Development of the State and Local Implementation Grant Program for the Nationwide Public Safety Broadband Network, 28857-28860 [2012-11818]
Download as PDF
<![CDATA[
Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 95 / Wednesday, May 16, 2012 / Notices
At the management unit level, the
LCFRB, ODFW, and the Washington
Gorge Implementation Team, working
with us, will develop implementation
schedules that provide greater
specificity for recovery actions to be
implemented over three- to five-year
periods. These entities also will
coordinate the implementation of the
recovery actions identified in the
management unit plans and subsequent
implementation schedules, and will
track and report on implementation
progress. Management unit planners
and NMFS staff will work together to
coordinate the implementation of
recovery actions among federal, state,
local, and tribal entities and
stakeholders.
Conclusion
Section 4(f)(1)(B) of the ESA requires
that recovery plans incorporate, to the
extent practicable, (1) objective,
measurable criteria which, when met,
would result in a determination that the
species is no longer threatened or
endangered; (2) site-specific
management actions necessary to
achieve the plan’s goals; and (3)
estimates of the time required and costs
to implement recovery actions. We
conclude that the Proposed Plan meets
the requirements of ESA section 4(f) and
is proposing to adopt it as the ESA
Recovery Plan for Lower Columbia River
Chinook Salmon, Lower Columbia River
Coho Salmon, Columbia River Chum
Salmon, and Lower Columbia River
Steelhead.
Public Comments Solicited
We are soliciting written comments
on the Proposed Plan. All substantive
comments received by the date specified
above will be considered and
incorporated, as appropriate, prior to
our decision whether to approve the
plan. We will issue a news release
announcing the adoption and
availability of a final plan. We will post
on the Northwest Region Web site
(www.nwr.noaa.gov) a summary of, and
responses to, the comments received,
along with electronic copies of the final
plan and its appendices.
srobinson on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
Literature Cited
Lower Columbia Fish Recovery Board
(LCFRB). 2010. Washington Lower
Columbia Salmon Recovery and Fish &
Wildlife Subbasin Plan. Lower Columbia
Fish Recovery Board, Washington. May
28, 2010.
McElhany, P., M.H. Ruckelshaus, M.J. Ford,
T.C. Wainwright, and E.P. Bjorkstedt.
2000. Viable salmon populations and the
recovery of evolutionarily significant
units. U.S. Dept. of Commerce, NOAA
Tech. Memo., NMFS NWFSC 42, 156 p.
VerDate Mar<15>2010
18:41 May 15, 2012
Jkt 226001
National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS).
2009. Middle Columbia River Steelhead
Distinct Population Segment ESA
Recovery Plan. Northwest Region.
November 30, 2009.
National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS).
2011a. Draft ESA Recovery Plan for the
White Salmon River Subbasin.
Northwest Region. December 2011.
National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS).
2011b. Columbia River Estuary ESA
Recovery Plan Module for Salmon and
Steelhead. Northwest Region. Prepared
for NMFS by the Lower Columbia River
Estuary Partnership (contractor) and PC
Trask & Associates, Inc. (subcontractor).
January 2011.
Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife.
2010. Lower Columbia River
Conservation and Recovery Plan for
Oregon Populations of Salmon and
Steelhead. August 6, 2010.
Authority: 16 U.S.C. 1531 et seq.
Dated: May 10, 2012.
Dwayne Meadows,
Acting Chief, Endangered Species Division,
Office of Protected Resources, National
Marine Fisheries Service.
[FR Doc. 2012–11872 Filed 5–15–12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510–22–P
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
National Telecommunications and
Information Administration
[Docket No: 120509050–1050–01]
RIN 0660–XC001
Development of the State and Local
Implementation Grant Program for the
Nationwide Public Safety Broadband
Network
National Telecommunications
and Information Administration, U.S.
Department of Commerce.
ACTION: Request for Information.
AGENCY:
The National
Telecommunications and Information
Administration (NTIA) is issuing a
Request for Information (RFI) seeking
public comment on various issues
relating to the development of the State
and Local Implementation grant
program, which NTIA must establish
pursuant to the Middle Class Tax Relief
and Job Creation Act of 2012 to assist
state and local governments in planning
for a single, nationwide interoperable
public safety broadband network. NTIA
intends to use the input from this
process to inform the development of
programmatic requirements to govern
the state and local planning grants
program.
DATES: Comments must be received by
June 15, 2012 at 5:00 p.m. Eastern
Daylight Time.
SUMMARY:
PO 00000
Frm 00007
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
28857
Comments may be
submitted by email to
SLIGP@ntia.doc.gov. Comments
submitted by email should be machinesearchable and should not be copyprotected. Written comments also may
be submitted by mail to: National
Telecommunications and Information
Administration, U.S. Department of
Commerce, HCHB Room 4812, 1401
Constitution Avenue NW., Washington,
DC 20230. Please note that all material
sent via the U.S. Postal Service
(including Overnight or Express Mail) is
subject to delivery delays of up to two
weeks due to mail security procedures.
