[House Hearing, 115 Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
SOLUTIONS TO STRENGTHEN U.S. PUBLIC SAFETY COMMUNICATIONS
=======================================================================
HEARING
BEFORE THE
SUBCOMMITTEE ON COMMUNICATIONS AND TECHNOLOGY
OF THE
COMMITTEE ON ENERGY AND COMMERCE
HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
ONE HUNDRED FIFTEENTH CONGRESS
SECOND SESSION
__________
SEPTEMBER 26, 2018
__________
Serial No. 115-168
[GRAPHIC NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
Printed for the use of the Committee on Energy and Commerce
energycommerce.house.gov
__________
U.S. GOVERNMENT PUBLISHING OFFICE
36-633 WASHINGTON : 2019
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
For sale by the Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Publishing Office,
http://bookstore.gpo.gov. For more information, contact the GPO Customer Contact Center,
U.S. Government Publishing Office. Phone 202-512-1800, or 866-512-1800 (toll-free).
E-mail, [email protected].
COMMITTEE ON ENERGY AND COMMERCE
GREG WALDEN, Oregon
Chairman
JOE BARTON, Texas FRANK PALLONE, Jr., New Jersey
Vice Chairman Ranking Member
FRED UPTON, Michigan BOBBY L. RUSH, Illinois
JOHN SHIMKUS, Illinois ANNA G. ESHOO, California
MICHAEL C. BURGESS, Texas ELIOT L. ENGEL, New York
MARSHA BLACKBURN, Tennessee GENE GREEN, Texas
STEVE SCALISE, Louisiana DIANA DeGETTE, Colorado
ROBERT E. LATTA, Ohio MICHAEL F. DOYLE, Pennsylvania
CATHY McMORRIS RODGERS, Washington JANICE D. SCHAKOWSKY, Illinois
GREGG HARPER, Mississippi G.K. BUTTERFIELD, North Carolina
LEONARD LANCE, New Jersey DORIS O. MATSUI, California
BRETT GUTHRIE, Kentucky KATHY CASTOR, Florida
PETE OLSON, Texas JOHN P. SARBANES, Maryland
DAVID B. McKINLEY, West Virginia JERRY McNERNEY, California
ADAM KINZINGER, Illinois PETER WELCH, Vermont
H. MORGAN GRIFFITH, Virginia BEN RAY LUJAN, New Mexico
GUS M. BILIRAKIS, Florida PAUL TONKO, New York
BILL JOHNSON, Ohio YVETTE D. CLARKE, New York
BILLY LONG, Missouri DAVID LOEBSACK, Iowa
LARRY BUCSHON, Indiana KURT SCHRADER, Oregon
BILL FLORES, Texas JOSEPH P. KENNEDY, III,
SUSAN W. BROOKS, Indiana Massachusetts
MARKWAYNE MULLIN, Oklahoma TONY CARDENAS, California
RICHARD HUDSON, North Carolina RAUL RUIZ, California
CHRIS COLLINS, New York SCOTT H. PETERS, California
KEVIN CRAMER, North Dakota DEBBIE DINGELL, Michigan
TIM WALBERG, Michigan
MIMI WALTERS, California
RYAN A. COSTELLO, Pennsylvania
EARL L. ``BUDDY'' CARTER, Georgia
JEFF DUNCAN, South Carolina
Subcommittee on Communications and Technology
MARSHA BLACKBURN, Tennessee
Chairman
LEONARD LANCE, New Jersey MICHAEL F. DOYLE, Pennsylvania
Vice Chairman Ranking Member
JOHN SHIMKUS, Illinois PETER WELCH, Vermont
STEVE SCALISE, Louisiana YVETTE D. CLARKE, New York
ROBERT E. LATTA, Ohio DAVID LOEBSACK, Iowa
BRETT GUTHRIE, Kentucky RAUL RUIZ, California
PETE OLSON, Texas DEBBIE DINGELL, Michigan
ADAM KINZINGER, Illinois BOBBY L. RUSH, Illinois
GUS M. BILIRAKIS, Florida ANNA G. ESHOO, California
BILL JOHNSON, Ohio ELIOT L. ENGEL, New York
BILLY LONG, Missouri G.K. BUTTERFIELD, North Carolina
BILL FLORES, Texas DORIS O. MATSUI, California
SUSAN W. BROOKS, Tennessee JERRY McNERNEY, California
CHRIS COLLINS, New York FRANK PALLONE, Jr., New Jersey (ex
KEVIN CRAMER, North Dakota officio)
MIMI WALTERS, California
RYAN A. COSTELLO, Pennsylvania
GREG WALDEN, Oregon (ex officio)
C O N T E N T S
----------
Page
Hon. Leonard Lance, a Representative in Congress from the State
of New Jersey, opening statement............................... 1
Prepared statement........................................... 3
Hon. Michael F. Doyle, a Representative in Congress from the
Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, opening statement................ 4
Prepared statement........................................... 6
Hon. Greg Walden, a Representative in Congress from the State of
Oregon, opening statement...................................... 7
Prepared statement........................................... 8
Hon. Frank Pallone, Jr., a Representative in Congress from the
State of New Jersey, opening statement......................... 9
Prepared statement........................................... 11
Hon. Anna G. Eshoo, a Representative in Congress from the State
of California, prepared statement.............................. 56
Witnesses
Eddie Reyes, Director, Public Safety Communications, Prince
William County Government...................................... 12
Prepared statement........................................... 14
James Curry, Communications Division Head, Hunterdon County, New
Jersey Department of Public Safety............................. 27
Prepared statement........................................... 29
Paul Starks, Director, Public Information Office, Montgomery
County, Maryland Police Department............................. 33
Prepared statement........................................... 35
Submitted Material
Statement of The Board of Chosen Freeholders, County of
Hunterdon, State of New Jersey................................. 57
Article entitled, ``N.J. raided your tax money intended for
critical 911 upgrades. `Quit it!` lawmaker says,'' NJ.com,
August 3, 2018................................................. 59
Article entitled, ``Lost in the Storm,'' The New York Times,
August 30, 2018................................................ 64
SOLUTIONS TO STRENGTHEN U.S. PUBLIC SAFETY COMMUNICATIONS
----------
WEDNESDAY, SEPTEMBER 26, 2018
House of Representatives,
Subcommittee on Communications and Technology,
Committee on Energy and Commerce,
Washington, DC.
The subcommittee met, pursuant to call, at 10:30 a.m., in
room 2322 Rayburn House Office Building, Hon. Leonard Lance
(vice chairman of the subcommittee) presiding.
Members present: Representatives Lance, Shimkus, Guthrie,
Olson, Bilirakis, Johnson, Long, Flores, Brooks, Walters,
Costello, Walden (ex officio), Doyle, Welch, Clarke, Ruiz,
Engel, McNerney, and Pallone (ex officio).
Staff present: Jon Adame, Policy Coordinator,
Communications and Technology; Mike Bloomquist, Deputy Staff
Director; Samantha Bopp, Staff Assistant; Robin Colwell, Chief
Counsel, Communications and Technology; Kristine Fargotstein,
Detailee, Communications and Technology; Sean Farrell,
Professional Staff Member, Communications and Technology; Elena
Hernandez, Press Secretary; Tim Kurth, Deputy Chief Counsel,
Communications and Technology; Lauren McCarty, Counsel,
Communications and Technology; Austin Stonebraker, Press
Assistant; Evan Viau, Legislative Clerk, Communications and
Technology; Hamlin Wade, Special Advisor, External Affairs;
Jeff Carroll, Minority Staff Director; Jennifer Epperson,
Minority FCC Detailee; Alex Hoehn-Saric, Minority Chief
Counsel, Communications and Technology; Jerry Leverich,
Minority Counsel; Jourdan Lewis, Minority Staff Assistant; Dan
Miller, Minority Policy Analyst; and C.J. Young, Minority Press
Secretary.
OPENING STATEMENT OF HON. LEONARD LANCE, A REPRESENTATIVE IN
CONGRESS FROM THE STATE OF NEW JERSEY
Mr. Lance [presiding]. Good morning, ladies and gentlemen.
The subcommittee will come to order. I am Leonard Lance, the
vice chair of the subcommittee and I have the honor of chairing
the subcommittee today. The Subcommittee on Communications and
Technology will now come to order. I thank our witnesses for
being here. I now recognize myself for 5 minutes for an opening
statement.
Since the inception of 9-1-1 as the nationwide emergency
telephone number in 1968, 9-1-1 call centers around the country
have saved countless lives by giving the public a quick and
easy way to request assistance in times of emergency.
Technological advances over the years such as geolocation have
opened up opportunities to improve upon the system, allowing
law enforcement officers to receive the approximate location of
where a call has originated.
In order to keep up with the times, many states have
established a fee or tax to upgrade and maintain their 9-1-1
systems. These funds are especially crucial as we look to Next
Gen 9-1-1 to update significantly the capabilities of our
emergency communications. Innovations such as text-to-9-1-1 and
the ability for citizens to send law enforcement officials
real-time video during an emergency have the potential to
revolutionize our emergency communications and save even more
lives.
Under the New and Emerging Technologies 911 Improvement Act
of 2008, the Federal Communications Commission is required to
submit a report to Congress on state collection and
distribution of 9-1-1 and enhanced 9-1-1 fees and charges.
These reports have shed light on a handful of states that have
been raiding these 9-1-1 fees and diverting the funds for
unrelated purposes.
This unacceptable practice leaves counties and localities
on the hook for maintaining and upgrading their systems, and
this of course endangers public safety. Since 2004, New Jersey,
where I live, has collected a 90 cent tax on consumers' monthly
telephone and cell phone bills for 9-1-1 improvements. However,
New Jersey has become the worst 9-1-1 fee diverter in the
country, diverting over one billion dollars to non-9-1-1
related purposes.
Quite simply, this is unacceptable. Our constituents need
to know that in an emergency their 9-1-1 call is going to go
through. Lawmakers in state capitals including Trenton and in
several other state capitals around the country have raided the
funds set aside to improve the 9-1-1 system and left the
account penniless, leaving public safety threatened and local
taxpayers on the hook as I have said.
I opposed the original legislation in New Jersey because it
opened the door to the diversion as we are seeing today and
this has been regardless of which party has controlled the
governorship in the state I represent. Now, New Jersey
lawmakers are considering an increase on the tax to fund Next
Gen 9-1-1. Instead of further taxing New Jerseyans, Trenton
should first stop diverting any existing fees from their
intended use.
I am pleased to welcome Jim Curry to our panel today. Mr.
Curry is the Division of Communications Director for Hunterdon
County's Department of Public Safety and Health Services.
Hunterdon County is one of 21 counties in New Jersey, and I
personally live in Hunterdon County.
Last month, Mr. Curry and the rest of the staff at the 9-1-
1 Communications Center were kind enough to give me a tour of
the facility and we were joined by Commissioner Mike O'Rielly
of the Federal Communications Commission. Commissioner O'Rielly
has been a leader in the effort to stop the states from
diverting and certainly I think we give him great credit in
that regard. The work that is being done is truly remarkable
and I was extremely impressed with the operation as it was
ongoing.
Despite receiving little to no funds from the state 9-1-1
fee fund, Hunterdon County has managed to maintain a state-of-
the-art system. However, because the state has been diverting
the fees in such a dramatic amount, counties in New Jersey are
left to their own devices. These funds generally come from
residents in property taxes which are already among the highest
in the Nation.
That is why I have joined Congressman Collins and
Congresswoman Eshoo in introducing the 9-1-1 Fee Integrity Act
which would direct the FCC to establish legitimate uses for 9-
1-1 fees to be directed. And obviously this is bipartisan in
nature, Congresswoman Eshoo is a very distinguished senior
member of the committee on the Democratic side.
I commend Commissioner O'Rielly and Commissioner
Rosenworcel for working hard at the FCC, again in a bipartisan
capacity, to bring to light the actions of these few bad actor
states. However, the Commission's ability to combat diversion
is limited. This bipartisan, common sense legislation will
enable the FCC to ensure that bad actors such as New Jersey are
no longer able to divert funds.
