Framework for Next Generation 911 Deployment, 2297-2309 [2011-565]
Download as PDF
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 9 / Thursday, January 13, 2011 / Proposed Rules
regulation that has federalism
implications and that preempts State
law unless the Agency consults with
State and local officials early in the
process of developing the proposed
regulation.
This rule will not have substantial
direct effects on the States, on the
relationship between the national
government and the States, or on the
distribution of power and
responsibilities among the various
levels of government, as specified in
Executive Order 13132, because it
merely approves a State rule
implementing a Federal standard, and
does not alter the relationship or the
distribution of power and
responsibilities established in the Clean
Air Act. Thus, the requirements of
section 6 of the Executive Order do not
apply to this rule.
F. Executive Order 13175, Coordination
With Indian Tribal Governments
Executive Order 13175, entitled
‘‘Consultation and Coordination with
Indian Tribal Governments’’ (65 FR
67249, November 9, 2000), requires EPA
to develop an accountable process to
ensure ‘‘meaningful and timely input by
tribal officials in the development of
regulatory policies that have tribal
implications.’’ This proposed rule does
not have tribal implications, as specified
in Executive Order 13175. It will not
have substantial direct effects on tribal
governments, on the relationship
between the Federal Government and
Indian tribes, or on the distribution of
power and responsibilities between the
Federal Government and Indian tribes.
Thus, Executive Order 13175 does not
apply to this rule.
G. Executive Order 13045, Protection of
Children From Environmental Health
Risks and Safety Risks
srobinson on DSKHWCL6B1PROD with PROPOSALS
EPA interprets Executive Order 13045
(62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997) as
applying only to those regulatory
actions that concern health or safety
risks, such that the analysis required
under section 5–501 of the Executive
Order has the potential to influence the
regulation. This rule is not subject to
Executive Order 13045, because it
approves a State rule implementing a
Federal standard.
H. Executive Order 13211, Actions That
Significantly Affect Energy Supply,
Distribution, or Use
not a significant regulatory action under
Executive Order 12866.
FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS
COMMISSION
I. National Technology Transfer and
Advancement Act
47 CFR Part 20
[PS Docket No. 10–255; FCC 10–200]
Section 12 of the National Technology
Transfer and Advancement Act
(NTTAA) of 1995 requires Federal
agencies to evaluate existing technical
standards when developing a new
regulation. To comply with NTTAA,
EPA must consider and use ‘‘voluntary
consensus standards’’ (VCS) if available
and applicable when developing
programs and policies unless doing so
would be inconsistent with applicable
law or otherwise impractical.
The EPA believes that VCS are
inapplicable to this action. Today’s
action does not require the public to
perform activities conducive to the use
of VCS.
J. Executive Order 12898: Federal
Actions To Address Environmental
Justice in Minority Populations and
Low-Income Population
Executive Order 12898 (59 FR 7629
(Feb. 16, 1994)) establishes Federal
executive policy on environmental
justice. Its main provision directs
Federal agencies, to the greatest extent
practicable and permitted by law, to
make environmental justice part of their
mission by identifying and addressing,
as appropriate, disproportionately high
and adverse human health or
environmental effects of their programs,
policies, and activities on minority
populations and low-income
populations in the United States.
EPA lacks the discretionary authority
to address environmental justice in this
rulemaking.
List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52
Environmental protection, Air
pollution control, Intergovernmental
relations, Particulate matter, Reporting
and recordkeeping requirements.
Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq.
Dated: December 30, 2010.
Jared Blumenfeld,
Regional Administrator, Region IX.
[FR Doc. 2011–647 Filed 1–12–11; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560–50–P
This rule is not subject to Executive
Order 13211, ‘‘Actions Concerning
Regulations That Significantly Affect
Energy Supply, Distribution, or Use’’ (66
FR 28355, May 22, 2001) because it is
VerDate Mar<15>2010
18:03 Jan 12, 2011
Jkt 223001
2297
PO 00000
Frm 00030
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
Framework for Next Generation 911
Deployment
Federal Communications
Commission
ACTION: Notice of inquiry.
AGENCY:
The Notice of Inquiry (NOI)
initiates a comprehensive proceeding to
address how Next Generation 911
(NG911) can enable the public to obtain
emergency assistance by means of
advanced communications technologies
beyond traditional voice-centric
devices. The NOI seeks to gain a better
understanding of how the gap between
the capabilities of modern networks and
devices and today’s 911 system can be
bridged and seeks comment on how to
further the transition to IP-based
communications capabilities for
emergency communications and NG911.
DATES: Submit comments on or before
February 28, 2011. Submit reply
comments March 14, 2011.
ADDRESSES: Pursuant to §§ 1.415 and
1.419 of the Commission’s rules, 47 CFR
1.415, 1.419, interested parties may file
comments and reply comments.
Comments may be filed using: (1) the
Commission’s Electronic Comment
Filing System (ECFS), (2) the Federal
Government’s eRulemaking Portal, or (3)
by filing paper copies. See Electronic
Filing of Documents in Rulemaking
Proceedings, 63 FR 24121 (May 1, 1998).
• Electronic Filers: Comments may be
filed electronically using the Internet by
accessing the ECFS: https://
fjallfoss.fcc.gov/ecfs2/ or the Federal
eRulemaking Portal: https://
www.regulations.gov.
• Paper Filers: Parties who choose to
file by paper must file an original and
four copies of each filing. If more than
one docket or rulemaking number
appears in the caption of this
proceeding, filers must submit two
additional copies for each additional
docket or rulemaking number.
• Filings can be sent by hand or
messenger delivery, by commercial
overnight courier, or by first-class or
overnight U.S. Postal Service mail. All
filings must be addressed to the
Commission’s Secretary, Office of the
Secretary, Federal Communications
Commission.
• All hand-delivered or messengerdelivered paper filings for the
Commission’s Secretary must be
delivered to FCC Headquarters at 445
SUMMARY:
E:\FR\FM\13JAP1.SGM
13JAP1
2298
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 9 / Thursday, January 13, 2011 / Proposed Rules
12th St., SW., Room TW–A325,
Washington, DC 20554. The filing hours
are 8 a.m. to 7 p.m. All hand deliveries
must be held together with rubber bands
or fasteners. Any envelopes must be
disposed of before entering the building.
• Commercial overnight mail (other
than U.S. Postal Service Express Mail
and Priority Mail) must be sent to 9300
East Hampton Drive, Capitol Heights,
MD 20743.
• U.S. Postal Service first-class,
Express, and Priority mail must be
addressed to 445 12th Street, SW.,
Washington DC 20554.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Patrick Donovan, Public Safety and
Homeland Security Bureau, at (202)
418–2413, Federal Communications
Commission, 445 12th Street, SW.,
Washington, DC 20554; or via the
Internet to Patrick.Donovan@fcc.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
I. Introduction
1. As recommended in the National
Broadband Plan, this Notice of Inquiry
(NOI) initiates a comprehensive
proceeding to address how Next
Generation 911 (NG911) can enable the
public to obtain emergency assistance
by means of advanced communications
technologies beyond traditional voicecentric devices. In the
telecommunications industry overall,
competitive forces and technological
innovation have ushered in an era of
advanced Internet-Protocol (IP)-based
devices and applications that have
vastly enhanced the ability of the public
to communicate and send and receive
information. At the same time, our
legacy circuit-switched 911 system is
unable to accommodate the capabilities
embedded in many of these advanced
technologies, such as the ability to
transmit and receive photos, text
messages, and video. Accordingly, in
this proceeding, we seek to gain a better
understanding of how the gap between
the capabilities of modern networks and
devices and today’s 911 system can be
bridged. We also seek comment on how
to further the transition to IP-based
communications capabilities for
emergency communications and NG911.
srobinson on DSKHWCL6B1PROD with PROPOSALS
II. Background
2. Since AT&T first made the digits
‘‘911’’ available nationally in 1968 for
wireline access to emergency services,
the American public increasingly has
come to depend on the service. Today,
the National Emergency Number
Association (NENA) estimates that some
form of 911 service is available to 99
percent of the population in 96 percent
of the counties in the United States, and
VerDate Mar<15>2010
18:03 Jan 12, 2011
Jkt 223001
240 million calls are made to 911 in the
United States each year. ‘‘911’’ is as well
known as any popular brand, and is
what we routinely teach to children as
the way to summon help from police,
fire, and ambulance services. In more
recent times, 911 has become
increasingly important for homeland
security, as the means for ordinary
citizens—in some ways the true ‘‘first
responders’’—to report suspicious
activity or summon emergency
assistance for themselves and others in
times of natural or man-made disasters.
It should therefore come as no surprise
that the American public has developed
clear expectations with respect to the
availability of 911 emergency services
via certain classes of communications
devices.
3. The availability of this critical
service is due largely to the dedicated
efforts of State, local, and Tribal
authorities and telecommunications
carriers, who have used the 911
abbreviated dialing code to provide
access to increasingly advanced and
effective emergency service capabilities.
Indeed, absent appropriate action by,
and funding for, states, Tribes, and local
jurisdictions, there can be no effective
911 service.
4. At the same time, new voice
communications technologies have
posed technical and operational
challenges to the 911 system,
necessitating the adoption of a uniform
national approach to preserve the
quality and reliability of 911 services for
such communications technologies.
This was first recognized following the
introduction of commercial mobile
radio services (CMRS) in the United
States, when the Commission in 1996
established rules requiring CMRS
carriers to implement basic 911 and
Enhanced 911 (E911) services.
5. In 1999, Congress continued this
recognition when it enacted the
Wireless Communications and Public
Safety Act (911 Act) to promote and
enhance public safety through the use of
wireless communications services. The
911 Act directed the Commission to
designate 911 as the universal
emergency assistance number for
wireless and wireline calls, and to
establish a transition period for areas of
the country where 911 was not yet
available. In 2000, the Commission
adopted an order which established 911
as the universal emergency telephone
number in the United States. In 2003,
the Commission revised ‘‘the scope of
[its] enhanced 911 rules to clarify which
technologies and services will be
required to be capable of transmitting
enhanced 911 information.’’ In adopting
rules tailored to specific services, the
PO 00000
Frm 00031
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
Commission clarified, inter alia, the
following matters: (1) Telematics service
providers offering interconnected CMRS
voice calling service may have an E911
service requirement and need to
coordinate with the underlying wireless
carriers, so that, regardless of the legal
relationship between them, E911
requirements can be met; and (2) resold
and prepaid mobile wireless service
providers must meet 911 rules to the
extent the underlying licensee has
deployed the necessary technology for
E911 service. The Commission declined,
however, to impose E911 requirements
on: (1) Telematics-only services
providers, reserving the right to revisit
E911 obligations in the future, (2)
manufacturers of disposable phones or
personal data assistants (PDAs) that
contain a voice service component, and
(3) multi-line telephone systems, except
for the Commission’s monitoring of
states’ progress on implementing E911
for those systems.
6. The next significant step in the
evolution of 911 followed the
introduction of Voice over Internet
Protocol (VoIP) services in the United
States. In this regard, in 2005, the
Commission established rules requiring
interconnected VoIP service providers
to supply E911 capabilities to their
customers as a standard feature from
wherever the customer is using the
service.
7. While the Commission and the 911
industry acted to enable 911 service
availability for wireless and VoIP
providers, today’s 911 system remains
reliant on increasingly antiquated
analog or digital circuit-switched
facilities. It is thus not capable of
supporting certain functionalities made
possible by a transition to broadband IPbased communications technologies—
functionalities that have become
commonplace in other communications
systems. At the same time, the
introduction of these new technologies
has created the potential for
development of and transition to NG911
to take advantage of the enhanced
capabilities of IP-based devices and
networks.
8. In the last few years, there have
been several important efforts to address
the need for a transition to a NG911
network. In the New and Emerging
Technologies 911 Improvement Act of
2008, Congress tasked the National E9–
1–1 Implementation Coordination Office
(ICO) to develop ‘‘a national plan for
migrating to a national [Internet
Protocol] IP-enabled emergency network
capable of receiving and responding to
all citizen-activated emergency
communications and improving
information sharing among all
E:\FR\FM\13JAP1.SGM
13JAP1
srobinson on DSKHWCL6B1PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 9 / Thursday, January 13, 2011 / Proposed Rules
emergency response entities.’’ The ICO,
managed jointly by the Department of
Commerce’s National
Telecommunications and Information
Administration (NTIA) and the
Department of Transportation’s National
Highway Traffic Safety Administration
(NHTSA), released its migration plan in
September 2009. In March 2010, NENA
released a handbook to serve as a guide
for public safety personnel and
government officials responsible for
ensuring that Federal, State, and local
911 laws and regulations effectively
enable the implementation of NG911
systems. Specifically, the NENA
Handbook provides an overview of key
policy, regulatory, and legislative issues
that need to be considered to enable the
transition to NG911. The NENA
Handbook states that ‘‘it is critical that
State regulatory bodies and the FCC take
timely and carefully scrutinized action
to analyze and update existing 9–1–1,
PSTN, and IP rules and regulations to
ensure they optimize 9–1–1 governing
authority choices for E9–1–1 and NG9–
1–1 and foster competition by
establishing a competitively neutral
marketplace.’’
9. On March 16, 2010, the
Commission delivered the National
Broadband Plan to Congress, which
included several recommendations
related to NG911. Specifically, the Plan
noted that the Commission was already
considering changes to its E911 location
accuracy requirements and
recommended that the Commission
expand that proceeding to explore how
NG911 may affect location accuracy and
provision of automated location
information. The Plan further
recommended that the Commission
initiate a new proceeding ‘‘to address
how NG911 can accommodate
communications technologies, networks
and architectures beyond traditional
voice-centric devices,’’ and to ‘‘explore
how public expectations may evolve in
terms of the communications platforms
the public would rely upon to request
emergency services.’’
10. In September 2010, addressing the
National Broadband Plan
recommendation with respect to
location accuracy, we adopted a Further
Notice of Proposed Rulemaking and
Notice of Inquiry in our E911 Location
Accuracy proceeding, in which we
sought comment on a number of issues
pertaining to the Commission’s location
accuracy rules, including the impact of
NG911 deployments on location
accuracy and Automatic Location
Identification (ALI). The FNPRM and
NOI was published in the Federal
Register at 75 FR 67321, November 2,
2010. In the Location Accuracy FNPRM/
VerDate Mar<15>2010
18:03 Jan 12, 2011
Jkt 223001
NOI, we limited the scope of our NG911
inquiry to location issues in the
provision of voice-based services. In this
Notice of Inquiry, we initiate the
broader proceeding recommended in the
National Broadband Plan concerning the
migration to NG911.
11. Most recently, on October 8, 2010,
the Twenty-First Century
Communications and Video
Accessibility Act of 2010 (Twenty-First
Century Act) was signed into law. The
Twenty-First Century Act directs the
Chairman of the Commission to
establish an advisory committee, to be
known as the Emergency Access
Advisory Committee (EAAC), for the
purpose of achieving equal access to
emergency services by individuals with
disabilities as part of our nation’s
migration to NG911. The Twenty-First
Century Act also directs the EAAC to
conduct a national survey with people
with disabilities and make
recommendations on the most effective
and efficient technologies and methods
to enable NG911 access. The EAAC will
be composed generally of State and
local government representatives
responsible for emergency management
and emergency responder
representatives, national organizations
representing people with disabilities
and senior citizens, communications
equipment manufacturers, service
providers, and subject matter experts.
III. Technical Comparison of Legacy
911 and Next Generation 911
12. In order to understand the
opportunities and challenges involved
with deploying an NG911 system across
the country, it is instructive to first
briefly review how, as a technical
matter, the current 911 system operates
for wireline, wireless and
interconnected VoIP 911 calls, and how
NG911 will differ from legacy 911 in its
applications and network architecture.
For brevity, the discussion simplifies
some of the technical details of both
legacy and NG911 systems.
