WASHINGTON-A technical committee for Code Division Multiple Access technology development is working on an adjunct standard of the technology that could be used for Phase II enhanced 911.
The specification would “put part of the global positioning system receiver in the phone and part on the infrastructure and they [would] communicate back and forth to calculate location,” said Ed Tiedemann of the wireless engineering subcommittee of the Telecommunications Industry Association.
The development of the adjunct standard continued last week. The document is expected to be put out for balloting this summer.
Location technology is a key piece of the Phase II E911 plan but variations of that technology, such as those used by some drivers today, also have commercial applications like locating the nearest pizza parlor.
Whether or not the standards committee is specifically designing a 911 solution is unclear but the meeting of the standards committee coincided last week with comments filed at the Federal Communications Commission by manufacturers, carriers and trade associations on how best to implement Phase II E911.
The comments were the result of a public notice the FCC released earlier this month investigating whether handset- or network-based systems would best implement Phase II.
Phase II requires commercial mobile radio service carriers to provide public safety answering points with automatic location information accurate to 125 meters, or 410 feet, for wireless customers dialing 911.
The deadline for Phase II is Oct. 1, 2001, but since the deadline for Phase I-April 1, 1998-has largely been unmet there are many questions about whether Phase II will be implemented on time.
Adding to the questions about Phase II are the waiver requests filed by many carriers earlier this year after the FCC opened up the issue of whether handset ALI would be a better system if it was allowed to be further developed.
Phasing in E911 was the result of an agreement between public safety officials and the wireless industry in 1996. Phase I required carriers to provide PSAPs with call back and cell site or base station information when 911 was dialed.
Both phases only have to be implemented in an area when a carrier receives a request from the PSAP that it is capable of receiving and utilizing the data and a method of cost recovery has been put in place.
The lack of deployment of Phase I also concerns the FCC and they have asked the parties to the original agreement including the Cellular Telecommunications Industry Association, the National Emergency Number Association and the Association of Public-Safety Communications Officials-International to sit down and determine why Phase I did not happen as scheduled. The groups are to file a report with the FCC by Aug. 9.
When the agreement was announced in 1996 it was expected that Phase II would be implemented through a network solution like that developed by TruePosition, Inc.
Since that time, handset systems using GPS technology have been developed by companies such as SnapTrack Inc.
While handset solutions seem to work well, there is a problem with GPS signals penetrating buildings making them perhaps less desirable in urban areas. While network solutions work well in urban environments, they do not work well in rural environments with fewer antennas.
The CDMA standard would be a hybrid of both a network and handset ALI system.
In addition to reviewing the comments filed by interested parties last Thursday, next Monday the FCC will hold a public forum where the pros and cons of the various technologies will be discussed.
Manufacturers and trade associations weigh in
Manufacturers are all taking different stances at the FCC.
Qualcomm, which appears to be pushing the CDMA technical standard, did not file comments. Neither did Nokia Corp.
Motorola Inc. points out that neither network or handset technology would be the best in all situations.
“We continue to investigate both handset and network [solutions]. We continue to believe handset [may be preferable] but there is not an ideal ALI solution for all situations,” said Mary E. Brooner, Motorola assistant director for telecommunications strategy and regulation.
Ericcson Inc. would apparently accept the TIA adjunct standard-once it is finalized-and would prefer the Time Division Multiple Access industry and the Global System for Mobile communications industry also develop technical standards for implementing Phase II rather than having each carrier decide a different method. This type of technology-specific-but-industry-wide solution would better facilitate roaming, said Barbara Baffer, manager of regulatory affairs.
The Personal Communications Industry Association said the FCC should stop creating an “artificial deadline” said Todd Lantor, PCIA director of government relations “PCIA thinks we are not far away [from a final ALI solution] and the [FCC] is the best [judge] but most agree that”[the October 2001 deadline is unworkable,” Lantor said.
CTIA has not taken a position on technology but, like PCIA, thinks the FCC should remain technologically-neutral.
