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
    • IWCE 2022 Winter Showcase
    • IWCE 2023 Pre-event Guide
  • 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
    • IWCE 2023 Pre-event Guide
    • IWCE 2022 Winter Showcase
  • 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

Long Term Evolution (LTE)


PSCR panel, attendees tackle controversial local-control aspect of proposed FirstNet LTE system

  • Written by Donny Jackson
  • 30th June 2014
FirstNet officials have promised that its public-safety LTE system will include local control, but first-responder representatives need to do a lot of work to determine how agencies access the broadband network and who will be given priority during times of network congestion, according to panelists and attendees of a PSCR session on the subject.

What is in this article?

  • PSCR panel, attendees tackle controversial local-control aspect of proposed FirstNet LTE system
  • PSCR panel, attendees tackle controversial local-control aspect of proposed FirstNet LTE system
  • PSCR panel, attendees tackle controversial local-control aspect of proposed FirstNet LTE system

PSCR panel, attendees tackle controversial local-control aspect of proposed FirstNet LTE system

FirstNet is building a nationwide broadband network for first responders that supposedly will provide local control to public-safety agencies using the system, but determining what that should include and how it should be implemented will require a lot of work, based on debate conducted during a session at the Public Safety Communications Research (PSCR) stakeholders meeting in Colorado earlier this month.

“Whenever I talk with a user about what makes them uncomfortable with a nationwide network, they always said, ‘I’m OK with it, as long as we have local control,’” said panelist Andrew Thiessen, division chief for the Institute of Telecommunications Sciences (ITS). “My immediate follow-up [question] was always, ‘What does that mean?’ And I got a different answer each time I asked that question.”

Most of the differences were not philosophical; instead, the differences stated included different approaches and aspects of local control, Thiessen said.

Session moderator Steve Devine, assistant director for the Missouri Statewide Wireless Interoperability Network (MOSWIN), expressed a similar sentiment as he introduced the notion of local control.

“Local control is a huge part of the nationwide public-safety broadband network,” Devine said. “We all know that it has to happen. What’s less clear is how and when.”

Indeed, there are several aspects of local control that need to be addressed, from network-design elements like site selection and hardening to device management. Wim Brouwer, CTO of Alcatel-Lucent's FirstNet team, suggested that devices might be managed most efficiently by utilizing a carrier model that includes store fronts that are able to serve multiple public-safety agencies in a given geographic area.

But the biggest issue raised was how network resources should be managed during an emergency, including which entities should be allowed to use the system and which ones should be given priority access during a given incident. Devine noted the importance of pre-planning incidents as much as possible to create policies that could be implemented automatically when they occur.

Audience member Richard Mirgon, former president of the Association of Public-Safety Communications Officials (APCO), expressed support for the notion of establishing policies for automated prioritization but noted that it can get very complicated during large events involving agencies with overlapping jurisdictions.

“Picture this: the world is falling around you, and I’m walking into a building where there’s been an active shooter and I’ve got two different fire agencies responding out of two different CAD systems, which are setting priorities and that are trying to treat patients, while my SWAT team is trying to go into a building to neutralize the active shooter, and you’ve got command-and-control people,” Mirgon said.

“Which CAD system takes priority, and how do you determine which one is more important than the other in an automated system like this? How does that work?”

While LTE has many layers of prioritization that can be implemented dynamically in a real-time manner, panelists acknowledged that determining how network resources are utilized needs to be determined by public safety.

“I wish technology could solve that problem, but I don’t know that it can,” said panelist Gino Scribano, a fellow on the Motorola Solutions’ technical staff.

Audience member Steve Williams, chief technology officer (CTO) for the Florida Highway Patrol, said determining prioritization will be difficult, but the fact that public-safety officials can have input into prioritization on the FirstNet system is an opportunity that should not be squandered.

“I ask anybody in this room, ‘What control do you have now [over broadband data]?’” Williams said. “You have none, so you’re at the mercy of the commercial network. I run a lot of broadband data, I run a lot of applications—a lot of mission-critical applications—but I have zero control.

“What I’m hearing is encouraging out of industry, and what I’m hearing is encouraging out of PSCR. We have an opportunity in public safety that we haven’t had in years, that I haven’t had in my career.”

