```

[Senate Report 109-211]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]

109th Congress 
 1st Session                     SENATE                          Report
                                                                109-211
_______________________________________________________________________
 
                                                      Calendar No. 353

     IP-ENABLED VOICE COMMUNICATIONS AND PUBLIC SAFETY ACT OF 2005

                               __________

                              R E P O R T

                                 of the

           COMMITTEE ON COMMERCE, SCIENCE, AND TRANSPORTATION

                                   on

                                S. 1063

DATE deg.December 20, 2005.--Ordered to be printed
       SENATE COMMITTEE ON COMMERCE, SCIENCE, AND TRANSPORTATION
                       one hundred ninth congress
                             first session

                     TED STEVENS, Alaska, Chairman
                 DANIEL K. INOUYE, Hawaii, Co-Chairman
JOHN McCAIN, Arizona                 JOHN D. ROCKEFELLER IV, West 
CONRAD BURNS, Montana                    Virginia
TRENT LOTT, Mississippi              JOHN F. KERRY, Massachusetts
KAY BAILEY HUTCHISON, Texas          BYRON L. DORGAN, North Dakota
OLYMPIA J. SNOWE, Maine              BARBARA BOXER, California
GORDON H. SMITH, Oregon              BILL NELSON, Florida
JOHN ENSIGN, Nevada                  MARIA CANTWELL, Washington
GEORGE ALLEN, Virginia               FRANK LAUTENBERG, New Jersey
JOHN E. SUNUNU, New Hampshire        E. BENJAMIN NELSON, Nebraska
JIM DeMINT, South Carolina           MARK PRYOR, Arkansas
DAVID VITTER, Louisiana
                    Lisa Sutherland, Staff Director
             Christine Drager Kurth, Deputy Staff Director
                      David Russell, Chief Counsel
     Margaret Cummisky, Democratic Staff Director and Chief Counsel
 Samuel Whitehorn, Democratic Deputy Staff Director and General Counsel
                                                       Calendar No. 353
109th Congress                                                   Report
                                 SENATE
 1st Session                                                    109-211

======================================================================

     IP-ENABLED VOICE COMMUNICATIONS AND PUBLIC SAFETY ACT OF 2005

                                _______
                                

               December 20, 2005.--Ordered to be printed

                                _______
                                

       Mr. Stevens, from the Committee on Commerce, Science, and 
                Transportation, submitted the following

                              R E P O R T

                         [To accompany S. 1063]

    The Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation, to 
which was referred the bill (S. 1063) to promote and enhance 
public safety and to encourage the rapid deployment of IP-
enabled voice services, having considered the same, reports 
favorably thereon with an amendment (in the nature of a 
substitute) and recommends that the bill (as amended) do pass.

                          Purpose of the Bill

The purpose of S. 1063 is to provide authority and guidance to 
the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) to ensure that 911 
and E-911 services are made available to consumers of IP-
enabled voice services. The bill does not reverse the FCC's 
actions to date. It directs the FCC to review its current rules 
and to issue any new rules as may be necessary to comply with 
this legislation within 120 days of enactment. The bill 
provides IP-enabled 911 and E-911 calls with the same level of 
liability protection as applies in the wireless and wireline 
context. To further ensure the deployment of 911 and E-911 
capability, the bill mandates that access to necessary 
components of the 911 and E-911 network be made available to 
IP-enabled voice service providers. To improve 911 and E-911 
services going forward, a national plan is required for 
migrating the 911 and E-911 network to an IP-enabled emergency 
network that would be able to offer additional capabilities.

                          Background and Needs

A functional 911 and E-911 system ensures that Americans can 
dial three digits in the case of an emergency and be connected 
to a dispatcher at the designated public safety answering point 
(PSAP) for the caller's location so that the emergency can be 
identified and emergency personnel can be deployed. An enhanced 
911 (E-911) call provides the PSAP dispatcher with the callback 
number of the caller as well as the caller's geographic 
location, even if the caller is unable to speak. 911 and E-911 
are essential public safety services that consumers have come 
to expect and rely upon.
    As new communications technologies and services develop, 
new challenges arise in the context of providing 911 and E-911 
service. IP-enabled voice services do not operate in the same 
manner as the wireline switched network so there are additional 
hurdles that must be overcome to make 911 and E-911 calls 
through the E-911 system. By acting now, Congress takes the 
necessary steps to ensure that 911 and E-911 are top priorities 
and are integrated into IP-enabled voice services.
