News media Information 202 / 418-0500 Fax-On-Demand 202 / 418-2830 Federal Communications Commission 1919 - M Street, N.W. Washington, D. C. 20554 National Telecommunications and Information Administration Department of Commerce Washington, D.C. 20230 August 8, 1996 PUBLIC SAFETY WIRELESS ADVISORY COMMITTEE REQUESTS COMMENTS ON DRAFT REPORT The Public Safety Wireless Advisory Committee requests comments on its DRAFT Final Report, dated August 7, 1996. The full text of the DRAFT Final Report is available by Internet on the PSWAC Homepage (http:\\pswac.ntia.doc.gov). Additional paper copies of the DRAFT Final Report can be requested by contacting Deborah Behlin or Christina Gavin at 202-418-0680 (or fax 202-418-2643). The Public Safety Wireless Advisory Committee was established jointly by the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) and the National Telecommunications and Information Administration (NTIA). The Final Report of the Public Safety Wireless Advisory Committee will advise the FCC and NTIA on operational, technical, and spectrum requirements of Federal, state, and local Public Safety entities through the year 2010. The DRAFT Final Report of the Public Safety Wireless Committee will continue to be updated and will be discussed at the next meeting of the PSWAC Steering Committee to be held on Thursday, August 22, 1996, at the Federal Communications Commission, 1919 M Street NW, Room 856, Washington, DC. See, Public Notice, Report No. WT 96-14, July 15 1996. The Final Report is expected to be completed by mid-September. Comments on the DRAFT Final Report are due by 5:00 P.M. EDT on Friday, August 16, 1996. Comments must be sent to Michael Amarosa, Deputy Commissioner for Technology and Systems Development, New York City Police Department, via facsimile to 212-374-0860 or 212-374-2477. (NOTE: DO NOT SUBMIT COMMENTS TO THE FCC or NTIA.) - FCC/NTIA - Federal Communications Commission contact: Kathryn Hosford at (202) 418-0680 or Kara Palamaras, FCC News Media at (202) 418-0654. National Telecommunicatons and Information Administration contact: William Donald Speights at (202) 482-1652 or Paige Darden, NTIA Public Affairs at (202) 482-1551. You may also obtain more information from the Internet at the Public Safety Wireless Advisory Committee homepage (http://pswac.ntia.doc.gov). EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Wireless communication systems are critical to Public Safety agencies ability to protect lives and property and the welfare of Public Safety officers. At the most basic level, radio-based voice communications allow dispatchers to direct mobile units to the scene of a crime and allow firefighters to coordinate and to warn each other of impending danger at fires. Radio systems are also vital for providing logistics and command support during major emergencies and disasters such as earthquakes, riots, or plane crashes. Systems are now being designed to allow transmission of video and broadband data, enabling paramedics to send pictures of injuries to trauma centers while en route, permitting the use of remote controlled robotics to defuse explosives, and making viable the tracking of wildland fires. Thus, radio-based technologies are critical to the effective discharge of Public Safety agencies obligations, providing a lifeline connecting Public Safety officers to assistance and delivering vital information to help in their critical mission. In an era where technology can bring news, current events, and entertainment such as the Olympics to the farthest reaches of the world, many police officers, firefighters, and emergency medical service personnel working in the same city cannot communicate with each other. Congested and fragmented spectral resources, inadequate funding for technology upgrades, and a wide variety of governmental and institutional obstacles result in a critical situation which, if not addressed expeditiously, will ultimately compromise the ability of Public Safety officers to protect life and property. The nation s Public Safety agencies, however, face several important problems in their use of radio communications:  First, the radio frequencies allocated for Public Safety use have become highly congested in many, especially urban, areas. Usable spectrum for mobile operations is limited, and Public Safety agencies are not able to meet existing requirements, much less to plan for future, more advanced communications needs. Not only does the shortage of spectrum jeopardize the lives and health of Public Safety officers, it threatens their ability to fully discharge their duty to protect the lives and property of all Americans.  Second, the ability of Public Safety agencies to communicate with each other is limited in many cases. Recently, a dramatic, quadruple fatality vehicle accident occurred on one of our nation s interstate highways. A semi tractor/trailer was traveling northbound in the middle lane next to a car also traveling northbound in the inside lane. The car apparently moved out of its lane and became wedged under the tractor/trailer. Subsequently, the truck lost control, crossed the median, and struck another commercial vehicle and several cars which were traveling southbound. Due to the severity of the incident, several police agencies, fire rescue units, ambulances and helicopters responded to the scene to assist the State Highway Patrol. Coordinating the efforts of multiple responders became a major communications challenge and the ability of the various agencies to talk with each other was a critical factor in saving lives and otherwise mitigating the incredibly negative impact of this event on those involved and other drivers traveling on the interstate. As tragic as the incident was, additional lives could have been placed in jeopardy had the involved agencies not been able to effectively communicate with each other. By the same token, any improvement in communications would increase the level of service provided by emergency response agencies and go a long way towards mitigating the impact of similar events. In many tragic incidents, especially those on a larger scale and involving a wider range of agencies such as the Oklahoma City bombing, interagency communications do not always, if at all, occur except through the use of messengers and certainly not through radio communications. Interoperability is key for the success of day-to-day, joint task force, and mutual aid operations, from everyday police/fire/EMS response to in-home emergencies, to situations like multi-jurisdictional drug interdiction activities and coordinating rescue and relief operations during incidents such as the World Trade Center bombing and natural disasters. However, several barriers undermine or prevent interoperable communication systems from being effectively used. First, the discrete frequency bands allocated to Public Safety are spread over a wide range; individual radios cannot operate across all these bands. As a result, different agencies may use different bands and not be able to communicate directly. Second, some Public Safety organizations use several frequency bands and may have to equip their users with two or more radios in order to ensure interoperability. Finally, different agencies use a wide variety of technologies that are often technically incompatible; there is little standardization in repeater spacing and transmission formats, for example.  Finally, Public Safety agencies have not been able to implement advanced features to aid in their mission. A wide variety of technologies both existing and under development hold substantial promise to reduce danger to Public Safety personnel and to achieve greater efficiencies in the performance of their duties. Broadband data systems, for example, offer greater access to databases and information that can save lives and contribute to keeping criminals off the street. Video systems promise better surveillance capabilities, increased use of robotics in toxic and hazardous environments, and better monitoring and tracking of both personnel and equipment. The Final Report concludes that, unless immediate measures are taken to alleviate spectrum shortfalls and promote interoperability, Public Safety agencies will not be able to adequately discharge their obligation to protect life and property in a safe, efficient, and cost effective manner. To address these and other problems, the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) and the National Telecommunications and Information Administration (NTIA) established the Public Safety Wireless Advisory Committee (PSWAC or Advisory Committee) to evaluate the wireless communications needs of federal, state, and local Public Safety agencies through the year 2010 and recommend possible solutions. This Final Report, drawn from the five attached subcommittee reports on Operational Requirements, Interoperability, Technology, Spectrum Requirements, and Transition, embodies the findings and recommendations of the PSWAC developed over the past year. The membership of the PSWAC encompassed a broad range of Public Safety agencies (federal, state, and local), public service providers, equipment manufacturers, commercial service providers, and the public at large. Implementing some of the requirements identified in the report, including transitioning to new bands and meeting minimal interoperability requirements, will require different levels of commitment from various user groups, and close cooperation and open dialogue with regulating officials and the manufacturing community. The recommendations made in the report recognize the substantial embedded infrastructure currently being used by the Public Safety community, the budgetary constraints Public Safety agencies face, and the critical lack of additional funding available to most Public Safety entities as a matter of course. To meet the immediate and future needs of the Public Safety community, the Steering Committee makes the following observations and recommendations:  More spectrum is required.  In the short term, approximately 25 MHz of new Public Safety allocations are needed. The present shortages could be alleviated in some measure by making some of the spectrum presently used for television broadcast channels 60-69 available as soon as possible.  Over the next 15 years, as much as 70 MHz of spectrum will be required to satisfy the mobile communication needs of the Public Safety community.  An additional 2.5 MHz of spectrum should be identified for interoperability from new or existing allocations.  Improved interoperability is required. Present limitations can be eased by establishing bands of frequencies for interoperability purposes, encouraging the development and use of shared systems, and building gateways between technically incompatible systems.  More flexible licensing policies are desirable. The current approach, focused primarily on continuous narrow banding, does not provide the Public Safety community the flexibility of selecting or obtaining the most efficient technology to meet user-defined needs. Policies should encourage the use of the most spectrally efficient approaches while remaining technology neutral.  More sharing and joint use should be encouraged. Some states and regions are experiencing considerable success in pooling spectral and other resources. In many instances, perceived losses in terms of independence of operation are more than offset by improvements in function and efficiency. Policies designed to streamline cooperative use of federal and non-federal spectrum should be adopted.  Greater use of commercial services and private contracts should be facilitated. Significant amounts of spectrum have been and are being licensed to commercial firms for mobile communications use. The increasing number of commercial radio service providers and the concomitant increasing competition among them offers Public Safety agencies an opportunity to write contracts that meet their expanding and particularized needs.  A continuing consultative process should be established to permit the Public Safety community and the FCC and NTIA to adjust to new requirements and new opportunities. The rapid changes in technology, among other things, make imperative, timely adjustments in the policies and requirements of the government agencies managing spectrum. An arrangement that facilitates continuing consultation between and among institutions responsible for, and interested in, Public Safety will help assure that opportunities for improvement are not missed.  Funding limitations remain a major obstacle to adoption of needed improvements in Public Safety communications even if additional spectrum can be secured. While no specific recommendations for overcoming the problem have emerged from this process, it is a problem that must be addressed if the substantial benefits afforded by technology are to be adequately exploited. The Steering Committee believes that none of these proposed solutions alone will solve the problems now confronting the Public Safety community. Rather, these solutions will need to be used together to achieve solutions that are tailored to the unique needs of each community and agency. The community must continue to work cooperatively to present its views and make its needs known. I. INTRODUCTION AND BACKGROUND No responsibility is more fundamental and reflective of the nation s values than that of its Public Safety agencies. The citizen s legitimate expectation is that when their life or property are endangered, their government will respond. Vast federal, state, and local resources are committed to ensure this obligation is met. The effectiveness of police officers, fire fighters, emergency medical services (EMS) personnel, and other Public Safety officers is inextricably tied to communications capability. Today s communications environment, however, impedes meeting this responsibility. Rescuing victims of the World Trade Center bombing, who were caught between floors, was obstructed when police officers could not communicate with fire fighters on the very next floor. Similarly, the inability to communicate among the agencies who had rushed to the Oklahoma City bombing site required resorting to runners to relay messages. The lack of sufficient quality radio spectrum suitable for Public Safety use deters technological innovation, diminishes the responsiveness and effectiveness of Public Safety, and ultimately compromises the safety of the responding officers and of the very indivi communications to the Public Safety community cannot be overestimated. In a large-scale disaster such as an earthquake or flood hundreds of agencies and thousands of individuals come together to provide emergency medical assistance, fire suppression, rescue operations, infrastructure repair, crowd control and security, food and shelter, and to begin the process of rebuilding. At a time when other means of communication are likely to be inoperable, Public Safety radio communication systems provide the lifeline that connects each responder to his or her agency and to each other. While high profile incidents receive the most attention, even the less dramatic and routine, day-to-day situations require effective radio communications. A trauma victim s ability to survive depends upon receiving prompt medical attention usually within minutes. Emergency medical providers desire the ability to transmit images and other vital statistics about the injured from the paramedic unit back to trauma centers or hospitals to aid in diagnosis and pre-arrival treatment. Fire officials