Responders should include the name of
the person or organization filing the
comment, as well as a page number, on
each page of their submissions. Paper
submissions should also include an
electronic version on CD or DVD in .txt,
.pdf, or Word format (please specify
version), which should be labeled with
the name and organizational affiliation
of the filer and the name of the word
processing program used to create the
document. All emails and comments
received are a part of the public record
and will generally be posted to the
NTIA Web site (https://
www.ntia.doc.gov) without change. All
personally identifying information (for
example, name, address, etc.)
voluntarily submitted by the commenter
may be publicly accessible. Do not
submit Confidential Business
Information or otherwise sensitive or
protected information.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Laura M. Pettus, Communications
Program Specialist, Office of
Telecommunications and Information
Applications, National
Telecommunications and Information
Administration, U.S. Department of
Commerce, 1401 Constitution Avenue
NW., Room 4878, Washington, DC
20230; telephone: (202) 482–4509;
email: lpettus@ntia.doc.gov. Please
direct media inquiries to NTIA’s Office
of Public Affairs, (202) 482–7002.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
ADDRESSES:
Background
On February 22, 2012, President
Obama signed the Middle Class Tax
Relief and Job Creation Act of 2012
(Act).1 The Act meets a long-standing
priority of the Obama Administration to
create a single, nationwide interoperable
public safety broadband network that
will, for the first time, allow police
officers, fire fighters, emergency medical
service professionals, and other public
1 Middle Class Tax Relief and Job Creation Act of
2012, Public Law 112–96, 126 Stat. 156 (2012)
(Act).
E:\FR\FM\16MYN1.SGM
16MYN1
28858
Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 95 / Wednesday, May 16, 2012 / Notices
safety officials to communicate with
each other across agencies and
jurisdictions. Public safety workers have
long been hindered by incompatible,
and often outdated, communications
equipment and this Act will help them
to do their jobs more safely and
effectively.
The Act establishes the First
Responder Network Authority (FirstNet)
as an independent authority within
NTIA and authorizes it to take all
actions necessary to ensure the design,
construction, and operation of a
nationwide public safety broadband
network (PSBN), based on a single,
national network architecture.2 FirstNet
is responsible for, at a minimum,
ensuring nationwide standards for use
and access of the network; issuing open,
transparent, and competitive requests
for proposals (RFPs) to build, operate
and maintain the network; leveraging, to
the maximum extent economically
desirable, existing commercial wireless
infrastructure to speed deployment of
the network; and overseeing contracts
with non-federal entities to build,
operate, and maintain the network.
Additionally, the Act charges NTIA
with establishing a grant program to
assist State, regional, tribal, and local
jurisdictions with identifying, planning,
and implementing the most efficient
and effective means to use and integrate
the infrastructure, equipment, and other
architecture associated with the
nationwide PSBN to satisfy the wireless
and data services needs of their
jurisdiction.3 Up to $135 million will be
available to NTIA for the State and
Local Implementation grant program.4
NTIA must establish requirements for
this program not later than six months
after the date of enactment (i.e., August
22, 2012). The programmatic
requirements for the State and Local
Implementation grant program must
include, at a minimum, a determination
of the scope of eligible activities that
will be funded, a definition of eligible
costs, and a method to prioritize grants
for activities that ensure coverage in
rural as well as urban areas.5
NTIA is requesting public comment
on certain aspects of the Act’s
provisions relating to the establishment
of the State and Local Implementation
grant program.
srobinson on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
Request for Comment
The Consultation Process
1. Section 6206(c)(2) of the Act directs
FirstNet to consult with regional, State,
2 Id.
at § 6206(b)(1).
at § 6302(a).
4 Id. at § 6301(c).
5 Id. at § 6302(c).
3 Id.
VerDate Mar<15>2010
18:41 May 15, 2012
tribal, and local jurisdictions about the
distribution and expenditure of any
amounts required to carry out the
network policies that it is charged with
establishing. This section enumerates
several areas for consultation, including:
(i) Construction of a core network and
any radio access network build-out; (ii)
placement of towers; (iii) coverage areas
of the network, whether at the regional,
State, tribal, or local level; (iv) adequacy
of hardening, security, reliability, and
resiliency requirements; (v) assignment
of priority to local users; (vi) assignment
of priority and selection of entities
seeking access to or use of the
nationwide public safety interoperable
broadband network; and (vii) training
needs of local users. What steps should
States take to prepare to consult with
FirstNet regarding these issues?
a. What data should States compile
for the consultation process with
FirstNet?
b. Should this activity be covered by
the State and Local Implementation
grant program?
