[Federal Register Volume 68, Number 14 (Wednesday, January 22, 2003)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 2914-2919]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 03-1326]


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

FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMIISSION

47 CFR Part 20

[CC Docket No. 94-102; FCC 02-318]


Compatibility With Enhanced 911 Emergency Calling Systems; PSAP 
E911 Service Readiness

AGENCY: Federal Communications Commission.

ACTION: Final rule; petitions for reconsideration.

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

SUMMARY: This document responds to petitions for reconsideration of the 
Commission's October 2001 decision which addressed a petition from the 
city of Richardson, Texas by adopting rules that clarify what 
constitutes a valid Public Safety Anwering Point (PSAP) to trigger a 
wireless carrier's obligation to provide E911 service to the PSAP 
within six months. The document modifies the Commission's rules to 
provide additional clarification regarding PSAP readiness. The action 
is taken to respond to the petitions for reconsideration and to promote 
rapid E911 implementation.

DATES: Effective February 21, 2003, except for Sec. Sec.  20.18(j)(4) 
and (5), which contain information collection requirements that are not 
effective until approved by the Office of Management and Budget. The 
Commission is seeking emergency approval from the Office of Management 
and Budget for these collections. Public comment on the information 
collections on these PRA burdens are due March 24, 2003. The Commission 
will publish a document in the Federal Register announcing the 
effective date of these sections.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Jennifer Salhus, Attorney, 202-418-
1310. For further information concerning the information collection 
contained in this Fourth Memorandum Opinion and Order, contact Judith 
Boley Herman, Federal Communications Commission, 202-418-0214, or via 
the Internet at [email protected].

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This is a summary of the Commission's Order 
on Reconsideration (Recon) in CC Docket No. 94-102; FCC 02-318, adopted 
November 21, 2002, and released November 26, 2002. The complete text of 
the Recon and the Supplemental Final Regulatory Flexibility Analysis is 
available on the Commission's Internet site, at http://www.fcc.gov., 
and is also available for inspection and copying during normal business 
hours in the FCC Reference Information Center, Courtyard Level, 445 
12th Street, SW., Washington, DC. The text may also be purchased from 
the Commission's copy contractor, Qualex International, Portals II, 445 
12th Street, SW., CY-B4202, Washington, DC 20554 (telephone 202-863-
2893).

Synopsis of the Order on Reconsideration

    1. The Recon responds to two petitions for reconsideration of the 
Commission's Order (60 FR 55618, November 2, 2001) in this proceeding. 
The Order, in further response to a petition filed by the city of 
Richardson, Texas, adopted rules clarifying what constitutes a valid 
PSAP request to trigger a wireless carrier's obligation to provide E911 
service to that PSAP within six months. The Recon modifies

[[Page 2915]]

the Commission's rules to provide additional clarification as to PSAP 
readiness.
    2. The Recon first adopts procedural guidelines for requesting 
documentation predictive of a PSAP's readiness to receive and utilize 
the E911 service it has requested. Specifically, the Recon provides 
that, where a wireless carrier requests such documentation from a PSAP 
within 15 days of receiving the PSAP's request for E911 service, the 
PSAP must respond within 15 days or the carrier's six-month 
implementation period will be tolled until such documentation is 
provided. (See paragraphs 9 through 12 of the full text of the Recon.)
    3. Second, the Recon clarifies that the readiness showing is for 
the purpose of commencing the wireless carrier's six-month 
implementation obligation. The Recon also establishes a procedure 
whereby wireless carriers that have completed all necessary steps 
toward E911 implementation that are not dependent on PSAP readiness may 
have their compliance obligation temporarily tolled, if the PSAP is not 
ready to receive the information at the end of the six-month period and 
the carrier files a certification to that effect with the Commission. 
(See paragraphs 14 through 21 of the full text of the Recon.)
    7. Finally, the Recon clarifies that nothing in the Commission's 
rules precludes wireless carriers and PSAPs from mutually agreeing to 
an implementation schedule different from that prescribed in the 
Commission's rules. (See paragraph 29 of the full text of the Recon.)

Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 Analysis

    8. This Recon has been analyzed with respect to the Paperwork 
Reduction Act of 1995 and found to contain new reporting and 
information collections. Implementation of these new reporting and 
recordkeeping requirements will be subject to approval by the Office of 
Management and Budget (OMB) as prescribed by the Act. The Commission is 
seeking this approval on an emergency basis and will publish a notice 
of effective date in the Federal Register when OMB approval for these 
PRA burdens is received. The Commission is seeking public comment on 
these PRA burdens. Public and agency comments are due March 24, 2003. 
Comments should address:
    [sbull] Whether the collection of information is necessary for the 
proper performance of the functions of the Commission, including 
whether the information shall have practical utility.
    [sbull] The accuracy of the Commission's burden estimates.
    [sbull] Ways to enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the 
information collected.
    [sbull] 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.
    9. A copy of any comments on the information collections contained 
in this Recon should be submitted to Judith Boley Herman, Federal 
Communications Commission, Room 1-C804, 445 Twelfth Street, SW., 
Washington, DC 20554, or via the Internet to [email protected] and to Kim 
A. Johnson, Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs (OIRA), Office 
of Management and Budget (OMB), Docket Library, Room 10236, New 
Executive Office Building (NEOB), 725 17th Street, NW., Washington, DC 
20503 or via the Internet at [email protected].
    OMB Approval Number: XXXX.
    Title: Revision of the Commission's Rules to Ensure Compatibility 
with Enhanced 911 Emergency Calling Systems: City of Richardson, Texas, 
Recon Order.
    Form No. N.A.
    Type of Review: New information collection.
    Respondents: Business or other for profit.
    Number of Respondents: 1,358.
    Estimated Time Per Response: 2-40 hours.
    Total Annual Burden: 13,960 hours.
    Cost to Respondents: 0.
    Needs and Uses: The information and coordination burdens are needed 
to ensure the fairness of the Commission's E911 rules and to facilitate 
speedy E911 implementation.

Supplemental Final Regulatory Flexibility Analysis (SFRFA)

    10. As required by the Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA), the 
Commission has prepared a Supplemental Regulatory Flexibility Analysis 
(SFRFA) of the estimated significant economic impact on small entities 
of the policies and rules adopted in the Recon. The analysis may be 
found in Appendix C of the full text of the Recon. This is a summary of 
the full SFRFA. The Commission's Consumer and Governmental Affairs 
Bureau, Reference Information Center, will send a copy of the Recon, 
including the SFRFA to the Chief Counsel for Advocacy of the Small 
Business Administration.

A. Need for, and Objectives of, the Recon Order

    11. In response to petitions for reconsideration, the Commission 
amends its rules to clarify what constitutes a valid Public Safety 
Answering Point (PSAP) request to trigger a wireless carrier's 
obligation to provide enhanced 911 (E911) service to the PSAP within 
six months. Specifically, the Recon adopts procedural guidelines for 
requesting documentation predictive of a PSAP's readiness to receive 
and utilize the E911 service it has requested, by specifying that where 
a wireless carrier requests such documentation from a PSAP within 15 
days of receiving the PSAP's request for E911 service, the PSAP must 
respond within 15 days or the carrier's six-month implementation period 
will be tolled until such documentation is provided. The Recon also 
clarifies that the PSAP readiness showing is for the purpose of 
commencing the wireless carrier's six-month implementation obligation, 
and establishes a procedure whereby wireless carriers that have 
completed all necessary steps toward E911 implementation that are not 
dependent on PSAP readiness may have their compliance obligation 
temporarily tolled, if the PSAP is not ready to receive the information 
at the end of the six-month period and the carrier files a 
certification to that effect with the Commission. Finally, the Recon 
clarifies that nothing in the Commission's rules precludes wireless 
carriers and PSAPs from mutually agreeing to an implementation schedule 
different from that prescribed by the Commission's rules.
    12. The actions adopted in the Recon are intended to promote 
communication between wireless carriers, local exchange carriers (LECs) 
and PSAPs and to provide further clarity regarding their respective 
obligations in implementing wireless E911. Wireless E911 implementation 
is very situation-specific and can vary significantly from jurisdiction 
to jurisdiction and from carrier to carrier, depending on a number of 
factors. The clarifications adopted in the Recon are also intended to 
facilitate the implementation process by encouraging parties to 
communicate with each other early in the E911 implementation process, 
and to maintain a constructive, on-going dialog throughout the 
implementation process.