desire the ability to obtain building blueprints/designs and other vital information while en route, information needed by firefighters for the prompt and safe removal of residents. Undercover officers must be able to coordinate an ongoing operation or, more rudimentary, call for immediate assistance. A host of other government users, public service providers, and utilities operate radio systems to maintain the infrastructure and services on which the public depends. Because of the special nature of their missions, Public Safety agencies often have unique communication needs. Many users, especially in the Federal government, require secure or encrypted communications to protect their operations. Coverage is also important; Public Safety agencies must be able to communicate throughout their jurisdictions no matter how remote or congested. Systems must provide immediate and reliable communications when lives are at stake and time is critical. Finally, Public Safety agencies must be able to communicate with each other. Whether as part of day- to-day operations or when disasters strike, cooperation is critical to ensuring that help is rapidly and effectively rendered. Interoperable communications systems are an absolute requirement. Today, however, the radio systems used by the Public Safety community are laboring under increasing burdens. Equipment is old and funding for new equipment is often scarce. The radios used by different local agencies or different jurisdictions often cannot communicate with each other. The radio frequencies that Public Safety users rely on are heavily congested in many areas. As a result, assistance can be delayed and response efforts can be inefficient, which ultimately jeopardizes lives, both those of the officers and of the public at large. In addition to these current problems, as technology advances, new services, including advanced data and image/video applications, are becoming available that could enhance the Public Safety community s ability to fulfill its mission. The limited radio frequency spectrum allocated to Public Safety users, however, will make such new services impossible to implement. To address these problems, the Federal Communications Commission (FCC or Commission) and the National Telecommunications and Information Administration (NTIA) of the Department of Commerce established the Public Safety Wireless Advisory Committee (PSWAC or Advisory Committee). The Public Safety Wireless Advisory Committee (PSWAC) 1. History The establishment of the PSWAC followed a long history of efforts by Congress, the FCC, the NTIA, and Public Safety organizations to address the spectrum requirements of Public Safety agencies. In 1983, Congress included as part of the FCC Authorization Bill a requirement that the Commission study Public Safety spectrum needs. The Commission s Private Radio Bureau subsequently completed a Future Public Safety Telecommunications Requirements report which included projections of the amount of additional Public Safety spectrum that would be required in 21 metropolitan areas by the year 2000. The projections ranged from 12.5 MHz in Pittsburgh to 44.6 MHz in Los Angeles/San Diego. The FCC sought public comment on the report in PR Docket No. 84-232, but never took any further action in that docket. In a separate proceeding, the Commission did allocate 6 MHz for Public Safety in the 800 MHz band. There have been no further nationwide Public Safety allocations since that time. In 1993, as part of the legislation authorizing the use of spectrum auctions, Congress required the FCC to complete a study by February 9, 1995 of the current and future spectrum needs of State and local government Public Safety agencies through the year 2010, and develop a specific plan to ensure that adequate frequencies are made available to Public Safety licensees. On February 9, 1995, the FCC submitted to Congress a Report and Plan, Meeting State and Local Government Public Safety Agency Spectrum Needs Through the Year 2010. The Report and Plan did not contain specific conclusions or recommendations regarding Public Safety spectrum, but merely indicated that further study was necessary. On March 22, 1995, during a hearing on FCC and NTIA appropriations, House Appropriations Subcommittee Chairman Harold Rogers expressed concern as to whether the Report and Plan was a sufficient response to Congressional concerns as expressed in the Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act. He asked the FCC and the NTIA to develop a plan addressing the issue in much greater detail, which led to a letter from NTIA Administrator Larry Irving proposing the establishment of a joint advisory committee on Public Safety spectrum issues. As a direct result of that letter, the FCC and NTIA established the PSWAC on June 25, 1995, to provide advice on the specific wireless communications requirements of Public Safety agencies through the year 2010 and make recommendations for meeting those needs. 2. Charter The PSWAC is chartered in accordance with the requirements of the Federal Advisory Committee Act. Its membership consists of senior members of Public Safety agencies, representatives of Public Safety organizations, and members of the private sector. The Advisory Committee was chartered to:  Advise the FCC and NTIA of specific operational wireless needs of the community including improvement of basic voice, data and E9-1-1 services, and the implementation of new wide-area, broadband telecommunications technologies for transmission of mugshots, fingerprints, video, and other high-speed data.  Advise the NTIA and FCC on options to provide for greater interoperability among federal, state, and local Public Safety entities.  Advise the FCC and NTIA on options to accommodate growth of basic and emerging services, including bandwidth vs. functional requirement trade-offs, technical options, and other options.  Advise the NTIA and FCC on the total spectrum requirements for the operational needs referred to above, including frequency band options, shared/joint spectrum use options, and other options. 3. Structure of the Committee The PSWAC consists of a Steering Committee and five (5) functional subcommittees. The Steering Committee exercised overall direction of the work of the subcommittees and was responsible for reviewing their output. The subcommittees were created to address specific areas of concern: Operational Requirements Subcommittee (ORSC) The Operational Requirements Subcommittee was chaired by Mr. Paul H. Wieck, Commissioner, Iowa State Police. This subcommittee was charged with identifying the communication needs of the Public Safety community to the year 2010. It focused on requirements that are currently unmet or suffer from reliability, quality, or coverage deficiencies. The subcommittee also examined the new services being made available by advances in both wide- and narrowband technology. Technology Subcommittee (TESC) The Technology Subcommittee was chaired by Mr. Alfred Mello, Chairman of the Public Safety Communications Council. This subcommittee reviewed the technologies now used by Public Safety and identified the emerging technologies that may serve Public Safety agencies needs in the future. A special focus was on those technologies that offer advances in spectral efficiency or new services to meet the community s growing needs. Interoperability Subcommittee (ISC) The Interoperability Subcommittee was chaired by Mr. James E. Downes of the U.S. Department of Treasury. This subcommittee defined Public Safety and interoperability for purposes of the Final Report and examined the specific problems of interoperability between Public Safety agencies. The group detailed the needs for interoperability among and between Public Safety agencies and the varying circumstances in which it must be available. Spectrum Requirements Subcommittee (SRSC) The Spectrum Requirements Subcommittee was chaired by Mr. Richard N. Allen of the Federal Bureau of Investigation. Based on the work of the above subcommittees, this subcommittee was charged with determining the specific spectrum requirements that will need to be met in order for Public Safety agencies to perform their missions in the most effective manner. It evaluated current spectrum allocations and usage, and made recommendations on future allocations and use. Transition Subcommittee (TRSC) The Transition Subcommittee was chaired by Mr. James R. Rand, Executive Director of the Association of Public Safety Communications Officials International, Inc. This subcommittee was charged with examining the mechanisms necessary to improve Public Safety wireless communications over the next 15 years. The subcommittee addressed spectrum management practices, funding alternatives, and regulatory changes necessary to effect the goals of the Advisory Committee. The meetings of the Steering Committee and the subcommittees were open to the public. Steering Committee and subcommittee meetings were held in various locations around the country to encourage maximum public participation. Over 480 individuals, representing all areas of the manufacturing, service, the Public Safety user communities, and the general public participated in the work of the subcommittees. The drafting of the Final Report was supervised by Michael Amarosa, Deputy Commissioner for Technology and Systems Development, Police Department of the City of New York; Raymond A. Barnett, United States Secret Service, Department of the Treasury; and Steven Proctor, Technical Manager for Communications of the State of Utah and past president of the Association of Public-Safety Communications Officials. The PSWAC Final Report This Final Report of PSWAC to the FCC and NTIA represents the views of the PSWAC Steering Committee. The Final Report is predicated upon the work of five (5) subcommittees, but departs from the various subcommittee reports in some respects. It examines the problems confronting the Public Safety community now and identifies the wireless communication needs of the community to the year 2010. The Final Report also discusses the technologies available, now and in the future, to meet those needs, the spectrum and interoperability requirements of the community, and the transition mechanisms that will be required to bring Public Safety communications up to expected levels of performance, efficiency, and effectiveness. The recommendations embodied in this report are advanced with varying degrees of certitude. Some, especially those susceptible to near term implementation, are quite specific. Some are more general. Overall, they represent the Steering Committee s collective judgement with respect to changes necessary to maintain and improve Public Safety communications functions in the United States. The work of each subcommittee is summarized later in this report, and the full reports from each are included as appendices. Federal Regulation of Public Safety Radio Services . Congressional Mandates to Regulate Public Safety Spectrum By statute, the NTIA manages the Federal government s use of the spectrum, while the FCC manages all non-federal spectrum usage. The two agencies are charged with jointly developing the National Table of Frequency Allocations and a comprehensive long-range plan for improved management of all radio spectrum resources. NTIA s policies and procedures are described in the Manual of Regulations and Procedures for Federal Radio Frequency Management (NTIA Manual), with similar guidance for the FCC contained in Title 47 of the Code of Federal Regulations. NTIA policy and technical analysis responsibilities include the development of long range spectrum planning and policy, the review of proposed federal radio communication systems to make sure that sufficient spectrum is available for their compatible operation, the analysis and resolution of interference problems involving federal radiocommunication systems, and the analysis of spectrum use in selected bands. These responsibilities hold both internationally, through a leadership role in the preparations for conferences/meetings of the International Telecommunication Union (ITU), and domestically, where NTIA chairs, and provides administrative and analytic support to the Interdepartment Radio Advisory Committee (IRAC). The IRAC, established in 1922, comprises representatives of the major spectrum-using federal agencies as well as a representative from the FCC to provide liaison with non-federal users of the spectrum. The IRAC provides the primary advice to NTIA regarding issues of concern to the Federal government spectrum-using community. Congress has directed both the FCC and NTIA to effectuate reforms in the mobile services spectrum each manages. Section 332(a) of the Communications Act requires the FCC to reduce regulatory burdens on spectrum users, improve efficient spectrum use and overall efficiency, increase interservice sharing opportunities between mobile providers and other services, encourage competition, and ensure the safety of life and property. The Telecommunications Authorization Act of 1992 imposed similar obligations on the NTIA to ensure efficient use of Federal government spectrum. The recommendations contained in this report parallel these mandates. The Steering Committee believes that the FCC and NTIA should move away from the old regulatory structure that emphasizes service classifications and particular use. It has done so in other areas. Except where a particular objective should be pursued, such as interoperability, Public Safety agencies should be committed substantial discretion to determine the most efficient and effective means to transmit information. The Steering Committee seeks to foster an environment where innovation and competition will respond directly to Public Safety s needs, instead of evolving from the regulatory process. Moreover, the Steering Committee believes that in this environment Public Safety agencies will more likely undertake efficiency efforts themselves. 