https://urgentcomm.com/wp-content/themes/ucm_child/assets/images/logo/footer-new-logo.png
  • Home
  • News
  • Multimedia
    • Back
    • Multimedia
    • Video
    • Podcasts
    • Galleries
    • IWCE’s Video Showcase
    • Product Guides
  • Commentary
    • Back
    • Commentary
    • Urgent Matters
    • View From The Top
    • All Things IWCE
    • Legal Matters
  • Resources
    • Back
    • Resources
    • Webinars
    • White Papers
    • Reprints & Reuse
  • IWCE
    • Back
    • IWCE
    • Conference
    • Special Events
    • Exhibitor Listings
    • Premier Partners
    • Floor Plan
    • Exhibiting Information
    • Register for IWCE
  • About Us
    • Back
    • About Us
    • Contact Us
    • Advertise
    • Terms of Service
    • Privacy Statement
    • Cookie Policy
  • Related Sites
    • Back
    • American City & County
    • IWCE
    • Light Reading
    • IOT World Today
    • Mission Critical Technologies
    • TU-Auto
  • In the field
    • Back
    • In the field
    • Broadband Push-to-X
    • Internet of Things
    • Project 25
    • Public-Safety Broadband/FirstNet
    • Virtual/Augmented Reality
    • Land Mobile Radio
    • Long Term Evolution (LTE)
    • Applications
    • Drones/Robots
    • IoT/Smart X
    • Software
    • Subscriber Devices
    • Video
  • Call Center/Command
    • Back
    • Call Center/Command
    • Artificial Intelligence
    • NG911
    • Alerting Systems
    • Analytics
    • Dispatch/Call-taking
    • Incident Command/Situational Awareness
    • Tracking, Monitoring & Control
  • Network Tech
    • Back
    • Network Tech
    • Interoperability
    • LMR 100
    • LMR 200
    • Backhaul
    • Deployables
    • Power
    • Tower & Site
    • Wireless Networks
    • Coverage/Interference
    • Security
    • System Design
    • System Installation
    • System Operation
    • Test & Measurement
  • Operations
    • Back
    • Operations
    • Critical Infrastructure
    • Enterprise
    • Federal Government/Military
    • Public Safety
    • State & Local Government
    • Training
  • Regulations
    • Back
    • Regulations
    • Narrowbanding
    • T-Band
    • Rebanding
    • TV White Spaces
    • None
    • Funding
    • Policy
    • Regional Coordination
    • Standards
  • Organizations
    • Back
    • Organizations
    • AASHTO
    • APCO
    • DHS
    • DMR Association
    • ETA
    • EWA
    • FCC
    • IWCE
    • NASEMSO
    • NATE
    • NXDN Forum
    • NENA
    • NIST/PSCR
    • NPSTC
    • NTIA/FirstNet
    • P25 TIG
    • TETRA + CCA
    • UTC
Urgent Communications
  • NEWSLETTER
  • Home
  • News
  • Multimedia
    • Back
    • Video
    • Podcasts
    • Omdia Crit Comms Circle Podcast
    • Galleries
    • IWCE’s Video Showcase
    • Product Guides
  • Commentary
    • Back
    • All Things IWCE
    • Urgent Matters
    • View From The Top
    • Legal Matters
  • Resources
    • Back
    • Webinars
    • White Papers
    • Reprints & Reuse
    • UC eZines
    • Sponsored content
  • IWCE
    • Back
    • Conference
    • Why Attend
    • Exhibitor Listing
    • Floor Plan
    • Exhibiting Information
    • Join the Event Mailing List
  • About Us
    • Back
    • About Us
    • Contact Us
    • Advertise
    • Cookie Policy
    • Terms of Service
    • Privacy Statement
  • Related Sites
    • Back
    • American City & County
    • IWCE
    • Light Reading
    • IOT World Today
    • TU-Auto
  • newsletter
  • In the field
    • Back
    • Internet of Things
    • Broadband Push-to-X
    • Project 25
    • Public-Safety Broadband/FirstNet
    • Virtual/Augmented Reality
    • Land Mobile Radio
    • Long Term Evolution (LTE)
    • Applications
    • Drones/Robots
    • IoT/Smart X
    • Software
    • Subscriber Devices
    • Video
  • Call Center/Command
    • Back
    • Artificial Intelligence
    • NG911
    • Alerting Systems
    • Analytics
    • Dispatch/Call-taking
    • Incident Command/Situational Awareness
    • Tracking, Monitoring & Control
  • Network Tech
    • Back
    • Cybersecurity
    • Interoperability
    • LMR 100
    • LMR 200
    • Backhaul
    • Deployables
    • Power
    • Tower & Site
    • Wireless Networks
    • Coverage/Interference
    • Security
    • System Design
    • System Installation
    • System Operation
    • Test & Measurement
  • Operations
    • Back
    • Critical Infrastructure
    • Enterprise
    • Federal Government/Military
    • Public Safety
    • State & Local Government
    • Training
  • Regulations
    • Back
    • Narrowbanding
    • T-Band
    • Rebanding
    • TV White Spaces
    • None
    • Funding
    • Policy
    • Regional Coordination
    • Standards
  • Organizations
    • Back
    • AASHTO
    • APCO
    • DHS
    • DMR Association
    • ETA
    • EWA
    • FCC
    • IWCE
    • NASEMSO
    • NATE
    • NXDN Forum
    • NENA
    • NIST/PSCR
    • NPSTC
    • NTIA/FirstNet
    • P25 TIG
    • TETRA + CCA
    • UTC
acc.com