I commend the members of the subcommittee for their fine
work in drafting these important pieces of legislation and I
thank our distinguished panel for appearing before us today. I
look forward to the testimony and I now recognize the ranking
member, Mr. Doyle.
I now recognize the ranking member, Mr. Doyle.
[The prepared statement of Mr. Lance follows:]
Prepared statement of Hon. Leonard Lance
Since the inception of 9-1-1 as the nationwide emergency
phone number in 1968, 9-1-1 call centers around the country
have saved countless lives by giving the public a quick and
easy way to request assistance in times of emergency.
Technological advances over the years, such as geolocation,
have opened up opportunities to improve upon the system, which
allows law enforcement officers to receive the approximate
location of where a call originated. In order to keep up with
the times, many states have established a fee or tax to upgrade
and maintain their 9-1-1 systems. These funds are especially
crucial as we look to Next Gen 9-1-1 to update significantly
the capabilities of our emergency communications. Innovations
such as text to 9-1-1 and the ability for citizens to send law
enforcement officers real time video during an emergency have
the potential to revolutionize our emergency communications and
save countless more lives.
Under the New and Emerging Technologies 911 Improvement Act
of 2008, the Federal Communications Commission is required to
submit a report to Congress on state collection and
distribution of 9-1-1 and enhanced 9-1-1 fees and charges.
These reports have shed light on a handful of states who have
been raiding these 9-1-1 fees and diverting the funds for
unrelated purposes. This unacceptable practice leaves counties
and localities on the hook for maintaining and upgrading their
systems, endangering public safety. Since 2004, New Jersey has
collected a 90-cent tax on consumers' monthly telephone and
cell phone bills for 9-1-1 improvements. However, New Jersey
has become the worst 9-1-1 fee diverter in country, diverting
over one billion dollars to non-9-1-1 related purposes. This is
unacceptable.
Our constituents need to know that in an emergency their 9-
1-1 call is going to go through. Lawmakers in Trenton, and in
several other state capitals around the country, have raided
the funds set aside to improve the 9-1-1 system and left the
account penniless--leaving public safety threatened and local
taxpayers on the hook. I opposed the original legislation in
New Jersey, because it opened the door to the diversion we are
seeing today. Now New Jersey lawmakers are considering an
increase on the tax to fund Next Gen 911. Instead of further
taxing New Jerseyans, Trenton should first stop diverting the
existing fees from their intended use.
I am very pleased to welcome Jim Curry on our panel today.
Mr. Curry is the Division of Communications Director for
Hunterdon County's Department of Public Safety and Health
Services. Last month Mr. Curry and the rest of the staff at the
9-1-1 communications center were kind enough to give me and
Commissioner Mike O'Rielly of the FCC, who has been a leader in
the effort to stop states from diverting, a tour of their
facility. The work they are doing there is truly remarkable and
I was extremely impressed with the operation they are doing
there. Despite receiving little to no funds from the state 9-1-
1 fee fund, Hunterdon County has managed to maintain a state of
the art communications center. However, because the state has
been diverting the fees in such drastic amounts, counties in
New Jersey, such as Hunterdon, are left to their own devices to
fund these critical operations. These funds generally come from
residents' property taxes, which are already some of the
highest in the Nation. This is completely unacceptable. New
Jersey must end this double taxation of its citizens and stop
leaving counties scrambling to fund essential emergency
services.
That is why I have joined Congressman Collins and
Congresswoman Eshoo in introducing the 9-1-1 Fee Integrity Act,
which would direct the FCC to establish legitimate uses for 9-
1-1 fees to be directed.
I commend Commissioner O'Rielly and Commissioner
Rosenworcel for working hard at the FCC to bring to light the
actions of these few bad actor states. However, the
Commission's ability to combat diversion is limited. This
bipartisan, common sense legislation will enable the FCC to
ensure that bad actors such as New Jersey are no longer able to
divert 9-1-1 funds to unrelated purposes and the fees are
instead directed to their intended use: updating and
maintaining our critical emergency communications systems.
We are also considering H.R. 5700, the National Non-
Emergency Mobile Number Act from Congresswoman Brooks and H.R.
6003, the Anti-Swatting Act of 2018 from Congressman Engel.
H.R. 5700 directs the FCC to consolidate non-emergency
numbers with the creation of a unified wireless non-emergency
number. This will help avoid confusion as consumers cross state
lines, as there are currently 18 different non-emergency codes
in use.
H.R. 6003 stiffens criminal penalties against ``swatting,''
a practice that involves maliciously calling emergency services
to trigger a law enforcement response against another person.
This is an extremely dangerous practice that puts both law
enforcement and residents in danger.
I commend the members of the subcommittee for their fine
work in drafting these important bills to improve our public
safety communications and thank our distinguished panel for
appearing before us today. I look forward to your testimony.
OPENING STATEMENT OF HON. MICHAEL F. DOYLE, A REPRESENTATIVE IN
CONGRESS FROM THE COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA
Mr. Doyle. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Thank you for holding
this hearing today and thank you to the witnesses for your
testimony today.
Public safety communications and the integrity of our 9-1-1
system is of paramount importance to our nation. Ensuring that
lifesaving aid gets to those in need, in time, often comes down
to a fast, well-coordinated response by local first responders,
something our witnesses deal with every day. This process often
starts when a person in need picks up their phone to call for
help.
This subcommittee is examining three pieces of legislation
today. Mr. Lance and Ms. Eshoo have introduced legislation
regarding 9-1-1 fee diversion. This is a practice where a small
number of states divert fees intended to fund and upgrade 9-1-1
call centers to other non-related public safety programs. This
bill seeks to further direct and clarify the FCC's efforts to
investigate and report on this practice.
The second piece of legislation was introduced by Mr. Engel
and Mr. Kinzinger regarding swatting, a malicious and deadly
practice where individuals use weaknesses in the phone network
to conceal their identity and report a false event that
warrants a large-scale police response. Such incidents require
full-scale responses that take time and money away from
departments tasked with protecting the public.
Like many here, I have read too many stories of how these
incidents can go bad as well with SWAT teams being prepared to
deal with extremely dangerous situations only to come across
confused and frightened individuals who have been targeted by
these swatting attacks. Too many times, innocent people have
lost their lives because of these malicious, deceptive calls.
Our colleague Congresswoman Clarke has, herself, been a victim
of swatting.
I am happy to once again support my colleague Mr. Engel's
bill to rein in this dangerous practice. This bill was voice
voted out of committee in the last Congress and I hope that we
can do so again. I hope as the committee examines this issue
that we continue our due diligence. Increasing the penalties
for this offense is important, but we need to strengthen our
telecommunications systems to ensure that the people calling 9-
1-1 and, to be honest, calling of us are who they say they are.
Every day I get calls from fake numbers claiming to come
from my neighborhood. We cannot ultimately curb swatting until
our phone systems can do a better job of identifying and
blocking fake numbers. I would urge the majority and the
chairman to keep this in mind if they hope to address this
underlying issue.
Finally, we are looking at a bill introduced by Mrs. Brooks
and Ms. Eshoo regarding the establishment of a national non-
emergency short dialing code. In Pittsburgh, like many cities,
3-1-1 is that number. Residents in Pittsburgh can use it to
report a downed tree, a building code violation, or in my city
all too often a pothole on a city street.
This service gives residents a valuable line to the city
and municipal agencies where they can report important but non-
emergency incidents. Properly implemented, this service can
reduce the burden on 9-1-1 operators and call centers allowing
them to focus more fully on responding to real emergency
situations. I hope we can advance this legislation as well.
And while I think these bills should be able to move in our
committee, I am very concerned that this hearing is titled,
``Solutions to Strengthen U.S. Public Safety Communications.''
None of these bills nor the committee's other efforts have gone
far enough to address many of the underlying challenges facing
this sector, in my opinion. As the witnesses pointed out,
public safety agencies need a strong Federal partner to ensure
that they have the technology and solutions deployed to meet
the needs of our country.
I would like to submit for the record an article from the
New York Times Magazine that was published last month regarding
one family's horrific experience in Houston during Hurricane
Harvey. The family couldn't get a medevac via 9-1-1 so they
resorted to calling their congressman, Gene Green, a member of
this committee, where an intern answered the phone and helped
to direct a helicopter rescue.
The 9-1-1 system was clearly overwhelmed and was not nearly
robust or resilient enough to tackle the volume of calls or the
multiple storm related equipment and facility failures that
occurred. And none of this is in any way intended to diminish
the brave and courageous efforts of so many volunteers who came
to their neighbors' aid in this disaster and so many others.
But for the richest, most powerful nation on earth we can and
should do better, Mr. Chairman. With that I yield back.
[The prepared statement of Mr. Doyle follows:]
Prepared statement of Hon. Michael F. Doyle
Thank you, Madam Chairman, for holding this hearing, and
thank you to the witnesses for your testimony today.
Public safety communications and the integrity of our 9-1-1
system is of paramount importance to our nation.
Ensuring that lifesaving aid gets to those in need in time
often comes down to a fast, well-coordinated response by local
first responders, something our witnesses deal with every day.
This process often starts when a person in need picks up their
phone to call for help.
This subcommittee is examining three pieces of legislation
today.
Mr. Lance and Ms. Eshoo have introduced legislation
regarding 9-1-1 fee diversion. This is a practice where a small
number of states divert fees intended to fund and upgrade 9-1-1
call centers to other non-related public safety programs. This
bill seeks to further direct and clarify the FCC's efforts to
investigate and report on this practice.
The second piece of legislation was introduced by Mr. Engel
and Mr. Kinzinger regarding Swatting, a malicious and deadly
practice, where individuals use weaknesses in the phone network
to conceal their identity and report a false event that
warrants a large-scale police response. Such incidents require
full-scale responses that take time and money away from
departments tasked with protecting the public.
Like many here, I've read too many stories of how these
incidents can go bad as well, with SWAT teams being prepared to
deal with extremely dangerous situations only to come across
confused and frightened individuals who have been targeted by
these Swatting attacks.
Too many times, innocent people have lost their lives
because of these malicious, deceptive calls. Our colleague
Congresswoman Clark has herself been a victim of Swatting.
I'm happy to once again support my colleague Mr. Engel's
bill, to rein in this dangerous practice. This bill was voice
voted out of Committee last Congress, and I hope that we can do
so again.
I hope as the Committee examines this issue, that we
continue our due diligence. Increasing the penalties for this
offence are important, but we need to strengthen our
telecommunications systems to ensure that the people calling
911--and to be honest, calling all of us--are who they say they
are. Every day I get calls from fake numbers claiming to come
from my neighborhood. We can not ultimately curb Swatting until
our phone systems can do a better job at identifying and
blocking fake numbers.
I would urge the majority and the chairman to keep this in
mind, if they hope to address this underlying issue.
Finally, we are looking at a bill introduced by Ms. Brooks
and Ms. Eshoo regarding the establishment of a national non-
emergency short dialing code. In Pittsburgh, like many cities,
3-1-1 is that number. Residents in Pittsburgh can use it to
report a downed tree, a building code violation, or all too
often a pothole on a city street.
This service gives residents a valuable line to city and
municipal agencies where they can report important but non-
emergency incidents.
Properly implemented, this service can reduce the burden on
9-1-1 operators and call centers, allowing them to focus more
fully on responding to real emergency situations.
I hope that we can advance this legislation as well.
While I think these bills should be able to move in our
Committee, I am very concerned that this hearing is titled
``Solutions to Strengthen U.S. Public Safety Communications.''
Neither these bills nor the Committee's other efforts have
gone far enough to address many of the underlying challenges
facing this sector. As the witnesses point out, Public Safety
agencies need a strong federal partner to ensure that they have
the technology and solutions deployed to meet the needs of our
country.
I'd like to submit for the record an article from the New
York Times Magazine that was published last month regarding one
family's horrific experience in Houston during Hurricane
Harvey. The family couldn't get a medivac via 9-1-1, and so
they resorted to calling their Congressman, Gene Green, where
an intern answered the phone and helped direct a helicopter
rescue.
The 9-1-1 system was clearly overwhelmed--and was not
nearly robust or resilient enough to tackle the volume of calls
or the multiple storm-related equipment and facility failures
that occurred.