2. Current Public Safety Service Categories The Public Safety Radio Services (PSRS) of the FCC form the backbone of state and local Public Safety communications systems, and include the following specific services: Police Radio Service (PRS) The PRS is used for mobile communications to handle police operations (e.g., dispatching units, coordinating tactical operations, and administrative matters). Any territory, possession, state, county, city, town, and similar governmental entity is eligible in the PRS. Fire Radio Service (FRS) The FRS can be used for emergency dispatch services and administrative functions. Governmental entities and persons or organizations charged with specific fire protection activities are eligible in the FRS to operate radio stations for transmission of communications essential to these responsibilities. Where a fire department has responsibility for providing rescue squad and ambulance service, FRS frequencies may be used for the dispatch of ambulances, the communication of medical information to personnel at the site of an emergency, and the transmission of information from the emergency site or the ambulance to hospital emergency personnel. Highway Maintenance Radio Service (HMRS) Communications related to highway activities, such as directing highway crews and vehicles to meet changing priorities due to road and weather emergencies, may be transmitted on HMRS frequencies. These frequencies are used for general road maintenance and paving operations, as well as in critical situations for communications related to ice and snow removal, accidents, removal of disabled vehicles and patrols of tunnels, bridges and turnpikes. Forestry- Conservation Radio Service (FCRS) Spectrum in the FCRS is used for law enforcement (e.g., park police and rangers enforcing fish, game, and environmental laws), fire prevention control, and emergency medical services. A non-federal governmental agency and any entity charged with specific forestry- conservation activities are eligible in the FCRS. Local Government Radio Service (LGRS) The LGRS addresses the day-to-day communications needs of territories, possessions, states, cities, counties, towns and similar governmental entities. These frequencies are also used to report the condition of public facilities such as reservoir levels, as well as for a variety of Public Safety and welfare uses. All Public Safety entities, including law enforcement, corrections, fire protection, lifeguard and rescue service users, also are permitted to use the LGRS spectrum. Emergency Medical Radio Service (EMRS) The EMRS was established to improve the communications capabilities of entities engaged in providing life support services, allowing transmissions between rescuers at the scene of an accident or disaster and physicians at a hospital, as well as the dispatch of emergency medical providers transporting injured persons to hospitals and trauma centers. Eligibility is limited to entities engaged in the provision of basic or advanced life-support services on an ongoing basis. Special Emergency Radio Service (SERS) The SERS frequencies may be used by medical services, rescue organizations, physically handicapped persons, veterinarians, disaster relief personnel, school bus operators, beach patrols, persons or organizations in isolated areas where public communication facilities are not available, communications standby facility operators, and personnel providing emergency repair of public communications facilities. Entities not meeting these eligibility criteria may be licensed in this service solely to provide service to SERS eligibles on one-way paging-only frequencies below 800 MHz. Federal government Public Safety wireless communication uses are similar to that of state and local governments, except with respect to communications supporting national security operations and the geographic area of coverage. Federal Public Safety responsibilities encompass law enforcement, transportation, natural resources, emergency and disaster, and medical and administrative duties. In nearly all cases, the equipment is the same as that used by state and local Public Safety agencies. The broad categories of federal Public Safety wireless communications are generally mirrored by the structure delineated by the FCC with regard to state and local Public Safety agencies. Public Safety Use of Radio Technology Today Public Safety operations have evolved over the years to be critically dependent on the use of the FM radio system as the only reliable and effective means of communication. The radio system is designed for general broadcast purposes, that is one Public Safety officer will talk and many can hear the transmission simultaneously. This method of operation is vitally important in fast moving situations such as a surveillance or hot pursuit, or the dispatch of fire rescue services, as many can hear the single broadcast and respond accordingly. This description of the radio system is extremely simplified, however, the technical components supporting this system are very sophisticated and without radio spectrum, it can t exist. Typical Public Safety communications from mobile sources are of relatively short duration usually less than a minute. As a result, channels often are shared by several independent users with specific audio sub-audible tones used to permit any combination of mobile radios to receive a radio transmission. In conventional voice and data systems, a single channel or a pair of channels is employed, which may require an end user to wait for a break to seize the channel. In trunked systems, multiple channel pairs are integrated into a single system. When a user wants to transmit a message, the trunked system will automatically select a currently unused channel pair and assign it to the user, decreasing the probability of having to wait for a free channel for a given channel loading. Public Safety agencies also use fixed (non-mobile) services to provide communications between designated endpoints (point to point), e.g., police headquarters to a district police station. Typical links operating in the microwave bands involve communications between one fixed transmitter and one fixed receiver, and links are generally paired to provide a two-way path. Point-to-multipoint services are also occasionally used, which involve multiple transmitters or receivers at fixed locations. Microwave spectrum is generally shared with other private land mobile users, as well as broadcast service users, common carrier users, and aviation and marine service users. The Unique Operational Requirements of Public Safety Users Public Safety users have operational requirements that differ substantially from other classes of wireless users. Unlike other users, the obligations of Public Safety users to meet their mission critical obligations requires, among other things, (1) dedicated capacity and/or priority access available at all times (and in sufficient amounts) to handle unexpected emergencies, (2) highly reliable (redundant) networks which are engineered and maintained to withstand natural disasters and other emergencies; (3) ubiquitous coverage within a given geographic area; (4) and unique terminal equipment (mobile or portable units) designed for quick response in emergency situations. These unique operational requirements complicate the wholesale substitution of commercial services for the dedicated networks currently owned and operated by Public Safety entities. The Public Safety community, while composed of users with varying and distinct Public Safety duties, have some common, overarching needs. All individual Public Safety users need the ability to communicate with agency control centers. They all need to be able to communicate directly with each other as well, in many cases. These common operational requirements include dispatch communications, transmission of operational and tactical instructions, and communication of administrative information. Agencies also have specialized requirements based on their specific missions and operating environments. Correctional facilities, for example, are compact geographical areas, but their concrete and steel structures pose unique radio communications and administrative problems. Forestry organizations need to communicate over long distances where foliage is a problem for higher frequency systems. Some agencies need reliable coverage inside buildings in urban areas, while others need effective long range communications that can cover hundreds of miles. For example, a state highway patrol requires wide-area coverage of highways whereas a metropolitan police department may need high reliability in-building coverage, system propagation characteristics that are often contradictory. The operational needs of Federal government Public Safety agencies are quite similar to state and local agencies in terms of voice, data, and video communications and the functions they serve, law enforcement, transportation, natural resources, emergency and disaster services, etc. Federal government Public Safety needs, however, do differ in their wider, national or even international, scope, and their greater need for multiple levels of secure communications to protect national security interests. Because of the wider area served, the Federal government makes greater use of satellite communications than do state and local governments; transportable satellite dishes are especially useful in disaster response. The wide geographic scope of federal responsibilities also require that frequencies be available for voice, data, and video applications nationwide, so that when an emergency situation arises, the necessary spectrum resources are available when federal assistance is deployed. Current Public Safety Spectrum Allocations Public Safety spectrum use has evolved as technology and needs changed over time. Initially, almost all two-way communications were confined to the frequency range 30-50 MHz. As technology advanced, however, transmission at higher frequencies became possible, offering a temporary solution for congestion and crowding. Now, Public Safety users operate in a wide variety of bands, including 150 MHz, 450 MHz, and 800 MHz spectrum. While these additional allocations added needed capacity to existing systems, they also resulted in the fragmentation that characterizes the Public Safety spectrum today. Many agencies use two or more frequency bands for a single system, resulting in vehicles having to be equipped with multiple radios. As shown in the following table, state and local Public Safety agencies have a total of 941 channels in six frequency bands, and some additional spectrum in major metropolitan areas: EXISTING STATE AND LOCAL PUBLIC SAFETY SPECTRUM ALLOCATIONS Band (MHz) Channels MHz (est.) Comments 25-50 315 6.3 VHF Low Band. Generally used for conventional, non-trunked dispatch voice communications. The band is in use by state highway patrols for wide-area coverage. Future use of the band is questionable as equipment availability is limited. 150-174 242 3.6 VHF High Band. Generally used for conventional, non-trunked dispatch voice communications. 220-222 10 0.1 220 MHz SMR Band. This allocation is fairly recent, and requires very narrow (5 kHz) channelization. New equipment is limited for this band. 450-470 74 3.7 UHF Low Band. Generally used for conventional, non-trunked dispatch voice communications. 470-512 * * UHF TV Sharing. Various bandwidth have been made available in 11 metropolitan areas for private land mobile radio use, including Public Safety use. 806-821 851-866 70 3.5 800 MHz Band. Used for both conventional and trunked systems. 821-824 866-869 230 6 800 MHz Band. Used for both conventional and trunked systems 941 23.2 TOTAL Various frequencies from 2 to 25 MHz (the HF band) are also available for disaster communications but, due to propagation factors, are not generally used for routine day to day needs. For fixed systems, Public Safety agencies are eligible for licensing in the Private Operational-Fixed Microwave Service and many Public Safety agencies have point-to-point communications systems near 2 GHz, 6 GHz and other bands. Federal government non-military and military non-tactical land mobile spectrum requirements are accommodated primarily in five radio frequency ranges: 30-50 MHz, 138-150.8 MHz, 162.0125-174 MHz, 220-222 MHz and the 406.1-420 MHz bands. However, in each of these ranges, portions are allocated either for exclusive Federal government/non-Federal government use or on a shared basis between Federal government and non-Federal government. These allocations total 6.36 MHz in the 30- 50 MHz band, 6.75 MHz in the 138-150.8 MHz band for a myriad of military applications including non-tactical land mobile as well as fixed and other mobile systems, 11.78 MHz in the 162-174 MHz band, 13.9 MHz in the 406.1 to 420 MHz band, and 10 channels in the 220-222 MHz band. It is extremely important to note that all Federal government mobile bands are allocated on a co-primary basis with the fixed service, and these bands are used extensively for fixed systems in addition to mobile systems, including fixed point-to-point, fixed point-to-multipoint, aeronautical mobile, and maritime mobile systems. In the following table, Federal government Public Safety spectrum allocations are outlined: EXISTING FEDERAL PUBLIC SAFETY SPECTRUM ALLOCATIONS Band (MHZ) Total Govt Allocation (MHz) Public Safety Allocation (portion) (MHz) Comments 30-50 6.36 3.8 VHF Low Band. Used extensively by the Military and other Fed Agencies for fixed, land/maritime/aeronautical mobile services. 138-150.8 6.75 4.0 VHF Military Band. Used extensively for Military non-tactical mobile systems. Heavy use by fixed, aero mobile and maritime mobile. 162-174 11.78 8.25 VHF High Band. Primary Public Safety band. Used for land mobile systems. Includes fixed and other uses. 220-222 0.1 0.1 220 SMR Band. Very narrowband. May be used for some ITS requirements. 406.1-420 13.9 8.3 UHF Low Band. Federal growth band. Used for wide variety of land, maritime, aero mobile. Heavily used for fixed service. Most Fed govt trunked systems. 38.89 24.45 TOTAL To provide Public Safety with enhanced communications higher quality transmission, access to emerging technologies, and availability of a broader range of services several general approaches are identified. The first is allocation of additional spectrum for Public Safety. This would entail reallocating spectrum from other uses and/or adding Public Safety uses to already allocated bands through sharing. The second approach focuses on more efficient use of present spectrum. This approach relies on advancing technology to bring increases in capacity and quality as well as enhancing interoperability. Greater sharing both within the Public Safety community and with other users is important. The third approach encourages Public Safety agencies to make greater use of communications capacity available in the commercial sector. No one of these elements will meet Public Safety communications needs by itself, and to choose only one course embodies substantial risk. Rather, a combination of these methods is likely to produce the most improvement. Allowing individual agencies to choose the best combination of elements will ensure that the most effective and efficient system is developed. This report also adopts several baseline standards designed to meet both short- and longer-term interoperability needs. It is clear that additional contributions from the user community are necessary for the development of satisfactory, evolving standards to govern the opportunities afforded by the emerging digital environment. In this regard, the report recommends that the FCC and NTIA sponsor an ongoing consultative effort to address these important needs. Implementing some of the requirements identified in the report, including transitioning to new bands and meeting minimal interoperability requirements, will require different levels of commitment from various user groups, along with close cooperation and open dialogue between regulating officials and the manufacturing community. The recommendations made in the Final Report with respect to transition mechanisms recognize and account for the substantial embedded infrastructure currently being used by the Public Safety community, the unique budgetary constraints imposed generally upon the Public Safety community, and the critical lack of additional funding available to most Public Safety agencies as a matter of course. II. KEY FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS The establishment the Public Safety Wireless Advisory Committee provided an unprecedented opportunity for the Public Safety community to recommend changes on a national basis to improve the methods of allocation and administration of radio spectrum for Public Safety support. In consideration of the above, the key findings of this effort are: Key Findings  Voice services, including dispatch (i.e., central control to mobile units), one-to- many communications, and monitoring, remain and are likely to remain the central and most critical communications modes for Public Safety users.  