[Federal Register Volume 64, Number 249 (Wednesday, December 29, 1999)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 72951-72956]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 99-33391]


=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION

47 CFR Part 20

[CC Docket No. 94-102; FCC 99-352]


Wireless Radio Services; Compatibility With Enhanced 911 
Emergency Calling Systems

AGENCY: Federal Communications Commission.

ACTION: Final rule; petitions for reconsideration.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: In this document the Commission decides various issues raised 
in petitions for reconsideration and clarification of the wireless 
Enhanced 911 (E911) rules that request the removal of ambiguities in 
the rules and the adoption of modifications to enhance Phase I 
implementation. Resolution of these issues should address delays in 
implementation of Phase I service. The Commission also resolves such 
issues in order to ensure implementation of Phase II and avoid 
potential delays in the provision of vital Phase II services. Finally, 
the Commission takes action to overcome obstacles in Commercial Mobile 
Radio Service carriers' ability to comply with the schedule and 
requirements that apply to their implementation of E911, consistent 
with the Commission's goals in adopting the framework for E911.

DATES: Effective April 27, 2000. Public comment on the information 
collection are due February 28, 2000, and comments by the Office of 
Management and Budget are due April 27, 2000.

ADDRESSES: A copy of any comments on the information collection 
contained herein should be submitted to Judy Boley, Federal 
Communications Commission, Room 1-C804, 445 12th Street, SW, 
Washington, D.C. 20554, or via the Internet to [email protected].

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Barbara Reideler, 202-418-1310. For 
further information concerning the information collection contained in 
this Report and Order, contact Judy Boley, Federal Communications 
Commission, 202-418-0214, or via the Internet at [email protected].

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This is a summary of the Commission's Second 
Memorandum Opinion and Order (Second MO&O) in CC Docket No. 94-102; FCC 
99-352, adopted November 18, 1999, and released December 8, 1999. The 
complete text of this Second MO&O is available for inspection and 
copying during normal business hours in the FCC Reference Information 
Center, Courtyard Level, 445 12th Street, S.W., Washington, DC, and 
also may be purchased from the Commission's copy contractor, 
International Transcription Services (ITS, Inc.), CY-B400, 445 12th 
Street, S.W., Washington, DC.

Synopsis of the Second Memorandum Opinion and Order

    1. In this Second Memorandum Opinion and Order (Second MO&O), the 
Commission takes steps to hasten the introduction and rollout of 
wireless Enhanced 911 (E911) services that were required by the 
Commission when it adopted E911 rules in the Report and Order. (61 FR 
40348, August 2, 1996.) The Commission seeks to accelerate 
implementation of this important service in order to enable wireless 
callers to obtain emergency assistance more rapidly and efficiently 
through the transmission of certain enhanced information that assists 
in locating the caller. Wireless subscribership continues to grow 
rapidly and wireless phones are used increasingly to place 911 calls in 
emergency situations. The Commission adopted E911 rules in accordance 
with an agreement between the wireless industry and State and local 911 
officials to promote wireless technologies and transmissions that 
provide important information to enable the 911 Public Safety Answering 
Point (PSAP) to promptly locate the 911 caller. The wireless E911 
service was established to ensure that wireless phones automatically 
transmit the same vital data about a 911 caller's location as wireline 
phones.
    2. The Commission reaffirmed its commitment to the goals for a 
wireless E911 service in the E911 First Reconsideration Order. (63 FR 
02631, January 16, 1998) Accordingly, covered Commercial Mobile Radio 
Service (CMRS) carriers were expected to achieve transmission of the 
enhanced

[[Page 72952]]

