Bb task force public safety 10 15-2012
Upcoming SlideShare
Loading in...5

Bb task force public safety 10 15-2012






Total Views
Views on SlideShare
Embed Views



3 Embeds 90 88 1 1



Upload Details

Uploaded via as Microsoft PowerPoint

Usage Rights

© All Rights Reserved

Report content

Flagged as inappropriate Flag as inappropriate
Flag as inappropriate

Select your reason for flagging this presentation as inappropriate.

  • Full Name Full Name Comment goes here.
    Are you sure you want to
    Your message goes here
Post Comment
Edit your comment

Bb task force public safety 10 15-2012 Bb task force public safety 10 15-2012 Presentation Transcript

  • Minnesota PublicSafety Broadbandand FirstNet BriefPrepared for:Governor’s Task Force on BroadbandOctober 16, 2012Presenter:Brandon Abley, DPS-ECN
  • Agenda1. Public Safety Broadband/LTE Basics2. FirstNet and a New National Model3. Minnesota’s Broadband Study4. Making a Business Case5. Unresolved Issues6. Next Steps for Minnesota 2
  • Introduction to LTE Technology• Next generation cellular standard• All Internet Protocol (IP) based• OFDM (DL) and SC-FDMA (UL) Air Interface• Flat architecture with more capable eNodeB’s• Use of Multi Inputs Multi Output (MIMO) antennas• Tens of megabits throughput and sub 50 mS latency • 10 band classes (incl. Band Class 14 for PS) and in seven bandwidths • Global adoption by dozens of commercial carriers including all major US carriers 3
  • LTE Performance Category LTE Performance• PSBL Block 5+5 MHz Bandwidth 10 MHz• D-Block 5+5 MHz Peak Downlink Data Rate Theoretical peak: 86 Mbps• Total 10 MHz in each Peak Uplink Data Rate Theoretical peak: 36 Mbps Estimated Avg DL Throughput 16 Mbps direction Est. Cell-Edge DL Throughput 0.5 Mbps• Estimated 3X more Est. Avg UL Throughput 9 Mbps spectral efficiency than 3G Est. Cell-Edge UL Throughput 0.3 Mbps VoIP Capacity 200 Users per sector• Varies based on antenna configuration – 2x2 MIMO – 4x4 MIMO• Highly variable based on signal to noise ratio 4 4
  • LTE Coverage Not Equal to LMRCoverage and Operations• LMR link budget is better than LTE at broadband speeds – 4G requires far more sites to match coverage – However, LTE could scale to non- broadband speeds• Significantly less cost per eNodeB than per LRM• More sites may increase operations budget versus LMR• Huge eNodeB backhaul requirements to Core 5
  • Architecture• RAN – Radio access network – Sites• EPC – Core network – Servers, gateways, switchin g, management• Applications – 3rd-party/neutral transport – Network-native 6
  • What is a RAN?Radio Access Network• UE (“User Equipment”) – These are user devices! – Cell phones, modems, etc.• eNodeB – These are sites! – They connect directly to the core network without intermediate controllers – LTE has a flat architecture and only IP connections 7
  • What is an EPC?Evolved Packet Core• Distributed Architecture• Not all traffic has to go through every network node• Well-defined interfaces (intended for) vendor interoperability• Some interfaces left open to vendor interpretation (by design)! 8
  • Why do we care?• Innovative new services through new applications• Make applications decisions independently of network decisions• Maximum communications interoperability; one network, one frequency; all systems can be interconnected• Enhanced situational awareness• NG9-1-1 traffic delivery to responders• Reduced long-term costs – Global standard shared by public and private (economy of scale) – Can offset existing costs spent on commercial services – Expanded public-private partnership capabilities• Better spectral efficiency (We are in a spectrum crunch!) 9
  • FirstNet and a New National Model
