43446 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 142 / Monday, July 26, 2010 / Proposed Rules 

1TTYs are also known as ‘‘telecommunications 

devices for the deaf’’ (TDDs). 

* * * * * 

Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 20th day 

of July 2010. 

For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission. 

Annette Vietti-Cook, 

Secretary of the Commission. 

[FR Doc. 2010–18223 Filed 7–23–10; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 7590–01–P 

DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY 

Alcohol and Tobacco Tax and Trade 

Bureau 

27 CFR Part 9 

[Docket No. TTB–2010–0003; Notice No. 

107; Re: Notice No.105] 

RIN 1513–AB41 

Proposed Establishment of the Pine 

Mountain-Mayacmas Viticultural Area; 

Comment Period Extension 

AGENCY: Alcohol and Tobacco Tax and 

Trade Bureau, Treasury. 

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking; 

extension of comment period. 

SUMMARY: In response to a request from 

a viticulture industry group, we are 

extending the comment period for 

Notice No. 105, Proposed Establishment 

of the Pine Mountain-Mayacmas 

Viticultural Area, a notice of proposed 

rulemaking published in the Federal 

Register on May 27, 2010, for an 

additional 45 days. 

DATES: Written comments on Notice No. 

105 are now due or before September 9, 

2010. 

ADDRESSES: You may send comments on 

this notice to one of the following 

addresses: 

• http://www.regulations.gov: Use the 

comment form for this notice as posted 

within Docket No. TTB–2010–0003 on 

‘‘Regulations.gov,’’ the Federal erulemaking portal, to submit comments 

via the Internet; 

• Mail: Director, Regulations and 

Rulings Division, Alcohol and Tobacco 

Tax and Trade Bureau, P.O. Box 14412, 

Washington, DC 20044–4412. 

• Hand Delivery/Courier in Lieu of 

Mail: Alcohol and Tobacco Tax and 

Trade Bureau, 1310 G Street, NW., Suite 

200–E, Washington, DC 20005. 

See the ‘‘Public Participation’’ section 

of this notice for specific instructions 

and requirements for submitting 

comments, and for information on how 

to request a public hearing. 

You may view copies of this notice, 

the original notice of proposed 

rulemaking (Notice No. 105), selected 

supporting materials, and any 

comments we receive about the 

proposed establishment of the Pine 

Mountain-Mayacmas viticultural area 

within Docket No. TTB–2010–0003 at 

http://www.regulations.gov. A direct 

link to this docket is posted on the TTB 

Web site at http://www.ttb.gov/wine/ 

wine-rulemaking.shtml under Notice 

No. 105. You also may view copies of 

this notice, all supporting materials, and 

any comments we receive about this 

proposal by appointment at the TTB 

Information Resource Center, 1310 G 

Street, NW., Washington, DC 20220. 

Please call 202–453–2270 to make an 

appointment. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: N.A. 

Sutton, Regulations and Rulings 

Division, Alcohol and Tobacco Tax and 

Trade Bureau, 925 Lakeville St., No. 

158, Petaluma, CA 94952; phone 415– 

271–1254. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: TTB 

received a petition from Sara Schorske 

of Compliance Service of American, 

prepared and filed on her own behalf 

and that of local wine industry members 

to establish the 4,600-acre Pine 

Mountain-Mayacmas viticultural area in 

northern California. About two-thirds of 

the proposed viticultural area lies in the 

extreme southern portion of Mendocino 

County, with the remaining one-third 

located in the extreme northern portion 

of Sonoma County. 

The proposed Pine MountainMayacmas viticultural area is totally 

within the multicounty North Coast 

viticultural area (27 CFR 9.30) and it 

overlaps the northernmost portions of 

the established Alexander Valley 

viticultural area (27 CFR 9.53) and the 

Northern Sonoma viticultural area 

(27 CFR 9.70). 

In Notice No. 105 published in the 

Federal Register (75 FR 29682) on 

Thursday, May 27, 2010, we described 

the petitioners’ rationale for the 

proposed establishment of the Pine 

Mountain-Mayacmas viticultural area 

and requested comments on the 

proposal on or before July 26, 2010. 

On July 16, 2010, we received a letter 

request from attorney Richard 

Mendelson on behalf of the Napa Valley 

Vintners (NVV), a wine industry trade 

association. The request explained that 

due to the periodic scheduling of the 

NVV’s committee and board of directors 

meetings, the group would be unable to 

meet the original July 26, 2010, 

comment deadline for Notice No. 105. 

The letter therefore requested a 45-day 

extension to the comment period for 

Notice No. 105 to allow the NVV to 

complete and thoroughly vet its 

comments on the proposed viticultural 

area. 

In response to this request we extend 

the comment period for Notice No. 105 

an additional 45 days. Therefore, the 

comments on Notice No. 105 are now 

due on or before September 9, 2010. 

Drafting Information 

Michael Hoover of the Regulations 

and Rulings Division drafted this notice. 

Signed: July 20, 2010. 

John J. Manfreda, 

Administrator. 

[FR Doc. 2010–18177 Filed 7–23–10; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4810–31–P 

DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE 

28 CFR Part 35 

[CRT Docket No. 111] 

RIN 1190–AA62 

Nondiscrimination on the Basis of 

Disability in State and Local 

Government Services; Accessibility of 

Next Generation 9-1-1 

AGENCY: Department of Justice, Civil 

Rights Division. 

ACTION: Advance notice of proposed 

rulemaking. 

