2294 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 9 / Thursday, January 13, 2011 / Proposed Rules 

Dated: December 29, 2010. 

Susan Hedman, 

Regional Administrator, Region 5. 

[FR Doc. 2011–342 Filed 1–12–11; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

40 CFR Part 52 

[EPA–R09–OAR–2010–1078; FRL–9252–7] 

Revision to the South Coast Portion of 

the California State Implementation 

Plan, CPV Sentinel Energy Project AB 

1318 Tracking System 

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA). 

ACTION: Proposed Rule. 

SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA) is proposing to approve a 

source-specific State Implementation 

Plan (SIP) revision for the South Coast 

Air Quality Management District 

(District) portion of the California SIP. 

This source-specific SIP revision is 

known as the CPV Sentinel Energy 

Project AB 1318 Tracking System. The 

submitted SIP revision, which consists 

of enabling language and the AB 1318 

Tracking System, supplements the 

District’s SIP approved New Source 

Review (NSR) program to allow the 

District to transfer offsetting emission 

reductions for particulate matter less 

than 10 microns in diameter (PM10) and 

one of its precursors, sulfur oxides 

(SOX), to the CPV Sentinel Energy 

Project. The District’s SIP approved NSR 

program currently allows the District to 

provide offsetting emission reductions 

for certain exempt sources and sources 

that qualify as essential public services. 

The Sentinel Energy Project, which will 

be a natural gas fired power plant, does 

not qualify under either of these SIP 

approved exceptions. This proposed 

action supplements the District’s SIP to 

allow the District to transfer offsetting 

emission reductions to the Sentinel 

Energy Project. In this action, EPA is 

proposing to incorporate the District’s 

enabling language, which in turn 

incorporates the AB 1318 Tracking 

System by reference into the SIP. EPA’s 

proposal to approve this source-specific 

SIP revision is based on finding that the 

offsetting emission reductions the 

District has transferred to the AB 1318 

Tracking System meet the requirements 

of the Clean Air Act (CAA). 

DATES: Comments on this Notice of 

Proposed Rulemaking (NPR) must be 

submitted no later than February 14, 

2011. 

ADDRESSES: Submit comments, 

identified by docket number EPA–R09– 

OAR–2010–1078, by one of the 

following methods: 

1. Federal eRulemaking Portal: 

http://www.regulations.gov. Follow the 

on-line instructions. 

2. E-mail: r9airpermits@epa.gov. 

3. Mail or deliver: Gerardo Rios (Air– 

3), U.S. Environmental Protection 

Agency Region IX, 75 Hawthorne Street, 

San Francisco, CA 94105–3901. 

Instructions: All comments will be 

included in the public docket without 

change and may be made available 

online at www.regulations.gov, 

including any personal information 

provided, unless the comment includes 

Confidential Business Information (CBI) 

or other information whose disclosure is 

restricted by statute. Information that 

you consider CBI or otherwise protected 

should be clearly identified as such and 

should not be submitted through http:// 

www.regulations.gov or e-mail. http:// 

www.regulations.gov is an ‘‘anonymous 

access’’ system, and EPA will not know 

your identity or contact information 

unless you provide it in the body of 

your comment. If you send e-mail 

directly to EPA, your e-mail address 

will be automatically captured and 

included as part of the public comment. 

If EPA cannot read your comment due 

to technical difficulties and cannot 

contact you for clarification, EPA may 

not be able to consider your comment. 

Docket: The index to the docket for 

this action is available electronically at 

http://www.regulations.gov and in hard 

copy at EPA Region IX, 75 Hawthorne 

Street, San Francisco, California. While 

all documents in the docket are listed in 

the index, some information may be 

publicly available only at the hard copy 

location (e.g., copyrighted material), and 

some may not be publicly available in 

either location (e.g., CBI). To inspect the 

hard copy materials, please schedule an 

appointment during normal business 

hours with the contact listed in the FOR

FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Laura Yannayon, EPA Region IX, (415) 

972–3524, yannayon.laura@epa.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Throughout this document, ‘‘we’’, ‘‘us’’, 

and ‘‘our’’ refer to EPA. 

Table of Contents 

I. Background 

A. Facility Description and Background 

B. Emission Offsets 

C. Procedural History of Source Specific 

SIP Revision 

II. Evaluation of Source Specific SIP Revision 

A. What is in the SIP revision? 

B. What are the Federal Clean Air Act 

requirements? 