A. Legacy 911
13. In the United States, legacy 911
service generally falls into two
categories—basic and enhanced. Basic
911 service transmits 911 calls from the
service provider’s switch to a single
geographically appropriate Public Safety
Answering Point (PSAP) or public safety
agency, usually over dedicated
emergency trunks. Basic 911 networks
are not capable of taking into account
the caller’s location, but simply forward
all 911 calls from a particular PSTN
switch to the appropriate PSAP or
public safety agency. E911 service
expands basic 911 service by not only
PO 00000
Frm 00032
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
2299
delivering 911 calls to the appropriate
PSAP or agency, but also providing the
call taker with the caller’s call back
number, referred to as Automatic
Numbering Information (ANI), and
location information—a capability
referred to as Automatic Location
Identification (ALI). Most areas of the
country have now implemented E911
service.
14. Wireline E911. In wireline E911,
PSAPs are connected to telephone
switches by dedicated trunk lines.
Wireline E911 networks generally have
been implemented, operated, and
maintained by a subset of incumbent
LECs, and are largely paid for by PSAPs
through tariffs. Network implementation
varies from carrier to carrier and
jurisdiction to jurisdiction, but usually
is based on traditional circuit-switched
architecture and implemented with
legacy components that place significant
limitations on the functions that can be
performed over the network. Typically,
a wireline E911 network utilizes a
selective router, which receives 911
calls from competitive and incumbent
LEC central offices over dedicated
trunks. The selective router then queries
an incumbent LEC-maintained selective
router database (SRDB) to determine
which PSAP serves the caller’s
geographic area. The selective router
will then forward the call, along with
the caller’s phone number (i.e., ANI) to
the PSAP that has been designated to
serve the caller’s area. The PSAP then
forwards the caller’s ANI to an
incumbent LEC-maintained Automatic
Location Identification database (ALI
database). The ALI database returns to
the PSAP the caller’s physical address
(that has previously been verified by
comparison to the MSAG). Wireline
E911 networks also include a Database
Management System (DBMS), which
provides a method for competitive and
incumbent LECs to enter customer data
into both the SRDB and the ALI
Database.
15. Wireless E911. Under the
Commission’s wireless E911 rules,
wireless carriers are obligated to provide
the telephone number of the originator
of a 911 call (i.e., ANI) and information
regarding the caller’s location (i.e., ALI)
to any PSAP that has requested that
such information be delivered with 911
calls. As explained in the VoIP 911
Order and VoIP 911 NPRM, the mobile
nature of wireless technology and other
IP-enabled services presents significant
obstacles to making E911 effective—in
particular the provision to PSAPs of
accurate ALI. Specifically, the mobility
of wireless service renders the use of
permanent street addresses as a location
indicator useless, and often requires the
E:\FR\FM\13JAP1.SGM
13JAP1
srobinson on DSKHWCL6B1PROD with PROPOSALS
2300
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 9 / Thursday, January 13, 2011 / Proposed Rules
provision of real-time location updates
to the PSAP. In addition, the caller’s
phone number (i.e., the ANI
information) may not be usable by the
selective router for PSAP routing
purposes within the specific geographic
region in which the mobile 911 call was
placed. To overcome this mobility
problem, wireless carriers have
developed various techniques to
provision ANI and ALI to the PSAP that
involve enhancements or ‘‘add-ons’’ to
existing Wireline E911 networks.
16. Interconnected VoIP E911. Under
the Commission’s rules, interconnected
VoIP providers must provide E911
service to their customers. As with
wireless service, the mobile nature of
interconnected VoIP service presents
challenges in making E911 effective.
Since an emergency call may be placed
from outside the caller’s home area
code, completing the call may require
the use of ‘‘pseudo-ANI’’ (p-ANI). The
most difficult challenge, however, is the
inability of the VoIP device or service
provider to determine the current
geographic location of the caller. As a
result, the Commission requires
interconnected VoIP providers to obtain
location information, called ‘‘Registered
Location,’’ from their subscribers, which
is either entered manually or based on
the subscriber’s billing record. Under
this approach, if a VoIP subscriber does
not update his or her location, the
subscriber’s 911 call may be routed to
the wrong PSAP, which may delay the
emergency response.
17. Beyond the basic functionality
above, the Commission imposes
additional obligations on interconnected
VoIP service providers. Under the
Commission’s rules, interconnected
VoIP providers must forward all 911
calls made over their interconnected
VoIP service, as well as a call back
number and the caller’s Registered
Location for each call, to the appropriate
PSAP. These calls must be routed
through the use of ANI and, if
necessary, and similar to wireless
carriers, p-ANI, via the dedicated
wireline E911 network, and the caller’s
Registered Location must be available
from or through the ALI Database.
Additionally, interconnected VoIP
providers must comply with several
customer notification requirements that
include apprising their subscribers of
any limitations in providing E911
service.
B. Next Generation 911
18. Next Generation 911 relies on IPbased architecture rather than the
PSTN-based architecture of legacy 911
to provide an expanded array of
emergency communications services
VerDate Mar<15>2010
18:03 Jan 12, 2011
Jkt 223001
that encompasses both the core
functionalities of legacy E911 and
additional functionalities that take
advantage of the enhanced capabilities
of IP-based devices and networks.
NENA defines NG911 as ‘‘a system
comprised of hardware, software, data
and operational policies and procedures
* * *, to: Provide standardized
interfaces from call and message
services; process all types of emergency
calls including non-voice (multi-media)
messages; acquire and integrate
additional data useful to call routing
and handling; deliver the calls/messages
and data to the appropriate PSAPs and
other appropriate emergency entities;
support data and communications needs
for coordinated incident response and
management provide a secure
environment for emergency
communications.’’
19. In an NG911 environment, IPbased technologies and applications are
used to provide call identification,
location determination, call routing, and
call signaling for emergency calls. Call
identification determines that a call
(which may be a voice call or some
other form of communication) is indeed
an emergency call, mapping a uservisible identifier (such as the digits 911
or 112) to a network-standard uniform
emergency call identifier, such as an
emergency service Uniform Resource
Name (URN). Location determination
provides the civic or geospatial location
of the caller to the initiating call router,
which will then use the emergency call
identifier and the location information,
along with other information, to route
the call to the nearest IP-enabled PSAP.
20. The NG911 architecture also
redefines the functions and capabilities
of PSAPs, who receive and process
emergency calls by means of Emergency
Services IP Networks (ESInets). An
ESInet is an IP-based network used by
the PSAP and other agencies that may
be involved in responding to an
emergency. Emergency calls can be
delivered to an ESInet from several
types of originating networks, including
both NG911 networks and legacy 911
networks. The ESInet, in turn,
completes the call to the appropriate
PSAP. The call signaling uses the same
standard protocols as non-emergency
calls, but user devices may use other
protocols via gateways.
21. The nature of NG911 technology
and architecture leads to certain key
differences when compared to legacy
911, as detailed in the paragraphs
below:
• NG911 networks can be accessed by
a wide variety of end users and devices,
many of which will have identifiers
other than telephone numbers.
PO 00000
Frm 00033
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
• NG911 networks are capable of
supporting multiple voice and nonvoice services, whereas legacy 911
supports voice only.
• In NG911, the difference between
mobile, nomadic, and fixed services is
blurred, because a single device may
operate in mobile, nomadic, and fixed
configurations at different times and
locations.
• In NG911, network access and
communications service may be
provided by separate entities rather than
the same entity.
• NG911 network services can be
provided by servers largely independent
of location.
22. As pointed out by the Internet
Engineering Task Force, Emergency
Context Resolution with Internet
Technologies (IETF–ECRIT) working
group, the use of the Internet rather than
circuit-switched networks changes the
requirements and operating conditions
of IP-based emergency calling. For
example, in an NG911 call scenario, the
caller’s provider of Internet access
services may not be the same entity that
provides voice calling services, i.e., that
routes calls and bridges them to the
PSTN when needed. Moreover, the
voice service provider may be located
far away from the caller, possibly in
another country, while the Internet
access provider remains, by physical
necessity, local to the caller. The voice
service provider may also not be a
traditional telecommunications
provider, particularly as the need to
interconnect with the PSTN diminishes.
23. Unlike communications systems
that interconnect with the PSTN, IPbased communication systems are
media-neutral, i.e., they can transport
any digital information, regardless of
content, and are not limited to voice or
voice-band data (TTY). As a result, a
wide variety of voice and non-voice
services can share the same Internet
infrastructure. Moreover, while wireless
or wireline E911 network users need no
special capabilities to dial 911, current
standards-based architectures for NG911
envision a more active role for end-user
devices and systems in identifying
emergency calls and acquiring the
caller’s location information. This
makes it easier for NG911 networks to
add media beyond voice, although it
also creates additional challenges such
as security.
24. NG911 will also require a new and
more multi-faceted approach to caller
identification. In legacy E911 networks,
all callers have telephone numbers as
identifiers, most of which are domestic
(+1) numbers. Initially, most users of IPbased systems (e.g., interconnected
VoIP) will also have telephone numbers,
E:\FR\FM\13JAP1.SGM
13JAP1
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 9 / Thursday, January 13, 2011 / Proposed Rules
srobinson on DSKHWCL6B1PROD with PROPOSALS
but an increasing percentage of these
users are likely to have international
rather than domestic numbers.
Moreover, in the longer term, as IPbased networks support an increasing
diversity of non-interconnected and
non-voice services, potential NG911 end
users and devices are less likely to have
any type of telephone number and more
likely to have identifiers such as email
addresses, Session Initiation Protocol
(SIP) URLs or service-specific ‘‘handles.’’
25. In contrast to the device-specific
connection protocols in legacy 911
networks for wireline, wireless, and
interconnected VoIP phones, NG911
will need to provide IP-enabled devices
with multiple means of accessing the
NG911 network, resulting in a blurring
of the difference between stationary,
nomadic and mobile devices. For
example, an IP-enabled mobile device
may be capable of accessing the Internet
via a Wi-Fi hotspot, a cable modem, or
a 4G wireless broadband network.
NG911 networks will need mechanisms
to recognize which form of access the
device is using when an emergency call
is made and to provide the appropriate
caller identification, location
determination, call routing, and call
signaling in each case.
26. NG911 also provides far more
flexibility to provide network services
that are not constrained by the location
of the caller or the nearest PSAP to the
caller. In circuit-switched networks, the
location of many types of network
services is constrained by the network
topology. For example, a selective router
has to be relatively close to the PSAPs
it serves. For NG911, since call routing
and media transport are completely
disjoint, almost any network server can
be located and replicated anywhere. As
an example, a SIP proxy that routes call
can be in a different part of the country,
incurring only a few milliseconds of
additional packet propagation delays.
IV. Discussion
27. While, as detailed above, the 911
system has been adapted to
accommodate wireless and
interconnected VoIP services, the
success of the 911 system, combined
with the antiquated aspects of today’s
911 infrastructure and the development
of advanced IP-based devices and
applications in the telecommunications
industry overall, creates a gulf between
consumer assumptions about the
system’s robust capabilities and its
actual limitations. Indeed, there is
widespread concurrence among
academics, industry experts, and
politicians that ‘‘the current
communications landscape is a far cry
from the one for which the current 9–
VerDate Mar<15>2010
18:03 Jan 12, 2011
Jkt 223001
1–1 system was engineered’’ and,
furthermore, that ‘‘our emergency
communications networks are unable to
accommodate what is increasingly
viewed as basic functionality inherent
in many of today’s technologies.’’ In
short, because 911 service was designed
to succeed in the legacy wireline
telephone environment, there are unmet
consumer expectations concerning
emergency service capability and
reliability across new communications
technologies (such as text messaging
requests for help, sending IP-based
information, including medical data,
photos, videos, car collision telemetry,
environmental sensors, gun shot
sensors, etc. via smartphones, and
delivering precise location information
from behind MLTS systems).
28. The deployment of and transition
to NG911 presents multiple
opportunities for the benefit of public
safety and homeland security. First,
replacing today’s system with a
broadband-enabled, IP-based 911
network will offer far more flexibility,
resilience, functionality, innovation
potential, and competitive opportunities
than is presently possible. NG911 holds
the promise to bridge the gap between
traditional means of voice-based
communications and the advanced
capabilities already in widespread use
by consumers using smartphones,
netbooks, and advanced wireless 4G. In
particular these digital devices have
powerful processor and storage
capabilities and are capable of
transmitting not only voice
communications, but also text, data,
telemetry, image, and video signals,
which have benefits to particular
communities such as persons with
disabilities. Unlike the circuit-switched
technology that lies at the heart of the
legacy 911 system, today’s wireless
networks increasingly use all-digital
packet switched technology based upon
the Internet Protocol suite. Thus, while
these networks are capable of conveying
text, data, image, and video in addition
to voice, the legacy 911 systems are not
capable of receiving or processing these
communications, and will not be until
NG911 is deployed across the country.
29. The adoption of broadband IPbased technology also creates the
potential for our 911 system to
accommodate a full range of specialized
devices and functionalities tailored to
particular emergency response
scenarios. For example, NG911 could
permit the simultaneous transmission of
critical health data along with a 911 call
for help, both from the ‘‘caller’’ seeking
assistance to a dispatcher, and back out
from a dispatcher to a first responder
arriving on scene or to an emergency
PO 00000
Frm 00034
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
2301
room receiving the patient. Likewise, a
vehicle’s Automatic Collision
Notification System could automatically
call for help while conveying other
relevant information such as the
vehicle’s location and the severity of the
crash. NG911 will also enable 911 call
routing based on caller characteristics,
not just the location of the call. For
example, a 911 call might be made via
a video-enabled device by a deaf caller
whose native language is American Sign
Language. In this situation, rather than
routing the call to the ‘‘geographically
appropriate’’ PSAP, it may be preferable
to enable the 911 system to route the
911 call to a PSAP that is video-enabled
and has a 911 call taker prepared to
respond to the caller using the caller’s
native sign language. NG911 will permit
this to happen. NG911 will also create
the ability to utilize a ‘‘virtual PSAP.’’
Today’s 911 system generally requires a
call taker to answer a 911 call from
within the walls of a physical PSAP. In
a NG911 network, however, a call taker
will be able to answer a 911 call from
virtually any location. This capability
will be particularly advantageous during
disasters and high call volume
situations. NG911 will also complement
the deployment of related next
generation emergency communications
networks, such as next generation
alerting systems and advanced public
safety broadband networks.
30. In this proceeding, we seek to gain
a general understanding of NG911 and
the applications that it supports. We
examine and seek comment about how
the applications and architecture of
NG911 will affect the interface with the
general public, the internal workings of
PSAPs, and the interface with
Emergency Medical Services (EMS) and
other first responder organizations,
including dispatch and database access.
We then look at issues associated with
implementing NG911 and how the
transition from legacy 911 will impact
the current architecture, structure, and
costs of today’s PSAPs over time.
Finally, we seek comment on the proper
roles of the FCC, other Federal agencies,
and State, Tribal, and local governments
in developing NG911 elements and
facilitating the transition to NG911 over
time.
A. NG911 Capabilities and Applications
31. In this section, we review the
potential capabilities that the
deployment of NG911 systems will
provide to the public, and the likely
architecture of NG911 networks. We
seek comment on each of these elements
as a component of NG911. Are there
core elements that should be part of
every NG911 system and standardized
E:\FR\FM\13JAP1.SGM
13JAP1
2302
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 9 / Thursday, January 13, 2011 / Proposed Rules
srobinson on DSKHWCL6B1PROD with PROPOSALS
across all NG911 deployments? Are
there non-core elements that could be
part of NG911 but are optional or can be
varied locally? How will these elements
(both core and non-core) be affected by
future technological change?
1. Potential Media Types in an NG911
Environment
32. Because NG911 architecture is IPbased, NG11 networks have the
potential to support a variety of nonvoice communications applications or
‘‘media types.’’ There is broad consensus
in the public safety community that
NG911 should include some
combination of non-voice media types,
and to this end, NENA, the IETF, and
others have been actively engaged in
developing and harmonizing technical
standards to support such IP-based
NG911 solutions. In addition, the U.S.