B. Summary of Significant Issues Raised by the Public in Response to 
the FRFA

    13. The Commission received two petitions for reconsideration of 
its decision in the Order. One petitioner, Cingular Wireless LLC 
(Cingular) raises several procedural arguments against the validity of 
the decision adopted in the Order, based on the requirements of the 
Administrative Procedure Act. In

[[Page 2916]]

support, several small carriers filed comments also challenging the 
decision on a procedural basis, arguing that the decision contravenes 
the provisions of the RFA because it does not take account of, and 
attempt to reduce, the disproportionate burdens placed on small and 
rural carriers. These smaller carriers maintain that, in order to 
minimize the danger of unnecessary economic outlay on small carriers, 
the Commission should impose an actual-readiness requirement on PSAPs 
operating in areas where rural, small and mid-sized carriers do not 
have a large customer base to absorb their E911 implementation costs 
and are thus more vulnerable to delays in implementation caused by a 
PSAP's inability to receive and utilize the E911 data supplied by the 
carrier. The Commission is aware of the concerns of small and mid-sized 
rural carriers and discussed these concerns in the FRFA. However, as 
the Commission has iterated throughout this proceeding, any failure in 
E911 communications, regardless of whether the carrier is small or 
large, or whether the carrier has a large customer base or small, can 
result in tragedy. Nonetheless, the Commission has tried wherever 
possible to ease the regulatory burden in this proceeding on small 
entities. The Commission's phased-in approach to E911 implementation is 
an example of this desire to accommodate the needs of small entities 
where it does not compromise our commitment to the goals of this 
proceeding.
    14. The FRFA addresses the issue of whether to adopt an actual-
readiness requirement on PSAPs and finds that the readiness showing 
adopted in the Order ``will in fact reduce the vulnerability of the 
smaller carriers, as they will be working along with the PSAPs to 
ensure implementation of E911 service on a timely basis, and will 
better be able to plan their progression and allocation of resources 
during the implementation process * * *.'' The FRFA concludes that, 
``Considering the potential burdens placed on all small entities, we 
find that the institution of objective criteria by rule amendment will 
benefit all PSAPs and carriers, including small entities, by more 
clearly defining E911 readiness, thus reducing the potential for 
misunderstanding between parties, and by reducing instances of delay in 
E911 implementation. In turn, this will reduce the likelihood that any 
PSAP or carrier, including all small entities, will have to expend its 
limited capital resources prematurely and/or improvidently.''
    15. The Recon takes several steps to mitigate the economic risk to 
smaller carriers. First, as discussed in paragraphs 9 through 12 of the 
full text, the Recon responds to carrier comment that indicates the 
present rule does not specify time limits for responding to a carrier's 
request for PSAP readiness documentation, by establishing that where a 
wireless carrier requests readiness documentation in writing within 15 
days of receiving the PSAP's request for E911 service, the PSAP will 
have 15 days to provide such documentation. The Commission believes 
that these 15-day timeframes will both reduce a carrier's ability to 
use a documentation request as a delaying tactic, and minimize 
unnecessary carrier expenditures in those situations where the PSAP is 
unable to demonstrate that it will be ready to receive and utilize the 
requested E911 information by the end of the six-month period allotted 
for carrier compliance. The Recon also acknowledges, as discussed in 
paragraph 14, that the current rules do not provide for situations 
where a PSAP has made the upfront readiness showing necessary to 
trigger Phase II implementation, but turns out to be incapable of 
receiving Phase II information at the end of the six-month 
implementation period. To address such situations, the Recon Order 
modified the Commission's rules in several respects. These 
modifications are set out in detail in paragraphs 15 through 21 of the 
Recon Order.