SUMMARY: The Department of Justice 

(Department) is considering revising the 

regulation implementing title II of the 

Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) 

to address in what manner public 

entities that operate 9-1-1 call-taking 

centers (also known as Public Safety 

Answering Points (PSAPs)) should be 

required to make changes in 

telecommunication technology to reflect 

developments that have occurred since 

the publication of the Department’s 

1991 regulation. Under its existing title 

II regulation, the Department requires 

that PSAPs provide direct, equal access 

to telephone emergency centers for 

individuals with disabilities who use 

analog text telephones (TTYs).1 Many 

individuals with disabilities now use 

the Internet and wireless text devices as 

their primary modes of 

telecommunications. At the same time, 

PSAPs are considering and planning to 

shift from analog telecommunications 

technology to new Internet-Protocol 

(IP)-enabled Next Generation 9-1-1 

services (NG 9-1-1) that will provide 

voice and data (such as text, pictures, 

and video) capabilities. This ANPRM 

seeks information on possible revisions 

to the Department’s regulation to ensure 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with PROPOSALS_PART 1
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 142 / Monday, July 26, 2010 / Proposed Rules 43447 

direct access to NG 9-1-1 services for 

individuals with disabilities. 

DATES: The Department invites written 

comments from members of the public. 

Written comments must be postmarked 

and electronic comments must be 

submitted on or before January 24, 2011. 

Commenters should be aware that the 

electronic Federal Docket Management 

System would not accept comments 

after Midnight Eastern Time on the last 

day of the comment period. 

ADDRESSES: You may submit comments, 

identified by RIN 1190–AA62 (or Docket 

ID No. 111), by any one of the following 

methods: 

• Federal eRulemaking Web site: 

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

Web site instructions for submitting 

comments. The Regulations.gov Docket 

ID is DOJ–CRT–0111. 

• Regular U.S. mail: Disability Rights 

Section, Civil Rights Division, U.S. 

Department of Justice, P.O. Box 2885, 

Fairfax, VA 22031–0885. 

• Overnight, courier or hand delivery: 

Disability Rights Section, Civil Rights 

Division, U.S. Department of Justice, 

1425 New York Avenue, NW., Suite 

4039, Washington, DC 20005. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Robert Mather, Attorney, Disability 

Rights Section, Civil Rights Division, 

U.S. Department of Justice, at (202) 307– 

0663 (voice or TTY). This is not a tollfree number. Information may also be 

obtained from the Department’s toll-free 

ADA Information Line at (800) 514– 

0301 (voice) or (800) 514–0383 (TTY). 

You may obtain copies of this 

ANPRM in large print or Braille or on 

audiotape or computer disk by calling 

the ADA Information Line at (800) 514– 

0301 (voice) and (800) 514–0383 (TTY). 

This ANRPM is also available on the 

ADA Home Page at http://www.ada.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

I. Electronic Submission of Comments 

and Posting of Public Comments 

You may submit electronic comments 

to http://www.regulations.gov. When 

submitting comments electronically, 

you must include DOJ–CRT 0111 in the 

search field, and you must include your 

full name and address. Electronic files 

should avoid the use of special 

characters or any form of encryption 

and should be free of any defects or 

viruses. 

Please note that all comments 

received are considered part of the 

public record and made available for 

public inspection online at http:// 

www.regulations.gov. Submission 

postings will include any personal 

identifying information (such as your 

name, address, etc.) included in the text 

of your comment. If you include 

personal identifying information (such 

as your name, address, etc.) in the text 

your comment, but do not want it to be 

posted online, you must include the 

phrase ‘‘PERSONAL IDENTIFYING 

INFORMATION’’ in the first paragraph 

of your comment. You must also 

include all the personal identifying 

information you want redacted along 

with this phrase. Similarly, if you 

submit confidential business 

information as part of your comment but 

do not want it posted online, you must 

include the phrase ‘‘CONFIDENTIAL 

BUSINESS INFORMATION’’ in the first 

paragraph of your comment. You must 

also prominently identify confidential 

business information to be redacted 

within the comment. If a comment has 

so much confidential business 

information that it cannot be effectively 

redacted, all or part of that comment 

may not be posted on http:// 

www.regulations.gov. 

Comments on this ANPRM will also 

be made available for public viewing by 

appointment at the Disability Rights 

Section, located at 1425 New York 

Avenue, NW., Suite 4039, Washington, 

DC 20005, during normal business 

hours. To arrange an appointment to 

review the comments, please contact the 

ADA Information Line at (800) 514– 

0301 (voice) or (800) 514–0383 (TTY). 

The reason that the Civil Rights 

Division is requesting electronic 

comments before Midnight Eastern 

Time on the day the comment period 

closes is because the inter-agency 

Regulations.gov/Federal Docket 

Management System (FDMS) which 

receives electronic comments terminates 

the public’s ability to submit comments 

at Midnight on the day the comment 

period closes. Commenters in time 

zones other than Eastern may want to 

take this fact into account so that their 

electronic comments can be received. 

The constraints imposed by the 

Regulations.gov/FDMS system do not 

apply to U.S. postal comments, which 

will be considered as timely filed if they 

are postmarked before Midnight on the 

day the comment period closes. 

II. Public Hearing 

The Department will hold at least one 

public hearing to solicit comments on 

the issues presented in this notice. The 

Department plans to hold the public 

hearing during the 180-day public 

comment period. The date, time, and 

location of the public hearing will be 

announced to the public in the Federal 

Register and on the Department’s ADA 

Home Page, http://www.ada.gov/. 

III. Background 

A. Statutory and Rulemaking History 

On July 26, 1990, President George 

H.W. Bush signed into law the ADA, a 

comprehensive civil rights law 

prohibiting discrimination on the basis 

of disability. The ADA broadly protects 

the rights of individuals with 

disabilities in employment, access to 

State and local government services, 

places of public accommodation, 

transportation, and other important 

areas of American life. The ADA also 

requires newly designed and 

constructed or altered State and local 

government facilities, public 

accommodations, and commercial 

facilities to be readily accessible to and 

usable by individuals with disabilities. 

42 U.S.C. 12101 et seq. Section 204(a) of 

title II and section 306(b) of title III 

direct the Attorney General to 

promulgate regulations to carry out the 

provisions of titles II and III, other than 

certain provisions dealing specifically 

with transportation. 42 U.S.C. 12134; 42 

U.S.C. 12186(b). 