2. The Act requires that each State
certify in its application for grant funds
that the State has designated a single
officer or governmental body to serve as
the coordinator of implementation of
the grant funds.6
a. Who might serve in the role as a
single officer within the State and will
it or should it vary for each State?
b. Who might serve on the
governmental body (e.g., public
partners, private partners, technical
experts, Chief Information Officers,
SWIC, finance officials, or legal
experts)?
c. How should the States plan to
involve the local entities in the State
and Local Implementation grant
program?
d. How should the States plan to
involve the tribal entities in the grant
program?
e. What requirements should be
included in the grant program to ensure
that local and tribal public safety
entities are able to participate in the
planning process?
f. How should the State and Local
Implementation grant program ensure
that all public safety disciplines (e.g.,
police, sheriffs, fire, and EMS) have
input into the State consultation
process?
g. How should the State and Local
Implementation grant program define
regional (e.g., interstate or intrastate)
and how might the grant program be
structured to facilitate regional
participation through the States?
6 Id.
Jkt 226001
PO 00000
at § 6302(d).
Frm 00008
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
h. How should States plan to involve
the Federal users and entities located
within their States in the grant program?
3. The Act contemplates that FirstNet
will consult with States regarding
existing infrastructure within their
boundaries, tower placements, and
network coverage, which FirstNet can
use to develop the requests for
proposals called for by the Act. The
States, however, will need time and
funding to collect the necessary
information before they are ready to
consult with FirstNet.
a. Given these interrelated activities,
how should the State and Local
Implementation grant program be used
by States to assist in gathering the
information to consult with FirstNet?
b. Should consistent standards and
processes be used by all States to gather
this information? If so, how should
those policies and standards be
established? What should those policies
and standards be?
c. What time period should NTIA
consider for States to perform activities
allowed under the grant program as it
relates to gathering the information to
consult with FirstNet?
Existing Public Safety Governance and
Planning Authorities
4. Over the years, States have invested
resources to conduct planning and to
create governance structures around
interoperable communications focused
primarily on Land Mobile Radio (LMR)
voice communications, including the
Statewide Interoperability Coordinators
(SWIC) and Statewide Interoperability
Governing Bodies (SIGB), often called
Statewide Interoperability Executive
Committees (SIEC).
a. What is the current role of these
existing governance structures in the
planning and development of wireless
public safety broadband networks?
b. What actions have the States’
governance structures (e.g., SWIC, SIGB,
or SIEC) taken to begin planning for the
implementation of the nationwide
public safety broadband network?
c. Can these existing governance
structures be used for the PSBN, and if
so, how might they need to change or
evolve to handle issues associated with
broadband access through the Long
Term Evolution (LTE) technology
platform?
d. What is or should be the role of the
Statewide Communications
Interoperability Plans (SCIPs) in a
State’s planning efforts for the
nationwide public safety broadband
network?
e. What actions do the States need to
take to update the SCIPs to include
broadband?
E:\FR\FM\16MYN1.SGM
16MYN1
Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 95 / Wednesday, May 16, 2012 / Notices
f. Should the costs to change or evolve
existing governance and Statewide
Plans be eligible in the new program?
g. Should the maintenance of those
existing governance bodies and plans be
eligible in State and Local
Implementation grant program?
Leveraging Existing Infrastructure
5. How should States and local
jurisdictions best leverage their existing
infrastructure assets and resources for
use and integration with the nationwide
public safety broadband network?
a. How should States and local
jurisdictions plan to use and/or
determine the suitability of their
existing infrastructure and equipment
for integration into the public safety
broadband network?
b. What technical resources do States
have available to assist with deployment
of the nationwide public safety
broadband network?
c. How will States include utilities or
other interested third parties in their
planning activities?
d. Should NTIA encourage planning
for the formation and use of public/
private partnerships in the deployment
of the nationwide public safety
broadband network? If so, how?
6. Section 6206(b)(1)(B) of the Act
directs FirstNet to issue open,
transparent, and competitive requests
for proposals (RFPs) to private sector
entities for the purposes of building,
operating, and maintaining the network.
How can Federal, State, tribal, and local
infrastructure get incorporated into this
model?
a. How would States plan for this
integration?
b. Should States serve as
clearinghouses or one-stop shops where
entities bidding to build and operate
portions of the FirstNet network can
obtain access to resources such as
towers and backhaul networks? If so,
what would be involved in setting up
such clearinghouses?
c. Should setting up a clearinghouse
be an eligible cost of the grant program?
srobinson on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
State and Local Implementation Grant
Activities
7. What are some of the best practices,
if any, from existing
telecommunications or public safety
grant programs that NTIA should
consider adopting for the State and
Local Implementation grant program?
8. What type of activities should be
allowable under the State and Local
Implementation grant program?