1 | 2 | 3 |
PSCR panel, attendees tackle controversial local-control aspect of proposed FirstNet LTE system
Tags: Disaster Response Incident Command Interoperability Public Safety Long Term Evolution (LTE) News NIST/PSCR NTIA/FirstNet Project 25 Public Safety News

3 comments

  1. Avatar drmikemyers 30th June 2014 @ 7:53 pm
    Reply

    Everyone is getting way down
    Everyone is getting way down in the weeds on this one. All we need to do is prioritize the bandwidth to Priority 1 and 2 users; Priority 3 usage will be limited in that geographic area until the incident commander says so…locally. All this talk about data traffic, video and handsets is not affective. Simplify this to overall Priority 1 and 2 users have precedence; even Priority 1 has precedence to Priority 2, but we will never come close to knocking anyone off the bandwidth (notice I did not say spectrum). This is another reason why trying to prioritize the spectrum is not a good idea, these kind of issues get raised.

    As for Local Control, it will be mandated. State’s have their own legislative processes and controls that demand it, thus the reason we have local Police, Fire and EMS type services.

    Example: we have the FBI at the Federal level, but States have their own internal Bureaus of Investigations as well. States have their own Emergency Management Organizations as does the Feds with FEMA. There is no such thing as a National Police Force, not yet anyway, they are always local. There is no one else to control an incident except local guys, unless a Federal Organization requests permission from the Governor of the given State to step in and help.

    Just my thoughts. What do I know.

    I’m just some guy and a blog…

    • Avatar Anonymous 1st July 2014 @ 6:04 pm
      Reply

      This is a classic mistake.
      This is a classic mistake. You have to think a little deeper than this. Who actually qualifies as a priority 1 user? How can that be dynamically determined, in a system in which static prioritization is established. This has been debated since cellular “prioritization” first started and can never be settled. Do fed responders (at any level including a buck private) have a higher priority than an EMS responder? System management can and never will be managable at the network level. By trying to settle network level use priorities before a network is even built is foolish. System use and priorities have to be dynamic and under the control of governance and command/control systems that can manage it on an incident by incident basis. While most do not wnat to think that it involves this much work, it really does and should. All systems require active use management, if they are going to be efficiently used and provide availability when needed.

  2. Avatar RandyK911 1st July 2014 @ 4:12 pm
    Reply

    Local control of FirstNet is
    Local control of FirstNet is and will be a major issue in the months to come.

    Maybe we should take notice of how the MABAS system in the Midwest works. In the event of a major fire or EMS incident, all communications for that incident are taken over by the regional MABAS communications center.

    This leaves the local agencies with their communications channel (or IP subnet) free for local traffic.

    The question is that of bandwidth at this point. This is specifically why I’m against permanent video use on FirstNet unless there is a way to remotely shut it down in such an incident to free up the bandwidth.

    Some chatter that I’ve overheard indicates that some think that a community camera system could be entirely based on a FirstNet platform.

    Just a few of my thoughts on this issue.

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

  • PSCR panel, attendees tackle controversial local-control aspect of proposed FirstNet LTE system
  • PSCR panel, attendees tackle controversial local-control aspect of proposed FirstNet LTE system
  • PSCR panel, attendees tackle controversial local-control aspect of proposed FirstNet LTE system
  • PSCR panel, attendees tackle controversial local-control aspect of proposed FirstNet LTE system

Commentary


Updated: How ‘sidelink’ peer-to-peer communications can enhance public-safety operations

  • 1
27th February 2023

NG911 needed to secure our communities and nation

24th February 2023

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

26th January 2023
view all

Events


UC Ezines


IWCE 2019 Wrap Up

13th May 2019
view all

Twitter


UrgentComm

State and local leaders can alleviate the burden on public-safety personnel by tackling three workforce trends dlvr.it/SlBH89

20th March 2023
UrgentComm

6G is shaping up to disappoint, and the industry can blame itself dlvr.it/Sl918J

20th March 2023
UrgentComm

Change is coming to the network detection and response (NDR) market dlvr.it/Sl4cts

18th March 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.