Title II applies to State and local 

government entities, and, in Subtitle A, 

protects qualified individuals with 

disabilities from discrimination on the 

basis of disability in services, programs, 

and activities provided by State and 

local government entities. Title II 

extends the prohibition on 

discrimination established by section 

504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973, as 

amended, 29 U.S.C. 794 (section 504), to 

all activities of State and local 

governments regardless of whether these 

entities receive Federal financial 

assistance. 42 U.S.C. 12131–65. 

Title III prohibits discrimination on 

the basis of disability in the activities of 

places of public accommodation 

(private entities whose operations affect 

commerce and that fall into one of 

twelve categories listed in the ADA, 

such as restaurants, movie theaters, 

schools, day care facilities, recreational 

facilities, and doctors’ offices) and 

requires newly constructed or altered 

places of public accommodation––as 

well as commercial facilities (privately 

owned, nonresidential facilities such as 

factories, warehouses, or office 

buildings)––to comply with the ADA 

Standards. 42 U.S.C. 12181–89. 

On July 26, 1991, the Department 

issued its final rules implementing title 

II and title III, which are codified at 28 

CFR part 35 (title II) and part 36 (title 

III). Appendix A of the title III 

regulation, at 28 CFR part 36, app. A, 

contains the ADA Standards for 

Accessible Design. On September 30, 

2004, the Department published an 

advance notice of proposed rulemaking 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with PROPOSALS_PART 1
43448 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 142 / Monday, July 26, 2010 / Proposed Rules 

2Many persons who became deaf or hard of 

hearing later in life prefer to speak instead of type. 

They use what is called voice carryover (VCO). 

With VCO, the caller speaks directly into the phone, 

and the call taker types back via TTY to the caller. 

VCO can be accomplished with standard standalone TTY equipment simply by having the call 

taker alternate between listening on the handset 

when the caller is speaking and placing the handset 

in the TTY couplers to type a response. People with 

speech impairments who are not deaf or hard of 

hearing often prefer HCO. HCO allows them to type 

their words on a TTY to call takers and hear call 

takers’ spoken responses through their handset. 

HCO can be accomplished by a call taker using 

standard stand-alone TTY equipment by alternating 

speaking into the handset and placing the handset 

in the TTY when the caller types a response. For 

more information about the title II requirements for 

PSAPs, you may consult the Department’s ADA 

technical assistance manual, http://www.usdoj.gov/ 

crt/ada/911ta.pdf (last visited July 12, 2010). 

3 ‘‘Convergence’’ is the integration of traditional 

telecommunications and newer information 

technology services. 

4See generally Telecommunications Relay 

Services and Speech-to-Speech Services for 

Individuals with Hearing and Speech Disabilities; 

E911 Requirements for IP–Enabled Service 

Providers, CG Docket No. 03–1123, WC Docket No. 

05–196, Report and Order and Further Notice of 

Proposed Rulemaking, 23 FCC Rcd 11591 (June 24, 

2008) (adopting new emergency call handling 

requirements). 

5Captioned telephone relay calls are set up 

somewhat differently, with the caller placing the 

call directly to the party being called (the PSAP) at 

the same time that the call is connected to the CA. 

The CA does not need to place the call separately 

to the PSAP. 

6See generally 47 CFR 64.601 et seq. (the TRS 

regulations). 

(2004 ANPRM) to begin the process of 

updating the 1991 regulations to adopt 

revised ADA Standards based on the 

relevant parts of the 2004 ADA/ABA 

Guidelines. 69 FR 58768. On June 17, 

2008, the Department issued a Notice of 

Proposed Rulemaking (2008 NPRM) to 

adopt the revised ADA Standards and 

revise the title II and title III regulations. 

73 FR 34466. The NPRM addressed the 

issues raised in the public’s comments 

to the ANPRM and sought additional 

comment. 

Although the Department did not 

propose to include NG 9-1-1 

accessibility provisions in the 2008 

NPRM, the Department received 

comments urging it to amend the title II 

rule to mandate that PSAPs move 

towards the implementation of NG 9-1- 

1 services that will provide voice and 

data (such as text, pictures, and video) 

capabilities so that they will be able to 

directly receive various kinds of voice- 

, text- and video-based ‘‘calls.’’ Several 

commenters, including the National 

Emergency Number Association (NENA) 

and the National Association of the 

Deaf, requested the development of 

standards for direct access to NG 9-1-1. 

Based on these comments and the 

reasons detailed below, the Department 

has decided to begin the process of 

soliciting comments and suggestions 

with respect to what an NPRM regarding 

NG 9-1-1 access should contain. 

B. Legal Foundation for Access to 

NG 9-1-1 

The Department’s current title II 

regulation, as interpreted and 

administered by the Department, 

requires that PSAPs provide direct 

access to individuals with disabilities 

who use TTYs. 28 CFR 35.162. The 

Department has interpreted title II so as 

to require that PSAPs provide ‘‘direct, 

equal access’’ to 9-1-1 for individuals 

with disabilities who use TTYs. Direct 

access means that PSAPs must be able 

to directly receive TTY calls without 

relying on an outside relay service or 

third-party services, i.e., the PSAP must 

be able to engage in TTY-to-TTY calls. 

Equal access requires that 9-1-1 services 

provided for individuals who use TTYs 

be as effective as those provided for 

individuals who make voice calls, in 

terms of response time, response 

quality, hours of operation, and all other 

features offered (e.g., automatic number 

identification, automatic location 

identification, automatic call 

distribution). PSAPs also must follow 

proper procedures and practices when 

TTY calls are received, including VoiceCarry Over (VCO) and Hearing-Carry 

Over (HCO).2

The Department recognizes that many 

individuals with disabilities now rely 

on Internet Protocol (IP)-based and 

digital wireless devices, rather than 

analog-based TTYs, as their primary 

modes of telecommunications and 

9-1-1 call-taking centers are shifting 

from existing traditional telephone 

emergency services to new IP-enabled 

NG 9-1-1 services. Therefore, this 

ANPRM seeks comments from members 

of the public and covered entities on 

possible revisions to the title II rule to 

establish new requirements and 

guidance to ensure that NG 9-1-1 

services are made accessible to, and 

usable by, individuals with disabilities. 

