Wireless Radio Services; Compatibility With Enhanced 911 Emergency Calling Systems

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