Landmark Use of Drones in Public Safety

New technologies are not only being implemented and used in their intended capacities, they are also transcending disciplines and agencies. Public Safety agencies, specifically in border regions, are finding U.S. Customs an Border Protection (CBP) drones to be useful in some of their operations.

One of the first arrests of a U.S. citizen was made with the assistance of a Predator spy drone in Nelson County, North Dakota, as covered by the A.W.A.R.E. (Alerts, Warnings, and Responses to Emergencies) Forum.  In atleast two dozen recent cases drones have been used to assist law enforcement with aerial surveillance, thanks to advancements making drones smaller, lighter and less expensive.  Eight Predator spy drones operate on the northern and southwestern U.S. borders to search for illegal immigrants and smugglers.  Drones have the ability to watch a target for much longer than police helicopters and other manned aircrafts.  This ability is useful in hostage situations, large-scale disasters and manhunts.

As beneficial as drones may be for Public Safety, they are still a controversial topic sparking privacy concerns.  U.S. courts have a long history of allowing law enforcement to conduct aerial surveillance without a warrant, since what is done in the open (even behind a backyard fence) can be seen from a passing plane and is not protected by privacy laws.

As debates over safety and privacy continue, the relevancy of this issue increases and more agencies are exploring the viability of drones in law enforcement operations.

The Department of Homeland Security released a Request for Information (RFI) September 24, 2012 regarding their Robotic Aircraft for Public Safety (RAPS) project, which seeks to further the use of these types of technologies for Public Safety.

How far away do you think your city is from utilizing drones for law enforcement?  What is your opinion of the privacy issue surrounding this technology?  We invite your comments below.

FCC: TETRA Authorization is Coming to Public Safety

The FCC released a Notice of Proposed Rule Making and Order Tuesday to modify rules permitting the certification and use of Terrestrial Trunked Radio (TETRA) equipment.  TETRA is spectrally efficient digital technology, but it does not comply with all Part 90 technical rules.  The TETRA Association (the Association, comprised of 150 organizations from 35 countries) recently filed a request for waiver for the Part 90 rules on occupied bandwidth limit, to allow implementation of TETRA technology in the United States.  Pending the outcome of the rulemaking proceeding, the Commission has granted the waiver request in part. 

The Association asserted that Part 90 technical rules were developed originally for analog equipment and technology.  Because digital technology operates more efficiently than analog, the rules are not always appropriate for digital technologies, therefore they should neither be applicable. 

TETRA offers a digital, trunked radio solution that operates with Time Division Multiple Access (TDMA) in four-slot channels utilizing 25 kHz bandwidth.  In a request filed in 2009, the Association held that:

• The TETRA standard (developed by the European Technical Standards Institute, or ETSI) is currently used worldwide, in coexistence with other technologies.
• Manufacturers are prepared to distribute interoperable TETRA devices in the United States, on various frequency bands.
• TETRA technology is more efficient, secure, and interoperable than alternative solutions.

TETRA's efficiency allows the devices to operate on 25 kHz of bandwidth, but without causing harmful interference to adjacent channels.  The ETSI standards set limits for adjacent channel power and unwanted emissions at different frequency offsets.  Despite concerned comments from filers stating TETRA causes interference, the Association has demonstrated research to the contrary.  The waiver request was accompanied by a TSB-88 analysis of the adjacent channel power ratio (ACPR) of a TETRA signal with a typical receiver, which indicated a lower interference potential from the TETRA signal. 

Although the waiver has been granted in part and under specificed conditions, the Commission agreed with commenters in the aspect that permanent authorization of TETRA technology must be achieved through the rulemaking process.  Therefore, the Commission has formally requested comment on multiple issues surrounding their rulemaking decision. 

FCC: House Committee Concerned About Motorola

Following the troubling San Francisco BayWEB fiasco, the House Committee on Energy and Commerce submitted a letter last Wednesday to FCC Chairman Julius Genachowski regarding its concern about Motorola's dominance in the market of Public Safety (PS) communications.  The committee cites a June 30, 2010 letter questioning PS's "reliance upon an exclusive or limite vendor pool for equipment and devices."  The lack of a diverse selection of vendors causes prices that are higher than corresponding commercial prices and fewer options for interoperability.  The FCC's July 20, 2010 reply agreed with the committee, also sharing its fears that this market structure hinders movement toward an interoperable broadband public safety network. 

Since the problem persists, with Motorola being the chosen vendor of most waiver requests for early deployment of 700 MHz broadband networks, the committee called attention to five issues, requesting a reponse from the FCC regarding:

1. A list of waiver recipients and applicants and their vendors
2. Competitive bidding process information in waiver recipient jurisdictions
3. Confirmation that the vendor is supplying open, LTE standard-compliant equipment
4. Indication of whether said vendors intend to implement proprietary broadband capabilities, and impact on:
1. network and device equipment prices relative to commercial equipment
2. innovation in PS wireless technology
3. terminated product lines or new mandatory releases resulting in unique costs relative to commercial costs
4. interoperability on application, device, and network levels among networks from other vendors
5. ability of PS users to enter into partnerships with commercial wireless providers
6. competition in the market
7. the effect of the FCC's National Broadband Plan, which found that encouraging incentive-based partnerships with a variety of commercial operators would benefit PS
5. The dominant vendor's effects on construction of early deployed PS networks regarding:
1. adoption of final technical and operations rules, and costs of any of the rules calling for changes  (Would the agencies be responsible for these costs?)
2. achievement of a nationwide interoperable system at the device, application, and network levels

These questions have been on the minds of industry insiders for years, and it appears these issues will be addressed soon, with the help of Congressional attention.