location information in two phases, with Phase I to begin April 1, 
1998. The Commission subsequently received petitions from BellSouth 
Corporation (BellSouth) and the Cellular Telecommunications Industry 
Association (CTIA) for further reconsideration and for clarification of 
the E911 rules that request the removal of ambiguities in the rules and 
the adoption of modifications to enhance Phase I implementation. In 
this Second MO&O, the Commission decides the various issues raised in 
the petitions for reconsideration and clarification. Resolution of 
these issues should address delays being experienced in implementation 
of Phase I service. In addition, the Commission resolves such issues in 
order to ensure implementation of Phase II and avoid potential delays 
in the provision of vital Phase II services. The Commission also takes 
action to overcome obstacles in CMRS carriers' ability to comply with 
the schedule and requirements that apply to their implementation of 
E911, consistent with the Commission's goals in adopting the framework 
for E911.
    3. First, the E911 rules are revised to remove the prerequisite 
that a cost recovery mechanism for carriers be in place before the CMRS 
carrier is obligated to provide E911 service in response to a valid 
PSAP service request. The Commission agrees with CTIA that modification 
of the rule is necessary to remove ambiguities that are causing delays 
in Phase I implementation and that, more significantly, may delay 
implementation of Phase II. The Commission declines to modify the rule, 
as suggested by commenters, by imposing certain requirements on the 
States to adopt formal mechanisms for the recovery of carrier costs and 
to adhere to certain definitions and procedures as the means to clarify 
the rule and facilitate implementation. Instead, the Commission finds 
that the disputes and delays that have arisen in the consideration and 
implementation of cost recovery mechanisms for carrier costs, in some 
instances, have become, and will continue to be, significant and 
unnecessary impediments to Phase I implementation. Moreover, the 
Commission finds that the disputes and delays also will be a problem in 
the implementation of Phase II.
    4. Although a number of States have decided that separate E911 cost 
recovery mechanisms are the best way to recover carriers' costs of 
implementing E911, such mechanisms are not necessary to permit CMRS 
carriers, whose rates are not regulated, to recover their costs. As a 
result, the Commission sees no need to make the obligations of carriers 
to implement E911 service contingent on the resolution of carrier cost 
recovery issues. However, in removing the condition that a cost 
recovery mechanism for carriers' costs be in place before the carrier 
is obligated to provide E911 service, the Commission does not intend to 
disturb the actions of States or localities that already have adopted 
such mechanisms or to discourage them from deciding that cost recovery 
or sharing mechanisms that cover carrier costs are an effective way of 
expediting wireless E911 for their citizens, especially in rural areas.
    5. At the same time, adequate funding of PSAPs to enable them to 
deploy the upgrades to use wireless E911 location information remains 
essential to implementation. State and local authorities have to 
provide their local public safety officials with the means needed to 
request and use wireless E911 location information. Otherwise, PSAPs 
will be unable to dispatch emergency services to wireless 911 callers 
in life-threatening situations as quickly as possible. In these 
circumstances, the Commission modifies the rule to retain a cost 
recovery requirement for recovery of the PSAP's costs of E911 service. 
Thus, while the Commission no longer conditions a carrier's obligation 
on a cost recovery mechanism to be in place for the carrier's costs, 
the obligation continues to be conditioned upon the carrier receiving a 
valid request from the PSAP that is capable of receiving and utilizing 
the data elements associated with the service. Inasmuch as those 
capabilities often were achieved through mechanisms that included 
carrier costs, the Commission modifies that condition to ensure that 
States or localities continue to address the needs of the PSAPs to be 
upgraded for wireless E911.
    6. Accordingly, before a carrier is required to provide E911 
services pursuant to a PSAP request, the PSAP must have the means of 
covering its costs of receiving and utilizing the E911 information to 
ensure the request is valid. As modified, the carrier's E911 service 
obligation is triggered when the carrier receives a valid request from 
a PSAP that is capable of receiving and utilizing the data elements 
associated with the service, and a mechanism for recovering the PSAP's 
cost of the E911 service is in place. The Commission does not mandate 
any specific State action, nor do we define the nature and extent of 
any funding mechanism or other approach that may achieve the necessary 
technology and service capabilities that enable the PSAP to make a 
valid service request.
    7. Second, the Commission agrees with CTIA that disputes between 
CMRS carriers and PSAPs on the choice of the transmission means and 
related technologies also have caused delays in Phase I implementation. 
The Commission declines, however, to establish in the E911 rules that 
the carriers, and not the PSAP, should have the final choice as the 
means to overcome the delays. Instead, given our elimination of a cost 
recovery mechanism for carriers as a prerequisite for E911 
implementation, the Commission concludes that negotiation between the 
parties, presumptively based on the alternative methods adopted in the 
official standard, is the best means in most instances to ensure an 
expeditious selection of transmission method that meets the individual 
requirements of the PSAP and carrier in each situation. However, in the 
event that an impasse arises, Commission staff will be available to 
help resolve these disagreements on an expedited basis, based on 
consideration of a number of specific factors. These include the 
additional costs of the two methodologies to the PSAP and the wireless 
carrier, whether the carrier is paying for its own E911 implementation 
costs or receiving funding from a State-sponsored cost recovery 
mechanism, the technical configuration of the PSAP's existing E911 
system, and the ability of the transmission technology to accommodate 
Phase II of wireless E911 and other planned changes in the E911 system.
    8. Third, we find that this Commission and the relevant State 
public service commissions can address the issues concerning local 
exchange carriers (LECs) that are identified as potential reasons for 
delay in the implementation of E911. LECs are important factors in 
achieving E911 implementation, inasmuch as State 911 systems are LEC-
based. Although the Commission has not, at this point, imposed special 
obligations on incumbent LECs in implementing E911, we note that 
incumbent LECs are already subject to obligations under the 
Telecommunications Act of 1996, as well as various Federal and State 
regulations, to ensure that interconnection agreements with CMRS 
carriers are fulfilled promptly and fairly. The Commission intends to 
further monitor the role of LECs to determine whether we need to impose 
additional obligations on them to ensure implementation of our wireless 
E911 rules. The Commission notes that parties may request consideration 
under our rocket docket procedures of

