Congressional Record, Volume 145 Issue 29 (Wednesday, February 24, 1999)

[Congressional Record Volume 145, Number 29 (Wednesday, February 24, 1999)]
[House]
[Pages H728-H737]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]

WIRELESS COMMUNICATIONS AND PUBLIC SAFETY ACT OF 1999

Mr. LINDER. Mr. Speaker, by direction of the Committee on Rules, I
call up House Resolution 76 and ask for its immediate consideration.
The Clerk read the resolution, as follows:

H. Res. 76

Resolved, That at any time after the adoption of this
resolution the Speaker may, pursuant to clause 2(b) of rule
XVIII, declare the House resolved into the Committee of the
Whole House on the state of the Union for consideration of
the bill (H.R. 438) to promote and enhance public safety
through use of 911 as the universal emergency assistance
number, and for other purposes. The first reading of the bill
shall be dispensed with. Points of order against
consideration of the bill for failure to comply with clause
4(a) of rule XIII are waived. General debate shall be
confined to the bill and shall not exceed one hour equally
divided and controlled by the chairman and ranking minority
member of the Committee on Commerce. After general debate the
bill shall be considered for amendment under the five-minute
rule. It shall be in order to consider as an original bill
for the purpose of amendment under the five-minute rule the
amendment in the nature of a substitute recommended by the
Committee on Commerce now printed in the bill. Each section
of the committee amendment in the nature of a substitute
shall be considered as read. During consideration of the bill
for amendment, the chairman of the Committee of the Whole may
accord priority in recognition on the basis of whether the
Member offering an amendment has caused it to be printed in
the portion of the Congressional Record designated for that
purpose in clause 8 of rule XVIII. Amendments so printed
shall be considered as read. The chairman of the Committee of
the Whole may: (1) postpone until a time during further
consideration in the Committee of the Whole a request for a
recorded vote on any amendment; and (2) reduce to five
minutes the minimum time for electronic voting on any
postponed question that follows another electronic vote
without intervening business, provided that the minimum time
for electronic voting on the first in any series of questions
shall be 15 minutes. At the conclusion of consideration of
the bill for amendment the Committee shall rise and report
the bill to the House with such amendments as may have been
adopted. Any Member may demand a separate vote in the House
on any amendment adopted in the Committee of the Whole to the
bill or to the committee amendment in the nature of a
substitute. The previous question shall be considered as
ordered on the bill and amendments thereto to final passage
without intervening motion except one motion to recommit with
or without instructions.

The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mr. Gillmor). The gentleman from Georgia
(Mr. Linder) is recognized for 1 hour.
Mr. LINDER. Mr. Speaker, for the purpose of debate only, I yield the
customary 30 minutes to the gentleman from Ohio (Mr. Hall), pending
which I yield myself such time as I may consume. During consideration
of this resolution, all time yielded is for the purpose of debate only.
Mr. Speaker, House Resolution 76 is an open rule providing for
consideration of H.R. 438, the Wireless Communications and Public
Safety Act of 1999. H. Res. 76 is a wide-open rule providing 1 hour of
general debate equally divided and controlled by the chairman and
ranking minority member of the Committee on Commerce. The rule waives
points of order against consideration of the bill for failure to comply
with clause 4(a) of Rule 13 which by rule requires a 3-day layover for
the committee report.
H. Res. 76 further allows the chairman of the Committee of the Whole
to accord priority and recognition to those Members who have preprinted
their amendments in the Congressional Record prior to the
consideration.
The rule also allows the Chairman of the Committee of the Whole to
postpone recorded votes and to reduce to 5 minutes the voting time on
any proposed postponed question provided that the voting time on the
first in any series of questions is not less than 15 minutes.
Finally, the rule provides one motion to recommit, with or without
instructions, as is the right of the minority.
Mr. Speaker, H.R. 438 will promote public safety and consistency in
the provision of emergency services through the universal use of 911
and enable States to develop the necessary communications
infrastructure to provide such emergency services. Millions of American
already know that 911 is the number to dial when they are in trouble
and need emergency assistance. However, for thousands of miles across
the country this is simply not true. Other numbers are used or no
emergency system exists at all. H.R. 438

[[Page H729]]

helps to end the confusion and makes 911 the universal emergency
number.
This change is particularly important for wireless phones which often
use other numbers, such as pound-77 or star-55, to link to local law
enforcement. However, these codes can change from one cellular calling
area to another, effectively eliminating the speed and safety that such
a number can provide in emergency. H.R. 438 will make 911 the universal
call for help that is already believed to be, so that public service is
not jeopardized.
H.R. 438 will also help to develop the full capability of wireless
communications by enhancing the ability of local authorities to locate
distressed individuals through information provided by wireless
carriers. It also contains the necessary privacy protections to ensure
that this capability is not misused. With the passage of H.R. 438,
Americans will know, once and for all, how to get help when they need
it.
Mr. Speaker, H.R. 438 easily passed the Committee on Commerce by
voice vote, as did this open rule from the Committee on Rules. I
applaud the hard work put forth by the gentleman from Illinois (Mr.
Shimkus) on this important legislation, and I urge my colleagues to
support this open rule and the underlying bill.
Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. HALL of Ohio. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may
consume.
Mr. Speaker, I want to thank my colleague, the gentleman from Georgia
(Mr. Linder), for yielding me the time.
This is an open rule. It will allow full and fair debate on H.R. 438,
which is the Wireless Communications and Public Safety Act of 1999. As
my colleague has described, this rule will provide for 1 hour of
general debate to be equally divided and controlled by the chairman and
the ranking minority member of the Committee on Commerce. The rule
permits amendments under the 5-minute rule, which is the normal
amending process in the House. All Members on both sides of the aisle
will have the opportunity to offer amendments.
In most parts of the country a caller from a standard telephone can
call 911 to ask for emergency assistance or to report a crime. That is
not so from the cellular or other wireless telephones. The Wireless
Communications and Public Safety Act of 1999 designates 911 as the
universal emergency number for both wireless and wire line telephone
calls. This will improve public safety by eliminating confusion over
what number to call for emergency services. This is especially
important to travelers who do not know the emergency number for the
place they are visiting.
The rule waives the prohibition against bringing up a bill under 3
days after the committee report was filed in the House. The committee
report for this bill was filed only yesterday afternoon, less than 24
hours ago. The 3-day layover rule is an important protection for the
minority, and by waiving this rule so early in the House session I hope
that we are not setting a pattern that will be followed for
controversial bills.
I recognize the need to move legislation early in the session, to
demonstrate that the House is serious about its business.
Moreover, the bill is not controversial. It has broad support on both
sides of the aisle. Therefore, I will support the open rule.
Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.
Mr. LINDER. Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time, and I
move the previous question on the resolution.
The previous question was ordered.
The resolution was agreed to.
A motion to reconsider was laid on the table.
The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mr. Gillmor). Pursuant to House Resolution
76 and rule XVIII, the Chair declares the House in the Committee of the
Whole House on the State of the Union for the consideration of the
bill, H.R. 438.

