TETRA Experience – Poland

1. TETRA Experience – Poland Public Safety Shared Networks Kees Verweij ISC/C2000

2. Background and involvement in TETRA • ISC: involved in TETRA since the early start in 1990 • Myself: representing the Netherlands in Operator/User Association,Technical Forum and ETSI TCTETRA • C2000 project in the Netherlands: country-wide shared TETRA network for Police, Fire brigade, Ambulance and Military Police TETRA Experience - Poland

3. Agenda • How it starts (in the Netherlands) • Pros and cons of a Shared Network • Consequences • The choices to make • NL, Fin, B and UK experience • Summary and conclusions TETRA Experience - Poland

4. How it starts (in the Netherlands) • The old situation in the Netherlands: • >100 small analogue Public Safety radio networks using >1600 sites in total • In 1 area 7 or more separate Public Safety radio networks • Growing user demand for: • Enhanced features (status, AVLS, mobile data applications) • Cooperation with other Public Safety organisations • Cooperation with other areas • Higher security • More capacity • Police and fire brigade developed a plan for their own, separate national digital trunking system TETRA Experience - Poland

5. How it starts (in the Netherlands) • Political decision: Their will be one, shared PS radio network: C2000 • Will be built and operated under responsibility of the government • Should cover the user requirements of • Ambulance • Police • Fire Brigade • Military police TETRA Experience - Poland

6. The benefits of sharing • Operational • Common and enhanced functionality, coverage and security • Possibilities for closer cooperation and new procedures • Multi-disciplinary fleetmap • Common control rooms • Cross border operation • Economics • One network built and managed by a dedicated organisation (“Policemen should be out on the street catching criminals”) • Larger volumes  Lower prices for radios • High network capacity to the users (trunking efficiency) • Environment • Lower number of base stations sites TETRA Experience - Poland

7. Perceived disadvantages of sharing • Tied to the operator: no direct influence on • Functionality • Coverage • Reliability • Security • Other users • Operator • Capacity • Guarantee during large incidents TETRA Experience - Poland

8. Overcoming disadvantages • Before roll-out: • To ensure that user requirements are met by the network: • User organisations should be involved in setting the requirements for the network • The user organisations should closely work together on: • A national fleetmap structure including talkgroup priority settings • After roll-out • To ensure that the operator performs: • User organisations should be represented in the political body controlling the operator • To fully exploit the possible advantages users should work on: • Common radio procurement providing a frame contract • Common control room procurement? TETRA Experience - Poland

9. The consequences • Big investment: • High profile political environment • Media attention • External audits • Extra requirements: • Should be future proof • Should enable international cooperation? • Common control rooms? • Many parties with different backgrounds involved • High complexity TETRA Experience - Poland

10. The consequences • Higher requirements • cost explosion • extra delay • Develop a procedure between central government and users to define and weigh the user requirements TETRA Experience - Poland

11. The choices to make: Potential Sharers • Decision on permitted sharers dependent on National Governments and importance of national response to a major disaster or emergency • Emergency Services • Government organisations • Military • Utilities • Transport • Others TETRA Experience - Poland

12. The choices to make: Operator models • Government Operator • Dedicated organisation • Pro: flexibility for adding coverage, capacity, new functionality • Con: efficiency?, technical challenge • Commercial Operator • Long term detailed contract with professional commercial organisation • Pro: clear responsibility • Con: long term commitment?, less direct influence on coverage, capacity, new functionality TETRA Experience - Poland

13. The choices to make: Fee/Cost Structure • How to split/differentiate between organisations • Same price for primary users and secondary users? • Number of radios • Usage of the network • Different cost structures: • Monthly fee per radio/user organisation • Pro: Stimulates the operator to perform • Con: Users may hesitate to use the new network • Central budget • Pro: Stimulates the users to use the new network • Con: The operator may not perform and become inefficient • Service Level Agreements (SLAs) for use of network • Clear agreement on operator performance • (Monthly) reports showing network performance and actual usage TETRA Experience - Poland

14. The Netherlands Experience • Main organisations: Police, Fire Brigade, Ambulance, Military police • 25 multi-disciplinary control rooms • >20 other Public Safety related organisations have limited access under responsibility of one of the main organisations • Government operator, central budget • Highlights: • During the project Ambulance and Firebrigade have strongly improved their organisation structure • Successful large scale multi-disciplinary disaster training in April 2006 TETRA Experience - Poland

15. Belgium Experience • Network was built for more than 15 organisations, including: • Ambulance • Fire brigade • Customs • Semi-government operator, monthly fee • Highlights: • In the procurement 20 parties from 7 Ministries were involved • It has been hard to level the requirements of all the parties TETRA Experience - Poland

16. Finnish Experience • Network built for wide user community, currently more than 20 different organisations, including: • Police • Fire and Rescue service • Frontier Guard • Military • Social and Health service • Municipalities • Government operator, monthly fee • Highlights: • Operational since 2002 • Common control rooms TETRA Experience - Poland

17. UK Experience • Network was built for Police • Commercial operator, monthly fee • Highlights: • No participation from Fire brigade and Ambulance in beginning • Common sense prevailed and both Ambulance and Fire chose to be a subscriber to Airwave • Next step: sharing common control rooms TETRA Experience - Poland

18. Polish experience? • Who will be the users of a Public Safety TETRA network in Poland? TETRA Experience - Poland

19. Common causes for historical problems • Emergency services have a different background and different organisation structures • government departments • Area • Financing model • Organisation grade • Operational need • Level of technical knowledge .. which make it hard to work together on a project • High media attention can introduce extra project complexity TETRA Experience - Poland

20. Summary & Conclusions • Building a national Shared Public Safety Network • has many advantages to the users and the government • the possible disadvantages can be handled • is complex (mainly organisational) • Successful examples in B, Fin, NL and UK • A successful project for a Shared Network depends on getting and keeping all parties involved! TETRA Experience - Poland

21. Thank You!! Questions??