Canada’s telecom regulator ordered every cellphone service provider operating in Canada to provide its subscribers with access to a local available 911 emergency service. Under the Tues. decision, wireless carriers must offer a wireless, enhanced 911 or E911 service including toll-free access to at least one of the call centers on a 24/7 basis to give 911 operators subscriber information such as addresses and phone numbers in emergency situations. Carriers also must file plans with the Canadian Radio-TV & Telecom Commission (CRTC) within 90 days on how they will inform new subscribers about the emergency services they offer and periodically update existing customers. No deadline was set for the enhanced 911 because “it’s a bit complex to do so simultaneously across the country,” a CRTC spokesman said. Carriers will need to order equipment and make arrangements with phone companies and 911 call centers, he said. But the technology should be in place across Canada in 6-12 months, he said: “Today’s decision sets a clear goal that this capability is to be offered nationwide and instructing the carriers to do so… We think it’s significant to say, ‘Thou shall do this.'” Previously, wireless providers weren’t required to transmit emergency calls unless they had accepted “the status and all of the obligations of a competitive local exchange carrier” such as Bell Canada or Telus, the Commission said. But in March 2001, Montreal-based telecom Microcell, which had been ordered to offer E911 in large cities, asked the Commission to order all phone companies to provide enhanced network access services. Of the country’s 3 other wireless carriers, Bell and Telus both offer wireless E911 in a few large cities and Rogers doesn’t offer the service at all, a company spokesmen confirmed. Bell said smaller cities were next on its agenda while Telus said it was working on the provinces of Ontario and Quebec and a Rogers spokesman said the company would start with big cities but didn’t know when. The Commission said its long-awaited decision “reaffirmed the importance of 911 service to enhancing public safety by updating 911 regulations” for cellphone carriers.

INDIANAPOLIS -- FCC Chmn. Powell told the Assn. of Public Safety Communications Officials (APCO) here Mon. the agency’s E911 Coordination Initiative would focus next on working with governors’ offices to build support for ensuring state funds set aside for E911 rollout were used for that purpose. “Consumers have an expectation that fees appearing on their bills for E911 will be used to further the deployment of these life-saving technologies, and we must ensure that those expectations are honored,” he said. Outlining the Commission’s next steps on E911, Powell also said it was creating a technical group on 911 network architecture and technical standards that would work under the Network Reliability & Interoperability Council (NRIC).

Five wireless carriers asked the FCC to review a Wireless Bureau letter last month that provided guidance on wireless local number portability (LNP) implementation issues. AllTel, AT&T Wireless, Cingular Wireless, Nextel and Sprint said they weren’t asking the full Commission to derail a Nov. 24 wireless LNP deadline. But they said the letter created more uncertainty and “upset carriers’ legitimate expectations, hindering efforts to finalize LNP implementation plans.”

Cingular Wireless told the FCC last week in a quarterly report on its Enhanced 911 rollout that it continued to make progress on Phase 1 and Phase 2 deployment, but some issues remained in areas such as the readiness of public safety answering points (PSAPs). Cingular said it had received 1,302 PSAP requests for Phase 2 service and 97.5% of them were in service or “in progress.” Of the remaining 33, 7 have been withdrawn and 26 are invalid, the filing said. Cingular said classification of a PSAP request as “invalid” under the Commission’s reporting requirements didn’t mean it had stopped work on rollout efforts. “In most instances, Cingular continues to move forward with its deployment efforts,” it said. So far, it said it had received 320 PSAP requests for Phase 2 services on its GSM networks. “Deployments will occur on a geographic basis such that PSAPs in proximity to one another requesting E911 Phase 2 service will be deployed together,” Cingular said. It said that kind of prioritization of requests would maximize the number of subscribers and PSAPs that would receive service while meeting FCC requirements. On its TDMA networks, Cingular said it had deployed Phase 2-compliant technology at 5,274 cell sites. It told the FCC it had completed end-to-end testing and had begun providing caller location information to PSAPs from 4,104 of those sites. “Because of PSAP readiness issues, however, PSAPs were unable to receive location information from 1,170 of the 5,274 cell sites,” it said. Cingular said it had received 437 requests for Phase 2 service on its TDMA networks. “Cingular has deployed its location solution in its service area that covers 363 of these requests; the 60 remaining PSAPs are planned for deployment,” it said. Of the 363 deployments, 133 PSAPs weren’t ready to accept Phase 2 data, it said. Many of the public safety centers weren’t able to complete end-to-end testing of Phase 2 because of readiness problems, including a lack of certain upgraded equipment, it said.