  On September 22, 2005, the Committee held a hearing on 
Communications in a Disaster. The importance of 911 and E-911 
was highlighted, as was the utility of IP-enabled voice 
services in the event of mass emergencies. In general, the 
ability to leverage IP capabilities to quickly reroute calls 
around system failures was discussed. The Chairman of the FCC 
also spoke of the importance of updating PSAPs to easily allow 
911 and E-911 calls to be rerouted from a PSAP where service 
has been disrupted to a functioning PSAP. In December, 2004, 
the Senate passed the ENHANCE 911 Act of 2004, which focuses on 
upgrading PSAPs to be able to offer full E-911 capability. On 
November 3, 2005, the Senate passed S. 1932, which would 
provide $250,000,000 for the ENHANCE 911 Act of 2004.
  In June 2005, the FCC adopted a Report and Order requiring 
IP-enabled voice service providers to register a subscriber's 
location and offer 911 and E-911 service using that registered 
location. IP-enabled voice service providers expressed concern 
that the FCC had not required access to certain critical 
components of the E-911 network controlled by incumbent phone 
companies that are needed to complete 911 and E-911 calls. 
Additionally, the Order did not extend the liability 
protections afforded to wireline and wireless for the provision 
of 911 and E-911 capability to IP-enabled voice service 
providers, which raised liability concerns for the public 
safety community and industry. The FCC noted that it did not 
have authority to address the liability issue.
  At the Executive Session for S.1063, Chairman Stevens and Co-
Chairman Inouye along with the sponsor and primary cosponsor, 
Senators Nelson and Burns, respectively, offered an amendment 
in the form of a substitute to clarify the FCC's authority, 
provide liability protection and to provide access to the key 
components of the 911 and E-911 system.

                         Summary of Provisions

  S. 1063, the IP-enabled Voice Communications and Public 
Safety Act of 2005, provides authority and guidance to the FCC 
to ensure that IP-enabled voice service providers offer 911 and 
E-911 services. The bill provides IP-enabled 911 and E-911 
calls with the same level of liability protection as applies in 
the wireless and wireline context. The bill further mandates 
that access to necessary components of the E-911 network be 
made available to IP-enabledvoice service providers. To improve 
911 and E-911 services going forward, a national plan is required for 
migrating the 911 and E-911 network to an IP-enabled emergency network 
that would be able to offer additional public safety capabilities to 
all Americans.
    Section 1 contains the short title of the bill, the ``IP-
Enabled Voice Communications and Public Safety Act of 2005.''
    Section 2 requires the FCC to review the rules established 
in its June 2005 Report and Order and revise or issue new rules 
as may be necessary and provides direction to the FCC to 
establish rules that are technologically and operationally 
feasible. It provides to IP-enabled voice service providers 
access to components of the 911 and E-911 network, preserves 
State authority to impose and collect 911 and E-911 fees and 
ensures that such fees are used to support 911 and E-911 
services, and provides liability protection. It also 
grandfathers existing IP-enabled voice service subscribers and 
allows waivers where a provider can demonstrate that it is not 
technically or operationally feasible to offer 911 or E-911 
service, and sunsets this waiver authority four years after the 
date of enactment. It makes clear that nothing in this Act 
impedes or interferes with the existing FCC Order.
    Section 3 makes clear that the FCC's enforcement authority 
under the Communications Act of 1934 also applies to the 
provisions of S. 1063.
    Section 4 outlines the parameters for the National Plan 
required under the bill migrating the 911 network to an IP-
enabled emergency network that would be able to offer 
additional public safety capabilities to Americans and calls on 
the FCC to compile lists of all PSAPs and selective routers.
    Section 5 provides definitions for key terms used in the 
bill including the definition of an IP-enabled voice service.

                          Legislative History

    The IP-Enabled Voice Communications and Public Safety Act 
of 2005 (S. 1063) was introduced by Senator Bill Nelson on May 
18, 2005 and referred to the Senate Committee on Commerce, 
Science, and Transportation. There are four cosponsors of S. 