{time} 1046

In the Committee of the Whole

Accordingly, the House resolved itself into the Committee of the
Whole House on the State of the Union for the consideration of the bill
(H.R. 438) to promote and enhance public safety through use of 911 as
the universal emergency assistance number, and for other purposes, with
Mr. Kingston in the chair.
The Clerk read the title of the bill.
The CHAIRMAN. Pursuant to the rule, the bill is considered as having
been read the first time.
Under the rule, the gentleman from Louisiana (Mr. Tauzin) and the
gentleman from Massachusetts (Mr. Markey) each will control 30 minutes.
The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Louisiana (Mr. Tauzin).
Mr. TAUZIN. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
Mr. Chairman, let me first compliment the gentleman from
Massachusetts (Mr. Markey) for his excellent cooperation and work and
the spirit by which we bring this bill to the floor today. I thank the
gentleman from Virginia (Mr. Bliley), the chairman, and the other
members of the Subcommittee on Telecommunications, Trade, and Consumer
Protection for the excellent work that they have done on this bill and
the other bill that we will bring to the floor today, both bills
dealing with the wireless telephone industry and its consumers and
aspects that are extremely important to both the public safety and to
the privacy of those communications.
I also want to thank my good friend the gentleman from Illinois (Mr.
Shimkus) and my dear colleague, the gentlewoman from New Mexico (Mrs.
Wilson) for sponsoring these bills and for leading the charge to indeed
make them the law of the land.
Mr. Chairman, 1997 was a landmark year in the history of this
country. In 1997, more Americans bought cordless phones than wired
phones, for the first time in the history of this technology. In fact,
some 68 million Americans now carry wireless telephones or pagers.
Studies show that most of those American subscribers of these wireless
phones purchase them for safety reasons. People count on those phones
to be their lifelines in emergencies.
A parent driving down an interstate highway with babies in the back
seat draws comfort from knowing if the car is involved in a crash he or
she can call 911 for help; an ambulance will be rolling in seconds. An
older American driving alone on a long trip feels safer knowing that if
an accident occurs or symptoms strike, he or she can use a wireless
phone to dial 911 for help and the State police will be on the way.
There is a problem with that expectation, though. In many parts of
our country, when a frantic parent or the suddenly disabled elder
punches 911 on the wireless phone, nothing happens. In many regions, in
fact, 911 is not the emergency number to call on a wireless phone. The
ambulance and the police will not be coming. Someone may be facing a
terrible life threatening emergency but they are on their own, because
they do not know the local number to call for the emergency for help.
This bill will help fix that problem by making 911 the universal
number to call in an emergency any time, anywhere in this country. The
rule in America ought to be a simple uniform system. If there is an
emergency, wherever someone is, on a highway, a byway, a bike path or a
duck blind in south Louisiana, wherever someone is, they call 911.
911 does four things. First, it directs the Federal Communications
Commission to use its existing exclusive authority to designate 911 as
a universal emergency telephone number for wireless and wireline
services. The bill also directs the FCC to provide support to the
States to help them implement a comprehensive end-to-end emergency
communications infrastructure.
The FCC required in 1997 that wireless carriers provide what is
called automatic number identification of a wireless user when the user
calls that emergency number, but only when the emergency call center
requests it. These emergency call centers are called PSAPS for Public
Safety Answering Points.
A recent study showed that only about 6 to 7 percent of wireless
subscribers live in regions or operate in regions where PSAPS have
undertaken the necessary upgrading to their existing plant to accept
the additional number data. Thus, despite a year's passage of this
deadline intended to enhance public safety to save American lives, only
a minuscule amount of subscribers are benefiting.

[[Page H730]]

The intent behind that requirement was that the PSAPS know the number
of the wireless caller to call back, provide instructions, whether it
be to a child, to an incapacitated adult or someone in a very dangerous
situation who needs to be walked through to safety. That was step one.
The second requirement was that by October of the year 2001, wireless
carriers provide automatic location information with each wireless
call, but only upon the PSAP's request. If the past is prologue,
October 2001 could easily roll around and the PSAP will not have
undertaken the necessary upgrades to accept this additional data
either, and that is critical, for unlike users who call 911 over the
phone or in an office or a house, that is over a wireless network, a
user on a cell phone rather than the user on a wireline network,
particularly a driver often has no clear idea of his location. If they
do not know where they are when they place a 911 call, how can anyone
else know where they are?
Imagine the public safety benefits of placing a 911 call if someone
can send out a radio signal that told rescuers exactly where they are.
Imagine if we could take the search out of search and rescue. Imagine
what a different fate those who were lost in the Swiss Alps would have
seen had they been equipped with cell phone transmitting location
information.
The wireless carriers are busy preparing to meet this location
information deadline, but all their preparations will come to naught if
the PSAPS have not undertaken the necessary upgrades. So the bill
addresses this weak link in the chain of public safety by requiring the
FCC to work with the States to develop a statewide plan for developing
end-to-end communications infrastructure for wireless services; to the
PSAP, to intelligent traffic systems, automatic crash notifications
technologies, triad algorithms and medical response, in short, a way to
locate someone who calls for help in a 911 emergency.
Third, the bill establishes parity between the wireless and the
wireline communications industries in protection from liability for the
provision of telephone services, including 911 service, and in the use
of that 911 service. This parity would be extended on a State-by-State
basis. Imagine a community that does not have 911 service available
because they are scared of lawsuits involved in the use of that 911
service insofar as a wireless telephone network is concerned.

They are protected from that on the wireline side. They are not
protected on the wireless side and so they do not implement a 911
strategy. This bill provides that wireless providers of telephone
service would receive at least as much protection from liability as
local exchange companies, the local wireline carriers receive in
providing telephone services in a given State, subject to a two-year
period during which the States may choose to enact the wireless
liability statute that differs from such parity.
Therefore, other than the 911 service, States may opt out of this
parity paradigm. The bill provides for users of wireless 911 service to
receive the same protection from liability under Federal or State laws,
as users of wireline 911 services receive. This good Samaritan
principle would again apply on a State-by-State basis.
Fourth and lastly, the bill protects wireless users' privacy by
limiting the disclosure of location information to specific instances,
and I want to particularly thank my friend, the gentleman from
Massachusetts (Mr. Markey) for his contributions in this critically
important area of privacy in the use of cellular phones and in the 911
systems.
While it will help rescuers to find victims in emergencies and cut
down on that golden hour following a car crash, where we have learned
in the hearings, for example, time is the issue, that golden hour is a
critical hour; lives are either saved or lost on the highway. Location
information is nevertheless sensitive personal information that must be
treated with great care.
We do not want police knowing everywhere someone is traveling on the
highway for no good reason. There is a lot of privacy in where someone
goes and what they are doing in their life that the government and
police agencies do not necessarily need to know about. Protecting
privacy and location when that is important is equally important in a
911 structure.
Under H.R. 438, a carrier can disclose location information only in
an emergency and only to the public safety personnel or the immediate
family. If a carrier seeks to use location information for marketing
purposes, it must obtain the customer's prior express authorization. In
short, the location of someone's travels is not going to be
commercialized for purposes without their permission. It is simply
going to be available to public safety information and to family when
necessary.
Location information may also be transmitted as part of an automatic
crash notification system, such as the one called OnStar, where the
crash triggers a cell phone mounted in the car to automatically dial
911, without the driver or the passenger actually dialing the number.
Last year, in fact a year and a half ago I think it is, we witnessed
in America the first car crash, head-on collision, between a car
equipped with the OnStar system and one that was not. There were
parties seriously injured in both cars. The car dialed up the
satellite. The car summoned help. Ambulances and emergency services
arrived and both loads of people were treated and helped with emergency
services because the automatic dialing system inside the car called for
help, located those individuals and got emergency help to them.
H.R. 438 permits providers of information or database managers who
provide emergency support services to PSAPS to receive subscriber lists
and unlisted data but only for the purposes of assisting in the
delivery of emergency service. Thus, the bill enhances a user's public
safety while also protecting their privacy interest. It encourages the
development of cellular and other wireless services by providing parity
and liability protection and it takes the FCC, it tasks the FCC,
rather, with working with the States to develop the end-to-end
infrastructure for delivering emergency services.
H.R. 438 is an important public service bill. This is a great bill
for this Congress to begin its work this year on, and I commend all of
my colleagues who have contributed to it.
Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. MARKEY. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
Mr. Chairman, let me begin by commending the gentleman from Louisiana
(Mr. Tauzin), the chairman, for the exemplary way in which he has
handled this very important path-breaking piece of legislation. He,
along with the gentleman from Virginia (Mr. Bliley), have treated
myself and the gentleman from Michigan (Mr. Dingell) very well in terms
of ensuring that the minority have their views completely included in
terms of the deliberations and ultimate product which has been
produced.
We also want to compliment the gentleman from Illinois (Mr. Shimkus)
for the work and the leadership which he has given on this issue. He is
the lead sponsor of the bill.