Public Safety radio systems must be highly reliable to withstand natural disasters, possess high capacity to ensure sufficient communications paths at peak usage in the event of major disasters, and provide high Delivered Audio Quality (DAQ), a factor that subsumes time delay, coverage, and other qualitative criteria.  Different Public Safety agencies also have varied and unique mission-specific requirements (e.g., encryption for drug interdiction activities), operating environments (e.g., foliage penetration needs of forestry service versus building penetration for correctional officers), and geographic coverage needs (wide area for state highway patrol systems, national and international for some federal and national security agencies).  Interoperability between Public Safety users in the past has been hampered by an interdependent set of factors that includes widely dispersed and fragmented spectrum allocations that cannot be covered by multiband radios, nonstandard frequency spacings and system access methods, and the lack of clear, nationwide channels allocated solely for interoperability.  Interoperability among and between different classes of users and different jurisdictions is critical to the effective discharge of Public Safety duties. PSWAC has identified separately needs for day-to-day (e.g., communications between concurrent jurisdictions such as a county sheriff and state highway patrol), mutual aid (e.g, riots and wildland fires where little pre-planning can occur), and task force (e.g., a federal, state, and county drug interdiction operation) requirements to allow Public Safety agencies to intercommunicate effectively.  The currently allocated Public Safety spectrum is insufficient to meet current voice and data needs, will not permit deployment of needed advanced data and video systems, does not provide adequate interoperability channels, and will not meet future needs under projected population growth and demographic changes.  Reallocating all Public Safety users to a single new band is not feasible due to the need to maintain different propagation characteristics for different Public Safety missions, the cost of replacing the embedded base of Public Safety radio equipment, and the lack of any single spectrum block of sufficient size to accommodate all Public Safety users.  Increased federal/non-federal sharing and improved spectrum management are critical to ensuring sufficient future efficiency and spectrum availability for Public Safety, but these measures are insufficient to fully address Public Safety users capacity needs in the near future.  The availability of efficient and effective radio technologies is necessary for Public Safety agencies to protect the lives and property of the country s citizens in a safe and economical manner.  New technologies generally produce two important, but counterbalancing effects for the Public Safety community. First, improvements in technology such as digital transmission and advanced modulation techniques permit users to increase the amount of traffic that can be transmitted over any given amount of spectrum. This phenomenon, considered alone, would minimize the requirements for new spectrum. However, the second corresponding effect of technology advances is the creation of a new range of functions and features. These additional capabilities such as high speed data and video transmission require additional spectrum to fully exploit.  Data communication needs are becoming as varied as voice needs, and are expected to grow rapidly in the next few years. New services and technologies (e.g., data systems enabling firefighters to obtain remote access to building plans and video systems for robotics-controlled bomb disposal) that are critical for Public Safety users to continue to fulfill their obligation to preserve life and property are now becoming available.  Wireless video needs are expected to expand in Public Safety applications.  Public Service providers require interoperable radio communications with Public Safety agencies.  The migration to new technologies will be driven by the life cycle of existing equipment, the need for additional communications capacity, and advanced services and features required by Public Safety agencies.  Flexible mandates are needed in order to encourage the rapid deployment of new technologies.  The current method of licensing coordination between federal and non-federal users is inefficient and should be reviewed.  Funding for acquisition of new spectrum-efficient technologies and/or relocation to different frequency bands is likely to be a major impediment to improving Public Safety wireless systems.  Digital technology will be the key technology for the future.  Commercial wireless systems, such as cellular, Personal Communications Services (PCS), paging, data, and network applications, are evolving rapidly and may offer tangible and reasonable alternatives to the demand for additional spectrum to meet present and future Public Safety requirements. Key Recommendations The Steering Committee has extensively reviewed the subcommittee reports and has formulated, in conjunction with our Charter, the following recommendations:  The Steering Committee agrees with the findings that voice is the principal need of the Public Safety community and also agrees with the conclusion that there will be a significant increase in the use of data, imagery, and video. The Steering Committee concluded that, in the short term, voice and data operations require approximately 25 MHz of new Public Safety allocations. By the year 2010, as much as an additional 70 MHz may be needed for these applications, plus image and video requirements. The Steering Committee also supports the recommendations regarding the need for additional spectrum for infrastructure development for Public Safety systems. The Steering Committee supports 2.5 MHz of spectrum for interoperability in the VHF and UHF bands. It also recommends a management structure in order to oversee the operation of the interoperability spectrum.  The Steering Committee supports block allocations of spectrum for Public Safety use. The Steering Committee believes the current method of allocation, focused primarily on narrow banding, does not provide the Public Safety community the flexibility of selecting or obtaining the most spectrally efficient technology to meet user defined requirements. The Steering Committee recommends that Public Safety spectrum management emulate the management of commercial spectrum which is based on a more open process.  The Steering Committee recommends the FCC pursue the development of a Public Safety management structure based on block allocations.  The Steering Committee agrees that the FCC licensing process should be streamlined through the utilization of electronic filing.  The Steering Committee agrees with a flexible regulatory environment which encourages the development of shared system infrastructure supporting Public Safety communications.  The Steering Committee supports coordinated planning at the federal, state and local levels of government in order to facilitate interoperability both on newly allocated channels and in the shorter term. The development, provision and utilization of interfaces/gateways between and among remaining independent Public Safety and public service infrastructures and between Public Safety and commercial infrastructures should be encouraged.  The Steering Committee recognizes that any transition to new technology or spectrum will impose costs on the Public Safety community. The Steering Committee recommends investigating the establishment alternative funding sources such as: appropriations through spectrum auction revenues, non-Public Safety spectrum user fees, amendments to asset forfeiture law, matching funds, and block grants to supplement traditional funding sources for Public Safety relocations and system upgrades.  The Steering Committee recognizes that flexible mandates need to be established to promote orderly transition to new spectrum. However, the committee recognizes that these must be incentive-oriented based on the availability of funding.  The Steering Committee recognizes the Federal government for raising the issue of interoperability through the National Performance Review process and for recommending the development of a Public Safety Wireless Network for use by federal, state and local agencies.  Throughout the Advisory Committee process, the manufacturing community has made significant contributions towards achieving the goals of the PSWAC. During Advisory Committee deliberations, however, the Steering Committee became aware of material disagreements within the manufacturing community over approaches and standards for interconnection and interoperability. Specific resolution of these disagreements is beyond the scope of the PSWAC charter, however, the Steering Committee adopts the following general recommendations of the Interoperability Subcommittee:  A connection between systems using different technologies or operating in a different part of the radio spectrum is one method of obtaining interoperability.  A minimum baseline standard is required for Public Safety radio equipment.  The Steering Committee agrees that these connections and standards should be developed by a fair and open process, and encourages industry to cooperate in order to provide the tools and technology needed by the Public Safety community.  Broad based efforts that evaluate cost effective, spectrally efficient radio systems, as well as those addressing wireless communications issues in general, such as projects on the state and regional level seeking to coordinate, consolidate, or study operations, and on the federal level by the Federal Law Enforcement Wireless Users Group, are critical to articulating the needs of Public Safety as well determining the most efficient and effective means to meet these requirements.  The Steering Committee is encouraged by the trend of deployment and utilization of shared/consolidated systems.  As the role of PSWAC subsides, the Steering Committee recommends a follow-up effort be continued to give advice and counsel to the FCC and NTIA with regards to issues surrounding Public Safety wireless communications.  The Steering Committee recognizes the changing role of commercial services in supporting Public Safety communications. It is incumbent upon Public Safety agencies to establish needs and priorities based on their requirements, and utilize those commercial services which fill that need. Commercial service providers need to recognize the criticality and priority placed on Public Safety communications and provide a market basket of products based on those requirements.  Given the technical constraints on Public Safety users and existing spectrum usage, the Steering Committee recommends the following priority actions to assure sufficient Public Safety spectrum availability in 2010:  Public Safety users should be granted access to unused TV channels in the 746-806 MHz band (UHF TV Channels 60-69);  Public Safety users should be granted immediate spectrum relief by permitting increased sharing on unused TV channels nationwide below 512 MHz;  The FCC should consider the reallocation of channels which may become available from private radio services as a result of the refarming mandates;  The 380-399.9 MHz band should be reallocated to Public Safety use from the Department of Defense. The Steering Committee recognizes the Department of Defense s (DoD) objection to reallocation of this spectrum to Public Safety, even on a shared basis. DoD conveys that despite reallocation of portions of this spectrum in Europe from NATO use to Public Safety, operational and national security reasons preclude such use domestically. Detailed discussions were limited because of the classified nature of this information. The Steering Committee recommends that individuals within the Executive Branch and the FCC with appropriate security clearances undertake discussions with representatives of DoD to pursue these recommendations further;  To the extent possible and consistent with National Security requirements and Department of Defense needs, the 138-144 MHz and 380-399.9 MHz bands should be shared;  Public Safety users should be allowed to share the 1710-1755 MHz band with federal users and that band should be reallocated on a permanent basis to Public Safety users upon termination of federal use on January 1, 2004;  The 4635-4685 MHz band should be allocated for Public Safety systems; and,  The proposed allocation at 5850-5925 MHz for intelligent transportation systems should be finalized.  As noted, the Steering Committee believes that committing broader discretion to users is essential to affording incentives for advanced technologies. It should fall to the user to determine what information to send, what technology to use, the quality of the transmission demanded, and the speed required. Present proceedings or initiatives at the FCC should recognize this premise. In context of those proceedings that do focus on a narrowband perspective, Public Safety agencies should be afforded opportunity to obtain exclusive areas or Protected Service Areas affording protection from interference and incentive where advanced technologies can be more readily pursued. The FCC should also consider dividing private radio services into three categories, ranked according to their relative critical character to the protection of life and property.  