1063, including Senator Burns and Senator Clinton as original 
cosponsors. Senators Snowe and Kerry are also cosponsors. On 
September 1, 2005 the Committee held a field hearing on 911 and 
VoIP in Great Falls, Montana. On November 2, 2005 the Committee 
considered the bill in an open Executive Session. Chairman 
Stevens and Co-Chairman Inouye offered an amendment in the 
nature of a substitute with Senators Bill Nelson and Burns. The 
substitute updated the bill in light of the FCC's action 
subsequent to the bill being introduced. Chairman Stevens, with 
Senators Bill Nelson and Burns, also offered a manager's 
package to the substitute. The substitute and manager's package 
were both adopted by voice vote. Amendments offered by both Co-
Chairman Inouye and Senator Sununu were also adopted. Co-
Chairman Inouye's amendment sunsets the FCC's waiver authority 
under the bill after four years, and was adopted by voice vote. 
Senator Sununu's amendment was adopted by a vote of 13 to 9 and 
clarified that the FCC cannot impose technology mandates in 
adopting its 911 and E-911 regulations. The Committee, without 
objection, ordered that S. 1063 be reported with the 
amendments.

                            Estimated Costs

    In accordance with paragraph 11(a) of rule XXVI of the 
Standing Rules of the Senate and section 403 of the 
Congressional Budget Act of 1974, the Committee provides the 
following cost estimate, prepared by the Congressional Budget 
Office:

                                                 November 16, 2005.
Hon. Ted Stevens,
Chairman, Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation, U.S. 
        Senate, Washington, DC.
    Dear Mr. Chairman: The Congressional Budget Office has 
prepared the enclosed cost estimate for S. 1063, the IP-Enabled 
Voice Communications and Public Safety Act of 2005.
     If you wish further details on this estimate, we will be 
pleased to provide them. The CBO staff contacts are Melissa Z. 
Petersen (for federal costs), Sarah Puro (for the state and 
local impact), and Craig Cammarata (for the private-sector 
impact).
            Sincerely,
                                               Douglas Holtz-Eakin.
    Enclosure.

S. 1063--IP-Enabled Voice Communications and Public Safety Act of 2005

    Summary: S. 1063 would amend current law and regulations 
regarding emergency 911 telephone service and the Internet-
based telephone service known as Voice-over-Internet-Protocol 
(VOIP). The bill would direct the Federal Communications 
Commission (FCC) to consider temporary waivers to the current 
requirement that VOIP providers connect users to emergency 911 
service by November 28, 2005. The bill also would require the 
federal E-911 Implementation Coordination Office to create a 
plan for a transition to an Internet-based emergency network. 
Assuming appropriation of the necessary amounts, CBO estimates 
that implementing the bill would cost about $1 million over the 
2006-2010 period. Enacting the bill would not affect direct 
spending or revenues.
     S. 1063 contains several intergovernmental mandates as 
defined in the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act (UMRA) including 
limitations on the imposition and use of certain fees that 
state and local governments can charge providers of a VOIP 
service. CBO estimates that the costs of these provisions to 
state, local, and tribal governments would grow over time but 
would not exceed the threshold established in UMRA ($62 million 
in 2005, adjusted annually for inflation) in any of the first 
five years that the mandates are in effect.
    S. 1063 would impose a private-sector mandate as defined in 
UMRA on all private entities that own 911 components necessary 
to transmit VOIP emergency services over their networks. Based 
on information provided by industry and government sources, CBO 
expects that the aggregate direct costs of complying with the 
mandate would be minimal and would fall below the annual 
threshold established by UMRA for private-sector mandates ($123 
million in 2005, adjusted annually for inflation).
    Estimated cost to the Federal Government:Under current law, 
VOIP providers must connect their users to emergency 911 services by 
November 28, 2005. S. 1063 would require the FCC to consider waivers 
for VOIP providers who may have technical difficulties complying with 
this requirement by the deadline. The bill also would require the E-911 
Implementation Coordination Office to create a plan to transition 
national 911 communications from telephone service to the Internet.
    Based on information provided by the FCC, CBO estimates 
that administrative costs for processing waivers applications 
from VOIP providers would cost about $1 million in 2006. Costs 
could be higher depending on the number of applications. We 
estimate that issuing regulations and planning for an Internet-
based 911 system would cost less than $500,000 over the 2006-
2010 period. Enacting the bill would not affect direct spending 
or revenues.
