*Pages 1--1 from  Microsoft Word - 40437*
 Federal  Communications  Commission  FCC  04-  160 
 SEPARATE  STATEMENT  OF  COMMISSIONER  MICHAEL  J.  COPPS  Approving  in  Part,  Dissenting  in  Part 


 Re:  Revision  of  the  Commission’s  Rules  to  Ensure  Compatibility  with  Enhanced  911  Call  Processing  Modes  in  CC  Docket  No.  94-  102  and  WT  Docket  No.  99-  328  (Adopted  June  30,  2004) 
 When  the  FCC  takes  actions  related  to  public  safety  and  the  Nation’s  911  system  it  must  be  especially  careful.  Americans  rely  on  911  in  life-  threatening  circumstances  and  it  is  our  responsibility  to 
 ensure  that  the  system  works.  Unfortunately,  the  question  of  whether  a  complex  technical  problem  leaves  callers  in  certain  circumstances  without  access  to  the  911  system  remains  unanswered. 


 If  a  mobile  carrier’s  analog  cell  phone  fails  to  connect  a  caller  with  911  through  that  carrier’s  network,  FCC  rules  require  the  phone  to  switch  to  another  carrier’s  network  within  17  seconds.  This  rule 
 means  that  even  if  a  caller  is  in  an  area  that  is  a  dead  zone  for  their  carrier,  a  911  call  remains  possible  as  long  as  some  other  carrier  provides  service  in  that  area. 


 The  Wireless  Consumers  Alliance  and  other  parties  assert  that  many  mobile  phone  networks  are  designed  in  a  way  that  creates  a  risk  that  when  this  switch  happens,  a  911  call  will  not  be  connected  to  a 
 911  center,  leaving  the  caller  without  access  to  help  in  an  emergency.  This  problem  is  known  as  “lock  in”.  The  Commission  attempted  to  fix  the  problem  in  1999.  Carriers  and  manufacturers  assert  that  the 
 FCC’s  1999  action  did  in  fact  improve  the  situation,  but  was  written  in  such  a  way  that  did  not  require  them  to  ensure  that  the  call  ever  reaches  a  911  center,  but  only  that  the  carrier  assign  a  voice  channel  to 
 the  911  caller  within  17  seconds  which  may  or  may  not  reach  the  911  center.  The  1999  Order  is  not  a  model  of  clarity.  In  places  it  appears  to  contradict  itself,  and  I  cannot  say  that  it  clearly  requires  more 
 than  the  manufacturers  and  carriers  claim  that  it  does,  although  today’s  Order  makes  the  1999  decision  out  to  clearer  than  it  is. 


 No  matter  what  the  outcome  of  our  retrospective  analysis  we  have  the  prospective  duty  to  determine  whether  some  911  calls  are  failing  unnecessarily.  If  we  find  that  they  are  failing,  we  have  to 
 duty  to  fix  the  problem.  Nonetheless,  the  majority  refuses  even  to  agree  to  explore  whether  911  calls  are  failing,  much  less  to  agree  to  fix  the  problem  if  we  find  that  they  are  failing.  Because  this  refusal  may 
 create  unnecessary  risks,  I  must  dissent  in  part. 
1