
for ensuring equal access to NG 9-1-1 for
individuals with disabilities. Should the
Department issue standards for other
methods to provide accessible NG 9-11 services? Should the Department
require specialized training to ensure
that these services can effectively
E:\FR\FM\26JYP1.SGM
26JYP1
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 142 / Monday, July 26, 2010 / Proposed Rules
wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with PROPOSALS_PART 1
respond to the needs of people with
disabilities in an NG 9-1-1 environment?
B. Performance Standards as Opposed
to Technical Standards
The Department is aware of ongoing
efforts by both the National Emergency
Number Association (NENA) and the
Association of Public-Safety
Communications Officials International
to develop technical standards for
guidance to service providers,
equipment manufacturers, and industryrelated standard setting bodies. The
Department has used the performance
standard of ‘‘direct access’’ for PSAPs in
enforcing title II.
Consistent with the Department’s
existing approach, the Department is
considering the use of performance
standards, as opposed to technical
standards, as new title II requirements
for access to NG 9-1-1. Two primary
considerations support this approach.
First, in light of evolving 9-1-1
technologies, it may not be feasible to
have identical scoping and technical
specifications nationwide to ensure
disability access to NG 9-1-1. Second,
performance standards would contain
flexibility to allow operational
standards, protocols, and best practices
to be adopted and implemented to meet
unique State and local circumstances
and needs.
Question 10. Should any regulatory
provision on NG 9-1-1 requirements
under title II be performance-based, or
should a final rule provide technical
specifications for call-taking technology
and equipment? Please provide as much
detail as possible in support of your
view.
Question 11. What are the technical
issues that the Department should
address in developing minimum
standards?
NENA, a leading professional,
nonprofit organization on 9-1-1 services,
has actively worked with public safety,
industry, and government groups, to
develop technical and operational
standards for NG 9-1-1 systems and
services.
Question 12. Should the Department
adopt any of NENA’s standards as the
minimum standards for direct access to
NG 9-1-1 services for individuals with
disabilities?
Speech-to-speech service (STS) is a
form of TRS that involves the use of
relay operators for people with speech
disabilities who have difficulty being
understood on the phone. STS relay
operators are trained individuals
familiar with many different speech
patterns and language recognition skills.
The relay operator makes the call and
repeats the words exactly. Individuals
VerDate Mar<15>2010
15:19 Jul 23, 2010
Jkt 220001
using STS include those with cerebral
palsy, Parkinson’s disease, a
laryngectomy, ALS, stuttering, muscular
dystrophy, stroke, and other conditions
affecting clarity of speech.11
Question 13. Should the title II
regulation be amended to require that
PSAPs directly receive calls from
individuals with speech disabilities?
C. Emergency Alerts
Public entities in many communities
now send pre-recorded emergency alert
messages to homes and businesses
automatically by phone. For instance,
emergency personnel can use
emergency alerts to notify residents in
the path of approaching wildfires,
hurricanes, or tornadoes to seek
immediate shelter or evacuate their
homes. Emergency alert systems can
also be set up to send emergency alert
text messages to smart phones, TTYs,
PDAs, and e-mail accounts. Many
colleges and universities now use this
kind of emergency alert system for their
students, parents and staff.
Converging 9-1-1 technologies will
make it possible to send automatic
emergency alerts to any communication
device—wired or mobile—via Internet
networks. For instance, vehicles
approaching a motor vehicle accident
involving hazardous materials could be
notified of the danger, thereby
preventing other vehicles from further
complicating the accident or hindering
emergency personnel. The Department
will not address any other emergency
mass notifications, such as Federal
efforts for a Common Alerting Protocol,
a next generation alerting delivery
system by which standardized alerts
will be gathered from various alerting
sources and distributed to the public (in
text, audio and video) via information
outlets, public safety alerting systems
and personal communication devices.
Question 14. Should the regulation be
amended to address sending emergency
alerts to text, video, and other devices
used by individuals with disabilities?
D. State and Local Plans To Ensure
Access to NG 9-1-1 for Individuals with
Disabilities
Title II of the ADA and the
Department’s implementing regulation
provide that State and local government
agencies must make reasonable
modifications to their policies,
practices, and procedures whenever
necessary to avoid discrimination
against individuals with disabilities
unless making the modification would
fundamentally alter the nature of the
11 https://www.fcc.gov/cgb/dro/sts.html (last
visited July 8, 2010).
PO 00000
Frm 00027
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
43451
service, program or activity, or would
result in undue financial and
administrative burdens. 28 CFR
35.130(b)(7) (reasonable modifications
in policies); 28 CFR 35.164 (undue
burdens). A growing number of State
and local governments have studied
options for IP-based 9-1-1 networks in
preparation for moving to NG 9-1-1 and
have developed NG 9-1-1 migration/
transition plans. The Department
believes that in developing new or
reviewing current NG 9-1-1 plans, State
and local 9-1-1 agencies must include
specific plans for equal access to NG 91-1 for individuals with disabilities.
Question 15. In their NG 9-1-1 plans,
how should PSAPs address issues
related to access for individuals with
disabilities?
E. Effective Date
Any regulation in this area needs to
address an effective date for the
application of any proposed new title II
requirements to upgrades to 9-1-1
networks with emerging IP technologies
or existing NG 9-1-1 services. When the
ADA was enacted, the effective dates for
various provisions were delayed in
order to provide time for public entities
to become familiar with their new
obligations. Title II of the ADA generally
became effective on January 26, 1992,
six months after the regulation was
published.
Question 16. Should the effective date
of any new title II requirements be
modeled on the effective date used to
implement the title II requirements and
commence six months after publication
of the final rule, or a longer period? If
you favor a longer period, please
indicate what period you favor and
provide as much detail as possible in
support of your view.
The term ‘‘triggering event’’ identifies
the event or action that compels
compliance with title II requirements.
The Department’s regulation
implementing title II of the ADA (28
CFR Part 35) does not establish any
separate triggering events for access to
emergency telephone services. Many
PSAPs are making transitions to new IP
networks; it is expected that some may
not be completed until after the effective
date of the new requirements.