Department of Transportation and other
Federal agencies have engaged in the
development of standards in this area.
We identify and discuss the most likely
media types below, and seek comment
on the potential for each of the media
types to be supported in the
development and deployment of NG911
networks. We also seek comment on
whether there are any additional media
types that we should consider for
inclusion in NG911.
33. Message-Based Text. When using
message-based text, two or more parties
have the ability to send complete,
typically short, text messages to each
other. Examples include Short Message
Service (‘‘SMS’’), instant messaging
(‘‘chat’’) sessions, or web-based tools. To
send a message-based text, a user must
make an explicit action, such as hitting
an SMS send key, or the return key on
a keyboard. Chat sessions are
bidirectional through their protocol
definition. While services such as SMS
consist of independent messages, they
may be presented to the user as a thread
of back-and-forth messages.
34. Real-Time Text. ‘‘Real-Time Text
(RTT) is conversational text that is
generally sent and received on a
character-by-character basis. The
characters are sent immediately (in a
fraction of a second) once they are typed
and are also displayed immediately to
the receiving person(s). This
functionality allows text to be used in
the same conversational mode as voice.’’
RTT is viewed by many in the disability
community as a replacement for the
dated TTY technology and preferable,
from a human interface perspective, to
message-based text, as it more closely
approximates the speed and flow of
human voice conversation. RTT also
prevents messages from crossing each
other during a call, and for this reason
VerDate Mar<15>2010
18:03 Jan 12, 2011
Jkt 223001
may be preferred over SMS as a means
of facilitating the exchange of
information between the caller and the
PSAP dispatcher.
35. Still Images (Photos). Still images
are captured by a digital camera,
typically encoded into a compressed file
format, such as JPEG, and made
available as a single data object (file).
Still images may help 911 call takers
and first responders assess the severity
of an incident or apprehend a criminal
suspect.
36. Real-Time Video. Real-time (live)
video may be captured by a webcam, a
camera built into a mobile phone, a
networked security camera, or another
video-capable device. The live nature of
real-time video distinguishes it from
streaming video, which is typically used
for watching entertainment content.
Real-time video will help first
responders better gauge the scope and
nature of an incident and will also help
determine a caller’s precise location.
37. Telemetry Data. Telemetry data
includes all sensor measurements that
quantify physical, chemical, or
biological phenomena. Examples
include vehicular information (such as
current speed and crash-related data),
biological and environmental sensors
that measure wind and temperature, and
physiometric sensors that measure
human pulse rates.
38. Auxiliary Medical and other
Personal Data. Auxiliary data would
include relevant information about the
caller’s medical conditions and
particular treatment needs, as well as
information related to those categories.
Such information could be provided on
a prior-consent basis to the PSAP for
forwarding to EMS personnel or other
first responders.
2. Primary vs. Secondary Usage of
Media Types
39. We also seek comment on the
degree to which each of the media types
discussed above will be used as a
primary versus a secondary form of
communication on NG911 networks. By
‘‘primary’’ media, we refer to media that
provide the basic communications link
between the 911 caller and the PSAP
during the emergency call. By
‘‘secondary’’ media, we refer to media
that may convey additional information
between the caller (or the device used
by the caller) and the PSAP to augment
the primary communication. Primary
media will likely include voice, RTT,
and text-based messaging (SMS, instant
messaging), because to differing degrees,
all of these media types will permit live
conversations between the 911 caller
and the PSAP. Thus, primary media can
also be considered ‘‘conversational
PO 00000
Frm 00035
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
media.’’ Primary media will likely be
used to convey the nature and location
of an emergency to a PSAP. In some
cases, primary media may not be
available to a 911 caller (e.g., due to
network congestion or end system
limitations). In these cases, we seek
comment on whether e-mail or social
network status pages could possibly be
used as the primary means of contacting
a PSAP. Secondary media will likely
include transmission of photos, live
video, and sensor data (e.g., data
acquired from sensors commonly found
in mobile devices, vehicles, and medical
monitoring systems). We envision a
PSAP most frequently using secondary
media to acquire supplemental
information from a 911 caller or the
caller’s device.
40. The Commission seeks comment
on what primary and secondary media
types PSAPs and service providers will
likely support. Should individual
PSAPs be able to choose the media
types that they will support, or should
all PSAPs be expected or required to
support a specific set of media types?
Should different standards or
requirements apply to primary
conversational media as opposed to
secondary non-conversational media? If
secondary non-conversational media
include the capability to transmit
sensitive personal data, what privacy
protection concerns are raised and how
should they be addressed? Would
changes in current laws, regulations,
tariffs, and overall policies be needed to
enable NG911 to support these media
types and system features?
3. SMS for Emergency Communications
41. In light of the popularity and
ubiquity of SMS, many consumers may
assume that they are or will soon be able
to text to 911. Indeed, consumer use of
SMS has exploded in the past decade
and billions of SMS messages are sent
each day. Also, unlike some of the other
media types discussed above, SMS is
readily available on most mobile
phones, and thus its implementation
into the NG911 network may be one of
the first steps in moving beyond a voiceonly emergency calling framework.
SMS, however, has limitations that will
need to be addressed if it is to become
a reliable means for emergency
communications. For example, a recent
study noted that SMS is an
asynchronous messaging service that
does not provide a means for the sender
to know whether and when the message
has reached its destination. In addition,
the study noted that because each SMS
is independent of its predecessors, it is
difficult to ensure that messages within
E:\FR\FM\13JAP1.SGM
13JAP1
srobinson on DSKHWCL6B1PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 9 / Thursday, January 13, 2011 / Proposed Rules
the same logical conversation are routed
to the same destination.
42. Given these limitations, we seek
comment on how the increasing use of
SMS may impact emergency
communications and whether NG911
networks should be configured to
support SMS emergency
communications. For example, are there
any proposed technical standards or
approaches that would sufficiently
address routing and location concerns?
Further, will it be possible to use the
existing short code system to reach
PSAPs? Are there measurement results
for mobile-to-fixed messaging that
indicate the reliability and delay of SMS
delivery under specified circumstances?
Would it be possible to add location
information to SMS messages to help in
routing such messages and, if so, how?
Would it be possible to maintain session
continuity across messages, e.g., at the
gateway between the cellular network
and the IP network? Can end-system
SMS applications address some of the
location-related issues, e.g., waiting to
send an emergency SMS until location
information has been acquired? Have
there been trials or operational
experiences using SMS within the
NG911 architecture? Should SMS be
considered primarily as a fall-back
mechanism when voice
communications are difficult or
impossible to transmit? As wireless
systems evolve to IP based 4G
architectures, can the reliability and
features of SMS messaging be improved
for the purposes of emergency
communications and if so, how?
43. We also seek comment on existing
and future public expectations related to
the use of SMS for emergency
communications. Do consumers
understand that currently available SMS
generally does not support sending text
messages to 911? Could the
implementation of NG911 lead to
changes in consumer expectations and
public misunderstandings about SMS
capabilities? Is there a need for
programs to educate the public about
the limitations of SMS for emergency
communications, and if so, what entity
should be responsible for developing
such programs? Are there liability issues
that could arise if consumers
unsuccessfully attempt to use SMS for
emergency communications?
4. NG911 Applications for Persons with
Disabilities and Special Needs
44. According to the ICO Plan, ‘‘[t]he
biggest gap between the technologies
used for daily communication and those
that can access 9–1–1 services is that for
the deaf and people with hearing or
speech impairments.’’ As noted in
VerDate Mar<15>2010
18:03 Jan 12, 2011
Jkt 223001
paragraph 11, supra, the Twenty-First
Century Act directs the Commission to
form the EAAC with the purpose of
determining the most effective and
efficient technologies and methods by
which to enable access to NG911
emergency services by individuals with
disabilities. Moreover, the Twenty-First
Century Act provides that ‘‘[t]he
Commission shall have the authority to
promulgate regulations to implement
the recommendations proposed by the
[EAAC], as well as any other
regulations, technical standards,
protocols, and procedures as are
necessary to achieve reliable,
interoperable communication that
ensures access by individuals with
disabilities to an Internet protocolenabled emergency network, where
achievable and technically feasible.’’ In
addition, the National Broadband Plan
recommended that NHTSA include ‘‘an
analysis of the needs of persons with
disabilities and should identify
standards and protocols for NG911 and
for incorporating VoIP and ‘Real Time
Text’ standards.’’ ICO has noted that
when it analyzed trial deployments of
IP-enabled emergency networks, texting
access through various IP-devices, RTT,
and third-party conferencing was
successfully demonstrated.
Additionally, streaming video and SMS
were successfully demonstrated, but
with key shortcomings.
45. The Commission seeks comment
on what media types and devices (e.g.,
text, video) persons with disabilities
will likely use to make an emergency
call in an NG911 environment. We
understand that some people with
hearing and speech disabilities make
emergency calls directly; others use
telecommunications relay services
(TRS), a more indirect method to make
these calls. How can the Commission
ensure that persons with disabilities
receive the appropriate benefits from the
NG911 system? What, if any, technical
or accessibility requirements should be
imposed to ensure that persons with
disabilities have the necessary access to
the NG911 system? To what extent can
real-time text, which permits the live
exchange of information with a PSAP
during a call, assist individuals with
hearing or speech disabilities who wish
to call 911 directly? Finally, the
Commission requires IP-based text and
video relay providers to ensure the
prompt and automatic call handling of
emergency calls. What considerations
are necessary to ensure effective access
to NG911 services for callers who
continue to rely on IP-based relay
services for their 911 calls? Are there
different considerations for individuals
PO 00000
Frm 00036
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
2303
who continue to use PSTN-based relay
services?
46. The Commission recognizes the
significant public safety interest in
ensuring that non-English speakers have
access to emergency services. We seek
comment on what media types nonEnglish speakers likely will use to make
an emergency call in an NG911
environment. What types of devices
may non-English speakers use to make
an emergency call in an NG911
environment? How can the Commission
ensure that non-English speakers
receive the appropriate benefits from the
NG911 system?
47. The ability to share information—
including medical information—could
be of particular value to EMS and other
first responders. Should such
information be provided in the ordinary
course to EMS and other first
responders in a manner similar to the
provision of medical condition
information described in paragraph 37,
supra? Since privacy protection
concerns would seemingly be
implicated in this case, as in the case of
transmitted medical information, how
should such concerns be addressed?
48. Independently of the
Commission’s efforts in connection with
the EAAC, we seek comment on
whether the Commission should
conduct a separate rulemaking to ensure
that individuals with disabilities have
access to an Internet protocol-enabled
emergency network, where achievable
and technically feasible.
B. NG911 Network Architecture
1. Transport Mechanisms in an NG911
Environment
49. In this section, we seek comment
on the mechanisms that will be used to
transport digital content across NG911
networks. In an IP-based NG911
architecture, unlike a circuit-switched
architecture, a variety of protocols can
be used to transport media types across
the network from the 911 caller to the
PSAP. For example, still images can be
carried: (1) As Multimedia Messaging
Services (MMS) sent by mobile devices,
(2) as attachments to Internet e-mail, (3)
within instant images and uploaded to
social network services, or (4) on other
web services. We note that a diverse mix
of physical infrastructures, networking
protocols, applications, and devices
may facilitate the carriage of potential
NG911 media types from a 911 caller to
a NG911-enabled PSAP. For example,
some carriage scenarios may rely solely
on ‘‘pure’’ IP-based solutions, some may
rely heavily on existing legacy
infrastructure, and some may rely on
gateway packet-based communications
E:\FR\FM\13JAP1.SGM
13JAP1
2304
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 9 / Thursday, January 13, 2011 / Proposed Rules
between callers and PSAPs. We seek
comment on each of these technical
approaches and request that
commenters discuss operational,
business, and other policy strengths and
weaknesses of each approach. For
example, while application of IP-based
approaches has generally led to robust
and unexpected innovations in
communications technologies, PSAPs
could face operational and funding
burdens from supporting a large number
of IP-based NG911 architectures, and
resources could be diverted from
technical solutions that incorporate
standardized features and
implementation approaches. Similarly,
introduction of operational
requirements such as reliability,
scalability, and standardized technology
could result in tradeoffs between
various legacy, proprietary, end-to-end
open-standard, or other approaches for
IP-based NG911 systems. We request
that commenters identify these
tradeoffs, or other relevant tradeoffs,
and discuss the relative strengths and
weaknesses of these technical
approaches.
2. NG911 Participants
50. In the traditional 911 system, only
a small number of entities participated
in the provisioning of emergency calling
services because an E911 call would
originate from an end user device that
was in practice tightly-coupled, both
technically and administratively, with
the service provider’s transport network.
Examples include a conventional
wireline phone, a mobile phone, and an
interconnected VoIP phone.
51. In a NG911 environment,
however, end user devices are far more
likely to be liberated from a particular
transport network. This treatment
acknowledges important industry
trends, such as the increasing portability
of devices among service providers,
open access possibilities, and the
increasing use of user-selected IP-based
devices that may exploit widelyavailable sources of Internet access. As
such, the number of participants in an
NG911 environment will increase
dramatically. The table below lists the
potential NG911 participants and their
possible roles in an NG911
environment.
Media transport
and encodings
Call/Message
identification
Location provisioning
Call/Message
routing
PSAPs ......................................................................................
VSP and application service providers ....................................
Residential ISP ........................................................................
Non-traditional ISP (hotels, coffee shops, community networks, etc.) ...........................................................................
Enterprise IP–PBX ...................................................................
UE vendors ..............................................................................
Communication software developers ......................................
Home gateway manufacturers .................................................
srobinson on DSKHWCL6B1PROD with PROPOSALS
Participant/Affected by
X
X
X
X
X
X
52. Currently, only devices that
provide telephone services are capable
of transmitting 911 calls. In the future,
however, most electronic devices will
have communication capabilities,
ranging from televisions, in-car systems,
portable music players, tablet
computers, and game consoles. We seek
comment on what devices can usefully
provide emergency calling services.
Should every consumer device with
Internet or cellular connectivity and a
suitable user interface have the ability to
request emergency assistance? Should
such devices be certified and labeled as
911-capable? How will a user of a
device or software be able to tell
whether a device or communication
software is capable of placing 911 calls?
If this capability is conditional, e.g., on
properly-configured network
connectivity, can the user or device test
911 reachability?
53. In the E911 Scope Order, the
Commission established the following
four criteria for determining which
licensees should be subject to the
wireless enhanced 911 obligations:
Those licensees that (1) offer real-time,
two-way switched voice service,
interconnected with the PSTN, either on
a stand-alone basis or packaged with
other telecommunications services; (2)
whose customers clearly expected
VerDate Mar<15>2010
18:03 Jan 12, 2011
Jkt 223001
X
X
X
X
access to 911 and E911; (3) that
competed with analog and broadband
PCS providers; and (4) where it is
technically and operationally feasible to
provide enhanced 911 service. Should
the Commission consider expanding or
modifying the four criteria from the
E911 911 Scope Order to apply to
additional NG911 participants? For
example, should hot-spot providers that
are not traditional communications
providers, such as coffee shops, hotels,
bus lines, and public parks be expected
to play a role in the deployment of
NG911?
3. Interoperability and Standards
54. Many potential NG911 media
types permit a range of encoding and
performance parameters. For example,
photos are typically compressed using
the JPEG standard, but may also use
other formats. Photos may also include
meta data (EXIF), ranging from camera
settings to embedded geographic
location. Further, camera images can
range from low-resolution web cam
photos with less than one megapixel to
professional-quality images with more
than 15 megapixels and several
megabytes in size. For text, accented
and foreign language characters can be
represented in a range of character
encodings with Unicode in its UTF–8
PO 00000
Frm 00037
Fmt 4702
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
Sfmt 4702
X
X
X
encoding among the most popular.
While a wide variety of digital formats
are potentially available for encoding
such information, NG911 will require
use of compatible formats across the
network, so that PSAPs can receive and
process the text, photos, and other
digital information that are sent by the
public. We seek comment on how best
to ensure such compatibility in the
formatting and coding of text, photos,
and other digital information. Should
there be standards for media encodings?