{time} 1100

Just as the gentleman from Louisiana has been saying, this is a new
era which we are in in which 68 million Americans now subscribe to some
form of wireless technology. 68 million. This was something that was
rare in America in 1990 and has almost reached the point of ubiquity in
terms of either subscribing or thinking about subscribing to this
technology.
As a result, we have to update our laws to ensure that we are moving
in a direction which deals with the implications of the introduction of
such a pervasive technology.
What this bill does today is to take something which was relatively
experimental a decade ago and to transform it into a national emergency
system; something where it makes it possible for Americans in their
automobiles, as they are walking, if they have an emergency health or
safety condition which has developed, to dial up a 911 number and to be
able to immediately access the resources which they would need in order
to deal with the problem that has now confronted them or their family.
This is a dramatic change in terms of how our country is going to
deal with these issues. When we are in our home we try to teach young
people how to dial if there is a fire or a police emergency. When we
are younger, each one

[[Page H731]]

of us is taught that the firebox is at the end of the street and to
only pull it when there is an emergency. But it has been put there for
that purpose and do not allow anyone else ever to pull it, because it
would not be right because it has been put there for that particular
reason.
Now, because of this new technology, people are able to travel
anywhere, to any corner of our country, far away from those corner
fireboxes, far away from the wire-fixed land phone system, and still be
able to call in.
What this legislation does is ensure that it is a national system,
that there are standards that are established that will ensure that it
will work for all Americans when they are on the road.
There is a particular part of this legislation, and the gentleman
from Louisiana referred to it, that I think will serve our country
well, which is that even as it makes it possible to dial up in the
event of an emergency on a wireless phone, it also creates the more
sinister side of cyberspace which is the capacity to be able to use
this as a national tracking system. No matter where we are in our car
with our cell phone, that someone might be able to track us where we
went.
What the legislation makes quite clear, and I thank the gentleman for
including this provision, an amendment which we had which we put into
last year's bill and now is reincluded in this legislation, which
guarantees that the information can be used only for emergency purposes
and it cannot be reused for any other purpose unless there has been a
preauthorization by the consumer giving authority to a company or to
public authorities to be able to use it for other purposes. I think
that is the correct balance, and I think the legislation with that
balance is something which is going to serve our country very well.
The gentleman from Louisiana has gone through all the details. There
is no point in going through the litany of all of the excellent
provisions which are built into the legislation. But, again, I cannot
compliment the gentleman from Louisiana (Chairman Tauzin) and the
gentleman from Virginia (Chairman Bliley) enough in terms of the way we
have been treated. The gentleman from Michigan (Mr. Dingell) and the
rest of the Democrats on the committee appreciate it. And, again, a tip
of the hat to the gentleman from Illinois (Mr. Shimkus) for his good
work.
Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. TAUZIN. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
Mr. Chairman, in a brief moment I will recognize the author of the
legislation, but I wanted to thank the gentleman from Massachusetts
(Mr. Markey) for his kind words and to assure him that that standard of
cooperation is one that the gentleman from Virginia (Mr. Bliley) and I
hope to emulate in all aspects of our committee's work in this
important area, that is so bipartisan, of extending communication
services to the bulk of our citizenry in a fashion that is competitive
and fair and also addresses public interest concerns and these
important privacy concerns that the gentleman from Massachusetts has
been so much a leader on. I want to compliment him on that.
Mr. Chairman, I also see in the Chamber, and I know that she will be
speaking in a minute, the gentlewoman from Missouri (Ms. Danner), my
dear friend, who was kind enough to come to our committee and lead the
charge and address the issue of 911 safety concerns, particularly the
concerns of citizens that she brought to our attention who have
suffered because of the fact that they did not have a common number in
this country.
I know that we will be hearing from the gentlewoman later, but I want
to thank her on behalf of the committee for her contributions on this
important issue.
Mr. Chairman, I yield such time as he may consume to the gentleman
from Illinois (Mr. Shimkus), the author of the legislation.
Mr. SHIMKUS. Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentleman from Louisiana and
the gentleman from Virginia (Chairman Bliley) for their help and
support. I also thank the gentleman from Michigan (Mr. Dingell), the
ranking member; and the gentleman from Massachusetts (Mr. Markey) for
their help and support in working on this legislation.
Mr. Chairman, we have bought our second cellular phone for the simple
purpose of my wife's protection when she is on the road. In the last 3
years, I have personally called 911 on vehicle accidents, all in my
20th District in Illinois, which is mostly rural, 19 counties and over
300 miles long.
One of those calls was for a vehicle that we could not find. It was
off the road, and we actually had to get on foot to search it out.
Another call was made, since I border the metropolitan St. Louis area,
right on the famous Poplar Street Bridge. Not knowing exactly how the
State of Missouri would answer and receive the 911 transmission,
knowing that in this legislation that there are many States did not
have it.
So, I think most Americans now have experienced and I think they
would be surprised to find out that 911 is not the national number.
The purpose of H.R. 438 is to improve our Nation's wireless 911
system so we can reduce response times to emergencies and basically
save lives. Reducing emergency response time will help to lessen the
impact of serious injuries and, again, save lives. Studies show that
crashes and care time for fatal accidents is over 30 minutes in urban
areas and over 50 minutes in rural areas. I know the gentlewoman from
Missouri (Ms. Danner) is going to mention that fact. In rural areas,
this is truly an important piece of legislation.
Mr. Chairman, reducing this time by mere minutes could save thousands
of lives each year. There are 68 million wireless phone users, as we
have heard before, across the Nation who make an average of 98,000
emergency calls every day. Even though every American is taught to dial
911 in an emergency, these teachings may be worthless in some areas of
the United States because dialing 911 on wireless phones does not
always connect one to the emergency service provider.
In fact, today there are currently 25 different wireless emergency
numbers across the country. Travelers may never figure out the
emergency number they need. H.R. 438 makes 911 the universal emergency
number for all phones so that everyone has simple access to emergency
help.
In order to make 911 work on every phone, we must have reliable phone
networks both in the wireless and in the wireline. This legislation
encourages States to develop coordinated plans to eliminate dead zones,
ensure seamless wireless networks, and upgrade their 911 systems so
that public safety officials and emergency medical service providers
can get the best available information as quickly as possible.
The bill also extends to wireless providers and users of 911 services
the same liability standard that each State has already established for
its wireline providers and users of 911 services. We do not want to
penalize and punish the good Samaritans in our society who are trying
to help someone in need. This legislation addresses that issue.
Finally, the bill provides protection for call location. And I thank
the gentleman from Massachusetts (Mr. Markey) for improving the
legislation, because there is a concern in the public about the ability
of location devices.
Mr. Chairman, I am a big fan of Star Trek and the communication
badges and they know where everyone is at and all they have to do is
identify them and they can get beamed across to another part of the
ship. Well, our society and our country is not prepared for the ``next
generation.'' We still like part of the old generation where we have
some privacy in thought, word, deed and location; and so I appreciate
the gentleman's support in that aspect of this legislation.
Finally, the bill provides that protection for call location
information concerning users of wireless phones, including such
information provided by an automatic crash notification system. Without
express written consent from the customer, location information may not
be released.
Again, I would like to thank the gentleman from Virginia (Mr.
Bliley), our full committee chairman; the gentleman from Louisiana (Mr.
Tauzin), my subcommittee chairman; and the ranking members on both the
full committee and the subcommittee. I urge all of my colleagues to
support this legislation.