9. What types of costs should be
eligible for funding under the State and
Local Implementation grant program
(e.g., personnel, planning meetings,
VerDate Mar<15>2010
18:41 May 15, 2012
Jkt 226001
development/upgrades of plans, or
assessments)?
a. Should data gathering on current
broadband and mobile data
infrastructure be considered an
allowable cost?
b. Should the State and Local
Implementation grant program fund any
new positions at the State, local, or
tribal level that may be needed to
support the work to plan for the
nationwide public safety broadband
network? If so, what, if any, restrictions
should NTIA consider placing on the
scope of hiring and the type of positions
that may be funded under the grant
program?
10. What factors should NTIA
consider in prioritizing grants for
activities that ensure coverage in rural
as well as urban areas?
11. Are there best practices used in
other telecommunications or public
safety grant programs to ensure
investments in rural areas that could be
used in the State and Local
Implementation grant program?
12. In 2009, NTIA launched the State
Broadband Initiative (SBI) grant
program to facilitate the integration of
broadband and information technology
into state and local economies.
a. Do States envision SBI state
designated entities participating or
assisting this new State and Local
Implementation grant program?
b. How can the SBI state designated
entities work with States in planning for
the nationwide public safety broadband
network?
13. What outcomes should be
achieved by the State and Local
Implementation grant program?
a. Are there data that the States and
local jurisdictions should deliver to
document the outcomes of the grant
program?
b. If so, how should they be
measured?
c. Who should collect this
information and in what format?
d. What data already exist and what
new data could be gathered as part of
the program?
14. The U.S. Department of Homeland
Security’s Office of Emergency
Communications (OEC) has developed
the following tools through its
Technical Assistance Program available
at https://www.publicsafetytools.info,
including: (1) Mobile Data Usage and
Survey Tool—Survey process to
document the current-state mobile data
environment, in preparation for a
migration to LTE; (2) Statewide
Broadband Planning Tool—Template
and support on Statewide strategic
broadband planning issues designed to
serve as an addendum to the SCIP; (3)
PO 00000
Frm 00009
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
28859
Frequency Mapping Tool—Graphical
tool to display FCC license information
and locations including cellular sites
within a jurisdiction; and (4)
Communications Assets Survey and
Mapping Tool (CASM)—Data collection
and analysis tool for existing land
mobile radio assets. Should States be
encouraged to utilize tools and support
available from Federal programs such as
those developed by OEC? Are there
other programs or tools that should be
considered?
15. Do the States have a preferred
methodology for NTIA to use to
distribute the grant funds available
under the State and Local
Implementation grant program?
a. Should NTIA consider allocating
the grant funds based on population?
b. What other targeted allocation
methods might be appropriate to use?
c. Should NTIA consider phasing the
distribution of grant funds in the new
program?
State Funding and Performance
Requirements
16. What role, if any, should the
States’ Chief Information Officer (CIO)
or Chief Technology Officer (CTO) play
in the State and Local Implementation
grant program and the required
consultations with FirstNet? How will
these different positions interact and
work with public safety officials under
the State and Local Implementation
grant program?
17. The Act requires that the Federal
share of the cost of activities carried out
under the State and Local
Implementation grant program not
exceed 80 percent and it gives the
Assistant Secretary the authority to
waive the matching requirement, in
whole or in part, if good cause is shown
and upon determining that the waiver is
in the public interest.7 As NTIA
develops the State and Local
Implementation grant program, what are
some of the factors it should consider
regarding States’ ability to secure
matching funds?
18. What public interest factors
should NTIA consider when weighing
whether to grant a waiver of the
matching requirement of State and Local
Implementation grant program?
Other
19. Please provide comment on any
other issues that NTIA should consider
in creating the State and Local
Implementation grant program,
consistent with the Act’s requirements.
7 Id.
E:\FR\FM\16MYN1.SGM
at § 6302(b).
16MYN1
28860
Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 95 / Wednesday, May 16, 2012 / Notices
Dated: May 11, 2012.
Lawrence E. Strickling,
Assistant Secretary for Communications and
Information.
[FR Doc. 2012–11818 Filed 5–15–12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510–60–P
DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE
Department of the Navy
Notice of Availability of GovernmentOwned Inventions; Available for
Licensing
Department of the Navy, DoD.
Notice.
AGENCY:
ACTION:
The inventions listed below
are assigned to the United States
Government as represented by the
Secretary of the Navy and are available
for licensing by the Department of the
Navy.
Navy Case No. 101588//U.S. Patent
Application No. 13/372,755: Foam Free
Testing Systems and Methods, Navy
Case No. 101448//U.S. Patent
Application No. 7,372,712: Foam Free
Testing Systems and Methods.