Should we specify minimal
performance ranges, e.g., minimum file
sizes for digital images, that NG911
networks must support and PSAPs be
able to accept?
55. If there is a need to develop
standards for digital information
transported on NG911 networks, what
entity should set and update these
standards, or assist in their
coordination? Should the standards be
national or international? Are there
standards efforts currently under way
that could form the basis for future
evolution in this regard? Should specific
technical standards or architectures be
mandated? How can the interoperability
of end user devices and PSAP devices
be ensured (e.g., through
interoperability testing)? Should there
be a certification process that indicates
E:\FR\FM\13JAP1.SGM
13JAP1
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 9 / Thursday, January 13, 2011 / Proposed Rules
srobinson on DSKHWCL6B1PROD with PROPOSALS
whether a device or downloadable
software application is compliant with
certain standards? If so, what form of
certification seems to be the most
suitable, e.g., self-certification or
approved certification organizations?
Should all devices of a certain class be
required to meet the certification
criteria? As more people—especially
within the disability community—begin
to make video-based telephone calls, are
there steps needed to ensure that NG911
networks interoperate seamlessly with
the video software and applications
being utilized in smart phones, tablets,
computers and other devices? Similarly,
are there steps needed to ensure
interoperability with the video
communication services provided by all
video relay service providers?
4. PSAP Functions in an NG911
Environment
56. As noted earlier, IP-based
technology removes many of the
location constraints of traditional
circuit-switched technology. In
particular, a PSAP no longer has to be
in a single building at a fixed location.
Call takers that are organizationally part
of a single PSAP can be located virtually
anywhere an Internet connection can be
found, and a single call taker could be
supporting multiple PSAPs. Such
‘‘virtual PSAP’’ arrangements may allow
more flexible and efficient staffing and
may allow PSAPs to better recover from
major disasters by temporarily
relocating operations. We seek comment
on the potential for development of
virtual PSAPs as part of the transition
from legacy 911 to NG911. Are current
technologies sufficient to support
virtual PSAPs? Are there regulatory or
legal barriers changes that are necessary
to facilitate the development and
operation of virtual PSAPs? Are there
current PSAP databases that would need
to be standardized to support a remote
‘‘virtual PSAP’’? How could local data
that is contained in current Computer
Aided Dispatch Data Bases, MSAGs, and
other repositories that are necessary for
an efficient response by emergency
personnel be distributed on a timely and
reliable basis for use by non-local
PSAPs?
57. While emergency service networks
and PSAPs will continue to be operated
and managed regionally, the
deployment of NG911 may require a set
of national infrastructure components.
Based on the current NENA NG911
architecture, these may include: (1) A
national PSAP and ESInet lookup
directory, called the LoST ‘‘forest
guide’’; (2) a public-key cryptography
certificate to ensure that other NG911
entities can authenticate PSAPs and to
VerDate Mar<15>2010
18:03 Jan 12, 2011
Jkt 223001
ensure that PSAPs are capable of
receiving access to sensitive
information; and (3) interconnection to
an IP-based national network to ensure
that emergency calls can be routed
amongst PSAPs without PSAPs losing
information. The Commission seeks
comment on whether it is necessary to
establish a national set of infrastructure
components to ensure the deployment
of NG911. If it is necessary, what entity
should operate this national set of
infrastructure components?
C. Other Specialized NG911
Applications
58. Device-Initiated Services for
Emergency Communications. In an IPbased network architecture, emergency
calls can be placed not only by human
beings, but by a variety of automatically
triggered devices. Examples of such
devices include environmental sensors
capable of detecting chemicals, highway
cameras, security cameras, alarms,
personal medical devices, telematics,
and consumer electronics in
automobiles. We seek comment on how
the deployment of NG911 will facilitate
the ability of device-initiated emergency
services to reach PSAPs. What steps are
needed to facilitate such deployment? Is
there a need to modify existing laws,
regulations, or tariffs to ensure that
device-initiated emergency services
have access to the NG911 network?
59. Social Media for Emergency
Communications. How have consumers
used social media to report an
emergency or contact public safety
during an emergency? How will
consumers expect to use social media
for emergency purposes in the future?
To what extent might State and local
public safety jurisdictions employ social
media tools as a way to interact with the
public? How will these tools impact the
deployment of NG911?
60. N11 Numbers and Other Services
for Emergency Communications. The
basic functionality of NG911 is similar
to many other location-based
information and assistance services,
such as 211 (community information
and referral), 311 (non-emergency city
services), 511 (traffic information),
poison control, call-before-you-dig, and
other similar services. Since these
services share much of the same
technical functionality, it may be
possible to reduce cost and improve
service by integrating some of these
services to use a common technology
platform. Further, callers may need to
be transferred from one service to
another, e.g., from 911 to 311 or 211.
Can such coordination and integration
be helpful and cut costs? How will the
deployment of NG911 address N11
PO 00000
Frm 00038
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
2305
numbers, including N11 services such
as 311, which is designated for nonemergencies? How will the deployment
of NG911 impact other emergency
services, such as poison control centers
using 800 services? How will the
deployment of NG911 affect TRS that
use 711?
61. Auxiliary Data. NG911 offers the
opportunity to provide additional data
to PSAPs and first responders, such as
the caller’s medical history, a
description of the caller’s residence or
business location, and related data,
including building floor plans,
information about hazardous materials,
and building occupants with special
needs. This data will often be
maintained and provided by third
parties, such as health care
organizations that maintain electronic
medical records or commercial
landlords that maintain floor plans.
How should the PSAP be informed
about the availability of this data? What
entity should associate this information
with the call or message, such as the
application service provider or a third
party? Is there a need for regulations
that require an application service
provider to supply these services, e.g.,
by providing the appropriate call
signaling or lookup functionality? Is
there a need for standards to ensure that
PSAPs and first responders receive
access to this data without every PSAP
having to make individual arrangements
with each data source? Since this
auxiliary data may be considered part of
the 911 call record and therefore subject
to public disclosure, is there a need to
protect the privacy of this data
differently than the remainder of the
call information?
62. Disaster Planning and Recovery.
How will NG911 facilitate disaster
planning and recovery? How will
NG911 interact with existing and future
public alerting systems? Can national
security be enhanced by the consistent
implementation of interoperable NG911
systems across the nation? What key
NG911 elements should be the focus for
consistent implementation and
interoperability?
63. MLTS for Emergency
Communications in an NG911
Environment. Currently, MLTS
operators are not subject to the FCC’s
E911 regulations. In 2003, the
Commission found that economic and
competitive factors existed that
rendered it impracticable to adopt E911
requirements for MLTS. The
Commission, however, sought comment
on its ‘‘jurisdiction over MLTS
operators, in light of the Commission’s
earlier interpretations of its section 4(i)
authority and its prior statement that
E:\FR\FM\13JAP1.SGM
13JAP1
2306
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 9 / Thursday, January 13, 2011 / Proposed Rules
srobinson on DSKHWCL6B1PROD with PROPOSALS
‘the reliability of 911 service is
integrally related to our responsibilities
under section 1 of the Act.’ ’’ In light of
NG911’s potential impact on MLTS, we
seek comment on whether the
Commission has the jurisdiction to
regulate MLTS operators. How will the
deployment of NG911 improve
emergency services for MLTS users?
Will MLTS operators be able to provide
improved location information in an
NG911 environment?
D. Issues Related to NG911
Implementation/Transition
64. We seek comment on the potential
operational, technical, and other
challenges associated with the transition
to NG911. As both the ICO Plan and the
National Broadband Plan highlight, the
transition to NG911 will be an
evolutionary process, involving
technological, economic, and
institutional challenges. The ICO Plan
also noted that ‘‘a timetable for national
deployment of NG9–1–1 is difficult to
estimate due to the lack of:
• Consistent funding for planning,
training, deployment and
implementation;
• Complete set of standards and time
required to develop them; and
• Coordinated planning and
implementation efforts by stakeholders
at all levels (e.g., government, industry,
OSPs, standards organizations).’’
65. In light of these challenges, what
actions should the Commission take to
encourage the deployment of NG911?
Have there been any recent
developments that provide additional
details on a potential timeline for
NG911 deployment? Have there been
any coordinated management efforts by
State, Tribal, or local governments?
Should there be a national set of
milestones that provide a planning
horizon? If so, what entity or entities
should set those milestones, measure
progress, and disseminate the
measurement results? What are the
milestones that will be useful to
accelerate and measure NG911
deployment? What changes will need to
take place in the emergency
communications governance structures,
at both the Federal and non-Federal
levels, to facilitate NG911 planning and
implementation? What policies can be
established to enable and instigate the
development and deployment of shared
State-wide ESInet, and related
cooperative working agreements
between Federal, State, Tribal, and local
agencies, as a fundamental 911 and
emergency communications policy
objective? Will waivers of certain rules
and regulations be necessary during the
transition to NG911? Should the FCC
VerDate Mar<15>2010
18:03 Jan 12, 2011
Jkt 223001
provide certain criteria for consideration
of waiver grants?
1. Disparate PSAP Capabilities in an
NG911 Environment
66. Because the transition to NG911 is
likely to be gradual rather than a large
scale ‘‘flash cut,’’ what can be done to
ensure that NG911 networks
interoperate seamlessly with legacy
networks? PSAPs will likely offer
different capabilities for both primary
and secondary media types during the
transition to NG911; however,
consumers in need of emergency
services will also expect a uniform
experience. For example, it may confuse
consumers if they can use IP-based
devices and applications to reach a
PSAP in one county, but cannot use
them to reach a PSAP in a neighboring
county. Will the deployment of NG911
permit statewide or nationwide PSAPs
to uniformly support new emergency
communication capabilities? We seek
comment on whether a timetable or
deadline should be established for all
PSAPs to support a minimal set of
NG911 capabilities. Should we
implement a timetable or deadline to
ensure that all primary media types can
be used to contact 911? Should certain
media types, such as message-based
text, only be permitted for emergency
purposes when a threshold percentage
of PSAPs across the country can accept
these media types? Is fallback routing
acceptable, where larger regional
entities handle media types, such as
SMS, when the local PSAP cannot? If
this is not the best path forward, how
should consumers determine what
media types they can use to reach
emergency services in their locality?
Should NG911-enabled devices be able
to automatically discover the local
NG911 capabilities?
2. 911 Competition
67. In the current 911 system,
incumbent local exchange carriers are
the primary 911 System Service
Providers (SSPs); however, in the
NG911 environment, there are likely to
be multiple SSPs offering a variety of
service capabilities and options. Thus,
NG911 systems will provide the
opportunity for competitive services to
emerge in the 911 marketplace.
However, as NENA has pointed out,
there are many State, local, and Federal
regulations that may inadvertently
inhibit the transition to NG911. We seek
comment on both the potential benefits
and potential drawbacks of competition
in the 911 marketplace. If competition
does provide a benefit, what steps
should be taken at both the Federal and
PO 00000
Frm 00039
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
non-Federal level to enable competition
for the delivery of NG911 services?
68. Since many 911 laws and
regulations were written in an era where
the technological capabilities of NG911
did not exist, we seek comment on how
legislative and regulatory bodies can
modify their laws and regulations to
ensure that they keep pace with the
rapidly changing public safety
marketplace. As NENA noted, ‘‘[d]uring
the transition to NG9–1–1 * * * rights
and obligations are unclear for those
companies that are providers of IP
services and seek to provide complete
systems or components of 9–1–1
systems * * * [thus] * * * a
clarification of rules impacting the
delivery of 9–1–1 and emergency
services is needed in the near term.’’
Given these new opportunities, what
regulations should the Commission
implement, or clarify, to facilitate an
open and competitive NG911
environment?
69. How competitive is today’s 911
system in terms of call routing,
switching, transport, and database
management services? Are there current
laws and regulations that would inhibit
an interoperable environment for
NG911? Can these laws and regulations
be modified to enable the IP-based,
software, and database controlled
structure of NG911? How do State laws
and local ordinances that currently
exclude non-voice based
communications, automated 911 access,
and sensors affect the deployment of
NG911? Are disparate cost recovery
mechanisms for originating 911 traffic
and data costs and varying
interconnection requirements impeding
the transition to NG911? Do incumbent
911 system service providers have
sufficient incentives to upgrade their
technology absent regulatory change?
Specifically, will NG911 architecture
encourage more competition in the
provision of 911 services? Should the
FCC encourage such competition, and if
so, how? What actions are necessary to
optimize 911 governing authority
choices for competitive NG911 SSPs,
including the ability of governing
authorities to act directly as SSPs?
Should existing regulations, laws, or
tariffs be modified to ensure that 911
governing authorities or new 911 SSPs
are entitled to receive relevant routing,
location, and other related 911
information at reasonable rates and
terms? Should laws, regulations, and
tariffs be modified to account for the
responsibility of cost distribution for the
decreasing use of shared legacy
resources, such as legacy selective
routers?
E:\FR\FM\13JAP1.SGM
13JAP1
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 9 / Thursday, January 13, 2011 / Proposed Rules
srobinson on DSKHWCL6B1PROD with PROPOSALS
70. NENA has also recommended that
the Commission examine its use of the
term ‘‘wireline E9–1–1 network’’ as
defined in section 9.3 of the
Commission’s rules. According to
NENA, ‘‘[i]t could be argued that this
definition would not allow for the
routing of 9–1–1 calls via an IP-based
NG9–1–1 system.’’ The Commission
seeks comment on NENA’s
recommendation. What other
regulations need to be modified or
expanded to enable data based services
and other NG911 capabilities, including
the expansion of call routing from a
location-only basis to more effective
forms, such as caller characteristics or
needs (e.g., hearing or speech impaired,
preferred language, etc.)?
3. Liability Concerns
71. NG911 will promote a more
complex service delivery environment,
with more types of services able to
connect to NG911 systems, more
external data sources available to
PSAPs, and increased informationsharing options among emergency
response agencies. While this flexibility
promises to provide benefits to the
public and PSAPs, it is also likely to
create more complex liability issues and
may require new forms of liability
protection for providers of NG911related services.
72. Liability concerns may arise in a
variety of contexts, based on the
variability and complexity of NG911
services. For example, PSAPs may face
differing liability scenarios depending
on whether they choose to receive all
possible information from all devices or
to limit their systems to receipt of
certain information or devices.
Moreover, because NG911 can provide
far more detailed information in real
time than legacy 911, new liability
issues may arise if errors occur in the
transition of such data. For example, a
911 call could arrive at a PSAP from a
telematics-equipped vehicle with
information on the severity of a crash
along with information from the vehicle
occupants’ electronic health records.
Based on this information, algorithms
may be able to predict the probability of
severe injury and suggest a certain type
of response. These capabilities are
intended to result in the appropriate
level of care quickly being sent to
victims in need of assistance; however,
they may also result in unintentional
errors and liability exposure. Liability
issues may also arise from the transfer
of emergency calls and data outside the
NG911 system, such as among multiple
national N11/800 numbers (e.g., 211,
311, 811, 911, suicide hotline, poison
control centers). The current ability to
VerDate Mar<15>2010
18:03 Jan 12, 2011
Jkt 223001
transfer calls and data among the
multiple N11 entities is limited, but will
not be as NG911 systems are deployed
and N11 calls are able to be routed over
shared networks. As a result, these
entities may be exposed to liability.
73. These examples illustrate that
NG911 may raise liability concerns both
for PSAPs and for commercial providers
of NG911-related services, and that
liability protections may therefore need
to be modified in an NG911
environment. Some of the new
communication services that have been
proposed for inclusion in the NG911
ecosystem may offer benefits to the
intended user. However, in their present
implementation, these services may not
provide the reliability and quality of
service that is associated with an
emergency service. We seek comment
on whether and how liability
protections should be modified to
ensure that NG911 service providers
and PSAPs are adequately protected in
an NG911 environment. How should the
benefits of these new modes of
communication be balanced against the
potential liabilities they may introduce?