Question 17. If you favor a triggering
event definition that looks to the date of
deployment or upgrade, please provide
as much detail as possible about what
should constitute an IP deployment or
upgrade.
Question 18. If you favor triggering
events other than an IP deployment/
upgrade, please state what event you
favor and provide as much detail as
possible to support your proposal.
E:\FR\FM\26JYP1.SGM
26JYP1
43452
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 142 / Monday, July 26, 2010 / Proposed Rules
F. Defenses
The title II rule does not require a
public entity to take any action that it
can demonstrate would result in a
fundamental alteration in the nature of
a service, program, or activity or in
undue financial and administrative
burdens. 28 CFR 35.164. The
Department has taken a long-standing
position that, because of the essential
nature of 9-1-1 services, that limitation
would rarely be applied to the
obligation to ensure effective
communication in the context of 9-1-1.
Question 19. The Department seeks
comments on whether there are certain
circumstances where providing direct
access to emerging NG 9-1-1 would be
considered a fundamental alteration to
the nature of the 9-1-1 service or be an
undue financial or administrative
burden on the PSAP. Please provide as
much detail as possible.
wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with PROPOSALS_PART 1
G. Cost and Benefits of NG 9-1-1
Regulations
Because this is an ANPRM, the
Department is not required, at this time,
to conduct certain economic analyses or
written assessments that otherwise may
be required for other more formal types
of agency regulatory actions (e.g.,
notices of proposed rulemaking or final
rules) that, for example, are deemed to
be economically ‘‘significant’’ regulatory
actions with an annual economic impact
of $100 million or more or that are
expected to have a significant economic
effect on a substantial number of small
entities or non-Federal governmental
jurisdictions (such as State, local, or
Tribal governments). See, e.g.,
Regulatory Flexibility Act of 1980, 5
U.S.C. 603–04 (2006); E.O. 13272, 67 FR
53461 (Aug. 13, 2002); E.O. 12866, 58
FR 51735 (Sept. 30, 1993), as amended
by E.O. 13497, 74 FR 6113 (Jan. 30,
2009); OMB Budget Circular A–4,
https://www.whitehouse.gov/OMB/
circulars/a004/a-4.pdf (last visited June
5, 2010). The Department does not
currently believe that any future
proposed rules relating to the
accessibility of NG 9-1-1 services will
likely meet the economic threshold for
these types of formal economic analyses
and written assessments.
Nonetheless, one of the purposes of
this ANPRM is to seek public comment
on various topics relating to NG 9-1-1
services, including perspectives from
stakeholders concerning the benefits
and costs of revising the Department’s
title II regulation to ensure the
accessibility of NG 9-1-1 services (from
both a quantitative and qualitative
perspective), particularly from members
of the disability community,
VerDate Mar<15>2010
15:19 Jul 23, 2010
Jkt 220001
governmental entities, and public safety
organizations. The Department thus asks
for information so that the Department
can determine whether such a proposed
rule (1) should be deemed an
economically ‘‘significant regulatory
action’’ as defined in section 3(f) of E.O.
12866; or (2) would have a significant
economic impact on a substantial
number of small entities within the
meaning of the Regulatory Flexibility
Act (RFA) and, if so, suggested
alternative regulatory approaches to
minimize any such impact. The RFA
defines small governmental
jurisdictions as governments of cities,
counties, towns, townships, villages,
school districts, or special districts with
a population of less than 50,000.
Question 20. The Department
encourages commenters, whenever
possible, to submit detailed quantitative
or qualitative information along with
their respective comments relating to:
the cost of NG 9-1-1 technology or
services; the incremental impact on
covered governmental entities to
transition from current requirements for
accessible analog 9-1-1 services to
proposed accessible NG 9-1-1 services,
including but not limited to training
PSAP employees and updating 9-1-1
plans and operating procedures;
personal anecdotes or experiences of
individuals with disabilities illustrating
the potential benefits of accessible NG
9-1-1 services; and any other
information that would assist the
Department in assessing the benefits
and costs of proposed regulatory
revisions for NG 9-1-1.
H. Other Issues
Question 21. Are there additional
issues or information not addressed by
the Department’s questions that are
important for the Department to
consider? Please provide as much detail
as possible in your response.
Dated: July 21, 2010.
Thomas E. Perez,
Assistant Attorney General, Civil Rights
Division.
[FR Doc. 2010–18336 Filed 7–22–10; 4:15 pm]
BILLING CODE 4410–13–P
PO 00000
Frm 00028
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE
28 CFR Parts 35 and 36
[CRT Docket No. 113]
RIN 1190–AA64
Nondiscrimination on the Basis of
Disability by State and Local
Governments and Places of Public
Accommodation; Equipment and
Furniture
Department of Justice, Civil
Rights Division.
ACTION: Advance Notice of Proposed
Rulemaking.
AGENCY:
The Department of Justice
(Department) is considering possible
changes to requirements under titles II
and III of the Americans with
Disabilities Act (ADA) to ensure that
equipment and furniture used in
programs and services provided by
public entities and public
accommodations are accessible to
individuals with disabilities. In this
Advance Notice of Proposed
Rulemaking (ANPRM), the Department
is seeking public input on issues
relating to possible revisions of ADA
regulations to ensure the accessibility of
equipment and furniture in such
programs and services and also is
seeking background information for the
regulatory assessment that the
Department may need to prepare if it
revises its regulations.
DATES: The Department invites written
comments from members of the public.
Written comments must be postmarked
and electronic comments must be
submitted on or before January 24, 2011.
Commenters should be aware that the
electronic Federal Docket Management
System will not accept comments after
Midnight Eastern Time on the last day
of the comment period.
ADDRESSES: You may submit comments,
identified by RIN 1190–AA64 (or Docket
ID No. 113), by any one of the following
methods:
• Federal eRulemaking Web site:
www.regulations.gov. Follow the Web
site instructions for submitting
comments.
• Regular U.S. mail: Disability Rights
Section, Civil Rights Division, U.S.
Department of Justice, P.O. Box 2885,
Fairfax, VA 22031–0885.