  • FirstNet2012 Middle Class Tax Relief and Job Creation Act• 700 MHz D Block to reallocated to public safety• First Responder Network Authority (new entity within NTIA) will hold public safety broadband license and be responsible for NATIONAL network deployment and operation – FirstNet board of directors will include federal, state, and local representatives (NTIA must appoint state/local members by August 20, 2012)• Up to $7.3 billion in funding for network from future FCC incentive auctions (NTIA can borrow $2 billion up front)• States can “opt-out” and deploy state networks (subject to FCC approval) Source: FCC Regulatory Update March 8 2012 11
  • FirstNet 698 704 710 716 722 728 734 740 746 A B C D E A B C Multiple AT&T AT&T AT&T Multiple Multiple AT&T AT&T DTV Licensees (acquired Licensees Licensees (most of (most of from (most of (most of US) US) Qualcomm) US) US) Ch 52 Ch 53 Ch 54 Ch 55 Ch 56 Ch 57 Ch 58 Ch 59 A Block Guard Band B Block GuardUpper 700 MHz Band (Access Band (Vacant) Spectrum, Pegasus, etc.)746 757 758 768 769 775 776 787 788 798 799 805 806 C PSBB PSNB C PSBB PSNB Verizon Verizon 800 MHz Ch 60 Ch 61 Ch 62 Ch 63 Ch 64 Ch 65 Ch 66 Ch 67 Ch 68 Ch 69 FirstNet License Source: FCC Regulatory Update March 8 2012 12
  • FirstNetTransition• FCC to transition public safety broadband spectrum to FirstNet• FCC Technical Advisory Board for First Responder Interoperability – Develop technical requirements for broadband interoperability – Board recommendations submitted to FCC for review – FCC approves Interoperability Board recommendations and transmits them to FirstNet for adoption• Timing: – March 23 -- FCC appoints Interoperability Board members – May 22 -- Board must submit recommendations to FCC – June 21 -- FCC must transmit recommendations to FirstNet Source: FCC Regulatory Update March 8 2012 13
  • FirstNetFirstNet Duties and Obligations• Determine uses/access to network• Develop RFPs• Promote competition in the equipment market• Receive payment for use of FirstNet’s spectrum/infrastructure• Consult with States on State & Local Planning• Leverage existing commercial or other infrastructure (e.g, ARMER)• Develop/sponsor national standards and requirements• Represent Public Safety before standards bodies Source: Alcatel-Lucent, “FirstNet: Implementation Timeline & Requirements”, March 2012 14
  • FirstNetFirstNet Duties and Obligations (More)• Creating the over-arching strategic framework for the public safety network• Ensuring nationwide standards for use and access to the network based on commercial standards• Working to deliver economies of scale for public safety• Maximizing opportunities for long-term cost savings and improved functionality• Integrating federal first responders and public-safety-related uses to maximize the efficiency of the new network• Formulating a fee collection system that reflects market reality and ensures FirstNet self-sustainability Source: 15
  • Timeline FCC 30 Days (March 23) Minnesota/SRB Interop Boardplanning activities Creation of State & Local 6 Months FirstNet Implementation Grant (August 20) FirstNet ?? (No deadline) RFPs NTIA/Governors ?? + 90 Days)Minnesota PublicSafety Broadband! State ?? + 180 Days) FirstNet Deploys Opt-Out Some information from: Alcatel-Lucent, “FirstNet: Implementation Timeline & Requirements”, March 2012
  • FirstNetWhat is “Opt-Out”?• State opts to do its own RAN build-out• The state’s network is still part of the national network• The state still pays access fees to FirstNet spectrum• The state may be required to still pay fees for national core infrastructure, or may be barred from buying its own core with Federal funds• The state is not excluded from national funding if it opts out• Opt-out plans subject to regulatory approval and must demonstrate a compelling economic case• Opting out means states can pursue novel/innovative partnerships 17
  • Core Functions: Findings With FirstNet model, these “core” services are not owned by any state/local government. 18
  • MinnesotaBroadband Study