[[Page 72953]]

complaints filed under section 208 of the Communications Act against 
LECs for violation of LECs' existing obligations.
    9. Finally, the Commission modifies the Phase I rule to conform 
with the E911 Orders (cited in paragraphs 1 and 2 of this synopsis) and 
clarifies that carriers are required to provide service within six 
months of a PSAP's request for Phase I service when the request is 
received after the date established in the rules. In addition, the 
Commission finds the requests in CTIA's petition to protect carriers 
from liability for providing E911 service and to mandate nationwide 
usage of 911 as the number for emergency assistance are moot. The 
Wireless Communications and Public Safety Act of 1999 (911 Act) 
requires that States provide CMRS carriers, users, and PSAPs involved 
in the transmission of wireless 911 and E911 calls with liability 
protection to the same extent the State provides protection with 
respect to wireline 911 services. The 911 Act also provides for the 
Commission to designate 911 as the universal emergency telephone number 
for both wireline and wireless telephone service and includes 
provisions for transition periods and Commission action to encourage 
the development of State-wide E911 systems. Insofar as the petition 
also requests that the Commission encourage federal agencies to make 
federal property available for the siting of wireless facilities, we 
find the request to be beyond the scope of this proceeding. The United 
States Congress is the preferable forum for addressing this issue, as 
well.
    10. The goals of this proceeding are to maintain the framework the 
Commission established to achieve the E911 service intended to provide 
the customers of wireless carriers with improved emergency response 
services. This relies on the voluntary efforts of wireless and wireline 
providers, manufacturers, third-party providers, State and local 
governments, public safety authorities, and consumer interest groups to 
achieve the necessary transmissions and provide the emergency 
assistance required by the public. The Commission adopted the E911 
rules to ensure that CMRS licensees developed the capabilities to 
achieve enhanced transmission of 911 calls and respond promptly when 
localities request service. The Commission is concerned by delays in 
the implementation of Phase I of the E911 service and addresses 
obstacles to that implementation in order to take appropriate action 
for their removal. The Commission is also concerned about the potential 
delays to Phase II implementation that are likely to result unless such 
obstacles are removed. The Commission's actions in this MO&O are 
intended to build on the progress that has been made and to expedite 
E911 implementation. Any unnecessary delay in deployment and effective, 
universal operation of E911 is undesirable.
    11. The Commission's actions also are consistent with the 
Congressional goals reflected in the newly enacted 911 Act. The purpose 
of the 911 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.'' Among other things, the 911 Act requires this 
Commission, or its delegatee, to designate 9-1-1 as ``the universal 
emergency telephone number within the United States.'' The Commission 
also is specifically directed to encourage and support efforts by 
States to deploy comprehensive end-to-end emergency communications 
infrastructure and programs, based on coordinated statewide plans that 
include a ubiquitous wireless network and wireless E911 service. The 
Commission plans to move forward promptly to implement these 
Congressional goals, including through the initiation of a rulemaking 
proceeding.

Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 Analysis

    12. The actions contained in this Second MO&O have been analyzed 
with respect to the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 and found to impose 
a new reporting requirement or burden on the public. Implementation of 
this new reporting requirement will be subject to approval by the 
Office of Management and Budget, as prescribed by the Act. The new 
paperwork requirement contained in the Second MO&O will go into effect 
April 27, 2000.

Final Regulatory Flexibility Analysis

    13. As required by the Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA),\1\ a Final 
Regulatory Flexibility Analysis (FRFA) was incorporated into the Report 
and Order and Further Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (E911 First Report 
and Order) in this proceeding. This Supplemental Final Regulatory 
Flexibility Analysis (Supplemental FRFA) in this Second Memorandum 
Opinion and Order (Second MO&O) contains information that is in 
addition to that contained in the FRFA. This Supplemental FRFA is 
limited to matters addressed in this Second Memorandum Opinion and 
Order. Specifically, the Order addresses petitions for further 
reconsideration and clarification of the E911 First Report and Order 
and the responsive pleadings, which were filed in response to the First 
Memorandum Opinion and Order (E911 First Reconsideration Order). The 
Commission sought to augment the record and requested that an 
Implementation Report be filed on the matters to be addressed. Upon the 
filing of the Implementation Report, the Commission requested written 
public comment on the proposals in the petitions and the Implementation 
Report. The petitions, the Implementation Report, and the responsive 
comments that were filed for consideration in the Second Memorandum 
Opinion and Order are discussed in this Supplemental FRFA. This 
Supplemental FRFA conforms to the RFA. (See 5 U.S.C. 604.)
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ See 5 U.S.C. 604. The RFA, see 5 U.S.C. 601 et seq., was 
amended by the Contract With America Advancement Act of 1996, Public 
Law 104-121, 110 Stat. 847 (1996) (CWAAA). Title II of the CWAAA is 
the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996 
(SBREFA).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    14. This is a summary of the full Supplemental FRFA. The full 
Supplemental FRFA may be found in Appendix C of the full text of this 
Second MO&O.

I. Need for, and Objectives of, the Second Memorandum Opinion and Order

    15. This Second MO&O takes steps to hasten the introduction and 
rollout of wireless Enhanced 911 (E911) services that were required 
under the E911 service rules adopted in the E911 First Report and 
Order. The petitions for reconsideration and clarification of the E911 
rules, the Implementation Report, and the responsive comments have 
identified a number of obstacles to the ability of carriers to comply 
with the schedule and performance requirements in the E911 rules. This 
Second MO&O aims to eliminate such delays and obstacles, and so to 
encourage prompt implementation of the E 911 rules.

II. Summary of Significant Issues Raised by the Public Comments in 
Response to the Petitions for Reconsideration and Clarification and the 
Implementation Report

    16. In the petitions for reconsideration and clarification, some 
issues were raised that might affect small entities. Comments from some 
rural carriers and the Rural Cellular Association (RCA) argued that 
small and rural carriers would benefit if the cost recovery rule were 
amended to require States to

[[Page 72954]]