This ANPRM identifies specific issues 

on which the Department solicits 

comment. The Department is also 

interested in comments on any other 

issues that affect access to NG 9-1-1 

services. The Department will consider 

all comments before deciding whether 

to propose revisions to the title II 

regulation. 

The Department requests comments 

regarding appropriate steps to provide 

individuals with disabilities with access 

to NG 9-1-1 technology at 9-1-1 

emergency call-taking centers, including 

converging 3 IP 9-1-1 technologies that 

are as effective as those provided for 

individuals without disabilities. In this 

ANPRM, the Department is asking two 

key questions: (1) What devices and 

modes of communication (voice, text, 

video, and data) are individuals with 

disabilities using to make ‘‘calls,’’ 

including emergency calls?, and (2) 

what steps should the Department take 

to ensure that any new IP-based PSAP 

platforms can receive direct calls from 

these devices? 

C. Major Migration in Communications 

Devices and 9-1-1 Services 

As communication technologies are 

developing, individuals with disabilities 

are transitioning from analog or legacy 

devices to digital and IP-based devices. 

Among these devices are both wired and 

mobile videophones, text messaging 

wireless devices, including ‘‘smart’’ 

phones, as well as computers (including 

computers with Web cams) and 

captioned telephones. Many PSAPs or 

emergency 9-1-1 call-taking centers are 

not yet equipped to directly receive 

video calls or text calls over the 

Internet. As a result, individuals who 

have to call 9-1-1 using their IP-based 

videophone or texting device must call 

through third-party telecommunications 

relay services (TRS). TRS uses a relay 

operator called a communication 

assistant (CA) who relays the call 

between the caller using text or video 

and the PSAP.4 In most IP-based videoor text-relay services, the CA receives 

the call from the person originating the 

call, places the call to the PSAP, and 

then relays the conversation between 

the caller and the PSAP.5 Relay services 

are under the jurisdiction of the Federal 

Communications Commission (FCC).6

The 9-1-1 number has been 

designated for public use throughout the 

United States to report an emergency, 

request emergency assistance, or both. 

The original 9-1-1 system is based on 

traditional telephone technology, which 

cannot process text, data, image, and 

video sent from handheld devices and 

computers (e.g., personal digital 

assistant (PDA), cellular phone, portable 

media player, video phone, or camera). 

To address the changing technology, 

State and local governments are working 

to improve their 9-1-1 emergency 

communications systems and are 

moving towards an IP-enabled network. 

The ultimate goal is to have an 

emergency network that will enable the 

general public to make a 9-1-1 ‘‘call’’ via 

voice, text, or video from wired and 

wireless devices and directly 

communicate with personnel at the 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with PROPOSALS_PART 1
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 142 / Monday, July 26, 2010 / Proposed Rules 43449 

7http://www.ncd.gov/newsroom/publications/ 

2006/discrimination.htm (last visited June 5, 2010). 

8See 42 U.S.C. 12134(a). 

9The term ‘‘broadband’’ refers to advanced 

communications systems capable of providing highspeed transmission of services such as data, voice, 

and video over the Internet and other networks. 

PSAP. Several States, regions, and 

counties, including Indiana, Montana, 

Vermont, Texas, Florida, Minnesota, 

Allegheny County, Pennsylvania and 

the District of Columbia, are either 

considering or implementing an IP 

network or next generation related 

components in preparation for NG 

9-1-1. http://www.nena.org/ng911- 

project/state-status (last visited July 12, 

2010). 

The Department is aware of two 

PSAPs’ efforts to provide access to 

individuals with disabilities who use 

smart phones as texting devices. For 

example, in 2003, the police department 

in Sacramento, California began to 

accept ‘‘9-1-1’’ e-mails from individuals 

with disabilities. That police 

department also has accepted e-mails 

from as far away as Los Angeles and 

Texas asking Sacramento police to relay 

emergency information to their local 

authorities. http:// 

www.helpkidshear.org/news/media/ 

2003/2003–11–21-cbs.htm (last visited 

July 12, 2010). Another PSAP, Black 

Hawk County, Iowa, recently started to 

receive and respond to short message 

service (SMS) messages from cell 

phones or pagers. See Enforcing the 

ADA, Update April, September 2009, 

page 12, available at http:// 

www.ada.gov/aprsep09.pdf (last visited 

July 12, 2010). With these additional 

services, individuals with disabilities 

are able to report an accident or other 

emergency quickly using their PDAs, 

without the necessity of locating and 

using a TTY or relying on another 

person to report the incident 

D. Other Federal Efforts 

The Department is familiar with 

ongoing efforts by other Federal 

agencies to ensure that advances in 

telecommunications systems, including 

NG 9-1-1 services, are accessible for all 

Americans, including individuals with 

disabilities. The National E–911 

Implementation Coordination Office 

(National 9-1-1 Office) issued in 

September 2009, a national plan (Plan) 

for migrating to IP-enabled 9-1-1 

Systems. See National Plan for 

Migrating to IP–Enabled 9-1-1 Systems, 

available at http://www.ntis.gov/search/ 

product.aspx?ABBR=PB2010102716 

(last visited June 5, 2010). As required 

by the NET 911 Improvement Act, 47 

U.S.C. 942(d), the Plan identified and 

analyzed 9-1-1 system migration issues 

and assessed potential options to 

resolve them. The Plan drew heavily 

from the United States Department of 

Transportation’s (DOT) NG 9-1-1 

Initiative work and findings. DOT had 

concluded that IP-enabled systems 

provide the optimal technical solution 

for future 9-1-1 networks. One of the 

requirements of the NET 9-1-1 

Improvement Act is to identify solutions 

for providing 9-1-1 and enhanced 9-1-1 

access to individuals with disabilities 

and needed steps to implement such 

solutions. 47 U.S.C. 942(d)(I). In 

addressing policy barriers and issues, 

the National 9-1-1 Office stated that ‘‘to 

foster the migration to IP-enabled 9-1-1, 

Federal * * * regulatory agencies will 

need to review current * * * regulations 

to keep pace with the rapidly changing 

9-1-1 marketplace.’’ Plan, at 5–10. 

