Wireless Subcommittee Minutes

Wireless Subcommittee Minutes

of the

E911 Advisory Committee

King County E911 Office

7300 Perimeter Road South, Seattle

May 16, 1997 – 9 a.m.

Present: Marlys Davis, Wireless Committee Chair, King County; Penelope Christopherson, State E911 Office; Joe Blaschka, AdComm; David Griffith, UTC; Doug Gehrke, US West; Ross Baker, AT&T Wireless; Natalie Robbins, Nancy Alpers, Nextel; Charlie Van Zandt, AirTouch; Rod Proctor, Ray Dellecker, Proctor & Associates; Jane Bissonnette, Lynn Mell, XYPoint; Vanessa Pegueros, Bic Nguyen, Sprint PCS; Al Kear, GTE.

Approval of April 17, 1997 meeting minutes

The minutes were approved as written and submitted.

Report from Wireless Companies on Review of King County Prosecutor=s Legal Opinion

Sprint and Nextel both reported they are still awaiting word on their corporate interpretation of FCC=s ruling and Washington law. AirTouch indicated it wouldn=t be doing anything until funding mechanisms are in place, but Charlie Van Zandt stated that under Washington state law AirTouch would provide 10-digit ANI at no cost to the PSAP.

Doug Gehrke, US West, stated their product, CellTrace, does Phase I of the FCC ruling,

but there will be a charge, and they need to know where to send the bill.

AirTouch says it is close to determining the total cost for delivering ANI. Besides the tariffs and capital costs, which are known, the only other cost to be determined is the administrative/internal cost, which should be nominal. Nextel indicated its costs have not been determined as they are not delivering ANI yet. Since Sprint is still building the network, they had no costs to provide the subcommittee. Ross Baker, AT&T Wireless, indicated he would have something to report at the next meeting on funding and cost to implement.

Marlys Davis, King Co. 911 Coordinator, will meet with county coordinators before the next Wireless Subcommittee Meeting (June 26) to get a consensus on the counties= interpretation of the FCC ruling and funding issues.

Report from US West on Phase I Interconnection

Doug Gehrke reported that Phase I interconnection involves the wireless carrier, the 911 Coordinator and US West. To implement Phase I, Gehrke said the 911 Coordinator needs to request the wireless service from the wireless carrier. Then if the wireless carrier needs to provide Phase I service through US West, they need to contact US West. US West would then coordinate a meeting with the three parties. Gehrke stated that the onus is on the 911 Coordinator to follow the process through. US West would coordinate the delivery of services, which includes testing. He distributed handouts on the E9-1-1 CellTrace Service.

Vanessa Pegueros, Sprint, asked for a procedure with responsibilities assigned explaining the role of the PSAP (911 Coordinator); role of the wireless carrier; role of US West. Sprint also indicated that it is the wireless carrier, not the PSAP, who will make the final determination of what solution to use (USWest, XYPoint, GTE, etc.). Marlys agreed that at this point the counties have indicated that Phase I service must use existing 911 network and equipment but have not specified how this interface is accomplished.

Report from GTE on Phase I Interconnection

Al Kear, GTE, distributed a draft document addressing implementation of Phase I through GTE- tariffed services. He indicated that GTE is using the NENA standard for Feature Group D trunking. Joe Blaschka, AdComm, distributed a draft of the NENA Recommendation for the implementation of Enhanced MF Signaling E9-1-1 Tandem to PSAP.

Kear will report all costs, including those costs for Idaho and Oregon, from various tariffs at the next Wireless Subcommittee meeting.

Ross Baker distributed a standard letter from AT&T Wireless to all Washington counties who requested Phase I service, acknowledging receipt of the county=s request. The letter further requests from the county the following information: funding mechanism to discharge the costs for the carrier to provide this service; will the PSAP wish to receive all 911 calls or just from subscribers; and identification of the contact person to interact with the AT&T

representative.

Discussion on whether 911 calls should be processed from non-subscriber cellular phones or only from cellular phones with registered subscribers.

AirTouch informed committee members that 911 calls are processed whether the caller is a subscriber or non-subscriber. Sprint also indicated that they would pass 911 calls through if they are non-subscribers.

The FCC ruling is currently being reexamined, but as it stands it indicates the PSAPs may give preference for the first 18 months on whether or not to accept non-identifiable 911 calls. After 18 months, the PSAPs must accept these calls.

The question was raised on how public safety might feel about this issue. Marlys will poll PSAP 911 Coordinators prior to the June meeting to discuss whether the PSAPs want 911 calls to come through on non-subscribed wireless calls.

Report from Wireless Companies on Security Contact Numbers and Procedures for PSAPs

Marlys asked the wireless carriers if they had finalized their work to establish security contact numbers and procedures for PSAPs to identify themselves when they need assistance. The wireless companies indicated that they are still working on this issue.

The WUTC will check the RCWs and report back whether there is a requirement for wireless carriers to provide security contact numbers and procedures to PSAPs.

Discussion on PSAP Numbers to be provided to operator services when cellular caller dials AO@ instead of 9-1-1.

The wireless carriers were asked what happens and what procedures do they have in place when a caller dials AO@ instead of 911 in an emergency. Both AirTouch and AT&T reported they use US West=s operator services. Sprint uses an operator service center in Florida and is not aware of how operator calls are dispatched. Sprint also indicated that their non-initialized phones cannot get AO@. Nextel is unaware of what operator services they use. For the June meeting, the wireless carriers will identify their operator services and procedures.

Update from Wireless Companies identifying which Washington state counties ordered Phase I implementation

Eighteen of the 26 Washington counties offering enhanced 911 services have requested Phase I Implementation by 4/1/98. Those counties include Lewis, Mason, Yakima, Snohomish, Clark, Kittitas, Pierce, Thurston, Kitsap, King, Jefferson, Grays Harbor, Island, Adams, Spokane, Douglas, Grant and Clallam.

Other

A memo from Allen Jakobitz to Marlys Davis was distributed for discussion for a wireless work group panel discussion at the APCO Summer Seminar on June 12 in Wenatchee. The panel members are Doug Gehrke, Jane Bissonnette, Bob Keeger and Andy Metcalfe. The handout proposed several topics for discussion. Allen was seeking input/concurrence. It was decided that the panel discussion should focus on what is happening in Washington state, describe the FCC ruling and its ramifications and touch on the work of the Wireless Subcommittee.

Marlys asked the wireless companies if they could identify a representative to join the Public Education Work Group of the State E911 Advisory Committee.

The next meeting is scheduled at the King County 911 Office at the King County Airport, 7300 Perimeter Road, South, Seattle on Thursday, June 26, 1997 from 9 a.m. to 12 noon. Subsequent meetings this year will be held from 9 to 12 at the King County 911 Office on July 24, August 21, September 18, October 16, November 13 and December 11.