House Committee Close to Completing E-911 Bill

“Think of this hearing today as group therapy,” said Rep. Mike Doyle, D-Pa., urging panelists to state clearly what objections they have to the measure. “We know that the bill needs to pass and it has to pass this year,” Doyle said. “Congress needs to act to make sure all Americans have access to emergency service on Internet or VoIP phones,” said Rep. Bart Gordon, D-Tenn., sponsor of the measure.

Two key provisions in the bill would speed deployment of emergency voice services, said Telecom Subcommittee Chairman Ed Markey, D-Mass. One would extend liability protection to VoIP providers, equal to the protections already in place for wireline and wireless, which the FCC can’t do without authority from Congress. A second provision would ensure that VoIP providers can access the 911 infrastructure to complete calls. While the FCC has mandated the VoIP providers give all customers E-911 service, the Commission didn’t order that providers “had a legal right to the components of the 911 infrastructure” to get the job done, Markey said.

But so far, it has been difficult to bridge disputes over those provisions between the VoIP and wireline industry and public safety groups -- to the frustration of lawmakers. “We need to get this through and make sure it gets to the president’s desk,” said Rep. Anna Eshoo, D- Calif., chair of the congressional E-911 caucus.

USTelecom is concerned that the bill would grant “additional access rights” beyond those wireless carriers enjoy, said Vice President Robert Mayer, a former state regulator who had been state chairman of the FCC’s joint federal-state E-911 task force. Mayer said Congress adopted the “proper federalism model” when it enacted the Enhance 911 Act of 2004, which required federal leadership to work with state and local governments to achieve full- scale delivery of services. If Congress gives state authority to review and resolve disputes, “we believe that states should exercise such authority in accordance with FCC established standards and procedures,” he said.

Public safety groups want state and local authorities to be in charge of imposing and collecting 911 fees, said Jason Barbour, speaking on behalf of the National Emergency Number Association and the Association of Public-Safety Communications Officials. The public safety community is “extremely concerned” that revenue from 911 fees and surcharges are being diverted to other uses. “It is essential that Congress do nothing to compromise” state and local authority of such fee collections, “regardless of the type of technology involved.”

But Mayer said the FCC is the “logical entity to enforce E-911 obligations” in light of its ruling that VoIP is an interstate service. USTelecom’s second concern is with the bill’s requirement restricting use of 911 database information for providing emergency services. “We do not think there is any need for legislation” on this issue because the FCC’s current customer proprietary network information rules are sufficient, Mayer said. The restriction the bill proposes could prohibit regulatory agencies from using the information for public policy purposes, he said. “It is a well-established practice of the FCC and various state commissions to rely on E-911 data in analyzing the extent of competition.”

The VoIP industry is pleased with the bill’s access requirements, which would require giving VoIP providers access to 911 networks on the same terms as wireless. “The 911 system remains a public trust, not a tool to slow competition,” said Christopher Putala, EarthLink executive vice president for public policy, speaking for the VON Coalition. But to really “close this divide,” he said, Congress needs to establish a “twenty-first century, IP- based 911 system,” Putala said. The bill proposes that NTIA report to Congress on how a national plan could improve information sharing among emergency service providers.