• Overnight, courier, or hand
delivery: Disability Rights Section, Civil
Rights Division, U.S. Department of
Justice, 1425 New York Avenue, NW.,
Suite 4039, Washington, DC 20005.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Sarah DeCosse, Attorney Advisor,
Disability Rights Section, Civil Rights
SUMMARY:
E:\FR\FM\26JYP1.SGM
26JYP1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 75, Number 142 (Monday, July 26, 2010)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 43446-43452]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2010-18336]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE
28 CFR Part 35
[CRT Docket No. 111]
RIN 1190-AA62
Nondiscrimination on the Basis of Disability in State and Local
Government Services; Accessibility of Next Generation 9-1-1
AGENCY: Department of Justice, Civil Rights Division.
ACTION: Advance notice of proposed rulemaking.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The Department of Justice (Department) is considering revising
the regulation implementing title II of the Americans with Disabilities
Act (ADA) to address in what manner public entities that operate 9-1-1
call-taking centers (also known as Public Safety Answering Points
(PSAPs)) should be required to make changes in telecommunication
technology to reflect developments that have occurred since the
publication of the Department's 1991 regulation. Under its existing
title II regulation, the Department requires that PSAPs provide direct,
equal access to telephone emergency centers for individuals with
disabilities who use analog text telephones (TTYs).\1\ Many individuals
with disabilities now use the Internet and wireless text devices as
their primary modes of telecommunications. At the same time, PSAPs are
considering and planning to shift from analog telecommunications
technology to new Internet-Protocol (IP)-enabled Next Generation 9-1-1
services (NG 9-1-1) that will provide voice and data (such as text,
pictures, and video) capabilities. This ANPRM seeks information on
possible revisions to the Department's regulation to ensure
[[Page 43447]]
direct access to NG 9-1-1 services for individuals with disabilities.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ TTYs are also known as ``telecommunications devices for the
deaf'' (TDDs).
DATES: The Department invites written comments from members of the
public. Written comments must be postmarked and electronic comments
must be submitted on or before January 24, 2011.
Commenters should be aware that the electronic Federal Docket
Management System would not accept comments after Midnight Eastern Time
on the last day of the comment period.
ADDRESSES: You may submit comments, identified by RIN 1190-AA62 (or
Docket ID No. 111), by any one of the following methods:
Federal eRulemaking Web site: https://www.regulations.gov.
Follow the Web site instructions for submitting comments. The
Regulations.gov Docket ID is DOJ-CRT-0111.
Regular U.S. mail: Disability Rights Section, Civil Rights
Division, U.S. Department of Justice, P.O. Box 2885, Fairfax, VA 22031-
0885.
Overnight, courier or hand delivery: Disability Rights
Section, Civil Rights Division, U.S. Department of Justice, 1425 New
York Avenue, NW., Suite 4039, Washington, DC 20005.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Robert Mather, Attorney, Disability
Rights Section, Civil Rights Division, U.S. Department of Justice, at
(202) 307-0663 (voice or TTY). This is not a toll-free number.
Information may also be obtained from the Department's toll-free ADA
Information Line at (800) 514-0301 (voice) or (800) 514-0383 (TTY).
You may obtain copies of this ANPRM in large print or Braille or on
audiotape or computer disk by calling the ADA Information Line at (800)
514-0301 (voice) and (800) 514-0383 (TTY). This ANRPM is also available
on the ADA Home Page at https://www.ada.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
I. Electronic Submission of Comments and Posting of Public Comments
You may submit electronic comments to https://www.regulations.gov.
When submitting comments electronically, you must include DOJ-CRT 0111
in the search field, and you must include your full name and address.
Electronic files should avoid the use of special characters or any form
of encryption and should be free of any defects or viruses.
Please note that all comments received are considered part of the
public record and made available for public inspection online at https://www.regulations.gov. Submission postings will include any personal
identifying information (such as your name, address, etc.) included in
the text of your comment. If you include personal identifying
information (such as your name, address, etc.) in the text your
comment, but do not want it to be posted online, you must include the
phrase ``PERSONAL IDENTIFYING INFORMATION'' in the first paragraph of
your comment. You must also include all the personal identifying
information you want redacted along with this phrase. Similarly, if you
submit confidential business information as part of your comment but do
not want it posted online, you must include the phrase ``CONFIDENTIAL
BUSINESS INFORMATION'' in the first paragraph of your comment. You must
also prominently identify confidential business information to be
redacted within the comment. If a comment has so much confidential
business information that it cannot be effectively redacted, all or
part of that comment may not be posted on https://www.regulations.gov.
Comments on this ANPRM will also be made available for public
viewing by appointment at the Disability Rights Section, located at
1425 New York Avenue, NW., Suite 4039, Washington, DC 20005, during
normal business hours. To arrange an appointment to review the
comments, please contact the ADA Information Line at (800) 514-0301
(voice) or (800) 514-0383 (TTY).
The reason that the Civil Rights Division is requesting electronic
comments before Midnight Eastern Time on the day the comment period
closes is because the inter-agency Regulations.gov/Federal Docket
Management System (FDMS) which receives electronic comments terminates
the public's ability to submit comments at Midnight on the day the
comment period closes. Commenters in time zones other than Eastern may
want to take this fact into account so that their electronic comments
can be received. The constraints imposed by the Regulations.gov/FDMS
system do not apply to U.S. postal comments, which will be considered
as timely filed if they are postmarked before Midnight on the day the
comment period closes.
II. Public Hearing
The Department will hold at least one public hearing to solicit
comments on the issues presented in this notice. The Department plans
to hold the public hearing during the 180-day public comment period.
The date, time, and location of the public hearing will be announced to
the public in the Federal Register and on the Department's ADA Home
Page, https://www.ada.gov/.
III. Background
A. Statutory and Rulemaking History
On July 26, 1990, President George H.W. Bush signed into law the
ADA, a comprehensive civil rights law prohibiting discrimination on the
basis of disability. The ADA broadly protects the rights of individuals
with disabilities in employment, access to State and local government
services, places of public accommodation, transportation, and other
important areas of American life. The ADA also requires newly designed
and constructed or altered State and local government facilities,
public accommodations, and commercial facilities to be readily
accessible to and usable by individuals with disabilities. 42 U.S.C.