Are there actions that the FCC can take,
consistent with its statutory authority,
in regard to modifying liability
protections? Should liability protection
extend to all forms of information
pushed to a PSAP or pulled from
external sources by a PSAP, regardless
of the platform over which information
travels? Should liability protection
extend beyond the PSAP to all entities
appropriately involved in the
emergency response? Should the FCC
review its requirement that all 911 calls
be routed to the ‘‘geographically
appropriate’’ PSAP to ensure that 911
calls are not prevented from being
intelligently routed to the appropriate
PSAP, even if it is not the
geographically closest PSAP? Does the
possibility of 911 calls being answered
by a ‘‘virtual’’ PSAP give rise to liability
concerns that would need to be
addressed?
4. Confidentiality and Privacy Concerns
74. The legacy 911 system is a
dedicated, closed, single-purpose
system. Since information associated
with a 911 call in today’s system is
generally stored in a single restricted
location, preserving the confidentiality
of the information and retaining
appropriate records as required by law
is relatively straightforward. Conversely,
NG911 systems will be shared systems
comprised of multiple entities. Indeed,
the NG911 network may be only one
part of a much larger system that will be
shared with government, private sector,
and other public safety entities. As
PO 00000
Frm 00040
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
2307
previously noted, the number of media
types that may be received by PSAPs
and shared with emergency response
agencies will greatly surpass that of
current E911 systems.
75. In light of the shared nature of
NG911 architecture, we seek comment
on whether privacy laws or regulations
will need to be modified to adapt to the
NG911 environment. What privacy
concerns will be introduced with the
deployment of NG911? What existing or
new regulations might be necessary to
ensure appropriate privacy controls?
Will the definition of a ‘‘911 call’’ need
to be modified in certain statutes and
rules? How should we address concerns
regarding private personal information
that may be transmitted as part of an
NG911 communication, for example,
personal medical information that
NG911 can provide to PSAPs and other
third parties? How can 911 call takers at
virtual PSAPs legally access 911 call
data when necessary, while requiring
adherence to appropriate
confidentiality, disclosure, and
retention statutes and rules?
5. Location Capabilities
76. As noted in the ICO Plan, new
location-based technologies and
applications have generated an
increased demand for location services,
yet the decoupling of originating service
providers from network operators will
make the delivery of real-time,
automatic location information more
challenging. To what degree should
Federal regulations require that access
providers provide call location data to
end systems and/or voice service
providers on reasonable and nondiscriminatory terms, using standard
protocol interfaces? How can stationary,
nomadic, and mobile end systems in
wireline and non-cellular wireless
networks (including Wi-Fi) reliably
discover their location information to
ensure call routing and dispatch? What,
if any, obligations need to be imposed
on Internet service providers, residential
and enterprise equipment vendors, and
other parties to ensure that location
information can be discovered,
conveyed, and validated? Is there a need
for a national or regional certification
entity that will allow a provider of
location information to
cryptographically sign the location
information?
6. Network and Data Security Concerns
77. The IP-based nature of NG911
architecture, and its complex
relationship with other systems, gives
rise to concerns about maintaining the
security, integrity, and reliability of
NG911 networks and information. We
E:\FR\FM\13JAP1.SGM
13JAP1
2308
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 9 / Thursday, January 13, 2011 / Proposed Rules
seek comment on how to address these
concerns. Will the deployment of
NG911 allow increased security of
information through role-based access
control and data rights management that
limits access to information only to
authorized entities? What additional
security concerns will be implicated by
the transition to NG911 as compared to
the legacy 911 security functionality?
How can the NG911 network be
protected against viruses, cyber attacks,
fraudulent or harassing transmissions,
and other unwarranted intrusions and
interruptions?
srobinson on DSKHWCL6B1PROD with PROPOSALS
7. Education
78. What role will public information
campaigns play in the transition to
NG911? How can the Commission
ensure that public safety personnel,
consumers, and carriers are aware of
NG911 deployments? What entities
should lead and contribute to consumer
education? Should the Commission
foster common terms and terminology to
facilitate the deployment of NG911?
How can we ensure that other relevant
organizations are aware of NG911’s
benefits, such as mobile health and
telemedicine? Beyond the EAAC, how
can we ensure that the disability
community is involved with and aware
of the transition to NG911?
8. Unidentified Caller Access to NG911
79. Given the proliferation of services
and devices that will be able to initiate
emergency calls in an NG911
environment, there will likely be many
more ways for callers to contact a PSAP,
including those callers that do not have
an active subscription with an
application (voice) service provider, or
do not have access privileges for the
wireless network available at their
current location.
80. We are concerned that
unauthorized access to the NG911
network will increase the number of
unintentional, prank, or malicious calls
to a PSAP. However, there may be
opportunities to reduce the risks by
creating authorization models that are
separate from traditional subscriber
arrangements. As a hypothetical
example, State motor vehicle authorities
could provide, as part of their normal
identity management operations,
network and Application Service
Provider (ASP) credentials that would
be valid for emergency calls. We seek
comment on whether such emergencycall-only credentials would be desirable
and feasible? If so, how can they be
implemented? What regulatory
arrangements would be necessary to
facilitate this emergency-call
authentication?
VerDate Mar<15>2010
18:03 Jan 12, 2011
Jkt 223001
81. Even if new authorization
procedures can be developed, it may
still be necessary for NG911 systems to
support emergency communications in
some circumstances where the caller
cannot be identified. We seek comment
on how this problem can be addressed.
When would it be appropriate for the
NG911 system to support emergency
calls without authentication and/or
authorization? Should ASPs be required
to support emergency calls for zerobalance customers? Should providers of
public and semi-public wireless data
networks, such as 802.11 hot spots, be
required to provide access for
emergency calls?
9. International Issues
82. Currently, an international
traveler can make a 911 call in the
United States as long as the traveler’s
mobile phone can connect to the local
wireless network. In an NG911
environment, an international traveler’s
home ASP can route an emergency call
to the appropriate PSAP in the United
States, even if the ASP is located in
another country. However, regulatory
arrangements may be needed to make
this call routing feasible. Should these
types of calls be supported by NG911?
What kind of arrangements and
regulatory changes will be needed to
facilitate these calls?
E. Jurisdiction, Authority, and
Regulatory Roles
83. State, Tribal, and local
governments are the primary
administrators of the legacy 911 system
and are responsible for establishing and
designating PSAPs or appropriate
default answering points, purchasing
customer premises equipment, retaining
and training PSAP personnel, and
purchasing 911 network services.
Certain communications technologies,
however, necessitated the adoption of a
uniform national approach. For
example, following the introduction of
CMRS in the United States, the
Commission established rules requiring
CMRS carriers to implement basic 911
and E911 services. In addition, Congress
adopted the 911 Act to promote and
enhance public safety through the use of
wireless communications services. The
911 Act directed the Commission to
designate 911 as the universal
emergency assistance number for
wireless and wireline calls, which the
Commission accomplished in 1999. The
911 Act also required the Commission
to consult and cooperate with State and
local officials in its role of encouraging
and supporting the deployment of
‘‘comprehensive end-to-end emergency
communications infrastructure and
PO 00000
Frm 00041
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
programs.’’ Similarly, in applying E911
rules to interconnected VoIP in 2005,
the Commission noted that a uniform
national approach was necessary to
ensure that the quality and reliability of
911 service would not be damaged by
the introduction of new
communications technologies that
posed technical and operational
challenges to the 911 system. In 2008,
Congress codified these rules in the NET
911 Act.
84. The level and manner of Statelevel coordination of 911 services varies
widely. In some states, 911 service is
strictly a local matter. Other states have
centralized the 911 program function or
have otherwise established a statewide
coordination mechanism, although their
circumstances and authority vary
widely. Another factor that varies
widely is the extent to which states have
coordinated their 911 systems with
those of Tribal governments. Although
the staffing of PSAPs and handling of
911 calls will generally remain a local
function, certain aspects of transitioning
to NG911 will require State-level
planning and implementation
coordination. For example, according to
NENA, ‘‘ESInets will be developed and
managed locally or regionally, but will
need strong State-level leadership and
coordination to ensure both operability
and interoperability of State, local, and
regional ESInets.’’ In light of the
variation in State-level approaches to
legacy 911, we seek comment on the
ability of states to effectively coordinate
the transition to NG911. Should each
State designate an organization that will
be responsible for planning,
coordinating, and implementing the
NG911 system in that particular State?
Similarly, we seek comment on how
coordination with Tribal governments is
effectuated at the local level.
85. We also seek comment on whether
there should be Federal oversight or
governance of State deployment of
NG911. The National Broadband Plan
called on Congress to enact and the FCC
to implement a Federal NG911
regulatory framework that confers
Federal jurisdiction and oversight for
the ‘‘development and transition to
NG911 networks’’ while preserving
‘‘existing State authority for 911
services.’’ We seek comment on the
extent of the FCC’s jurisdiction to
oversee the transition to NG911, since
PSAPs, service providers, consumer
device manufacturers, and software
developers will all be involved. We also
seek comment on the role that other
Federal agencies, such as ICO and those
entities with responsibilities to Tribal
lands, should play. Should a single
Federal entity be established to oversee
E:\FR\FM\13JAP1.SGM
13JAP1
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 9 / Thursday, January 13, 2011 / Proposed Rules
the transition to NG911? Should there
be a single Federal entity to ensure
compliance with required standards,
coordination, implementation, and
policies? Should there be a national
policy established by the Commission or
another Federal entity to ensure
consistent regulation? What entity
should enable and instigate the
development and deployment of shared
State-wide ESInets and related
cooperative working agreements
between Federal, State, tribal, and local
agencies? What functions and
responsibilities should be performed at
the Federal, regional, State, Tribal, and
local levels in the implementation,
transition to, and ongoing operation of
NG911 in areas including networks,
NG911 functional elements, databases,
system operation, and PSAP operation?
What statutory or regulatory changes, if
any, would be necessary for the
Commission, other Federal agencies,
States, Tribes, or localities to facilitate
and oversee NG911?
86. How should the FCC coordinate
with other Federal agencies on issues
related to the deployment of NG911,
such as mobile health, telemedicine and
disability access? How should the FCC
and other Federal agencies coordinate
with the states and Tribal governments?
Should the FCC provide oversight to the
states as they assume leadership roles in
the transition to and implementation of
NG911 systems within and between
states?
V. Procedural Matters
A. Paperwork Reduction Act
87. This document does not contain
proposed information collection(s)
subject to the Paperwork Reduction Act
of 1995 (PRA), Public Law 104–13. In
addition, therefore, it does not contain
any new or modified ‘‘information
collection burden for small business
concerns with fewer than 25
employees,’’ pursuant to the Small
Business Paperwork Relief Act of 2002,
Public Law 107–198, see 47 U.S.C.
3506(c)(4).
srobinson on DSKHWCL6B1PROD with PROPOSALS
B. Ex Parte Presentations
88. The inquiry this Notice initiates
shall be treated as a ‘‘permit-butdisclose’’ proceeding in accordance with
the Commission’s ex parte rules.
Persons making oral ex parte
presentations are reminded that
memoranda summarizing the
presentations must contain summaries
of the substance of the presentations
and not merely a listing of the subjects
discussed. More than a one or two
sentence description of the views and
arguments presented generally is
VerDate Mar<15>2010
18:03 Jan 12, 2011
Jkt 223001
required. Other requirements pertaining
to oral and written presentations are set
forth in section 1.1206(b) of the
Commission’s rules.
C. Comment Filing Procedures
89. Pursuant to sections 1.415 and
1.419 of the Commission’s rules, 47 CFR
1.415, 1.419, interested parties may file
comments and reply comments on or
before the dates indicated on the first
page of this document. Comments may
be filed using: (1) the Commission’s
Electronic Comment Filing System
(ECFS), (2) the Federal Government’s
eRulemaking Portal, or (3) by filing
paper copies. See Electronic Filing of
Documents in Rulemaking Proceedings,
63 FR 24121 (1998).
• Electronic Filers: Comments may be
filed electronically using the Internet by
accessing the ECFS: https://
fjallfoss.fcc.gov/ecfs2/ or the Federal
eRulemaking Portal: https://
www.regulations.gov.
• Paper Filers: Parties who choose to
file by paper must file an original and
four copies of each filing. If more than
one docket or rulemaking number
appears in the caption of this
proceeding, filers must submit two
additional copies for each additional
docket or rulemaking number.
• Filings can be sent by hand or
messenger delivery, by commercial
overnight courier, or by first-class or
overnight U.S. Postal Service mail. All
filings must be addressed to the
Commission’s Secretary, Office of the
Secretary, Federal Communications
Commission.
• All hand-delivered or messengerdelivered paper filings for the
Commission’s Secretary must be
delivered to FCC Headquarters at 445
12th St., SW., Room TW–A325,
Washington, DC 20554. The filing hours
are 8 a.m. to 7 p.m. All hand deliveries
must be held together with rubber bands
or fasteners. Any envelopes must be
disposed of before entering the building.
• Commercial overnight mail (other
than U.S. Postal Service Express Mail
and Priority Mail) must be sent to 9300
East Hampton Drive, Capitol Heights,
MD 20743.
• U.S. Postal Service first-class,
Express, and Priority mail must be
addressed to 445 12th Street, SW.,
Washington DC 20554.
90. People with Disabilities: To
request materials in accessible formats
for people with disabilities (braille,
large print, electronic files, audio
format), send an e-mail to
fcc504@fcc.gov or call the Consumer &
Governmental Affairs Bureau at 202–
418–0530 (voice), 202–418–0432 (tty).
PO 00000
Frm 00042
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
2309
VI. Ordering Clause
91. Accordingly, it is ordered that,
pursuant to the authority contained in
sections 4(i), 4(j), 10, 218, 303(b), 303(r),
and 403 of the Communications Act of
1934, as amended, 47 U.S.C. 154(i),
154(j), 160, 218, 303(b), 303(r), and 403,
this Notice of Inquiry is adopted.
Federal Communications Commission
Marlene H. Dortch,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2011–565 Filed 1–12–11; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6712–01–P
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
National Highway Traffic Safety
Administration
49 CFR Part 575
[Docket No. NHTSA 2011–0005]
RIN 2127–AK06
Consumer Information Regulations;
Fees for Use of Traction Skid Pads
National Highway Traffic
Safety Administration (NHTSA),
Department of Transportation (DOT).
ACTION: Notice of Proposed Rulemaking
(NPRM).
AGENCY:
This NPRM proposes to
amend NHTSA’s consumer information
regulations on uniform tire quality
grading standards by updating the fees
currently charged for use of the traction
skid pads at NHTSA’s San Angelo Test
Facility, formerly called the Uniform
Tire Quality Grading Test Facility, in
San Angelo, Texas and by eliminating
fees for course monitoring tires, which
are no longer supplied by NHTSA. This
NPRM updates the fees in accordance
with Office of Management and Budget
Circular A–25, which governs fees
assessed for Government services and
use of Government goods or resources.
DATES: Comments to this proposal must
be received on or before March 14, 2011.
ADDRESSES: You may submit comments,
identified by the docket number in the
heading of this document, by any of the
following methods:
• Federal eRulemaking Portal: Go to
https://www.regulations.gov. Follow the
instructions for submitting comments
on the electronic docket site by clicking
on ‘‘Help’’ or ‘‘FAQ.’’
• Mail: Docket Management Facility,
M–30, U.S. Department of
Transportation, 1200 New Jersey
Avenue, SE., West Building Ground
Floor, Rm. W12–140, Washington, DC
20590.
SUMMARY:
E:\FR\FM\13JAP1.SGM
13JAP1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 76, Number 9 (Thursday, January 13, 2011)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 2297-2309]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2011-565]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION
47 CFR Part 20
[PS Docket No. 10-255; FCC 10-200]
Framework for Next Generation 911 Deployment
AGENCY: Federal Communications Commission
ACTION: Notice of inquiry.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The Notice of Inquiry (NOI) initiates a comprehensive
proceeding to address how Next Generation 911 (NG911) can enable the
public to obtain emergency assistance by means of advanced
communications technologies beyond traditional voice-centric devices.