And that none of this is in any way intended to diminish
the brave and courageous efforts of so many volunteers who came
to their neighbors' aid in this disaster and so many others.
Butfor the richest most powerful nation on earth, we can and
should do better.
Mr. Lance. Thank you very much, Mr. Doyle. The chair now
recognizes the chairman of the full committee, Mr. Walden of
Oregon, for 5 minutes for an opening statement.
OPENING STATEMENT OF HON. GREG WALDEN, A REPRESENTATIVE IN
CONGRESS FROM THE STATE OF OREGON
Mr. Walden. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. I want to
welcome our witnesses. Thanks both for your help this morning
in giving us your guidance and counsel and the service you
provide in your states and communities.
We have a legislative hearing where we will be discussing
three important bipartisan public safety bills. Two weeks ago,
we remembered the sacrifices and the heroism of the September
11th attacks. Ceremonies across our nation reminded us not just
of those Americans we lost, but also of the hard work our
public safety community does day in and day out to keep us
safe. This is evident again as our first responders managed the
consequences of various hurricanes including, especially,
Hurricane Florence.
Whether at home or at school, our children learn at an
early age that when an emergency strikes you dial 9-1-1. But
like the technology systems, our 9-1-1 systems must be
preserved and improved to deliver potentially lifesaving
services reliably and seamlessly when called upon. This
committee worked in a bipartisan manner in Congress to enact
improved rural call completion so the call actually will go
through. Also, we passed Kari's Law. That ensures that when we
dial 9-1-1, no matter where we are including a hotel room, the
call will go through without the need to dial another number.
With rules finally approved for NTIA and NHTSA to move
forward on distributing funds for Next Gen 9-1-1, I am pleased
these dollars will be finding their way to localities. Whether
it is these dollars or the much larger share of fees collected
on your phone bill, we have a duty to ensure that the 6,000
public safety answering points or PSAPs nationwide that manage
our 9-1-1 systems are actually receiving these vital funds.
Unfortunately, we have found that some states have diverted
their 9-1-1 funds that were assessed for this specific purpose.
We have seen states divert funding directly into their general
funds while others use the money for another public safety
related purpose that may have nothing to do with the 9-1-1
system. The result is the same: PSAPs aren't getting the money
they are promised.
And I would just say as an aside, I would guess that it
would be a fraud for most people other than the government that
if you collected a fee for an intended purpose and you put it
in writing and sent it through the mail and then you diverted
the funds for some other purpose, my guess is if you weren't
the government you would be facing a prosecutor.
So today we will discuss H.R. 6424, the 9-1-1 Fee Integrity
Act, which would clarify for states and municipalities that
funds raised for 9-1-1, paid for by users of 9-1-1 and phones,
are only spent on 9-1-1.
We will also discuss H.R. 5700, Mrs. Brooks' National Non-
emergency Mobile Number Act. While the FCC designated 9-1-1 as
the Nation's emergency number more than 50 years ago, the 9-1-1
system is sometimes used unnecessarily in non-emergencies. So
in order to preserve 9-1-1 services for true emergencies and to
ensure limited public safety resources are not used
unnecessarily, some states have adopted an easy-to-remember,
short code that the public can dial to reach public safety
officials in non-emergency situations.
However, there is no unified short code, so a traveler
traveling from Colorado to Oregon might be able to dial *-2-7-7
in Colorado, #-4-3-5-7 in Wyoming, *-4-7-7 throughout Idaho,
and finally there is no short code in Oregon. So that is a lot
to keep track of. Mrs. Brooks' bill would make things a whole
bunch easier. We appreciate her diligent work on this issue
directing the FCC to set up a unified short code that states
could choose and then adopt.
Finally, we will be discussing H.R. 6300 that is Mr.
Engel's Anti-swatting Act. This should be a familiar bill given
that we approved by voice vote this bill last Congress.
Swatting is the act of using misleading or inaccurate caller ID
information with an intent to trigger a law enforcement
response where no real emergency exists. Swatting is dangerous,
it is a drain on precious resources, and it is illegal.
Unfortunately, swatting incidents remain a problem and continue
to put law enforcement or innocent bystanders in harm's way.
Mr. Engel's bill would stiffen criminal penalties against those
who are convicted of swatting and bolster our public safety
officials' ability to serve and to protect.
So, collectively, the bipartisan bills to be discussed
today will help improve, they will help strengthen the 9-1-1
system, and enhance public safety across the country.
So I want to thank our witnesses for being here today. And
I would also say that it was this committee several years ago
that passed the legislation that set up the spectrum auction
that has funded and helped get in place FirstNet and we intend
to continue to do our due diligence to oversee the
implementation of FirstNet to make sure that it actually
delivers on the promise that our first responders will have an
interoperable public safety network that works for them.
And so we have done a lot out of the committee mostly in a
bipartisan way. We appreciate your being here today. We have
three more important bills to look at. And with that, Mr.
Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.
[The prepared statement of Mr. Walden follows:]
Prepared statement of Hon. Greg Walden
Good morning and welcome to today's legislative hearing
where we will be discussing three important, bipartisan public
safety bills. Two weeks ago, we remembered the sacrifices and
the heroism of the September 11th attacks. The ceremonies
across our nation reminded us not just of those Americans we
lost, but also of the hard work our public safety community
does day-in and day-out to keep us safe. This is evident again
as our first responders manage the consequences of Hurricane
Florence.
Whether at home or at school, our children learn at an
early age that when an emergency strikes, you should dial 9-1-
1. But like all technology systems, our 9-1-1 systems must be
preserved and improved to deliver potentially life-saving
services reliably and seamlessly when called upon. This
committee worked in a bipartisan manner this Congress to enact
improved rural call completion so that call goes through, as
well as Kari's Law to ensure that when we dial 9-1-1 no matter
where we are, that call will go through without the need to
dial another number.
With rules finally approved for NTIA and NHTSA to move
forward on distributing funds for Next Generation 9-1-1, I'm
pleased these dollars will be finding their way to localities.
Whether it is these dollars, or the much larger share of fees
collected on your phone bill, we have a duty to ensure that the
6,000 Public Safety Answering Points, or PSAPs, nationwide that
manage our 9-1-1 system are actually receiving these vital
funds.
Unfortunately, we have found that some states have diverted
9-1-1funds that were assessed for this specific purpose. We
have seen states divert funding directly into their general
fund, while others use this money for another public-safety
related purpose that may have nothing to do with the 9- 1-1
system. The result is the same: PSAPs aren't getting the
resources they are promised.
Today, we will discuss H.R. 6424, the 9-1-1 Fee Integrity
Act, which would clarify for states and municipalities that
funds raised for 9-1-1 are only spent on 9-1-1.
We will also discuss H.R. 5700, Ms. Brooks' National Non-
Emergency Mobile Number Act.
While the FCC designated 9-1-1 as the national emergency
number over 50 years ago, the 9-1-1 system is sometimes used
unnecessarily in non- emergencies. In order to preserve 9-1-1
services for true emergencies, and to ensure limited public
safety resources are not used unnecessarily, some states have
adopted an easy-to-remember short code that the public can dial
to reach public safety officials in non-emergency situations.
However, there is no unified short code, so a traveler driving
from Colorado to Oregon might be able to dial ``star'' *277 in
Colorado, ``pound'' #4357 in Wyoming, ``star'' *477 up through
Idaho, and finally have no short code available at all in
Oregon. That's a lot to keep track of.
Ms. Brooks' bill would make things easier, directing the
FCC to set up a unified short code that states could choose to
adopt.
Finally, we will be discussing H.R. 6003, Mr. Engel's Anti-
SWATting Act. This should be a familiar bill given we approved
by voice vote last Congress. SWATting is the act of using
misleading or inaccurate caller ID information with an intent
to trigger a law enforcement response where no real emergency
exists. SWATting is dangerous, it is a drain on precious
resources, and it is illegal.
Unfortunately, SWATting incidents remain a problem and
continue to put law enforcement and innocent bystanders in
harm's way. Mr. Engel's bill would stiffen criminal penalties
against those who are convicted of SWATting and bolster our
public safety officials' ability to serve and protect.
Collectively, the bipartisan bills to be discussed today
will improve strengthen and improve the 9-1-1 system and
enhance public safety across the country. I'd like to thank our
witnesses for taking time out of their busy week to share their
thoughts on these bipartisan bills, and with that I yield back.
Mr. Lance. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. The chair now
recognizes the ranking member of the full committee, Mr.
Pallone of New Jersey, for 5 minutes.
OPENING STATEMENT OF HON. FRANK PALLONE, JR., A REPRESENTATIVE
IN CONGRESS FROM THE STATE OF NEW JERSEY
Mr. Pallone. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Today we are here to talk about ways to support public
safety and our nation's first responders. America asks so much
of our emergency workers and the least we can do is make sure
they have the best and most up-to-date tools to do their jobs.
I would like to thank our panel for the work they do every day
helping Americans in times of crisis and distress.
It seems almost every week we are reminded of the critical
role first responders play in keeping people safe. Last week we
watched as first responders along the Carolina coast rescued
people trapped in their homes as rising waters made it nearly
impossible to escape. Emergency communications is critical in
such times. If 9-1-1 calls are not completed emergency
responders will not arrive.
And that is why it so important that Congress enacted my
SANDy Act earlier this year to help ensure our critical
communications networks have access to the resources they need
to stay on line during a disaster. Beyond calls from the public
to 9-1-1 dispatchers, if police or firefighters can't
communicate with each other during a crisis their lives and the
lives of the public are put at risk.
This committee on a bipartisan basis passed legislation to
create a nationwide broadband communications network dedicated
to public safety. What resulted is FirstNet. While early in its
rollout, the network promises to make first responders across
the country safer and help them with their work, FirstNet is an
important step but more must be done to help public safety.
Today's hearing considers some important issues. I have
long criticized states including my own in New Jersey of
diverting 9-1-1 fees. As Mr. Curry will explain, it is
expensive to operate a 9-1-1 center and it is important that
they are fully funded. States should also be upgrading centers
to be Next Generation 9-1-1 capable. Next Generation 9-1-1 will
enable the public to transmit images, video, and texts to 9-1-1
centers where operators will be able to process and pass this
information to first responders. And this is extremely valuable
information, but the costs will be significant.
Last year, every Democrat on the committee co-sponsored the
LIFT America Act which makes key investments in our nation's
infrastructure including helping to fund the deployment of Next
Generation 911. In addition, Representatives Eshoo, Torres, and
I introduced the Next Generation 9-1-1 Act of 2017 which
expands the federal NG-9-1-1 grant program. These are common
sense proposals that we should be able to work on together.
In the coming year, I urge my colleagues to work with me on
legislation to upgrade our nation's infrastructure including
our public safety systems. I would also like to recognize the
important efforts of Mr. Engel to fight swatting, fake
emergency calls to dispatch police to an address where no
emergency is occurring. This is really dangerous. It puts
innocent lives at risk and burdens already stretched police
resources. So Congress must provide law enforcement the tools
to stop such malicious acts.
And I would like now to yield the remaining 2 minutes to,
oh, I guess he is not here yet, Mr. Engel. I think he is at his
Foreign Affairs Committee. So I would at this point yield the
balance of my time.
Mr. Lance. Thank you very much, Ranking Member. Are there
any other members of the committee who would like to have an
opening statement?
Seeing none, this concludes member opening statements. The
chair reminds members that pursuant to the committee rules, all
members' opening statements will be made part of the record.
We want to thank our witnesses for being here today and we
appreciate your taking the time to testify before the
subcommittee. Today's witnesses will have the opportunity to
give opening statements followed by a round of questions from
members.
Our panel for today's hearings will include Mr. Eddie
Reyes, Director of Public Safety Communications for Prince
William County; Mr. Jim Curry, the Division Head of the
Communications Division of the Hunterdon County Department of
Public Safety; and Captain Paul Starks, the director of the
Public Information Office at the Montgomery County Police
Department. We appreciate the fact, gentlemen, that you are
here today before the committee. We know you have important
responsibilities in your jurisdictions and we are honored that
you are in Washington.