C. Description and Estimate of the Number of Small Entities to Which 
the Proposed Rules Will Apply

    16. 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. The RFA generally defines 
the term ``small entity'' as having the same meaning as the terms 
``small business,'' ``small organization,'' and ``small governmental 
jurisdiction.'' In addition, the term ``small business'' has the same 
meaning as the term ``small business concern'' under section 3 of the 
Small Business Act, unless the Commission has developed one or more 
definitions that are appropriate for its activities. Nationwide, there 
are 4.44 million small business firms, according to SBA reporting data.
    17. Under the Small Business Act, a ``small business concern'' is 
one that: (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). A small 
organization is generally ``any not-for-profit enterprise which is 
independently owned and operated and is not dominant in its field.'' 
Nationwide, as of 1992, there were approximately 275,801 small 
organizations.
    18. The definition of ``small governmental jurisdiction'' is one 
with populations of fewer than 50,000. There are approximately 85,006 
governmental jurisdictions in the nation. This number includes such 
entities as states, counties, cities, utility districts and school 
districts. There are no figures available on what portion of this 
number has populations of fewer than 50,000. However, this number 
includes 38,978 counties, cities and towns, and of those, 37,556, or 
ninety-six percent, have populations of fewer than 50,000. The Census 
Bureau estimates that this ratio is approximately accurate for all 
government entities. Thus, of the 85,006 governmental entities, we 
estimate that ninety-six percent, or about 81,600, are small entities 
that may be affected by our rules.
    19. Neither the Commission nor the SBA has developed definitions 
for small providers of the specific industries affected. Therefore, 
throughout our analysis, the Commission uses the closest applicable 
definition under the SBA rules, the North American Industry 
Classification System (NAICS) standards for ``Cellular and Other 
Wireless Telecommunications'' and ``Wired Telecommunications 
Carriers.'' According to this standard, a small entity is one with no 
more than 1,500 employees. To determine which of the affected entities 
in the affected services fit into the SBA definition of small business, 
the Commission will refer to Table 5.3 in Trends in Telephone Service 
(Trends) a report published annually by the Commission's Wireline 
Competition Bureau.
    20. We have included small incumbent local exchange carriers in 
this RFA analysis. As noted above, a ``small business'' under the RFA 
is one that, inter alia, meets the pertinent small business size 
standard (e.g., a telephone communications business having 1,500 or 
fewer employees), and ``is not dominant in its field of operation.'' 
The SBA's Office of Advocacy contends that, for RFA purposes, small 
incumbent local exchange carriers are not dominant in their field of 
operation because any such dominance is not ``national'' in scope. The 
Commission has therefore included small incumbent carriers in this RFA 
analysis, although we emphasize that this RFA action has no effect on 
the Commission's analyses and determinations in other, non-RFA 
contexts.

[[Page 2917]]

