Summary: In this document, the Federal Communications Commission (Commission) amends its rules to require wireless licensees subject to standards for wireless Enhanced 911 (E911) Phase II location accuracy and reliability to satisfy these standards at either a county-based or Public Safety Answering Point (PSAP)-based geographic level. The Commission takes this step in order to ensure an appropriate and consistent compliance methodology with respect to location accuracy standards.

Effective Date: The rule is effective January 18, 2011, except for SUBSEC 20.18(h)(1)(vi), 20.18(h)(2)(iii), and 20.18(h)(3), which contains information collection requirements that have not been approved by OMB. The Federal Communications Commission will publish a document in the Federal Register announcing the effective date.

For Further Information Contact: Patrick Donovan, Policy Division, Public Safety and Homeland Security Bureau, (202) 418-2413.

Supplementary Information: This is a summary of the Commission’s Second Report and Order (Order) in PS Docket No. 07-114, FCC 10-176, adopted September 23, 2010, and released September 23, 2010. The complete text of this document is available for inspection and copying during normal business hours in the FCC Reference Information Center, Room CY-A257, 445 12th Street, SW., Washington, DC 20554. This document may also be obtained from the Commission’s duplicating contractor, Best Copy and Printing, Inc., in person at 445 12th Street, SW., Room CY-B402, Washington, DC 20554, via telephone at (202) 488-5300, via facsimile at (202) 488-5563, or via e-mail at FCC@BCPIWEB.COM Alternative formats (computer diskette, large print, audio cassette, and Braille) are available to persons with disabilities by sending an e-mail to FCC504@fcc.gov or calling the Consumer and Governmental Affairs Bureau at (202) 418-0530, TTY (202) 418-0432. This document is also available on the Commission’s Web site at http://www.fcc.gov.

I. Introduction
1. One of the most important opportunities afforded by mobile telephony is the potential for the American public to have access to emergency services personnel during times of crisis, wherever they may be. To ensure this benefit is realized, however, public safety personnel must have accurate information regarding the location of the caller. Without precise location information, public safety’s ability to provide critical services in a timely fashion becomes far more difficult, if not impossible. Accordingly, this order requires wireless carriers to take steps to provide more specific automatic location information in connection with 911 emergency calls to Public Safety Answering Points (PSAPs) in areas where they have not done so in the past. As a result of this order, emergency responders will be able to reach the site of an emergency more quickly and efficiently. In addition, in a companion Further Notice of Proposed Rulemaking and Notice of Inquiry that we adopt today, we build on the order and explore how to further enhance location accuracy for existing and new wireless voice communications technologies, including new broadband technologies associated with deployment of Next Generation 911 (NG911) networks.

2. To accomplish these goals, in this Second Report and Order, we revise section 20.18(h) of the Commission’s rules, which specifies standards for wireless Enhanced 911 (E911) Phase II location accuracy and reliability. Specifically, we now require wireless licensees subject to section 20.18(h) to satisfy these standards at either a county-based or PSAP-based geographic level. We also revise the requirements of section 20.18(h) for handset-based and network-based location technologies.

II. Background
3. On June 1, 2007, the Commission released a Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (NPRM) seeking comment on the appropriate geographic area over which to measure compliance with section 20.18(h), as well as a variety of additional questions about how to improve 911 location accuracy and reliability. In the NPRM, the Commission indicated that carriers should not be permitted to average their accuracy results over vast service areas, because carriers thereby could assert that they satisfy the requirements of section 20.18(h) without meeting the accuracy requirements in substantial segments of their service areas. The Commission stated that although measuring location accuracy at the PSAP level may present challenges, the public interest demands that carriers and technology providers strive to ensure that when wireless callers dial 911, emergency responders are provided location information that enables them to reach the site of the emergency as quickly as possible. Because many carriers were not measuring and testing location accuracy at the PSAP service area level, the Commission sought comment on whether to defer enforcement of section 20.18(h) if the Commission adopted its tentative conclusion to require compliance at the PSAP level.