    Estimated impact on state, local, and tribal governments: 
S. 1063 contains several intergovernmental mandates as defined 
in the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act including limitations on 
certain fees that state and local governments impose on 
providers of VOIP, a preemption of state liability laws, and a 
requirement on public safety answering points (PSAPs) to comply 
with requests for information from the FCC. CBO estimates that 
the costs of these provisions to state, local, and tribal 
governments would grow over time but would not exceed the 
threshold established in UMRA ($62 million in 2005, adjusted 
annually for inflation) in any of the first five years that the 
mandate is in effect.

Limitations on fees

    Section 2(c) would prohibit state, local, and tribal 
governments from imposing fees on VOIP providers that exceed 
those imposed on other telecommunications providers. The bill 
also would require that intergovernmental entities spend 911 
fees collected from VOIP providers only for support of 
emergency communications.
    VOIP is a relatively new technology and few states are 
currently imposing 911 fees on this service. It is possible 
that some state and local governments would choose to impose 
such fees at a rate higher than those charged on other 
telephone services, but CBO has no information upon which to 
make such an assumption at this time. Furthermore, most states 
impose 911 fees on wire line and wireless services that are 
similar, implying the likelihood that such fees on VOIP also 
would be similar. Therefore, CBO estimates that the costs to 
state and local governments from the bill's limitation on fees, 
while they might grow over time, would likely be small over the 
next five years.

Preemption of state liability laws and requirements on PSAPs

    Section 2(f) would preempt state liability laws covering 
PSAPs and other governmental entities that answer VOIP-
connected 911 calls. This provision would provide PSAPs, 
providers, or users of VOIP the same protection granted to 
wireless and wireline entities and would benefit 
intergovernmental entities by protecting them from liability 
claims.
     Section 4 would require PSAPs to comply with certain 
nominal information requests from the FCC and would not be 
costly.
    Estimated impact on the private sector: S. 1063 would 
impose a private-sector mandate as defined in UMRA on all 
private entities that own 911 components necessary to transmit 
VOIP emergency services over their networks. Section 2 of the 
bill would require all VOIP service providers to have full 
access to the necessary 911 components. Owners of 911 
components would be able to charge VOIP service providers a fee 
for using their network components, but would be mandated to 
enter into such agreements with those providers. Large private 
entities that own 911 components have most of the 
infrastructure in place to comply with the mandate. Some 
smaller owners of 911 components may not have such capacity and 
would incur costs to comply with the mandate. Based on 
information provided by industry and government sources, CBO 
expects that the aggregate direct costs of complying with the 
mandate would be minimal and would fall below the annual 
threshold established by UMRA for private-sector mandates ($123 
million in 2005, adjusted annually for inflation).
    Estimate prepared by: Federal Costs: Melissa Z. Petersen. 
Impact on State, Local, and Tribal Governments: Sarah Puro. 
Impact on the Private Sector: Craig Cammarata.
    Estimate approved by: Peter H. Fontaine, Deputy Assistant 
Director for Budget Analysis.

                      Regulatory Impact Statement

  In accordance with paragraph 11(b) of rule XXVI of the 
Standing Rules of the Senate, the Committee provides the 
following evaluation of the regulatory impact of the 
legislation, as reported:

                       NUMBER OF PERSONS COVERED

  S. 1063 is intended to extend 911 and E-911 requirements to 
IP-enabled voice service providers. The bill affects IP-enabled 
voice service providers and other entities already subject to 
911 and E-911 regulations. Most IP-enabled voice service 
subscribers either transition from existing voice services for 
which 911 and E-911 requirements already apply or use IP-
enabled voice services in addition to other voice services. As 
such, there is not a significant increase to the number of 
persons subject to 911 or E-911 regulations.

                            ECONOMIC IMPACT

  S. 1063 would not have an adverse economic impact on the 
nation's economy.

                                PRIVACY

  The reported bill would have no impact on the personal 
privacy of U.S. citizens.

                               PAPERWORK

  The reported bill should not significantly increase paperwork 
requirements for individuals and businesses.

                      Section-by-Section Analysis

Section 1. Short title

  The short title is the ``IP-Enabled Voice Communications and 
Public Safety Act of 2005''.

Section 2. Emergency service

            Subsection (a).--911 and E-911 services
  Subsection (a) would give the FCC authority and direction to 
revise or adopt new regulations as may be necessary to ensure 
911 and E-911 services are available to IP-enabled voice 
service subscribers taking into consideration the technological 
and operational feasibility of providing such service. The FCC 
is charged with setting a reasonable time frame for companies 
to come into compliance with the regulations. This subsection 
also would permit the FCC to delegate to appropriate State 
entities the authority to enforce the FCC's 911 and E-911 
rules.