We will begin with Mr. Reyes. You are recognized, sir, for
5 minutes for the purposes of an opening statement. Good
morning to you.
[The prepared statement of Mr. Pallone follows:]
Prepared statement of Hon. Frank Pallone, Jr.
Today, we're here to talk about ways to support public
safety and our nation's first responders. America asks so much
of our emergency workers, the least we can do is make sure they
have the best and most up-to-date tools to do their jobs.
I'd like to thank our panel for the work they do every day
helping Americans in times of crisis and distress.
It seems almost every week we are reminded of the critical
role first responders play in keeping people safe. Last week,
we watched as first responders along the Carolina coast rescued
people trapped in their homes as rising waters made it nearly
impossible to escape.
Emergency communications is critical. If 911 calls are not
completed, emergency responders will not arrive. That's why
it's so important that Congress enacted my SANDy Act earlier
this year to help ensure our critical communications networks
have access to the resources they need to stay online during a
disaster.
Beyond calls from the public to 911 dispatchers, if police
or firefighters cannot communicate with each other during a
crisis, their lives and the lives of the public are put at
risk.
This Committee, on a bipartisan basis, passed legislation
to create a nationwide, broadband communications network
dedicated to public safety. What resulted is FirstNet. While
early in its roll-out, the network promises to make first
responders across the country safer and help them with their
work.
FirstNet is an important step, but more must be done to
help public safety. Today's hearing considers some important
issues. I have long criticized states, including New Jersey, of
diverting 911 fees. As Mr. Currey will explain, it is expensive
to operate a 911 center, and it is important that they are
fully funded.
States should also be upgrading centers to be next
generation 911 capable. Next generation 911 will enable the
public to transmit images, video, and text to 911 centers where
operators will be able to process and pass this information to
first responders.
This is extremely valuable information, but the costs will
be significant. Last year, every Democrat on the Committee
cosponsored the LIFT America Act, which makes key investments
in our nation's infrastructure, including helping to fund the
deployment of next generation 911. In addition, Representatives
Eshoo, Torres, and I introduced the Next Generation 911 Act of
2017, which expands the federal NG-911 grant program.
These are commonsense proposals that we should be able to
work on together. In the coming year, I urge my colleagues to
work with me on legislation to upgrade our nation's
infrastructure, including our public safety systems.
I also would like to recognize the important efforts of Mr.
Engel to fight swatting--fake emergency calls to dispatch
police to an address where no emergency is occurring. This is
dangerous. It puts innocent lives at risk and burdens already
stretched police resources. Congress must provide law
enforcement the tools to stop such malicious acts.
Thank you, I yield back.
STATEMENTS OF EDDIE REYES, DIRECTOR, PUBLIC SAFETY
COMMUNICATIONS, PRINCE WILLIAM COUNTY GOVERNMENT; JAMES CURRY,
COMMUNICATIONS DIVISION HEAD, HUNTERDON COUNTY, NEW JERSEY
DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC SAFETY; AND, PAUL STARKS, DIRECTOR, PUBLIC
INFORMATION OFFICE, MONTGOMERY COUNTY, MARYLAND POLICE
DEPARTMENT
STATEMENT OF EDDIE REYES
Mr. Reyes. Thank you, Mr. Lance. Chairman Blackburn,
Ranking Member Doyle, Mr. Lance, thank you for giving me this
opportunity to testify before you today. It is an honor and a
privilege to be selected to represent the 9-1-1 community at
this hearing and be a part of this bipartisan process.
I am the director of Office of Public Safety Communications
in Prince William County, Virginia, one of the Nation's
approximately 5,800 public safety answering points which has
been recognized as PSAPs. They are also known as emergency
communication centers or 9-1-1 centers. ECCs, like the one I
lead, answer more than 240 million calls every year in the
United States. That is roughly about 657,000 calls per day.
Prior to becoming the ECC director in Prince William County
I was a police officer in Alexandria, Virginia for 25 years. I
retired as a senior deputy chief and second in command at the
police department. I worked in almost every unit of the police
department and I was ECC director in 2001 during the September
11th attack at the Pentagon and during the 3 weeks in 2002 when
the Beltway Sniper gripped the entire National Capital Region
with fear. I am also the chairman of the International
Association of Chiefs of Police Communications & Technology
Committee.
A few statistics about Prince William County's emergency
communications center: In addition to serving almost half a
million residents in the county, we provide a wireless 9-1-1
service and dispatch for police, fire and rescue personnel to
five small municipalities within our county. We are also part
of the National Capital Region which has a population of over
six million residents.
Public safety organizations in the NCR coordinate
extensively to make sure area residents receive high quality
emergency response across the region. Mutual aid is an hourly
thing for us. My center has just over a hundred employees that
receive and process approximately 409,000 calls per year in
which 154,000 of those were emergencies and 254,000 were non-
emergencies. Of the 409,000 calls for service that we received,
about 251,000 were for police and 44,000 were for fire and
rescue.
The largest difference between the number of calls received
and those dispatched are that they all come from a smartphone.
I will transition over to the bill that I am most
passionate about and that is H.R. 6003. I have spoken to 9-1-1
center directors or staff, law enforcement officers, and major
associations such as APCO and NENA and all of them support this
bill. Even before the FBI coined the term ``9-1-1 swatting,''
across the country we have been fighting this complex, ever-
evolving threat to public safety. It would just be repetitive
for me to mention a lot of the things that have already been
said about swatting other than ditto and we agree. So this is
very, very important to us.
Next, I will transition over to House Bill 6424 and that,
well, almost everyone in the 9-1-1 industry is in favor of this
bill provided it eliminates a big loophole--lack of audit,
accountability, and enforcement mechanism to the offending
states. As it has already been reported, there are offending
states like New Jersey, West Virginia, and others that are
known to public safety and 9-1-1 centers for diverting funds.
And I can tell you that as a proud resident of the Commonwealth
of Virginia, we know how important it is not to divert funds,
so I very much support that bill as well.
Regarding 5700, H.R. 5700, this bill caused the greatest
quantity in discussion and disagreement among all that I spoke
with. While some were supportive, the addition of public
safety, non-emergency short code for mobile users can bring
unintended consequences to emergency communication centers,
significantly increasing call volume without considering
additional staffing. So statistics demonstrate that 9-1-1 has
been a problem caused by too many non-emergency calls.
So in closing I would like to take a brief moment to thank
you, to thank Representative Shimkus and Eshoo for joining with
their co-chairs of the Next Gen 9-1-1 caucus to send a
bipartisan letter to the Office of Management and Budget to
revise the standard occupational classification to accurately
represent the lifesaving nature of the work performed by 9-1-1
professionals. 9-1-1 professionals work behind the scenes to
protect the lives of first responders.
I am very grateful for the attention this committee has
given to these very important bills to public safety in
general, but most importantly to emergency telecommunicators.
Thank you very much.
[The statement of Mr. Reyes follows:]
[GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
Mr. Lance. Thank you very much for your distinguished
testimony.
Mr. Curry, you are recognized for 5 minutes.
STATEMENT OF JAMES CURRY
Mr. Curry. Good morning.
Mr. Lance. Good morning.
Mr. Curry. Vice Chairman Lance, members of the committee
thank you for giving me the opportunity to speak with you
today. It is an honor and privilege to take part in this
hearing and be a part of this great nation's legislative
process.
I am the division head for the Hunterdon County
communications center in New Jersey, the first county 9-1-1
system to operate in that State. Prior to my current position,
I was a police officer for 27 years and retired at the rank of
captain. I have spent my entire professional career in public
emergency service without regret.
Like many counties in New Jersey, Hunterdon County is a mix
of suburban and rural communities with many bucolic hamlets and
villages. It is dotted with preserved farmland, numerous acres
of park land, and two recreational reservoirs. Interstate 78, a
major highway and artery for Newark and Elizabeth, divides the
county in half north and south.
The communications center is the sole provider of emergency
communications for each municipal police department, fire
department, and EMS agency in the county. All totaled we
dispatch for about 60 organizations. Daily we average a little
over 100 9-1-1 calls or about 38,000 a year. This is carried
out by 25 dedicated, full-time public safety telecommunicators,
commonly referred to as dispatchers.
These men and women are never seen, always heard, and
seldom recognized. They work nights, weekends, and holidays,
and like our first responders they can't stay home because the
weather is bad. Day in and day out they speak to folks who are
having the worst day of their lives. For some of those callers,
the dispatcher is the last human voice they will hear. If you
ask the dispatchers why they keep doing the job, most will
answer because they enjoy it. They enjoy making a difference.
I live and work in the State of New Jersey. It is a
fantastic state. Beaches, mountains, entertainment venues, New
York City, and Philadelphia all within a short drive from most
anywhere in the state. Its marine ports, colleges and
universities, all within a short drive from anywhere in the
State, and businesses, also make it a great place to live and
work. New Jersey is a major hub of global economy.
Unfortunately, but deservedly, it is also known as a
heavily-taxed state. We in New Jersey have come to enjoy top-
shelf services, especially the emergency service we receive.
After all, you get what you pay for. Well, maybe not always. I
was requested to appear today before this committee to discuss
H.R. 6424, the 9-1-1 Fee Integrity Act, because in my State
when you pay certain fees on your phone bills, called 9-1-1
fees, it doesn't finance what one might expect.
According to the New Jersey Association of Counties and the
New Jersey Wireless Association, the state collects
approximately $120 million annually in consumer surcharges as
9-1-1 system and emergency response fees and deposits into a
trust fund. However, according to the FCC, since 2006, only 11
percent of the 1.3 billion collected has been spent on eligible
expenses. None of the money has been used to fund those
eligible expenses at the 9-1-1 level, local 9-1-1 level.
To provide an example, last year we completed an upgrade to
our 9-1-1 phone system. It wasn't voluntary. The old system was
no longer supported. At a cost of $600,000 the project was paid
for using capital improvement funds, in other words taxpayer
money. Those taxpayers may have thought they subsidized it when
they paid their phone bills, but actually they paid for it
twice.
Operating a 9-1-1 center is expensive. In 2016, our overall
budget exceeded two and a quarter million dollars. This year
our operating budget alone was $310,000. The cost to maintain
our 9-1-1 system will devour well over one-third of that. The
remainder will be spent on radio equipment and tower and
generator maintenance, site security, and a host of other
essential expenses.
We look forward to the day when Next Generation 9-1-1 is
realized in New Jersey. It will enable the public to transmit
text images, video, and data to our center. Our frequent saying
by one of our technicians, Matt Tamburro, is this isn't like
what you see on television, and it isn't. The reality is
dispatchers try to find a caller's location by manual entries
and interrogation.
We don't know what the associated costs will be for us for
Next Generation 9-1-1 and I dodge the constant barrage of
vendors, daily, willing to sell us their products that will get
us through until the arrival of Next Generation 9-1-1. Those
wares come with a hefty price tag. Even in just a small 9-1-1
center like ours, the cost can exceed $35,000 annually.
I could ramble on about the 9-1-1 funding needs of the
Hunterdon County communications center, but I would prefer to
conclude with the importance of 9-1-1. When a caller requests
the police they understand that officer may be on another call.
When that caller dialed 9-1-1 they expect it to be answered
immediately and by a well-trained professional. The police may
work shorthanded for a shift, but the 9-1-1 seat must be
occupied.
This month we remember the tragic events of 9/11 and just a
few miles to our south the effects of a major hurricane
continues to wreak havoc on tens of thousands of people's
lives. When citizens are faced with a situation beyond their
own capabilities they will dial 9-1-1. Those three digits are
the same for everyone and it does not discriminate. Perhaps we
can do without electricity for a short while, but we must have
a robust 9-1-1 lifeline infrastructure. Likewise, the
dispatchers need the tools to accomplish their mission of
helping others and saving lives.
I want to end my statement by publicly thanking the
Hunterdon County dispatchers, technicians, and administrative
staff. You do make a difference every day. Moreover, I wish to
thank this committee for your time and devotion to public
service not only concerning this issue but for all matters that
have and will be decided on in the future. Thank you.
