WASHINGTON-In a report to Congress obtained by RCR Wireless News, the Federal Communications Commission told lawmakers last week that it had granted 32 whole or partial waivers for rural wireless carrier enhanced 911 Phase II obligations. The FCC denied or dismissed eight other requests.
The details of the 2005 Tier III Order are expected to be released later.
The waiver requests, which had been pending for an average of 461 days, are the first major wireless actions taken under new FCC Chairman Kevin Martin.
“There are no waiver requests pending as of the filing of this report,” said the FCC. “We note that one petition for forbearance relating to the 911 service rules remains pending as of the filing of this report. The Tier IV Coalition filed this petition on Dec. 28, 2004.”
Martin’s FCC was under the gun to report the status of the Tier III waiver requests because last year’s 911 bill required it to make a report on Tier III carriers’ E911 obligations within 90 days of the president signing the bill into law. President George W. Bush signed the Enhanced 911 bill on Dec. 22, making March 23 the deadline for the report to Congress.
The FCC released the report Friday.
The 32 waivers continue a trend of granting rural carriers relief from E911 obligations. According to the report, the FCC has granted 175 whole or partial waivers during the past nine years. The commission has denied or dismissed nine other requests.
In addition to reporting on the status of the Tier III waiver requests, the FCC also attempted to educate Congress on wireless and E911 technology and the interplay between air interfaces and carrier circumstances. It describes the various air interfaces and the differences among handset, network and hybrid solutions for meeting the E911 Phase II mandate. It also describes the advantages and disadvantages of each.
“In the end, there is no one solution that is necessarily better than another. Each Tier III carrier must assess its own situation in terms of geography, technology, economics and ease of implementation to determine which solution for Phase II E911 best complies with the FCC’s Phase II accuracy requirements,” said the FCC.
E911 service is being deployed in two phases.
Phase I required carriers to supply public safety answering points with a callback number and cell-site location information. The initial deadline was April 1, 1998, or six months after receipt of a valid PSAP request, whichever is later.
Phase II requires more precise location information. It was supposed to be available in some areas by Oct. 1, 2001, but the FCC waived that requirement, giving each nationwide carrier a different implementation schedule. All carriers employing a handset-based location solution must ensure that 95 percent of their subscribers have location-capable handsets by 2006 and must fully deploy Phase II in any particular area within six months of receiving a valid PSAP request. Carriers employing a network-based location solution must deploy Phase II to 50 percent of a PSAP’s area within six months after receiving a valid request, and must finish deploying in the PSAP’s area within 18 months. In Phase II deployments, network-based solutions must be able to locate the caller within 100 meters 67 percent of the time and within 300 meters 95 percent of the time.
Handset-based solutions must be able to locate the caller within 50 meters 67 percent of the time and within 150 meters 95 percent of the time. The FCC’s Wireless Telecommunications Bureau said in January that it expects that by the end of the year, 95 percent of the handsets used by customers of carriers that have chosen the handset solution will comply with the FCC’s rules.
E911 deployment began in 1994, but did not gain momentum until recently. While nationwide carriers are making progress, rural carriers complain it has been a more difficult process for them.
Rural carriers have noted that a GSM handset solution will not be available to meet the deadline, and a network-based solution is impractical because triangulation is often difficult as towers are placed in a “string-of-pearls” fashion along highways. Many rural carriers have said they are tied to upgrading to GSM technology due to roaming agreements.
At what geographic level should accuracy be measured has caused a division within a subcommittee of the FCC’s Network Reliability & Interoperability Council. Carriers wanted accuracy to be measured at the network level, and public safety wanted accuracy to be measured at the PSAP level.
“Fundamental differences exist among the stakeholders regarding the geographical areas that define the accuracy certifications and reporting area,” according to a draft report, expected to be adopted at Tuesday’s NRIC meeting and obtained by RCR Wireless News.
The subcommittee is expected to recommend accuracy be measured at the state level and that rural carriers meet the same accuracy as larger carriers serving their coverage area.
The Association of Public-safety Communications Officials refused to agree to the report. The reasons for APCO’s dissent are not immediately known, but according to a draft report obtained by RCR Wireless News, “APCO, although participating in this proceeding, elected not to support the final consensus document,” according to a footnote after the subcommittee says it reached a “majority consensus.”
It has been 11 years since the FCC took its first steps toward a nationwide wireless E911 system.