Last year, DOT’s National Highway 

Traffic Safety Administration and the 

United States Department of 

Commerce’s National 

Telecommunications and Information 

Administration announced more than 

$40 million in grants to help PSAPs 

nationwide implement next-generation 

technologies. 

Another Federal agency has called for 

action to ensure that IP technology is 

accessible to individuals with 

disabilities. The National Council on 

Disability, in its 2006 report, The Need 

for Federal Legislation and Regulation 

Prohibiting Telecommunications and 

Information Services Discrimination, 7

calls for such Federal action because 

experience has shown that market forces 

are not sufficient to ensure individuals 

with disabilities equal access to 

emerging technologies. As the 

responsible agency for writing 

regulations to ensure that 9-1-1 services 

are accessible to individuals with 

disabilities,8 in this ANPRM the 

Department is seeking comments from 

the public, including 9-1-1 stakeholders, 

in addressing barriers to NG 9-1-1 and 

ensuring access to NG 9-1-1 services. 

The FCC has recently undertaken a 

number of broadband 9 initiatives. One 

of these initiatives seeks to improve the 

nation’s current 9-1-1 system by 

establishing the foundation for the 

transmission of voice, data, or video to 

PSAPs during emergency calls. 

Broadband & Public Safety and 

Homeland Security, http://www.fcc.gov/ 

pshs/broadband.html (last visited July 

12, 2010). In another NG 9-1-1 matter, 

the FCC’s Communications Security, 

Reliability and Interoperability 

Council’s working group is considering 

ways that NG 9-1-1 architectures and 

technologies can provide access for 

individuals with disabilities. See 

http://www.fcc.gov/pshs/advisory/csric/ 

wg-4b.pdf (last visited July 12, 2010). 

With respect to emergency calls made 

via TRS (i.e., through a relay operator), 

the FCC has implemented new 

numbering and E9-1-1 requirements for 

Video Relay Services and IP-Relay 

Services. New Numbering and E911 

Requirements for VRS and IP Relay 

Video In American Sign Language 

(ASL), http://www.fcc.gov/cgb/dro/

numbering_and_e911_for_vrs_ip.html 

(last visited June 5, 2010). Access to 

PSAPs via TRS is not addressed in this 

ANPRM. 

IV. Request for Public Comments 

The Department is seeking public 

comment on the issues discussed below. 

In addition to seeking comments in 

response to the specific questions raised 

in this ANPRM, the Department is 

particularly interested in receiving 

comments from all of those who have a 

stake in ensuring that NG 9-1-1 is 

accessible to individual people with 

disabilities, advocacy groups, 

representatives from Tribal, local, State, 

and Federal governments, public safety 

organizations, and industry 

professionals, about the potential 

application of the new requirements to 

plans for migration to, and deployment 

of, NG 9-1-1 services. 

The prospect of developing new title 

II requirements for access to NG 9-1-1 

raises a number of general issues, 

including determining which 

performance-based standards or 

technical specifications would better 

ensure access to NG 9-1-1 to 

determining the effective date for the 

application of the new provisions. 

Responses should clearly identify the 

specific question being addressed 

according to the numbered questions in 

this document. 

A. Direct, Equal Access to NG 9-1-1 

Question 1. What modes of 

communication (e.g., voice, text, video, 

or data) do (or will) individuals with 

disabilities use to make direct calls to a 

PSAP, and from what types of devices 

would the calls be made? 

i. Text Communications 

IP allows several formats of text 

communications, divided into two 

types: real-time, and non-real-time. 

Real-time text communications refer to 

those that are sent and received on a 

character-by-character basis; the 

characters are sent immediately once 

typed and also displayed immediately 

to the receiving person. In an 

emergency, sending text 

communications to a PSAP in real-time 

may save valuable time that is needed 

to effectively respond to the emergency. 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with PROPOSALS_PART 1
43450 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 142 / Monday, July 26, 2010 / Proposed Rules 

10 In addition, the United States Access Board 

recently proposed draft guidelines for real-time text 

functionality for adoption by Federal agencies. Draft 

Information and Communication technology (ICT) 

Standards and Guidelines http://www.accessboard.gov/sec508/refresh/draft-rule.htm at Section 

902 (last visited July 12, 2010). 

Non-real-time communications rely on 

messaging capabilities where users 

‘‘type-enter-wait-read-respond-reply’’— 

e.g., short messages service (SMS) texts, 

multimedia messaging service (MMS), 

instant messaging (IM), text chat, and email. When this type of messaging is 

used, messages can overlap one another. 

In an emergency, this could result in the 

caller or PSAP personnel responding to 

each other out of the order in which 

their communications were sent, 

creating some confusion or delay. The 

agenda for the FCC’s National 

Broadband Plan states that this year, the 

FCC will open a proceeding to identify 

a reliable, interoperable, real-time text 

standard to enable consumers to 

communicate in a digital and IP-based 

environment. Broadband Action 

Agenda, http://www.broadband.gov/ 

plan/national-broadband-plan-actionagenda.pdf at 4.10 (last visited July 12, 

2010).10

Currently, telephone 9-1-1 

technologies support TTYs, which 

provide text communications in an 

analog environment. Using IP-based 

devices, PSAPs would require a text 

gateway in order to converse with 

individuals using analog-based devices. 

Question 2. Should the Department 

issue a requirement for NG 9-1-1 

technologies to support text 

communications along with analogbased TTY communications? If so, 

should NG 9-1-1 text technologies be 

backward compatible with analog-based 

TTYs or should the two communication 

methods be available side by side? 