[[Page H732]]

Mr. MARKEY. Mr. Chairman, I yield 4 minutes to the gentlewoman from
Missouri (Ms. Danner), who has given us great leadership on this issue.
Ms. DANNER. Mr. Chairman, first of all, let me express my
appreciation to the gentleman from Louisiana (Chairman Tauzin), the
gentleman from Massachusetts (Mr. Markey), ranking member; and the
gentleman from Illinois (Mr. Shimkus), the sponsor of the bill; for
bringing this very important legislation to the floor.
Over 100 years ago, Henry Wadsworth Longfellow said, and I quote,
``All things come around to him who will but wait.'' And I have waited,
sometimes impatiently, Mr. Chairman, for this legislation to come to
the floor.
Two years ago, I recognized the need for legislation to address the
problem we are discussing today, the problem faced by cellular
telephone users who require emergency assistance. In March of 1997, I
introduced legislation to accomplish that purpose. Now, 2 years later,
I am very pleased that my concept has come to the floor incorporated in
this very important bill we are discussing today.
As we all know, wireless technology has helped to simplify or maybe
in some instances complicate our lives, but one important attribute of
cellular telephones is that they greatly increase the ability of
individuals to quickly report accidents or other emergencies and help
speed the arrival of assistance.
Let me share a true story that demonstrates the current limits of
wireless telephone service, a tragedy that might have ended very
differently had this legislation been in place in 1997.
On Thanksgiving Day in 1997, a couple from Kansas was driving south
on U.S. 71 in southwestern Missouri. They observed a minivan that was
ahead of them being driven in an erratic fashion, weaving back and
forth at high rates of speed, crossing first the shoulder then the
center line.
Using the cellular telephone they had at their disposal, they began
dialing numbers. Unfortunately, having come from Kansas into our State
of Missouri, they were not aware that our cellular emergency number is
``star 55.'' I might mention that in Kansas they have two emergency
numbers, a different one if one is on the toll road.
This couple first tried to reach the Missouri Highway Patrol, but the
number they dialed brought forth a message saying that it was a toll
call, and they had to first give a credit card number if they wanted to
reach the highway patrol. Next, they dialed 911. This connected them to
an administrative number at the Joplin Police Department.
Unfortunately, that phone call was not answered.
Next, as they were approaching Neosho, they tried the Neosho Police
Department; and their first call was unanswered. They dialed again. The
second call was finally answered. However, by that time, unfortunately,
tragically, it was too late. For as the police of Neosho were beginning
to establish their roadblock, this minivan crossed the lane, hit an
oncoming vehicle in which a 22-year-old mother was killed and her 2-
year-old son. And I might say that the little baby boy was in a car
seat in the rear of the vehicle.
This tragic accident might have been avoided if the caller had been
able to reach the proper authority on the first attempt.
Mr. Chairman, I am pleased that the bill that we are voting upon and
hopefully will pass today includes, among many other important
provisions, the designation of 911 as the universal cellular assistance
number. Adoption of this bill will provide one of the many positive
utilizations of cellular telephones: their use in emergency situations.
Mr. Chairman, I urge my colleagues to vote in favor of this very
important public safety legislation which can and will literally save
lives.
Mr. TAUZIN. Mr. Chairman, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from
Florida (Mr. Stearns), my good colleague on the committee.
Mr. STEARNS. Mr. Chairman, I also rise in strong support of H.R. 438,
the Wireless Communications and Public Safety Act, which will begin
creating a national, seamless emergency system.
In today's world, a wireless telephone user cannot automatically,
believe it or not, dial 911 in order to reach emergency personnel.

{time} 1115

For instance, if you go into the State of Nevada, a citizen would
have to dial NHP, that is right, NHP. In Arkansas, a resident would
have to dial 55. And somebody in Virginia would have to call 77 or put
the star sign 77 or the pound sign 77 to get the 911.
So, for many of us, we felt that was not right. So this legislation
would require the FCC to designate 911 as the universal emergency
telephone number for both wireless and wireline calls.
The bill also would require the FCC to provide support to the States
in their development of their Statewide plans.
As the Chairman knows, the House passed similar legislation
overwhelmingly in the last Congress with my support and others. But the
previous bill contained a glaring provision that should not have been
included in the bill. The previous legislation unnecessarily co-opted
local decision-making authority regarding access to Federal sites in
deploying necessary equipment for the transmission of wireless
networks.
The previous bill wanted to establish an ability to fund the creation
of a seamless 911 system, but frankly, in my opinion, it was done at
the detriment of local officials playing a role at deciding the
location of wireless towers.
This mistake has been corrected in this version, which makes the bill
more palatable, especially for our colleagues in the Senate. Obviously,
it will likely pass the other body, I think, with ease. It is necessary
this morning and imperative to allow our local cities and counties to
play a primary role in tower siting issues that affect, of course,
their local communities.
Another important change in the bill is the provision to grant
liability protection to wireless providers. The liability protection
will establish a legal parity between wireline providers and wireless
companies that have to carry emergency calls on their systems and help
provide emergency services. Wireless providers should and will have
equal protection under the law as wireline providers do.
Finally, Mr. Chairman, H.R. 438 would also grant privacy protection
to wireless consumers by prohibiting carriers from releasing a user's
location information. Location information will only be given to
emergency personnel responding to an emergency call and will be given
to family members to notify them of the emergency situation. Location
information can also be distributed with the wireless consumers
consent.
Mr. Chairman, I appreciate all the work that the gentleman from
Louisiana (Chairman Tauzin) has done, the gentleman from Illinois (Mr.
Shimkus) has done, and also the gentleman from Virginia (Chairman
Bliley), and keep up the good work.
Mr. TAUZIN. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself as much time as I may
consume.
Mr. Chairman, I simply want to take the time to thank our staff; to,
first of all, thank the minority staff, Andy Levin and Colin Crowell,
who have been so helpful and instrumental in helping us get this bill
done; to thank the majority staff, Tricia Paoletta, Mike O'Rielly, Hugh
Halpern and Cliff Riccio, as well as my own staffer, Monica Azare, who
all contributed so much to moving this bill forward and I think
perfecting it.
I want to say, as we move this bill forward, that we should always, I
think, take time to say special thanks to both hardworking staffers on
both our personal staff and the committee staff because they toil very
often late at night and sometimes with not enough recognition for how
much of a contribution they make to this body as a whole. Our thanks go
out to all of them collectively.
Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. MARKEY. Mr. Chairman, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from
Texas (Mr. Green).
Mr. GREEN of Texas. Mr. Chairman, I thank my colleague, the gentleman
from Massachusetts, for allowing me to address the House and support
the bill.
The number of wireless subscribers in our country totals about 68
million, and that number continues to grow. Although being in my fourth
term in Congress, the first time I became aware

[[Page H733]]