PSWAC supports existing efforts as established in FCC Docket 94-102 for upgrading 9-1-1 systems and services. We also support future rulemakings addressing compatibility of Private Branch Exchanges (PBX s) with E9-1-1 systems. Public Safety Use of Commercial Wireless Systems The subcommittee reports reflect several perspectives with regard to the use of commercial wireless systems by Public Safety agencies. Commercial systems offer a valuable opportunity to meet some present and expanding needs. Yet, Public Safety has historically resisted use of commercial services, particularly for mission critical requirements. The Steering Committee believes that the availability of commercial systems as a reasonable alternative depends on satisfying several essential requirements. These are: 1) high reliability coverage throughout the area designated by the agency; 2) affordable cost; 3) priority access during peak periods and crisis circumstances; 4) secure transmission, including, in particular cases, encryption; 5) sufficient reserve capacity; 6) reliability comparable to dedicated systems; and 6) mobile and portable units characterized by the durability and ergonomic factors required by field personnel. The Steering Committee believes that clear standards, such as those enumerated above, will allow Public Safety agencies and commercial service providers to work together to determine if alternatives exist to develop features and capabilities needed by Public Safety agencies in both mission critical and non-mission critical areas. With technology and innovation advancing rapidly, and markets becoming more competitive and focused, historic experience will not necessarily accurately reflect the potential of commercial services to meet Public Safety s needs. The need to exploit all opportunities for efficient, effective services imposes an obligation to weigh carefully areas that have not traditionally satisfied Public Safety s requirements. The potential adoption of commercial service by Public Safety agencies is also tempered by a number of other factors. The most important of these factors is the influence of history. Public Safety agencies operated land mobile radio systems long before there was a commercial wireless industry. Consequently, they have a vast investment in existing plant. Technology and systems have been developed to meet specific Public Safety needs. The close match of the embedded systems to Public Safety needs makes it difficult for commercial systems to become effective competitors. The minimum baseline requirements for mission critical applications are not met by any existing or planned commercial offerings. However, a range of non-mission critical communications can be satisfied by commercial systems. Indeed, commercial systems offer unique capabilities that will be important in the future, including nationwide coverage by satellite systems and near universal urban area coverage by commercial data service providers. As the variety and number of commercial systems increases, Public Safety agencies and commercial service providers should be encouraged to work together to develop the features and capabilities needed by Public Safety users. The ability of government agencies to contract with an increasingly large and competitive commercial wireless industry for particular features and functions offers a basis for optimism that eventually many Public Safety requirements can be met by commercial mobile radio services companies. If and to the extent that government procurement requirements inhibit the writing of such contracts, reforming those requirements could produce material benefits. III. SUMMARY OF SUBCOMMITTEE REPORTS OPERATIONAL REQUIREMENTS SUBCOMMITTEE Overview The general charter of the Operational Requirements Subcommittee (ORSC) was to identify the wireless communication needs of the Public Safety community through the year 2010. The subcommittee was also tasked to examine current operational requirements that are unmet or suffer reliability, quality, or coverage deficiencies. Needs were to be prioritized as to necessity for proper functioning of the Public Safety community. The subcommittee s report provides a snapshot of operational capabilities that Public Safety providers require, now and in the future, in order to fulfill their mission of protecting lives and property. The subcommittee analyzed the needs of a broad range of Public Safety entities according to the type of service (voice, data, image, and video) and quantity of service (number of channels) required. The bulk of the subcommittee s report discusses these requirements in detail. General requirements for the quality of transmission were also developed, and are contained in Annex A of the subcommittee s report. The subcommittee was asked to provide input data to the spectrum model developed in the Spectrum Requirements Subcommittee, and this input is included as Annex B. Finally, the subcommittee notes the need for interagency communications of both an incident-based and routine operational nature. These interoperability requirements were input to the Interoperability Subcommittee for their consideration. In addition to future needs, the report includes observations and recommendations regarding current problems meeting communication requirements. In particular, the report discusses communication needs that are unmet or suffer from capacity, reliability, quality, or coverage deficiencies. The report cites continuing difficulty with frequency interference from users in foreign countries, insufficient path or channel availability, inadequate coverage inside buildings, and multipath interference. The subcommittee observes the efficiencies available through trunked, data-only and vehicle location-only systems, and strongly encourages sharing of such systems when possible. General Observations While all Public Safety users have some common needs, different Public Safety users also have unique, mission-specific requirements. General requirements include dispatch communications, transmission of operational and tactical instructions, and communication of administrative information. All individual users, for example, need to communicate with their agency control centers or supervisors, but they also need to be able to communicate directly with each other in many cases. Agencies identify high reliability and capacity sufficient to respond to major disasters as important requirements. Agencies also have specialized requirements based on their specific mission and operating environments. For example, a state highway patrol requires wide-area coverage of highways whereas a metropolitan police department may need high reliability in-building coverage; in each case, system propagation characteristics are often contradictory. Correctional facilities, for example, are compact geographic areas, but their concrete and steel structures pose unique radio communication and administrative problems. Forestry organizations need to communicate over long distances where foliage is a problem for higher frequency systems. The subcommittee investigated both the common and mission-specific operational requirements of Public Safety users in great detail. The operational needs of Federal government Public Safety agencies are quite similar to state and local agencies, both in terms of the kinds of communications they require, voice, data, and video, and the functions they serve, law enforcement, transportation, natural resources, emergency and disaster services, etc. Federal government Public Safety needs, however, do differ in their wider, national or even international, scope, and their greater need for multiple levels of secure communications to protect national security interests. Because of the wider area served, the Federal government makes greater use of satellite communications than do state and local governments; transportable satellite dishes are especially useful in disaster response. The wide geographic scope of federal responsibilities also require that frequencies be available for voice, data, and video applications nationwide, so that when an emergency situation arises, the necessary spectrum resources are available when federal assistance is deployed. For many years, the communications needs of the Public Safety community centered around voice communications; for dispatching officers, coordinating activities at the scene of an accident or during large-scale emergencies, as well as peer-to-peer communications. Today, advances in technology are providing a wealth of new capabilities and applications that can substantially aid Public Safety agencies in the performance of their duties. As a result, wireless communication needs once limited to voice frequencies are now expanding rapidly to encompass new data and video services. These new applications and services make up a significant portion of the community s need for new spectrum. Voice communications remain the primary form of communication for Public Safety agencies. Current voice communication needs are highly varied and include: dispatch, tactical and command, direct unit-to-unit, air-to-ground, special operations communication, and communication with other agencies. Travel channels are also needed to allow units to communicate while operating out of their home systems. Interstate transportation of prisoners is one example. Voice is the primary method of communication, especially during emergency situations. Many different groups are often required to respond to fires and hazardous materials incidents, and in large-scale incidents such as a forest fire, up to 150 separate voice paths may be needed to effectively direct and manage the fire-fighting effort. Coordination of these groups is critical as they may involve police, fire, ambulance, hospitals, utilities, and federal/state/local government responsibilities. Data communication needs are becoming as varied as voice needs, and are expected to grow rapidly in the next few years as new data-based systems, such as the Integrated Automated Fingerprint Identification System, which will allow officers in the field to check fingerprints instantly, are implemented. Many types of data needs are identified, including text (information on a chemical involved in a spill), graphics (blueprints, maps, images), and data (position information, patient vital signs and diagnostic data). Other potential uses include geographic location data to track personnel and vehicles important for safety as well as control, emergency signaling (officer in trouble), remote transmission of (accident, arrest, investigative, patient) reports, electronic messaging, remote device monitoring such as perimeter detection systems in prisons, road/weather conditions, and emergency vehicle traffic signal control. The International Association of Chiefs of Police estimates that as many as 75 percent of officers could be equipped with Mobile Data Terminals (MDTs) by the year 2010. Video communication needs are limited now, but are expanding as technology advances. Current uses include on-scene incident video, surveillance and monitoring (including aerial), robotics control for bomb disposal and fire fighting, and on-site patient care. In the future, two-way video communication between remote vehicles and central control stations may become common. Both point-to-point and broadcast applications are envisioned. Currently allocated spectrum does not provide adequate spectrum to meet today s channel requirements. This conclusion was reached in all the working groups analyzing Public Safety needs across a range of activities and missions. Channel shortages are especially noticeable in voice communications, but shortages exist in some parts of the country for point-to-point microwave links, and the subcommittee found that existing allocations will not support future data or video communication needs. Growth of operations, combined with the need for new applications to support Public Safety, will make current conditions of congestion even worse. Specific Findings  Quality of communication is a critical factor in Public Safety communication. Personnel have come to rely on voice communications systems that permit immediate connections and a high degree of clarity. Data and video needs are similarly time-sensitive, and quality is still a concern. The subcommittee adopted transmission quality recommendations based on the standards contained in a report by the Telecommunications Industry Association and the Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers. The subcommittee recommends that a minimum Delivered Audio Quality (DAQ) of 3.4 or better be achieved in Public Safety systems. A level of 3.4 is defined to mean that speech is understandable without repetition, with some noise or distortion allowed. The full discussion of and specific recommendations for audio quality, including intelligibility, coverage, reliability, and delay, is contained in Annex A to the subcommittee report.  Operational fixed links, using microwave or lower frequencies, are a vital part of Public Safety communication networks, and are used to carry voice, data, and video. They connect the control center(s) with the various base stations that transmit to mobile/portable units. While some of these links are provided by commercial (leased line) service providers, some sites are too remote or expensive to employ this type of service. In these cases, privately owned systems are required. Agency control is also an important consideration.  Large-scale events (Olympics) and disasters such as hurricanes, floods and earthquakes put serious strains on Public Safety communication systems. One major problem is capacity. In events such as these, many Public Safety personnel and agencies have to respond, and each will need radios to do its part of the job. Further, interoperability becomes a serious problem when trying to link together all the disparate agencies. To the extent possible, such events need to be planned for so that adequate spectrum resources are available when needed. Specific recommendations on numbers of channels needed for various agencies (search and rescue, medical assistance, utilities, and non-Public Safety organizations such as the Red Cross, Civil Air Patrol, and Salvation Army) in support of these needs can be found in section 4.4.3 of the subcommittee report. A nationwide channel for distributing information to the media and the public is also recommended.  Development of Intelligent Transportation Systems will entail provision of a wide range of new services, many of which will depend on radiocommunications. Some new spectrum may be required, as well as sharing with Public Safety and other radio services. Section 4.7.4 of the subcommittee report describes the needs in detail.  Interoperability with other agencies is a critical need for a variety of day-to-day, emergency, and special operations. Especially in large disaster situations, the effective coordination of multiple agencies (fire, police, local government, utilities) and jurisdictions is largely dependent on interoperable communications systems. Thousands of individuals may be involved. The 1993 fire in Malibu, California required 458 agencies from 12 states to bring it under control. Interoperability requirements are discussed more fully below.  Public service providers, such as transportation companies and utilities rely extensively on radiocommunications in their day-to-day operations, which involve safeguarding safety and preventing accidents from occurring. These entities also play important roles in supporting first responders once an incident does occur. In all their operations, they have many of the same needs as Public Safety agencies. Additional information on the communications requirements of public service providers is provided in Annex C of the subcommittee report.  Encryption is becoming increasingly important for both voice and data communications, especially in criminal justice operations. The Federal government generally identifies a greater need for secure, encrypted communications than do state and local agencies (excepting law enforcement).  Public Safety systems need quick expandability to accommodate peak use. Although normal day-to-day operations may not require high capacity, in times of disaster, for example, many new users may come on a system simultaneously. Expansion capacity must be engineered into systems. This is especially true of emergency management and disaster services, which are characterized by very low usage patterns on a day-to-day basis, but extremely high use during a major event such as an earthquake, hurricane or flood.  Interference is a problem along international borders. Public Safety entities operating in these areas report interference on both VHF and UHF frequencies. Recommendations  A system of mutual aid links should be available based on the following priorities: 1) Disaster and extreme emergency operations for mutual aid and interagency communications; 2) Emergency or urgent operations involving imminent danger to life or property; 3) Special event control, generally of a preplanned nature; 4) Single agency secondary communications.  