Public Safety: Bay Area Systems Struggle

The East Bay Regional Communications System and the Bay Area Wireless Enhanced Broadband (BayWeb) network, the two projects that started with the promise of $100 million from federal funds, are both currently in suspended animation. A full decade after the opportunity for critical system upgrades arose from post-9/11 interoperability initiatives, the systems that were meant to keep 31 East Bay municipalities safe are still not in place.

Following the Money
Various accusations have been made as to where the blame lies for the state of these two massive systems. According to the article on baycitizen.org, improprieties in the contracting process have been sited. The projects are both said to have been “rushed,” in an eager effort to utilize the large amount of federal funding available. Motorola was awarded most of the work on both systems, and equipment is still sitting idle in warehouses. Tens of millions of dollars of unexpected costs will have to be covered, much to the outrage of local officials. There has not been a single county or municipality yet to sign a formal contract for use of the Bay Area broadband network.

The original budget of the system overhaul included $50 million from the federal government, $17 million from participating local governments. Now that maintenance and operations have been calculated, however, an additional $37 million will have to be covered by local governments. In 2005, Alameda County entered into a contract with Motorola Solutions to construct the first elements of the system. Following this first step, a regional government agency, the East Bay Regional Communications System Authority, was created, with a board seating of 23 representatives from participating municipalities and districts. In 2009, an audit by the federal government revealed that no formal cost analysis had ever been completed for the project, and the state had never been advised of the noncompetitive nature of the Motorola contract. Many officials express remorse over how quickly the contracts were signed and the project was began. Some extensive planning and budgeting processes were lost in the hurried shuffle.

Poor technology choices have caused wasteful outcomes, such as about $630,000 worth of equipment being installed, uninstalled, transferred to warehouses, and now it may have to be recycled or given away, authorities say.

The budgeting and organizational nightmare of the two systems comes down to a lack of accountability, according to Robert Stern, president of the Los Angeles-based Center for Governmental Studies. The Bay Citizen quotes: “The problem is that when it comes to highly technical deals, it is hard to follow the money. There is less concern and accountability when it comes to federal government money.”

Challenges Ahead
In the midst of heavy criticism and concern about both projects, the head of the Broadband project has made a surprising announcement. Laura Philips, head of the Bay Area Urban Area Security Initiative and former manager in Motorola Solutions’ government relations division, recently set plans for resignation. The original task of selecting a vendor for the project fell to the Bay Area Urban Area Security Initiative, led by Philips, who happens to be a former manager in Motorola’s government relations division. Last spring six members were appointed to an evaluation panel.

One panelist, Morris Tabak, claimed he lacked crucial technical expertise and admitted to relying upon an account manager at Motorola to guide his decision. The same account manager now works at the San Francisco Department of Emergency Management. Philips’ retirement will be effective April 16, and she has yet to give a clear reason for her decision.

The most recent report on the budget situation reveals that as much as $24 million will be necessary from participating governments to cover user fees and operating expenses. Motorola claims no wrongdoing, and Philips holds that the vendor selection process was fair, neutral, and allowed adequate opportunity for interested vendors to bid.

What the Future Holds
A recent Urgent Communications article sheds a more optimistic light on the situation, with comments from Alameda County Sheriff Gregory Ahern about his work towards solutions. Ahern is now the executive sponsor of the BayWEB project, meant to build a 700 MHZ LTE network. One obstacle Ahern is tackling is an error on the FCC granted waiver to use spectrum in the Bay Area. The spectrum lease was not voted on by any of the cities in the area and had been signed by Ahern on behalf of the “San Francisco Bay Area Urban Area,” which is a nonexistent entity.

Ahern had been under the impression that “everyone was on the same page,” but after discovering the discrepancies, he is now working to correct the grant error and create joint powers authority (JPA) to sign the contract and govern the project. Ahern said his goal is to have the JPA in place before the end of the month, though other officials expect it to be challenging enough to do so by the end of May, due to time requirements necessary for voting.

Hindsight's 20/20
Comments from professionals in the industry seem to treat the East Bay fiasco as a sort of cautionary tale. A lack of planning, direction, and, arguably, transparency and disclosure, have created a difficult scenario for the Bay Area: a disorganized and halted attempt to build a system that will be way beyond the original planned budget. The intermingling of wireless, politics, control, and money has brewed a storm that will take yet another two and a half years to remedy. Sources say construction of the system is in its preliminary phases and is scheduled to be complete in January 2013.

Project management, engineering, vendor selection, funding guidance, and flawless FCC licensing are all specializations of EMR Consulting. To discover how EMR can helps agencies successfully and efficiently complete large-scale communications projects, visit our website or contact our consultants today.