[The statement of Mr. Curry follows:]
[GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
Mr. Lance. Thank you very much, Mr. Curry.
The chair now recognizes Captain Starks for 5 minutes,
Captain Starks. Welcome to the subcommittee.
STATEMENT OF PAUL STARKS
Mr. Starks. Thank you and good morning to distinguished
members of this committee. My name is Paul Starks. I am
director of the Public Information Office with the Montgomery
County Police Department where I have been a cop for 34 years.
Our jurisdiction is in Maryland just across the line and
adjacent to the District of Columbia.
We live in a time where so many forms of technology have
been developed and can be accessed by most people and we live
in a country with a free and open society where a variety of
communication paths are available to virtually everyone. Some
of these methods to call in a phone call or post or send
messages are assigned to and can be traced back to an
individual, but some of the steps that are used in some of
these methods are not as easily walked back and therefore it is
not as easy to determine the history of access or use.
Some of that lends itself to false reporting of in-
progress, violent crimes that can potentially cause a major
response by law enforcement, fire and rescue, and other
emergency services providers. That type of false call has been
termed ``swatting.'' When an individual creates a swatting
incident detailing false information that involves an act of
violence, sometimes involving a large population group like
that of a school, it causes large numbers of personnel to put
forth efforts that are not only costly but also strip an
organization and a community of public safety resources.
When a message is first received, call takers, dispatchers,
and their supervisors become involved in gathering details
regarding that call. This event also may take a 9-1-1 line out
of service while these details are confirmed. Next to be
involved are the cops and fire and rescue employees who are
taken from their primary responsibilities and direct their
attention to the current call. This involves a potentially
dangerous, higher speed, lights and siren responses and removes
public safety personnel from their legitimate duties.
Should there be an actual need in that same geographical
area, help must come from further away making someone
experiencing a medical emergency or a crime victim wait
unnecessarily for potentially lifesaving resources.
Furthermore, depending on the details of the swatting call,
tactical team members, negotiators, and specialty fire and
rescue personnel and their equipment are often dispatched to
these scenes.
When first responders arrive, an attempt to contact
potential victims and suspects at what it is believed to be an
active and volatile scene it becomes potentially dangerous for
all parties. At one such encounter in Kansas this led to an
innocent father of two being fatally shot by responding law
enforcement officers who legitimately believed he was a threat
at that scene. Investigation of that event led to a California
man being charged with being responsible for the swatting event
where the call was initiated.
In the recent past in my jurisdiction, Montgomery County
has received multiple swatting calls. One event involved a
message claiming that bombs had been planted in a Silver Spring
high school which led to an emergency response by public safety
and evacuation of approximately 2,000 students and staff. This
call was ultimately determined to have come from out of state.
Fortunately there were no reported injuries, but resources
were deployed, teaching and learning came to a halt that day,
and due to the weather students and staff had to be housed at
other nearby schools and places of worship causing other
disruption. This doesn't begin to address the cost of long-term
investigative efforts and also the potential emotional toll
taken on students and staff who are affected by these types of
calls.
In conclusion, I believe this bill is necessary to augment
state and local efforts with federal resources to investigate
swatting events, and in the end individuals who initiate these
calls will be more easily held responsible by employing
appropriate fines, incarceration, and specific cost recovery
from suspects for expenses incurred during the response and
investigation. I thank you for your attention.
[The statement of Mr. Starks follows:]
[GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
Mr. Lance. Thank you very much, Captain Starks. And to the
entire panel, thank you for your public service.
I will begin the questioning and recognize myself for 5
minutes. I had the opportunity to tour the 9-1-1 call center
operated by Mr. Curry in Hunterdon County, New Jersey. It is
the county where I live. It is a relatively small county,
130,000 residents. We only have 21 counties in New Jersey with
nine million people, so it is one of our smaller counties.
Mr. Curry, how much funding have you received from the
state 9-1-1 system over the past 10 years?
Mr. Curry. From the state, zero.
Mr. Lance. Where does the majority or perhaps the entirety
of your funding come from?
Mr. Curry. Taxpayer money.
Mr. Lance. Taxpayer money, but not from state coffers.
Mr. Curry. No, it is local property tax.
Mr. Lance. From the property tax burden. What is your
county's long-term plan for upgrading to Next Gen 9-1-1 given
the lack of state funding?
Mr. Curry. As we wait for the Next Gen 9-1-1, there are
vendors out there that can provide us with software similar to
the Next Gen 9-1-1, but it comes at a very high price tag. So
it is questionable if we will actually be able to afford that.
Until then, we will just continue conducting business as we do.
Mr. Lance. Thank you.
Mr. Reyes, does the public, in your opinion, understand
that in some states funds are diverted and that part of their
monthly telephone bill is being collected to upgrade the
systems when in fact that may not always be the case?
Mr. Reyes. I don't think they understand, but as I said,
Mr. Lance, in the Commonwealth of Virginia that is not so much
of a problem. So that is why it has not been a widely
publicized issue for that.
Mr. Lance. You are doing a good job in Virginia.
Mr. Reyes. Well, the elected officials are, sir.
Mr. Lance. I commend you.
And what is the situation in Maryland, in your
jurisdiction, Montgomery County?
Mr. Starks. What was the specific question?
Mr. Lance. The question relates to the funding that is
received. Do you receive funding for these purposes from the
state of Maryland?
Mr. Starks. Some generally, I can't confirm the exact forms
for the amounts or percentages.
Mr. Lance. Thank you.
Regarding Congresswoman Brooks' fine legislation, would any
member of this distinguished panel care to comment on it and on
your views as to how we should move forward regarding
Congresswoman Brooks' legislation?
Mr. Starks. Is that for the cost recovery?
Mr. Lance. No, no, on emergency calls.
Mr. Reyes?
Mr. Reyes. Yes. I will start with that, Mr. Lance. So that
is a mixed one for us. So while we think that there should be
standard----
Mr. Lance. I am a hundred percent for it, but----
Mr. Reyes. So while I think that, you know, it makes sense
to come up with a standardized non-emergency number that is
across the country similar to what we have right now for the
emergency number, the concerns with that is that centers would
start to receive a lot more volume and that we wouldn't have
sufficient personnel.
So I think it is a good idea providing that there was
funding considerations given to additional staffing in the
centers.
Mr. Lance. Very good. Would any other member of the panel
like to comment? Mr. Curry?
Mr. Curry. Sure, Congressman, thank you. In the state of
New Jersey we have #-7-7, which is informally known as the
snitch number, which is when you can dial that number in for
aggressive drivers, people on cell phones and stuff.
Mr. Lance. Yes.
Mr. Curry. We also have 5-1-1, which is another number,
which gives you an automated instructions for traffic.
Mr. Lance. I see.
Mr. Curry. So even in amongst the state of New Jersey we
have two different numbers that can be confused.
Mr. Lance. It is confusing.
Mr. Curry. So I would appreciate that in my state.
Mr. Lance. Captain Starks?
Mr. Starks. To echo what Mr. Reyes said, this is a good
idea for this national non-emergency code or number but as long
as the staffing is also provided.
Before coming here I spoke with the director of our ECC. He
is for anything that can free up 9-1-1 lines for true
emergencies and get the non-emergency calls which every center
receives directed to the non-emergency lines.
Mr. Lance. Thank you.
Without objection, I will enter into the record the
following documents: A letter from the Hunterdon County
Freeholders--freeholders in New Jersey are county
commissioners--in support of H.R. 6424, the bill I am
sponsoring, and an article on the 9-1-1 fee diversion in New
Jersey, without objection.
[The information appears at the conclusion of the hearing.]
Mr. Lance. And now I am pleased to recognize the ranking
member, Mr. Doyle of Pittsburgh.
Mr. Doyle. Thank you, Mr. Lance. Snitch number, huh? That
is only in Jersey would they call it a snitch number.
Mr. Lance. Thank you for that very nice compliment, Mr.
Ranking Member.
Mr. Doyle. Well, I will tell you I would like to call that
number every time I see somebody texting while they are driving
their car.
So let me ask a question for the entire panel. Maybe we can
just start with Mr. Reyes and go forward. You know, as all of
you are considering the cost of maintaining and upgrading 9-1-1
systems to enhance the next generation systems, are you
concerned that the current federal, state, and local funding
structures are sufficient to deploy a robust and resilient
national 9-1-1 system?
Do you any of you believe there is a funding shortfall
nationally that may leave many communities behind? What is your
thoughts on or how confident do you feel that the funding
exists for you to put that kind of a system in?
Mr. Reyes. So in Virginia I can tell you that most 9-1-1
center directors are grossly underbudgeted. And so there is not
enough budgeting especially not for Next Generation 9-1-1. In
the National Capital Region, the Northern Virginia center
directors are implementing Next Generation 9-1-1 as a region,
not so much as an individual, just to take advantage of, you
know, multiple purchases reducing the cost. And I can tell you
that we are, you know, moving our different priorities around
to make sure to accommodate that.
At the federal and state level, again I don't agree that
there is sufficient funding being directed towards 9-1-1
centers. I think what we would need in order to get to that
level is a bill similar to the bill that brought FirstNet on
for national broadband. Give that same level of attention and
funding to Next Generation 9-1-1.
Mr. Doyle. Thanks, Mr. Reyes.
Mr. Curry?
Mr. Curry. As it stands today, with 89 percent of the phone
bill fees being diverted away there is obviously not enough
money. Only 11 percent is going towards 9-1-1 at all at the
state level.
Mr. Doyle. This is in New Jersey?
Mr. Curry. This is in the state of New Jersey. And I have
full faith in the state of New Jersey that the people who
handle 9-1-1 at that level that they can get us Next Gen 9-1-1,
but they would need proper funding to do so.
Mr. Doyle. Thank you.
Mr. Starks?
Mr. Starks. Thank you. To save time I would say similar to
what they said, and in Montgomery County a specific example is
that the funding isn't there. Right now we have mandatory
overtime for workers there and there is an incredible turnover.
I don't think that is unique across the country.
Mr. Doyle. Yes. I would just reiterate to my colleagues, if
we want to get this problem solved it is going to take more
resources and I think there is just no doubt about that. It
seems like swatting is only getting more and more commonplace.
I get calls all the time that are not only my area code, but my
local dialing code. And I am thinking it is somebody that I
know because the number looks familiar and it is--well, you
don't know who it is. It is a tape recording or something else
saying that they want you to do something.
But, and I think, we see this swatting as putting more and
more people at risk every day too when it involves, you know,
phony calls that require first responders to do something, you
know, the question is there.
Are you all getting concerned that it is getting harder to
verify a caller's identity and location? Do you see this is as
a problem and are your people experiencing more and more
incidents of not being able to correctly identify a caller's
name and location?
Mr. Reyes. So in Prince William County, Mr. Doyle, it is
difficult to find legitimate callers, people that are calling
9-1-1 because they can't breathe or they are having a robbery
in progress, let alone the swatters. The swatters, the
experiences that we have had, we had one just a couple months
ago at a school and that person was out of the country, the IP
address that was tracked down wasn't even in the United States.
So of course even if we were to track that person down,
prosecution would be nearly impossible.
Mr. Doyle. Any others have comments on that?
Mr. Curry. To echo what Mr. Reyes said, we had one
recently. And we work in a--I wouldn't say that it is getting
harder for us to track people down, but it is surely not
getting easier and Next Gen 9-1-1 would help us with that.
But also to echo the captain as well, for a small center
like ours when we get one of those calls we don't have a lot of
redundant resources in the form of personnel. So when we get a
call like that it is all hands on deck and it really does
detract from somebody else who could possibly be having a
legitimate emergency.
Mr. Doyle. Yes. It is a real problem.
Mr. Starks. Mr. Doyle, in your opening statement you used
the terms ``malicious,'' ``deadly,'' and I believe
``wasteful,'' and you are dead-on there. There is just a ripple
effect when these calls come in and many times it is a larger
scale event like a school, but sometimes it is a residence,
somebody of some notoriety.