  • FindingsSection 1: User Needs AssessmentData collected through:• Face-to-face interviews (hundreds of man-hours’ worth)• Online survey (175 respondents)• Included use cases, equipment/applications needed, and a tabletop exercise 20
  • FindingsSurvey Responses by Organization: Other Tribal Government State Government NGO Hospital County Government City Government 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 Number of Respondents 21
  • Findings Survey Responses by Profession: 120 100 80Responses 60 40 20 0 22
  • Devices: Findings What device(s) do you currently use on the existing wireless network(s)? Smartphone or PDA 54%Devices: Rugged Smartphone or PDA 9% Embedded Cards (within laptop) 21% Expansion Slot or USB Modem 33% Express Card 10% USB Modem Card 25% Rugged PC or Tablet 41% Mobile Router (modem + Wi-Fi) 13% Vehicular Modem (single radio) 18% None 15% Other (please specify) 6% 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 23
  • Applications: Findings 100%Devices: 90% Current 2015 Current (2015 responders) 80% 70% 60% 50% 40% 30% 20% 10% 0% 24
  • FindingsService Area:• Existing carrier coverage is not ubiquitous, many rural areas without service – 85% of respondent reported coverage problems• Expectations: – Priority must be to provide 95% mobile coverage on County-by-County basis – In-building coverage to be a growing requirement – Must have quicker coverage augmentation solutions available for emergencies; COWs, COLTs, Satellite, etc. 25
  • Incident Modeling: Findings Law Enforcement Incident Command SWAT Fire EMS 120 Number of First Responders by Agency 100 80 60 40 20 0 0 15 30 45 60 75 90 105 120 135 150 165 180 195 210 225 240 INCIDENT TIMELINE (minutes) 26
  • Findings Stats: PEAK Uplink PEAK Downlink Average Uplink Up % Average Downlink Downlink % Strike Team Subtotal: 2856 kbps 492 kbps 2667 kbps 62% 303 kbps 4.0%Unified Command Subtotal: 1106 kbps 10009 kbps 427 kbps 10% 6524 kbps 86% Staging Area Subtotal: 1044 kbps 609 kbps 947 kbps 22% 513 kbps 7% Perimeter Subtotal: 257 kbps 256 kbps 257 kbps 6% 256 kbps 3.4% INCIDENT TOTALS: 5263 kbps 11366 kbps 4298 kbps 7596 kbps • Peak Traffic: 11,366 DL / 7596 UL kbps • Or, approximately one completely maxed out 10x10 MHz LTE sector • Uses multicast/broadcast for traffic efficiency • Does not include mission-critical push-to-talk • At the time, showed we did not have enough spectrum for an incident. We do now with the D Block. 27
  • Findings Other Notes:Scenario Average Average Percentage Speed Comparisons: Uplink Downlink Video Dial-up: 56 kbps (kbps) (kbps) (UL/DL) Project 25: 9.6 kbpsPresent / 623 3,849 26%/60% (per-channel)Urban DSL: 1,500 / 256 kbpsPresent & 197 2,509 41%/61%Future Rural (down/up)Future / 4,298 7,596 74%/77% Cable Modem: 3,000 / 756 kbpsUrban (down/up) Study document includes separate figures for urban, rural, present, future scenarios 28
  • FindingsNetwork Requirements• A statement of basic technical requirements that would form the basis of an RFP specification• Includes detail on coverage, throughput, features, security, etc. 29
  • Findings Coverage Requirement:Coverage Requirement Area Description UL Rate DL Rate95% In-Building Metropolitan areas 256 kbps 933 kbps95% Outdoor Handheld Suburban counties 256 kbps 1437 kbps95% Mobile Statewide County-by-County 256 kbps 1437 kbps Speed Comparisons: Scenario Av UL Av DL % Video Dial-up: 56 kbps Present Urban 623 3,849 26%/60% Project 25: 9.6 kbps Rural 197 2,509 41%/61% DSL: 1500 / 256 kbps Future / Urban 4,298 7,596 74%/77% Modem: 3000 / 756 kbps 30
  • FindingsSection 3: Carrier Assessment• No pre-emptive priority• No ARMER-level coverage (no commercial benefit)• Availability approx. 99.5%• Not public safety-grade on carrier spectrum• May have option for using public safety spectrum on carrier network (hosted core/leased backhaul) A B C D E A B C C A D B C A D B Public Safety Public Safety Public Safety Public Safety Narrowband Narrowband Broadband Broadband D - BLOCK D - BLOCK MediaFlo MediaFlo Guard Guard Guard Guard Guard Guard LTE Band 17 LTE Band 17 LTE Band 13 LTE Band 14 LTE Band 13 LTE Band 14 LTE Band 12 LTE Band 12 698 704 710 716 722 728 734 740 746 757 758 763 768 775 776 787 788 793 798 805 769 799 31