  It makes clear that the bill does not reverse the FCC Report 
and Order released in June 2005, but instead supplements that 
action.
            Subsection (b).--Non-discriminatory access to capabilities
  Subsection (b) would require the FCC to establish regulations 
to provide IP-enabled voice service providers with the same 
access to the components of the public safety network for 911 
and E-911 services as is enjoyed by commercial mobile service 
providers (i.e., wireless carriers), while allowing the FCC to 
consider any technical or security issues that might apply with 
respect to IP-enabled voice services that would not apply with 
respect to commercial mobile service providers.
  This approach would ensure certainty and expediency of 
regulations based on an already established model rather than 
creating a new regime. Certainty is important given the 
pressing need to make 911 and E-911 services available as 
quickly as possible.
            Subsection (c).--State authority over fees
  Subsection (c) would permit States to charge IP-enabled voice 
service providers a 911 or E-911 fee to support E-911 services 
so long as the fee does not exceed what is charged or imposed 
on providers of telecommunications service and so long as the 
fee is used to support 911 and E-911 services or enhancements 
to such services.
            Subsection (d).--Grandfathering of current IP-enabled voice 
                    service subscribers
  Subsection (d) would allow IP-enabled voice service providers 
who are not able to meet the FCC's requirements to grandfather 
their existing customer base as of December 31, 2005 so long as 
they provide notice to their subscribers of the lack of 911 and 
E-911 services. After December 31, 2005, those providers will 
not be permitted to sign up new subscribers unless they are in 
compliance with the FCC's regulations or if they obtain a 
waiver. This provision will prevent termination of service for 
existing IP-enabled voice subscribers, as these providers would 
otherwise be required to shut off service to existing 
subscribers under the FCC's rules before they are able to come 
into compliance with the FCC's rules. A provider of IP-enabled 
voice service would be required to file a report with the FCC 
to explain its efforts to comply with the 911 and E-911 rules.
            Subsection (e).--Technical and operational feasibility
  Subsection (e) would provide a waiver process by which IP-
enabled voice service providers may continue to add subscribers 
after December 31, 2005. A waiver requires a provider to 
demonstrate to the FCC that it is technically or operationally 
infeasible to comply with its rules and then permits the FCC to 
grant waivers of limited duration (not more than a year) that 
may also be limited in geographic area (for instance, limited 
to where E-911 service is not supported by the PSAP). In 
addition, a provider of IP-enabled voice service is required to 
provide separate, clear and conspicuous notice and obtain 
subscriber acknowledgement of the lack of 911 and/or E-911 
services. These limits and the high standard are aimed at 
striking the right balance of ensuring that service providers 
identifyand implement solutions to offer 911 and E-911 service 
while still being able to offer service to new subscribers where they 
cannot offer 911 and E-911 service for reasons beyond their control. 
The waiver authority provided under this subsection would sunset 48 
months after the date of enactment. The FCC's general regulatory 
authority to waive its regulations for good cause shown would remain 
after that time. After the special waiver authority established in this 
Act sunsets, all voice communications providers will be treated 
similarly when seeking waivers of the FCC's applicable 911 and E-911 
regulations. The Committee notes that special waiver provisions have 
been adopted elsewhere in the Communications Act.
            Subsection (f).--Parity of protection for provision or use 
                    of IP-enabled voice service
  Subsection (f) would extend the liability protection afforded 
to other voice services, such as wireline and wireless voice 
services, to IP-enabled voice services, including protection 
for good Samaritans, PSAPs, and providers of IP-enabled voice 
service, as well as their employees and their agents.
  The intent is to provide IP-enabled voice service providers 
with the same liability protections under Federal and State law 
as are provided to wireless and wireline voice providers by 
explicitly referencing Public Law 106-81, the Wireless 
Communications and Public Safety Act of 1999, for wireless 
carriers. The certainty is important for both the public safety 
community as well as industry.
            Subsection (g).--Limitation on commission
  Subsection (g) would clarify that the FCC in promulgating its 
regulations shall not specify a particular technology or 
develop a standard that would favor a particular technology. 
This subsection does not prevent the FCC from adopting open 
standards or performance standards of general applicability.

