| |
Introduction Good morning and thank you Mr. Chairman for inviting AT&T
Wireless to share our E911 implementation experience.
AT& T Wireless is the largest independent wireless provider in the U.S.
with approximately 22 million customers. AT&T Wireless is using a
network-based E911 solution in our TDMA second generation network to provide
Phase 2 location of calls to 9-1-1. This network today provides service to the
majority of our customers. In the third quarter of 2002 we decided to deploy
that same network-based solution in our new GSM network. Network-based location
systems use equipment installed in wireless cell sites, rather than GPS
receivers in phones, to estimate the latitude and longitude of a caller. As a
result, AT&T Wireless customers will not need to purchase new handsets to
take advantage of Phase 2 E911 when it becomes available in their area.
Making Progress AT&T Wireless and our partners in Public Safety are
making great strides in deployment of wireless E911 service. First, on our TDMA
network, over 1,300 requesting PSAPs receive Phase 1 service today, which
includes the caller's phone number and location of the serving cell site.
Approximately 340 of these PSAPs also requested and receive Phase 2 service,
which provides a more precise estimate of the caller's location. We have dozens
of requesting PSAPs in various stages of deployment, and we are integrating
Phase 2 service with additional PSAPs nearly every week.
We have Phase 2 service now in 20 states, with service in more states
scheduled in the next several months. By the end of June, we will have over
4,000 TDMA cell sites providing Phase 2 location to PSAPs. Locally, we have
integrated our Phase 2 service with PSAPs in Loudon, Arlington, Prince William
and Stafford Counties and Alexandria, Virginia. In Fairfax County, Virginia and
Anne Arundel County, Maryland, we have installed Phase 2 equipment and are ready
for integration.
On our new GSM network, we have been deploying GSM capable locations
equipment in our cell sites for the past five months, as soon as it was
available from our vendor. We have equipped well over 3000 GSM cell sites
already. We have been testing since early March in two markets - Ft. Myers, FL
on a Nokia GSM network and York County, PA on an Ericsson GSM network.
Pre-deployment testing on the Nokia network completed last week, and GSM Phase 2
is now integrated with the PSAP in Ft. Myers. We expect our vendor to complete
shortly the final pre-deployment validation on one remaining component still
under test in York County. We have begun rolling out GSM Phase 2 service on our
Nokia GSM systems as rapidly as possible, to those thousands of pre-equipped
cell sites.
Vendor delays can sometimes challenge our short term progress on the
milestones we committed to -- this week, for instance, we will be providing the
FCC with information on vendor delays in finalizing the operational software for
GSM Phase 2 systems -- but let me stress that AT&T Wireless has done
everything possible, and will continue to do everything possible, to speed the
delivery of Phase 2 on GSM. Though our schedule for PSAP integration is now
severely compressed, we are working diligently with our vendor to solve
remaining deployment and technical hurdles, and to stage our resources across
the county to catch up on GSM as quickly as possible. We have GSM Phase 2
integration scheduled this month in 6 states with our partners in Public Safety,
and in 12 additional states next month.
Lessons Learned I have three "lessons learned" to share with you,
from our experience to date.
First, AT&T Wireless and our vendors are getting very experienced at
deploying Phase 2 systems. On TDMA, the speed of our network design and
installation has been improving, so that the "critical path" issues
are usually not the wireless location technology, but rather procedural and
coordination issues -- such as getting trunk orders processed by local exchange
carriers, end-to-end integration testing, and obtaining permits for new
antennas. Likewise on GSM, as our vendor breaks through the final technical
barriers, procedural and coordination issues will become the critical path to
deployment.
Second, we find that state and regional leadership by Public Safety officials
speeds Phase 2 deployment significantly. Kansas City is a good example. The
Metropolitan Area Regional Council (MARC) prepared for a long time, and when we
were ready to hook up and test our Phase 2 system, MARC officials had over 30
PSAPs scheduled and ready. Likewise, in Indiana, state leadership - in this case
by both elected officials and Public Safety - provided key leadership in
education and funding. Other states, such as Texas, North Carolina, California,
Tennessee, New Jersey, Minnesota and Illinois are examples of widespread Phase 2
implementation, due to the foresight of state Public Safety leaders in
education, planning, coordination and fiscal management. State and regional
leadership have made a big difference.
Third, AT&T Wireless has seen significant progress result from the
collaborative dialogue on technical issues sponsored by the Emergency Services
Interconnection Forum's (ESIF). This is a neutral forum for industry and Public
Safety experts to discuss solutions to technical issues. Though active for only
a year or so, ESIF has already been a great help to Wireless E911 deployment
efforts.
Conclusion Finally, carriers & public safety together should do more to
make deployments more efficient. Having done hundreds of successful Phase 2
implementations, carriers and public safety should do more to apply our learning
to the benefit of the remaining areas of the country. AT&T Wireless pledges
the deployment experience of our engineers and technicians, and that of our
vendors, to work with Public Safety experts in the states, and with national
NENA & APCO experts, to establish pre-deployment teams. These pre-deployment
teams could transfer knowledge, lessons learned and best practices to Public
Safety agencies interested in having Wireless E911 service. We are ready to
begin now to establish these teams. Perhaps we could have one pre-deployment
team per state. However we organize it, through the NENA SWAT process or
state-by-state, I know from experience that Phase 2 implementation will become
more efficient as our collective efforts increase.
Thank you for giving me the opportunity to share our experience with the
Committee this morning and I look forward to answering any questions you may
have for me.
|
|
