Linda K. Moore
Specialist in Telecommunications Policy
Effective emergency response is dependent on wireless communications. To minimize communications failures during and after a crisis requires ongoing improvements in emergency communications capacity and capability. The availability of radio frequency spectrum is considered essential to developing a modern, interoperable communications network for public safety. Equally critical is building the radio network to use this spectrum. Opinions diverge, however, on such issues as how much spectrum should be made available for the network, who should own it, who should build it, who should operate it, who should be allowed to use it, and how it might be paid for.
To resolve the debate and move the planning process forward, Congress may decide to pursue oversight or change existing law. Actions proposed to Congress include (1) authorizing the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) to reassign spectrum and (2) changing requirements for the use of spectrum auction proceeds. In particular, legislation in the Deficit Reduction Act of 2005 (P.L. 109-171) might be modified. This law mandated the termination of analog television broadcasting and the release of those channels for other uses, including public safety.
Congress may consider additional legislation to meet desired levels of emergency communications performance. A bill that would increase the amount of radio frequency spectrum assigned for public safety has been introduced (H.R. 5081, Representative King). A Senate bill contains similar provisions for spectrum assignment and would add a number of new provisions, including funding (S. 3625, Senator Lieberman). Both bills would require the FCC to transfer a spectrum license intended for commercial use, the D Block, to the license-holder for adjacent frequencies already assigned to public safety, known as the Public Safety Broadband License. Other bills and oversight activities are likely.
Congress has before it an opportunity to bring public safety communications into the 21st century by assuring that a nationwide, interoperable communications network is put in place. The tools at its disposal include homeland security policy, spectrum policy, funding programs, and leadership.
Among the actions that Congress might take, those dealing with governance and funding are often cited by public safety officials and others as the areas most in need of its consideration. They have recommended that, for the proposed network project to go forward on a sustainable footing, funding sources need to be identified for investment and operating expenses over the long term. To ensure the resources are wisely used, many analysts point to the primacy of putting in place a well-grounded but flexible governance structure. They argue that good governance is essential to complete development of needed technologies and standards, and to plan for and execute their deployment. In its National Broadband Plan, the FCC proposed that it assume the needed leadership role and has since taken a number of steps to realize the goals it has set for itself.
Since September 11, 2001, Congress has passed several laws that empowered the Department of Homeland Security to recognize and respond to technological developments in wireless and Internet protocol (IP) communications, and to apply this knowledge to guiding the development of a nationwide, interoperable network for public safety. By choosing to focus on interim solutions, the Department might appear to have passed on the opportunity to provide the needed leadership and planning to move public safety communications toward a next-generation emergency communications network. .
Date of Report: June 23, 2010
Number of Pages: 27
Order Number: R40859
Price: $29.95
Document available via e-mail as a pdf file or in paper form.
To order, e-mail Penny Hill Press or call us at 301-253-0881. Provide a Visa, MasterCard, American Express, or Discover card number, expiration date, and name on the card. Indicate whether you want e-mail or postal delivery. Phone orders are preferred and receive priority processing.
Wednesday, July 28, 2010
Public Safety Communications and Spectrum Resources: Policy Issues for Congress
Broadband Loan and Grant Programs in the USDA’s Rural Utilities Service
Lennard G. Kruger
Specialist in Science and Technology Policy
Given the large potential impact broadband access may have on the economic development of rural America, concern has been raised over a "digital divide" between rural and urban or suburban areas with respect to broadband deployment. While there are many examples of rural communities with state of the art telecommunications facilities, recent surveys and studies have indicated that, in general, rural areas tend to lag behind urban and suburban areas in broadband deployment.
Citing the lagging deployment of broadband in many rural areas, Congress and the Administration acted in 2001 and 2002 to initiate pilot broadband loan and grant programs within the Rural Utilities Service (RUS) at the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA). Subsequently, Section 6103 of the Farm Security and Rural Investment Act of 2002 (P.L. 107-171) amended the Rural Electrification Act of 1936 to authorize a loan and loan guarantee program to provide funds for the costs of the construction, improvement, and acquisition of facilities and equipment for broadband service in eligible rural communities. The RUS/USDA houses two assistance programs exclusively dedicated to financing broadband deployment: the Rural Broadband Access Loan and Loan Guarantee Program and the Community Connect Grant Program.
The 110th Congress considered reauthorization and modification of the loan and loan guarantee program as part of the farm bill. The Food, Conservation, and Energy Act of 2008 became law on June 18, 2008 (P.L. 110-246). Title VI (Rural Development) contains authorizing language for the broadband loan program.
Meanwhile, on May 11, 2007, RUS released a Proposed Rule seeking to revise the broadband loan program rules and regulations. Some key issues pertinent to a consideration of the RUS broadband programs include restrictions on applicant eligibility, how "rural" is defined with respect to eligible rural communities, how to address assistance to areas with preexisting broadband service, technological neutrality, funding levels and mechanisms, and the appropriateness of federal assistance. The final rule will reflect language in the enacted farm bill statute (P.L. 110-246). Ultimately, modification of rules, regulations, or criteria associated with the RUS broadband program will likely result in "winners and losers" in terms of which companies, communities, regions of the country, and technologies are eligible or more likely to receive broadband loans and grants.