provide for the recovery of carriers' E911 costs through the adoption 
of pooling cost recovery mechanisms. They requested that the rule 
include requirements and procedures to ensure that the State 
legislatures adopt such mechanisms for carrier recovery and to overcome 
the delays under the current rule. The Association of Public-Safety 
Communications Officials-International, Inc. (APCO) alternatively 
argued that rural carriers and areas and PSAPs would benefit by 
elimination of the cost recovery rule and the complex, expensive, time-
consuming process of achieving cost recovery mechanisms for carriers 
with State legislatures.
    17. The Commission declined to adopt the specific definitions for 
carrier cost recovery, because they would be difficult to apply and 
would increase the delays already experienced in establishing State-
adopted mechanisms as a prerequisite to E911 service. The Commission 
found that the cost recovery rule for carrier costs was unnecessary and 
eliminated the rule, giving carriers and States the option of such 
mechanisms while removing the obstacle to E911 implementation that 
resulted from carriers waiting for such a mechanism before initiating 
service. The Commission modified the rule to require that a PSAP cost 
recovery mechanism be in place, however, to ensure that States or 
localities funded PSAPs to enable PSAPs to request and provide vital 
E911 services.
    18. CTIA and some carriers requested that the E911 rules be 
clarified to give carriers, and not PSAPs, the authority to choose 
which of the two official transmission means to use in transmitting 
E911 data to the PSAP in order to resolve disputes and expedite E911 
implementation. The Public Safety Associations opposed the request, 
arguing that carrier choice would be too costly for many PSAPs and 
would fail to take into account the need to integrate with the PSAPs' 
systems. The Commission declined to adopt a rule on transmission choice 
as unnecessary and inappropriate, determining that any disputes should 
be resolved by the elimination of the carrier cost recovery rule and 
that negotiation between the parties was essential to ensure that a 
compatible transmission means is selected. The Commission provided the 
parties an opportunity to petition the Commission in the rare event of 
an impasse for a resolution.
    19. Finally, the Implementation Report requested the Commission 
investigate the role of LECs and the delays in E911 implementation that 
result when LECs fail to cooperate with wireless carriers and promptly 
establish the necessary interconnection with the LEC's 911 system to 
enable the wireless carrier to transmit E911 data to the PSAP. The 
Commission declined to conduct such an investigation as unnecessary and 
problematic. The Commission encouraged incumbent LECs to fulfill their 
obligations under several federal and State regulations that require 
prompt and fair interconnection agreements, noted that wireless 
carriers may file complaints for expedited treatment under the federal 
regulations, and intended to monitor the role of LECs to ensure that 
wireless E911 was being implemented promptly.
    20. A more detailed discussion on issues raised by public comments 
may be found in section II of Appendix C to the full text of this 
decision.

III. Description and Estimates of the Number of Small Entities to Which 
the Rule Modifications and Decisions in the Second Memorandum Opinion 
and Order Will Apply

    21. The RFA directs agencies to provide a description of and, where 
feasible, an estimate of the number of small entities that may be 
affected by the proposed rules, if adopted. (5 U.S.C.603 (b)(3)). The 
RFA generally defines the term ``small entity'' as having the same 
meaning as the term ``small business.'' (5 U.S.C. 601(6)). In addition, 
the term ``small business'' has the same meaning as the terms ``small 
business,'' ``small organization,'' and ``small governmental 
jurisdiction.'' (5 U.S.C. 601(6)), incorporating by reference the 
definition of ``small business concern'' in 15 U.S.C. 632). Pursuant to 
the RFA, the statutory definition of a small business applies ``unless 
an agency, after consultation with the Office of Advocacy of the Small 
Business Administration and after opportunity for public comment, 
establishes one or more definitions of such term which are appropriate 
to the activities of the agency and publishes such definition(s) in the 
Federal Register.'' 5 U.S.C. 601(3). A small business concern is one 
which: (1) Is independently owned and operated; (2) is not dominant in 
its field of operation; and (3) satisfies any additional criteria 
established by the Small Business Administration (SBA). (Small Business 
Act, 15 U.S.C. 632 (1996).) ``Small governmental jurisdiction'' 
generally means ``governments of cities, counties, towns, townships, 
villages, school districts, or special districts, with a population of 
less that 50,000'' (5 U.S.C. 601(5)); using Census Bureau data we 
estimate that 81,600 are small entities.
    22. SMR Licensees. Pursuant to Sec. 90.814(b)(1) of the 
Commission's Rules, the Commission has defined ``small business'' for 
purposes of auctioning 900 Mhz SMR licenses, 800 MHz SMR licenses for 
the upper 200 channels, and 800 MHz SMR licenses for the lower 230 
channels as a firm that has had average annual gross revenues of $15 
million or less in the three preceding calendar years. This small 
business size standard for all 800 MHz and 900 MHz auctions has been 
approved by the SBA. The rule modification in this Second MO&O that 
eliminates the requirement for a carrier cost recovery mechanism 
affects all SMR licensees that were previously subject to the rule. 
That rule was limited to SMR licensees that offer real-time, two-way 
voice or data service that is interconnected with the public switched 
network and that use an in-network switching facility.
    23. The Commission concludes that the number of small 900 MHz SMR 
geographic area licensees affected by the rule modification that 
eliminates the rule for carrier cost recovery is at least 60. 
Additionally, the Commission estimates at least 10 small 800 MHz SMR 
geographic area licensees for the upper 200 channels affected by the 
rule modification that eliminates that rule for carrier cost recovery.
    24. The Commission has determined that 3325 geographic area 
licenses will be awarded in the 800 MHz SMR auction for the lower 230 
channels. Because the auction of these licenses has not yet been 
conducted, there is no basis to estimate how many winning bidders will 
qualify as small businesses or which of these licensees would have been 
covered by the previous rule. Therefore, the Commission concludes that 
the number of 800 MHz SMR geographic area licensees for the lower 230 
channels that may ultimately be affected by this rule modification is 
at least 3325.
    25. Finally, the Commission concludes that the number of SMR 
licensees operating in the 800 MHz and 900 MHz bands under extended 
implementation authorizations that may be affected by this rule 
modification is, at most, 6800 licensees.
    26. Cellular Licensees. Neither the Commission nor the SBA has 
developed a definition of small entities applicable to cellular 
licensees. Therefore, the applicable definition of small entities is 
the definition under the SBA rules applicable to radiotelephone 
(wireless) companies. This provides that a small entity is a 
radiotelephone company employing no more than 1,500 persons. The 
Commission concludes that there are fewer than 732 small cellular 
service carriers that may be affected by the rule

