Public safety groups told FCC that some clarification or change i...
Public safety groups told FCC that some clarification or change in existing Enhanced 911 rules might be needed but certain modifications shouldn’t be retroactive. Verizon Wireless recently asked Commission to stipulate that wireless carrier wouldn’t be in violation of…
Sign up for a free preview to unlock the rest of this article
Timely, relevant coverage of court proceedings and agency rulings involving tariffs, classification, valuation, origin and antidumping and countervailing duties. Each day, Trade Law Daily subscribers receive a daily headline email, in-depth PDF edition and access to all relevant documents via our trade law source document library and website.
E911 Phase 2 deadline when public safety answering point (PSAP) couldn’t yet receive and use more detailed location information because either PSAP or LEC hadn’t completed necessary network upgrades. Sprint PCS endorsed modified approach to one that Verizon outlined. Verizon had said its clarification could be carried out while keeping in place previous FCC decision that required licensees to start Phase 2 deployment in advance of actual PSAP readiness. Under existing rules, PSAP request for more-detailed Phase 2 information is deemed valid if PSAP can show it has ordered necessary equipment and has vendor commitments to have it installed and operational within 6 months. National Emergency Number Assn., Assn. of Public-Safety Communications Officials and National Assn. of State 911 Administrators told FCC that some changes might be needed to address LEC and PSAP readiness issues raised by Sprint and Verizon: “However, in the end, as we have said previously, implementation will depend more on common-sense accommodations reached in good faith among the parties than on rule changes. Nevertheless, removal of lingering uncertainties remains a worthy objective.” Groups said any relief from 6-month requirement should hinge on there being agreement between carrier and relevant PSAP on need to extend implementation deadline. Such agreement could take form of letter from PSAP agreeing to revised schedule, groups said. “Submission of that letter to the FCC would relieve the carrier of its 6-month requirement and avoid the need for enforcement action,” filing said. But public safety groups stressed that carriers shouldn’t have right to “unilaterally” extend compliance date because they perceived that PSAP wasn’t ready, whether because of equipment installation delays or because LEC hadn’t done necessary database upgrades. Filing raised concerns that Verizon and Sprint proposals would involve rule changes that would be applied retroactively. “Retroactive rulemaking is usually not a good idea and we cannot accept it here,” filing said. Although there may be more valid PSAP requests than carrier facing Dec. 2002 deadline can handle, “these need not be summarily invalidated,” filing said.