Question 3. Which, if any, of the 

following text options should the 

Department designate as essential 

accessibility features of NG 9-1-1 to be 

incorporated into the initial deployment 

of an NG 9-1-1 system to assure equal 

access to emergency call-taking centers 

for individuals with disabilities? 

a. Real-time text. 

b. Short message service (SMS). 

c. Instant messaging (IM). 

d. E-mail. 

e. Analog gateway. 

f. Other modes of text 

communication. 

The Department recognizes that all of 

these text options will benefit not only 

individuals who are deaf or hard of 

hearing, but also individuals with other 

disabilities who require an alternative 

mean to making a voiced 9-1-1 call due 

to their disabilities. The Department 

recognizes that a State or local 

government’s NG 9-1-1 system may 

eventually provide all of these options 

in the future. However, the Department 

is interested in learning how each of the 

options would benefit individuals with 

disabilities in order to determine 

whether they should be designated as 

‘‘essential’’ to providing access to NG 9- 

1-1. 

Individuals with disabilities are 

increasingly using smart phones since 

they are currently the only accessible 

mobile devices available for text 

messaging (e.g., e-mail, SMS, or IM). 

Until NG 9-1-1 services are 

implemented, PSAPs will not be able to 

receive text messages sent directly to 9- 

1-1 from these devices. 

Question 4. For this period, should a 

PSAP develop and implement an 

interim plan to receive text messages 

directly or via a third party? How 

should a PSAP develop an interim plan? 

What solutions should PSAPs consider 

as part of their interim plan? 

Question 5. Are there significant 

issues related to the interoperability of 

messages sent by text that need to be 

addressed in any final regulation? 

ii. Video Communications 

A technology that has emerged since 

publication of the original title II rule 

allows individuals who use sign 

language to communicate by video. An 

individual who communicates by 

American Sign Language (ASL) may use 

a videophone or other video device (e.g., 

a Web cam connector to a computer) to 

directly communicate in sign language 

with either another videophone user or 

a voice telephone user. In the latter case, 

videophones can be used to make TRS 

calls (Video Relay Service) or to use 

remote sign language interpreting 

services (video remote interpreting or 

VRI) when an in-person interpreter is 

not available. VRI is generally a feebased service. NG 9-1-1 technologies 

will allow video phone users to make 

direct video calls to a PSAP and allow 

the callers and the emergency personnel 

to engage in virtual face-to-face 

communication. 

The Department is seeking comments 

on what steps a PSAP, in providing 

video services, should take to ensure 

effective communication with a 9-1-1 

caller who uses sign language for 

communication. One possible method of 

communication for handling a direct 

video-to-video call between the 

individual with disabilities and the 

PSAP would be through the use of VRI. 

Upon receipt of a request for sign 

language services, the PSAP would 

make a call to a VRI service center and 

connect the interpreter so that the 

interpreter appears on both the caller’s 

and PSAP’s video phone screens. The 

call would then become a 3-way video 

call between the caller and PSAP, both 

using the interpreter. The PSAP would 

see both the interpreter and caller on the 

PSAP’s screen, and both the interpreter 

and the caller would see each other on 

their screens. Using this method, the 

PSAP would have the ability to 

‘‘conference in’’ (virtually 

instantaneously) a qualified interpreter 

(in-house or in a remote facility) 

Question 6. In implementing NG 9-1- 

1, should the Department amend its title 

II regulation to require each PSAP to 

provide VRI service? If so, should the 

Department regulate how to provide 

such service? 

With NG 9-1-1, call routing allows the 

sharing of networks to route calls for 

multiple numbers (e.g., 2-1-1, 3-1-1, 8– 

1–1, suicide hotline, poison control). 

Also, NG 9-1-1 enables call access, 

transfer, and backup between and 

among 9-1-1 call-taking centers and 

between these centers and specialized 

emergency services. 

Question 7. Should a center also be 

allowed to transfer a caller’s call to a 

particular center where call takers are 

trained and fluent in oral/sign language 

interpreting services or where call takers 

are trained in working with individuals 

with speech impairments? If so, should 

a final rule address call routing policies 

that restrict or prohibit such transfers? 

The title II rule requires that when an 

oral or sign language interpreter is 

necessary for effective communication, 

the interpreter must be ‘‘qualified.’’ The 

rule has defined ‘‘qualified interpreter’’ 

as ‘‘an interpreter who is able to 

interpret effectively, accurately, and 

impartially both receptively and 

expressively, using any necessary 

specialized vocabulary.’’ 28 CFR 35.104. 

Although the definition does not require 

‘‘certified’’ interpreters, it does require 

interpreters with the necessary skills to 

interpret accurately in the particular 

context. 

Question 8. In the context of NG 9-1- 

1, the Department is asking for public 

views on whether PSAPs should use 

only those interpreters who are 

specifically trained to handle emergency 

calls in using interpreting services onsite or via VRI. 

Question 9. The Department also 

seeks comments on any other methods 

for ensuring equal access to NG 9-1-1 for 

individuals with disabilities. Should the 

Department issue standards for other 

methods to provide accessible NG 9-1- 

1 services? Should the Department 

require specialized training to ensure 

that these services can effectively 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with PROPOSALS_PART 1
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 142 / Monday, July 26, 2010 / Proposed Rules 43451 

11http://www.fcc.gov/cgb/dro/sts.html (last 

visited July 8, 2010). 

respond to the needs of people with 

disabilities in an NG 9-1-1 environment? 

B. Performance Standards as Opposed 

to Technical Standards 

The Department is aware of ongoing 

efforts by both the National Emergency 

Number Association (NENA) and the 

Association of Public-Safety 

Communications Officials International 

to develop technical standards for 

guidance to service providers, 

equipment manufacturers, and industryrelated standard setting bodies. The 

Department has used the performance 

standard of ‘‘direct access’’ for PSAPs in 

enforcing title II. 

Consistent with the Department’s 

existing approach, the Department is 

considering the use of performance 

standards, as opposed to technical 

standards, as new title II requirements 

for access to NG 9-1-1. Two primary 

considerations support this approach. 