4. On November 20, 2007, the Commission released a Report and Order (First Report and Order) requiring wireless licensees to satisfy the E911 accuracy and reliability standards at a geographic level defined by the service area of a PSAP. The decision to adopt a PSAP-level compliance requirement was responsive to a request for declaratory ruling filed by the Association of Public-Safety Communications Officials-International, Inc. (APCO) asking that the Commission require carriers to meet the Commission’s location accuracy requirements at the PSAP service area level. Specifically, the First Report and Order established interim annual requirements leading to an ultimate deadline of September 11, 2012 for achieving compliance with section 20.18(h) at the PSAP level, for both handset-based and network-based technologies. Several carriers filed with the Commission Motions for Stay of the First Report and Order, seeking a stay of the effectiveness of the rules adopted in the First Report and Order pending judicial review. Following petitions for review filed with respect to the First Report and Order, on March 25, 2008, the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit (Court) stayed the First Report and Order.

5. On July 14, 2008, APCO and the National Emergency Number Association (NENA) filed an ex parte letter stating that they “are now willing to accept compliance measurements at the county level” rather than at the PSAP level. APCO and NENA added that “[p]ublic safety and wireless carriers are in current discussions on a number of other issues associated with E9-1-1, with the goal of improving information available to PSAPs. There are areas of agreement in concept; however, the details are still being developed.”

6. On July 31, 2008, the Commission filed with the Court a Motion for Voluntary Remand and Vacatur, which requested remand based on the proposals contained in the July 14 ex parte letter and “[i]n light of the public safety community’s support for revised rules.” Following this filing with the Court, NENA, APCO, Verizon Wireless, Sprint Nextel Corporation (Sprint Nextel), and ATandT Inc. (ATandT) submitted written ex parte letters with the Commission with proposed new wireless E911 rules. On September 17, 2008, the Court granted the Commission’s Motion for Voluntary Remand.

7. On September 22, 2008, the Public Safety and Homeland Security Bureau (Bureau) released a public notice seeking comment on the proposals submitted in the ex parte letters. The Bureau sought comment on the proposed changed accuracy requirements, including the benchmarks, limitations, and exclusions, for handset-based and network-based location technologies. The Bureau also sought comment on pledges to convene industry groups to explore related issues, and whether the Commission should require the provision of confidence and uncertainty data, as well as any alternative modifications to location accuracy requirements. The Bureau urged all interested parties to review the entirety of the ex parte letters.

8. On November 4, 2008, the Commission adopted two Orders approving applications for transfers of control, involving Verizon Wireless and ALLTEL Corporation, and Sprint Nextel and Clearwire Corporation, conditioned upon their voluntary agreements to abide by the conditions set forth in their respective ex parte letters, which are identical to the wireless E911 proposals they submitted in this proceeding. In each case, the Commission found that these conditions would “further ensure that consummation of the proposed merger serves the public interest, convenience and necessity.”

9. On November 20, 2009, in light of the passage of time, the Bureau released a public notice seeking to refresh the record. Specifically, the Bureau sought comment on whether subsequent developments in the industry and technology may have affected parties’ positions on the issues raised. A list of parties submitting comments in response to the Second Bureau Public Notice is attached as Appendix A.

10. On June 16, 2010, T-Mobile USA, Inc. (T-Mobile) filed an ex parte letter stating that it would agree to comply with the benchmarks for network-based location technologies that were proposed in the APCO/NENA/ATandT Aug. 25 Ex Parte, with several modifications. On June 30, 2010, the Rural Cellular Association (RCA) filed an ex parte letter stating that it supports the proposed modifications in the T-Mobile Ex Parte. On July 7, 2010, APCO and NENA filed an ex parte letter stating that they do not object to the proposed modifications in the T-Mobile Ex Parte and urged the Commission to proceed expeditiously to implement the modified proposals. On July 29, 2010, General Communication, Inc. (GCI) filed an ex parte letter including proposals with specific application to rural and regional providers.

This is a summary of a Federal Register article originally published on the page number listed below:

Final rule.
CFR Part: “47 CFR Part 20”
Citation: “75 FR 70604”
Document Number: “PS Docket No. 07-114; FCC 10-176”
Federal Register Page Number: “70604”
“Rules and Regulations”

Copyright © 2010 LexisNexis, a division of Reed Elsevier Inc. All Rights Reserved. Terms and Conditions, Privacy Policy