In one instance in Montgomery County it was a national news
broadcaster who wasn't home. And dispatchers and good cops who
were responding recognized some of the characteristics of this
call and really put some information together and determined
that this man wasn't even home but was in New York City, made
contact with him and really diverted a lot of resources from
coming and stopped a potentially dangerous situation from
occurring.
Mr. Doyle. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I yield back.
Mr. Lance. Thank you. And the chair now recognizes Mr.
Shimkus.
Mr. Shimkus. Thank you, great to have you. Thank you for
your service, all of you. I am going to be pretty brief and
short because I think the bills are pretty clear and I think
they identify problems and we have got to move the process
forward.
But, first of all, I just wanted to mention that here,
across the country, and even in Washington, D.C. it is kind of
all opioids all the time and so we allowed the naloxone to be
administered by first responders in this most recent package. I
think we want to obviously have the appropriate training, so I
think there is some funding to allow training for that to
happen because we know with that ability to help comes a risk
and we have seen that in the first-line responders.
So I would ask the associations to keep us posted on what
we may be doing to be helpful and what things we are doing that
may not be helpful.
This fee diversion thing has been a bone of contention with
me for a long time. I have been in the 9-1-1 debate especially
in the cellular side since I have been a member and my state
was pretty good at first and then it became bad and now rumors
are that they are labeled as good. But I am worried about the
gaming of the system by states by filing that they are not
diverting and then as soon as it has been listed that they are
not a diversion state they divert.
Do you see any of that gaming going on in the system from
your observations? Mr. Curry is probably the best.
Mr. Lance. You have a right to remain silent, Mr. Curry.
Mr. Curry. I don't know that it is good or bad that you
called on me for that. You know, if I sounded too negative
about the state of New Jersey I didn't mean to be. In fact,
they are one of the states that when they were asked did come
forward and they were truthful in how they do spend the money.
I think it is going to just require a constant observation by
the FCC.
Mr. Shimkus. Well, I think the benefit of my colleague Mr.
Lance's bill it ensures that states do the right thing. And I
think Congressman Lance is right on, or actually Chairman
Walden too. We see this in other things. When you collect money
for a certain purpose and not use it for that purpose most
average Americans would not get away with what governments are
allowed to get away with.
So, well, let me ask Mr. Curry, on the accounting side
loss, so for a year you probably have a projection of what you
should receive and if you don't receive that is there any hope
and expectation that you will receive it or is it a loss, year
by year it is gone?
Mr. Curry. There is never a projection to receive anything.
I know from every year that from the state I am going to
receive zero.
Mr. Shimkus. But you should be able to know since it is a
fee on--don't you have a projection of what you hope to get?
Mr. Curry. That figure would be what the state takes in and
then how they decide to spend that money would be up to them.
Mr. Shimkus. Yes, I would think that there would be a
better way. I guess the way I am trying to ask the question is
since you don't know what the apportioned amount might be there
is no way that you book hopeful incoming revenue so that you
can't book loss because you are never projecting revenue.
Mr. Curry. Correct. I never project revenue from the state.
Mr. Shimkus. Yes. Well, I am sorry to hear that. Let me, I
guess the last thing is for--I represent 33 counties in
southern Illinois so obviously most of them are--yours would be
a good county in my congressional district. It would probably
be the biggest county in my congressional district.
Having said that, fee diversions for rural, small operating
systems are probably, would you say there is an exponential
challenge for rurals because of the cost, you just don't have
the numbers? And what about the PSAPs really cover multiple
areas so there may be a cascading event. Is that appropriate to
word it that way?
Mr. Curry. I think what you are asking me and I hope I am
answering this correctly, there are certain requirements that
you must have if you have a 9-1-1 center. It doesn't matter if
you are a big 9-1-1 center or a small 9-1-1 center. You have to
have CAD system. You have to have a recorder. You have the
continued maintenance on all this equipment.
Again for us all that money is paid for by the taxpayer.
And for these taxpayers they are paying for it twice.
Mr. Shimkus. Yes, great. Thank you very much.
I yield back, Mr. Chairman.
Mr. Lance. Thank you, Mr. Shimkus. The chair recognizes Mr.
McNerney.
Mr. McNerney. Well, I thank the chairman and I thank the
panelists. I am going to change the subject a little bit if you
don't mind too much.
Our nation is facing a growing number of cybersecurity
threats. For example, the Mirai botnet that was used in the
DDoS attacks, WannaCry that had infiltrated hospital systems,
and the Spectre and Meltdown chip vulnerabilities. So it is
clear that we need to be more vigilant in protecting against
cybersecurity threat. Now this is especially important in the
case when it comes to protecting the safety infrastructure that
we have. After all, how can public safety officials protect the
public from harm if their own systems are vulnerable to attack?
So, Mr. Reyes, would you agree that it is something that we
need to be concerned about?
Mr. Reyes. Yes, absolutely, sir. We just had a meeting this
week, the 9-1-1 centers of Northern Virginia--Ms. Gordon who is
here representing Alexandria--and that was one of the issues
that was in our agenda. And this is where the 9-1-1 funds that
are given to 9-1-1 centers are being diverted. We are talking
at the Northern Virginia region how to as a region, bring about
one vendor that can give us the same level of protection across
the board.
So that is something that is very high up on our agenda and
we desperately are dedicating funding for protecting our
networks because they are crippling on a regular basis around
here, around the Beltway. And, you know, the vendors just chalk
it up to, oh, we had a network issue, but we know that it is
happening way too common for it to just be network issues all
the time.
Mr. McNerney. Thank you.
Mr. Curry and Mr. Starks, do you also agree?
Mr. Curry. I agree. I don't have anything to add.
Mr. Starks. Yes.
Mr. McNerney. Well, what challenges do you face when it
comes to protecting your own systems against the potential
cyber threats, Mr. Reyes?
Mr. Reyes. Well, it is the same threats and challenges that
everyone else faces including, you know, the Department of
Defense where our networks are constantly being attacked. The
threats are growing stronger on a regular basis, but yet
unfortunately at the local municipal level we don't have the
resources both in personnel and in funding to address or tackle
those types of constant threats.
So we are not in a proactive mode, we are more in a
reactive mode. Unfortunately for us we would like to see when
we are getting an attack to be able to prevent it.
Unfortunately for some of the denials of service that we have
witnessed it has been after the fact and we would like to
prevent them and make sure they don't happen.
Mr. McNerney. Well, I mean you were talking about some of
the steps that you have taken. What are some of the things that
you think that we in Congress could do to help you better
protect your systems?
Mr. Reyes. Well, funding of course is always the number one
thing. And of course number two is some dedicated federal
legislation that when we identify these individuals that are in
our home and our home country be able to put some significant
fines and punishment behind these individuals so that it could
hopefully serve as a deterrence to others.
Mr. McNerney. Thank you. I also want to talk about
wildfires. In Northern California we have witnessed some
devastating wildfires and it is absolutely critical that first
responders have access to information as quickly as possible.
Now in a recent incident, data service was slowed down for
first responders battling wildfires and that is completely
unacceptable. The wildfires have also drawn attention to the
importance of wireless emergency alerts.
So, Mr. Reyes, given your experience in public safety what
are some of the reasons why counties would choose not to use
wireless emergency services?
Mr. Reyes. Well, coverage is one of them. And the scenario
that you described, while there was allegations of the vendor
deliberately throttling back bandwidth the most significant
concern when that is not the issue is just getting coverage in
those rural and remote areas. So that is one of them.
The other one is overloading of the system. Because most of
us are on commercial wireless networks, when you have a
convergence of a lot of mutual aid and lots of first responders
they very quickly overwhelm a commercial wireless system,
whereas if we were to be on a dedicated network like FirstNet
that should not happen.
Mr. McNerney. Do you have anything to add, Mr. Curry?
Mr. Curry. Actually I was just informed this past week by a
vendor, by a representative of AT&T, we did buy into the
FirstNet system. We are the first county dispatch center in New
Jersey to do so, and again they assured that there would be no
throttling back on the FirstNet system. As Mr. Reyes said, we
do have some coverage issues in the county, but it is early on
yet.
Mr. McNerney. Well, how important, Mr. Reyes, do you think
it is to have appropriate officials to receive the necessary
training to administer these alerts then?
Mr. Reyes. Very important, yes.
Mr. McNerney. OK.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I yield back.
Mr. Lance. Thank you very much. The chair recognizes Mr.
Guthrie.
Mr. Guthrie. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I appreciate the
opportunity to be here and I have a few questions. And I am
sorry. I have been--a couple other hearings are going on so I
have been bouncing in and out, but I will try not to repeat
what has already been asked or said.
So these are for Mr. Curry. Do you think states should be
required to report the fees they divert to FCC? Right now the
FCC study is voluntary. And is there any other information you
don't get to include on the FCC study that you wish you could?
Mr. Curry. To ensure that the money was being spent the way
that taxpayers expect the money to be paid, I would have to say
yes that there should be FCC oversight.
Mr. Guthrie. For the study. And do you think there is some
information you would like to include that is not in the study
now? Is there additional information?
Mr. Curry. Not if the bill looked to be fairly thorough and
complete.
Mr. Guthrie. Fairly thorough, OK. How does a county in a
diverting state with multiple call centers handle this
situation? Do they have to choose which call centers to upgrade
or which call centers get to hire more staff or do they evenly
split the funds among the call centers?
Mr. Curry. Among local call centers in New Jersey no one
has received any money.
Mr. Guthrie. No one has seen any money, OK.
Mr. Curry. Out of the 11 percent that was spent on 9-1-1 it
did not reach the local level.
Mr. Guthrie. It didn't get to the county level. OK. And
then what are some of the features your 9-1-1 system is missing
because you have been unable to upgrade due to financial
constraints?
Mr. Curry. The biggest hurdle we have is caller location.
We don't have Next Gen 9-1-1 and the software is very expensive
to purchase for us to give us the ability to do that without
the Next Gen 9-1-1. We would have to have an outside vendor
provide us with that software.
Mr. Guthrie. OK, I appreciate, well, I appreciate that and
that is my questions. So I will yield back my time.
Mr. Lance. The chair recognizes Ms. Clarke.
Ms. Clarke. I thank Chairman Lance and Ranking Member Doyle
for convening this very important hearing on public safety
communications. I am pleased that the subcommittee is
considering the Anti-swatting Act introduced by my colleague
and fellow New Yorker Mr. Engel.
Over the past several years, the practice of swatting has
increased in prominence. Swatters who have often been involved
in online disputes make hoax calls to emergency response teams
leading to their deployment. The practice has resulted in
wasted law enforcement resources and physical harm, even death,
to its unsuspecting victims.
So my first question is actually to Captain Starks. I have
read stories of Parkland activist David Hogg being the victim
of swatting and worry that such techniques may be used to
stifle debate and free expression in addition to all of the
other harm that it causes. In your experience are swatting
calls being targeted at particular populations or types of
individuals?
Mr. Starks. Yes, and I don't think it is unique to
Montgomery County. It has been schools where I mentioned had to
be evacuated and housed because of the weather that day, but
also people of notoriety as well are targeted. And the intent
is to bringing all kinds of resources and then when you do that
the potential dangerous situation to anyone who may be at that
location whether it is a business or a residence with that kind
of response.
Ms. Clarke. Is there a psychological profile that is sort
of beginning to, I guess, come to the fore around individuals
who would engage in these swatting tactics?
Mr. Starks. None that I know of. But it seems just to be a
younger population. The example I mentioned where the school
was evacuated, I believe the person was a juvenile located
outside of this country.
Ms. Clarke. Wow, OK. Law enforcement officers face
difficult choices in the best of circumstances and I am
concerned that swatting calls might be particularly devastating
in some minority communities where unfortunately there might
already be tensions with law enforcement.
So Captain Starks, what can we do to deter swatters and
help police officers safely respond to these dangerous hoaxes
regardless of where they are called in?
Mr. Starks. I think more discussion about this, more
education to the public that this is not a joke. It is not a
hoax but it does cause, as been mentioned, a waste of
resources, resources being stripped away from what they would
normally be doing. But more importantly, there is a potential
danger to anyone on both sides of this issue, the responders
and whoever happens to be home.