of 911 was as a State Representative in Houston in the early 1980s, and
we created a 911 system in Harris County, Texas, due to the cooperation
from Harris County and the City of Houston. Then Texas went on to
create the 911 system around the State.
So it is great to see what we have learned in our individual States,
whether it be in Missouri with the gentlewoman from Missouri (Ms.
Danner) or any other State and now this idea has come to Washington,
which is the way it should be.
We have experimented with it on the local level and learned what
works and what does not. Now we can create an emergency wireless
network for our whole country.
H.R. 438 is the first step in increasing safety in our Nation. First
by designating 911 as the emergency number for not only wireless calls
but also wireline calls.
It has been said before during this debate that many States have
different emergency wireless numbers. In fact, I had the opportunity a
few weeks ago to drive from Houston to Washington, and going through
Mississippi, Alabama, Virginia, Tennessee, to see the different numbers
that each State has made this bill even more important.
H.R. 438 builds on the existing number of wireless networks and
subscribers to form an expansive emergency end-to-end wireless safety
network in the United States.
Again, I think it is so important that we are doing this today, and I
am a little disappointed that we did not have the funding mechanisms to
upgrade the State PSAPs and for the research and development for the
automatic crash notification system.
However, I also understand that the concerns about local control for
the siting of the towers, and for local zoning concerns. But, again,
coming from Houston where we are the largest city in the world, I
guess, without zoning, so it is not a big concern.
I also hope that the FCC will continue their public safety efforts,
because I think our chairman of our subcommittee noted a lot of this
could have been done by the regulatory agency, and hopefully they will
do that.
I also hope that the Federal Communications Commission will continue
with their public safety agenda. I have heard that only 6-7% of the
country is in compliance with the Phase 1 wireless location
requirement. I hope that the FCC will take the appropriate steps to
ensure that Phase I location identification technology is in place in a
timely fashion all around the country.
H.R. 438 will save lives. In order to save lives we have to make sure
that emergency services can quickly get out to the site of an accident.
That is the basic premise of this legislation to help save lives.
H.R. 438 is a great start in increasing safety in our country. It
will start the deployment of an E-911 system for our country. However,
in order to ensure the full deployment of an end to end wireless
communications emergency network, we all must work together on all
levels of government and between all agencies in our government.
I stand in support of H.R. 438 and encourage my colleagues to do the
same.
Mr. MARKEY. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
Mr. Chairman, again, this is a very important piece of legislation.
The FCC has the responsibility for ensuring that these location
technologies are built into wireless technologies over the next 2 or 3
or 4 years. We want to encourage the FCC to make progress on that
issue, meeting the deadlines which have been established. At that
point, we will have an ability to get help for everyone in the country
who has a wireless phone and at the same time protect their privacy.
That is a good balance. This is a good bill.
I want to congratulate the gentleman from Louisiana (Mr. Tauzin), the
gentleman from Virginia (Mr. Bliley) once again, and all the staff who
have worked on it, the litany of saints that the gentleman from
Louisiana (Mr. Tauzin) mentioned and everyone else that helped.
Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.
Mr. TAUZIN. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself as much time as I may
consume.
Mr. Chairman, let me again thank my friend, the gentleman from
Massachusetts (Mr. Markey). I am not sure if the House is aware of it,
but the gentleman from Massachusetts and I also, in the context of this
bill, engaged the Park Service in an interesting experiment to see how
fast the Park Service could authorize the installation of cellular
towers in Rock Creek Park, which is now an area of our country which is
considered a hole in the cellular system where people enjoying that
park cannot call 911 or any other number because cellular phones will
not work in it.
Almost a year ago, I guess, we had hearings, and the Park Service
promised us that within 90 days they would process an application. Rock
Creek Park is still waiting for the approval of an application. Our
latest hearings on this bill, they promised us again, in 75 days, they
would complete the application leading to the installation of cellular
service for Rock Creek Parkway and all the residents in the area as
well as those who enjoy Rock Creek Park.
It is a good example of problems we have across America, getting out
there and then having a safety net system like 911 available to help
them.
I want to thank my friend again for all of his excellent work on this
bill, for our cooperative efforts in issues like this. I regret the
bill does not move the process of cellular location towers forward. But
as the gentleman from Florida (Mr. Stearns) pointed out, it was a
necessary task to leave that language out of the bill in order to
ensure passage of this good legislation.
But let me say, as we conclude debate on this bill, that I hope the
communities of America who have passed moratoriums against additional
tower siting will rethink those moratoriums and will instead come up
with zoning plans that effectively, under their own discretion, get
towers located so that people not only can have cellular service
without losing signals as they move from one area to another but that
they can also have this incredibly important safety system, the E-911
system, available for them and their family when they are in desperate
need of emergency help.
Mr. Chairman, as I said, this is a great way for us to start this
session. I think we have demonstrated the way we can work cooperatively
in a bipartisan fashion to do something good for our country.
This is a good start because we have focused on something that is
critically important to every American, every American who is out there
driving our highways, riding the bike paths or running on those bike
paths or enjoying the great outdoors in our parks and wonderful areas
such as we have along I-10 in south Louisiana that my friend, the
gentleman from Texas (Mr. Green), drove on his way up here; that they
will know, when something goes wrong, there is a number they can call,
and they can get help. Mr. Chairman, this is good legislation.
Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas. Mr. Chairman, I thank you for giving me the
opportunity to speak on behalf of this bill, which further standardizes
our emergency infrastructure around the country.
One of the great benefits of wireless technology, and specifically,
cellular phones, is the improvement of safety on the roadways. Whereas
in past years, people who had car trouble or had become involved in a
traffic accident had to rely on passers-by to notify the proper
authorities, now, cellular phone users can dial for help from nearly
everywhere in the United States.
In fact, many purchasers of cellular phones do so with the sole
intention of using it as a safety device--much like a fire
extinguisher. Many cellular service providers have elaborated on that
concept by offering cellular calling plans that cost less than
``landlines,'' based on the fact that they will only be used on great
occasion. Still others have marketed their products in a way that
promotes the use of cellular phones as measure of security.
This bill enhances the safety value of wireless phones by
standardizing the phone number ``911'' for exclusive use by emergency
agencies. Although this is currently standardized on land-based phone
systems, this is not the case with cellular systems. This will remedy
that problem so that there is no confusion for consumers who are in
need of assistance. And in a time of emergency--one second of confusion
could mean the difference between life and death.
However, before I fully endorse this bill, I would like to raise an
area of concern, for my district and for the city of Houston. Houston
recently adopted a new phone number designation for nonemergency phone
calls--``311''. That number was designated in order to offload
nonemergency phone calls from 911, thereby freeing up our scarce
emergency resources.

[[Page H734]]

One important aspect of 311 is educating the public that it should be
used in place of 911 in nonemergency situations. And while I believe
that this bill and the 311 program will both prove themselves to be
valuable and effective programs, I hope that this bill will not
adversely affect the implementation of 311.
Having said that, I would hope that the Conference Committee will
take a close look at the issue of 311, and if any problems are
foreseen, that they would place clarifying language in the Conference
Committee Report so that there will be some guidance for local and
State legislators as well as the courts on this matter.
I look forward to seeing H.R. 438 enacted into law, and encourage my
colleagues to support it, along with other efforts at enhancing the
safety of this country for our citizens.
Mr. BLILEY. Mr. Chairman, at the outset, let me thank the sponsor of
H.R. 438, the gentleman from Illinois, Mr. Shimkus, for his hard work
on this issue. Let me also thank the subcommittee chair, Mr. Tauzin,
for his leadership on this important issue over the last Congress and
this Congress as well.
As I said in December when I outlined the priorities for the Commerce
Committee this Congress, we intent to move telecommunications
legislation that promotes consumers access to emergency personnel in
times of need and promotes wireless communications privacy. Today, we
take the first step by bringing to the floor H.R. 438, a bill to
solidify the use of 911 as the emergency telephone number for consumers
to dial in emergency situations and other purposes. Tomorrow, the House
will consider H.R. 514, a bill to strengthen the privacy protections
afforded wireless communications consumers. These two bills complement
each other by improving and facilitating consumer utilization of
wireless communications. They also have important public interest
benefits--improving personal safety and privacy protections. I am
hopeful that the other body will consider the hard work of the House
when it receives these two bills and will quickly take similar action.
While we couldn't quite enact these bills into law last Congress, these
bills deserve the attention of the other body of this Congress.
As many Members of the House already know, the growth rate in
wireless telephone subscribers has been phenomenal. The Cellular
Telecommunications Industry Association indicates that there are over
68 million wireless subscribers in the United States today and the
demand for wireless services continues to grow. One reason for this
significant growth is that more and more subscribers are purchasing
wireless telephones for safety.
Whether traveling with our children or grandchildren, or driving on
unfamiliar roads, an increasing number of Americans are comforted by
knowing that in the case of an emergency they could make a telephone
call to reach a close relative or police. Far too often, however, that
critical call cannot go through. In order for a successful emergency
call to be made, wireless communications users need to know what number
to dial to reach emergency personnel. And the problem doesn't lie just
with wireless communications. In some parts of our Nation, the
seemingly ubiquitous telephone number 911 is not the number used by the
local community for emergencies. This situation causes consumer
confusion that can delay or prevent emergency personnel from reaching
people in need. There are approximately 15 emergency numbers
used around the country for wireless calls. These range from 911, to
*55, #77, the acronym of the State highway police, to the local sheriff
or police department. Take a moment to image trying to get emergency
help on an interstate highway when you are not certain of your precise
location, and then stumbling through the telephone number possibilities
while a loved one suffers. Representative Danner testified at a hearing
before the Subcommittee on Telecommunications, Trade, and Consumer
Protection last year that to drive through the six States from her
district in Missouri to Washington, DC, a driver would have to know 5
different emergency wireless numbers.