Verizon Wireless told the FCC in an Enhanced 911 quarterly status report that it now could support E911 Phase 2 service requests in markets that had equipment by all 3 of its switch vendors. It also told the FCC it had: (1) Met milestones for finalizing the rollout of the network-assisted part of its Assisted GPS/Advanced Forward Link Trilateration (AGPS/AFLT) in Lucent and Nortel markets by last April and last Aug., respectively. (2) Completed deployment of the network-assisted part of AGPS/AFLT in its Motorola markets by March 1. (3) Deployed Phase 1 E911 service to another 125 public safety answering points (PSAPs) since its last quarterly report to the Commission in May. Verizon said it now offered Phase 1 E911 service to 1,975 PSAPs. (4) Rolled out Phase 2 service to 244 additional PSAPs since its last report. It now offers Phase 2 service to 699 PSAPs. (5) Introduced an interim Enhanced Forward Trilateration Link solution in markets served by Lucent and Nortel switches that was activated along with the Phase 2 AGPS/AFLT service to PSAPs that requested it. Verizon Wireless also told the Commission it now sold 15 GPS-capable handsets that could transmit caller location. The carrier said it had met the FCC’s 25% handset deployment target set by the FCC that was to be met by March 30. Verizon said 35% of the new handsets activated in the period ending March 30 met that target. It has another milestone that at least half of all handsets sold be compliant with those caller location capabilities by Dec. 30. Verizon said it now was selling handsets to meet the deployment target. In addition to detailing the counties where E911 Phase 2 requests by PSAPs had been met, Verizon Wireless said that more than a year after meeting deployment deadlines in St. Louis County, Mo., and Chicago, PSAPs hadn’t yet acquired certain LEC upgrades needed to activate their E911 service. In the case of St. Louis, the company said the county’s PSAP was disputing selective router charges by Southwestern Bell, which it said wouldn’t install facilities for the wireless carrier until it received confirmation that its charges for the selective router would be paid. The county has declined to pay the charges since Jan. 2002. Verizon said that problem had prevented it from turning on Phase 1 and Phase 2 technology it deployed in the county more than a year ago. In some cases LECs are “declining to provision trunk orders until an interconnection agreement amendment is finalized to cover E911 services,” the carrier said. “Disputes with LECs over the appropriate party to bill for various network charges has also delayed implementation.” In other cases, the carrier said a handful of state 911 authorities had asked it to provide a “proof of concept” demonstration before they would authorize deployments in a particular state. “This process can significantly forestall meeting the 6-month deployment window, especially if the 911 authority is testing with multiple carriers on a sequential basis,” Verizon said. In some cases, even if such a demonstration isn’t required, state 911 bodies must approve a carrier’s deployment plan before work can move forward, it said.

Verizon distanced itself Thurs. from a letter issued by 3 ILEC trade groups, including USTA, that told Senate Commerce Committee Chmn. McCain (R-Ariz.) that it would be a “serious mistake” for the FCC to stick to a Nov. 24 deadline for wireless local number portability. Verizon is one of the largest members of USTA. It had announced last month that it was reversing its earlier opposition to wireless LNP and wasn’t likely to impose a surcharge of more than 15 cents per customer after the Nov. 24 deadline. The joint letter from USTA, the Independent Telephone & Telecommunications Alliance and the Western Alliance said the FCC had not resolved serious implementation issues on wireless LNP, including factors related to E911 callbacks and wireless-wireline porting (CD July 24 p8). The only “real” deadline for wireless LNP should be the point at which the FCC resolved those issues, the letter said. “Verizon agrees there are real issues with wireless LNP that can adversely affect the customer’s experience if not resolved,” a Verizon spokesman said. “But we are not calling for delaying implementation. Yes, the FCC has an important role to play in providing guidelines, but we call for all involved to roll up their sleeves and solve the problems to get the job done.” Meanwhile, AT&T Wireless officials said in an earnings conference call late Wed. that customer turnover decisions don’t appear to be shaped now in anticipation of the Nov. 24 deadline. The carrier reported churn (customer turnover rate) of 2.2% in the 2nd quarter, which officials said was 20 basis points better than the year-ago period. Asked by an analyst whether customers appeared to be hanging on to their phones in anticipation of the LNP date, Michael Keith, pres.- mobility operations, said that hadn’t had an impact. Meanwhile, several wireless carriers are expected to file a petition for review next week at the FCC of a July 3 letter from Bureau Chief John Muleta on wireless LNP implementation issues. CTIA had told the bureau earlier this month that Muleta’s guidance didn’t go far enough to address industry questions on LNP. The group had asked for clarification of several implementation issues after the U.S. Appeals Court, D.C., last month turned down a wireless industry challenge to the Commission’s decision to retain LNP requirement on wireless operators. Muleta said carriers wouldn’t be held liable for 911 callbacks that were lost during the porting period, citing the “mixed service” period during which a customer porting a number between wireless and wireline service might not have the correct callback number listed for a 911 operator. Among other issues that Muleta said would be addressed before the Nov. 24 deadline are how to handle a wireline customer who ports to a wireless carrier without a rate center presence in the customer’s wireline rate center.