I think the education piece is one part of it and I think
the components of this legislation are important as well to
make it a federal crime. And of particular interest to my ECC
director was the cost recovery where we can provide an
accounting or a local jurisdiction could provide an accounting
and then get those dollars back from the group or an individual
who caused it to occur.
Ms. Clarke. Very well. And law enforcement has sometimes
had difficulty classifying swatting under current laws. Some
cases have resulted in charges related to cyber terrorism while
others have approached the issue as a criminal mischief. How
would you classify swatting under our current legal system?
Mr. Starks. Well, it would be a criminal offense to make a
false call in the state of Maryland, to make a false, you know,
emergency call. But this additional legislation would clearly
add more bite to it.
Ms. Clarke. Very well. Some swatters have been convicted
under federal criminal statutes. How would Mr. Engel's bill
help law enforcement officers and prosecutors contain the
threats posed by swatting?
Mr. Starks. I think with the more specific legislation that
has been mentioned and the ability to have some options
depending on the circumstances of the allegations--local,
state, or federal--gives us more options and more advantage
over these criminals.
Ms. Clarke. Well, I thank you very much, Captain Starks.
And I thank all of our witnesses for your expertise this
morning and I yield back.
Mr. Lance. Thank you, Ms. Clarke. The chair recognizes Mr.
Olson for 5 minutes.
Mr. Olson. I thank the chair and welcome to our three
witnesses. Also I want to thank you all for your years, decades
of service on the thin blue line. Thank you, thank you, thank
you, for that.
My questions will focus on one big storm, Hurricane Harvey.
Now as you all know it hit my hometown, my home region twice
moving very, very slow. It dropped on average 40 inches of rain
in 2 days, almost four feet of rain over almost all of
Southeast Texas. 9-1-1 was overwhelmed with calls. As Ranking
Member Doyle mentioned in his opening statement, people could
not get through with the calls. One example I heard back home,
a senior citizen, his wife, their home was flooding. They
called 9-1-1 for about an hour, could not get through. Somehow
they planned to go to Chick-fil-A after they were rescued. They
made that call to Chick-fil-A that went through. And for some
reason only known to God and luck, Chick-fil-A showed up and
rescued those two people.
Mr. Curry, before this hearing you told me a great story
about how a big difference between Kingwood, New Jersey and
Kingwood, Texas. And prior to Hurricane Harvey someone was
misrouted from Kingwood, Texas to Kingwood, New Jersey and your
people stuck with this person over and over and got them
rescued back home in Kingwood, Texas. So thank you for that
again, but that is lucky as opposed to having a plan.
I want to talk about the Brooks-Eshoo bill, the H.R. 5700
National Emergency Mobile Number Act. And my hometown of Sugar
Land has a 3-1-1 system already that opened up last year I
found out at the mayor's big annual State of the City address,
it works. About 2 months ago I am riding down my street. There
is a big branch on the sidewalk. I called up 3-1-1; within
hours that branch is gone. But my neighbors had no clue that 3-
1-1 was available, no idea it was out there.
And so the question is how can people determine, how do you
determine what is a true emergency for 9-1-1 and what is a non-
emergency for 3-1-1? Can callers differentiate between 9-1-1
and 3-1-1, in your opinion, Mr. Reyes, Mr. Curry, and Mr.
Starks? What are the challenges there to get them to know what
is really an emergency and what is not?
Mr. Reyes. So, sir, we do not have 3-1-1 in Prince William
County, but from talking to some municipalities that do have 3-
1-1 they embed in the voice calling options. If you dialed 3-1-
1 for example, when it answers, the voice tree answers, it says
if you have an emergency press one and then it reroutes you
over to 9-1-1. So that is my only experience with 3-1-1, but we
are not a 3-1-1 municipality.
Mr. Olson. How do you deal with Chick-fil-A calling up you
guys at 9-1-1? How do you deal with that situation? How do you
get them off your line because that is clearly not an
emergency?
Mr. Reyes. Well, that happens on our ten-digit non-
emergency. So our county has a ten-digit non-emergency number
that the county residents use and so when they dial 9-1-1 and
it is a non-emergency call our call takers divert them to the
non-emergency calls internally.
And then we are doing an education program within our
county at the school level where we are reaching out to kids.
We just awarded four kids on Saturday, awards for making the
right call----
Mr. Olson. Awesome.
Mr. Reyes [continuing]. Because at school they learned the
awesome power of 9-1-1 and how to use it properly. So I think
we have to do something similar with the non-emergency number.
Mr. Olson. Great. Mr. Curry, your comments on----
Mr. Curry. Because we handle all the phone calls for each
municipal police agency in Hunterdon County, if somebody were
to call on the non-emergency and they do, they call on the non-
emergency ten-digit number, because all the calls come to the
same center it wouldn't be an issue for us.
Mr. Olson. Yes.
Mr. Curry. Because the same dispatchers who take the 9-1-1
calls, they are in that same room and they can just as easily
handle that 3-1-1, for example. And we are going to take the
same number of calls if it is 9-1-1, 3-1-1 or the ten-digit
number because if they are going to call they are going to
call. It is just a matter of the method in which they decide to
use and what is most beneficial for them and what is most
beneficial for us.
Mr. Olson. Captain Starks?
Mr. Starks. What Mr. Reyes said, we have a ten-digit non-
emergency number but getting that number in people's heads is
very, very tough and 9-1-1 is just so much easier to remember.
The county has started a 3-1-1 line. It is separate from our
emergency call center and it is a very deliberate process, but
what Mr. Reyes said at the beginning, if you think you have an
emergency that message is given and it directs people to the 9-
1-1.
Mr. Olson. I am about out of time. I have one question
remaining about the Anti-Swatting Act and this is for all three
witnesses, a simple yes or no answer. I just want to ensure
that H.R. 6003, the Anti-Swatting Act, has no effect on my
Houston Astros swatting the heck out of the American League
rivals and National League champion in regard to our repeat of
the World Series.
Does this affect my Houston Astros swatting the National
League and the American League?
Mr. Reyes. No.
Mr. Curry. I would think not.
Mr. Starks. No, sir.
Mr. Olson. There you go. That is what I want to hear. I
yield back.
Mr. Lance. Your time is expired, Mr. Olson.
Mr. Engel, you are recognized.
Mr. Engel. Thank you. And let me tell my friend and
colleague Mr. Olson that the Bill 6003, the Anti-Swatting Act,
is my bill and you don't have to worry. The New York Yankees
are going to swat all the other teams.
Mr. Olson. Repeat, repeat.
Mr. Engel. So thank you, Chairman Lance and Ranking Member
Doyle, for holding today's hearing and including my bill, the
Anti-Swatting Act, 6003. And I want to thank Yvette Clarke for
highlighting some of the things of that bill.
According to the FBI, a single SWAT team deployment can
cost thousands of taxpayers' dollars. It obviously wastes law
enforcement's time which prevents them from responding to real
emergencies. And most importantly, it risks injury to
unassuming victims as well as to the officials who mount a
response.
One of the most tragic examples took place last December in
Wichita, Kansas where officers shot and killed an unarmed 28-
year-old man on his front doorstep after receiving a phony call
alleging an ongoing crime. This is a very serious problem and
that is why we introduce this bill to address it.
My bill would expand on the Truth in Caller ID Act that
Chairman Emeritus Joe Barton and I introduced and it signed
into law in 2010. In last Congress my Anti-swatting Act was
amended and favorably reported out of our committee but it did
not come up for a vote on the floor. So we have a real
opportunity now.
The current version of my bill includes the amendments we
passed last Congress and in short my Anti-swatting Act would
increase penalties for people who falsify their caller ID
information to mislead law enforcement. This technological
trick called spoofing allows swatters to hide their identity by
making law enforcement believe that they are calling in an
emergency from a different phone booth, phone number, a phone
number or location. The bill would also force swatters to
reimburse emergency service entities for the resources they
spend responding to the invented emergency.
So I would like to ask Captain Starks or anybody else who
would care to answer, when law enforcement receives a swatting
call you obviously don't know when you have received it that it
is a phony, that is it a fake. Can you explain how law
enforcement responds to such a call?
Mr. Starks. Sure. The people in the 9-1-1 center have to
begin vetting some of the details of that call as they are
being dispatched to the first responders. Usually a swatting
call has some details regarding violence where the caller
states maybe he or she has already shot someone, is there with
a higher powered weapon, that kind of thing, someone else is in
danger.
So that activates not only the first cops on the street
responding but also tactical units, negotiators who come, and
then fire and rescue services who have to come by and respond
to treat who may be injured there and who may become injured
there as well. So it is wave after wave after wave of affecting
public safety.
Mr. Engel. You know, it is really a sick thing, you know,
you wonder what kind of a fool would do something like this. It
is absolutely mind-boggling with total, you know, to play a
joke or to get a kick out of something to really put people's
lives in jeopardy. It is just absolutely disgraceful. Swatting
incidents have profound impacts on families too, I am sure you
would agree with that.
Mr. Starks. Absolutely.
Mr. Engel. My bill calls for increased penalties for
swatting including up to 20 years where the emergency response
results in serious bodily injury. Violators would also be
required to reimburse law enforcement entities for their
expenses, which is another thing in responding to the hoax. In
your opinion will that help?
Mr. Starks. Yes, it will.
Mr. Engel. OK. Thank you very much and thank you for the
good work you do. I don't know if Mr. Reyes or Mr. Curry have
any comments.
Mr. Reyes. The only thing I would add to what we all have
discussed here on the swatting thing is something that is often
overlooked is that oftentimes these could be diverted actions
to divert law enforcement attention from perhaps another real-
life crime that is going to be taking place like a bank robbery
for example.
So that is one of the things. And then on a much bigger
scale I don't think we should minimize the importance that this
plays to homeland security issues around the country. What if
this is just some rehearsals for these would-be homeland
terrorists that are just seeing how responders are going to be
responding so that they can then prepare for a larger, real-
life attack?
Mr. Engel. Well, two very good points. Thank you and thank
all three of you. We appreciate it.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Mr. Lance. Thank you very much. The chair recognizes Mr.
Bilirakis.
Mr. Bilirakis. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, I appreciate it and
I welcome the witnesses. Thank you for their testimony. I was
actually downstairs at the hearing so we have two going on at
once. I also want to acknowledge my constituent, a paramedic
Maya Daniels, who was recognized as a local, first responder of
the year for going above and beyond. Thank you for your
service, gentlemen, I appreciate it so very much.
Moving on to questions, I want to address an issue related
to the Anti-swatting Act. I know this has been discussed but I
have a specific question here, which is impacting of course our
general population. The number of scam calls to Americans has
increased from about four percent of the calls in 2017 to about
29 percent this year, and now a new report from First Orion
projects a 45 percent of all sale calls will be from scammers
in 2019. It is unacceptable. It is just awful.
My question is for both of you. Are you seeing significant
increases in fake emergency calls to your public safety systems
or non-emergency response lines regardless of whether they are
purposeful swatting calls or spoof calls and will the bills
being discussed today protect against these threats?
And we will start with Mr. Curry if that is OK.
Mr. Curry. I don't have any empirical data. I can say
anecdotally they are on the increase. I have been in this
particular business for a couple of years now and as I said, I
think we had one just a few months ago an actual swatting call.
So again I would say that they are on the rise, but again I
don't have the data to back it up.
Mr. Bilirakis. And what about the bills that are being
discussed today? Will they make a difference?
Mr. Curry. I hope so.
Mr. Bilirakis. In your opinion?
Mr. Curry. I would hope that they would.
Mr. Bilirakis. OK, very good. Anyone else want to touch
that, any questions?
Mr. Reyes. So just like Mr. Curry I don't have any
empirical data either, but they are definitely steady in our
municipality. While they may not be on the increase they are
definitely constant. So that is one of the things.
The three bills that we are talking about here today I
think will have a significant positive impact on the job that
we do every single day.
Mr. Bilirakis. Good, good, good. And again if you have any
input on how we can improve in addition to those three bills,
please don't hesitate to--I guess it is Mr. Starks?
