Next Generation 9–1–1 Act
- Sponsor
- Rep. Hudson, Richard [R-NC-9]
- Committees
- Energy and Commerce Committee (primary)
- Last action
- Jan 15, 2026
Bottom line
The Next Generation 9-1-1 Act aims to modernize emergency communication infrastructure nationwide through federal grants, enhanced coordination, and dedicated cybersecurity measures, with a focus on interoperability and reliability.
What it actually does
This bill amends the National Telecommunications and Information Administration Organization Act to establish a grant program for the implementation and maintenance of Next Generation 9-1-1 (NG9-1-1) systems across states and tribal lands. It outlines specific duties for the Assistant Secretary regarding coordination, technical assistance, and oversight of these grants, and mandates the creation of a management plan. The bill also establishes a Nationwide NG9-1-1 Cybersecurity Center and an Advisory Board to guide deployment and address cybersecurity concerns.
Proponents argue
Proponents argue that modernizing 9-1-1 systems to Next Generation 9-1-1 is critical for public safety, enabling emergency services to receive multimedia information (like texts and photos) and improving response times and coordination. They emphasize that the bill's focus on cybersecurity, interoperability, and sustainable funding mechanisms will ensure a robust and future-proof emergency communication infrastructure, saving lives and enhancing national security.
Opponents contend
Opponents might raise concerns about the potential for federal overreach into state and local emergency services, the administrative burden associated with grant applications and certifications, and the cost implications for states and tribes to establish 'sustainable funding mechanisms' and 'effective cybersecurity resources' within three years, which could be challenging for smaller or less resourced jurisdictions. There could also be concerns about the 4% administrative cost cap being too low for effective oversight of a complex grant program.
The bill is moderately technical due to its focus on telecommunications infrastructure and cybersecurity, but its structure is clear. An informed reader can understand its core provisions within the given time.
Section 2, adding new Section 159(c) to the National Telecommunications and Information Administration Organization Act.
Next Generation 9-1-1 Implementation Grants
This provision directs the Assistant Secretary to provide grants to states and tribes for implementing, maintaining, and operating Next Generation 9-1-1 systems. Funds can also be used for related training, public outreach, administrative costs (with caps), and cybersecurity measures. Applicants must submit detailed plans ensuring interoperability, reliability, multimedia processing, and robust cybersecurity.
Supporters argue
Supporters argue this grant program is essential to accelerate the transition to NG9-1-1, which is vital for public safety in the digital age. It provides necessary financial support and guidance to states and tribes, ensuring a coordinated and secure national emergency response system.
Critics contend
Critics might argue that the administrative caps for training (3-5%) and planning (1-2%) might be too restrictive, potentially hindering effective implementation, especially for smaller entities or those with complex legacy systems. They might also express concern that the grant conditions impose significant unfunded mandates on states to establish sustainable funding and cybersecurity resources.
Tradeoffs
Balances the need for federal financial support with the desire to ensure accountability and specific technical standards. It also balances flexibility for local needs with the goal of national interoperability.
Section 2, adding new Section 159(c)(5)-(7) to the National Telecommunications and Information Administration Organization Act.
Grant Certifications and Penalties
This provision requires eligible entities applying for grants to certify that they are not misusing 9-1-1 fees, will use funds for reliable and interoperable NG9-1-1, will establish sustainable funding and cybersecurity resources within three years, will promote interoperability with the nationwide public safety broadband network, and will coordinate with adjoining jurisdictions. Failure to comply or providing false information results in the return of funds and ineligibility for future grants.
Section 2, adding new Section 160 to the National Telecommunications and Information Administration Organization Act.
Nationwide Next Generation 9-1-1 Cybersecurity Center
This provision mandates the Assistant Secretary, in consultation with the Administrator of the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration and the Director of CISA, to establish a Cybersecurity Center specifically for Next Generation 9-1-1. This center will coordinate with state, local, and regional governments to share cybersecurity information, analyze threats, and develop guidelines for detecting and preventing intrusions related to NG9-1-1.
Section 2, adding new Section 161 to the National Telecommunications and Information Administration Organization Act.
Public Safety Next Generation 9-1-1 Advisory Board
This provision establishes a 16-member advisory board composed of representatives from local law enforcement, fire/rescue, emergency medical services, and 9-1-1 professionals. The board will provide recommendations to the Assistant Secretary on deploying NG9-1-1 in diverse areas, ensuring technological flexibility, creating efficiencies, coordinating among government entities, and incorporating cybersecurity resources. The board terminates when grant funds are no longer available.
Section 2, adding new Section 162 to the National Telecommunications and Information Administration Organization Act.
Authorization of Appropriations
This provision authorizes the appropriation of 'such sums as may be necessary' for fiscal years 2026 through 2030 to carry out the NG9-1-1 grant program, cybersecurity center, and advisory board. These funds are authorized to remain available until expended. It also caps administrative costs for the Assistant Secretary at no more than 4% of the appropriated amounts.
Prohibits grant funds from being used to make payments to any person who has been prohibited by any entity of the Federal Government from bidding on a contract, participating in an auction, or receiving a grant for reasons of national security.
Section 2, adding new Section 159(c)(8)(B)
Why it matters:Standard legislative practice to include specific restrictions on funding, but its placement might mean a casual reader focuses more on the positive grant uses.
Case for: Supporters would argue this is a critical national security measure, preventing federal funds from inadvertently supporting entities that pose a risk to U.S. infrastructure or intelligence, especially in sensitive areas like emergency communications.
Case against: No direct opposition, but some might argue it could inadvertently restrict competition if the list of prohibited entities becomes extensive or vaguely defined, potentially limiting options for states and tribes.
Estimated impact: Prevents potentially significant contracts from being awarded to entities deemed national security risks, impacting the vendor landscape for NG9-1-1 technology.
Defines 'commonly accepted standards' as technical standards followed by the communications industry for network, device, and Internet Protocol connectivity that enable interoperability, are developed and approved by an accredited standards development organization (SDO) through an open, public, consensus-based process with conflict resolution, and are made publicly available.
Section 2, adding new Section 159(d)(4)
Why it matters:Standard practice for defining key terms, but the specifics of how standards are developed and approved are crucial for ensuring true interoperability and avoiding proprietary lock-in.
Case for: Proponents would argue this detailed definition is essential to ensure that NG9-1-1 systems are truly interoperable and not reliant on proprietary technologies, fostering competition and future-proofing the infrastructure. It promotes transparency and broad industry participation in standard setting.
Case against: No direct opposition, but some technology vendors might prefer less stringent requirements that allow for more proprietary solutions, potentially leading to faster deployment but less interoperability.
Estimated impact: Shapes the entire technological ecosystem of NG9-1-1, influencing vendor choices, system design, and long-term costs for states and tribes.