PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Received in the Senate and Read twice and referred to the Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs.
Congressional Research Service
Version 81 · Passed House without amendment · Jul 25, 2006
(This measure has not been amended since it was introduced. The summary has been expanded because action occurred on the measure.)
21st Century Emergency Communications Act of 2006 - (Sec. 2) Amends the Homeland Security Act of 2002 to establish in the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) an Office of Emergency Communications, to be headed by the Assistant Secretary for Emergency Communications.
Includes among the Assistant Secretary's responsibilities: (1) assisting the Secretary of DHS in developing and implementing the program to enhance public safety interoperable communications at all levels of government; (2) administering DHS authorities for the SAFECOM Program, the Integrated Wireless Network program, and the Interoperable Communications Technical Assistance Program; (3) coordinating administration of the National Communications System; (4) facilitating creation of Regional Emergency Communications Coordination Working Groups; (5) establishing requirements for total and nonproprietary interoperable emergency communications capabilities for all public safety radio and data communications systems and equipment purchased using DHS assistance; and (6) coordinating with the Director of the Office for Interoperability and Compatibility.
Showing the opening paragraphs of the official summary.
Directs the Secretary, through the Assistant Secretary, to: (1) assess the range of emergency communications capabilities needed, the current capabilities, and the gap between the two; (2) develop a National Emergency Communications Report to provide recommendations regarding how the United States can accelerate the deployment of interoperable emergency communications nationwide; (3) report annually on the degree to which such communications have been achieved and on the feasibility of developing a mobile communications capability; and (4) ensure that grant guidelines for the use of DHS assistance relating to interoperable emergency communications are coordinated and consistent with Report goals and recommendations.
Requires the Secretary to: (1) support the development of national voluntary consensus standards for interoperable emergency communications; and (2) prohibit a governmental jurisdiction from using DHS assistance for new equipment or systems that do not meet such standards.
Establishes the Emergency Communications Preparedness Center to serve as the focal point for interagency efforts to address operable and interoperable communications.
Directs the Secretary to provide technical guidance, training, and other assistance to support the rapid establishment of effective interoperable emergency communications capabilities in emergencies in areas determined to be at consistently high risk from acts of terrorism, natural disasters, and other emergencies. Requires that such capabilities ensure the ability of all levels of government, emergency response and support providers, the private sector, and other organizations with emergency response capabilities to: (1) communicate with each other; (2) have timely access to the Information Sharing Environment described in the National Security Intelligence Reform Act of 2004; and (3) be consistent with any applicable state or urban area homeland strategy or plan.
(Sec. 3) Requires the Director of the Office of Interoperability and Compatibility to: (1) assist the Secretary in developing and implementing the science and technology aspects of public safety interoperable communications programs of the Intelligence Reform and Terrorism Prevention Act; (2) support the creation of national voluntary consensus standards for interoperable emergency communications; (3) establish a comprehensive research, development, testing, and evaluation program for improving interoperable emergency communications; (4) evaluate and assess new technology in real-world environments to achieve interoperable emergency communications capabilities; and (5) coordinate with the private sector to develop solutions to improve and achieve such capabilities.
(Sec. 4) Expresses the sense of Congress that in carrying out DHS responsibilities relating to the SAFECOM Program, the Assistant Secretary and the Director should work with the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) to implement the Project 25 Compliance Assessment Program.
People & committees
Rep. Reichert, David G. [R-WA-8] · R–WA
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Received in the Senate and Read twice and referred to the Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs.
On motion to suspend the rules and pass the bill Agreed to by the Yeas and Nays: (2/3 required): 414 - 2 (Roll no. 397). (text: CR H5696-5698)
House roll call 397 · Individual votesMotion to reconsider laid on the table Agreed to without objection.
Passed/agreed to in House: On motion to suspend the rules and pass the bill Agreed to by the Yeas and Nays: (2/3 required): 414 - 2 (Roll no. 397).(text: CR H5696-5698)
House roll call 397 · Individual votesConsidered as unfinished business. (consideration: CR H5742-5743)
At the conclusion of debate, the Yeas and Nays were demanded and ordered. Pursuant to the provisions of clause 8, rule XX, the Chair announced that further proceedings on the motion would be postponed.
DEBATE - The House proceeded with forty minutes of debate on H.R. 5852.
Considered under suspension of the rules. (consideration: CR H5696-5705)
Mr. Upton moved to suspend the rules and pass the bill.
Referred to the Subcommittee on Telecommunications and the Internet.
Referred to the Committee on Energy and Commerce, and in addition to the Committee on Homeland Security, for a period to be subsequently determined by the Speaker, in each case for consideration of such provisions as fall within the jurisdiction of the committee concerned.
Referred to the Committee on Energy and Commerce, and in addition to the Committee on Homeland Security, for a period to be subsequently determined by the Speaker, in each case for consideration of such provisions as fall within the jurisdiction of the committee concerned.
Referred to the Committee on Energy and Commerce, and in addition to the Committee on Homeland Security, for a period to be subsequently determined by the Speaker, in each case for consideration of such provisions as fall within the jurisdiction of the committee concerned.
Introduced in House
Introduced in House
Primary sources
Text links open the official source. We currently store references to these documents.
No related bills are listed in this snapshot. This does not establish whether the proposal has appeared in earlier Congresses.
Source last updated: Apr 7, 2025. Consult Congress.gov for the current record.
AI Conversation Starters
Choose a perspective, copy a prompt, and paste it into your preferred AI. Each prompt includes the bill version and available official source links, and asks for counterarguments as well as supporting evidence.
Analyze H.R.5852 as objectively as possible. Explain its main provisions, who would be affected, possible benefits and harms, implementation, exceptions, and uncertainties. Present the strongest arguments for and against it, and identify evidence needed to assess its public impact.
Examine H.R.5852 through a progressive lens, focusing on fairness, access, economic inequality, and effects on vulnerable communities. Explain potential benefits, costs, and unintended consequences. Consider the strongest counterarguments and distinguish stated goals from demonstrated outcomes.
Examine H.R.5852 through a conservative lens, focusing on fiscal responsibility, institutional stability, federalism, and the scope of government. Explain potential benefits, costs, and unintended consequences. Consider the strongest counterarguments and any provisions that challenge this perspective.
Examine H.R.5852 through a civil-liberties and limited-government lens. Consider individual rights, privacy, voluntary choice, accountability, and government power. Explain tradeoffs, possible safeguards, and the strongest counterarguments without assuming the proposal is beneficial or harmful.