12101 et seq. Section 204(a) of title II and section 306(b) of title
III direct the Attorney General to promulgate regulations to carry out
the provisions of titles II and III, other than certain provisions
dealing specifically with transportation. 42 U.S.C. 12134; 42 U.S.C.
12186(b).
Title II applies to State and local government entities, and, in
Subtitle A, protects qualified individuals with disabilities from
discrimination on the basis of disability in services, programs, and
activities provided by State and local government entities. Title II
extends the prohibition on discrimination established by section 504 of
the Rehabilitation Act of 1973, as amended, 29 U.S.C. 794 (section
504), to all activities of State and local governments regardless of
whether these entities receive Federal financial assistance. 42 U.S.C.
12131-65.
Title III prohibits discrimination on the basis of disability in
the activities of places of public accommodation (private entities
whose operations affect commerce and that fall into one of twelve
categories listed in the ADA, such as restaurants, movie theaters,
schools, day care facilities, recreational facilities, and doctors'
offices) and requires newly constructed or altered places of public
accommodation--as well as commercial facilities (privately owned,
nonresidential facilities such as factories, warehouses, or office
buildings)--to comply with the ADA Standards. 42 U.S.C. 12181-89.
On July 26, 1991, the Department issued its final rules
implementing title II and title III, which are codified at 28 CFR part
35 (title II) and part 36 (title III). Appendix A of the title III
regulation, at 28 CFR part 36, app. A, contains the ADA Standards for
Accessible Design. On September 30, 2004, the Department published an
advance notice of proposed rulemaking
[[Page 43448]]
(2004 ANPRM) to begin the process of updating the 1991 regulations to
adopt revised ADA Standards based on the relevant parts of the 2004
ADA/ABA Guidelines. 69 FR 58768. On June 17, 2008, the Department
issued a Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (2008 NPRM) to adopt the revised
ADA Standards and revise the title II and title III regulations. 73 FR
34466. The NPRM addressed the issues raised in the public's comments to
the ANPRM and sought additional comment.
Although the Department did not propose to include NG 9-1-1
accessibility provisions in the 2008 NPRM, the Department received
comments urging it to amend the title II rule to mandate that PSAPs
move towards the implementation of NG 9-1-1 services that will provide
voice and data (such as text, pictures, and video) capabilities so that
they will be able to directly receive various kinds of voice-, text-
and video-based ``calls.'' Several commenters, including the National
Emergency Number Association (NENA) and the National Association of the
Deaf, requested the development of standards for direct access to NG 9-
1-1. Based on these comments and the reasons detailed below, the
Department has decided to begin the process of soliciting comments and
suggestions with respect to what an NPRM regarding NG 9-1-1 access
should contain.
B. Legal Foundation for Access to NG 9-1-1
The Department's current title II regulation, as interpreted and
administered by the Department, requires that PSAPs provide direct
access to individuals with disabilities who use TTYs. 28 CFR 35.162.
The Department has interpreted title II so as to require that PSAPs
provide ``direct, equal access'' to 9-1-1 for individuals with
disabilities who use TTYs. Direct access means that PSAPs must be able
to directly receive TTY calls without relying on an outside relay
service or third-party services, i.e., the PSAP must be able to engage
in TTY-to-TTY calls. Equal access requires that 9-1-1 services provided
for individuals who use TTYs be as effective as those provided for
individuals who make voice calls, in terms of response time, response
quality, hours of operation, and all other features offered (e.g.,
automatic number identification, automatic location identification,
automatic call distribution). PSAPs also must follow proper procedures
and practices when TTY calls are received, including Voice-Carry Over
(VCO) and Hearing-Carry Over (HCO).\2\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\2\ Many persons who became deaf or hard of hearing later in
life prefer to speak instead of type. They use what is called voice
carryover (VCO). With VCO, the caller speaks directly into the
phone, and the call taker types back via TTY to the caller. VCO can
be accomplished with standard stand-alone TTY equipment simply by
having the call taker alternate between listening on the handset
when the caller is speaking and placing the handset in the TTY
couplers to type a response. People with speech impairments who are
not deaf or hard of hearing often prefer HCO. HCO allows them to
type their words on a TTY to call takers and hear call takers'
spoken responses through their handset. HCO can be accomplished by a
call taker using standard stand-alone TTY equipment by alternating
speaking into the handset and placing the handset in the TTY when
the caller types a response. For more information about the title II
requirements for PSAPs, you may consult the Department's ADA
technical assistance manual, https://www.usdoj.gov/crt/ada/911ta.pdf
(last visited July 12, 2010).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Department recognizes that many individuals with disabilities
now rely on Internet Protocol (IP)-based and digital wireless devices,
rather than analog-based TTYs, as their primary modes of
telecommunications and 9-1-1 call-taking centers are shifting from
existing traditional telephone emergency services to new IP-enabled NG
9-1-1 services. Therefore, this ANPRM seeks comments from members of
the public and covered entities on possible revisions to the title II
rule to establish new requirements and guidance to ensure that NG 9-1-1
services are made accessible to, and usable by, individuals with
disabilities.
This ANPRM identifies specific issues on which the Department
solicits comment. The Department is also interested in comments on any
other issues that affect access to NG 9-1-1 services. The Department
will consider all comments before deciding whether to propose revisions
to the title II regulation.
The Department requests comments regarding appropriate steps to
provide individuals with disabilities with access to NG 9-1-1
technology at 9-1-1 emergency call-taking centers, including converging
\3\ IP 9-1-1 technologies that are as effective as those provided for
individuals without disabilities. In this ANPRM, the Department is
asking two key questions: (1) What devices and modes of communication
(voice, text, video, and data) are individuals with disabilities using
to make ``calls,'' including emergency calls?, and (2) what steps
should the Department take to ensure that any new IP-based PSAP
platforms can receive direct calls from these devices?