    Local Exchange Carriers. According to the most recent Trends data, 
1,329 incumbent carriers reported that they were engaged in the 
provision of local exchange services. Trends indicates that of these 
entities, 1,024 local exchange carriers report that, in combination 
with their affiliates, they have 1,500 or fewer employees, and would 
thus be considered small businesses as defined by NAICS.
    Competitive Access Providers and Competitive Local Exchange 
Carriers (CAPs and CLECs). Trends indicates that 532 CAPs and CLECs, 
134 local resellers, and 55 other local exchange carriers reported that 
they were engaged in the provision of competitive local exchange 
services. The Commission does not have data specifying the number of 
these carriers that are not independently owned and operated. However, 
Trends states that a total of 595 of these entities employ 1,500 
individuals, thus qualifying as small entities.
    Wireless Telephone Including Cellular, Personal Communications 
Service (PCS) and SMR Telephony Carriers. There are 858 entities in 
this category as estimated in Trends, and 291 such licensees in 
combination with their affiliates have 1,500 or fewer employees, and 
thus qualify as small businesses using the NAICS guide as small 
businesses.
    Special Mobile Radio (SMR) Dispatch. Trends estimates 289 entities 
in this category and all 289 licensees, in combination with their 
affiliates, have 1,500 or fewer employees, and thus qualify as small 
entities using the NAICS guide.
    Other Mobile Service Providers. Trends estimates that there are 32 
providers of other mobile services, and again using the NAICS standard, 
all 32 providers of other mobile services utilize with their affiliates 
1,500 or fewer employees, and thus may be considered small entities.
    Toll Service Providers. Trends calculates that there are 932 toll 
service providers, and that 832 toll service providers with their 
affiliates have 1,500 or fewer employees and thus qualify as small 
entities as defined by NAICS.
    Offshore Radiotelephone Service. At present, there are 
approximately 55 licensees in this service. The Commission is unable at 
this time to estimate the number of licensees that would qualify as 
small entities under the SBA definition for radiotelephone 
communications. The Commission assumes, for purposes of this SFRFA, 
that all of the 55 licensees are small entities, as that term is 
defined by NAICS.
    Public Safety Answering Points. Neither the Commission nor the SBA 
has developed a definition of small entities applicable to PSAPs. In 
order to give a numerical quantification of the number of PSAPs that 
are small entities affected by the rule modifications, it appears there 
are approximately 5,000 primary PSAPs nationwide. For purposes of this 
SFRFA, we assume that all of the PSAPs are small entities, and may be 
affected by the rule amendments.

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

    21. As indicated in paragraphs 15 through 21 of the Recon, in order 
to toll the six-month implementation period, a wireless carrier must 
file a certification with the Commission that it has completed all 
necessary steps towards E911 implementation that are not dependent on 
PSAP readiness and that the PSAP is not ready to receive the 
information at the end of the six month period. Additionally, the 
Commission clarifies that nothing in our rules precludes wireless 
carriers and PSAPs from mutually agreeing to an implementation schedule 
different from that prescribed by the Commission's rules.

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

    22. The Commission is limited in this proceeding as to minimizing 
the burden on small entities. The proceeding is intended to provide all 
Americans with the most reliable, responsive emergency services that 
are technologically possible. The critical nature of this goal demands 
that all entities involved, regardless of size, bear the same 
responsibility for complying with requirements adopted to expedite 
reaching this goal. A delay in response caused by a small entity could 
result in the same fatal consequences as a delay caused by a large 
entity.
    23. The Commission, upon review of the petitions for 
reconsideration of the Order, could have elected to simply deny the 
petitions and leave the rules as is, or it could have modified the 
rules to intensify the demonstration requirements on PSAPs. Instead the 
Commission makes certain clarifications to the rules to dispel some of 
the existing confusion as to PSAP readiness and the decision adopted in 
the Order, and modifies the rules to accommodate certain of the 
carrier's continuing concerns, while refraining from imposing 
additional burdens on PSAPs, most of whom are either small or mid-sized 
entities.
    24. First, the Recon, in paragraphs 9 through 12 clarifies the 
rules along the lines suggested by two wireless carriers by 
establishing the parallel 15-day timeframe for carrier requests and 
PSAP responses in certain instances where the PSAP does not provide 
readiness documentation simultaneous with its request for E911 service. 
The Commission takes this action to promote early communication between 
wireless carriers and PSAPs, to expedite the E911 implementation 
process, to reduce a carrier's ability to use a documentation request 
as a delaying tactic, while minimizing unnecessary carrier expenditures 
where the PSAP is unable to demonstrate that it will be E911 capable by 
the end of the six-month period allotted for carrier compliance. This 
modification thus benefits both small and mid-sized wireless carriers 
and PSAPs and strengthens the Commission's efforts to encourage 
necessary cooperation between carriers and PSAPs in achieving truly 
responsive E911 implementation.
    25. Second, to address situations in which a PSAP has made the 
upfront readiness showing but turns out to be incapable of receiving 
E911 Phase II information at the end of the six-month implementation 
period, the Recon amends 47 CFR 20.18(j) in several ways. (See 
paragraphs 14 through 21 of the Recon.) The Recon clarifies that the 
readiness showing is for the purpose of commencing the wireless 
carrier's six-month implementation obligation. The Recon also 
establishes a certification procedure whereby wireless carriers that 
have completed all necessary steps toward E911 implementation that are 
not dependent on PSAP readiness may have their six-month compliance 
obligation temporarily tolled. These procedures, set out in paragraphs 
15 through 21 of the Recon, minimize the financial risk to wireless 
carriers while providing PSAPs with an opportunity to respond and set 
up several other restrictions in the certification procedure to avoid 
abuse of the process by all parties involved.
    26. Several wireless carrier commenters recommend that the 
Commission amend its rules to require that the PSAP obtain the local 
exchange carrier's (LEC's) written commitment to complete the required 
Automated Location Information (ALI) database upgrades within the six-
month period. As discussed in paragraph 23 of the Recon, the Commission 
does not adopt such a regulation. In paragraph 24, the Commission also 
declines to adopt a