ADDRESSES: Requests for copies of the
inventions cited should be directed to
Andrew Drucker, Naval Facilities
Engineering Service Center, Code EV12,
1100 23rd Ave., Port Hueneme, CA
93043–4370 and must include the Navy
Case number.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Andrew Drucker supporting the Head of
Technology Transfer Office, Naval
Facilities Engineering Service Center,
Code EV12, 1100 23rd Ave., Port
Hueneme, CA 93043–4370, telephone
805–982–1108, FAX 805–982–4832,
Email: andrew.drucker@navy.mil.
SUMMARY:
Authority: 35 U.S.C. 207, 37 CFR part 404.
Dated: May 9, 2012.
J.M. Beal,
Lieutenant Commander, Office of the Judge
Advocate General, U.S. Navy, Federal
Register Liaison Officer.
[FR Doc. 2012–11882 Filed 5–15–12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3810–FF–P
srobinson on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION
Notice of Proposed Information
Collection Requests; Federal Student
Aid; Federal Perkins Loan Program
Master Promissory Note
The Federal Perkins Loan
Master Promissory Note (MPN) provides
the terms and conditions of the Perkins
Loan program and is prepared by the
participating eligible institution and
signed by the borrower.
SUMMARY:
VerDate Mar<15>2010
19:33 May 15, 2012
Jkt 226001
Interested persons are invited to
submit comments on or before July 16,
2012.
ADDRESSES: Written comments
regarding burden and/or the collection
activity requirements should be
electronically mailed to
ICDocketMgr@ed.gov or mailed to U.S.
Department of Education, 400 Maryland
Avenue SW., LBJ, Washington, DC
20202–4537. Copies of the proposed
information collection request may be
accessed from https://edicsweb.ed.gov,
by selecting the ‘‘Browse Pending
Collections’’ link and by clicking on
link number 04850. When you access
the information collection, click on
‘‘Download Attachments’’ to view.
Written requests for information should
be addressed to U.S. Department of
Education, 400 Maryland Avenue SW.,
LBJ, Washington, DC 20202–4537.
Requests may also be electronically
mailed to ICDocketMgr@ed.gov or faxed
to 202–401–0920. Please specify the
complete title of the information
collection and OMB Control Number
when making your request.
Individuals who use a
telecommunications device for the deaf
(TDD) may call the Federal Information
Relay Service (FIRS) at 1–800–877–
8339.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Section
3506 of the Paperwork Reduction Act of
1995 (44 U.S.C. Chapter 35) requires
that Federal agencies provide interested
parties an early opportunity to comment
on information collection requests. The
Director, Information Collection
Clearance Division, Privacy, Information
and Records Management Services,
Office of Management, publishes this
notice containing proposed information
collection requests at the beginning of
the Departmental review of the
information collection. The Department
of Education is especially interested in
public comment addressing the
following issues: (1) Is this collection
necessary to the proper functions of the
Department; (2) will this information be
processed and used in a timely manner;
(3) is the estimate of burden accurate;
(4) how might the Department enhance
the quality, utility, and clarity of the
information to be collected; and (5) how
might the Department minimize the
burden of this collection on the
respondents, including through the use
of information technology. Please note
that written comments received in
response to this notice will be
considered public records.
Title of Collection: Federal Perkins
Loan Program Master Promissory Note.
OMB Control Number: 1845–0074.
Type of Review: Extension.
DATES:
PO 00000
Frm 00010
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
Total Estimated Number of Annual
Responses: 462,922.
Total Estimated Number of Annual
Burden Hours: 231,461.
Abstract: The borrower may receive
loans for a single academic year or
multiple academic years. The adoption
of the MPN in the Perkins Loan Program
has simplified the loan process by
eliminating the need for institutions to
prepare, and students to sign, a
promissory note each award year.
Dated: May 10, 2012.
Kate Mullan,
Acting Director, Information Collection
Clearance Division, Privacy, Information and
Records Management Services, Office of
Management.
[FR Doc. 2012–11820 Filed 5–15–12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4000–01–P
DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION
Notice of Submission for OMB Review;
Office of Elementary and Secondary
Education; Application for New Grants
Under the Indian Education
Professional Development Program
The Office of Indian
Education of the U.S. Department of
Education requests clearance for the
Indian Education Discretionary Grant
Applications authorized under Title VII,
Part A, of the Elementary and Secondary
Education Act, as amended. The
Professional Development (CFDA
84.299B) program is a competitive
discretionary grant program. The grant
applications submitted for this program
are evaluated on the basis of how well
an applicant addresses the selection
criteria, and are used to determine
applicant eligibility and amount of
award for projects selected for funding.
DATES: Interested persons are invited to
submit comments on or before June 15,
2012.
ADDRESSES: Written comments
regarding burden and/or the collection
activity requirements should be
electronically mailed to
ICDocketMgr@ed.gov or mailed to U.S.