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\3\ ``Convergence'' is the integration of traditional
telecommunications and newer information technology services.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
C. Major Migration in Communications Devices and 9-1-1 Services
As communication technologies are developing, individuals with
disabilities are transitioning from analog or legacy devices to digital
and IP-based devices. Among these devices are both wired and mobile
videophones, text messaging wireless devices, including ``smart''
phones, as well as computers (including computers with Web cams) and
captioned telephones. Many PSAPs or emergency 9-1-1 call-taking centers
are not yet equipped to directly receive video calls or text calls over
the Internet. As a result, individuals who have to call 9-1-1 using
their IP-based videophone or texting device must call through third-
party telecommunications relay services (TRS). TRS uses a relay
operator called a communication assistant (CA) who relays the call
between the caller using text or video and the PSAP.\4\ In most IP-
based video-or text-relay services, the CA receives the call from the
person originating the call, places the call to the PSAP, and then
relays the conversation between the caller and the PSAP.\5\ Relay
services are under the jurisdiction of the Federal Communications
Commission (FCC).\6\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\4\ See generally Telecommunications Relay Services and Speech-
to-Speech Services for Individuals with Hearing and Speech
Disabilities; E911 Requirements for IP-Enabled Service Providers, CG
Docket No. 03-1123, WC Docket No. 05-196, Report and Order and
Further Notice of Proposed Rulemaking, 23 FCC Rcd 11591 (June 24,
2008) (adopting new emergency call handling requirements).
\5\ Captioned telephone relay calls are set up somewhat
differently, with the caller placing the call directly to the party
being called (the PSAP) at the same time that the call is connected
to the CA. The CA does not need to place the call separately to the
PSAP.
\6\ See generally 47 CFR 64.601 et seq. (the TRS regulations).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The 9-1-1 number has been designated for public use throughout the
United States to report an emergency, request emergency assistance, or
both. The original 9-1-1 system is based on traditional telephone
technology, which cannot process text, data, image, and video sent from
handheld devices and computers (e.g., personal digital assistant (PDA),
cellular phone, portable media player, video phone, or camera). To
address the changing technology, State and local governments are
working to improve their 9-1-1 emergency communications systems and are
moving towards an IP-enabled network. The ultimate goal is to have an
emergency network that will enable the general public to make a 9-1-1
``call'' via voice, text, or video from wired and wireless devices and
directly communicate with personnel at the
[[Page 43449]]
PSAP. Several States, regions, and counties, including Indiana,
Montana, Vermont, Texas, Florida, Minnesota, Allegheny County,
Pennsylvania and the District of Columbia, are either considering or
implementing an IP network or next generation related components in
preparation for NG 9-1-1. https://www.nena.org/ng911-project/state-status (last visited July 12, 2010).
The Department is aware of two PSAPs' efforts to provide access to
individuals with disabilities who use smart phones as texting devices.
For example, in 2003, the police department in Sacramento, California
began to accept ``9-1-1'' e-mails from individuals with disabilities.
That police department also has accepted e-mails from as far away as
Los Angeles and Texas asking Sacramento police to relay emergency
information to their local authorities. https://www.helpkidshear.org/news/media/2003/2003-11-21-cbs.htm (last visited July 12, 2010).
Another PSAP, Black Hawk County, Iowa, recently started to receive and
respond to short message service (SMS) messages from cell phones or
pagers. See Enforcing the ADA, Update April, September 2009, page 12,
available at https://www.ada.gov/aprsep09.pdf (last visited July 12,
2010). With these additional services, individuals with disabilities
are able to report an accident or other emergency quickly using their
PDAs, without the necessity of locating and using a TTY or relying on
another person to report the incident
D. Other Federal Efforts
The Department is familiar with ongoing efforts by other Federal
agencies to ensure that advances in telecommunications systems,
including NG 9-1-1 services, are accessible for all Americans,
including individuals with disabilities. The National E-911
Implementation Coordination Office (National 9-1-1 Office) issued in
September 2009, a national plan (Plan) for migrating to IP-enabled 9-1-
1 Systems. See National Plan for Migrating to IP-Enabled 9-1-1 Systems,
available at https://www.ntis.gov/search/product.aspx?ABBR=PB2010102716
(last visited June 5, 2010). As required by the NET 911 Improvement
Act, 47 U.S.C. 942(d), the Plan identified and analyzed 9-1-1 system
migration issues and assessed potential options to resolve them. The
Plan drew heavily from the United States Department of Transportation's
(DOT) NG 9-1-1 Initiative work and findings. DOT had concluded that IP-
enabled systems provide the optimal technical solution for future 9-1-1
networks. One of the requirements of the NET 9-1-1 Improvement Act is
to identify solutions for providing 9-1-1 and enhanced 9-1-1 access to
individuals with disabilities and needed steps to implement such
solutions. 47 U.S.C. 942(d)(I). In addressing policy barriers and
issues, the National 9-1-1 Office stated that ``to foster the migration
to IP-enabled 9-1-1, Federal * * * regulatory agencies will need to
review current * * * regulations to keep pace with the rapidly changing
9-1-1 marketplace.'' Plan, at 5-10.
Last year, DOT's National Highway Traffic Safety Administration and
the United States Department of Commerce's National Telecommunications
and Information Administration announced more than $40 million in
grants to help PSAPs nationwide implement next-generation technologies.
Another Federal agency has called for action to ensure that IP
technology is accessible to individuals with disabilities. The National
Council on Disability, in its 2006 report, The Need for Federal
Legislation and Regulation Prohibiting Telecommunications and
Information Services Discrimination, \7\ calls for such Federal action
because experience has shown that market forces are not sufficient to
ensure individuals with disabilities equal access to emerging
technologies. As the responsible agency for writing regulations to
ensure that 9-1-1 services are accessible to individuals with
disabilities,\8\ in this ANPRM the Department is seeking comments from
the public, including 9-1-1 stakeholders, in addressing barriers to NG
9-1-1 and ensuring access to NG 9-1-1 services.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\7\ https://www.ncd.gov/newsroom/publications/2006/discrimination.htm (last visited June 5, 2010).