[[Page 2918]]

second, alternative proposal that would require PSAPs to acquire copies 
of an LEC's schedule of ALI database upgrade, because PSAPs are not in 
the best position to furnish such documentation. In paragraph 25 of the 
Recon, the Commission directs the Wireless Telecommunications Bureau to 
collect additional information periodically from LECs regarding the 
status of their efforts in connection with wireless E911 deployment to 
PSAPs and to consumers.
    27. Report to Congress: The Commission will send a copy of this 
Recon, including this Supplemental FRFA, in a report to be sent to 
Congress pursuant to the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness 
Act of 1996. In addition, the Commission will send a copy of this 
Recon, including this Supplemental FRFA, to the Chief Counsel for 
Advocacy of the Small Business Administration.

Ordering Clauses

    28. The Petition for Reconsideration filed by Sprint is granted to 
the extent provided in the full text of the Recon and that the Petition 
is otherwise denied.
    29. The Petition for Reconsideration filed by Cingular is denied.
    30. Part 20 of the Commission's rules is amended as indicated in 
the rule changes section of this summary, effective February 21, 2003, 
except for Sec. Sec.  20.18(j)(4) and (5), which contain information 
collection requirements that are not effective until approved by the 
Office of Management and Budget. The Commission is seeking emergency 
approval from the Office of Management and Budget for these 
collections. Public comment on the information collections on these PRA 
burdens are due March 24, 2003. The Commission will publish a document 
in the Federal Register announcing the effective date for these 
sections.
    31. The Commission's Consumer and Governmental Affairs Bureau, 
Reference Information Center, shall send a copy of the Recon, including 
the Supplemental Final Regulatory Flexibility Act Analysis, to the 
Chief Counsel for Advocacy of the Small Business Administration.

List of Subjects in 47 CFR Part 20

    Communications common carrier, Communications equipment, Radio.

Federal Communications Commission.
Marlene H. Dortch,
Secretary.

Rule Changes

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

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(j) is revised to read as follows:


Sec.  20.18  911 Service.