The NOI seeks to gain a better understanding of how the gap between the
capabilities of modern networks and devices and today's 911 system can
be bridged and seeks comment on how to further the transition to IP-
based communications capabilities for emergency communications and
NG911.
DATES: Submit comments on or before February 28, 2011. Submit reply
comments March 14, 2011.
ADDRESSES: Pursuant to Sec. Sec. 1.415 and 1.419 of the Commission's
rules, 47 CFR 1.415, 1.419, interested parties may file comments and
reply comments. Comments may be filed using: (1) the Commission's
Electronic Comment Filing System (ECFS), (2) the Federal Government's
eRulemaking Portal, or (3) by filing paper copies. See Electronic
Filing of Documents in Rulemaking Proceedings, 63 FR 24121 (May 1,
1998).
Electronic Filers: Comments may be filed electronically
using the Internet by accessing the ECFS: https://fjallfoss.fcc.gov/ecfs2/ or the Federal eRulemaking Portal: https://www.regulations.gov.
Paper Filers: Parties who choose to file by paper must
file an original and four copies of each filing. If more than one
docket or rulemaking number appears in the caption of this proceeding,
filers must submit two additional copies for each additional docket or
rulemaking number.
Filings can be sent by hand or messenger delivery, by
commercial overnight courier, or by first-class or overnight U.S.
Postal Service mail. All filings must be addressed to the Commission's
Secretary, Office of the Secretary, Federal Communications Commission.
All hand-delivered or messenger-delivered paper filings
for the Commission's Secretary must be delivered to FCC Headquarters at
445
[[Page 2298]]
12th St., SW., Room TW-A325, Washington, DC 20554. The filing hours are
8 a.m. to 7 p.m. All hand deliveries must be held together with rubber
bands or fasteners. Any envelopes must be disposed of before entering
the building.
Commercial overnight mail (other than U.S. Postal Service
Express Mail and Priority Mail) must be sent to 9300 East Hampton
Drive, Capitol Heights, MD 20743.
U.S. Postal Service first-class, Express, and Priority
mail must be addressed to 445 12th Street, SW., Washington DC 20554.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Patrick Donovan, Public Safety and
Homeland Security Bureau, at (202) 418-2413, Federal Communications
Commission, 445 12th Street, SW., Washington, DC 20554; or via the
Internet to Patrick.Donovan@fcc.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
I. Introduction
1. As recommended in the National Broadband Plan, this Notice of
Inquiry (NOI) initiates a comprehensive proceeding to address how Next
Generation 911 (NG911) can enable the public to obtain emergency
assistance by means of advanced communications technologies beyond
traditional voice-centric devices. In the telecommunications industry
overall, competitive forces and technological innovation have ushered
in an era of advanced Internet-Protocol (IP)-based devices and
applications that have vastly enhanced the ability of the public to
communicate and send and receive information. At the same time, our
legacy circuit-switched 911 system is unable to accommodate the
capabilities embedded in many of these advanced technologies, such as
the ability to transmit and receive photos, text messages, and video.
Accordingly, in this proceeding, we seek to gain a better understanding
of how the gap between the capabilities of modern networks and devices
and today's 911 system can be bridged. We also seek comment on how to
further the transition to IP-based communications capabilities for
emergency communications and NG911.
II. Background
2. Since AT&T first made the digits ``911'' available nationally in
1968 for wireline access to emergency services, the American public
increasingly has come to depend on the service. Today, the National
Emergency Number Association (NENA) estimates that some form of 911
service is available to 99 percent of the population in 96 percent of
the counties in the United States, and 240 million calls are made to
911 in the United States each year. ``911'' is as well known as any
popular brand, and is what we routinely teach to children as the way to
summon help from police, fire, and ambulance services. In more recent
times, 911 has become increasingly important for homeland security, as
the means for ordinary citizens--in some ways the true ``first
responders''--to report suspicious activity or summon emergency
assistance for themselves and others in times of natural or man-made
disasters. It should therefore come as no surprise that the American
public has developed clear expectations with respect to the
availability of 911 emergency services via certain classes of
communications devices.
3. The availability of this critical service is due largely to the
dedicated efforts of State, local, and Tribal authorities and
telecommunications carriers, who have used the 911 abbreviated dialing
code to provide access to increasingly advanced and effective emergency
service capabilities. Indeed, absent appropriate action by, and funding
for, states, Tribes, and local jurisdictions, there can be no effective
911 service.
4. At the same time, new voice communications technologies have
posed technical and operational challenges to the 911 system,
necessitating the adoption of a uniform national approach to preserve
the quality and reliability of 911 services for such communications
technologies. This was first recognized following the introduction of
commercial mobile radio services (CMRS) in the United States, when the
Commission in 1996 established rules requiring CMRS carriers to
implement basic 911 and Enhanced 911 (E911) services.
5. In 1999, Congress continued this recognition when it enacted the
Wireless Communications and Public Safety Act (911 Act) to promote and
enhance public safety through the use of wireless communications
services. The 911 Act directed the Commission to designate 911 as the
universal emergency assistance number for wireless and wireline calls,
and to establish a transition period for areas of the country where 911
was not yet available. In 2000, the Commission adopted an order which
established 911 as the universal emergency telephone number in the
United States. In 2003, the Commission revised ``the scope of [its]
enhanced 911 rules to clarify which technologies and services will be
required to be capable of transmitting enhanced 911 information.'' In
adopting rules tailored to specific services, the Commission clarified,
inter alia, the following matters: (1) Telematics service providers
offering interconnected CMRS voice calling service may have an E911
service requirement and need to coordinate with the underlying wireless
carriers, so that, regardless of the legal relationship between them,
E911 requirements can be met; and (2) resold and prepaid mobile
wireless service providers must meet 911 rules to the extent the
underlying licensee has deployed the necessary technology for E911
service. The Commission declined, however, to impose E911 requirements
on: (1) Telematics-only services providers, reserving the right to
revisit E911 obligations in the future, (2) manufacturers of disposable
phones or personal data assistants (PDAs) that contain a voice service
component, and (3) multi-line telephone systems, except for the
Commission's monitoring of states' progress on implementing E911 for
those systems.
6. The next significant step in the evolution of 911 followed the
introduction of Voice over Internet Protocol (VoIP) services in the
United States. In this regard, in 2005, the Commission established
rules requiring interconnected VoIP service providers to supply E911
capabilities to their customers as a standard feature from wherever the
customer is using the service.
7. While the Commission and the 911 industry acted to enable 911
service availability for wireless and VoIP providers, today's 911
system remains reliant on increasingly antiquated analog or digital
circuit-switched facilities. It is thus not capable of supporting
certain functionalities made possible by a transition to broadband IP-
based communications technologies--functionalities that have become
commonplace in other communications systems. At the same time, the
introduction of these new technologies has created the potential for
development of and transition to NG911 to take advantage of the
enhanced capabilities of IP-based devices and networks.
8. In the last few years, there have been several important efforts
to address the need for a transition to a NG911 network. In the New and
Emerging Technologies 911 Improvement Act of 2008, Congress tasked the
National E9-1-1 Implementation Coordination Office (ICO) to develop ``a
national plan for migrating to a national [Internet Protocol] IP-
enabled emergency network capable of receiving and responding to all
citizen-activated emergency communications and improving information
sharing among all
[[Page 2299]]
emergency response entities.'' The ICO, managed jointly by the
Department of Commerce's National Telecommunications and Information
Administration (NTIA) and the Department of Transportation's National
Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA), released its migration
plan in September 2009. In March 2010, NENA released a handbook to
serve as a guide for public safety personnel and government officials
responsible for ensuring that Federal, State, and local 911 laws and
regulations effectively enable the implementation of NG911 systems.
Specifically, the NENA Handbook provides an overview of key policy,
regulatory, and legislative issues that need to be considered to enable
the transition to NG911. The NENA Handbook states that ``it is critical
that State regulatory bodies and the FCC take timely and carefully
scrutinized action to analyze and update existing 9-1-1, PSTN, and IP
rules and regulations to ensure they optimize 9-1-1 governing authority
choices for E9-1-1 and NG9-1-1 and foster competition by establishing a
competitively neutral marketplace.''
9. On March 16, 2010, the Commission delivered the National
Broadband Plan to Congress, which included several recommendations
related to NG911. Specifically, the Plan noted that the Commission was
already considering changes to its E911 location accuracy requirements
and recommended that the Commission expand that proceeding to explore
how NG911 may affect location accuracy and provision of automated
location information. The Plan further recommended that the Commission
initiate a new proceeding ``to address how NG911 can accommodate
communications technologies, networks and architectures beyond
traditional voice-centric devices,'' and to ``explore how public
expectations may evolve in terms of the communications platforms the
public would rely upon to request emergency services.''
10. In September 2010, addressing the National Broadband Plan
recommendation with respect to location accuracy, we adopted a Further
Notice of Proposed Rulemaking and Notice of Inquiry in our E911
Location Accuracy proceeding, in which we sought comment on a number of
issues pertaining to the Commission's location accuracy rules,
including the impact of NG911 deployments on location accuracy and
Automatic Location Identification (ALI). The FNPRM and NOI was
published in the Federal Register at 75 FR 67321, November 2, 2010. In
the Location Accuracy FNPRM/NOI, we limited the scope of our NG911
inquiry to location issues in the provision of voice-based services. In
this Notice of Inquiry, we initiate the broader proceeding recommended
in the National Broadband Plan concerning the migration to NG911.
11. Most recently, on October 8, 2010, the Twenty-First Century
Communications and Video Accessibility Act of 2010 (Twenty-First
Century Act) was signed into law. The Twenty-First Century Act directs
the Chairman of the Commission to establish an advisory committee, to
be known as the Emergency Access Advisory Committee (EAAC), for the
purpose of achieving equal access to emergency services by individuals
with disabilities as part of our nation's migration to NG911. The
Twenty-First Century Act also directs the EAAC to conduct a national
survey with people with disabilities and make recommendations on the
most effective and efficient technologies and methods to enable NG911
access. The EAAC will be composed generally of State and local
government representatives responsible for emergency management and
emergency responder representatives, national organizations
representing people with disabilities and senior citizens,
communications equipment manufacturers, service providers, and subject
matter experts.
III. Technical Comparison of Legacy 911 and Next Generation 911
12. In order to understand the opportunities and challenges
involved with deploying an NG911 system across the country, it is
instructive to first briefly review how, as a technical matter, the
current 911 system operates for wireline, wireless and interconnected
VoIP 911 calls, and how NG911 will differ from legacy 911 in its
applications and network architecture. For brevity, the discussion
simplifies some of the technical details of both legacy and NG911
systems.
A. Legacy 911
13. In the United States, legacy 911 service generally falls into
two categories--basic and enhanced. Basic 911 service transmits 911
calls from the service provider's switch to a single geographically
appropriate Public Safety Answering Point (PSAP) or public safety
agency, usually over dedicated emergency trunks. Basic 911 networks are
not capable of taking into account the caller's location, but simply
forward all 911 calls from a particular PSTN switch to the appropriate
PSAP or public safety agency. E911 service expands basic 911 service by
not only delivering 911 calls to the appropriate PSAP or agency, but
also providing the call taker with the caller's call back number,
referred to as Automatic Numbering Information (ANI), and location
information--a capability referred to as Automatic Location
Identification (ALI). Most areas of the country have now implemented
E911 service.
14. Wireline E911. In wireline E911, PSAPs are connected to
telephone switches by dedicated trunk lines. Wireline E911 networks
generally have been implemented, operated, and maintained by a subset
of incumbent LECs, and are largely paid for by PSAPs through tariffs.
Network implementation varies from carrier to carrier and jurisdiction
to jurisdiction, but usually is based on traditional circuit-switched
architecture and implemented with legacy components that place
significant limitations on the functions that can be performed over the
network. Typically, a wireline E911 network utilizes a selective
router, which receives 911 calls from competitive and incumbent LEC
central offices over dedicated trunks. The selective router then
queries an incumbent LEC-maintained selective router database (SRDB) to
determine which PSAP serves the caller's geographic area. The selective
router will then forward the call, along with the caller's phone number
(i.e., ANI) to the PSAP that has been designated to serve the caller's
area. The PSAP then forwards the caller's ANI to an incumbent LEC-
maintained Automatic Location Identification database (ALI database).
The ALI database returns to the PSAP the caller's physical address
(that has previously been verified by comparison to the MSAG). Wireline
E911 networks also include a Database Management System (DBMS), which
provides a method for competitive and incumbent LECs to enter customer
data into both the SRDB and the ALI Database.
15. Wireless E911. Under the Commission's wireless E911 rules,
wireless carriers are obligated to provide the telephone number of the
originator of a 911 call (i.e., ANI) and information regarding the
caller's location (i.e., ALI) to any PSAP that has requested that such
information be delivered with 911 calls. As explained in the VoIP 911
Order and VoIP 911 NPRM, the mobile nature of wireless technology and
other IP-enabled services presents significant obstacles to making E911
effective--in particular the provision to PSAPs of accurate ALI.
Specifically, the mobility of wireless service renders the use of
permanent street addresses as a location indicator useless, and often
requires the
[[Page 2300]]
provision of real-time location updates to the PSAP. In addition, the
caller's phone number (i.e., the ANI information) may not be usable by
the selective router for PSAP routing purposes within the specific
geographic region in which the mobile 911 call was placed. To overcome
this mobility problem, wireless carriers have developed various
techniques to provision ANI and ALI to the PSAP that involve
enhancements or ``add-ons'' to existing Wireline E911 networks.
16. Interconnected VoIP E911. Under the Commission's rules,
interconnected VoIP providers must provide E911 service to their
customers. As with wireless service, the mobile nature of
interconnected VoIP service presents challenges in making E911
effective. Since an emergency call may be placed from outside the
caller's home area code, completing the call may require the use of
``pseudo-ANI'' (p-ANI). The most difficult challenge, however, is the
inability of the VoIP device or service provider to determine the
current geographic location of the caller. As a result, the Commission
requires interconnected VoIP providers to obtain location information,
called ``Registered Location,'' from their subscribers, which is either
entered manually or based on the subscriber's billing record. Under
this approach, if a VoIP subscriber does not update his or her
location, the subscriber's 911 call may be routed to the wrong PSAP,
which may delay the emergency response.
17. Beyond the basic functionality above, the Commission imposes
additional obligations on interconnected VoIP service providers. Under
the Commission's rules, interconnected VoIP providers must forward all
911 calls made over their interconnected VoIP service, as well as a
call back number and the caller's Registered Location for each call, to
the appropriate PSAP. These calls must be routed through the use of ANI
and, if necessary, and similar to wireless carriers, p-ANI, via the
dedicated wireline E911 network, and the caller's Registered Location
must be available from or through the ALI Database. Additionally,
interconnected VoIP providers must comply with several customer
notification requirements that include apprising their subscribers of
any limitations in providing E911 service.
B. Next Generation 911
18. Next Generation 911 relies on IP-based architecture rather than
the PSTN-based architecture of legacy 911 to provide an expanded array
of emergency communications services that encompasses both the core
functionalities of legacy E911 and additional functionalities that take
advantage of the enhanced capabilities of IP-based devices and
networks. NENA defines NG911 as ``a system comprised of hardware,
software, data and operational policies and procedures * * *, to:
Provide standardized interfaces from call and message services; process
all types of emergency calls including non-voice (multi-media)
messages; acquire and integrate additional data useful to call routing
and handling; deliver the calls/messages and data to the appropriate
PSAPs and other appropriate emergency entities; support data and
communications needs for coordinated incident response and management
provide a secure environment for emergency communications.''
19. In an NG911 environment, IP-based technologies and applications
are used to provide call identification, location determination, call
routing, and call signaling for emergency calls. Call identification
determines that a call (which may be a voice call or some other form of
communication) is indeed an emergency call, mapping a user-visible
identifier (such as the digits 911 or 112) to a network-standard
uniform emergency call identifier, such as an emergency service Uniform
Resource Name (URN). Location determination provides the civic or
geospatial location of the caller to the initiating call router, which
will then use the emergency call identifier and the location
information, along with other information, to route the call to the
nearest IP-enabled PSAP.