\8\ See 42 U.S.C. 12134(a).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The FCC has recently undertaken a number of broadband \9\
initiatives. One of these initiatives seeks to improve the nation's
current 9-1-1 system by establishing the foundation for the
transmission of voice, data, or video to PSAPs during emergency calls.
Broadband & Public Safety and Homeland Security, https://www.fcc.gov/pshs/broadband.html (last visited July 12, 2010). In another NG 9-1-1
matter, the FCC's Communications Security, Reliability and
Interoperability Council's working group is considering ways that NG 9-
1-1 architectures and technologies can provide access for individuals
with disabilities. See https://www.fcc.gov/pshs/advisory/csric/wg-4b.pdf
(last visited July 12, 2010). With respect to emergency calls made via
TRS (i.e., through a relay operator), the FCC has implemented new
numbering and E9-1-1 requirements for Video Relay Services and IP-Relay
Services. New Numbering and E911 Requirements for VRS and IP Relay
Video In American Sign Language (ASL), https://www.fcc.gov/cgb/dro/numbering_and_e911_for_vrs_ip.html (last visited June 5, 2010).
Access to PSAPs via TRS is not addressed in this ANPRM.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\9\ The term ``broadband'' refers to advanced communications
systems capable of providing high-speed transmission of services
such as data, voice, and video over the Internet and other networks.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
IV. Request for Public Comments
The Department is seeking public comment on the issues discussed
below. In addition to seeking comments in response to the specific
questions raised in this ANPRM, the Department is particularly
interested in receiving comments from all of those who have a stake in
ensuring that NG 9-1-1 is accessible to individual people with
disabilities, advocacy groups, representatives from Tribal, local,
State, and Federal governments, public safety organizations, and
industry professionals, about the potential application of the new
requirements to plans for migration to, and deployment of, NG 9-1-1
services.
The prospect of developing new title II requirements for access to
NG 9-1-1 raises a number of general issues, including determining which
performance-based standards or technical specifications would better
ensure access to NG 9-1-1 to determining the effective date for the
application of the new provisions. Responses should clearly identify
the specific question being addressed according to the numbered
questions in this document.
A. Direct, Equal Access to NG 9-1-1
Question 1. What modes of communication (e.g., voice, text, video,
or data) do (or will) individuals with disabilities use to make direct
calls to a PSAP, and from what types of devices would the calls be
made?
i. Text Communications
IP allows several formats of text communications, divided into two
types: real-time, and non-real-time. Real-time text communications
refer to those that are sent and received on a character-by-character
basis; the characters are sent immediately once typed and also
displayed immediately to the receiving person. In an emergency, sending
text communications to a PSAP in real-time may save valuable time that
is needed to effectively respond to the emergency.
[[Page 43450]]
Non-real-time communications rely on messaging capabilities where users
``type-enter-wait-read-respond-reply''--e.g., short messages service
(SMS) texts, multimedia messaging service (MMS), instant messaging
(IM), text chat, and e-mail. When this type of messaging is used,
messages can overlap one another. In an emergency, this could result in
the caller or PSAP personnel responding to each other out of the order
in which their communications were sent, creating some confusion or
delay. The agenda for the FCC's National Broadband Plan states that
this year, the FCC will open a proceeding to identify a reliable,
interoperable, real-time text standard to enable consumers to
communicate in a digital and IP-based environment. Broadband Action
Agenda, https://www.broadband.gov/plan/national-broadband-plan-action-agenda.pdf at 4.10 (last visited July 12, 2010).\10\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\10\ In addition, the United States Access Board recently
proposed draft guidelines for real-time text functionality for
adoption by Federal agencies. Draft Information and Communication
technology (ICT) Standards and Guidelines https://www.access-board.gov/sec508/refresh/draft-rule.htm at Section 902 (last visited
July 12, 2010).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Currently, telephone 9-1-1 technologies support TTYs, which provide
text communications in an analog environment. Using IP-based devices,
PSAPs would require a text gateway in order to converse with
individuals using analog-based devices.
Question 2. Should the Department issue a requirement for NG 9-1-1
technologies to support text communications along with analog-based TTY
communications? If so, should NG 9-1-1 text technologies be backward
compatible with analog-based TTYs or should the two communication
methods be available side by side?
Question 3. Which, if any, of the following text options should the
Department designate as essential accessibility features of NG 9-1-1 to
be incorporated into the initial deployment of an NG 9-1-1 system to
assure equal access to emergency call-taking centers for individuals
with disabilities?
a. Real-time text.
b. Short message service (SMS).
c. Instant messaging (IM).
d. E-mail.
e. Analog gateway.
f. Other modes of text communication.
The Department recognizes that all of these text options will
benefit not only individuals who are deaf or hard of hearing, but also
individuals with other disabilities who require an alternative mean to
making a voiced 9-1-1 call due to their disabilities. The Department
recognizes that a State or local government's NG 9-1-1 system may
eventually provide all of these options in the future. However, the
Department is interested in learning how each of the options would
benefit individuals with disabilities in order to determine whether
they should be designated as ``essential'' to providing access to NG 9-
1-1.
Individuals with disabilities are increasingly using smart phones
since they are currently the only accessible mobile devices available
for text messaging (e.g., e-mail, SMS, or IM). Until NG 9-1-1 services
are implemented, PSAPs will not be able to receive text messages sent
directly to 9-1-1 from these devices.
Question 4. For this period, should a PSAP develop and implement an
interim plan to receive text messages directly or via a third party?
How should a PSAP develop an interim plan? What solutions should PSAPs
consider as part of their interim plan?
Question 5. Are there significant issues related to the
interoperability of messages sent by text that need to be addressed in
any final regulation?
ii. Video Communications
A technology that has emerged since publication of the original
title II rule allows individuals who use sign language to communicate
by video. An individual who communicates by American Sign Language
(ASL) may use a videophone or other video device (e.g., a Web cam
connector to a computer) to directly communicate in sign language with
either another videophone user or a voice telephone user. In the latter
case, videophones can be used to make TRS calls (Video Relay Service)
or to use remote sign language interpreting services (video remote
interpreting or VRI) when an in-person interpreter is not available.
