NASNA Cites 'Urgent Concerns' With Spectrum Innovation Act's NG-911 Requirements

upgrades, the group said in an open letter to senators posted Tuesday. The House passed HR-7624 in July with language allocating up to $10 billion in proceeds from a proposed auction of spectrum on the 3.1-3.45 GHz band for NG-911 implementation (see 2207280052). NASNA “supported” initial language funding NG-911 via HR-7624 that the House Communications Subcommittee advanced in June (see 2206140077) “and we still support the premise of federal assistance” for NG-911, said Executive Director Harriet Rennie-Brown in the letter. “However, we believe now is the time to voice our strong and urgent concern about” other NG-911 language in the measure that mirrors the group’s past qualms with language in the Leading Infrastructure for Tomorrow’s America Act (HR-1848), including interoperability requirements and language on “commonly accepted standards” (see 2104080003). NASNA is “fully aware that there have been matters raised by other public safety groups and we are concerned that these other interests will unnecessarily detract from and delay NG911 implementation,” Rennie-Brown said: The existing proposed language supports the National Emergency Number Association’s i3 standard “that is already in use and is saving lives today. While we support innovation and competition, we do not support any amended language that would give preference to an alternative standard. Every state, regional, and local agency that is implementing NG911 is based on the NENA i3 standard.” The group opposes a proposed Nationwide Next Generation 911 Cybersecurity Center as “redundant and unnecessary” and is concerned by HR-7624’s language to end the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration’s involvement in NG-911 implementation, she said. “Leaving the joint implementation and coordination office between NHTSA and NTIA in place for the present time is not only feasible, but HR 7624 language should allow for an objective evaluation of the proper federal ‘home’ for the resources to assist the states with 911 and coordinate federal 911 activities.” NASNA believes “the overly prescriptive conditions written into” HR-7624 “for the states’ NG911 plan are redundant, unnecessary, and create burdensome requirements for the states' 911 systems,” Rennie-Brown said: “The NG911 plan requirements are best suited to the grant rulemaking process, not congressional mandates.”