C. SIP Relaxation 

D. Public Comment and Final Action 

III. Administrative Requirements 

A. Executive Order 12866, Regulatory 

Planning and Review 

B. Paperwork Reduction Act 

C. Regulatory Flexibility Act 

D. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act 

E. Executive Order 13132, Federalism 

F. Executive Order 13175, Coordination 

With Indian Tribal Governments 

G. Executive Order 13045, Protection of 

Children From Environmental Health 

Risks and Safety Risks 

H. Executive Order 13211, Actions That 

Significantly Affect Energy Supply, 

Distribution, or Use 

I. National Technology Transfer and 

Advancement Act 

J. Executive Order 12898: Federal Actions 

To Address Environmental Justice in 

Minority Populations and Low-Income 

Population 

I. Background 

A. Facility Description and Background 

The proposed Sentinel Energy Project 

is designed to be a nominally rated 850 

megawatt electrical generating facility 

covering approximately 37 acres within 

Riverside County, adjacent to Palm 

Springs, California. The Sentinel Energy 

Project will emit air pollutants from 

eight General Electric LMS100 

combustion turbine generators equipped 

with oxidation catalyst and selective 

catalytic reduction equipment, eight 

single cell mechanical draft cooling 

towers, and a 240 brake horsepower Tier 

III diesel emergency fire pump engine. 

The California Energy Commission 

(CEC) approved the application for 

certification for Sentinel on December 1, 

2010. The District issued a Final 

Determination of Compliance (FDOC) 

and an Addendum to the FDOC, known 

as Appendix N, on March 2, 2010. 

Appendix N to the FDOC has evolved 

into the AB 1318 Tracking System 

submitted as part of this SIP revision. 

The CEC certification and the District’s 

FDOC require the Sentinel Energy 

Project to install and operate stringent 

emissions controls to reduce emissions 

of NOX, VOC, CO and PM10 to the 

lowest achievable emissions rates. 

B. Emission Offsets 

Pursuant to section 173 of the CAA, 

new major stationary sources are 

required to provide offsetting emission 

reductions for any non-attainment 

pollutants that continue to be emitted 

after operation of the most stringent 

emissions controls, if those levels 

exceed certain thresholds. 42 U.S.C. 

7503(a)(1)(A). The District implements 

these requirements through its NSR 

program in Regulation XIII, which EPA 

approved into the SIP in 1996 as 


srobinson on DSKHWCL6B1PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 9 / Thursday, January 13, 2011 / Proposed Rules 2295 

1When sources are exempt from offsets pursuant 

to Rule 1304 or entitled to allocations pursuant to 

Continued 

meeting the requirements for CAA 

Section 110, Part D. 61 FR 64291. 

The District estimated the amount of 

offsetting emission reductions that 

Sentinel must provide to comply with 

District Rule 1303 and CAA § 173 for all 

non-attainment pollutants. For all 

pollutants other than PM10 and SOX, 

Sentinel has purchased Emission 

Reduction Credits (ERCs) on the open 

market. Those ERCs comply with Rule 

1309. 

For PM10 and SOX emissions, the 

California Legislature enacted California 

Assembly Bill (AB) 1318, which went 

into effect on January 1, 2010. AB 1318 

requires the District, upon making a 

specified finding, to transfer SOX and 

PM10 emission offsets from its internal 

bank to eligible electric generating 

facilities. The District determined that 

the Sentinel Energy Project met all of 

the requirements of an eligible electric 

generating facility and made the 

required finding. 

AB 1318 also establishes requirements 

for the District’s implementation of 

transferring the offsetting emission 

reductions from its internal bank to an 

eligible electric generating facility and 

for tracking the transfer of offsetting 

emissions reductions. The District 

completed those requirements as 

documented in Appendix N to the 

FDOC, which has evolved into the AB 

1318 Tracking System for this SIP 

revision. The offsetting emission 

reductions transferred to the AB 1318 

Tracking System from the District’s 

internal bank were created by permitted 

equipment that permanently ceased or 

reduced operations in District. The 

District examined each of these 

offsetting emission reductions and 

determined that they met the ‘‘integrity 

criteria’’ established in CAA § 173(c). 

Specifically, the District determined 

that the offsetting emission reductions 

were real, permanent, quantifiable, 

enforceable and surplus. The District 

then transferred those specific PM10 and 

SOX offsetting emission reductions out 

of its internal bank and into the AB 

1318 Tracking System. These offsetting 

emission reductions are no longer 

available for use in any other action. 