VRI is generally a fee-based service. NG 9-1-1 technologies will allow
video phone users to make direct video calls to a PSAP and allow the
callers and the emergency personnel to engage in virtual face-to-face
communication.
The Department is seeking comments on what steps a PSAP, in
providing video services, should take to ensure effective communication
with a 9-1-1 caller who uses sign language for communication. One
possible method of communication for handling a direct video-to-video
call between the individual with disabilities and the PSAP would be
through the use of VRI. Upon receipt of a request for sign language
services, the PSAP would make a call to a VRI service center and
connect the interpreter so that the interpreter appears on both the
caller's and PSAP's video phone screens. The call would then become a
3-way video call between the caller and PSAP, both using the
interpreter. The PSAP would see both the interpreter and caller on the
PSAP's screen, and both the interpreter and the caller would see each
other on their screens. Using this method, the PSAP would have the
ability to ``conference in'' (virtually instantaneously) a qualified
interpreter (in-house or in a remote facility)
Question 6. In implementing NG 9-1-1, should the Department amend
its title II regulation to require each PSAP to provide VRI service? If
so, should the Department regulate how to provide such service?
With NG 9-1-1, call routing allows the sharing of networks to route
calls for multiple numbers (e.g., 2-1-1, 3-1-1, 8-1-1, suicide hotline,
poison control). Also, NG 9-1-1 enables call access, transfer, and
backup between and among 9-1-1 call-taking centers and between these
centers and specialized emergency services.
Question 7. Should a center also be allowed to transfer a caller's
call to a particular center where call takers are trained and fluent in
oral/sign language interpreting services or where call takers are
trained in working with individuals with speech impairments? If so,
should a final rule address call routing policies that restrict or
prohibit such transfers?
The title II rule requires that when an oral or sign language
interpreter is necessary for effective communication, the interpreter
must be ``qualified.'' The rule has defined ``qualified interpreter''
as ``an interpreter who is able to interpret effectively, accurately,
and impartially both receptively and expressively, using any necessary
specialized vocabulary.'' 28 CFR 35.104. Although the definition does
not require ``certified'' interpreters, it does require interpreters
with the necessary skills to interpret accurately in the particular
context.
Question 8. In the context of NG 9-1-1, the Department is asking
for public views on whether PSAPs should use only those interpreters
who are specifically trained to handle emergency calls in using
interpreting services on-site or via VRI.
Question 9. The Department also seeks comments on any other methods
for ensuring equal access to NG 9-1-1 for individuals with
disabilities. Should the Department issue standards for other methods
to provide accessible NG 9-1-1 services? Should the Department require
specialized training to ensure that these services can effectively
[[Page 43451]]
respond to the needs of people with disabilities in an NG 9-1-1
environment?
B. Performance Standards as Opposed to Technical Standards
The Department is aware of ongoing efforts by both the National
Emergency Number Association (NENA) and the Association of Public-
Safety Communications Officials International to develop technical
standards for guidance to service providers, equipment manufacturers,
and industry-related standard setting bodies. The Department has used
the performance standard of ``direct access'' for PSAPs in enforcing
title II.
Consistent with the Department's existing approach, the Department
is considering the use of performance standards, as opposed to
technical standards, as new title II requirements for access to NG 9-1-
1. Two primary considerations support this approach. First, in light of
evolving 9-1-1 technologies, it may not be feasible to have identical
scoping and technical specifications nationwide to ensure disability
access to NG 9-1-1. Second, performance standards would contain
flexibility to allow operational standards, protocols, and best
practices to be adopted and implemented to meet unique State and local
circumstances and needs.
Question 10. Should any regulatory provision on NG 9-1-1
requirements under title II be performance-based, or should a final
rule provide technical specifications for call-taking technology and
equipment? Please provide as much detail as possible in support of your
view.
Question 11. What are the technical issues that the Department
should address in developing minimum standards?
NENA, a leading professional, nonprofit organization on 9-1-1
services, has actively worked with public safety, industry, and
government groups, to develop technical and operational standards for
NG 9-1-1 systems and services.
Question 12. Should the Department adopt any of NENA's standards as
the minimum standards for direct access to NG 9-1-1 services for
individuals with disabilities?
Speech-to-speech service (STS) is a form of TRS that involves the
use of relay operators for people with speech disabilities who have
difficulty being understood on the phone. STS relay operators are
trained individuals familiar with many different speech patterns and
language recognition skills. The relay operator makes the call and
repeats the words exactly. Individuals using STS include those with
cerebral palsy, Parkinson's disease, a laryngectomy, ALS, stuttering,
muscular dystrophy, stroke, and other conditions affecting clarity of
speech.\11\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\11\ https://www.fcc.gov/cgb/dro/sts.html (last visited July 8,
2010).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Question 13. Should the title II regulation be amended to require
that PSAPs directly receive calls from individuals with speech
disabilities?
C. Emergency Alerts
Public entities in many communities now send pre-recorded emergency
alert messages to homes and businesses automatically by phone. For
instance, emergency personnel can use emergency alerts to notify
residents in the path of approaching wildfires, hurricanes, or
tornadoes to seek immediate shelter or evacuate their homes. Emergency
alert systems can also be set up to send emergency alert text messages
to smart phones, TTYs, PDAs, and e-mail accounts. Many colleges and
universities now use this kind of emergency alert system for their
students, parents and staff.
Converging 9-1-1 technologies will make it possible to send
automatic emergency alerts to any communication device--wired or
mobile--via Internet networks. For instance, vehicles approaching a
motor vehicle accident involving hazardous materials could be notified
of the danger, thereby preventing other vehicles from further
complicating the accident or hindering emergency personnel. The
Department will not address any other emergency mass notifications,
such as Federal efforts for a Common Alerting Protocol, a next
generation alerting delivery system by which standardized alerts will
be gathered from various alerting sources and distributed to the public
(in text, audio and video) via information outlets, public safety
alerting systems and personal communication devices.