H.R. 438 will resolve this problem once and for all. The bill
designates 911 as the universal emergency telephone number. When a
consumer picks up a telephone or pulls out a pocket phone they can be
confident that dialing 911 will reach proper emergency personnel. This
simple concept will have a significant impact on overall public safety
and consumer welfare.
H.R. 438 will require the Federal Communications Commission to
provide technical support to the States and encourage the development
of statewide plans to develop end-to-end emergency communications
network, by working both with the States and interested parties in the
private sector.
H.R. 438 provides liability parity between wireline and wireless
carriers. After examining the issue closely, the Committee felt
strongly that wireless carriers should be afforded every legal
protection provided a wireline carrier in a given State in order to
provide the emergency communications in need. The bill allows States to
``opt-out'' of the liability parity scheme if it develops its own
protections within a two year period. This will provide adequate time
for States to take action if they so choose but will also provide a
Federal standard to promote common legal treatment of wireless
carriers.
The Committee has been told by a small minority that liability
protections for wireless carriers are inappropriate and the other body
will eliminate them during the process. I hope that this is not the
case. Anything that promotes public safety should not be dropped merely
because it is opposed by the powerful lobby groups. Wireless carriers
have carefully made the case as to why liability parity is justified in
this limited instance and how public safety will be enhanced if it is
enacted. This provision should remain in any companion bill.
H.R. 438 will also provide privacy protections for consumers in the
use of subscriber call location information. Call location information
is a technology that will help locate consumers dialing from a wireless
telephone. In many instances today, wireless users dial the appropriate
telephone number but are unable to describe exactly where they are.
Technology that is available today and newer technologies in the
experimental stages are being deployed to help public service answering
points (PSAP's) locate the exact position of a wireless call without
requiring consumer input. This technology already exists in a wireline
world. Its use in a wireless world will help speed the deployment of
personnel in emergency situations.
As call location information technologies are deployed, it is equally
important that we ensure that this information is treated
confidentially. It is not appropriate to let government or commercial
parties collect such information or keep tabs on the exact location of
individual subscribers. H.R. 438 will ensure that such call location
information is not disclosed without the authorization of the user,
except in emergency situations, and only to specific personnel.
Lastly, the bill will clarify the privacy protections of current law
to ensure that emergency support services, such as those provided by
information or database management service providers, can receive
subscriber list information from telecommunications carriers in a
timely, unbundled and reasonable manner. it is important that emergency
support service providers have accurate and timely information to
ensure that the service they offer the PSAP is the best that can be
done. Emergency support service providers should not have to pay for
information they don't need and should not be forced to pay exorbitant
rates or wait for such information. The bill provides a balanced
requirement to alleviate concerns about obtaining such information from
telecommunications companies by emergency support service providers.
Before closing, I want to thank my good friend, the chairman of the
Committee on the Judiciary, Mr. Hyde, for his assistance in moving this
legislation forward. With his understanding, we were able to resolve a
last-minute jurisdictional issue between his committee and the
Committee on Commerce. Without objection, at this point in the Record,
I want to insert an exchange of letters between the committees on this
legislation.
I urge all of my colleagues to support H.R. 438.

House of Representatives,

Committee on the Judiciary,

Washington, DC, February 23, 1999.
Hon. Tom Bliley,
Chairman, Committee on Commerce, House of Representatives,
Washington, DC.
Dear Mr. Chairman: I am writing you regarding H.R. 438, the
``Wireless Communications and Public Safety Act of 1999,''
legislation that has been ordered reported by the Committee
on Commerce. As ordered reported, H.R. 438 contains language
within the Rule X jurisdiction of the Committee on the
Judiciary.
Section 4 of H.R. 438 governs the legal liability under
Federal and state law of wireless carriers and wireless 911
service users. As you know, matters relating to immunity and
limitations on liability fall within the jurisdiction of this
committee.
I am, however, willing to forgo a sequential referral of
this bill with the understanding that the Commerce Committee
accedes to this committee's jurisdictional claim on this
matter. We will, of course, insist that the Speaker name
conferees from this committee on section 4 of this bill and
any similar Senate provision.
Sincerely,
Henry J. Hyde,
Chairman.
____

House of Representatives,

Committee on Commerce,

Washington, DC, February 23, 1999.
Hon. Henry Hyde,
Chairman, Committee on the Judiciary, House of
Representatives, Rayburn House Office Building,
Washington, DC.
Dear Henry: Thank you for your letter regarding your
Committee's jurisdictional interest in H.R. 438, the Wireless
Communications and Public Safety Act of 1999.

[[Page H735]]

I acknowledge your committee's jurisdiction over section 4
of this legislation and appreciate your cooperation in moving
the bill to the House floor expeditiously. I agree that your
decision to forgo further action on the bill will not
prejudice the Judiciary Committee with respect to its
jurisdictional prerogatives on this or similar provisions,
and will support your request for conferees on those
provisions within the Committee on the Judiciary's
jurisdiction should they be the subject of a House-Senate
conference. I will also include a copy of your letter and
this response in the Congressional Record when the
legislation is considered by the House.
Thank you again for your cooperation.
Sincerely,
Tom Bliley,
Chairman.
____

Mr. TAUZIN. Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.
The CHAIRMAN pro tempore (Mr. Linder). All time for general debate
has expired.
The amendment in the nature of a substitute printed in the bill shall
be considered by sections as an original bill for the purpose of
amendment and, pursuant to the rule, each section is considered read.
During consideration of the bill for amendment, the Chair may accord
priority in recognition to a Member offering an amendment that he has
printed in the designated place in the Congressional Record. Those
amendments will be considered read.
The Chairman of the Committee of the Whole may postpone a request for
a recorded vote on any amendment and may reduce to a minimum of 5
minutes the time for voting on any postponed question that immediately
follows another vote, provided that the time for voting on the first
question shall be a minimum of 15 minutes.
The Clerk will designate section 1.
The text of section 1 is as follows:

Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of
the United States of America in Congress assembled,

SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

This Act may be cited as the ``Wireless Communications and
Public Safety Act of 1999''.

The CHAIRMAN pro tempore. Are there any amendments to section 1?
The Clerk will designate section 2.
The text of section 2 is as follows:

SEC. 2. FINDINGS AND PURPOSE.

(a) Findings.--The Congress finds that--
(1) the establishment and maintenance of an end-to-end
emergency communications infrastructure among members of the
public, local public safety, fire service, and law
enforcement officials, emergency dispatch providers, and
hospital emergency and trauma care facilities will reduce
response times for the delivery of emergency care, assist in
delivering appropriate care, and thereby prevent fatalities,
substantially reduce the severity and extent of injuries,
reduce time lost from work, and save thousands of lives and
billions of dollars in health care costs;
(2) the rapid, efficient deployment of emergency
telecommunications service requires statewide coordination of
the efforts of local public safety, fire service, and law
enforcement officials, and emergency dispatch providers, and
the designation of 911 as the number to call in emergencies
throughout the Nation;
(3) improved public safety remains an important public
health objective of Federal, State, and local governments and
substantially facilitates interstate and foreign commerce;
(4) the benefits of wireless communications in emergencies
will be enhanced by the development of state-wide plans to
coordinate the efforts of local public safety, fire service,
and law enforcement officials, emergency dispatch providers,
emergency medical service providers on end-to-end emergency
communications infrastructures; and
(5) the construction and operation of seamless, ubiquitous,
and reliable wireless telecommunications systems promote
public safety and provide immediate and critical
communications links among members of the public, emergency
medical service providers and emergency dispatch providers,
public safety, fire service and law enforcement officials,
and hospital emergency and trauma care facilities.
(b) Purpose.--The purpose of this Act is to encourage and
facilitate the prompt deployment throughout the United States
of a seamless, ubiquitous, and reliable end-to-end
infrastructure for communications, including wireless
communications, to meet the Nation's public safety and other
communications needs.