[[Page 72955]]

modification that eliminates the requirement for a carrier cost 
recovery mechanism adopted in this Second Memorandum Opinion and Order.
    27. Broadband Personal Communications Service. The broadband PCS 
spectrum is divided into six frequency blocks designated A through F, 
and the Commission has held auctions for each block. The Commission 
defined ``small entity'' for Blocks C and F as an entity that has 
average gross revenues of less than $40 million in the three previous 
calendar years. For Block F, an additional classification for ``very 
small business'' was added and is defined as an entity that, together 
with its affiliates, has average gross revenues of not more than $15 
million for the preceding three calendar years. These regulations 
defining ``small entity'' in the context of broadband PCS auctions have 
been approved by the SBA. No small businesses within the SBA-approved 
definition bid successfully for licenses in Blocks A and B. The 
Commission concludes that the number of small broadband PCS licensees 
will include the 90 winning C Block bidders and the 93 qualifying 
bidders in the D, E, and F blocks, for a total of 183 small entity PCS 
providers as defined by the SBA and the Commission's auction rules.
    28. Public Safety Answering Points. A PSAP is ``a point that has 
been designated to receive 911 calls and route them to emergency 
service personnel.'' (47 CFR 20.3.) Neither the Commission nor the SBA 
has developed a definition of small businesses specifically directed 
towards PSAPs. The category for small businesses that are within the 
SIC code 4899, ``Communications Services, Not Elsewhere Classified,'' 
contains entities that have an annual revenue of $11 million or less. 
We can estimate that the small entities affected by the rule 
modifications are approximately 10,000 PSAPs nationwide. The Commission 
assumes that, for purposes of this Supplemental FRFA, all of the PSAPs 
may be affected by the rule modifications.

IV. Description of Projected Reporting, Recordkeeping, and Other 
Compliance Requirements

    29. The Second MO&O modifies the rule for a cost recovery 
mechanism, first, to eliminate the requirement that the mechanism 
provide for the recovery of the carrier's costs of implementing E911 as 
a precondition of service. Second, the cost recovery rule is modified 
to provide a recovery mechanism for the PSAP's E911 costs as a 
precondition of the carrier's service. The Second MO&O also provided 
wireless carriers and PSAPs with an opportunity to petition the 
Commission in the rare case that they reach an impasse in their 
negotiations to choose the means of transmission for E911, but did not 
adopt any rule or otherwise impose any compliance requirements to 
govern such voluntary petitions.

V. Steps Taken To Minimize Significant Economic Impact on Small 
Entities, and Significant Alternatives Considered

    30. The rule modifications and decisions adopted in the Second MO&O 
are in response to the petitions for reconsideration and clarification 
of the E911 rules, the Implementation Report, and the responsive 
pleadings that, for purposes of this analysis, the Commission has 
considered to be filed by small entities, as discussed in section V of 
Appendix C of the full text of this decision.
    31. Report to Congress: The Commission will send a copy of this 
Second Memorandum Opinion and Order, including this Supplemental FRFA, 
in a report to be sent to Congress pursuant to the Small Business 
Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996, 5 U.S.C. 801(a)(1)(A). In 
addition, the Commission will send a copy of the Second Memorandum 
Opinion and Order and this Supplemental FRFA to the Chief Counsel for 
Advocacy of the Small Business Administration.