Section 3. Enforcement

  Section 3 would provide the FCC with the same enforcement 
authority for violations of the IP-Enabled Voice Communications 
and Public Safety Act of 2005 as the FCC has under the 
Communications Act of 1934.

Section 4. Migration to IP-enabled emergency network

  Subsection (a) would require the E-911 Implementation 
Coordination Office to develop a national plan for migrating 
the 911 network to an IP-enabled emergency network that would 
be able to transmit additional public safety information beyond 
the location of the call and outlines some of the components of 
the plan.
  Subsection (b) would require the FCC to compile a list of all 
known PSAPs and make certain information available to the 
public and subsection (c) would require the FCC to compile a 
list of selective routers and make such list available to IP-
enabled voice service providers and other telecommunications 
service providers.

Section 5. Definitions

  Section 5 defines ``911'', ``911 Component'', ``E-911 
service'', ``IP-enabled voice service'', and ``PSAP''. IP-
enabled voice service is defined as a voice service provided 
for a fee using Internet Protocol that can make calls to and 
receive calls from the public switched telephone network. The 
definition is designed to identify the elements that are most 
critical for an IP-enabled voice service to act as a substitute 
to traditional wireline phone service. The definition of IP-
enabled voice service is not intended to cover services that 
are connected to the public switched telephone network in only 
one direction. If a user combines two one-way services, that 
user-created service is not intended to fall under the 
definition of an IP-enabled voice service, so long as the 
entity providing the one-way services is not marketing those 
services together, or the combination of those services, as a 
replacement service for traditional wireline telephone service. 
The definition of IP-enabled voice service is also not intended 
to cover services commonly referred to as conference calling 
services regardless of whether users call into or are called 
through the conference calling service and regardless of the 
numbering system used to access such service. One critical 
respect in which the definition differs from the FCC definition 
is that it does not require a broadband service. Because 
broadband service is defined by speed and can change over time, 
it is not included to ensure that any IP-enabled voice services 
that do not require a broadband connection are still covered by 
this Act.

                      Rollcall Votes in Committee

  Senator Sununu offered an amendment clarifying that the FCC 
cannot impose technology mandates in adopting its regulations. 
On a rollcall vote of 13 yeas and 9 nays as follows, the 
amendment was adopted:

        YEAS--13                      NAYS--9
Mr. McCain \1\                      Mr. Inouye
Mr. Burns                           Mr. Rockefeller \1\
Mr. Lott \1\                        Mr. Kerry \1\
Mrs. Hutchison                      Mr. Dorgan \1\
Ms. Snowe                           Mrs. Boxer \1\
Mr. Smith \1\                       Mr. Nelson of Florida
Mr. Ensign \1\                      Mr. Lautenberg \1\
Mr. Allen                           Mr. Nelson of Nebraska
Mr. Sununu                          Mr. Pryor
Mr. DeMint
Mr. Vitter \1\
Ms. Cantwell
Mr. Stevens
    \1\ By proxy

                        Changes in Existing Law

    In compliance with paragraph 12 of rule XXVI of the 
Standing Rules of the Senate, changes in existing law made by 
the bill, as reported, are shown as follows (existing law 
proposed to be omitted is enclosed in black brackets, new 
material is printed in italic, existing law in which no change 
is proposed is shown in roman):

SEC. 158. COORDINATION OF E-911 IMPLEMENTATION.

                            [47 U.S.C. 942]

    (a) E-911 Implementation Coordination Office.--
          (1) Establishment.--The Assistant Secretary and the 
        Administrator of the National Highway Traffic Safety 
        Administration shall--
                  (A) establish a joint program to facilitate 
                coordination and communication between Federal, 
                State, and local emergency communications 
                systems, emergency personnel, public safety 
                organizations, telecommunications carriers, and 
                telecommunications equipment manufacturers and 
                vendors involved in the implementation of E-911 
                services; and
                  (B) create an E-911 Implementation 
                Coordination Office to implement the provisions 
                of this section.
          (2) Management plan.--The Assistant Secretary and the 
        Administrator shall jointly develop a management plan 
        for the program established under this section. Such 
        plan shall include the organizational structure and 
        funding profiles for the 5-year duration of the 
        program. The Assistant Secretary and the Administrator 
        shall, within 90 days after the date of enactment of 
        this Act, submit the management plan to the Committees 
        on Energy and Commerce and Appropriations of the House 
        of Representatives and the Committees on Commerce, 
        Science, and Transportation and Appropriations of the 
        Senate.