The CHAIRMAN pro tempore. Are there amendments to section 2?
The Clerk will designate section 3.
The text of section 3 is as follows:

SEC. 3. UNIVERSAL EMERGENCY TELEPHONE NUMBER.

(a) Establishment of Universal Service Emergency Telephone
Number.--Section 251(e) of the Communications Act of 1934 (47
U.S.C. 251(e)) is amended by adding at the end the following
new paragraph:
``(3) Universal emergency telephone number.--The Commission
and any agency or entity to which the Commission has
delegated authority under this subsection shall designate 911
as the universal emergency telephone number within the United
States for reporting an emergency to appropriate authorities
and requesting assistance. Such designation shall apply to
both wireline and wireless telephone service. In making such
designation, the Commission (and any such agency or entity)
shall provide appropriate transition periods for areas in
which 911 is not in use as an emergency telephone number on
the date of enactment of the Wireless Communications and
Public Safety Act of 1999.''.
(b) Technical Support.--The Federal Communications
Commission shall provide technical support to States to
support and encourage the development of statewide plans for
the deployment and functioning of a comprehensive end-to-end
emergency communications infrastructure, including enhanced
wireless 911 service, on a coordinated statewide basis. In
supporting and encouraging such deployment and functioning,
the Commission shall consult and cooperate with State and
local officials responsible for emergency services and public
safety, the telecommunications industry (specifically
including the cellular and other wireless telecommunications
service providers), the motor vehicle manufacturing industry,
emergency medical service providers and emergency dispatch
providers, special 911 districts, public safety, fire service
and law enforcement officials, consumer groups, and hospital
emergency and trauma care personnel (including emergency
physicians, trauma surgeons, and nurses).

The CHAIRMAN pro tempore. Are there any amendments to section 3?
The Clerk will designate section 4.
The text of section 4 is as follows:

SEC. 4. PARITY OF PROTECTION FOR PROVISION OR USE OF WIRELESS
SERVICE.

(a) Provider Parity.--A wireless carrier, and its officers,
directors, employees, vendors, and agents, shall have
immunity or other protection from liability of a scope and
extent that is not less than the scope and extent of immunity
or other protection from liability in a particular
jurisdiction that a local exchange company, and its officers,
directors, employees, vendors, or agents, have under Federal
and State law applicable in such jurisdiction with respect to
wireline services, including in connection with an act or
omission involving--
(1) development, design, installation, operation,
maintenance, performance, or provision of wireless service;
(2) transmission errors, failures, network outages, or
other technical difficulties that may arise in the course of
transmitting or handling emergency calls or providing
emergency services (including wireless 911 service); and
(3) release to a PSAP, emergency medical service provider
or emergency dispatch provider, public safety, fire service
or law enforcement official, or hospital emergency or trauma
care facility of subscriber information related to emergency
calls or emergency services involving use of wireless
services.
(b) User Parity.--A person using wireless 911 service shall
have immunity or other protection from liability in a
particular jurisdiction of a scope and extent that is not
less than the scope and extent of immunity or other
protection from liability under Federal or State law
applicable in such jurisdiction in similar circumstances of a
person using 911 service that is not wireless.
(c) Exception for State Legislative Action.--The immunity
or other protection from liability required by subsection
(a)(1) shall not apply in any State that, prior to the
expiration of 2 years after the date of enactment of this
Act, enacts a statute that specifically refers to this
section and establishes a different standard of immunity or
other protection from liability with respect to an act or
omission involving development, design, installation,
operation, maintenance, performance, or provision of wireless
service (other than wireless 911 service). The enactment of
such a State statute shall not affect the immunity or other
protection from liability required by such subsection (a)(1)
with respect to acts or omissions occurring before the date
of enactment of such State statute.

The CHAIRMAN pro tempore. Are there any amendments to section 4?
The Clerk will designate section 5.
The text of section 5 is as follows:

SEC. 5. AUTHORITY TO PROVIDE CUSTOMER INFORMATION.

Section 222 of the Communications Act of 1934 (47 U.S.C.
222) is amended--
(1) in subsection (d)--
(A) by striking ``or'' at the end of paragraph (2);
(B) by striking the period at the end of paragraph (3) and
inserting a semicolon;
(C) by adding at the end the following new paragraphs:
``(4) to provide call location information concerning the
user of a commercial mobile service (as such term is defined
in section 332(d))--
``(A) to a public safety answering point, emergency medical
service provider or emergency dispatch provider, public
safety, fire service, or law enforcement official, or
hospital emergency or trauma care facility, in order to
respond to the user's call for emergency services;
``(B) to inform the user's legal guardian or members of the
user's immediate family of the user's location in an
emergency situation that involves the risk of death or
serious physical harm; or
``(C) to providers of information or database management
services solely for purposes of assisting in the delivery of
emergency services in response to an emergency; or
``(5) to transmit automatic crash notification information
as part of the operation of an automatic crash notification
system.'';
(2) by redesignating subsection (f) as subsection (h) and
by inserting before such subsection the following new
subsections:
``(f) Authority To Use Wireless Location Information.--For
purposes of subsection

[[Page H736]]

(c)(1), without the express prior authorization of the
customer, a customer shall not be considered to have approved
the use or disclosure of or access to--
``(1) call location information concerning the user of a
commercial mobile service (as such term is defined in section
332(d)), other than in accordance with subsection (d)(4); or
``(2) automatic crash notification information to any
person other than for use in the operation of an automatic
crash notification system.
``(g) Subscriber Listed and Unlisted Information for
Emergency Services.--Notwithstanding subsections (b), (c),
and (d), a telecommunications carrier that provides telephone
exchange service shall provide information described in
subsection (h)(3)(A) (including information pertaining to
subscribers whose information is unlisted or unpublished)
that is in its possession or control (including information
pertaining to subscribers of other carriers) on a timely and
unbundled basis, under nondiscriminatory and reasonable
rates, terms, and conditions to providers of emergency
services, and providers of emergency support services, solely
for purposes of delivering or assisting in the delivery of
emergency services.'';
(3) in subsection (h)(1)(A) (as redesignated by paragraph
(2)), by inserting ``location,'' after ``destination,''; and
(4) in such subsection (h), by adding at the end the
following new paragraphs:
``(4) Public safety answering point.--The term `public
safety answering point' means a facility that has been
designated to receive emergency calls and route them to
emergency service personnel.
``(5) Emergency services.--The term `emergency services'
means 911 emergency services and emergency notification
services.
``(6) Emergency notification services.--The term `emergency
notification services' means services that notify the public
of an emergency.
``(7) Emergency support services.--The term `emergency
support services' means information or data base management
services used in support of emergency services.''.

The CHAIRMAN pro tempore. Are there any amendments to section 5?
The Clerk will designate section 6.
The text of section 6 is as follows:

SEC. 6. DEFINITIONS.

As used in this Act:
(1) The term ``State'' means any of the several States, the
District of Columbia, or any territory or possession of the
United States.
(2) The term ``public safety answering point'' or ``PSAP''
means a facility that has been designated to receive
emergency calls and route them to emergency service
personnel.
(3) The term ``wireless carrier'' means a provider of
commercial mobile services or any other radio communications
service that the Federal Communications Commission requires
to provide wireless emergency service.
(4) The term ``enhanced wireless 911 service'' means any
enhanced 911 service so designated by the Federal
Communications Commission in the proceeding entitled
``Revision of the Commission's Rules to Ensure Compatibility
with Enhanced 911 Emergency Calling Systems'' (CC Docket No.
94-102; RM-8143), or any successor proceeding.
(5) The term ``wireless 911 service'' means any 911 service
provided by a wireless carrier, including enhanced wireless
911 service.