  • Findings Section 4: Implementation ModelModel Description Advantages DisadvantagesPrivate Completely Private State controls Highest capital costService Solution (could be requirements and DBOM by 3rd party) priorities (public safety grade, pre-emption)Public / Leverages assets of Reduced capital costs, Unknown operatingPrivate commercial carriers balanced costs, potentiallyPartnership requirements versus unmet requirements capitalCommercial Commercial carrier No capital costs High risk of unmetService DBOM system requirements 32
  • Preliminary Network Designs:“ARMER PLUS” Findings ARMER New Region Total % New Sites Sites Central 63 20 83 24% Metro 70 36 106 34% Northeast 97 35 132 27% Northwest 59 18 77 23% South 20 3 23 13% Central Southeast 39 18 57 32% Southwest 32 11 43 26% Total 380 141 521 27% 521 sites to meet all requirements 33
  • Findings 34
  • Actual Throughput Findings • Actual LTE throughput at each site can be as high as 8500 kbps with 5x5 MHz; double that with 10x10 MHz • Various factors degrade actual throughput, so statewide requirement is actually a fraction of peak performance • Sectors are unlikely to perform at peak performance most of the time for technical reasons (adaptive modulation, intra- system interference, others) 35
  • Note: Throughput rates Findingswith 5x5 MHz Channels (i.e. without D Block) 36
  • Preliminary Network Designs: Findings“ARMER” 380-site Transitional Design ARMER Only – Broadband Speed • Avoids 141 tower builds • 94% statewide mobile coverage (lt. green) • 28 counties < 95%, E.G.,: – Cook: 78% – Winona: 82% – Lake of Woods: 86% – Lake: 82% ARMER Only – Dial-up Speed • LTE can scale down to lower rates in the yellow areas • > 95% statewide coverage • 4 counties < 95%: – Cook: 92% – Winona: 93% – Lake of Woods: 91% – Lake: 94% 37
  • Findings 38
  • FindingsSection 5: Funding Models• Three models covered• To range the gamut from fully state-owned (like ARMER; “opt-out” scenario) to carrier-ownedModel DescriptionState Public Model The State builds, owns, operates, and maintains the network. This is analogous to land-mobile radio deployment in the past, such as ARMER.Vendor-Financed Model A vendor fills in financial shortfall for building and operating the network by making commercial usage available to the network.Commercial Carrier Model An existing carrier augments it network to meet public safety needs. 39
  • Implementation Cost per Subscriber $100.00 Findings ARMER+ $90.00 Amort. & ARMER+ $80.00 ARMERCost per User per Month $70.00 Amort. & ARMER $60.00 $50.00 $40.00 $30.00 $20.00 $10.00 $- 0 10,000 20,000 30,000 40,000 50,000 60,000 70,000 80,000 90,000 100,000 110,000 120,000 130,000 140,000 150,000 Number of Subscribers (Users) 40
  • Phase 2Phase 2 Broadband Study “Plan the Plan”• To develop a process for: – Compiling the data needed by FirstNet to design in MN – Compiling the data needed by stakeholders to join NPSBN• To Identify gaps in – Governance – Statewide planning – Sustainability – Support needed by FirstNet• To create a basic Minnesota public safety broadband plan template to empower stakeholders to make “the big decision” 41
  • Making a Business Case
  • Making a Business CaseAn LTE Network is Useless!• A network, by itself, does absolutely nothing• The value of the network is determined by: – The services it provides – The services that users can provide for themselves – The ability for the network to deliver those services – Potential for consolidation and cost center mitigation• The national model provides us with a means for basic connectivity, but as of yet, there is no real business case• To make a decision and to interact with FirstNet, the state needs a business case for the network 43