APCO


Panel: Politics, funding are the biggest obstacles to interoperability

  • Written by Donny Jackson
  • 1st October 2013
Interoperability remain a challenge for first responders in the United States, but it is politics and funding--not technology--that are the problems, according to panelists speaking during a webinar hosted by IWCE's Urgent Communications.

What is in this article?

  • Panel: Politics, funding are the biggest obstacles to interoperability
  • Panel: Politics, funding are the biggest obstacles to interoperability

Panel: Politics, funding are the biggest obstacles to interoperability

Last week, in a webinar hosted by IWCE’s Urgent Communications and sponsored by Avtec—click here to view the archived event—panelists discussed the current state of interoperable communications in the U.S., which often are found lacking. Indeed, first responders complained about interoperability issues in the aftermath of the recent Washington Navy Yard shootings, according to several media reports.

The situation appears to be widespread, even though it has been more than two decades since the advent of the Project 25 standard—created, in part, to foster interoperability—and a dozen years since the 9/11 terrorist attacks, an event that placed interoperability shortcomings in a harsh light.

Panelists were united in their belief that politics and funding issues are the primary obstacles standing in the way of interoperable communications, wherever they do not exist.

According to Terry Hall, chief of emergency communications for York County, Va., and the immediate past president of the Association of Public Safety Communications Officials (APCO), spoke about the “turf wars” that often ensue.

“Who talks where—that’s the number one when you’re looking at doing anything right now with interoperability,” Hall said. “[And] who owns what … I have a fairly large regional system, and what you run into is, who get the key, and who gets what talk groups.”

Hall told of a plan that he developed that would have resulted in some of the channels from the statewide radio system being programmed into York County radios and vice versa—but politics prevented it from happening.

 “So, here I’ve got a $60 million investment and the state has a $250 million investment, and the only way we can communicate with each other is through NPSPAC channels that have very limited coverage, instead of talking on the system real and live. And that’s pure politics—it has nothing to do with the functionality of the radio.”

According to Barbara Jaeger—911 administrator for the state of Arizona and the immediate past president of the National Emergency Number Association (NENA)—interoperability is just as crucial on  the 911 side of first response as it is on the radio side.

“If a call cannot be answered by the primary PSAP [public-safety answering point], and it has to be rotated to another PSAP—how do you handle those calls? What happens when a call is received by an agency that has no [such] capability? … I can move that call probably anywhere within a geographic area, but what happens when they get the call—what do they do with that call? They try to transfer it back, and now you’re in this endless loop you can’t resolve.” she said.

Next-generation 911 technology is architected to provide that sort of interoperability, but the 911 sector has significant funding issues that will make it difficult for many agencies to make the transition, Jaeger said.

“Often, you have funding for 911 at a state level, and not at a local level,” she said. “When those costs come down to the communities, they just don’t have the revenues to support it. … We’re in a state where a tax increase can’t even be discussed. ”

Consequently, the state of Arizona is close to launching a managed-services model that Jaeger hopes will make it affordable for PSAPs to upgrade their gear. The state negotiated a monthly per-seat fee that would cover all necessary equipment and component upgrades, as well as maintenance. While a managed-services model is uncommon in the public-safety sector, businesses have been using it for years, according to Jaeger.

 In addition to eliminating capital expenditures for equipment, it is possible that many agencies will be able to roll the fee into their existing operating-expenditure budgets, Jaeger said.

“What we went out to the vendor with was, ‘What can we do for this amount of money—per seat, per month—for all of the 911 centers, and all of the positions, in the state?’ … We said, ‘This is how much our revenue is, and what can you do for us?’” she said.

1 | 2 |
Panel: Politics, funding are the biggest obstacles to interoperability
Tags: Interoperability APCO Interoperability NENA News NPSTC Regional Coordination News

2 comments

  1. Avatar petervonb 1st October 2013 @ 9:45 pm
    Reply

    We are trying to establish
    We are trying to establish interoperability among several fire departments in several counties in the lower Hudson River valley and to do so using the UHF public safety spectrum.
    Politics has certainly interfered with this program with the ridiculous planned sale of T-Band Public Safety frequencies. That was clearly done jut to mollify a bunch of dummies in Congress who don’t care about the facts – just want to show some revenue in the LTE project.
    Politics is also a big factor in the P-25 program. We cannot get federal grants for radio equipment unless it is P-25, so that means we have to ask for three times as much money to buy P-25 radios which we have to use without any P-25 features for two reasons: 1) there is no P-25 backbone in our area and won’t be for a long, long time; and 2) we’ll be damned if we want to send firefighters into treacherous situations using digital communications.
    We will continue to operate on our T-Band portable and mobile radios and build what we have permission to build in the way of T-Band repeaters, but we are severely constrained by the fact that we won’t be able to complete a system to see where additional T-Band repeater sites will be needed, because we won’t get FCC authorization to create them.