The CHAIRMAN pro tempore. Are there any amendments to section 6?
Are there any amendments to the bill?
If not, the question is on the committee amendment in the nature of a
substitute.
The committee amendment in the nature of a substitute was agreed to.
The CHAIRMAN pro tempore. Under the rule, the Committee rises.
Accordingly, the Committee rose; and the Speaker pro tempore (Mr.
Horn) having assumed the chair, Mr. Linder, Chairman pro tempore of the
Committee of the Whole House on the State of the Union, reported that
that Committee, having had under consideration the bill (H.R. 438) to
promote and enhance public safety through use of 911 as the universal
emergency assistance number, and for other purposes, pursuant to House
Resolution 76, he reported the bill back to the House with an amendment
adopted by the Committee of the Whole.
The CHAIRMAN pro tempore. Under the rule, the previous question is
ordered.
The question is on the committee amendment in the nature of a
substitute.
The committee amendment in the nature of a substitute was agreed to.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The question is on the engrossment and third
reading of the bill.
The bill was ordered to be engrossed and read a third time, and was
read the third time.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The question is on the passage of the bill.
The question was taken, and the Speaker pro tempore announced the
ayes appeared to have it.
Mr. TAUZIN. Mr. Speaker, on that, I demand the yeas and nays.
The yeas and nays were ordered.
The vote was taken by electronic device, and there were--yeas 415,
nays 2, not voting 16, as follows:

[Roll No. 24]

YEAS--415

Abercrombie
Ackerman
Aderholt
Allen
Andrews
Archer
Armey
Bachus
Baird
Baker
Baldacci
Baldwin
Ballenger
Barcia
Barr
Barrett (NE)
Barrett (WI)
Bartlett
Barton
Bass
Bateman
Becerra
Bentsen
Bereuter
Berkley
Berman
Berry
Biggert
Bilbray
Bilirakis
Bishop
Blagojevich
Bliley
Blumenauer
Blunt
Boehlert
Boehner
Bonilla
Bonior
Bono
Borski
Boswell
Boucher
Boyd
Brady (PA)
Brown (CA)
Brown (FL)
Brown (OH)
Bryant
Burr
Burton
Buyer
Callahan
Calvert
Camp
Campbell
Canady
Cannon
Capuano
Cardin
Carson
Castle
Chabot
Chambliss
Clay
Clayton
Clement
Clyburn
Coble
Coburn
Collins
Combest
Condit
Conyers
Cook
Cooksey
Costello
Cox
Coyne
Cramer
Crane
Crowley
Cubin
Cummings
Cunningham
Danner
Davis (FL)
Davis (VA)
Deal
DeFazio
DeGette
Delahunt
DeLauro
DeLay
DeMint
Deutsch
Diaz-Balart
Dickey
Dicks
Dingell
Dixon
Doggett
Dooley
Doolittle
Doyle
Dreier
Duncan
Dunn
Edwards
Ehlers
Ehrlich
Emerson
English
Eshoo
Etheridge
Evans
Everett
Ewing
Farr
Fattah
Filner
Fletcher
Foley
Forbes
Ford
Fossella
Fowler
Frank (MA)
Franks (NJ)
Frelinghuysen
Frost
Gallegly
Gejdenson
Gekas
Gephardt
Gibbons
Gilchrest
Gillmor
Gilman
Gonzalez
Goode
Goodlatte
Goodling
Gordon
Goss
Graham
Granger
Green (TX)
Green (WI)
Greenwood
Gutierrez
Gutknecht
Hall (OH)
Hall (TX)
Hansen
Hastings (FL)
Hastings (WA)
Hayes
Hayworth
Hefley
Herger
Hill (MT)
Hilleary
Hilliard
Hinojosa
Hobson
Hoeffel
Hoekstra
Holden
Holt
Hooley
Horn
Hostettler
Houghton
Hoyer
Hulshof
Hunter
Hutchinson
Hyde
Inslee
Istook
Jackson (IL)
Jackson-Lee (TX)
Jefferson
Jenkins
John
Johnson (CT)
Johnson, E. B.
Johnson, Sam
Jones (NC)
Jones (OH)
Kanjorski
Kaptur
Kasich
Kelly
Kildee
Kilpatrick
Kind (WI)
King (NY)
Kingston
Kleczka
Klink
Knollenberg
Kolbe
Kucinich
Kuykendall
LaFalce
LaHood
Lampson
Lantos
Largent
Larson
Latham
LaTourette
Lazio
Leach
Lee
Levin
Lewis (CA)
Lewis (GA)
Lewis (KY)
Linder
Lipinski
LoBiondo
Lofgren
Lowey
Lucas (KY)
Lucas (OK)
Luther
Maloney (CT)
Maloney (NY)
Manzullo
Markey
Martinez
Mascara
Matsui
McCarthy (MO)
McCarthy (NY)
McCollum
McCrery
McDermott
McGovern
McHugh
McIntosh
McIntyre
McKeon
McKinney
McNulty
Meehan
Meek (FL)
Meeks (NY)
Menendez
Metcalf
Mica
Millender-McDonald
Miller (FL)
Miller, Gary
Miller, George
Minge
Mink
Moakley
Mollohan
Moore
Moran (KS)
Moran (VA)
Morella
Murtha
Myrick
Nadler
Napolitano
Nethercutt
Ney
Northup
Norwood
Nussle
Oberstar
Obey
Olver
Ortiz
Ose
Oxley
Packard
Pallone
Pascrell
Pastor
Payne
Pease
Pelosi
Peterson (MN)
Peterson (PA)
Petri
Phelps
Pickett
Pitts
Pombo
Pomeroy
Porter
Portman
Price (NC)
Pryce (OH)
Quinn
Radanovich
Rahall
Ramstad
Rangel
Regula
Reynolds
Riley
Rivers
Rodriguez
Roemer
Rogan
Rogers
Rohrabacher
Ros-Lehtinen
Rothman
Roukema
Roybal-Allard
Royce
Ryan (WI)
Ryun (KS)
Sabo
Salmon
Sanchez
Sandlin
Sanford
Sawyer
Saxton
Scarborough
Schaffer
Schakowsky
Scott
Sensenbrenner
Serrano
Sessions
Shadegg
Shaw
Shays
Sherman
Sherwood
Shimkus
Shows
Shuster
Simpson
Sisisky
Skeen
Skelton
Slaughter
Smith (MI)
Smith (NJ)
Smith (TX)
Smith (WA)
Snyder
Souder
Spence
Spratt
Stabenow
Stark
Stearns
Stenholm
Strickland
Stump
Stupak
Sununu
Sweeney
Talent
Tancredo
Tanner
Tauscher
Tauzin
Taylor (MS)
Taylor (NC)
Terry
Thomas
Thompson (CA)
Thompson (MS)
Thornberry
Thune
Thurman
Tiahrt
Tierney
Toomey
Towns
Traficant
Turner
Udall (CO)
Udall (NM)
Upton
Velazquez
Vento
Visclosky
Walden
Walsh
Wamp
Waters
Watkins
Watt (NC)
Watts (OK)
Waxman
Weiner
Weldon (FL)
Weldon (PA)
Weller
Wexler
Weygand
Whitfield
Wicker
Wilson
Wise
Wolf
Woolsey
Wu
Wynn
Young (AK)
Young (FL)

[[Page H737]]

NAYS--2

Chenoweth
Paul

NOT VOTING--16

Brady (TX)
Capps
Davis (IL)
Engel
Ganske
Hill (IN)
Hinchey
Kennedy
Livingston
McInnis
Neal
Owens
Pickering
Reyes
Rush
Sanders

{time} 1151

So the bill was passed.
The result of the vote was announced as above recorded.
A motion to reconsider was laid on the table.
Stated for:
Mr. HILL of Indiana. Mr. Speaker, during rollcall vote No. 24 on H.R.
438, I was unavoidably detained. Had I been present, I would have voted
``yes.''
Mr. McINNIS. Mr. Speaker, due to business in Colorado, I will be
unable to vote on the following bill, H.R. 438. Had I been able to
vote, I would have voted ``yea.''

____________________