The amounts of offsetting emission 

reductions the District transferred from 

its internal bank to the AB 1318 

Tracking System are based on estimated 

actual PM10 and SOX emissions reported 

to the District according to its Annual 

Emissions Reporting Program. For each 

source of offsetting emission reductions 

from a permanent shutdown of 

equipment, the District has inactivated 

that source’s permit. For each offsetting 

emission reduction created by a source 

reducing emissions, the District has 

revised the source’s federally 

enforceable permit to ensure the 

reduction is permanent. The complete 

list of PM10 and SOX offsetting emission 

reductions is provided in the AB 1318 

Tracking System which is attached to 

EPA’s Technical Support Document 

(TSD). Documentation for each of these 

offsetting emission reductions is 

included in the docket for this proposal. 

C. Procedural History of Source Specific 

SIP Revision 

The District adopted the CPV Sentinel 

Energy Project AB 1318 Tracking 

System on July 9, 2010. The California 

Air Resources Board (CARB) submitted 

the CPV Sentinel Energy Project AB 

1318 Tracking System to EPA as a 

source specific SIP revision on 

September 10, 2010. EPA issued a 

completeness letter on October 27, 2010, 

finding that the submittal had met the 

completeness criteria in 40 CFR Part 51 

Appendix V. 

II. Evaluation of Source Specific SIP 

Revision 

A. What is in the SIP revision? 

The package that the District, through 

CARB, submitted to EPA consists of text 

to be included as a revision to the 

District’s portion of the California SIP, 

and the Sentinel Energy Project AB 1318 

Tracking System created to implement 

this new SIP provision. The District’s 

SIP text incorporates the Sentinel 

Energy Project AB 1318 Tracking 

System by reference. The AB 1318 

Tracking System includes specific 

offsetting emission reductions that were 

identified from reductions of SOX and 

PM10 occurring between 1999 and 2008 

from permitted equipment that has 

either permanently ceased operations in 

the District or became subject to 

federally enforceable conditions that 

reduced actual emissions. The District 

has not issued any Rule 1309 ERCs for 

these specific emissions reductions and 

has inactivated the permits for the 

equipment that has been shut down. 

These SOX and PM10 offsetting emission 

reductions were transferred out of the 

District’s internal bank and into the AB 

1318 Tracking System. These reductions 

have not been used by any other source 

and cannot be used for any other source 

in the future if they are used to 

construct the CPV Sentinel Energy 

Project. A copy of the AB 1318 Tracking 

System for CPV Sentinel is included as 

an attachment to the TSD for this action. 

The text of the proposed sourcespecific SIP revision, in relevant part, is: 

The Executive Officer of the South Coast 

Air Quality Management District shall 

transfer sulfur oxides and particulate 

emission credits from the CPV Sentinel 

Energy Project AB 1318 Tracking System, 

attached hereto and incorporated by 

reference herein, to eligible electrical 

generating facilities pursuant to Health and 

Safety Code section 40440.14, as in effect 

January 1, 2010, (i.e. the CPV Sentinel Power 

Plant to be located in Desert Hot Springs, CA) 

in the full amounts needed to issue permits 

to construct and to meet requirements for 

sulfur oxides and particulate matter 

emissions. Notwithstanding District Rule 

1303, this SIP revision provides a federally 

enforceable mechanism for transferring 

offsets from the AQMD’s internal accounts to 

the CPV Sentinel Project. 

The SIP revision is intended to 

provide a federally approved and 

enforceable mechanism for the District 

to transfer PM10 and SOX offsetting 

emissions reductions from the District’s 

internal bank to the Sentinel Energy 

Project and to track those emissions 

credits through the AB 1318 Tracking 

System. 

B. What are the Federal Clean Air Act 

requirements? 

The South Coast Air Basin is an 

extreme non-attainment area for ozone 

and a serious non-attainment area for 

PM10. Sulfur oxide emissions are PM10

precursors and are therefore also treated 

as a PM10 non-attainment pollutant. As 

required by CAA § 110(a)(2)(C), SIPs are 

required to include provisions to 

comply with CAA Part D for nonattainment pollutants. Among the Part D 

requirements, § 173(a)(1)(A) requires 

offsetting emission reductions for new 

and modified major stationary sources. 

Section 173(c) requires the offsetting 

emission reductions to be real, 

quantifiable, surplus, permanent, and 

enforceable. 