Question 14. Should the regulation be amended to address sending
emergency alerts to text, video, and other devices used by individuals
with disabilities?
D. State and Local Plans To Ensure Access to NG 9-1-1 for Individuals
with Disabilities
Title II of the ADA and the Department's implementing regulation
provide that State and local government agencies must make reasonable
modifications to their policies, practices, and procedures whenever
necessary to avoid discrimination against individuals with disabilities
unless making the modification would fundamentally alter the nature of
the service, program or activity, or would result in undue financial
and administrative burdens. 28 CFR 35.130(b)(7) (reasonable
modifications in policies); 28 CFR 35.164 (undue burdens). A growing
number of State and local governments have studied options for IP-based
9-1-1 networks in preparation for moving to NG 9-1-1 and have developed
NG 9-1-1 migration/transition plans. The Department believes that in
developing new or reviewing current NG 9-1-1 plans, State and local 9-
1-1 agencies must include specific plans for equal access to NG 9-1-1
for individuals with disabilities.
Question 15. In their NG 9-1-1 plans, how should PSAPs address
issues related to access for individuals with disabilities?
E. Effective Date
Any regulation in this area needs to address an effective date for
the application of any proposed new title II requirements to upgrades
to 9-1-1 networks with emerging IP technologies or existing NG 9-1-1
services. When the ADA was enacted, the effective dates for various
provisions were delayed in order to provide time for public entities to
become familiar with their new obligations. Title II of the ADA
generally became effective on January 26, 1992, six months after the
regulation was published.
Question 16. Should the effective date of any new title II
requirements be modeled on the effective date used to implement the
title II requirements and commence six months after publication of the
final rule, or a longer period? If you favor a longer period, please
indicate what period you favor and provide as much detail as possible
in support of your view.
The term ``triggering event'' identifies the event or action that
compels compliance with title II requirements. The Department's
regulation implementing title II of the ADA (28 CFR Part 35) does not
establish any separate triggering events for access to emergency
telephone services. Many PSAPs are making transitions to new IP
networks; it is expected that some may not be completed until after the
effective date of the new requirements.
Question 17. If you favor a triggering event definition that looks
to the date of deployment or upgrade, please provide as much detail as
possible about what should constitute an IP deployment or upgrade.
Question 18. If you favor triggering events other than an IP
deployment/upgrade, please state what event you favor and provide as
much detail as possible to support your proposal.
[[Page 43452]]
F. Defenses
The title II rule does not require a public entity to take any
action that it can demonstrate would result in a fundamental alteration
in the nature of a service, program, or activity or in undue financial
and administrative burdens. 28 CFR 35.164. The Department has taken a
long-standing position that, because of the essential nature of 9-1-1
services, that limitation would rarely be applied to the obligation to
ensure effective communication in the context of 9-1-1.
Question 19. The Department seeks comments on whether there are
certain circumstances where providing direct access to emerging NG 9-1-
1 would be considered a fundamental alteration to the nature of the 9-
1-1 service or be an undue financial or administrative burden on the
PSAP. Please provide as much detail as possible.
G. Cost and Benefits of NG 9-1-1 Regulations
Because this is an ANPRM, the Department is not required, at this
time, to conduct certain economic analyses or written assessments that
otherwise may be required for other more formal types of agency
regulatory actions (e.g., notices of proposed rulemaking or final
rules) that, for example, are deemed to be economically ``significant''
regulatory actions with an annual economic impact of $100 million or
more or that are expected to have a significant economic effect on a
substantial number of small entities or non-Federal governmental
jurisdictions (such as State, local, or Tribal governments). See, e.g.,
Regulatory Flexibility Act of 1980, 5 U.S.C. 603-04 (2006); E.O. 13272,
67 FR 53461 (Aug. 13, 2002); E.O. 12866, 58 FR 51735 (Sept. 30, 1993),
as amended by E.O. 13497, 74 FR 6113 (Jan. 30, 2009); OMB Budget
Circular A-4, https://www.whitehouse.gov/OMB/circulars/a004/a-4.pdf
(last visited June 5, 2010). The Department does not currently believe
that any future proposed rules relating to the accessibility of NG 9-1-
1 services will likely meet the economic threshold for these types of
formal economic analyses and written assessments.
Nonetheless, one of the purposes of this ANPRM is to seek public
comment on various topics relating to NG 9-1-1 services, including
perspectives from stakeholders concerning the benefits and costs of
revising the Department's title II regulation to ensure the
accessibility of NG 9-1-1 services (from both a quantitative and
qualitative perspective), particularly from members of the disability
community, governmental entities, and public safety organizations. The
Department thus asks for information so that the Department can
determine whether such a proposed rule (1) should be deemed an
economically ``significant regulatory action'' as defined in section
3(f) of E.O. 12866; or (2) would have a significant economic impact on
a substantial number of small entities within the meaning of the
Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA) and, if so, suggested alternative
regulatory approaches to minimize any such impact. The RFA defines
small governmental jurisdictions as governments of cities, counties,
towns, townships, villages, school districts, or special districts with
a population of less than 50,000.
Question 20. The Department encourages commenters, whenever
possible, to submit detailed quantitative or qualitative information
along with their respective comments relating to: the cost of NG 9-1-1
technology or services; the incremental impact on covered governmental
entities to transition from current requirements for accessible analog
9-1-1 services to proposed accessible NG 9-1-1 services, including but
not limited to training PSAP employees and updating 9-1-1 plans and
operating procedures; personal anecdotes or experiences of individuals
with disabilities illustrating the potential benefits of accessible NG
9-1-1 services; and any other information that would assist the
Department in assessing the benefits and costs of proposed regulatory
revisions for NG 9-1-1.
H. Other Issues
Question 21. Are there additional issues or information not
addressed by the Department's questions that are important for the
Department to consider? Please provide as much detail as possible in
your response.
Dated: July 21, 2010.
Thomas E. Perez,
Assistant Attorney General, Civil Rights Division.
[FR Doc. 2010-18336 Filed 7-22-10; 4:15 pm]
BILLING CODE 4410-13-P