20. The NG911 architecture also redefines the functions and
capabilities of PSAPs, who receive and process emergency calls by means
of Emergency Services IP Networks (ESInets). An ESInet is an IP-based
network used by the PSAP and other agencies that may be involved in
responding to an emergency. Emergency calls can be delivered to an
ESInet from several types of originating networks, including both NG911
networks and legacy 911 networks. The ESInet, in turn, completes the
call to the appropriate PSAP. The call signaling uses the same standard
protocols as non-emergency calls, but user devices may use other
protocols via gateways.
21. The nature of NG911 technology and architecture leads to
certain key differences when compared to legacy 911, as detailed in the
paragraphs below:
NG911 networks can be accessed by a wide variety of end
users and devices, many of which will have identifiers other than
telephone numbers.
NG911 networks are capable of supporting multiple voice
and non-voice services, whereas legacy 911 supports voice only.
In NG911, the difference between mobile, nomadic, and
fixed services is blurred, because a single device may operate in
mobile, nomadic, and fixed configurations at different times and
locations.
In NG911, network access and communications service may be
provided by separate entities rather than the same entity.
NG911 network services can be provided by servers largely
independent of location.
22. As pointed out by the Internet Engineering Task Force,
Emergency Context Resolution with Internet Technologies (IETF-ECRIT)
working group, the use of the Internet rather than circuit-switched
networks changes the requirements and operating conditions of IP-based
emergency calling. For example, in an NG911 call scenario, the caller's
provider of Internet access services may not be the same entity that
provides voice calling services, i.e., that routes calls and bridges
them to the PSTN when needed. Moreover, the voice service provider may
be located far away from the caller, possibly in another country, while
the Internet access provider remains, by physical necessity, local to
the caller. The voice service provider may also not be a traditional
telecommunications provider, particularly as the need to interconnect
with the PSTN diminishes.
23. Unlike communications systems that interconnect with the PSTN,
IP-based communication systems are media-neutral, i.e., they can
transport any digital information, regardless of content, and are not
limited to voice or voice-band data (TTY). As a result, a wide variety
of voice and non-voice services can share the same Internet
infrastructure. Moreover, while wireless or wireline E911 network users
need no special capabilities to dial 911, current standards-based
architectures for NG911 envision a more active role for end-user
devices and systems in identifying emergency calls and acquiring the
caller's location information. This makes it easier for NG911 networks
to add media beyond voice, although it also creates additional
challenges such as security.
24. NG911 will also require a new and more multi-faceted approach
to caller identification. In legacy E911 networks, all callers have
telephone numbers as identifiers, most of which are domestic (+1)
numbers. Initially, most users of IP-based systems (e.g.,
interconnected VoIP) will also have telephone numbers,
[[Page 2301]]
but an increasing percentage of these users are likely to have
international rather than domestic numbers. Moreover, in the longer
term, as IP-based networks support an increasing diversity of non-
interconnected and non-voice services, potential NG911 end users and
devices are less likely to have any type of telephone number and more
likely to have identifiers such as email addresses, Session Initiation
Protocol (SIP) URLs or service-specific ``handles.''
25. In contrast to the device-specific connection protocols in
legacy 911 networks for wireline, wireless, and interconnected VoIP
phones, NG911 will need to provide IP-enabled devices with multiple
means of accessing the NG911 network, resulting in a blurring of the
difference between stationary, nomadic and mobile devices. For example,
an IP-enabled mobile device may be capable of accessing the Internet
via a Wi-Fi hotspot, a cable modem, or a 4G wireless broadband network.
NG911 networks will need mechanisms to recognize which form of access
the device is using when an emergency call is made and to provide the
appropriate caller identification, location determination, call
routing, and call signaling in each case.
26. NG911 also provides far more flexibility to provide network
services that are not constrained by the location of the caller or the
nearest PSAP to the caller. In circuit-switched networks, the location
of many types of network services is constrained by the network
topology. For example, a selective router has to be relatively close to
the PSAPs it serves. For NG911, since call routing and media transport
are completely disjoint, almost any network server can be located and
replicated anywhere. As an example, a SIP proxy that routes call can be
in a different part of the country, incurring only a few milliseconds
of additional packet propagation delays.
IV. Discussion
27. While, as detailed above, the 911 system has been adapted to
accommodate wireless and interconnected VoIP services, the success of
the 911 system, combined with the antiquated aspects of today's 911
infrastructure and the development of advanced IP-based devices and
applications in the telecommunications industry overall, creates a gulf
between consumer assumptions about the system's robust capabilities and
its actual limitations. Indeed, there is widespread concurrence among
academics, industry experts, and politicians that ``the current
communications landscape is a far cry from the one for which the
current 9-1-1 system was engineered'' and, furthermore, that ``our
emergency communications networks are unable to accommodate what is
increasingly viewed as basic functionality inherent in many of today's
technologies.'' In short, because 911 service was designed to succeed
in the legacy wireline telephone environment, there are unmet consumer
expectations concerning emergency service capability and reliability
across new communications technologies (such as text messaging requests
for help, sending IP-based information, including medical data, photos,
videos, car collision telemetry, environmental sensors, gun shot
sensors, etc. via smartphones, and delivering precise location
information from behind MLTS systems).
28. The deployment of and transition to NG911 presents multiple
opportunities for the benefit of public safety and homeland security.
First, replacing today's system with a broadband-enabled, IP-based 911
network will offer far more flexibility, resilience, functionality,
innovation potential, and competitive opportunities than is presently
possible. NG911 holds the promise to bridge the gap between traditional
means of voice-based communications and the advanced capabilities
already in widespread use by consumers using smartphones, netbooks, and
advanced wireless 4G. In particular these digital devices have powerful
processor and storage capabilities and are capable of transmitting not
only voice communications, but also text, data, telemetry, image, and
video signals, which have benefits to particular communities such as
persons with disabilities. Unlike the circuit-switched technology that
lies at the heart of the legacy 911 system, today's wireless networks
increasingly use all-digital packet switched technology based upon the
Internet Protocol suite. Thus, while these networks are capable of
conveying text, data, image, and video in addition to voice, the legacy
911 systems are not capable of receiving or processing these
communications, and will not be until NG911 is deployed across the
country.
29. The adoption of broadband IP-based technology also creates the
potential for our 911 system to accommodate a full range of specialized
devices and functionalities tailored to particular emergency response
scenarios. For example, NG911 could permit the simultaneous
transmission of critical health data along with a 911 call for help,
both from the ``caller'' seeking assistance to a dispatcher, and back
out from a dispatcher to a first responder arriving on scene or to an
emergency room receiving the patient. Likewise, a vehicle's Automatic
Collision Notification System could automatically call for help while
conveying other relevant information such as the vehicle's location and
the severity of the crash. NG911 will also enable 911 call routing
based on caller characteristics, not just the location of the call. For
example, a 911 call might be made via a video-enabled device by a deaf
caller whose native language is American Sign Language. In this
situation, rather than routing the call to the ``geographically
appropriate'' PSAP, it may be preferable to enable the 911 system to
route the 911 call to a PSAP that is video-enabled and has a 911 call
taker prepared to respond to the caller using the caller's native sign
language. NG911 will permit this to happen. NG911 will also create the
ability to utilize a ``virtual PSAP.'' Today's 911 system generally
requires a call taker to answer a 911 call from within the walls of a
physical PSAP. In a NG911 network, however, a call taker will be able
to answer a 911 call from virtually any location. This capability will
be particularly advantageous during disasters and high call volume
situations. NG911 will also complement the deployment of related next
generation emergency communications networks, such as next generation
alerting systems and advanced public safety broadband networks.
30. In this proceeding, we seek to gain a general understanding of
NG911 and the applications that it supports. We examine and seek
comment about how the applications and architecture of NG911 will
affect the interface with the general public, the internal workings of
PSAPs, and the interface with Emergency Medical Services (EMS) and
other first responder organizations, including dispatch and database
access. We then look at issues associated with implementing NG911 and
how the transition from legacy 911 will impact the current
architecture, structure, and costs of today's PSAPs over time. Finally,
we seek comment on the proper roles of the FCC, other Federal agencies,
and State, Tribal, and local governments in developing NG911 elements
and facilitating the transition to NG911 over time.
A. NG911 Capabilities and Applications
31. In this section, we review the potential capabilities that the
deployment of NG911 systems will provide to the public, and the likely
architecture of NG911 networks. We seek comment on each of these
elements as a component of NG911. Are there core elements that should
be part of every NG911 system and standardized
[[Page 2302]]
across all NG911 deployments? Are there non-core elements that could be
part of NG911 but are optional or can be varied locally? How will these
elements (both core and non-core) be affected by future technological
change?
1. Potential Media Types in an NG911 Environment
32. Because NG911 architecture is IP-based, NG11 networks have the
potential to support a variety of non-voice communications applications
or ``media types.'' There is broad consensus in the public safety
community that NG911 should include some combination of non-voice media
types, and to this end, NENA, the IETF, and others have been actively
engaged in developing and harmonizing technical standards to support
such IP-based NG911 solutions. In addition, the U.S. Department of
Transportation and other Federal agencies have engaged in the
development of standards in this area. We identify and discuss the most
likely media types below, and seek comment on the potential for each of
the media types to be supported in the development and deployment of
NG911 networks. We also seek comment on whether there are any
additional media types that we should consider for inclusion in NG911.
33. Message-Based Text. When using message-based text, two or more
parties have the ability to send complete, typically short, text
messages to each other. Examples include Short Message Service
(``SMS''), instant messaging (``chat'') sessions, or web-based tools.
To send a message-based text, a user must make an explicit action, such
as hitting an SMS send key, or the return key on a keyboard. Chat
sessions are bidirectional through their protocol definition. While
services such as SMS consist of independent messages, they may be
presented to the user as a thread of back-and-forth messages.
34. Real-Time Text. ``Real-Time Text (RTT) is conversational text
that is generally sent and received on a character-by-character basis.
The characters are sent immediately (in a fraction of a second) once
they are typed and are also displayed immediately to the receiving
person(s). This functionality allows text to be used in the same
conversational mode as voice.'' RTT is viewed by many in the disability
community as a replacement for the dated TTY technology and preferable,
from a human interface perspective, to message-based text, as it more
closely approximates the speed and flow of human voice conversation.
RTT also prevents messages from crossing each other during a call, and
for this reason may be preferred over SMS as a means of facilitating
the exchange of information between the caller and the PSAP dispatcher.
35. Still Images (Photos). Still images are captured by a digital
camera, typically encoded into a compressed file format, such as JPEG,
and made available as a single data object (file). Still images may
help 911 call takers and first responders assess the severity of an
incident or apprehend a criminal suspect.
36. Real-Time Video. Real-time (live) video may be captured by a
webcam, a camera built into a mobile phone, a networked security
camera, or another video-capable device. The live nature of real-time
video distinguishes it from streaming video, which is typically used
for watching entertainment content. Real-time video will help first
responders better gauge the scope and nature of an incident and will
also help determine a caller's precise location.
37. Telemetry Data. Telemetry data includes all sensor measurements
that quantify physical, chemical, or biological phenomena. Examples
include vehicular information (such as current speed and crash-related
data), biological and environmental sensors that measure wind and
temperature, and physiometric sensors that measure human pulse rates.
38. Auxiliary Medical and other Personal Data. Auxiliary data would
include relevant information about the caller's medical conditions and
particular treatment needs, as well as information related to those
categories. Such information could be provided on a prior-consent basis
to the PSAP for forwarding to EMS personnel or other first responders.
2. Primary vs. Secondary Usage of Media Types
39. We also seek comment on the degree to which each of the media
types discussed above will be used as a primary versus a secondary form
of communication on NG911 networks. By ``primary'' media, we refer to
media that provide the basic communications link between the 911 caller
and the PSAP during the emergency call. By ``secondary'' media, we
refer to media that may convey additional information between the
caller (or the device used by the caller) and the PSAP to augment the
primary communication. Primary media will likely include voice, RTT,
and text-based messaging (SMS, instant messaging), because to differing
degrees, all of these media types will permit live conversations
between the 911 caller and the PSAP. Thus, primary media can also be
considered ``conversational media.'' Primary media will likely be used
to convey the nature and location of an emergency to a PSAP. In some
cases, primary media may not be available to a 911 caller (e.g., due to
network congestion or end system limitations). In these cases, we seek
comment on whether e-mail or social network status pages could possibly
be used as the primary means of contacting a PSAP. Secondary media will
likely include transmission of photos, live video, and sensor data
(e.g., data acquired from sensors commonly found in mobile devices,
vehicles, and medical monitoring systems). We envision a PSAP most
frequently using secondary media to acquire supplemental information
from a 911 caller or the caller's device.
40. The Commission seeks comment on what primary and secondary
media types PSAPs and service providers will likely support. Should
individual PSAPs be able to choose the media types that they will
support, or should all PSAPs be expected or required to support a
specific set of media types? Should different standards or requirements
apply to primary conversational media as opposed to secondary non-
conversational media? If secondary non-conversational media include the
capability to transmit sensitive personal data, what privacy protection
concerns are raised and how should they be addressed? Would changes in
current laws, regulations, tariffs, and overall policies be needed to
enable NG911 to support these media types and system features?
3. SMS for Emergency Communications
41. In light of the popularity and ubiquity of SMS, many consumers
may assume that they are or will soon be able to text to 911. Indeed,
consumer use of SMS has exploded in the past decade and billions of SMS
messages are sent each day. Also, unlike some of the other media types
discussed above, SMS is readily available on most mobile phones, and
thus its implementation into the NG911 network may be one of the first
steps in moving beyond a voice-only emergency calling framework. SMS,
however, has limitations that will need to be addressed if it is to
become a reliable means for emergency communications. For example, a
recent study noted that SMS is an asynchronous messaging service that
does not provide a means for the sender to know whether and when the
message has reached its destination. In addition, the study noted that
because each SMS is independent of its predecessors, it is difficult to
ensure that messages within
[[Page 2303]]
the same logical conversation are routed to the same destination.
42. Given these limitations, we seek comment on how the increasing
use of SMS may impact emergency communications and whether NG911
networks should be configured to support SMS emergency communications.
For example, are there any proposed technical standards or approaches
that would sufficiently address routing and location concerns? Further,
will it be possible to use the existing short code system to reach
PSAPs? Are there measurement results for mobile-to-fixed messaging that
indicate the reliability and delay of SMS delivery under specified
circumstances? Would it be possible to add location information to SMS
messages to help in routing such messages and, if so, how? Would it be
possible to maintain session continuity across messages, e.g., at the
gateway between the cellular network and the IP network? Can end-system
SMS applications address some of the location-related issues, e.g.,
waiting to send an emergency SMS until location information has been
acquired? Have there been trials or operational experiences using SMS
within the NG911 architecture? Should SMS be considered primarily as a
fall-back mechanism when voice communications are difficult or
impossible to transmit? As wireless systems evolve to IP based 4G
architectures, can the reliability and features of SMS messaging be
improved for the purposes of emergency communications and if so, how?
43. We also seek comment on existing and future public expectations
related to the use of SMS for emergency communications. Do consumers
understand that currently available SMS generally does not support
sending text messages to 911? Could the implementation of NG911 lead to
changes in consumer expectations and public misunderstandings about SMS
capabilities? Is there a need for programs to educate the public about
the limitations of SMS for emergency communications, and if so, what
entity should be responsible for developing such programs? Are there
liability issues that could arise if consumers unsuccessfully attempt
to use SMS for emergency communications?