The District’s NSR permitting 

program is contained in District 

Regulation XIII, which was approved 

into the South Coast portion of the 

California SIP on December 4, 1996, for 

purposes of complying with the CAA 

Part D. (61 FR 64291). District Rule 

1303(b)(2) requires the District to deny 

a permit to construct a new source or 

modify an existing source unless it is 

exempt from offset requirements 

pursuant to Rule 1304, emissions 

increases are offset by ERCs approved 

pursuant to Rule 1309, or the source 

obtains allocations from the District’s 

Priority Reserve accounts in accordance 

with the provisions of Rule 1309.1. For 

PM10 and SOX emissions, Sentinel is not 

exempt pursuant to Rule 1304 and does 

not qualify for allocations from the 

Priority Reserve.1


srobinson on DSKHWCL6B1PROD with PROPOSALS
2296 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 9 / Thursday, January 13, 2011 / Proposed Rules 

Rule 1309.1, the District deducts sufficient emission 

credits from its internal bank of credits to offset any 

emissions that would be subject to Federal offset 

requirements. The District prepares annual reports 

to show that it has adequate emissions credits in its 

internal bank. 

2Air Quality Demonstration: SIP Revision for 

CPV Sentinel Energy Project 

However, the California legislature 

directed the District to provide 

offsetting emission reductions from the 

District’s internal bank to the Sentinel 

Energy Project (providing it qualified) to 

offset its PM10 and SOX emissions. This 

source-specific SIP revision approves 

the Sentinel Energy Project AB 1318 

Tracking System to provide the 

federally enforceable mechanism 

allowing the District to transfer PM10

and SOX offsetting emission reductions 

to meet the requirements of Rule 

1303(b). 

EPA has reviewed the documents 

provided for each offsetting emission 

reduction the District has transferred to 

the AB 1318 Tracking System. We are 

proposing to find that the PM10 and SOX

offsetting emission reductions 

transferred to the AB 1318 Tracking 

System meet the CAA Section 173 

requirements that emission reductions 

used as offsets be real, quantifiable, 

surplus, permanent, and enforceable 

prior to use. The TSD for this action 

provides more detail regarding how the 

offsetting emission reductions 

transferred to the AB 1318 Tracking 

System meet these requirements. 

C. SIP Relaxation 

Under section 110(l) of the CAA, EPA 

may not approve any SIP revision that 

would interfere with attainment, 

reasonable further progress (RFP) or any 

other CAA requirement. 

We believe this revision will not 

interfere with attainment or RFP 

because the emission credits in the AB 

1318 Tracking System are not relied on 

for attainment or RFP in the District’s 

most recent attainment demonstrations. 

We are also not aware of this revision 

interfering with any other CAA 

requirement. For example, this sourcespecific SIP revision provides a new but 

equivalent mechanism to provisions in 

Regulation XIII for satisfying the offset 

requirements of CAA § 173 because the 

offsetting emission reductions the 

District is transferring from its internal 

bank to the AB 1318 Tracking System 

meet all Federal requirements. In 

addition, the District supplied a copy of 

its air quality analysis for the CPV 

Sentinel Energy Project which shows 

that operation of the facility will not 

interfere with the ability of the District 

to reach attainment.2

D. Public Comment and Final Action 

Because EPA believes the submittal 

fulfills all relevant requirements, we are 

proposing to fully approve it as 

described in section 110(k)(3) of the Act. 

We will accept comments from the 

public on this proposal for the next 30 

days. Unless we receive convincing new 

information during the comment period, 

we intend to publish a final approval 

action that will incorporate this 

submittal into the federally enforceable 

SIP. 

III. Administrative Requirements 

A. Executive Order 12866, Regulatory 

Planning and Review 

The Office of Management and Budget 

(OMB) has exempted this regulatory 

action from Executive Order 12866, 

entitled ‘‘Regulatory Planning and 

Review.’’ 

B. Paperwork Reduction Act 

This action does not impose an 

information collection burden under the 

provisions of the Paperwork Reduction 

Act, 44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq. Burden is 

defined at 5 CFR 1320.3(b). 

C. Regulatory Flexibility Act 

The Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA) 

generally requires an agency to conduct 

a regulatory flexibility analysis of any 

rule subject to notice and comment 

rulemaking requirements unless the 

agency certifies that the rule will not 

have a significant economic impact on 

a substantial number of small entities. 

Small entities include small businesses, 

small not-for-profit enterprises, and 

small governmental jurisdictions. 

This rule will not have a significant 

impact on a substantial number of small 

entities because SIP approvals under 

section 110 and subchapter I, part D of 

the Clean Air Act do not create any new 

requirements but simply approve 

requirements that the State is already 

imposing. Therefore, because the 

Federal SIP approval does not create 

any new requirements, I certify that this 

action will not have a significant 

economic impact on a substantial 

number of small entities. 