  • Making a Business CasePotential Assets in Minnesota:• Commercial service offsets (cellphones, network, internet access)• Private partners – Users: Utilities, rural communities, general government ($$ generation) – Providers: Telcos, cellular companies, ISPs ($$ savings)• Hosted applications (CAD, CPE, logging, LMR, productivity)• Incumbent private public safety communications systems• Incumbent government (agencies, funds, technical staff, leadership)• Pre-existing infrastructure (ARMER, locally-owned fiber)To make a business case, we should focus on offsetting existing costs first, then exploring new and added value. 44
  • Making a Business CasePublic Safety is Local• The role of state and Federal government in public safety is somewhat limited – All incidents are local incidents – Some incidents are state or Federal incidents – E.g., ARMER: <25% of system users are state or Federal responders• We cannot justify a network of this size without comprehensive support from local government• Minnesota’s—and the nation’s—business case must be palatable for local government to ensure participation 45
  • Making a Business CaseHow Much Will it Cost?• Estimates vary; if we extract estimates for Minnesota to all 50 states we can expect: – CAPEX: Over $16 Billion – OPEX: Over $795 Million• FirstNet bill provides up $7.3 Billion; most likely won’t cover even HALF of CAPEX• FirstNet bill provides no OPEX, but gives FirstNet the authority to collect fees to support operational expenses• Unlikely that government at all levels will generate new revenues at these levels; better to focus on cost savings and efficiencies 46
  • Unresolved Issues
  • FirstNetState Planning Funding• State grant funding guidelines required to advance the planning strategy• State assets analysis during the planning phase (tower, fiber, data centers, POPs)FirstNet Network Deployment• What is the role of states and local jurisdictions in developing the implementation strategy?• How will the network deployment strategy be prioritized?• What FirstNet service level agreements are to be proposed and are the network coverage objectives?• How will the cost of service be determined?• Who are the authorized public safety users?• Is FirstNet pursuing national or regional partnerships for revenue sharing?• What is the schedule to auction spectrum to fund the build out?• What is the balance of the FirstNet proposal compared to an Opt-Out strategy? 48
  • Next Steps
  • Next StepsSRB/SCIP Broadband Action Items:1. Establish a statewide body under the Statewide Radio Board to sanction public safety interoperable data planning activities2. Develop a full assessment of assets to contribute to the network3. Develop a Minnesota Public Safety Broadband Plan4. Develop applications and data interoperability standards5. Investigate potential formal partnerships6. Continue to foster interoperability planning on a regional basis7. Monitor, and participate when appropriate, in larger planning and standards-setting 50
  • Next StepsProgress Snapshot, October 2012:• Goal 1: SRB has established interoperable data committee, representing varied public safety and private interests.• Goals 2 and 3: Project to establish framework for public safety broadband plan underway. A core component of this plan is a detailed inventory of assets to assist local governments in making a business case.• Goal 4: Minnesota participation in national efforts to set nationwide baseline requirements for the NPSBN through professional organizations (NPSTC, etc)• Goal 5: Private partners to be included as stakeholders in the state broadband plan• Goal 6: Minnesota work through RECCWG; region-wide joint filings with NTIA/FCC on public safety broadband issues• Goal 7: Minnesota representation in workgroups through NPSTC, APCO, etc. 51
  • Questions? Brandon Abley MN DPS-ECN 651 201 7554 52