On February 17, 2009, President Obama signed P.L. 111-5, the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act (ARRA). Broadband provisions of the ARRA provide a total of $7.2 billion, primarily for broadband grants. The total consists of $2.5 billion for RUS broadband loans, grants, and loan/grant combinations, and $4.7 billion to the National Telecommunications and Information Administration (NTIA) at the Department of Commerce (DOC) for a newly established Broadband Technology Opportunities Program.
Date of Report: June 23, 2010
Number of Pages: 23
Order Number: RL33816
Price: $29.95
Document available via e-mail as a pdf file or in paper form.
To order, e-mail Penny Hill Press or call us at 301-253-0881. Provide a Visa, MasterCard, American Express, or Discover card number, expiration date, and name on the card. Indicate whether you want e-mail or postal delivery. Phone orders are preferred and receive priority processing.
Friday, July 23, 2010
Assistance to Firefighters Program: Distribution of Fire Grant Funding
Lennard G. Kruger
Specialist in Science and Technology Policy
The Assistance to Firefighters Grant (AFG) Program, also known as fire grants or the FIRE Act grant program, was established by Title XVII of the FY2001 National Defense Authorization Act (P.L. 106-398). Currently administered by the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA), Department of Homeland Security (DHS), the program provides federal grants directly to local fire departments and unaffiliated Emergency Medical Services (EMS) organizations to help address a variety of equipment, training, and other firefighter-related and EMS needs. A related program is the Staffing for Adequate Fire and Emergency Response Firefighters (SAFER) program, which provides grants for hiring, recruiting, and retaining firefighters.
The fire grant program is now in its tenth year. The Fire Act statute was reauthorized in 2004 (Title XXXVI of P.L. 108-375) and provides overall guidelines on how fire grant money should be distributed. There is no set geographical formula for the distribution of fire grants—fire departments throughout the nation apply, and award decisions are made by a peer panel based on the merits of the application and the needs of the community. However, the law does require that fire grants be distributed to a diverse mix of fire departments, with respect to type of department (paid, volunteer, or combination), geographic location, and type of community served (e.g. urban, suburban, or rural).
On February 17, 2009, the President signed P.L. 111-5, the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act (ARRA) of 2009. The ARRA included an additional $210 million in firefighter assistance grants for modifying, upgrading, or constructing state and local non-federal fire stations, provided that 5% be set aside for program administration and provided that no grant shall exceed $15 million.
P.L. 111-83, the FY2010 Department of Homeland Security appropriations bill, provided $810 million for firefighter assistance, including $390 million for AFG and $420 million for SAFER. The Administration's FY2011 budget proposed $305 million for AFG (a 22% decrease from the FY2010 level) and $305 million for SAFER (a 27% decrease). The total amount requested for firefighter assistance (AFG and SAFER) was $610 million, a 25% decrease from FY2010.
Meanwhile, on November 18, 2009, the House passed H.R. 3791, the Fire Grants Reauthorization Act of 2009, which would reauthorize AFG and SAFER through FY2014 and modify the distribution of fire grant funds. On April 27, 2010, S. 3267, the Fire Grants Reauthorization Act of 2010, was introduced and referred to the Senate Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs. On April 28, the Committee ordered S. 3267 to be reported with an amendment favorably. Debate over the AFG reauthorization has reflected a competition for funding between career/urban/suburban departments and volunteer/rural departments. The urgency of this debate could be heightened by the proposed reduction of overall AFG funding in FY2011, and the economic downturn in many local communities increasingly hard pressed to allocate funding for their local fire departments.
Date of Report: July 13, 2010
Number of Pages: 23
Order Number: RL32341
Price: $29.95
The report is available via eMail as a pdf file or in paper form.
To order, e-mail Penny Hill Press or call us at 301-253-0881. Provide a Visa, MasterCard, American Express, or Discover card number, expiration date, and name on the card. Indicate whether you want eMail or postal delivery. Phone orders are preferred and receive priority processing.
Wednesday, July 21, 2010
Project BioShield: Authorities, Appropriations, Acquisitions, and Issues for Congress
Frank Gottron
Specialist in Science and Technology Policy
Many potential chemical, biological, radiological, and nuclear (CBRN) terrorism agents lack available medical countermeasures. In 2003, President Bush proposed Project BioShield to address this need. The Project BioShield Act became law in July 2004 (P.L. 108-276).
This law has three main provisions: (1) relaxing regulatory requirements for some CBRN terrorism-related spending, including hiring personnel and awarding research grants; (2) guaranteeing a federal government market for new CBRN medical countermeasures; and (3) permitting emergency use of unapproved countermeasures. The Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) has used each of these authorities. The HHS used expedited review authorities to approve contracts and grants related to CBRN countermeasure research and development. The HHS used the authority to guarantee a government market to obligate approximately $2 billion to acquire countermeasures against anthrax, botulism, radiation, and smallpox. The HHS has also employed the emergency use authority several times, including allowing young children with H1N1 "swine" influenza to receive specific antiviral drugs.