Moreover, due to the nature of the 

Federal-State relationship under the 

Clean Air Act, preparation of flexibility 

analysis would constitute Federal 

inquiry into the economic 

reasonableness of State action. The 

Clean Air Act forbids EPA to base its 

actions concerning SIPs on such 

grounds. Union Electric Co., v. U.S. 

EPA, 427 U.S. 246, 255–66 (1976); 42 

U.S.C. 7410(a)(2). 

D. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act 

Under sections 202 of the Unfunded 

Mandates Reform Act of 1995 

(‘‘Unfunded Mandates Act’’), signed into 

law on March 22, 1995, EPA must 

prepare a budgetary impact statement to 

accompany any proposed or final rule 

that includes a Federal mandate that 

may result in estimated costs to State, 

local, or tribal governments in the 

aggregate; or to the private sector, of 

$100 million or more. Under section 

205, EPA must select the most costeffective and least burdensome 

alternative that achieves the objectives 

of the rule and is consistent with 

statutory requirements. Section 203 

requires EPA to establish a plan for 

informing and advising any small 

governments that may be significantly 

or uniquely impacted by the rule. 

EPA has determined that the approval 

action proposed does not include a 

Federal mandate that may result in 

estimated costs of $100 million or more 

to either State, local, or tribal 

governments in the aggregate, or to the 

private sector. This Federal action 

proposes to approve pre-existing 

requirements under State or local law, 

and imposes no new requirements. 

Accordingly, no additional costs to 

State, local, or tribal governments, or to 

the private sector, result from this 

action. 

E. Executive Order 13132, Federalism 

Federalism (64 FR 43255, August 10, 

1999) revokes and replaces Executive 

Orders 12612 (Federalism) and 12875 

(Enhancing the Intergovernmental 

Partnership). Executive Order 13132 

requires EPA to develop an accountable 

process to ensure ‘‘meaningful and 

timely input by State and local officials 

in the development of regulatory 

policies that have federalism 

implications.’’ ‘‘Policies that have 

federalism implications’’ is defined in 

the Executive Order to include 

regulations that have ‘‘substantial direct 

effects on the States, on the relationship 

between the national government and 

the States, or on the distribution of 

power and responsibilities among the 

various levels of government.’’ Under 

Executive Order 13132, EPA may not 

issue a regulation that has federalism 

implications, that imposes substantial 

direct compliance costs, and that is not 

required by statute, unless the Federal 

Government provides the funds 

necessary to pay the direct compliance 

costs incurred by State and local 

governments, or EPA consults with 

State and local officials early in the 

process of developing the proposed 

regulation. EPA also may not issue a 


srobinson on DSKHWCL6B1PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 9 / Thursday, January 13, 2011 / Proposed Rules 2297 

regulation that has federalism 

implications and that preempts State 

law unless the Agency consults with 

State and local officials early in the 

process of developing the proposed 

regulation. 

This rule will not have substantial 

direct effects on the States, on the 

relationship between the national 

government and the States, or on the 

distribution of power and 

responsibilities among the various 

levels of government, as specified in 

Executive Order 13132, because it 

merely approves a State rule 

implementing a Federal standard, and 

does not alter the relationship or the 

distribution of power and 

responsibilities established in the Clean 

Air Act. Thus, the requirements of 

section 6 of the Executive Order do not 

apply to this rule. 

F. Executive Order 13175, Coordination 

With Indian Tribal Governments 

Executive Order 13175, entitled 

‘‘Consultation and Coordination with 

Indian Tribal Governments’’ (65 FR 

67249, November 9, 2000), requires EPA 

to develop an accountable process to 

ensure ‘‘meaningful and timely input by 

tribal officials in the development of 

regulatory policies that have tribal 

implications.’’ This proposed rule does 

not have tribal implications, as specified 

in Executive Order 13175. It will not 

have substantial direct effects on tribal 

governments, on the relationship 

between the Federal Government and 

Indian tribes, or on the distribution of 

power and responsibilities between the 

Federal Government and Indian tribes. 

Thus, Executive Order 13175 does not 

apply to this rule. 

G. Executive Order 13045, Protection of 

Children From Environmental Health 

Risks and Safety Risks 

EPA interprets Executive Order 13045 

(62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997) as 

applying only to those regulatory 

actions that concern health or safety 

risks, such that the analysis required 

under section 5–501 of the Executive 

Order has the potential to influence the 

regulation. This rule is not subject to 

Executive Order 13045, because it 

approves a State rule implementing a 

Federal standard. 