Department of Education, 400 Maryland
Avenue SW., LBJ, Washington, DC
20202–4537. Copies of the proposed
information collection request may be
accessed from https://edicsweb.ed.gov,
by selecting the ‘‘Browse Pending
Collections’’ link and by clicking on
link number 04856. When you access
the information collection, click on
‘‘Download Attachments’’ to view.
Written requests for information should
be addressed to U.S. Department of
Education, 400 Maryland Avenue SW.,
LBJ, Washington, DC 20202–4537.
Requests may also be electronically
SUMMARY:
E:\FR\FM\16MYN1.SGM
16MYN1
]]>Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 77, Number 95 (Wednesday, May 16, 2012)]
[Notices]
[Pages 28857-28860]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2012-11818]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
National Telecommunications and Information Administration
[Docket No: 120509050-1050-01]
RIN 0660-XC001
Development of the State and Local Implementation Grant Program
for the Nationwide Public Safety Broadband Network
AGENCY: National Telecommunications and Information Administration,
U.S. Department of Commerce.
ACTION: Request for Information.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The National Telecommunications and Information Administration
(NTIA) is issuing a Request for Information (RFI) seeking public
comment on various issues relating to the development of the State and
Local Implementation grant program, which NTIA must establish pursuant
to the Middle Class Tax Relief and Job Creation Act of 2012 to assist
state and local governments in planning for a single, nationwide
interoperable public safety broadband network. NTIA intends to use the
input from this process to inform the development of programmatic
requirements to govern the state and local planning grants program.
DATES: Comments must be received by June 15, 2012 at 5:00 p.m. Eastern
Daylight Time.
ADDRESSES: Comments may be submitted by email to SLIGP@ntia.doc.gov.
Comments submitted by email should be machine-searchable and should not
be copy-protected. Written comments also may be submitted by mail to:
National Telecommunications and Information Administration, U.S.
Department of Commerce, HCHB Room 4812, 1401 Constitution Avenue NW.,
Washington, DC 20230. Please note that all material sent via the U.S.
Postal Service (including Overnight or Express Mail) is subject to
delivery delays of up to two weeks due to mail security procedures.
Responders should include the name of the person or organization filing
the comment, as well as a page number, on each page of their
submissions. Paper submissions should also include an electronic
version on CD or DVD in .txt, .pdf, or Word format (please specify
version), which should be labeled with the name and organizational
affiliation of the filer and the name of the word processing program
used to create the document. All emails and comments received are a
part of the public record and will generally be posted to the NTIA Web
site (https://www.ntia.doc.gov) without change. All personally
identifying information (for example, name, address, etc.) voluntarily
submitted by the commenter may be publicly accessible. Do not submit
Confidential Business Information or otherwise sensitive or protected
information.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Laura M. Pettus, Communications
Program Specialist, Office of Telecommunications and Information
Applications, National Telecommunications and Information
Administration, U.S. Department of Commerce, 1401 Constitution Avenue
NW., Room 4878, Washington, DC 20230; telephone: (202) 482-4509; email:
lpettus@ntia.doc.gov. Please direct media inquiries to NTIA's Office of
Public Affairs, (202) 482-7002.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Background
On February 22, 2012, President Obama signed the Middle Class Tax
Relief and Job Creation Act of 2012 (Act).\1\ The Act meets a long-
standing priority of the Obama Administration to create a single,
nationwide interoperable public safety broadband network that will, for
the first time, allow police officers, fire fighters, emergency medical
service professionals, and other public
[[Page 28858]]
safety officials to communicate with each other across agencies and
jurisdictions. Public safety workers have long been hindered by
incompatible, and often outdated, communications equipment and this Act
will help them to do their jobs more safely and effectively.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Middle Class Tax Relief and Job Creation Act of 2012, Public
Law 112-96, 126 Stat. 156 (2012) (Act).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Act establishes the First Responder Network Authority
(FirstNet) as an independent authority within NTIA and authorizes it to
take all actions necessary to ensure the design, construction, and
operation of a nationwide public safety broadband network (PSBN), based
on a single, national network architecture.\2\ FirstNet is responsible
for, at a minimum, ensuring nationwide standards for use and access of
the network; issuing open, transparent, and competitive requests for
proposals (RFPs) to build, operate and maintain the network;
leveraging, to the maximum extent economically desirable, existing
commercial wireless infrastructure to speed deployment of the network;
and overseeing contracts with non-federal entities to build, operate,
and maintain the network.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\2\ Id. at Sec. 6206(b)(1).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Additionally, the Act charges NTIA with establishing a grant
program to assist State, regional, tribal, and local jurisdictions with
identifying, planning, and implementing the most efficient and
effective means to use and integrate the infrastructure, equipment, and
other architecture associated with the nationwide PSBN to satisfy the
wireless and data services needs of their jurisdiction.\3\ Up to $135
million will be available to NTIA for the State and Local
Implementation grant program.\4\ NTIA must establish requirements for
this program not later than six months after the date of enactment
(i.e., August 22, 2012). The programmatic requirements for the State
and Local Implementation grant program must include, at a minimum, a
determination of the scope of eligible activities that will be funded,
a definition of eligible costs, and a method to prioritize grants for
activities that ensure coverage in rural as well as urban areas.\5\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\3\ Id. at Sec. 6302(a).