First, in light of evolving 9-1-1 

technologies, it may not be feasible to 

have identical scoping and technical 

specifications nationwide to ensure 

disability access to NG 9-1-1. Second, 

performance standards would contain 

flexibility to allow operational 

standards, protocols, and best practices 

to be adopted and implemented to meet 

unique State and local circumstances 

and needs. 

Question 10. Should any regulatory 

provision on NG 9-1-1 requirements 

under title II be performance-based, or 

should a final rule provide technical 

specifications for call-taking technology 

and equipment? Please provide as much 

detail as possible in support of your 

view. 

Question 11. What are the technical 

issues that the Department should 

address in developing minimum 

standards? 

NENA, a leading professional, 

nonprofit organization on 9-1-1 services, 

has actively worked with public safety, 

industry, and government groups, to 

develop technical and operational 

standards for NG 9-1-1 systems and 

services. 

Question 12. Should the Department 

adopt any of NENA’s standards as the 

minimum standards for direct access to 

NG 9-1-1 services for individuals with 

disabilities? 

Speech-to-speech service (STS) is a 

form of TRS that involves the use of 

relay operators for people with speech 

disabilities who have difficulty being 

understood on the phone. STS relay 

operators are trained individuals 

familiar with many different speech 

patterns and language recognition skills. 

The relay operator makes the call and 

repeats the words exactly. Individuals 

using STS include those with cerebral 

palsy, Parkinson’s disease, a 

laryngectomy, ALS, stuttering, muscular 

dystrophy, stroke, and other conditions 

affecting clarity of speech.11

Question 13. Should the title II 

regulation be amended to require that 

PSAPs directly receive calls from 

individuals with speech disabilities? 

C. Emergency Alerts 

Public entities in many communities 

now send pre-recorded emergency alert 

messages to homes and businesses 

automatically by phone. For instance, 

emergency personnel can use 

emergency alerts to notify residents in 

the path of approaching wildfires, 

hurricanes, or tornadoes to seek 

immediate shelter or evacuate their 

homes. Emergency alert systems can 

also be set up to send emergency alert 

text messages to smart phones, TTYs, 

PDAs, and e-mail accounts. Many 

colleges and universities now use this 

kind of emergency alert system for their 

students, parents and staff. 

Converging 9-1-1 technologies will 

make it possible to send automatic 

emergency alerts to any communication 

device—wired or mobile—via Internet 

networks. For instance, vehicles 

approaching a motor vehicle accident 

involving hazardous materials could be 

notified of the danger, thereby 

preventing other vehicles from further 

complicating the accident or hindering 

emergency personnel. The Department 

will not address any other emergency 

mass notifications, such as Federal 

efforts for a Common Alerting Protocol, 

a next generation alerting delivery 

system by which standardized alerts 

will be gathered from various alerting 

sources and distributed to the public (in 

text, audio and video) via information 

outlets, public safety alerting systems 

and personal communication devices. 

Question 14. Should the regulation be 

amended to address sending emergency 

alerts to text, video, and other devices 

used by individuals with disabilities? 

D. State and Local Plans To Ensure 

Access to NG 9-1-1 for Individuals with 

Disabilities 

Title II of the ADA and the 

Department’s implementing regulation 

provide that State and local government 

agencies must make reasonable 

modifications to their policies, 

practices, and procedures whenever 

necessary to avoid discrimination 

against individuals with disabilities 

unless making the modification would 

fundamentally alter the nature of the 

service, program or activity, or would 

result in undue financial and 

administrative burdens. 28 CFR 

35.130(b)(7) (reasonable modifications 

in policies); 28 CFR 35.164 (undue 

burdens). A growing number of State 

and local governments have studied 

options for IP-based 9-1-1 networks in 

preparation for moving to NG 9-1-1 and 

have developed NG 9-1-1 migration/ 

transition plans. The Department 

believes that in developing new or 

reviewing current NG 9-1-1 plans, State 

and local 9-1-1 agencies must include 

specific plans for equal access to NG 9- 

1-1 for individuals with disabilities. 

Question 15. In their NG 9-1-1 plans, 

how should PSAPs address issues 

related to access for individuals with 

disabilities? 

E. Effective Date 

Any regulation in this area needs to 

address an effective date for the 

application of any proposed new title II 

requirements to upgrades to 9-1-1 

networks with emerging IP technologies 

or existing NG 9-1-1 services. When the 

ADA was enacted, the effective dates for 

various provisions were delayed in 

order to provide time for public entities 

to become familiar with their new 

obligations. Title II of the ADA generally 

became effective on January 26, 1992, 

six months after the regulation was 

published. 

Question 16. Should the effective date 

of any new title II requirements be 

modeled on the effective date used to 

implement the title II requirements and 

commence six months after publication 

of the final rule, or a longer period? If 

you favor a longer period, please 

indicate what period you favor and 

provide as much detail as possible in 

support of your view. 

The term ‘‘triggering event’’ identifies 

the event or action that compels 

compliance with title II requirements. 

The Department’s regulation 

implementing title II of the ADA (28 

CFR Part 35) does not establish any 

separate triggering events for access to 

emergency telephone services. Many 

PSAPs are making transitions to new IP 

networks; it is expected that some may 

not be completed until after the effective 

date of the new requirements. 

Question 17. If you favor a triggering 

event definition that looks to the date of 

deployment or upgrade, please provide 

as much detail as possible about what 

should constitute an IP deployment or 

upgrade. 

Question 18. If you favor triggering 

events other than an IP deployment/ 

upgrade, please state what event you 

favor and provide as much detail as 

possible to support your proposal. 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with PROPOSALS_PART 1
43452 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 142 / Monday, July 26, 2010 / Proposed Rules 

F. Defenses 

The title II rule does not require a 

public entity to take any action that it 

can demonstrate would result in a 

fundamental alteration in the nature of 

a service, program, or activity or in 

undue financial and administrative 

burdens. 28 CFR 35.164. The 

Department has taken a long-standing 

position that, because of the essential 

nature of 9-1-1 services, that limitation 

would rarely be applied to the 

obligation to ensure effective 

communication in the context of 9-1-1. 