Ordering Clauses

    32. Accordingly, the Petitions for Reconsideration and 
Clarification of the Memorandum Opinion and Order, Revision of the 
Commission's Rules to Ensure Compatibility with Enhanced 911 Calling 
Systems, are granted in part, as provided in the text of the Second 
Memorandum Opinion and Order, and are otherwise denied.
    33. The late-filed Comments of Wireless Consumers Alliance are 
accepted.
    34. The request for declaratory ruling of the Attorney General of 
the State of Washington is dismissed as moot.
    35. Part 20 of the Commission's Rules is amended as reflected in 
the Rule Changes portion of this synopsis.
    36. The Second Memorandum Opinion and Order and its rule amendments 
shall become effective April 27, 2000. The Commission will publish a 
document at a later date announcing OMB approval of the information 
collection requirements.
    37. The Commission's Consumer Information Bureau, Reference 
Information Center, shall send a copy of this Second Memorandum Opinion 
and Order, including the Supplementary Final Regulatory Flexibility 
Analysis, to the Chief Counsel for Advocacy of the Small Business 
Association.

Paperwork Reduction Act

    38. This Second MO&O contains a new information collection.
    39. The Commission, as part of its continuing effort to reduce 
paperwork burdens, invites the general public to comment on the 
information collections contained in this Second MO&O, as required by 
the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, Public Law 104-13. Public and 
agency comments are due February 28, 2000. Comments should address: (a) 
Whether the new collection of information is necessary for the proper 
performance of the functions of the Commission, including whether the 
information shall have practical utility; (b) the accuracy of the 
Commission's burden estimates; (3) ways to enhance the quality, 
utility, and clarity of the information collected; and (4) ways to 
minimize the burden of the collection of information on the 
respondents, including the use of automated collection techniques or 
other forms of information technology.
    OMB Approval Number: N.A.
    Title: Revision of the Commission's Rules To Ensure Compatibility 
With Enhanced 911 Emergency Calling Systems, Second Memorandum Opinion 
and Order.
    Form No. N.A.
    Type of Review: New information collection.
    Respondents: Business or other for profit.
    Number of Respondents: 50.
    Estimated Time Per Response: 1 hour.
    Total Annual Burden: 50 hours (one-time burden).
    Cost to Respondents: .0.
    Needs and Uses: The information required to be reported to the 
Commission by CMRS carriers and PSAPs who cannot agree on the choice of 
the transmission means and related technologies will be used by the 
Commission to resolve such disputes.

List of Subjects in 47 CFR Part 20

    Communications common carrier, Communications equipment, Radio.

Federal Communications Commission.
Magalie Roman Salas,
Secretary.

Rule Changes

    For the reasons discussed in the preamble, the Federal 
Communications Commission amends 47 CFR part 20 as follows:

[[Page 72956]]

PART 20--COMMERCIAL MOBILE RADIO SERVICES

    1. The authority citation for part 20 continues to read as follows:

    Authority: 47 U.S.C. 154, 160, 251-254, 303, and 332 unless 
otherwise noted.

    2. Section 20.18 is amended by revising paragraphs (d)(1) and (j) 
to read as follows:


Sec. 20.18  911 Service.

* * * * *
    (d) Phase I enhanced 911 services. (1) As of April 1, 1998, or 
within six months of a request by the designated Public Safety 
Answering Point as set forth in paragraph (j) of this section, 
whichever is later, licensees subject to this section must provide the 
telephone number of the originator of a 911 call and the location of 
the cell site or base station receiving a 911 call from any mobile 
handset accessing their systems to the designated Public Safety 
Answering Point through the use of ANI and Pseudo-ANI.
* * * * *
    (j) Conditions for enhanced 911 services. The requirements set 
forth in paragraphs (d) through (h) of this section shall be applicable 
only if the administrator of the designated Public Safety Answering 
Point has requested the services required under those paragraphs and is 
capable of receiving and utilizing the data elements associated with 
the service, and a mechanism for recovering the Public Safety Answering 
Point's costs of the enhanced 911 service is in place.
* * * * *
[FR Doc. 99-33391 Filed 12-28-99; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6712-01-P