Current frequency allocations to Public Safety in the HF bands should be maintained to provide for long-range communications, but limitations on intrastate use, and day/night restrictions should be removed. TECHNOLOGY SUBCOMMITTEE SUMMARY Overview The Technology Subcommittee (TESC) was chartered to review the technologies now used by Public Safety agencies and identify the emerging technologies that may serve Public Safety agencies needs in the future. A special focus was on those technologies that offer advances in spectral efficiency or new services to meet the community s growing needs. General Observations Wireless communications, mobile and portable, provide an essential resource for Public Safety operations. The revolution in microelectronics and computers has brought and will continue to bring enormous improvements in the performance of these systems. Improved electronic systems also change the ways Public Safety agencies can use wireless communications systems, offering advanced data and video systems that can lead to tangible improvements in saved lives and property. In assessing the role of technology in Public Safety communications, the subcommittee evaluated the benefits of technological trends and the impact of technology on spectrum requirements. In evaluating technology effects, the subcommittee examined a range of specific technology advances, as shown in the following table: Expected Advances in System Building Blocks Technology Building Block Observations Digital Integrated Circuits Integrated circuit progress is expected to continue at historical rates with a factor of ten improvement every five years. These advances will allow designers to incorporate more processing, more storage, better compression algorithms, and more efficient modulation techniques into radios. These advances will also permit building complementary equipment (such as affordable personal digital cameras) which will require additional communications resources. Batteries and other RF Generation Equipment Batteries are expected to become lighter. Battery saving technology, such as sleep modes, is expected to become more effective and widespread. Oscillator stability will improve. In some applications, antennas will be replaced by smart antennas which will reduce interference and allow for lower-power operation, greater range, or greater frequency reuse. Source Coding (Compression) Trends indicate that we will be able to compress voice and image signals significantly more than is possible today. Modulation Trends indicate that we will be able to transmit more information in each unit of bandwidth. Multiple Access Techniques A variety of techniques are used today to access channels including: FDMA (frequency-division multiple access), TDMA (time-division multiple access), and CDMA (code-division multiple access). Each channel access technology has its specific advantages and disadvantages. The subcommittee does not project that any new multiple access technique would be of significant importance during the next fifteen years. Error Correction Coding The land mobile radio channel is challenging. Received digital signals normally contain some bits with errors. Error correcting coding allows these bit errors to be corrected or detected. The Technology Subcommittee projected the widespread use of error-correcting coding technology in land mobile communications. Specific Findings General: The revolution in microelectronics and computers has brought and will continue to bring enormous improvements in the performance of wireless technology. Improved electronic systems also will change the ways Public Safety agencies can use wireless communications systems. There was no need for wireless access to digital messaging systems until digital messaging systems came into being. While voice communications has been, and remains today, by far the most important Public Safety application of wireless technology, it appears highly likely that non-voice communications, most importantly data and image communications, will become increasingly important and will account for a major portion of all Public Safety wireless communications by the year 2010. In the year 2010, a great many of our requirements will be served by some technology which has not yet even emerged from the research labs. Remember that the first trunking systems were only deployed in the very late 70s, and the first cellular systems went commercially on-line in the early 80s. The most pervasive technology of the year 2010 may be just emerging, or may not yet have emerged. But undoubtedly, the cutting edge technologies of today will still be employed for 15 years. Voice: Most Public Safety communications systems use analog FM technology operating in 25 or 30 kHz channels to carry their voice signals. Public Safety communications systems normally operate using a variant of one of two basic methods: repeater and trunked. The key attributes of voice communications systems are availability, delay and clarity. Public Safety systems are designed to maximize availability and minimize delay. Clarity, the ability to recognize the individual speaking, is an important feature. While digital voice is a technological reality, it is little used today in Public Safety communications. It is expected that more digital voice systems will be offered by several manufacturers in the Public Safety market in the next few years. Increasingly, voice is transitioning to digital transmission. High quality digital speech in land mobile channel bandwidths could not be implemented in affordable technology until recently. Digital transmission provides mechanisms to combat the familiar static and pop effects that radio reception impairments traditionally caused to analog transmission. Digital signals can be encrypted to prevent interception far more easily, reliably and effectively than can analog signals. Data: Today data communications capabilitis digital dispatch and checking computer data bases for information associated with wanted persons/property and vehicle registration license plates. Data today is typically sent over the voice channel or by a separate radio. Many of the early Public Safety data communications systems used circuitry much like telephone modems to create a voice-like signal which could both carry the data and travel over the analog voice paths of the Public Safety radio communication systems. Such hybrid systems are still widely used today. With the growth in the use of computers and associated reductions in the cost of computing equipment has come an increased demand for data communications capabilities. Data rates range from 0.3 to 19.2 kbps in a 25 kHz channel. Use of mobile data terminals (MDTs) is growing rapidly. More recently, manufacturers have begun to provide radio systems that are fully digital and that can carry data directly on the radio channel. Key attributes of data communications systems are message/file size, reliability, error control, and encryption. Transmitting high speed data reliably on mobile radio channels is an enormous engineering challenge as compared to transmitting via wire, cable, microwave, fiber optics or other similar carriers. Image: Images represent a special category of data that is a numeric representation of a picture. Still images include snapshots such as accidents, and crime scenes, mug shots, fingerprints, and a wide variety of other images. Today, there is relatively little use of still image transmission to and from the field in Public Safety. The rapid increase in use of wire-line based facsimile transmission and similar image technologies within the Public Safety services has paralleled that within the broader economy. It is expected that such systems will be deployed in ever increasing numbers over the next decade and a half. Emergency medical providers desire the ability to transmit images of thers or hospitals to aid in diagnosis and pre-arrival treatment. Fire agencies desire the ability to transmit building plans and copies of permit and other data for fire prevention and protection. Law enforcement agencies need to quickly transmit fingerprints from field units back to federal, state, and local databases; units need the capability to receive mugshots and drivers license photographs to aid in identifying people in the field. Key attributes of image communications systems include resolution, B/W vs color, compression, and error control. The subcommittee report outlines existing standards for facsimile and snapshots. Medical services will need high resolution imaging. The typical passport photo of 2 inch square black and white results in only 1 or 2 kilobytes, while a full-color still from a video camera may exceed a few hundred kilobytes, and a high-definition (several hundred dpi) scan of a color photo can easily reach several megabytes. Image translation can convert higher resolution into a smaller form for transmission, although the reverse is not generally achievable. A notable exception is the emerging technology known as fractal image coding. It promises highly compressed image formats which are rescalable without loss of quality at the destination. Video: Wireless video systems have seen limited use in state and local Public Safety services to date primarily due to a lack of available Public Safety spectrum over which to implement these systems. Video is used in Public Safety today primarily for surveillance of crime scenes and of highways. The fire service uses full motion video extensively in some areas, primarily to monitor wildland fire scenes from airborne platforms, providing real-time video back to emergency command centers. Law enforcement agencies, particularly at the federal level and which have spectrum available for video, have long used video for surveillance purposes. State and local agencies have only recently begun to implement similar systems for monitoring areas of high crime and drug use. State and local transportation agencies have implemented wireless video systems to monitor traffic flow and detect collisions and hazards on roadways in congested metropolitan areas. There is a growing need for full motion video for use with robotic devices in bomb, hostage, hazard avoidance and hazardous materials situations. Key attributes of video communications systems include frame rate, resolution and color level, error control, and compression. Today, video images are normally transmitted using analog modulation. Wideband channels (several megahertz) are normally used to carry full-motion, high-quality video. However, only very limited spectrum is available to state and local agencies. In the future, we expect that most Public Safety video communications will be digital. Currently, however, compxpensive and standards are changing rapidly. The coming of affordable digital video cameras and affordable digital compression can be expected to lead to substantial growth in the requirements for Public Safety video communications. System Fundamentals: Digital Integrated Circuits. The fundamental technology thrust through the year 2010 will be, as it has been in the recent past, that of semiconductor technology. The improvements in semiconductor processing and materials have resulted in roughly an order of magnitude advance every five years. Rapid advancement is also observed in the progress of microprocessor technology over the last two decades. Batteries. The batteries required to operate portable communications equipment are usually heavy, provide limited hours of operation, and can be expensive. A number of developments in battery technology are alleviating this situation. Some involve new technologies, such as nickel-metal-hydride and lithium-ion batteries. Another development is a zinc-air battery that draws oxygen from the atmosphere to extend its life. Power saving solutions that make more efficient use of battery power by communications equipment hold promise for extending battery life further; more power efficient amplifiers and more efficient sleep modes are examples of ways in which battery life may be increased. Oscillators. Spectrum efficiency is improved if more communication channels can be placed within a given band of spectrum. In the past, the ability to decrease the channel size has been limited by both the transmission bandwidth and frequency stability concerns. Frequency stability in land mobile radio has also benefitted from improvements in semiconductors. Improvements in frequency stability can be used to enhance spectrum efficiency even when channel spacing is not reduced because the guard bands around the occupied bandwidth of each transmission can be reduced. The information content of the transmitted signal cacent channel splatter. This is important because reductions in guard bandwidth are limited by adjacent channel splatter considerations. Antennas. Smart antennas is a term applied to a family of technologies that generally integrate active antenna elements with microprocessor technology. By changing the current distribution of the array, the shape of the beam can be changed electronically in real-time. Diversity is a commonly used technique for improving the quality of both digital and analog signals. When the new technique of single sideband is employed the use of multiple antennas becomes a virtual necessity, as when the vehicle is traveling at high speed, signal will become distorted due to phase shift. The most common form of diversity is space diversity, which is implemented using two appropriately spaced antennas. Another method being researched is a one-piece diversity antenna system that uses two antenna elements that performs the signal combining function in the antenna base. Maximal ratio diversity combining is a third diversity technique which is used to combat fading. The advantages of these techniques must be weighed against the disadvantages. Source Coding. Using today s systems, additional traffic demands can only be met by increases in the available spectrum. However, the demands can, at least in part, be offset by utilizing semiconductor advances to make more efficient use of the limited spectrum resources. Information compression allows reduction in the amount of information which must be transmitted on the communications channel. Digital speech encoding has received significant attention of late. This means of transmitting speech leads naturally to encryption which is one very important aspect in many Public Safety communications scenarios. Looking to the future, it can be expected that increasingly powerful digital signal processing IC s will facilitate the introduction of more powerful and effective methods for reducing the amount of information that must be transmitted on the communication channel. As digital processing capability improves, higher complexity compression algorithms will become viable, increasing the compression ratios possible for these services. Thus, by the year 2010, compression schemes more than ten times as complex as those of today should be viable for Public Safety radio. As a result, an assumption of a 3:1 increase in source coding efficiency for fax by 2010 seems reasonable. For full-motion video, a 2:1 improvement over today s compression ratios, or roughly 0.25 bits/pel, should be achievable by the year 2010. For slow video, a 3:1 increase in slow video coding efficiency is indicated when we it is assumed that MPEG-4 will be implemented by 2010. Modulation. Another method of improving improved spectrum efficiency is to increase the amount of information that the communication channel can support. Nonlinear constant-envelope systems have approached 1.28 bit/sec/Hz, considered to be the limit for those systems. Linear modulation, based on newer SSB-based techniques, is expected to be able to improve this efficiency to approximately 5 bit/sec/Hz by the year 2010; while such linear modulation narrowband techniques have long been used in other applications, the engineering challenges of matching them to mobile communications channels have only recently