\4\ Id. at Sec. 6301(c).
\5\ Id. at Sec. 6302(c).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
NTIA is requesting public comment on certain aspects of the Act's
provisions relating to the establishment of the State and Local
Implementation grant program.
Request for Comment
The Consultation Process
1. Section 6206(c)(2) of the Act directs FirstNet to consult with
regional, State, tribal, and local jurisdictions about the distribution
and expenditure of any amounts required to carry out the network
policies that it is charged with establishing. This section enumerates
several areas for consultation, including: (i) Construction of a core
network and any radio access network build-out; (ii) placement of
towers; (iii) coverage areas of the network, whether at the regional,
State, tribal, or local level; (iv) adequacy of hardening, security,
reliability, and resiliency requirements; (v) assignment of priority to
local users; (vi) assignment of priority and selection of entities
seeking access to or use of the nationwide public safety interoperable
broadband network; and (vii) training needs of local users. What steps
should States take to prepare to consult with FirstNet regarding these
issues?
a. What data should States compile for the consultation process
with FirstNet?
b. Should this activity be covered by the State and Local
Implementation grant program?
2. The Act requires that each State certify in its application for
grant funds that the State has designated a single officer or
governmental body to serve as the coordinator of implementation of the
grant funds.\6\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\6\ Id. at Sec. 6302(d).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
a. Who might serve in the role as a single officer within the State
and will it or should it vary for each State?
b. Who might serve on the governmental body (e.g., public partners,
private partners, technical experts, Chief Information Officers, SWIC,
finance officials, or legal experts)?
c. How should the States plan to involve the local entities in the
State and Local Implementation grant program?
d. How should the States plan to involve the tribal entities in the
grant program?
e. What requirements should be included in the grant program to
ensure that local and tribal public safety entities are able to
participate in the planning process?
f. How should the State and Local Implementation grant program
ensure that all public safety disciplines (e.g., police, sheriffs,
fire, and EMS) have input into the State consultation process?
g. How should the State and Local Implementation grant program
define regional (e.g., interstate or intrastate) and how might the
grant program be structured to facilitate regional participation
through the States?
h. How should States plan to involve the Federal users and entities
located within their States in the grant program?
3. The Act contemplates that FirstNet will consult with States
regarding existing infrastructure within their boundaries, tower
placements, and network coverage, which FirstNet can use to develop the
requests for proposals called for by the Act. The States, however, will
need time and funding to collect the necessary information before they
are ready to consult with FirstNet.
a. Given these interrelated activities, how should the State and
Local Implementation grant program be used by States to assist in
gathering the information to consult with FirstNet?
b. Should consistent standards and processes be used by all States
to gather this information? If so, how should those policies and
standards be established? What should those policies and standards be?
c. What time period should NTIA consider for States to perform
activities allowed under the grant program as it relates to gathering
the information to consult with FirstNet?
Existing Public Safety Governance and Planning Authorities
4. Over the years, States have invested resources to conduct
planning and to create governance structures around interoperable
communications focused primarily on Land Mobile Radio (LMR) voice
communications, including the Statewide Interoperability Coordinators
(SWIC) and Statewide Interoperability Governing Bodies (SIGB), often
called Statewide Interoperability Executive Committees (SIEC).
a. What is the current role of these existing governance structures
in the planning and development of wireless public safety broadband
networks?
b. What actions have the States' governance structures (e.g., SWIC,
SIGB, or SIEC) taken to begin planning for the implementation of the
nationwide public safety broadband network?
c. Can these existing governance structures be used for the PSBN,
and if so, how might they need to change or evolve to handle issues
associated with broadband access through the Long Term Evolution (LTE)
technology platform?
d. What is or should be the role of the Statewide Communications
Interoperability Plans (SCIPs) in a State's planning efforts for the
nationwide public safety broadband network?
e. What actions do the States need to take to update the SCIPs to
include broadband?
[[Page 28859]]
f. Should the costs to change or evolve existing governance and
Statewide Plans be eligible in the new program?
g. Should the maintenance of those existing governance bodies and
plans be eligible in State and Local Implementation grant program?
Leveraging Existing Infrastructure
5. How should States and local jurisdictions best leverage their
existing infrastructure assets and resources for use and integration
with the nationwide public safety broadband network?
a. How should States and local jurisdictions plan to use and/or
determine the suitability of their existing infrastructure and
equipment for integration into the public safety broadband network?
b. What technical resources do States have available to assist with
deployment of the nationwide public safety broadband network?
c. How will States include utilities or other interested third
parties in their planning activities?
d. Should NTIA encourage planning for the formation and use of
public/private partnerships in the deployment of the nationwide public
safety broadband network? If so, how?