* * * * *
    (j) Conditions for enhanced 911 services. (1) Generally. 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 the Public Safety Answering Point 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.
    (2) Commencement of six-month period. (i) Except as provided in 
paragraph (ii) of this section, for purposes of commencing the six-
month period for carrier implementation specified in paragraphs (d), 
(f) and (g) of this section, a PSAP will be deemed capable of receiving 
and utilizing the data elements associated with the service requested, 
if it can demonstrate that it has:
    (A) Ordered the necessary equipment and has commitments from 
suppliers to have it installed and operational within such six-month 
period; and
    (B) Made a timely request to the appropriate local exchange carrier 
for the necessary trunking, upgrades, and other facilities.
    (ii) For purposes of commencing the six-month period for carrier 
implementation specified in paragraphs (f) and (g) of this section, a 
PSAP that is Phase I-capable using a Non-Call Path Associated Signaling 
(NCAS) technology will be deemed capable of receiving and utilizing the 
data elements associated with Phase II service if it can demonstrate 
that it has made a timely request to the appropriate local exchange 
carrier for the ALI database upgrade necessary to receive the Phase II 
information.
    (3) Tolling of six-month period. Where a wireless carrier has 
served a written request for documentation on the PSAP within 15 days 
of receiving the PSAP's request for Phase I or Phase II enhanced 911 
service, and the PSAP fails to respond to such request within 15 days 
of such service, the six-month period for carrier implementation 
specified in paragraphs (d), (f), and (g) of this section will be 
tolled until the PSAP provides the carrier with such documentation.
    (4) Carrier certification regarding PSAP readiness issues. At the 
end of the six-month period for carrier implementation specified in 
paragraphs (d), (f) and (g) of this section, a wireless carrier that 
believes that the PSAP is not capable of receiving and utilizing the 
data elements associated with the service requested may file a 
certification with the Commission. Upon filing and service of such 
certification, the carrier may suspend further implementation efforts, 
except as provided in paragraph (j)(4)(x) of this section.
    (i) As a prerequisite to filing such certification, no later than 
21 days prior to such filing, the wireless carrier must notify the 
affected PSAP, in writing, of its intent to file such certification. 
Any response that the carrier receives from the PSAP must be included 
with the carrier's certification filing.
    (ii) The certification process shall be subject to the procedural 
requirements set forth in sections 1.45 and 1.47 of this chapter.
    (iii) The certification must be in the form of an affidavit signed 
by a director or officer of the carrier, documenting:
    (A) The basis for the carrier's determination that the PSAP will 
not be ready;
    (B) Each of the specific steps the carrier has taken to provide the 
E911 service requested;
    (C) The reasons why further implementation efforts cannot be made 
until the PSAP becomes capable of receiving and utilizing the data 
elements associated with the E911 service requested; and
    (D) The specific steps that remain to be completed by the wireless 
carrier and, to the extent known, the PSAP or other parties before the 
carrier can provide the E911 service requested.
    (iv) All affidavits must be correct. The carrier must ensure that 
its affidavit is correct, and the certifying director or officer has 
the duty to personally determine that the affidavit is correct.
    (v) A carrier may not engage in a practice of filing inadequate or 
incomplete certifications for the purpose of delaying its 
responsibilities.
    (vi) To be eligible to make a certification, the wireless carrier 
must have completed all necessary steps toward E911 implementation that 
are not dependent on PSAP readiness.
    (vii) A copy of the certification must be served on the PSAP in 
accordance with Sec.  1.47 of this chapter. The PSAP

[[Page 2919]]

may challenge in writing the accuracy of the carrier's certification 
and shall serve a copy of such challenge on the carrier. See Sec. Sec.  
1.45 and 1.47 and Sec. Sec.  1.720 through 1.736 of this chapter.
    (viii) If a wireless carrier's certification is facially 
inadequate, the six-month implementation period specified in paragraphs 
(d), (f) and (g) of this section will not be suspended as provided for 
in paragraph (j)(4) of this section.
    (ix) If a wireless carrier's certification is inaccurate, the 
wireless carrier will be liable for noncompliance as if the 
certification had not been filed.
    (x) A carrier that files a certification under paragraph (j)(4) of 
this section shall have 90 days from receipt of the PSAP's written 
notice that it is capable of receiving and utilizing the data elements 
associated with the service requested to provide such service in 
accordance with the requirements of paragraphs (d) through (h) of this 
section.
    (5) Modification of deadlines by agreement. Nothing in this section 
shall prevent Public Safety Answering Points and carriers from 
establishing, by mutual consent, deadlines different from those imposed 
for carrier and PSAP compliance in paragraphs (d), (f), and (g)(2) of 
this section.
* * * * *
[FR Doc. 03-1326 Filed 1-21-03; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6712-01-P