Question 19. The Department seeks 

comments on whether there are certain 

circumstances where providing direct 

access to emerging NG 9-1-1 would be 

considered a fundamental alteration to 

the nature of the 9-1-1 service or be an 

undue financial or administrative 

burden on the PSAP. Please provide as 

much detail as possible. 

G. Cost and Benefits of NG 9-1-1 

Regulations 

Because this is an ANPRM, the 

Department is not required, at this time, 

to conduct certain economic analyses or 

written assessments that otherwise may 

be required for other more formal types 

of agency regulatory actions (e.g., 

notices of proposed rulemaking or final 

rules) that, for example, are deemed to 

be economically ‘‘significant’’ regulatory 

actions with an annual economic impact 

of $100 million or more or that are 

expected to have a significant economic 

effect on a substantial number of small 

entities or non-Federal governmental 

jurisdictions (such as State, local, or 

Tribal governments). See, e.g., 

Regulatory Flexibility Act of 1980, 5 

U.S.C. 603–04 (2006); E.O. 13272, 67 FR 

53461 (Aug. 13, 2002); E.O. 12866, 58 

FR 51735 (Sept. 30, 1993), as amended 

by E.O. 13497, 74 FR 6113 (Jan. 30, 

2009); OMB Budget Circular A–4, 

http://www.whitehouse.gov/OMB/ 

circulars/a004/a-4.pdf (last visited June 

5, 2010). The Department does not 

currently believe that any future 

proposed rules relating to the 

accessibility of NG 9-1-1 services will 

likely meet the economic threshold for 

these types of formal economic analyses 

and written assessments. 

Nonetheless, one of the purposes of 

this ANPRM is to seek public comment 

on various topics relating to NG 9-1-1 

services, including perspectives from 

stakeholders concerning the benefits 

and costs of revising the Department’s 

title II regulation to ensure the 

accessibility of NG 9-1-1 services (from 

both a quantitative and qualitative 

perspective), particularly from members 

of the disability community, 

governmental entities, and public safety 

organizations. The Department thus asks 

for information so that the Department 

can determine whether such a proposed 

rule (1) should be deemed an 

economically ‘‘significant regulatory 

action’’ as defined in section 3(f) of E.O. 

12866; or (2) would have a significant 

economic impact on a substantial 

number of small entities within the 

meaning of the Regulatory Flexibility 

Act (RFA) and, if so, suggested 

alternative regulatory approaches to 

minimize any such impact. The RFA 

defines small governmental 

jurisdictions as governments of cities, 

counties, towns, townships, villages, 

school districts, or special districts with 

a population of less than 50,000. 

Question 20. The Department 

encourages commenters, whenever 

possible, to submit detailed quantitative 

or qualitative information along with 

their respective comments relating to: 

the cost of NG 9-1-1 technology or 

services; the incremental impact on 

covered governmental entities to 

transition from current requirements for 

accessible analog 9-1-1 services to 

proposed accessible NG 9-1-1 services, 

including but not limited to training 

PSAP employees and updating 9-1-1 

plans and operating procedures; 

personal anecdotes or experiences of 

individuals with disabilities illustrating 

the potential benefits of accessible NG 

9-1-1 services; and any other 

information that would assist the 

Department in assessing the benefits 

and costs of proposed regulatory 

revisions for NG 9-1-1. 

H. Other Issues 

Question 21. Are there additional 

issues or information not addressed by 

the Department’s questions that are 

important for the Department to 

consider? Please provide as much detail 

as possible in your response. 

Dated: July 21, 2010. 

Thomas E. Perez, 

Assistant Attorney General, Civil Rights 

Division. 

[FR Doc. 2010–18336 Filed 7–22–10; 4:15 pm] 

BILLING CODE 4410–13–P 

DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE 

28 CFR Parts 35 and 36 

[CRT Docket No. 113] 

RIN 1190–AA64 

Nondiscrimination on the Basis of 

Disability by State and Local 

Governments and Places of Public 

Accommodation; Equipment and 

Furniture 

AGENCY: Department of Justice, Civil 

Rights Division. 

ACTION: Advance Notice of Proposed 

Rulemaking. 

SUMMARY: The Department of Justice 

(Department) is considering possible 

changes to requirements under titles II 

and III of the Americans with 

Disabilities Act (ADA) to ensure that 

equipment and furniture used in 

programs and services provided by 

public entities and public 

accommodations are accessible to 

individuals with disabilities. In this 

Advance Notice of Proposed 

Rulemaking (ANPRM), the Department 

is seeking public input on issues 

relating to possible revisions of ADA 

regulations to ensure the accessibility of 

equipment and furniture in such 

programs and services and also is 

seeking background information for the 

regulatory assessment that the 

Department may need to prepare if it 

revises its regulations. 

DATES: The Department invites written 

comments from members of the public. 

Written comments must be postmarked 

and electronic comments must be 

submitted on or before January 24, 2011. 

Commenters should be aware that the 

electronic Federal Docket Management 

System will not accept comments after 

Midnight Eastern Time on the last day 

of the comment period. 

ADDRESSES: You may submit comments, 

identified by RIN 1190–AA64 (or Docket 

ID No. 113), by any one of the following 

methods: 

• Federal eRulemaking Web site: 

www.regulations.gov. Follow the Web 

site instructions for submitting 

comments. 

• Regular U.S. mail: Disability Rights 

Section, Civil Rights Division, U.S. 

Department of Justice, P.O. Box 2885, 

Fairfax, VA 22031–0885. 

• Overnight, courier, or hand 

delivery: Disability Rights Section, Civil 

Rights Division, U.S. Department of 

Justice, 1425 New York Avenue, NW., 

Suite 4039, Washington, DC 20005. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Sarah DeCosse, Attorney Advisor, 

Disability Rights Section, Civil Rights 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with PROPOSALS_PART 1