6. Section 6206(b)(1)(B) of the Act directs FirstNet to issue open,
transparent, and competitive requests for proposals (RFPs) to private
sector entities for the purposes of building, operating, and
maintaining the network. How can Federal, State, tribal, and local
infrastructure get incorporated into this model?
a. How would States plan for this integration?
b. Should States serve as clearinghouses or one-stop shops where
entities bidding to build and operate portions of the FirstNet network
can obtain access to resources such as towers and backhaul networks? If
so, what would be involved in setting up such clearinghouses?
c. Should setting up a clearinghouse be an eligible cost of the
grant program?
State and Local Implementation Grant Activities
7. What are some of the best practices, if any, from existing
telecommunications or public safety grant programs that NTIA should
consider adopting for the State and Local Implementation grant program?
8. What type of activities should be allowable under the State and
Local Implementation grant program?
9. What types of costs should be eligible for funding under the
State and Local Implementation grant program (e.g., personnel, planning
meetings, development/upgrades of plans, or assessments)?
a. Should data gathering on current broadband and mobile data
infrastructure be considered an allowable cost?
b. Should the State and Local Implementation grant program fund any
new positions at the State, local, or tribal level that may be needed
to support the work to plan for the nationwide public safety broadband
network? If so, what, if any, restrictions should NTIA consider placing
on the scope of hiring and the type of positions that may be funded
under the grant program?
10. What factors should NTIA consider in prioritizing grants for
activities that ensure coverage in rural as well as urban areas?
11. Are there best practices used in other telecommunications or
public safety grant programs to ensure investments in rural areas that
could be used in the State and Local Implementation grant program?
12. In 2009, NTIA launched the State Broadband Initiative (SBI)
grant program to facilitate the integration of broadband and
information technology into state and local economies.
a. Do States envision SBI state designated entities participating
or assisting this new State and Local Implementation grant program?
b. How can the SBI state designated entities work with States in
planning for the nationwide public safety broadband network?
13. What outcomes should be achieved by the State and Local
Implementation grant program?
a. Are there data that the States and local jurisdictions should
deliver to document the outcomes of the grant program?
b. If so, how should they be measured?
c. Who should collect this information and in what format?
d. What data already exist and what new data could be gathered as
part of the program?
14. The U.S. Department of Homeland Security's Office of Emergency
Communications (OEC) has developed the following tools through its
Technical Assistance Program available at https://www.publicsafetytools.info, including: (1) Mobile Data Usage and Survey
Tool--Survey process to document the current-state mobile data
environment, in preparation for a migration to LTE; (2) Statewide
Broadband Planning Tool--Template and support on Statewide strategic
broadband planning issues designed to serve as an addendum to the SCIP;
(3) Frequency Mapping Tool--Graphical tool to display FCC license
information and locations including cellular sites within a
jurisdiction; and (4) Communications Assets Survey and Mapping Tool
(CASM)--Data collection and analysis tool for existing land mobile
radio assets. Should States be encouraged to utilize tools and support
available from Federal programs such as those developed by OEC? Are
there other programs or tools that should be considered?
15. Do the States have a preferred methodology for NTIA to use to
distribute the grant funds available under the State and Local
Implementation grant program?
a. Should NTIA consider allocating the grant funds based on
population?
b. What other targeted allocation methods might be appropriate to
use?
c. Should NTIA consider phasing the distribution of grant funds in
the new program?
State Funding and Performance Requirements
16. What role, if any, should the States' Chief Information Officer
(CIO) or Chief Technology Officer (CTO) play in the State and Local
Implementation grant program and the required consultations with
FirstNet? How will these different positions interact and work with
public safety officials under the State and Local Implementation grant
program?
17. The Act requires that the Federal share of the cost of
activities carried out under the State and Local Implementation grant
program not exceed 80 percent and it gives the Assistant Secretary the
authority to waive the matching requirement, in whole or in part, if
good cause is shown and upon determining that the waiver is in the
public interest.\7\ As NTIA develops the State and Local Implementation
grant program, what are some of the factors it should consider
regarding States' ability to secure matching funds?
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\7\ Id. at Sec. 6302(b).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
18. What public interest factors should NTIA consider when weighing
whether to grant a waiver of the matching requirement of State and
Local Implementation grant program?
Other
19. Please provide comment on any other issues that NTIA should
consider in creating the State and Local Implementation grant program,
consistent with the Act's requirements.
[[Page 28860]]
Dated: May 11, 2012.
Lawrence E. Strickling,
Assistant Secretary for Communications and Information.
[FR Doc. 2012-11818 Filed 5-15-12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510-60-P