The Department of Homeland Security (DHS) Appropriations Act, 2004 (P.L. 108-90) advance appropriated $5.593 billion from FY2004 to FY2013 for CBRN countermeasures acquisition through Project BioShield. Subsequent Congresses have rescinded or transferred to other accounts approximately 19% of the advance appropriation. In FY2004 and FY2005, Congress removed a total of approximately $25 million from this account through rescissions included in the Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2004 (P.L. 108-199) and the Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2005 (P.L. 108-447). In the Omnibus Appropriations Act, 2009 (P.L. 111-8), Congress transferred $412 million from this account to support countermeasure advanced research and development and pandemic influenza preparedness and response. The Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2010 (P.L. 111-117) transferred $609 million from this account to support basic research and advanced countermeasure development. P.L. 111-117 also transferred the remaining Project BioShield funds from DHS to HHS. The Disaster Relief and Summer Jobs Act of 2010 (H.R. 4899) would rescind up to $2 billion of Project BioShield funds. For FY2011, President Obama has requested the transfer of at least $476 million from this account.
Since passing the Project BioShield Act, subsequent Congresses have considered additional measures to further encourage countermeasure development. The 109th Congress passed the Pandemic and All-Hazard Preparedness Act (P.L. 109-417) which created the Biomedical Advanced Research and Development Authority (BARDA) in HHS. Amongst other duties, BARDA oversees all of HHS' Project BioShield activities. The Pandemic and All-Hazard Preparedness Act also modified the Project BioShield procurement process. Some stakeholders question whether these changes have sufficiently improved countermeasure development and procurement. The Administration is considering implementing additional changes to the countermeasure research, development, and acquisition process.
The 111th Congress continues to address several Project BioShield-related policy issues. These include whether to continue diverting Project BioShield acquisition funding to other purposes; whether to change the countermeasure development and acquisition process; how to replace stockpiled countermeasures as they expire; and whether to alter federal efforts to encourage the development of broad-spectrum countermeasures .
Date of Report: July 15, 2010
Number of Pages: 18
Order Number: R41033
Price: $29.95
Document available via e-mail as a pdf file or in paper form.
To order, e-mail Penny Hill Press or call us at 301-253-0881. Provide a Visa, MasterCard, American Express, or Discover card number, expiration date, and name on the card. Indicate whether you want e-mail or postal delivery. Phone orders are preferred and receive priority processing
Public Safety Communications and Spectrum Resources: Policy Issues for Congress
Linda K. Moore
Specialist in Telecommunications Policy
Effective emergency response is dependent on wireless communications. To minimize communications failures during and after a crisis requires ongoing improvements in emergency communications capacity and capability. The availability of radio frequency spectrum is considered essential to developing a modern, interoperable communications network for public safety. Equally critical is building the radio network to use this spectrum. Opinions diverge, however, on such issues as how much spectrum should be made available for the network, who should own it, who should build it, who should operate it, who should be allowed to use it, and how it might be paid for.
To resolve the debate and move the planning process forward, Congress may decide to pursue oversight or change existing law. Actions proposed to Congress include (1) authorizing the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) to reassign spectrum and (2) changing requirements for the use of spectrum auction proceeds. In particular, legislation in the Deficit Reduction Act of 2005 (P.L. 109-171) might be modified. This law mandated the termination of analog television broadcasting and the release of those channels for other uses, including public safety.
Congress may consider additional legislation to meet desired levels of emergency communications performance. One bill that would increase the amount of radio frequency spectrum assigned for public safety has been introduced (H.R. 5081, Representative King) and other bills and oversight activities are likely.
Congress has before it an opportunity to bring public safety communications into the 21st century by assuring that a nationwide, interoperable communications network is put in place. The tools at its disposal include homeland security policy, spectrum policy, funding programs, and leadership.
Among the actions that Congress might take, those dealing with governance and funding are often cited by public safety officials and others as the areas most in need of its consideration. They recommend that, for the proposed network project to go forward on a sustainable footing, funding sources need to be identified for investment and operating expenses over the long term. To ensure the resources are wisely used, many analysts point to the primacy of putting in place a well-grounded but flexible governance structure. They argue that good governance is essential to complete development of needed technologies and standards, and to plan for and execute their deployment. In its National Broadband Plan, the FCC proposed that it assume the needed leadership role and has since taken a number of steps to realize the goals it has set for itself.
Since September 11, 2001, Congress has passed several laws that empowered the Department of Homeland Security to recognize and respond to technological developments in wireless and Internet protocol (IP) communications, and to apply this knowledge to guiding the development of a nationwide, interoperable network for public safety. By choosing to focus on interim solutions, the Department might appear to have passed on the opportunity to provide the needed leadership and planning to move public safety communications toward a next-generation emergency communications network.
Date of Report: July 15, 2010
Number of Pages: 26
Order Number: R40859
Price: $29.95
Document available via e-mail as a pdf file or in paper form.
To order, e-mail Penny Hill Press or call us at 301-253-0881. Provide a Visa, MasterCard, American Express, or Discover card number, expiration date, and name on the card. Indicate whether you want e-mail or postal delivery. Phone orders are preferred and receive priority processing.