4. NG911 Applications for Persons with Disabilities and Special Needs
44. According to the ICO Plan, ``[t]he biggest gap between the
technologies used for daily communication and those that can access 9-
1-1 services is that for the deaf and people with hearing or speech
impairments.'' As noted in paragraph 11, supra, the Twenty-First
Century Act directs the Commission to form the EAAC with the purpose of
determining the most effective and efficient technologies and methods
by which to enable access to NG911 emergency services by individuals
with disabilities. Moreover, the Twenty-First Century Act provides that
``[t]he Commission shall have the authority to promulgate regulations
to implement the recommendations proposed by the [EAAC], as well as any
other regulations, technical standards, protocols, and procedures as
are necessary to achieve reliable, interoperable communication that
ensures access by individuals with disabilities to an Internet
protocol-enabled emergency network, where achievable and technically
feasible.'' In addition, the National Broadband Plan recommended that
NHTSA include ``an analysis of the needs of persons with disabilities
and should identify standards and protocols for NG911 and for
incorporating VoIP and `Real Time Text' standards.'' ICO has noted that
when it analyzed trial deployments of IP-enabled emergency networks,
texting access through various IP-devices, RTT, and third-party
conferencing was successfully demonstrated. Additionally, streaming
video and SMS were successfully demonstrated, but with key
shortcomings.
45. The Commission seeks comment on what media types and devices
(e.g., text, video) persons with disabilities will likely use to make
an emergency call in an NG911 environment. We understand that some
people with hearing and speech disabilities make emergency calls
directly; others use telecommunications relay services (TRS), a more
indirect method to make these calls. How can the Commission ensure that
persons with disabilities receive the appropriate benefits from the
NG911 system? What, if any, technical or accessibility requirements
should be imposed to ensure that persons with disabilities have the
necessary access to the NG911 system? To what extent can real-time
text, which permits the live exchange of information with a PSAP during
a call, assist individuals with hearing or speech disabilities who wish
to call 911 directly? Finally, the Commission requires IP-based text
and video relay providers to ensure the prompt and automatic call
handling of emergency calls. What considerations are necessary to
ensure effective access to NG911 services for callers who continue to
rely on IP-based relay services for their 911 calls? Are there
different considerations for individuals who continue to use PSTN-based
relay services?
46. The Commission recognizes the significant public safety
interest in ensuring that non-English speakers have access to emergency
services. We seek comment on what media types non-English speakers
likely will use to make an emergency call in an NG911 environment. What
types of devices may non-English speakers use to make an emergency call
in an NG911 environment? How can the Commission ensure that non-English
speakers receive the appropriate benefits from the NG911 system?
47. The ability to share information--including medical
information--could be of particular value to EMS and other first
responders. Should such information be provided in the ordinary course
to EMS and other first responders in a manner similar to the provision
of medical condition information described in paragraph 37, supra?
Since privacy protection concerns would seemingly be implicated in this
case, as in the case of transmitted medical information, how should
such concerns be addressed?
48. Independently of the Commission's efforts in connection with
the EAAC, we seek comment on whether the Commission should conduct a
separate rulemaking to ensure that individuals with disabilities have
access to an Internet protocol-enabled emergency network, where
achievable and technically feasible.
B. NG911 Network Architecture
1. Transport Mechanisms in an NG911 Environment
49. In this section, we seek comment on the mechanisms that will be
used to transport digital content across NG911 networks. In an IP-based
NG911 architecture, unlike a circuit-switched architecture, a variety
of protocols can be used to transport media types across the network
from the 911 caller to the PSAP. For example, still images can be
carried: (1) As Multimedia Messaging Services (MMS) sent by mobile
devices, (2) as attachments to Internet e-mail, (3) within instant
images and uploaded to social network services, or (4) on other web
services. We note that a diverse mix of physical infrastructures,
networking protocols, applications, and devices may facilitate the
carriage of potential NG911 media types from a 911 caller to a NG911-
enabled PSAP. For example, some carriage scenarios may rely solely on
``pure'' IP-based solutions, some may rely heavily on existing legacy
infrastructure, and some may rely on gateway packet-based
communications
[[Page 2304]]
between callers and PSAPs. We seek comment on each of these technical
approaches and request that commenters discuss operational, business,
and other policy strengths and weaknesses of each approach. For
example, while application of IP-based approaches has generally led to
robust and unexpected innovations in communications technologies, PSAPs
could face operational and funding burdens from supporting a large
number of IP-based NG911 architectures, and resources could be diverted
from technical solutions that incorporate standardized features and
implementation approaches. Similarly, introduction of operational
requirements such as reliability, scalability, and standardized
technology could result in tradeoffs between various legacy,
proprietary, end-to-end open-standard, or other approaches for IP-based
NG911 systems. We request that commenters identify these tradeoffs, or
other relevant tradeoffs, and discuss the relative strengths and
weaknesses of these technical approaches.
2. NG911 Participants
50. In the traditional 911 system, only a small number of entities
participated in the provisioning of emergency calling services because
an E911 call would originate from an end user device that was in
practice tightly-coupled, both technically and administratively, with
the service provider's transport network. Examples include a
conventional wireline phone, a mobile phone, and an interconnected VoIP
phone.
51. In a NG911 environment, however, end user devices are far more
likely to be liberated from a particular transport network. This
treatment acknowledges important industry trends, such as the
increasing portability of devices among service providers, open access
possibilities, and the increasing use of user-selected IP-based devices
that may exploit widely-available sources of Internet access. As such,
the number of participants in an NG911 environment will increase
dramatically. The table below lists the potential NG911 participants
and their possible roles in an NG911 environment.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Media transport Call/Message Location Call/Message
Participant/Affected by and encodings identification provisioning routing
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
PSAPs........................... X X X X
VSP and application service .................. X .................. X
providers......................
Residential ISP................. .................. .................. X ..................
Non-traditional ISP (hotels, .................. .................. X ..................
coffee shops, community
networks, etc.)................
Enterprise IP-PBX............... X X X X
UE vendors...................... X X X X
Communication software X X X X
developers.....................
Home gateway manufacturers...... .................. .................. X ..................
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
52. Currently, only devices that provide telephone services are
capable of transmitting 911 calls. In the future, however, most
electronic devices will have communication capabilities, ranging from
televisions, in-car systems, portable music players, tablet computers,
and game consoles. We seek comment on what devices can usefully provide
emergency calling services. Should every consumer device with Internet
or cellular connectivity and a suitable user interface have the ability
to request emergency assistance? Should such devices be certified and
labeled as 911-capable? How will a user of a device or software be able
to tell whether a device or communication software is capable of
placing 911 calls? If this capability is conditional, e.g., on
properly-configured network connectivity, can the user or device test
911 reachability?
53. In the E911 Scope Order, the Commission established the
following four criteria for determining which licensees should be
subject to the wireless enhanced 911 obligations: Those licensees that
(1) offer real-time, two-way switched voice service, interconnected
with the PSTN, either on a stand-alone basis or packaged with other
telecommunications services; (2) whose customers clearly expected
access to 911 and E911; (3) that competed with analog and broadband PCS
providers; and (4) where it is technically and operationally feasible
to provide enhanced 911 service. Should the Commission consider
expanding or modifying the four criteria from the E911 911 Scope Order
to apply to additional NG911 participants? For example, should hot-spot
providers that are not traditional communications providers, such as
coffee shops, hotels, bus lines, and public parks be expected to play a
role in the deployment of NG911?
3. Interoperability and Standards
54. Many potential NG911 media types permit a range of encoding and
performance parameters. For example, photos are typically compressed
using the JPEG standard, but may also use other formats. Photos may
also include meta data (EXIF), ranging from camera settings to embedded
geographic location. Further, camera images can range from low-
resolution web cam photos with less than one megapixel to professional-
quality images with more than 15 megapixels and several megabytes in
size. For text, accented and foreign language characters can be
represented in a range of character encodings with Unicode in its UTF-8
encoding among the most popular. While a wide variety of digital
formats are potentially available for encoding such information, NG911
will require use of compatible formats across the network, so that
PSAPs can receive and process the text, photos, and other digital
information that are sent by the public. We seek comment on how best to
ensure such compatibility in the formatting and coding of text, photos,
and other digital information. Should there be standards for media
encodings? Should we specify minimal performance ranges, e.g., minimum
file sizes for digital images, that NG911 networks must support and
PSAPs be able to accept?
55. If there is a need to develop standards for digital information
transported on NG911 networks, what entity should set and update these
standards, or assist in their coordination? Should the standards be
national or international? Are there standards efforts currently under
way that could form the basis for future evolution in this regard?
Should specific technical standards or architectures be mandated? How
can the interoperability of end user devices and PSAP devices be
ensured (e.g., through interoperability testing)? Should there be a
certification process that indicates
[[Page 2305]]
whether a device or downloadable software application is compliant with
certain standards? If so, what form of certification seems to be the
most suitable, e.g., self-certification or approved certification
organizations? Should all devices of a certain class be required to
meet the certification criteria? As more people--especially within the
disability community--begin to make video-based telephone calls, are
there steps needed to ensure that NG911 networks interoperate
seamlessly with the video software and applications being utilized in
smart phones, tablets, computers and other devices? Similarly, are
there steps needed to ensure interoperability with the video
communication services provided by all video relay service providers?
4. PSAP Functions in an NG911 Environment
56. As noted earlier, IP-based technology removes many of the
location constraints of traditional circuit-switched technology. In
particular, a PSAP no longer has to be in a single building at a fixed
location. Call takers that are organizationally part of a single PSAP
can be located virtually anywhere an Internet connection can be found,
and a single call taker could be supporting multiple PSAPs. Such
``virtual PSAP'' arrangements may allow more flexible and efficient
staffing and may allow PSAPs to better recover from major disasters by
temporarily relocating operations. We seek comment on the potential for
development of virtual PSAPs as part of the transition from legacy 911
to NG911. Are current technologies sufficient to support virtual PSAPs?
Are there regulatory or legal barriers changes that are necessary to
facilitate the development and operation of virtual PSAPs? Are there
current PSAP databases that would need to be standardized to support a
remote ``virtual PSAP''? How could local data that is contained in
current Computer Aided Dispatch Data Bases, MSAGs, and other
repositories that are necessary for an efficient response by emergency
personnel be distributed on a timely and reliable basis for use by non-
local PSAPs?
57. While emergency service networks and PSAPs will continue to be
operated and managed regionally, the deployment of NG911 may require a
set of national infrastructure components. Based on the current NENA
NG911 architecture, these may include: (1) A national PSAP and ESInet
lookup directory, called the LoST ``forest guide''; (2) a public-key
cryptography certificate to ensure that other NG911 entities can
authenticate PSAPs and to ensure that PSAPs are capable of receiving
access to sensitive information; and (3) interconnection to an IP-based
national network to ensure that emergency calls can be routed amongst
PSAPs without PSAPs losing information. The Commission seeks comment on
whether it is necessary to establish a national set of infrastructure
components to ensure the deployment of NG911. If it is necessary, what
entity should operate this national set of infrastructure components?
C. Other Specialized NG911 Applications
58. Device-Initiated Services for Emergency Communications. In an
IP-based network architecture, emergency calls can be placed not only
by human beings, but by a variety of automatically triggered devices.
Examples of such devices include environmental sensors capable of
detecting chemicals, highway cameras, security cameras, alarms,
personal medical devices, telematics, and consumer electronics in
automobiles. We seek comment on how the deployment of NG911 will
facilitate the ability of device-initiated emergency services to reach
PSAPs. What steps are needed to facilitate such deployment? Is there a
need to modify existing laws, regulations, or tariffs to ensure that
device-initiated emergency services have access to the NG911 network?
59. Social Media for Emergency Communications. How have consumers
used social media to report an emergency or contact public safety
during an emergency? How will consumers expect to use social media for
emergency purposes in the future? To what extent might State and local
public safety jurisdictions employ social media tools as a way to
interact with the public? How will these tools impact the deployment of
NG911?
60. N11 Numbers and Other Services for Emergency Communications.
The basic functionality of NG911 is similar to many other location-
based information and assistance services, such as 211 (community
information and referral), 311 (non-emergency city services), 511
(traffic information), poison control, call-before-you-dig, and other
similar services. Since these services share much of the same technical
functionality, it may be possible to reduce cost and improve service by
integrating some of these services to use a common technology platform.
Further, callers may need to be transferred from one service to
another, e.g., from 911 to 311 or 211. Can such coordination and
integration be helpful and cut costs? How will the deployment of NG911
address N11 numbers, including N11 services such as 311, which is
designated for non-emergencies? How will the deployment of NG911 impact
other emergency services, such as poison control centers using 800
services? How will the deployment of NG911 affect TRS that use 711?
61. Auxiliary Data. NG911 offers the opportunity to provide
additional data to PSAPs and first responders, such as the caller's
medical history, a description of the caller's residence or business
location, and related data, including building floor plans, information
about hazardous materials, and building occupants with special needs.
This data will often be maintained and provided by third parties, such
as health care organizations that maintain electronic medical records
or commercial landlords that maintain floor plans. How should the PSAP
be informed about the availability of this data? What entity should
associate this information with the call or message, such as the
application service provider or a third party? Is there a need for
regulations that require an application service provider to supply
these services, e.g., by providing the appropriate call signaling or
lookup functionality? Is there a need for standards to ensure that
PSAPs and first responders receive access to this data without every
PSAP having to make individual arrangements with each data source?
Since this auxiliary data may be considered part of the 911 call record
and therefore subject to public disclosure, is there a need to protect
the privacy of this data differently than the remainder of the call
information?
62. Disaster Planning and Recovery. How will NG911 facilitate
disaster planning and recovery? How will NG911 interact with existing
and future public alerting systems? Can national security be enhanced
by the consistent implementation of interoperable NG911 systems across
the nation? What key NG911 elements should be the focus for consistent
implementation and interoperability?
63. MLTS for Emergency Communications in an NG911 Environment.
Currently, MLTS operators are not subject to the FCC's E911
regulations. In 2003, the Commission found that economic and
competitive factors existed that rendered it impracticable to adopt
E911 requirements for MLTS. The Commission, however, sought comment on
its ``jurisdiction over MLTS operators, in light of the Commission's
earlier interpretations of its section 4(i) authority and its prior
statement that
[[Page 2306]]
`the reliability of 911 service is integrally related to our
responsibilities under section 1 of the Act.' '' In light of NG911's
potential impact on MLTS, we seek comment on whether the Commission has
the jurisdiction to regulate MLTS operators. How will the deployment of
NG911 improve emergency services for MLTS users? Will MLTS operators be
able to provide improved location information in an NG911 environment?
D. Issues Related to NG911 Implementation/Transition
64. We seek comment on the potential operational, technical, and
other challenges associated with the transition to NG911. As both the
ICO Plan and the National Broadband Plan highlight, the transition to
NG911 will be an evolutionary process, involving technological,
economic, and institutional challenges. The ICO Plan also noted that
``a timetable for national deployment of NG9-1-1 is difficult to
estimate due to the lack of:
Consistent funding for planning, training, deployment and
implementation;
Complete set of standards and time required to develop
them; and
Coordinated planning and implementation efforts by
stakeholders at all levels (e.g., government, industry, OSPs, standards
organizations).''
65. In light of these challenges, what actions should the
Commission take to encourage the deployment of NG911? Have there been
any recent developments that provide additional details on a potential
timeline for NG911 deployment? Have there been any coordinated
management efforts by State, Tribal, or local governments? Should there
be a national set of milestones that provide a planning horizon? If so,
what entity or entities should set those milestones, measure progress,
and disseminate the measurement results? What are the milestones that
will be useful to accelerate and measure NG911 deployment? What changes
will need to take place in the emergency communications governance
structures, at both the Federal and non-Federal levels, to facilitate
NG911 planning and implementation? What policies can be established to
enable and instigate the development and deployment of shared State-
wide ESInet, and related cooperative working agreements between
Federal, State, Tribal, and local agencies, as a fundamental 911 and
emergency communications policy objective? Will waivers of certain
rules and regulations be necessary during the transition to NG911?
Should the FCC provide certain criteria for consideration of waiver
grants?
1. Disparate PSAP Capabilities in an NG911 Environment
66. Because the transition to NG911 is likely to be gradual rather
than a large scale