          (3) Purpose of office.--The Office shall--
                  (A) take actions, in concert with 
                coordinators designated in accordance with 
                subsection (b)(3)(A)(ii), to improve such 
                coordination and communication;
                  (B) develop, collect, and disseminate 
                information concerning practices, procedures, 
                and technology used in the implementation of E-
                911 services;
                  (C) advise and assist eligible entities in 
                the preparation of implementation plans 
                required under subsection (b)(3)(A)(iii);
                  (D) receive, review, and recommend the 
                approval or disapproval of applications for 
                grants under subsection (b); and
                  (E) oversee the use of funds provided by such 
                grants in fulfilling such implementation plans.
          (4) Reports.--The Assistant Secretary and the 
        Administrator shall provide a joint annual report to 
        Congress by the first day of October of each year on 
        the activities of the Office to improve coordination 
        and communication with respect to the implementation of 
        E-911 services.
  (b) Phase II E-911 Implementation Grants.--
          (1) Matching grants.--The Assistant Secretary and the 
        Administrator, after consultation with the Secretary of 
        Homeland Security and the Chairman of the Federal 
        Communications Commission, and acting through the 
        Office, shall provide grants to eligible entities for 
        the implementation and operation of Phase II E-911 
        [services.] services, and, upon completion of 
        development of the national plan for migrating to a 
        national IP-enabled emergency network under subsection 
        (d), for migration to an IP-enabled emergency network.
          (2) Matching requirement.--The Federal share of the 
        cost of a project eligible for a grant under this 
        section shall not exceed 50 percent. The non-Federal 
        share of the cost shall be provided from non-Federal 
        sources.
          (3) Coordination required.--In providing grants under 
        paragraph (1), the Assistant Secretary and the 
        Administrator shall require an eligible entity to 
        certify in its application that--
                  (A) in the case of an eligible entity that is 
                a State government, the entity--
                          (i) has coordinated its application 
                        with the public safety answering points 
                        (as such term is defined in section 
                        222(h)(4) of the Communications Act of 
                        1934) located within the jurisdiction 
                        of such entity;
                          (ii) has designated a single officer 
                        or governmental body of the entity to 
                        serve as the coordinator of 
                        implementation of E-911 services, 
                        except that such designation need not 
                        vest such coordinator with direct legal 
                        authority to implement E-911 services 
                        or manage emergency communications 
                        operations;
                          (iii) has established a plan for the 
                        coordination and implementation of E-
                        911 services; and
                          (iv) has integrated 
                        telecommunications services involved in 
                        the implementation and delivery of 
                        phase II E-911 services; or
                  (B) in the case of an eligible entity that is 
                not a State, the entity has complied with 
                clauses (i), (iii), and (iv) of subparagraph 
                (A), and the State in which it is located has 
                complied with clause (ii) of such subparagraph.
          (4) Criteria.--The Assistant Secretary and the 
        Administrator shall jointly issue regulations within 
        180 days after the date of enactment of the ENHANCE 911 
        Act of 2004, after a public comment period of not less 
        than 60 days, prescribing the criteria for selection 
        for grants under this section, and shall update such 
        regulations as necessary. The criteria shall include 
        performance requirements and a timeline for completion 
        of any project to be financed by a grant under this 
        section.
  (c) Diversion of E-911 Charges.--
          (1) Designated e-911 charges.--For the purposes of 
        this subsection, the term ``designated E-911 charges'' 
        means any taxes, fees, or other charges imposed by a 
        State or other taxing jurisdiction that are designated 
        or presented as dedicated to deliver or improve E-911 
        services.
          (2) Certification.--Each applicant for a matching 
        grant under this section shall certify to the Assistant 
        Secretary and the Administrator at the time of 
        application, and each applicant that receives such a 
        grant shall certify to the Assistant Secretary and the 
        Administrator annually thereafter during any period of 
        time during which the funds from the grant are 
        available to the applicant, that no portion of any 
        designated E-911 charges imposed by a State or other 
        taxing jurisdiction within which the applicant is 
        located are being obligated or expended for any purpose 
        other than the purposes for which such charges are 
        designated or presented during the period beginning 180 
        days immediately preceding the date of the application 
        and continuing through the period of time during which 
        the funds from the grant are available to the 
        applicant.