  2. Avatar RWilliams 2nd October 2013 @ 4:40 pm
    Reply

    Yes, politics and funding
    Yes, politics and funding have and do play a big part in agencies not having interoperability, but after working in the public safety communications field for 33 years and seeing what I have seen since 2001 I would put the biggest blame on the vendors of P25 equipment for pricing it so high. The vendors saw the dollar signs in their eyes when the economy was good and federal grant dollars were being given out faster than one can make pancakes to they set their prices high. There are very few ways a department that has been use to paying between $250 to $750 for a portable radio to justify spending over $3,500 for a radio even if it does give their personnel interoperability with other agencies. I personally can address the turf wars and deal with the politics but when a vendor sets a price I can’t change that. Another reason I blame the vendors is they continue to sell proprietary radio equipment and systems that is much less expensive than P25. If they truly wanted P25 to become the “standard of choice” then they should have priced P25 equipment to be the same price as or at least close to the cost of proprietary equipment even if it meant reducing the price of P25 and increasing the price of proprietary equipment. This would have probably made P25 extremely attractive to not only public safety, but to public works, public utilities, school systems and even the business community so all could have interoperability during major incidents and disasters.

    On the topic of spectrum, since many federal government and military operations occur in the 380 MHz to 420 MHz and many of the larger cities in our nation like Boston, L.A., New York, etc. use the UHF-T band wouldn’t it have made sense and possibly been less expensive to move all non-government operations off 450 MHz to 512 MHz and put all of local and state government operations to include public safety in the same band to coincide with the military and federal government operations? Think about it

    I don’t know about you, but it seems we have two major forces working against us when it comes to interoperability with the first being the vendors and the other being our own federal government (Congress and the FCC).

Leave a comment Cancel reply

To leave a comment login with your Urgent Comms account:

Log in with your Urgent Comms account

Or alternatively provide your name, email address below:

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Related Content

  • Panel: Politics, funding are the biggest obstacles to interoperability
  • Panel: Politics, funding are the biggest obstacles to interoperability
  • Panel: Politics, funding are the biggest obstacles to interoperability
  • Panel: Politics, funding are the biggest obstacles to interoperability

Commentary


How 5G is making cities safer, smarter, and more efficient

26th January 2023

3GPP moves Release 18 freeze date to March 2024

18th January 2023

Do smart cities make safer cities?

  • 1
6th January 2023
view all

Events


UC Ezines


IWCE 2019 Wrap Up

13th May 2019
view all

Twitter


UrgentComm

Public-safety coalition renews efforts to secure federal NG911 funding dlvr.it/ShwGfn

4th February 2023
UrgentComm

Newscan: Cyberattacks on DoE national labs draw lawmaker scrutiny dlvr.it/Shvpw3

3rd February 2023
UrgentComm

The shine begins to wear off 5G private wireless dlvr.it/Shth0P

3rd February 2023
UrgentComm

Phishers trick Microsoft into granting them ‘verified’ Cloud Partner status dlvr.it/Shqngn

2nd February 2023
UrgentComm

Shapeshifting robot can morph from a liquid to a solid dlvr.it/Shqk9K

2nd February 2023
UrgentComm

Automakers against stampede to BEV dominance dlvr.it/ShpX08

2nd February 2023
UrgentComm

FCC nominee Gigi Sohn headed for third Senate hearing dlvr.it/ShpDcZ

1st February 2023
UrgentComm

Sign up to learn how to successfully manage your Motorola ASTRO® 25 System: spr.ly/60143j8fp https://t.co/XcxiUwzN27

1st February 2023

Newsletter

Sign up for UrgentComm’s newsletters to receive regular news and information updates about Communications and Technology.

Expert Commentary

Learn from experts about the latest technology in automation, machine-learning, big data and cybersecurity.

Business Media

Find the latest videos and media from the market leaders.

Media Kit and Advertising

Want to reach our digital and print audiences? Learn more here.

DISCOVER MORE FROM INFORMA TECH

  • American City & County
  • IWCE
  • Light Reading
  • IOT World Today
  • Mission Critical Technologies
  • TU-Auto

WORKING WITH US

  • About Us
  • Contact Us
  • Events
  • Careers

FOLLOW Urgent Comms ON SOCIAL

  • Privacy
  • CCPA: “Do Not Sell My Data”
  • Cookie Policy
  • Terms
Copyright © 2023 Informa PLC. Informa PLC is registered in England and Wales with company number 8860726 whose registered and Head office is 5 Howick Place, London, SW1P 1WG.