been overcome in commercially available products. Multiple Access Techniques. FDMA, TDMA, CDMA, and TDD are different channel access methods. In FDMA (Frequency Division Multiple Access), different conversations are separated onto different frequencies. In TDMA (Time Division Multiple Access), different conversations are separated into different time slots. In CDMA (Code Division Multiple Access), all conversations are separated by code space. And in TDD (Time Division Duplexing multiple access), a single channel is shared in time to achieve full duplex operation. Each has specific strengths and weaknesses. Error Correction Coding. In radio systems the primary goal is to reliably deliver communications. In digital communications systems this equates to maximizing the ability to successfully receive digitally coded messages. One method of improving signal reception that is specific to digital communications is to employ error control that add bits to the data stream in a precise fashion. Two types of error control techniques are Forward Error Correction (FEC), which provides the ability to receive a correct message even in the presence of transmission errors, and error detection employed in concert with Automatic Repeat reQuest (ARQ), which uses a return channel to request retransmission of corrupted data. FEC is more commonly used in voi are more commonly used in two-way data communications. Software Radios. Software programmable radios, in which applications are configured under software control, makes it possible to implement multiple military, law enforcement, and commercial air interface standards in a single radio, despite different physical layers (modulation, frequency bands, forward error correction), link layers (link acquisition protocols, link maintenance, frame/slot processing), network layers (network protocols, media access protocols, network time maintenance), upper layers (source coding), timebases and bandwidths. There are many challenges, however, to producing a practical and economical software programmable radio for law enforcement applications; software radios are now much more expensive than hardware-based radios, with the market being largely confined to military applications. It has been projected that, within a few hardware generations, software radios will sufficiently leverage the economics of advancements in microelectronics, and provide seamless communications at a vest-pocket and palmtop level of affordability and miniaturization. Backbone Systems. Most Public Safety mobile communications systems need a reliable backbone to carry signals to and from the base station sites to the control points. Historically, many of these links have been provided over microwave connections operated by the Public Safety agency. Leased lines obtained from the local telephone companies have also been used. It is expected that the future supply of backbone system elements will look much like the past but with two major exceptions. First, the lowest microwave frequencies (2 GHz) are no longer available for such backbone systems. The second exception is the supply of facilities by the local carriers; historically, only one firm, the local telephone company, provided telecommunications services for hire. However, changes in law and technology have led to the entry of new competitor extensive further entry. Considering all these factors it is reasonable to conclude that these commercial fiber systems could provide valuable backbone alternatives for many Public Safety communication needs. However, the use of any ground-based carrier for Public Safety systems in earthquake-prone areas may be undesirable. In contrast, in areas affected by hurricanes, such as the southeastern coastal areas, an in-ground fiber network could be preferred. Performance Modeling. As wireless communications systems evolve, the complexity in determining compatibility among different types of such systems increases. Geography, frequency, modulation method, antenna type, and other such factors impact compatibility. Spectrum managers, system designers and system maintainers have a common interest in utilizing the most accurate and repeatable modeling and simulation capabilities to determine likely wireless communications system performance. The Telecommunications Industries Association TR-8 WG-8.8 Technology Compatibility Committee is working under a charter and mission statement to address these technical challenges. Many present and future technological capabilities are (or will be) developed for large commercial service providers or government systems. Public Safety agencies often utilize the existing commercial services as an adjunct to the systems which they have developed to provide their essential services. Those essential services (such as voice dispatch) may have unique operational, availability, or security needs, or may be more economically feasible and desirable. In the future, as usage of and dependence on these services increase, Public Safety agencies might elect to partner with commercial services (for customized services or features), or develop their own systems utilizing similar technologies. Mobile Satellite Systems. Satellite systems support thousands of voice channels and in many spot beams are used so that some e completely digital thereby facilitating encryption systems, as well as commercial voice privacy alternatives. Public Safety agencies and others may lease dedicated channel(s) for their exclusive use. Dispatch, push-to-talk, and party line talk group services are available. Priority designations will be lost when communications enter the Public Switched Telephone Network (PSTN) as they are currently configured unless dedicated lines are provided between gateway stations and public service agencies. Cellular. Current cellular telephone systems have several attributes which limit their appeal to Public Safety users. They are designed to provide adequate capacity during most peak periods, but they are still vulnerable to overload and abuse during large incidents or special activities. In spite of these limitations, cellular telephones are able to meet certain aspects of Public Safety communications needs. They are useful for communications between Public Safety field personnel and the public being served. Cellular telephones are also preferred by many Public Safety agencies as an alternative to carrying telephone interconnect traffic (and consuming large percentages of available capacity) on essential voice channels. Cellular Digital Packet Data (CDPD). Even with the proliferation of analog cellular systems, circuit switched communications are still not popular for general data applications. Circuit switched usage fees are based on connect time, not data volume. Short interruptions during hand-offs between cell sites are often imperceptible during voice conversations, but most data communications equipment sends (and expects to receive) a continuous carrier signal. Cellular Digital Packet Data (CDPD) systems were developed to transport data to (or between) cellular users without the need to set up a traditional call. Without some method to provide priority access, CDPD users are subject to the same delays or unavailability of service during peak periods that traditional voice users encounter. Personal Communications Systems (PCS). PCS are an emerging commercial technology. Due to propagation characteristics of the band, most 2 GHz systems are expected to be developed using a micro-cellular architecture, serving the most populous metropolitan areas using a network of closely spaced stations. Service in lower demand areas will be provided by systems with antenna heights, output power levels, and coverage areas which are more in line with today s cellular systems. Both are intended to provide subscribers with enhanced features and untethered access to the public switched telephone network. Personal Communications Services are under development as of this writing, but indications are that the successful licensees will select and implement differing technologies, even for similar systems in adjacent areas or bands; thus limiting not only competition, but interoperability and mobility as well. The lack of standards is likely to impede the ability of some PCS users to roam nationwide using local subscriber equipment, or to select between carriers to the extent that current cellular telephones allow. Specialized Mobile Radio (SMR) services were estabportion of the 800 MHz band for private land mobile communications system. SMR systems are characterized by a single high-power, high-elevation base station for maximum coverage. The versatility of the SMR industry and its relationship to Public Safety because of the dependence of both on dispatch as a primary service will continue to be attractive as the SMR industry becomes more sophisticated and integrated. Enhanced SMR. The latest systems, based on digital technology, are known as Enhanced SMR (ESMR) or wide-area SMR systems. ESMR systems are typically characterized by a network of base stations in a cellular-type configuration. They are several times as spectrum efficient as SMR systems and offer enhancements including the consolidation of voice dispatch, telephone interconnect and data services into a single portable/mobile subscriber unit. Regardless of the type of SMR/ESMR service, the Public Safety agency must insure that the coverage, security, priority access and reliability factors associated with each service provider/operator will meet the requirements of the applying agency. Paging. Today, over 27 million people use commercial paging services. Continued use and increased dependence are expected for many Public Safety functions. New higher speed, multi-level paging protocols have been developed to increase the efficiency of paging networks, while maintaining backward compatibility with existing (lower speed) devices. With increased transmission speeds, higher content messages (such as facsimiles) can also be delivered to paging receivers with reasonable latency. Advanced paging systems being introduced today allow peer-to-peer communications between pagers, by allowing the initiation of messages from pagers to the network over the reverse channel. Future two-way paging applications are likely to include services like AVL and individual-based GPS services, telemetry services, and interoperable services on dual devices with other wireless providers. Findings  New technologies generally produce two important, but counterbalancing effects for the Public Safety community. First, improvements in technology such as digital transmission and advanced modulation techniques permit users to increase the amount of traffic that can be transmitted over any given amount of spectrum. This phenomenon, considered alone, would minimize the requirements for new spectrum. However, the second corresponding effect of technology advances is the creation of a new range of functions and features. These additional capabilities such as high speed data and video transmission require additional spectrum to fully exploit.  In the year 2010, a great many requirements will be served by some technology which has not yet even emerged from the research labs. However, several aspects of future technology are fairly well agreed upon by examination of technical trends, regardless of whatever specific technology may emerge within the next decade.  Technology is constantly improving spectrum efficiency. Improvements in semiconductor processing and materials have resulted in roughly an order of magnitude advancement every five years. Rapid advancements in microprocessor technology has also been observed over the last two decades. Although theoretically possible to approach gains of 8:1 based on 25 kHz analog by the year 2010, it is appropriate to set the factor to 4:1 for planning purposes. A 4:1 efficiency recognizes the practical limit of advances over the intervening years; that is, doubling (2:1) in five years, doubling again in another five (4:1), then doubling again in five more years (for a 8:1 improvement in 15 years). Further, within current Public Safety bands, there will be an established base of equipment that will have to be amortized and withdrawn from service before full benefits of any advanced technologies can be realized. Additionally, many of the emerging Public Safety technologies (video and high speed data, for example) will require significantly wider bandwidths than the current 25 kHz channel for analog voice.  Digital technology will be the key technology for the future. A digital signal format is assumed by most of the bandwidth efficient methods employed today. Digital is essential to data transmission. Digital appears to be superior for secure communications technology. Nevertheless, there is a vast investment in existing analog voice communications technology which meets communications needs today and which will last for a long time. Analog equipment with 10 to 20 year lifetimes will continue to be installed for several years. Current Public Safety digital equipment offers approximately a 2:1 improvement in spectrum efficiency over 25 kHz analog. Consequently, the Public Safety community will operate with a mix of analog and digital equipment (a mix shifting towards digital) for the foreseeable future.  Trunking will become increasingly prevalent as the technology for trunking control becomes deployed and copied in what are currently known as conventional systems.  Improvement in technology unrelated to voice, such as data, will be driven by dramatic technology improvements in computers. It is quite conceivable that computer spectrum efficiency may be more important than voice spectrum efficiency in 2010. Imaging technology will be driven by improvements in digital signal processing (DSP) technology, which should also be dramatic in a decade.  Spectrum efficient technology includes low bit-rate speech coding. Speech coding trends have already left the concept of waveform coding behind, where the ability to reproduce the exact analog speech waveform is lost. This property, employed commonly in land-line telephony where wire bandwidth is less of an issue, permits voice to be converted back and forth from analog to digital at will without loss of quality. Low bit-rate speech coding also produces greater speech delay. Barring currently unexpected innovation in transcoding, this means that interoperability between systems with different speech coding technologies will likely suffer quality loss and increased speech delay, even when patched through infrastructure.  Direct interoperability over-the-air does not appear possible between systems with different speech coding technologies, bit rates, modulations, formats, access method, or any other attribute associated with the air-interface of a given RF system.  