Mr. Starks. Just to echo what has been said is that this
legislation, I think Mr. Pallone in his statement said this
will also help keep first responders safer. And if first
responders are safer to include call takers and dispatchers
then we can do our job better in protecting the public.
Mr. Bilirakis. Very good, thank you.
Mr. Curry, in your testimony you mentioned that finding a
caller's location is determined through manual entries and
interrogation. Do you have any estimate on how long it
typically takes to get an accurate emergency location, or worse
are there situations where a location cannot be identified and
can you explain how the Next Generation 9-1-1 will help bring
down these numbers?
Mr. Curry. If there is any delay at all that is a problem
because seconds count. So if it is just a couple of seconds to
locate where the caller is that is an issue.
The other problem is, I had mentioned that, you know, we
have a major interstate. People call 9-1-1 because again that
is the universal number to call and they are moving. So as they
are moving we are still trying to track their location which is
very difficult and it has to be done by through manual entry
and again as I mentioned through interrogation. We get a lot of
transient traffic and they just don't know where they are. I
couldn't tell you how long it takes on an average, but the Next
Gen 9-1-1 and some of this other software I had mentioned
before would actually put the person's location within, I want
to say about three meters. And it would do it quickly and
continuously.
Mr. Bilirakis. Very good, thank you. And again thank you
for your service, appreciate it. Thanks for putting your lives
on the line to protect us and we need to be as helpful as we
possibly can. Thank you. I yield back.
Mr. Lance. Thank you very much. The chair recognizes Mr.
Johnson for 5 minutes.
Mr. Johnson. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. And I too want to
thank you gentlemen for your service. Thanks for being here
today.
Mr. Reyes and Captain Starks, shifting gears just a little
bit, what are some of the most extreme or alarming
circumstances where someone called 9-1-1 where they should have
called a non-emergency number? Do you have any examples?
Mr. Reyes, you can go first.
Mr. Reyes. Well, when I was in Alexandria the most extreme
call that I recall was a resident who called asking for a medic
unit because they had run out of aspirin and they wanted an
ambulance to take them to the hospital.
Mr. Johnson. They had run out of aspirin.
Mr. Reyes. And they used 9-1-1 for that. So that is an
extreme example that I can give you.
Mr. Johnson. Yes.
Mr. Reyes. And that happens pretty regularly across centers
across America.
Mr. Johnson. Captain Starks?
Mr. Starks. Generally the abuse is calls for normal county
or government services for like snow or leaves or just they are
using it as 4-1-1, so like asking questions instead of needing
emergency services right away. There is a finite number of 9-1-
1 lines in any emergency center and in that case that line is
being held up not being able to be used for any incoming
emergency.
Mr. Johnson. OK. Have you noticed a higher number of these
calls coming from out-of-state travelers, any correlation
there?
Mr. Reyes. You mean the calls that come into 9-1-1 that
should not be?
Mr. Johnson. Yes. That should go to a non-emergency number.
Mr. Reyes. Yes, so just like Mr. Curry we have a major
interstate running through our county, I-95, and that generates
a lot of traffic, as well as a large shopping complex known as
Potomac Mills and that generates a lot of visitors and tourists
as well. And just like Captain Stark has indicated, oftentimes
rather than look for the ten-digit emergency number quite
frankly not even knowing what municipality they are in,
everyone knows that the universal number that is always going
to get answered no matter what square foot in America you are
in is going to be 9-1-1. So that seems to be the default number
when people have a question and don't know who to ask.
Mr. Johnson. Do you think they knew to call a non-emergency
number but just didn't have or know-how to locate the non-
emergency number and do you think they would have called it if
we had a nationwide standardized non-emergency number, do you
think that would have helped?
Mr. Reyes. I can only suspect yes, because I mean some of
the calls that we receive that are clearly non-emergency that
come into the emergency line are just at the common sense
perspective that person should have clearly known not to dial
9-1-1, but yet they are asking for directions to wherever they
are trying to go. And so they know that the de facto number
that is always going to get answered is 9-1-1.
Mr. Johnson. OK. Captain Starks?
Mr. Starks. I would just echo the same for the sake of
time.
Mr. Johnson. OK. Continuing on this same thought, one
potential criticism of a broader uniform non-emergency mobile
number is the consumer education that would have to take place
to inform citizens of its existence. Some states have already
got such a number and so that creates a potentially even
greater need to standardize the process so that someone driving
from one state to the next doesn't have to worry about knowing
multiple numbers across the nation.
What are some of the benefits, gentlemen, of having a
nationwide non-emergency number like that?
Mr. Reyes. Well, I will start. And again it would be to
take that unnecessary and unjustified volume of calls that come
into 9-1-1 to a dedicated number. But again just like all these
very successful campaigns that we have used like Buckle Up,
things like that where we teach children and start teaching at
a very young age and start teaching our residents the
importance of the number, then we can start focusing on a
number.
But like Mr. Curry said, in one state there could be three,
up to three 3-digit numbers and so the citizens get confused
and don't know which one to call, number one, or for what type
of event to use that number for.
Mr. Johnson. And do either one of you gentlemen want to--
anything more to add to that?
Mr. Starks. I just believe that, in the '70s we went to the
9-1-1 system and we didn't have any type of resources like we
have now to communicate campaigns like the internet and social
media and that type of thing. It is about, I think, education
and changing the culture. It has been in my career of 30 years,
just the way drunk driving is viewed now in this country that
has changed, it is just taking a while. The same thing can
happen, but I think a lot quicker with a standardized non-
emergency number.
Mr. Johnson. OK, all right.
Mr. Chairman, I yield back.
Mr. Lance. Thank you very much, Mr. Johnson. The chair
recognizes Mrs. Brooks.
Mrs. Brooks. Thank you, Mr. Chair. I want to continue on
this line of question about the bill that I introduced
regarding non-emergency numbers. And I want to ask you, Captain
Starks, you talked about in your career you have seen how 9-1-1
has become so successful. Do you have examples of how the
public does have a good understanding of the use of non-
emergency numbers in some of the states that do have it?
Mr. Starks. I don't have any examples from out of state. I
think that within my jurisdiction, Montgomery County, there is
some understanding, but I think there is a great deal of
confusion and just ignorance or lack of knowledge in regarding
this ten-digit non-emergency number that we employ.
Mrs. Brooks. And so would it be fair to say that you would
like to see a shorter number that because so many people go
from one community to another in the area that you represent,
if we had a very simple three-digit number wouldn't that be
incredibly advantageous?
Mr. Starks. It sure would be in the first look. But Mr.
Reyes also spoke earlier of just cautionary about making sure
that funding and staffing is there because it is going to cause
an increase of calls to the center. But yes, a uniform number
would be helpful.
Mrs. Brooks. And, Mr. Reyes, going back, and I appreciate--
I visited my PSAP in Indiana in Hamilton County and certainly
appreciate what the concern is about resources. But do we have
any data from the 9-1-1 from the PSAPs how many calls right now
come in that are non-emergency versus emergency?
Mr. Reyes. Yes, ma'am. During my opening remarks I gave
that statistic for our agency and our organization receives
more non-emergency calls than emergency calls. Overall, we are
at 400,000 calls total and of those 400,000 some 254,000 were
non-emergency.
Mrs. Brooks. And so would you agree that if there were
resources as well as a public education campaign much like what
we have done and I think it is much easier now because of
social media and other and smart phones to be able to
communicate what that number would be if a person wanted to use
a non-emergency number.
Mr. Reyes. Yes.
Mr. Curry. If you don't mind, if I could just add to that?
Mrs. Brooks. Please.
Mr. Curry. In Hunterdon County where I live, my post office
isn't even in my county so we have postal mailing addresses
that expand way beyond where you think you may live. In
addition to that about one-third of our county is covered by
the state police and that is three different state police
barracks. People don't know who their police agencies are, let
alone know the number to call for a non-emergency.
So I know we have talked about the nationwide scale, but
for me it is more important on a local level.
Mrs. Brooks. So it is even a local, not just the traveling
because I have been told if a person were driving we have no
fewer than 18 different abbreviated short codes across 29
states and if a person were driving across Highway 95 they
would even see ten different dialing codes.
Mr. Curry. Yes.
Mrs. Brooks. And so it is impossible for just a citizen to
be driving even on our interstate system and know who to call
if they saw a tree down or a dead deer along the side of the
road. Things that might not be a true emergency and yet the 9-
1-1 operators and folks, dispatchers rather, that I am speaking
with are very concerned about making sure they have the time
and the bandwidth to handle the true emergency calls because
those are the ones that really deserve their attention.
Wouldn't you agree?
Mr. Curry. Yes.
Mrs. Brooks. And do we have many situations documented of
people being on hold for 9-1-1 for quite some time when they
have true emergencies? Do we have that documented as well?
Mr. Reyes. We don't document that in our jurisdiction.
Mr. Starks. I don't have the data, but I know that it has
occurred within Montgomery County.
Mrs. Brooks. And how about you, Mr. Curry?
Mr. Curry. This past early spring, late winter we had two
storms come through, Quinn and Riley, and the way our 9-1-1
system works is if it doesn't get answered in one PSAP it goes
to the next and it bounces. And during one particular storm we
received over 200 9-1-1 calls from the previous county and even
a handful of calls from two counties before that. A lot of
those calls were just that--my power is out.
Mrs. Brooks. OK. And so therefore your dispatchers are
taking all those calls in, whereas if someone had a horrific
wreck or something during that storm they could have been on
hold.
Mr. Curry. Correct. And some of those were emergencies that
we were getting those redundant calls from.
Mrs. Brooks. OK, thank you. Appreciate it and yield back.
Mr. Lance. Thank you, Mrs. Brooks.
Seeing there are no further members wishing to ask
questions for the panel, I thank our witnesses for being here
today. Before we conclude, I ask unanimous consent to enter the
following documents into the record: The letter from Hunterdon
County Freeholders in support of H.R. 6424; an article on 9-1-1
fee diversion in New Jersey; and an article from the New York
Times offered by Mr. Doyle.
Pursuant to committee rules, I remind members that they
have 10 business days to submit additional questions for the
record and I ask that witnesses submit their responses within
10 business days upon receipt of the questions.
Seeing no further business before the subcommittee today,
without objection, the subcommittee is adjourned.
[Whereupon, at 12:04 p.m., the subcommittee was adjourned.]
[Material submitted for inclusion in the record follows:]
Prepared statement of Hon. Anna G. Eshoo
Madame Chairwoman, thank you for holding this hearing
today. It comes at a time when werecall the public safety
lessons we learned when our country was attacked seventeen
years ago. At the same time, in the midst of another hurricane
season we are aware that we must be proactive to ensure the
ongoing integrity of our public safety networks.
I believe the bills before the Committee today will bolster
America's public safety communications networks, and I'm proud
to be an original cosponsor of two of them.
The `9-1-1 Fee Integrity Act' ensures that states use 9-1-1
fees charged to consumers intended to improve 9-1-1 emergency
communications systems for that purpose and that purpose only.
Our 9-1-1 call centers are the first point of contact in
emergency situations, but many of these call centers rely on
technology that's been in place since the time of the first 9-
1-1 call 50 years ago. 9-1-1 fees collected by states should
only be used to upgrade our 9-1-1 infrastructure, not diverted
to the general coffers of state governments. It's our
responsibility to make sure our constituents' dollars are being
used as intended--especially when it comes to keeping them
safe.
The second bill is the other side of the same public safety
coin and I'm also pleased to partner with Representative Brooks
as an original cosponsor of the `National Non- Emergency Number
Act'. Often when drivers see a fellow traveler in need of
assistance, or another issue of concern, they aren't sure how
to help, so they default to calling 911. This can have the
unfortunate effect of diverting much-needed emergency resources
to important but non-dire situations. This bill provides the
dual benefit of streamlining travelers' access to assistance
when they need it, while allowing emergency workers to focus on
urgent matters when lives are on the line, reducing traveler
confusion and hastening response times across the board.
Thank you again for bringing these bipartisan bills before
the Committee today. I encourage the Committee to continue
moving this legislation forward in a timely manner because
together, these bills can further our collective goal of more
efficient, reliable, and cost-effective safety services for all
Americans.
[GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
[all]