          (3) Condition of grant.--Each applicant for a grant 
        under this section shall agree, as a condition of 
        receipt of the grant, that if the State or other taxing 
        jurisdiction within which the applicant is located, 
        during any period of time during which the funds from 
        the grant are available to the applicant, obligates or 
        expends designated E-911 charges for any purpose other 
        than the purposes for which such charges are designated 
        or presented, all of the funds from such grant shall be 
        returned to the Office.
          (4) Penalty for providing false information.--Any 
        applicant that provides a certification under paragraph 
        (1) knowing that the information provided in the 
        certification was false shall--
                  (A) not be eligible to receive the grant 
                under subsection (b);
                  (B) return any grant awarded under subsection 
                (b) during the time that the certification was 
                not valid; and
                  (C) not be eligible to receive any subsequent 
                grants under subsection (b).
  (d) Migration Plan Required.--
          (1) National plan required.--No more than 18 months 
        after the date of the enactment of the IP-Enabled Voice 
        Communications and Public Safety Act of 2005, the 
        Office shall develop and report to Congress on a 
        national plan for migrating to a national IP-enabled 
        emergency network capable of receiving and responding 
        to all citizen activated emergency communications.
          (2) Contents of plan.--The plan required by paragraph 
        (1) shall--
                  (A) outline the potential benefits of such a 
                migration;
                  (B) identify barriers that must be overcome 
                and funding mechanisms to address those 
                barriers;
                  (C) include a proposed timetable, an outline 
                of costs and potential savings;
                  (D) provide specific legislative language, if 
                necessary, for achieving the plan;
                  (E) provide recommendations on any 
                legislative changes, including updating 
                definitions, to facilitate a national IP-
                enabled emergency network; and
                  (F) assess, collect, and analyze the 
                experiences of the PSAPs and related public 
                safety authorities who are conducting trial 
                deployments of IP-enabled emergency networks as 
                of the date of enactment of the IP-Enabled 
                Voice Communications and Public Safety Act of 
                2005.
          (3) Consultation.--In developing the plan required by 
        paragraph (1), the Office shall consult with 
        representatives of the public safety community, 
        technology and telecommunications providers, and others 
        it deems appropriate.
  [(d)] (e) Authorization; Termination.--
          (1) Authorization.--There are authorized to be 
        appropriated to the Department of Transportation, for 
        the purposes of grants under the joint program operated 
        under this section with the Department of Commerce, not 
        more than $250,000,000 for each of the fiscal years 
        2005 through 2009, not more than 5 percent of which for 
        any fiscal year may be obligated or expended for 
        administrative costs.
          (2) Termination.--The provisions of this section 
        shall cease to be effective on October 1, 2009.
  [(e)] (f) Definitions.--As used in this section:
          (1) Office.--The term ``Office'' means the E-911 
        Implementation Coordination Office.
          (2) Administrator.--The term ``Administrator'' means 
        the Administrator of the National Highway Traffic 
        Safety Administration.
          (3) Eligible entity.--
                  (A) In general.--The term ``eligible entity'' 
                means a State or local government or a tribal 
                organization (as defined in section 4(l) of the 
                Indian Self-Determination and Education 
                Assistance Act (25 U.S.C. 450b(l))).
                  (B) Instrumentalities.--Such term includes 
                public authorities, boards, commissions, and 
                similar bodies created by one or more eligible 
                entities described in subparagraph (A) to 
                provide E-911 services.
                  (C) Exception.--Such term does not include 
                any entity that has failed to submit the most 
                recently required certification under 
                subsection (c) within 30 days after the date on 
                which such certification is due.
          (4) E-911 services.--The term ``E-911 services'' 
        means both phase I and phase II enhanced 911 services, 
        as described in section 20.18 of the Commission's 
        regulations (47 C.F.R. 20.18), as in effect on the date 
        of enactment of the ENHANCE 911 Act of 2004, or as 
        subsequently revised by the Federal Communications 
        Commission.
          (5) Phase II E-911 services.--The term ``phase II E-
        911 services'' means only phase II enhanced 911 
        services, as described in such section 20.18 (47 C.F.R. 
        20.18), as in effect on such date, or as subsequently 
        revised by the Federal Communications Commission.
          (6) State.--The term ``State'' means any State of the 
        United States, the District of Columbia, Puerto Rico, 
        the Northern Mariana Islands, and any territory or 
        possession of the United States.

                                  

```