Without any significant coordination, disparate systems will achieve analog interoperability using a common base-line interoperability technology (analog FM). This can serve both analog speech or data that is converted to a speech bandwidth signal in a fashion similar to using modems over telephone. Data transmitted via analog transmission are subject to no more coordination than generally practiced today requiring compatible modems on both sides of a telephone link. Data speed is significantly less than compared to direct digital transmission. INTEROPERABILITY SUBCOMMITTEE SUMMARY Overview Interoperability between and among wireless communications systems used by federal, state, and local Public Safety agencies is generally accepted to be not only desirable, but essential for the protection of life and property. Hence, a key activity of the PSWAC was to advise the NTIA and FCC on options to provide for greater interoperability among federal, state, and local Public Safety entities. Within the PSWAC structure, interoperability issues were addressed by the Interoperability Subcommittee (ISC). In its deliberations, the Interoperability Subcommittee and ultimately the Steering Committee adopted the following formal definitions of Public Safety, Public Service, Interoperability, and Mission Critical: Public Safety: The public s right, exercised through Federal, State or Local government as prescribed by law, to protect and preserve life, property, and natural resources and to serve the public welfare. Public Safety Services: Those services rendered by or through Federal, State, or Local government entities in support of Public Safety duties. Public Safety Services Provider: Governmental and public entities or those non- governmental, private organizations, which are properly authorized by the appropriate governmental authority whose primary mission is providing Public Safety services. Public Safety Support Provider: Governmental and public entities or those non- governmental, private organizations which provide essential public services that are properly authorized by the appropriate governmental authority whose mission is to support Public Safety services. This support may be provided either directly to the public or in support of Public Safety services providers. Public Services: Those services provided by non-Public Safety entities that furnish, maintain, and protect the nation s basic infrastructures which are required to promote the public s safety and welfare. The term Public Safety, as defined, extends to all applicable functions of government at the federal, state and local levels, including Public Safety operations on Department of Defense facilities. There are two levels of Public Safety providers. The Public Safety Services Provider definition is focused toward entities performing such duties as emergency first response and similar activities. The Interoperability Subcommittee Workgroup recognized that this particular definition did not adequately cover the diverse Public Safety community and it was necessary to include another level of provider, the Public Safety Support Provider. This was in accordance with the question encountered by the Operational Requirements Subcommittee during the process to identify entity- specific needs. The Operational Requirements Subcommittee acknowledged that although a particular organization s primary mission might not fall within the classic Public Safety definition, some aspects of its operations could involve or impact Public Safety. The Public Safety Support Provider definition is meant to include entities whose primary mission is other than Public Safety services, but which may provide vital support to the general public and/or the Public Safety Service Provider. The ISC also addressed Public Safety Service Providers that were non-govern- mental. Properly authorized non-governmental, private organizations performing Public Safety functions on behalf of the government are included in these definitions. The need for this portion of the definition is becoming more evident with the privatization of certain governmental services. For example, a number of local governments contract private organizations for emergency medical and/or ambulance service. Although private, these entities are authorized by the applicable government entity to provide life-saving functions on its behalf. Specific licensing concerns have been surfaced through this mode of operation and will be discussed in a later section of this report. Interoperability: An essential communication link within Public Safety and public service wireless communications systems which permits units from two or more different agencies to interact with one another and to exchange information according to a prescribed method in order to achieve predictable results. The communications link, whether infrastructure dependent or independent, must satisfy one or both of the following requirements: Multi-jurisdictional: Wireless communications involving two or more similar agencies having different areas of responsibility. Some examples include a fire agency from one city communicating with a fire agency from another city and the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) communicating with a County Sheriff. Multi-disciplinary: Wireless communications involving two or more different agencies. Some examples include a police agency communicating with a fire agency and a parks agency communicating with an emergency medical services agency. The communications link may involve any combination of subscriber units and fixed equipment (e.g., repeaters, dispatch positions, data resources). The points of communication are dependent upon the specific needs of the situation and any operational procedures and policies which might exist between the involved agencies. The communications link may be classified as either of the following two types: Infrastructure independent: The communications link occurs between subscriber units over a direct RF path. An example is portable-to-portable tactical communications at the scene of an incident. Infrastructure dependent: The communications link requires the use of some items(s) of equipment, other than a subscriber unit, for establishment of the link and for complete subscriber operation. Some examples include a communications link for which a repeater station is required; a communications link which provides full system coverage for a visiting subscriber unit within a host trunked radio system; and a communications link which provides interconnectivity between two or more otherwise incompatible radio systems by cross-connecting the audio signals and/or appropriate signaling functions at some central point. Mission Critical: A mission critical communication is that which must be immediate, ubiquitous, reliable and, in most cases, secure. EXPLANATION: An immediate communication must be capable of being transmitted and received instantaneously, without waiting for a system to be set up, a clear channel or a dial tone. A ubiquitous communication is that which can be transmitted and received throughout the area that the mission requires. A reliable communication system must be designed, constructed and maintained such that short-term disruptions are minimal. Finally, security, while not current- ly available in many situations, is increasingly a requirement for law enforcement and other sensitive communications. In this case, security is provided with voice privacy encryption. General Observations and Specific Findings Interoperability Needs of Public Safety: The ISC identified requirements for three different types of interoperability missions in Public Safety communications day-to- day, mutual aid, and task force. The ISC described the day-to-day requirement as the most commonly encountered type of interoperability and one which is typically associated with areas of concurrent jurisdiction where agencies need to monitor each other s routine traffic. For example, the day-to-day requirement might arise when a county sheriff s department wants to monitor the radio traffic on a police system operated by a large city within the county and vice versa. Such interoperability minimizes the need for dispatcher-to-dispatcher interaction in the exchange of information among units in the field. The ISC described the mutual aid requirement as often involving interoperability among multiple agencies under conditions that allow little opportunity for prior planning for the specific event e.g., riots or wildland fires. In its description of this type of interoperability, the subcommittee noted that there is often a requirement to establish communications among numerous small groups with each group having its own individual talk group or frequency. Such communication is referred to as tactical, and once the responders are on the scene, it typically involves the use of portable radios. The ISC described the task force requirement as often involving communications among agencies representing several layers of government (federal, state, and/or local) under conditions that typically allow for prior planning. In its description of this type of interoperability, the ISC noted that (i) it usually involves the use of portable and/or covert equipment, (ii) it often requires extensive close-range communications, and, (iii) due to the nature of the communications traffic involved, long range transmission is undesirable. The subcommittee conducted much of its analysis in the context of the Incident Command System (ICS). The ICS is a standardized method of operation for Public Safety agencies during large-scale emergency incidents. It has a hierarchical structure which identifies lines of reporting (communications) throughout the organization. This, in turn, provides a framework for assessing communications needs. The Interoperability Subcommittee concluded that interoperability solutions for large scale events such as wildfires necessarily encompasses solutions for lesser events. Obstacles to Interoperability: As part of its analysis, the ISC studied how interoperability requirements are being met today. As a result of that analysis and taking into account future interoperability needs, the subcommittee identified a number of obstacles to achieving interoperability under current conditions. The obstacles or constraints identified included, among others, (i) the diversity of spectrum resources (bands) utilized by Public Safety agencies, (ii) the sheer scarcity of channels for interoperability, (iii) certain human and institutional factors, (iv) the lack of common communications modes among different types of systems, (v) the lack of congruent coverage among different systems for which interoperability is desired, (vi) the limitations of current commercial systems in terms of their reliability, priority access and command and control characteristics in Public Safety applications, and (vii) the lack of an adequate nationwide mutual aid plan and incident command system to facilitate the interoperability.  The first obstacle, the diversity of spectrum resources, reflects the fact that Public Safety agencies, federal, state, and local, use a total of ten radio bands that range from a low of 30 MHz to over 800 MHz. No single, commercial grade radio is capable of operating in all of the bands utilized by different agencies. Thus, individual agencies may be prevented from communicating with another agency simply because their individual radio systems operate in different frequency bands.  The second obstacle is the general lack of channels available for interoperability. In some cases this may stem from inadequate planning or an overriding need to utilize all available channels to satisfy routine operational demands, but in any event, the subcommittee observed that few channels have been designated and made available to satisfy interoperability requirements.  The third obstacle involves certain human and institutional limitations or constraints including the ability of a human operator to remember the specific channels assigned for interoperability and the reluctance of some agencies to allow their units to join another system when it jeopardizes their ability to maintain communications with their own personnel.  The fourth obstacle, the lack of a common communications mode, reflects the fact that, even if the units from different systems operate in the same band, they may not be able to communicate because they use different transmission or signaling techniques. For example, one system may use an analog modulation technique (e.g., FM) while the other may use a digital modulation technique or the two systems may be using proprietary, trunked or digital radio systems provided by different manufacturers.  The fifth obstacle refers to the fact that, even with infrastructure dependent systems that employ some type of gateway to allow communications between units on their respective systems, they still may not always be able to communicate because the coverage areas of the two systems do not completely overlap.  The sixth obstacle, limitations of current commercial systems, reflects the fact that while in theory, commercial systems could be used to achieve interoperability, they currently lack certain characteristics that are deemed critical in Public Safety applications.  The seventh obstacle reflects the fact that, for numerous reasons, there is a lack of an adequate nationwide mutual aid plan and incident command system to facilitate the required degree of interoperability. Interoperability Solutions: The ISC defined multiple levels of technological solutions to interoperability, both short term (defined to be within five years) and long term. These solutions can be categorized into infrastructure independent versus infra- structure dependent, both of which have ranges from simple to complex solutions. These solutions are not mutually exclusive and the optimum solution may use various combinations, especially as the interoperability requirement escalates from day-to-day to mutual aid or task force levels. Infrastructure independent methodologies are communication links directly between radios over a direct RF path. These solutions are typically used for close proximity communications by multiple disciplines and jurisdictions converging on the scene to support the public needs. They are also used when radios are out of range of their infrastructure coverage, such as in rural areas or some in-building communications. Common analog FM technology and mutual aid frequencies allow users to communicate regardless of radio manufacturer. Widespread implementation of infrastructure indepen- dent interoperability is hindered by a number of significant issues discussed within the ISC report, including the diversity of radio frequency spectrum in which Public Safety agencies operate, the critical shortage of spectrum available and designated for interoperability, the introduction of new technology creating the risk that a common mode of interfacing over-the-air will hinder interoperability, and other factors discussed in the report. More complex solutions include development of broad band, dual band and multi-band radios. Commercial viability of these approaches is yet to be proven. Infrastructure dependent methodologies and technologies require the use of some items(s) of equipment, other than a subscriber unit (radio), to establish a communications link and for complete radio operation. These solutions are typically used for wide area communications, where individual users are not within direct range of each other, and for on the scene communications where they may not have a common operating channel. This interconnection can be a temporary or permanent connection and can be accessed through a number of locations using various access methods. Once a permanent solution is in place, it can be idle in standby mode and be activated immediately when required, if all participating systems are operational. Gateways between two or more system infrastructures can provide viable infrastructure dependent solutions at various degrees of complexity and may be one of the few available solutions in the short term. They can interconnect systems operating in different frequency bands, modes of operation, and manufacturer protocols. M