Three ILEC trade groups told Sen. McCain (R-Ariz.) it would be a “serious mistake” for the FCC to stick to its current deadline of Nov. 24 for implementing wireless local number portability (WLNP), based on the number of issues the agency hadn’t resolved in that area. “The only real deadline for WLNP implementation should be the point in time at which the Commission effectively addresses the foregoing implementation issues,” the groups said. USTA, the Independent Telephone & Telecommunications Alliance and the Western Alliance said in a July 22 letter to McCain that they had “grave concerns” about the lack of FCC guidance. Keeping to the current deadline with those issues unanswered “would invite chaos into what should otherwise be an orderly implementation process,” the groups said. Unresolved issues they cited included: (1) Enhanced 911 calls, which they said wouldn’t be transmitted to a public safety answering point with the requisite valid call-back number “without additional Commission action.” (2) Inadvertent toll charges. The groups said that as numbers were ported between wireless and wireline networks, it would become harder for consumers to determine whether the call they were placing was local or toll. They said the FCC hadn’t taken steps to minimize that potential source of consumer confusion. (3) The FCC hadn’t created a standardized intercarrier communication process or a porting interval to resolve the technical and operating issues that stemmed from wireless and wireline LNP. The groups said the wireless industry had worked on protocols for porting numbers between wireless operators, but said wireline-wireless porting still had several unresolved issues, including the implications for rate centers, communications protocols, porting intervals and dispute resolution. “To date, the Commission has not resolved these issues,” they said. “Practically speaking, it has left itself little choice in the matter if it is to keep to its pending November 24 deadline since any real intermodal communication protocols would likely take longer to develop and would require active Commission oversight.”

Correction: The FCC approved a consent decree last week in which T-Mobile USA agreed to make a voluntary $1.1 million contribution to the U.S. Treasury to resolve possible violations of the agency’s Enhanced 911 Phase 2 rules and a Commission waiver (CD July 18 p7).

The FCC approved a consent decree in which T-Mobile USA agreed to pay $1.25 million to the U.S. Treasury to resolve possible violations of the agency’s Enhanced 911 Phase 2 rules and a Commission waiver. Earlier this year, an FCC Enforcement Bureau investigation found that in more than 450 cases, T-Mobile hadn’t furnished E911 Phase 1 service within 6 months of a request from a public safety answering point (PSAP). The Commission said at the time that it had granted T-Mobile a waiver for its E911 Phase 2 rules, but that the carrier never sought more time or other relief from Phase 1 rules. The temporary waiver, granted in 2000, gave the carrier more time to deploy a hybrid network and handset- based technology called Enhanced Observed Time Difference of Arrival (EOTD) across its GSM network. T-Mobile subsequently requested changes in the waiver and ultimately told the FCC in March it had decided to establish a network-based solution for Phase 2 instead of EOTD. Under the consent order, T- Mobile agreed to: (1) Roll out Phase 2 technology at a minimum of 1,000 cell sites within 9 months. T-Mobile must give priority to markets with pending PSAP requests that are valid. (2) Deploy Phase 2 solutions for at least 2,000 cell sites within 10 months. (3) Deploy Phase 2 technology for at least 4,000 cell sites and provide Phase 2 service at 2,000 of those sites within 13 months. (4) Deploy Phase 2 technology for at least 6,000 cell sites within 16 months and for at least 8,000 within 19 months. (5) Provide a compliant Phase 2 service to half of PSAP coverage areas or population within 19 months, with all of the coverage areas served within 22 months, for any valid PSAP requests received after April 30, 2003, but before Feb. 28, 2004. (6) Provide Phase 2 service to half of PSAPs’ coverage areas or population within 6 months and 100% of the coverage area within 15 months of receiving the request for valid PSAP requests received after Feb. 28, 2004 As part of the agreement, T- Mobile said that if it missed any of the benchmarks that involved cell site deployment, it would pay $450,000 to the govt. for the first one that was missed, $900,000 for the 2nd and $1.8 million for the 3rd and any after that. “T-Mobile is committed to working with local E911 organizations and all involved parties on the swift implementation of E911 Phase II,” the company said. “It is moving forward expeditiously on its E911 Phase II deployment timeline.” The fine marks the first time the FCC has taken such enforcement action involving a Phase 1 violation of its E911 rules. Previous E91 enforcement moves that involved fines covered Phase 2 compliance, including a $2 million consent decree the FCC approved last fall with AT&T Wireless.

The Senate Commerce Committee is scheduled to mark up E- 911 legislation (S-1250) today (Thurs.) at 9:30 a.m. in Russell Bldg. Rm. 253. The bill was introduced by Communications Subcommittee Chmn. Burns (R-Mont.) and Sen. Clinton (D-N.Y.), who are co-chmn. of the Congressional E-911 Caucus.