July 17, 1998 FBI Seeks Electronic Tracking Data ______________________________________________________________ Filed at 4:39 p.m. EDT By The Associated Press WASHINGTON (AP) -- Law officers would be allowed to obtain the exact location of a cellular telephone customer for up to two days without court approval under a proposal the FBI is circulating on Capitol Hill. But a senior Justice Department official said Friday the FBI's proposed legislative language needs to be tightened in consultation with industry and privacy groups. The FBI proposed that in situations where there has been a felony, where a fugitive is being hunted or where there's ``immediate danger of death or serious bodily injury to any person,'' any federal, state or local law enforcer would be able to find out the location of a cellular phone user without first having to obtain a court order. Otherwise, law enforcers would need to obtain a court order to get location information and show the data is relevant to ``a legitimate law enforcement objective.'' But there would not have to be an ongoing investigation, which is required for current wiretaps. The Justice official said the FBI's draft language did not accomplish the administration's goal of requiring court orders for all location information, with a strictly limited and temporary exception for emergencies. This official, who requested anonymity, said perhaps prior approval by the attorney general also should be required, as it is now for emergency wiretaps. The FBI's provision is contained in a proposed amendment to a Justice Department appropriations bill awaiting action by a Senate committee. The FBI is seeking this authority as part of the implementation of a 1994 law requiring telecommunications companies -- wired and wireless -- to make digital wiretapping technology available to law enforcers. Attorney General Janet Reno met with FCC Chairman Kennard Friday on broad digital wiretapping issue. ``My consultation ... was productive and quite helpful,'' Kennard said. When the 1994 law was passed, FBI Director Louis Freeh said, ``There is no intent whatsoever to acquire anything that could properly be called `tracking' information.'' He and Reno claimed they wanted no more than existing wiretap authority, updated to apply to new technology. But Thomas E. Wheeler, president of the Cellular Telecommunications Industry Association, the cellular industry's main lobbying group, called the draft amendment ``a major expansion of existing wiretap law.'' The Federal Communications Commission has ordered cellular companies to install tracking technology by 2001. This was done so that 911 operators would be able to automatically locate a cell phone user during an emergency call -- just as they now do with 911 calls on wired phones. Under FCC rules, the technology must pinpoint any cellular phone that is turned on, whether a call is in progress or not, within 125 meters -- roughly the distance of a football field. ``If a consumer says, `Please find me. I'm dialing 911. There's an emergency. I want to be found,' That is entirely different from what the FBI is proposing, which is find anybody, anywhere, anytime,'' said Wheeler of the cellular industry group. The Center for Democracy and Technology, a privacy rights group, contends the proposal would violate privacy rights. ``The 40 million to 50 million people who carry wireless phones with them in their daily lives would have to realize that they are carrying a tracking device which any police officer could use to monitor their movements,'' said the group's James Dempsey. The senior Justice official noted that even the FBI language requires that a court order be obtained within 48 hours in emergency situations. If the court order were not obtained by then, the location data would not be admissible in court and lawmen who obtained it could be prosecuted. Officers obtain wiretap orders in secret court sessions where the target is not represented. Federal and state judges approve almost 1,200 wiretaps a year nationwide, and since 1988 only three wiretap requests have ever been turned down by a court in this country. More than 2 million private conversations a year are overheard under these orders. ------ EDITORS NOTE: Associated Press Writer Michael J. Sniffen contributed to this report. ______________________________________________________________ Copyright 1998 The New York Times Company The information contained in this AP Online news report may not be republished or redistributed without the prior written authority of The Associated Press.