H. Executive Order 13211, Actions That 

Significantly Affect Energy Supply, 

Distribution, or Use 

This rule is not subject to Executive 

Order 13211, ‘‘Actions Concerning 

Regulations That Significantly Affect 

Energy Supply, Distribution, or Use’’ (66 

FR 28355, May 22, 2001) because it is 

not a significant regulatory action under 

Executive Order 12866. 

I. National Technology Transfer and 

Advancement Act 

Section 12 of the National Technology 

Transfer and Advancement Act 

(NTTAA) of 1995 requires Federal 

agencies to evaluate existing technical 

standards when developing a new 

regulation. To comply with NTTAA, 

EPA must consider and use ‘‘voluntary 

consensus standards’’ (VCS) if available 

and applicable when developing 

programs and policies unless doing so 

would be inconsistent with applicable 

law or otherwise impractical. 

The EPA believes that VCS are 

inapplicable to this action. Today’s 

action does not require the public to 

perform activities conducive to the use 

of VCS. 

J. Executive Order 12898: Federal 

Actions To Address Environmental 

Justice in Minority Populations and 

Low-Income Population 

Executive Order 12898 (59 FR 7629 

(Feb. 16, 1994)) establishes Federal 

executive policy on environmental 

justice. Its main provision directs 

Federal agencies, to the greatest extent 

practicable and permitted by law, to 

make environmental justice part of their 

mission by identifying and addressing, 

as appropriate, disproportionately high 

and adverse human health or 

environmental effects of their programs, 

policies, and activities on minority 

populations and low-income 

populations in the United States. 

EPA lacks the discretionary authority 

to address environmental justice in this 

rulemaking. 

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52 

Environmental protection, Air 

pollution control, Intergovernmental 

relations, Particulate matter, Reporting 

and recordkeeping requirements. 

Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq. 

Dated: December 30, 2010. 

Jared Blumenfeld, 

Regional Administrator, Region IX. 

[FR Doc. 2011–647 Filed 1–12–11; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P 

FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS 

COMMISSION 

47 CFR Part 20 

[PS Docket No. 10–255; FCC 10–200] 

Framework for Next Generation 911 

Deployment 

AGENCY: Federal Communications 

Commission 

ACTION: Notice of inquiry. 

SUMMARY: The Notice of Inquiry (NOI) 

initiates a comprehensive proceeding to 

address how Next Generation 911 

(NG911) can enable the public to obtain 

emergency assistance by means of 

advanced communications technologies 

beyond traditional voice-centric 

devices. The NOI seeks to gain a better 

understanding of how the gap between 

the capabilities of modern networks and 

devices and today’s 911 system can be 

bridged and seeks comment on how to 

further the transition to IP-based 

communications capabilities for 

emergency communications and NG911. 

DATES: Submit comments on or before 

February 28, 2011. Submit reply 

comments March 14, 2011. 

ADDRESSES: Pursuant to §§ 1.415 and 

1.419 of the Commission’s rules, 47 CFR 

1.415, 1.419, interested parties may file 

comments and reply comments. 

Comments may be filed using: (1) the 

Commission’s Electronic Comment 

Filing System (ECFS), (2) the Federal 

Government’s eRulemaking Portal, or (3) 

by filing paper copies. See Electronic 

Filing of Documents in Rulemaking 

Proceedings, 63 FR 24121 (May 1, 1998). 

• Electronic Filers: Comments may be 

filed electronically using the Internet by 

accessing the ECFS: http:// 

fjallfoss.fcc.gov/ecfs2/ or the Federal 

eRulemaking Portal: http:// 

www.regulations.gov. 

• Paper Filers: Parties who choose to 

file by paper must file an original and 

four copies of each filing. If more than 

one docket or rulemaking number 

appears in the caption of this 

proceeding, filers must submit two 

additional copies for each additional 

docket or rulemaking number. 

• Filings can be sent by hand or 

messenger delivery, by commercial 

overnight courier, or by first-class or 

overnight U.S. Postal Service mail. All 

filings must be addressed to the 

Commission’s Secretary, Office of the 

Secretary, Federal Communications 

Commission. 

• All hand-delivered or messengerdelivered paper filings for the 

Commission’s Secretary must be 

delivered to FCC Headquarters at 445 


srobinson on DSKHWCL6B1PROD with PROPOSALS